Lin to the Raptors a good idea? Lin Raptors Plan B? (168)

Quote:

---

joey_hesketh wrote:

Lol 4.5 TOPG would lead the League by a decent margin, Nilanka. Not a good start.
I'm not exaggerating at all. He turned it over ALOT.

He played an average of 26MPG, 136th in the League, and still managed to crack the Top 7 in Turnovers. Thats BAD.




There were games where he was taking 17 and 18 shots WITH Carmelo and Amare in the Lineup.

And once again, Bayless, played UNREAL as a PG, for a solid stretch of games, led us to wins against some solid teams ... and he's still not a PG? Odd.



And me.

And I'll point it out again. Bayless managed a better Assist/TO ratio than Lin, which to me, IS the measurement of a Point Guard.

---

The assist:turnover ratio is an overrated/misused stat. Nobody even knew what it was before Calderon started excelling in it. And he's far from the best PG in the league. Matt Bonner was #3 in A:TO ratio this year. Other guys in the top 10? Lou Williams, Andre Iguodala and Beno Udrih. If you're looking for a single statistical measure of PG play, I don't know if A:TO is your best option.

Yes, 4.5 turnovers is a lot, but is it that far ahead of Deron Williams' 4.0, or John Wall's 3.9, or Kevin Durant's 3.8? And it's a lot less than the "10" you quoted (hence the exaggeration).

Lin has played a mere 64 games in his NBA career. He's a newborn baby by NBA standards (covered in gross after-birth with the umbilical cord still attached). The assumption is that he'll cut down his turnovers in due time.

If Bayless is retained, it'll be because Barbosa was unavailable (as a scoring option off the bench). After all, Colangelo wouldn't go on the air saying that he needs a PG if he honestly thought Bayless was the guy.

Quote:

---

Nilanka wrote:

Lin has played a mere 64 games in his NBA career. He's a newborn baby by NBA standards (covered in gross after-birth with the umbilical cord still attached).

---

No doubt and people are suggesting the Raptors should give him $20M in the final two years on a contract. Two full MLE years in the beginning of the contract. All this based on 64 career games after he went undrafted and was cut like four times. Where are all the Lin supporters going to be in three years if the Raptors do this bone head deal? Pushing him and Colangelo under the bus is my guess.

Quote:

---

Nilanka wrote:

Yes, 4.5 turnovers is a lot, but is it that far ahead of Deron Williams' 4.0, or John Wall's 3.9, or Kevin Durant's 3.8?

---

Over an 82 game schedule, beating these guys by .5 TOPG would result in an extra 41 TO's. Thats quite a few if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Nilanka wrote:

And it's a lot less than the "10" you quoted (hence the exaggeration).

---

Sorry, when I said 10 Turnovers, I meant to say 8 (Feb 6th), 8 (Feb 14th), 9 (Feb 17th), 7 (Feb 19th), 9 (Feb 23rd).

Quote:

---

Apollo wrote:

No doubt and people are suggesting the Raptors should give him $20M in the final two years on a contract. Two full MLE years in the beginning of the contract. All this based on 64 career games after he went undrafted and was cut like four times. Where are all the Lin supporters going to be in three years if the Raptors do this bone head deal? Pushing him and Colangelo under the bus is my guess.

---

Personally, I don't want Colangelo to overspend on Lin either. I wasn't trying to make any claims about Lin's monetary value. I was just saying that I think he'll be a good PG in this league, and a better one than Bayless.

Bayless has all the tools to be much better than Lin. Lin is overhyped nothing more

I think they're pretty comparable at this point. When Bayless has been given the freedom Lin has he's produced as well and in similar fashion. If we're going to look at average production per dollar I think you're going to find far more value in Bayless.

The problem is that neither is the solid, reliable, prototypical PG I want to see leading a team into the playoffs. Maybe they evolve into it, I don't know but if I'm going with this type of PG I don't want him as my starter and so I don't pay starter dollars period.

You are absolutely right Apollo. If JB had not been injured we would have gotten a better idea of how good he can be. Just look at Ramon Sessions, Bayless is basically a bigger, more athletic, and better shooting version of Sessions. Who wouldn't want that? he also loves the city and is willing to do whatever it takes to help us win.

Sessions when he played for the cavs was underrated and a lot of people, including some of the guys here on RR, criticized him as a PG. Now that he's in the spot light he's getting all the attention and everyone's saying what a great pickup he was. If we let go of bayless the same thing will happen and we'll regret it

Quote:

---

joey_hesketh wrote:

Over an 82 game schedule, beating these guys by .5 TOPG would result in an extra 41 TO's. Thats quite a few if you ask me.

---

I acknowledged that it's a lot of turnovers.

But considering Lin's relative inexperience, combined with very little practice time afforded last year (in a condensed schedule), it's not far-fetched to assume he'll cut down his turnovers as his career progresses.

I still wouldn't want Sessions in Toronto.

Quote:

---

Nilanka wrote:

I acknowledged that it's a lot of turnovers.

But considering Lin's relative inexperience, combined with very little practice time afforded last year (in a condensed schedule), it's not far-fetched to assume he'll cut down his turnovers as his career progresses.

---

Didn't everybody deal with that, in particular Bayless as he also had a new coach and new system to contend with as well?

Quote:

---

Apollo wrote:

Didn't everybody deal with that, in particular Bayless as he also had a new coach and new system to contend with as well?

---

Yes, but Bayless had 198 games of prior experience to fall back on. Lin had 29.

I dont envy Grunwald and the Knicks having to make the decision (basketball) to retain Lin and hope Melo and he will/can coexist. This past season was not pretty when the 2 were on the floor together. Lin of course was trying to get all involved including himself on the shot taking...but of course Melo was quite miffed at this. Will he pout again if Lin is still the PG? Will Lin have to change his game and be just as effective? One aspect of their coexistence is true...Lin has neither the cachet nor possibly the character to takeon Melo in the locker room to assert his control over the running the team as a pg in the L at this time.

So what are the poor Knicks to do? I have a feeling Melo will have a lot of say in the decision.

A few things on Lin:

1. Assists/TOs. He was 6th among PGs with an AST% of 41%. He is not a pass-adverse PG. His TOV% is right in line with guys like Andre Miller, Rondo, Rubio. Steve Nash's TOV% is 6%age points higher. So, while the raw turnovers may have been high, when looked at in context they don't look nearly as bad considering the system he was playing in and his USG%.

2. Scoring. His 55.2TS% isn't spectacular but it isn't terrible and is pretty much in line with a guy like Kyle Lowry. Irving was at 56% and Rubio was at ~48%.

3. Sample Size. Yeah, it's small. But pedigree means less to me in basketball than it does in baseball, for example. In baseball, I'm far more inclined to believe in the power arm in A-ball than the plucky feel-good 15th rounder who tore up AA after 2 years in A-ball. In the NBA, the success of small-school players, lower first rounders, and given the traditionally late-blooming PG-spot, I'm not disinclined to believe his performance is sustainable. Based on his advanced numbers, I think expecting he can maintain a 15PPG/7AST line is realistic.

4. Raptors. The team desperately needs a perimeter player who can create his own shot and shots for others. Now, Lin isn't the elite superstar, top of the food chain scorer they need but he is both a shot creator and playmaker. The 3-PT shooting is poor but with his TS% it isn't a end of the world issue. Having said all of that, given that this team is light years away from being any good, I don't see Lin as worhwhile right now and certainly not at the dollars he will command.

Quote:

---

Nilanka wrote:

Yes, but Bayless had 198 games of prior experience to fall back on. Lin had 29.

---

So Bayless should be penalized for being good enough to be selected in the lottery and play in the NBA at a young age? We should give Lin a pass because he wasn't drafted and got cut by like four teams? Does that make sense? They're the same age and Bayless has accomplished far more.

Lin is going to land a huge payday because he's popular with the fans and so the risk is worth it to some. If Bayless was that popular his price tag would be higher because demand would be higher. At the end of the day Lin is a large risk, Bayless is a small risk due to the price tags and production of each. I think the potential rewards are relatively similar.

Quote:

---

Apollo wrote:

Didn't everybody deal with that, in particular Bayless as he also had a new coach and new system to contend with as well?

---

The Bayless comparison is useful. The major differences I see between teh two players are: FTAs (Lin gets to the line far more often) and AST% (~31% for Bayless and 41% for Lin). Bayless' big advantage is that he's a much, much better 3PT shooter than Lin. As I noted above, the turnover issue is overblown as a result of a few high turnover games (the numbers normalized the more he played), the system he played in and his USG%.

The other obvious difference is that Bayless is what he is. He's highly unlikely to improve much or at all. With Lin, there's an obvious upside if his 3PT shooting improves and his turnovers normalize. Price is obviously an issue but I'd much rather roll the dice on Lin than on Bayless. Preferably, I'd get Deron Williams but beggars can't be choosers....

Quote:

---

Apollo wrote:

So Bayless should be penalized for being good enough to be selected in the lottery and play in the NBA at a young age? We should give Lin a pass because he wasn't drafted and got cut by like four teams? Does that make sense? They're the same age and Bayless has accomplished far more.

Lin is going to land a huge payday because he's popular with the fans and so the risk is worth it to some. If Bayless was that popular his price tag would be higher because demand would be higher. At the end of the day Lin is a large risk, Bayless is a small risk due to the price tags and production of each. I think the potential rewards are relatively similar.

---

Nobody needs to be penalized. I was just pointing out that Bayless has had more time to adjust to the NBA than Lin has.

Edit: Even if Lin was 35 years old, the above would be true.

Quote:

---

slaw wrote:

2. Scoring. His 55.2TS% isn't spectacular but it isn't terrible and is pretty much in line with a guy like Kyle Lowry. Irving was at 56% and Rubio was at ~48%.

---

Bayless had a higher TS%.

Quote:

---

slaw wrote:

The other obvious difference is that Bayless is what he is. He's highly unlikely to improve much or at all. With Lin, there's an obvious upside if his 3PT shooting improves and his turnovers normalize.

---

No disrespect, but that sounds an awful lot like Weak Cop out.
They're the same age, so I'm not sure where you are getting this?

I could just as easily say that Bayless has an OBVIOUS upside if his Ball Distribution improves; and Jeremy Lin "is what he is", and will never improve his turnovers.

Quote:

---

joey_hesketh wrote:

No disrespect, but that sounds an awful lot like Weak Cop out.
They're the same age, so I'm not sure where you are getting this?

I could just as easily say that Bayless has an OBVIOUS upside in his Ball Distribution.

---

I was going to ask him to explain that statement too. I'm dieing the hear the answer because it's not often a player peaks at age 23. I can't think of many outside of Vince Carter. For Vince, it was a choice because he was so naturally gifted he didn't have to work hard. Bayless works hard.

Quote:

---

Nilanka wrote:

Nobody needs to be penalized. I was just pointing out that Bayless has had more time to adjust to the NBA than Lin has.

Edit: Even if Lin was 35 years old, the above would be true.

---

Well then he's not played long enough to be given $20M in the back end two years of a contract in that case.

Quote:

---

Apollo wrote:

Well then he's not played long enough to be given $20M in the back end two years of a contract in that case.

---

Agreed. That's a lot of money to throw at an unproven player.