stats say he got both more assists and less TO's per minute his rookie year then any of Martell's first three. I can read the bottom line on the eye chart STOMP
Nico is going to be a star in the league. I'd put bank on it. If Martell can simply play at the level of a good backup, we are set at the position. I have higher expectations for Martell than many. I expect Martell to have his best season, and that includes shooting. IMO his previous shooting problems were mostly mental. Supposedly he's past that. We'll see.
I realize that, as it has been pointed out many times. I usually trust and use stats, but if my gut feeling/eye test or whatever you want to call it goes against the stats, I will trust it more. Unless it is like ridiculous. My stance may be slightly irrational but I don't see it as ridiculous. If people want, I will come out and say I was wrong if it turns out that I am.
he wasn't that great offensively, but he was a little better then Martell ever was and much better on D. This year he won't be a skinny 19 year old rookie who barely speaks english, but he'll still be teammates with some solid players who deserve minutes. Rudy specifically deserved PT which pushed Brandon to SF more then ever before and Roy is the best player on the club. Now a bit seasoned and reaping the benefits of a year in the league, I'm looking forward to seeing more of Nic playing alongside Roy & Rudy. STOMP
I think the place where you really saw what Nic can do on defense was not against small-forwards, but against point guards and star small-guards. He is versatile enough to play defense on 3 (maybe 4) positions - but he was just too weak to do the same great job against small-forwards that he did against PGs and small-guards. I suspect this will change and we will see him doing a much better job guarding other players, even the stronger, bigger small-forwards. Look at it this way - in his rookie year, Nic had a defensive win score of 1.6 in 1454 minutes of play. In his 3rd year, Webster had a defensive win score of 1.6 in 2132 minutes of play... - this right there shows you the difference between them defensively...
Batum rarely defended PG's and PF's last year. I don't know where people got the idea that he was actually good at guarding either position. What, that they are comparable defenders at the moment? Youth is pretty much irrelevant, Webster is only 22, and since we're in a position to win now, I'd rather take the better player on offense, Webster. One more thing, since when did Batum become a better three point shooter than Webster? Last year, he took 168 attempts, and made 62 of them, 36.9%. In Webster's second season, Webster shot 250 threes and made 91 of them, 36.4%. In Webster's third season, he took 317 threes and made 123 of them, 38.8%. Also, Webster is more apt at attacking the basket. In his first year, he averaged 2.4 FTA per 36 mins. Webster also improved his FTA in the following years. In Batum's rookie season, Batum averaged 1.3 FTA per 36 minutes. Neither are great at it, but still, Webster is better. And while it's true that Batum shot a higher FG% overall, he shoots a lot less than Webster, and if they were to take around the same number of shots, Batum's FG% would be dragged down as well. It's not that I'm saying Webster is great by any means, but I'd rather have his decent offense than Batum's passive no-factor offense. His lack of offensive ability really hurt us last season, and is one of the reason's he couldn't get more minutes even though he was the only true SF on our team last year.
Nic usually guarded the opponent's tougher wing each night, and that wasn't necessarily the SF. Heck I'm recalling Tony Parker lighting up the Blazers early on in the season... they then played a couple games close together vs the Spurs where Nic spent a good deal of time shadowing TP with pretty decent results. Like I said, the opinion of his D is pretty unanimous... keep being a Webster homer if you must. STOMP
And Webster didn't? It was more by design, since either Webster or Roy had to guard the star player, and they didn't want Roy getting tired out. Kind of the same situation with Batum too. And the game against the Spurs, Batum guarded Parker for like 3 possessions and then after the game (Batum) said there was no way he could keep up with Parker for more than a few plays. He was "too quick".
That isn't what that defensive win scores stat showed. It showed that Batum racked up the same defensive win score as Webster in about half the minutes played. That suggests that Batum is nearly twice as effective on defense. There's not much evidence that Webster is better on offense. The only thing in his favour is that he scored more points on more shots on a significantly worse team. He's not better, he's about the same. Considering that's supposed to be Webster's ace in the hole ability, that doesn't make Webster's case very effectively. Batum's FG% and TS% (which factors in free throws and three-pointers) are superior and Webster's usage rate wasn't that much higher. Both Webster and Batum are passive players on offense. The differences are: 1. Batum strikes almost everyone as a significantly better defender and 2. Webster hasn't improved his offense in three years, limiting his upside projection, while Batum can be expected to improve from his age-19 rookie season. Even if Batum's efficiency is brought down by more shots, that would simply bring him down to Webster's efficiency levels, while providing the same offensive contribution. Meanwhile, Batum will be providing more on defense. And that assumes zero improvement from Batum, which I find unlikely.
1500/2100 =/= half. More like 1-1/3 better. No he's not. Webster shot a significantly higher volume, and at a better %. And yet, he still couldn't get more than 20 minutes a game, even though his TS% was higher than Outlaw's, Aldridge's, and (surprisingly) Roy's 1st and second seasons. Damn, he's so efficient, why can't he play more and get more shots? I still don't agree that Batum provides the same offensive production. Batum, more often than not, did not even command a defender. But hey, whatever. Batum just isn't that special in my eyes. I'll let his play speak for itself this upcoming season.
Yeah, I just quickly eye-balled the numbers. It's actually about 1.5x better, not 2x better. The point is, significantly better. He was still only shooting open shots. He was creating nothing. Webster was on a team with fewer scoring options than Batum, so got more shots. Batum can hit open shots as well and at a substantially similar rate. Outlaw has a different skillset, he can create shots against defenders, something Batum and Webster can't do. If you want to argue about Batum and Outlaw, at least Outlaw can do something Batum can't (yet). But I see nothing Webster can do that Batum can't. Webster is no better at creating offense, he's an equally passive shooter and only slightly better at that. So there's nothing compelling to recommend Webster over Batum, considering Batum can defend. Crazy exaggeration. He occasionally didn't draw a defender and when he didn't, he often made the defense pay with a three. Most of the time, he had a defender on him, which meant he passed the ball. Webster does the same thing--shoot if he's open, pass the ball if not. Webster has been doing that for all three full seasons he's played. Batum may actually improve.
Well firstly, how do you "create" threes? Don't you just mainly shoot open shots? Fewer scoring options? The only other person I can think of is Rudy, and that's balanced out by Webster playing with Jarrett Jack. I suppose there's Oden...but we all know how many times he touched the ball. It's more like the other players were just shooting more with Batum in the lineup. I'm just saying efficiency isn't the be all end all of offensive ability. At the very least, Webster drew 2x as many foul shots as Batum, showing that he at least shows more intiative to drive the ball rather than shoot everything. (Webster also drew more foul shots than Outlaw too btw, expect for this past season) Webster puts the ball on the floor more and is generally more aggressive on offense. You can see it from games, you can see it from foul shot performance, and you can see it from shots p/36. Batum - 9. Webster - 11. And how much do you realistically expect Batum to improve? Usually the one thing that allows a player to improve is minutes, as in a 10+ mpg boost, and I have a very hard time seeing Batum getting 30 minutes per game. Even though I prefer Webster over Batum, I feel Rudy is better than both (and the coaching staff probably thinks the same too), and is more deserving of minutes than either Webster or Batum. As such, Roy will be moved more towards the SF position, and that means less minutes for Batum and Webster.
Roy and Aldridge became significantly better, leading them to taking more shots (which would have happened whether Webster or Batum were at small forward). More shots to Roy and Aldridge, shots by Rudy and more shots taken by the center position in general...that definitely leaves fewer shots for offensively-limited players like Batum and Webster. Foul shots are factored into TS%. By "creating" and "aggression," I am, of course, referring to effective creation. Webster may have tried to attack more than Batum, but it didn't yield superior results. I think it is probably true that Batum's efficiency would drop if he took as many shots as Webster...but it's not like Webster was taking 17 shots per game. I think the slightly more shots/points generated by Webster are pretty proportional to the slightly better efficiency by Batum. I think if Batum took as many shots as Webster, his efficiency wouldn't fall below Webster's. That's a major factor in a significant improvement in raw stats. Development (skills improving, muscle added, experience with NBA speed) is what leads to actual improvement. I don't know if Batum will play 30 MPG. I think he should, because Portland was a top offense last year with Batum playing...if they want to improve their defense, I think they should play Batum, their best perimeter defender, more. But however many minutes he plays, I expect him to be better in those minutes...more effective on offense, more effective on defense. I agree that Rudy is better right now, but I think Batum is the better talent and will close the gap significantly on Rudy over the next couple of years. If anyone's minutes are lost (from last year's team), I'd want it to be Outlaw (though he can and should suck up all minutes that went to Frye/Diogu/Ruffin/Randolph). I don't see a lot of minutes for Webster. Regardless of which of us is right, Webster is certainly no difference-maker on offense. Considering that he's also a mediocre defender, I think he'll have a hard time getting serious minutes. Unless he's improved a lot since 2007-08, which is possible and would be great...I just wouldn't bet on it.
Don't see it. Aldridge, for the most part, stayed exactly the same (and took the same 15.3 shots per game). Shots taken by Rudy were also taken by Jarrett Jack. Offense from the center was mainly from offensive putbacks. The reason we got more offense at the center position was because Oden+Przybilla gobble up offensive rebounds. The only one who got significantly better was Roy, and he only took one extra shot per game. And I would argue that the extra shots taken by Roy and to a lesser extent, Blake, were to cover up for the loss of some of last years offensive options like Jack and Jones. Batum's TS% was only .07% higher, so it's not as if Batum blew Webster away. And even then, it was mainly because Webster took much more shots than Batum. FTA just shows that Webster wasn't as limited to open jumpers as Batum was. (Both of them really are limited to jumpers, but Webster less so) The Blazers were a good offensive team in general, and it had less to do with Batum than it did with every other player on the team. His contributions on that end are much less than of Blake's, Roy's, Joel's, Aldridge's etc., and I don't think that can be disputed. Next year, I expect him to become a better defender, but I don't think he will improve his incredibly raw offense. We disagree then. Rudy has a much better feel for the game, obviously that comes with his age and experience. I think we have a chance to win within the next few years, so I'm willing to put off developing Batum (and Webster) if it means more minutes for Rudy. I agree. He'll take up the 12 minutes at PF that Aldridge doesn't play, and the 4-5 minutes that the crappers played. Even still, you know McMillan is going to play him some at SF every game, even if he says otherwise. No, but he's still significantly more effective than Nicolas in my opinion. I don't expect him to win the starting position right off the bat, since he is coming back from a significant injury. In the end, I don't see many minutes for Webster or Batum, but I'd rather have Webster playing those limited minutes.
That does not mean it is right. Do you believe everything a bunch of other people believe just because they believe it. That PER rating is very telling to me, as the vast majority of the time Batum was guarding SFs. There is no evidence to say that Batum is THAT MUCH better than Webster at defense. And in my opinion, Webster has more potential on defense than Batum does, if only because of his body type. It is also my opinion that Webster is better/more versatile on offense. And I do not deny that I am a Webster fan. But I am also a Batum fan and I just see Webster as the better player.
