In 02-03, O'Neal had two very efficient players playing along side him. One of them was Reggie Miller ffs.

The problem with O'neal is not just his low fg%. He doesn't do anything else offensively. He can't shoot 3s and he can't shoot free throws. A guy like Reggie Miller "only" shot .441, but he was way more efficient than Jermaine.

Also, PER will always overrate a guy who takes 17 shots per game at an inefficient rate. You can't say his inefficiency is OK, he has a 20 PER. He has a 20 PER because he's inefficient.

He had 20+ PER for two real seasons. Then he had 20+ PER for two seasons where he played 44 and 51 games. Then it dropped to 18.8 as he played a decent 69 games. Then it plummeted to 14.4 while playing half a season. He is really injury prone and shows signs of declining, as he used to put up good numbers while being hurt, but really isn't anymore. He's only 29, but he's been in the league for 12 years now and has a TON of miles on him. Him returning to form is really, really unlikely. It's a good pick if you're trying to win in the next 2 years. After that, it's not.

oh sweet while the ball is rolling epip is going to bump old **** to argue about.

moose,

Nice post.

Shark,

Nice pick. I was beginning to consider him even though he plays the same spot as Bird. I'm a little down on him just due to the gay 24 thing again.

fewer brains /= more balls

must be why you drafted a guy who's never won a playoff series

I honestly don't even care this much about this draft anymore to even keep this a secret anylonger (although obv some of u knew).

defense isn't that much more important in this league than in normal nba. However players that can play BOTH elite defense AND offense while also being able to play off the ball offense (not just ball in their hands offense) is by far much more important, and was at a HUGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE premium (only a few players are left that can do this and I don't even care if they get taken anymore).

i'm assuming Alex is the break tonight. Haven't seen him at all

How does Player Efficiency Rating overrate inefficient players?

Guess this is my cue to sleep.

it's a definite critique of Hollinger's rating. more shots = more points = higher PER. He tends to overrate chuckers. He argues that there's positive value in a guy who scores a lot even if he does so inefficiently (i.e. high usage)... over say a chucker who doesn't get the ball much

Sure thing.....

-Marbury is 5th among active players in loss shares.

-Marbury just doesn't seem to win:

He was drafted by the Timberwolves. They won 40 and 45 games with him. They traded him midseason the next year. The first full year without him they won 50 games.

The Nets won 26 games with Marbury in 00-01(Marbury was traded right near the end of the season). The next year with Kidd instead of Marbury they won 52 games.

The 03-04 Suns won 29 games. They traded Marbury midseason. Next season with Nash they won 62 games.

Obviously he hasn't been a winner with the Knicks.


-"In all seriousness though, we aren't doing an 82-game regular season, it's basically just one big playoffs, so Marbury will definitely not be half-assing on the court when everything is at stake. "

I found this statement interesting consider that in 4 playoff appearances Marbury put up a 36.5 FG% and a 121-64 assist-to-turnover ratio.

-Marbury is bat**** insane.

-Marbury is not a good defender, nor is he extremely efficient, nor is he a huge bulk scorer. He does nothing at an elite level. This is still round 2. You should be getting someone who does SOMETHING elite. Marbury will score 20 points per game with below average efficiency. He'll dish out 7 or 8 assists per game. He'll be weak defensively.

-Marbury is going to take shots, and you only have one ball. In a draft like this you're going to have a lot of efficient teams. Marbury kills you here, and like I said above he adds nothing. I could understand an inefficient player like Ben Wallace who gives you something(defense) and doesn't take a lot of shots, but Marbury doesn't give you anything really.

-Defense, defense, defense, defense, defense. Its what wins basketball games. Marbury is not good at it.

-Marbury is struggling to get playing time on the New York ****ing Knicks right now. Think about that.

KG is obv better than Barkley/Malone in this format, and is obv the closest to McHale. However I would still take McHale over KG.

KG has gotten overrated over the years (omg i'm a boston homer and saying this, and note i've said this in other theards BEFORE this draft).

Both his defense and offense are overrated. His defense is very good don't get me wrong, but his 1v1 man to man defense is not elite at all. He is an elite help defender (helping out on other peoples mans like Ben Wallace) but he cannot guard most elite players in the post.

And his offense is overrated also. I don't agree that much with the tnt guys, but they are right when they say KG can never go for 40 points etc. He just can't dominate, he can't take/score consistantly easy buckets in the post. He always takes fallaway jump shots after posting up his man, he doesn't have the stength or post moves like McHale and for some reason cannot blow buy a guy like (example zomg Amare) can.

His jump shot is very good, if not great, but he is just not a great post player at all. He can't create his own shot 1v1 consistantly at a top 5 elite level like someone like McHale could.

ZOMG i'm a Boston homer and saying KG is overrated. Oh wait...i'm not a Boston homer.

Edit: Shouldn't say never for KG going for 40+ just veryyyyyyyyy rarley

How long is this McHale crap going to last???

over under on 5 more rounds??

It sounds weird, right? The scoring component of PER is this:

PTS + FG*.4 - FGA*.7 - (FTA-FT)*.7

The "break even point" on two-pointers is only 30%. Surely a guy who's shooting 30% isn't helping his team, right?

I'm thinking right now if I'd trade you my 10th round pick for Marbury and I'm having a really tough time deciding. No I'm not joking.

assani,

tsk tsk. edit plz

Assani,

Those are all excellent reasons why Marbury is horrible and bat**** insane.

Well done,
BJLTNYK

Not trying to be a dick here as you seem genuine, but how about any player who doesn't play the exact same position(PF) and have the exact same fault(poor defense) as your first round pick?

I like Boozer and would've definitely considered him at my pick to play with Duncan, but with Dirk it just doesn't work imo.

any round.

What does everyone think of drafting cities to play in as well? Good idea or waste of time?

waste. I draft Providence, RI

I wanna stop this conversation here. I think we should let everyone form their coach pick strategy completely on their own.

I like Bynum better because theres potential for something great. With Marbury you know what you're getting(and its not good).

whilst I name a ton of coaches and players a few posts up

Not taking it as a dick comment. I go brain dead sometimes. I think Dirk can play SF though. The other point is still valid though.

Probably a waste of time. Whoever has Manu would just draft Buenos Aires and undoubtedly he would get a ton of calls for flopping.

I don't know what you guys are talking about regarding judging these teams, but this is incorrect. I instructed everyone to draft teams as if they were starting a franchise to play in a league with today's NBA rules. Today's NBA rules means 82 games season.