Marc Stein: Hearing that the Grizzlies — who will be looking for wing upgrades with their mid-level exception — have Avery Bradley high among their free-agent targets
- AB has averaged 4 less games per season compared to Marcus after AB's rookie season when he sucked too much to get on the floor.
- I'm all for bringing Smart back at a reasonable price, but the hero worship here for Smart may be as bad as anyone I've seen on the Cs. Ever.
- AB was the better player in the 2016-17 season FWIW:
http://bkref.com/tiny/ce9Bj
No. You are putting to much stock into "production" and extremely faulty metrics. Production does NOT equal on court impact. The "dinosaur" centers have been/are being pushed out of the league because you simply cannot win with them on the floor remotely consistently. Small guards are the next biggest target to exploit and with the dinosaur centers disappearing they are next. A bigger 3 and D guy on the wing, with no other skills, provides an easily better skill set to win with the way the game is being played now even if his "production" on offense is minimal.
Avery doesn't have a single above average skill that can be utilized to provide a positive impact. His shooting is average on the wing and his on ball defensive value is significantly diminished in a league that has grown much smarter. When you add in the fact that he is undersized, injury prone, afraid of screens, very reluctant to draw a charge, poor help defender, etc.. I mean I like Avery but I can't think of a single reason why a G.M. would want to acquire him, let alone sign him to anything resembling a big, long term contract.
Do you have some better metrics?
There are no metrics anywhere capable of quantifying a players defensive prowess with any semblance of accuracy. These metrics primarily use very limited counting stats like defensive rebounds, steals and blocks in all encompassing formulas to evaluate players playing different positions, with different roles, you just can't do that. Would you do that with Hockey, Football or soccer who's players play different positions with different roles, the answer is no and basketball is no different.
Obtaining 12 defensive rebounds in a game or on average in a given season doesn't mean you were even a positive on defense. Many of the best rebounders are actually big negatives on defense but these metrics will positively credit them for those rebounds. Same goes for steals and blocks as some players get more of them by sacrificing position, while others get fewer blocks and steals while maintaining position more often and not gambling. Which is more valuable?
Metrics that use on off numbers are subject to things like who you are playing with, as well as who you are replacing or being replaced by, good luck accurately accounting for that in a formula. Some of these formulas even use height as a factor suggesting that if you are tall you are automatically better which isn't remotely true for everyone. They are all garbage designed to get clicks.