Utah Jazz Survivor ROUND 11

[theNBAnerd]

There are certainly a lot of those that are coming through the woodwork. I would have to say that I will be one of them if Millsap demands a contract that pays him anything more than 10 million a year for 2 or 3 years.

then you have no idea what the market value is for a player of that caliber. to go out and replace paul in free agency, we're looking at 4 yrs 50M minimum. we might get a discount on paul because there won't be a ton of buyers next summer, but it's silly to think we can get someone that good for 2 yrs and 20M.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Who didn't get neutralized during that crapfest of a playoff run.

Favors and Jefferson mostly. Harris for a few moments. That's about it.

 

[Deleted member 848]

i hope you're joking cy...

chauncey 2004 - 16.9 pts, 5.7 ast, .394 shooting and a PER of 18.6
tayshaun 2004 - 10.3 pts, 4.8 reb, .467 shooting and a PER of 13.3
rip 2004 - 17.6 pts, 4.0 ast, .455 shooting and a PER of 16.8
sheed 2004 - 13.7 pts, 7.0 reb, .431 shooting and a PER of 18.8
wallace 2004 - 9.5 pts, 12.4 reb, .421 shooting and a PER of 17.3
paul 2012 - 16.6 pts, 8.8 reb, .495 shootings and a PER of 21.8

if you put paul on that 2004 pistons team in place of just about anybody on their team (except maybe chauncey, who was so core to their system and their personality as a team) they only get better.

the real strength of that pistons team was their depth. they had 10 guys with a PER of 13 or higher, which is basically unheard of (although last year's nuggets had something similar). but on an individual level, it's hard to argue that anybody other than chauncey was so good that they'd be better than what paul would provide as a hypothetical time machine replacement.

i think paul is the next recipient of the andrei kirilenko award, given to the guy whose own fans and team don't even realize how valuable he is.

Their greatest strength was having 10 players who averaged more than 13 PER?? I am facepalming so hard right now.


PS: How can your conscience comprehend touting Al as the inferior player to Millsap, despite Al being the player with the higher PER? If you are making exceptions to this, how are we not supposed to make exceptions to all of your arguments whenever YOU use PER as an indicator for player comparisons?

 

[theNBAnerd]

my point about the pistons is that they had a lot of balance in their starting unit, and efficient enough players on the bench that the drop-off was pretty minor when the first five sat down.

my point about al has always been that he sucks in ways that don't show up in PER - like horrendous defense, an inability to recognize situations, and a fear of making contact with other humans. my point about al has always been that his stats make him look better than he is, and that PER caters to dudes like al: one-way players who score and rebound well, with little regard to how they make people around them better.

 

[Deleted member 848]

my point about the pistons is that they had a lot of balance in their starting unit, and efficient enough players on the bench that the drop-off was pretty minor when the first five sat down.

You fail to give praise to their defense specifically, which intrigues me.

my point about al has always been that he sucks in ways that don't show up in PER - like horrendous defense, an inability to recognize situations, and a fear of making contact with other humans. my point about al has always been that his stats make him look better than he is, and that PER caters to dudes like al: one-way players who score and rebound well, with little regard to how they make people around them better.

Look, I agree with you here. Which is why I just scrap PER altogether. I can't understand why its okay sometimes, but then sometimes it isn't. Its just an inherently permeable statistic, that we would all be better off without. I don't need a stupid number to tell me that Al never turns the ball over, blocks at an okay rate, and scores around 20 at close to 50%.

 

[theNBAnerd]

i don't think you know what permeable means.

anyway... i think we're saying the same thing. PER measures some stuff, doesn't measure other stuff. in the pistons' case, it failed to account for how good they were on D (although really, history says they weren't as elite a defensive team as everybody thought they were at the time). in al's case, it fails to account for how bad he is at certain elements of the game.

however, if you want a stat that is a pretty good summary to compare people across positions, PER does the job as well as anything. WS or WS/48 might be less flawed in theory, except that they are fed by PER anyway.

i've always said that any stat is good if you pay attention to what it tells you and bogus if you don't pay attention to what it DOESN'T tell you. PER is one of those stats.