Batum for #4 pick?

[Denny Crane]

Who cares about "true efficiency?"

Gay is one of the elite scorers in the league. Batum simply isn't even close.

 

[Pinwheel1]

At some point you just know Gay will land on some contending team with a good coach and he will help them win a ring.
Maybe it will be from off the bench. He keeps going to young teams, but at some point he will land with a bunch of savvy vets and he will fit in nicely.

Hoopshype has his contract this year at 19 mil, but then it drops to 13. I would take a chance on him.

 

[magnifier661]

Who cares about "true efficiency?"

Gay is one of the elite scorers in the league. Batum simply isn't even close.

Not when you pair that player with another that demands a ton of shots like Melo. This is the argument Denny, which you have been obviously avoiding. There isn't enough shots to go around with Melo and Gay. Especially since they are both SFs

 

[Natebishop3]

Yes, because Gay and Melo will work sooooooooooo well together

 

[Boob-No-More]

1) Incorrect! Not every player has a drastic decrease in PER.

I never used the word drastic, and I didn't say every player. I said most players see their PER decrease in the post season. When you put words in my mouth, it's easy for you to claim what I "said" is incorrect! Siting two counter examples does not disprove what I wrote.

Just look at the Blazers alone:

Aldridge:
Regular Season PER = 22.8
Playoff PER = 16.7
Net = - 6.1

Lillard:
Regular Season PER = 20.7
Playoff PER = 15.0
Net = -5.7

Batum:
Regular Season PER = 13.1
Playoff PER =11.1
Net = -2.0

Lopez:
Regular Season PER = 16.2
Playoff PER = 11.6
Net = -4.6

Afflalo:
Regular Season PER = 8.2
Playoff PER = -5.0
Net = -13.2

Kaman:
Regular Season PER = 17.3
Playoff PER = 11.7
Net = -5.6

Blake:
Regular Season PER = 9.5
Playoff PER = 2.9
Net = -6.6

Leonard:
Regular Season PER = 14.8
Playoff PER = 19.6
Net = +4.8

McCollum:
Regular Season PER = 13.1
Playoff PER = 16.1
Net = +3.0

So, all of the top 7 in MPG during the regular season saw their PER drop in the post season. Of those, Batum's -2.0 drop in PER was significantly less than Aldridge, Lillard, Lopez, Afflalo, Kaman and Blake. The only two players who saw an increase in PER in the playoffs were two backups that weren't even in the regular rotation for most of the season (in other words, two guys the Grizzlies did not heavily scout and prepare for).

Also, you'll notice Batum went from slightly above average PER wise to below average.

No, I didn't notice that (again, putting words in my mouth). By definition a PER = 15.0 is league average. So, Batum's regular season PER = 13.1 was, by definition below average.

EFFICIENCY IS CRITICAL IN THE PLAYOFFS. But our 3rd best player cannot, absolutely CANNOT, go from above average to below average in the playoffs if you want the team to be successful.

First, in spite of the acronym Hollinger chose, PER is NOT a good measure of efficiency. It attempts to be one single number that represents total production. In terms of scoring efficiency, there are better stats (TS% or PTS/FGA). And if you are going to single out Batum, our 3rd best player, for his 2.0 decrease in efficiency what about our 1st best player (-6.1), our second best player (-5.6), our 4th best player (-4.6), etc.

2) As it is my understanding, you are successfully arguing why PER is a good stat - it accounts for pace adjustment, less rebounds, smaller numbers because it measures EFFICIENCY and not STAT mongering. Rebound %, Ast%, TO%, shooting percentage, etc.

No, that's not what I am arguing at all (again, putting words in MY mouth to make YOUR point). I'm saying comparing regular season PER to playoff PER is a crappy way to show a player whose scoring increased by 50% and rebounding increased by over 60% "disappeared" in the playoffs. PER does NOT measure efficiency, and is probably the most misnamed stat ever. Even Hollinger's own definition of PER does not mention the word efficiency: "The PER sums up all a player's positive accomplishments, subtracts the negative accomplishments, and returns a per-minute rating of a player's performance." PER is all about production, not efficiency. Allen Iverson has a career post season PER = 21.2, but his career playoff TS% is only .489. Iverson was a volume scorer, not an efficient scorer, and PER rewards him for the volume of his scoring in spite if his low scoring efficiency.

Most of the advanced stats you mentioned are not used in the calculation of PER.

3) I did not ignore his per game stats, I actually took this into account (and you're the first person to question me about them) but the fact is, they are inefficient stats regarding points (additionally, this post season Batum had to make up for the loss of Wesley Matthews garnering a larger role - in which he only increase his scoring by 3 points? Sheesh.) Playoffs are about EFFICIENCY and he simply is LESS efficient than he must be in the playoffs for this team to be successful. He goes from a good above average player (PER WISE) to not very good and that is WITHOUT TEAMS KEYING IN ON HIM.

First, Batum did not increase his scoring by only 3 points per game in he playoffs, he increased it by 4.8 PPG. And what about his other teammates? How much did they increase their scoring to make up for the loss of Wesley? I already showed that other than C.J. and Meyers, all out other top players saw their PERs decrease by much more than Batum. Aldridge's scoring = down 1.6 PPG and much less efficient. Lillard's scoring up 0.6 PPG, but much less efficient. Lopez' scoring down 4.2 PPG. Afflalo scoring down 8.9 PPG. Kaman scoring down 6.6 PPG, Blake scoring down 2.9 PPG. Again only Batum, McCollum and Leonard saw their scoring increase in the playoffs. Why didn't any of our other starters step up and make up for the loss of Wesley's scoring?

I'm not saying Batum played great during the playoffs. Other than C.J. and Meyers, nobody did. What I take exception to is your basic point that Batum disappears during the playoffs. That's just flat out false. The guy increased his scoring by over 50% and his rebounding by over 60%. Was he efficient? Not especially, but neither were Aldridge, Lillard, Afflalo, Kaman, Blake, etc. The simple truth is Batum did not disappear during the playoffs. He was not passive. He took more shots, scored more points, got more rebounds and dished more assists. If you want to blame someone for disappearing, why not start with the guys who scored less, got fewer rebounds and had fewer assists.

BNM

 

[Denny Crane]

Not when you pair that player with another that demands a ton of shots like Melo. This is the argument Denny, which you have been obviously avoiding. There isn't enough shots to go around with Melo and Gay. Especially since they are both SFs

Nonsense.

The Heat won championships with LeBron, Wade, and Bosh. Three guys with high USG%. Championships and finals appearances are pretty good indications it works, theres enough ball to go around.

Melo can play PF and has a lot recently. Gay has played at SG and PF. If they did make this trade, the coach will play his best players.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Who cares about "true efficiency?"

Gay is one of the elite scorers in the league. Batum simply isn't even close.

Rudy Gay is the Stephon Marbury of small forwards. He scores a lot, but when he gets traded, his old team gets better and his new team gets worse.

There's a reason why guys like Gay and Marbury, in spite of their "elite" scoring, are always getting traded.

BNM

 

[Natebishop3]

Nonsense.

The Heat won championships with LeBron, Wade, and Bosh. Three guys with high USG%. Championships and finals appearances are pretty good indications it works, theres enough ball to go around.

Melo can play PF and has a lot recently. Gay has played at SG and PF. If they did make this trade, the coach will play his best players.

LeBron/Wade/Bosh were three guys who chose to join forces to win a championship. Bosh took a major back seat for the good of the team. Trading for Rudy Gay and pairing him with one of the most selfish basketball players I have ever seen does not equal LeBron/Wade/Bosh in Miami.

 

[Denny Crane]

Rudy Gay is the Stephon Marbury of small forwards. He scores a lot, but when he gets traded, his old team gets better and his new team gets worse.

There's a reason why guys like Gay and Marbury, in spite of their "elite" scoring, are always getting traded.

BNM

Sacramento is better with Gay. 25-43 with him, 3-12 without him this season. 27-46 last season with him, 1-8 without.

Toronto went from 23-43 to 34-48 after acquiring him.

But yeah, his new team gets worse by some measure.

 

[magnifier661]

Nonsense.

The Heat won championships with LeBron, Wade, and Bosh. Three guys with high USG%. Championships and finals appearances are pretty good indications it works, theres enough ball to go around.

Melo can play PF and has a lot recently. Gay has played at SG and PF. If they did make this trade, the coach will play his best players.

LBJ is not Melo. He actually distributes and makes other players around him better. Wade has already proven before, being able to play with a dominant ISO player (Shaq). Bosh had high usage in Toronto, but understood LBJ and wade are better players for usage.

Melo and Gay have proven that they will take shots away from whom they are paired up with. Gay did it in Memphis, Toronto and he did it in Sac, when Boogie was obviously their most efficient player.

 

[blue9]

Sacramento is better with Gay. 25-43 with him, 3-12 without him this season. 27-46 last season with him, 1-8 without.

Toronto went from 23-43 to 34-48 after acquiring him.

But yeah, his new team gets worse by some measure.

So teams that he's on go from sucking to sucking. Yeah, he's a great player alright!
How was MEM after they traded him?
How was TOR after they traded him? (I honestly don't know for certain - the East sucks so I don't pay attention. But I'm pretty sure they got better.)

 

[magnifier661]

Sacramento is better with Gay. 25-43 with him, 3-12 without him this season. 27-46 last season with him, 1-8 without.

Toronto went from 23-43 to 34-48 after acquiring him.

But yeah, his new team gets worse by some measure.

Toronto had one of the best records when he left. Memphis had a much better record after he left. The Sac stat is skewed because Boogie was also hurt when gay was hurt.

 

[Denny Crane]

Memphis' record with Gay: 22-60, 22-60, 24-58, 40-42, 46-36. His team got better with him. He was 20 years old as a rookie.

Toronto went from 23-43 to 34-48 with him.

 

[magnifier661]

Memphis' record with Gay: 22-60, 22-60, 24-58, 40-42, 46-36. His team got better with him. He was 20 years old as a rookie.

Toronto went from 23-43 to 34-48 with him.

Memphis actually got better after he left, which is more of a testament of Gasol coming along. What was Toronto's record this season (the season after Gay left)?

 

[riverman]

I never used the word drastic, and I didn't say every player. I said most players see their PER decrease in the post season. When you put words in my mouth, it's easy for you to claim what I "said" is incorrect! Siting two counter examples does not disprove what I wrote.

Just look at the Blazers alone:

Aldridge:
Regular Season PER = 22.8
Playoff PER = 16.7
Net = - 6.1

Lillard:
Regular Season PER = 20.7
Playoff PER = 15.0
Net = -5.7

Batum:
Regular Season PER = 13.1
Playoff PER =11.1
Net = -2.0

Lopez:
Regular Season PER = 16.2
Playoff PER = 11.6
Net = -4.6

Afflalo:
Regular Season PER = 8.2
Playoff PER = -5.0
Net = -13.2

Kaman:
Regular Season PER = 17.3
Playoff PER = 11.7
Net = -5.6

Blake:
Regular Season PER = 9.5
Playoff PER = 2.9
Net = -6.6

Leonard:
Regular Season PER = 14.8
Playoff PER = 19.6
Net = +4.8

McCollum:
Regular Season PER = 13.1
Playoff PER = 16.1
Net = +3.0

So, all of the top 7 in MPG during the regular season saw their PER drop in the post season. Of those, Batum's -2.0 drop in PER was significantly less than Aldridge, Lillard, Lopez, Afflalo, Kaman and Blake. The only two players who saw an increase in PER in the playoffs were two backups that weren't even in the regular rotation for most of the season (in other words, two guys the Grizzlies did not heavily scout and prepare for).



No, I didn't notice that (again, putting words in my mouth). By definition a PER = 15.0 is league average. So, Batum's regular season PER = 13.1 was, by definition below average.



First, in spite of the acronym Hollinger chose, PER is NOT a good measure of efficiency. It attempts to be one single number that represents total production. In terms of scoring efficiency, there are better stats (TS% or PTS/FGA). And if you are going to single out Batum, our 3rd best player, for his 2.0 decrease in efficiency what about our 1st best player (-6.1), our second best player (-5.6), our 4th best player (-4.6), etc.



No, that's not what I am arguing at all (again, putting words in MY mouth to make YOUR point). I'm saying comparing regular season PER to playoff PER is a crappy way to show a player whose scoring increased by 50% and rebounding increased by over 60% "disappeared" in the playoffs. PER does NOT measure efficiency, and is probably the most misnamed stat ever. Even Hollinger's own definition of PER does not mention the word efficiency: "The PER sums up all a player's positive accomplishments, subtracts the negative accomplishments, and returns a per-minute rating of a player's performance." PER is all about production, not efficiency. Allen Iverson has a career post season PER = 21.2, but his career playoff TS% is only .489. Iverson was a volume scorer, not an efficient scorer, and PER rewards him for the volume of his scoring in spite if his low scoring efficiency.

Most of the advanced stats you mentioned are not used in the calculation of PER.



First, Batum did not increase his scoring by only 3 points per game in he playoffs, he increased it by 4.8 PPG. And what about his other teammates? How much did they increase their scoring to make up for the loss of Wesley? I already showed that other than C.J. and Meyers, all out other top players saw their PERs decrease by much more than Batum. Aldridge's scoring = down 1.6 PPG and much less efficient. Lillard's scoring up 0.6 PPG, but much less efficient. Lopez' scoring down 4.2 PPG. Afflalo scoring down 8.9 PPG. Kaman scoring down 6.6 PPG, Blake scoring down 2.9 PPG. Again only Batum, McCollum and Leonard saw their scoring increase in the playoffs. Why didn't any of our other starters step up and make up for the loss of Wesley's scoring?

I'm not saying Batum played great during the playoffs. Other than C.J. and Meyers, nobody did. What I take exception to is your basic point that Batum disappears during the playoffs. That's just flat out false. The guy increased his scoring by over 50% and his rebounding by over 60%. Was he efficient? Not especially, but neither were Aldridge, Lillard, Afflalo, Kaman, Blake, etc. The simple truth is Batum did not disappear during the playoffs. He was not passive. He took more shots, scored more points, got more rebounds and dished more assists. If you want to blame someone for disappearing, why not start with the guys who scored less, got fewer rebounds and had fewer assists.

BNM

Thank you! Post of the thread!

 

[Denny Crane]

Memphis actually got better after he left, which is more of a testament of Gasol coming along. What was Toronto's record this season (the season after Gay left)?

Memphis continued to improve, so what? Going from 20 wins to 46 wins with Gay is a pretty good indication he didn't make his team suck.

 

[magnifier661]

Memphis continued to improve, so what? Going from 20 wins to 46 wins with Gay is a pretty good indication he didn't make his team suck.

Actually it was more of an indicator that Gasol made them much better. The year they had that huge improvement had Gasol's numbers go up dramatically. Gay's usage actually went down that season.

 

[Denny Crane]

Actually it was more of an indicator that Gasol made them much better. The year they had that huge improvement had Gasol's numbers go up dramatically. Gay's usage actually went down that season.

So he's a team player? Good to hear.

Marbury wasn't so bad, I'm finding out.

Minny went from 26-56 to 40-42 Marbury's rookie season. 45-37 his sophomore season. He was traded after 18 games and Minny finished .500.

The Nets went from 16-34 to 31-51, but to 26-56 the following season (that was just a shitty team).

Phoenix went from 36-46 to 44-38. They traded him the following season and they went 29-53 (didn't get better).

The Knicks improved from 37-45 to 39-43 with him for part of his first season there. But with Isaiah Thomas in charge, the team went south.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Memphis' record with Gay: 22-60, 22-60, 24-58, 40-42, 46-36. His team got better with him. He was 20 years old as a rookie.

So, Gay gets all the credit for MEM's improvement in those years? It had nothing to do with the additions of Gasol, Conley, ZBo, etc.?

MEM got even better after they traded the elite scorer for a broken down, shadow of his former self Tayshaun Prince.

BNM

 

[Denny Crane]

So, Gay gets all the credit for MEM's improvement in those years? It had nothing to do with the additions of Gasol, Conley, ZBo, etc.?

MEM got even better after they traded the elite scorer for a broken down, shadow of his former self Tayshaun Prince.

BNM

No, but it is a very different story from "his team gets better when he leaves." His team gets better when he stays, too.

 

[Boob-No-More]

So he's a team player? Good to hear.

Marbury wasn't so bad, I'm finding out.

Minny went from 26-56 to 40-42 Marbury's rookie season. 45-37 his sophomore season. He was traded after 18 games and Minny finished .500.

The Nets went from 16-34 to 31-51, but to 26-56 the following season (that was just a shitty team).

Phoenix went from 36-46 to 44-38. They traded him the following season and they went 29-53 (didn't get better).

The Knicks improved from 37-45 to 39-43 with him for part of his first season there. But with Isaiah Thomas in charge, the team went south.

I suspect MIN's improvement had a lot more to do with a guy named Garnett than Marbury. Yeah the season Marbury was traded MIN finished .500. but that was the 50-game lockout shortened season. The next year, with Terrel Brandon at PG, MIN won 50 games for the first time in franchise history.

After swapping Marbury for Jason Kidd, the Nets immediately went from 26-56 to two consecutive finals appearances.

BNM

 

[Denny Crane]

I suspect MIN's improvement had a lot more to do with a guy named Garnett than Marbury. Yeah the season Marbury was traded MIN finished .500. but that was the 50-game lockout shortened season. The next year, with Terrel Brandon at PG, MIN won 50 games for the first time in franchise history.

After swapping Marbury for Jason Kidd, the Nets immediately went from 26-56 to two consecutive finals appearances.

BNM

So you're willing go attribute more losing to getting rid of Gay or Marbury, but not more winning to having Gay or Marbury. Tough double standard to live up to.

Anyhow, would you trade the #4 for Batum if you were the Knicks?

 

[Natebishop3]

So you're willing go attribute more losing to getting rid of Gay or Marbury, but not more winning to having Gay or Marbury. Tough double standard to live up to.

Anyhow, would you trade the #4 for Batum if you were the Knicks?

I would not. I would also not trade the #4 for Gay.

 

[Boob-No-More]

So you're willing go attribute more losing to getting rid of Gay or Marbury, but not more winning to having Gay or Marbury. Tough double standard to live up to.

The "more winning" you listed was small, incremental improvement over multiple seasons when there were several other key personnel moves. Nothing nearly as dramatic as improvement MIN and NJN made the season immediately after trading Marbury.

Anyhow, would you trade the #4 for Batum if you were the Knicks?

I have no idea. I don't know what the Knicks plans are. They were definitely dumping salary last season. So, does that mean they were clearing space to surround Carmelo with other high priced veterans, or does that mean a total rebuild as soon as they can get Carmelo off the books? If the former, yes, but I'd also want the #23 and one other asset. The other asset would not need to be a young player. They have so many holes to fill, even a veteran center like Kaman on the cheap would be useful to them. Even if they sign a starting center with their cap space, they'll still need a back up. I'd probably also try to force the Blazers to take Calderon and his contract to preserve as much cap space as possible to sign other players.

Honestly, that roster is such a train wreck, I'd probably totally blow things up and build around youth - which means no, I wouldn't trade the 4th pick for Batum, or anyone else except a player who is already and all star and under the age of 25.

BNM

 

[Natebishop3]

The "more winning" you listed was small, incremental improvement over multiple seasons when there were several other key personnel moves. Nothing nearly as dramatic as improvement MIN and NJN made the season immediately after trading Marbury.


I have no idea. I don't know what the Knicks plans are. They were definitely dumping salary last season. So, does that mean they were clearing space to surround Carmelo with other high priced veterans, or does that mean a total rebuild as soon as they can get Carmelo off the books? If the former, yes, but I'd also want the #23 and one other asset. The other asset would not need to be a young player. They have so many holes to fill, even a veteran center like Kaman on the cheap would be useful to them. Even if they sign a starting center with their cap space, they'll still need a back up. I'd probably also try to force the Blazers to take Calderon and his contract to preserve as much cap space as possible. to sign other players.

Honestly, that roster is such a train wreck, I'd probably totally blow things up and build around youth - which means no, I wouldn't trade the 4th pick for Batum, or anyone else except a player who is already and all star and under the age of 25.

BNM

The Knicks need a fresh start in the worst way possible.

New owner.

New team.

New coach.

The verdict is still out on PJax. He wanted Kerr really bad and that appears to have been a really good call on his part.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Best case scenario for the Knicks: the euro-flavor-of-the-month goes top 3 and either Russell or Okafor fall to #4.

Worst case: they have to "settle" for Winslow.

Why would they trade an asset that valuable for a vet with 80% of the talent and 4 times the salary?

 

[magnifier661]

The "more winning" you listed was small, incremental improvement over multiple seasons when there were several other key personnel moves. Nothing nearly as dramatic as improvement MIN and NJN made the season immediately after trading Marbury.


I have no idea. I don't know what the Knicks plans are. They were definitely dumping salary last season. So, does that mean they were clearing space to surround Carmelo with other high priced veterans, or does that mean a total rebuild as soon as they can get Carmelo off the books? If the former, yes, but I'd also want the #23 and one other asset. The other asset would not need to be a young player. They have so many holes to fill, even a veteran center like Kaman on the cheap would be useful to them. Even if they sign a starting center with their cap space, they'll still need a back up. I'd probably also try to force the Blazers to take Calderon and his contract to preserve as much cap space as possible to sign other players.

Honestly, that roster is such a train wreck, I'd probably totally blow things up and build around youth - which means no, I wouldn't trade the 4th pick for Batum, or anyone else except a player who is already and all star and under the age of 25.

BNM

Well said...

I think they should of blown shit up last season. The new problem was signing Melo to a max deal. That means they want to build around Melo. Because of that, they need veterans that can accommodate and support Melo's high potent ISO offense and low defense. I think Batum is versatile enough to be that guy, especially on the cheap (being an expiring if it fails).

Adding more youth will not help them now. Definitely helps them in the future. But if NY wants to work for the future, they would have let Melo walk last summer.

 

[Denny Crane]

The "more winning" you listed was small, incremental improvement over multiple seasons when there were several other key personnel moves. Nothing nearly as dramatic as improvement MIN and NJN made the season immediately after trading Marbury.


I have no idea. I don't know what the Knicks plans are. They were definitely dumping salary last season. So, does that mean they were clearing space to surround Carmelo with other high priced veterans, or does that mean a total rebuild as soon as they can get Carmelo off the books? If the former, yes, but I'd also want the #23 and one other asset. The other asset would not need to be a young player. They have so many holes to fill, even a veteran center like Kaman on the cheap would be useful to them. Even if they sign a starting center with their cap space, they'll still need a back up.

Honestly, that roster is such a train wreck, I'd probably totally blow things up and build around youth - which means no, I wouldn't trade the 4th pick for Batum, or anyone else except a player who is already and all star and under the age of 25.

BNM

I'm pretty much with you on this.

I don't see how adding Batum to a train wreck/rebuild project is going to make enough of a difference. Especially at the expense of the #4 that can make a difference as part of the rebuild strategy.

With the cap space, they could absorb a contract like Gay's and have a guy who'll score and put butts in the seats. Something for the fans to root for. Gay isn't going to cost them the #4. My only point is that's a better option than Batum for the #4. I do not expect it to go down.

The #2 option for the Knicks last season was Hardaway, who shot .389. Surely the Knicks could use another scorer and Gay would be an immediate improvement.

Gay's contract actually gets better as time goes on, too:

 

[ThugginPaulyGAllen]

1) Fair enough. Most players in the playoffs are not making 12+ million and there third best player. I'm not about to go through every team that made the playoffs and figure out who their third best player is and look at what there PER is. I did it with two examples (2 out of 16 teams, so 1/8) and it proved my point. If you care to look at more third options and list there PER, go for it. We are arguing two completely different things it would appear; im not comparing Batum to every player, I'm comparing Batum to what we need him to be in order to be successful - in accordance with what other teams third options do for them to be successful in the playoffs.

Furthermore, I am talking body of work not JUST this playoffs. For example;

Damian Lillard regular season PER through his career on avg - 18.5. In the playoffs? 18.0
Lamarcus Aldridge regular season? 20.3. Post season? 19.0.
Batum? 15.2. Post season? 12.3.

(All of the above are career averages in reg and post season PER wise.)

So, you tell me who is consistently significantly worse in the playoffs of the core 3?

2) So, you're defending a player who has a below average PER? Okay... Not sure why, but ok.

3) I'm singling out Batum because this thread is Batum for the #4 pick, is it not? It isn't Lamarcus, Damian, Wesley, Meyers, CJ, etc. It appears I'm not the only one cherry picking since I noted that in my post that they have their flaws as well, but this specific post is about NICOLAS BATUM and I responded in accordance with the player mentioned in this thread; in fact, I believe I even stated that while those other players have flaws, Batum has the most value as an asset for us as a team, due to how good he is in the regular season, but he (as shown earlier) is worse in the playoffs by a pretty decent margin throughout the length of his career.

4) Also, in regards to the players PER increasing - McCollum and Leonard, THAT IS WHAT WE NEED IN THE PLAYOFFS from role players. Because, yes, Lamarcus and Damian face MUCH tougher defenses and are schemed out of the game. Any half decent coach will tell you, they do not want you getting your first or second option. That is why the third option is critical. Furthermore, it was stated that McCollum was openly being game planned against and still managed a postitive PER shift (I'd attribute that more to a poor regular season, but whatever "defenses are so much better in the playoffs and Memphis is "a really fucking good defensive team"). Additionally, All of the rest of the players were/are scrubs with the exception of Afflalo (who shouldn't have even been playing, tbh) of the 7 you listed. We NEED a better team but this THREAD is about BATUM our THIRD best player. Kaman and Blake are not championship worthy, but they don't make 12+ million or play 30+ minutes a game. So we had TWO players step up while Aldridge and Lillard were facing two of the best defensive players in the league, McCollum and Leonard, neither of which have the role or importance of Batum.

5) It is apparent to me you disregarded a majority of my post as I mentioned that there are flaws with other players BUT advanced stats don't show them being consistently significantly worse in the postseason (my words), as evidenced by PER, throughout the course of their careers (I gave the numbers earlier.) The numbers don't lie, Lillard and Aldridge stay approximately the same (Lillard has limited experience, but Aldridge sure as hell doesn't) and Batum gets much worse. He disappears in the playoffs in accordance with the statistics that I provided, which formulated my opinion for my theory that he disappears, supported by numbers. I don't care about his per game stat increases as much as I care about him being inefficient and being a BELOW AVERAGE NBA player in the playoffs - consistently.

So, no. I'm not going to question our two best players who stay relatively the same while our third best player becomes below average. I'll question the guy making 12 million and playing as a below average NBA player while facing defenses not geared towards stopping him long before I'll question Lillard (guarded by Tony Allen and Mike Conley) or Aldridge (Zbo and Gasol). There are reasons that Lillard and Aldridge should be significantly worse and less efficient - there is no reason Batum should be significantly worse. He should get more open shots due to defensive assignments and rotations due to the defenses being geared towards Aldridge and Lillard (and McCcollum LOL)

I never used the word drastic, and I didn't say every player. I said most players see their PER decrease in the post season. When you put words in my mouth, it's easy for you to claim what I "said" is incorrect! Siting two counter examples does not disprove what I wrote.

Just look at the Blazers alone:

Aldridge:
Regular Season PER = 22.8
Playoff PER = 16.7
Net = - 6.1

Lillard:
Regular Season PER = 20.7
Playoff PER = 15.0
Net = -5.7

Batum:
Regular Season PER = 13.1
Playoff PER =11.1
Net = -2.0

Lopez:
Regular Season PER = 16.2
Playoff PER = 11.6
Net = -4.6

Afflalo:
Regular Season PER = 8.2
Playoff PER = -5.0
Net = -13.2

Kaman:
Regular Season PER = 17.3
Playoff PER = 11.7
Net = -5.6

Blake:
Regular Season PER = 9.5
Playoff PER = 2.9
Net = -6.6

Leonard:
Regular Season PER = 14.8
Playoff PER = 19.6
Net = +4.8

McCollum:
Regular Season PER = 13.1
Playoff PER = 16.1
Net = +3.0

So, all of the top 7 in MPG during the regular season saw their PER drop in the post season. Of those, Batum's -2.0 drop in PER was significantly less than Aldridge, Lillard, Lopez, Afflalo, Kaman and Blake. The only two players who saw an increase in PER in the playoffs were two backups that weren't even in the regular rotation for most of the season (in other words, two guys the Grizzlies did not heavily scout and prepare for).



No, I didn't notice that (again, putting words in my mouth). By definition a PER = 15.0 is league average. So, Batum's regular season PER = 13.1 was, by definition below average.



First, in spite of the acronym Hollinger chose, PER is NOT a good measure of efficiency. It attempts to be one single number that represents total production. In terms of scoring efficiency, there are better stats (TS% or PTS/FGA). And if you are going to single out Batum, our 3rd best player, for his 2.0 decrease in efficiency what about our 1st best player (-6.1), our second best player (-5.6), our 4th best player (-4.6), etc.



No, that's not what I am arguing at all (again, putting words in MY mouth to make YOUR point). I'm saying comparing regular season PER to playoff PER is a crappy way to show a player whose scoring increased by 50% and rebounding increased by over 60% "disappeared" in the playoffs. PER does NOT measure efficiency, and is probably the most misnamed stat ever. Even Hollinger's own definition of PER does not mention the word efficiency: "The PER sums up all a player's positive accomplishments, subtracts the negative accomplishments, and returns a per-minute rating of a player's performance." PER is all about production, not efficiency. Allen Iverson has a career post season PER = 21.2, but his career playoff TS% is only .489. Iverson was a volume scorer, not an efficient scorer, and PER rewards him for the volume of his scoring in spite if his low scoring efficiency.

Most of the advanced stats you mentioned are not used in the calculation of PER.



First, Batum did not increase his scoring by only 3 points per game in he playoffs, he increased it by 4.8 PPG. And what about his other teammates? How much did they increase their scoring to make up for the loss of Wesley? I already showed that other than C.J. and Meyers, all out other top players saw their PERs decrease by much more than Batum. Aldridge's scoring = down 1.6 PPG and much less efficient. Lillard's scoring up 0.6 PPG, but much less efficient. Lopez' scoring down 4.2 PPG. Afflalo scoring down 8.9 PPG. Kaman scoring down 6.6 PPG, Blake scoring down 2.9 PPG. Again only Batum, McCollum and Leonard saw their scoring increase in the playoffs. Why didn't any of our other starters step up and make up for the loss of Wesley's scoring?

I'm not saying Batum played great during the playoffs. Other than C.J. and Meyers, nobody did. What I take exception to is your basic point that Batum disappears during the playoffs. That's just flat out false. The guy increased his scoring by over 50% and his rebounding by over 60%. Was he efficient? Not especially, but neither were Aldridge, Lillard, Afflalo, Kaman, Blake, etc. The simple truth is Batum did not disappear during the playoffs. He was not passive. He took more shots, scored more points, got more rebounds and dished more assists. If you want to blame someone for disappearing, why not start with the guys who scored less, got fewer rebounds and had fewer assists.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

1) Fair enough. Most players in the playoffs are not making 12+ million and there third best player. I'm not about to go through every team that made the playoffs and figure out who their third best player is and look at what there PER is. I did it with two examples (2 out of 16 teams, so 1/8) and it proved my point. If you care to look at more third options and list there PER, go for it. We are arguing two completely different things it would appear; im not comparing Batum to every player, I'm comparing Batum to what we need him to be in order to be successful - in accordance with what other teams third options do for them to be successful in the playoffs.

Furthermore, I am talking body of work not JUST this playoffs. For example;

Damian Lillard regular season PER through his career on avg - 18.5. In the playoffs? 18.0
Lamarcus Aldridge regular season? 20.3. Post season? 19.0.
Batum? 15.2. Post season? 12.3.

(All of the above are career averages in reg and post season PER wise.)

So, you tell me who is consistently significantly worse in the playoffs of the core 3?

2) So, you're defending a player who has a below average PER? Okay... Not sure why, but ok.

3) I'm singling out Batum because this thread is Batum for the #4 pick, is it not? It isn't Lamarcus, Damian, Wesley, Meyers, CJ, etc. It appears I'm not the only one cherry picking since I noted that in my post that they have their flaws as well, but this specific post is about NICOLAS BATUM and I responded in accordance with the player mentioned in this thread; in fact, I believe I even stated that while those other players have flaws, Batum has the most value as an asset for us as a team, due to how good he is in the regular season, but he (as shown earlier) is worse in the playoffs by a pretty decent margin throughout the length of his career.

4) Also, in regards to the players PER increasing - McCollum and Leonard, THAT IS WHAT WE NEED IN THE PLAYOFFS from role players. Because, yes, Lamarcus and Damian face MUCH tougher defenses and are schemed out of the game. Any half decent coach will tell you, they do not want you getting your first or second option. That is why the third option is critical. Furthermore, it was stated that McCollum was openly being game planned against and still managed a postitive PER shift (I'd attribute that more to a poor regular season, but whatever "defenses are so much better in the playoffs and Memphis is "a really fucking good defensive team"). Additionally, All of the rest of the players were/are scrubs with the exception of Afflalo (who shouldn't have even been playing, tbh) of the 7 you listed. We NEED a better team but this THREAD is about BATUM our THIRD best player. Kaman and Blake are not championship worthy, but they don't make 12+ million or play 30+ minutes a game. So we had TWO players step up while Aldridge and Lillard were facing two of the best defensive players in the league, McCollum and Leonard, neither of which have the role or importance of Batum.

5) It is apparent to me you disregarded a majority of my post as I mentioned that there are flaws with other players BUT advanced stats don't show them being consistently significantly worse in the postseason (my words), as evidenced by PER, throughout the course of their careers (I gave the numbers earlier.) The numbers don't lie, Lillard and Aldridge stay approximately the same (Lillard has limited experience, but Aldridge sure as hell doesn't) and Batum gets much worse. He disappears in the playoffs in accordance with the statistics that I provided, which formulated my opinion for my theory that he disappears, supported by numbers. I don't care about his per game stat increases as much as I care about him being inefficient and being a BELOW AVERAGE NBA player in the playoffs - consistently.

So, no. I'm not going to question our two best players who stay relatively the same while our third best player becomes below average. I'll question the guy making 12 million and playing as a below average NBA player while facing defenses not geared towards stopping him long before I'll question Lillard (guarded by Tony Allen and Mike Conley) or Aldridge (Zbo and Gasol). There are reasons that Lillard and Aldridge should be significantly worse and less efficient - there is no reason Batum should be significantly worse. He should get more open shots due to defensive assignments and rotations due to the defenses being geared towards Aldridge and Lillard (and McCcollum LOL)

We've beaten this pretty well to death, and I'm certainly not going to look at regular season vs. playoff PERs for every 3rd option on every playoff team. Just a couple general points. Batum should not have been our 3rd option against MEM. He was actually our 6th leading scorer during the regular season (5th if you count Wes and Afflalo as 1 option since we got Afflalo about a week before Wes went down). Batum's major strength is his rebounding and facilitating. He averaged 8.6 RPG and 5.2 APG in the playoffs. Other than LeBron, name one small forward in the playoffs this year that topped one of those numbers, let alone both. I think most teams would take that kind of production, plus his 14.2 PPG, from their small forward in the playoffs. Again, I'm not saying Batum played great, but you don't average 14.2 PPG, 8.6 RPG and 5.2 APG (or 15.2 PPG, 7.6 RPG and 4.8 APG last year) by disappearing.

And, it wasn't just this year. Batum played very well against HOU last year and both his PPG and RPG were up, and his APG about the same in the playoffs last year vs. the regular season.

I admit I discount Batum's earlier playoff performances under Nate McMillan. McMillan always severely under utilized Batum. Under Nate, Batum's one and only role was to stand in the corner for the occasional corner 3.

Second, PER isn't the be all end all stat to begin with, but it's absolutely HORRIBLE when comparing small sample sizes, like a single playoff series (in Batum's case). Just look at Spencer Hawes, for example. He had an absolutely stellar PER = 18.8 in the post season, compared to a rather crappy PER = 9.8 during the regular season. If you're just going by PER, it certainly looks like Hawes was one of those role players that stepped up his game in the playoffs. The truth is much different. Over two series, Hawes played in 8 playoff games, but did not make one single meaningful contribution to his team. He only played garbage time minutes. In the first round, he scored 2 points in a 27-point loss to SAS. In the second round against HOU, he scored 2 points in a 25-point win, 8 points in a 33-point win and 11 points in a 21-point loss - all meaningless garbage time points that had zero impact on his team's playoff success. But, there's that gaudy playoff PER of 18.8.

Yeah, I know it's just one example, but PER has always led to a large number of what I call S^4 - Small Sample Size Superstars, guys who have all-star like PERs, but don't really help their teams win. Of course, with a small sample size, it can also swing in the other direction. If a player has one bad game, it can drastically skew their PER in a 4 or 5 game playoff series.

BNM