bucks are willing to listen to offers fro bogut...
We really don't know how good of a mid-range shooter Turiaf is right now. Truth is he has shot over 35% from 15-23 feet out the majority of his career but his attempts (along with his confidence) seemed to have regressed the past few seasons. Why is that? Because he's been hampered dealing with injuries the majority of the past 3 seasons.
His numbers the past 3 years (10'-11'-12') are somewhat misleading, due to him missing more than half the games (in 2 of the 3 years) and being injured the majority of the three years (which causes the sample size to be relatively small; which makes Turiaf seem to be a worse shooter than Blair; which is false IMO).
Now, when you look at his past 3 healthy seasons, the numbers sky rocket to 107 for 278 in shots from 15-23 feet out-- which is equivalent to 39%. via Hoopdata. That number suggests he's better shooter and a more viable threat than Blair from mid-range.
Also, throughout his career, Turiaf has attempted three times as many shots from 15-23 feet than shots from 10-15 feet out. Take that however you want it.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 02-26-2012 at 09:03 PM.
Bogut's pretty injury prone though :/
LINK
That leads us to Andrew Bogut, who fractured his left ankle and is out for another 8-12 weeks. Hurt or healthy, there are always teams interested in the 2005 pick of the litter, who’s under contract ($13M/$14M) for the next seasons. Obviously, the Bucks have yet to hear anything especially enticing, but they’re “definitely open to offers,” disclosed an East Coast coach.
Yeah...I saw that(guess I was wrong again, gets easier every time). I was going to edit what I said to add that year as the exception but I was too lazy to bother. I guess I was chalking it up as a bit of a fluke as his shooting has fallen off a cliff since then.
Still...the fact remains that our friend TD21 is still grasping onto misinformation to try to prove himself right. He used last year as his evidence...evidence he got from Hollinger who obviously didn't do proper research either(which is strange for a numbers guy). All he had to do was look it up himself. Instead, he once again cited the same false stats after the true stats were presented to him.
Yes, whether or not Turiaf was once or had the potential to be a decent outside shooter, at this moment his outside shooting is weak. Perhaps it's from injuries as 'Tres mentions, but the fact that he's been injured a lot in the last few years doesn't exactly improve one's confidence in him to somehow reverse a 5 year trend.
That said, if Blair doesn't improve his rebounding then it's hard for me to say that Blair is that much better. The other way to look at that is: why pursue Turiaf if he isn't a marked improvement?
Bingo. He's had some past success. Was it a fluke? Was it injuries as you suggested that made things worse? Could be either. There are only assumptions at this point and the numbers. The only safe assumption right now is that he really can't be trusted to stretch the floor at all. If the Spurs were going to target a player to help on the front line, I'd like to work with more concrete evidence.
I just wonder what kind of offer the Bucks expects for Bogut
Looks like we are on the same page here. No real reason to target a free agent that...tbh...doesn't make them significantly better. Backup plan or last resort? I could see that.
If healthy, Turiaf would be a significant improvement over Blair on the defensive end. IMO Most specifically in pick and roll defense/contesting shots in the paint. As Hollinger pointed out here in his assessment of Turiaf's defense:
Also, it can be debated that Turiaf would be an improvement on the offensive end, as he would allow the superior offensive players on the team more shots by not taking any bad ones--which Blair has a problem with. (Simplified addition by subtraction; solid play over sloppy play) And that's not even to mention him potentially being a much better mid-range threat than Blair right now.He's a strong plus-minus guy at the defensive end because he'll guard pick-and-rolls and run around like a crazy person trying to block everything. He just can't do this for extended minutes given the foul trouble and the manic pace he maintains.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 02-26-2012 at 09:30 PM.
I guess we have different definitions of significant. Still to many unknowns and assumptions for me to accept that he would make the team much better. Hed be better than doing nothing.
And he's friends with Parker, which would be a positive to get him here and for him to be happy here, in theory.
Edit: IF healthy.
The thing is that there doesnt appear to be many options that would "clearly" make the Spurs better. What we do know is that we need shot blocking (he provides that) & consistent energy and a dirty work guy next to Tim (he provides that). This is really all moot because he's not available in reality at the moment.
Last edited by DPG21920; 02-26-2012 at 10:50 PM.
The team isn't making a move. This decision was clarly made in the offseason when they chose to keep Rj. Now, they are going to stick with their guns and go with the youth (Splitter, Green, Leonard), and if it doesn't work, so be it.
Edit - Turiaf blows
Last edited by Hoops Czar; 02-26-2012 at 11:53 PM.
Mavs shopping Beaubois - Anderson's agent asked for a trade...
Salaries are similar...
My biggest concern with Turiaf is that he hasn't played since New Year's Day. He's been out with a broken hand and who knows how far away he is from returning and how much time he will need to get back to playing condition.
I'd definitely want him if he's bought out, but projecting him as an immediate addition to the rotation is optimistic.
Fair enough. But you're still missing the point. This is a classic case of not seeing the forest (the fact that I said he's a better, more versatile defender, in addition to being a better shot blocker, which would make your savior wrong) from the trees (debating whether Turiaf is a decent or worse mid range shooter).
I wasn't necessarily wrong; Hollinger was. There's no earthly idea for me to have presumed he was wrong though and no one made me aware of it until now. But like 'tres did, you can interpret the numbers differently and I do. Either way, like I said from the beginning, I agree with your savior that he wouldn't crack the rotation anyway. Despite this team's desperate need for a versatile defensive big, who can block shots, they value corporate knowledge/chemistry too much to sign what's by most measures an inferior player and play him over Blair. Especially when you consider the fact that he wouldn't be in game shape and would have limited time to master even the basics of the system, as well as build chemistry.
Still, he'd be good insurance. I can't say with conviction that he'd make the team "that much better", but I can say with conviction that I can't imagine Blair being a rotation player -- and a starter at that -- on a championship team. He's a good stats/bad team guy, who just so happens to be on a good team. I'd rather find out if Turiaf can make the team "that much better" than have Blair inevitably end up being a large part of their undoing.
yeah, but the values are not similar even considering Beaubois injuries;
Well...I guess your consistency is admirable.
This we can agree on. At least we meet in the middle somewhere.Still, he'd be good insurance. I can't say with conviction that he'd make the team "that much better", but I can say with conviction that I can't imagine Blair being a rotation player -- and a starter at that -- on a championship team.
Francisco Elson was waived today by the 76ers.
He is a true 7 footer.
Elson can run the floor too. Remember when he was the fastest player beside parker on the team?
Seriously this team could get Dwight Howard and Pop probably still wouldn't play him because it wouldn't be fair to the other guys and he doesn't spread the floor.
I would love elson man. He was a high energy guy. He played Dirk well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
