TripleThreat wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:D Rose is no slouch of a player--anyone you add with LBJ goes up a few notches on top of it.

I don't put anything past James, but this past year rose was the definition of a slouch.

Low assist rate, low efg%, no defense.

His penetration is only useful if it leads to converted scores.

It did not.

Are you really signing Rose because of his 3 pt. shooting? Defensive prowless? Court vision? The metrics are great... But mostly for guys sitting in front of a their computers trying to prove they know all aspects of playing basketball. Metrics do not tell the whole story or talk about filling a need on a team. As it is still a team game and not a individual statistical competition.

Did not like Rose's tunnel vision, lack of assists or 3pt shooting. However was one of our best penetrating guards, in a long time. and was great to have as an option in tight game? The guy can still create as well as anyone in the NBA. Now is that worth $20M? Of course not. Half of Ron Bakers salary? Absolutely. Also consider that he was not a good fit on the 2016 Knicks. Team that needed a passing/set up point guard. A team that needed additional 3pt. shooting.

Briggs is right. For $2,1 Million, Rose is a very good signing. A great signing if he stays healthy. Specialy on the Cavs. As Lebron is the facilitator and they have several 3pt shooters. A drivinng point guard will help their team.

I can't respond to what people meant, only what they write.

Rose is a slouch of a player, which helps explains why he could only find a min deal.

If his effectiveness has to be qualified by his minimum salary and/or playing with James, I think that speaks somewhat for itself in the bigger picture.

But I didn't respond to that qualification, just the basic idea he is not a poor player in general.

He is.

Cleveland can apparently sign anyone for the min and it becomes a great signing because Lebron will make them better.

If they get him to pass the ball, out of drives, 3 or 4 times more per game, he then turns into a great addition.

If anyone fundamentally changes their game, of course all bets are off the table.

If the Knicks get Hardaway to grab 3 or 4 more rebounds, he becomes a different player.

The rub is it actually occurring.

Some truth there. But your making something, so well known, a mere circumstance. That he is doing what so many have done in recent years. Sacrificing his market value for a chance at winning a Chip! Because I know your not going to try to argue that his market value is 2.1M.

Rose's camp expressed a willingness to return to NY on a discount. He met with the Bucks... twice. The Clippers and the Lakers. It is late in free agency when every spent their money. Cleveland could've had him for the min a month ago.

If you don't see it's perfectly clear he was looking for more money, even in places like Milwaukee and either LA, I can't say anything that will change this conversation.

Lol. Rose's camp agreed that they would be open to getting overpaid by the Knicks.
Don't think many vets are rushing to the Clips, Bucks or Lakers, for vets min, in order to play in a guaranteed final. As they have not made the finals in quite some time and are long shots to do so any time soon. Also, don't think you know what kind of numbers were discussed. As Rose has said he would sacrifice some money to be in a better situation. In the finals, with LBJ, may qualify as one.

Just a year ago, Rose still believed he could earn a $20 million a year long-term deal, but he accepted a one-year, $2.1 million veterans minimum deal. To regain his footing in the NBA, Rose wanted a real team with real games.

"A one-year deal on a bad team to try and put up numbers -- we did not want to entertain that way of thinking," agent B.J. Armstrong, a three-time NBA champion with the Chicago Bulls, told ESPN on Tuesday. "Getting up every day to go to the gym to just try and put up numbers -- that's not who he is. He didn't want to chase anything this summer other than, 'Hey, let's get around a group of guys who are like-minded, who are pursuing winning and be a part of that.'"

This is Rose's agent acknowledging his options were one year 'show me' deals.

If he had multi-year offers, his agent would have said so to better make his point.

Nobody believed in Rose enough to offer him more than one year.

If you regard it all together, clear he wasn't offered much in terms of $$ either.

Sorry? You post a quote from BJ that validates my point. But claim it supports your view by adding your own interpretation. Don't see how it's "clear" he was not offered $$, when nothing referencing money was mentioned in said quote. Are you an attorney? Lol

No worries man. It's not like it affects the Knicks. Unless one thinks Rose is 1/2 the player Ron is. Or 1/9 the player Timmy is. Speaking of current markets

Sigh.

Derrick Rose's production in an abstract sense is worth more than the 2.1 million veteran's minimum.

Derrick Rose's production, while factoring in his POSITIONAL VALUE, was only worth a one year deal, which drove down his market to a 2.1 million dollar deal.

Rose is not a wing. Comparing him to wings isn't going to work here. Wings have, at this point, the highest positional value in the entire league. Even rim protecting big men and stretch 4s are plentiful enough now where their market has stabilized.

What impacted Rose's market were

- Point guards who got traded like Rubio
- Free agent point guards like Teague, Hill, etc
- The draft class which was stocked to the gills with point guard prospects
- Guys like Dennis Schroeder and DeJounte Murray, who stepped up for their teams and filled the role internally

The farther you are away from a classic 3 And D wing skill set, the harder your market will be for a non big man in the NBA.

There's the market push/pull for your raw production

There's the market push/pull for your specific position on the court, that has to reflect the entire marketplace demand and league trends.

I don't think Dion Waiters is actually that great a player. But he's a wing and he's young. So he got a long term deal.

The problem with raw counting stats in abstract is they don't factor in roles and restraint. Tim Duncan, in his last 4 years, could have averaged 30 points a game. But to do it, he would have had to cash in any kind of defense. He'd have to freeze out his team mates and he'd have to kill all ball movement and any kind of free flowing offense. He'd get his points, but at the detriment to the entire team. And any pursuit to win.

If you compare Rose to many other players, you are comparing a player without restraint and without a team enforcing discipline, to other players likely subverting their individual games to suit a team role. Shane Battier in his prime could have scored 15-18 points a game, if he simply said screw this team and jacked the ball up every chance he got.

Byron Mullens can be, in a technical sense, a lethal Stretch 5. Give the guy some daylight and he will space the floor and bomb you into oblivion. The problem is every other aspect of his game sinks your team. Give him 25 shots a game, he'll light up the scoreboard. Just what will those shots cost you though?

Rose is being evaluated against his POTENTIAL ROLE within a team framework that will ENFORCE DISCIPLINE on his style of play or they will bench him. Something that would not happen on the Knicks. He's not an 18 point per game scorer in that dynamic.

He's WORTH MORE THAN 2.1 MILLION AS AN INDIVIDUAL PLAYER

He's ONLY WORTH 2.1 MILLION AS A TEAM PLAYER

NBA history has shown player can work on and develop a three point shot. Rose never did. No one to blame but himself. The league trend didn't happen overnight. You'd have to be blind and deaf and insane to be an NBA player and not see the critical mass regarding the 3 ball. Even DeMarcus Cousins and Anthony Davis worked on this aspect of their games. Rose is a selfish player, and he's also stupid. Because you have to be stupid to not develop a three point shot in todays game.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

In this case, the stupid prize was 2.1.

Some good points. As mentioned above, have to add the discount taken in order to play with LBJ and compete for a chip. And lowered value due to a season ending injury.

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:D Rose is no slouch of a player--anyone you add with LBJ goes up a few notches on top of it.

I don't put anything past James, but this past year rose was the definition of a slouch.

Low assist rate, low efg%, no defense.

His penetration is only useful if it leads to converted scores.

It did not.

Are you really signing Rose because of his 3 pt. shooting? Defensive prowless? Court vision? The metrics are great... But mostly for guys sitting in front of a their computers trying to prove they know all aspects of playing basketball. Metrics do not tell the whole story or talk about filling a need on a team. As it is still a team game and not a individual statistical competition.

Did not like Rose's tunnel vision, lack of assists or 3pt shooting. However was one of our best penetrating guards, in a long time. and was great to have as an option in tight game? The guy can still create as well as anyone in the NBA. Now is that worth $20M? Of course not. Half of Ron Bakers salary? Absolutely. Also consider that he was not a good fit on the 2016 Knicks. Team that needed a passing/set up point guard. A team that needed additional 3pt. shooting.

Briggs is right. For $2,1 Million, Rose is a very good signing. A great signing if he stays healthy. Specialy on the Cavs. As Lebron is the facilitator and they have several 3pt shooters. A drivinng point guard will help their team.

I can't respond to what people meant, only what they write.

Rose is a slouch of a player, which helps explains why he could only find a min deal.

If his effectiveness has to be qualified by his minimum salary and/or playing with James, I think that speaks somewhat for itself in the bigger picture.

But I didn't respond to that qualification, just the basic idea he is not a poor player in general.

He is.

Cleveland can apparently sign anyone for the min and it becomes a great signing because Lebron will make them better.

If they get him to pass the ball, out of drives, 3 or 4 times more per game, he then turns into a great addition.

If anyone fundamentally changes their game, of course all bets are off the table.

If the Knicks get Hardaway to grab 3 or 4 more rebounds, he becomes a different player.

The rub is it actually occurring.

Some truth there. But your making something, so well known, a mere circumstance. That he is doing what so many have done in recent years. Sacrificing his market value for a chance at winning a Chip! Because I know your not going to try to argue that his market value is 2.1M.

Rose's camp expressed a willingness to return to NY on a discount. He met with the Bucks... twice. The Clippers and the Lakers. It is late in free agency when every spent their money. Cleveland could've had him for the min a month ago.

If you don't see it's perfectly clear he was looking for more money, even in places like Milwaukee and either LA, I can't say anything that will change this conversation.

Lol. Rose's camp agreed that they would be open to getting overpaid by the Knicks.
Don't think many vets are rushing to the Clips, Bucks or Lakers, for vets min, in order to play in a guaranteed final. As they have not made the finals in quite some time and are long shots to do so any time soon. Also, don't think you know what kind of numbers were discussed. As Rose has said he would sacrifice some money to be in a better situation. In the finals, with LBJ, may qualify as one.

Just a year ago, Rose still believed he could earn a $20 million a year long-term deal, but he accepted a one-year, $2.1 million veterans minimum deal. To regain his footing in the NBA, Rose wanted a real team with real games.

"A one-year deal on a bad team to try and put up numbers -- we did not want to entertain that way of thinking," agent B.J. Armstrong, a three-time NBA champion with the Chicago Bulls, told ESPN on Tuesday. "Getting up every day to go to the gym to just try and put up numbers -- that's not who he is. He didn't want to chase anything this summer other than, 'Hey, let's get around a group of guys who are like-minded, who are pursuing winning and be a part of that.'"

This is Rose's agent acknowledging his options were one year 'show me' deals.

If he had multi-year offers, his agent would have said so to better make his point.

Nobody believed in Rose enough to offer him more than one year.

If you regard it all together, clear he wasn't offered much in terms of $$ either.

Sorry? You post a quote from BJ that validates my point. But claim it supports your view by adding your own interpretation. Don't see how it's "clear" he was not offered $$, when nothing referencing money was mentioned in said quote. Are you an attorney? Lol

No worries man. It's not like it affects the Knicks. Unless one thinks Rose is 1/2 the player Ron is. Or 1/9 the player Timmy is. Speaking of current markets

1/9 Timmy sounds about right. We don't really have enough data to judge Baker but I do think it's clear the team was better him than Rose on the court.

9 times better? No way. Not even better. Unless Rose tears another acl. You do remember Timmy right? The guy we got rid of. But guess we shall see.

But for ****s and gigglea, your a stat guy:

http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/tim_hardaway_jr_vs_derrick_rose.htm

LOL. Those are the kind of stats GMs used before cell phones came out.

And before these guys:

The guys who could not beat anyone on the court/field but now search the Internet for stats to try to prove they know the sport.

But let's stick to stats. Please pick the smallest sample size, of stats, you can find to prove Hardaway is a better player than Rose. (Cuz that's how stat guys operate) I'll bet your going to use Hardaways second half of the 2016 season? Anyone that's played the sport and has watched Timmy (most of us) definately do not think Timmy is 9 times better than a healthy Rose. But I'm sure your stats will prove otherwise.

Nope. I'm comfortable using the mainstream advanced stats from the past 2 years. I wasn't literally saying 9 as opposed to 8.9 or 9.1...I'm just saying he's WAY better than anything Rose has shown int he past 4 or 5 years. I only gave the Hardaway signing a C/C+. I'm not a hardcore supporter of it. And if Rose was willing to accept competing for minutes with our other PGs rather than automatically getting minutes, I would accept him on the roster at a price of $2.1 mil too. I'm sure he'd have no reason to come here for questionable playing time instead of the Cavs deal though. So we would have to have overpaid.

For the record, those stat guys are a key reason (probably the main reason) every team is shooting exponentially more 3s than before and fewer mid-range shots. And all serious NBA teams are hiring metrics experts now.

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:D Rose is no slouch of a player--anyone you add with LBJ goes up a few notches on top of it.

I don't put anything past James, but this past year rose was the definition of a slouch.

Low assist rate, low efg%, no defense.

His penetration is only useful if it leads to converted scores.

It did not.

Are you really signing Rose because of his 3 pt. shooting? Defensive prowless? Court vision? The metrics are great... But mostly for guys sitting in front of a their computers trying to prove they know all aspects of playing basketball. Metrics do not tell the whole story or talk about filling a need on a team. As it is still a team game and not a individual statistical competition.

Did not like Rose's tunnel vision, lack of assists or 3pt shooting. However was one of our best penetrating guards, in a long time. and was great to have as an option in tight game? The guy can still create as well as anyone in the NBA. Now is that worth $20M? Of course not. Half of Ron Bakers salary? Absolutely. Also consider that he was not a good fit on the 2016 Knicks. Team that needed a passing/set up point guard. A team that needed additional 3pt. shooting.

Briggs is right. For $2,1 Million, Rose is a very good signing. A great signing if he stays healthy. Specialy on the Cavs. As Lebron is the facilitator and they have several 3pt shooters. A drivinng point guard will help their team.

I can't respond to what people meant, only what they write.

Rose is a slouch of a player, which helps explains why he could only find a min deal.

If his effectiveness has to be qualified by his minimum salary and/or playing with James, I think that speaks somewhat for itself in the bigger picture.

But I didn't respond to that qualification, just the basic idea he is not a poor player in general.

He is.

Cleveland can apparently sign anyone for the min and it becomes a great signing because Lebron will make them better.

If they get him to pass the ball, out of drives, 3 or 4 times more per game, he then turns into a great addition.

If anyone fundamentally changes their game, of course all bets are off the table.

If the Knicks get Hardaway to grab 3 or 4 more rebounds, he becomes a different player.

The rub is it actually occurring.

Some truth there. But your making something, so well known, a mere circumstance. That he is doing what so many have done in recent years. Sacrificing his market value for a chance at winning a Chip! Because I know your not going to try to argue that his market value is 2.1M.

Rose's camp expressed a willingness to return to NY on a discount. He met with the Bucks... twice. The Clippers and the Lakers. It is late in free agency when every spent their money. Cleveland could've had him for the min a month ago.

If you don't see it's perfectly clear he was looking for more money, even in places like Milwaukee and either LA, I can't say anything that will change this conversation.

Lol. Rose's camp agreed that they would be open to getting overpaid by the Knicks.
Don't think many vets are rushing to the Clips, Bucks or Lakers, for vets min, in order to play in a guaranteed final. As they have not made the finals in quite some time and are long shots to do so any time soon. Also, don't think you know what kind of numbers were discussed. As Rose has said he would sacrifice some money to be in a better situation. In the finals, with LBJ, may qualify as one.

Just a year ago, Rose still believed he could earn a $20 million a year long-term deal, but he accepted a one-year, $2.1 million veterans minimum deal. To regain his footing in the NBA, Rose wanted a real team with real games.

"A one-year deal on a bad team to try and put up numbers -- we did not want to entertain that way of thinking," agent B.J. Armstrong, a three-time NBA champion with the Chicago Bulls, told ESPN on Tuesday. "Getting up every day to go to the gym to just try and put up numbers -- that's not who he is. He didn't want to chase anything this summer other than, 'Hey, let's get around a group of guys who are like-minded, who are pursuing winning and be a part of that.'"

This is Rose's agent acknowledging his options were one year 'show me' deals.

If he had multi-year offers, his agent would have said so to better make his point.

Nobody believed in Rose enough to offer him more than one year.

If you regard it all together, clear he wasn't offered much in terms of $$ either.

Sorry? You post a quote from BJ that validates my point. But claim it supports your view by adding your own interpretation. Don't see how it's "clear" he was not offered $$, when nothing referencing money was mentioned in said quote. Are you an attorney? Lol

No worries man. It's not like it affects the Knicks. Unless one thinks Rose is 1/2 the player Ron is. Or 1/9 the player Timmy is. Speaking of current markets

1/9 Timmy sounds about right. We don't really have enough data to judge Baker but I do think it's clear the team was better him than Rose on the court.

9 times better? No way. Not even better. Unless Rose tears another acl. You do remember Timmy right? The guy we got rid of. But guess we shall see.

But for ****s and gigglea, your a stat guy:

http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/tim_hardaway_jr_vs_derrick_rose.htm

LOL. Those are the kind of stats GMs used before cell phones came out.

And before these guys:

The guys who could not beat anyone on the court/field but now search the Internet for stats to try to prove they know the sport.

But let's stick to stats. Please pick the smallest sample size, of stats, you can find to prove Hardaway is a better player than Rose. (Cuz that's how stat guys operate) I'll bet your going to use Hardaways second half of the 2016 season? Anyone that's played the sport and has watched Timmy (most of us) definately do not think Timmy is 9 times better than a healthy Rose. But I'm sure your stats will prove otherwise.

Nope. I'm comfortable using the mainstream advanced stats from the past 2 years. I wasn't literally saying 9 as opposed to 8.9 or 9.1...I'm just saying he's WAY better than anything Rose has shown int he past 4 or 5 years. I only gave the Hardaway signing a C/C+. I'm not a hardcore supporter of it. And if Rose was willing to accept competing for minutes with our other PGs rather than automatically getting minutes, I would accept him on the roster at a price of $2.1 mil too. I'm sure he'd have no reason to come here for questionable playing time instead of the Cavs deal though. So we would have to have overpaid.

For the record, those stat guys are a key reason (probably the main reason) every team is shooting exponentially more 3s than before and fewer mid-range shots. And all serious NBA teams are hiring metrics experts now.

same metrics that have resulted in the gross overpaying of anyone who can shoot it. Morey is so brilliant. How's Anderson's contract look? Ujuri is so brilliant, how's Carrol's contract look? How's Bazemore's deal looking? Eh.. still waiting to be impressed with the movement.

The league as a whole has moved to a 3 point focus though and if you want to build a team now focused on mid-range shots, the modern good teams will embarrass you on a nightly basis.

HofstraBBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:D Rose is no slouch of a player--anyone you add with LBJ goes up a few notches on top of it.

I don't put anything past James, but this past year rose was the definition of a slouch.

Low assist rate, low efg%, no defense.

His penetration is only useful if it leads to converted scores.

It did not.

Are you really signing Rose because of his 3 pt. shooting? Defensive prowless? Court vision? The metrics are great... But mostly for guys sitting in front of a their computers trying to prove they know all aspects of playing basketball. Metrics do not tell the whole story or talk about filling a need on a team. As it is still a team game and not a individual statistical competition.

Did not like Rose's tunnel vision, lack of assists or 3pt shooting. However was one of our best penetrating guards, in a long time. and was great to have as an option in tight game? The guy can still create as well as anyone in the NBA. Now is that worth $20M? Of course not. Half of Ron Bakers salary? Absolutely. Also consider that he was not a good fit on the 2016 Knicks. Team that needed a passing/set up point guard. A team that needed additional 3pt. shooting.

Briggs is right. For $2,1 Million, Rose is a very good signing. A great signing if he stays healthy. Specialy on the Cavs. As Lebron is the facilitator and they have several 3pt shooters. A drivinng point guard will help their team.

I can't respond to what people meant, only what they write.

Rose is a slouch of a player, which helps explains why he could only find a min deal.

If his effectiveness has to be qualified by his minimum salary and/or playing with James, I think that speaks somewhat for itself in the bigger picture.

But I didn't respond to that qualification, just the basic idea he is not a poor player in general.

He is.

Cleveland can apparently sign anyone for the min and it becomes a great signing because Lebron will make them better.

If they get him to pass the ball, out of drives, 3 or 4 times more per game, he then turns into a great addition.

If anyone fundamentally changes their game, of course all bets are off the table.

If the Knicks get Hardaway to grab 3 or 4 more rebounds, he becomes a different player.

The rub is it actually occurring.

Some truth there. But your making something, so well known, a mere circumstance. That he is doing what so many have done in recent years. Sacrificing his market value for a chance at winning a Chip! Because I know your not going to try to argue that his market value is 2.1M.

Rose's camp expressed a willingness to return to NY on a discount. He met with the Bucks... twice. The Clippers and the Lakers. It is late in free agency when every spent their money. Cleveland could've had him for the min a month ago.

If you don't see it's perfectly clear he was looking for more money, even in places like Milwaukee and either LA, I can't say anything that will change this conversation.

Lol. Rose's camp agreed that they would be open to getting overpaid by the Knicks.
Don't think many vets are rushing to the Clips, Bucks or Lakers, for vets min, in order to play in a guaranteed final. As they have not made the finals in quite some time and are long shots to do so any time soon. Also, don't think you know what kind of numbers were discussed. As Rose has said he would sacrifice some money to be in a better situation. In the finals, with LBJ, may qualify as one.

Just a year ago, Rose still believed he could earn a $20 million a year long-term deal, but he accepted a one-year, $2.1 million veterans minimum deal. To regain his footing in the NBA, Rose wanted a real team with real games.

"A one-year deal on a bad team to try and put up numbers -- we did not want to entertain that way of thinking," agent B.J. Armstrong, a three-time NBA champion with the Chicago Bulls, told ESPN on Tuesday. "Getting up every day to go to the gym to just try and put up numbers -- that's not who he is. He didn't want to chase anything this summer other than, 'Hey, let's get around a group of guys who are like-minded, who are pursuing winning and be a part of that.'"

This is Rose's agent acknowledging his options were one year 'show me' deals.

If he had multi-year offers, his agent would have said so to better make his point.

Nobody believed in Rose enough to offer him more than one year.

If you regard it all together, clear he wasn't offered much in terms of $$ either.

Sorry? You post a quote from BJ that validates my point. But claim it supports your view by adding your own interpretation. Don't see how it's "clear" he was not offered $$, when nothing referencing money was mentioned in said quote. Are you an attorney? Lol

No worries man. It's not like it affects the Knicks. Unless one thinks Rose is 1/2 the player Ron is. Or 1/9 the player Timmy is. Speaking of current markets

1/9 Timmy sounds about right. We don't really have enough data to judge Baker but I do think it's clear the team was better him than Rose on the court.

9 times better? No way. Not even better. Unless Rose tears another acl. You do remember Timmy right? The guy we got rid of. But guess we shall see.

But for ****s and gigglea, your a stat guy:

http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/tim_hardaway_jr_vs_derrick_rose.htm

LOL. Those are the kind of stats GMs used before cell phones came out.

And before these guys:

The guys who could not beat anyone on the court/field but now search the Internet for stats to try to prove they know the sport.

But let's stick to stats. Please pick the smallest sample size, of stats, you can find to prove Hardaway is a better player than Rose. (Cuz that's how stat guys operate) I'll bet your going to use Hardaways second half of the 2016 season? Anyone that's played the sport and has watched Timmy (most of us) definately do not think Timmy is 9 times better than a healthy Rose. But I'm sure your stats will prove otherwise.

Nope. I'm comfortable using the mainstream advanced stats from the past 2 years. I wasn't literally saying 9 as opposed to 8.9 or 9.1...I'm just saying he's WAY better than anything Rose has shown int he past 4 or 5 years. I only gave the Hardaway signing a C/C+. I'm not a hardcore supporter of it. And if Rose was willing to accept competing for minutes with our other PGs rather than automatically getting minutes, I would accept him on the roster at a price of $2.1 mil too. I'm sure he'd have no reason to come here for questionable playing time instead of the Cavs deal though. So we would have to have overpaid.

For the record, those stat guys are a key reason (probably the main reason) every team is shooting exponentially more 3s than before and fewer mid-range shots. And all serious NBA teams are hiring metrics experts now.

same metrics that have resulted in the gross overpaying of anyone who can shoot it. Morey is so brilliant. How's Anderson's contract look? Ujuri is so brilliant, how's Carrol's contract look? How's Bazemore's deal looking? Eh.. still waiting to be impressed with the movement.

Stats shouldn't be used to overpay anyone. It's possible someone could misinterpret stats or just make a mistake though.
Do you defend every thought any human who uses the eyeball test to evaluate players? Why do you think I would defend every decision any GM who uses metrics makes?

The league as a whole has moved to a 3 point focus though and if you want to build a team now focused on mid-range shots, the modern good teams will embarrass you on a nightly basis.

Our discussion started by you saying Rose was 1/9th the player Timmy is. Basic thread topic...was he a good pick up for 2.1.

As for 3pt focus. The thing about players that only shoot the 3pt shot is that they need guys to set them up. Except for the great ones, who can also create. Think a guy like Rose, if he increases his kick outs, is a better fit with Love, Korver, Smith who tend to hover the stripe. Add James and Irving, who can do the facilitating. Think he will spell Irving off the bench. They also have Jose as an insurance policy if he gets hurt.