THE 10 BEST 2012-13 CONTRACTS

The other day I did the ten worst contracts of the season. It was a fairly big hit, and as usual, not everyone agreed with my picks. I expect more of the same today, as I pick the ten best.

I think the GMs negotiated well on these deals.

For this list, I'm ignoring salaries that I think are "fair". These are contracts where the owners aren't getting a bad deal, but also are not getting a bargain. Some examples of contracts that I think are fair:

  • Spencer Hawes: He was terrible for a few years, but great last year. If last year really was transformative, they have a huge bargain, but only for two years, so he'll become a very expensive UFA during his prime. On the other hand, if last year was just an outlier, their downside is capped, so this contract is "fair". One could also put Brandon Roy in this category. Might be great, might bust, only two years, whatever.
  • Marcus Camby, Jason Kidd, Ray Allen: These are still great win producers, but they will only play limited minutes. At their age, the end could come at any minute, so they aren't strictly bargains even at their moderate prices; the cheaper price is a fair trade off for the risk of age/injury ending things.
  • Kevin Garnett, Steve Nash, Tim Duncan, Gerald Wallace: These are similar to the above, but a lot more expensive. I don't think any of these are bad at all, and in year one they are likely to be underpaid, but given the ages and lengths of contracts involved, I wouldn't really call them bargains either. Although if any of them does turn into a bargain, it will probably be Nash, who's game is least dependent on his body and who is least vulnerable to injury due to playstyle.
  • Nic Batum, George Hill, Roy Hibbert, Lou Williams, etc: good but expensive players. Not bargains.

Also, like the worst contracts. Rookies don't count. Anthony Davis will probably have the best contract in the NBA next season, but that's just the nature of the draft.

10) Lavoy Allen, 2 years, $6 million

Allen looks like he'll be a great, young, underpaid player, but I could probably argue that Allen's contract belongs in the "worst contracts" post. The only reason Lavoy Allen is making $3 million instead of about $800k is because Philadelphia only signed him to a one year contract after they drafted him. NBA Teams shoot themselves in the feet constantly with their crazy conservative strategy with 2nd round picks.

Hey NBA GMs!

Here's a friendly PSA. The pay structure for 2nd round draft picks is really favorable to you. You should probably sign every 2nd round pick to the maximum-length four years, with a team option for the 3rd and 4th years. That $800k or so in year 2 is not going to break your bank if they don't work out. Let's face it, if you don't spend it on these guys, you were going to waste that money on some washed-up vet like Jermaine O'Neal or Raja Bell anyway, right?

Trying to limit your downside on 2nd round picks with these short contracts is very bad business -- owners who do this are trying to save money by cutting the wrong corners. These players are very cheap, so owners should be doing everything in their power to maximize the upside, and ignore the downside.

9) Greg Stiemsma, 1 year, $2.5 million

Which brings us to Greg Stiensma. Boston made a similar mistake. He had a very good rookie campaign for Boston, and he's pretty good, and $2.5 million for a "pretty good" big man, even in a reserve role, is a huge bargain. But Boston couldn't match because of some stuff probably only Larry Coon understands, and Boston was only in this position because Stiemsma only had a one year deal. Why didn't they offer Stiemsma a multiyear deal with a team option? Did they think Stiemsma, who was desperate to crack into the NBA, would have hesitated to sign anything that Boston put in front of him? Minnesota is profiting from Boston's mistake and it's a great contract.

The only downside to this signing is that I'm probably going to misspell his name as often as I did Wally Szczerbiak's.

8) Elton Brand, 1 year, $2.1 million

It's almost tempting to make amnesty picks not count, but from Dallas's perspective, they are paying $2.1 million for an above-average big. And they were not the only team that could have placed a bid. That makes this a steal and a great contract in my book. The fact that the bidding didn't get higher here is weird. I imagine the GMs fixated on the fact that Brand is kind of old, and is overpaid. Neither is relevant; it's a one-year deal, and whoever got him wouldn't be the one overpaying him. The fact is, Brand is still good at basketball. He keeps his turnovers low, he blocks shots, and he's still a reasonably efficient scorer and rebounder. That's worth $6-$8 million at least in today's NBA. I wouldn't want Brand on a long-term contract, but at one year, this is a very good deal.

7) Ronnie Brewer, 1 year, $800k or so

This would be much higher on the list if it were a multi-year deal. Brewer's not a great shooter, but that's ok because unlike some other bad shooters, he doesn't shoot a lot. He's a great rebounder and gets lots of steals, while avoiding turnovers and personal fouls. He's worth what Fields is getting and more, and Chicago is silly for letting him go. Supposedly he turned down more money and the promise of more minutes elsewhere, which makes him a bit of an idiot as far as I'm concerned, but I'm probably just bitter he didn't want to play in Minnesota. Imagine him next to Stiemsma, AK and Rubio. That team would be a defensive monster.

6) JaVale McGee, 4 years $44 million

McGee gets a bad rap. I think the problem is that when he screws up, he screws up big. Dunks that rattle off the back of the rim and fly into the backcourt. He leads the league in goaltends by a huge margin. And he's not exactly smart about how he handles the media either. But it gets lost in that shuffle that JaVale produces. He rebounds well and he blocks a lot of shots, and isn't terrible at anything else but free throw shooting. He's an above average center, and he's young. This combination is usually very expensive. L.A. gave Bynum about $16 million per year way back when he hadn't yet done squat and had trouble playing 3 games in a row without rolling an ankle -- and nobody blinked. New Jersey gave Brook Lopez the worst contract of the summer and a lot of folks just shrug and say that New Jersey "had to do it". And some folks in Denver are up in arms about giving an above-average young center $11 million? Head-scratching. This is a good deal. People need to learn to look beyond the fact that McGee does a lot of boneheaded stuff.

5) Andrei Kirilenko, 2 years, $20 million

When Kirilenko last played in the NBA, he was an underrated superstar. He's a little older now, but by no means ancient, and even if he's declined he's likely still a very good player. When you consider that he replaces an awful Wes Johnson, and thus becomes a player who transforms Minnesota from "meh" to "good playoff team," this becomes a great deal. When you add to the fact that it's only two years, so Minnesota won't be stuck overpaying an old player, it looks even better.

4) Jeremy Lin, 3 years, $25 million

A lot has been said about this. But let's note that 3 years at about $8 million per year would be a reasonable contract for an above-average point guard with a lot of international marketing potential. But the contract is actually better than this because it essentially defers $7 million dollars to the final year. All of the journalists who keep saying that it "doesn't matter" how the money is distributed have clearly never taken a finance course. The first rule of finance is that unless you live in a deflationary economy, money now is worth more than money later. You can even quantify how much using a net present value approach.

But there are further ramifications. Many (including me) have brought up that if Lin isn't all that great, at least his big expiring contract will have value to some team that wants to take a big chunk of its books. If this is true, and the Rockets can trade Lin in his final year, this will end up meaning that the Rockets deferred about $7 million in payments, but then ended up forcing some other team foot the bill (or a big chunk of it)! I realize that the Rockets will have to take back salary in any deal, but one can only presume that any salary that they take back in such a hypothetical trade is for a player that they actually want to pay (otherwise, why make the trade, obviously).

The other scenario is that Linsanity continues, in which case Houston won't really be all that upset to pay the bill when its due.

3) Ersan Ilyasova, 5 years, $45 million

Beastly rebounder who has improved every year in the league so far gets locked up for $9 million per year all the way through his prime years? Sure! I'm not sure what else there is to say about this contract. It's great!

2) Omer Asik, 3 years, $25 million

The same principles that apply to Lin's contract also apply to Asik's, but there's an important difference, and that's that at $8 million per year, Asik is probably not fairly paid, he's underpaid. As a fantastic rebounder and shot-blocker, he's well worth $10+ million in his own right. In fact, if his production holds steady with increased minutes, he probably won't even be overpaid in that "poison pill" year. So Houston will be paying him $5 million or so, while earning interest on the rest until 2014/15, for a beastly defensive center who's only 26 right now. And once again, they might get someone else to foot the bill!

As you can tell, I disagree with Dre about Daryl Morey -- I think he's a pretty savvy GM.

1) Ryan Anderson, 4 years $36 million

This contract is so good I wrote a whole article about it, and coined a fallacy after this player (the Ryan Anderson Fallacy refers to a situation in which a reviewer calls a contract "bad" when in fact that contract is really good). Twitter kind of exploded with "$9 million for Ryan Anderson? Really?" comments. Yeah, really, why would you want to pay $9 million for a 6'10" great offensive rebounder and 3-point shooter who doesn't turn the ball over? Pff, what do you need guys like that for? I mean, unless you're trying to win basketball games, those kinds of guys are useless! If the value of a win is about $1.47 million dollars per win, Anderson is probably going to be "worth" somewhere north of $18  million dollars per year, meaning he's in the "superstar" category (guys who are underpaid even at the max salary), and New Orleans is getting him for $9 million. That's a crazy contract.
 
Who'd I miss?
Picture?type=square

Brett Gunter

Patrick,
The only other deal I would expect to make your list hasn't happened yet; to my knowledge, Josh Childress still doesn't have a team. Come on, Kupchak! HE'S FREE! He's goddamn free! I realize the last time an NBA team was smart enough to give him legit minutes was 4 years ago--but MY GOD! His WP was .293! Phoenix is going to pay him to win games for someone this season, if anyone has the brains to sign him. He was approaching superstar performance when Atlanta decided he wasn't worth a third of Joe Johnson's money, and his career went off the rails--but he still gives star numbers in garbage minutes, and he's in his prime! Did I mention HE'S FREE? Jesus Christ!
Would you sign him if Kobe busted a knee? I'm no Jeff Gilhooly, but I could give it a shot--or swing. Please? I'll be good, I promise. You like FREE, right? Gott in Himmel.

321 days ago

Picture?type=square

Andrew Johnson

Groan Dragic's contract is better than Lin's, aside from marketing potential. Dragic is a better player and is making less money even in an NPV basis unless one applied an insanely high discount rate, which can't be justified in this economy.

321 days ago

Default_profile_1_normal

Charles Connaughton

I feel obligated to give you grief for spelling Greg Stiemsma's name two different ways in an article where you explicitly poke fun at yourself for misspelling his name.

Unless you did that on purpose as a form of preemptive counter-trolling, in which case I tip my hat to you.

321 days ago

Default_profile_1_normal

Charles Connaughton

I think JaVale McGee suffers from the flip side of the 'hard shots count more than easy shots' fallacy. In the same way they we'll lionize the players who hit hard shots (even though they are not good shots statistically) over players who consistently get open and hit easy shots, we'll demonize players that commit stupid mistakes over those who make more innocuous mistakes.

So while a goaltending violation isn't nearly as big a deal as, say, chunking up a 23 foot jumper while double teamed, and I don't care if 10% of his dunk attempts fly out of bounds as long as he's actually getting a lot of dunk attempts, the optics are so much worse. Re-signing McGee long term for only $11 million was a great deal for Denver and their fans should be thrilled.

321 days ago

17330462_normal

motherwell

The best part of Lin and Asik, versus Dragic or Lowry, is it preserves capspace. Ballooning payments three years down the line and having two FA shots seems rather smart to me. Get the two hardest positions in FA, then look for the thrid hard part (a superstar). 2/3 done - can they get 3?

320 days ago

Default_profile_1_normal

Shawn Furyan

@Andrew Johnson

I strongly disagree that Dragic's contract is better than Lin's when you discount Lin's marketability, and for a plethora of reasons. Dragic is 26.5 where Lin is 23.999. Also, Dragic has a lot more minutes under his belt, and has mostly been pretty meh, plus he was only marginally better on a per minute basis than Lin this last season. Dragic's minute weighted average WP48 for the last 3 seasons is 0.093, where Lin's over the past 2 seasons (just over 1200 minutes) is 0.137.

Then we have the fact that Dragic has a $30M 4-year contract (player option 4th year) that carries on through his 30th birthday (a very awkward age for a contract to end on, because there are still probably a couple productive years, but if you want them, you're going to have to do a 4-year contract, and probably overpay for the 2 good years he'll have left anyway) and makes him a middling $7.5M expiring contract his final year.

Lin's contract on the other hand is for $25M of which the Rockets will only have paid $10M when he becomes a highly tradeable high profile player on a huge expiring $16M contract. At which point, if he works out, and actually makes good on his billing as the ABC basketball messiah, the Rockets will hold his bird rights, and will have the option of giving him a 4 year contract that last through age 31, which basically means that they have the ability to lock down all of his most productive years with very little financial risk if he doesn't work out. It's actually kind of masterful.

320 days ago

Nba-geek-avatar

Patrick Minton

I agree with Andrew on Lin. I almost put Dragic on this list, but when I looked at his career, I was like....hmm...which Dragic is going to show up? Lin is younger and although the sample size is small, it's actually more consistent than Dragic. As we here often point out, Lin was good in Golden State too.

320 days ago

Picture?type=square

Andrew Johnson

Shawn- I had the wrong figure in mind on Dragic's contract, so it doesn't look quite as good now that I realize that. I don't think the age difference is that big of a deal though.

On another contract I think the Stiemsa contract would be better than Asik's if it was a two year deal, even for a bit more per year.

320 days ago

Fn1tkq7dm17aetg2t0wk_normal

Aakash Gupta

Great stuff, perhaps even better writing -

though I'm not sure I fundamentally agree with your tendency to rely on 48 min productions

let's talk asik in a year

319 days ago

J_lin_normal

robert miller

As a basketball fan I definitely think that Goran Dragic's contract is more favorable than Lin's. If I were in Phoenix I would be very happy about that deal (then very sad that we are stuck with Beasley).

Regardless of all the weighty "expiring contract" talk, NBA GM's would be better served getting great value for less money than simply having a bronze ticket in the form of an underperforming expiring contract. If I had a team like the current Denver Nuggets I would be very pleased. I wouldn't have a huge 15 million dollar (overpaid) contract that I could use to shake up my team....but I would have a lot of good players that are in some cases woefully underpaid (Faried, Lawson).Such teams can easily do trades for "star" players. And even if they are unable to execute such moves they still have exciting teams that will satisfy the fan base and thus rake in $$$.

Back to the case of Lin: It's been previously noted that when we examine the statistics as a starter last year (per minute stats aren't a great measure to extrapolate how someone will perform when given true starter's minutes) Dragic outperformed Lin in various categories (fg%, ft%, AST, TO). Perhaps an even more interesting bit of information is that over the course of his four year career he has been able to produce at nearly the same level when given starter's minutes. In 36 starts over the course of four years he has done a fairly good job. In 25 starts over the course of one year Lin has done well (but not quite as well).

A previous post mentioned Dragic's age vs Lin's age. I'm not sure what that is meant to prove. From 26-30 Dragic should be right within his prime as a player and should almost certainly outperform his contract. Lin is currently 24 and is locked down till 27. The contract doesn't represent his prime years and thus is even more likely to overpay him. I'm not sure how Dragic having played more minutes in the NBA somehow hurts his chances of even more improved play. If anything it should help since he is reaching his prime. He has more experience with the NBA game and probably should be well equipped to run the PHX system that he previously saw executed by Nash (surely watching Steve Nash from the bench and facing him in practice properly equips you to run the PHX offense). In the case of Lin he is a younger guy who is not exactly familiar with what Kevin Mchale runs and it may take some getting used to (though I'm sure he will be fine for the most part).

I don't think it will be fair to note the defensive attention and thus difficulty Lin may face as (assuming a superstar big-man doesn't join HOU) the face of this team. The fact that the guide on how to defend Lin (force him left and trap) is out also doesn't help. Aside from that, I just think as an investor Dragic holds less risk than Lin. You are paying 7.5 mil for a four-year guard who has consistently shown the ability of a solid starting PG throughout his career and who has played behind one of the best PG's of all time. In the case of Lin you are paying on avg 8.3m per year (though the balloon 15m may be used) for a guy that has essentially had one year of real NBA experience under a very PG friendly system, facing mostly middling talent during his prime (examine Lin's stats against +.500 vs. -.500 teams). Don't get me wrong, Lin may very well live up to ability he showed during that brief stretch, but as a betting man I'd go with Dragic. Lin is the sexier choice and if he goes big then your profits are humongous, but Dragic is the safe call. On the converse side, if Lin is a complete bust do you honestly think teams will be trading you non-shitty multiyear contracts for him. It's not like you will release the expiring 15m and get back someone of Kenneth Faried's level...you will be getting Trevor Ariza quality or even worse for not one year....but two.

The concept of old players being given huge contracts at the tail end of their careers is definitely an issue, but I would say we are using some increidble foresight to deem Dragic's contract mediocre because of events that might take place four years from now in the event that he is significantly outperforming his contract.

Now lemme give some praise to Daryl Morey:
In terms of overall flexibility Morey has done a bang-up job. He has a lot of young and appetizing contracts along with some nice expiring contracts for the future which can all be used in package deals for superstars. In the grand scheme, Houston has positioned themselves quite nicely and have done a better job than PHX. However, I would suspect PHX's thought process is much different than HOU. PHX is most likely going into tank mode. They want to put out a product that will be amusing to watch but will produce some lottery picks. Whether they will suck enough remains to be seen but I'd say it's a longshot they make the playoffs.

Ultimately, teams have to be pay some guys to get in above the minimum and it looks like Phoenix has done just that. I think PHX is a top five market in this country yet the team is being fairly niggardly with spending (55m). Ideally, they tank and get the next Durant or James Harden and then in four years time begin their real run. The bastard stepson of the SA model (the OKC model) is definitely being followed .

319 days ago

Nba-geek-avatar

Patrick Minton

"per minute stats aren't a great measure to extrapolate how someone will perform when given true starter's minute"

you'll find that on these forums, blindly stating things like this without evidence won't get you far. There is very little evidence to back up this claim. It basically puts you in the camp of people who, after 09/10, didn't think Love would ever be a star player.

if you're just making a sample size argument, we've already addressed that.

319 days ago

Nba-geek-avatar

Patrick Minton

it's also silly that you use the word "consistent" with Dragic, who has been the very model of inconsistency in his career.

And if Lin thrives in "PG friendly" systems, who's forcing Houston not to run one!? That's not an argument, that's a rationalization.

319 days ago

Nba-geek-avatar

Patrick Minton

one final comment: The fact that teams who are in "tank mode" give out three- and four-year contracts might explain why they stay in they stay in that mode so long.

319 days ago

Default_profile_1_normal

Charles Connaughton

I'll buy the argument that you don't know how many minutes 'true starter minutes' can be for a guy going from the bench to starting, especially when we're talking about big men. Maybe Asik can handle 40 minutes a game, maybe he can only handle 30 - we don't know and that's a definite question mark when evaluating his contract.

I have no clue where the per minute productivity argument comes from though, that has always translated exceptionally well with more playing time. Is that some sort of bastard child of the usage argument gone horribly wrong?

319 days ago

J_lin_normal

robert miller

@Frank "There is very little evidence to back up this claim. It basically puts you in the camp of people who, after 09/10, didn't think Love would ever be a star player".

Perhaps I should qualify my statement. When people talk about per minute stats for Jeremy Lin in Golden State they are referring to a period where he average a measly 9 minutes per game and never started, as compared to KLove who averaged 26 or so minutes per game in his rookie campaign and started 37 times (his 2009/10 stats follow suit). I didn't realize that I worded my argument in a way that made it seems like I consider per minute stats USELESS. I find them to be useful but not when we are talking about what I would consider "insignificant" minutes. It's not insane to presume that the per-36 for a guy who originally was playing 26 minutes would be more accurate than the per-36s for a guy playing 9 minutes. I just don't get how you can't see this. Per minute becomes more accurate for establishing things like per 36s as the minutes played increase. No congratulations are required for someone seeing that KLove could be a great player based on the stats he put up on the Wolves that season, however, there is a reason Lin was a breakout star (he was thought to be shitty prior to be given enough quality minutes to establish himself).

Another note: I'm not sure how you can view Dragic as the model of inconsistency when virtually every time he's been given starter's minutes he has produced at 2nd tier PG levels. He is no more inconsistent than Lin who struggled against harsh competition when he was a starter. It also isn't too shocking to see some level of inconsistency from all basketball players in their first couple of years (Westbrook, Rose, Jennings, Wall etc). Young PG's have some inconsistent showings but we have to judge by the average of their performances in these cases. I also don't think woefully inconsistent players tend to have their coaches throwing fits when they leave as Kevin Mchale was reported to have done. Furthermore, Dragic (I know you must hate this argument) has played more and should know better.

As for your statements regarding tank teams handing out long term 3/4 year contracts, I think you make a decent point, but, outright tanking is an egregious sin for fans. As a Knick fan I remember the days of Jamal Crawford and the horrible basketball we were playing while simultaneously not tanking properly. Purgatory is a tough place to be but I still think that a good contract is a good contract and even if you are in what I will call the "semi-tank" state it is useful to have good (and movable) contracts like Dragic. The way I look at it the Suns had to put some bodies in uniforms to meet the minimum and chose nicely in some cases and poorly in other cases.....but they made the mark. There is no sense in going into a "they should have gotten "so and so" argument because in the long term no free agency signing would have truly given PHX a team where we could say "wow they have a great short/long term team" while also allowing them to meet the minimum cap. No matter what they could have done they would've been murky in the present and future. All they could do is sign whatever talent they could get, remain cheap, and live to fight another day..

As for my "PG-Friendly system" statement. I stand by it. Not every coach is Mike D'antoni...there is something to be said about a guy that can make even Chris Duhon and Ray Felton look good for short stretches (LOL). With that being said, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps you are right. Basically, all Mchale has done with PG's is allow them to do what they do best (Lowry/Dragic). He isn't quite as limiting as others and shouldn't actively IMPEDE Lin. However, we cannot underestimate the importance of quality coaching (offensively and defensively). A good example would be what Dwayne Casey was able to do on the defensive end of the floor for the Raptors with a similar roster to what Triano had the previous year (going from nearly last to around 9th or so in OPP ppg ain't bad).

To be honest, I'm a little upset no one has tried to argue for the stranger points of the "Lin contract is better than Dragic" debate that I pointed out in my earlier post (agism? Lin being significantly better than Dragic?.Contract length as a means to overpay a player in the future?) Perhaps it was a case of TL;DR.... :( I think I made some nice points.

I feel the need on these forums to note that I'm not attempting to troll or denigrate anyone's points. I'm just trying to give my honest and (self-professed) sensible opinion. I also wanna state this again: I enjoy your statistical analysis and find it useful. I just feel there is a need for what you refer to as "rationalizations" (I consider it more of a "critical thinking" approach to hoops) when it comes to considering contracts. All the answers aren't in the numbers...we are dealing with different styles of play, skill sets, and an assortment of variables that effect statistics. While not easily quantified, these points need to be acknowledged at times.

319 days ago

Default_profile_1_normal

Charles Connaughton

If you're trying to make some sort of sample size argument about why you should per minute data from 26 minutes per game over 9 minutes per game, well, obviously, larger samples are going to be more accurate. That's a given.

But I'm getting that you're trying to make some sort of usage argument; that guys who only play 10 minutes per game have inflated per minute stats that wouldn't carry over to 30 or 36 or 40 or whatever minutes per game. That isn't obvious at all and certainly isn't something we've ever seen borne out in the data to any significant degree.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if your question is something along the lines of 'sure, he can play well for 9 minutes a game, but can he keep it up for 36?' the answer is yes, yes he can.

318 days ago

Iv4dpcpila5evtplwjvy_normal

Zoey

Lin isn't going to have a "big expiring contract" in the final year of his deal. The cap hit for the Rockets is going to be $8.3M each of those three years. Same for Asik.

318 days ago

J_lin_normal

robert miller

"Inflated" isn't the right word my friend. I'm mainly making the point that 9 minutes per game (mostly played in blowouts and garbage time) isn't gonna be as accurate as 26 minutes per game (in a variety of games) when we are trying to determine what someone can do as a starter. It goes both ways, someone could under-perform or over-perform in the small sample size.

I'm not really going for a usage argument here. However the element that is glossed over consistently is the actual nature of the games being played. You touched on it but I think there is something to be said about the ease of competition. Stats acquired against the opposing team's third string in blowouts are probably of less significance when trying to predict a player's performance against superstar talent. The notion that someone could confidently say "Looking at JLin's rookie WP48 I was fully confident he would be capable of Linsanity with more minutes" seem facetious to me. It's a less than 300 minute sample size! In that case we may as well call Jeremy Evans the next star in this league! (Btw if he does become the next star in this league I will choke on my own words and maybe even bow down to the WoW gods... but hey...I put the chances of that at slim to none)

318 days ago

Picture?type=square

Brett Gunter

Robert,

"I just don't see how anyone can claim they foresaw _____" is not a statement of fact. It is not even an argument. It is simply saying you did NOT foresee the same thing--or perhaps that you don't believe it is possible. However, the numbers guru of the Wages of Wins network, Arturo Galletti, was on the Lin bandwagon before he ever played an NBA minute, and published posts to that effect.

There is a lot of material on the network now; if you were to peruse the archives, you might better understand some of the dismay with which your more subjective points are being met.

318 days ago

Default_profile_1_normal

Charles Connaughton

No one that I know of was saying 'based on his 300 minutes with the Warriors, I am confident that Jeremy Lin will be an above average starter in the NBA' - and I think anyone saying that is crazy. 300 minutes is just not enough to information to base that statement on.

On the other hand, quite a few people were saying 'in the 300 minutes Lin has played so far, he's done pretty well. Someone should sign him and give him more minutes to see if he is for real, because there's a decent chance he is' - which is exactly what GMs should do with limited sample set data. If they've looked promising so far, give them more minutes to see if they pan out! So in that sense, yeah, a lot of people saw Jeremy Lin coming. Not in idiotic, binary terms of 'I knew he was good!', but in the statistically based logic of him being a good bet for working out.

At this point, Lin has been an excellent player in college, he performed very well in the summer league after signing with the Warriors after the draft, he's played well in limited minutes with the Warriors, and after coming down from a furious start with the Knicks he ended up with respectable numbers there as well. Is that enough for me to say he's going to be great with the Rockets? No - the sample size is still small, and more importantly the reasons why he's been good in different situations have been very different. Still, betting against Lin is definitely taking the short side at this point, and I'd be very surprised if he flames out completely.

318 days ago

J_lin_normal

robert miller

Well Charles...you've made the point I made to all my fellow Knick fan friends about Lin. "I knew he was good in summer league and college and thought he deserved a chance." That sort of stance is rational...I think I'm more disappointed by the casual fan (that doesn't look at summer league or Harvard college stats) that felt they saw Lin coming because of 300 minutes. I don't think it's too nuts to take that as Shawn Ryan's stance given his post. Mind you, my whole response was really aimed at considering some of the more suspect points of Ryan's argument. Can you give a guy a chance based on 300 or so minutes of solid ball? Sure. Can you make the statement that the writing was on the wall and use the GS stats as definitive and singular proof of the Linsanity phenom? I think not. Charles....I AGREE with you.

@Brett, I know you believe in numbers and numbers only but you behave as if you never state any form of educated opinion on these forums or in general with regards to basketball. Most of the fun about discussing basketball is that different people have different philosophies. Of course, more educated philosophies are generally more useful....and I don't think that based on
Let me state my point differently:

If you said something to the effect that "I knew Jeremy Lin was a star in the making SOLELY after viewing his GS stats" I can't view you as a wholly rational individual. Yes the wp48 was higher....but the sample size was low and the quality of the minutes were suspect.

318 days ago

Nba-geek-avatar

Patrick Minton

You folks are still rationalizing.

Facts:

1) Lin has been above average in several samples of minutes
2) Dragic has been both above averag and also way below average in several samples of minutes.
3) There is some uncertainty about both players' futures

Opinions:

1) Garbage time minutes are not reliable samples
2) Lin was only good because of a system
3) Lin's future performance will be ________ because I'm ignoring the small sample.
4) Dragic's future performance will be ________ because I am ignoring some parts of Dragic's larger sample.

Occam's razor tells us that the most likely explanation for Lin being above average over those samples is that Lin is above average. There simply isn't any evidence (yet) to predict that he won't be.

There is, however, ample evidence for the case that Dragic is not that good OR bad, depending on which parts of his sample you use.

stating opinions about their future performance as if they were fact will not make it so.

318 days ago

J_lin_normal

robert miller

I feel like I need to beseech you to reread my posts. I'm not using any sort of singular means to say Lin is somehow way worse than Dragic. I'm saying both Dragic and Lin are comparable (nothing provocative there) and I actually think Dragic is slightly better. Your claims for Dragic being inconsistent are rooted in the less than 1/3 of his total minutes played that were well below average by WP48 standards. I can understand that. However, I am not stating pure opinions here. I'm looking at Pts, rebs, ast, stl, to, minutes, etc and evaluating what both players have done. Upon further examining the WP48 even I must admit the numbers for Dragic in that 1600 or so minutes of basketball were egregious.

I have examined the majority of stats garnered from games in which Dragic has played and an interesting pattern occurs. When he is given a good deal of minutes he tends to play like someone who deserves those minutes. As I stated earlier, when given starter's minutes....he performs like a starter. This extends even into the terrible periods that you've used to argue that he is risky. Lin's numbers and Dragic's numbers look unusually similar when looking at games in which they have played 25 or more minutes. And if you take the time to examine Dragic's games where he has started and Lin's games where he has started....Dragic wins the WP48 battle iirc.

As for the "opinions" on garbage time minutes we have a fundamental riff here. I refuse to believe that all minutes are made equal. There is a reason why things like ease rankings are created. When facing a bad team or bad competition a player is expected to perform at a higher level. This is an integral part of sports and statistics. If I cherry pick all of the games a player has played against terrible teams I should expect statistics that are much better than what that player might usually do. One's above average play in nine minutes in the 4th quarter of a 100-62 blowout against third stringers doesn't mean much to me or to many coaches. Lin's WP48 actually decreased in NY by a significant amount.

I AM NOT IGNORING ANY PART OF EITHER PLAYER'S SAMPLE. I recognize the good and bad points of each. I simply have a tad more confidence in Dragic because I'm looking a bit deeper than simply WP48. The presumption by you has consistently been that I'm coming up with these points out of my ass...This is just not the case. What you consider rationalizing or making excuses....I consider critical thinking and attempting to make sense of it all. The stats don't always stand alone. Otherwise, All GM's would be listening exclusively to everything you are saying. The fact that you are unwilling to accept any sort of critical breakdown of why stats are the way they are is not surprising to me....you are not here for that...you are here to purely browbeat the WP48 model as the end all be all. Fair enough...

I NEVER SAID LIN WAS ONLY GOOD BECAUSE OF A SYSTEM....My points have been exaggerated here quite a bit. Especially considering how much you guys love employing "facts". I didn't even state his good numbers were owed solely to D'Antoni...I merely acknowledged the presence of a coach that runs a nice offense. I don't really know what to say here. One of the points noted in "Wages of Wins" and "Stumbling On Wins" is that the results will fly in the face of "conventional wisdom" and indeed they often do....but there is a reason why "conventional wisdom" is just that. I would love to exist within the pure and unadulterated WoW world wherein everyone is following your model and everything happens according to your plans but this isn't the way it works. Deviation occurs...and many times it occurs for some of the reasons I've expressed (I wonder why Troy Murphy was so bad in NJ a couple years back?)

"stating opinions about their future performance as if they were fact will not make it so."
Indeed. I never claimed to be stating my projections as fact. Even in WP48 you can't claim your projections as fact. You can only call them educated guesses. I'm not Nostradamus....in fact....Nostradamus wasn't Nostradamus if you see what I'm getting at.....

Beside opinion points 2, 3, and 4 being poor representations of what I said....I feel like everything I'm saying is being framed as the most hard-line stance possible. I'm not purporting anything in a hard manner. I'm not the hard-line guy here....if anything the overwhelming lionizing of the WP48 causes you (Frank) to ignore some of the points I'm making entirely as conjecture. My original point was to say that Goran Dragic's contract is worthy of being on the list by comparing him to Lin. I don't think Dragic is the second coming of Chris Paul or anything but I'm confident that 7.5m/yr is money fairly well spent in an effort to both have a solid PG and stay above the cap minimum. I said a lot of things in my previous posts....many of those things were completely hazed over and it seems like you formulated this exotic view of where I'm coming from.

In addition...Zoey recently posted that the 15m balloon payment may not even be there for Lin so that may slightly mitigate the value of the contract.

318 days ago

251536_10150207588359904_507379903_6941019_7228358_n_normal

J. Sherman

The CBA's so-called Arenas provision allows the Rockets to take an even cap hit each season (in this case, just over $8 million)....pretty big part of the analysis

317 days ago

Nba-geek-avatar

Patrick Minton

Robert,

Please don't make me put a character limit on comments. I'm way too busy to write that kind of code, but good god, your comments are longer than many of my articles :P

316 days ago

J_lin_normal

robert miller

My apologies...it's very difficult to be curt and not reductive. I'm trying to be reasonable and respectful while also making my point. Long-windedness is just a curse. Good luck on that code.

316 days ago


You must be signed in to leave a comment.