Top 25 NBA Players Age 25 & Under
by SoulHonky on Jan 25, 2011 5:17 AM PST
Email
PrintWhere would you ranked Monta and Curry if you were putting together a list of the best NBA players 25 or younger in the NBA? Gordon or Curry? Does Monta's tweener status hurt him?
My Top Ten
1. Dwight Howard: Franchise big men are few and far between so I think you have to put Superman Jr. at the top of the list.
2. Chris Paul : Even though quality young point guards are abundant in this new generation, I'd still go with CP3 as my #2 pick. He's a true 1A star who can be the best player AND the motor that drives his team; I'm not sure the same can be said for most other players on this list (or in this entire league even.)
3. Blake Griffin: Am I going overboard by putting Blake over Kevin Durant? Possibly but one thing is for certain, Blake Griffin's going to get a team more highlights and put more asses in the seat and in this economy, I think that has to count for something. As for on the court, I like Blake's attitude a bit more than Durant and like that he's one of the few young power forward in the league that seems to be willing to mix it up down low a bit rather than just hoist jumpers. And as many others have said, his energy is so contagious that its even brought Baron Davis back from the dead.
4. Kevin Durant: My 1A comment in the Chris Paul write-up was indeed aimed at Durant. While Kevin Durant is a scoring machine, I still believe that the engine that runs the Thunder is Russell Westbrook. Durant reminds me a bit of Paul Pierce; a guy who is definitely the best player on the team but isn't necessarily the lead dog. I can understand putting Durant as high as two and probably wouldn't ever put him before four but if I was building a team, I'd opt for Dewey, CP3, and Blake first.
5. Derrick Rose: Celtics fans might hate me for this but, yes, Derrick Rose is the best young point guard in the NBA. I love Rondo but his absolute lack of a shot troubles me. Yes, Rose's inconsistent defense is also bothersome but I have more faith in Rose improving that weakness than Rondo ever being able to knock down the jumper as well as Rose, who in spite of having limited but expanding range has a pretty nice mid-range J.
6. Rajon Rondo: If anyone wants to say that this is a homer pick, well, yeah, it might be. But for all of the complaints that Rondo has the luxury of playing with three (and now four) Hall of Famers, the flipside of that is if he might be allowed to do more and have more impact himself on a team like OK City.
7. Russell Westbrook: Russell seems a bit like Rondo-lite but, y'know, there are worse things to be. I think he's a players that will continue to get better and will always be in the conversation with the best PG's in the league but for some reason, I just see him as always being a shade below the elite.
8. Al Horford: Because of the depth of the young PG field, I could see moving Horford up a bit but there's just something that just seems to be missing with Al. If Durant is a 1B star, Horford is like Kevin Garnett a 2A type - someone who might not be the best player on the team but is the leader and motivator.
9. Stephon Curry: As much as I like the Monta/Curry tandem, I don't think Curry will ever be as good as he could be since he'll be playing off ball more often alongside Monta. On another team, I think he might be garnering All-Star buzz but he's stuck in a role on Golden State. It's a role he still fill quite nicely but it's hard to be as consistent as he could be as a true PG on another squad.
10. Eric Gordon: To me, Gordon is where you get to the guys who are clear second stars. That's not to say that he isn't a very good player and a potential All-Star talent but I don't think a team with him is going to be anything more than a 2nd round playoff squad. He reminds me a bit of Joe Johnson; Johnson and Horford can make a little noise in the playoffs but they'll never be able to beat the elite squads. If Blake Griffin doesn't pan out to the lofty expectations I'm already holding him to, the Clippers could very well be Atlanta West.
Find the rest at http://soulhonky.com/
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
123 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Solid list. I could come up with a few quibbles (I’d take Noah and Bynum long before Gordon, e.g.) but no major complaints.
Oh, wait — one major complaint. Misspelling Stephen Curry on a Warriors board? For shame!
There will be no extra point!
GAH!
Curry’s first name is one of those things that I just have ingrained in my head incorrectly.
the Clippers could very well be Atlanta West.
Atlanta west would a nice next step for either the Clips or the Warriors.
by Only In Fairfax on Jan 25, 2011 9:59 AM PST reply actions
Not sure if Curry makes the top 10.(insert Kevin Love and Rudy Gay). Perhaps the top 20 or so.In top 20 Monta would be in there as well.+ Adridge,Bargnani, Josh Smith,Stuckey,Lopez,Bynum,Wall,Fields,Neil etc Jordon?
by Only In Fairfax on Jan 25, 2011 10:37 AM PST reply actions
Hmmm….some of those names are really gross. Bargnani and Stuckey, especially. Aldridge also isn’t that good, but there’s probably not that much competition to be a top 20 guy 25 or younger….
by Missing Barry on Jan 25, 2011 11:25 AM PST up reply actions
I think that's a little charitable to both Warriors guards.
eg, if there was a draft today, I have a hard time seeing either of them going ahead of Love or Noah.
Why do you post here if you are not a fan of this team?
by HerFavColor on Jan 25, 2011 12:54 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Just because I'm a fan doesn't mean I check my brain at the door.
I’m not going to tell you up is down just because it makes the Warriors position in the standings look better.
Monta?
I’m not 100% sure I’d put him in the top 10 but he’d at least be in the running for one of the last three spots and he’s younger than Chris Paul.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
sorry
just noticed you do have Monta at 13 in your top 25 which seems pretty close to where he should be. I think you have Kevin Love far too high and Brandon Jennings far too high. Mine would look something like this:
1. Durant 2. Howard 3. Griffin 4. Paul 5. Rose 6. Rondo 7. Westbrook 8. Love 9. Curry 10. Horford 11. Noah 12. Ellis 13. Smith 14. Wall 15-25 would probably include Wilson Chandler, Gay, Bynum, Evans, Gordon, Aldridge, and Lopez in some order, but I’d need to look at a bigger list of guys under 25 to figure out exact placement.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
*Kevin Love far too low
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Yes Love gets no Love from GSOM
The kick is his defense is so poor, and yet it better than at least half this group of 25, and at least as good as Curry, Monta and Lee.The second kick is that he’s on a bad team so his numbers are inflated. Still he’s the number one rebounder per 48 in the NBA and it isn’t even close. He’s over 1.5 rebounds better than the next highest Camby, and 2.5 rebounds per 48 better than D. Howard.
He’s tied for the lead in TRR with Camby 23.6 and that 2.0 higher than Dwight 21.7. His TS% ranks 7th among the 25 players listed. He scores almost 22 points agame, which makes him 16th among NBA players and 8th on this list, which ranks him 20th behind such notables.as Jennings, (who shouldn’t even be on the list,) B. Lopez, Tyreke,Aldridge, or Gay..I think if you asked the management of the lowest half rebounding nba teams if they’d trade that short list or Monta for example, for Kevin Love they would do it in a rebounding heartbeat.
Outside of that, I like the list, my top 4 is identical, I’d rate Rose around 8th
because he’s rather selfish and doesn’t make any one around him any better.Love would barely make my top 10. After him there is a group of Horford,Bynum, J. Smith,Monta, Noah, and that I think are pretty close, depending on what you’re looking for.Right now I think Gordon places right after that group.
by War Years Legacy on Jan 27, 2011 1:48 PM PST up reply actions
I’d rate him defensive behind even Curry and Monta. At Lee’s level – in other words, he’s pretty much on the court, and he rebounds, but does nothing else defensively. Though I guess he’s even better than Lee on the glass so maybe he’s a bit better than Lee defensively. But basically – here’s the thing. With Monta and especially Curry, as bad as they are defensively, it’s really not that big of a deal. It’s easy to hide a bad perimeter defender. We don’t have enough other defensive personnel to do it, but plenty of teams do. With a guy like Love or Lee, the problem is opportunity cost. You can still hide them to a large extent with enough other defensive players, but the problem is what you’re missing. A good defensive big has such a bigger impact than a good defensive wing, and having a guy like that makes it that much harder to get a quality defensive front court. Look at a team like the Lakers – none of Pau, Odom or Bynum are elite defenders, but they’re all pretty good in different ways, and the combination makes them a pretty darn good defensive front court. With Lee/Love, you essentially need Bogut/Howard next to them to have that kind of defensive presence.
But actually, I’m mostly in agreement that Love is still really good.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
I do understand your points
I’m wondering how complete a conversation you can have about how good a player is defensively without considering how often that player secures a possession for your team ( Love:Drr 33.5, ranks 2nd ) from an opponent. I don’t see him as significantly worse defensively than Monta, Curry, and Lee, but I can’t discount that he rebounds at a rate far above.
Another factor is, though I always find them interesting ,I’ve yet to find really good stats that assess how good a player is defensively.Usually most of the lists I see have certain players excelling that I would never have guessed from watching them play defense and I guess I’m just not ready to disbelieve my eyes quite yet.
by War Years Legacy on Jan 27, 2011 2:40 PM PST up reply actions
I haven’t found a really good defensive stat yet, either. A lot of it I base on observation. I do like defensive /-, but I’m weary of it without a large sample, like 3 seasons, and heck, in that time period, guys defensive ability/effort could change quite a bit.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 2:43 PM PST up reply actions
Basically, watching Kevin Love, I see David Lee on defense but a better rebounder, though Lee is obviously no slouch himself even though he’s underachieved for us so far.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 2:43 PM PST up reply actions
you’re selling Jason Kidd, John Stockton and perhaps Steve Nash way too short. If Paul continues to play at this level for several more years then you can start to have that discussion, but its way too early.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Paul is the best scorer and defender off the bunch. I’ll take him over all of them.
by HerFavColor on Jan 26, 2011 12:07 AM PST up reply actions
you clearly don’t know how good Jason Kidd was defensively in his prime or have enough respect for how good of a shooter Steve Nash is. Nash is scoring more points per minute than Paul this year and still doing it much more efficiently than Paul despite the fact that Paul is having a career year in offensive efficiency.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
ah give me a break. Kidd couldn’t defend quick Point Guards to save his life. He only succeeded with bigger guards. Hardly a plus in my eyes. Nash is leading his team to lottery. Paul is leading his team to 3rd best record. Nash also never had a season that touched CP3’s 08 season.
by HerFavColor on Jan 26, 2011 12:40 AM PST up reply actions
ah give me a break. Kidd couldn’t defend quick Point Guards to save his life. He only succeeded with bigger guards.
I said Jason Kidd in his prime. Jason Kidd of the last 3-5 seasons, which seems to be the only Jason Kidd you remember, hasnt been that great defensively against quicker guards (though I wouldn’t say he’s been really bad either) In his prime Kidd was probably the premier defensive guard in the league with the quickness to match up with just about any PG, the size to match up with just about any 2, and a higher basketball IQ than just about anyone in the game. Even in Paul’s ‘08 season (the one you pointed to as his best) there was strong evidence to suggest that not only was Kidd still a better defensive PG than Paul, but that Kidd was still elite while Paul wasn’t among the top 10 defensive PGs in the league.
Nash is leading his team to lottery. Paul is leading his team to 3rd best record. Nash also never had a season that touched CP3’s 08 season.
Chris Paul’s ‘08-’09: 21.4 pp36, 10.3 ap36, 2.6 sp36, 5.2 reb p36, .599 TS%
Steve Nash ‘05-’06: 19.2 pp36, 10.6 ap36, .8 sp36, 4.3 reb p36, .654 TS%
So Paul scored a bit more frequently but much less efficiently than Nash. I’m not sure you understand how ridiculously good a 65.4 TS% is from a point guard. Thats the 28th best single season TS% of all time and most of the guys higher on the list are big guys like Amare, Wilt, Daryl Dawkins, Barkley and McHale. The only legitimate point guard who finished higher while playing even close to as many minutes as Nash was John Stockton. The 5.5% difference in TS% is pretty significant. Thats a bigger difference than there currently is between Monta Ellis and an awful shooter like Brandon Jennings. Nash collected a few more assists while rebounding a bit worse than Paul, but still very well for his position. I’ll certainly concede that Paul is the much better defensive PG, but I think we likely disagree on the disparity between the two. I don’t believe Paul is an elite defensive PG, and I’m not sure he’s enough better than Nash to make up for that 5.5% TS%. Either way, to say Nash never touched that kind of season is just obviously wrong.
Yes the Hornets are better than the Suns this season, but you don’t think thats influenced by Emeka Okafor and David West both having strong seasons? If you want to start measuring that way Steve Nash has carried the Suns much farther than Paul has carried the the Hornets. Paul is probably having a better year than Nash right now, but if “the best PG since Magic” at age 25 isn’t outperforming a guy who is about 2 weeks away from his 37th birthday then there’s a serious problem with your argument.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
I’d take Paul at his peak over any of them, as well.
by Missing Barry on Jan 26, 2011 5:26 AM PST up reply actions
Though you really can’t go wrong with any of those choices. And Kidd in his prime was by far the best defender of the bunch.
by Missing Barry on Jan 26, 2011 5:27 AM PST up reply actions
I could see how that might seem like a hasty jump on the Griffin hype bandwagon
but I think Paul comes with more injury concerns for the future. Honestly though, I think you could put that top 4 in pretty much any order and not really be wrong.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Have you seen the way Griffin plays?
it’s almost a guarantee he will blow out a knee on one of his dumb dunk attempts.
by HerFavColor on Jan 25, 2011 11:45 PM PST up reply actions
I feel like I hear someone say this every time Griffin’s name comes up now. Is it just because Simmons says it all the time or what? Yes, he’s incredibly aggressive and plays hard all the time, but I dont feel like he’s playing recklessly or out of control, he’s just an amazing athlete.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
he’s incredibly aggressive and plays hard all the time, but I dont feel like he’s playing recklessly or out of control, he’s just an amazing athlete.
but he’s pushing the limits of the physics of human body materials exposed to extreme and repeated stress.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 26, 2011 11:31 AM PST up reply actions
It seems to me that you could say that about most professional athletes.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
It it seems to me that you could say that about most professional athletes.
but the ones who last know when to get near that fine line and when to back off. Griffin looks like he doesn’t understand the concept of “career” versus the moment.
Anthony rudolf looked much the same when he first came up, jumping on guys backs and mopping the floor with his body. Haven’t seen him play this year to see if he’s still doin git but maybe his injury got his attention?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 26, 2011 3:06 PM PST up reply actions
Monta and Paul are the same age
That third guitar note you played just now was perfect, dogg. Maybe play it again a little later alright.
by Reverend_Randy on Jan 26, 2011 1:52 PM PST up reply actions
Horford and Rondo over Rose.
Keith Smart is challenging Red Auerbach to be the greatest coach of all time.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 25, 2011 1:37 PM PST reply actions
I'm not really sold on Rose, quite frankly.
He’s a low-efficiency volume scorer, and that team’s offense is really about the high-efficiency points Noah and Boozer get them. But he’s their top scorer, so he’s going to get the lions share of the credit.
The rest of Rose’s game is really really good, though, so it’s not like he’s an empty scorer. I’m just not on the Rose-is-elite bandwagon.
He’s improved to pretty average efficiency. The biggest thing that strikes me is that while yes, he is the leader of that offense, he’s leaading a below average offense. That’s not nearly as impressive as the Rose-for-MVP pundits make it out to be. He has supposedly improved a lot on defense.
The one I’m not really sold on is Horford. I like him, I just don’t see what makes him elite. For instance, I’m not sure what would set him apart from pre-injury Kendrick Perkins? I’d say Perkins D largely offsets Horford’s O.
by Missing Barry on Jan 25, 2011 1:45 PM PST up reply actions
Problem is we don't have definite measures of their defense.
Keith Smart is challenging Red Auerbach to be the greatest coach of all time.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 25, 2011 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t see why people seem to be so high on his D? I don’t see it with Tyson Chandler, either….
by Missing Barry on Jan 25, 2011 4:45 PM PST up reply actions
Tyson Chandler is different.
Horford does actually make a difference.
Keith Smart is challenging Red Auerbach to be the greatest coach of all time.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 25, 2011 8:16 PM PST up reply actions
Tyson Chandler is better on defense than Horford.
He’s one of the best help defenders in the NBA. He’s helped to improve the Mavericks defense quite a bit because he’s actually healthy this season. What impact exactly does Horford have on Atlanta’s defense? His footwork is okay, but he’s not particularly quick. He’s undersized as a center and struggles against big guys, plus he’s not a big shot-blocking threat. Where does he excel on defense?
I'm looking forward to the Warriors being led to the playoffs by Monta Ellis AND Stephen Curry.
I really, really, really don’t see that with Chandler. Every time I watch the Mavs I look for it because people keep talking about it, and I leave wondering what the heck everyone’s talking about. Chandler really isn’t anything special on help D, at least I’m not seeing it. He’s not a great shot blocker, guys are more than willing to challenge him and go right at him, and they don’t seem to have that big of a problem scoring over him, he doesn’t limit his fouls or anything….I’m really, really not seeing it. As far as I can tell he’s pretty similar to Biedrins but a better post defender.
The Mavs really haven’t improved all that much on D from last year to this year – 12th best to 10th best. Don’t get me wrong, I think Chandler is still a decent defender, especially because he rebounds so well, so I think he improves them a bit, but I really don’t see him as an impact defender at all….
by Missing Barry on Jan 26, 2011 5:34 AM PST up reply actions
What I've seen from Chandler...
is that his length affects shots whether they’re good looks or not. He makes players shoot the ball higher even though he’s never been an elite shot-blocker. Maybe I should watch the Mavs more often, but as far as I could tell he makes a difference.
I'm looking forward to the Warriors being led to the playoffs by Monta Ellis AND Stephen Curry.
The times I’ve watched them I haven’t seen that. He does sometimes, sure, but every C does it from time to time. I guess I’m just not seeing anything on the level of elite defensive C’s….
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 7:15 PM PST up reply actions
Again, I think its attitude.
Unlike past Dallas centers who either didn’t know how to play defense or just didn’t want to (looking at you, Brenda), Chandler comes to play defense and does a good job communicating and kind of quarterbacking the defense.
Now, in this case, I think that while Chandler has gotten the Mavs to think about defense, he hasn’t done all that much to actually improve them defensively. Honestly, I think that the Mavs aren’t out of position as much so it takes opposing teams a little longer to score but they aren’t getting that many more actual stops.
Interesting points. The stats do seem to go along with that story – pace is down, while defense is only slightly improved. When I watch it looks to me like Chandler’s biggest impact is on the boards. Checking out +/-, the Mavs really are playing better across the boards while he’s been in, he’s sporting a ridiculous +16.0. We’ll see how that holds up as the sample size increases.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 8:45 PM PST up reply actions
The one I’m not really sold on is Horford. I like him, I just don’t see what makes him elite. For instance, I’m not sure what would set him apart from pre-injury Kendrick Perkins?
the fact that perkins is too old to be on the list is probably the main reason?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 25, 2011 3:40 PM PST up reply actions
Well Horford has one of the best mid range jumpers and post games
+He’s quick and athletic. Perkins is just a good defender. He’d be great next to Dirk or Lee. (or Horford..). But he’s not even close to being as good.
by HerFavColor on Jan 25, 2011 11:44 PM PST up reply actions
Perkins is an excellent defender. Other than Dwight, Bogut, and Duncan, I’m not sure there’s a better defensive C in basketball. And Perkins isn’t a great offensive player, but he’s a very useful one. Knows his role and makes good decisions and takes good shots – been a 60% TS% guy over the last few years, and scores at a decent enough volume for a big man (10-12 points per 36). Heck, Horford really doesn’t even score that much more than Perkins does, he’s just under 17 per 36, which is a career high over his former high of 14.5…..
I don’t see how Perkins isn’t close to as good? Defense matters just as much as offense. And it’s not like Horford is carrying an offense or anything.
by Missing Barry on Jan 26, 2011 5:39 AM PST up reply actions
For what it’s worth, defensive numbers suggest that Horford’s pretty damn good in that department: opposing centers don’t do much against the Hawks, and their already-good defense is extra-good when he’s in there. My sense is that Josh Smith’s their real ace defensively, but Horford’s a definite asset on that end.
Offensively, there’s a pretty massive difference between Horford and Perkins, and that’s passing. Perkins is a bad passer, averaging 1.0 assists against 2.1 turnovers last season. That’s fine — that’s not what the Celtics are looking for from him — but it is a flaw. Horford, meanwhile, is a brilliant passer. He’s averaging 3.5 assists this season, which is impressive for a center, but with only 1.5 turnovers, which is kinda mindblowing for a fairly high-scoring big man. Al Horford passes with PG-level efficiency (far better, for instance, than Steph Curry). A big that can pass out of the post and never gives the other team the ball is a pretty special thing to have.
Horford is a truly elite guy by adjusted plus-minus: as of today, his two-year APM is the 12th-best in the league. I don’t think that’s the gospel, but it’s worth something. My sense is that Horford is a fairly big asset on both ends, and that that’s a pretty rare combo. I think his top-ten ranking on this list is justified.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
Agree with you about Josh Smith
When we played them, it really seemed like his athleticism was causing trouble for a lot of our players – not just the guys he was guarding.
Didn't know Deng is that good
Should we get him?
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 25, 2011 4:26 PM PST reply actions
this is a joke right.
monta is agruably the best sg in the league statistics wise and cant cut the top 10. And how is durant not #1. monta is definately in top five i would put him in front of griffin right now. Griffin hasnt even played a half season yet.
by Belinelli's the savior on Jan 25, 2011 5:27 PM PST reply actions
monta is agruably the best sg in the league statistics wise and cant cut the top 10. And how is durant not #1.
Answer in both cases is that there’s a lot more to being a great player than PPG.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jan 25, 2011 5:51 PM PST up reply actions
In addition to what Sleepy said, Griffin not having played half a season doesn’t make him any worse. It just means he hasn’t had a big opportunity to showcase his skills. The dude is playing pretty awesome, and he’s gotten better as the season goes on. He’s scoring at a high rate (a pretty comparable rate to Monta), doing it at above average efficiency, he’s been a beast on the boards, he’s racking up a ton of assists for a big man….yep, Blake Griffin is a really good player.
by Missing Barry on Jan 25, 2011 6:01 PM PST up reply actions
monta is definitely in top five i would put him in front of griffin right now.
Dude! you need to repeat basketball kindergarten if you can’t tell why griffin is superior to montay :>)
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 25, 2011 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not understanding all of your reasons for where people are ranked, so I'll try my own rankings:
These are not based off who I’d take if starting a team or what players could become in the future. It’s a ranking of where they’re at right now regardless of age (other than being under 25) and contract. I’m including everyone with 1985 birthdays to be fair to the ones who just had birthdays pass. Clearly some guys were completely forgotten on the original list.
1. Dwight Howard
2. Rajon Rondo
3. Chris Paul
4. Kevin Durant
5. Derrick Rose
6. Andrew Bynum
7. Blake Griffin
8. Joakim Noah
9. Josh Smith
10. Monta Ellis
11. Russell Westbrook
12. Rudy Gay
13. Brandon Jennings
14. John Wall
15. Al Horford
16. Stephen Curry
17. LaMarcus Aldridge
18. Paul Millsap
19. Eric Gordon
20. Kevin Love
21. Wesley Matthews
22. Brook Lopez
23. Tyreke Evans
24. O.J. Mayo
25. Luol Deng
I'm looking forward to the Warriors being led to the playoffs by Monta Ellis AND Stephen Curry.
fail..what does Rondo do better than Paul?
by HerFavColor on Jan 25, 2011 11:46 PM PST up reply actions
He's better defensively.
And he’s a better playmaker for his teammates. As far as I’m concerned, you’re team is a stronger championship competitor if you’re point guard is better in those two categories. I know Rondo isn’t a good shooter, but on a championship caliber team, an elite point guard doesn’t have to be that. I’d rather have him on an already good team or to build around.
I'm looking forward to the Warriors being led to the playoffs by Monta Ellis AND Stephen Curry.
I don’t think he’s a better playmaker for his teammates, to be honest. I have little doubt Paul could do what Rondo does if asked to….
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 7:16 PM PST up reply actions
And still score 20 points efficiently...
Keith Smart is challenging Red Auerbach to be the greatest coach of all time.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 27, 2011 11:21 PM PST up reply actions
I cringe any time someone says somebody other than Chris Paul is the best point guard in the NBA
Literally. My face hurts from all the Rose for MVP, Williams should start for the Western Conference All-Stars, and Rondo is a better player to build your team around talk I’ve been reading lately.
Chris Paul is the second best player in the NBA right now. And I think he’s even giving Lebron a run for his money.
Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!
*Note: This post probably doesn't exist. The author of this post has to be dreaming. He's going to wake up and it's going to be November 1st again. Because there's no way that this really happening.*
what exactly do people like so much about Brandon Jennings? He seems like a really poor shooting Monta Ellis to me. He’s taking even more shots this season, but he still has a TS% under 50%. Is there another guy in the league that attempts 15 or more shots per game with such poor efficiency? I kind of doubt it. His assist to turnover rate has gotten worse than it was last year, and while he does rebound his position well he still isn’t much on the defensive end. I just really don’t think he’s a very good player right now.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Still like his potential, but agree that he’s pretty bad at the moment. I also don’t think either Aldridge is too high, or guys below him are too low – specifically, the 3 guys right affter him. Love me some John Wall, but I’d also put him lower. Turns it over a ton and doesn’t score efficiently yet. Think he’s showing some very promising signs for the future, but he’s still trying to figure out how to play winning basketball. And of course, Rondo is too high. ;)
by Missing Barry on Jan 26, 2011 5:43 AM PST up reply actions
Yea, I just think the best thing anyone could say about Jennings right now is that he’s still only 21, and thats usually not a great sign. My list got a little messy because I went back and forth between who I’d want to start a team with and who is the best player right now. Those should be two very different lists. I guess if you go with best player right now it has to start with Howard and Paul with guys like Josh Smith, Noah, and Monta moving up considerably. If I made a list of guys I’d want to start my team with I’d begin with either Durant or Howard with Griffin, Wall and Westbrook all pretty close to the top too.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Better PG than Monta
Kid helped lead a team to the playoffs at 20 years old and then pushed the Hawks to 7 games without Bogut. Not too shabby IMO. I can understand knocking him down a few pegs because of his shooting but he strikes me as a guy who could pan out to be Marbury without the crap attitude.
If by “helped lead” you mean “he was on the 2nd best defensive team in the NBA”, then sure. He happened to be on a team that was mildly successsful. I don’t see the evidence he had much to do with that success. Maybe if their offense wasn’t so bad (which he definitely contributed to) they would have had actual success?
And while I’ve actually come to like Marbury the person, the player was a loser. The dude was a ball dominant, offense killing black hole of an inefficient scorer…even if he did have skills.
by Missing Barry on Jan 26, 2011 5:59 PM PST up reply actions
What do you mean Marbury the person?
Keith Smart is challenging Red Auerbach to be the greatest coach of all time.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 26, 2011 10:56 PM PST up reply actions
Who he is, as opposed to what kind of player he is.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 7:20 AM PST up reply actions
I know i literally want to know what Marbury does that you like off the court?
Keith Smart is challenging Red Auerbach to be the greatest coach of all time.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 27, 2011 11:22 PM PST up reply actions
He’s a much brighter person than you’d expect. He also managed to make it after a really messed up childhood. I’ve read a lot about Marbury, can’t really summarize it down to a paragraph. ;)
by Missing Barry on Jan 28, 2011 7:03 AM PST up reply actions
i literally want to know what Marbury does that you like off the court?
one thing he did that was cool was try to create a line of inexpensive shoes so the poor kids wouldn’t be pressured to buy high priced ones.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 28, 2011 9:39 AM PST up reply actions
Right now his focus is on moving to China, pretty much permanently. Let’s see, a country with more than a billion people in it that’s becoming increasingly bigger fans of the NBA, that’s on track to become the world’s superpower in our lifetime, and he’s trying to move over and get a basketball apparel line going and put his kids in a position to suceed in the future, as well. Yeah, he’s not as dumb as he seems.
by Missing Barry on Jan 28, 2011 9:47 AM PST up reply actions
he’s not as dumb as he seems.
apparently not, Jimmy Rodgers moved to Singapore for the same reasons.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 28, 2011 10:02 AM PST up reply actions
This article was posted a long time ago on here by somebody, it’s a good read.
http://sportsonmymind.com/2008/12/03/you-dont-know-stephon-marbury/
wtf..
he helped lead his team? so what? so did Luke Walton to 2 consecutive finals. Fact is that Bogut and Salmons lead them there and Ridnour outplayed him for most of the year anyways.
Jennings stepped up in the 2nd half and in the playoffs.
I thought he was pretty impressive for a young PG. He has his flaws but I think he’ll be one of the better PG’s in the league in the future. I thought he also was impressive in the playoffs.
49.8% TS%, 3.0 rebounds, 3.6 assists per game in 35.6 minutes? I’m not impressed. Bucks do better if he takes on a much lesser role.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 7:22 AM PST up reply actions
?
He was worse in points, assists, rebounds, FG%, and 3PT% in the second half last year than he was in the first half. Then he went on to post those pretty unimpressive numbers that MB mentioned in a whole 7 games. How is that stepping it up?
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Jennings's TS% are close to Westbrook progression
He takes a couple more shots than Russ but I’m sure Jennings would cede those shots to Durant as well.
I’m not sure how common 40 point jumps in TS% are. That said, scoring efficiency is the weakest part of Westbrook’s game, and the only thing holding him back from being a superstar. If Jennings created shots for teammates like Westbrook does, he’d look more promising….
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 7:24 AM PST up reply actions
1. Thats not true, Westbrook has posted a .534 TS% so far this season so his increase in shot attempts is acceptable. If Jennings showed that kind of improvement in his shooting I’d understand him landing somewhere in the back half of your top 25 rankings.
2. Westbrook is a far better passer, rebounder and defender. I don’t really understand why you brought up Westbrook’s name since Westbrook is much better at everything. Westbrook used to be a poor shooter but, like Rondo, he’s able to influence the game positively in a variety of other ways. Jennings doesn’t defend well, he doesn’t rebound especially well, and he doesn’t pass well enough to excuse how often he turns the ball over. He’s very quick, but what exactly is it that he does do that you like so much?
3. People were saying last year that Jennings would cede shots to a more efficient teammate who could get his own shot if one existed. Well they got Corey Maggette and Drew Gooden, kept John Salmons and have had a healthy Bogut. But Jennings is still firing up shots at almost the exact same rate and handing out assists at a lower rate so far.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
C'mon.
Maggette and Gooden are garbage. You can talk about efficiency all you want but those two guys are the epitome of players who excel on bad teams and don’t make good teams better. Also, Maggette has hit the wall and is absolutely useless this year.
There’s a difference between ceding shots to Kevin Durant and giving the rock to a fallen-back-to-Earth John Salmons.
We’ll have to see what happens. I’ve been a fan of Jennings for a while and think he has a bright future ahead of him. I might have been a bit too high on him but I’d be happy to have him on my team. Well, if my team already didn’t have Rondo.
Yes, Maggette hasn’t ever been a part of a very successful team, but there are fewer than a dozen players in the NBA that couldve made those Warrior and Clipper teams successful if they had been in Maggette’s place. Maggette is below most of his career averages in per minute numbers, but I definitely wouldn’t call him useless. He’s still scoring at a high rate with well above average efficiency and he still rebounds quite well for a wing player. He still gets to the line about as well as anyone. I wouldnt be surprised at all to find that his FG% is well below his career mark this year because he’s averaging fewer minutes per game than he has since 2001. I also wouldn’t be surprised at all to hear that he’s playing such few minutes because both he and Brandon Jennings are drive to the hoop scorers almost exclusively. The problem the Bucks havent seemed to have figured out yet is that Corey Maggette is still a much better offensive player than Jennings.
My point in noting the Bucks’ additions was simply to say that Jennings should have no reason to feel like he has to do it all himself now as he has quite a few veteran players with a history of offensive success around him. Most of those guys may be having poor seasons in terms of scoring, but Jennings has still been even worse and he’s obviously not making them better.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
There are some things Corey Maggette doesn’t do very well at all, like defense and ball movement. When it comes to scoring, however, he is quite good at it. Also, as Sam noted, almost his entire career has been spent on the Warriors and Clippers. The Warriors and Clippers were unsuccessful before Maggette, with Maggette, and after Maggette. Until very recently, they’ve been the two worst run franchises in the NBA (and the Clippers haven’t really changed as much as lucked into Blake Griffin and made a couple other nice draft picks)….
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 10:40 AM PST up reply actions
Good defensively.
Improved his outside shot a lot between HS and the NBA (it was supposed to be a huge ? for him). He’s an underrated passer who is actually an excellent ball-handler. Though he struggles to finish inside and in mid-range, it’s more a product of his horrid offensive system. And unlike what a lot of people think, he was vocal on that Bucks team last year. He wasn’t just there, he was a leader. And that’s something hard to find in young players.
I'm looking forward to the Warriors being led to the playoffs by Monta Ellis AND Stephen Curry.
Nobody was forgotten
I just don’t rank Millsap or Matthews in the top 25.
Admittedly, I haven’t been Rondo’s biggest supporter over the years but as a C’s fan, I’d trade him for Chris Paul in a heartbeat. I think the C’s would become everyone’s favorites for the title for the next two years if we had CP3.
I’d be interested in seeing someone make the case why Aldridge is better than Millsap, if anyone cares to?
by Missing Barry on Jan 26, 2011 6:01 PM PST up reply actions
Just a matter of preference.
I thought Millsap was in the late 20’s, I just think Aldridge has stepped up his game this year and I think LA has room to grow whereas Millsap has pretty much peaked. I also think Aldridge’s defense is a bit better, especially on the pick and roll.
Their production seems extremely, extremely similar to me. I can buy Aldridge is a better defender. Not sure how much. I don’t view Aldridge as a great defender or anything. It’s just strange to me how people seem to be hyping Aldridge while a very, very similar player gets no love at all. I think both of them are pretty close to their peak, honestly. I also don’t think anything about Aldridge has changed this year (I’ve heard that he’s stepped up his game a bunch of times from a bunch of people, not just you)….I’m just not seeing it. He’s shooting a little bit more, and that’s pretty much it. He’s not even making a higher percentage of those shots or anything….just taking more.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 7:28 AM PST up reply actions
A lot has to do with his attitude this year.
I wasn’t a fan of LA but he’s really taken a leadership role and put the team on his back at times this year. He’s still prone to an absolute stinker every once in a while and I doubt he’ll ever be anything more than a poor man’s Bosh but he’s impressed me this year.
In the actual NBA, I’d probably opt for Millsap because, despite his shortcomings, his production is similar and he makes half as much as Aldridge. But if contracts weren’t an issue, I’d go with Aldridge and I think the Jazz would be better with LA whereas Millsap wouldn’t be as effective on offense if he had ’Dre instead of Deron.
You praise Aldridge for picking the team up and carrying them a few times this year and then say he’d be better off with Deron Williams. If Aldridge has stepped his game up (and he hasnt really, he’s just shooting more) then it has to be attributed to Roy’s absence. So basically Aldridge has improved this year because his really good guard teammate is hurt but if he was playing with a really good guard teammate he’d be better?
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
They aren't mutually exclusive.
One reason Aldridge has improved this year because the Blazers’ offense doesn’t run through isos anymore. Similarly, Aldridge would be even better if he was in an pick and roll offense, especially one alongside Deron Williams.
As good as Roy is, when he is healthy, he bogs down the offense. The Blazers are iso-heavy and the ball doesn’t move much. It’s going to be interesting to see if he can fit in when he comes back because I have a feeling that his knees aren’t going to let him be the player he once was and he will need to fit in an offense rather than have the offense fit around him, as it has in the past.
As it affects Aldridge, he’s moved more into the paint with Roy out, both in working in the post and cutting to the hoop (with ’Dre running the offense instead of Roy, LA is now #1 in alley-oops in the NBA.)
Also, if you look beyond the statistics, Aldridge has stepped up in terms of being a leader. I thought, given all of the injuries the Blazers have faced, he’d fold ala Bosh last season. But he’s become more aggressive. He’s still too soft for my liking but he seems like a passable leader now whereas in the past he was a third fiddle.
If his aggressiveness only leads to him taking more shots while continuing to hit them at the same rate and not improving on the boards or showing dramatic defensive improvement then what good is this change in attitude really?
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
There's more to the game than statistics
and players can impact the game and help give their team a boost in ways that don’t show up in the stat sheet.
If you’ve watched the Blazers over the years, it’s immediately evident when watching the games that Aldridge is better this year, even if his stat lines are somewhat similar.
There is more to the game than statistics
but that doesn’t mean you should throw them out. I think a lot of times fans see a guy shooting, and thus scoring, more and assume the player has really become more aggressive and improved. I just don’t think that’s real improvement, especially when its largely due to the fact that the team’s top scorer suffered a major injury.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
How many Blazers games have you watched this year?
I honestly don’t know many, if any, people who have watched the Blazers a fair amount this year and not come away thinking that Aldridge is playing better basketball and at a higher level this year.
It’s interesting — Aldridge’s rate numbers suggest only marginal improvement from last season (similar scoring efficiency, slightly higher volume, slightly better rebounding, similar assist rate, much worse turnover rate). But the plus-minus numbers suggest a huge jump forward — from a modest +3.1 last year to an NBA star-like +13.7 so far this season.
Perhaps he’s really stepped up his defensive game this year? He has nearly doubled his block rate while keeping his foul rate constant, which lends some credence to that possibility. He certainly has the length and athleticism to be a very good defender, if he sets his mind to it.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jan 27, 2011 10:00 AM PST up reply actions
My friend who lives in Portland said he's the Blazers best player.
And he has a pretty good grasp of things, he follows TS% and stuff for example. Said he’s only think keeping them from collapsing….that’s pretty good APM.
Keith Smart is challenging Red Auerbach to be the greatest coach of all time.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 27, 2011 11:24 PM PST up reply actions
Really depends on what stats you’re looking at. Everything that happens on the court is captured in +/-, for instance. Heck, the game is played to see which teams end up with the most points at the end (and points, of course, are a stat). I assume we’re both on the same page when we say a guys contributions should somehow affect points scored, or points allowed, for them to be meaningful, right?
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 10:43 AM PST up reply actions
Not necessarily.
There are countless examples of stats being misleading or not showing you “everything that happens on the court”. Do you really think that the Thunder win last night without Kevin Durant? I mean, Durant was -3 for the night.
And there’s stuff like Big Baby Davis getting guys in foul trouble by taking charges, and then KG comes in and takes advantage of the foul situation. (Or again, in last night’s game, K-Love NOT taking a charge that could have fouled Russ Westbrook out of the game.)
Again, I compare Aldridge to Bosh last year. Bosh’s numbers looked great. But his attitude sucked and affected the entire team. Contrast that to Aldridge who didn’t quit when injuries mounted for the Blazers. He stepped up and is helping the Blazers keep pace.
Now I’m not saying that stats don’t have a place in the discussion but they can’t be the core of the discussion. If people haven’t seen Aldridge play a fair amount, I’m not sure how they can really make any claim on his play this year.
Do you really think that the Thunder win last night without Kevin Durant? I mean, Durant was -3 for the night.
The team was -3 while Durant was in. That doesn’t mean Durant was -3. And random variation happens. It’s a core idea in statistics.
And there’s stuff like Big Baby Davis getting guys in foul trouble by taking charges, and then KG comes in and takes advantage of the foul situation.
And of course, this can be verified or not with other statistics. ;)
Honestly, I think most of the time when people talk about guys intangibles like they can “see it”, I think they’re full of crap. Not a shot at you, more a shot at the general punditry of sports analysis. It makes a good story. It’s interesting. Some times, I’m sure it’s true. The thing is – I don’t think the people who are talking about it have any clue when it’s true and when it’s not. What we see as fans is so limited, and our own perceptions are generally weak at analyzing things objectively, I just don’t put much stock into it. Evidence always has to be the core of a discussion. Otherwise….well, I’m just generally skeptical.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
I think it's a little of both
The team was -3 while Durant was in. That doesn’t mean Durant was -3.
I guess it’s semantics but to me that’s the same thing.
But besides that, a lot of sports writing is gimmicks. Hollinger’s player write-ups are great but I feel like ESPN makes him focus more on just stats in his other articles to play up that angle. On the other hand, I agree with you that there are a lot of guys who denounce stats simply because they get in the way of their point.
But I do think watching the games is key and often lost in message board discussions. (The poster child being Kevin Martin; you really have to watch him to realize how much he really slows down an offense.)
In the end, I think Roy’s injury has allowed Andre Miller to play his game, Wes Matthews to play a bigger role, and LaMarcus is stepping up as the leader, steadying factor, and the glue to keep the team winning.
I guess I don’t see it as semantics because in a single game, his teammates and opponents are going to have a bigger effect on his +/- than he will. Sample size solves a lot of that, though there could definitely still be biases left (hello, adjusted +/-!)…
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 2:02 PM PST up reply actions
Heck, they’re Phil Jackson’s favorites as it stands…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jan 26, 2011 7:06 PM PST up reply actions
I wish we could collapse these threads
I have no idea who you are replying too.
_______________________________________________________________
The City: A Golden State Warriors-Centric NBA Blog
to
_______________________________________________________________
The City: A Golden State Warriors-Centric NBA Blog
Just click "up" next to reply
and it takes you to the post that the person is replying to.
thanks!
I always wondered what that was for. :)
_______________________________________________________________
The City: A Golden State Warriors-Centric NBA Blog
IMO, the guy being slept on is Eric Gordon… his offensive numbers are every bit as good as Curry and Monta’s, and he’s worlds better as a defender. I don’t really see an argument for rating either guy above him.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
Well, even though he’s improved he’s still not as good of a passer as either of those guys. I think Curry and Ellis could both pass for point guards with the right backcourt mate and I don’t think Gordon will ever be that kind of player. He may be the better defensive player right now, but he’ll always be undersized for his position where Curry and Ellis could conceivably both be PGs sometime in the next 2-3 years, and both could be much better on the defensive end than they are now. He also hasnt rebounded as well as Curry or Ellis.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
I think he’s a lot closer to being one than Gordon
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
I’m not sure that I agree.
Monta this year: 5.6 assists, 3.3 turnovers, 1.60 AST/TO
Gordon this year: 4.5 assists, 2.6 turnovers, 1.72 AST/TO
Monta is being asked to do more point guard-type stuff than Gordon is, but it’s not clear to me that he’s actually better at that stuff than Gordon. And while Gordon’s passing numbers are the best of his career, Monta’s recording career-high passing numbers this year, too.
I don’t think Eric Gordon’s a point guard by any stretch, but then I don’t think Monta is, either. (I think Curry is one, albeit a flawed one.) Gordon’s a really awful rebounder, but Monta’s no great shakes there either… actually Gordon’s REB% is very slightly higher than Monta’s on the year, 4.8% to 4.6%.
I dunno. I suppose you could make a case for Curry being better if you really value his ability to play the point (though I’d contend that Gordon’s defensive edge outweighs that). But I don’t really see the case for Monta being Gordon’s equal. Gordon is basically a more consistent Monta that plays defense.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
Monta is being asked to do more point guard-type stuff than Gordon is, but it’s not clear to me that he’s actually better at that stuff than Gordon
I only saw gordon play against the dubs but IIFC he looked like he’s got way better handles than Montay?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 27, 2011 9:33 PM PST up reply actions
Well that’s not saying much. Monta’s handles are still pretty weak.
by Missing Barry on Jan 28, 2011 7:01 AM PST up reply actions
Well that’s not saying much.
but that’s what point guards need to do, handle and distribute more than PPG.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 28, 2011 9:41 AM PST up reply actions
I don’t think Gordon’s really that undersized. He is short, but he’s long (though he appears to be Ekpe Udoh long where his standing reach isn’t nearly as impressive as his wingspan would suggest) and he’s very stocky for an NBA player.
by Missing Barry on Jan 27, 2011 7:20 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Golden State Of Mind
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
- David West hilariously denies each and every one of his young fans a high-five (VIDEO)
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat are moving on to the conference finals
