Nolan Smith is not the PGOTF

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

That's if he actually HAD success. Getting a good PER doesn't actually count for anything.

It doesn't count, huh? OK.

Also, in case you missed it (when it was reported and then when other people posted it): Bayless is hurt. That's the reason he didn't play tonight.

:)

Ed O.
 
It doesn't count, huh? OK.

It is at best an instrumental good. That is, good if it leads to something actually valuable, like your team being better with you on the court.

Also, in case you missed it (when it was reported and then when other people posted it): Bayless is hurt. That's the reason he didn't play tonight.

I did miss it. Like I said, I just read the boxscore, that apparently LIED to me.

I'm sure that if he had played the Raptors would've won by 40.
 
I'm also interested to hear how a player that "sucks" can have a PER of almost 18 more than halfway through a regular-length season.

His PER is 17.6. Here are players between 17 and 18. A few are fighting to just barely stay in the league for another couple of years, and he's one.

Our own Elliot Williams is 18.9. Armon Johnson is 20.8. You don't allow a mere statistic to blind you to what your eyes see. That's PapaG thinking.

http://www.basketball-reference.com...6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=per&order_by_asc=Y
 
His PER is 17.6. Here are players between 17 and 18. A few are fighting to just barely stay in the league for another couple of years, and he's one.

Our own Elliot Williams is 18.9. Armon Johnson is 20.8. You don't allow a mere statistic to blind you to what your eyes see. That's PapaG thinking.

http://www.basketball-reference.com...6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=per&order_by_asc=Y

The per scenario Needs usage %. And that lost you mentioned on the link has Batum in some very nice company. Rondo, amare, and many other like them in star power. I'll take it!
 
Yes, but the exceptions on the list, and he is one, show that being in the 17s doesn't inevitably mean he is headed for big things, as Ed O inferred.
 
back to nolan smith, because who gives a fuck about jeryd bayless at this point, why does no one bring up the fact he didn't even play the point in college? he was forced into the duty his senior year because of Irving's injury. and even then his pg skills were mediocre at best. why this organization ever thought he would be a decent to good pg is beyond me.
 
back to nolan smith, because who gives a fuck about jeryd bayless at this point, why does no one bring up the fact he didn't even play the point in college? he was forced into the duty his senior year because of Irving's injury. and even then his pg skills were mediocre at best. why this organization ever thought he would be a decent to good pg is beyond me.

:dunno: I brought that up at the time he was drafted. I was soundly told to shut up.
 
Yes, but the exceptions on the list, and he is one, show that being in the 17s doesn't inevitably mean he is headed for big things, as Ed O inferred.

It doesn't mean he can't either.
 
Here's all you need to know about Nolan Smith. Steve Blake D'd him up. Yes, Steve Blake. Smith tried to crossover Blake and Blake stripped him. Then while pressuring Smith at midcourt, Blake forced Smith to dribble off his own foot for a backcourt violation.

Steve Blake ladies and gentlemen. Steve Blake. Let that marinate for a little bit...
 
His PER is 17.6. Here are players between 17 and 18. A few are fighting to just barely stay in the league for another couple of years, and he's one.

Our own Elliot Williams is 18.9. Armon Johnson is 20.8. You don't allow a mere statistic to blind you to what your eyes see. That's PapaG thinking.

http://www.basketball-reference.com...6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=per&order_by_asc=Y

There are three 23 year-olds on that list: Batum, DeAndre Jordan and Bayless.

That's a pretty good group of prospects, in my opinion.

Actually, the list as a whole looks good... the majority of them are starters and almost all of them are significantly older than Bayless.

Ed O.
 
Here's all you need to know about Nolan Smith. Steve Blake D'd him up. Yes, Steve Blake. Smith tried to crossover Blake and Blake stripped him. Then while pressuring Smith at midcourt, Blake forced Smith to dribble off his own foot for a backcourt violation.

Steve Blake ladies and gentlemen. Steve Blake. Let that marinate for a little bit...

Never should have traded him :wink:
 
12 minutes tonight and he gave us NOTHING! Not taking Faried was our biggest draft blunder. Smith is supposed to be a 4 year NBA ready guy.
 
12 minutes tonight and he gave us NOTHING! Not taking Faried was our biggest draft blunder. Smith is supposed to be a 4 year NBA ready guy.

That's pretty much the norm around here every year, don't you think? Not a big surprise.
 
Here's all you need to know about Nolan Smith. Steve Blake D'd him up. Yes, Steve Blake. Smith tried to crossover Blake and Blake stripped him. Then while pressuring Smith at midcourt, Blake forced Smith to dribble off his own foot for a backcourt violation.

Steve Blake ladies and gentlemen. Steve Blake. Let that marinate for a little bit...

I am shocked. A veteran befuddled a rookie. This is amazing.

You just discovered that Blake tries to play defense religiously? Why do you think McMillan liked him? For his looks?
 
Bayless has a hip injury, and has been playing better than any PG we have had since Porter

Wait, what? Surely you jest. Several glaring oversights here, the first that comes to mind would be Rod Strickland.
 
After watching Felton play so badly for the past 4 months, you'd think people would appreciate Dre more. sigh.
 
After watching Felton play so badly for the past 4 months, you'd think people would appreciate Dre more. sigh.

It's sad that this soon after Dre being gone, one of his biggest hindrances (McMillan) is no longer in the way, and I've defended McMillan a lot as well.
 
If you change your query to account for age, suddenly Bayless looks a lot more promising.

http://bkref.com/tiny/GWsEj

Armon Johnson and Ben Uzoh are obvious outliers, but it's basically a list of who you kind of expect to still be pretty good in 10 years. Given that there's 31 names on the list, you can think of the talent pool there to be enough for one of these guys per team.

It's nice that we've got three of those guys (Batum, Williams and Armon--even if he's an outlier) but I'd be a lot more happy with our rebuild if we had six of them, which would be pretty easy to imagine without us making some recent gaffes (Blair, Faried, Bayless).
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top