OUTLAW

[demens]

Those stats you're using are inflated. First they're per 100 possessions so they won't be entirely accurate because they're just percentages. Just got back and look at our roster in 2008 (that is the year your stats are using) Our starting 5 averaged more than 67.5 ppg. I've been basing all my information off of basketball reference by doing the math myself. But doing the math here, those numbers don't add up because it's percentages.

You can even go back and look at Laker stats and compare it to these you're looking at. Lakers starting 5 in the 08-09 season averages way more than 72 ppg

- Data as of Feb. 6, 2008.

That would make it the 07/08 season.

I dont get what made you make an assumption that its a % or per 100 possessions stats or inflated in any way. Nothing in the description indicates that. Also not sure how you could do the math yourself as you say, since the starting line-up changes very frequently a guy can start 40/80 games, how exactly are you calculating that. I would also love to see which team you calculated 15 ppg game bench points, i find that pretty impossible.

The most steady starting 5 in 07/08 i came across was Boston, they add up to 73.3 and the link i posted has them at 73.4. I'd say thats pretty accurate.

[Petro45]

Those stats you're using are inflated. First they're per 100 possessions so they won't be entirely accurate because they're just percentages. Just got back and look at our roster in 2008 (that is the year your stats are using) Our starting 5 averaged more than 67.5 ppg. I've been basing all my information off of basketball reference by doing the math myself. But doing the math here, those numbers don't add up because it's percentages.

You can even go back and look at Laker stats and compare it to these you're looking at. Lakers starting 5 in the 08-09 season averages way more than 72 ppg

You really need to just admit when you're wrong. The tables he linked to show, among other things, the average points scored by the team's starters and bench in a game. The "points per 100 possessions" stat is a separate stat on the tables.

"Doing the math yourself" doesn't work. Determining how many points the "starting five" averaged isn't as simple as adding the scoring average of the ostensible "starters", because the starters can change from game to game, people miss time with injuries, etc.

Demens' table is the best indicator we've seen of how many points a typical starting five and bench can be expected to average. Take the knowledge and learn something, rather than digging a deeper hole.

[Preludepunk27]

Those stats you're using are inflated. First they're per 100 possessions so they won't be entirely accurate because they're just percentages. Just got back and look at our roster in 2008 (that is the year your stats are using) Our starting 5 averaged more than 67.5 ppg. I've been basing all my information off of basketball reference by doing the math myself. But doing the math here, those numbers don't add up because it's percentages.

You can even go back and look at Laker stats and compare it to these you're looking at. Lakers starting 5 in the 08-09 season averages way more than 72 ppg

- Data as of Feb. 6, 2008.

That would make it the 07/08 season.

I dont get what made you make an assumption that its a % or per 100 possessions stats or inflated in any way. Nothing in the description indicates that. Also not sure how you could do the math yourself as you say, since the starting line-up changes very frequently a guy can start 40/80 games, how exactly are you calculating that. I would also love to see which team you calculated 15 ppg game bench points, i find that pretty impossible.

The most steady starting 5 in 07/08 i came across was Boston, they add up to 73.3 and the link i posted has them at 73.4. I'd say thats pretty accurate.

See this is what E has been talking about with you and the need to show logic with your discussion. Of course, when you finally decide to start bringing stats/information-other-than-basisless remarks...you completely blow me out of the water. I'll give you this one and actually admit you did great.

And Petro, get off Demens's junk ballboy. If you've been around here long enough, you know that most of us here clearly admit when we're wrong. Demens generally is the one who doesn't admit, but I'm honestly impressed by his work on this thread.

[demens]

Just so you know, i looked those stats up after saying this

"There is zero chance our starters are scoring 80-85. ZERO."

Most of my arguments (like this one) fall under common sense, its sad that its necessary to bring up stats to back them up.

[PDXKnight]

Blazer fan here. I think the Outlaw signing was decent, but I think some of you may be getting a bit out of hand with his stat projections. He's a bit too inconsistent to put up 19 or even 16. He may have a shot at 14 PPG logging more minutes, but he'd have to jack up a lot of shots to put up anything more than that IMO. I think he can do fine in your system so long as he plays to his capabilities. Quite honestly, I think he's too limited offensively to put up some of the PPG stats that some of you guys are suggesting, but nonetheless, I still think he can be a relatively effective option for the Nets.