OK he scores when he's open. Malone made a living off of pick-n-pop in Utah. He also killed us with it in the 90's. I dont get you ppl. We finally have a pf who can compliment our playmakers and your complaining. You can't have steak at every position. My biggest issue isnt as much 2Pats rebounding as it is keeping his man off the glass. He jsut needs to box out. Seeing Bargani outfight him for a rebound was demoralizing
I was a bit of a Patterson detractor before, but recently I've changed my mind. It's not just him getting better numbers. But rather, I finally get a feel that his jumper is here to stay. I'm not kidding when I say that Patterson is one of the best jump-shooting PF in the game. And by PF I mean a true PF, and not a SF playing stretch 4. Between his current start and his hot rookie shooting, I honestly feel like he's an incredible floor spreader at the PF position, something that's very integral to the offense the Rockets want to run. In addition, his hook shot has looked alright(5 of 9 on hook shots) and he's penetrating to the basket more than ever before. So there's a hint of improvement in the future. Indeed, his rebounding leaves some to be desired. And the Rockets have been porous on defense in recent days. Whether that's more on him or others, I can't be certian. But I think with more experience will come better defense. As for rebounding, he rebounded okay as a rookie. So perhaps there is some to be said about Asik simply being a monster on the boards. As a team, the Rockets are ranked #10 in defensive rebounding %. So they're not getting slaughtered. I doubt he'll ever be a great rebounder. But if he gets back to his rookie rebounding levels, or ~8 per 36-minutes, that basically put him in the Amare range. Not good, but next to Asik a very good fit.
PPatt had a sophomore slump last year, and people are continuing the hat even though he is not slumping anymore (except on rebounding)
Poor decision-maker, but he's powerful & skilled for a 6'11'' 22-year-old. I think he'd blossom in the right situation. Sacramento has been one of the most unstable environments in the league over the last 2 years, so a change of scenery could work wonders for him. A motivated, hungry Cuz in a winning environment would be terrifying. We've never seen him fighting for life in the Playoffs, lining up against basketball's best under the brightest of lights, so we don't know how he'd perform in a positive locker room with a contender. I think he has another gear. He's a special player.
With 14 points, 5 rebounds, and mediocre defense? I don't see it. There are a LOT of PFs in the NBA better than Patterson. I just looked over all the NBA teams and I counted four teams where PPat would start, seven maybes. The rest of them he probably or definitely would not start. I don't agree that he'd start for Miami by the way. He'd get minutes off the bench. I don't see them pushing Battier out of the starting lineup for him. Shane has too much chemistry with their starters and does too much to make them click.
You think Patterson is a better jump shooting PF than Dirk? Or are you counting Dirk as a center? Either way that seems like a REALLY bold statement.
Short term we don't have anybody better. Long term I think D-Mo will be the better player. The best option is probably to trade PPat at the deadline as part of a package to upgrade PF and/or backup PG.
With Patterson scoring like this, do you really think that replacing Patterson with say Aldridge, will really improve us that much ? Our biggest problem right now is defense, and Aldridge will not solve that problem. He plays like an improved version of Patterson. Maybe Josh Smith is a better option ?
Are you just trying to nit-pick? meh said "one of the best", not definitely "the best". I'm with the camp that he needs to up his defensive rebounding, but if he does that, he'll be just fine. Generally speaking, we still need another cornerstone. And if that guy is a 4, I wouldn't hesitate in saying good bye to Patterson. But if we get that guy at another position, Patterson is a good role player assuming he continues to knock down shots like he has.
Dirk I almost don't count because he's such a unique player. But put it this way. If Harden drives to the basket, defense collapses, and he kicks out to an open power forward for a jumper. Who would you want taking that shot? IMO, Patterson up there among the best at it. In fact, he's A LOT BETTER than Aldridge at it right now, whom most fans think of as a premier shooter.
The difference between 20 pts from LMA and PPat is night and day. Pat gets his points as a result of people leaving him open. LMA is a guy that draws attention and makes the game easier for his teammates. He's also a bigger body, better defender, and better rebounder. LMA makes us much much better if you just switch him out for LMA. I'll pass on a jump shooting Smith that makes terrible decisions and is going to demand a lot of money this offseason.
Hehe, what a surprising post. You obviously didn't read my post closely or you're so worked up about some imaginary person in your mind that you've decided to conflate me with that figure. So, where in my post did I credit all of Patterson's scoring to Lin? I didn't make my post about Lin -- you're the one who did that, and you're part of the problem of the deterioration of the GARM, ruining threads and throwing insults instead of having a real conversation. I find THAT unbearable. Read my post again if you haven't done so. I said specifically Patterson's scoring numbers are a function of team offense, which is the very definition of a role player. As I acknowledged in my post, he shoots the midrange efficiently. But a starting player should be hitting most of his shots if he is being set up for open looks, or getting trickle down. This season, 75.4% of PatPat's shots were assisted according to HoopData -- that's a lot, in fact among the highest in his position. My point is not so much that he cannot create his own shot, but that many players put in that same position would do comparably well. Compare PatPat's 75% of shots being assisted to other PFs: Favors, 51.1% assisted. LeMarcus Aldridge, 52.6%. Randolph, 55.6%. Scola, 61.5%. Griffin, 59.1% (even while playing with CP3, this is much lower than Ppat's percentage of assisted shots.) And it's not just that many of PatPat's shots are assisted, but the quality of shots he gets from teammates and the team dynamic. He gets many very open looks. It's to his credit that he can hit those open shots, but how many PFs put in that position to succeed would do comparably well? I think many. Maybe not as efficiently as PatPat but PatPat's weaknesses in other dimensions of his game negate -- and it's debatable how much -- his superior margin in jumpshot efficiency. You're obviously a fan of PatPat. That's fine. I'm not, and I've stated my reasons why, and part of it is just a personal preference for playing style. Don't make this more than it is. The GARM has deteriorated for several reasons. Consider your own role in it, instead of assuming it's others that are the problem.
I think Aldridge is better than Patterson, and is a very good player in general. But the idea that defense pay attention to him is laughable. The guy has shot 42 times this season at the rim at a conversion rate of 69%. 236 times away from the basket at a conversion rate of 40%. If you think teams care about a 40% jumpshooter so much to double/triple team him, you're just not watching games. Those shots were either open shots or against single defender. Teams give that shot every day of the week. The reason why Aldridge always seem to have big games against the Rockets, including that playoff match, is because Rockets coaches and scouting staff WANT Aldridge to shoot that shot. He's not getting that shot inspite of double teams.
Short response: Amare Stoudamire, Karl Malone, and I'm sure many others not rolling the top of my head would disagree to being a role player by your definition. Long response: There was a study done in terms of how much credit each player gets for the 2(or 3) points in an assisted shot. Basically, the conclusion was that the player shooting gets a lion share of the credit, something like 2:1 ratio between finisher and assister, with a tiny bit of credit to defensive breakdowns. Also, more credit goes to the assister on close range baskets, since it's more difficult to make such passes. And less credit goes to the assister on jump shots. Patrick Patterson deserives most of the credit for making his shots. Even if they are set up for him. Because there aren't many players who can shoot at his level. Much more valuable than a PG who can find a shooter left open for a 15ft jumper.
I agree with this. I'll add that, IIRC, each assist is only valued as equivalent to 0.8 pts in Berri's Wins Produced model. However, you are taking the discussion to be about 'Who deserves more credit -- the jumpshooter or the assister?' I was not so much interested in that discussion, but rather 'How well would another PF do if he were in PatPat's place and considered as a replacement for him?' I acknowledge he shoots the midrange efficiently but that does not easily offset his lackluster showing in other parts of his game. The discussion, as I understood it, was not about taking credit away from PatPat and giving it to Harden or Lin or whomever, but thinking about how he compares to other PF candidates that may be available in the future.
better peripheral stats last night (7 rebs, 3 blks). gotta give PPat credit too- instead of pouting over the number of bodies Morey brought in, he's risen to the challenge. PPat is more valuable to the Rockets than to most teams- I hope Morey doesn't get rid of him when he asks to be paid.
