I said "Sure it is" in response to player ratings being subjective. I would happily speak that way to you in person. If, after having done so, you repeated what I said in an effort to mock my point, our personal interaction would likely change in tone and demeanor.
I'm going to stop responding now, as I am going down the road of myself bringing the animus to this board I was trying to address. Let's leave it at this: 1. I believe player rankings are largely subjective. 2. I am happy to have TJ Warren on the Suns. 3. This conversation is clearly not going down a constructive path. I apologize for my contribution to that.
I don't think so. West is just a rotation player on an elite team, so in his case RPM can be misleading. Covington is one of the top 3 and D players, plays +32 min. for a good team, averages 14 PPG on 58% TS. Warren is less effective on offense and a much weaker defender. I didn't use RPM as a Holy Bible but it is a good tool (combining with others) to determire which player is more valuable. For example in case of Covington and Warren, it is obviously Covington.
This. Stats are an indicator but they can be extremely misleading depending on your team, scheme and coaching. There is definitely an element of subjectivity in rankings.
This is definitely an interesting phenomenon that is somewhat recurring. It was the same thing with Bledsoe, Dragic, and Bell, Marion, and a few other before. It is amazing to me that knowledgeable people can look at the same player, look at the same stats and to one group he is a top-15 SF and to the other group he is a top five.
So consider his contract as an added dimension: “Warren’s rank in this league as a player is (arguably) hard to determine; by some metrics he’s a top 10 player by others he’s not, but if you also consider the value of his contract, and length of service due under that contract, dollar for dollar he’s one of the most valuable players in the league”. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"One of the most..." never does anything for me because it doesn't say one of the how many most. Is Warren one of the 200 most valuable players in the league? Sure. One of the 10 most? No. So now there's a whole additional layer of confusion about how many players are included under the umbrella "one of the most." You could have two people who agree precisely on Warren's value, but still disagree on whether he qualifies by the "one of the most" language. Heck, Trump is one of the best Presidents in U.S. history, if you say one of the 45 best. It's a shame that Bill Simmons doesn't do his NBA Trade Value column anymore, because he made an attempt to get to exactly this question. His analyses were biased, but at least they were a starting point. If Simmons were to do that column now, would Warren crack the top 50? I'd lean toward No, but it's a close call.
As a guess...mid-lottery. On his contract, I think he's worth a lot. I doubt anyone is trading out of the top 6 (maybe 7) in this stacked class for anything short of an all-star, but I think he could fetch a pick between 7-10. Incidentally, I wouldn't trade him for a pick unless it was top 6 (maybe 7). We don't need more raw prospects unless they are potential franchise-changers (of which this draft has a shocking amount).
I don't buy that my deliberately general generalisation (!) doesn't make sense - one of the best means one of the best (in the upper percentile of a data set, to get specific). I would have thought a metric like: PER x Value of Contract x Length of Contract Remaining Would give a pretty good idea of what's what? And i'd bet Warren is easily a top 50 player based on this. Considering the link below that shows PER for the current season, filtered by Minutes Played > 800 (click on the PER column header to rank by this), he's top 50 already - 41 to be exact - and considering Warren's contract, he is surely "one of the best": https://www.basketball-reference.co...7.9&c2stat=mp&c2comp=gt&c2val=800&order_by=ws
What pick would Covington or ariza get? Congratulations on posing a question that ends up losing your own argument.
Lotto teams would never give up their pick for a role player. Contenders don’t have a high enough pick to get it done. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The "upper percentile" means the top 1%. By that standard, Warren is not one of the best. So you are saying that "one of the best" means "top 50." In that case it is clearer to say "top 50."
