Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, June 01, 2012

OT: NBA Monthly Thread, June 2012

I estimate that only 10-12 Primates care about the NBA, but with our own thread, we won’t detract from what the site is really about: overwrought, acrimonious discussions about having where to put the site’s overwrought, acrimonious discussions.

Famous Original Joe C Posted: June 01, 2012 at 09:58 AM | 2704 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: general

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 24 of 28 pages ‹ First  < 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 > 
   2301. Lassus Posted: June 24, 2012 at 08:22 AM (#4164666)
   2302. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: June 24, 2012 at 11:38 AM (#4164704)
   2303. CFBF Is A Golden Spider Duck Posted: June 24, 2012 at 11:52 AM (#4164714)
Do the Bulls still have that sucking chest wound at shooting guard (or do we just call it the 2 these days)? They might look to Brad Beal if they can get a high enough choice.
   2304. Joel W Posted: June 24, 2012 at 12:00 PM (#4164718)
Getting caught up:

1) DIdn't KPelton or Hollinger or somebody (Neil Paine?) do a study showing that experience actually does matter in the playoffs. Not a lot, but maybe like half a win a year of experience or something? I think also I've realized how much later defense peaks in basketball than offense. The knowledge premium is really high over and above the declining athleticism premium.

2) As to Deng, I think Haralabos Voulgaris often implies that his ratings think much more highly of Deng than other metrics do. In particular, I think that PER would be a metric that leaves everything he does out of the equation, namely he spreads the floor and plays great defense. As a counterpoint (and I don't think it's a great stat, but useful) he rates very well in 2 year adjusted plus-minus http://basketballvalue.com/topplayers.php?&year=2011-2012

   2305. tshipman Posted: June 24, 2012 at 12:06 PM (#4164724)
As a counterpoint (and I don't think it's a great stat, but useful) he rates very well in 2 year adjusted plus-minus


I think the entire case for trading Deng is that he's increasingly beat-up and getting older fast. If you think he rebounds to who he was two years ago, you don't trade him because he's a good bet to provide equal value for his contract. If you think he's on a downward progression, you dump him a year early.

A lot of this depends on how much you care about his salary. 12 million isn't a max deal, but it's awfully close. If you can replace the production with a rookie contract, that's a big plus.
   2306. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM (#4164755)
To be clear, I've no problem w/ 2305 (though I'd be quite curious as to how CHI could use the resultant TPE). I just don't think it's right to denigrate Deng's contributions last year.

2304/Joel(1) - Think BbPro did, yeah.
(2): PER (and thus simple rating) underrate Deng, yeah.
   2307. baudib Posted: June 24, 2012 at 02:13 PM (#4164784)
It just occurred to me that I understand very little of NBA player aging. I remain skeptical that it's easy to replace someone like Deng immediately but how much should we expect him to have left in the tank?
   2308. PJ Martinez Posted: June 24, 2012 at 02:27 PM (#4164794)
Deng said he does not believe the Bulls are shopping him in retaliation for his decision to delay the wrist surgery he needs until after the Games.

But Deng, 27, did acknowledge that he's not dismissing recent reports suggesting the Bulls are willing to trade him for a top pick in Thursday's NBA draft, with speculation mounting that Chicago could send Deng to the Golden State Warriors in exchange for the No. 7 overall pick.

Link. Seems to me this has to be about 1 of 2 things (or both): Deng's health and Deng's contract. (Edit: or maybe Rose's health, as noted above.)

PER definitely underrates him, since defense is the best part of his game. His low FG% last season looks to me either fluky or wrist-related (maybe both). His 3-pt% remained solid.

Also, getting the #7 pick for him is a lot different than getting the #2 pick, unless the Bulls really think they know something about someone who will still be around at #7. (Maybe they like Waiters or Lamb?) Guys like Beal and MKG will presumably not be around at #7.

Edit: As for Deng's age, for a long time there seemed to be a consensus that basketball players, like baseball players, peaked around 27. That's lately been disputed. But Deng seems to me more likely to help a team win a championship in the next year or two then some 19-year-old, who will probably be at least six years away from his prime.
   2309. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 03:04 PM (#4164836)
And the Bulls are a contender, if Rose is healthy.
   2310. tshipman Posted: June 24, 2012 at 03:15 PM (#4164859)
Also, getting the #7 pick for him is a lot different than getting the #2 pick, unless the Bulls really think they know something about someone who will still be around at #7. (Maybe they like Waiters or Lamb?) Guys like Beal and MKG will presumably not be around at #7.


Yeah. I have no idea how a Deng to GS trade would work (Deng for Jefferson??+ pick?). Any trade that involves guys with negative value like Richard Jefferson or Andris Biedrins doesn't seem like it would work to me.

I'm on board for a straight #2-5 for Deng+ cap space. I'm not on board with Deng for another overpaid guy plus a pick. It seems like you give up half the value.
   2311. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 03:23 PM (#4164870)
To be clear, you're not really getting a #x pick, you're (likely) getting the guy you take with that pick. If you're Chicago, who helps them? MKG, I presume - but I'm not sure how NBA rotation ready he is (which is weird to say about an intangibles type).

Aging: I like Pelton's blurb (linked by PJ in 2308) a great deal.
   2312. rr Posted: June 24, 2012 at 03:28 PM (#4164884)
I pretty much agree with PJ here. First, I can't see Charlotte or Washington trading the 2 or the 3 for Deng. If I ran Charlotte, I would much rather have the 2 than Deng, and I would probably rather have it than Noah. Second, I assume that the Bulls are still in the business of trying to beat Miami and win the championship over the next couple of years. Deng ISTM is more likely, maybe far more likely, to help with that than a guy they get with the 6th or 7th pick is, particularly since Deng is one of the guys they use to guard James.

One of the harsh lessons of the Rose injury is that even if your team is young and really good, you can't assume that you will have multiple chances to win the championship (baudib referenced this idea during the Finals, saying that Durant talked about it). Another thing to remember is that I think the MSM/public will see Miami's title as the beginning of James inevitably settling in for a Jordan-like run astride the league, particularly since they took OKC out in 5 and ended the series with a blowout, and given that James is 27 and how good he is, that may well be the case. But OTOH, Wade is starting to show his age/mileage, Miami is still very capped out, they got huge lifts from role players in the Finals, something that that has an element of luck to it, and they actually had the 4th-best record in the NBA.

So, while the Bulls should, like any org, keep an eye on the future, they should still IMO be living right in the present, and I wouldn't be looking to move Deng for the 7th pick, unless it was being done to set up another move, or they know something major about Deng or Rose that we don't.
   2313. tshipman Posted: June 24, 2012 at 03:45 PM (#4164908)
To be clear, you're not really getting a #x pick, you're (likely) getting the guy you tale with that pick. If you're Chicago, who helps them? MKG, I presume - but I'm not sure how NBA rotation ready he is (which is weird to say about an intangibles type).


MKG, Brad Beal, Harrison Barnes (to a lesser extent), I'd be fine with any of those guys. I think all those guys are gone by the time #7 rolls around. I don't know enough about college ball to recommend a specific guy (I think stats are better suited to throw up giant red flags on guys you might otherwise take from the scouting. I worry that MKG isn't a very good 3p shooter, but otherwise he's totally rotation ready. He's a better finisher than Deng, and probably a better rebounder.
   2314. kpelton Posted: June 24, 2012 at 04:05 PM (#4164930)
"Didn't KPelton or Hollinger or somebody (Neil Paine?) do a study showing that experience actually does matter in the playoffs. Not a lot, but maybe like half a win a year of experience or something?"

Here's the study: http://basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=635

With those metrics in hand, we can see whether teams overachieved or underperformed in the postseason and compare this to their experience in terms of career playoff games. Doing this shows a very, very slight value to postseason experience. For each 250 additional games of postseason experience, teams on average gain one point of Playoff Score relative to their projection--that is, about one extra win. The difference between the '96-'97 Clippers and the most experienced team in that span (last year's San Antonio Spurs, with 1,028 career playoff games between them) is about four points of Playoff Score.
   2315. baudib Posted: June 24, 2012 at 04:18 PM (#4164949)
Kevin, thanks again for posting here.

Doing this shows a very, very slight value to postseason experience.


It's sort of apples to oranges, but I recall Bill James doing a matched pairs study and found that veteran hitters very slightly outperform young hitters in various "clutch" situations. I think this is a similar case where "veteran leadership" has value and there is a real and measurable impact but it's not nearly as large as observers and commentators might expect.

I am tempted to say that we've seen in recent years that teams that are more athletic and younger tend to wear down older, veteran teams (Celtics, Spurs) but that may just be a lame way of saying that the better team wins.
   2316. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 04:32 PM (#4164971)
I'm curious as to how much, in any, of the effect suggested by your work, Kevin, is a "lose the battle, win the war" effect - where veteran teams rest more in the regular season (losing some pt differential / wins in the process) and thereby ending up with a lesser playoff score.
   2317. smileyy Posted: June 24, 2012 at 04:34 PM (#4164977)
I know they'll never stop happening, but I can't summon any sympathy for the "player + nightclub = bad thing happening equation" even if Tony Parker wasn't part of the initial fight (i can't remember the actual story because I care so little about the situation in question that I purged it from my memory)
   2318. baudib Posted: June 24, 2012 at 04:57 PM (#4165030)
As someone who has spent probably 500+ nights lifetime in a dance club, I think it's a little unfair to criticize players from going to them. They're fun. You could say that, as a celebrity, you run the risk of being caught up in some stupidity, especially when the egos (and entourages) of other celebrities are involved, but stupid stuff can happen to normal people, too.

As for what happened, Drake sent a note to Chris Brown saying he was still banging Rihanna, and a bottle-tossing fight ensued. It seems that Drake also threw the first bottle.
   2319. GregD Posted: June 24, 2012 at 05:01 PM (#4165040)
Soon bottle service will come in plastic baggies.
   2320. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 05:06 PM (#4165053)
Last year, MKG did very well scoring in transition and on post-ups, and was a solid FT shooter. Otherwise, his shooting numbers are kind of a horror show. 24% shooter off the dribble. 30% as a spot up shooter, 25% on jumpers... and his mechanics look bad.
Physically, he's a slightly more compact Deng with a heck of a lot less miles on him (shorter, heavier, more ups).

You know, their college numbers aren't that, that different (both even played 31.1 mpg). Deng was a better scorer (and player), but... oh, here's their pace-neutralized per 40 figs (both frosh, MKG was 5.5 mths younger):

18.9 pts, 8.7 reb, 2.3 ast, 1.7 stl, 2.8 to, 1.3 blk, 2.8 pf, 5.8-11.2 51.4% (from two), 1.4-3.8 36.0% (from 3), 3.3-4.7 71.0% (ft), 2.8 orb, 5.9 drb
15.3 pts, 9.5 reb, 2.4 ast, 1.2 stl, 2.8 to, 1.2 blk, 3.1 pf, 5.1-10.4 53.5% (from two), 0.4-1.6 25.5% (from 3), 4.6-6.2 74.5% (ft), 3.3 orb, 6.2 drb
(some of these differences can be traced to role, of course.)

(all those #s from draft express)
   2321. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 05:08 PM (#4165057)
I thought the (supposed?) note was kind of funny.
   2322. Spivey Posted: June 24, 2012 at 05:35 PM (#4165115)
I think it's a poor way to evaluate players, but if they're playing the same position and neither is a great passer, I'm more ok with it.... so here goes: I think if Deng and MKG played 1 on 1, Deng would demolish MKG.
   2323. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 05:38 PM (#4165121)
Well, Deng should - he's got a whole lot of experience on MKG and his hallmark offensively is versatility - he does pretty much everything acceptably.
   2324. tshipman Posted: June 24, 2012 at 05:46 PM (#4165133)
You know, their college numbers aren't that, that different (both even played 31.1 mpg). Deng was a better scorer (and player), but... oh, here's their pace-neutralized per 40 figs (both frosh, MKG was 5.5 mths younger):


Having no love for MKG, I think I still pick him over 19 year old Deng. Gilchrist gets to the line better and is a better rebounder. He's a good FT shooter and a poor 3p shooter--something that typically indicates that he can become a decent 3p shooter with practice. The almost 6 month age difference is a big deal for me.

However, that isn't the choice (in theory). The choice is between 28 year old Deng who's been injured the last two years and is paid more than 12 million per year, and a rookie who projects fairly well. Again, I don't make the deal for anything below the #5 pick, and I certainly don't make the deal if it means picking up someone like Biedrins or Jefferson.
   2325. baudib Posted: June 24, 2012 at 06:12 PM (#4165145)
My distinct impression from this draft -- I could be wrong as I know nothing about college basketball -- is that there's one clear-cut sure thing in Davis, who is definitely going to be good but doesn't project to be Shaq or Tim Duncan. After that there's a big dropoff to a second tier of guys who look good but none are going to be a Kevin Durant. There also seems to be a sentiment that the draft is fairly deep and there may not be much difference between a guy you get at 12-20 and a guy who's 5-8 or so.

What I suspect is that we will end up with someone like a Paul Pierce or Scottie Pippen take at No. 9 or 11 or something and end up making people look foolish in a few years, but it's hard at this point to zero in on that guy.

Anyway, I don't see how Deng for a No. 2-5 pick makes sense for either team. Deng isn't going to make a lottery team into a playoff team, let alone a contender, and he costs a lot of money. I could see how a team like Golden State, who seems to produce scorers at will but has seemingly never had a great defense, could be interested in a guy like Deng. But yeah, I'd want to cast off a worthless contract in a deal like that, too.

Deng is like a poor man's Iguodala, more problematic offensively without the same level of defense. He could be a piece for a title team the way Ron Artest filled a role for the Lakers in 2010, but he's not a building block.

A worthless player and a project doesn't seem to be what Chicago needs right now. They're probably setting up another move.
   2326. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 07:20 PM (#4165183)
The half year difference is a big deal to me as well - but it's not enough to make up for some other issues. (in reference to the false choice of MKG now v. Deng then)

I don't accept that good ft shooter plus effort -> decent 3pt% shooter in time. Apart from the fact that there are lots of contrapositives, MKG's base shooting skills are simply bad, as reflected both in his numbers and on film. I contend that his fg% was propped up by Kentucky's ability to get him the ball on the break. If he garnered a bucket less per game this way, suddenly he's under 10 per and we're not having this conversation.

I see the difference in rebounding as small and MKG's advantage in getting to the line, in part, arise from his having to post up because he couldn't hit js. He's good at it - but I'm not sure how well that will translate right away.
The relative lack of steals and blocks is a red flag for me (well, dark yellow) - not like how it often is for Weiland/Hoopsanalyst, but more than most might feel. Not as an indicator of defense, but because high stl/blk guys often beat expectations in other areas too (and vice versa). (Mind you, teasing out "usable athleticism" from defensive tactics/habits is tricky.)

Honestly, the biggest pluses I see in this kid are:
* when I watched him play, he looks like he knows what he's doing.
* he's really young with plus physical tools
* everybody else loves him.
(then stuff like rebounding, ability to guard other spots, etc...)

I'm not saying that I wouldn't take him at, say, #4 - but, if I do, I'm not thrilled about it.

***

I don't think Deng is 'problematic' offensively at all - one of his virtues is that he's useful in almost any system or situation. He's just not the kind of scorer / level of efficiency you want for the money (and I do famously(?) prefer Iggy - witness my call for the Bulls to try to swap the pair two years back). Semantics!

I'm pretty much on board w most of 2325, tho.
   2327. tshipman Posted: June 24, 2012 at 07:50 PM (#4165198)
I'm not saying that I wouldn't take him at, say, #4 - but, if I do, I'm not thrilled about it.


I wouldn't take him if I were any team other than the Bulls (before #5). He's perfect as a running mate for Rose. I suppose you could say the same thing about other teams with good young PG's as well, of course. I think he fits the Bulls needs almost perfectly (short of a 3p shot).

I don't accept that good ft shooter plus effort -> decent 3pt% shooter in time. Apart from the fact that there are lots of contrapositives, MKG's base shooting skills are simply bad, as reflected both in his numbers and on film. I contend that his fg% was propped up by Kentucky's ability to get him the ball on the break.


I don't think it's immutable, but the fact remains that FT% predicts 3p% very well. If one is out of whack with the other, it typically can be fixed with coaching. A guy who shoots 79% from the FT line is a pretty good shooter. You have to be to hit that kind of a percentage. Can you find a guy who hit 79% or more from the charity stripe who never developed a 3p shot?
   2328. thok Posted: June 24, 2012 at 08:22 PM (#4165234)
If the Warriors can turn the 7th pick into Deng, that fully justifies their tanking. (I would prefer if they got Noah but either would be a solid talent upgrade.)
   2329. tshipman Posted: June 24, 2012 at 08:26 PM (#4165236)
If the Warriors can turn the 7th pick into Deng, that fully justifies their tanking. (I would prefer if they got Noah but either would be a solid talent upgrade.)


Can someone explain to me how the salaries would work on that deal? The 'Dubs are over the cap, so it shouldn't be possible for them to straight up trade the pick, right?

They also don't have any expirings large enough ... I am mystified on the reports for that deal.
   2330. JJ1986 Posted: June 24, 2012 at 08:40 PM (#4165255)
I think it would have to be for Jefferson. It was such an awful move to amnesty Charlie Bell with Biedrins contract on the books.
   2331. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 24, 2012 at 09:34 PM (#4165309)
Well, he shot 74.5%, not 79% but - sure.
I was just talking about DeMar DeRozan (who had a considerably better shooting rep than does MKG). Career 80% from the line, 21% from three. Muggsy Bogues was just referenced not long back - 83% from the line, 28% from three. David West is a good shooter, not so much from three (84%/26%). Ron Mercer. (81%/25%) Andre Miller. (81%/21%) Brevin Knight. (79%/13%)
You know how I reference Eric Snow as possibly the most amazing improvement in free throw shooting I've ever seen at the NBA level? Career: 76% free throw, 21% three point - Snow never did become a good jump shooter, but he learned to stick free throws. There are many, many more.

As for coaching, it's easier to teach someone how to hit free throws than it is how to shoot jumpers.
   2332. kpelton Posted: June 25, 2012 at 12:35 AM (#4165410)
"I'm curious as to how much, in any, of the effect suggested by your work, Kevin, is a "lose the battle, win the war" effect - where veteran teams rest more in the regular season (losing some pt differential / wins in the process) and thereby ending up with a lesser playoff score."

Good question. I'm not sure how we could tease that out of the numbers, but it certainly makes sense.

Having been early on the MKG-Deng comparison bandwagon, I was really excited that SCHOENE spit out Deng as his No. 1 comp ... until I loaded in the 2011 draft and Tobias Harris bumped Deng to No. 2.
   2333. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 25, 2012 at 08:41 AM (#4165469)
Ooh - Tobias Harris, I kind of like that too. MKG's lateral mobility gives him a big leg up, but that's good.
   2334. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: June 25, 2012 at 09:08 AM (#4165478)
As someone who has spent probably 500+ nights lifetime in a dance club, I think it's a little unfair to criticize players from going to them. They're fun.

Well, part of it is coded racism, sure. But another part is - fun, but not THAT fun, and not worth it when it can mess with your livelihood. There are a lot more yuppie guys in this country with the money to have a good time at a club than there are guys who actually go to clubs more than every so often. I actually think a surprisingly high percentage of athletes recognize that they basically have a decade to make their money and are pretty risk averse in those 10 years - not sure its unfair to criticze someone who didn't follow that rule.
   2335. Spivey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 09:42 AM (#4165499)
I still worry about how MKG is going to get his points. I haven't seen anything to lead me to think he's going to have the range you want from a 3. I don't know if his post-game will translate well since he's not going to be that much bigger/stronger than the guys guarding him, plus there's going to be NBA level help defenders. I don't see him in his first couple of years scoring much beyond fast break and putback type shots. I think if Chicago traded Deng for him, they may not make the playoffs next year. This was still a team that looked quite good in the regular season without Rose - I think they should be trying to get into the playoffs and see if Rose can contribute anything late in the year.
   2336. JL Posted: June 25, 2012 at 11:06 AM (#4165578)
I wouldn't take him if I were any team other than the Bulls (before #5). He's perfect as a running mate for Rose. I suppose you could say the same thing about other teams with good young PG's as well, of course. I think he fits the Bulls needs almost perfectly (short of a 3p shot).

In that case, don't the Wizards make sense with him and Wall running the break? If nothing else, it sure ups the entertainment value for that team.

MKG seems, from my very limited knowledge, like a true lottery pick - if he hits, he could become great due to his tools, but if (or more likely when) he misses, he will have little value.
   2337. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 25, 2012 at 11:44 AM (#4165625)
MKG's got a relatively high floor. Let's say he busts, what's that mean, an upscale Ariza? Still a solid player.

I see MKG as a bad fit for Washington, who need outside shooting (John Wall last year shot 79% from the line and 7% from three (3-for-42!)). They've been linked to Beal who, while he was blah from beyond the arc for the Gators (33.9%), does project as a plus guy from the outside going forward.
   2338. tshipman Posted: June 25, 2012 at 12:42 PM (#4165685)
MKG's got a relatively high floor. Let's say he busts, what's that mean, an upscale Ariza? Still a solid player.


Yeah, pretty much this.


In that case, don't the Wizards make sense with him and Wall running the break? If nothing else, it sure ups the entertainment value for that team.


It depends on how you view the Wizards. Is John Wall the man? Is he Derrick Rose, or is he Tyreke Evans? If he's Rose, then someone like MKG is an okaaaay complementary piece. Nick Young was their only shooter last year, and he's gone now. Der K is right that they really need outside shooting more than finishing.

Also, the Wiz didn't really run that well or much (could be due to Flip related reasons).

(John Wall last year shot 79% from the line and 7% from three (3-for-42!))


See, that split can't be sustainable. It just can't.
   2339. Spivey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM (#4165695)
MKG's got a relatively high floor. Let's say he busts, what's that mean, an upscale Ariza? Still a solid player.

I'm not ready to say that MKG's defensive floor is Ariza. Ariza is a little longer, and has actually done it. And since that is pretty much all Ariza brings to the table, besides a great shooting run in the playoffs 4 years ago, I'm actually not sure if that's a complementary comparison.

I went to Draft Express, and here are some interesting numbers I found from two guys listed right next to each other (MKG and Player A, I added Player B too)

MKG: Height 6'5.75", Wingspan 7', Vertical 35.5", 6 bench reps, Agility 11.77, Sprint 3.18
Player A: Height 6'5.75", Wingspan 7'1.25", Vertical 33", 9 bench reps, Agility 11.01, Sprint 3.40
Player B: Height 6'6.5", Wingspan 7'2.75", Vertical 37", 13 bench reps, Agility 10.48, Sprint 3.28

Player A is noted freak athlete Draymon Green. Who has considerably more offensive game, to go along with being a pretty similar athlete. I have to admit, I'm intrigued by thse numbers for Green. Green had a lower body fat % too. Player B is Quincy Acy, who seemed to have a similar offensive game to MKG, but with a little more polish. I'm more impressed with the other guys numbers than I am disappointed with MKG. But he strikes me as a guy whose best attributes are being young and playing hard. Which are nice attributes, admittedly. But he doesn't have offensive polish, doesn't look like he's going to be a very good shooter, and his athleticism is adequate for the NBA but he's not going to be a "special" NBA athlete.
Note: I realize I compared him to a couple of older guys coming out. But the comparison was mostly on size/athleticism.
   2340. Spivey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM (#4165702)
Edit doesn't seem to work... Being a Big 12 fan, I liked Acy's game quite a bit. I do remember he had a pretty sick drive and throw down on Anthony Davis in the tournament last year. He's likely a tweener (SF athleticism and size, but a PFs skills). I still think more highly of him than Perry Jones, who just doesn't strike me as the type of player that's good enough at anything or tough enough to play in the NBA.
   2341. smileyy Posted: June 25, 2012 at 01:59 PM (#4165764)
(John Wall last year shot 79% from the line and 7% from three (3-for-42!))


IIRC, that's a big drop-off from his previous season. If I had to guess, I'd say he took way too many 3's from off the dribble, and didn't shoot many at all with his feet set or coming off of screens.
   2342. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:04 PM (#4165766)
Oh, I bet Wall will continue to lose over three quarters of his 3pt% percentag per season - in three years, he'll go around 1-for-800 from beyond the arc.
   2343. Joel W Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:11 PM (#4165771)
This thread leads me to believe MKG is going to be really not good. So can somebody provide the best positive argument for him?
   2344. Joel W Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:21 PM (#4165778)
Reading the Draft Express write up on MKG makes me think the Timberwolves should trade the #18 and Derrick Williams to get him. Am I wrong to think he fits in really nicely with them? Can't create for himself much, so Rubio helps a lot, as to Kevin Love outlets. Plays very good defense, which helps make up for shortcomings of Love defensively. Love spreads the floor, which takes some pressure off of the SF to do so.
   2345. AROM Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:23 PM (#4165783)
IIRC, that's a big drop-off from his previous season. If I had to guess, I'd say he took way too many 3's from off the dribble, and didn't shoot many at all with his feet set or coming off of screens.


42 is not a lot of attempts. Since he's the primary ballhandler I'd assume that he's getting the ball at the end of quarters and ends up being the guy throwing up a desperation 45 footer. I wonder if anyone tracks that and removes the desperation 3's.
   2346. tshipman Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:39 PM (#4165790)
Player A is noted freak athlete Draymon Green. Who has considerably more offensive game, to go along with being a pretty similar athlete. I have to admit, I'm intrigued by thse numbers for Green. Green had a lower body fat % too. Player B is Quincy Acy, who seemed to have a similar offensive game to MKG, but with a little more polish. I'm more impressed with the other guys numbers than I am disappointed with MKG.


MKG is 19, Acy is an old 21 and Draymon Green is 22.

Compare MKG's numbers to Draymon Green's and Acy's age 18 season. MKG looks a lot more impressive when you do that.

I wonder if anyone tracks that and removes the desperation 3's.


Yeah, I wish this was done more often in general. Those shots have positive value, just in getting off a shot, but they're evaluated as a negative.
   2347. Spivey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:42 PM (#4165794)
MKG is 19, Acy is an old 21 and Draymon Green is 22.

Compare MKG's numbers to Draymon Green's and Acy's age 18 season. MKG looks a lot more impressive when you do that.


I agree with this. But the main number I'm comparing is athleticism/length. I wouldn't expect most of these numbers to change much from 19 to 21/22 (perhaps this is wrong?). And in a lot of respects, Green's offensive development should be considered an above-median development for a lot of 19 year olds.
   2348. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:52 PM (#4165800)
Yeah, I wish this was done more often in general. Those shots have positive value, just in getting off a shot, but they're evaluated as a negative.

Thirded. Is there a way to do it on Bask-Ref's play-index stuff? Can you look at shooting percentages where all shots greater than...35 or so feet are eliminated?

Reading the Draft Express write up on MKG makes me think the Timberwolves should trade the #18 and Derrick Williams to get him. Am I wrong to think he fits in really nicely with them? Can't create for himself much, so Rubio helps a lot, as to Kevin Love outlets. Plays very good defense, which helps make up for shortcomings of Love defensively. Love spreads the floor, which takes some pressure off of the SF to do so.

MIN should just draft Lamb.
   2349. AROM Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:53 PM (#4165803)
Length/height usually doesn't change much in those years. Sometimes a player will have a late growth spurt, like Scottie Pippen who was guard-size out of high school. I would not expect agility/sprint to change much. On the bench press, he will almost certainly improve.
   2350. AROM Posted: June 25, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4165804)
Thirded. Is there a way to do it on Bask-Ref's play-index stuff? Can you look at shooting percentages where all shots greater than...35 or so feet are eliminated?


I tried but I couldn't find anything like that. I was hoping for an "event finder", like I can do in baseball if I want to see the details of all triples hit by Johnny Damon or something. Outside of that, you could just find the games where he had at least 1 3 point attempt, then search through the game logs to see how long they were.
   2351. tshipman Posted: June 25, 2012 at 03:15 PM (#4165822)
Outside of that, you could just find the games where he had at least 1 3 point attempt, then search through the game logs to see how long they were.


You really want to remove all 3pers longer than 30 feet or so, or anything attempted with 1 or zero seconds on the shot clock. IMO, those plays are consistently mis-evaluated.
   2352. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 25, 2012 at 03:33 PM (#4165840)
Have the Bulls decided that next year will be a lost season, thanks to Rose's injury? That's the only way I can see a Deng or Noah trade for a high pick makes any sense. Even then it doesn't make much sense to me. But maybe they're very high on someone they figure will be available somewhere from 3-7 or so?

Edit: Or is this just Reinsdorf being cheap?


Way behind, so picking on choosing on the Deng stuff. It's a little of column A, little of column B here. Jerry really doesn't want to pay the tax, and they're most likely going to be in it next year and they're unlikely to be a contender next season. So I understand it at that level. It also sounds like part of it is spurred because he won't skip the Olympics (where he's the best player on the host British team) to get surgery on his writ. Which seems petty to me.

All that said, if you can trade a guy who was probably your fourth best player (while making 10 million+ per year) for the #2 pick in the draft, you make that trade 99 times out of 100. This gets even easier when you can pick a guy who can slot right in at spot immediately vacated by the guy you just traded. You get younger, cheaper and potentially more talented. Yeah, it can blow up on you, but that's a good basketball move, imo.

This *severely* underestimates Deng and I totally disagree with the 99/100 trade part here. He did play 80% of the year with a torn wrist ligament, so that depresses his numbers somewhat (also, he is better next to Rose than as the main focal point of an offense.

---

I'm torn, as I'm one of the bigger Deng defenders - both here and IRL. There probably is a deal out there that makes sense for the Bulls to retool a younger core around Rose post-recovery. Deng has had injuries - I always bristle at calling him injury prone since they're all unrelated, but they all tend to be more serious so perhaps it's at least partially true - but he's also got a lot of miles on him now. I don't expect him to ever be significantly better than he was this year, even if 100% so it might be the right time to move him now.

I don't think they're interested in moving Noah now, since Asik didn't progress at all offensively this season.
   2353. Booey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 03:58 PM (#4165859)
You really want to remove all 3pers longer than 30 feet or so


Unless you're talking about players like White Chocolate Jason Williams or Jimmer Fredette (in college; I haven't seen enough of him in the NBA to know if he still does this) that deliberately shoot really deep 3's so they can look cool on the off chance that they make it.

or anything attempted with 1 or zero seconds on the shot clock. IMO, those plays are consistently mis-evaluated.


Problem with doing this is that it all depends on the play. When teams just stand around without creating anything and then have to chuck up an awful shot at the buzzer, that's bad offense and it should be counted as a negative against their percentages.

It's completely different of course if they get the ball with a second left and have no other choice from the onset of the possession.
   2354. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 25, 2012 at 04:07 PM (#4165866)
This thread leads me to believe MKG is going to be really not good. So can somebody provide the best positive argument for him?

Hollinger's draft rater likes him:

This year, we have two names to add to that list: Dion Waiters and Michael Kidd-Gilchrist. Kidd-Gilchrist is probably the safest pick on the board -- a big wing who plays defense, has strong stats and comes with no character questions. From a risk-aversion perspective alone he should be a top-five pick; I have him third on my board after Robinson. (See below for how I would rank the prospects, regardless of their Draft Rater numbers.)
   2355. andrewberg Posted: June 25, 2012 at 04:45 PM (#4165898)
Don't short sell the possibility that MKG's jumpshot could improve quite a bit once he fixes his mechanics. There is a long list of guys, including Lebron, who came into the league as young, athletic guys without so much as a decent midrange jumper but improved to the point that it became a strength. As Hollinger and others have noted, MKG has a basket of skills that make him useful without that improvement, and the improvement is not far fetched. Not all unknowns are created equal- a guy with a good work ethic and good overall offensive skills is more likely to develop into a strong jumpshooter than someone like Drummond.
   2356. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 25, 2012 at 04:55 PM (#4165910)
I mostly agree with andrew here - I certainly think it's no given that he'll fix it, but he certainly could.
   2357. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 25, 2012 at 04:57 PM (#4165911)
Also, I'm under the impression that NBA teams regularly account for end of clock / quarter long threes in their analyses.
   2358. tshipman Posted: June 25, 2012 at 05:00 PM (#4165916)
Unless you're talking about players like White Chocolate Jason Williams or Jimmer Fredette (in college; I haven't seen enough of him in the NBA to know if he still does this) that deliberately shoot really deep 3's so they can look cool on the off chance that they make it.


Kobe is the king of the 35-ft heat check. I say this with love.

Problem with doing this is that it all depends on the play. When teams just stand around without creating anything and then have to chuck up an awful shot at the buzzer, that's bad offense and it should be counted as a negative against their percentages.

It's completely different of course if they get the ball with a second left and have no other choice from the onset of the possession.


Yeah, and ideally, I'm talking about the latter. I think some guys are much more likely to take the end of quarter/shot clock bailout shots, but I can't really prove it, short of a ton of work.

   2359. smileyy Posted: June 25, 2012 at 05:08 PM (#4165922)
I think some guys are much more likely to take the end of quarter/shot clock bailout shots


Especially with guys like Wall's straight-line speed. Now I'm really curious to see his 3-point shot distribution.
   2360. tshipman Posted: June 25, 2012 at 05:49 PM (#4165947)
Especially with guys like Wall's straight-line speed. Now I'm really curious to see his 3-point shot distribution.


Well, it's not that hard to pull the numbers for one guy. Wall in 2011-2012.

Not sure if the link will work. Wall took 11 shots in the last 10 seconds of quarters. All of them misses. He took one more really long 3per, but I'm not sure why he did it. It should be noted that even if we gave him a mulligan on every one of those 3pers, he still would have shot 3/30.

Now, here's something crazy: Kobe has taken 247 shots from 31 feet or more with less than 2 seconds left in the quarter for his career (2000/2001-today at least). 247!

He made 31. 31 of 247. If we took those out of his career numbers, he'd be a .348 3p shooter, rather than the career .337 shooter he is today.

Looking at just 2011-2012, Kobe took 14 3p-ers and made one in the last 3 seconds of quarters. Again, if we took those out of his attempts for the year, his 3p% improves by .012. I wonder who would have the biggest difference in their end of season numbers. Let me check some usual suspects.
   2361. Booey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 06:04 PM (#4165954)
He made 31. 31 of 247. If we took those out of his career numbers, he'd be a .348 3p shooter, rather than the career .337 shooter he is today.


Are you just taking away the 216 misses, or the 31 makes too? The makes should still count as shots, same way that shots when you're fouled still count towards your percentage if they go in.
   2362. tshipman Posted: June 25, 2012 at 06:12 PM (#4165958)
Okay, so going through the list of 3pers attempted with less than 3 seconds left in the quarter.

Jordan Crawford: 4/20 (2 were assisted)
Tyreke Evans: 3/15 (1 was assisted)
Jamal Crawford: 2/29 (those Crawford boys like to shoot--this brought him up 0.029 vs. his season 3p%)
Lou Williams: 4/20
Dwight Howard (amusingly): 0/7
Marco Bellini: 3/17 (2 assisted)
LeBron: 5/18 (would have shot .374 without these attempts)
Chris Paul: 0/14 (would have shot .396 without these attempts)
Jason Terry: 3/16

Other notables:
Russell Westbrook: 4/12
Kevin Durant: 4/15 (3 assisted)
Kevin Love, 4/14
Dwyane Wade: 1/3 (lowest attempts *I think* of any big name)


So, to answer the question, I think Jamal Crawford hurt his season/efficiency stats the most by chucking up shots at the end of quarters.
   2363. tshipman Posted: June 25, 2012 at 06:13 PM (#4165959)
Are you just taking away the 216 misses, or the 31 makes too? The makes should still count as shots, same way that shots when you're fouled still count towards your percentage if they go in.


The makes and misses. IOW, what he shot outside of end-of-quarter three's.

Annoyingly, I cannot edit my posts anymore.
   2364. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 25, 2012 at 06:30 PM (#4165972)
Not this most recent season, but the season before one of the Bulls blogs tracked Rose's end of quarter heaves (it may have also included end of shot clock ones) and those hurt his numbers some.
   2365. tshipman Posted: June 25, 2012 at 06:35 PM (#4165975)
Not this most recent season, but the season before one of the Bulls blogs tracked Rose's end of quarter heaves (it may have also included end of shot clock ones) and those hurt his numbers some.


Well, he only played a half season this last year, but for his career, he's 12/82 from 3p range on the end of quarter shots.

If we ignore those situations, he's a .332 career shooter, compared to .310 with them included.
   2366. andrewberg Posted: June 25, 2012 at 06:41 PM (#4165989)
Jamal Crawford: 2/29 (those Crawford boys like to shoot--this brought him up 0.029 vs. his season 3p%)


Did anyone else see the video of him at summer league? He dribbled up with the game tied, waiting for the clock to run down, jacked up a long three, then walked off the court and out of the gym while the ball hung in the air and eventually went in. By the time he made it, he was already about at the door of the gym on his way out.
   2367. Spivey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 07:24 PM (#4166036)
Did anyone else see the video of him at summer league? He dribbled up with the game tied, waiting for the clock to run down, jacked up a long three, then walked off the court and out of the gym while the ball hung in the air and eventually went in. By the time he made it, he was already about at the door of the gym on his way out.


Is this a joke? How long of a 3 are we talking about?
   2368. If on a winter's night a baserunner Posted: June 25, 2012 at 08:35 PM (#4166131)
Only a couple of feet long, but his swag is phenomenal: http://youtu.be/4fwNdfcD7OE
   2369. kpelton Posted: June 25, 2012 at 08:47 PM (#4166150)
I think Jamal illustrates the challenge of looking at these numbers. A lot of them came when he dribbled out the clock and shot a three at the end of the quarter, as opposed to getting the ball with seconds left and throwing up a shot. So what's the right baseline for comparison?
   2370. Spivey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 08:55 PM (#4166155)
Jamal Crawford is only the answer if the question is "Mike Bibby?"
   2371. smileyy Posted: June 25, 2012 at 09:00 PM (#4166166)
Hand down man down. Its basically an uncontested 3.
   2372. Booey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 09:16 PM (#4166188)
kpelton makes a good point in 2369, and not just WGT Crawford. A lot of players dribble the clock down to the final seconds before shooting to get their team the last shot of the quarter. These are calculated plays and not desperation heaves, so it doesn't really fit to remove them from the equation.
   2373. Spivey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 09:19 PM (#4166195)
kpelton makes a good point in 2369, and not just WGT Crawford. A lot of players dribble the clock down to the final seconds before shooting to get their team the last shot of the quarter. These are calculated plays and not desperation heaves, so it doesn't really fit to remove them from the equation.


Yes, it's also a situation like a last second heave, where a strategy that helps a team isn't going to help an individual's (rate) stats.

Also, after good-job good-effort kid, the Heat went 6-1.
   2374. Spivey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 09:26 PM (#4166203)
Would have been an Edit: Good job, good effort kid has been spotted at a Jets game. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrsktoLv8ck
   2375. baudib Posted: June 25, 2012 at 09:45 PM (#4166219)
I remember in that Michael Lewis article, Battier admitted that he refused to take last-second heaves because it hurt his 3-point %, which was the only "traditional" stat he was strong in.
   2376. Booey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 09:55 PM (#4166223)
Yes, it's also a situation like a last second heave, where a strategy that helps a team isn't going to help an individual's (rate) stats.


Kinda, but these type of shots tend to be higher percentage shots than last second catch and shoots, so they shouldn't be lumped together.
   2377. Booey Posted: June 25, 2012 at 10:00 PM (#4166225)
I remember in that Michael Lewis article, Battier admitted that he refused to take last-second heaves because it hurt his 3-point %, which was the only "traditional" stat he was strong in.


I've noticed other players do this too, probably for that same reason. But even from a selfish standpoint, I'd think a lot of players would like these opportunities to shoot deep 3's they'd normally get yelled at for taking, just to see if they can make them. Even if you only make one half court heave in your entire career, that one shot will be used in highlight reels of your career forever.
   2378. AROM Posted: June 26, 2012 at 09:47 AM (#4166434)
tshipman, that shotfinder is exactly what I was looking for. Didn't know bb-ref had that. It's pretty fun.

For Kobe, I looked for all shots from 30+ feet taken with at least 5 seconds on the clock. He's taken 24 of them, and made 4. Some of these might be explainable. Say the shot clock is winding down, somebody pokes the ball away, Kobe runs it down and throws up a desperation shot. But some of those are just Kobe being Kobe.

On 3-6-2007, Kobe was playing against Minnesota, down to 10 seconds in OT, Lakers leading by 2. Kobe throws up a 34 footer as the shot clock expires, and Kevin Garnett blocks it. T-Wolves go on to tie the game and win in the second OT.
   2379. JJ1986 Posted: June 26, 2012 at 10:10 AM (#4166460)
Chase Budinger traded to Minnesota for the 18th pick. I assume Houston is now going to try to trade up for Sacramento's selection.

   2380. Jimmy P Posted: June 26, 2012 at 10:54 AM (#4166516)
Chase Budinger traded to Minnesota for the 18th pick. I assume Houston is now going to try to trade up for Sacramento's selection.


Stein says that Houston is going for Dwight Howard, with no assurance from Dwight on an extension, or Josh Smith. Kyle Lowry is also in play.
   2381. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 26, 2012 at 10:55 AM (#4166518)
WojYahooNBA: Houston will keep working to flip those picks (14, 16 and 18) as part of package for Howard, or perhaps an impact player high in lottery.


Lots of picks for the Rockets again.

Buddinger seems like a good fit for the Wolves.
   2382. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 26, 2012 at 10:59 AM (#4166524)
Well, he only played a half season this last year, but for his career, he's 12/82 from 3p range on the end of quarter shots.

If we ignore those situations, he's a .332 career shooter, compared to .310 with them included.


Thanks. Lots of 40+ feet misses in there - 5 over 70 and a long of 81ft. I don't recall many he didn't shoot before the buzzer, so it fits his reputation of not caring about stats (or his narrative, if you will).
   2383. Joel W Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:25 AM (#4166561)
This Truehoop article about what you can get in the draft combines the best of Truehoop and the worst of Truehoop into one maddening article: http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/46559/good-teams-know-what-the-draft-offers
   2384. Jimmy P Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM (#4166575)
This Truehoop article about what you can get in the draft combines the best of Truehoop and the worst of Truehoop into one maddening article: http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/46559/good-teams-know-what-the-draft-offers


Not enough Kobe bashing. You'd think Henry could've worked it in a little. He's clearly mailing it in.
   2385. andrewberg Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM (#4166576)
Buddinger seems like a good fit for the Wolves.


I am happy about getting him for several reasons:

-His biggest weakness is probably creating off the dribble, but that is mitigated with Rubio, Barea, Ridnour.
-He fills in a gaping wound at SF. Subbing an average player for Wes Johnson is a several win improvement.
-He is more of a sure thing than anything you could get at the 18th pick, especially since it has started to look like Rivers and Ross will be off the board.
-One question mark is his motor (and his apparent preference for volleyball), but if his old coach is reacquiring him, it makes me less worried about his motor.

Hollinger also says that the Israeli throw in is a reasonable approximation of Casspi. That could be a useful bench piece.

With $11m in cap space, I am just sort of assuming that Jamal Crawford is the piece they sign to fill in at SG, although I also read that they plan to offer Brandon Roy a 2 year contract.
   2386. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:33 AM (#4166582)
With $11m in cap space, I am just sort of assuming that Jamal Crawford is the piece they sign to fill in at SG, although I also read that they plan to offer Brandon Roy a 2 year contract.

The Bulls are also interested in Roy. I wonder what he'll have left. He's getting all him money from the Blazers, so I wonder how much the deal might play into his preferences (vs. say ring chasing somewhere).
   2387. JJ1986 Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:36 AM (#4166585)
Are the Wolves giving up on Derrick Williams - Small Forward already? He's of much less use to the team as a 4.
   2388. Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:38 AM (#4166589)
Cosign [2385]. Budinger's a solid complementary piece. If his 3P% improvement last year is anything close to for real (up to .402) he will be a very good contributor and the Wolves could use that.
   2389. Jimmy P Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:39 AM (#4166591)
The Bulls are also interested in Roy. I wonder what he'll have left. He's getting all him money from the Blazers, so I wonder how much the deal might play into his preferences (vs. say ring chasing somewhere).

I can't imagine he'd be more than a bench shooter. His knees are toast, and the media here has been interviewing doctors that say there's no treatment that will help.
   2390. Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:41 AM (#4166594)
[2387] Budinger can play the 2 also, didn't get a chance to do that much in HOU since they had Martin and plenty of guards in general but he can do it.
   2391. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:49 AM (#4166605)
rumor (givony at draftexpress): hou offering lowry, 14, 16 to sac for 5 + tyreke evans.
   2392. Jimmy P Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:49 AM (#4166607)
Larry Bird is supposedly not going to return to the Pacers. There's been a lot of talk of Kevin Pritchard taking over.
   2393. andrewberg Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:52 AM (#4166609)
Are the Wolves giving up on Derrick Williams - Small Forward already? He's of much less use to the team as a 4.


In addition to Buddinger playing some 2 (like AS noted), there will be plenty of backup 3 minutes. Love can play some 5 with Williams at the 4. Williams can play 4 with Love off the court. Williams can play 3 with Bud off the court or at the 2. There are plenty of minutes for him. If he shows growth, that is MN's best trade chip.

Also, peace to Michael Beasley. It's been nice watching you shoot 21 footers.
   2394. andrewberg Posted: June 26, 2012 at 11:53 AM (#4166611)
Larry Bird is supposedly not going to return to the Pacers. There's been a lot of talk of Kevin Pritchard taking over.


Didn't the already announce that Walsh is back in some capacity?
   2395. Jimmy P Posted: June 26, 2012 at 12:16 PM (#4166641)
Didn't the already announce that Walsh is back in some capacity?


All of this is rumors. Did they officially get rid of Morey? He rubbed some people the wrong way there.
   2396. andrewberg Posted: June 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM (#4166678)
Looks pretty definite WRT Walsh.

Also, Morway rather than Morey. One of them should adopt a pseudonym.
   2397. Joel W Posted: June 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM (#4166680)
rumor (givony at draftexpress): hou offering lowry, 14, 16 to sac for 5 + tyreke evans.


Really interesting. Rockets go with Evans at the 2 and Dragic at the 3? Or does Evans go along with the 5 and the 18 to the Magic?
   2398. JC in DC Posted: June 26, 2012 at 12:55 PM (#4166687)
Or does Evans go along with the 5 and the 18 to the Magic?


For Orlando's sake, I hope they can get more than that.
   2399. Joel W Posted: June 26, 2012 at 01:05 PM (#4166706)
Celtics get the Thunder's pick from the Bobcats over a dispute over Jeff Green. There really aren't many details, but I assume it's because the Thunder knew he had a heart condition and didn't divulge the information. Celtics essentially now have 3 late first round picks. They could really fill out some rotation depth in the back end.
   2400. Fourth True Outcome Posted: June 26, 2012 at 01:12 PM (#4166716)
Celtics essentially now have 3 late first round picks. They could really fill out some rotation depth in the back end.


The pick is for 2013, not an extra for this draft.
Page 24 of 28 pages ‹ First  < 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
rr
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogJohn McGrath: The Giants have become the Yankees — obnoxious | The News Tribune
(12 - 1:31am, Oct 25)
Last: Into the Void

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(916 - 1:29am, Oct 25)
Last: J. Sosa

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(515 - 1:26am, Oct 25)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(80 - 1:10am, Oct 25)
Last: stevegamer

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(385 - 1:05am, Oct 25)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogCurt Schilling not hiding his scars - ESPN Boston
(21 - 12:44am, Oct 25)
Last: The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott)

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3736 - 12:23am, Oct 25)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogHow top World Series players ranked as prospects. | SportsonEarth.com : Jim Callis Article
(21 - 12:04am, Oct 25)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogRoyals get four AL Gold Glove finalists, but not Lorenzo Cain | The Kansas City Star
(14 - 11:59pm, Oct 24)
Last: Zach

NewsblogDid Adam Dunn Ruin Baseball? – The Hardball Times
(73 - 11:22pm, Oct 24)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogBeaneball | Gold Gloves and Coco Crisp's Terrible 2014 Defense
(2 - 7:47pm, Oct 24)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(871 - 7:22pm, Oct 24)
Last: Jim Wisinski

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(67 - 6:38pm, Oct 24)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogThe ‘Little Things’ – The Hardball Times
(2 - 6:34pm, Oct 24)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(15 - 5:31pm, Oct 24)
Last: zonk

Page rendered in 1.0594 seconds
53 querie(s) executed