I disagree with the bolded statement. From what I've seen, inefficient high scoring players do not change much when they become less needed. From an offensive standpoint, I think that many of the drafted teams are putting too much weight on having a team full of scorers, no matter how inefficient they may be.

I took the top scorers who've been in the league for at least 10 years, and broke them down into two categories: The first being the top 12 PPG scorers (draft eligible) who had a True Shooting Percentage under .540, and the second being the top 12 players who shot over .540.

Group I

Allen Iverson, Dominique Wilkins, Vince Carter, Tracy Macgrady, Chris Webber, Stephon Marbury, Antawnn Jamison, Isiah Thomas, Jerry Stackhouse, Tim Hardaway, undrafted guy, Baron Davis.

Group II

Michael Jordan, Karl Malone, Shaquille O'neal, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan, Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce, Larry Bird, Kevin Mchale, Hakeem , Charles Barkley, David Robinson

While this is a crude measurement, it's not hard to see that group II has undoubtedly been the much more successful group as far as team wins are concerned. If you continue to go down the list for these, you'll see similar patterns. I would have gone further, except many of the players in group II have (rightfully) gone undrafted.

I think efficient scoring is even more important in this league. None of these teams is going to be able to compete with the great squads 1-3, but from their 4th man down, these drafted teams are going to have a huge edge. This curtails the need for someone who can score in bulk, unless that person is more efficient than his options and has the basketball IQ to pass it to them. We should be able to find smarter players given the size of the pool, so there is less need for a player who can create for himself. If you've got an inefficient scorer who doesn't pass that often, he's going to be huge detriment to your team, even if your only other option is a role player who doesn't shoot enough. There is less need to be "the guy" on these teams because, once again theoretically, you should be able to put together a team that knows how to create high percentage situations as a group.

I think the most underrated traits in this draft so far have been efficient scorers who like to pass. If you've got a guy who can draw opposing defenders, he's going to put his teammates in situations that offer higher percentage scoring opportunities, higher than he can manufacture on his own.

I'll vote against

Also, I vote to do this next year, but we should vote on the rules before hand .

1 thing about Tim H, is at 32 he hit a pretty big wall and his stats fell pretty hard. From 24-31 he averaged about 19/10a/3r/2s, a 20 PER and 54 TS%. At the end of his career he had TS% of 51, 50, 51, 49, and 48 but at his peak he was at 54.7, 54, 55, 54, 53, 53. I also have Iggy and DH, SS who are all either rediculous efficient or above average efficient.

Also for PGs, other than Nash, Magic and Stockton, a lot are not highly efficient, Kidd is really bad.

Deron and CP3 are both pretty good for PGs but have a short sample size.
Andre Miller - 53%
Marbury - 50%
Payton - 53%
Kidd - 50%
Isiah - 51%
Billups - 57%
KJ -58%
Price - 58%
Parker - 54%
Porter - 57%

I don't think TH is that great shooting and I wish he wasn't a bigger chucker, but he passes really well got a sick cross over and when there is good D in the paint plays pretty damn good D for one of 8 that averaged 20/10 in a season (he did it twice and before CP3 did it this year, the last since 1991 I believe although Nash is close).

Good posting imo. I think I've followed your advice a ton and really targetted efficient scorers who like to pass, so I definitely agree with your philosophy.

My only real inefficient guy is I have is Clifford, and the reason I picked him over other guys is he plays excellent D, he spreads the floor and he never got hurt; also my #1 Okur who is definitely more efficient but plays no D was picked before him. There are still some high efficiency guys left on the board who I am definitely targetting.

this post. I really enjoy well-thought-out arguements.

The major thing I've learned from this thread (aside from most of us have too much time on our hands) is Seadood has emerged as probably the best basketball poster. Really excited for his preview of the season next year.

Thing about nath's team is that people are talking about athletic or whatever... forget that. There are plenty of teams in this league with people at the SF spot that Dirk can cover (Peja, Odom, Deng maybe, dunno) or at least not give up more on the defensive end than he will get on the offensive end. Donaldson is a decent post defender who adds a bit of offense to what is at this point a very efficient team from 1-5 with 3 players who can stretch the court. Thunder Dan, while white, could take it to the rim and finish and was a very good defender. There's also plenty more picks to make and certainly vs some teams playing Boozer/Donald/Dirk at once won't be an option, but that just means this team has among the best 1-3 scoring bigs in the league, with a PG to distribute it to them (and hit the 3 if left open) and another wing who can hit the 3 and D up.

Honestly I thought about taking PGs out of that argument because they tend to be a different animal, but I would have had to go waaay down the list because there were so many undrafted guys in the sub .540 TS range. It went down so far that there were guys who weren't even the first option on their team. Perhaps I should've prefaced the post or something.

Also the top 4 TS guys are Reggie, Sir Charles, Stockton, and Magic... Talk about a bunch of winners.

I bat a low average. That Toronto fan, I forget his name, comes in once in a blue moon and kills it every time.

but thanks for the compliment. And Nugs win the title next year ldo.

against coaches

for jailbait threads.

Seadood,

What thread are you reading? It's like the most overrated trait in this thread. This thread has turned into "who can draft the highest TS% team". It's kind of absurd to be honest.

+1. Also wouldn't mind expanding this bad boy to 12 rounds.

Dear RUFFNECK,

**** YOU

<3

Actually I was more referring to the passing part, I probably would have been better saying "relying solely on TS% and forgetting whether the guy was an efficient and willing passer."

I still think that TS% is very important though. I don't think it's absurd at all, since it's the most important measure of how efficiently a player puts points on the board.

Disagree. I mean, it's nice and all, but I think PER is horribly flawed and I think PER is a better measure than TS%. We've got people in here now sorting just by TS% and picking players. It's pretty absurd and really doesn't have much to do with how good a player really is. There are entirely too many people who are essentially looking at that one number now. God, I can't believe you have me defending PER.

Which list has better players?

Top 40 all time PER

Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan 27.91
2. Shaquille O'Neal 27.14
3. David Robinson 26.18
4. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
5. Bob Pettit* 25.37
6. LeBron James 25.17
7. Tim Duncan 25.10
8. Neil Johnston* 24.67
9. Charles Barkley* 24.63
10. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
11. Magic Johnson* 24.11
12. Kevin Garnett 23.93
13. Dirk Nowitzki 23.92
14. Karl Malone 23.90
15. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
16. Kobe Bryant 23.57
17. Larry Bird* 23.50
18. Tracy McGrady 23.38
19. Oscar Robertson* 23.18
20. Jerry West* 22.90
21. Elgin Baylor* 22.70
22. Elton Brand 22.69
23. Moses Malone* 22.31
24. Julius Erving* 21.97
25. Dolph Schayes* 21.94
26. John Stockton 21.83
27. George Gervin* 21.74
28. Pau Gasol 21.70
29. Bob Lanier* 21.69
30. Clyde Lovellette* 21.67
31. Vince Carter 21.65
32. Dominique Wilkins* 21.56
33. Adrian Dantley* 21.51
34. Harry Gallatin* 21.45
35. Allen Iverson 21.42
36. Paul Pierce 21.37
37. Alonzo Mourning 21.24
38. Clyde Drexler* 21.07
39. Patrick Ewing* 21.01
40. Dan Issel* 20.9

Top 40 all time TS%

1. Artis Gilmore .6433
2. Cedric Maxwell .6294
3. James Donaldson .6177
4. Adrian Dantley* .6166
5. Jeff Ruland .6152
6. Reggie Miller .6139
7. Charles Barkley* .6120
8. Magic Johnson* .6095
9. John Stockton .6081
10. Brent Barry .6074
11. Darryl Dawkins .6048
12. Kevin McHale* .6045
13. Bobby Jones .6041
14. Steve Nash .6028
15. Amare Stoudemire .6025
16. Ed Pinckney .6019
17. Steve Johnson .6002
18.
19. Dwight Howard .5962
20. Chris Mullin .5938
21. Kiki Vandeweghe .5937
22.
23. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* .5924
24. Yao Ming .5920
25.
26. Sidney Moncrief .5907
27. Manu Ginobili .5901
28. Brad Daugherty .5900
29. Bill Cartwright .5881
30. Buck Williams .5872
31. Brad Davis .5870
32. Larry Nance .5864
33. Detlef Schrempf .5858
34. Mark Price .5855
35. Hersey Hawkins .5851
36. Kevin Johnson .5848
37. Otis Thorpe .5842
38. Peja Stojakovic .5838
39. Shaquille O'Neal .5837
40. David Robinson .5830

Clark,

to argue that point like that is simply idiotic. Do I need to explain why or were you just posting that for fun?

I'm merely tired of this turning into the "modern era TS% draft". It's beyond ******ed.

Clark, nobody is saying PER is worse or better than TS. They are both flawed, but they are both great tools for judging a players effectiveness. I don't know why you are trying to defend PER because it wasn't being attacked.

And PER has been mentioned just as much if not more than TS%. You are just bitter that you can't take the Mookie pick back

You need to factor in TS%, PER, D, Injuries, what team their on, PPG, Rebounds, Blocks, Assists, Steals, 3 point %, FG%, length of career, "clutchness," attitude, mpg, stats per 36 min, how the person goes with the rest of the team and the direction of team, upside for young players, etc.

I just want to re-iterate what an awesome pick Pressey was. Averaged 8 SHOTS per game while averaging 5 APG and playing very good defense.

TS% and eFG% aren't really flawed at all.

also clark you got some eligibles in there

I know you didn't specifically mention PER. You did, however, posit that TS% coupled with assists is the key to this draft and is *underrated*. I'm not sure how you can say that when the last 1,000 posts, if not more, have centered on TS%. You didn't directly attack PER (which I also think is flawed), but did so indirectly by implying that TS% was more important.

I'm not a huge PER guy, but I'd certainly say PER is more key than TS% and has become more underrated. End of the day, you don't win games without bulk production.

People are only using TS% to describe one single aspect of a player's game: how efficiently he puts points up with each shot he takes.

Would anyone ever try and use this stat as the sole indicator of a player's worth when it completely ignores defense, rebounding and passing? Of course not. But if you are trying to talk specifically about how a player impacts the game by his scoring, I can't think of a better way to do so than combining ppg and ts%.

James