RE: Kevin Martin

I think the physique and mechanics arguments are weak. BB IQ maybe, but the injury concerns, defense, and relative lack of passing are much more valid concerns.

KMart can be nasty though. I know it's a small sample, but he's shown the ability to completely take over games on several occaisions, just like Reg... who happens to possess a similar build.

KMart truly does have 2nd round talent imo, but has 4th round question marks. I think he went about right.

off to bed now, will check in when I wake up

Sure, Kevin Martin is super talented but I am not sold on him...yet. I have seen some games that make me scratch my head, maybe some Sacto fans can clue me in--why on numerous occasions is he on the bench during clutch time. 3 Kings logged more minutes during this time and the 5th King is 1 minute behind Martin. I say this b/c I have seen him a few times on the bench and was wondering why their high bulk, high efficiency guy has a towel on his head and ****ing Brad Miller has the ball in his hands?

Why isn't he in the game? Every other team has its star log more minutes during this time than their other players--maybe some exceptions, I am not looking it up but there maybe explanations too.

Reggie Theus hates Kevin Martin.

KMart also got to the line 9.5 times/game this year. He is an absolute stud.

this.

lapoker with perhaps the worst argument in this thread, which is sad.

the Theus thing was in the papers here shortly after the season. Theus said something about Martin not being the go to guy, and that's why it was nice to have Artest, despite Kevin being an elite, efficient offensive talent and Artest being a poor-decision making launcher most of the time.

It's sorta weird.. Theus is intimidated by Martin. There was an interview mid-season and he was asked if he thought Martin was better than he was (debatable, but probably), and he got kinda defensive. He's a **** coach.

This is the answer I was kind of looking for. BTW, I love Kevin Martin. I don't think he is mid 2nd talent in this draft but I am a huge fan.

You're better than that. It's really too bad Kobe's back gave Utah a glimmer of hope, because now I'm going to have to listen to this nonsense for the whole offseason.

What I mean is that there is a disconnect between the skills that lead to basketball success and the stats that tally results. When you get into silliness like PER, it becomes even more evident. I'm flying back from NY tonight, so I'll be able to look into it further later, but I think it's quite clear what I mean by "overrated by the stats": he scores higher in certain stats than other players who I believe to be better than him at the aspect(s) of the game that specific stat is meant to cover.

I watched probably 10-15 Kings games this year (at the very least the 4 Laker games and 3-4 Spurs games), and was underwhelmed at best.

edit: I quickly browsed through his gamelog. Is there anyone else in the league (with any significant minutes/contributions) who scored even close to as high a % (over 33%) of his points at the line? I think this was what struck me the most watching him; he didn't really seem to be all that great, but he was getting hacked/getting calls like crazy. Is he really a tougher cover than Kobe or Lebron? Something stinks in Kevin Martin land....

I think it just appears that way b/c he doesn't have a SG or SF yet. Once picks 4/5 come in, I think his team will look a lot better on offense.

I just like his team so much b/c they can do the important things:

1) Low Post Scoring - Not many teams will be able to guard both Ewing and Nance in the post, and both guys can hit a midrange J.

2) Defense - All 3 of his players are good to great defensively. Scoring on the inside is going to be difficult and getting penetration will be too, as Blaylock is a excellent defender

3) Rebounding. Again, all 3 players are good to great rebounders for their position. His team will get a lot of 2nd chance points.

There is one specific player in mind that I think will fit in perfectly @ the 3 on this team, but I think he should be able to round out his roster with guys that will provide him what he is missing.

Basically, he's going to have a team that is awesome defensively, plays a low post, grind it out offense, rebounds well, etc... That crap wins championships. I live in Phoenix and love the Suns, but every year its the Spurs and the Pistons.

D

Couple of things on Mookie before I head out:

I knew people would focus on his TS% - it's become the focus of many people in the second half of this thread. However, that's ignoring all of the other things he does well - which are plenty as evidenced by a consistently good PER for a guy who is so good at defense. This isn't Ben Wallace on the offensive end. It's also a great example of how young players who haven't played past 25 get overrated in this format. Mookies peak from 25-29 or so his TS% was a more than respectible 53% for a defensive stopper/pass first PG. But things get weighed down over the course of a career, in this case somewhat due to two early seasons that don't even count for this.

In addition, he really helped carry a team without any true inside presense for years. Mutombo and one other undrafted mediocre post presence for a few years was the closest thing they had to a post scorer. This not only hurts his shooting, but it also depressed his assist totals since it was a team of inefficient jump shooters/slashers. That is rectified in a huge way on my team.

In this format, Mark Aguirre (who I think was a good pick) would've gone like top 20 overall if we had done this after his 24yo season. Tons of other players both drafted and undrafted also would have had a similar escalation of value. Looking at career stats that include a decline phase (even an effective decline phase) for long lived players like Blaylock doesn't really give an apples to apples.

The general thought process here is "let's look at career averages for the retired guys, but let's extrapolate like 8 more years of current production (or better) for the young guys. That's imo a suboptimal way to evaluate things.

Anyways, I'd rather have Blaylock than, for example, Baron Davis who is inefficient shooting while taking far more shots, and isn't anywhere near the defender that Mookie is. There were like 3 other good PG options available, but none were close to as good on the ball as Mookie, which I think is important given the number of quality PGs that my team will be facing in this league. The fewer breakdowns on the point, the tougher my interior guys are. I understand why people dislike the pick, I just respectfully disagree and think he's better than the PGs who are certain to go in the next half-round or so of picks.

Oh, and cliffs notes on Jamison:

Horrid defender both on the ball and with help D, and on offense he's a black hole. Prefers to just float at the 3pt line and wait to be passed the ball, occassionally posts up, but never does anything to help the team flow. Doesn't set picks, doesn't add any motion, etc. Makes it far easier on the other team than it should be to defend him and by extension his teammates.

Clark be speakin' the truf, y'all.

But I kinda like Jamison though.

D

lol. clark said mookie "never really had an inside presence until Deke and (unnamed player who hasn't been drafted)." This is just untrue. first his nets teams had some very good players (DC for one, can't name others). secondly, the hawks had some great players ('nique and Willis, then Deke and (undrafted player who clark should edit out) as clark mentioned). it's not like he was playing with scot ****ing pollard.

it's not an awful pick, but it's not great by any means like the nance pick was. mookie is a very good defender who will certainly help you play great defense, but until you fill up your team with some other things (read: shooting) your team will struggle mightily offensively.

also, i agree with clark about the antawn pick. he isn't a good shooter for someone who likes to do it a lot.

antawn's a very good defensive rebounder though

oh and an upshot to clark's so far drafting strategy is that there are still some very good scorers left. there's one 3 left that it's boggling my mind is still available, and if he falls to clark in 55 picks i will be very upset.

holy s my pick is close! I wasn't really paying attention. Guess I better start figuring out who to take.

I agree Mookie's not a "great" pick. He's decent value for the spot, nothing more. There are others who have similar (though I think slightly lesser) value still undrafted.

And, yes, there are a lot of good scorers left.

also, you are severely underrating baron davis. he only looks bad defensively because he plays on the warriors who's defensive philosophy is "if he gets by you, run the other way to start a fast break." i've seen baron get many stops when it was necessary.

My problem with taking Mookie over others is his lack of a high percentage 3 ball. Basically you've got a great post up guy, and another guy who is automatic from 12' but can't hit the ocean from 13'. It just looks like a recipe for a whole lot of bunching whenever Patrick gets to ball in the paint.

omg hurry up people I want to pick!

Agree. I mean he may win a 50 point game but he needs to get a sleeper next round that is nails from 3--there are some that will fall.

yeah guys, he only has 3 players, and we aren't playing 3v3 here

This is a good point, he can't draft a point and a SG with is 3rd round pick. I mean mod powers ftw!

BiiiiigChips
centurion

BiiiiigChips is offline
Last Activity: Today 01:32 AM



hopefully he gets his pick in within the next two hours, it looks like he posts a lot during that time period