SilentA wrote:Huh? I more or less said the same thing, that he'd be an average shooter when accounting for team, modern offensive systems, spacing.
It sounded, and forgive me if I misinterpreted, like you were complaining that people were treating him as if he'd still be a 52% TS guy in today's league, so my response was tailored to noting that multiple posters had been talking about how today's game would boost his absolute efficiency.
I only added that a player like him would have an above average overall offensive toolkit because of existing slashing and finishing. Not all offensive players rely on having a good 3 point shot. "League average midrange/3P/FT shooting + very good slashing and finishing + excellent playmaking" is still a good offensive player, first option on a bad team, second option on a good one.
Sure. Not all players rely on having a three. But perimeter players need one in today's game. Particularly if they aren't elite at finishing inside the arc (which he wasn't) or at drawing fouls (which he also wasn't). Thomas wasn't a particularly impressive scorer relative to his peers then, so even with league environment factors boosting some numbers, he was unlikely to look that impressive now. Better than he was, sure, but he was still a tiny guard with a non-elite shot and nothing remarkable in the middle. Again, he'd look better than he did then, that's sort of a given.
He was a talented guy, but you don't magically become THAT much better by playing in today's league. And Thomas' jumper wasn't elite. There are 10 guys in the league who just played 40+ games and scored 15+ ppg at 6'2 or under. They shot 47.6% to 51.2% 2FG. Thomas was a 46.8% 2FG shooter in his career. That number probably wouldn't move too much.
The things that change in today's league which change efficiency are FG% in the RA, FTr and 3P%. Thomas wouldn't dominate 3P%, though he'd likely rise enough to help himself. He drew fouls acceptably well in his own era, and would likely see a boost there because he was fast and had a good handle. So that's one of the areas where a projected boost to his efficiency would come from. But if you think his FG% was harmed by shot selection that would be eliminated today, I don't know what to say. That's not the case. He had issues because of his size, as players his height have and always will have in a league of giants. He'd likely deemphasize long twos in favor of 3s to some extent, which might help some, but only a little, given his projected non-elite 3pt shot. Sub-80% FT shooter isn't suddenly going to turn into Dame when you hand him a bunch of unassisted, above-break 3s, aka the lowest-percentage 3s you can take. That's sort of part and parcel with POA guys. Efficient, volume-scoring small guards are rare and almost exclusively 3pt maestros. That's one of the reasons it's not often a good idea to lean into them for scoring volume in the first place, and why you have to start balancing efficiency with their impact (circling back to your point about Thomas' impact despite his inefficiency). That's why someone like, for example, Derrick Rose, was useful to Chicago. Or even Iverson to Philly, at that, because they didn't have the other tools around him offensively, so they had D, rebounding, and him.
Thomas was good. He would still be good, but that doesn't mean he didn't have flaws and limitations. Maybe we're talking past one another a bit, so let me lay it out.
In my head, Thomas is like an 18-20 ppg scorer on maybe +1 or +2% rTS in today's game. They probably make him spam PnR a fair bit and he's probably a 9-11 apg guy. That's pretty good. I said earlier, I think arguments can be made for him anywhere in the 13-20 range. So, very much in line with your remark about "first option on a bad team, second option on a good one." I think perhaps we agree more than we may realize. But you're taking a stance about his efficiency which has created some contention between us, I guess? He was inefficient then, and when his playmaking volume dropped, so did his impact on Detroit's offense. But he had good scorers around him, particularly by the time the team started winning titles, so it was okay, and he was smart enough to buy into the team concept and reduce his scoring load except in high-leverage moments, which worked out quite well for them. I'm sure he'd do the same thing today. And I'm sure he'd actually be MORE efficient today, both in the absolute and relative to league average, because the environment is more permissive.
