Camden wrote:Carlos Danger wrote:Camden wrote:Not the same thing. I would have stood by Rubio even without the "hot" shooting to end the season because of all the other things he does really well. There's years of evidence on that, not just 36 games. I wouldn't let 36 games alter my decision making when you could get an All-Star player that fits perfectly with the rest of the team. That's super risky, IMO.
And you have to realize that that starting lineup that included Dieng was awful defensively, and not effective against teams with bigger frontcourts or teams that had a play-making PF. Dieng was unplayable against Golden State when we beat them. Horford/Towns would be really hard to stop, but still be able to match up with any frontcourt in the league. That's ideal.
Per 36 figures of Horford and Dieng against Golden State this past season:
Dieng: 16.2 points, 8.9 rebounds and +2.8 rating
Horford: 17.7 points, 11.1 rebounds and -6.6 rating
So, we're comparing a guy who played 17, 19, and 27 minutes against a player who logged 39 and 42 minutes? Per 36 traditionally favors the player with significantly lesser minutes because it extrapolates their per minute production into numbers they didn't actually produce, which is likely why you used it.
Dieng started twice against GS. In one game, he shot 2-7 from the field and had 7 boards, yet he was +11. In the game we won against GS, he was 5-8 from the field with 5 boards, but had to be benched for a large part of the game because he couldn't stick with Green on the perimeter nor could he body Bogut. He was a -15. This isn't the only time Dieng's been pulled because he just couldn't match up with the opposition. Thankfully, Bjelica played much better to end the season and he was a good option to turn to when this happened.
I used "Per 36" because Hortford played 40 minutes/game which is very unusual and inflates his overall numbers on a per game basis (how often do players play 40 minutes in a game?). Per 36 is the easiest way to calibrate two players with disproportionate minutes. It is what it is. Dieng was an overall positive against GS and Hortford was a negative. Both are tiny samples - so nobody should read too much it.
The game you reference where "Dieng got pulled" I recall as us going small with Bazz at PF and scoring 35 points. I wouldn't read too much into that either. They ran with the hot line up/hand. It happens. Dieng had a very good season and has a long enough track record that you certainly should be looking at his whole body of work vs. one game.