If we hadn't signed Turner, Meyers, and Mo, I wonder what they would have ended up with?
I'm using this post as an excuse to do a stat dive; honestly they probably all get MLE money without Paul Allen.
Are We Better Or Worse with Them? A TED Talk
Meyers: Neither better nor worse because he doesn't fucking play (Meyers plays in 6% of total team minutes... roflcopter)
Mo and Turner: these guys have a lot of minutes, and we have overall negative points vs opponents while either one is on the floor.
http://www.82games.com/1718/1718POR1.HTM
In the 33% of team total minutes that Mo is on the floor, we're 91 points down, and we only win 38% of the shifts he's played. Yikes.
Turner is -35 overall, but we've won 51% of the shifts he's played.
In this particular case, Mo is really bad (which explains why he didn't play for long stretches of the season). Turner is... well, he's higher risk, but high (okay okay less low) reward.
http://www.82games.com/1718/1718POR2.HTM
The main lineup of Turner with Dame, CJ, Nurk, and Aminu wins 64% of the time, compared to 53.3% for the Harkless variant without Turner, and is +47 versus -11 for the Harkless variant.
Turner with the starters is much more effective than Turner off the bench. Mo is ineffective period.
http://www.82games.com/1718/1718POR5.HTM
The obvious problem is obvious: Our SF position is weak, but our PF position is weaker. Aminu is playing out of position, and we have no effective backup for him (Collins is doing good work out there, so maybe we're seeing the emergence of Aminu as stopgap PF).
In fact, I'd go so far as to say I kind of like Turner starting, and if we got a legit PF next to him at SF, we'd probably be really good until the bench comes in and ruins it.