How much will Hickson command?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

So I guess it comes down to how comfortable we are with Meyers Leonard at the end of the year. His PER has ben steadily rising, but he's still got a ways to go before I feel comfy with him starting. However, in the Hickson position where he's just a garbage man, we could have Leonard start next season and call it good...

Regardless, Hickson's not going to come off the bench for us. He's going to start somewhere. And he's also not going to accept another one-year deal, no matter how big we make it. So, basically, he's not coming back next season.
 
As our team leader in PER despite 2/3 the minutes of Aldridge, Hickson is the greatest Blazer free agent of the generation. Paul Allen might offer him compensation off the books, like 15% ownership of the team.
 
That's what they all say. Prove it. And don't just cite a big page full of equations.

That's my trick; you don't get to.
 
That's what they all say. Prove it. And don't just cite a big page full of equations.

That's my trick; you don't get to.

My trick is I don't have to prove it to you. You have to prove it isn't normalized to me.
 
514nj5.png
 

Hickson is a solid role player, but his FT% is brutal. He's a very good garbage man who can rebound. Drtg is dependent on who is on the floor with you, as is Ortg, fwiw.

I wouldn't pay him more than the MLE, and I will be surprised if somebody offers him more than the MLE. He is a very limited player who is very good at rebounding, but you lose on the defensive end because of the terrible defense. The Blazers need to get someone who can defend at least as well as LMA, because I am sick of seeing Kevin Love and a few others get to coast on the defensive end while playing the Blazers, at the same time LMA has to defend him and a few others.
 
Last edited:
Hickson is a role player who can fill a valuable niche on a good team. RE the comparative statistics, Hickson simply is not used or guarded the same way LaMarcus is.

Hickson isn't as valuable or versatile or used the same or as much as LaMarcus in the real world, no matter what those numbers suggest. I would suggest that LaMarcus' usage is the very reason some of his numbers aren't higher.

Just imagine for a moment Hickson were used the same way LaMarcus is: what do you think his numbers would look like? Conversely, we know that putting LaMarcus in the low block unleashes LaMonster.

It will be interesting to see what the market says Hickson's value is, but I think it is going to be largely dependent on whethere there is a team that can afford him that needs a role player that brings what Hickson does. I think we are one of those teams.
 
He'll get about $9M.

Shows what you know; PER is normalized so that how many minutes you play doesn't matter.

I knew it of course, but for most players, fewer minutes means less productivity per minute. Aldridge has 50% more time to get his momentum going. Hickson is pulled out more times, disrupting his continuity during the game. So I mentioned their large diference in minutes per game.
 
He'll get about $9M.



I knew it of course, but for most players, fewer minutes means less productivity per minute. Aldridge has 50% more time to get his momentum going. Hickson is pulled out more times, disrupting his continuity during the game. So I mentioned their large diference in minutes per game.

That works both ways. JJ is a hustle player. Hustle players do not sustain their level of play if they play 40 minutes a game like LMA is forced to do most nights. His per could be effected by less rebounds and more turnovers per minute if he is tired.
 
That makes sense, which makes you good enough for your own shoe, once you learn about affect vs effect.
 
He'll get about $9M.



I knew it of course, but for most players, fewer minutes means less productivity per minute. Aldridge has 50% more time to get his momentum going. Hickson is pulled out more times, disrupting his continuity during the game. So I mentioned their large diference in minutes per game.

Or fewer minutes also could equate to better PER 36 minutes as well. Hypothetical doesn't count unless we are talking how Unicorns exist.

I look at the hypothetical and compare it with real numbers. What if Hickson got as many minutes and still scored the same amount? Maybe he doesn't have the conditioning to even last that long. Whatever the case, the true numbers are the telling tail; not some mysterious if he gets more minutes, he will give you better stat bullshit.
 
Or fewer minutes also could equate to better PER 36 minutes as well. Hypothetical doesn't count unless we are talking how Unicorns exist.

I look at the hypothetical and compare it with real numbers. What if Hickson got as many minutes and still scored the same amount? Maybe he doesn't have the conditioning to even last that long. Whatever the case, the true numbers are the telling tail; not some mysterious if he gets more minutes, he will give you better stat bullshit.

So far we have a 7-game sample in which Hickson played approximately 33 minutes or more. In those games he averaged about 14 ppg and 13 rpg.
 
Fucking pay the man! Starting to be that Brian grant type player for us.
 
Or fewer minutes also could equate to better PER 36 minutes as well. Hypothetical doesn't count unless we are talking how Unicorns exist.

I look at the hypothetical and compare it with real numbers. What if Hickson got as many minutes and still scored the same amount? Maybe he doesn't have the conditioning to even last that long. Whatever the case, the true numbers are the telling tail; not some mysterious if he gets more minutes, he will give you better stat bullshit.

The bullshit is yours. Minutes played is a real stat, not a hypothetical. It is 100% certain that if he played more minutes, his stats would be even greater. His minutes are not limited by conditioning or fouls. They are limited by Olshey wanting to give his pick Leonard some experience. There is no mystery here except to you.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top