DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

A Look At Dalembert's Career Arc

The level of detail in this entry is quite astounding.

With Brand out Dalembert is the only Sixer who can consistently rebound the ball. He definitely needs to get big minutes until Brand returns.

I feel this data confirms what we already know, that despite his very obvious flaws he is an above average center in the NBA. Problem for us is that our other pieces are as equally frustrating as he is.

I feel Dalembert's offensive game should be limited to putbacks and open dunks and the occasional alley oop. His jumper is ugly and unreliable, just like that of every other Sixer, only worse.

His value to the team is great because Brand and Evans are undersized and neither Smith nor Speights can grab a rebound to save their lives. Ratliff is a perfect example for Dalembert to follow.

I ask of nothing more than 5 points, 11 rebounds and 2.5 blocks per game from Dalembert. If he can produce that and the rest of the team gets their act together we should be fine.

I think 5-7 FGA, 11 boards and 2+ blocks would be ideal from Dalembert, and I think that's exactly what he'd give you with consistent minutes and a sound offensive system. Even w/ that level of production, though, moving him would probably be the best long-term move for the team.

great research Brian, but I honestly don't care much about his stats

just watching the games is enough to realize he's detrimental to the team, for every good thing he does, he has two boneheaded plays, and always in the worst moments of the game

too bad the fumbles, the goaltendings, the fouls etc arent's showed in any stat sheet or graphics

I came to the conclusion that a combo of Speights + a healthy Jason Smith + a veteran big man to back them up (Theo or similar) is enough to provide all the things that Dalembert provides, but for half the price and minus the (dozen of) idiotic plays that make you lose games, just like in Denver

ship him out of town for a 2nd rounder

Smith + Sp8s would be cheaper, and much better offensively, but you can't disregard the rebounds.

user-pic
John reply to Brian on Dec 28 at 14:47
+/-

People need to stop over valuing Smith - he's worse defensively at his position than Kyle Korver - short arms, slow, and poor lateral quickness - he can sink the 3 - and that's great - but speights is far and away better than him (and sure smith is better than evans, but hell even sam is better than evans)

Speights is already better than Sam - he was better than Sam the moment he was drafted - let's not forget that sam's also a whiny bitch when things don't go his way

Speights is better offensively, but he needs to start rebounding before you can just hand the job to him. Since Brand went down his rebounding has been pitiful

user-pic
John reply to Brian on Dec 28 at 14:45
+/-

Speights knows how to play basketball - sam doesn't - sam never has - he's still as ignorant about basketball fundamentals as he was when he first picked up the ball - he shows no work ethic - dedication to getting better or to a team (or why did he get kicked off in canada) he's a bad player AND a bad influence...i'd rather watch speights learn in this non championship season - which it always was - then watch sam waste more time - a center who you'll nEVER win an nba title with if he starts.

Sam should have been traded when the hawks offered childress, but billy king was a pretty dumb man

Sam's better than Perkins, statistically. Boston won with Perkins.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Dec 30 at 2:34
+/-

Perkins doesn't do anything to actively hurt them, though, does he? He's just not a big contributor.

2.5 turnovers/game is way too many for a guy that doesn't handle the ball much, I mean, he's mostly just getting the ball right at the hoop, how does he turn it over that much?

Maybe based on straight rebounds/blocks.

But based on PER (15.4 for perkins, 12.5 for Dalembert) and PER differential (+1.3 for Perkins, -0.3 for Dalembert) he's not. Also not based on on-court/off-court, where Perkins is a +3, whereas Dalembert's a +0.6.

Perkins also has sammy beat in both Ortg (103 vs 97) and Drtg (96 vs 101), as well as offensive win shares (+0.4 vs -0.1) and defensive win shares (+2.1 vs +1.3).

Where are you getting those PER numbers? I'm seeing 11.3 for Sammy, 13.8 for Perkins. Perkins' career PER ave is 13.3, Sammy's is 15.1.

In fact, prior to this season, Dalembert has dominated Perkins in every one of the categories you mention above. This year Dalembert's minutes are down, and apparently effectiveness as well. But beyond these 30 games, Sammy has been the better center, statistically.

I was using 82games.com, which apparently uses a slightly different method of calculating PER, or is out of date. Basketball-reference has the #'s you listed.

I was arguing about this year, as I see Perkins as a player who is still developing (particularly defensively), whereas I don't see improvement in Dalembert. I can see in your case talking about last year with Perkins winning a title. It can also be argued that playing with 3 hall-of-famers, Perkins touches (and hence production, which is what PER is based off of) takes a significant hit. Dalembert rebounds would likely be down if he were playing with Garnett as well.

(btw, Perkins did have a better Drtg and defensive win share than Dalembert last year as well).

Is a lower number better in Drtg?

Yeah. It's from Dean Oliver's Basketball on Paper. It's basically defensive points allowed per 100 possessions.

Basketball-Reference uses the stat. BasketballValue.com has some nice uses of various stats as well.

Brain, yes a lower number in DRTG is better. It is points allowed per 100 possessions. Subsequently a higher number in ORTG is better as it is points produced per 100 possessions.

Brian there has been a pretty heated Sammy debate in the comments on my blog for the last week or so. The funny thing about conversations about Sam is people always disregard what the numbers say because they don't support all the bashing of him. Almost all the numbers you look at over his career say Sam is and has been a positive and contributes more to winning games than losing games. But people ignore them and focus almost entirely on what isn't tracked or closely measured like fumbled/dropped passes or being in the wrong spot offensively.

This is just pure truth. Over the past two seasons, he's been an above-average center. He's paid to be an above-average center.

That being said, if they can find another team who looks at it this way, and is willing to trade a shooter for him, I think the team as a whole would be better off. Mike Miller, for example. The problem is, I think a lot of people around the league see Sammy as a negative, no matter what the numbers say. Their announcers certainly do.

It's a tough situation. If he isn't going to get minutes, and it sure looks like he isn't, then his trade value will continue to plummet and that contract will look more and more like an albatross.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif