googs was on my list bc i always thought he was awesome as a kid. but looking at his stats he was pretty bad. its weird. googs makes me wish bballref didnt exist.

+1

I talked to Tbach for a while abotu Googs, and I was considering him in 20 picks or so. I think there are BPA but even still, he's a white PF, which is hard to find.

i hope no one hates me forever for pointing this out, its just itching me so much though, but mamadou ndiyae is still available wtf?

im going to be at a wedding until later tonight so when i log back on ill see if i got any trade offers and accept the best one. if no trade offers, i'll just spew a random pick

Gugliatta is a very good pick.

Hi guys, sorry for missing my pick. It was my birthday this week and didn't really check the sporting events threads.

What is the protocol for making my pick?

You're up now, just make your pick.

K, 20 mins...

Pick is up...
















Sorry again for delay...

Welcome back and nice pick. Almost took him with the other team but we needed someone who could play after Reggie went down and Kittles didn't have the longevity.

I don't have the time for a write up write now. I am taking Armen (Armon) Gilliam.

It'd be cool if tdarko stopped making up players

You serious?? Gilliam was around until the start of the 2000's. Good scorer early in his career, good rebounder throughout most of it. This pick is further evidence of how much people are overrating the current decade. There were plenty of big guys in the 90's that are still around. Gilliam makes Perkins look bad.

Its pretty obvious that he wasn't.

Kittles decent pick IMO - injury issues are unavoidable, but his peak was solid.
Gilliam nice pick as well, v. solid frontcourt sub.

glad to have you back, VEF

Clark, can you please edit Xorbie/D's writeup into the pick thread? Thanks.

Ya cause Gilliam is a much better defender than Perkins........lol

At least say Gilliam makes Haywood look bad, since Perkins is better than Haywood.

i was kind of tempted to pick Kittles way back when. He was a nice defensive member of those NJ teams.

Haywood > Perkins.

No way, first Haywood is 28 and has pretty much peaked, Perkins is 23 and has improved every single year except for 2 years ago when he played hurt all season.

Haywood is a slightly better scorer, and they are both roughly the same at rebounding, and Perkins defense is much much better (which is also the most important part in this league for a 7th rounder, considering they won't have the ball in their hands).

Perkins is not only better in the real NBA, but even more so in this league, since no one will ever be feeding Haywood the ball in the post (and if they do, it's a huge win for the defense).

Bobbo,

basketball?

Cant today - will be able to tomorrow

**** **** **** the hammer **** **** ****

Incorrect. Let's break it down several ways. We'll go by roughly when we get them in the league (for Perkins, this past year, which inarguably favors him since this year he was head and shoulders better than his previous years, for Haywood, his season @24) their body of work (so we can see what they have accomplished in real NBA minutes) and finally by established peaks, so Perkins "best" vs Haywoods "best". Also, before going into stats, lets also knock out several myths: (Bolded parts above)

MYTH 1 - Haywood has peaked whereas Perkins has not. This is true for Haywood; it's tough to say he's going to get any better, especially since last year he was a true hidden gem on the Wizards. For Perkins, is there truly any room for him to get better? If he was a college player, I would agree, but next year will be his 6th year in the league. Most HS players peak younger due to "learning curve cap," so it's tough to say Perkins can truly get any better then what he was last year. (Although he certainly should maintain it for a while - likely 24-29 he'll put up similar seasons)
MYTH 2 - Haywood has been incredibly durable in his career. His rookie year he did not play every game because of DNP:CD. He then played 81, 77, 68, 79, 77, 80. For a 7 footer this is very impressive. Perkins, although younger, is still fairly durable, but not to the extent of Haywood. Since you can discount his rookie year (10 games played) he has averaged 69.5 games. Not bad. (vs 77 a year for Haywood, which is extraordinary)
MYTH 3 - The stats below will address this.
MYTH 4 - This is essentially repeating your 2nd paragraph, and again, stats will dispute this.

"First" Hypothetical Season
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...wobr01&y2=2004
Essentially neither played major minutes, both are better suited towards being the 4th man in a 4 man rotation, or splitting time with a center who can only play ~28 mins a game. In their playtime though, they both are about as efficient on offense (110 ORtg vs 110 ORtg, .547 on 17% vs .631 on 13.5%) with Haywood drawing more fouls (5.7 vs 3.4) and delving out fewer (3.7 vs 4.6). Rebound-wise, you're right, they're equals: 14.6% vs 14.8%, with Haywood being the better offensive rebounder and Perk the better defensive rebounder. Neither is a good passer, but Perk is more of a liability with turning the ball over; .5 more TOPG (14% vs 22.5%). Defensively, Haywood brings you about average bigman 1on1 defense (104 DRtg) whereas Perkins brings you exceptional bigman 1on1 defense. (97 DRtg) Help-wise, they're about the same, 4.9 to 4.9 BLK%. Essentially, if we just use these splits, Haywood is better vs a team that doesn't have a particularly good big since he can do more damage offensively and isn't as much of a help defensively 1on1. In fact, using just this trial, I'd feel in this league Perk has more value. (Worth noting, PER wise Haywood crushes Perk)

"Full Body" Hypothetical Season
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...wobr01&y2=2008
Best split now is to use per 36, because per game would favor Haywood since he played about 5 mins per game more than Perk. (Which technically benefits him) Looking at relevant categories, I'm not even sure how it's close: Haywood 15.4 PER vs 12.0. .564 TS vs .566 TS, on 14.8% vs 13.8%. You would THINK this means they are identical offensively, but no! This is not the case: Haywood's ORtg career wise is 114 (fantastic) whereas Perk is 101 (bad), and this is due to ORB and TO - Haywood grabs 1 more Oreb more per game and commits 1 fewer TO per game. (This means Haywood is essentially 2 possessions per game "better" than Perk)
Defensively, Perk shows he's been exceptional 1on1 his entire career whereas Haywood has been at-best mediocre (106 vs 101 DRtg), but the helpside def is pretty identical (2.2 bpg vs 2.4) but Perk does give up an extra foul per game (4.1 vs 5.1). *Jumping back to offense, Haywood draws more fouls than Perk - 1.5 FTA more per game...

"Best vs Best" Hypothetical Season
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...wobr01&y2=2008
This split is likely the best because players got similar MPG so we can look at bulk stats.
Offense... Clear win for Haywood, as he shot .582 on 17.3 USG for 119 ORtg. 10.6 ppg, 3.7 FTA, 3.4 ORB, only 1.4 TOV. Compare this to .631 on 13.5 USG for 110 ORtg. 6.9 ppg, 2.3 FTA, 1.9 ORB, and 1.6 TOV.
Defense... Clear win for Perkins, as he garnered the said 97 DRtg, 2.1 bpg, and 4.6 pfpg. Also was a slightly better defensive rebounder, getting 4.2 DRB. Haywood got a poor 109 DRtg (Bogut territory) weakside def resulted in 2.1 bpg but only 3.5 pfpg. He got 3.8 DRB.

Other stats wise, Haywood put up a 18.3 PER vs 13.3 PER, both got 7.0 WSAA.

Meh, I've typed out alot so I'm going to finish posting it, but I think in conclusion saying either is better is sorta dumb, it depends on your team. Perks gives you more defense, Haywood gives you more offense, similar rebounding, Haywood gives you better intangibles (durability and minutes) but the question is can Perk get better? Also, you say that the difference in Perks offense is much greater than the difference between their offense, and I'm not sure I agree.