CB Draft '09 Mock Press Conference: Northwest Division

[nickagneta]

On the Young vs. Dunleavy debate, head to head Dunleavy has been better, I think.  Link.  Also, if you compare Young's season last year to Dunleavy's 2008 (when he was healthier), Dunleavy was a better and more efficient scorer, got more assists, and about the same number of rebounds.

Does any of that change your opinion, Seattle?

On top of that you've got to look at how Young has performed as a PF as compared with a SF. As a SF his teams win % was 46, as a PF, 56%.

As a SF he scored 20 pts per 48, as a PF, 22. 2 more rbs per as a PF than SF, more blocks as a PF than SF...

I think in a strict positional sense, Dunleavy is better if healthy.

In a team helping sense, factoring Young's versatility he WOULD be a better option, but behind him you got Brewer, who obivously you can't count on yet (if ever..his per min stuff is pretty bad)..so you'll have to take a less effective Thad Young if you want to compete with Portland and Utah.

Thad Young should have been your Manu GInobli, and he matches up great with Rashard.

I say this with the utmost respect.

Are you out of your mind?

Thaddeus Young has slightly, I mean slightly better stats as a PF than as a SF but that matters not. What matters is who is going to bring more to the team and the very very obvious answer is a 21 year old emerging star not an injured 29 year old guy who is 2 years removed form his career year that will probably be worst than Youngs average season when all is said and done!

And I mean that with all due respect. Dunleavy is being given a ton more respect by you two than he has ever earned in this league. He is average at best.

[Roy Hobbs]

I've seen you discuss the very mediocre Dunleavy a couple of times now Roy and each time you revert back to mentioning his 2007-08 year as if that year was the year that is his most common one. He's going to be 29, he's entering his 8th year in the league and you are pointing to his "career" year as being the year we should judge him by?

I discussed his 2008 season because it's the one where he wasn't hampered by injury.  However, in 2009, his "per minute" averages were about the same -- or even better -- as in 2008.  The only place he showed significant decline was in his field goal percentage.

Thaddeus Young is 21 and in his second year had a better year than any that Dunleavy ever had except for that 2007-08 year when Dunleavy was 27. Dunleavy was still in college at 21 whereas Young put up 15.3 points 5 rebounds and 1.3 steals in the NBA at the age of 20.

Thad Young may improve, and become significantly better than Dunleavy.  However, from his rookie season, his stats overall actually regressed, and on average, he scored less and got fewer assists than Dunleavy. 

I think you are all wrong on this one and think Thaddeus Young is not only now, by far the better player, but also the much, much better long term prospect. Given that Dunleavy is a huge injury question mark, for me, that puts Seattle ahead of Utah and honestly, breathing down Portland necks.

I don't see how he's "by far the better player".  Maybe he will be, but I do wonder how you're coming up with your assessment.

To me Dunleavy is more of a 12 PPG, 5 RPG, 2 APG 44% FG% 36% 3FG% player than the player I envision Young being which will be close to 20 PPG, 6-7 RPG, 3 APG, 50% FG% 35% 3FG% with much tougher defense and athleticism.

Per 36 minutes, Dunleavy has *never* been a 12/5/2 guy.  Even going by raw numbers, Dunleavy has only averaged as few as 5.0 rebounds or 2.0 assists one time each.  It's fine to be high on Young, but I think you're significantly underrating Dunleavy at the same time.  The players, in my mind, are about equal right now, with Young having more potential, but Dunleavy having a slight edge in stats and experience.

[Hoyo de Monterrey]

Roy you keep mentioning a stats regression from Young's 1st to 2nd year. Where? What stats? Can you link to it, because everything I've seen has improvement.

Also, Dunleavy played 18 games last year, and has had 3 major surgeries since!! How is that even a semi-reasonable assumption that he returns to career year form??

[nickagneta]

I've seen you discuss the very mediocre Dunleavy a couple of times now Roy and each time you revert back to mentioning his 2007-08 year as if that year was the year that is his most common one. He's going to be 29, he's entering his 8th year in the league and you are pointing to his "career" year as being the year we should judge him by?

I discussed his 2008 season because it's the one where he wasn't hampered by injury.  However, in 2009, his "per minute" averages were about the same -- or even better -- as in 2008.  The only place he showed significant decline was in his field goal percentage.

Thaddeus Young is 21 and in his second year had a better year than any that Dunleavy ever had except for that 2007-08 year when Dunleavy was 27. Dunleavy was still in college at 21 whereas Young put up 15.3 points 5 rebounds and 1.3 steals in the NBA at the age of 20.

Thad Young may improve, and become significantly better than Dunleavy.  However, from his rookie season, his stats overall actually regressed, and on average, he scored less and got fewer assists than Dunleavy. 

I think you are all wrong on this one and think Thaddeus Young is not only now, by far the better player, but also the much, much better long term prospect. Given that Dunleavy is a huge injury question mark, for me, that puts Seattle ahead of Utah and honestly, breathing down Portland necks.

I don't see how he's "by far the better player".  Maybe he will be, but I do wonder how you're coming up with your assessment.

To me Dunleavy is more of a 12 PPG, 5 RPG, 2 APG 44% FG% 36% 3FG% player than the player I envision Young being which will be close to 20 PPG, 6-7 RPG, 3 APG, 50% FG% 35% 3FG% with much tougher defense and athleticism.

Per 36 minutes, Dunleavy has *never* been a 12/5/2 guy.  Even going by raw numbers, Dunleavy has only averaged as few as 5.0 rebounds or 2.0 assists one time each.  It's fine to be high on Young, but I think you're significantly underrating Dunleavy at the same time.  The players, in my mind, are about equal right now, with Young having more potential, but Dunleavy having a slight edge in stats and experience.

Why do you keep mentioned per minute and per 36 as some sort of end all stats? They aren't. I could quote you, and you know this quite well, bunches of guys who have great per 36 and per minute stats who absolutely suck. You know this Roy.

Simply put basketball is less a statistical game comparing one player to another as it is an observed game. In my observations Thaddeus Young is by far the better player. He's stronger. He's more athletic. He's more physical. He plays better defense. He's considerably young. He gets to more rebounds on average. He turns the ball over less. He's as good if not better shooter.

All by observation. Lo and behold, the stats kinda back all this up.

At the same age Thaddeus Young is tons better than Dunleavy. Comparing current games, he's better than Dunleavy and he's healthy and won't be sidelined for months.

Young is clearly the better player but of course, if you downplay the quality of your best competition in your division by calling a weaker player better, that could conceivably be better for Portland. Not that you would do that or anything. Just saying.

[Roy Hobbs]

Roy you keep mentioning a stats regression from Young's 1st to 2nd year. Where? What stats? Can you link to it, because everything I've seen has improvement.

Also, Dunleavy played 18 games last year, and has had 3 major surgeries since!! How is that even a semi-reasonable assumption that he returns to career year form??

From his rookie year to his sophomore season, Young's Per 36 minutes stats were as follows:

Points:  Improved by 1.9 points per 36 minutes
Rebounds: Decreased by 1.9 rebounds per 36 minutes
Assists: Stayed level (-.1 assist/36)
Blocks: Stayed level (+.1 block/36)
Steals: Decreased by 0.3 steals be 36 minutes
Turnovers: Stayed level (increased by .1 turnovers/36)
FT%: Stayed level (decreased by .03%)
FG%:  Decreased by .44%
3PT%: Increased by .25%
eFG%: Decreased by .21%

In other words, he slightly improved his three point shooting and points totals, but took a statistical hit across the board elsewhere on a per-minute basis. 

Also, his per-minute playoff averages took a fairly substantial hit; he had about the same productivity as in his rookie season, but in above 10 more minutes per game.

That doesn't mean, of course, that Young definitely has reached his potential.  I'm just not sure that it means he will absolutely take "the leap" next season.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/y/youngth01.html

That being said, the injury concerns for Dunleavy are legitimate ones.  If he can't be the same player that he was in the past 1 1/4 seasons, then Young should win this matchup going away.

[nickagneta]

Roy you keep mentioning a stats regression from Young's 1st to 2nd year. Where? What stats? Can you link to it, because everything I've seen has improvement.

Also, Dunleavy played 18 games last year, and has had 3 major surgeries since!! How is that even a semi-reasonable assumption that he returns to career year form??

From his rookie year to his sophomore season, Young's Per 36 minutes stats were as follows:

Points:  Improved by 1.9 points per 36 minutes
Rebounds: Decreased by 1.9 rebounds per 36 minutes
Assists: Stayed level (-.1 assist/36)
Blocks: Stayed level (+.1 block/36)
Steals: Decreased by 0.3 steals be 36 minutes
Turnovers: Stayed level (increased by .1 turnovers/36)
FT%: Stayed level (decreased by .03%)
FG%:  Decreased by .44%
3PT%: Increased by .25%
eFG%: Decreased by .21%

In other words, he slightly improved his three point shooting and points totals, but took a statistical hit across the board elsewhere on a per-minute basis. 

Also, his per-minute playoff averages took a fairly substantial hit; he had about the same productivity as in his rookie season, but in above 10 more minutes per game.

That doesn't mean, of course, that Young definitely has reached his potential.  I'm just not sure that it means he will absolutely take "the leap" next season.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/y/youngth01.html

That being said, the injury concerns for Dunleavy are legitimate ones.  If he can't be the same player that he was in the past 1 1/4 seasons, then Young should win this matchup going away.

Roy, Ike Diogu has better per minute stats than Rashard Lewis. Which do you take to start on your team? per 36 and per minute stats are flawed and players have slight fluctuations from year to year because they are such a detailed stat. That does not mean game regression and you know that.

[Roy Hobbs]

\

Young is clearly the better player but of course, if you downplay the quality of your best competition in your division by calling a weaker player better, that could conceivably be better for Portland. Not that you would do that or anything. Just saying.

Feel free to question my integrity, nick.  However, since you and I have specifically debated Mike Dunleavy's value to a roster long before this draft, I would have thought you'd be above such petty insinuations.

Also, of course, I've never said Thad Young isn't a good player.  I've simply said that Mike Dunleavy is pretty good, too.  If anything, it seems like I'm boosting two of my division rivals, rather than just one of them.

[Hoyo de Monterrey]

Top is his 19 year old rookie season, the bottom is his sophomore year at age 20. Per 36 minutes numbers are bound to decrease when someone sees a 13 minute per game jump in minutes. I feel confident in saying a 21 year old Thaddeus Young is ready in his third year of NBA experience to make a big jump in contributions. If at the 6 month mark a person can objectively compare Young and Dunleavy and have a serious debate over it, then I'd be very, very surprised.

G  GS MP   FG  FGA  FG% 3P  3PA  3P% FT  FTA  FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF
74 22 21.0 3.6 6.6 .539 0.1 0.3 .316 1.0 1.4 .738 1.6 2.6 4.2 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.7
PTS
8.2

G  GS MP   FG  FGA   FG%  3P 3PA  3P% FT  FTA  FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF
75 71 34.4 6.3 12.8 .495 0.7 2.2 .341 1.9 2.5 .735 1.9 3.2 5.0 1.1 1.3 0.3 1.6 2.2
PTS
15.3

Again, Mike Dunleavy had 3 major knee surgeries. He played in 18 games last year. I don't care what his per 36 minute numbers were if the guy can't play 36. 

[Hoyo de Monterrey]

\

Young is clearly the better player but of course, if you downplay the quality of your best competition in your division by calling a weaker player better, that could conceivably be better for Portland. Not that you would do that or anything. Just saying.

Feel free to question my integrity, nick.  However, since you and I have specifically debated Mike Dunleavy's value to a roster long before this draft, I would have thought you'd be above such petty insinuations.

Also, of course, I've never said Thad Young isn't a good player.  I've simply said that Mike Dunleavy is pretty good, too.  If anything, it seems like I'm boosting two of my division rivals, rather than just one of them.

I'll be honest, I'm taking the favorable comparisons between Young and Dunleavy as a major surprise. The mere fact that people are debating this is downplaying Young's abilities significantly. People should be debating the Rashard Lewis-Thaddeus Young matchup.

[nickagneta]

\

Young is clearly the better player but of course, if you downplay the quality of your best competition in your division by calling a weaker player better, that could conceivably be better for Portland. Not that you would do that or anything. Just saying.

Feel free to question my integrity, nick.  However, since you and I have specifically debated Mike Dunleavy's value to a roster long before this draft, I would have thought you'd be above such petty insinuations.

Also, of course, I've never said Thad Young isn't a good player.  I've simply said that Mike Dunleavy is pretty good, too.  If anything, it seems like I'm boosting two of my division rivals, rather than just one of them.

I'll be honest, I'm taking the favorable comparisons between Young and Dunleavy as a major surprise. The mere fact that people are debating this is downplaying Young's abilities significantly. People should be debating the Rashard Lewis-Thaddeus Young matchup.

I would have to agree with this statement

[nickagneta]

\

Young is clearly the better player but of course, if you downplay the quality of your best competition in your division by calling a weaker player better, that could conceivably be better for Portland. Not that you would do that or anything. Just saying.

Feel free to question my integrity, nick.  However, since you and I have specifically debated Mike Dunleavy's value to a roster long before this draft, I would have thought you'd be above such petty insinuations.

Also, of course, I've never said Thad Young isn't a good player.  I've simply said that Mike Dunleavy is pretty good, too.  If anything, it seems like I'm boosting two of my division rivals, rather than just one of them.

I am not questioning your integrity. I am saying that you are using a game strategy.

Yes I knew your feelings on this player beforehand but you can still have this opinion on Dunleavy and be passive aggressively insulting Young by comparing a much lesser player to him. I can love Mitch Richmond's game but if I start comparing him to Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant, am I not, in an off hand way, insulting MJ or Kobe?

I can love Mike James but if I compare his best season to derrick Rose's rookie year, am I not being insulting to Derrick Rose?

Your integrity is intact I didn't insult it. I truly believe you think Dunleavy a good player, though for the life of me I can't see why. But I also think in this subtle game of diplomacy and voye swaying I don't think it would be beyond a game strategy to compare a possible up and coming star to a mediocre player to bring down his value to influence votes.

If that's insulting your integrity then I truly apologize. I did not mean to do it.

[Roy Hobbs]

\

Young is clearly the better player but of course, if you downplay the quality of your best competition in your division by calling a weaker player better, that could conceivably be better for Portland. Not that you would do that or anything. Just saying.

Feel free to question my integrity, nick.  However, since you and I have specifically debated Mike Dunleavy's value to a roster long before this draft, I would have thought you'd be above such petty insinuations.

Also, of course, I've never said Thad Young isn't a good player.  I've simply said that Mike Dunleavy is pretty good, too.  If anything, it seems like I'm boosting two of my division rivals, rather than just one of them.

I am not questioning your integrity. I am saying that you are using a game strategy.

Yes I knew your feelings on this player beforehand but you can still have this opinion on Dunleavy and be passive aggressively insulting Young by comparing a much lesser player to him. I can love Mitch Richmond's game but if I start comparing him to Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant, am I not, in an off hand way, insulting MJ or Kobe?

I can love Mike James but if I compare his best season to derrick Rose's rookie year, am I not being insulting to Derrick Rose?

Your integrity is intact I didn't insult it. I truly believe you think Dunleavy a good player, though for the life of me I can't see why. But I also think in this subtle game of diplomacy and voye swaying I don't think it would be beyond a game strategy to compare a possible up and coming star to a mediocre player to bring down his value to influence votes.

If that's insulting your integrity then I truly apologize. I did not mean to do it.

There's no gamesmanship here, though.  When it comes to the voting, I have Seattle ranked above Utah in the regular season, simply due to Dunleavy's injury.  However, if Dunleavy plays well when he comes back, I can easily see myself switching that vote at the six month review.

Seattle and Utah are both good teams.  I'm not trying to put either one of them down.  I figure they'll both be joining Portland in the playoffs, without much of a question in my mind.

[KCattheStripe]

1. KC was great to work with. It was tough to leave him because we did a lot of predraft work to get ready. There wasn't really a conflict with him because he was targeting different guys than i was. He had his PG right out of the gates. We tried to work a deal after the draft but couldn't come to it. I was hoping for a danny-mchale type deal but he wasn't willing  

The Memphis Grizzlies would like to congratulate CiO on making such a greatteam out of aa bad situation.

[nickagneta]

\

Young is clearly the better player but of course, if you downplay the quality of your best competition in your division by calling a weaker player better, that could conceivably be better for Portland. Not that you would do that or anything. Just saying.

Feel free to question my integrity, nick.  However, since you and I have specifically debated Mike Dunleavy's value to a roster long before this draft, I would have thought you'd be above such petty insinuations.

Also, of course, I've never said Thad Young isn't a good player.  I've simply said that Mike Dunleavy is pretty good, too.  If anything, it seems like I'm boosting two of my division rivals, rather than just one of them.

I am not questioning your integrity. I am saying that you are using a game strategy.

Yes I knew your feelings on this player beforehand but you can still have this opinion on Dunleavy and be passive aggressively insulting Young by comparing a much lesser player to him. I can love Mitch Richmond's game but if I start comparing him to Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant, am I not, in an off hand way, insulting MJ or Kobe?

I can love Mike James but if I compare his best season to derrick Rose's rookie year, am I not being insulting to Derrick Rose?

Your integrity is intact I didn't insult it. I truly believe you think Dunleavy a good player, though for the life of me I can't see why. But I also think in this subtle game of diplomacy and voye swaying I don't think it would be beyond a game strategy to compare a possible up and coming star to a mediocre player to bring down his value to influence votes.

If that's insulting your integrity then I truly apologize. I did not mean to do it.

There's no gamesmanship here, though.  When it comes to the voting, I have Seattle ranked above Utah in the regular season, simply due to Dunleavy's injury.  However, if Dunleavy plays well when he comes back, I can easily see myself switching that vote at the six month review.

Seattle and Utah are both good teams.  I'm not trying to put either one of them down.  I figure they'll both be joining Portland in the playoffs, without much of a question in my mind.

Seattle definitely. Utah, it will be close. I see the Pacific putting three definite in the playoffs and the Southwest might put three in too. I have to take a closer look over the next couple of days. Yeah, Utah could definitely grab a seed as well.

[KCattheStripe]

\

Young is clearly the better player but of course, if you downplay the quality of your best competition in your division by calling a weaker player better, that could conceivably be better for Portland. Not that you would do that or anything. Just saying.

Feel free to question my integrity, nick.  However, since you and I have specifically debated Mike Dunleavy's value to a roster long before this draft, I would have thought you'd be above such petty insinuations.

Also, of course, I've never said Thad Young isn't a good player.  I've simply said that Mike Dunleavy is pretty good, too.  If anything, it seems like I'm boosting two of my division rivals, rather than just one of them.

I am not questioning your integrity. I am saying that you are using a game strategy.

Yes I knew your feelings on this player beforehand but you can still have this opinion on Dunleavy and be passive aggressively insulting Young by comparing a much lesser player to him. I can love Mitch Richmond's game but if I start comparing him to Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant, am I not, in an off hand way, insulting MJ or Kobe?

I can love Mike James but if I compare his best season to derrick Rose's rookie year, am I not being insulting to Derrick Rose?

Your integrity is intact I didn't insult it. I truly believe you think Dunleavy a good player, though for the life of me I can't see why. But I also think in this subtle game of diplomacy and voye swaying I don't think it would be beyond a game strategy to compare a possible up and coming star to a mediocre player to bring down his value to influence votes.

If that's insulting your integrity then I truly apologize. I did not mean to do it.

There's no gamesmanship here, though.  When it comes to the voting, I have Seattle ranked above Utah in the regular season, simply due to Dunleavy's injury.  However, if Dunleavy plays well when he comes back, I can easily see myself switching that vote at the six month review.

Seattle and Utah are both good teams.  I'm not trying to put either one of them down.  I figure they'll both be joining Portland in the playoffs, without much of a question in my mind.

Seattle definitely. Utah, it will be close. I see the Pacific putting three definite in the playoffs and the Southwest might put three in too. I have to take a closer look over the next couple of days. Yeah, Utah could definitely grab a seed as well.

I thinK utah needs Dunleavy to be healthy to be a playoff team.