I can see where you are coming from, but Batum's NBA play is far from potential - and his actual advanced statistics are better than Deng all-around. Batum's 2nd year PER is better than any of Deng's years PER but 1, Batum's WS/48 score is higher than any of Deng's years and he does it with a much lower usage% than Deng. Deng is far from the worst contract in the NBA as some paint him - but Batum is already a more efficient player than Deng - while being younger and used less. No disrespect to Deng - but if I had a horse in this race - it would be Batum.
Your analogy doesn't quite wash because you are comparing Chandler to Batum when one was not even an NBA player and the other has already played a couple of seasons in the league. Granted Nic hasn't yet logged 30+ minutes a game in a season, but he has shown that he can hit the three pointer as a large part of his repetoire (versus Deng's very occasional 3 as a ratio to his total field goal attempts), Deng has also shown himself to be a consistent injury risk. Batum had trouble with his shoulder last year too, so that might be a push, but when you are talking about a guy on their rookie scale deal versus a guy set to make 50+ million for the next 4 years, one injury risk is a lot easier to stomach versus another. And really if history has taught us anything every team has to consider CBA economics until they've found the formula that generates championship caliber squads, if you hamstring yourself before you've tapped into that particular mix of players (such as the Lakers have found) then you lose flexibility and you end up looking a lot like the Hornets.
Yes, because you traded a proven player for someone who had not been in the NBA yet. Big difference. So same amount of All-NBA defensive team votes? But Deng has been in the league for 6 years, and plays in central time, in Chicago. Batum has played 1.5 years, on pacific time in Portland. Hmm, I'll take the p-p-p-potential, and the consideration when nobody seems him as an equal defender in Batum, for 10 million less a year, thanks.
A) Of course Batum and ____ could get us Nash. B) Seriously? You want to give up a 22 year old kid who is already our best defensive player for a year rental on Steve Nash? Yikes.
I try to keep an open mind about these things. The first thing I would remind people is Deng is a proven scorer with playoff experience. The second thing I would remind folks about is that Batum is capable of playing multiple positions, and one thing that has crossed my mind occasionally is the fact that last summer he took the place of Tony Parker as the PG for the French National team. I also think Deng would be an awesome 6th man. Think of it this way. Martell is gone. Wouldn't Deng make a hell of an uprade?
After this years free agent feeding frenzy I don't think his salary is really that bad. Luol Deng is only 25 years old, and averaging about 18 points and 7 boards a game. When was the last time we had a small forward who averaged that? They must feel strongly about signing a free agent guard if they think they can move Bayless/Joel and pull this off.
The problem I see with this is Nate would play Deng to much and Batum not enough. I don't want anybody to take any minutes from Batum unless his name is Lebron not Deng.
Yea I don't trust Nate either. But I still think he is an upgrade over the previous player. I also think he is insurance in case Batum get's hurt again.
I just don't see how he makes any sense if we still have Batum. Like I said earlier, this has to be a precursor to another move that involves Batum Nic is not a backup. Dung is too expensive to not start. But then again this is all probably a moot point -- this was all started by O-Live for fuck sakes!
Which is what makes it even funnier. That's the state of ESPN's sports journalism at this point, newspaper message boards equal, "The Oregonian is reporting."
Just for fun's sake, let's say this rumor is true. Let's also say that NOH ownership really plans on keeping Paul but would be willing to trade Collison for Batum. Takers?
