Hollinger's 2009-10 Bobcats Forecast

[thruthefire]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/training ... recast0910

Charlotte Bobcats with PERs below 8

Code: Select all

Player           Min*    PER
Adam Morrison    668    5.69
Matt Carroll     476    5.57
Nazr Mohammed    341    7.71
Alexis Ajinca    182    7.02
Sean Singletary  180    6.74
Sean May         301    6.24

* Total: 2,148 (CHA mins. only)

edit: TTF, sorry but you cant quote insider material since that info is stuff you have to pay for and is copywrite protected. you can, however, post recap using your own words. thanks. fats

[thruthefire]

Well, he thinks we'll finish 29-53, and that Felts won't be able to hold off DJ for the starting spot. He also said the QO is about market value for Felts, since he wouldn't start on a good team (his words, not mine -- I actually disagree).

He still thinks the Chandler trade makes little basketball sense. Of course, I agree.

Acknowledged that giving LB free reign is a dangerous proposition. Mentions passing up Lopez for Augustin, and giving up a future first for a rookie bust.

Loves the Flip Murray signing.

I thought that PER chart above was interesting. Never would have guessed that so many players performing well below replacement level would log that many minutes on an NBA team.

[Battery]

Nobody gives a crap what Hollinger thinks, he's probably watched the Bobcats all of ten minutes the past 2 years. I'd like to tell him where he can stick all those meaningless fancy statistics of his.


Do you stat guys even watch the games?

[fatlever]

i agree with hollinger about felton and murray. disagree about chandler and i'm on the fence about giving LB too much imput for roster decisions.

[thruthefire]

IDK, Battery; Hollinger's the only ESPN guy who's given the Bobcats credit in the past.

[Paydro70]

He's the only expert to ever have any confidence in us... not that the team has rewarded him for it.

But it's cool, just rant some more about how he doesn't watch games, as if that isn't basically his entire job.

[ohara]

Yeah, his article was like a kick in the gut. But overall, he has been fair to the Bobcats in the past.

[Eoghan]

He still looks like a fetus.

[Battery]

He's the only expert to ever have any confidence in us... not that the team has rewarded him for it.

But it's cool, just rant some more about how he doesn't watch games, as if that isn't basically his entire job.

Ohhhh he's an "expert" huh? What exactly QUALIFIES him as being an "expert?" Expert in bullsh*t is more like it.

Did you happen to catch the nice article on Tyson Chandler in todays Observer?

[Paydro70]

Ohhhh he's an "expert" huh? What exactly QUALIFIES him as being an "expert?" Expert in bullsh*t is more like it.

Did you happen to catch the nice article on Tyson Chandler in todays Observer?

Expert in bull! What a good one! If you have no respect for sportswriters, that's fine. Hollinger is one of the few that actually DO pay attention to the Bobcats and has had some confidence us in the past. But as usual, you claim someone who disagrees with you doesn't watch basketball, which is both boring and stupid. Ad hominem all the way!

As for the article, yeah, I read it. So Chandler likes to get vocal on defense... how big a difference is that supposed to make? We're already 7th on that side of the ball, are we going to be 1st? I'd be more interested to know how we're planning on cutting down turnovers, especially if the new plan is to launch lobs at the rim. The bit about playing PF is even better, I can't wait for Chandler-Diop or Chandler-Nazr.

I'll believe this "spreading the floor" benefit Chandler provides when I see it, my guess is that this team bogs down on offense as much or more this year as last.

[Battery]

Expert in bull! What a good one! If you have no respect for sportswriters, that's fine. Hollinger is one of the few that actually DO pay attention to the Bobcats and has had some confidence us in the past. But as usual, you claim someone who disagrees with you doesn't watch basketball, which is both boring and stupid. Ad hominem all the way!

As for the article, yeah, I read it. So Chandler likes to get vocal on defense... how big a difference is that supposed to make? We're already 7th on that side of the ball, are we going to be 1st? I'd be more interested to know how we're planning on cutting down turnovers, especially if the new plan is to launch lobs at the rim. The bit about playing PF is even better, I can't wait for Chandler-Diop or Chandler-Nazr.

I'll believe this "spreading the floor" benefit Chandler provides when I see it, my guess is that this team bogs down on offense as much or more this year as last.

When I read stuff like this, it truly makes me wonder if you've ever seen Okafor play. Nobody bogs down an offense more than Okafor with his lazy ass jog from one end to the other. His lazy ass setting up under the hoop. The difference between Chandler and Okafor is that TC is constantly on the move which draws the opposing big men away from the hoop, this opens up the lane for the perimeter players. This will especially be valuable to Ray because he will have more opportunities to get into the paint and create easier opportunities for his teammates.

Okafor on the other hand would stand under the hoop with that sour puss face after not receiving a pass because he took FOREVER to set up. Then he'd give up on the play and just camp out under the hoop which in turn would clog up the lane leaving no room for our perimeter players to drive to the hoop. Whenever Okafor would hustle up court is when he helped the offense create space which made it easier for Ray. Unfortunately Okafor would only do this about 30% of the time. One of the reasons why his lame ass is out of here.

So go right ahead and post all of your fancy Hollinger stats until the cows come home, but one thing you cannot post is the effect that players who do the little things that don't show up in boxscores have on their teammates performance. Until you can post those "stats," everything else is meaningless.

Okafor is like Iverson, as long as they get their stats, it's all good.

Oh and ya still believe Larry Brown wanted Iverson in Charlotte? *snicker* (you were wrong on that one too)

Another thing, I have trouble taking you seriously on anything after you showed incredible amounts of man-love for Iverson in Charlotte. Mind boggling and I'm very disappointed in you. Now I expect it from thruthefire because he's like what, 15 years old? But you? Come on, you're smarter than that.

[Paydro70]

When I read stuff like this, it truly makes me wonder if you've ever seen Okafor play. Nobody bogs down an offense more than Okafor with his lazy ass jog from one end to the other. His lazy ass setting up under the hoop. The difference between Chandler and Okafor is that TC is constantly on the move which draws the opposing big men away from the hoop, this opens up the lane for the perimeter players. This will especially be valuable to Ray because he will have more opportunities to get into the paint and create easier opportunities for his teammates.

Okafor on the other hand would stand under the hoop with that sour puss face after not receiving a pass because he took FOREVER to set up. Then he'd give up on the play and just camp out under the hoop which in turn would clog up the lane leaving no room for our perimeter players to drive to the hoop. Whenever Okafor would hustle up court is when he helped the offense create space which made it easier for Ray. Unfortunately Okafor would only do this about 30% of the time. One of the reasons why his lame ass is out of here.

So go right ahead and post all of your fancy Hollinger stats until the cows come home, but one thing you cannot post is the effect that players who do the little things that don't show up in boxscores have on their teammates performance. Until you can post those "stats," everything else is meaningless.

I'm just not sure why they'd follow Chandler out, since he's among the worst shooters in the league. The only way he punishes you is if he sets a pick to free the point guard, but since Ray is such a terrible shooter, even an open shot for him seems infinitely preferable to allowing Chandler to roll to the basket. Regardless, Ray getting to the hoop has never been the issue... it's been his inability to make layups, and Chandler's not giving him pointers there.

And again, however "lazy" it is for Okafor to sit under the basket, Chandler has no back-to-the-basket game, and will offer us nothing in that area. Unless we're planning on sitting Diaw down low on offense instead of the high post where he's most comfortable, we have no post scoring at all. That is what worries me, and why I think we'll end up as vulnerable to bogging down as before, especially against a team with good athleticism. Chandler's Bulls teams were terrible offensively, and the Hornets were too both his first year with them and last year. I just don't really buy the idea that he's going to revolutionize our offense since his entire career he's been a bad offensive player on bad offensive teams, except for one magic year with Chris Paul.

Okafor is like Iverson, as long as they get their stats, it's all good.

...huh? Can you post me one quote, ever, from Emeka Okafor about his stats? About how good he is? Do you have any evidence for this sentence at all?

With Iverson at least you can claim he's selfish because he shoots a lot, but with Okafor? If anything the consensus has been he doesn't care enough about scoring, every game last year we had complaints that he wasn't aggressive enough on offense.

Oh and ya still believe Larry Brown wanted Iverson in Charlotte? *snicker* (you were wrong on that one too)

Another thing, I have trouble taking you seriously on anything after you showed incredible amounts of man-love for Iverson in Charlotte. Mind boggling and I'm very disappointed in you. Now I expect it from thruthefire because he's like what, 15 years old? But you? Come on, you're smarter than that.

Who says LB didn't? I guess I'm crazy for thinking he wasn't just straight-up lying when he said he'd like to coach him again. Maybe Iverson didn't like our offer. Maybe Higgins hates Iverson. Maybe MJ's still pissed about the crossover. Or maybe Johnson didn't want to pay the extra $1.5m for Iverson over a generic FA... especially since we hadn't re-signed Felton yet so the luxury tax was an eminent possibility. I have no idea, and neither do you.

And yet again, you really just can't talk about anything without the other person being biased or ignorant, can you? I don't have "man-love" for Iverson, I just think he could still be good. Obviously, you disagree (oh man, I sure hope I get another 2 paragraphs about what a jerk he is). Now of course, we'll never know, because he's going to that total mess in Memphis, and instead we got Flip Murray. I'm OK with Flip, but I know what we're getting: an average to below-average player. At least with Iverson there was a chance we were getting a good one.

[thruthefire]

Did you happen to catch the nice article on Tyson Chandler in todays Observer?

I thought it was interesting how LB said Chandler's not as strong as Okafor. You know, quite a few people said this was an upgrade because we were getting a true center. If that were true, I would imagine TC would be stronger than Okafor, who [supposedly] got pushed around by everyone.