John Hollinger leaving ESPN to work for the Grizzlies

Not a Gay guy myself, either, but it's OK if you are.

 

http://www.pundittracker.com/pundits/profile/john-hollinger

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by heypartner
Analytics isn't just about the Draft and Trades. It's NBA Facts, for the coaches to use, of both your own team and that of opponents. Battier is given folders of data each game to study, for instance.

I believe he downloads them form the cloud to his iPad now.

 

He isn't the only member here who would like to see you grow up, chump.
Just keep it up, dude, and see how far you can take it.

 

i'm not gonna argue whether this dude is a max player or not, i don't think memph fans give a fock because he's good for them. pull your head out of your stats. the most important stat, wins and losses.

 

The most important stat is wins and losses, but there isn't a lot of evidence that Gay contributes to that as much as he arguably should be given his salary....7-17 isn't going to cut it.

The definitive piece on Gay and his role on the Grizz was in the NYT hoops blog last month, worth reading the whole thing:

Centerpiece or Expensive Accessory?

 

Chris Broussard is reporting that he COULD be persuaded to leave ESPN for an NBA team himself, according to sources close to the situation.

 

To clarify: I very much doubt that the Grizz trade Gay or any other major piece this year. They are having a great season and you don't mess with a hot team for no good reason. But if they don't make a great playoff run? Then the new ownership probably want to put its own stamps on things.

 

Do you think the Grizzlies would be better or worse with Mayo instead at fraction of the cost?

 

Worse, Mayo disrupts the way they play more than Gay becuase he takes the ball out of Conley/whoever's hands more.

 

Nah, I'm not a big Gay either myself either.

I quickly checked through Hollinger's last 10 chats or so and it does seem that he thinks Randolph and Gay can co-exist and that the issue with Gay really just comes down to him being overpaid, which I'd tend to agree with.

Hollinger was high on Tony Wroten coming out of college and thought the Grizzlies would get a steal if they were to draft him. Wasn't high on Selby coming out of college.
Also thinks the Grizz need more shooting (obviously) -- doesn't think Ellington is the answer -- and believes that the Grizzlies need four capable bigs, which would make Arthur a vital part of their team.

So... Hollinger wouldn't want to just dump Gay, but would certainly entertain the idea of trading him (perhaps something around Gay for Granger or Gallo?) and would want to add a (cheap) shooter (???), while ideally getting under the luxury tax.
Gay, Ellington and Haddadi add up to about $20M. Grizz are a litte over $4M over the tax. Good SF + a shooter for a bit under $16M.

Of course, Hollinger in his first season might not have enough saying power and as well the Grizzlies have been playing, I think it's more likely they'll keep Gay for another season.

 

We are going down this slippery slope?

 

Glad for Hollinger, good to see someone from the "outside" break into the fraternity. By all accounts he is a very nice man. Having said that, he is not on the cutting edge of statistics and I don't believe that he will help the Grizzlies that much.

 

rockets fans need to be worried about a certain pg's contract whom god signed

 

So ESPN lost their only credible writer? Inevitable.

 

Paid intern? Fancy stuff there at ESPN!

 

before i read this piece, you see a guy like gay slip through the cracks and become arguably a max player and a team is almost held hostage because to most fans they can not make a legitimate argument to not sign him. gay is almost a max player who might surprise you one night and drop forty points in a crucial game on the way to the playoffs. you look up and he's your leading scorer. to the sophisticated eye he is not a max player.

i used to argue that a max player is in the top 60 players in the league, because the best team have two max players. every team can conceivably sign two under the nba salary cap. therefore a joe johnson whom we know is not lebron or wade or even harden imo can become a max player, simply meaning they have a max contract. its a supply and demand issue as well as ability.

 

Yes that's it. And it DOES take into about TS%, but using different math.

If you look up the Top 50 players in the history of the NBA using that forumla "EFF" vs the Top 50 in PER, you will better appreciate its accuracy vs PER. It is a better list of Top 50; thus there is some inherent flaw in PER if it creates such a relatively weird Top 50. And don't presume it's me with the weird Top 50, until you first see the two side by side.

And you actually state the very problem with PER, it normalizes the reserve to equal the playing time of the starters. That is just flat out wrong to do that. There is a reason a starter gets the minutes they do, because they can play more efficient for longer minutes during a game. Reserves often can't, so coaches maximize their efficiency by giving them less minutes...that doesn't make them as good as the starter with equal PER.

Relying on PER to measure people with significantly different amounts of minutes is misguided. I can understand normalizing with a few minutes per game...but not 20-25 mpg players versus 35-40 mpg players. There is a wide gulf of difference there that should not be normalized.

I can explain this with math, too if you want. But the coach who gives a reserve less minutes is the one who really knows that that player cannot be equally efficient with more minutes.

 

steve francis is the perfect example of a guy who signs for a max contract when in your heart you know he isn't worth it.

 

He was slightly better than Gay at his peak, it's just that he peaked early (Rookie of the year, then peaked really as a 2nd year player) and was finished as an all-star level player by year 5.

Gay actually peaked early too, though not quite as early as Francis, he wasn't very good as a rookie, then made a pretty big leap from year 1 to year 2, but has plateaued/slight decline.

This is actually a pretty decent article from a few years ago of somebody questioning why people were skeptical (after he signed his max deal) that Gay wouldn't continue improving and eventually reach all-star/franchise player level.

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/a-case-study-in-n-b-a-expectations-rudy-gay/

Valid points, but the skeptics have thus far seemed to be correct, with Gay not really exceeding his year 2 height.