it wasn't an argument that PER ~= overall value, rather that the EV of marginal increase is probably not that much higher than last year for Harden

i can see how you thought otherwise given how disjunct the post was overall.

And if you take Wall over Rondo you're way overrating variance. At a certain point you want to create variance, but if you spend the entire draft sacrificing EV for variance then you need to run good just to be average.

what's the downside of that? You could run like god and win, taking the safe route you're supposed to never win.

His idea of drafting seems to resolve around the fact that coming in 10th or 15th is as good as coming in 30th, so one should go for the high variance route any time the draft order forces it upon them (i.e. they don't have a top5 pick)

The clock is ticking, tho nobody seems to care

Wesrwood or Bowens pick pick pick pick

if anything last season taught us, its that u can run super mega hawt as a jump shooting team and win a RANG

nice points

Am I close to up?
I'm gonna be out drankin all day and night, but someone here who knows me can text me and I'll jump on the phone and pick

Who will be around most of the day?

The whole foar contenders thing doesn't really apply since all these teams are going to be pretty close to average

Not huge gaps of disparity like in the leauge

When the going got tough in the playoffs last year OKC was most successful running the offense through Harden.

As the owner of the Tebow Checkmates, I will do everything in my power to guide this young star prospect into becoming an amazing player.

Did someone snatch up SWDs team yet? Read the last few pages but honestly forget if someone got it.

wow what is going on? isn't anyone skipped?

I said that statistically he was one of the 5 worst most harmful players last year. If you disagree then stop LOLing and refute it.

Surely, you'd agree that the 23-59 Wizards weren't a good team, right? Who do you think was mostly responsible for that? Taking a look at their starting lineup, at PG, SG, PF, and C they kept the same starter throughout the year(barring injury).

Their starting PG was Wall. As I pointed out above he put up a -5.67 2yr APM, -9.25 1 yr APM, and a -2.8 simple rating.

Their starting SG put up a -1.21 2yr APM, a -5.26 1yr APM, and a +1.9 simple rating.

Their starting PF put up a +1.33 2yr APM, a +5.96 1yr APM, and a +1.4 simple rating.

Their starting C put up a +1.56 2 yr APM, a +7.42 1yr APM, and a +2.7 simple rating.

As I said, they didn't have a set starting SF, but one guy did lead the team with 23 starts at SF. He put up a -2.43 2yr APM, a -0.05 1 yr APM, and a -0.3 simple rating.


According to APM and simple rating, they had 2 reasonable bench players. One put up a +2.17 2 yr APM, a +1.46 1 yr APM, and a +0.8 simple rating. The other put up a +1.47 2yr APM, a +3.89 1yr APM, and a -1.5 simple rating.


The Reasons why the Wizards were so bad last year imo:

1. John Wall
2. bad depth
3. injuries

#2 and #3 are kinda a combo. Wall was the main reason by far.

worst starter on bad team != bottom 5 player

top 5 offensive wing player + bottom 5 defensive wing player = just about average player in a vacuum

On the right team that exploits his strengths and hides his weaknesses, I could see him being more valuable than an average player though.

With Harden, Odom, and other bench players its important to remember that its definitely easier to put up good stats as a 6th man than as a starter. I think both are being a tad bit overrated as a result.

My post didn't just show that he was the 'worst starter.' It showed that he actually had some positive pieces around him, which is in direct contrast to the commonly held narrative:




Kevin Love = legitimate worst supporting cast in NBA history
John Wall = the main reason his team was so bad

lol no, klove's cast was the woat since he was responsible for 25 wins and his teammates for -8 wins

his cast is comparative to love's. not even sure which is better.

anyway, cavs obv had the worst cast but we shudnt count dleague teams.

I was thinking the same thing. Seems like it should be easier for a player who is very good at one thing and very bad at another to be an overall positive contributor, than it would be for someone who is perfectly average at both things.

I could buy Kobe at #4 in this draft before I'd buy Love's supporting cast being better than Wall's. In fact, I'd probably buy Kobe > Lebron before I bought that. Because of my legitimate interest in our KLove debate and because I very much understood the criticism of "how can his team be so bad if KLove is as good as you say?" I've looked into the quality of his supporting cast from every possible angle, and everything I've studied has all pointed to them being magnitudes worse than any other supporting cast I've ever seen(including last year's Cavs).

Do you just deliberately ignore context in every argument you make?

My apologies. Just got back in. I'll take what may be a facemelter here, to match up with my stud PG:



Team so far:
PG - Derrick Rose
C - DeMarcus Cousins

There is nothing that I agree with in this entire post. No way was the TWolves cast THAT much worse than the Wiz or Cavs.

In fact I would say this post has less truth in it than trying to argue Kevin Love actually being the best player in the league for the first 30 games last year or whatever. Expect better and less obvious from you, Assani.

this is a perfect example of confirmation bias