OT - Kleiza to Europe. Nuggets weaker?

I think Denver will be at least a bit worse, from the losses of Jones and Kleiza. Neither was an impact player, but they added some needed depth. Losing them and not adding anyone of note downgrades them a little. One of their best players, Billups, has a relatively high chance of declining a bit. Kenyon Martin has been declining slowly but steadily since his peak in 2003. And Nene is always a major injury risk.

Overall, I think things went very right for Denver last season. Losing a couple of useful players, factoring in reasonably expected decline from key players and the possible risk of losing their third-best player for an extended period (Nene), I would peg Denver at somewhere around 48-50 wins. Not a huge step back, but a significant one, still.

 

It's not about who I would trade or not, it's about someone saying Denver had no bench compared to ours. Their bench isn't that much different from ours.


Basketball only, I would trade Birdman for Joel. I would not trade Rudy for Afflalo

 

Really? They seem to be about as productive as each other. The birdman is a better offensive player and shot blocker, Joel is a better defensive player (other than blocks) and rebounder. Add the fact that Joel is actually younger and bigger and was just as efficient when his usage% was much lower than the birdman - and even if we ignore the birdman's volatility - Joel seems like a better guy to have...

Don't get me wrong - the birdman is fun to watch and it is an interesting human story - but as a basketball player? I just do not see him as a better player than Joel.

Gut feeling - Joel will see his offensive output go up just as Oden will with a PG that actually looks to pass the ball into the paint...

 

To be honest, I think you're reaching on a bunch of those comparisons above. I don't think of Balkman as a legit NBA contributor, like I do Webster. I always feel there is an underlying fallacy in comparing PER 36 stats. And the idea that you consider Rudy and Afflalo as equals is baffling to me.

 

Pure salary dump. Stan Kroenke is tired of paying luxury tax. Even after letting Kleiza walk and dumping Hunter, the Nuggets look to be about 500K over the luxury tax threshold. So look for another give away to dump a little more salary.

BNM

 

I agree with Charley Rose on this one. Birdman is a stat monger who constantly checks how many blocks he as during the course of the game. He's a show boater who's more worried about his stats than playing actual defense. Yeah, he gets a lot of weak side blocks, but he also leaves his man unguarded and unboxed out when going for the help side block. Remember LaMarcus dunking on him after he swatted Rudy's shot? That's Chris Andersen in a nut shell - lots of weak side blocks on smaller players, but can't actually stop the man he's (supposedly) guarding.

Joel is a MUCH better defender and a better rebounder. He's also not one failed drug test away from a lfetime ban. Andersen is more fun to watch, but Joel will help you win more games. I'd take Joel any day over Andersen.

BNM

 

It sounds like the wildly inconsitent and equally immature J.R. Smith has had a rather eventful summer.

This is not the kind of player I want to rely on night in and night out as my starting SG. He has all the talent in the world, but I'm not sure he'll ever get his head on straight. He reminds me a lot of J.R. Rider - great talent, but immature, poor decision making that leads to tons of problems off the court.

BNM

 

It was a luxury tax move that saved them a little over $7MM.

 

Not only is Balkman a good rather then poor wing defender, but he's got a career 14.7 PER compared to Martell's 11.2

you are very wrong here

STOMP

 

You won't change some views. Some will always think Portland's players are better than they are, and all other players are garbage.

 

At the same time, PERS does not make a player. If you needed a 3 pointer would you rather have Balkman shoot it or Webster? See? It's all about what they are asked to do for their team.

Secondly, Webster is 2 years younger than Balkman and actually has some offensive skills. Balkman gets all his points by being a garbage man. I don't see a garbage man being useful on this team, and in most cases players who are garbage men are only useful on teams where there is so much offensive talent on the floor that they don't have to worry about it. Last year Portland basically had 2 garbage man type players in the starting unit and it cost the team when they faced a superior defensive team in the playoffs. You can only afford one garbage man type player to be on the floor at once when playing good teams. They will shut down your main options and make your secondary guys score. If those guys can't score, then your fucked.

 

the only thing Martell has on Balkman is his outside shot... everything else is just as slanted the other way.

If it were offered, I'd trade MW for Balkman in a heartbeat and laugh the rest of the day.

STOMP

 

Balkman hasn't averaged over 15 min/game in his three seasons . . . to analze him through PERS I think is missing the big picture. Balkman was third string behind Anthony and Kleiza.

He will get his shot this year . . . but up to this point he is playing less games each season and not very many minutes.

 

If PER is one-all, be-all for Martell, one case I see in favor of him is the career of Joe Johnson, who had a PER of 11.7 in his first couple seasons in the NBA, and now look at him. He got up to 13.9 PER at 22, and then took off.

Not saying Martell is going to be Joe Johnson, but age 23 and up seems to be when guys finally realize their potential, and we see whether they can play or not. And this is where Martell is. His foot injury is a big concern, though. But the guy's got some talent to be a solid role/rotation player, or else current management wouldn't have offered him a four-year extension just last summer.

Here's some other guys who had good careers, but who had below average PERs at their respective ages around Martell's, and then blew up:

Glen Rice, age 22, 11.3 PER
Mark Price, age 22, 11.3 PER
Danny Ainge, age 24 10.4 PER
Jeff Hornacek, age 23, 11.2 PER
Steve Smith, age 22, 12.5 PER
Dell Curry, age 22, 11.3 PER
Joe Dumars, age 23, 11.9 PER
Dan Majerle, age 23, 11.3 PER
Hubert Davis, age 22, 8.7 PER
John Starks, age 23, 10.3 PER
Joe Johnson, age 21, 11.6 PER

 

Just currious, but how many years had those players been in the league? Martell has been in the league 3 years.

 

For Joe Johnson - it was his 2nd year, for Dell Curry, his first.

The issue is that Joe Johnson always had the lateral movement and ball handling that Webster has not shown - so the comparison is questionable, in my mind.

Webster would love to be a long-range shooter like Curry, but Curry had a PER of 15 by his 2nd season and 18 on his 3rd.

 

I think losing Kleiza and Jones definitely makes them a little weaker, Jones was a decent wing defender and Kleiza could stretch the floor with his outside shooting which helped to open the lane for other players. At first glance I'd say it doesn't exactly cripple them, but if they endure any significant injuries the holes are going to be much harder to mask.

 

It's not comparing Joe Johnson the skillset vs Martell's skillset. It's the fact that for some players who had nice careers, their PERs don't take off until after the age of 23.
Honestly, I find PERs overrated as the one-all, be-all to determine a player's worth. It's definitely part of the whole equation but not the one thing that determines all.