Nah, Hollinger's consistently been on the "Ginobili is vastly underrated" bandwagon. He had the infamous "Ginobili > Kobe" article in '07, and generally speaking he's been a strong proponent for Ginobili getting All-NBA 3rd team and/or making the All-star team in years that he didn't.
As far as PER is concerned, he's only given Ginobili the "usual" expected decline in PER that he gives all aging players. 23 --> 22.1 or 22.5 --> 21.2. He's never called any of his years fluke years.
I agree with Hollinger in most of his says,
Paul is franchise and is ahead of Parker, spurs are a team, clippers are a bunch of scrubs winning only thanks to Paul.
Now saying westbrook 's better than tony just insane.
Despite the fact i can't bear a piece of this head westbrook, I think he's far far away from Tony who's just the third best PG in the league.
Tony deserves at least second team.
3 quick remarks :
- realistically that was probably the year TP had the best shot at the mvp and passed on it knowingly, he didn't ask for extra minutes or anything, didn't argue with the nights off except for the lakers game, he didn't put his (low) mvp chances before the team (higher) PO's chances. It is known that both Durant and Lebron like to statpad, they made multiple declarations showing that, Durant even played 37 minutes in the All-Star game.
- Chris Paul is, like a lot of people in this thread, my mvp, nothing to do with numbers but just from watching games, he has a frontline that needs to be assisted on everything, Billups who was probably as valuable to them as Manu was for us went down. But TP this year clearly belongs right at the top with CP3.
- Hollinger relies too heavily on numbers, numbers told him that Diaw was strictly a good insurance at the end of the bench. He comes up with some great stuff like his article on high potential bargains but he also comes up with a lot of facepalm-worthy stuff that just shows he's not watching the games.
Hollinger put Ginobili on his All-Decline team at least once ... maybe twice. IIRC, he predicted a pretty huge drop in play right before Ginobili had his career year in 2008.
It's funny that Ginobili was on his All-Decline team a half decade ago and could conceivably post his career-high in PER this season.
Also Hollinger doesn't mind taking the story side of things into account himself :
Whether you chose Andrew Bynum or Dwight Howard as your second big man largely depends on which brand of immaturity rankled you more. Bynum's errors, however, were largely borne out of compe iveness; Howard's at times seemed to come from a place of sheer apathy. I freely admit that on sheer per-minute productivity Howard was the superior player, but it's hard for me to give a first-team All-NBA nod to a guy who was clearly uncommitted to his team and trying to backstab the coach.
Ah, you're right. I remember the All-decline article. Here's Manu's portion -
Manu turned around and increased his PER from 24.1 (06-07) to 24.3 (07-08)Manu Ginobili, Spurs (last season 24.18, projected 21.7)
Don't take this too far -- the guy is still an All-Star caliber performer who remains one of the league's most underrated players because the restrictions on his minutes hurt his per-game averages (believe it or not, he had the league's ninth-best PER last season).
But Manu was so good last season that it would be very difficult for him to repeat it -- he put up his best numbers since coming to the NBA in pretty much every category. As a 30-year-old slasher, we'd expect his numbers to go down anyway, and I think it's a relatively safe bet that he won't finish in the top 10 in PER this season [07-08] despite his strong start so far.
Since 07-08, he's posted PERs of 22.9, 22.5, 21.7, and 24.2 (current)
Can anyone with insider access post Manu's projected PER since 07-08?
Yeah, agreed. Westbrick is a scoring point guard who hasn't get IT, that personal glory is nothing compared to team achievement.
Ah, here we go. I found Manu's projected PER for this year at least -
2011-12 Current PER: 24.22
League Average Comparison: +9.22
Projected PER ('11-'12): 20.55
2010-11 PER: 21.78
yes i saw that article earlier.. wasn't surprised tho.. i mean it's pretty rare someone who's got some MVP buzz would be on the all nba 3rd team.. unless it's a spur of course
Westbrook is the most overrated player in basketball. Durant won't win anything in OKC with him running the point
I agree with this point. We'd not have championships if we judged players only on their stats. Guys like Bowen or Manu don't impress you with stat lines, but they win you games. Also, find it interesting now that a Spur is in the talks for MVP race, media are making up excuses like "story points", as if MVP for years hasn't been about story points. LAME
Which stat lines?
Manu has consistently impressed Hollinger with his advanced stat lines (though as we just found out even Hollinger underrated Manu after '06-'07). If you're talking about the stat lines that give "blue collar" casual fans hard-ons (PPG, APG, RPG, FG%, probably in that order), then yeah, I'd agree.
Hollinger just might like to go against the grain because he feels it makes him smarter. As for Westbrook I can't say I've watched him much this year, but in that recent meltdown game against the Lakers, Westbrook was pulling the same routine that got him ridiculed in the playoffs. He hasn't learned anything. He's like an uber-talented...I don't know, Antonio Daniels? Athletic, talented, but not great instincts. After that Lakers meltdown I felt convinced that OKC will never get over the next hump. Assuming Harden can recover to his previous play, I'd consider trading Westbrook to give more room for Durant.
I'm with Hollinger on this one...
It comes down to that, LJ.
Hollinger's PER is a nice stat that can be used to compare players when you haven't seen them play just as a referencing tool. But it is no accurate comparison metric. It omits defense, overrates volume of shots over shoot accuracy, and also overrates usage rate. Plus it is based on weights arbitrarily defined and drawn not from actual empirical data, but from subjective insight.
If Hollinger was truly being objective, he would have made his awards based on the fact that his PER was flawed and adjusting for that. Unfortunately he is in love with himself and that narcissism refuses to give Parker his due over Westbrook.
Anyone who saw Parker annihilate Westbrook whenever the Spurs met Thunder would know that the former is quite better than the latter.. Not Hollinger though.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
