2016 Offseason Thread -- Not (just) #KD2DC

[stevemcqueen1]

I'd love to have Parsons on the contract he had in Houston. At his max? Not so much.

Same here, although I assume you meant Dallas. In Houston he was getting paid a second round contract.

He wants too much money. You can't justify paying a rotation PF like him a max contract with his history of knee injuries. Too much risk.

[fishercob]

I'd love to have Parsons on the contract he had in Houston. At his max? Not so much.

Same here, although I assume you meant Dallas. In Houston he was getting paid a second round contract.

He wants too much money. You can't justify paying a rotation PF like him a max contract with his history of knee injuries. Too much risk.

I meant what I said.

[80sballboy]

Did anybody see Parsons on Twitter yesterday? He had a chat. Funny dude but not sure he has healthy knees. No way is he a max guy.
https://twitter.com/chandlerparsons?lang=en

[stevemcqueen1]

Batum is not a significant enough upgrade over Porter to justify the difference in age and salary. I can't get behind signing him. I'd rather pursue PFs and just sign a cheap veteran SF to be Porter's back up.

http://bkref.com/tiny/T68kp

I'm in the minority on Batum, but defense and passing? There's no comparison. He just makes teams better. I don't like Porter as my starting small forward and I think it puts too much pressure on Wall to create for everybody. Mabye Otto starts juicing and puts on 20 pounds or Oubre decides he doesn't want to be Nick Young Jr. I'm assuming will get Anderson and live with the lack of defense.

Porter had a much better season on defense than Batum did. Porter was 11th among SFs in DRPM while Batum finished 33rd among SGs and had a negative rating.

Batum is a better playmaker no doubt, but that gets offset by the fact that he has a very high number of TOs per game for a secondary/tertiary ball handler. Wall is a pass first PG, we don't need any player that's going to take the ball out of his hands a whole bunch anyway. We need efficient finishers. Porter is a more efficient offensive player and shoots better than Batum from 2 and 3. We're flat out better off with him than Batum, especially when you factor in age and salary.

We should only be looking for bigs and back ups.

[80sballboy]

Batum is not a significant enough upgrade over Porter to justify the difference in age and salary. I can't get behind signing him. I'd rather pursue PFs and just sign a cheap veteran SF to be Porter's back up.

http://bkref.com/tiny/T68kp

I'm in the minority on Batum, but defense and passing? There's no comparison. He just makes teams better. I don't like Porter as my starting small forward and I think it puts too much pressure on Wall to create for everybody. Mabye Otto starts juicing and puts on 20 pounds or Oubre decides he doesn't want to be Nick Young Jr. I'm assuming will get Anderson and live with the lack of defense.

Porter had a much better season on defense than Batum did. Porter was 11th among SFs in DRPM while Batum finished 33rd among SGs and had a negative rating.

Batum is a better playmaker no doubt, but that gets offset by the fact that he has a very high number of TOs per game for a secondary/tertiary ball handler. Wall is a pass first PG, we don't need any player that's going to take the ball out of his hands a whole bunch anyway. We need efficient finishers. Porter is a more efficient offensive player and shoots better than Batum from 2 and 3. We're flat out better off with him than Batum, especially when you factor in age and salary.

We should only be looking for bigs and back ups.

Did you watch both play or do you just watch the metrics? Bigger smaller forwards dominated Porter last season. I don't care about defensive metrics. They don't tell the whole story. Porter was lost defensively half the time. If Porter was so great on offense and defense, why did we finish .500 and out of the playoffs? But again, moot point because he's not coming. Most people with eyes around the league will tell you Batum is a much better player save for shooting percentage.

[pcbothwel]

Batum is not a significant enough upgrade over Porter to justify the difference in age and salary. I can't get behind signing him. I'd rather pursue PFs and just sign a cheap veteran SF to be Porter's back up.

http://bkref.com/tiny/T68kp

I'm in the minority on Batum, but defense and passing? There's no comparison. He just makes teams better. I don't like Porter as my starting small forward and I think it puts too much pressure on Wall to create for everybody. Mabye Otto starts juicing and puts on 20 pounds or Oubre decides he doesn't want to be Nick Young Jr. I'm assuming will get Anderson and live with the lack of defense.

Maybe passing, but DRtg, DBPM, and RDPM all show Otto to be the better defender. He also has a higher TS, ORtg, WS/48, etc. This doesn't take into account that he is 5 years younger and a lot cheaper.

I agree we need another facilitator, but I think Satoransky really helps in that regard.

I'm really all in on Horford. His game will age well and i like the pedigree he brings (Back to back champs with Florida, Playoffs for last 9 years, learned under Coach Bud)

[Dark Faze]

I think chances of getting Batum or Horford are slim to none

[fishercob]

Batum is not a significant enough upgrade over Porter to justify the difference in age and salary. I can't get behind signing him. I'd rather pursue PFs and just sign a cheap veteran SF to be Porter's back up.

http://bkref.com/tiny/T68kp

I'm in the minority on Batum, but defense and passing? There's no comparison. He just makes teams better. I don't like Porter as my starting small forward and I think it puts too much pressure on Wall to create for everybody. Mabye Otto starts juicing and puts on 20 pounds or Oubre decides he doesn't want to be Nick Young Jr. I'm assuming will get Anderson and live with the lack of defense.

Maybe passing, but DRtg, DBPM, and RDPM all show Otto to be the better defender. He also has a higher TS, ORtg, WS/48, etc. This doesn't take into account that he is 5 years younger and a lot cheaper.

I agree we need another facilitator, but I think Satoransky really helps in that regard.

I'm really all in on Horford. His game will age well and i like the pedigree he brings (Back to back champs with Florida, Playoffs for last 9 years, learned under Coach Bud)

Yep. He has a great track record of being a key ingredient on really good teams, but doesn't have an egocentric game. The fact that he played for Bud is great. First, they emphasize moving the ball and getting the best shots; Horford isn't a "get his" kind of player. Second, Bud's rotations (sometimes to ATL's detriment) emphasized playing more combinations together than typical. Thus, I very much think Horford could thrive as a starting 4 and a backup 5 whereby Morris subs in for him 4-5 mins into the 1Q and then Horford comes back in for Gortat 4-5 mins later.

You can play matchups as game progresses. Horford can anchor a smaller unit or he and Gortat could bang with a big frontcourt like Kanter/Adams or Gasol/Randolph.

Yes, I worry about what we'll think in three years, but whatever. We're too crappy to not take on some risks.

Yes, go get AL Horford and live with the results.

[Dark Faze]

did the wiz really just tank two years with **** tier contracts to come away with ryan anderson

[80sballboy]

did the wiz really just tank two years with **** tier contracts to come away with ryan anderson

Not understanding the word "tank" as referred to last year or two years ago, when we could have reached the conference finals had Wall stayed healthy.

[pcbothwel]

Yes, I worry about what we'll think in three years, but whatever. We're too crappy to not take on some risks.

I dont even worry about that. Horford will play the entire 16/17 season at 30 y/o. So a full max contract will be 30 - 33.
Look at other players that had similar games (PF/C, High IQ Defense, 3pt range, Great Passer, Low TOV, In Shape)

Rasheed Wallace - was longer, but not in as good of shape. 30-34 were really good years for him
LaMarcus Aldridge - just played all last year at 30 (He's exactly 1 year older than Al). He had the best year of his career.
Pau Gasol: Remarkably similar to Horford... http://bkref.com/tiny/VUInw
Brad Miller: Great player until 34/35
Bob Lanier: 30- 35 were great years for him
Kevin Garnett: 30-34 were great years

He actually reminds me a lot of Nene, except he will stay in better shape and he is a better shooter. Which helps as he ages and struggles to score over better athletes inside 5 ft.

[truwizfan4evr]

I would love to get Batum.

[stevemcqueen1]

Yeah I am 100% sold on Horford at the max level salary. I think he'd be a terrific fit and that signing him would put us in 50 win territory in one transaction.

[payitforward]

I'm in the minority on Batum, but defense and passing? There's no comparison. He just makes teams better. I don't like Porter as my starting small forward and I think it puts too much pressure on Wall to create for everybody. Mabye Otto starts juicing and puts on 20 pounds or Oubre decides he doesn't want to be Nick Young Jr. I'm assuming will get Anderson and live with the lack of defense.

Porter had a much better season on defense than Batum did. Porter was 11th among SFs in DRPM while Batum finished 33rd among SGs and had a negative rating.

Batum is a better playmaker no doubt, but that gets offset by the fact that he has a very high number of TOs per game for a secondary/tertiary ball handler. Wall is a pass first PG, we don't need any player that's going to take the ball out of his hands a whole bunch anyway. We need efficient finishers. Porter is a more efficient offensive player and shoots better than Batum from 2 and 3. We're flat out better off with him than Batum, especially when you factor in age and salary.

We should only be looking for bigs and back ups.

Did you watch both play or do you just watch the metrics? Bigger smaller forwards dominated Porter last season. I don't care about defensive metrics. They don't tell the whole story. Porter was lost defensively half the time. If Porter was so great on offense and defense, why did we finish .500 and out of the playoffs? But again, moot point because he's not coming. Most people with eyes around the league will tell you Batum is a much better player save for shooting percentage.

Oh that is so clever about, you know, just watching the numbers instead of actually watching them play! You really got him with that one, I'll tell you. Except for the fact that the numbers happen in those games, and that numbers and only numbers are how you determine who won a game and who lost it.

You do understand that Porter's higher TS% than Batum last year reflects what actually happened in games you could watch them play, right?

And that in these actual games you could watch how other actual numbers came into being by what the players actually did: e.g. that Porter shot a higher 2pt % than Batum. And a higher 3pt. % than Batum.

You do understand that Batum turned the ball over 2.1 more times and stole it .8 fewer times every 40 minutes than Porter, and that means 2.9 more possessions for the opponent every 40 minutes with Batum on the floor than with Porter on the floor -- in actual games that you can watch them play -- right?

Batum does a couple of things better than Porter -- he's a much better playmaker, gets lots more assists. And he's a much better FT shooter as well.

As to "if Porter's so great how come we were a .500 team?" -- here's the answer: because of how other players performed. Because Dudley (who would be a good backup 2-3) was an awful 4. Because Neal stunk, and Anderson cost $$ but didn't play. Because we had nobody at all playing the 4 at an NBA level. In short, because we had about 9000 minutes played at above average productivity and over 10,500 minutes played at below average productivity. Porter's minutes were in that first "above average" group.

Otto is also 4.5 years younger than Batum, and costs about 25% or less of what Batum will command this off season. Not much reason to look at Nicolas Batum, even though, yes, he is quite a good player.

[80sballboy]

Porter had a much better season on defense than Batum did. Porter was 11th among SFs in DRPM while Batum finished 33rd among SGs and had a negative rating.

Batum is a better playmaker no doubt, but that gets offset by the fact that he has a very high number of TOs per game for a secondary/tertiary ball handler. Wall is a pass first PG, we don't need any player that's going to take the ball out of his hands a whole bunch anyway. We need efficient finishers. Porter is a more efficient offensive player and shoots better than Batum from 2 and 3. We're flat out better off with him than Batum, especially when you factor in age and salary.

We should only be looking for bigs and back ups.

Did you watch both play or do you just watch the metrics? Bigger smaller forwards dominated Porter last season. I don't care about defensive metrics. They don't tell the whole story. Porter was lost defensively half the time. If Porter was so great on offense and defense, why did we finish .500 and out of the playoffs? But again, moot point because he's not coming. Most people with eyes around the league will tell you Batum is a much better player save for shooting percentage.

Oh that is so clever about, you know, just watching the numbers instead of actually watching them play! You really got him with that one, I'll tell you. Except for the fact that the numbers happen in those games, and that numbers and only numbers are how you determine who won a game and who lost it.

You do understand that Porter's higher TS% than Batum last year reflects what actually happened in games you could watch them play, right?

And that in these actual games you could watch how other actual numbers came into being by what the players actually did: e.g. that Porter shot a higher 2pt % than Batum. And a higher 3pt. % than Batum.

You do understand that Batum turned the ball over 2.1 more times and stole it .8 fewer times every 40 minutes than Porter, and that means 2.9 more possessions for the opponent every 40 minutes with Batum on the floor than with Porter on the floor -- in actual games that you can watch them play -- right?

Batum does a couple of things better than Porter -- he's a much better playmaker, gets lots more assists. And he's a much better FT shooter as well.

As to "if Porter's so great how come we were a .500 team?" -- here's the answer: because of how other players performed. Because Dudley (who would be a good backup 2-3) was an awful 4. Because Neal stunk, and Anderson cost $$ but didn't play. Because we had nobody at all playing the 4 at an NBA level. In short, because we had about 9000 minutes played at above average productivity and over 10,500 minutes played at below average productivity. Porter's minutes were in that first "above average" group.

Otto is also 4.5 years younger than Batum, and costs about 25% or less of what Batum will command this off season. Not much reason to look at Nicolas Batum, even though, yes, he is quite a good player.

We'll agree to disagree about Batum. As for Porter, I don't know how you blame Gary Neal for our .500 play when he played 40 games and yes, Anderson not being there hurt the bench. But to say there's no correlation to Otto starting at small forward and the record is ludicrous. Small forwards feasted on us last year and that didn't happen two years ago when Ariza played the 3 and it wasn't quite as bad when Pierce tried to play the position. Sorry, I don't have the metrics to show you that. Is there a metric to getting lost because somebody set a screen on you? Just my eyes and other people who watch the games showed that Porter wasn't very good defensively. Maybe I didn't catch all 82 of Batum's games, so he could have been shi-tty as well but it didn't really hurt the Hornets' record.

[montestewart]

Did you watch both play or do you just watch the metrics? Bigger smaller forwards dominated Porter last season. I don't care about defensive metrics. They don't tell the whole story. Porter was lost defensively half the time. If Porter was so great on offense and defense, why did we finish .500 and out of the playoffs? But again, moot point because he's not coming. Most people with eyes around the league will tell you Batum is a much better player save for shooting percentage.

Oh that is so clever about, you know, just watching the numbers instead of actually watching them play! You really got him with that one, I'll tell you. Except for the fact that the numbers happen in those games, and that numbers and only numbers are how you determine who won a game and who lost it.

You do understand that Porter's higher TS% than Batum last year reflects what actually happened in games you could watch them play, right?

And that in these actual games you could watch how other actual numbers came into being by what the players actually did: e.g. that Porter shot a higher 2pt % than Batum. And a higher 3pt. % than Batum.

You do understand that Batum turned the ball over 2.1 more times and stole it .8 fewer times every 40 minutes than Porter, and that means 2.9 more possessions for the opponent every 40 minutes with Batum on the floor than with Porter on the floor -- in actual games that you can watch them play -- right?

Batum does a couple of things better than Porter -- he's a much better playmaker, gets lots more assists. And he's a much better FT shooter as well.

As to "if Porter's so great how come we were a .500 team?" -- here's the answer: because of how other players performed. Because Dudley (who would be a good backup 2-3) was an awful 4. Because Neal stunk, and Anderson cost $$ but didn't play. Because we had nobody at all playing the 4 at an NBA level. In short, because we had about 9000 minutes played at above average productivity and over 10,500 minutes played at below average productivity. Porter's minutes were in that first "above average" group.

Otto is also 4.5 years younger than Batum, and costs about 25% or less of what Batum will command this off season. Not much reason to look at Nicolas Batum, even though, yes, he is quite a good player.

We'll agree to disagree about Batum. As for Porter, I don't know how you blame Gary Neal for our .500 play when he played 40 games and yes, Anderson not being there hurt the bench. But to say there's no correlation to Otto starting at small forward and the record is ludicrous. Small forwards feasted on us last year and that didn't happen two years ago when Ariza played the 3 and it wasn't quite as bad when Pierce tried to play the position. Sorry, I don't have the metrics to show you that. Is there a metric to getting lost because somebody set a screen on you? Just my eyes and other people who watch the games showed that Porter wasn't very good defensively. Maybe I didn't catch all 82 of Batum's games, so he could have been shi-tty as well but it didn't really hurt the Hornets' record.

Porter has had some glaring defensive lapses, and one or two have landed him on Shaqtin the Fool, but unlike McGee, Porter isn't a fool, and at least some of this looks like a young player still learning. The numbers PIF cites give evidence that he has the tools to be a good defender and player. I think of Batum as in his prime and expect his decline to begin soon. I think of Porter as likely still in ascent, not yet in his prime, and I can overlook some of those defensive lapses as long as I think he's learning from his mistakes, which I do.

[LyricalRico]

Has anybody mentioned D.Wade yet?

Not saying I'd sign him, but which would you prefer: Wade for 2yrs/$45M...or...Beal for 4 yrs/$90M?

[montestewart]

Has anybody mentioned D.Wade yet?

Not saying I'd sign him, but which would you prefer: Wade for 2yrs/$45M...or...Beal for 4 yrs/$90M?

Beal, in the hope that he develops and his body becomes stronger rather than increasingly breaking down. Wade is tough, but I don't see anything but decline in his future, and I don't see the point in adding him to this Not Ready for Prime Time crew.

[fishercob]

Lots of Wizardsy stuff here: https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/news/nba-odds-free-agent-frenzy-looms/

Wizards are the favorite individual team to sign RYan Anderson at 9/2, but the field gets 3/2 odds
Wiz have third best odds at Batum (12/1) but he's an overwhelming favorite to stay in Charlotte for that 5th year
Fifth-best team odds to Horford (9/1) but the field is 3/1
Second best odds at Jo Noah (5/1) but Knicks are a huge favorite -- even odds
Close Second best team odds at Parsons (9/2)
5/1 Odds at Marvin Williams (tied for second/third)
Just 3/1 Odds that Beal doesn't return to the Wizards. You'd think they'd be higher for a RFA.

Happy betting!

[montestewart]

Lots of Wizardsy stuff here: https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/news/nba-odds-free-agent-frenzy-looms/

Wizards are the favorite individual team to sign RYan Anderson at 9/2, but the field gets 3/2 odds
Wiz have third best odds at Batum (12/1) but he's an overwhelming favorite to stay in Charlotte for that 5th year
Fifth-best team odds to Horford (9/1) but the field is 3/1
Second best odds at Jo Noah (5/1) but Knicks are a huge favorite -- even odds
Close Second best team odds at Parsons (9/2)
5/1 Odds at Marvin Williams (tied for second/third)
Just 3/1 Odds that Beal doesn't return to the Wizards. You'd think they'd be higher for a RFA.

Happy betting!

Odds that EG gets canned after this year?