What's new
By:
Filters

31+ year old PGs

green said:
This thread is really cute and all, but it is all sidestepping a major point:

If we need to create this super specific subgroup of players so Hill fits in nicely and looks good, then that is a risk that I don't want to take when it comes to 100 million dollars.

If I'm going to spend 100 million dollars on a player, I want it to be as close to a slam dunk as possible. If I were Utah, I'd look at trading Favors, Hood, Burke, a lot of my picks, etc for a younger, proven PG this summer.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't trade Burke, Trey is a franchise cornerstone.

But I kinda agree with your sentiments.
 
checkbookdoc said:
I thought this was historical data before, but now I think this is based on current players... not nearly as informative as tracking historical players over their career would be.
Click to expand...

I agree with this completely, that approach would be much better. This just looks at current qualified players (per ESPN). It is shorthand of something that I'm sure has been analyzed much more thoroughly. Thanks for the feedback.
 
538's view on Hill's future, before the season began:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/carmelo/george-hill/

Hope is that he is more like 87 Michael Cooper, 85 Dennis Johnson or 92 Doc Rivers.

And less like 97 Del Negro, 05 Kerry Kittles, 02 Bryant Stith.

Great news is that he has certainly broken the curve this season! Question is what happens next 3 years, and is the downside worth $80M risk?
 
checkbookdoc said:
Can you tell me what constitutes a "qualified PG"? Also, what years are you using (I would assume this is very different in the 80's and 90's)?

I love the idea of having actual data to support this discussion! Could you run this again but using a representative sample? Maybe focus on those PGs with a similar EWA over the years 25-30 that Hill has? If you wanted to be very informative you would also identify and eliminate any players that suffered serious injury in the two or three years before.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input, these are all great ideas. Unfortunately I don't have the time, but maybe someone else will take this up. I'm 99.999% certain the Jazz are looking at these numbers every which way.
 
Siro said:
I bet age is more accurate.
Click to expand...

it is. And many of the PGs who've hit 35 in the NBA (aka those in this graph) likely had longer college careers. Even in the days of high-school draftees one-and-dones weren't as prominent as they are now (and even the players who came straight out of high school weren't coming at a high clip).
 
Was it just last year Rondo had a great year with Sac and only signed with the bulls for like 14M and two years. He was only 29 and no one wanted a long term deal with him. Last year it was Conley and then everyone else when it came to PG. Looking at the entire league last year I don't see a player over 30 that got the kind of money that Hill is supposedly seeking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top