Who would you trade CJ McCollum for?

Well, here's my thought: Is CJ a point guard? Not in the same vein as a Westbrook or a Wall or even a Lillard, but he has enough playmaking ability to get by and I think he plays better with the ball in his hands. He's not going to average 8+ assists per game, but I think he could put up 5 to 6, to go along with 24 points and 4-5 rebounds. He's an Arenas. Prolific scorer, capable passer, but not really a true point guard.

 

He's a true six man....a guy who can score in bunches without worrying about running the team as a point guard..younger, taller Mo Williams..

 

Comparing him to Mo is selling him short...... by a lot.

Arenas is actually a very good comparison for him. If you look at his numbers, Arenas' career averages are 20 ppg, 5.3 assists, and 3.9 rebounds. I could see CJ putting those numbers up. In his best seasons, Arenas averaged between 25 and 29 ppg, 5-6 assists, and 3.5 to 4.5 rebounds. I think that could be CJ's ceiling if he were the go-to-guy.

 

I actually don't think it is....Mo was a spark plug off the bench who could score in bunches..we got old Mo..when he was younger with the Cavs and went to the finals with Lebron...you'd see more of what I'm talking about. CJ is a better talent, but it's the role of the six man more than the skillset I'm using as a comparison

 

I guess I just disagree. I think he could be the starting point guard and the primary scorer for a team. His run while Dame was out was very impressive.

 

I think he's fairly similar to someone like Kyrie.

 

The situation with Dame and Crabbe reminds me of a not-dysfunctional version of Damon/Rider/Anthony.

 

I could see that, although I guess we'll see if he can be sturdier than Kyrie.

 

in that they're both short, have great handles, and play basketball. Sure. lol

They're games are so far apart it's crazy. Kyrie= elite interior finisher that consistently breaks guys down off the dribble with a solid midrange game. But he wants to take you to the rim as his go to. That sets everything else up. CJ is the exact opposite. His go to is his jumper and his handle is based on getting free to do just that. Kyrie is 53% at the rim right now, and that's low for him. CJ is 46% at the rim (Restricted Area) 7% may not seem like much but that's huge over the course of a season.

 

This.

 

What was Arenas' career average at the rim compared to outside shots?

 

Arenas was stupid good inside AT THE RIM- inside the restricted area he was ~60%(he also took nearly 1/4 of his shots over his career from there). His in-between game was meh, but he took less than 10% of his shots from there so the dude knew his weaknesses. He was a career 35% 3 point shooter and he took about 35% of his shots from there too- so he was ahead of his time as far as the analytics bubble is concerned. If you want to compare him to someone today- he was more Harden than anyone else in my eyes. But Gilbert is a strange case just b/c he's... well... Gilbert.

 

go back and read- I've demonstrated it about 4 times now. Keep up man!

 

That's fine, I appreciate your data. But that still doesn't change my view of CJ, and my position on whether I would trade him.

He creates his own shot at will, and is good at the rim. Dame gets rejected often because he telegraphs his moves and often isn't as creative at the rim as CJ. IMO.

Without CJ, we'd have nobody to create their own shot except Dame.

 

I won't argue most of those points. But the fact is he's not good at the rim. CJ himself has said as much.

Your assumption is that if CJ is traded the player coming back wouldn't be able to create their own shot? That's how I take that last sentence at least. If that were the case, that incoming player better be incredibly overwhelming in other areas to compensate for that.

I think far too many people are reading this as me wanting to trade CJ, or I don't like CJ, or something completely out of context.

I LIKE CJ. End. Period.

However, one can like a player and still critically analyze them. I can at one time appreciate all the positive things about him as a player, yet still recognize his shortcomings. That can in fact happen. Just to clear that up.

 

No offense because I really do enjoy your posts as they offer a different perspective, but they seem to be based purely on analytics. And although numbers are helpful, they don't tell the whole story. So sorry if we don't all bow down to them.

 

Sorry, I meant more statistically than stylistically. I don't see him ever being arenas( 25-28 and 6), but see him above mo (17 and 6). Which is about kyrie-ish. 21, 22 and 6.

 

gotcha, my mistake! I can see him on that stat line for sure. Makes perfect sense.

 

I would never ask anyone to bow down to anything. But there are analytics. There are facts. And there are gut feelings.

For example. CJ doesn't finish well inside is a fact. That's not some insider information or driven off any kind of optical data from Synergy. Personally, I use facts and analytics to see if what my eyes tell me is happening is in fact real, or if I'm perceiving something incorrectly or out of context. It may appear I'm basing it on analytics but I watch the games- over and over and over. Then I go back and look at specific clips. Then I take the context and weigh that against the data. I could do that in my writing, but that would take an already long and arduous read and make it even longer. I don't claim to have the holy grail of analytics either- there have been plenty of things I've been wrong on. However, I've learned from those instances and now- before I make a statement on something I try to have a fully formed opinion backed by not only the data but what my eyes tell me is going on. However, if I'm going to differ- I'll always side with the data in decision making. Why? Because the smartest people in sports, and the world do so.

"Bringing this back to basketball, both R.C. Buford and Del Harris (who were both a part of this panel), were in agreement when it came to making decisions based on preparation and data vs. gut feeling. For Buford, he tends to shy away from gut decisions because it makes it harder to take a step back and analyze those decisions after the fact. If you get the decision wrong, you don’t know why, but maybe more importantly, if you get it correct, you don’t know how to duplicate it."

Gut Data vs Decision Making - from the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

I get it- some people want to rely on their gut instinct. I do it as well. I just try to back up what my brain is telling me against what the data is telling me to make any real sense of it. Don't for one second sit there and think I' m just some guy crunching numbers on basketball. Sit down and watch a game with me sometime, see if you think I'm just the data nerd, guarantee you'll have a different opinion

 

Nothing advanced, his FG% 0-3 is 49%. Pretty bad to make under half of your shots from that range.