Your Memphis Grizzlies Basketball Thread III

#2,728
#2,728
Grizz drafted Adams based off analytics and the fact that he has a solid jumpshot. We'll see how this analytics approach works out.
 
#2,731
#2,731
Chad Fords analysis:

Adams is one of the best scorers in the draft, and, according to Kevin Pelton's projected WARP, he was one of the best players in the draft. John Hollinger, who helped pioneer those stats, still is in the Grizzlies' front office. He can score -- really score. But he's one of the most unathletic 2-guards ever.
Click to expand...
 
#2,732
#2,732
Ford's analysis on Stokes

The Jazz will send Stokes to the Grizzlies for a 2016 first-round pick. Stokes was another guy who ranked very high in analytics models. Clearly, the Grizzlies are still watching the numbers. He can really rebound, and his numbers were almost identical to Julius Randle's last season.
Click to expand...
 
#2,739
#2,739
They're taking a risk on Z-Bo in my opinion but I'm happy that Stokes wil get to learn from him for the next few seasons.
 
#2,741
#2,741
I really think Jarnell and Zach have similiar physical structure and talent (strong points, not relative impact) and I am excited to see them together at the "four".
 
#2,743
#2,743
Though I'm thoroughly pissed the Jazz traded Stokes, I'm glad for him because he probably wants to play in Memphis. How hard is it going to be for him to get on the floor? I think he's got potential to be one of the league's best rebounders if he doesn't get buried on the bench.
 
#2,746
#2,746
n_huffhines said:
What analytics? Do you know? The stats I look at ranked him 42nd in the draft (among college players).
Click to expand...

Look it up. You can read Hollinger and Ford's analytics and can figure why the Grizz drafted him. After all, they do take an analytics approach now.
 
#2,747
#2,747
gordonr24 said:
Look it up. You can read Hollinger and Ford's analytics and can figure why the Grizz drafted him. After all, they do take an analytics approach now.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...I'll have to check out Ford's. I know Hollinger's PER is deeply flawed. It's not based on anything really mathematical. He just arbitrarily created values for certain attributes and made a point system. It's pretty meaningless.

I'm interested to see what Ford does, and this other guy Pelton, too. :good!:
 
#2,748
#2,748
I'm not saying that I agree with the analytics approach, but I can understand why they picked Adams. I'll wait and see how he pans out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,750
#2,750
I'm used to our draft picks not panning out. Who was our last decent contributor....Conley? OJ was okay but we passed on Love for him.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top