Merged: Josh Childress return to NBA?

[AHF]

AHF... At this point, what exactly does Age matter? Marvin has been in the league for 4 years now. His age is irrelevant. Guys like Beasley and Rose and Durant are coming in younger than Marvin and dominating. Marvin has had starter minutes for the last 3 years. It's silly to keep track of his age. By this point, he should have shown something. By this point, he should have broke out. Instead, he is the most impactless starter in the NBA.

Neither Marvin nor Childress are going to impact the game like Rose or Durant. For that matter, neither are Joe Johnson, Al Horford or Josh Smith. If that is your standard, we can clear out the team.

If we are choosing between Marvin and Childress, however, then age is very relevant, IMO. (As is price).

Rashard Lewis at age 23 put up a 16.7 PER. Over the next four years he showed continued improvement - peaking at around a 20 PER.

Hedo Turkoglu put up a 12 PER at age 23. Over the next four years he showed significant improvement from 14.1 to 16.7.

Tayshaun Prince put up a 13.3 PER at age 23. Over the next four years he showed significant improvement from 14.8 to 16.2.

Corey Maggette put up at 17.4 PER at age 23. Over the next four years he showed significant improvement from 18.6 to 20.1.

These are the first four players I looked at and the trend was the same in every case - improvement from age 23 and a lack of improvement after age 26. That is why age is relevant in my mind. There are a ton of players who improved from age 23 - including players who went into the NBA straight from HS (and thus had more NBA experience at the same age than Marvin). From the anecdotal examples I just pulled, there does not seem to be a correlation between NBA experience and hitting the plateau. It is reasonable in my mind to think Marvin has a good chance of continuing the steady improvement he has shown every season of his career.

Childress is at an age where a lot of players are not doing much in the way of improving.

If I am betting on who has more upside left in their career at this point, I am betting on Marvin and it is because of age.

For the same reason that I wouldn't touch Jermaine O'Neal with a 10 foot poll at his price (no upside, serious downside with his age and health), I would certainly take age into account with Marvin and Childress. This doesn't mean I would take Marvin over, say, Paul Pierce because the difference in productivity is really significant. However, with Marvin and Childress I see two players with similar impacts on the game and think Marvin has both more upside and a skill set that fits better with the Hawks (better defensive rebounder, on the ball defender, perimeter shooter, etc.).

[Diesel]

Neither Marvin nor Childress are going to impact the game like Rose or Durant. For that matter, neither are Joe Johnson, Al Horford or Josh Smith. If that is your standard, we can clear out the team.

If we are choosing between Marvin and Childress, however, then age is very relevant, IMO. (As is price).

Rashard Lewis at age 23 put up a 16.7 PER. Over the next four years he showed continued improvement - peaking at around a 20 PER.

Hedo Turkoglu put up a 12 PER at age 23. Over the next four years he showed significant improvement from 14.1 to 16.7.

Tayshaun Prince put up a 13.3 PER at age 23. Over the next four years he showed significant improvement from 14.8 to 16.2.

Corey Maggette put up at 17.4 PER at age 23. Over the next four years he showed significant improvement from 18.6 to 20.1.

These are the first four players I looked at and the trend was the same in every case - improvement from age 23 and a lack of improvement after age 26. That is why age is relevant in my mind. There are a ton of players who improved from age 23 - including players who went into the NBA straight from HS (and thus had more NBA experience at the same age than Marvin). From the anecdotal examples I just pulled, there does not seem to be a correlation between NBA experience and hitting the plateau. It is reasonable in my mind to think Marvin has a good chance of continuing the steady improvement he has shown every season of his career.

Childress is at an age where a lot of players are not doing much in the way of improving.

If I am betting on who has more upside left in their career at this point, I am betting on Marvin and it is because of age.

For the same reason that I wouldn't touch Jermaine O'Neal with a 10 foot poll at his price (no upside, serious downside with his age and health), I would certainly take age into account with Marvin and Childress. This doesn't mean I would take Marvin over, say, Paul Pierce because the difference in productivity is really significant. However, with Marvin and Childress I see two players with similar impacts on the game and think Marvin has both more upside and a skill set that fits better with the Hawks (better defensive rebounder, on the ball defender, perimeter shooter, etc.).

Even without the statistical mumbo jumbo, i don't think you can say that Lewis, Hedo, or Maggette played as many minutes under the same coach as Marvin. Prince was a second year player at 23. In his first year, he played 435 minutes total. In his second year, he started and got better from there.

Marvin on the other hand played 1952 minutes his rookie year and hasn't had a season below 2000 minutes since. If you want to talk about true growth, look again at Lewis. At age 21, Lewis was doing better than what Marvin is doing now. At age 21, Lewis was 14.8 ppg, 6.9 rpg, and 1.6 apg shooting 48% from the field and 43.2% from 3. At age 21, Lewis played his first year as starter. After two full years where he had started 15 games total averaging 7 and 19 mpg respectively. Marvin is no Lewis. Marvin has been starting since season 2 of his career. He's just not the player you're trying to say he is. His age is irrelevant when you compare it to how many starts and minutes he has logged in. It's ridiculous.

[AHF]

It is ridiculous that you can't see that Marvin has significantly improved his skills and efficiency every season. He isn't a star. He is never going to be one. He will never be Chris Paul or live up to the expectations of a #2 overall draft pick but he is a starter quality small forward and there is every reason to expect he will continue to improve over the next several years.

If you want to find exacting comparables, find someone under the age of 30 who was an NBA starter and went to Europe and got better. If you are only willing to accept exact comparables you must admit there is no reason to believe that Childress will be better. In fact, I defy you to find one American-born person who left the NBA for Europe while averaging double figures under the age of 30 and returned to the NBA within 2-3 years and was able to walk. Without that comparable, how can you expect Childress will be able to walk? The fact is that there aren't any exact comparables for either player.

I think there are plenty of meaningful comparables for Marvin. I could point out that Rashard Lewis played over 2500 minutes every season from age 21 onward but you don't need to get to statistical mumbo-jumbo. You have a young player who has shown a consistent growth curve. At age 23, there is no reason to expect that to stop.

He isn't worth maxing out or anything like that, but there is every reason to expect continued growth for his future given his age and history to date. That makes his age very relevant, IMO.

[Diesel]

It is ridiculous that you can't see that Marvin has significantly improved his skills and efficiency every season. He isn't a star. He is never going to be one. He will never be Chris Paul or live up to the expectations of a #2 overall draft pick but he is a starter quality small forward and there is every reason to expect he will continue to improve over the next several years.

If you want to find exacting comparables, find someone under the age of 30 who was an NBA starter and went to Europe and got better. If you are only willing to accept exact comparables you must admit there is no reason to believe that Childress will be better. In fact, I defy you to find one American-born person who left the NBA for Europe while averaging double figures under the age of 30 and returned to the NBA within 2-3 years and was able to walk. Without that comparable, how can you expect Childress will be able to walk? The fact is that there aren't any exact comparables for either player.

I think there are plenty of meaningful comparables for Marvin. I could point out that Rashard Lewis played over 2500 minutes every season from age 21 onward but you don't need to get to statistical mumbo-jumbo. You have a young player who has shown a consistent growth curve. At age 23, there is no reason to expect that to stop.

He isn't worth maxing out or anything like that, but there is every reason to expect continued growth for his future given his age and history to date. That makes his age very relevant, IMO.

Oh, I'm sorry... Marvin has went from Bad to average..... so we should throw him a party. You said it yourself (grudgingly I'm sure) that Marvin after 3 years of starters minutes was not better (according to the PER) than Childress after 3 years of riding the bench behind Marvin. Consider that. Childress last year as our sixth man was statistically better than Marvin who is our 3 year starter logging more than 2000 mp season. Here's the rub... Marvin has had the same coach. Marvin has had the same duties. Marvin has had the luxury of starting beside Joe and Smoove his whole career. Yet... after 3 years of being the starter at Sf, Marvin is no better than his former backup? This makes it worse... Many of you guys want to give Marvin 9 to 10 million dollars for his nonimpact mediocrity and would scream bloody Murder if Childress got 6?

Back to Lewis. It again is irrelevant because once Lewis got starters minutes, he was better than Marvin. BETTER... Much better. You just want to point to Lewis' age 23 because you know that is the year that Payton was traded for Allen and that Lewis' 3 pt percentage was the worst that it has ever been... Thus effecting your PER. I call it statistical mumbo jumbo because when you look beyond the numbers, there's an explanation.

[AHF]

I am not saying that Marvin is as good as Lewis. I am saying that many, many players have continued to improve beyond their age 23 seasons and I expect Marvin to do the same.

With Childress he has always played starter minutes so I don't know why it burns you so badly that he came off the bench. The fewest minutes he has ever played per game in a season is 29.7 mpg. He has had every chance to develop. There is absolutely no disagreement that he had a better PER at age 25 than Marvin did at age 23 from me either. I do think Childress' PER is somewhat inflated due to his shot selection and his tendency to crash the offensive boards and leak out on defense (which explains his overall weaker RBP36 compared to Marvin but higher ORBP36). The bottomline, though, is that I think Marvin's better defense and longer range makes him a better mesh with the rest of the team than Childress. I think you are certainly entitled to disagree.

What I can't believe I am hearing from you, though, is that you think Marvin's age is irrelevant to whether he will continue to improve in the future. I'll just take the top 10 picks of the 2000 and 2001 draft classes as an example:

Kwame Brown - Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

Tyson Chandler - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 12.2 PER to 17.0, 17.5, 13.4 PERs

Pau Gasol - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 21.7 PER to 22.5, 22.7, 24.1 PERs

Eddy Curry - Sustained improvement in donut eating. Not sustained improvement in play.

Jason Richardson - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 16.8 PER to 19.0, 19.2, 15.5, 18.4 PERs

Shane Battier - Minor improvement from age 23 - 13.9 PER to 15.0, 15.3, 14.8, 14.7 PERs

Eddie Griffin - Not applicable going out of league within next year

DeSagana Diop - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 6.3 PER to 11.5, 10.6, 12.5 PERs

Rodney White - Not applicable going out of league within next year

Joe Johnson - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 15.1 PER to 17.9, 19.5, 17.3, 18.2 PERs

Kenyon Martin - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 13.4 PER to 14.5, 16.9, 18.7 PERs

Stromile Swift - Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

Darius Miles - Not applicable due to injury

Marcus Fizer - Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

Mike Miller - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 14.9 PER to 16.7, 17.2, 16.4 PERs

DerMarr Johnson - Not applicable due to injury

Chris Mihm - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 13.2 PER to 14.6, 15.7, 15.3 PERs

Jamal Crawford - Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

Joel Pryzbilla - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 8.0 PER to 6.7, 15.5, 15.3, 7.4, 12.3, 15.4 PERs

Keyon Dooling - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 10.0 PER to 10.1, 12.6, 11.1, 14.1, 13.6 PERs

So we are looking (regardless of situation or time in the NBA) at a rate for top 10 picks in the 2000-2001 draft classes of:

50% Sustained improvement after age 23

5% Minor (imo not significant) improvement after age 23

10% Not sustained improvement after age 23 (but may have improved donut eating)

20% Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

20% Not applicable (due to injury or washing out)

Given Marvin's track record of improvement of both numbers and skills and the general track record for players, I see no reason to think that he has completed his development and topped out as a player.

Edited April 24, 2009 by AHF

[Diesel]

I am not saying that Marvin is as good as Lewis. I am saying that many, many players have continued to improve beyond their age 23 seasons and I expect Marvin to do the same.

With Childress he has always played starter minutes so I don't know why it burns you so badly that he came off the bench. The fewest minutes he has ever played per game in a season is 29.7 mpg. He has had every chance to develop. There is absolutely no disagreement that he had a better PER at age 25 than Marvin did at age 23 from me either. I do think Childress' PER is somewhat inflated due to his shot selection and his tendency to crash the offensive boards and leak out on defense (which explains his overall weaker RBP36 compared to Marvin but higher ORBP36). The bottomline, though, is that I think Marvin's better defense and longer range makes him a better mesh with the rest of the team than Childress. I think you are certainly entitled to disagree.

What I can't believe I am hearing from you, though, is that you think Marvin's age is irrelevant to whether he will continue to improve in the future. I'll just take the top 10 picks of the 2000 and 2001 draft classes as an example:

Kwame Brown - Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

Tyson Chandler - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 12.2 PER to 17.0, 17.5, 13.4 PERs

Pau Gasol - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 21.7 PER to 22.5, 22.7, 24.1 PERs

Eddy Curry - Sustained improvement in donut eating. Not sustained improvement in play.

Jason Richardson - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 16.8 PER to 19.0, 19.2, 15.5, 18.4 PERs

Shane Battier - Minor improvement from age 23 - 13.9 PER to 15.0, 15.3, 14.8, 14.7 PERs

Eddie Griffin - Not applicable going out of league within next year

DeSagana Diop - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 6.3 PER to 11.5, 10.6, 12.5 PERs

Rodney White - Not applicable going out of league within next year

Joe Johnson - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 15.1 PER to 17.9, 19.5, 17.3, 18.2 PERs

Kenyon Martin - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 13.4 PER to 14.5, 16.9, 18.7 PERs

Stromile Swift - Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

Darius Miles - Not applicable due to injury

Marcus Fizer - Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

Mike Miller - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 14.9 PER to 16.7, 17.2, 16.4 PERs

DerMarr Johnson - Not applicable due to injury

Chris Mihm - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 13.2 PER to 14.6, 15.7, 15.3 PERs

Jamal Crawford - Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

Joel Pryzbilla - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 8.0 PER to 6.7, 15.5, 15.3, 7.4, 12.3, 15.4 PERs

Keyon Dooling - Sustained improvement from age 23 - 10.0 PER to 10.1, 12.6, 11.1, 14.1, 13.6 PERs

So we are looking (regardless of situation or time in the NBA) at a rate for top 10 picks in the 2000-2001 draft classes of:

50% Sustained improvement after age 23

5% Minor (imo not significant) improvement after age 23

10% Not sustained improvement after age 23 (but may have improved donut eating)

20% Mixed, career high after 23 but up and down

20% Not applicable (due to injury or washing out)

Given Marvin's track record of improvement of both numbers and skills and the general track record for players, I see no reason to think that he has completed his development and topped out as a player.

Once you go through that same list...

1. Remove all player who had a significant change in minutes.

2. Remove all player who had a change in role because of a change of coaches.

3. Remove all PGs. (hardest position to play).

4. Remove all Cs. (hardest position to develop).

5. Remove all players who have changed teams.

I'll even leave you SGs and Pfs. How many are left?

That would describe the bleakness of what you expect of Marvin. Dominique has said that minutes (floortime) is the cure for all ills. He's correct, you can develop a player better if he has more minutes. Marvin has been playing more than 2000 minutes per season since he was 19-20 years old. After all that, he still doesn't match the impact that his former backup matched.

This is the second offseason in a row where you will find Marvin nursing the bench in the crucial 4th qtr. The reason being is not because of a back injury... but because Woody already knows that Marvin is not an impactful player.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Diesel

[AHF]

Once you go through that same list...

1. Remove all player who had a significant change in minutes.

2. Remove all player who had a change in role because of a change of coaches.

3. Remove all PGs. (hardest position to play).

4. Remove all Cs. (hardest position to develop).

5. Remove all players who have changed teams

Your standards are unreasonably restrictive, IMO. I named a bunch of SFs earlier and I named a spread of all players in a second post. The trend was the same in both cases - continued improvement after age 23. You couldn't even compare Marvin to Marvin if he ends up signing with another team. How meaningful is that? Of course things change for players over time. For some more than others, but the trends are significant, IMO. Identifying people who have played for a 4-5 year period from 23-26/27 under the same coach, for the same team, only at SG, SF & PF, who haven't had their minutes change, and haven't seen their role change is minuscule.

* * * *

Using a similarly meaninless level of scrutiny, please identify why you believe Childress will be able to walk when he returns from Greece by showing comparables:

1. Take the list of every player in the history of mankind who played in Greece and remove all players who didn't play more than 28 mpg in the NBA for at least 3 seasons immediately preceding when they went to play in Greece.

2. Remove all players who were over the age of 26 when they went to Greece.

3. Identify among the remaining players any player that could walk after playing in Greece.

My new conclusion:

Marvin can't improve because he is too old and Childress won't be able to walk when he returns from Europe. Marvin is a better investment because Marvin as he is now is better than Childress who we have no reason to think will be able to walk.

[HawksBalla]

I would take him back in a heartbeat. He would easily be the most athletic player on our bench. Play Flip at pg, play Mo Evans at sg and Chills at Sf, or flip them if there is a matchup advantage. Or, I wouldnt be opposed to starting him if we lose Marvin.