no, kc, this is limited analysis. you're better than that.

fouls tell some of the story: he tries to block too many shots. he also doesn't block a TON of shots per 36, but it's reasonable. def. rebounds are decent defensive box score stat - he gets alot of those.

his team gives up a ton of penetration, the best perimeter defender is ok, but other than him, it's guys who wave white flags so that they can race back down to the other end. plus, the warriors are constantly undersized, which means biedrins needs to foul to keep guys out of the post. further, with no help/weakside defense, rather than lettin a guy slip, biedrins needs to make costly contests which result in more fouls.

anyway, dude fouls a ton, but again, in spite of this, is still a solid average defender.

No way...Cal Ripken #1 overall pick!!!

what's the deal with possible/probable 'system' players?

mason bounced around the league (and even got cut) before settling in with new york. his career numbers are pretty consistent (12/9/4 per 36), and fluctuate only really with playing time (two years with 42+ MPG? lol). dale ellis didn't do much in his earlier years with dallas, flourished with seattle for 4 years, and then went back to being mediocre for the rest of his career. are we assuming that if we take these players at 24 and put them in the 'right' system then they will be automatically performing in the peaks of their careers?

extrapolating results from a player's short career is one thing, but extrapolating specific results from a player's long career is another, especially when that player was significantly less effective statistically.

i think the burden of proof is on the owner if they're going to take someone who only had limited success (singling out ellis, but along the same tangent: nash?) during his career and extrapolate that success into him being an overall 'good' player. not to mention the 3rd round is a little early for these types, but that's my opinion

and we can't discuss strategy? since when? we have been this whole thread (regarding the defense thing, regarding injuries, regarding depth at certain positions).

i think he means drafting strategy

you really can't replace solidarity IMO

dale ellis could always shoot the rock tho. there are very few systems where this skill is not important. when he was on denver he still tore the cover off the ball in terms of shooting - hell he shot 46% from 3s one year! (3.5 a game too) so.. not seeing your point with him.

anthony mason tho i think you're right but you made the wrong argument. he got better when he LEFT new york, he was buried behind ewing's shadow, on the hornets they put the ball in his hands a lot more and he showed he could do wonders with it.

since this began i thought that the biggest argument we'd have (besides the injury thing) would be extrapolation from one system to another. some great examples are stockton and malone, pippen w/o jordan (althoguh that was kinda solved), amare w/o nash, etc. but it's very applicable to guys like ellis and mason.

it's really hard to define exactly how a player would've played because you can't just definitively say "look he put up these numbers here, he would've put them up at another time earlier in his career"

agreed.

you're right, his 3pt% was generally consistent (although his fg% was significantly higher with SEA). my argument (which i guess i wrote unclearly), is why do we consider a guy like him a "23/4/3/1" guy, when he only put up those numbers as a more integral part of the offense (which he won't be in this league). i consider him a good shooter with average defense, but not a whole lot more.

no, i think the much more drastic change was that it was the consensus that he sucked monkey balls until new york, and after he left new york he was basically the same player (only with a little more minutes and usage)

with NYK (per 36 mins): 11/9/3 with 2 TO on .529/.684 with 32 mpg
with CHH (per 36 mins): 12/9/4.3 with 2 TO on .506/.720 with 40 mpg

also back on my tangent regarding nash:
he was a "good" but nowhere near "great" player for the first 8 years of his career. how is someone going to convince me that if we took the 24-year old steve nash and put him on the 04-05 suns he would be the same player (or better?!) as the 30-year old steve nash on the 04-05 suns?

Yea I feel like his D is really hard to evaluate due to his team situation.

KLJ - good argument:

As everyone else does, too. Although people would replace shooter with "scorer," and isolating his shooting, I'd replace good with "elite".

So - do I think in this league he will put up 23 pts? Well, it hinges on the pace of the team, the system run, the other players, etc. So, it's very conceivable Dale Ellis will be putting up 23 ppg. I could also see him putting up 15 ppg. Etc.

As for Anthony Mason -
Interesting, but if you look at advanced stats, his rebound rate, assist rate, turnover rate all got BETTER (turnover rate decreasing, obv) once he moved. It looks as tho he put up the same per 36 stats, but he was a more effective (ie, "better") player outside of NYK. (PER jumps from roughly 13 over the knick seasons to 16.5 over the hornet seasons)

it's saturday i don't feel like giving detailed analysis.

I was hoping biedrins might fall to the Nash/GNobe squad for the all white purposes.

ok, fair enough. i concede this. i didn't look into the advanced metrics. i'll contend that he could have been the "same player" but still used in a different way, as almost the 2nd ball-handling option (+Ast%) and replacing Ewing with Divac (+Reb%). regardless, my question:

do you think if we get Mason at age 24 (during his monkey-balls stage), in your opinion, which Mason do we get if we put him into a random system?

a) monkey-balls Mason
b) NYK Mason
c) CHH Mason

this is why the "you get him at 24" rather than "you get him at any age" or "you get him at his peak statistical age" creates problems, imo

yeah, i like your argument, and agree its up for his owner to argue the case. it really depends on his role.

in NYK, he was coupled with ewing, and was told never to dribble the ball. (for a PF he loves dribbling) in CHA, he was let loose, and with other unmentionable guys, he had the ball in his hands more often, and he actually is a pretty smart bball IQ guy. (made good decisions)

I think we'd get somewhere in the middle between the two, which means a guy who offers unusual but nothing special offensive production and solid, above average, but not brilliant defense. So, was this a good pick for round 3? Probably a little early, since he's a v good roleplayer, but probably not a bad pick either.

The Big Poodle (Pau Gasol) is one the most fundamentally sound big men I have ever seen and I guess all it took was him not having to be the star to show us.


http://blogs.hoopshype.com/blogs/joh...erce-delivers/


where the **** did this nickname come from???

wtf Biedrins?

In the name of Nash Head, what's going on.

plz that's nothing compared to some of the reaches I have in store. And I'm NOT trading down.

Yea I'm pretty shocked a bunch of people like that pick.

Hopefully this means keeping with the white/european theme.

we shall see. There are lots of guys not in the master race I have my eyes on. Assani Akbar

KC I'm going to be super pissed if you steal Verne Schillinger from me.

I was thinking more along the lines of White Power Bill. Short peak before the unfortunate Tobias inspired suicide.

He is the Penny of the Arrested Development cast.