Jimmy Butler for a 42 win Bulls team: 20.9 points, 5.3 rebounds, 4.8 assists, 1.6 steals, 45%/31%/83%
Ricky Davis for a 33 win Celtic team: 19.7 points, 5.3 assists, 4.5 rebounds, 1.2 steals, 46%/32%/79%
Neither made the playoffs. Butler had former MVP Derrick Rose, 6x All-star Pau Gasol, last year's ROY runnerup Nikola Mirotic and a solid bench of players like Taj Gibson.
I wouldn't mind bringing in Butler, but I'm not overpaying for premium-brand Ricky Davis.
Jimmy Butler for a 50-win Bulls team: 20.0 points, 5.8 rebounds, 3.0 assists, 1.8 steals, 46.2%/37.8%/83.4%
Ricky Davis Career stats: 13.5 points, 3.3 assists, 3.5 rebounds, 1 steal 45%/36%/78% in 29.8mpg
Jimmy Butler Career stats: 13.6 points, 2.6 assists, 4.5 rebounds, 1.4 steals, 45%/33%/81% in 31.2mpg
Dude cmon now. You know you're just using career stats to have a (lame) reason to not want butler. You know jimmy didn't get a ton of time in his earlier years, and was only getting PT for his defense, right?
Yeah, I also know I've seen articles from Bulls fans who said his defense cratered once he was given a larger offensive role.
Honestly, I haven't watched enough of Butler to really have a major opinion one way or the other. Did you guys watch a ton of Bulls games this year? I just know what I've read about him. I'm fine with bringing him in, but I wouldn't overpay for him.
As a 23 year old Ricky Davis put up Butler-esque stats of 20.6 points, 5.5 assists, 4.9 rebounds and 1.6 steals... It was his 5th season. He was an effective player for a number of years.
This was Butler's 5th season. The 26 year old has game. Davis was a bit of a headcase (though I've heard Butler has a little of that in him as well) and Butler is widely believed to be a better defensive player (though playing for a team with an elite defensive identity impacted that a bit). I'm not saying Davis was better than Butler. I'm just saying that we've seen guys put up big stats for losers in the past. I wouldn't mind trading for Butler if the price is right. I wouldn't hold my breathe on him being the franchise player the team needs.
Your problem is instead of reading articles written about Butler from credible news sources or watching Bulls games, you are getting your information from uninformed and biased Bulls fans on blog sites. That's like trying to learn more about the Celtics players by listening to Celtics fans that post on Celticsblog. If people did that and took BBallTim seriously they would believe that Rondo was better than Jordan. If those people listened to triboy they would think Jordan Mickey was better than Bill Russell. If they listened to our group of young posters that love tanking they would have been convinced Ainge was an incompetent boob for not going all Hinkie. If they listened to some others they would be convinced Isaish Thomas isn't an All-Star caliber talent and should be coming off the bench. If they listened to you they would have been convinced that the Nets pick wouldn't have stood a chance at landing in the top ten of the lottery.
Time to start getting your information from better sources LB. Jimmy Butler is ten times the player Ricky Davis ever was.
You say he was 10x the player Davis ever was. We never saw prime Davis play on a loaded Bulls team lead by defensive mastermind Tom Thibs. We never saw Butler play on a weak Celtic/Cavs team with no defensive identity.
It's pretty likely Butler is better than Davis was. I'm just pointing out that statistically, they were on a par with one another. ...
No. You did not point such a thing out, because they are not, at all, statistically on a par with each other.
What you did, was cherry pick. You cherry picked some numbers that, when taken way out of context, looked kinda like similar numbers. That in no way makes them 'statistically on a par with each other'.
except that statistically... prime Ricky Davis was on a par with him. So, yes. That's precisely what it shows. Similar career stats. Similar peak. Whether or not Butler continues playing on this level and increases the tiny gap above Davis is another question.
This is wrong on so many levels.
First off, Ricky Davis' "prime" never produced a season with more than 6.5 Wins Produced (using Wages of Win definition) or 5.7 Win Shares (basketball-reference definition). That was in 2006-07 in Minnesota. But he played some 3000 minutes, thus producing at a rate of only .106 WP/48 or .091 WS/48.
Davis had only one other season of greater than 3.0 WP in his whole career -- 4.5 WP in 2003-04 for Boston. That was arguable his actual, 'best season' because he produced at an at-least-better-than-average WP/48 of .129.
Otherwise, the rest of Davis' 13-year career was the definition of mediocre, averaging just 2.0 WP per season.
Butler, on the other hand, in his short 5 year career has already produced far more Wins than Davis' entire career. After not playing much his rookie season, Butler has ripped off 4 straight seasons of huge WP numbers: 11.4, 9.8, 14.3 & 11.8 (or, 7.0, 7.1, 11.2 & 9.1 Win Shares).
And in of those 4 seasons, he accrued wins at super star rates: .257, .182, .274 & .229 WP/48.
Not one of Davis' seasons really resembles _any_ of Butler's seasons.
Butler's career averages (9.8 WP and .233 WP/48) crushes Davis' career averages (2.0 WP, .054 WP/48).
One can argue about the exacting accuracy of Wins Produced or Win Shares - that's not the point. That they differ is mainly a matter of difference of weighting and normalization in each model. Both, though, are much more comprehensive statistical models of the value of what a player has done than the cherry picked, out-of-context number comparisons that you did.
And BOTH models show that Ricky Davis and Jimmy Butler are in no way, shape or form on a 'statistical par with each other'.
Topic: Tim Bontemps predicts Jimmy Butler will be traded to Boston (Read 33598 times)