RealGM

I really can't believe I'm asking this question. Pekovic has become a fan favorite here, but has he reached his ceiling? Does he fit well enough with Rubio and Love to keep him around?

The Sloan Sports Analytics Conference is taking place at MIT this weekend. Someone over on Canis Hoopus shared one of the articles from the conference about how a team's best players complement each other: http://www.canishoopus.com/2012/3/2/283 ... zing-how-a

According to the article:

worst performing combination of any Big 2 or Big 3 is a 5-5-9 combination that, you guessed it, are the likeliest fits for Kevin Love, Nikola Pekovic, and Ricky Rubio.

Now I realize that this isn't an exact science, however look at the games. Many of the shots Pekovic is getting are ones that might normally go to Love in the past. Is Pekovic part of the reason that Love is struggling this year?

I don't know if there's much more to Pekovic's game than we've already seen. So it makes me wonder...should we try to trade him and get value for him while his stock is high?

I read that article as well and I don't put a lot of stock into the analysis. Simply put, Pek is not a 5 in the sense that love is a 5. Their games complement eachother well with Pek a more post oriented and Kevin a more perimeter oriented player. They're not really crowding eachother out in any sense and Kevin has remarked how much easier Pek has made it for him to play his game.

That being said the premise behind the poor play of that particular pairing is unbalanced scoring (since Ricky is a pass first PG you've got nothing from the perimeter. That's something that we can address either through trade or through free agency this offseason. What I like about our big three is that two of them are locked up for a combined 7-10 million a season for the next several years. That makes overcoming this particular problem easy to do without having to jettison anyone.

Yeah if we can get Marc Gasol or Bargnani.

I know this is blaspheme, but I think it's Love we should trade.
I'm really really liking Harden/Ibaka for Love+ for both teams.

Narf wrote:I know this is blaspheme, but I think it's Love we should trade.
I'm really really liking Harden/Ibaka for Love+ for both teams.

OKC was actually a landing spot I thought of for Pekovic, with us getting Perkins in return. I'm not sure that Perkins is playing well enough for it to be a straight up swap, but I like it as a base idea.

Klomp wrote:

Narf wrote:I know this is blaspheme, but I think it's Love we should trade.
I'm really really liking Harden/Ibaka for Love+ for both teams.

OKC was actually a landing spot I thought of for Pekovic, with us getting Perkins in return. I'm not sure that Perkins is playing well enough for it to be a straight up swap, but I like it as a base idea.

That would be awful for us. Why would we need Perkins when we have Darko?

Klomp wrote:

Narf wrote:I know this is blaspheme, but I think it's Love we should trade.
I'm really really liking Harden/Ibaka for Love+ for both teams.

OKC was actually a landing spot I thought of for Pekovic, with us getting Perkins in return. I'm not sure that Perkins is playing well enough for it to be a straight up swap, but I like it as a base idea.

Ibaka?

B Calrissian wrote:Why would we need Perkins when we have Darko?

Seriously?

liley wrote:I read that article as well and I don't put a lot of stock into the analysis. Simply put, Pek is not a 5 in the sense that love is a 5. Their games complement eachother well with Pek a more post oriented and Kevin a more perimeter oriented player. They're not really crowding eachother out in any sense and Kevin has remarked how much easier Pek has made it for him to play his game.

That being said the premise behind the poor play of that particular pairing is unbalanced scoring (since Ricky is a pass first PG you've got nothing from the perimeter. That's something that we can address either through trade or through free agency this offseason. What I like about our big three is that two of them are locked up for a combined 7-10 million a season for the next several years. That makes overcoming this particular problem easy to do without having to jettison anyone.

Agreed on basically all points. I don't think Pek fits that #5 cluster so that pretty much negates the point of the article.

Pek doesn't really have a ceiling that is much higher than what he currently is but I don't see that as a problem When he can play his game, he's pretty darn hard to defend. The problem is Rubio's poor shooting, Wes' poor shooting, and Luke a liability at SG most nights. Teams just collapse the post and don't allow our bigs to do their thing. We need a consistent threat (or two) from the perimeter to open things back up for Pek and all will be good.

Klomp wrote:

B Calrissian wrote:Why would we need Perkins when we have Darko?

Seriously?

Yes. Do tell.

Both of them are limited on offense and good post defenders. Perkins is better at rebounding. Something we don't need. Darko is better at shot blocking. Something we do need.

Varejao should be the target if you are looking to trade Pek for a defensive center.

* I realize Varejao's name could be subbed in for Perkins above but he is a hustle player. Much more agile than Perkins or Darko.

Only if he can get us Marcin Gortat.

Thoughts about Andrea Bargnani?

My problem with Love/Pek combination is that the sum of their qualities is very similar to Boozer/Okur front court. Which proved not very effective in the playoffs. Utah lacked the defensive edge. Love/Pek is also very similar to Love/AlJeff combo that Kahn was looking to break up. if we had Ibaka or Josh Smith instead of Love than Pek would be a fantastic fit on our team. maybe we should try to go after Josh Smith to be our AK47 next to our "Booz/Okur".

I would trade Pek for a wing if we could get a center like Meyers Leonard as well. /end unrealistic dreams.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=7eaeq4n

take a look at this masterpiece.

Klomp wrote:Is Pekovic part of the reason that Love is struggling this year?

4th in the league in scoring and 2nd in the league in rebounds is struggling? If we are going to trade Love or Pek, I'd actually vote for trading Love. Finding a really good PF in this league right now is about as easy as shoving a piece of pizza in my mouth. On our team alone we already have DWill and Beasy. But finding a really good C? The fact our franchise has never had one speaks volumes to how difficult that is. Plus, who would bring a bigger return?

keep both. why is this even being discussed

Narf wrote:I know this is blaspheme, but I think it's Love we should trade.
I'm really really liking Harden/Ibaka for Love+ for both teams.

Sign me up! But I don't think Oklahoma would do it without a lot more to sweeten the pot.

Love isn't struggling. Pek and Love seem to play just fine together most nights, and it's almost impossible to find a decent center. I don't see why trading either of these players makes any sense. Sell high? Why not KEEP high?

Shuffling the frontcourt isn't going to improve our team as drastically as acquiring a decent wing or two and for Rubio to improve his shooting.

OK, I just went and read the Sloan Analytics paper on Big 2's and Big 3's. Decent paper but not great. Biggest issue as relates to TWolves is that Love does not project at all into any of these clusters. He is a ridiculous outlier in rebounding. The other thing from my point of view is that Pek is closest to a "cluster 12":

Cluster 12: High scoring post players, high rebounds, high blocks: Shaquille O’Neal, Hakeem
Olajuwon, David Robinson

With the obvious issue being that he is not really a shot blocker. But he is high-rebound, high scoring, and his entire game is within 8 feet of the basket, and really, more like 5. Does this matter? Yes! The true "cluster 12" center is a powerhouse, the third most valuable player type behind "cluster 8" and "cluster 2".

In other words, I think this is not much of an issue. Pek and Love are not a serious defensive powerhouse, but they can dominate the boards. This, in combination with a defense structured around denying the passing lanes might have a shot in the playoffs.

The bigger issue that we have is the "cluster 8" or "cluster 2" player, which both showed to be the most beneficial to have among your top 2 or 3 players as long as the other top 2 or 3 players does not result in a double "cluster 8."

Cluster-8: Multi-faceted, high scoring wings, with high assists for their position and are great 3 point shooters: Paul Pierce, Danny Ainge

Cluster-2: High scoring, dynamic guards (mostly 2 guards, but some 3’s like Grant Hill), typically not great 3 point shooters, or if they are, don’t shoot very many: Kobe Bryant, Dwayne Wade, Tracy McGrady, Adrian Dantley.

To my ears, these both very much sound like "not a player currently on this team." And to be honest, I do not think that Johnson, Webster, Beasley or Williams are going to suddenly start sprouting high assist numbers. This is completely independent of whatever becomes of their 3-point shooting, which in all cases seems more like "sometimes" rather than "great."

But is there a "cluster 8" or "cluster 2" type player available out there right now? Seems doubtful.

However, going by the conclusions of this paper, if we were going to trade our "near-cluster 12" center, we should be getting back a well rounded, high-defense big plus a really good "cluster 2" or "cluster 8" player.

We finally get decent production from a center and you want to trade him? Lol. He is making far less then market value, that's just a dumb idea.