Lance Stephenson

[Walt Frazier]

Current Rating: 81
Suggested Rating: 76

Wow, just looked at this guy as a trade target in a fantasy league and, just wow.

15% from 3? And he takes 2 per game? We have to really lower that.

38.6% from the field? That's horrid. And he's shooting just as often as last year.

60.3% from the line? He's 67 for his career but his 71% last year helped him get his boost. Gotta bring that back down.

I do like that he's a good rebound guy and still passing very well, so we shouldn't hit those areas.

But, those %'s are literally killing me. Guy can NOT be over an 80 anymore.

Also, honestly, the difference between a 35% 3pt guy (probably have an ind. rating of about 70-75) and a 15% 3pt guy (probably have an ind. rating of about 30?) equals almost 3 full OVR Rating points just by itself. Whether we hit it that hard or wait a little bit, that gives an example of why I have a 5-point drop here.

[Alex English]

Player A: 10.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.1 bpg, 38.6 FG%, 15.1 3P%, 60.1 FT%, 10.1 PER - Rating: 81
Player B: 9.2 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.8 apg, 1.2 spg, 0.7 bpg, 39.6 FG%, 25.7 3P%, 81.0 FT%, 12.4 PER - Rating: 84

Player A is rated 81 and Walt proposes decreasing him to a 76. Player A is obviously Lance. Player B is rated 84 and Walt proposes we don't decrease him at this time. Player B is Nicolas Batum.

Sorry Walt, I don't mean to go after you or anything, but it's just a very obvious difference in how these two similar players are being treated. There is just no justification to act like there should be an 8 point difference in their ratings.

I'll give Lance an 80. His percentages are awful, but they were great last year. Also 6.6 rebounds and 4.7 assists should be worth quite a lot on it's own.

I'd drop Batum's rating 2 or 3 points so I think an 80 for Lance is good right now.

[Charles Barkley]

Jan 16, 2015 7:15:15 GMT Alex English said:

Player A: 10.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.1 bpg, 38.6 FG%, 15.1 3P%, 60.1 FT%, 10.1 PER - Rating: 81
Player B: 9.2 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.8 apg, 1.2 spg, 0.7 bpg, 39.6 FG%, 25.7 3P%, 81.0 FT%, 12.4 PER - Rating: 84

Player A is rated 81 and Walt proposes decreasing him to a 76. Player A is obviously Lance. Player B is rated 84 and Walt proposes we don't decrease him at this time. Player B is Nicolas Batum.

Sorry Walt, I don't mean to go after you or anything, but it's just a very obvious difference in how these two similar players are being treated. There is just no justification to act like there should be an 8 point difference in their ratings.

I'll give Lance an 80. His percentages are awful, but they were great last year. Also 6.6 rebounds and 4.7 assists should be worth quite a lot on it's own.

I'd drop Batum's rating 2 or 3 points so I think an 80 for Lance is good right now.

I think Batum needs dropped some, but I also think Batum will pick things back up. Lance, on the other hand, is in a new situation, he just got all the money, and, well, he just doesn't seem to care anymore. And it isn't just that, he just seems like he isn't in a good situation. I don't think the Hornets understood that having two ball dominant guards would be a bad thing, but hey, I'm just a guy playing another guy as a GM on the internet, so what do I know.

Not comparing Lance to Batum. Just going to go off of my own ratings. Those percentages cancel out his high RBDs and ASTs for a guard, and I'm left seeing a 10 point scorer with decent defense, basically Tony Allen. 

Plus we have all these trade rumors swirling, I reserve my right to vote at a later date, after this Nets thing plays out.


Gonna go with a 77 

[Brian Scalabrine]

81 good point alex

changed to 77

[Kevin Hollis]

77 would be okay with me.

[Larry Bird]

Honestly, I might wait and see what he does in Brookyln.
With the Brooklyn - Charlotte - Oklahoma City trade in the works playing for his hometown may cause him to play some better ball.

[Deleted]

81

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 16, 2015 7:15:15 GMT Alex English said:

Player A: 10.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.1 bpg, 38.6 FG%, 15.1 3P%, 60.1 FT%, 10.1 PER - Rating: 81
Player B: 9.2 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.8 apg, 1.2 spg, 0.7 bpg, 39.6 FG%, 25.7 3P%, 81.0 FT%, 12.4 PER - Rating: 84

Player A is rated 81 and Walt proposes decreasing him to a 76. Player A is obviously Lance. Player B is rated 84 and Walt proposes we don't decrease him at this time. Player B is Nicolas Batum.

Sorry Walt, I don't mean to go after you or anything, but it's just a very obvious difference in how these two similar players are being treated. There is just no justification to act like there should be an 8 point difference in their ratings.

I'll give Lance an 80. His percentages are awful, but they were great last year. Also 6.6 rebounds and 4.7 assists should be worth quite a lot on it's own.

I'd drop Batum's rating 2 or 3 points so I think an 80 for Lance is good right now.

Here's how the ratings work out basically...and I'm referring to Individual Ratings for each category.

Lance would have about a 10 point advantage in REB
Even in Passing & Handle
Batum would have about a 20 point advantage in STEAL
Batum would have about a 40 point advantage in BLOCK
Batum would have a slight FG advantage but we can even call that equal for now
Batum would have a 21 point advantage in FT
Batum would have about a 20-30 point advantage in 3PT.

So all told, even using just 20 point advantage for 3pt, in these categories alone, Batum is 91 IND rating points better than Stephenson.  Every 14 points is equal to 1 OVR Rating point, so that means just there, Batum is 6.5 points better than Stephenson.


I will now go further.  Batum is actually getting back to himself.  Over the last month, his counting stats are very similar to his season stats, but his %'s are improving.

FG% is up by about 4%
3PT% is up by about 4%

Neither of those should be ignored.

And, finally, to put the nail in the coffin...Career #'s, which give Batum the benefit of the doubt, while allowing us to question what the hell is going on with Stephenson and wondering who he really is in this league.

Batum's career FG% is 44.9%.  Career 3PT is 36.1%.  Career FT% is 82.9%.  
Lance's career FG% is 45.5%.  Career 3PT is 30.8%.  Career FT% is 67.1%.  

Lance's career also has 2 years of 33.3 & 37.6% FG and 2 years of 46 and 49%.  Now this year he's at 38.6 again.   Who is he?
Lance's career 3PT%'s are 0, 13.3, 33.0, 35.2, and 15.1 again.  Who is he?
FT has gone from 78.6 - 47.1 - 65.2 - 71.1 - 60.3  I dunno, honestly I am confused.

Batum on the other hand has never shot under 42.3% from the Field (documented injury that year, every other season is up at 45%
Batum has never been below 34.5% from 3, and every other season was 36% or higher, including a 39 and 41% season.
Batum has never been below 80.3% from the line.  

---

Listen, I understand their stats have a similar look, but things like Steals, Blocks, and %'s (not only this year are Batum's better (no, not that good themselves), but they've been way more established for his career) end up making a BIG difference in a player's rating.

If/when Stephenson gets things figured out we can always boost him back up, but he is a horrible, horrible shooter right now and that needs to be accounted for in our attempts to keep ratings current.


P.S.  I know you guys know Barber and I don't get along, but I truly would not have posted this if Lance was doing what he did last year.  I think anyone with %'s these bad need to be looked at, especially with a funky career line so far.  

To sum up/wrap up from above, Batum, this season alone, is still 6.5 points better than Lance.  When you factor in Batum's career lines compared to Lance's, it becomes an even larger gap.  That's the reason for my personal vote.  I would vote the same no matter who owned Lance.  

Kevin Hollis Brian Scalabrine Larry Bird

[Walt Frazier]

Going another route:

Player A: 10.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.1 bpg, 38.6 FG%, 15.1 3P%, 60.1 FT%, 10.1 PER - Rating: 81
Player B: 13.7 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 1.2 apg, 0.5 spg, 0.2 bpg, 48.8 FG%, 41.3 3P%, 72.2 FT%, 19.73 PER - Rating: ?? Who is he guys?


I'm not PER's biggest fan but even it knows, Player B is having a MUCH better season.

You can cancel out their Steal/Block ratings basically.
A gets probably a 20-25 point advantage in reb & a 35 point advantage in passing?
B gets a 12 point advantage in FT, possibly a 50-55 point advantage in 3PT, and I'm gonna guess something around a 25-30 point advantage in FG.

That would give B a 37 point advantage there, which is over 2.5 OVR Rating points. Player A is a better defender but I still think it ends up bringing them to about equal.

So, I can tell you guys this. Player B does need to prove himself more, but he currently has a rating thread up. He's only getting votes in the 74-77 range.

Is my 76 for "Player A" (Lance) really that off?

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 16, 2015 13:55:50 GMT Larry Bird said:

Honestly, I might wait and see what he does in Brookyln.
With the Brooklyn - Charlotte - Oklahoma City trade in the works playing for his hometown may cause him to play some better ball.

Charlotte no longer involved in trade talks. - Charles Barkley

[Brian Scalabrine]

I still don't think Lance should be more than 2 or 3 overall points less than batum. The statistics this year don't back up more than that. 81 still

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 16, 2015 17:33:12 GMT Brian Scalabrine said:

I still don't think Lance should be more than 2 or 3 overall points less than batum. The statistics this year don't back up more than that. 81 still

I actually broke down exactly how this year's stats do reflect more than 2-3 OVR points. I know it was a big post, but if you care, it's there.

6.5 points different based on this year's stats, basically.

[Brian Scalabrine]

I saw but I agree with alexs post more they should be similar

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 16, 2015 18:16:53 GMT Brian Scalabrine said:

I saw but I agree with alexs post more they should be similar

Alex's post is the one I used for the stats that I used.

Anyway, to each their own. I'm cool with anyone who wants to wait, though we are now just about a month away from the ASB, so some of these things should start to get a true first read about now.

I am having trouble comprehending anyone viewing both of their stats and not seeing the glaring weaknesses (3PT%, FT%, BLK, STL) and how they WILL reflect on OVR rating. There is really no arguing that.

Where are the similar areas of Stephenson's game that are so superior to Batum's? Other than some completely subjective "Eye Test" that some correspond to at times.

Also, Blazers are dominating in a TOUGH Western Conference...Hornets are meh in a meh Eastern Conference. Lance's jacking up 2 3's every game and only making one every 3 games is just hurting his team, probably more than his assists and rebounds are helping when coupled with his bad FT and general bad FG%.

I guess that's what I'm looking to comprehend, for those of you (not necessarily you Brian) who think their stats are similar. How do you account for Lance's disadvantages in FT%/3p%/STL/BLK in comparison to Batum? I'm totally open to seeing it, but no one has presented it yet so I'm having trouble. And I don't think the answer is the 1 rpg advantage lol. Batum has proven to be as good of a rebounder as Stephenson for longer in his career.

[Kevin Hollis]

I didn't say anything about your dislike towards Barber. I just believe Stephenson is a decent all-around player. I mean his percentages are down, but I still feel that this may be a result of a conflict of interest between him and Kemba. There wouldn't be reports of those two not liking each other if this wasn't a bit true.

[Alex English]

Jan 16, 2015 16:23:32 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Going another route:

Player A: 10.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.1 bpg, 38.6 FG%, 15.1 3P%, 60.1 FT%, 10.1 PER - Rating: 81
Player B: 13.7 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 1.2 apg, 0.5 spg, 0.2 bpg, 48.8 FG%, 41.3 3P%, 72.2 FT%, 19.73 PER - Rating: ?? Who is he guys?


I'm not PER's biggest fan but even it knows, Player B is having a MUCH better season.

You can cancel out their Steal/Block ratings basically.
A gets probably a 20-25 point advantage in reb & a 35 point advantage in passing?
B gets a 12 point advantage in FT, possibly a 50-55 point advantage in 3PT, and I'm gonna guess something around a 25-30 point advantage in FG.

That would give B a 37 point advantage there, which is over 2.5 OVR Rating points. Player A is a better defender but I still think it ends up bringing them to about equal.

So, I can tell you guys this. Player B does need to prove himself more, but he currently has a rating thread up. He's only getting votes in the 74-77 range.

Is my 76 for "Player A" (Lance) really that off?

Shabazz is coming off an awful rookie season, but I do think most people were going low in his thread. I gave him a 77 and would have gone higher if the Timberwolves weren't so bad and he had more than just half a season of playing the way he is.

But you could use his stats and compare them to Batum and make the same argument, so it doesn't really argue against my point.

Also, about your other post, there isn't a 1:1 ratio of a player's current stats and their rating. That would be madness for trying to match everything up since there is a lot of variation among any one player's stats alone from one season to the other.

I think both Lance and Batum are better than their current stats show, but they're both the same type of player that help their teams mostly in ways besides scoring. I think they are very worthy of comparison.

[Brian Scalabrine]

I understand what you're saying Walt but I think batums advantages in 3s blocks and steals should just be a little lower in comparison to Lance.

Agree to disagree ☺

[Walt Frazier]

Still haven't seen anyone counteract my rating point but whatever, I don't think it is counter-able. Just different opinions, which yours make zero sense to me personally, but that's why we all have a vote.

I'm honestly mostly interested in figuring out how you guys give ratings, b/c I don't see consistency, but to each their own.

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 16, 2015 19:01:13 GMT Alex English said:

Jan 16, 2015 16:23:32 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Going another route:

Player A: 10.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 4.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.1 bpg, 38.6 FG%, 15.1 3P%, 60.1 FT%, 10.1 PER - Rating: 81
Player B: 13.7 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 1.2 apg, 0.5 spg, 0.2 bpg, 48.8 FG%, 41.3 3P%, 72.2 FT%, 19.73 PER - Rating: ?? Who is he guys?


I'm not PER's biggest fan but even it knows, Player B is having a MUCH better season.

You can cancel out their Steal/Block ratings basically.
A gets probably a 20-25 point advantage in reb & a 35 point advantage in passing?
B gets a 12 point advantage in FT, possibly a 50-55 point advantage in 3PT, and I'm gonna guess something around a 25-30 point advantage in FG.

That would give B a 37 point advantage there, which is over 2.5 OVR Rating points. Player A is a better defender but I still think it ends up bringing them to about equal.

So, I can tell you guys this. Player B does need to prove himself more, but he currently has a rating thread up. He's only getting votes in the 74-77 range.

Is my 76 for "Player A" (Lance) really that off?

Shabazz is coming off an awful rookie season, but I do think most people were going low in his thread. I gave him a 77 and would have gone higher if the Timberwolves weren't so bad and he had more than just half a season of playing the way he is.

But you could use his stats and compare them to Batum and make the same argument, so it doesn't really argue against my point.

Also, about your other post, there isn't a 1:1 ratio of a player's current stats and their rating. That would be madness for trying to match everything up since there is a lot of variation among any one player's stats alone from one season to the other.

I think both Lance and Batum are better than their current stats show, but they're both the same type of player that help their teams mostly in ways besides scoring. I think they are very worthy of comparison.

The comparison is OK, but it illustrates (IMO) just how much better Batum still is than Lance overall. Which is what we're rating, OVR rating.

In fact, I agree with what I bolded above, to a certain extent. In conjunction with the fact that these two are fairly comparable as types of players, most of their stats are close as far as athleticism and such. So, we can then go and highlight the areas where one player is above the other. That's all I've done, and it's b/c they are somewhat comparable that I felt comfortable doing that.

[Alex English]

Jan 16, 2015 19:12:03 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Still haven't seen anyone counteract my rating point but whatever, I don't think it is counter-able. Just different opinions, which yours make zero sense to me personally, but that's why we all have a vote.

I'm honestly mostly interested in figuring out how you guys give ratings, b/c I don't see consistency, but to each their own.

Counteract what rating? This?

Jan 16, 2015 15:34:57 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Lance would have about a 10 point advantage in REB
Even in Passing & Handle
Batum would have about a 20 point advantage in STEAL
Batum would have about a 40 point advantage in BLOCK
Batum would have a slight FG advantage but we can even call that equal for now
Batum would have a 21 point advantage in FT
Batum would have about a 20-30 point advantage in 3PT.

So all told, even using just 20 point advantage for 3pt, in these categories alone, Batum is 91 IND rating points better than Stephenson.  Every 14 points is equal to 1 OVR Rating point, so that means just there, Batum is 6.5 points better than Stephenson.

That's a ridiculous rating and I'll counteract it with my boy James Harden.

Nicolas Batum: 9.2 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.8 apg, 1.2 spg, 0.7 bpg, 39.6 FG%, 25.7 3P%, 81.0 FT%, 12.4 PER - Rating: 84
James Harden: 27.0 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 6.8 apg, 1.9 spg, 0.9 bpg, 45.0 FG%, 37.8 3P%, 89.4 FT%, 27.2 PER - Rating: 90

Ok then, lets have some fun.

Harden would have about a 30 point advantage in Offensive Awareness
Harden would have about a 60 point advantage in FG when you take into account way higher production and efficiency.
Harden would have about a 40 point advantage in 3PT, again way higher efficiency and volume.
Harden would have about a slight advantage in rebounding but we can call that equal for now.
Harden would have about a 30 point advantage in Passing
Harden would have about a 15 point advantage in Handle
Harden would have about a 20 point advantage in Steal
Harden would have about a 5 point advantage in Block
Harden would have about a 8 point advantage in FT

Just those categories have Harden 208 individual rating points higher than Batum. That comes out to about 15 Overall rating points. Batum is an 84, which means Harden has to be a 99. On second thought, I like your rating system. Let's keep it.

So it's settled, Harden gets a 99?

[Walt Frazier]

Well, the things you have ignored Alex are things like D-Aware. You're also totally ignoring Batum's also-established FG (right in line with Harden's this year) and 3PT (again, right in line with Harden's this year)...so you can get rid of those 60 and 40 points, or at least a fair chunk of both.

A key part of my argument which you just ignored is Batum has established what he is capable of in those areas. Considering that, actually my rating system still works considering...

Personally, I think our ratings are too conservative with upper-end guys though. And I think Harden is having a wonderful season, the increase in Steal/Block this year especially, very impressive. I'd put him in the Mid-90's but I'd get laughed at in this league.

I get Defense is a big part of the game, and no, Harden's D isn't that good, though it's improved. But when rating players, there just aren't that many areas where "defense" really comes into the equation. On it's own, it's just in D-Aware. Of course things like athleticism come into account, as far as a player's capability to play defense, but just b/c a guy like Kevin Love is bad on defense shouldn't keep him from that 90-range alone. Not when he, and Harden (different but somewhat similar based on previous rating discussions) is so good in so many other areas.

In summary, my system isn't actually that wacky b/c Batum needs to be given credit for his past stats and the injury and changing role he has on his team this year.

[Alex English]

Jan 16, 2015 19:58:29 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Well, the things you have ignored Alex are things like D-Aware. You're also totally ignoring Batum's also-established FG (right in line with Harden's this year) and 3PT (again, right in line with Harden's this year)...so you can get rid of those 60 and 40 points, or at least a fair chunk of both.

A key part of my argument which you just ignored is Batum has established what he is capable of in those areas. Considering that, actually my rating system still works considering...

Personally, I think our ratings are too conservative with upper-end guys though. And I think Harden is having a wonderful season, the increase in Steal/Block this year especially, very impressive. I'd put him in the Mid-90's but I'd get laughed at in this league.

I get Defense is a big part of the game, and no, Harden's D isn't that good, though it's improved. But when rating players, there just aren't that many areas where "defense" really comes into the equation. On it's own, it's just in D-Aware. Of course things like athleticism come into account, as far as a player's capability to play defense, but just b/c a guy like Kevin Love is bad on defense shouldn't keep him from that 90-range alone. Not when he, and Harden (different but somewhat similar based on previous rating discussions) is so good in so many other areas.

In summary, my system isn't actually that wacky b/c Batum needs to be given credit for his past stats and the injury and changing role he has on his team this year.

DAware is the only category where Batum can be rated higher than Harden. All the other defensive categories like Steal, Block and DReb Harden is actually better. So you'd never make up the difference with that one rating alone, even though Batum would be 20-30 points higher there. That's especially true when you have to consider that Harden would be higher in Dunk, Quickness, Stamina, and Injury at least.

Also this part:

Jan 16, 2015 19:58:29 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Well, the things you have ignored Alex are things like D-Aware. You're also totally ignoring Batum's also-established FG (right in line with Harden's this year) and 3PT (again, right in line with Harden's this year)...so you can get rid of those 60 and 40 points, or at least a fair chunk of both.

A key part of my argument which you just ignored is Batum has established what he is capable of in those areas.

Can also be applied to Stephenson. Here are their stats last season:

Lance Stephenson: 13.8 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 4.6 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.1 bpg, 49.1 FG%, 35.2 3P%, 71.1 FT%, 14.7 PER
Nicolas Batum: 13.0 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 5.1 apg, 0.9 spg, 0.7 bpg, 46.5 FG%, 36.1 3P%, 80.3 FT%, 15.8 PER

If I'm ignoring Batum's past accomplishments, then you are doing the same thing with Lance.

I'm not trying to wage a war here or anything, but I see Batum and Stephenson as similar players who play similar roles on their team. The notable differences between the two being that Batum is a more well rounded defender with an ability to block shots, and Batum has a much better attitude.

My biggest problem with this thread is there is definitely not a 6-8 point separation between these two guys, which is what this thread would result in.

[Charles Barkley]

Alex English you need to look at Lance's usage rate this season vs Batum's. One player is being used a lot more than the other, and the one that is being used more, Lance, has worse stats this season than Batum. I think that Batum's decline is due to his usage, and I think that Lance's decline is due to him getting a fat contract and not caring as well as being in the wrong system for him. I think that Lance should get a decrease pending what happens next for him. I mean, Charlotte was a good team last year, and this year they are terrible, and their big change was adding Lance, I don't think that is a coincidence; it is the same reason they are trying to trade him, and trying very very hard.

I don't think neither guy should have the gavel thrown down and have their rating decrease happen right now. I think in both Batum's and Lance's case, we should analyze, collect knowledge, and vote. And we need more games. And, I feel confident in saying this, after those games, Lance will still need a decrease and Batum will be alright (although I think an 84 for him is high to begin with).

[Andrei Kirilenko]

This is clearl just Walt attacking my player, either because he doesn't like me, or because he owns my pick. Either way, it's sad coming from a member of the ratings committee.

Lance has been injured this year and is getting adjusted to a new team. If you're gonna use that argument for Love and others, it applies to Lance as well.

I'm not even gonna vote because this thread is stupid.

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 16, 2015 20:19:14 GMT Alex English said:

Jan 16, 2015 19:58:29 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Well, the things you have ignored Alex are things like D-Aware. You're also totally ignoring Batum's also-established FG (right in line with Harden's this year) and 3PT (again, right in line with Harden's this year)...so you can get rid of those 60 and 40 points, or at least a fair chunk of both.

A key part of my argument which you just ignored is Batum has established what he is capable of in those areas. Considering that, actually my rating system still works considering...

Personally, I think our ratings are too conservative with upper-end guys though. And I think Harden is having a wonderful season, the increase in Steal/Block this year especially, very impressive. I'd put him in the Mid-90's but I'd get laughed at in this league.

I get Defense is a big part of the game, and no, Harden's D isn't that good, though it's improved. But when rating players, there just aren't that many areas where "defense" really comes into the equation. On it's own, it's just in D-Aware. Of course things like athleticism come into account, as far as a player's capability to play defense, but just b/c a guy like Kevin Love is bad on defense shouldn't keep him from that 90-range alone. Not when he, and Harden (different but somewhat similar based on previous rating discussions) is so good in so many other areas.

In summary, my system isn't actually that wacky b/c Batum needs to be given credit for his past stats and the injury and changing role he has on his team this year.

DAware is the only category where Batum can be rated higher than Harden. All the other defensive categories like Steal, Block and DReb Harden is actually better. So you'd never make up the difference with that one rating alone, even though Batum would be 20-30 points higher there. That's especially true when you have to consider that Harden would be higher in Dunk, Quickness, Stamina, and Injury at least.

Also this part:

Jan 16, 2015 19:58:29 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Well, the things you have ignored Alex are things like D-Aware. You're also totally ignoring Batum's also-established FG (right in line with Harden's this year) and 3PT (again, right in line with Harden's this year)...so you can get rid of those 60 and 40 points, or at least a fair chunk of both.

A key part of my argument which you just ignored is Batum has established what he is capable of in those areas.

Can also be applied to Stephenson. Here are their stats last season:

Lance Stephenson: 13.8 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 4.6 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.1 bpg, 49.1 FG%, 35.2 3P%, 71.1 FT%, 14.7 PER
Nicolas Batum: 13.0 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 5.1 apg, 0.9 spg, 0.7 bpg, 46.5 FG%, 36.1 3P%, 80.3 FT%, 15.8 PER

If I'm ignoring Batum's past accomplishments, then you are doing the same thing with Lance.

I'm not trying to wage a war here or anything, but I see Batum and Stephenson as similar players who play similar roles on their team. The notable differences between the two being that Batum is a more well rounded defender with an ability to block shots, and Batum has a much better attitude.

My biggest problem with this thread is there is definitely not a 6-8 point separation between these two guys, which is what this thread would result in.

Not trying to war either. My point was bigger than just last season, thought I made that clear but I guess not. Batum is WELL-established. As I said, like 6-7 years of 44-45% or higher FG%, same number of years with like 36% 3pt. Lance gave us a brief two-season blip (comparatively to Batum) where things looked good, but who knows? Maybe he was working with a coach who understood him a lot better. It's possible he never gets that again. Maybe his teammates pushed him a certain way to improve, and now he's lost that. Maybe he made a bunch of money and isn't trying as hard anymore. Honestly I don't know, none of us really do of course, and that's fine. I personally, don't trust the guy enough to just totally ignore what's happening this season. Batum, I trust a heck of a lot more. If there was some requirement to give Batum a rating, I'd probably go 82 or 83. He hasn't been quite as good this year, but things are rounding into form a bit so, given his long track-record I think he has earned the "let's wait this out" treatment.

Plus, as bad as Batum's %'s look, Lance's are even worse, by a LOT in the case of his 3pt and ft. ijs. Even if I conceded Batum down to an 82, it would mean Lance should REALLY be down to the mid 70's. We'd of course leave his passing and rebound where they were, it's not hard to do.

Seems like the majority want to wait and see on Lance, and as long as we're doing that with Batum and Love and others like them, I get it. As long as there is consistency. That's all I'm after.

My consistency in this case was that %'s that bad need to be reflected in our ratings. I believe that whole-heartedly. He looks like he's taken a big big BIG step back, but maybe he'll turn it around. My consistency with Batum is that, actually, he has been incredibly consistent in his career, enough to earn that "wait and see" for a bit, especially with current signs pointing to him turning things around in the right direction.

[Walt Frazier]

Jan 17, 2015 4:14:04 GMT Andrei Kirilenko said:

This is clearl just Walt attacking my player, either because he doesn't like me, or because he owns my pick. Either way, it's sad coming from a member of the ratings committee.

Lance has been injured this year and is getting adjusted to a new team. If you're gonna use that argument for Love and others, it applies to Lance as well.

I'm not even gonna vote because this thread is stupid.

You'll never believe me but I'm attacking a horrible shooting player, the end. If he were on another team when I went to trade for him in my fantasy league, I would've come here and posted it just the same.

Get off your God complex and accept that Lance's %'s are horrible. They deserve a look or at least a conversation.

[Andrei Kirilenko]

Lance shot 49.1% last year, one of the best for SGs in the league. He's been battling a pelvic strain all year and joined a new team with a dysfunctional offense. How is this even a conversation?

Here's your lineup big guy:

Rubio 42.6%
Shump 40.9%
Batum 39.6%
Love 43.4%

Please keep going down this road, Walt. PLEASE do.

[Alex English]

Jan 17, 2015 4:15:09 GMT Walt Frazier said:

Not trying to war either. My point was bigger than just last season, thought I made that clear but I guess not. Batum is WELL-established. As I said, like 6-7 years of 44-45% or higher FG%, same number of years with like 36% 3pt. Lance gave us a brief two-season blip (comparatively to Batum) where things looked good, but who knows? Maybe he was working with a coach who understood him a lot better. It's possible he never gets that again. Maybe his teammates pushed him a certain way to improve, and now he's lost that. Maybe he made a bunch of money and isn't trying as hard anymore. Honestly I don't know, none of us really do of course, and that's fine. I personally, don't trust the guy enough to just totally ignore what's happening this season. Batum, I trust a heck of a lot more. If there was some requirement to give Batum a rating, I'd probably go 82 or 83. He hasn't been quite as good this year, but things are rounding into form a bit so, given his long track-record I think he has earned the "let's wait this out" treatment.

Plus, as bad as Batum's %'s look, Lance's are even worse, by a LOT in the case of his 3pt and ft. ijs. Even if I conceded Batum down to an 82, it would mean Lance should REALLY be down to the mid 70's. We'd of course leave his passing and rebound where they were, it's not hard to do.

Seems like the majority want to wait and see on Lance, and as long as we're doing that with Batum and Love and others like them, I get it. As long as there is consistency. That's all I'm after.

My consistency in this case was that %'s that bad need to be reflected in our ratings. I believe that whole-heartedly. He looks like he's taken a big big BIG step back, but maybe he'll turn it around. My consistency with Batum is that, actually, he has been incredibly consistent in his career, enough to earn that "wait and see" for a bit, especially with current signs pointing to him turning things around in the right direction.

Honestly, the way you describe the two just minimizes Lance and exaggerates Batum.

You say "Batum is WELL-established. As I said, like 6-7 years of 44-45% or higher FG%, same number of years with like 36% 3pt." The reality is Batum has 6 pro years before this season but the first 2 he was pretty much irrelevant due to not being part of the rotation or injury. So it's 4 years of a legit track record.

Then you say "Lance gave us a brief two-season blip (comparatively to Batum) where things looked good, but who knows?" So two seasons where he played 156 games is basically a blink of the eye and we can't really take it seriously because "who knows?"

If two seasons and 156 games is a blip we can't take seriously then we need to make some major changes around here. All these guys having breakout seasons like Draymond Green, Shabazz Muhammed, etc. who's productive track records are less than half a season need to have their threads deleted/increases reversed. If two seasons is a blip then what is 30-40 games?

I'm sure you are just trying to sell your argument, but it actually makes it harder for me to honestly consider what you are saying when I can just pull up basketball-reference to confirm what you're saying, and believe me, I do that with every single claim that is made around here that's verifiable.

I think Batum is 2 or 3 points better than Lance, assuming they both return to their much better means, and I haven't really been convinced otherwise in this thread. It's kind of time to just agree to disagree.

[Walt Frazier]

My point was plain and simple. 6 years for Batum of consistent %'s. 2 good years for Lance (great fg%, solid 3p%, meh ft%), with 2 bad and working on a 3rd bad.

That's quite a difference in my opinion.

To be honest, I may have oversold the 2 season thing as a blink or whatever, i was more getting after two good seasons and two bad seasons, and now he's working on a third bad.

That's all. It's significantly, in my opinion, different from Batum's entire career being way more consistent. This is all in defense of myself judging the two differently. I think it is warranted based on their careers to give Batum a much longer leash than Lance. Plain and simple.

[anonymous]