Please? Pretty please?
http://espn.go.com/chicago/nba/story/_/id/7518789/orlando-magic-dwight-howard-ok-playing-chicago-bulls
Honestly though, if Howard's goal is to win multiple championships, Chicago is absolutely the place to go at the moment. If he wants money or doesn't care about winning, anywhere else will do.
Honestly, I think the Bulls are better off without him. One superstar and a (very) solid supporting cast will win this team multiple championships.
Quote from: buzzchiapet on January 30, 2012, 11:50:19 AM
Honestly, I think the Bulls are better off without him. One superstar and a (very) solid supporting cast will win this team multiple championships.
Not with the Heat having 3 superstars and the Thunder having 2 superstars and an even better supporting cast.
Quote from: buzzchiapet on January 30, 2012, 11:50:19 AM
Honestly, I think the Bulls are better off without him. One superstar and a (very) solid supporting cast will win this team multiple championships.
This lineup won't be the Heat in a 7 game series.
Quote from: marqptm on January 30, 2012, 12:01:39 PM
This lineup won't be the Heat in a 7 game series.
Agreed. I'm not sure Howard is the answer either though. Especially with how much I would guess they would have to give up to get Howard (maybe they wouldn't have to give up that much, who knows?). I will say, even though I hate the Bulls (only because I don't want to see Chicago get any championships...not an NBA fan until the playoffs, and the Bucks aren't there very often, and when they are it's only for a very short period of time, so go Thunder), there would be a lot of fun highlights with Rose and Howard on the same team. Would rival CP3 and Blake in LALA Land.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 30, 2012, 12:11:39 PM
Agreed. I'm not sure Howard is the answer either though. Especially with how much I would guess they would have to give up to get Howard (maybe they wouldn't have to give up that much, who knows?). I will say, even though I hate the Bulls (only because I don't want to see Chicago get any championships...not an NBA fan until the playoffs, and the Bucks aren't there very often, and when they are it's only for a very short period of time, so go Thunder), there would be a lot of fun highlights with Rose and Howard on the same team. Would rival CP3 and Blake in LALA Land.
If they can keep Deng, it'll be enough to take out the Heat.
Rose/Howard would dominate CP3/BG
The bulls need to realize games like this don't mean a whole lot. The bulls need to make sure they are as healthy has can be for the playoffs. Rose already said his toe isn't going to get better, so get him rest.
We all know boozer and noah will go down with some crappy injury, sit one of them for a game here and there.
There are a lot of bad teams in the NBA. Use those games to rest people.
Quote from: marqptm on January 30, 2012, 12:14:22 PM
If they can keep Deng, it'll be enough to take out the Heat.
Rose/Howard would dominate CP3/BG
I meant Rose and howard rivaling CP3 and Griffin in terms of highlights. They would absolutely dominate them in terms of basketball ability.
Deng, Rose, Howard and the supporting cast could definitely give the Heat all they can handle, but I'm not sure if they'd take them out or not. I think Howard is an incredibly overrated team basketball players. One of those guys who is an unbelievable talent, yet somehow fails to make his team that much better like a guy like Kobe does. He hasn't really improved his game all that much throughout his career. He's still just a guy who can jump really high and dunk a ball really hard and rebound really well, but not much else.
Anyone have an inkling what a Howard to Bulls deal would look like? I'm guessing 2 of Deng, Noah, Boozer, and Gibson and 2 first rounders?
Quote from: MUBurrow on January 30, 2012, 12:34:51 PM
Anyone have an inkling what a Howard to Bulls deal would look like? I'm guessing 2 of Deng, Noah, Boozer, and Gibson and 2 first rounders?
Noah, Booz, Gibson, Butler and a first round is a starting place.
If you can get it done without losing Deng, make it happen.
Keep Deng for sure. Hopefully keep Gibson as well. Hopefully a semi-capable defensive minded supporting cast. Need a shooter or two. Ray Allen after the season?
Deng, Rose, Howard, Gibson is a great nucleus for the next 5-7 years
Quote from: TallTitan34 on January 30, 2012, 12:51:40 PM
If you can get it done without losing Deng, make it happen.
That's pretty much my take as well.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on January 30, 2012, 12:51:40 PM
If you can get it done without losing Deng, make it happen.
I think this undervalues how good many of the other parts on the Bulls have been.
For example, using Wins Produced from last year.
Rose - 10.2 wins
Deng - 9.8
Brewer - 9.1
Noah - 8.4
Gibson - 6.4
Bogans - 4.4
Boozer - 4.2
vs Howard (18.4 wins)
The Bulls win a lot of games because they have a lot of good parts. Mortgage too many of those parts away...
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 30, 2012, 01:36:58 PM
I think this undervalues how good many of the other parts on the Bulls have been.
For example, using Wins Produced from last year.
Rose - 10.2 wins
Deng - 9.8
Brewer - 9.1
Noah - 8.4
Gibson - 6.4
Bogans - 4.4
Boozer - 4.2
vs Howard (18.4 wins)
The Bulls win a lot of games because they have a lot of good parts. Mortgage too many of those parts away...
Lose Noah, Gibson, Boozer for 19 wins for Howard's 18.4 wins.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on January 30, 2012, 12:51:40 PM
If you can get it done without losing Deng, make it happen.
Cannot lose Omer either.
If the Bulls could shed Boozer in order to get Howard, that would be fantastic. Talk about switching from playing under the rim to well above it. Boozer's jumper makes babies cry
Quote from: marqptm on January 30, 2012, 01:40:27 PM
Cannot lose Omer either.
Was this supposed to be in teal? This is the essence of the Bull's issues. They love their own players too much.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 30, 2012, 02:05:52 PM
Was this supposed to be in teal? This is the essence of the Bull's issues. They love their own players too much.
I think we would all assume Noah would be dealt if Howard is brought in. Losing Noah AND Omer would not be in the Bulls' best interests.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 30, 2012, 02:05:52 PM
Was this supposed to be in teal? This is the essence of the Bull's issues. They love their own players too much.
Have you watched Omer this year? Killing it defensively.
I've watched Omer this year. Howard is still better and shouldn't be a reason for why they don't trade for him.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 30, 2012, 02:17:51 PM
I've watched Omer this year. Howard is still better and shouldn't be a reason for why they don't trade for him.
I agree, but if you're giving up Noah and Gibson, Omer cannot be included.
OK...got it. Makes sense.
Orlando may prefer Omer to Noah based on their play this season...
Noah has been playing better lately, 4 straight double-doubles. Unfortunately, he was out of shape during the lockout, and he now looks to be slowly rounding back into game shape.
I like Omer, but his offensive game is brutal. I mean, he makes Noah look like Olajuwon. On this Bulls team and in his role, that's ok.... He's a back-up big on a defensive minded team. However, if he's your starter and playing 35 minutes a night, the fact that he's completely useless on the offensive end is going to hurt you.
Quote from: marqptm on January 30, 2012, 01:40:27 PM
Cannot lose Omer either.
You should borrow Bernstein's "Go OMER" t-shirt.
Some NBA guys on the score believe Noah, Boozer, and two first round draft picks would get the job done.
I'd make that deal in a second if offered.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on January 30, 2012, 02:56:59 PM
Some NBA guys on the score believe Noah, Boozer, and two first round draft picks would get the job done.
I'd make that deal in a second if offered.
I couldn't believe that would be the best deal out there. Perhaps David Stern would have to step in again if that went through.
The Bulls would also have to take Turko and all of his money.
Quote from: reinko on January 30, 2012, 03:05:58 PM
I couldn't believe that would be the best deal out there. Perhaps David Stern would have to step in again if that went through.
That's four first round draft picks, it'll put the lotion on the skin.
seems fair. sign me up...
Is Howard really that good? I think he is still really limited offensively. Obviously if he gets good position it's as good as 2 points, but he can't really do anything away from the paint. Admittedly, I haven't watched much (or any) of Howard this season, but watching him in the Playoffs, when defenses actually start to work, has been brutal in his career. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks Howard is very overrated (again, still a physical monster, but I really don't know how much better the Bulls would be without Noah and Boozer but with Howard...and I HATE Boozer).
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think that move would help the future of the Magic, so I don't see why Stern would step in...although I didn't with the Lakers deal either...
Quote from: wadesworld on January 30, 2012, 05:27:01 PM
Is Howard really that good? I think he is still really limited offensively. Obviously if he gets good position it's as good as 2 points, but he can't really do anything away from the paint. Admittedly, I haven't watched much (or any) of Howard this season, but watching him in the Playoffs, when defenses actually start to work, has been brutal in his career. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks Howard is very overrated (again, still a physical monster, but I really don't know how much better the Bulls would be without Noah and Boozer but with Howard...and I HATE Boozer).
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think that move would help the future of the Magic, so I don't see why Stern would step in...although I didn't with the Lakers deal either...
+1 ... also believe he is overrated, and the Magic need to get something for him while his value is still sky-high. I wouldn't be surprised to see a return package on the level of what N.O. got for Paul, meaning Orlando is really in a position to clean up here (if they knew how to draft)
Quote from: wadesworld on January 30, 2012, 05:27:01 PM
Is Howard really that good? I think he is still really limited offensively. Obviously if he gets good position it's as good as 2 points, but he can't really do anything away from the paint. Admittedly, I haven't watched much (or any) of Howard this season, but watching him in the Playoffs, when defenses actually start to work, has been brutal in his career. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks Howard is very overrated (again, still a physical monster, but I really don't know how much better the Bulls would be without Noah and Boozer but with Howard...and I HATE Boozer).
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think that move would help the future of the Magic, so I don't see why Stern would step in...although I didn't with the Lakers deal either...
Howard's problems in the playoffs have nothing to do with defensive strategy. However, his problem is how many guys end up defending him. There is no one on Orlando that's as good as Deng, let alone Derrick Rose. Teams can double and even triple team on a collapse and the Magic still won't beat you.
Bulls would be MUCH better off. Boozer is garbage.
Quote from: marqptm on January 30, 2012, 05:36:21 PM
Howard's problems in the playoffs have nothing to do with defensive strategy. However, his problem is how many guys end up defending him. There is no one on Orlando that's as good as Deng, let alone Derrick Rose. Teams can double and even triple team on a collapse and the Magic still won't beat you.
Bulls would be MUCH better off. Boozer is garbage.
While I agree Boozer is garbage - mostly on the defensive end, did you see him play when Rose was out? Mike James and Watson knew how to use that pick and roll properly with Boozer. That's the type of player Boozer is. I've been saying it ever since he signed with Chicago. That's where he gets most of his points. If there was one complaint I have about Rose it would be his inability to fully play the pick and roll. Mike James had like 10 assists in as many minutes because he just PnRed with Boozer.
I guess what I'm saying is the Boozer needs to be utilized more in pick and roll instances. Once he does, his game becomes MUCH more enjoyable to watch. His confidence goes up, and when it does, you can begin relying on him in post up situations.
All that said, he's the WORST defensive big the Bulls have - and that totally includes the Mamba.
Quote from: MUCrew on January 30, 2012, 06:09:13 PM
While I agree Boozer is garbage - mostly on the defensive end, did you see him play when Rose was out? Mike James and Watson knew how to use that pick and roll properly with Boozer. That's the type of player Boozer is. I've been saying it ever since he signed with Chicago. That's where he gets most of his points. If there was one complaint I have about Rose it would be his inability to fully play the pick and roll. Mike James had like 10 assists in as many minutes because he just PnRed with Boozer.
I guess what I'm saying is the Boozer needs to be utilized more in pick and roll instances. Once he does, his game becomes MUCH more enjoyable to watch. His confidence goes up, and when it does, you can begin relying on him in post up situations.
All that said, he's the WORST defensive big the Bulls have - and that totally includes the Mamba.
Pick and roll is his game, 100%.
Howard is the best big man in basketball, and its not even close.
Howard has a higher ppg in the playoffs than the regular season in his career. He can hit a jump hook over both shoulders and is unstoppable within 3 feet of the basket. He is the best center in the nba, hands down, and he's getting better.
Quote from: marqptm on January 30, 2012, 05:36:21 PM
Howard's problems in the playoffs have nothing to do with defensive strategy. However, his problem is how many guys end up defending him. There is no one on Orlando that's as good as Deng, let alone Derrick Rose. Teams can double and even triple team on a collapse and the Magic still won't beat you.
Bulls would be MUCH better off. Boozer is garbage.
Dwight Howard singlehandedly got the Magic to the NBA Finals and made Hedo Turkoglu a ton of money. What the Bulls can trot out there with Rose, Deng, etc. is much better than what the Magic could ever put out there. Kyle Korver will all of the sudden become a lot more potent with Howard on the floor.
And, after thinking about it, I would give up Noah and Omer in that trade. This team cannot win a NBA Championship. They need a guy like Howard to take that next step.
Quote from: marqptm on January 30, 2012, 02:18:33 PM
I agree, but if you're giving up Noah and Gibson, Omer cannot be included.
I think this and a draft pick is what it would take. And I think both teams would be better off. No way Noah and Omer in the same deal -- one or the other. Would hate to lose Gibson, but love to shed Boozer.
The Bulls should do EVERYTHING (except giving up Rose obviously) possible to make a trade for Howard. Having Rose and Howard on the same team would make them legitimate championship contenders for the next decade. Even if it means giving up Deng, Noah, Boozer, Gibson, and Omer AND draft picks, the Bulls have to make the trade. Once Howard and Rose are on the team together, everything else will fall into place.
Quote from: flash on February 01, 2012, 02:14:37 PM
The Bulls should do EVERYTHING (except giving up Rose obviously) possible to make a trade for Howard. Having Rose and Howard on the same team would make them legitimate championship contenders for the next decade. Even if it means giving up Deng, Noah, Boozer, Gibson, and Omer AND draft picks, the Bulls have to make the trade. Once Howard and Rose are on the team together, everything else will fall into place.
Just like it is for the Knicks with Amare and Carmelo?
Quote from: Bocephys on February 01, 2012, 02:38:33 PM
Just like it is for the Nicks with Amare and Carmelo?
Agreed.
Quote from: flash on February 01, 2012, 02:14:37 PM
The Bulls should do EVERYTHING (except giving up Rose obviously) possible to make a trade for Howard. Having Rose and Howard on the same team would make them legitimate championship contenders for the next decade. Even if it means giving up Deng, Noah, Boozer, Gibson, and Omer AND draft picks, the Bulls have to make the trade. Once Howard and Rose are on the team together, everything else will fall into place.
So you think Rose and Howard alone are a better combination than Wade and Lebron, not to mention Bosh along with Wade and Lebron? I disagree.
Quote from: Bocephys on February 01, 2012, 02:38:33 PM
Just like it is for the Nicks with Amare and Carmelo?
+100
Quote from: Bocephys on February 01, 2012, 02:38:33 PM
Just like it is for the Nicks with Amare and Carmelo?
Not defending the strategy proposed by flash, but just wanted to point out that the Melo / Amare''' combo is not the same situation.
Last year Melo and Amare''' produced 5.9 wins and -0.5 wins, respectively. That two player combo isn't working because neither player is very good.
#2 all day long
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7527886/three-dwight-howard-chicago-bulls-trades-work-nba?eleven=twelve
for those without insider:
Chicago could make it happen, but does it want to fix something that's not broken?
Dwight Howard and Derrick Rose could vault this year's Bulls into Michael Jordan-era greatness.
The other day, Dwight Howard sent the hearts of Bulls fans aflutter with comments that seemed to open the door for him to join his adidas comrade Derrick Rose in Chicago.
The Bulls have won more regular-season games than any other team since the beginning of last season. Their core is young and ascending. The chemistry on the court and in the locker room is impeccable -- the kind of environment coaches dream about. But the problem is that there is an awfully big hurdle perched in the sands of South Beach. Every transaction the Bulls make has to be a response to this question: Will this help us beat the Miami Heat?
The Howard-to-the-Bulls chatter certainly falls under the heading of "soft news," but nevertheless, the notion is interesting from a basketball perspective. Howard is the best center in the game, but Chicago is already a championship-level team. Do you dare mess with that?
Any trade Chicago might make for Howard would involve Joakim Noah going back to the Magic. Orlando would need a young center and Chicago would need to move Noah's dollars. There has been some confusion about whether Noah is subject to base year compensation, which would mean he could not be traded before March 1. According to the team, however, Noah is not a BYC player. That means he can be traded at any time.
Also, Orlando is going to want draft picks, expiring contracts, cost-controlled rotation players, cash and ready-made replacements for Howard. No team can fulfill all these needs; the Bulls can fulfill quite a few. In each of the subsequent scenarios, throw in Chicago's first-round picks in 2012 and '14, plus the valuable protected pick Charlotte owes the Bulls from the Tyrus Thomas trade, a selection that becomes unprotected in 2016, as well as $3 million in cash per the new CBA.
Lastly, the Bulls aren't going to break up a core that might already be good enough to win a title unless they get an ironclad assurance that Howard will sign long-term. So assume that Howard agrees to an extend-and-trade deal and isn't looking to maximize dollars. The win gains referenced in each scenario are set by our SCHOENE projection system.
1. The megadeal
Howard, Hedo Turkoglu and Ryan Anderson for Joakim Noah, Taj Gibson, Luol Deng and Jimmy Butler, plus picks and cash
The salaries work on this deal even though it would put the Bulls over the luxury-tax line. The hang-up would be Anderson, who is far too good to be included as a throw-in on a trade for the second time in his career. However, the Bulls would be well-advised to insist on the sharp-shooting forward.
With a Howard trade scenario, the Bulls could insist on power forward Ryan Anderson.
The Bulls would likely hold onto Turkoglu for the rest of this season, and perhaps try to flip him this summer. One of Chicago's long-term issues is that it has four players signed to multiyear deals that will pay eight figures per season. It's tough to manage a cap that way, and there are eventual extensions for Gibson (unless he's dealt) and Omer Asik to consider. Trading Turkoglu helps Orlando get rid of a player it won't need, especially after Howard is gone, but can't amnesty because it burned that privilege on Gilbert Arenas. Chicago wouldn't have that problem.
Our post-lockout projections set the Bulls' 82-game baseline at 58.7 wins. If this version of the trade had taken place before the season, the baseline would have been revised upward to 65.8 wins, up 7.1 games. That's enough to vault the Bulls over Miami and puts them in the Air Jordan class of Bulls squads. Orlando has chronically undervalued Anderson, but his play this season may have finally cast aside any reservations they may have had about him. His inclusion could be the deal-breaker.
The revamped Bulls would move from fifth to third in projected Offensive Rating and remain first in projected Defensive Rating. Actually, that is a factor to consider for Chicago. Howard may be the game's best defender, but it's the Bulls that feature the game's best team defense -- with or without him. In each proposed trade in this piece, Chicago remains at No. 1 in projected team defense. In any potential Chicago-Orlando deal, the Bulls have all the leverage. Chicago is a championship contender as is and would only be attempting to improve at the margins. Those marginal wins might be the difference between beating Miami or not, but even without them, the Bulls are close enough to the Heat to have around a 40-45 percent chance to emerge in a seven-game series. In other words, there is no reason for the Bulls to be timid in these negotiations. If they are going to move Noah, Gibson AND Deng, then Anderson has to be part of the return.
2. The Carlos Boozer version
Howard and Turkoglu for Noah, Boozer and Butler, plus picks and cash
The Bulls don't get Anderson in this version of the trade, but that's offset by not sending Deng to Orlando. That in itself makes this deal more realistic, because Orlando would have to pry Deng out of Tom Thibodeau's cold, dead hands anyway. The Bulls improve by 4.1 wins, putting them basically in a dead heat with Miami.
If the Magic think Carlos Boozer has gas left in the tank, his inclusion in a Howard deal works.
Chicago still jumps to third in projected Offensive Rating, with Howard's field goal percentage more than offsetting the loss of offensive rebounding that comes from dealing Noah and Boozer. From Orlando's standpoint, not only does it get its new center in Noah, but Boozer gives it an interior scorer that would otherwise be lacking. Orlando doesn't get much long-term cap relief in any of these deals, but in place of that, Chicago can offer usable rotation players.
In fact, Chicago can offer more legit talent than any of Howard's other suitors. The wild card here is that it's hard to say what Boozer's value is perceived to be around the league. This trade assumes that Smith sees Boozer as a bedrock kind of talent.
If Boozer really is that good, then it's just barely, and his days at that level are dwindling fast. In fact, because of Chicago's aforementioned cap issues and need to extend Gibson and Asik, there is a real possibility that Boozer will eventually be waived via the amnesty clause. This trade would allow the Bulls to side-step that messy situation -- if Smith values Boozer.
3. The 'simple' version
Howard for Noah, Taj Gibson, C.J. Watson picks and cash
Trades get so complicated in the NBA that sometimes you can overthink them. By just trading Noah and Gibson, the Bulls may be able to swing a deal. They wouldn't want to include Watson, but another player would have to go to Orlando to make the salaries work. The Bulls' bench depth will allow Thibodeau to get by just fine without Watson to run his second unit.
The 6.1 wins the Bulls gain on paper look great, but it's no slam dunk that the deal would work out so well. Any trade that involves both Noah and Gibson robs Thibodeau of much of his team's defensive versatility. He'd be left with Howard and Asik -- both true centers -- and Boozer as his only big men. There would be no backup for Boozer, so you're left shopping for the likes of Fabricio Oberto or perhaps a stretch 4 to fill out your rotation.
The key would be how Boozer and Howard fit together on the court. They tend to occupy different spaces on the floor. Howard can operate on the block or as the roll man after setting ball screens for Derrick Rose. However, if the matchups are right, Boozer can set the screen and pop out for his nice face-up jumper. Heck, Thibodeau could use them in double-screen sets, which not only gives Rose all kinds of options, but also clears the lane for his whirling-dervish finishes.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on February 01, 2012, 03:16:15 PM
Not defending the strategy proposed by flash, but just wanted to point out that the Melo / Amare''' combo is not the same situation.
Last year Melo and Amare''' produced 5.9 wins and -0.5 wins, respectively. That two player combo isn't working because neither player is very good.
I don't think Melo and Amare are great players, certainly not as good as Rose and Howard, but wins produced is a highly flawed system--as is any that tries to measure a basketball players value by using boxscore stats.
Quote from: jmayer1 on February 01, 2012, 08:19:03 PM
I don't think Melo and Amare are great players, certainly not as good as Rose and Howard, but wins produced is a highly flawed system--as is any that tries to measure a basketball players value by using boxscore stats.
Care to back those statements up?
Quote from: jmayer1 on February 01, 2012, 08:19:03 PM
I don't think Melo and Amare are great players, certainly not as good as Rose and Howard, but wins produced is a highly flawed system--as is any that tries to measure a basketball players value by using boxscore stats.
Rose is arguably (and its a strong argument) the best PG in a league that is full of really good PGs, and Howard is absolutely the best center in the league... probably the best since Shaq (if you don't count Duncan as a C). They are the premeire players at their positions. Melo and Amar'e are not. And they play at very complimentary positions, unlike Amar'e and Melo (neither do Wade and LeBron).
Quote from: Henry Sugar on February 01, 2012, 03:16:15 PM
Not defending the strategy proposed by flash, but just wanted to point out that the Melo / Amare''' combo is not the same situation.
+1
More than anything, its not the same situation because those two players don't work well together. In fact, they're both very close to doing the exact same things.
I'm in the camp that thinks that if there's anything the Bulls can do to get this done, they do it. It would give them the best post player and the reigning point guard mvp. The NBA is chock full of serviceable 2s, 3s, and 4s to match with them. You can get good defensive stoppers, etc, mid to late in the first round of NBA drafts. The reason the other super teams aren't necessarily working out are because their stars are those 2s, 3s, and 4s.
Quote from: shiloh26 on February 01, 2012, 10:03:35 PM
Rose is arguably (and its a strong argument) the best PG in a league that is full of really good PGs, and Howard is absolutely the best center in the league... probably the best since Shaq (if you don't count Duncan as a C). They are the premeire players at their positions. Melo and Amar'e are not. And they play at very complimentary positions, unlike Amar'e and Melo (neither do Wade and LeBron).
Oh, I definitely agree on that.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on February 01, 2012, 09:43:43 PM
Care to back those statements up?
Wins produced is a nice measure, but as with a lot of other individual basketball statistics (+/-, efficiency ratings) it is limited and needs to be used in context with other statistics and your own eyes. Some supporters of wins produced (not saying you necessarily--I don't know your stance) take it as gospel and don't admit that it has flaws (as do other basketball stats). In my opinion, basketball isn't particularly conducive to advanced individual statistics, although I still enjoy looking at them, as there are just too many things that happen on a basketball court that aren't very easy to measure, unlike baseball where pretty much every event that occurs can be quantified. However, I think basketball is much more conducive to measurement by team.
To specifically point out the flaws of wins produced, I think any sane basketball observer would agree that Landry Fields isn't the 8th best player in the NBA, Jason Kidd the 12th, Kris Humphries the 17th, or Ronnie Brewer the 31st while Dirk Nowitzki is only the 66th, Carmelo is 100, Amare is 187, Brook Lopez is 373rd, and Demarco Cousins the 451st (2nd to last).
Now, every good measure--statistical, opinion, or otherwise, is going to have outliers (KenPom and UW earlier in the year for instance). I was just simply stating that taking wins produced as a set in stone measure to determine the exact value of a basketball player isn't a good idea. Perhaps I should have stated it has some flaws, rather than saying it is highly flawed, since I think it is a pretty reasonable measure.
Quote from: jmayer1 on February 02, 2012, 12:12:31 PM
To specifically point out the flaws of wins produced, I think any sane basketball observer would agree that Landry Fields isn't the 8th best player in the NBA, Jason Kidd the 12th, Kris Humphries the 17th, or Ronnie Brewer the 31st while Dirk Nowitzki is only the 66th, Carmelo is 100, Amare is 187, Brook Lopez is 373rd, and Demarco Cousins the 451st (2nd to last).
The list I have from last year is slightly off from yours, but what makes you so certain that those rankings are wrong? Dirk may have had a good postseason, but he's 34 and on the downslide of his career. One of the basic premises of the authors/creators of Wins Produced is that people overvalue scorers.
There are many reasonable critiques of Wins Produced. In particular, it probably overvalues the impact of rebounds. However, I like it for two reasons:
#1 - it's based on work done by an economist and submitted through the peer-review / journal process
#2 - the wins produced per player maps really closely to the final per-team results of wins. Really close
If anyone is interested, I recommend the Wages of Wins FAQ.
http://wagesofwins.com/faq/
Quote from: jmayer1 on February 02, 2012, 12:12:31 PM
Now, every good measure--statistical, opinion, or otherwise, is going to have outliers (KenPom and UW earlier in the year for instance). I was just simply stating that taking wins produced as a set in stone measure to determine the exact value of a basketball player isn't a good idea. Perhaps I should have stated it has some flaws, rather than saying it is highly flawed, since I think it is a pretty reasonable measure.
I agree with this 100%.
One the topic of Melo and Amare, if there are a set of stats that say "hey these guys aren't very good"... it makes me reconsider how valuable they are rather than going off my impressions of how good they are.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on February 02, 2012, 04:40:14 PM
The list I have from last year is slightly off from yours, but what makes you so certain that those rankings are wrong? Dirk may have had a good postseason, but he's 34 and on the downslide of his career. One of the basic premises of the authors/creators of Wins Produced is that people overvalue scorers.
There are many reasonable critiques of Wins Produced. In particular, it probably overvalues the impact of rebounds. However, I like it for two reasons:
#1 - it's based on work done by an economist and submitted through the peer-review / journal process
#2 - the wins produced per player maps really closely to the final per-team results of wins. Really close
If anyone is interested, I recommend the Wages of Wins FAQ.
http://wagesofwins.com/faq/
I can't be certain of anything, of course, and Dirk might be a bad example to use, since he wasn't actually that low. But, I really don't see that Landry Fields is an impact player and could ever be a superstar, which you would think he is at #8. I think the "over-rankings" tend to be more apparent than the "under-rankings", however an argument could be made that those guys aren't too "over-ranked" just underrated. Or they are anomalies, as there always seems to be certain guys the computers love and other guys the computers seem to hate.
Definitely agree, people very often (especially those not familiar with advanced stats) highly overrate points. However, sometime I feel like so many people in the statistical community devalue points that now they've almost become underrated among that group. Some guys are loved by advanced stats when they have low usages because they are so efficient, but ultimately the ball has to get in the basket to win and almost invariably efficiciency will taper off with more usage.
That's a great FAQ, thanks for posting.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on February 02, 2012, 04:40:14 PM
I agree with this 100%.
One the topic of Melo and Amare, if there are a set of stats that say "hey these guys aren't very good"... it makes me reconsider how valuable they are rather than going off my impressions of how good they are.
Good to hear that.
Agreed. Those two are solid players, but neither is a superstar (unlike Rose and Howard), just a couple of high-usage players that are overrated by most casual basketball fans. I'm sure they are fine with that though, as a couple more points at the sake of efficiency and defense means more $$$ for them.
(http://nsa21.casimages.com/img/2012/01/01/120101122848511088.jpg)
Quote from: TallTitan34 on February 03, 2012, 01:22:49 PM
(http://nsa21.casimages.com/img/2012/01/01/120101122848511088.jpg)
Haha that's great