Comparing TMacs previous 2 seasons with Ariza this year

I agree, I think that the coach tells him to shoot when he is open, but the problem is that he is not a good shooter, he need do something else.

 

V-Dub just got cut by his team in Greece. Why not bring him back for $1M? Then someone can do a comparison of his stats-per-dollar versus T-Mac's.

 

So efficiency is flashy now and not worthy of focus? I love how, on the one hand, you're talking about how Ariza doesn't have Wafer's flashy numbers, yet you're using Ariza's defense, which is all flash, as a reason he's better than Wafer.

 

We have a winner!!! :grin:

 

so why do people complain if t-mac is gonna take minutes away from ariza and a guy like bundinger who is worth 750K

 

Ariza and Budinger are likely going to be Rockets for at least a few years. The same can't be said for McGrady. So assuming that McGrady's trade value does lie in his expiring contract, it's in our best interest to develop the players that have a future with the team.

 

I thought Ariza was the Replacement for Artest but TMac

Rocket River

 

Ariza's defense is not all flash. There is a common misconception that people who play his style of defense all have the same level of effectiveness, this is not true. Yes, he gets steals but he is not the 'Allen Iverson poke the ball lose a few times a game' type of defender. Ariza is elite at forcing turnovers, one of if not the best in the league. He doesn't just wait for the steal, he gets plenty of deflections and his length makes opposing teams think twice before making otherwise safe passes. Morey believes he's an elite defender, I agree with him.

All of what Wafer does positive shows up in stats and none of what he does wrong does. He gets highlight reel dunks and shoots a high percentage. He does the things that'll get you on ESPN and get fans riled up. I don't think he's an awful player, we needed him last year, but he isn't as good as Ariza - not even close.

Far too often we use the term efficiency when we only mean shooting efficiency. Ariza is much more efficient at doing the other things (things other than scoring) that help a basketball team win.

 

What's the point of this? They're two different players, with different expectations from the team and, when McGrady and Yao are healthy, two different roles on the team. Ariza's not supposed to be T-Mac version 2.

 

Trevor Ariza is not going to be the next Tracy McGrady.

Dunno why anyone would compare the two.

Even Tracy McGrady isn't going to be the next Tracy McGrady.

 

Next week, we will do a side by side comparision of McGrady and Brian Cook.

Stay tuned for further lowering expectations.

 

How is that table even right? You have 2 completely different sets of stats for 2007-08 McGrady.

 

What does this even mean? You're saying Iverson gets his steals playing man D, while Ariza gets his steals playing help D? I thought the knock on Iverson was that he just played the passing lanes (in much the same way you're describing Ariza's style). And if what you're saying is true, what, is help D more important than man D?

How is shooting a high percentage and not turning the ball over more "ESPN" than this Antoine Walker/Larry Hughes impression we're seeing from Ariza? And Ariza gets some highlight reel dunks too, you know.

Would you say Ron Artest is more efficient than somebody like Anthony Morrow or, I don't know, Chase Budinger?

 

Most worthless comparison ever. McGrady (before last season's injury plagued year) was an indispensable part of this team, poor shooting or not. But on the topic of shooting, before last year, he was never anywhere near as bad as Ariza has been so far this year, especially when you consider how much harder he had to work for his shots given the much higher amount of defensive attention he got.

 

I honestly feel that it's one of the greatest follies to entirely predicate a team's success around two players. Players will almost always go down at some point, and you never know which ones will happen to be the ones that go down. Examples of the benefits of integrating others can be found in the last two champions, the Celtics and the Lakers. The Celtics relied on Posey and Rondo in a big way, while the Lakers also heavily rely on their big men to get it done. Even though they still struggle without their best players, which should be expected, they still soften the blow considerably. I keep going back to that Utah game where only four players scored as evidence of overly relying on our two best at the time.

 

Umm...where have you been for the last 7 years?
He's been injury plagued for more seasons than healthy.
It can be said that he shot poorly because of the defensive attention.

He shot 68% at the free throw line with nobody guarding him, the injury plagued year(07-08) before "last season's injury plagued year(08-09)".

 

Tmac when somewhat healthy commands a double team which creates for other. He can also play defense when he wants to. Moving off the ball, tmac sucks but all star players suck moving off the ball.

 

I'm pretty sure DD hasn't heard of the law of diminishing returns. Is a $200k 5x better than a $40k car? No, maybe 3 times as good. But the costs go up exponentially as talent/potential increases, not linearly.