DeMar has a higher PER (14.7 to 12.7)
DeMar has higher win shares (4.7 to 4.3 and 0.75 to 0.7 per 48)
DeMar has the same difference between ORtg and DRtg despite playing on a crappy team (-5)
DeMar scores more points (18.1) on the same number of shots (14.7) than Klay (16.6) despite hardly making any threes
DeMar rebounds (3.9 to 3.8) and assists (2.5 to 2.2) slightly better per 36
DeMar has a higher assist rate (12.0% to 10.1%)
DeMar has a lower turnover rate (9.6% to 11.0%)
DeMar has a higher rebounding rate (6.3% to 5.7%)
The only argument you really have is that Klay's TS% is 1% higher, which basically means nothing. This is a classic case of overrating a player because their team went deep in the playoffs. Which is why everyone thinks Paul George is a superstar now. And btw Klay was even worse in the playoffs than in the regular season.
Joe Johnson at this stage of his career is just not a better player than DeRozan by any stretch of the imagination.
So, based on this analysis, that we have 4 top ten players going forward, how many wins this year?
Klay might be a better fit on the Warriors because of his 3 ball but he is certainly not the better player. DeRozan who isn't even considered a great shot creator is far better at creating his own shot. He also does a better job of creating opportunities for his teammates with his drive and kick game. Additionally he has the 3rd best post game of any 2-guard in the league, Klay's post game is about as good as my ability to write in Ancient Greek.
Klay pretty much just has more range. He also plays on a more uptempo team which should inflate his scoring, yet DD still outscores him on the same # of shots. If we played at the Warriors pace DeMar would be over 20 a game.
I think in the halfcourt he should primarily work from either corner or the high post. Why? He can actually hit the corner 3, but unlike a typical 3+D player like a Danny Green or Jared Dudley, he can blow by his man and finish at the rim or get to the ft line if he's being played to tightly. His turnaround fadeaway on the baseline out of the post was also extremely effective last year.
This is why everyone thinks the Spurs players are so good, and then they end up sucking on other teams (see Roger Mason). They are given specific roles and asked to play to their strengths. If you asked Kawhi Leonard to isolate and score off the bounce he would shoot 30% and be considered a chucker. Instead because all he has to do is hit corner 3s, cut and score off o-rebounds he's highly efficient and effective.
Miami: Wade, LBJ, Bosh (actually all top 5 tbh)
Indy: PG, Granger, Hibbert, West
NY: Melo, Chandler, JR
BKN: DWill, KG, PP, B-Lo
CHI: Rose, Boozer, Deng, Noah
CLE: Kyrie, Bynum, Varejao (at least he was last year when healthy)
OKC: KD, RW, Ibaka
SA: TD, Parker, maybe Manu and Kawhi
LAC: CP3, Griffin, Crawford
MEM: Conley (debatable), gasol, Z-Bo
GSW: Curry, Iguodala, Lee, Bogut (when healthy)
HOU: Harden, Dwight, Parsons (debatable)
NOLA: EG, Holiday, Anthony Davis
I specifically stated in the OP that this doesn't necessarily mean anything, I just wanted to know if people agreed that we have some top 10 positional guys.
East: Miami - 66 wins; Indy - 49; NY - 54; Brooklyn - 49 (with just D-Will and Lopez); Chi -No Rose, massive injurie, 45 wins;
West: OKC - 60; SA -58; LAC - 56; MEM - 56; GSW - 47.
So, why wouldn't 50+ wins be fair? What about 49? Those are the teams you referenced. Their records are clearly in the ~50 range. I just think it's odd to suggest that the Raps have that many top 10 players at their positions yet it doesn't mean anything, isn't relevant and doesn't necessarily translate into wins. All the teams you referenced clearly translated their talent into wins. If the Raps are that good, shouldn't we expect the same?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)