IMO getting the exact same statistics (quantity and efficiency) on a better team makes you a better player 99% of the time. Secondly, the importance of assist to turnover ratio has not been considered appropriately. These are PG's, so assist to turnover ratio should be at least as important as any other statistic considered (if not more). Dragic is doing 3:1 ass/to ratio. There are few in the league who can average 3:1 ass/to ratio in that many minutes and on almost 9 assists. That is a very good number, a feature that has been lacking in Houston Rockets PG's for a long time until Lowry. I would go as far as to say there are at least 50 PG's in/out the league who can put up those Collison assists numbers. I would say there are perhaps 10 who could emulate Dragic's assist and TO numbers over a long period of time. I think perhaps it's better the OP beware rather than everyone else. You wouldn't fall for Collison if you were looking at stats properly. It was evident he was an average passer at best. There are other things to consider as well. Like how Dragic's personality fits into a winning team. How his hard work earns him the respect of his veteran teammates. How he has actually shown the steadiest improvement, whereas Collison had a meteoric rise. In fact, I'd say pretty much the only thing these two have in common is that they had surprising stints of games in the absence of the usual starter, and they were both efficient scorers. Hundreds of players have this in common. Having said all that, Dragic will eventually see a decline and may decline greatly next season, depends on circumstances. But these stats don't prove that he will or he might.
Both true, and good points. There is a huge difference between putting up great stats on a losing team and great stats on a winning team. (Although I think NO was actually winning with Collison at the point.)
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/collida01/splits/2010/ In Collison's 37 starts, the Hornets were 14-23.
ok, thanks so collison was having good stats on a losing team , and dragic is having good stats on a winning team, this should close this debate ... even jarret jack or jerryd bayless have good numbers with losing teams this year
Collison is still a good player, no matter what dragic would still be a great backup. Also, collison was traded out of the system he was doing so well in, and maybe because he's so young thats what screwed him up.
He reminds me of Steve Nash when he was still with Dallas. Who is going to step up with the big bucks and have their point guard for the next 10 years?
Of course they don't. No one is trying to say that they do. They just point out the possibility, which some people don't recognize
what's being forgotten is that collison did not run that team as efficiently as the goran. He lost games more than he won but that's a lot to put on collison. Goran's abilities have been there. it's not a fluke. he slashes with a purpose and others benefit from it. It's as simple as that. And he goes all out on defense.
Everyone said the same thing about Lowry and he proved everyone, including DD, wrong. Dragic being the hard working player that he is, will keep playing just as well.
Collison was a case of someone having to put up numbers on a bad team. Dragic makes plays and gets others involved - he's the best playmaker we've had since Tracy (not trying to compare them). You have to re-sign this guy. For me, point guards are usually dime a dozen -- as in it's easy to find a guy that can shoot well enough and not turn the ball over. As much as I love Lowry, he's in that sort of mold. But Goran is a guy that you can give the ball to and count on him to get an open look or find the open man, which isn't always the case for Lowry (he often ends up jacking up a long three in tight situations). Goran has always been this kind of player, just never got enough of a chance to show it. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LLWjQ7nZTkI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
People do this a lot and I don't understand -- using physical measurements to debunk a comparison. Their physical attributes are irrelevant to the comparison. OP is talking about a phenomeon in which a point guard outperformed expectations in one season and then later returned to the mean. That Dragic is taller doesn't mean he can't play over his head for a season and then get overpaid in the offseason. His height doesn't matter at all in that phenomenon. In fact, we've seen this happen with many players in many positions in the past. The argument you make about Dragic's stats last year is much stronger -- his good data runs longer than just this year. He was good for us last year. He was good for Phoenix before that. That makes his current performance look like it's not a complete fluke. (Though I do think that our offense was built to strongly feature the PG because of our reliance on Lowry. So, Dragic got every opportunity when he stepped in. In that way, our offense probably helped make him look good. Even so, he did make the most of the opportunity given him, which not everyone could do.)
Dumb comparison. Dragic did not just start playing good when he was inserted into the starting line-up. He has played damn good since he has been in Houston and played well in Phoenix before that.
It amazes me how so many people just completely miss the point of this thread. Everything doesn't have to devolve into a direct comparison of two players, but the words "Dragic," "VS." and "Collison" were in the title, so reading comprehension goes out the window. If you can't figure out that this is meant to caution against judging a player based on a 17-game sample while using Darren Collison as a recent example, please do everyone a favor and save your opinions for game threads. Relevant to the actual point of this thread, yes, he played pretty well in Phoenix for a while. But he was struggling mightily in his first 48 games last year before he came to Houston.
A more apt comparison would be Lowry when Brooks got hurt, he had played well off bench and then exploded as a starter, that is the same as Goran. DD
As terrible as that decision was (and it was terrible, especially after signing Dampier), I don't think the Mavs really lost that much sleep for it. They were prepping Harris for the job for a while. He took them to a 69-win regular season along with one finals appearance prior to being shipped out for an elite (or used to be elite) PG in Jason Kidd (who led them to a title).
