Sign Ariza on a 1 year/2 year w/ TO deal?

[azuresou1]

Is Contract Year Ariza a real thing?

08-09 Ariza: 15.5 PER, .544 TS%, 45% 3PT shooting in the playoffs
13-14 Ariza: 15.8 PER, .590 TS%, 40.7 3PT%, 45% 3PT shooting in the playoffs

If so, I'd suggest offering Ariza either a 1 year deal, or a 2 year deal with a team option. He gets more money on a per-year basis than he would elsewhere; we get quality production with the peace of mind that we can cut ties if he falls off.

Compared to Deng he's a WAY better shooter (180! 3PTM on 31%), and he also has ~7500 fewer MP, or about 3 seasons less of basketball wear/tear. He'd be an excellent fit into our offense.

[ATLHawksfan21]

Is Contract Year Ariza a real thing?

08-09 Ariza: 15.5 PER, .544 TS%, 45% 3PT shooting in the playoffs
13-14 Ariza: 15.8 PER, .590 TS%, 40.7 3PT%, 45% 3PT shooting in the playoffs

If so, I'd suggest offering Ariza either a 1 year deal, or a 2 year deal with a team option. He gets more money on a per-year basis than he would elsewhere; we get quality production with the peace of mind that we can cut ties if he falls off.

Compared to Deng LAST YEAR he's a WAY better shooter (180! 3PTM on 31%), and he also has ~7500 fewer MP, or about 3 seasons less of basketball wear/tear. He'd be an excellent fit into our offense.

I fixed the bold for you. I know you can't trust reporters all that much but I have seen reports of Ariza looking for a 4 year deal.

Would you rather have Ariza at 4/40 or 4/36 or Deng at 2/24 or 3/36

[azuresou1]

At those terms, neither. I'd rather sign Bazemore for the 2/6 or whatever he was looking for, and keep the cap space open if teams want to dump guys at midseason.

Also Ariza's been a better shooter than Deng for most of their careers. He's at 34.7% for his career on 1650 attempts, which is far better than Deng's 32.9% on 1297 attempts.

[theatlfan]

One thing here to see if I'm on the same page here:
Neither Deng nor Ariza are good shooters - not even average really. Deng relies on a excellent conversion rate at the rim to buoy his FG% in the below average range. Until last season, has been terrible in the mid-to-long range shooting zones over the last 3-4 seasons. Even last season, his uptick in %-ages from the midrange seem to be more due to a decline in attempts (and hence, some SSS) than a true gain. Ariza is merely very good at the rim and he adds the ability to hit the corner 3 at a reasonable rate but is also otherwise similarly terrible from the mid-to-long range zones. IF we're signing either, then we expect that our shooting coach can bring them up into the respectable territory for their shooting to be a threat.

Do others think differently here?

[Geaux_Hawks]

When you say mid-to-long range zone, does that include both shots as one % or are you speaking as if both zones are bad? I honestly thought Deng had a decent mid-range shot, but Ariza was the better spot up shooter.

Looking at the stats Azure provided, Ariza is a better shooter than what the numbers show. Could be just bad shots that's pulling his RS averages down.

[PandaKidd]

Deng is the better risk IMO better IQ, has been a better defender in the past. I think his limited minutes would be great for him (we wouldnt have to pound him like THIBS did)

But , as ive stated OVER AND OVER it comes down to $.

If we are talking equal value, ill take Deng. IF we are talking 2/24 DENG vs 4/36 Ariza, DEng hands down.

If we are talking 3/36 DENG vs 2/20 Ariza, Id take Ariza.

I think Deng is the superior player, but Ariza is serviceable in the right environment.

[PandaKidd]

Basically, i dont want either for long. I dont want a 33-34 year old SF. They are ready for 2-3 years tops. I want the best value, but it has to be significant for ME to take ARiza over Deng

[theatlfan]

When you say mid-to-long range zone, does that include both shots as one % or are you speaking as if both zones are bad? I honestly thought Deng had a decent mid-range shot, but Ariza was the better spot up shooter.

Looking at the stats Azure provided, Ariza is a better shooter than what the numbers show. Could be just bad shots that's pulling his RS averages down.

Midrange shot is typically defined as outside of the paint and inside the 3PT arc. Some say that anything out from under the rim (about 1/2 between the basket and the 3PT line) would also be included.

Anyway, what you're thinking as to my comments is correct - Deng actually isn't very good from the midrange. Here's a link to his shot chart from '12-'13. The tool will also allow you to select from a variety of time periods in the from the '10-'11 season to this past season and you can view his shot charts in a variety of forms. The evidence doesn't back up that Deng is the midrange shooter that he seems to get the tag for around here...

[Geaux_Hawks]

Yeah I figured that's what you were hinting on. Like I said, I think his mid range is okay. Deng's gotten by with having a guy who can create for others and get him open looks near the rim. Which is why he has such a high conversion rate around the rim.

[azuresou1]

I think Ariza's a pretty good shooter at what he'll be asked to do in our offense - namely hit open 3s.

http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=2772

40.7% from deep, with his worst zone being the top right zone, where he took about a third of his deep looks and only shot 33.6%. In other zones he was far better, dipping no lower than 42.9%. From the corners, he shot an excellent 45.0%.

Yeah, he sucks at midrange shots, but he doesn't take many of those - just 105 for the entire season. He knows his role - 3s and slashing to the rim.

[azuresou1]

Also, compare that shotchart to the atrocity that is Luol Deng's shot chart.

http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=2736

Outside of the top of the 3 where he made 6/15 3s (40%), he doesn't have a single other zone ABOVE 33.3%. His corner 3 rate is 32.8%, which is downright horrible.

He actually shot the exact same percentage (40.9%) from midrange as Ariza, although to be fair he did have exactly double the volume. However, this is actually a negative, since midrange jumpshots are inefficient shots.

He does have quite a few more conversions at the rim (albeit at a lower percent).

[azuresou1]

All in all, if you compare Ariza to Deng in terms of what they would contribute to our offense, I think Ariza is the clear winner.

Ariza takes and makes a significant number of 3s, and has mostly cut out the inefficient midrange jumpshot from his repertoire. He is a very good slasher who makes his attempts at the rim, and in our ball movement offense he would be expected to be a dual threat both from deep as well as on cuts, which makes him dangerous off ball.

Deng doesn't make many 3s or midrange jumpshots, but still likes to take a lot of them. To his credit he IS good at the rim, but they're only ~40% of his shot attempts. Does this description sound like someone that we used to know?

[theatlfan]

Yeah I figured that's what you were hinting on. Like I said, I think his mid range is okay. Deng's gotten by with having a guy who can create for others and get him open looks near the rim. Which is why he has such a high conversion rate around the rim.

I don't think the stats are backing up your assumption though. I know Deng had a reputation as a decent midrange shooter, but that was years ago - before his last contract - and he hasn't been that person since. Even in the year that Rose got MVP, he was more average than good from midrange.

I can't find stats on his shots at the rim, but I think a fair amount of them actually come from post ups. He measures up well for a SF with an exceptional wingspan. I've seen some mention that he is actually pretty good at it, but I can't find any concrete number to back that up.

All in all, if you compare Ariza to Deng in terms of what they would contribute to our offense, I think Ariza is the clear winner.

Ariza takes and makes a significant number of 3s, and has mostly cut out the inefficient midrange jumpshot from his repertoire. He is a very good slasher who makes his attempts at the rim, and in our ball movement offense he would be expected to be a dual threat both from deep as well as on cuts, which makes him dangerous off ball.

Deng doesn't make many 3s or midrange jumpshots, but still likes to take a lot of them. To his credit he IS good at the rim, but they're only ~40% of his shot attempts. Does this description sound like someone that we used to know?

Look at their 3-year averages. Deng's year last season looks like a fluke, his %-ages aren't that good over the wider sample set; Ariza's season was probably better than the average but not the red flag that Deng's is.

The bigger picture is that it ppears that we want someone to be an offensive centerpiece and take the lion's share of the shots - much like our pursuit of Monta last off-season. The problem is that I don't see any evidence that Ariza can do that, and all the evidence I see that Deng can also comes with the caveat that he's terrible at the job. I'd imagine Deng would be marginally better with the surrounding cast we'd have for him and we do have a good shooting coach, but I'm not sure even that much help would be enough to realistically get Deng over the hump and into the "efficient" category.

[PandaKidd]

I think we all agree at the minimum, neither is a WOW for us. marginal improvment, but not anything to get us over the hump

[Geaux_Hawks]

Yeah I figured that's what you were hinting on. Like I said, I think his mid range is okay. Deng's gotten by with having a guy who can create for others and get him open looks near the rim. Which is why he has such a high conversion rate around the rim.

I don't think the stats are backing up your assumption though. I know Deng had a reputation as a decent midrange shooter, but that was years ago - before his last contract - and he hasn't been that person since. Even in the year that Rose got MVP, he was more average than good from midrange.

I can't find stats on his shots at the rim, but I think a fair amount of them actually come from post ups. He measures up well for a SF with an exceptional wingspan. I've seen some mention that he is actually pretty good at it, but I can't find any concrete number to back that up.

All in all, if you compare Ariza to Deng in terms of what they would contribute to our offense, I think Ariza is the clear winner.

Ariza takes and makes a significant number of 3s, and has mostly cut out the inefficient midrange jumpshot from his repertoire. He is a very good slasher who makes his attempts at the rim, and in our ball movement offense he would be expected to be a dual threat both from deep as well as on cuts, which makes him dangerous off ball.

Deng doesn't make many 3s or midrange jumpshots, but still likes to take a lot of them. To his credit he IS good at the rim, but they're only ~40% of his shot attempts. Does this description sound like someone that we used to know?

Look at their 3-year averages. Deng's year last season looks like a fluke, his %-ages aren't that good over the wider sample set; Ariza's season was probably better than the average but not the red flag that Deng's is.

The bigger picture is that it ppears that we want someone to be an offensive centerpiece and take the lion's share of the shots - much like our pursuit of Monta last off-season. The problem is that I don't see any evidence that Ariza can do that, and all the evidence I see that Deng can also comes with the caveat that he's terrible at the job. I'd imagine Deng would be marginally better with the surrounding cast we'd have for him and we do have a good shooting coach, but I'm not sure even that much help would be enough to realistically get Deng over the hump and into the "efficient" category.

Oh I wasn't disagreeing with you on Deng's midrange shot. I think it is just average, hence why I describe it as "okay" or "decent". I agree that Ariza isn't the guy we're looking for to take 15-20 shots or make a play when we need him to as if he was a "Go-to" guy. Since he does hit the 3 adequantly(more so in the playoffs), then he would help us tremendously since he also is a solid defender on the wing, and should cost less than Deng. Even with our current core of players, I don't think Deng will make us that much better than what Ariza would.

[MaceCase]

I hate them both for the salaries that they think they deserve. Both seem to be holding out for ~12 mil annual over 4 years of which I say kick rocks. To get them to budge off that on a short deal I'd imagine they'd want 2yr/~30mil and a PO not a TO of which I say again, kick rocks. The fact the RFA SFs have poisoned the well some isn't helping Ferry's cause as I sincerely doubt he'll be able to pull another Millsap coup with the way GMs have relapsed to their bad habits.

[azuresou1]

If they are sticking to their 4/48 demands I say we sit out and let other teams poison themselves.

[PandaKidd]

Agreed I want neither past 2 years unless the 3rd year is a TO

[azuresou1]

I don't even want a second year. The 2015 FA class is too good to be wasting cap space on those guys.

[PandaKidd]

I don't even want a second year. The 2015 FA class is too good to be wasting cap space on those guys.

Well I mean we KNOW they arent taking a 1 year deal so we are basically saying we dont sign anything right now.

Which , might be the smarter LONG term play.