What is our PG worth? SI takes a stab at it.

[Gilles]

The problem is Malone and FO have to decide if IT is a starting PG going forward, cause if they think he's a 6th man, they know it will take extra to keep IT compared to the offer from a team, that offers him a starting spot. And if some team sees him as a starting PG they also wouldn't have any problem to pay $7-8 for their 25 y.o. starting PG with good efficiency. At which point you have ridiculously paid 6th man.
As for whole Kings wouldn't get as many points without him argument, well, they also won't give up as much. Plus Boogie/Rudy have no problem scoring in half court, so if you slow down the game they would still get basically the same production, but it will become more valuable due to less possessions in the game.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

I agree with him on one point. Looking toward the draft for the next piece to our puzzle is backing up if you ask me. We are past that. If we had full rights and could trade it we would already have the next piece. As of now it will probably be draft day before we get it.

i disagree with the win now mode. we are in perfect position to possibly add that last piece before we ascend into non lottery for years. the win now can backfire like they did with lebron, constantly shuffling ok talent around before finally losing him. bad cap management & lots of patchwork vets. if we play the cards right, we'll strike gold in the lottery. cheap elite talent for 4 years, cuz

this seems an accurate evaluation of the overall argument. the problem is that a ton of gray area exists between these two camps because of the issue of thomas' expiring contract. he's gonna get paid this summer. it's likely that he's gonna get paid well. i pretty much fall into the second camp, but i'm also very open to the idea of trading thomas before the deadline because i'd rather not see the kings overpay an undersized gunner to start at PG or come off the bench as a sixth man. i see it as too much of a risk to lose thomas for nothing, because you just know that somebody out there will be drooling over the advanced statistics enough to throw big money at him...

dude that guy is our GM, the gerbil. hope he aint in the first camp looking to throw a carl landry type contract at him.

 

[jcwkings]

The problem is Malone and FO have to decide if IT is a starting PG going forward, cause if they think he's a 6th man, they know it will take extra to keep IT compared to the offer from a team, that offers him a starting spot. And if some team sees him as a starting PG they also wouldn't have any problem to pay $7-8 for their 25 y.o. starting PG with good efficiency. At which point you have ridiculously paid 6th man.
As for whole Kings wouldn't get as many points without him argument, well, they also won't give up as much. Plus Boogie/Rudy have no problem scoring in half court, so if you slow down the game they would still get basically the same production, but it will become more valuable due to less possessions in the game.

Tyreke was signed as a 6th man for $11 million, Ginobli is the 3rd part of a big 3 as the 6th man. If we move IT to the 6th man that doesn't mean our starting PG should be paid more or be better overall than IT. At that point it would be about finding a guy that fits and gives the starting lineup balance. In the end IT would still be getting his 30-32 min a night and the starter would probably get 18-20 min, the problem is finding the right guy.

 

[rainmaker]

The problem is Malone and FO have to decide if IT is a starting PG going forward, cause if they think he's a 6th man, they know it will take extra to keep IT compared to the offer from a team, that offers him a starting spot. And if some team sees him as a starting PG they also wouldn't have any problem to pay $7-8 for their 25 y.o. starting PG with good efficiency. At which point you have ridiculously paid 6th man.
As for whole Kings wouldn't get as many points without him argument, well, they also won't give up as much. Plus Boogie/Rudy have no problem scoring in half court, so if you slow down the game they would still get basically the same production, but it will become more valuable due to less possessions in the game.

Thing is, I see little which suggests PDA/Malone think IT is our starting PG of the future. There's consistent rumors of us looking for another PG, a pass first PG. There's Malone's quotes about him preferring IT off the bench and thinking he's better in that role and that came up when he was outplaying Vasquez but elected to bring IT off the bench as in his mind that's where he excels. Then we have Malone apparently asking IT to change the way he plays which is obvious to anyone watching the last couple weeks. It implies even though he thinks IT is best when aggressive, he doesn't feel that's the best role for our starting PG, which further implies Malone wants more of a facilitator at the PG spot. That's on top of Malone repeatedly not being happy about our perimeter defense and containing penetration which IT is a big part of. I don't think anyone can argue that we can't get a better facilitator and defender at the PG spot than IT and that's what evidence suggests both PDA and Malone want.

We've also heard quotes about how great Cuz is and how good Gay is doing. We haven't heard quotes regarding how highly Malone/PDA think IT is doing in the starting role unless I missed them somewhere.

 

[LPKingsFan]

The problem is Malone and FO have to decide if IT is a starting PG going forward, cause if they think he's a 6th man, they know it will take extra to keep IT compared to the offer from a team, that offers him a starting spot. And if some team sees him as a starting PG they also wouldn't have any problem to pay $7-8 for their 25 y.o. starting PG with good efficiency. At which point you have ridiculously paid 6th man.

Well, luckily we have until Feb 20 to see how things shake out. We definitely need a larger sample size to evaluate this starting group, and need to see how things work once Landry returns.

Again, though, I still don't see a team on that list of teams with cap space willing to pay him $8 million+. I know all it takes is one, but if some of you are so sure, are you at least willing to point out some possibilities?

hope he aint in the first camp looking to throw a carl landry type contract at him.

I'm not a fan of Carl's contract, but if IT signs for $6.5 million/year for four years, that's not too far from being reasonable. Maybe a million over the average deal for uber 6th man types: JR Smith ($5.6 million), Jamal Crawford ($5.2 million), and less than Manu ($7.5 million this year, but made $14 last year).

 

[rainmaker]

Reke was offered 11M in large part to be the replacement to Gordon and the future backcourt partner to Holiday. He wasn't given 11M per year to be a 6th man over the length of the contract.

 

[jcwkings]

i disagree with the win now mode. we are in perfect position to possibly add that last piece before we ascend into non lottery for years. the win now can backfire like they did with lebron, constantly shuffling ok talent around before finally losing him. bad cap management & lots of patchwork vets. if we play the cards right, we'll strike gold in the lottery. cheap elite talent for 4 years, cuz



dude that guy is our GM, the gerbil. hope he aint in the first camp looking to throw a carl landry type contract at him.

If you disagree to "win now" that means letting Rudy walk, trading IT for picks or young(er) talent. Drafting another 20 year old with our 7-10 pick(most likely) , hope we hit a home run with it, where in all likely he develops into a starting piece or role player in 3 or 4 seasons. Try selling that to your superstar center that hates losing. You will have another Kevin Love situation in 2 years where its a foregone conclusion that Cousins is moving to a big club.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Quoting this again because the thread seems to have diverged significantly from the subject of IT's probable payment this summer, and, while I think that's expected somewhat, I have seen an assumption that IT will make more than $7 million/year in his next deal. Personally, I'd be uncomfortable paying more than that, but, based on this analysis, we may not have to. I understand the unwillingness to face that, risk, though. And if teams would prefer him to Teague, or Lowry, then I'd happily entertain a swap...

thats when you lose leverage during a swap after a contract has been signed. you will have to do a deal w/ another team for their assets otherwise he will walk for nothing or you get stuck w/ a eric gordon type cap killing contract. if you were toronto when they had bosh and cleveland when they had lebron .. would you take the sign & trade for capspace+picks or deal them to get the most you can? it's time to be proactive and get something good in exchange for our asset.

 

[Toasty]

IT is playing for his contract right now. Probably a bit more for himself than the team...but I don't really blame him too much if he is.

Don't mean to be out of line by saying that but Gay seemed to confirm it.

If you win it is cool but if the
Big two are struggling, it could be an issue.

 

[jcwkings]

Reke was offered 11M in large part to be the replacement to Gordon and the future backcourt partner to Holiday. He wasn't given 11M per year to be a 6th man over the length of the contract.

Off topic, but Holiday/Evans backcourt will not work, both are ball dominant scorers. It will be the IT/Evans thing all over again.

 

[LPKingsFan]

thats when you lose leverage during a swap after a contract has been signed. you will have to do a deal w/ another team for their assets otherwise he will walk for nothing or you get stuck w/ a eric gordon type cap killing contract. if you were toronto when they had bosh and cleveland when they had lebron .. would you take the sign & trade for capspace+picks or deal them to get the most you can? it's time to be proactive and get something good in exchange for our asset.

Right. Should have been more clear. The idea would be to call the teams with capspace NOW to see if they'd be willing to "rent" IT with the idea that they could easily keep him as a restricted FA beyond this season. It also gives them the impression that you're not so keen on keeping IT around, so if one team does want to dangle an offer, they don't feel compelled to overpay because they don't think you'd match.

 

[jcwkings]

thats when you lose leverage during a swap after a contract has been signed. you will have to do a deal w/ another team for their assets otherwise he will walk for nothing or you get stuck w/ a eric gordon type cap killing contract. if you were toronto when they had bosh and cleveland when they had lebron .. would you take the sign & trade for capspace+picks or deal them to get the most you can? it's time to be proactive and get something good in exchange for our asset.

To trade IT this season for a significant or similar upgrade you will have to package him with JT, McLemore, Thornton and picks (or any combination). For example a trade of IT and JT for say Lowry would be a steal for the Raptors in every sense. The only guy I would trade for if available is Rondo as he is truly a legit upgrade and proven winner/champion.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Rest of your post fine. I'm not quite there with the "almost sure" on the ppg if given minutes, but that's what opinions are for. Having said that, Jimmer has been fun to watch lately.

I don't think it's that far-fetched at all: seventeen might be a stretch, but certainly not fifteen. Isaiah Thomas is averaging 15.4 shots per game, as a starter. You know how many players there are in the league averaging less than fifteen points a night, on 15 or more shots? Zero, that's how many. There are thirty-one players in the league right now averaging 15+ shots a game on the season (thirty-two, if you count Rose), and none of them are averaging fewer than fifteen points per.

In fact, it's so uncommon, it's almost impossible: there have only been eight players in the entire Shot Clock era of NBA basketball to average fewer than fifteen points on at least fifteen shots, and only three in my lifetime. Humorously enough, all three of them played for the Kings franchise at some point in their careers (JoJo White, Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf and Jason Williams) but, fortunately, none of them did it while playing for the Kings.

So yeah, I tend to agree with Chubbs (even though I feel like I may have to wash my hands after typing that): it's not like, if Thomas weren't here, we'd only be averaging 82 points a game. Nobody can possibly believe that. Give an NBA player enough shots, and he'll score for you, even if it's by accident.

 

[Chubbs]

Rest of your post fine. I'm not quite there with the "almost sure" on the ppg if given minutes, but that's what opinions are for. Having said that, Jimmer has been fun to watch lately.

He's been right at 15-17 ppg per 36 minutes for his entire career. Those weren't randomly selected numbers. So, not so much an opinion but going off what he projects to. It's not a perfect projection since he plays so few minutes.. It's not much of a stretch to think he could do that. If he ever got those minutes, based on him being a rhythm guy, I don't think it'd be a shock if he scored more than that. I really don't. Would he ever get those minutes? If our current PG gets hurt, he'd get close to it by default. Maybe we'll get a chance to see what he could do in minutes.

The guy can score.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/f/fredeji01.html

 

[Big Cuz 15]

If you disagree to "win now" that means letting Rudy walk, trading IT for picks or young(er) talent. Drafting another 20 year old with our 7-10 pick(most likely) , hope we hit a home run with it, where in all likely he develops into a starting piece or role player in 3 or 4 seasons. Try selling that to your superstar center that hates losing. You will have another Kevin Love situation in 2 years where its a foregone conclusion that Cousins is moving to a big club.

i agree with shuffling the deck again in a trade and causing chaos in the line up so we suck a few more losses. while many want playoffs after so many years of losses. i feel we need to dip in another year of lottery to get a great player on a cheap contract. isn't that were we picked up cousins?

does kevin love have a solid #2 on his team if he is #1? i can't think of that player. is it corey brewer? alexey shved? the ghost of andrei kirilenko? there is a difference between that team and ours. we have a solid #1 & 2. if the cards are played right, we have a solid #3 from the draft. our salary situations are different. We have cousins locked in for another 4 years and will have about 30+M in free capspace in 2015 to find a #2 & (#3 if we chose to go with the big 3 route).

 

[The_Jamal]

i agree with shuffling the deck again in a trade and causing chaos in the line up so we suck a few more losses. while many want playoffs after so many years of losses. i feel we need to dip in another year of lottery to get a great player on a cheap contract. isn't that were we picked up cousins?

does kevin love have a solid #2 on his team if he is #1? i can't think of that player. is it corey brewer? alexey shved? the ghost of andrei kirilenko? there is a difference between that team and ours. we have a solid #1 & 2. if the cards are played right, we have a solid #3 from the draft. our salary situations are different. We have cousins locked in for another 4 years and will have about 30+M in free capspace in 2015 to find a #2 & (#3 if we chose to go with the bigTho 3 route).

Pek and Kevin Martin. Those 3 put up around 60 PPG as well, I believe.

 

[jcwkings]

i agree with shuffling the deck again in a trade and causing chaos in the line up so we suck a few more losses. while many want playoffs after so many years of losses. i feel we need to dip in another year of lottery to get a great player on a cheap contract. isn't that were we picked up cousins?

does kevin love have a solid #2 on his team if he is #1? i can't think of that player. is it corey brewer? alexey shved? the ghost of andrei kirilenko? there is a difference between that team and ours. we have a solid #1 & 2. if the cards are played right, we have a solid #3 from the draft. our salary situations are different. We have cousins locked in for another 4 years and will have about 30+M in free capspace in 2015 to find a #2 & (#3 if we chose to go with the big 3 route).

Well if you think Cuz is a legit #1 (which by the consensus here is hell yes, most dominant center in the game right now at 23 and just entering his big money years). Then the goal needs to be to get him in the playoffs ASAP, thats where good players learn to become great. We have Gay at 27 who is producing like a legit #2 and probably has 4 or 5 more seasons of prime basketball barring injury. We just need the right pieces around them, a defensive wing that can spot up, a rim protector next to Cousins. We also have Landry who is a very nice piece to have on the bench on a contending team and IT who would make a great 6th man on a team that is making deep pushes in the playoffs, but for now functions just fine as the starter. We are not far from the playoffs as currently constructed(imagine this roster with a full training camp together). You don't just go from a high lottery team, to a team that goes deep in the playoffs year to year. The most common path of the best teams is lottery, find a great player, just miss the playoffs(9-11 seed, where we are probably there now imo given a full year together), finally make the 8th seed and lose in the first round, 4-6 seed make it out of the first round, 1-4 seed deep push. Thats typically a 3 or 4 year development from playoff contender to top 4 seed. Obviously there are teams like the Celtics who signed big names together or traded for them, but the difference between how big markets and small markets develop playoff contenders is big. We need to look at teams like the Spurs to try and emulate excellence.

 

[bajaden]

Well, luckily we have until Feb 20 to see how things shake out. We definitely need a larger sample size to evaluate this starting group, and need to see how things work once Landry returns.

Again, though, I still don't see a team on that list of teams with cap space willing to pay him $8 million+. I know all it takes is one, but if some of you are so sure, are you at least willing to point out some possibilities?



I'm not a fan of Carl's contract, but if IT signs for $6.5 million/year for four years, that's not too far from being reasonable. Maybe a million over the average deal for uber 6th man types: JR Smith ($5.6 million), Jamal Crawford ($5.2 million), and less than Manu ($7.5 million this year, but made $14 last year).

You could be right about no team offering IT 8 mil or so, but if your Kings, do you take that gamble? If there's a chance that one team will offer that kind of money, and you not willing to match it, then IT walks and you get absolutely nothing in return. Whether anyone likes him or hates him, he has value, and the Kings have to make sure they end up with something of value for him. You either make up your mind your going to resign him no matter what, or you trade him before the deadline.

 

[rainmaker]

Off topic, but Holiday/Evans backcourt will not work, both are ball dominant scorers. It will be the IT/Evans thing all over again.

Except for that they've paired very well together. Better than Jrue/Gordon have. Reke also plays very well with Davis, far better than Gordon does.

 

[jcwkings]

Except for that they've paired very well together. Better than Jrue/Gordon have. Reke also plays very well with Davis, far better than Gordon does.

Maybe they look good together in stretches early, but in the long run one or both will have to sacrifice production, it would be fine if you have Lebron/Wade because they are all time greats at their positions, but Reke/Holiday are nowhere near as good as those. So you are sacrificing production from borderline all stars rather than all time great superstars. Their hope is that Davis develops into a top 5 in the league player(its possible but he needs to add offense to his game other than catching lobs in the open court.)

 

[bajaden]

If you disagree to "win now" that means letting Rudy walk, trading IT for picks or young(er) talent. Drafting another 20 year old with our 7-10 pick(most likely) , hope we hit a home run with it, where in all likely he develops into a starting piece or role player in 3 or 4 seasons. Try selling that to your superstar center that hates losing. You will have another Kevin Love situation in 2 years where its a foregone conclusion that Cousins is moving to a big club.

I think your going a bit extreme here. To say were not quite ready to compete for a championship isn't to say we have to start from scratch. I think were two years away from being a very good team. However, if things go right, I can see us making the playoffs next season, and probably going out in the first round. Maybe it depends on someone's definition of win now. I think we also have to remember that whether Rudy stays or not is up to him as much as its up to us. He's an unrestricted freeagent and he can go where he wants. The only advantage is that we can offer him more money than anyone else, but of course, the plan is to get him to sign for less than the 19 mil he's promised next season, so if true, it becomes a moot point.

The idea of building aroung Gay and Cousins is a good one. But at the same time, we have to be careful how we spend and who we spend it on. Were at a point where one big contract mistake could set us back. And I'm not referring to any pending player or deal. Just that all the pieces have to fit properly, and the money has to be planned properly. If there's a player you really like (not meaning you), and he wants and amount you consider overpaying, then you have to pass, as hard as that is to do sometimes. I think were only a couple of solid pieces away from being a very good team. Maybe we'll get on in the draft, but the other has to come from a trade or freeagency. We got lucky with Gay. Maybe we'll get lucky again.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Well if you think Cuz is a legit #1 (which by the consensus here is hell yes, most dominant center in the game right now at 23 and just entering his big money years). Then the goal needs to be to get him in the playoffs ASAP, thats where good players learn to become great. We have Gay at 27 who is producing like a legit #2 and probably has 4 or 5 more seasons of prime basketball barring injury. We just need the right pieces around them, a defensive wing that can spot up, a rim protector next to Cousins. We also have Landry who is a very nice piece to have on the bench on a contending team and IT who would make a great 6th man on a team that is making deep pushes in the playoffs, but for now functions just fine as the starter. We are not far from the playoffs as currently constructed(imagine this roster with a full training camp together). You don't just go from a high lottery team, to a team that goes deep in the playoffs year to year. The most common path of the best teams is lottery, find a great player, just miss the playoffs(9-11 seed, where we are probably there now imo given a full year together), finally make the 8th seed and lose in the first round, 4-6 seed make it out of the first round, 1-4 seed deep push. Thats typically a 3 or 4 year development from playoff contender to top 4 seed. Obviously there are teams like the Celtics who signed big names together or traded for them, but the difference between how big markets and small markets develop playoff contenders is big. We need to look at teams like the Spurs to try and emulate excellence.

i'm sorry your logic doesn't make sense to me with the way our team is currently constructed. just an FYI, i guarantee you the spurs would not pay anywhere near what you suggested of 7-8m or more for IT. they would pull a george hill for kawhi leonard and ship him out for something they need. they are a "team" oriented team not lots of mememe gunners on there if you haven't noticed. so i agree with you and try to emulate them. lots of solid players and foreign players to stash for development.

 

[jcwkings]

I think your going a bit extreme here. To say were not quite ready to compete for a championship isn't to say we have to start from scratch. I think were two years away from being a very good team. However, if things go right, I can see us making the playoffs next season, and probably going out in the first round. Maybe it depends on someone's definition of win now. I think we also have to remember that whether Rudy stays or not is up to him as much as its up to us. He's an unrestricted freeagent and he can go where he wants. The only advantage is that we can offer him more money than anyone else, but of course, the plan is to get him to sign for less than the 19 mil he's promised next season, so if true, it becomes a moot point.

The idea of building aroung Gay and Cousins is a good one. But at the same time, we have to be careful how we spend and who we spend it on. Were at a point where one big contract mistake could set us back. And I'm not referring to any pending player or deal. Just that all the pieces have to fit properly, and the money has to be planned properly. If there's a player you really like (not meaning you), and he wants and amount you consider overpaying, then you have to pass, as hard as that is to do sometimes. I think were only a couple of solid pieces away from being a very good team. Maybe we'll get on in the draft, but the other has to come from a trade or freeagency. We got lucky with Gay. Maybe we'll get lucky again.

I don't think we are in the luxury of just letting talents that can produce like IT walk(whether it helps or hurts the team is obviously up for debate amongst fans). I was one of the guys that was against singing Tyreke to $11 million, but I also knew it was a mistake for a small market team like us to let a talented player like him walk. Thankfully we got Vasquez out of it and were able to parlay that and some other pieces into Gay. Our free agent history has never been impressive, maybe we can sign a nice complimentary piece, but we will likely never attract a #2 or #3 big time producer to come here. That leaves draft and trade as the primary way for us to build. As it stands on our roster our biggest trade asset is Cousins followed by IT, McLemore as a prospect and everyone else will be hard to trade as a primary piece (Gay because of contract). If we can sign IT to $6-$7 million per that is still a nice value that we can potentially use in a trade down the line if needed, continue to start, or slide to 6th man. I mean signing IT to a Landry type contract is more than fair and more than moveable. If you start moving up from there you start analyzing, but at worst you do a sign and trade.

 

[whozit]

He's been right at 15-17 ppg per 36 minutes for his entire career. Those weren't randomly selected numbers. So, not so much an opinion but going off what he projects to. It's not a perfect projection since he plays so few minutes.. It's not much of a stretch to think he could do that. If he ever got those minutes, based on him being a rhythm guy, I don't think it'd be a shock if he scored more than that. I really don't. Would he ever get those minutes? If our current PG gets hurt, he'd get close to it by default. Maybe we'll get a chance to see what he could do in minutes.

The guy can score.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/f/fredeji01.html

OK, fair enough. You did have a comment referencing if a player got enough shots, However I ignored that (note that I commented that I was fine with the rest of your post which included the comment about enough shots) and went strictly with the part about Jimmer's ppg if 'given minutes.' If Jimmer is getting starter minutes, I don't want him taking the volume of shots IT is taking now especially since he would be playing beside Cousins and Gay. Just my opinion.

And yes, he can score and I'm glad he's showing his confidence when on the court.

 

[jcwkings]

i'm sorry your logic doesn't make sense to me with the way our team is currently constructed. just an FYI, i guarantee you the spurs would not pay anywhere near what you suggested of 7-8m or more for IT. they would pull a george hill for kawhi leonard and ship him out for something they need. they are a "team" oriented team not lots of mememe gunners on there if you haven't noticed. so i agree with you and try to emulate them. lots of solid players and foreign players to stash for development.

Which is why I said we need the right pieces(rim protector, defensive wing). Your suggestion sounds more like blow up the whole team other than Cousins. I don't think that is necessary to make this roster a playoff contender(playoff contender and championship contender are very different). You try and make the playoffs to get you top guys acclimated to the playoff level and then you analyze what pieces you need to add, change etc. The roster you have from playoff contender to when you finally develop to championship contender will look pretty different(especially at the role player level/ guys on short term contracts, and sometimes one of your big contributors will change for a better fitting piece).

 

[bajaden]

I don't think we are in the luxury of just letting talents that can produce like IT walk(whether it helps or hurts the team is obviously up for debate amongst fans). I was one of the guys that was against singing Tyreke to $11 million, but I also knew it was a mistake for a small market team like us to let a talented player like him walk. Thankfully we got Vasquez out of it and were able to parlay that and some other pieces into Gay. Our free agent history has never been impressive, maybe we can sign a nice complimentary piece, but we will likely never attract a #2 or #3 big time producer to come here. That leaves draft and trade as the primary way for us to build. As it stands on our roster our biggest trade asset is Cousins followed by IT, McLemore as a prospect and everyone else will be hard to trade as a primary piece (Gay because of contract). If we can sign IT to $6-$7 million per that is still a nice value that we can potentially use in a trade down the line if needed, continue to start, or slide to 6th man. I mean signing IT to a Landry type contract is more than fair and more than moveable. If you start moving up from there you start analyzing, but at worst you do a sign and trade.

By no means was I advocating letting IT walk. I stated that either we make up our minds were going to resign him, no matter the cost, or were going to trade him. We either keep him or try and get value for him. But I don't want to overpay him either. If we can get him at a reasonable price, I'm on board. To me, 7 or 8 million isn't a reasonable price. I have no idea what the Kings think is a reasonable price.

 

[bajaden]

OK, fair enough. You did have a comment referencing if a player got enough shots, However I ignored that (note that I commented that I was fine with the rest of your post which included the comment about enough shots) and went strictly with the part about Jimmer's ppg if 'given minutes.' If Jimmer is getting starter minutes, I don't want him taking the volume of shots IT is taking now especially since he would be playing beside Cousins and Gay. Just my opinion.

And yes, he can score and I'm glad he's showing his confidence when on the court.

I'm just curious, why is it OK for IT to take that many shots starting along side Cousins and Gay, but its not OK for Jimmer, who is just as good, if not a better shooter than IT? Or is that you don't want any starting PG taking that many shots, including IT?

 

[whozit]

I'm just curious, why is it OK for IT to take that many shots starting along side Cousins and Gay, but its not OK for Jimmer, who is just as good, if not a better shooter than IT? Or is that you don't want any starting PG taking that many shots, including IT?

I don't want any starting PG taking that many shots when you have Cousins and Gay out there.

 

[Entity]

I don't think it's that far-fetched at all: seventeen might be a stretch, but certainly not fifteen. Isaiah Thomas is averaging 15.4 shots per game, as a starter. You know how many players there are in the league averaging less than fifteen points a night, on 15 or more shots? Zero, that's how many. There are thirty-one players in the league right now averaging 15+ shots a game on the season (thirty-two, if you count Rose), and none of them are averaging fewer than fifteen points per.

In fact, it's so uncommon, it's almost impossible: there have only been eight players in the entire Shot Clock era of NBA basketball to average fewer than fifteen points on at least fifteen shots, and only three in my lifetime. Humorously enough, all three of them played for the Kings franchise at some point in their careers (JoJo White, Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf and Jason Williams) but, fortunately, none of them did it while playing for the Kings.

So yeah, I tend to agree with Chubbs (even though I feel like I may have to wash my hands after typing that): it's not like, if Thomas weren't here, we'd only be averaging 82 points a game. Nobody can possibly believe that. Give an NBA player enough shots, and he'll score for you, even if it's by accident.

I jus felt like this needed to be seen again

 

[Chubbs]

I don't think it's that far-fetched at all: seventeen might be a stretch, but certainly not fifteen. Isaiah Thomas is averaging 15.4 shots per game, as a starter. You know how many players there are in the league averaging less than fifteen points a night, on 15 or more shots? Zero, that's how many. There are thirty-one players in the league right now averaging 15+ shots a game on the season (thirty-two, if you count Rose), and none of them are averaging fewer than fifteen points per.

In fact, it's so uncommon, it's almost impossible: there have only been eight players in the entire Shot Clock era of NBA basketball to average fewer than fifteen points on at least fifteen shots, and only three in my lifetime. Humorously enough, all three of them played for the Kings franchise at some point in their careers (JoJo White, Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf and Jason Williams) but, fortunately, none of them did it while playing for the Kings.

So yeah, I tend to agree with Chubbs (even though I feel like I may have to wash my hands after typing that): it's not like, if Thomas weren't here, we'd only be averaging 82 points a game. Nobody can possibly believe that. Give an NBA player enough shots, and he'll score for you, even if it's by accident.

Hey!