Severn Hoos wrote:I'm not a fan of this trade mostly because of the limited cap flexibility in the future years, but the criticism of Okafor and Ariza is kind of ridiculous, IMO. Take Okafor - he was "injured" this past year, but we also know that the Hornets had every reason to shut him down rather than play him (and risk aggravating the injury) when the post-trade goal for them was to acquire ping pong balls. So I don't put much worry into the fact that he played 27 (out of 66) games. And when he did play, in a "down year", he had a PER of 15.1, shot 53% from the floor, and averaged 10 rebounds per 36 minutes. If he is indeed healthy (and I do understand the chronic back issue, that's obviously a concern), there's no reason to think those numbers wouldn't improve this coming season.
Then, when you look at 2010-11 - when the Hornets were a playoff team, so there's no "good stats on a bad team" syndrome going on here - he played 72 games, had a PER of 16.0, shot 57% from the floor, and averaged 11 rebounds per 36, with a DReb% of 25%. And the three seasons before that, he played all 82 games in each season, never had a PER below 16.5, never shot below 55%, and his Reb% consistently at 18%, with a DReb% at 25% or better.
Again - if he is healthy and can approximate those numbers, he is clearly much, much better than "average." And certainly not "below average."
And here's the other thing. Okafor has shown the ability to be a great rebounder, particularly on the defensive boards. Why is he able to do that? Is it physical attributes, some 6th sense, or what? Well, a lot of it has to come from technique and using his strength and leverage to keep his man off the glass. In other words, things that can be taught. Now, Keveen has many of the same physical attributes that Emeka has. Maybe if he spends 2 years watching and learning, he'll pick up defensive rebounding from Okafor the way he seems to have responded to Nene (who, frankly, is not a great rebounder). One can hope, anyway.
And for Ariza - I think he has many similar physical attributes as Singleton. (Don't forget, however "stiff" Singleton looked as a rookie, he had outstanding scores at the pre-draft combine.) But what Ariza has that CSing doesn't is experience. Craftiness. Knowing the tricks of the trade. Again, if Chris can watch and learn for 2 years, maybe he comes out of it with a defensive game approximating Ariza's. And as it has been pointed out many times, he is already a better 3-point shooter than Ariza, he may end up as an ideal fit in the coveted 3-and-D role.
So - I still wouldn't have made the trade because I hate that our flexibility in FA is pretty much gone now. And I think the price that was paid in the hope of secondary benefits to guys like Seraphin and Singleton was way too high. But I do believe the trade was made mostly to improve those guys, not to get Okafor & Ariza for their own sake. And in that, I can kind of understand it.
good balanced post Sev. I concur.
loss of flexibilty - bad
influx of vet knowledge with the possibility of productive play
AND we won't be paying huge bucks for shard to go away - good
Yes I understand they committed more total $$ to Okafor and Ariza.
I would only point out that it remains to be seen how much of that
present commitment they end up paying particularly in the 2nd year.
At worst they are at least getting players who have some possibility of
playing and mentoring the kids. I have little concern that the presence
of these 2 guys will be chemistry destroying.
As you point out, Okafor has been a productive player in the past and
he could be attractive trade bait. I'm intrigued by the possibility that
as a solid big, he could yield a quality wing in a trade, like Ricky Martin.
