another ridiculous trade proposal

[elindholm]

For some reason I'm just drawn to think about hilarious trades today. This would never happen, but I find it amusing to think about.

New Jersey gets:
Penny Hardaway (2006)
Tom Gugliotta (2004)

Phoenix gets:
Dikembe Mutombo (2005)
Kerry Kittles (2005)

This works even with Gugliotta's trade kicker. I've said forever that the Suns won't trade Gugliotta because of the promise Colangelo made, but in my opinion Gugliotta's crippling injuries and unwillingness to accept a buyout void any "gentlemen's agreement."

The Suns get hammered by luxury tax in 2004-05 but then get a break in 2005-06. If Mutombo can play at all and Johnson continues to develop, they are legitimate title contenders.

The Nets move out some unwanted contracts, get a big salary break in 2004-05, and get to reunite Backcourt 2000. Assuming they re-sign Kidd.

 

[fordronken]

Ha!

 

[se7en]

Interesting as far as "fantasies" go. Actually if there is one location that Googs might accept, New Jersey would be it since his family lives there. But I can't ever recall a trade with that many large contracts.

 

[Chaplin]

I'm nautious just reading that.

 

[fordronken]

I've been one of the relative Googs supporters over that past year or so, but I must say, in all honesty, that he is the only player I don't really care about. If any of the other guys were to suddenly leave, even Randy Brown or Alton Ford, I would feel at least a little sad. I've become very attatched to everyone on this team...except Gugliotta. He seems like a nice guy, but he's just been AWA wallpaper all season. Has anyone even seen him smile this year?

 

[SweetD]

He doesn't realy have much to smile about. He is going though a devorce and is sitting on the end of a bench getting slack for being payed a but load of money to do nothing. I would have to say he is not ready and should not have come back yet. IMO Googs can still play but he needs work BAD! Let him ride the bench until he can contribute to the team or his contract is over.

 

[hcsilla]

Interesting proposal.

The two main questions are:

1.Is Mutombo an improvement at C?
2.Is Kittles an improvement over Hardaway?

My answers are: maybe and maybe.
I wouldn't break up this chemistry for two "maybe"s unless we get some plus.
An we don't in this trade.

 

[elindholm]

1.Is Mutombo an improvement at C?
2.Is Kittles an improvement over Hardaway?

My answers are: maybe and maybe.

My answers are: definitely, and probably not.

Mutombo, even at age 46 or however old he is, is better than Tsakalidis will ever be. This is someone who flat knows how to play the game and defend. He's no longer at All-Star level, but when healthy, he is unquestionably one of the top ten centers in the league, and likely top five.

I don't like Kittles, but his contract is up sooner than Hardaway's, and he could at least cover some minutes without embarrassing himself too much.

I wouldn't break up this chemistry for two "maybe"s unless we get some plus.

I don't really like the trade either. It would just be something to consider if the Suns thought they could contend right away. It would be a big gamble, at not terribly good odds. But it does look to me like they have about given up on Tsakalidis ever getting real starter's minutes at center.

 

[JS22]

I would probably do it if the Suns werent gelling as well as they are now. Even so, its still pretty tempting.

Mutumbo would make this team VERY scary next year. Even if he is just half of what he once was, mutumbo is still twice as good as Jake will ever be. Next year's lineup:

Marbury - Top PG in the league. No doubt.
Johnson - Seems like the light has come on. Could be a top SG next year.
Marion - Best SF in the league? Pretty much.
Amare - Up and coming. Could be a STUD next year. Already a top 15-20 PF dispite his limited experience.
Mutumbo - Clogs the middle, blocks shots, grabs the easy rebound. Why not?

 

[elindholm]

I agree -- if Johnson continues to develop and Mutombo can play, that is a terrifying starting lineup. And if Johnson isn't ready, Kittles would certainly be adequate.

The key bench players would be Voskuhl, Outlaw, and Johnson/Kittles. Unfortunately, then it starts looking very thin. Jacobsen wouldn't have much to do, Tsakalidis would see almost no time, and there isn't anyone to back up Marbury or Marion.

Still, I'd love to visit a parallel universe for a while where that trade happens, just to see if it works out....

 

[JS22]

The suns could easily pick up someone to give Marbs 5-10 minutes off each night. Hell, Brown was even adequate enough. The Suns #1 priority should be to draft a SF. Zarko comes to mind. (http://nbadraft.net/profiles/zarkocabarkapa.htm)

He could be a solid backup for Marion and to a lesser extent the PF/C spots. But then again, as I said before, he could become another Dan Langhi + 1 inch. Gotta take chances though.

The rest of the bench would see very little time anyways. So its not THAT much of a problem. (Not like googs is playing now anyways.)

 

[hcsilla]

NOTICE: I am very sorry, hcsilla. I meant to quote your post, but instead I accidentally edited it. Again, I'm sorry I did not mean to do that.- Joe

Originally posted by elindholm
Shaq,Divac,Miller,Ilgauskas,Curry,Yao,Dampier,Thomas,Hilario,Wright,Swift,Nesterovic and Ratliff all are playing better C than Mutombo.
Right now Mutombo is only the shadow of former himself.

BTW,if Mutombo is really that good why would NJN do this trade?

NJ would not do that trade. By the way, please refresh my memory. Who is Thomas? If you're talking about Kurt Thomas I have a hard time including him in a comparison with Mutumbo because he is really a power forward. The same goes for Swift.

Joe Mama

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

evertone knows deke is 85 years old, not 46.

plus, look how he faired earlier this season in NJ's running game. our team also likes to push the ball, deke was decent in half court sets, not transition offense IMO.

 

[elindholm]

Hcsilla:

I wanted to respond to your statement that Mutombo is no better than any current Suns center. Joe Mama "strategically" erased the stats you provided , but I think you said that any Suns center could do the same if given the time.

If you look at the numbers, I think it's pretty clear that the Suns' centers could compete only in scoring, and not in rebounding or blocked shots.

Mutombo this year:
5.8 pts, 6.4 reb, 1.5 blk in 21.4 min

Tsakalidis:
4.8 pts, 3.6 reb, 0.5 blk in 16.3 min

Voskuhl:
3.9 pts, 3.4 reb, 0.5 blk in 14.7 min

Williams:
4.0 pts, 2.8 reb, 0.3 blk in 12.7 min

I do not consider Outlaw a center, but he is the only player on the Suns whose block rate comes anywhere near Mutombo's.

Mutombo is obviously a terrible fit on the Nets, and he is way overpaid. I already have said that I don't like the trade I made up -- I just think it would be a fascinating gamble that might (but probably wouldn't) pay off.

However, to say that Mutombo, even with this year's injury-depleted numbers, is no better than the Suns' centers is incorrect. As for the many other centers you mentioned, they are better scorers than Mutombo, but not nearly as good defensively.

In fact, if he had played enough games to qualify, Mutombo would be in the top ten in the league in rebounds per 48 minutes, and #11 in blocks per 48. It isn't that he's no longer effective; it's that he has been hurt and the Nets aren't built to be able to use him.

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by elindholm

However, to say that Mutombo, even with this year's injury-depleted numbers, is no better than the Suns' centers is incorrect. As for the many other centers you mentioned, they are better scorers than Mutombo, but not nearly as good defensively.

In fact, if he had played enough games to qualify, Mutombo would be in the top ten in the league in rebounds per 48 minutes, and #11 in blocks per 48. It isn't that he's no longer effective; it's that he has been hurt and the Nets aren't built to be able to use him.

Yuck yuck yuck yuck yuck!

Why is this even being discussed? Not only are your basing your entire arguement on stats from BEFORE Mutombo was injured, but you are also stating the meaningless per-48 statistics.

Mutombo? No thank you. The gain isn't worth the loss.

 

[elindholm]

Not only are your basing your entire arguement on stats from BEFORE Mutombo was injured, but you are also stating the meaningless per-48 statistics.

Chaplin, the statistics are from this season. They include games from before and after Mutombo's injury.

Per-48 statistics are meaningless only to you. Hcsilla understands how to apply them.

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by elindholm


Per-48 statistics are meaningless only to you. Hcsilla understands how to apply them.

Thanks for setting me straight.

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by elindholm


Chaplin, the statistics are from this season. They include games from before and after Mutombo's injury.

Oh, you mean the 8 games he's played since November. And only one with more than 10 rebounds, and none with more than 8 points scored.

 

[elindholm]

Thanks for setting me straight.

I'm not sure why you're being sarcastic. I've explained a hundred times why I think per-48 statistics are meaningful, and I'm not the only one. You've said you don't like them, and that's fine. It's just a set of numbers, and people can use them or not as they see fit.

There are people that will argue to the death that Iverson's low FG% is meaningless, because of the opportunities he creates for his teammates with his penetration. That can be debated. But if one person elects to reject a statistic, that doesn't invalidate it for the entire rest of the world.

 

[Chaplin]

A low FG% is something tangible, something real. How can per-48 statistics be applied to ANYTHING, they are theoretical and only exist in a mathematical fantasy land. They are statistics that can NEVER be achieved.

And I was replying to the (probably unintentional) subconscious personal attack you made.

 

[Joe Mama]

48 minutes statistics are meaningless or at least less meaningful... when we are discussing a player who is getting those statistics in junk time. 48 minute stats are useful when you are discussing starters and bench players who played mostly during the crucial parts of games.

Really, anybody who thinks that Mutombo isn't better than the Jakes and Scott Williams has severely overrated the Phoenix Suns center rotation.

At least that's my $.02.

Joe Mama

 

[elindholm]

How can per-48 statistics be applied to ANYTHING, they are theoretical and only exist in a mathematical fantasy land. They are statistics that can NEVER be achieved.

Okay, I'll try again.

Per-48 stats are just the same as per-minute stats. The only difference is a factor of 48. If Player A averages 18 rebounds "per 48 minutes," that doesn't mean that he is "potentially" someone who could actually average 18 rebounds per game. That isn't the point at all.

What it means is, if Player B averages only 13 rebounds per 48, then if each player were to be on the floor the same amount of time, Player A would be expected to collect more rebounds. That's all.

If you want, think of it like a batting average. What does it really mean if someone hits .322? Technically, it means that if he had 1000 at-bats over the season, he would be expected to get 322 hits. Of course he will never get 1000 at-bats in a season, but the number is still meaningful. He collects hits at a "rate" of 322 per 1000, no matter how many at-bats he winds up with. 500 at-bats means 161 hits. And so on.

Imagine if baseball had a statistic called "hits per game." You could have a terrible hitter, who has to play regularly because the team doesn't have a decent second baseman (or whatever), and he'd be a .220 hitter with about 1 "hit per game." Then there'd be the guy who's your fourth outfielder and top pinch hitter, and he wouldn't get nearly as many plate appearances, so he might be a .290 hitter with, whatever, 0.4 "hits per game." The "hits per game" statistic wouldn't tell you as much about the quality of his hitting as his batting average would.

That's the problem with looking at "per game" statistics for part-time NBA players. Obviously someone will get bigger total numbers if he plays starter's minutes. But there are bench players who are very effective during the time they get.

So that is the use of per-48 stats. It's not that someone will play 48 minutes in a game. It's a rate. If he gets 20 rebounds per 48 minutes, then that means 5 rebounds in 12 minutes, or 7.5 rebounds in 18 minutes, or 10 rebounds in 24 minutes. Whatever. If you don't like calling it 20 rebounds per 48 minutes, then you can call it 0.43 rebounds per minute. It's the same thing.

With per-48 stats, sometimes you'll have players whose numbers are inflated by garbage time, and sometimes you'll have players whose stamina (or propensity for fouls, or whatever) simply doesn't allow them to play many minutes -- like Arvydas Sabonis, who is fantastic per-minute (or per-48) player. So it's far from a perfect indicator. No statistic is.

But, in my opinion, when you're talking about Mutombo, it's still valid. Mutombo could play 30-35 minutes for any team in the league right now and do just fine. The Nets are so much of an open-court team, they can't use him, and you're right that his numbers are down since he came back from his injury.

That, however, was not the topic of discussion. Hcsilla said that any Suns center could put up similar numbers to Mutombo "if given the time." The only way to evaluate that claim statistically is to look at per-minute (or per-48) figures.

Again, if you want to reject the statistic, go ahead. There are a lot of statistics out there, and depending on how you want to look at the game, not all of them are meaningful.

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by elindholm
That, however, was not the topic of discussion. Hcsilla said that any Suns center could put up similar numbers to Mutombo "if given the time." The only way to evaluate that claim statistically is to look at per-minute (or per-48) figures.

Now, per-minute is much more of a workable statistic. According to your thoughts, per-48 is just an expansion of per-minute stats.

But, why not just use per-minute statistics and be done with it? Per-48, I guess, can be used to make it look better than the statistics actually are, and that's why I think they are meaningless.

As to the topic at hand, there is no doubt that Mutombo's rebounding and blocks are better than any of our centers. Even now. But Mutombo isn't much better all in all than any of our centers. He doesn't move as well as little Jake, he doesn't shoot as well as Scott Williams, and I'm sorry, but Big Jake is a much better guy to plug up the lane to prevent drives. Mutombo's blocking strength helps him in this regard, but Shaq would have a harder time backing down Big Jake than he would Old Man Mutombo.

 

[elindholm]

According to your thoughts, per-48 is just an expansion of per-minute stats.

Uh, not "according to my thoughts." It's just a proportion. I didn't invent multiplication and division. They get used a lot, though, so I wish I had. You know, royalties and so on.

But, why not just use per-minute statistics and be done with it? Per-48, I guess, can be used to make it look better than the statistics actually are

Actually, it's just because the numbers are easier to look at, that's all. If it's per-minute, everyone's going to be in decimals -- something like 0.08 blocks per minute would be a good number, but that's awkward to think about.

 

[elindholm]

Sorry, one other thing to clarify:

If Mutombo would be #11 in the league in blocks per 48 minutes, he would also be #11 in the league in blocks per minute. The league rankings would be identical.