Exclusive Zach Collins - An In-Depth Discussion

[Buffalo Custard]

If you think Zach is Meyers Leonard, you're not paying attention to anything other than their skin color.

Career arc has nothing to do with pigmentation or style of play. All the excuses and rationalizations won't make Collins a player to build around. Nor do I trust NO on the subject of extensions.

 

[wizenheimer]

None of those stats are an accurate reflection of defense.

actually, defensive rebounding rate, winshares, BPM, and VORP do include defense as part of the equation

it's a very small sample size, but DBPM this season:



at least Zach is better than CJ and Melo. But last season is a fairer gauge:



he was tied with Meyers

and of course, there are two ends of the floor:



8 Blazers with positive BPM's and 10 higher than -1.0 and Zach was one of them

as for DRPM last season, when you toss out guys who played less than 30 games, Zach was 23rd among PF's with a DRPM of 0.99
PF's who ranked higher included Thon Maker, Mason Plumlee, Maxi Kleber, Ed Davis, Anthony Tolliver, Domantas Sabonis, Ersan Ilyasova, Frank Kaminski, Aaron Gordon, JaMychal Green, and Thaddeus Young

there were also 15 C's who ranked higher including Aaron Baynes, Jakob Poeltl, Nikola Vucevic, and Ante Zizic

as I've been saying, Zach is a role player who hasn't even reached the level of Harkless or Aminu yet. Maybe all you Zach fans will eventually be proven right, and his critics proven wrong, but currently, you guys seem to be seeing a lot more 'potential' than reality. The only reason Zach was named the starter before the season, IMO, is because Olshey made sure there was nobody on the team that could beat him out for that role. Olshey has done that before

 

[kjironman1]

Collins has some fundamental issues that he can work on but the raw talent is there. Needs to clean up the ball handling skills. He effects the rebounding numbers in a big way. Maybe not so much by getting the rebound as much as boxing out and making it so others can.
Impact on the floor is not always on box score. He also has a motor that won't quit. People forget about his energy. My bet is if you trade or replace Zach Collins at this point every Blazer fan will regret it.

To the one poster that is calling him garbage we will consider the source....

 

[BonesJones]

actually, defensive rebounding rate, winshares, BPM, and VORP do include defense as part of the equation

it's a very small sample size, but DBPM this season:

View attachment 33340

at least Zach is better than CJ and Melo. But last season is a fairer gauge:

View attachment 33341

he was tied with Meyers

and of course, there are two ends of the floor:

View attachment 33342

8 Blazers with positive BPM's and 10 higher than -1.0 and Zach was one of them

as for DRPM last season, when you toss out guys who played less than 30 games, Zach was 23rd among PF's with a DRPM of 0.99
PF's who ranked higher included Thon Maker, Mason Plumlee, Maxi Kleber, Ed Davis, Anthony Tolliver, Domantas Sabonis, Ersan Ilyasova, Frank Kaminski, Aaron Gordon, JaMychal Green, and Thaddeus Young

there were also 15 C's who ranked higher including Aaron Baynes, Jakob Poeltl, Nikola Vucevic, and Ante Zizic

as I've been saying, Zach is a role player who hasn't even reached the level of Harkless or Aminu yet. Maybe all you Zach fans will eventually be proven right, and his critics proven wrong, but currently, you guys seem to be seeing a lot more 'potential' than reality. The only reason Zach was named the starter before the season, IMO, is because Olshey made sure there was nobody on the team that could beat him out for that role. Olshey has done that before

They include defense as part of the equation but that doesnt mean the accurately reflect defensive ability. You think I dont know what DBPM means? C'mon.

You overvalue stats, and often times cherry-pick them to fit your argument. The discussion is rarely about basketball, it's about numbers. Paragraphs and paragraphs of numbers. It sounds fancy and smart, but it doesnt change the following for me:

- John Collins is a terrible defender.
- Zach Collins is a solid defender.
- Zach Collins has the potential to be an extremely good defender.
- Zach Collins will likely be FAR superior to John Collins defensively at their peaks, thus making him a better long-term fit.

 

[BonesJones]

He’s garbage

Insightful.

 

[BonesJones]

Guys, Tolliver has a higher DRPM than Collins so hes a better defender! And last year his DBPM was tied with Meyers so he's no better defensively than Meyers is, since last year is a fairer gauge than this year!

 

[perkinsfor3]

Guys, Tolliver has a higher DRPM than Collins so hes a better defender! And last year his DBPM was tied with Meyers so he's no better defensively than Meyers is, since last year is a fairer gauge than this year!

To be fair, I always was surprised Tolliver didnt pan out with us. I think his skillset is a good fit.

 

[jlprk]

Despite the popular demand, I refuse to be the first person in this thread to call Zach Collins a worthless bum. Someone else will have to call him a worthless bum before I am quoted calling him a worthless bum.

 

[AldoTrapani]

Insightful.

Remember you said he was going to be a star lmao

 

[wizenheimer]

They include defense as part of the equation but that doesnt mean the accurately reflect defensive ability. You think I dont know what DBPM means? C'mon.

what? where was it I said you didn't know what DBPM means? That makes no sense

in reply to those numbers I posted comparing the two Collins, you said "none of those stats are an accurate reflection of defense". So, I posted some defensive stats. Apparently, defensive stats don't accurately reflect defense. I'd be willing to concede they can be real noisy, but both the stats and he eyeball test show that Zach has a long ways to go before he's the defender some of you hope he becomes

You overvalue stats, and often times cherry-pick them to fit your argument. The discussion is rarely about basketball, it's about numbers. Paragraphs and paragraphs of numbers.

pound sand with that insulting bullshit. I overvalue stats? fine, ok then....you overvalue your own opinion and almost always defend it by personally attacking the poster disagreeing with you....how's that? you like that? ...tell me: does that kind of attack-the-messenger crap advance a discussion? It's great for starting a pissing contest though....maybe that's why you get in so many around here

another thing: it's kind of heavy irony that you slam me for "paragraphs of numbers" in a thread started with you making an 18 minute video on Zach. How many paragraphs were in that video?

- John Collins is a terrible defender.
- Zach Collins is a solid defender.

yeah, I'll just believe John Collins is a "terrible" defender because you say so

well then here's some more cherry picked stats you'll hate (and another paragraph or two):

this season, among the 98 PF's tracked by DRPM, John Collins ranked 27th; that's 27th of 98. And of the 520 NBA players tracked he was 147th. He had a defensive rating that was 2.8 points better than his team. For reference, last season, Zach had a defensive rating that was 0.5 points better than his team. 2.8 vs 0.5

those numbers certainly don't prove John Collins is a good defender. But they sure as hell imply he's nothing close to "terrible" on defense. And, a significant component of defense for front-court players is defensive rebounding; JC is quite a bit better at that than Zach. And, JC commits 5.2 fouls per/100 possessions; Zach commits 6.2

but more than that, defense is only part of the game, and not the most important part either. Wade Baldwin was a solid defender but a shitty NBA player. Same for Thomas Robinson. And remember Tyrus Thomas? Lots of solid defenders have had short NBA careers because they were poor at offense. You have to look at both ends of the floor and the best way to defeat good defense is with better offense. John Collins is pretty damn good at offense. And that's why he's an overall plus in BPM, RPM, PER etc. while Zach is an overall minus. JC is simply a better player overall, and the gap is significant right now

- Zach Collins has the potential to be an extremely good defender.
- Zach Collins will likely be FAR superior to John Collins defensively at their peaks, thus making him a better long-term fit.

ok then....that's the problem we're having. I'm looking at where players are now. You're arguing for a theoretical Zach that may or may not arrive sometime in the future. I remember the theoretical Meyers so I'm cynical about the theory

 

[craigehlo]

Zach has a pretty slight frame for an NBA PF/C, doesn't have a lot of bounce and isn't a great 3 point shooter. I know he can work on his shot, but he's not suddenly going to be an dynamic forward on either side of the ball. I see him as he was in his high school and college career, a solid backup.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

what? where was it I said you didn't know what DBPM means? That makes no sense

in reply to those numbers I posted comparing the two Collins, you said "none of those stats are an accurate reflection of defense". So, I posted some defensive stats. Apparently, defensive stats don't accurately reflect defense. I'd be willing to concede they can be real noisy, but both the stats and he eyeball test show that Zach has a long ways to go before he's the defender some of you hope he becomes



pound sand with that insulting bullshit. I overvalue stats? fine, ok then....you overvalue your own opinion and almost always defend it by personally attacking the poster disagreeing with you....how's that? you like that? ...tell me: does that kind of attack-the-messenger crap advance a discussion? It's great for starting a pissing contest though....maybe that's why you get in so many around here

another thing: it's kind of heavy irony that you slam me for "paragraphs of numbers" in a thread started with you making an 18 minute video on Zach. How many paragraphs were in that video?



yeah, I'll just believe John Collins is a "terrible" defender because you say so

well then here's some more cherry picked stats you'll hate (and another paragraph or two):

this season, among the 98 PF's tracked by DRPM, John Collins ranked 27th; that's 27th of 98. And of the 520 NBA players tracked he was 147th. He had a defensive rating that was 2.8 points better than his team. For reference, last season, Zach had a defensive rating that was 0.5 points better than his team. 2.8 vs 0.5

those numbers certainly don't prove John Collins is a good defender. But they sure as hell imply he's nothing close to "terrible" on defense. And, a significant component of defense for front-court players is defensive rebounding; JC is quite a bit better at that than Zach. And, JC commits 5.2 fouls per/100 possessions; Zach commits 6.2

but more than that, defense is only part of the game, and not the most important part either. Wade Baldwin was a solid defender but a shitty NBA player. Same for Thomas Robinson. And remember Tyrus Thomas? Lots of solid defenders have had short NBA careers because they were poor at offense. You have to look at both ends of the floor and the best way to defeat good defense is with better offense. John Collins is pretty damn good at offense. And that's why he's an overall plus in BPM, RPM, PER etc. while Zach is an overall minus. JC is simply a better player overall, and the gap is significant right now




ok then....that's the problem we're having. I'm looking at where players are now. You're arguing for a theoretical Zach that may or may not arrive sometime in the future. I remember the theoretical Meyers so I'm cynical about the theory

Awesome post. You win sir.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

what? where was it I said you didn't know what DBPM means? That makes no sense

in reply to those numbers I posted comparing the two Collins, you said "none of those stats are an accurate reflection of defense". So, I posted some defensive stats. Apparently, defensive stats don't accurately reflect defense. I'd be willing to concede they can be real noisy, but both the stats and he eyeball test show that Zach has a long ways to go before he's the defender some of you hope he becomes



pound sand with that insulting bullshit. I overvalue stats? fine, ok then....you overvalue your own opinion and almost always defend it by personally attacking the poster disagreeing with you....how's that? you like that? ...tell me: does that kind of attack-the-messenger crap advance a discussion? It's great for starting a pissing contest though....maybe that's why you get in so many around here

another thing: it's kind of heavy irony that you slam me for "paragraphs of numbers" in a thread started with you making an 18 minute video on Zach. How many paragraphs were in that video?



yeah, I'll just believe John Collins is a "terrible" defender because you say so

well then here's some more cherry picked stats you'll hate (and another paragraph or two):

this season, among the 98 PF's tracked by DRPM, John Collins ranked 27th; that's 27th of 98. And of the 520 NBA players tracked he was 147th. He had a defensive rating that was 2.8 points better than his team. For reference, last season, Zach had a defensive rating that was 0.5 points better than his team. 2.8 vs 0.5

those numbers certainly don't prove John Collins is a good defender. But they sure as hell imply he's nothing close to "terrible" on defense. And, a significant component of defense for front-court players is defensive rebounding; JC is quite a bit better at that than Zach. And, JC commits 5.2 fouls per/100 possessions; Zach commits 6.2

but more than that, defense is only part of the game, and not the most important part either. Wade Baldwin was a solid defender but a shitty NBA player. Same for Thomas Robinson. And remember Tyrus Thomas? Lots of solid defenders have had short NBA careers because they were poor at offense. You have to look at both ends of the floor and the best way to defeat good defense is with better offense. John Collins is pretty damn good at offense. And that's why he's an overall plus in BPM, RPM, PER etc. while Zach is an overall minus. JC is simply a better player overall, and the gap is significant right now




ok then....that's the problem we're having. I'm looking at where players are now. You're arguing for a theoretical Zach that may or may not arrive sometime in the future. I remember the theoretical Meyers so I'm cynical about the theory

I definitely wouldnt argue that right now Zach is better than JC, I would say Im somewhat cautious about players on really bad teams who produce stats. He plays a lot, the team is in rebuild mode, he’s their second option and Zach is kind of there as a guy to play defense and be a spot up shooter. So different roles on teams in different positions.
That said, I dont think Zach would put up as good of numbers as JC has if the roles were reversed. I also think JC would make Portland a little better (as of right now).

 

[AldoTrapani]

what? where was it I said you didn't know what DBPM means? That makes no sense

in reply to those numbers I posted comparing the two Collins, you said "none of those stats are an accurate reflection of defense". So, I posted some defensive stats. Apparently, defensive stats don't accurately reflect defense. I'd be willing to concede they can be real noisy, but both the stats and he eyeball test show that Zach has a long ways to go before he's the defender some of you hope he becomes



pound sand with that insulting bullshit. I overvalue stats? fine, ok then....you overvalue your own opinion and almost always defend it by personally attacking the poster disagreeing with you....how's that? you like that? ...tell me: does that kind of attack-the-messenger crap advance a discussion? It's great for starting a pissing contest though....maybe that's why you get in so many around here

another thing: it's kind of heavy irony that you slam me for "paragraphs of numbers" in a thread started with you making an 18 minute video on Zach. How many paragraphs were in that video?



yeah, I'll just believe John Collins is a "terrible" defender because you say so

well then here's some more cherry picked stats you'll hate (and another paragraph or two):

this season, among the 98 PF's tracked by DRPM, John Collins ranked 27th; that's 27th of 98. And of the 520 NBA players tracked he was 147th. He had a defensive rating that was 2.8 points better than his team. For reference, last season, Zach had a defensive rating that was 0.5 points better than his team. 2.8 vs 0.5

those numbers certainly don't prove John Collins is a good defender. But they sure as hell imply he's nothing close to "terrible" on defense. And, a significant component of defense for front-court players is defensive rebounding; JC is quite a bit better at that than Zach. And, JC commits 5.2 fouls per/100 possessions; Zach commits 6.2

but more than that, defense is only part of the game, and not the most important part either. Wade Baldwin was a solid defender but a shitty NBA player. Same for Thomas Robinson. And remember Tyrus Thomas? Lots of solid defenders have had short NBA careers because they were poor at offense. You have to look at both ends of the floor and the best way to defeat good defense is with better offense. John Collins is pretty damn good at offense. And that's why he's an overall plus in BPM, RPM, PER etc. while Zach is an overall minus. JC is simply a better player overall, and the gap is significant right now




ok then....that's the problem we're having. I'm looking at where players are now. You're arguing for a theoretical Zach that may or may not arrive sometime in the future. I remember the theoretical Meyers so I'm cynical about the theory

@BonesJones you just got ethered

 

[blazerkor]

He’s garbage

At one time or another you think everyone is garbage. If you were a fan when Jordan was around, you would have called him garbage and overrated a bunch of times... not comparing Zach to Jordan just pointing out yet again your incomparable ability to be negative... you're the best at that.

 

[blazerkor]

Making judgments on Zach right now is foolhardy. We just don't have the sample size. Given that Zach plays like he plays, judging him by the numbers doesn't make any sense. He's an effort guy, who is really athletic for his size, has nice footwork on both ends and has good form to his jumper. Those are the things we can know about Zach. How far those things can take him is a question mark. If he will continue to get injured is a question mark. I would give him an extension if he'd take 8-10 million per season for the next 3 or 4 seasons, otherwise I'd let him play and see if he could earn more or show that he's not even worth that.

 

[PCmor7]

Collins' potential and ability is a moot point when he can't stay on the floor because of his tendency to commit ridiculous fouls.

Guy's most notable ability at this point is picking up 2-3 quick fouls and going to the bench.

 

[BonesJones]

what? where was it I said you didn't know what DBPM means? That makes no sense

in reply to those numbers I posted comparing the two Collins, you said "none of those stats are an accurate reflection of defense". So, I posted some defensive stats. Apparently, defensive stats don't accurately reflect defense. I'd be willing to concede they can be real noisy, but both the stats and he eyeball test show that Zach has a long ways to go before he's the defender some of you hope he becomes



pound sand with that insulting bullshit. I overvalue stats? fine, ok then....you overvalue your own opinion and almost always defend it by personally attacking the poster disagreeing with you....how's that? you like that? ...tell me: does that kind of attack-the-messenger crap advance a discussion? It's great for starting a pissing contest though....maybe that's why you get in so many around here

another thing: it's kind of heavy irony that you slam me for "paragraphs of numbers" in a thread started with you making an 18 minute video on Zach. How many paragraphs were in that video?



yeah, I'll just believe John Collins is a "terrible" defender because you say so

well then here's some more cherry picked stats you'll hate (and another paragraph or two):

this season, among the 98 PF's tracked by DRPM, John Collins ranked 27th; that's 27th of 98. And of the 520 NBA players tracked he was 147th. He had a defensive rating that was 2.8 points better than his team. For reference, last season, Zach had a defensive rating that was 0.5 points better than his team. 2.8 vs 0.5

those numbers certainly don't prove John Collins is a good defender. But they sure as hell imply he's nothing close to "terrible" on defense. And, a significant component of defense for front-court players is defensive rebounding; JC is quite a bit better at that than Zach. And, JC commits 5.2 fouls per/100 possessions; Zach commits 6.2

but more than that, defense is only part of the game, and not the most important part either. Wade Baldwin was a solid defender but a shitty NBA player. Same for Thomas Robinson. And remember Tyrus Thomas? Lots of solid defenders have had short NBA careers because they were poor at offense. You have to look at both ends of the floor and the best way to defeat good defense is with better offense. John Collins is pretty damn good at offense. And that's why he's an overall plus in BPM, RPM, PER etc. while Zach is an overall minus. JC is simply a better player overall, and the gap is significant right now




ok then....that's the problem we're having. I'm looking at where players are now. You're arguing for a theoretical Zach that may or may not arrive sometime in the future. I remember the theoretical Meyers so I'm cynical about the theory

If you're insulted by me saying you overvalue stats and cherry-pick some of them, then you should relax a bit. I'm not personally insulting you. I think you know basketball but tend to rely on stats to make a point far too much.

Nobody is arguing that JC isnt better. You seem to be confused on that. I'm strictly talking defense. Yes, defensive stats have a ton of noise. According to some, C.J. was a good defender this past year. They can be used but they need proper context and they shouldn't be over-relied on when trying to evaluate a players defense. That's the trap I think you're falling into.

You're bringing up guys like Tyrus Thomas and Thomas Robinson... Those guys have major differences from their games than Zach does.

Of course the argument about Zach is going to be theoretical. He has barely gotten a chance to start and was injured for a good chunk of that time. You're using stats from his 1st and 2nd season to argue me saying that I think he's a better long-term fit for this roster than John Collins, mainly because of defense. People are saying they dont want to "deal with another Meyers" and it baffles me. Zach is nothing like Meyers.

Another defensive thing: I think the biggest problem is him fouling. You pointed that out. He'll improve that, and refs should hopefully end up giving him more of the benefit of the doubt, because right now he gets none, and good defensive plays end up in a lot of bullshit calls that hurt his defensive metrics. Another part of it is he tries to protector the rim on every single play. He gives so much effort defensively that he fouls at a higher rate than a guy like JC. That's not an inherent negative, and bodes well for the future because he has the motor, and can improve the decision making.

The Blazers are 10-3 with Collins starting. If he was as bad as you suggest, I have a hard time seeing their record with him starting being that good.

 

[Buffalo Custard]

Simple (simplistic?) question.Would the Blazers have been better off in the bubble and against the Flakers with Ariza in place of Zach? What about Harkless or Aminu?

 

[jlprk]

Simple (simplistic?) question.Would the Blazers have been better off in the bubble and against the Flakers with Ariza in place of Zach? What about Harkless or Aminu?

All. Ariza and Aminu are much better than Collins. Harkless, per minute, is somewhat better than Collins. But Harkless lasts 48 minutes, while Collins lasts 25 minutes before he fouls out.

Simplistic means over-simplified, so in this case you mean simple.

 

[James lamphear]

If you're insulted by me saying you overvalue stats and cherry-pick some of them, then you should relax a bit. I'm not personally insulting you. I think you know basketball but tend to rely on stats to make a point far too much.

Nobody is arguing that JC isnt better. You seem to be confused on that. I'm strictly talking defense. Yes, defensive stats have a ton of noise. According to some, C.J. was a good defender this past year. They can be used but they need proper context and they shouldn't be over-relied on when trying to evaluate a players defense. That's the trap I think you're falling into.

You're bringing up guys like Tyrus Thomas and Thomas Robinson... Those guys have major differences from their games than Zach does.

Of course the argument about Zach is going to be theoretical. He has barely gotten a chance to start and was injured for a good chunk of that time. You're using stats from his 1st and 2nd season to argue me saying that I think he's a better long-term fit for this roster than John Collins, mainly because of defense. People are saying they dont want to "deal with another Meyers" and it baffles me. Zach is nothing like Meyers.

Another defensive thing: I think the biggest problem is him fouling. You pointed that out. He'll improve that, and refs should hopefully end up giving him more of the benefit of the doubt, because right now he gets none, and good defensive plays end up in a lot of bullshit calls that hurt his defensive metrics. Another part of it is he tries to protector the rim on every single play. He gives so much effort defensively that he fouls at a higher rate than a guy like JC. That's not an inherent negative, and bodes well for the future because he has the motor, and can improve the decision making.

The Blazers are 10-3 with Collins starting. If he was as bad as you suggest, I have a hard time seeing their record with him starting being that good.

I like that Bones plus in his 11 games this year he also on-off he was +8.9 that lead the team 2nd was Dame with +8.6. It really when he was on the court we was pretty good.

 

[Drttimmy]

I'd be more optimistic if he had shown more improvement since his rookie year. Statistically, he's improved, but from an impact perspective the improvement is from raw rookie with potential to serviceable backup. Was kind of expecting more. I never saw him as a future All Star, but I thought he'd become a reliable shooter with a handful of go-to post moves along with strong defense. None of that has materialized yet and I'm not sure it will based on his progression rate so far. He'll have to make a large leap at some point, but he's always injured making that difficult. We gave Meyers a 4 year extension with a worse progression rate, so I'm sure we'll see if he can make that leap as a Blazer.

 

[wizenheimer]

If you're insulted by me saying you overvalue stats and cherry-pick some of them, then you should relax a bit. I'm not personally insulting you. .

the only context I have is the discussion we were engaged in. It doesn't bother me if someone says I "overvalue" stats. Maybe I do. Every once in a while stats and the eyeball tests don't match; but most time they do

but saying I'm "cherry-picking" is implying bad faith and dishonesty, so yeah, that's insulting

furthermore, the stats I posted was a comparison of 2 players over 19 statistical categories covering every regular season game each had played. It was their entire careers. I didn't mix & match seasons and I didn't leave out any revealing stats. It was just about every category that bbref compiles

 

[James lamphear]

A lot of you guys says he foul to much but out of 156 games he has only foul out 7 times in his career.

 

[BonesJones]

the only context I have is the discussion we were engaged in. It doesn't bother me if someone says I "overvalue" stats. Maybe I do. Every once in a while stats and the eyeball tests don't match; but most time they do

but saying I'm "cherry-picking" is implying bad faith and dishonesty, so yeah, that's insulting

furthermore, the stats I posted was a comparison of 2 players over 19 statistical categories covering every regular season game each had played. It was their entire careers. I didn't mix & match seasons and I didn't leave out any revealing stats. It was just about every category that bbref compiles

I hope they're paying you, lol.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Making judgments on Zach right now is foolhardy. We just don't have the sample size. Given that Zach plays like he plays, judging him by the numbers doesn't make any sense. He's an effort guy, who is really athletic for his size, has nice footwork on both ends and has good form to his jumper. Those are the things we can know about Zach. How far those things can take him is a question mark. If he will continue to get injured is a question mark. I would give him an extension if he'd take 8-10 million per season for the next 3 or 4 seasons, otherwise I'd let him play and see if he could earn more or show that he's not even worth that.

I'm all for saying the book is not closed on Zach. But he hasn't proved much either. Giving him 40 million now is as stupid as the extension Neil gave Meyers.

 

[blazerkor]

Simple (simplistic?) question.Would the Blazers have been better off in the bubble and against the Flakers with Ariza in place of Zach? What about Harkless or Aminu?

I would obviously take Ariza assuming he's healthy and had played with the team all season like he did over Zach who was coming off a season long injury and hurt himself again so we couldn't use him in the playoffs. I hope you understand that I'm pointing out that it's totally unfair to judge Zach on his bubble performance due to two unrelated injuries. If you want to call Zach injury prone and that's why you don't like him, go for it but I don't think that we have anywhere close to an accurate gauge of what his ceiling or floor is. As far as Moe and Chief are concerned... if Moe was going to contribute a lot then he would have been the man on the Knicks this season because that team had no one but Moe sucked this season, Chief played shitty basketball the first 18 games of the season before hurting his knee and not returning. So I would say I'll choose option D. which is where the NBA or our team communicates that Ariza should opt in since we weren't planning on filling the roster, even if he didn't think he'd be able to play in the bubble, so then Ariza would have been able to come back when he wanted to and be on the roster with Zach.

 

[blazerkor]

I'm all for saying the book is not closed on Zach. But he hasn't proved much either. Giving him 40 million now is as stupid as the extension Neil gave Meyers.

OK then, let him play and see what he can earn himself next season.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

All I know is I just don't see Collins getting much better. And I think he doesn't bring much to the table currently. I think he can have a fine career as a below average starter or decent bench player, but that's about it. I personally don't see more potential than that.

 

[blazerkor]

All. Ariza and Aminu are much better than Collins. Harkless, per minute, is somewhat better than Collins. But Harkless lasts 48 minutes, while Collins lasts 25 minutes before he fouls out.

Simplistic means over-simplified, so in this case you mean simple.

What Aminu and Harkless are we talking about because Aminu was terrible for the 18 games he played before losing the rest of his season to a knee injury and Harkless definitely didn't go 48 minutes per game this season he went 23 minutes per game for one of the worst teams in the league and although he was efficient offensively he still put up terrible numbers. So I would probably still have taken Moe this season in hindsight, knowing what I know about Zach's injuries but I would have taken Zach over Chief knowing what I know about both of their injuries. It's so important to realize that Zach's season was defined by his injuries not his potential.