Rudy For Taj Gibson?

[BGrantFan]

I'm sorry. You're right. That puts me on par with 3/4 of your snide posts.

Oh, and I can fight statistics. PER is only one stat. I choose not to fight stats at this moment, at least with you. But I don't necessarily disagree with regards to Gipson.

It's "Gipson".

Anyhow, Drtg is another stat, and Gippy wins over the "defensive specialist" Matthews. I notice Ed left, though.

 

[BGrantFan]

Which available statistic shows that Wesley Matthews is a "defensive specialist" compared to Taj Gibson, Ed?

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

It's "Gipson".

Anyhow, Drtg is another stat, and Gippy wins over the "defensive specialist" Matthews. I notice Ed left, though.

I guess I'm not a traditionalist, as I don't always buy into stats. I buy into them only so much. I say I'm excited about Matthews - I enjoyed what I saw of him last season. I think he could be a big pickup for us. I liked what I saw on the floor.

As or Gibson, again, don't care much for him. Not for Rudy, anyhow, and I don't care how much better Gibson's stats are than Matthews.

 

[BGrantFan]

I guess I'm not a traditionalist, as I don't always buy into stats. I buy into them only so much. I say I'm excited about Matthews - I enjoyed what I saw of him last season. I think he could be a big pickup for us. I liked what I saw on the floor.

As or Gibson, again, don't care much for him. Not for Rudy, anyhow, and I don't care how much better Gibson's stats are than Matthews.

I have no issue with your opinion on Matthews. I was only commenting on Ed's blatant contradictions on his use of PER and age with regards to Gippy and Matthews. The guy literally called me a "liar" multiple times in a thread for doing much less than he just did tonight.

Why you continued to defend him (by attacking me) after he ran away after being called out is puzzling, but that's fine.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

I have no issue with your opinion on Matthews. I was only commenting on Ed's blatant contradictions on his use of PER and age with regards to Gippy and Matthews. The guy literally called me a "liar" multiple times in a thread for doing much less than he just did tonight.

Oh, I know you don't have an issue with my opinion on Matthews. It's hard to argue with me, when I say "I'm not worried about his stats, I just like what I see on the court." Unless you know my level of experience in basketball, that opinion doesn't mean much.

That being said, I'm just very much a tongue-in-cheek, sarcastic asshole who sometimes doesn't know when to egg people on and when not to.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

He was an old rookie!

The positive: DRtg -- 103

 

[BGrantFan]

He was an old rookie!

The positive: DRtg -- 103

"Defensive specialist" Wesley Matthews: DRtg -- 108.

 

[Nikolokolus]

"Defensive specialist" Wesley Matthews: DRtg -- 108.

The worst thing BBR ever did was to include defensive rating as an individual player stat -- totally bogus and totally dependent on teammates.

 

[RoyToy]

And I laugh when I see people using it.

Kind of like using PER as the be all, end all

 

[Nikolokolus]

And I laugh when I see people using it.

Kind of like using PER as the be all, end all

There are times when both are relevant and appropriate. Dismissing one or both out of hand is just as foolish as using it to cover all situations.

 

[andalusian]

Mathews primary job was as an individual defender, and when you look at his Position PER vs. opposition PER - he actually did much, much better than Gibson (who is not bad at all for a rookie).

 

[Nikolokolus]

Mathews primary job was as an individual defender, and when you look at his Position PER vs. opposition PER - he actually did much, much better than Gibson (who is not bad at all for a rookie).

Precisely. When you are given the task of covering the opponent's best wing scorer it's almost a guarantee that they are going to get their points, all you can do is try to slow them down and shave a few points off of their field goal percentage. Hell, look at Shane Battier (108) and Ron Artest's (105) defensive rating. Did both of those guys suddenly morph into middling defenders? Probably not.

 

[andalusian]

Precisely. When you are given the task of covering the opponent's best wing scorer it's almost a guarantee that they are going to get their points, all you can do is try to slow them down and shave a few points off of their field goal percentage. Hell, look at Shane Battier (108) and Ron Artest's (105) defensive rating. Did both of those guys suddenly morph into middling to defenders? Probably not.

I agree. DRTG is not a stat you want to look at in a vacuum. For example, Outlaw's DRTG as a Blazer last year was better than Batum's - anyone that will take from that that Outlaw is a better defensive player than Batum is not paying attention. On the opposite side of the spectrum - the team's best ORTG players last year were Jeff Pendergraph and Batum. Anyone that thinks these guys are our best offensive players based on these stats needs to rethink his belief in stats.

 

[BGrantFan]

Mathews primary job was as an individual defender, and when you look at his Position PER vs. opposition PER - he actually did much, much better than Gibson (who is not bad at all for a rookie).

Matthews got torched by Carmelo Anthony and Kobe Bryant in the playoffs.

 

[andalusian]

Matthews got torched by Carmelo Anthony and Kobe Bryant in the playoffs.

So what? Everyone gets torched by these guys. He is a rookie that made them work hard.

In all of Batum's games against Brynat Kobe scored 23, 26, 26, 32 and 20

In all of Batum's games against Anthony Carmelo scored 38, 12, 30, 25

Does this make Batum a bad defender? No it does not.

Let me remind you that when Roy was a rookie and he faced Kobe, Kobe scored 25 and 65 (yikes) against him.

Kobe Bryant is a fantastic player, as is Anthony, these guys are among the best scorers in the NBA night in, night out. They are going to score on people. All you want your defenders to do - is make it hard for them, and if you are lucky enough and have a good "mistake cleaner" big behind you - you make them take contested shots, or if they work hard to get by you - make it easier for the guys behind to clean up.

Utah had no shot-blockers, no real defensive interior presence. The Blazers currently have 3 of these guys on the roster. But, the Blazers, had bad perimeter defense that put the bigs in foul trouble last year. With Batum and Mathews on the perimeter and Oden, Camby, Joel inside, the Blazers will make life much much harder for opposing players.

If you look at head2head matches - you will see that Kobe scored in the 30s many times on Ron Artest, he had multiple games scoring 40+ points against Bruce Bowen. These guys are going to score, especially with the no-hands defensive rules of the NBA. You can never stop them, you can make them work hard, however, and it seems that Mathews is good at that.

 

[BGrantFan]

So what? Everyone gets torched by these guys. He is a rookie that made them work hard.

In all of Batum's games against Brynat Kobe scored 23, 26, 26, 32 and 20

In all of Batum's games against Anthony Carmelo scored 38, 12, 30, 25

Does this make Batum a bad defender? No it does not.

Let me remind you that when Roy was a rookie and he faced Kobe, Kobe scored 25 and 65 (yikes) against him.

Kobe Bryant is a fantastic player, as is Anthony, these guys are among the best scorers in the NBA night in, night out. They are going to score on people. All you want your defenders to do - is make it hard for them, and if you are lucky enough and have a good "mistake cleaner" big behind you - you make them take contested shots, or if they work hard to get by you - make it easier for the guys behind to clean up.

Utah had no shot-blockers, no real defensive interior presence. The Blazers currently have 3 of these guys on the roster. But, the Blazers, had bad perimeter defense that put the bigs in foul trouble last year. With Batum and Mathews on the perimeter and Oden, Camby, Joel inside, the Blazers will make life much much harder for opposing players.

Untrue. Kobe struggled against Boston, for example, this year in the Finals. Against Utah, with Matthews on him, he had a Game Score of 20 or better in every single game, which is the first time that he achieved that in a series since Shaq left LA.

Not only did Kobe torch Matthews, he did it to the tune of his best playoff series in years. I guess I don't see how that makes Matthews a "defensive specialist". Bruce Bowen never had a series like that against Kobe.

 

[andalusian]

Untrue. Kobe struggled against Boston, for example, this year in the Finals. Against Utah, with Matthews on him, he had a Game Score of 20 or better in every single game, which is the first time that he achieved that in a series since Shaq left LA.

Which point to what I was saying about the need for good perimeter and interior defense. Utah does not have it. Boston did.

Not only did Kobe torch Matthews, he did it to the tune of his best playoff series in years. I guess I don't see how that makes Matthews a "defensive specialist". Bruce Bowen never had a series like that against Kobe.

Maybe because Bruce Bowen never had a series as a rookie where he was the primary defender against one of the best players in the league? Maybe because when Bowen was on the Spurs they had that fantastic combination I mentioned above of good perimeter AND interior defense?

BTW - despite the fact that Bryant struggled against the Celtics and their fantastic team defense, he still scored 30, 21, 29, 33, 38, 26 and 23 - proving again, that no matter what - he is going to score on you.

 

[Ed O]

Anyhow, Drtg is another stat, and Gippy wins over the "defensive specialist" Matthews. I notice Ed left, though.

I left because it was Thursday night and there are many attractive young women to talk to in my neighborhood on Thursday night.

Which available statistic shows that Wesley Matthews is a "defensive specialist" compared to Taj Gibson, Ed?

I have no idea. I don't need a statistic to tell me that Matthews was starting for a playoff team because of his defense.

Ed O.

 

[BGrantFan]

Which point to what I was saying about the need for good perimeter and interior defense. Utah does not have it. Boston did.



Maybe because Bruce Bowen never had a series as a rookie where he was the primary defender against one of the best players in the league? Maybe because when Bowen was on the Spurs they had that fantastic combination I mentioned above of good perimeter AND interior defense?

BTW - despite the fact that Bryant struggled against the Celtics and their fantastic team defense, he still scored 30, 21, 29, 33, 38, 26 and 23 - proving again, that no matter what - he is going to score on you.

My only point is that statistically and by my observation, the rookie Matthews is not a "defensive specialist", at least in terms of being an elite defender. The Blazers grossly overpaid for him IMO, but I do hope that he proves me wrong and helps the Blazers win a title.

 

[BGrantFan]

I left because it was Thursday night and there are many attractive young women to talk to in my neighborhood on Thursday night.

 

[andalusian]

My only point is that statistically and by my observation, the rookie Matthews is not a "defensive specialist", at least in terms of being an elite defender. The Blazers grossly overpaid for him IMO, but I do hope that he proves me wrong and helps the Blazers win a title.

If you look at per position offensive PER differential as broken by 82games.com - you will see that last year Mathews had a better differential PER than someone like Ron Artest, which, given that he is a rookie, is very, very promising.

He has shown that as an individual defender, he is pretty good, especially when you factor his inexperience.

While I agree that the Blazers over-paid, that was probably the only way they could be sure they get him, and since they are over the cap anyway, it does not really matter in the big picture as far as their flexibility going forward is.

If the Blazers want to become an elite contending team, they need to have elite team defensive scheme, given that the great offensive scorers in the NBA do not play for the Blazers (other than possibly Roy). They basically had to go the Celtics way from the 2008 year, and they now have the ingredients to do it. If they can actually bake this cake, is yet to be seen.

 

[MikeDC]

I don't see the Bulls making Taj available. At best, that would be plugging one hole in our lineup by creating another. Add in the facts that Rudy can bolt if he feels like it, Taj is on a nice rookie deal for several more years, the guys in front of him are not known for staying healthy, and the guys behind him are not known at all, and it doesn't make sense for the Bulls to trade him. He's solid all around and pretty guaranteed to play 24mpg. I don't even know Rudy will get that for sure.

Also, were I the Blazers, I'd prefer a pick to Gibson. I do think he's better than Pendergraph and Cunningham, but it's a fairly marginal upgrade. On the other hand, having a pick could be a pretty big upgrade, and it could come at a time you actually need it. So fit wise, Taj is good for us and not good for you.

I don't see any sense in comparing Matthews and Gibson defensively, since even under the best circs, you wouldn't expect "good defense" for a wing and a big to be all that similar. That being said, I think Taj is all-around good defensively and not terrible offensively.

 

[andalusian]

I don't see the Bulls making Taj available. At best, that would be plugging one hole in our lineup by creating another. Add in the facts that Rudy can bolt if he feels like it, Taj is on a nice rookie deal for several more years, the guys in front of him are not known for staying healthy, and the guys behind him are not known at all, and it doesn't make sense for the Bulls to trade him. He's solid all around and pretty guaranteed to play 24mpg. I don't even know Rudy will get that for sure.

Also, were I the Blazers, I'd prefer a pick to Gibson. I do think he's better than Pendergraph and Cunningham, but it's a fairly marginal upgrade. On the other hand, having a pick could be a pretty big upgrade, and it could come at a time you actually need it. So fit wise, Taj is good for us and not good for you.

I don't see any sense in comparing Matthews and Gibson defensively, since even under the best circs, you wouldn't expect "good defense" for a wing and a big to be all that similar. That being said, I think Taj is all-around good defensively and not terrible offensively.

I generally agree with this assessment (with the exception that I really do not think that at this point you can confidently say that Gibson is better than Dante). Another thing that would make the Blazers value a pick more, might be the fact that it will allow them to sign both Patty and Armon - as both of these guys bring a different skill that the Blazers need to the table.

I would not, however, be too surprised to see Rudy starting the year on the Blazers roster and included in a deal closer to the trade deadline.

 

[blazerboy30]

I have no issue with your opinion on Matthews. I was only commenting on Ed's blatant contradictions on his use of PER and age with regards to Gippy and Matthews. The guy literally called me a "liar" multiple times in a thread for doing much less than he just did tonight.

Why you continued to defend him (by attacking me) after he ran away after being called out is puzzling, but that's fine.

You're the victim, PapaG.

 

[BGrantFan]

You're the victim.

You're the stalker.

 

[Ed O]

You're the stalker.

Can you make fun of him for going to a good school again? Everyone loves that routine.

Ed O.

 

[BGrantFan]

Can you make fun of him for going to a good school again? Everyone loves that routine.

Ed O.

You mean pretending to go to a good school?

 

[Ed O]

You mean pretending to go to a good school?

Pretending to be someone you're not is no bueno. Do you agree?

I might misremember, but you seemed to be making fun of him for going there and having it as his avatar, though, rather than calling him out for not going there.

FWIW, I find it exceedingly likely that he did go to that school, given how long he's been a part of the community and how it's come up occasionally.

Ed O.

 

[BGrantFan]

Pretending to be someone you're not is no bueno. Do you agree?

I might misremember, but you seemed to be making fun of him for going there and having it as his avatar, though, rather than calling him out for not going there.

FWIW, I find it exceedingly likely that he did go to that school, given how long he's been a part of the community and how it's come up occasionally.

Ed O.

Thank you for telling me what you think, Ed. I can now sleep well tonight.

 

[oldmangrouch]

You mean pretending to go to a good school?

Ducks rule -trees drool!