What's new

What to do with AK?

In the same year AK was flailing, he was, per 48, amongst other 3's in the league:

13th in scoring
18th in rebounds
1st in assists
1st in blocked shots
7th in PER

How can you keep ignoring all this? Or how do you account for why it doesn't matter and there are lots of guys who can do this?
Per minute stats are worthless when you are talking about a player that spent a good portion of the year coming off the bench, and another good portion of the year wearing a suit behind the bench.
 
At $7-8M, yes. I wouldn't tie up that kind of salary in a 30 yr. old with a history of ankle and back problems. Give me a young player who has upside, or spend more on a very good starting wing who can hit some outside shots. AK is an inconsistent shooter. He can drive into the lane and get some fouls called at home. That's less effective on the road. If we accuse others of "flopping' then I think we need to come up with another term for what AK does, perhaps "flailing?"

OK, so as I read it, you think AK isn't worth 7-8 million per year?

What's he worth, then?
 
Per minute stats are worthless when you are talking about a player that spent a good portion of the year coming off the bench, and another good portion of the year wearing a suit behind the bench.

Right. The old bench stats argument. Except AK started 35 of his 58 games. And we all know AK closed halves and games until he got hurt. I have no idea why you think these arguments work.
 
Per minute stats are worthless when you are talking about a player that spent a good portion of the year coming off the bench,

Uh, Salty, that's why per minute stats get used. Because, um, it wouldn't make much sense to compare a bench player's production, playing 25-30 minutes a game to starter's production who plays 35-40 minutes. Just a thought.
 
Uh, Salty, that's why per minute stats get used. Because, um, it wouldn't make much sense to compare a bench player's production, playing 25-30 minutes a game to starter's production who plays 35-40 minutes. Just a thought.
Well it doesn't make much sense to compare a player's stats when he is going against bench players, to another player's stats who is going up against starters. And that is exactly what comparing AK's per minute stats is doing.
 
Sorry, man.

I just thought you were one of those morans who defended Boozer at all costs. My bad.
I didn't defend him at all costs, I just said it would be stupid to trade him for scrubs like Tyrus Thomas or Udonis Haslem. Now that we have Jefferson, I guess we can all agree I was right about that.

Jefferson is defnitely a lot better than those scrubs.

I'm a fan of the team. I'm not into any one player more than the team.
 
I didn't defend him at all costs, I just said it would be stupid to trade him for scrubs like Tyrus Thomas or Udonis Haslem. Now that we have Jefferson, I guess we can all agree I was right about that.

Jefferson is defnitely a lot better than those scrubs.

I'm a fan of the team. I'm not into any one player more than the team.

Fair enough.

Anyway, I agree with you. Boozer sucks.
 
Fair enough.

Anyway, I agree with you. Boozer sucks.

I wouldn't say he sucks, but the Jazz certainly won't be hurting by replacing him with Jefferson either. He is a good player, but obviously not someone that can't be replaced.

Anyway, back on topic- if AK actually makes the team worse, then there is no way he is under rated. And no matter how many times someone says to leave salary out of it, it doesn't change the fact that salary IS considered by the people putting the team together.

So while you can speculate on AK signing a small contract, staying healthy, bringing it every night, and then at that point possibly being under rated, right now the fact is he is anything but under rated. He is actually hindering the team BECAUSE of his contract, so you can't just pretend his contract isn't there.
 
Back
Top