Hollinger's Player Projections

[ReasonablySober]

Bogut only had 11.7 FGA last year. I don't see any more combined FGA by the PF's. Yi/CV combined for 18.6 FGA last year. Mo and Ivey combined for 18.9. I don't see either of those spots taking more shots, CV will take more as a starter but Allen/Elson will take less off the bench. We won't have many FGA at all from PG,both Ridnour/Sessions are pass first and Lue isn't getting that much burn. Yes, RJ will increase the FGA at SF, but overall, I see very little change. Skiles is not going to play CV if he's taking a ridiculous FGA total, because most likely that means he's taking bad ones, and Skiles is not about poor shot selection.

My guess is on Bogut at 12 FGA or higher.

Ridnour's career FGA/game as a starter is 9. It's also not as if Sessions doesn't put up his share of shots. In the D-League he averaged 15 a night. In the NBA as a starter he threw up 11 per game.

As for SF, very little change? Really?

I could certainly see Skiles sending CV to the bench if he's taking bad shots. I'll give you that. I could also see CV being our third best scorer this season by a massive margin. The majority of his shots tonight were in and around the hoop and he took 8 FTs. Now, obviously this is only one meaningless preseason game. But look at the FGAs. Redd only took 6 shots. Sessions only took 8. Our SF took 12. Our starting PG, SG and SF will all average more than that per game once the regular season starts and Bogut still only put up 7 shots.

[LUKE23]

When I said very little change, I meant overall, not at SF. I realize that SF FGA will go up.

[paul]

Well, I'd say a good estimate for FGA for the team per game is 83-84. Skiles teams are always top ten in FGA per 48, and 84 would have put the Bucks 5th last season, 83 would have put them 8th. Either way, use 83-84 FGA for your estimate, how would you break down the per game FGA for each player on the roster?

I'm getting deja-vu. I know we've had this exact discussion.

The one year Skiles had a center that could score his team put up 80 FGAs per game. That team didn't have Michael Redd or Richard Jefferson on it, though.

As for a per-game estimate, if I have time tomorrow I'll see what I come up with.

But assuming CV is in the starting lineup there's no way Bogut's shot attempts don't go down. I doubt they would go up even if CV's brought off the bench.

I watched the game tonight. Bogut was the same guy he's been since he got here. No jumper, one post move, scared to make a move with the ball, looks to pass first and second.

That said, I suppose one stat that will go up will be the assists. He didn't have one tonight but he could have had a couple real nice ones had others converted.

I sincerely hope we're not basing what might happen this season with Bogut on his very first pre-season hitout are we? Not for nothing, but he's had an interrupted offseason, missed the game the other night and played like 24 minutes or something? I know he's going to get marked hard this year but this might be just slightly over the top .

I hate PER and stats similar to it. I prefer to watch the guys play and then determine how good they are that way.

+1

[europa]

I can think of many reasons to expect his numbers to go down and have stated them many times. Can you share one reason why you expect them to go up?

The fact Skiles has a proven history of getting his starting C a higher number of shot attempts per minute than Bogut has ever received and the fact he has stated on several occasions he wants to start the offense inside out and trying to establish Bogut as the first option.

Everything is set up for Bogut's production to increase this season. Whether it does is up to him.

[europa]

I hate PER and stats similar to it. I prefer to watch the guys play and then determine how good they are that way. But that sounds about right... If I had to rank the guys starting on our team they would all be right around there.

Redd might move up or down a spot or two, same with RJ and Bogut.

I'm not a fan of PER either - mainly because Hollinger places so much emphasis on it at the exclusion of so many other (in my opinion) critical factors.

That said, I'd say his rankings are pretty solid for the most part. I'd probably move Bogut up and I'm struggling to think of 15 starting SFs I'd rather have then Richard Jefferson. However, I could probably come up with 29 or so I'd rather have than Desmond Mason.