No. But, you said putting him there without practicing the offense seems unfair to him. What aspects of the Nate's offense does he need to learn to be able to play that position? To me, there it isn't really a different role within the offense in regards to being labeled a SG and SF. The biggest hurdle for SF's playing SG is their ability to stay with SG's defensively.
Well, if that's how you feel, please explain why that is the case. Break down some tape. I assume there is a reason that most NBA players have defined positions in the NBA. If Nate has no difference between the SG and SF in his sets, tell me why, and I'll join the "start Batum at SG" brigade.
Generally, a SG is placed at that position because of his size and ability to put the ball on the floor and create, along of course with the ability to defend the position. Its changed over the years in that just because of a players size doesn't necessarily mean they have to be put in that position. In Nate's offense its mainly predicated on ISO and pick and roll to Aldridge. Not much player movement off ball in halfcourt sets. I don't think the SG and SF position are really much different in Nate's system. Batum is better at putting the ball on the floor than the alternative in Matthews. I think the transition would be seamless. I've seen the lineup as Crawford, Batum, Wallace, Aldridge, Camby on a few occasions and we played really good ball.
I meant "where he is accustomed to playing". What does Matthews do at that position that Nic can't do as well or better?
As has been mentioned PER is highly biased towards offensive contributions. So, players who can score, but suck at other things (like defense) tend to have inflated PERs. I look at PER, but also place an even higher value on WS/48. It's not perfect, but it weights offense and defense equally. The usual caveat about small sample size applies, but the level of direct competition should also be considered. Guys who play mostly against second unit players, or exclusively garbage time minutes will have inflated WS/48 numbers, which just basically says our 12th man is better than your 12th man. Another good single number stat is the Net Production stats at 82games.com. It basically rates a players production against the guys he's guarding. Same caveats about sample size and quality of opposition apply. I wouldn't use either of these stats in isolation. Keep in mind the Steve Novaks of the world don't spend a lot of time guarding LeBron James, Kevin Durant and Carmelo Anthony. Gerald Wallace guards those guys night in and night out. Of the guys you list, Jared Dudely is the only full time starter, he's actually a pretty decent player, but he still falls short of Gerald Wallace in both WS/48 and Net Production. Here's a comparison, between Gerald Wallace and the other four you mentioned: Gerald Wallace: WS/48 = .143 Net Production = +5.5 Corey Brewer: WS/48 = .138 Net Production = +2.8 Steve Novak: WS/48 = .185 Net Production = -2.5 Jared Dudley: WS/48 = .135 Net Production = +4.6 Tracy McGrady WS/48 = .134 Net Production = +4.4 So, Wallace, as a starter is out performing all the other guys listed, only one who is playing a similar role (starter) against comparable competition (other starting small forwards). For the record, Nicolas Batum excels in both of these areas (second on the team in both to LaMarcus Aldrdidge). Nicolas Batum: WS/48 = .198 Net Production = +6.1 BNM
It can be easily argued that Wes has trouble at SG, and one could ask who would do better? Nic is shooting way better than Wes, has at least as good a handle (probably better). Is SG Nic's best position? No, it's probably SF. But it appears likely he could play the SG position better than WES and this allows Wallace to play and start at SF. Wes is currently no threat for outside and Nic is which helps the starting unit, and Nic can guard both guard positions as well or probably better than Wes. I don't understand why you would not at least try Nic starting at SG?
Wallaces' lack of an outside shot hurts the team. When we start Felton/Wallace/Matthews/Camby our outside shooting has to be the worst in league. Call it slumping or whatever you want for Matthews and Felton but it's been that was almost all season. One IMO very strong argument for starting NIC is getting our best outside shooter into a lineup that BADLY needs it.
As mentioned before whether its Nic "natural" position or not there is nothing that Wes does drastically or at all better that Nic wouldnt be able to at this "un-natural" position for Batum. In fact Nic would do most things better and some things far better. And this is all right now with Nic not "knowing" this position. Putting him there now doesnt hurt the team at all it only makes us better and Nic would only get better there as time went on. Wes has proven he can be a very production bench player. I dont see a single reason, not one, why this isnt stupidly obvious to Nate. In fact if Nic was 6'4" we wouldnt even be having this conversation. But here is the stupid thing, the fact that Nic is in fact 6'8" only works in his favor. I understand that this is on a totally totally different level but its like telling Magic Johnson, "Sorry buddy, you're 6'9" so you need to play the SF position." Another thing about Nic, his defense and specifically his blocked shots on the break flat erase guaranteed points for the other team. So for the people that say that playing him 6-10 more minutes a game wouldnt mean anything it very could be one saved bucket and we sure seem to be struggling in close games right now so I would take a few extra defensive stops at this point.
I think Batum should start at SG. A few reasons. 1.) that will light a fire under Matthews ass. Hopefully Matthews took up the challenge to get his starting job back. 2.) being SG gives you the best opportunity to help defend. That's something Batum has really mastered IMO. 3.) so far he has been our only consistent shooter. Shooting guard = shooter. I love Matthews but lets be real here. The dude has been playing like shit this season. Something needs to happen or we will lose Batum. Yeah I know he's restricted. I mean more mentally.
I will repeat that starting Ray-Wes-Wallace-Camby is simply an awful outside shooting lineup and frankly those guys aren't all that good at taking it inside either, IMO this just reinforces to me just how good LMA is playing given how poorly his teamates are shooting!
So Nate has been willing to play Nic at the 2 for spot or limited minutes so that makes me really wish someone could ask Nate, "So Nate, if you are willing to play him there in limited minutes what do you feel you would lose by playing him there extensively???? What would be the drawbacks or concerns? Wait wait Nate, let me get my pen and pad ready for all these insightful reasons. Annnnnnddddddd .... go ..."
So it is by pure chance that Lebron, CP3, Kobe, Wade, Durant, Rose, Howard and Aldridge are in the top 10 in the league in PER? Do you not consider all of those players top 20 players in the league? If you consider those players near the top of the league, it seems pretty obvious that PER isn't "meaningless".
You and I have had debates over the internals surrounding PER, and what impacts it, but I think we both agree that in terms of assessing play over a variety of factors, PER is clearly the best measure of a player in terms of offensive efficiency compared to other players.
Word. It's not the be-all, end-all, but... it's definitely a valuable piece of the puzzle in looking at players. Ed O.
Yes. It isn't perfect, and doesn't incorporate every aspect of the game. But is a reasonable tool for grouping and roughly comparing players.
Jeremy Lin is 7th in the league in PER. Also, Aldridge is 10th but only barely behind Dwight Howard at 9th. Shame Lin didn't get his chance a few weeks ago. He would've been voted in by the fans to the All Star team.
