User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.7001 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
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.
---
I don't understand why they'd be ok with moving him either. I mean, he said he'll sign for the most money. But shouldn't he be someone they should want to resign?
Do they have the cap space? They have some pretty foolish contracts taking up salary. There's two other reasons I'd trade him now. First, even though we keep hearing it's a good free agent year, I just don't believe it. There's two prime players and then a bunch of guys that can give you 2 or 3 years. A guy like Ilyasova is ripe to be overpaid in that kind of market. Second, Ilyasova's said he's pretty much going for the money, including Europe. If a Euro team offers him a ton of money, your going to lose him for nothing. I guess I can see dumping him if you think he's gone. Not sure Beasley, Randolph, and a mid-round 1 are a great return, though. It's basically a 1 and then guys that no one else wants to coach.
Of course, I think I'd pay to watch Skiles try and coach a team with Captain Jack, Beasley, and Randolph.
He's good but he's far from great. And the rest of the Nets is far inferior to the supporting cast Howard is working with in Orlando. Not that it means he won't want to play there, but if he's looking to contend for a championship any time soon he should pick somewhere else.
Well, he already has a history of neck problems. So that sort of bump isn't innocuous to him.
FWIW, I think criticisms like this are sometimes overblown. In the case of those two guys, they are stars who the NBA specifically request corporate promoters to work with because they don't have tattoos and have relatively clean cut images.
Would people be interested in a bracket competition on yahoo or espn?
Self-promoter has a negative connotation, but I didn't really mean it as a criticism. As we discussed before, some guys (Metta Artest, Melo, Wade, Dwight, Blake Griffin) seek outside opportunities/media face time/celeb interaction more than others do. It is not a good or a bad thing; it's just a thing. For example, Howard had a deal with ESPN The Magazine where he Tweeted where he was going to be and interacted with whoever from his Tweeps got there first. ESPN ran a cover story on it, and Howard was photographed at a karaoke bar, a park, etc, with his fans. That may have been at the "request" of the NBA I suppose, but Howard didn't have to do it. In the piece, Howard made a big deal about how he Tweets all the time and responds to his Tweeps.
I have read several things about Howard to the effect that "he wants to be the guy" etc. I think that is part of that package.
I am not sure I agree here. "Great" is a subjective term, but Deron Williams is an extremely good player.
As far as the other observation, it was Simmons who said a couple of months ago that Howard should force his way to Chicago and the fact that he isn't shows that he (Howard) "cares about the wrong things."
76ers should be in on this. They have enough depth to 1) surround him with good players and 2) Have good players to offer Orlando. Yet they don't have a single player who can approach Howard in star power.
Like a great rebounding big man from the past, he could lead this team to the promised land.
Apologies to Steagles if this has already been covered, but these threads are too long and my memory too short to reference all the ideas that have been discussed in the past.
I'm not capable of the sort of reasoning that sees Howard wanting to play with Rose as a good thing and Lebron wanting to play with Wade as a bad thing.
It's SimmonsTown, Jake.
In a roundabout way, I think it's a compliment to LeBron. He's supposed to be good enough to win a title without any other stars, while no one expects Howard to be able to.
Among point guards, I'd put him in the top 10 but not top 5.
Paul and Rose are better than he is. Not as sure, but I'd put Westbrook, Parker, and Nash ahead as well. I think I would prefer Rondo's all around game but not sure. Really depends on the rest of the team's makeup as to which strengths would fit better.
and i completely agree with you. they're already the #1 defensive team in the NBA, but if the sixers add dwight howard (the best post defender of his generation) to andre iguodala (arguably the best perimeter defender of his generation), the team just becomes a defensive juggernaut.
at the moment, i'm kind of content to just see where the jrue-turner-iguodala lineup can take the sixers this year, but i'm definitely salivating at the (implausible and unlikely) idea of howard in a sixers jersey.
If Lebron were that good he'd be the first.
Aye. Anyone else think Harvard will be the 12 this year?
If Lebron were that good he'd be the first.
Duncan his second title with no other star. There was a end-of-the-line Robinson, and a rookie Ginobili who wasn't getting very many minutes. Tony Parker was getting benched in the playoffs for points for Speedy Claxton.
I believe you are forgetting Captain Jack.
Parker may have been getting benched, but he still averaged the 2nd most minutes in the playoffs for them.
DUNCAN 116/92
ROBINSON 116/94
Robinson only played about 22 MPG, however.
The 2003 Spurs' run was similar to the 2011 Mavericks in some ways. Here are Tyson Chandler's ORTG/DRTG and WS/48 for the playoffs, compared to Dirk's:
NOWITZKI 118/105 .213
CHANDLER 131/102 .218
Duncan's playoff PER that year was a phenomenal 28.4.
I've written a bit about Howard here before, and this just confirms my thoughts on him: he's a superstar, but he's not a leader and off court priorities rank at least as high as winning for him. In Brooklyn it would be his team, even though Deron is really good, he's not Howard good. In LA, he'd be taking the torch from Kobe, no matter if the team wouldn't be much better than his Magic bunch -- he'd be king of Lakerdom.
In Dallas, again, he'd be taking the torch from Dirk, who already won a title, so he'd have little pressure.
But Chicago? Chicago is Rose's team. He's not clearly better than Rose like he would be with Deron, and of course Rose is the hometown hero.
Nevermind that a Rose and Howard based team, coached by Thibs, would instantly contend with the Heat and would probably win 2 or so titles before either of them hits 32.
Oh well, go be happy, Dwight.
-- Howard wants "his own" team
-- Howard dislikes Chicago as a city
-- Howard wants to play somewhere glamorous (LA or NY)
-- Howard dislikes Rose (obviously buddy-buddy in public for PR reasons including adidas)
-- Howard dislikes Thibodeau
-- Howard dislikes the Bulls' uniforms
-- Howard dislikes Reinsdorf
-- Howard has little confidence in the Bulls' front office
-- Howard dislikes Chicago fans
-- Howard's pastor has dissuaded him from playing in Chicago
-- Howard doesn't think he's a good basketball fit with Rose
I think one thing that is clear about Howard is that he doesn't bash anyone in public, pretty much ever. If he had any of the above objections I doubt he'd vocalize them (especially before FA actually happens). The guy is going to get paid $X to play basketball over the next several years, where X is both very large and essentially independent of where he plays (not totally -- state tax and the slight bump + extra year from Orlando). There could be any number of reasons he doesn't want to play there and from a money standpoint things are pretty equal? We just don't really have any evidence for or against any theory here, "sources" notwithstanding.
I agree, it's pretty much just mental masturbation, but that's what message boards were invented for. Howard doesn't want to play in Chicago, for Bulls fans, it's fun to speculate why seeings how a) Chicago can offer the best package for Howard, and b) Rose and Howard would be the athletic answer to Wade and Lebron in a way those two could never have envisioned.
I have yet to look at a bracket, as I was attempting to get tickets and plan a trip to watch the WVU/Gonzaga game. Well looks like I'm not the only one. Tickets to the 2nd session in Pittsburgh on Thursday (WVU/Gonzaga, OSU/15 seed) start at $190 on stubhub for upper level behind the basket. The same quality of seats for Session 1 (Cuse/16 seed, USM/KSU) are $41. I believe I'll be watching the tournament from my living room again this year.
See post 578. And it wasn't so much "blocking a trade", as it was the same not really interested and thus the Bulls aren't really interested.
Cool, this thread moves fast at times, missed that one.
A "source" on the Bulls RealGM board, (he's been right probably on 10% of his rumors) is claiming the Bulls and Celtics are heavy in trade talks centering around Garnett and Pierce for some combo of Boozer / Deng / Asik / Filler.
Now that would be a \"####### eh" trade.
My head has exploded.
Oooo, another wing player and another young point guard for Nate to bench and #### on.
Holy moly. That trade is too big and too fundamentally jarring for me to have any idea if it is a good idea for either side. I guess Boston gets a lot younger and can amnesty Boozer after the year, and Chicago has a pretty tough and battle tested starting five to trot out against the Heat. I have to say, I kind of like the Rose-Hamilton-Pierce-Garnett-Noah crunch time lineup against Chalmers-Wade-James-Bosh-Anthony.
They cannot. A traded player can not be amnestied.
I have to say, I kind of like the Rose-Hamilton-Pierce-Garnett-Noah crunch time lineup against Chalmers-Wade-James-Bosh-Anthony.
How much do KG and PP have left*? That's an old team all of a sudden, even if it might be better this year than the current Bulls team.
*On a side note, I wouldn't have a problem falling back in like with KG, but it would take some time for me to warm to Pierce.
Geez.
If they were to trade Lin, I pity their PR staff.
I agree, but I still think the Clippers aren't going to contend until they have one really good wing defender, and they're not filling that spot if they give up their best trade chip for Jamal Crawfor_.
Doesn't need to be too much. I think Pierce has something left because he does a lot of things that don't require a ton of athleticism. He has thrived in Boston where he is not the full-time playmaker, and Chicago would allow him to do the same things. He would also be the part-time offensive leader Chicago wanted Boozer (and even Rip) to be. Plus, losing Deng sucks because you need someone to guard Lebron to make it out of the east, but Pierce does well enough against Lebron to at least make him work, and it's not like anyone is just going to shut him out.
As for KG, I think he would be such a monumental improvement defensively over Boozer with at least as many games played, so some small drop offensively would be fine, and that might not even happen. Either way, I suppose he leaves after the year and Gibson takes that spot.
I'm a lifelong Celtics fan and I'm still working on it.
In all honesty, I fully appreciate his effectiveness and his contributions to the franchise, I've just never dug his style of play.
It's hard to know what this time of year is really being discussed, and what's just talk. But it is fun to try and imagine the reconstituted teams.
Or is the idea that GS gets Kaman and Redick with Anderson going to New Orleans? That actually makes sense for the Hornets, but that seems like a pretty weak return for Ellis.
I set one up on Yahoo. League ID: 144026. Password: mutombo.
Not if they think Howard's leaving. I think Anderson's value drops considerably without Howard there.
Broussard and Stein say this won't work anyway, for a simple reason: DeVos wants Ellis so he can keep Howard, and Lacob only wants to give up Ellis if he can get Howard. People may sneer at Broussard/Stein, but that actually makes sense to me, based on what those two orgs reportedly seem to think about Ellis.
Stein says that GS is trying to get Bogut.
As one would guess, their report is that Otis Smith is doing anything and everything to try to "placate" Howard by making a big add, but if Smith can't do it, ORL may have to go ahead and trade Howard on Thursday. DeVos, however, seems to think his "relationship" with Howard will eventually lead Howard to stay.
Conceding that this is all spec and how knows who the "sources" are, this sounds like exactly what Gilbert believed about James. Gilbert of course did the right thing by keeping James--the Cavs were seen as title faves. It is a little different with DeVos and Howard.
nueva york at los bulls is on ESPN right now. i think i'm rooting for chicago here.
this year, anderson is shooting .43/.42/.87 with a 14.1 TRR, and is averaging 18 and 9 per 36 minutes with a 21.5 usage.
it's also worth noting that while only 1 in every 4 of dirk's made FGs were from beyond the arc, anderson is at a better than 1:1 rate.
and i'm not saying that anderson is going to be as good as dirk was at his peak, i'm just saying that he's having a hell of a year, is a hell of a player, and among 6'10 forwards that shoot 40% from beyond the arc, anderson is a lot closer to nowitzky than he is to bonner or novak.
Why Stern may be against a Kaman buyout
"Only one problem there for longtime Kaman fan Pat Riley. Sources say that the league-owned Hornets remain adamantly against buying Kaman out if they can't trade the 7-footer and that Kaman has been warned not to expect a buyout if no trade is consummated. Teams issue those threats all the time, of course, only to grant the buyout in the end. Remember, however, that we're talking about the league-owned Hornets here. The sense is that NBA commissioner David Stern, who will continue to serve as New Orleans' ultimate decision-maker until the team is sold, would have no interest in setting Kaman free to join the contender of his choosing. If he did, with Eric Gordon still sidelined after knee surgery, Al-Farouq Aminu would be the only player New Orleans received in the Chris Paul trade who's actually playing for the Hornets."
Here's my pick for the Ivy League All-Star team (guys since '60):
Lineup: F/C Rudy LaRusso (Dartmouth), F Jim McMillan (Columbia), F/G Bill Bradley (Princeton), G/F Geoff Petrie (Princeton), G Brian Taylor (Princeton)
Bench: C Chris Dudley (Yale), F/C John Hummer (Princeton), C Dave Newmark (Columbia), F Corky Calhoun (Penn), G Armond Hill (Princeton), G Matt Maloney (Penn), G Dave Wohl (Penn)
Kind of a Don Nelson team - starts four wings and a power forward. LaRusso made 4 All-Star teams and once finished eighth in the league in scoring - but was mainly a defender/enforcer at the four spot. McMillan* was an efficient shooting three and somewhat similar to the other starting forward, Bradley. Bill never had a league average season by PER standards, but did make an All-Star team and was very famous. Petrie's maybe the best of the bunch. The original Trailblazer (I didn't know that) - OregonLive.com named him the 4th best Blazer of all time (I'm pretty sure that's too high) and he averaged 24.x points per game in three of his first four seasons, making two A-S teams. Knee injuries did him in**. Taylor's out of position (he's a combo guard, much more a two) but a tough defender and sweet shooter. Made 2 ABA All-Star teams but best season was arguably his first post-merger. Like LaRusso, was an 2nd team All-NBA defender.
On the bench, Dudley is a strong defender, shot blocker, and rebounder at center*** - but foul prone and a horrendous shooter. Hummer's an adequate backup big. Hill (and, to a lesser extent) Maloney can help out with distribution and pg play.
* Whose rent, I hear, is too damn high.
** Only played 6 seasons and, yes, this is the exec. He was traded to Atlanta, for whom he never played, for Mo Lucas, O-Live's #5 Blazer of all time.
*** 10th all time in rebounding percentage (only tracked since '70).
a boston loss in game 2 would make this a pretty solid night.
i'm not saying he's a clone, i'm not saying he's as good as dirk at his peak, i'm just saying that anderson is really freaking good, and that, like dirk, he can get his shot off against anyone.
Knicks need a new coach and more athleticism all over the court. Chicago was beating them to every lose ball and at least twice Chicago players straight out hustled a Knick to the ball.
Amare with only 3 boards is an obvious target.
_______
Steagles you just jumped the shark man, Anderson is a spot up shooter that also isn't aa complete stiff. Comparing him to dirk is like comparing kyle korver to Larry Bird.
Dirk at 23: PER 24.1, WS/48: .222, simple rating: unavailable (was +11.2 last year)
Anderson at 23: PER 22.3, WS/48: .249, simple rating +11.6
Bonner at 23: (not in league)
Bonner at 28, best season: PER: 15.0, WS/48: .169, +2.7
That said... Orlando has not done well this year with Howard out and Anderson in. Part of that is having Davis at center (Davis kind of sucks and is a bad choice to match w/ RA) - part of it is how well the games of DH and Anderson complement each other. (Also, Anderson minus Howard was reasonably effective last year ... some of what's going on now is also a fluke).
In any event, you don't move him in a deal for Ellis - Anderson is already a better player by some margin.
[As for comps, I'm thinking a wealthy man's Troy Murphy.]
He is just about as good as this kind of player could possibly be. (This is reminiscent of the Harden stuff.)
His simple rating is 11.6, which confirms what ws/48 is saying using on court / off court numbers as well.
He's a good player, certainly better than Korver in my example, but he's not a volume scorer or playmaker or elite defensive presense inside:
so he's not a superstar, but a team could win a title with him as their 3rd best player. Sorta like Luol Deng or Lamar Odom type impact.
He's a good player, certainly better than Korver in my example, but he's not a volume scorer or playmaker or elite defensive presence inside:
I don't think we know the limits of his scoring ability yet - he's only 23 and already averages over a point every other minute. And, if you take him away from Howard, you'll see a bump up in his defensive board numbers (D boards being somewhat discretionary) - he was a fine rebounder at Cal. Certainly not a playmaker or defensive presence, no.
I think he can be a 20-9-2, with very good shooting/turnover numbers. Kind of like a tougher, but less offensively diverse Kiki Vandeweghe (and with lower usage than Kiki). Not sure if that's a #2 or #3 guy on a title winner.
Anderson shoots almost 42% from 3p. That is really, really good! He only shoots 44% or so from 2p range, though. That is really bad for a PF! He takes 56% of his shots from 3p, so it isn't as much of an issue. Imagine if he took a third of his shots from 3. Or a quarter.
What does a primary option forward who shoots a really good percentage from 3p do? Nowitzki takes 19% of his shots from 3p from his career--around 15-17% during his peak from 2005/06-06/07. It's really hard for a primary option on offense to take that many shots from 3p.
How many teams could Ryan Anderson take 7 3p per game on with success? The Magic, obviously. Probably The Heat, the Lakers (if Gasol wasn't there), the Bulls (if Boozer wasn't), the Suns (?), the Thunder maybe, the Nets (?), and maaaaybe Minnesota (if Love could play the 5).
If Ryan Anderson were on the Milwaukee Bucks he'd be a 7th or 8th man.
If Anderson were on the Bucks, he'd've been starting at the four all year and Ilyasova (another underrated stretch four) wouldn't have gotten the opportunity to be a stud the last few weeks.
I think there is some truth to this, but Anderson is an excellent rebounder for a perimeter oriented big man. So yea Howard's prescense gets him a reprieve from any sort of offense other than stand outside and take advantage of the double team, but his rebounding is good enough to where even if he had to adjust his game inside the rim a bit more (with a dropoff in efficiency) he'd still be a solid starter.
I was convinced he was over-rated last year and now I'm almost convinced he's under-rated. Dunno, beauty of the nba in the complexity of how players benefit (or don't) from who they play with.
edit: buyout is ~2 million euros, signed thru 2015-16.
He's indicated in the Spanish press that he'd like to come over soon, but the Bulls can't pay him enough until at least 2014-15 season to make it worth his while. I guess if he really wants to come over he will, but the over under is on 2014 and it might even be until 2015-16 that he comes over.
he's been a winner, he's got a high basketball IQ, and he'd be a steady veteran presence on a team that's sorely lacking in all 3.
he's a shooter. not as good of one as he used to be, but he's still an effective floor spreader.
he's a good secondary ballhandler, and he'd be able to take some pressure off of wall when the game starts to get away.
and even though he's really lacking in athleticism, washington has a ton of athletes they could put around him. mcgee, booker, singleton, young, wall, crawford, vesely, seraphin--turkoglu is basically the polar opposite of all of them.
i know the guy's never really been all that great, and i know that he's way past the point where he can be the leader of a contending team, but as a guy who can transition washington from losing to winning, i think, if motivated, he'd actually be a hell of a fit.
This is a complicated man, this Ryan Anderson.
if i had to take a guess at that, i'd say anderson's increased usage with howard off the court is the result of him replacing howard as the lead man in orlando's pick and roll. his 3PAs with and without howard on court are steady, but he attempts 4 more 2-pointers (plus an extra FT) per 36 when howard is off the court. additionally, a ton of anderson's shots at the rim occur with howard off the court.
i'd also say that the volume of corner 3s that he hits with howard on the court is the result of him being the third man in orlando's pick and roll.
that's really a cool tool, though.
\
League ID: 144026
Password: mutombo
Doesn't this get to what we talk about when we talk about "good"?
At some level or another, good is a judgment on the player. LeBron is a good player. He would succeed in any offense, any defense. Some guys have conditional success. They succeed more
That's not what that link said to me. To me, it demonstrates that he wouldn't be as efficient without Howard. First of all, there are extremely small sample sizes--only 308 minutes (less than 10 games). He also only takes a third of his shots from 3p with Howard Off, versus over half in total.
Well, I'm not sure I'd go that far. First, he's played 3 times as many minutes with Howard on the court. His 3 point percentage does drop by 4% without Dwight, so he's probably seeing more D. Second, who's he playing against? I know that if I'm playing the Magic and Dwight leaves the game, I probably take my big man defender out so he doesn't get ticky-tack fouls on Ryan Anderson. I want all my big man fouls on Dwight and his 50% free throws.
I didn't say Anderson wasn't good. I said he loses some value without Dwight. He's not an All-Star, and I don't even think he'd be in the discussion without Howard. Rashard Lewis isn't too bad of a comp, probably (haven't actually looked).
I feel like even in that statement, there are two different versions of "good." There's the "empirical good," where a player is judged only by his past accomplishments no matter how he got there. Bill Russell is one of the empirically best players of all time because he won like crazy regardless of how he did it. A pitcher with an ERA a run lower than his FIP is empirically good. There's also "platonically good," where a player is judged by whether we could hypothesize his quality in the abstract. Lebron is platonically good because he could dominate in any system. The fact that he has not won a title* has no effect on whether he conforms to the quidity of goodness. Javier Vazquez embodies the platonically good pitcher.
*Using championships as a barometer is probably too metaphysical. It might be better to look at a guy who won an MVP award in a season where his FG% was way above his true talent level or something along those lines.
Well then Stan has to resign, immediately. That's shameful, if true.
Even with your further clarification, this is just ridiculous. He's what, the 2nd best player on Orlando, but would be the 2nd or 3rd guy off the bench for a team 10 games worse? Yes, a lot of the difference between Orlando and Milwaukee is Howard, but come on.
I will say, between this and the Harden discussion, you seem to have a high bar for young players (not a criticism, just an observation).
He's a good player, certainly better than Korver in my example, but he's not a volume scorer or playmaker or elite defensive presense inside:
There's no explanation for Korver being included in this discussion, except for the only compare white guys to white guys rule.
The guy the Bulls have stashed at Real Madrid, Mirotic, is a Ryan Anderson clone. An absolute steal for Chicago that helps make probably losing Gibson for nothing this summer quite a bit more palatable.
Depending on how the playoffs shake out, I could see the Bulls bringing him back and jettisoning Boozer. If they lose to the Heat again in the ECF (or god forbid, to someone else before then), I foresee some big changes. A Gibson/Mirotic platoon would be a great fit at PF next to Howard...crap, here I go again.
---
I went to the Bulls/Knicks game last night. It really is impressive to watch Chandler play defense in person. He really is the entire Knicks' defense. He was tasked with shutting down Boozer and the entire lane. Play after play it looked like there was a wide open lane to the bucket for Rose, but his recovery and help is so quick - and always to the right spot. Rose played a bit out of control last night, and the officiating clearly rattled him (that dunk was the angriest dunk I've ever seen out of him). One play, he had a shot blocked right back to him; he caught it, started complaining, clearly traveled, then passed the ball to the top of the key and was out of the rest of the play. He is complaining more lately, and I understand the frustration - he gets hammered so much, and so much of it is uncalled - but I don't exactly agree with the sentiment behind this quote:
Being a superstar shouldn't matter; I know about superstar calls and whatnot, but he shouldn't really expect special treatment. He does get the benefit of the doubt on occasion, but if he got a foul called every time he's touched he'd be shooting 20 FTs a game.
That means you probably haven't seen this story. I'm rooting for him, it was good to see him take advantage of his PT last night and the crowd loved it.
*Rose's quote on the dunk:
The idea of blacking out when dunking like that is fun.
When he leaves as a FA, the Magic are going to be in a world of hurt.
Rose hadn't dunked like that since the Miami playoffs. He was getting hacked all night with no calls. I'm glad he's started to become more vocal with the officials. As a wise man once said (I believe it was Brandon Roy): "I used to not complain, then I saw all the guys that get the most calls are the biggest whiners, so I changed up".
FWIW, as a Knicks..........................................fan.........................., I thought the officiating as a whole was terrible.
What I don't get is why Golden St doesn't want to do it. They still think they have a chance at Howard.
I think they need to decide which of their guards they're keeping and move on. They've been stuck in this Curry-Ellis-other guards thing for years. Just move some of the guys. It's not like they're going to get much worse if they do, and if they do, that's probably better for them long term.
Additionally, I also think it's somewhat disingenuous to ignore that other teams try to put the players in optimal positions to succeed as well.
Anderson is, afaict, a rich man's Lewis* (IIRC, B-Pro lists both Lewis and Dirk in mentioning Anderson comparables). Rashard's career highs in PER is 20.7 and WS/48 is .160, both of which are topped by Anderson this year (Anderson's lowest WS/48 with Orlando is .161). More globally, Lewis lacked a peak year, but played at a high level for 8 seasons (ages 22-29: PER: 18.2, WS/48: .142). Anderson's over the last three years (his three years w/ ORL - ages 21-23) is a bit better...
PER Lewis 18.2, Anderson 19.9
WS/48 Lewis .142, Anderson .214
TS% Lewis 56.7, Anderson 58.7
EFG% Lewis 52.5, Anderson 55.0
Orb% Lewis 4.9, Anderson 11.3
Drb% Lewis 13.9, Anderson 16.5
Ast% Lewis 9.7, Anderson 6.2
Stl% Lewis 1.7, Anderson 1.3
To% Lewis 9.6, Anderson 8.1
Blk% Lewis 1.3, Anderson 1.4
Usg Lewis 22.5, Anderson 21.8
ORtg Lewis 114, Anderson 121
DRtg Lewis 107, Anderson 102
I give Anderson the edge in man-on defense, fwiw.
Anderson is, generally, a more extreme version of Lewis - more threes, less turnovers, less assists and steals, except that he's got a big edge in rebounding.
FWIW, Lewis did not appear to play any better with Orlando than he did with Seattle (though he did play differently. He's being better from two than Anderson suggests that Andferson could lose a little if he moved to mid-oughts Seattle).
* Oh, Lewis did play in 2 All-Star games, one with Seattle, one with Orlando.
what exactly would orlando be giving up in this deal to make it worth them getting back ellis? as i've said, i think it'd be an awful decision for them to get rid of anderson, but beyond him, i don't really see them having anything of value to give up.
I'd assume they'd be sending things toward Milwaukee. I have no clue what, though.
If getting rid of Anderson enables you to keep Howard, then wave goodbye to Anderson.
i...am not really a fan of this. hinrich is just having a really awful year, and i don't think he's a good enough defender to even replace jodie meeks.
and i like radmanovic, and i think he'd fit with the team (even if he'd have to get most of his minutes at SF, where he's not really athletic enough to adequately defend the position) but i think giving up meeks to get him would be a bit foolish.
also, i still think there's something they can do with nocioni's contract this offseason, since he has the team option, and if they trade him now, for this, that opportunity just goes *poof*.
So - is Howard the #2 player in the league? I think so. Who else is on the short list - Durant, maybe Paul...
(I've yet to watch a Hawks game this year.)
You mean like trading for Antawn Jamison?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main