Comparison of Two Big Men
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:59 pm
If you were to compare the following two big men:
Big Man #1: Age 20, 7'0 260, ppg 11.4, rbs 8.1, fg% .485, Blocks PG 2.0, NBA experience 1 year
vs.
Big Man #1 Age 21, 7'0 275, ppg 12.7, rbs 7.7, fg% .538, Blocks PG 1.7, NBA experience 3 years
Without know who is who (and I'm sure most can guess anyway) which player would you rather have? I seems to have more upside (player 1 is younger, less experienced, a better rebounder and similar stats), while #2 has a higher field goal %, slightly better offensive numbers.
As most of you can guess #2 is Andrew Bynum, and most might have guessed that #2 is Brook Lopez for the Nets. Now in all this, you could also argue that Bynum is on a better team thus is harder to get stats (but conversely you can argue that Bynum doesn't get double-teamed, has more open shots, and that's why his FG % is higher) or you argue that the West is deeper with big men - though some of Lopez's best games have come against the Celtics and the Trailblazers - both with strong inside games. Another way of thinking of it, if the two were switched would their numbers change after a half season of getting acclimated; and my guess is that Bynum's offensive numbers would be a bit higher, his FG % lower, and his rebounds about the same; and Lopez's offensive numbers would be the same, but his FG% higher, and his rebounds slightly higher.
Rather than trying to down Bynum, the lightbulb went off for me about whether this supposed 'upside' for Bynum is real at this point or imagined. Even if you say he really only has 1 year of real experience (though 2.5 years of NBA level practice, training, and acclimation) - Lopez hasn't been through a full NBA season yet.
To me this suggests that Bynum will be a solid but not a superstar big man (a 15-18ppg; 9 rebpg type) - which is okay - but maybe doesn't deserve the superlatives often tossed his way when discussing the future.
Big Man #1: Age 20, 7'0 260, ppg 11.4, rbs 8.1, fg% .485, Blocks PG 2.0, NBA experience 1 year
vs.
Big Man #1 Age 21, 7'0 275, ppg 12.7, rbs 7.7, fg% .538, Blocks PG 1.7, NBA experience 3 years
Without know who is who (and I'm sure most can guess anyway) which player would you rather have? I seems to have more upside (player 1 is younger, less experienced, a better rebounder and similar stats), while #2 has a higher field goal %, slightly better offensive numbers.
As most of you can guess #2 is Andrew Bynum, and most might have guessed that #2 is Brook Lopez for the Nets. Now in all this, you could also argue that Bynum is on a better team thus is harder to get stats (but conversely you can argue that Bynum doesn't get double-teamed, has more open shots, and that's why his FG % is higher) or you argue that the West is deeper with big men - though some of Lopez's best games have come against the Celtics and the Trailblazers - both with strong inside games. Another way of thinking of it, if the two were switched would their numbers change after a half season of getting acclimated; and my guess is that Bynum's offensive numbers would be a bit higher, his FG % lower, and his rebounds about the same; and Lopez's offensive numbers would be the same, but his FG% higher, and his rebounds slightly higher.
Rather than trying to down Bynum, the lightbulb went off for me about whether this supposed 'upside' for Bynum is real at this point or imagined. Even if you say he really only has 1 year of real experience (though 2.5 years of NBA level practice, training, and acclimation) - Lopez hasn't been through a full NBA season yet.
To me this suggests that Bynum will be a solid but not a superstar big man (a 15-18ppg; 9 rebpg type) - which is okay - but maybe doesn't deserve the superlatives often tossed his way when discussing the future.