mook

Look, I've been critical of Zach too. I just don't see why people are so eager to pile on right now when:
a) there's only a two game PRE-season sample size
b) he did just go for 27 points and 10 boards
c) he played through a tough injury last year when Amare Stoudemire wouldn't
d) the guards he has played with haven't had a lot of experience together in working with a low-post based offense

I'm annoyed by the guy's unwillingness to show up to work on time, and his first game didn't sound like it went well. but it's only the pre-season and Zach is finally playing healthy. let's give him a little time before passing judgment. the guy has been a 20/10 threat for us for several years now, and at least deserves that.

Schilly

I don't think you are right at all...All of those you list are arguable, but stats don't lie when it comes to things like possitive impact on the floor. Perceived best players maybe, but come on in all of those cases you are comparing 2 very good players to each other.

Example in Charlotte...we all think Okafor is the best player, but he isn't, Gerald wallace is.
Wallace scored more 15ppg vs 13ppg...Rebounded very little less (7.5 vs 10) averaged more assists blocks and steals and had a higher FG %.

McGrady and Yao...They are both very good players. But their positive impacts on the game are different. Yao only score 2ppg less, but got 4 rpg more, had a higher fg % blocked more shots and was the bigger factor to the Rockets success last year.

Is Bibby better than Brad Miller?
Bibby: 21ppg, 2.9rpg, 5.4apg .432fg%
Miller: 15ppg, 7.8rpg, 4.7apg .495fg%

Artest was right there with Miller.

Kidd and Carter, again 2 very good players hard call...Statisticall Carter averaged more than 10ppg more than Kdd though.

I already pointed out the NY thing...But maybe it's not wrong, how successful has Marbury been in his career?

crowTrobot

i think you meant effect

tlong

Anybody that thinks that simply by removing Zach from the lineup we instantly become a better team is crazy. We needs his interior threat to keep teams honest. We would have been blown out by 20+ without Zach last night.

Schilly

BTW Mook I wouldn't say I'm being critical of Zach...well not exaclty, but my personal observation the last couple years is that while he puts up very solid stats he doesn't necessarily make the team that much better as a whole. I know not having Zach hurts us, but that's because we haven't had an adequite backup to absorb his absence.

Schilly

You'r eright...but I find that people that use that argument rarely consider that if a trade was made to move Zach that we would be supplimented with a player that would have an impact on the game. A guy who could bring 12ppg and 7rpg and play within the system and play better Defense may be more effective than Zach himself is.

mook

Charlotte is a great example. I can't think of anyone who would rather have Gerald Wallace on their team instead of Okafor. the Roland numbers say otherwise because Okafor got injured in the season, before they started to gell a little, and Wallace seized the opportunity. nobody really thinks Wallace is the franchise cornerstone though.

I don't know where you get the Roland numbers for, but it'd be interesting to see what they said about Zach before he was injured. I suspect he'd look pretty good in those ratings.

is Zach as good as most of the names on your list? clearly no. is he the best player on our team? clearly yes. for now.

Schilly

Mook there is another stat at 82games that is very telling, it's the "Per 100 possesions" stat and it indicates the teams performance with and without said player per 100 possesions...As it appears on 82games.

Charlotte
Gerald Wallace +4.6
Felton +4.6
Emeka -0.5

Houston
Ming +6.8
McGrady +6.1

New Jersey
Carter +15.6
Kidd +12.9
Jefferson +11.3

Sacramento
Artest +9.8
Miller +8.9
Bibby +3.0


San Antonio
Parker +8.8
Manu +7.6
Duncan +4.6

Portland
Patterson +7.8
Przybilla +2.2
Ratliff +4.9
Miles +3.0
Dixon +1.1
Randolph +0.8

My theory may be a little off... but if you go by the per 100 possetions Zach looks to been even less important from an efficiency stand point.

I don't think it's a matter of him being good or bad, I think it's a matter of him not being a good fit on this team.

mook

who exactly do you mean? are you saying we would be better off with Kenyon Martin? maybe. Abdur Rahim? that bridge is burned. Rasheed? not likely. Theo Ratliff? *ducks*

I'm trying to think of whom else we could trade Zach's massive contract for and get that kind of production out of in replacement.

or is this the ol' addition by subtraction theory, whereby we dump our most talented player for basically dead meat, because we'd be better off as a team without him?

seems like we've been down that road before, and it led us to the worst record in the league.

It's_GO_Time

Weren't you just arguing after the last game that an analysis based only on stats, without being at the game, is a useless analysis. That someone who is at the game can give a much better analysis and not to tell you about flow or whatever if you weren't at the game.

And now your making a point that Zach has a bad affect on the team (or not as good as Roy) based soley on stats????

Dan

nope. he was at the game and wondered if stats would back up his feelings about how the team flowed with zach (and roy).

__________________
A Buddhist walks up to a hot dog vendor and says "Make me one with everything".

when will the loss of life end?

The world respects the power of our example, not an example of our power.

I'd like to say I made this, but I didn't

Schilly

I was at both games....LOL

No my argument the other day was that it is hard to simply look at the play by play transcript and determine the flow of the game and how certain players affect it. I also think you are right on, you can't simply look at a players individual production and guage their impact on the game. For Example last night, Zach had a monster game, but breaking it down the team was better offensively and defensively when he wasn't in the game.

When you read the Play by Play, at say ESPN, it doesn't say "Zach dribbling, dribbling cribbling, lazy pass to Sergio, Now Sergio has to rush the shot with 3 on the clock" it says "Rodriguez Missed Jumper 3 seconds on Sot Clock".

Blazer Ringbearer

So the 40 minutes he was in, the team had terrible flow, and the 8 he was out, they played great?

This is just stretching. The agenda is clear, lot's of people don't like Zach.

Get over it, he's a very good basketball player and the team is better with him than without him.

Dan