Next person who calls De'Andre Hunter a PF gets my foot in their back side.

[AHF]

1 minute ago, Peoriabird said:

Does the same go for Ortgs?  If a player goes to team with better offensive players then should his rating should go up too?

Ortg is not as team dependent as it measures points produced per 100 possessions.  It is fairly easy to see what possessions a player individually controls whereas team defense is much more nebulous to individually assign responsibility from a box score - even if you track what the opposing player you were primarily responsible for guarding did it won't show up in the box score if you are missing assignments, letting guys drive by you who then kick to the next open player, if you get abused on a switch, etc. 

Part of this is a product of offense being much more subject to individual statistical quantification (i.e., if you look at points, scoring efficiency, turnover rate, passing stats, etc. you get a very good approximation of a player's offensive ability) whereas the traditionally maintained defensive numbers of blocks, steals and rebounds get you a very incomplete picture of a player's defense by themselves (as Russell Westbrook's high counting stats contrasted against someone like Tony Allen demonstrates).  

[Diesel]

5 hours ago, MaceCase said:

exactly, and this is easier to comprehend once people divorce themselves from the archaic idea that a player’s height determines their specific position and their specific position determines their primary skillset. 

This is true... I mean, Lebron plays PG.   It's the skillset.    I would say Pippen was the Point Guard for the Bulls during their championship years. ... A little. 

But I think it's just as erroneous to use the designations that you did when you had PG, SG/PG, SG/SF, SF/PF, PF/C  C

or however you put it. 

The truth is that aside from a big being the rim protector, you don't know where the skillset is going to come from.   Kobe was a slasher.  He could have played the 2 or the 3. 

I think height should still maintain 1-5 but it doesn't have to dictate skillset.   I've seen some 2s that ran an offense better than the PG. 

 

[Diesel]

And by the way.. the reason why size determines 1-5 is because of defensive matchup. 

 

Just because Trae can have the skillset of a shooter, doesn't mean that we make him a 2.  He will get kilt on the PNR.

It's the same reasoning for me not wanting to see Gallo at the 3.

You are who you can defend when it comes to 1-5. 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[AHF]

He has been doing everything any of us could hope for so far.  Really making TS's trade look good.  That 3pt% isn't sustainable, but his overall improvement looks real to me.

[Peoriabird]

16 minutes ago, AHF said:

He has been doing everything any of us could hope for so far.  Really making TS's trade look good.  That 3pt% isn't sustainable, but his overall improvement looks real to me.

Never understood the Cam is better argument from many posters

[Diesel]

4 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Never understood the Cam is better argument from many posters

I can explain it.   Hunter is not a player that you can put a finger down and say he's great at this.  He's good at many things but great at none.   Whereas Cam has slasher written all over him.  Cam has the potential to be our Kobe whereas Hunter's potential seems like Paul Pierce.   Both great players.. but you notice the potential of one over the other. 

[AHF]

14 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Never understood the Cam is better argument from many posters

Probably derived from Cam being better in the 2020 portion of the 2019-20 season combined with their assessment that Cam has the higher ceiling.

I assessed Cam as having the higher ceiling and still do but I was happy to get Hunter and love seeing his development.  

I do expect Hunter to come along more quickly and be better in the short-term since he is 23 and Cam is 21 and generally a 23 year old is much closer to developmental maturity than a 21 year old.  

They should make a dynamic duo for years to come.

[Peoriabird]

4 minutes ago, AHF said:

Probably derived from Cam being better in the 2020 portion of the 2019-20 season combined with their assessment that Cam has the higher ceiling.

I assessed Cam as having the higher ceiling and still do but I was happy to get Hunter and love seeing his development.  

I do expect Hunter to come along more quickly and be better in the short-term since he is 23 and Cam is 21 and generally a 23 year old is much closer to developmental maturity than a 21 year old.  

They should make a dynamic duo for years to come.

I always thought that Hunter would be the better shooter by far.  I also felt that he would be more consistent game to game and was more cerebral.  I hope Cam becomes a more cerebral player but right now he isn't.  Tough to say who will have a better career or who has more upside.  It is also tough to judge players that don't appear to have the highest BBIQ like Cam. Those types of players never seem to reach their potential ceilings.

[AHF]

21 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

I always thought that Hunter would be the better shooter by far.  I also felt that he would be more consistent game to game and was more cerebral.  I hope Cam becomes a more cerebral player but right now he isn't.  Tough to say who will have a better career or who has more upside.  It is also tough to judge players that don't appear to have the highest BBIQ like Cam. Those types of players never seem to reach their potential ceilings.

You may well be right.  I've definitely missed on my assessments on plenty of college players.  

I think you are being a bit harsh on Cam's BBIQ, though.  I see his struggles more as having to do with age and experience than BBIQ.  Give him 2 years so that he is the same age as Hunter and let's compare Hunter in 2020-21 versus Cam in 2022-23 to get a more apples to apples comparison.

Either way, both have made huge strides since their 2019 NBA performance and have plenty more positive development ahead of them.  I'm excited for them both.

[Peoriabird]

21 minutes ago, AHF said:

I think you are being a bit harsh on Cam's BBIQ, though.  I see his struggles more as having to do with age and experience than BBIQ.  Give him 2 years so that he is the same age as Hunter and let's compare Hunter in 2020-21 versus Cam in 2022-23 to get a more apples to apples comparison.

 

I don't think age is correlate of BBIQ.  Guys like Bembry will always have a low BBIQ

[thecampster]

1 hour ago, Peoriabird said:

Never understood the Cam is better argument from many posters

Cam is a better ball handler and better disruptor of passing lanes. Those are very obvious skills. Its why people prefer him. I'm not saying its right, but that is why.

I believe in 3 years, Cam is the better all around player but I said it before last season started, "Cam will take 2-3 years to develop and start showing his potential". Hunter was farther along when we drafted him.

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Cam is a better ball handler and better disruptor of passing lanes.

He is better at those 2 things yes but the rest of his game is below average.  Some nights it is difficult to play him for long stretches because of his terrible play.  That shouldn't be the case in your 2nd year.

[kg01]

10 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Cam is a better ball handler and better disruptor of passing lanes. Those are very obvious skills. Its why people prefer him. I'm not saying its right, but that is why.

I believe in 3 years, Cam is the better all around player but I said it before last season started, "Cam will take 2-3 years to develop and start showing his potential". Hunter was farther along when we drafted him.

This is interesting and I think I agree.  Hunter spent a lot of time at UVA, including a redshirt year.

Maybe the things Cam is better at "show up" more quickly.

[thecampster]

4 minutes ago, kg01 said:

This is interesting and I think I agree.  Hunter spent a lot of time at UVA, including a redshirt year.

Maybe the things Cam is better at "show up" more quickly.

Thanks buddy! You know earning your approval is something I strive for.

[Peoriabird]

39 minutes ago, AHF said:

I think you are being a bit harsh on Cam's BBIQ, though.  I see his struggles more as having to do with age and experience than BBIQ.  Give him 2 years so that he is the same age as Hunter and let's compare Hunter in 2020-21 versus Cam in 2022-23 to get a more apples to apples comparison.

 

Plus posters were ready to trade Hunter and start Cam this year.  They weren't saying Cam was the future.  They were saying Cam is the present and is better than Hunter now.

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Plus posters were ready to trade Hunter and start Cam this year.  They weren't saying Cam was the future.  They were saying Cam is the present and is better than Hunter now.

I think that was because he was better for the 2020 portion of last season.

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

I think that was because he was better for the 2020 portion of last season.

So did we learn anything from this? Because obviously you can't pick and choose the numbers you want to use!  And like I've stated before, Hunter was playing out of position a lot in 2020 which distorted his numbers. 

[AHF]

Just now, Peoriabird said:

So did we learn anything from this? Because obviously you can't pick and choose the numbers you want to use!  And like I've stated before, Hunter was playing out of position a lot in 2020 which distorted his numbers. 

They used the logic that people used to state that Trae would be an impact player his second year in placing greater emphasis on the 2019 portion of his rookie season relative to the dismal 2018 portion.  I don't think that was a mistake to place that greater emphasis on that period (I'd also note that Cam's numbers were better on a full year basis using metrics like BPM and VORP).  Add in the fact that players (especially young players) tend to fluctuate from month to month and year to year and there was no real basis for picking Cam or Hunter as better for 2020-21 other than your personal projections for them.  Given that different people had different projections for their immediate future, I don't think there is some big lesson learned for the future.  

On the issue of position, I've made a similar but different point on Hunter's numbers noting that he was playing SF for the first time last year (having played PF in college) and that this would depress his numbers while he made that transition.  Under this logic, it would therefore be unsurprising to see Hunter put up worse numbers his rookie season than other players who were similarly situated but not making that position transition.

For this season, I'd rather do a true comparison of age 23 Hunter vs age 21 Reddish once we have a more meaningful sample size.  That is if a comparison is needed at all (which I don't think is particularly illuminative myself when they are playing different positions and rolls often with one another rather than spending the bulk of their competing for the same minutes at the same position). 

I think for me the more interesting comparison once we get a bigger sample size will be each of them versus their rookie selves.

[kg01]

59 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Thanks buddy! You know earning your approval is something I strive for.

Everybody's thinking it.  You're just the only one man enough to say it aloud.