I don't see what's wrong with rooting on to see one of our players succeed. He was set to be the starter at the beginning of just last season. We haven't gotten to see him play with Oden, with Rudy, and now a guy like Andre Miller who can open things up for him and set him up. Seems like Nicolas has developed the same type of cult following. If I had choose, though, who had more of an upside, it'd be Batum. For a 19-year-old rookie from France who had to step in at starter, he did great. In terms of NBA starting SFs, however, he wasn't 'that' great.
has anyone said he was great? What posters have pointed out is that he was a better SF at 19 then Martell was in any of his 3 years in the league. The cult of Blazer fans tend to back their bright young prospects who happen to be the club's best option at their respective position. Also, I'm reading you trumpeting Martell as having the "best pure stroke from the outside". If you're just talking the aesthetics of having pretty form then I probably agree, but results are a different matter. His career 3 point % is 37% just like Batum's. Last season Blake 43% Rudy 40% Travis 38% & Roy 38% all did better. Last season without Martell Portland was one of the better % and most prolific 3 point shooting teams in the league. STOMP
Yeah, I like Batum too, but among starting small forwards, he was probably in the bottom third. Blake was in the bottom fifth among point guards. Pretty cool that we won 54 games anyway. It's really exciting to think we've moved from (around) the 25th best starting PG to (around) the 11th, and just from natural progression our SF will move up at least a few slots too. I can't wait for this season to start.
Yeah, the results and percentages have been discussed a great deal on this board. With Martell, he has the tools to be one of the best 3-point shooters on the team I still believe. Being 22, I still view him as a prospect with upside to his game barring his health. And just like baseball, scouts are going to pick the guy with the best stroke and balance at the plate. Or the pitcher with the best mechanics. Obviously some fail, and there are other guys that have gotten it done in other ways. For every guy with a great stroke like Glen Rice or Dell Curry who could play, there are guys like Randolph Childress and Marcus Brown who couldn't. For me, I see a guy like Martell who's increased his 3-point field goal percentage every year, and his point production with increased minutes. He may not be efficient in doing it yet, but I don't think many players who were 20-21 years old are unless you're LeBron James. I'm just giving the guy the benefit of the doubt. If for some reason he doesn't cut it and just disappears again, or the injury has really affected his game and he can't go, I have no problem letting him loose or claiming he can't play. I'm not going to be arguing for him at age 29 if he's the same Martell than he was at 21, but I think right now he still has the game to be successful and be the starter at SF if he's healthy.
where do you get that Childress couldn't play??? He was a tremendous shooter with the sort of ice water in his veins that I only wish Martell possessed. But unfortunately like so many other talents before him, dude's career was derailed by repeated injuries (specifically multiple knee ligament tears). I'm not sure how many scouts you talk to but I'm pretty sure they don't just value form when picking a guy. Other important factors include athleticism, reaction time, coordination, and aptitude of the various mental parts of the game/competition. you're more then giving him the benefit of the doubt if you're projecting him as the starter let alone an effective one. As a 19 year old rookie with culture/language issues, Batum was decidedly better then Martell on both ends of the court. Nicolas wasn't a good SF offensively (12.9 PER) but he was certainly a cut above what Martell has ever been able to show... was there a starting SF in the league in 2007-8 with a lower PER then 12.0??? and that was his best season. Defensively there was no comparison... barring injury to NB, Martell will be coming off the bench behind a superior player. STOMP
Webster has repeatedly shown flashes of great play. We all use one quarter at Utah as an example, but there have been multiple times where I have watched him and said, wow, this guy looks like a player. Unfortunately, it was on a FAR too inconsistent basis to rely on him. Too often two years ago (his last healthy year) he'd disappear on offense. He would spot up somewhere and shoot a three. Now he certainly wasn't bad at it, but he wasn't great. If he wants to earn a spot, he has to much more consistently play at a high level. He is a decent defender, but Batum is, dare I say, a great defender (or at least one in the making) so he has that major advantage over Martell. I don't think Martell has the body and wingspan to be the defender that Batum is, so he'll have to make up for it on offense. If Martell comes out and plays with energy and consistently at a level where, thus far, we've only seen in spurts, we will have a real conundrum on our hands. Ultimately, I think Batum still wins out, as we have a lot of offense already, and Batum's offensive ceiling is ultimately higher than Web's defensive ceiling, but if Webster fills the roll of dead eye shooter, and starts creating more, it will be tough to get rid of him for a lot of fans, including me.
In college yeah, the guy was tremendous. But I don't think he had the handles or the defense to play PG at an elite level in the NBA. If you don't like the Childress example, how about Shawn Respert, Khalid Reeves? If you want to discuss Randolph Childress the player, that's a whole other issue. But it seems like that's just arguing the point on why Martell can't play. I thought we were just talking about shooting. The guy was projected to be our starter at the beginning of just last season. I don't see why it's unreasonable to think he can't beat out Nicolas for the starting job this season barring his health. What specifically in Nicolas' game gave him the 0.9 PER edge over Martell that makes him such a superior player? Is that really that much to overcome? Has Martell peaked in his career? I don't know but I'll give the guy a chance to compete with Nicolas for that starting job.
A lot of things gave him the 0.9 PER advantage - but the thing that stands to me as why I believe he will pan out as a much better offensive player than Webster is his ability to move side to side with the ball and change directions with it. We have seen it several times last years when he was finishing the break with a guy standing in his way and he could move around him - something that I have yet to see Webster do. Webster is actually a decent finisher on a break - because he is mighty fast in a straight line - but that little ability to break the defense by moving laterally with the ball is the main reason I think Nic has a much higher ceiling, as an offensive player, than Webster.
Because that's before Batum had played any NBA games. Now that he has and done better than Webster ever has, last year's projections are out-dated and relatively useless. Last year, Batum was considered a project that was too raw to play in the NBA...many were surprised he even made the roster. Projecting Webster as the starter over a too-raw-for-the-NBA rookie is hugely different than projecting Webster as the starter over a second-year player who's rookie season was better than any of Webster's seasons.
no it's just a poor example. Childress tore the ACL in both knees during his college career. By the time he was a senior he wasn't nearly the athlete he was as a Frosh. Tearing an ACL during his rookie year w/Portland cost him another step. There are plenty of examples of lotto picks who didn't have the talent/game to stick in the league, but Respert is another I'd shy away from siting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shawn_Respert Respert had stomach cancer but did not admit it until 2005. He started being bothered with stomach cramps towards the end of his rookie season. He noticed a lump below his belly button even after changing his diet. Respert was diagnosed with cancer after undergoing a series of tests at Milwaukee's St. Joseph Regional Medical Center in May 1996. After confirmation through a second opinion, he underwent daily radiation therapy for three consecutive months, losing twenty pounds in the process. The only people who knew about this treatment were the Bucks' trainers, doctors, his coach Mike Dunleavy and Michigan State backcourt partner Eric Snow. He only told a select few, not even his family and girlfriend knew, because he "did not want to make an excuse, even if it was cancer" he never has been as good as Nic was last season. NB is 3 years younger and won't be a foreign rookie adjusting to a new league and culture next season It's very reasonable to project him to be on at least as much of an upswing as MW... if anything I think it's more likely that the disparity between the two will grow. most every Blazer fan wants the best for Martell so of course we'd love for him to advance his game and expect him to be given a shot to prove his worth, has anyone suggested he'll be denied this opportunity? Why do you keep projecting these overly dramatic views on posters who are merely being realistic? your question about the PER statistic is one you really should look into yourself so as to clear up this type of question in the future. Here's an explanation of PER from it's creator, and here are links to advanced stats for both Martell and Nicolas. Enjoy! STOMP
I just don't see the huge disparity yet in Nicolas' and Webster's games that make it so clear cut that Nicolas is the superior player yet. I think eventually Batum will be that guy, but right now, I'm just not convinced. I'm not being dramatic. I'm just saying it's arguable that Nicolas is so much more superior than Martell right now. Yes, I've seen that. But my question is what exactly in Nicolas' game and Martell's game explains that 0.9 PER difference? I'm just wondering, that's all.
IMO, the huge disparity is on defense. Batum is legitimately good, with the potential to be great, while Webster has never been anything more than mediocre. Webster would need a big disparity, in his favour, in production to cancel that out and I don't see one. In fact, I'd rather have Batum on offense than Webster (though not by any major amount on that end of the floor, yet). A 0.9 PER difference isn't big, but I'd say that Batum is a better ball-handler, passer and decision-maker. His shooting results (as opposed to aesthetic form) are equivalent to Webster's. Batum obviously made his share of mistakes and disappeared at times...but the same was true of Webster in his third season.
More mobile, better ballhandling, much better D. the way you characterize those that you're arguing with ridiculous views that haven't been expressed is something I've pointed out repeatedly. You've claimed that others want to cut Martell/have given up on him and have anointed Batum as great... in fact, nobody has said anything close to these things but you. Thats what I'm referring to as overly dramatic. STOMP
Actually all of the stats are there for Martell, but they are broken up into separate webpages that can be navigated to through links at the top of his stats page
I would not say Batum is a much better defender than Webster. I have always liked the "Opponent Counterpart 48-Minute Production" stat, and it shows that Batum's counterpart had a PER of 16.4 while shooting 52% eFG and Webster's counterpart had a PER of 16.6 while shooting 49% eFG. Plus, their defensive win share was exactly the same. If anything, they are the same on defense.
They are? I clearly missed it. Links. We don't need no stinking links! Thanks. I will try to look at it tomorrow.
Batum's defensive win-share was accumulated in 3/4 of the minutes. I would argue that if your defensive win-share is the same at less than 75% of the time - your defense is better. Not worlds better - but enough to be significant to be measured.
Win share is not a minute adjusted stat? I really don't know but I just assumed it was. And isn't win share also affected by the quality of the players around you more than opponents PER and eFG%?
Well, since PER is a minutes-adjusted statistical measure, the difference can be found in the statistics as well. --Batum's FG% was .024 higher, his FT% .073 higher. --Looking at per-36 numbers, Batum got .4 more rebounds, .3 more assists, .5 more steals, .5 more blocks, and .2 fewer turnovers. --Looking at advanced stats, Batum's TS% was .007 higher, eFG% .016 higher, TRB% 1.2 higher, AST% .8 higher, STL% .8 higher, and BLK% 1.2 higher. So to simplify, Batum is a more efficient scorer, and he does all the other main things (rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks) just a little bit better than Webster. Looking only at the stats that are normalized for playing time, there are very few places (3p%, pts, tov%) where Webster has the advantage. So, it's not surprising that Batum's PER is higher.
No, winshare is not minutes adjusted. The formula actually starts with (minutes played / team minutes played) - so if player A played twice as many minutes as player B - and all their other stats/parameters are identical - player A's defensive win-share will be twice as big. To a point defensive win-share is affected by the team play - but the same is true for any other statistic - if no one is passing you the ball and you are the best shooter in the history of the world - you are not going to score any points, right? Like every individual statistical measure in a team sport - the results are biased based on the environment you play in - but it is not such a big deal and you still get a pretty nice idea about one's ability. It is not perfect - but it is not completely bogus.
