PDA

View Full Version : Waiters tired of bench role ?



Stunner
07-15-2014, 02:04 PM
RT @dionwaiters3: Nooooooooo RT @CavsForever_: Would you accept the role of coming off the bench or..? @dionwaiters3


With Wiggins looks like he might be staying and starting over Waiters who seems to want to get a better role now ; is best for them to cut their loses ?

In the past it was shown that Philly / Chicago / NY showed interest in trading for him , should those talks open again ?


Chicago would be a scary place for him to end up in , Dunleavy for Waiters matches salary wise and both offer a team need for each other . Dunleavy could become a bigger asset if the Cavs miss out on Miller and Allen as well . Bulls have the Kings pick and could offer another future 1st as well for Waiters . The picks could also be used in a Love deal . Waiters value looks to have taken a dip because of the Kyrie thing so I wouldn't expect the Cavs to get the world for the 3rd year guard . But that Bulls trade makes sense and seems fair .

kobe4thewinbang
07-15-2014, 02:06 PM
I think Wiggins will be traded for Kevin Love. It's best for both sides (for Wiggins and for Cavs in the immediate future) because Wiggins won't be able to develop much with LeBron James and Kyrie Irving hogging the ball. LeBron doesn't mind passing the ball, but let's be real--he's the star of the Cavaliers again. I think everyone was shocked when LeBron picked Cleveland over Miami, including the Cavaliers who had just drafted Wiggins. I wonder how that makes Kyrie feel, if not Wiggins. By doing the trade, 1) They get Kevin Love and 2) Wiggins gets his own team in the T'Wolves to develop properly and 3) Waiters gets the starting role at SG.

Stunner
07-15-2014, 02:08 PM
I think Minny will want to ditch Kevin Martin in any Kevin Love deal , they made that known . So Martin and Love could be headed to Cle , a third team needs to be involved tho . Minny doesn't want his cap anymore .

FlashBolt
07-15-2014, 02:11 PM
Trade Waiters, Thompson, and Bennett and maybe some picks to Minnesota. Start Wiggins at SG (capable of playing that) and get Love on board. I'm not liking Waiters's attitude.

Stunner
07-15-2014, 02:12 PM
Trade Waiters, Thompson, and Bennett and maybe some picks to Minnesota. Start Wiggins at SG (capable of playing that) and get Love on board. I'm not liking Waiters's attitude.

Minny already rejected that trade , Minny wants Wiggins and the Cavs pretty much said he's untouchable .

Vinny642
07-15-2014, 02:50 PM
Waiters, Bennett who is beyond garbage, and Thompson are not worth Love. Its Wiggins or no deal.

WITZ
07-15-2014, 02:52 PM
Hes a scrub,cancer, and chucker ...according to most people on here. Oh and he punched kyrie :laugh2:

utl768
07-15-2014, 02:55 PM
id trade kyrie for love and keep wiggins

u dont need a pg with lebron on the team

Vinny642
07-15-2014, 03:01 PM
id trade kyrie for love and keep wiggins

u dont need a pg with lebron on the team

What need would that fill for the Wolves? They already have Rubio...

nyKnicks126
07-15-2014, 03:03 PM
So..... Dion might have to get used to it.. Or request a trade..

Stunner
07-15-2014, 03:03 PM
What need would that fill for the Wolves? They already have Rubio...

Rubio wants a max contact .... I think it's safe to say he will be living if Kyrie is there .

nyKnicks126
07-15-2014, 03:04 PM
I think Wiggins will be traded for Kevin Love. It's best for both sides (for Wiggins and for Cavs in the immediate future) because Wiggins won't be able to develop much with LeBron James and Kyrie Irving hogging the ball. LeBron doesn't mind passing the ball, but let's be real--he's the star of the Cavaliers again. I think everyone was shocked when LeBron picked Cleveland over Miami, including the Cavaliers who had just drafted Wiggins. I wonder how that makes Kyrie feel, if not Wiggins. By doing the trade, 1) They get Kevin Love and 2) Wiggins gets his own team in the T'Wolves to develop properly and 3) Waiters gets the starting role at SG.

Are you the same person that said Melo will be a Laker?

mjt20mik
07-15-2014, 03:05 PM
Entitled player who is very streaky, a locker room cancer, and can't play defense.

Trade him.

Vinny642
07-15-2014, 03:05 PM
Rubio wants a max contact .... I think it's safe to say he will be living if Kyrie is there .

Everybody wants a max contract. And I wouldnt be surprised if the Wolves gave him one after losing Love.

Stunner
07-15-2014, 03:07 PM
Everybody wants a max contract. And I wouldnt be surprised if the Wolves gave him one after losing Love.

The point is he doesn't deserve it , not even close to it . He's trash

Vinny642
07-15-2014, 03:09 PM
The point is he doesn't deserve it , not even close to it . He's trash

And what does that have to do with whether he'll get it or not? I see Kyrie as overrated. If im the Wolves, im not trading Love for anyone other than Wiggins from the Cavs.

mavwar53
07-15-2014, 03:11 PM
He should embrace it, he is a terrible defender and a hot and cold shooter. Jamal Crawford just younger and heavier.

hugepatsfan
07-15-2014, 03:12 PM
Hes a scrub,cancer, and chucker ...according to most people on here. Oh and he punched kyrie :laugh2:

He's not a scrub. I wouldn't call him a chucker but I wouldn't call him efficient either. I know he developed from year 1 to year 2 but there really was no where to go but up with him in that area. He shot just under 46% in his last 35 games last year (under 41% in his first 35) so that does show some improvement. I just don't think he's the type of guy who can thrive without high usage. A lot of that is attitude. At this point in his career he is a "cancer" (that's such a dramatic term to describe someone in the locker room but whatever). IDK if he actually punched Kyrie but stuff like these tweets just prove he isn't a guy that gets the team concept. He just doesn't have a personality that allows him to take a back seat. And I don't think he's good enough to be a top player that doesn't need to take a backseat.

I don't think anyone here thinks he sucks. His ability points to role player rather than star though and he clearly isn't capable of accepting that. When Cavs fans talk about him they look at his talent and value him at his highest, ignoring other factors.

Stunner
07-15-2014, 03:13 PM
And what does that have to do with whether he'll get it or not? I see Kyrie as overrated. If im the Wolves, im not trading Love for anyone other than Wiggins from the Cavs.

How does it have nothing to do with him getting it ? If you're not loving up to your hype do you deserve max money ? Of course the wolves would prob love wiggins but if Irving came back in the deal theft would love it prob just the same because he's locked up , offensively better than Rubio and they have the chance to move Rubio for another piece.

Stunner
07-15-2014, 03:13 PM
Waiters numbers aren't even that bad if you dig into them .
Also - Dion Waiters #s across the board last year:
50.8ts% 47.9efg% 26.9usg% 99 ORtg 18.2ast% 12.3tov% 0.237 FTR 0.252 3PAr

that looks terrible at first glance right? Yeah, but I look at it this way: that's an insanely high usage rate for a second year player in a terrible offensive system with no structure. The good things about that usage rate though, is that it will absolutely drop about 8% if he came here. With that droppage, his true shooting percentage will skyrocket imo. Why's that? Because he has a good balance of free throw/3pt attempt ratios there. Drop that usage and put him in the right system, that 3pt attempt ratio goes up and he'll get easier buckets at the rim.

Then, if you look really closesly: his ORtg is by far the most staggering, no? It's really bad. But, CLE had the 22nd worst offense last year (104.2 ORtg). So he's 5 points worse per 100 possessions on a ****** team with no structure or flow. The GOOD part about that is, it's entirely correlated with his true shooting percentage! Look at those solid assist vs turnover percentages. As a secondary ball-handler on the perimeter, an 18% assist rate is solid. What's greater is that he had such a high usage rate but only posted just above a 12% turnover rate.


I think with this team and in this system, he easily posts a
54ts% 49efg% 20usg% 17ast% 12tov% 108 ORtg 0.300 3PAr .250 FTR

as your instant offense off the bench guy that's exactly the type of move I'd love to see the Bulls pull off

Vinny642
07-15-2014, 03:15 PM
How does it have nothing to do with him getting it ? If you're not loving up to your hype do you deserve max money ? Of course the wolves would prob love wiggins but if Irving came back in the deal theft would love it prob just the same because he's locked up , offensively better than Rubio and they have the chance to move Rubio for another piece.

Offensively better? He is a better scorer and handler, Rubio's passing is better. As well as Rubio's defense.
Like I said, its Wiggins or find another trade elsewhere.

Stunner
07-15-2014, 03:15 PM
Offensively better? He is a better scorer and handler, Rubio's passing is better. As well as Rubio's defense.
Like I said, its Wiggins or find another trade elsewhere.

Rubios defense yes is better but also overrated

Jamiecballer
07-15-2014, 03:43 PM
He's not a scrub. I wouldn't call him a chucker but I wouldn't call him efficient either. I know he developed from year 1 to year 2 but there really was no where to go but up with him in that area. He shot just under 46% in his last 35 games last year (under 41% in his first 35) so that does show some improvement. I just don't think he's the type of guy who can thrive without high usage. A lot of that is attitude. At this point in his career he is a "cancer" (that's such a dramatic term to describe someone in the locker room but whatever). IDK if he actually punched Kyrie but stuff like these tweets just prove he isn't a guy that gets the team concept. He just doesn't have a personality that allows him to take a back seat. And I don't think he's good enough to be a top player that doesn't need to take a backseat.

I don't think anyone here thinks he sucks. His ability points to role player rather than star though and he clearly isn't capable of accepting that. When Cavs fans talk about him they look at his talent and value him at his highest, ignoring other factors.
If you say nobody thinks he sucks - you and I need to talk.

Jamiecballer
07-15-2014, 03:45 PM
Waiters numbers aren't even that bad if you dig into them .
Its like digging through a big pile of **** to find a Timex watch. Not worth the effort. :)

Ty Fast
07-15-2014, 04:09 PM
Waiters is a b**ch!!!
Who cares!!!

HowFit
07-15-2014, 05:20 PM
Offensively better? He is a better scorer and handler, Rubio's passing is better. As well as Rubio's defense.
Like I said, its Wiggins or find another trade elsewhere.

Or lose him for nothing....

Vinny642
07-15-2014, 06:05 PM
Or lose him for nothing....

Um no

Vinny642
07-15-2014, 06:05 PM
Waiters is a b**ch!!!
Who cares!!!

That contribution to this thread tho!

Tony_Starks
07-15-2014, 07:25 PM
Waiters has a nice game but he is too big for his britches at this point. They might as well trade him now while he has moderate value because you can bet he's not going to quietly spot up in the corner and wait for Lebron to drive and kick to him....

JEDean89
07-15-2014, 08:58 PM
taking him over drummond :facepalm:

NBA_Starter
07-15-2014, 09:20 PM
He really won't like it when Ray Allen takes his job.

MrfadeawayJB
07-15-2014, 09:21 PM
Better get used to it. Or he can start for a garbage team

IndyRealist
07-15-2014, 09:25 PM
Waiters numbers aren't even that bad if you dig into them .

Disagree significantly. His numbers are horrible and Shammyguys analysis is flawed. First off, he assumes that Waiters' TS% will go up (there is no guarantee of that since he is a poor decision maker) and then he goes further with that assumption and says that his piss poor offensive rating will go up because his TS% will go up (more on that in a minute). Two of his major points are based on a pretty ugly assumption, that when his usage goes down that the only shots he will give up are the bad shots. It is just as likely that many of the bad shots that happened to go in will also be turned down, as well as good shots that will be passed up for better shots.

Cleveland was a mediocre offensive team, and he was worse than the team average, meaning he was part of the problem and several players played better than he did. He logged the 4th most minutes on the team (2072) yet had only the 11th best offensive rating. And this completely ignores that he had only the 14th best defensive rating (110, with a team rating of 107.7). 11th in offense, 14th in defense on a 15 person squad? He should have been nailed to the bench.

And lets take a closer look at his TS% to see WHY he is so horrible offensively. His 3pt shooting is just about average for a SG, so that's not it. On 2pt FGs he only shoots 45.5% vs. 46.7% average, which is below average but not horrible. Where he really gets killed is at the line. Despite getting to the line slightly more than average, he shoots a paltry 68.5%, vs 79.9% average. This is when he is not being guarded, when he doesn't have to make decisions, all he has to do is shoot.

Turnover rate is grossly misused here, because Dion Waiters TAKES A LOT OF SHOTS. He ends up being rewarded for chucking because as a percentage of his possessions used, his turnovers don't seem as horrible as they really are. He actually turns the ball over 33% MORE OFTEN than the average SG. His numbers look even worse if you compare him to a PG, as his assist-to-turnover ratio is horrible. So saying that he's a "ball handler" only implies that he handles the ball, not that he's good at it.

Now, he's only in year 2. Players can improve a lot in years 3 and 4. But improving from "borderline D-leaguer" to "might be able to crack the rotation" is not worth the money a #4 pick gets paid in those years. Maybe 5-7 years down the line, he might be an average SG. Does anyone want to pay him for the next 5 years so you can have an average guy? There's a reason rookie contracts have 2 team options at the end, so you can get out from under the deals of the Dion Waiters' of the league. The team made a bad pick, own up to it and cut ties. Continuing to pay this guy is throwing good money after bad. Never mind the number of wins you end up throwing away in those years, that you would have gotten from even an average player.

Waiters, don't want to come off the bench? Then don't suck.

Hotone1401
07-15-2014, 09:36 PM
And what does that have to do with whether he'll get it or not? I see Kyrie as overrated. If im the Wolves, im not trading Love for anyone other than Wiggins from the Cavs.

Are you sure? What happens when Love just walks away after his contract is up?

Love is really really good but Wiggins is going to be special IMO. If I'm the Cavs I'm not giving Wiggins up. I would give up Kyrie because Lebron would be much more effective without playing alongside a ball-dominating PG. I also think the Cavs know this too. There's no way they give up Wiggins.

0nekhmer
07-15-2014, 09:37 PM
Dion just strikes me as a guy with ego problems. I wouldn't be surprised if most of that team has problems with one guy or another. Up to the new head coach and lebron to be real leaders. They're lucky wiggins is a Canadian, cause sorry, we're too nice to have an ego ;)

NBA_Starter
07-15-2014, 09:44 PM
Maybe he wants to play for Philly, he tweeted something about the 6ers.

kobe4thewinbang
07-15-2014, 10:48 PM
Are you the same person that said Melo will be a Laker?Nope.

Well, if Cavaliers reportedly refused to trade Wiggins, it looks like the Warriors might be back in the mix. In that case, I think Cavaliers should trade Waiters, especially now that Mike Miller is with the team and Ray Allen might join also.

WITZ
07-15-2014, 11:14 PM
taking him over drummond :facepalm:

Could have been worse, they could have drafted Harrison Barnes :laugh2:

Duncan = Donkey
07-15-2014, 11:36 PM
Man he sounds like an *******

mrblisterdundee
07-16-2014, 01:11 AM
Waiters needs to man up and be that spark off the bench. All he's been so far is a scoring punch. The guy's talented enough to be a solid sixth man on a contender.

5ass
07-16-2014, 01:29 AM
Disagree significantly. His numbers are horrible and Shammyguys analysis is flawed. First off, he assumes that Waiters' TS% will go up (there is no guarantee of that since he is a poor decision maker) and then he goes further with that assumption and says that his piss poor offensive rating will go up because his TS% will go up (more on that in a minute). Two of his major points are based on a pretty ugly assumption, that when his usage goes down that the only shots he will give up are the bad shots. It is just as likely that many of the bad shots that happened to go in will also be turned down, as well as good shots that will be passed up for better shots.

Cleveland was a mediocre offensive team, and he was worse than the team average, meaning he was part of the problem and several players played better than he did. He logged the 4th most minutes on the team (2072) yet had only the 11th best offensive rating. And this completely ignores that he had only the 14th best defensive rating (110, with a team rating of 107.7). 11th in offense, 14th in defense on a 15 person squad? He should have been nailed to the bench.

And lets take a closer look at his TS% to see WHY he is so horrible offensively. His 3pt shooting is just about average for a SG, so that's not it. On 2pt FGs he only shoots 45.5% vs. 46.7% average, which is below average but not horrible. Where he really gets killed is at the line. Despite getting to the line slightly more than average, he shoots a paltry 68.5%, vs 79.9% average. This is when he is not being guarded, when he doesn't have to make decisions, all he has to do is shoot.

Turnover rate is grossly misused here, because Dion Waiters TAKES A LOT OF SHOTS. He ends up being rewarded for chucking because as a percentage of his possessions used, his turnovers don't seem as horrible as they really are. He actually turns the ball over 33% MORE OFTEN than the average SG. His numbers look even worse if you compare him to a PG, as his assist-to-turnover ratio is horrible. So saying that he's a "ball handler" only implies that he handles the ball, not that he's good at it.

Now, he's only in year 2. Players can improve a lot in years 3 and 4. But improving from "borderline D-leaguer" to "might be able to crack the rotation" is not worth the money a #4 pick gets paid in those years. Maybe 5-7 years down the line, he might be an average SG. Does anyone want to pay him for the next 5 years so you can have an average guy? There's a reason rookie contracts have 2 team options at the end, so you can get out from under the deals of the Dion Waiters' of the league. The team made a bad pick, own up to it and cut ties. Continuing to pay this guy is throwing good money after bad. Never mind the number of wins you end up throwing away in those years, that you would have gotten from even an average player.

Waiters, don't want to come off the bench? Then don't suck.

good post. I wouldnt give up on him so fast, keep him for next year, and if he doesnt show improvement I'd cut him.
But yes, not a good player at all. On a team trying to make the play offs he should barely be seeing 15-20 mpg. If I was his coach and saw this tweet, I would make him come off the bench just to teach him a lesson.

Stunner
07-16-2014, 01:43 AM
good post. I wouldnt give up on him so fast, keep him for next year, and if he doesnt show improvement I'd cut him.
But yes, not a good player at all. On a team trying to make the play offs he should barely be seeing 15-20 mpg. If I was his coach and saw this tweet, I would make him come off the bench just to teach him a lesson.

Ehh he based that off something else , what Sham said wasn't flawed at all he just Mistook it . Sham was saying what could happen if he was in the Bulls offensive set .

Shammyguy3
07-16-2014, 01:50 AM
Disagree significantly. His numbers are horrible and Shammyguys analysis is flawed. First off, he assumes that Waiters' TS% will go up (there is no guarantee of that since he is a poor decision maker) and then he goes further with that assumption and says that his piss poor offensive rating will go up because his TS% will go up (more on that in a minute). Two of his major points are based on a pretty ugly assumption, that when his usage goes down that the only shots he will give up are the bad shots. It is just as likely that many of the bad shots that happened to go in will also be turned down, as well as good shots that will be passed up for better shots.

Here's where Stunner really messed up in quoting my post into this main-forum thread. That post I made was in the Bulls forum, where I made all of my points and analysis on the assumption that the Bulls indeed traded for him. If he goes to some other team, I have far less knowledge about team X, Y, Z and how their offense would be run and what Waiters fit is on that team. But, since you seem to have called out my reasoning i'll respond back (remember, all of these points are on the assumption that Waiters is in a Bulls uniform and under Thibs' offensive system and running those sets, not any other team's or coach's):

While there isn't a direct linear correlation with a drop in usage percentage and a rise in true shooting percentage, on the Bulls I feel like the relief that having multiple guys to create in the low/high post would take a tremendous amount of pressure off of Waiters to go ISO as often as he does.

Typically, when you take less shots than you do, and have less pressure to get a shot up, or are taught to have more composure (remember that Bulls' context I keep referring to?) you are taking far less bad shots. What's the percentage of bad shots that Dion Waiters makes? I mean, SURE some of those shots he took he actually made. But the vast majority of those shots he took he didn't make. Otherwise, his efficiency would be at least average. No? And if Waiters passes up good shots for better shots, then what the heck is wrong with that?



Cleveland was a mediocre offensive team, and he was worse than the team average, meaning he was part of the problem and several players played better than he did. He logged the 4th most minutes on the team (2072) yet had only the 11th best offensive rating. And this completely ignores that he had only the 14th best defensive rating (110, with a team rating of 107.7). 11th in offense, 14th in defense on a 15 person squad? He should have been nailed to the bench.

They weren't a mediocre offensive team. They were 22nd in the league in ORtg. That's bad. Mediocre would be anywhere between in the mid-teens. And once again, those numbers ARE BAD. They're rotten. They stink. Monkeys would throw them at people in a zoo if they could. But my optimistic-attitude in regards to Waiters' fit in the Bulls system led me to this analysis on how he would PROJECT in the Bulls' system only. Once again, just to reiterate my point.

I couldn't care less about Waiters' defensive rating. Carlos Boozer's defensive rating all four years in Chicago were as follows: 99, 95, 100, 98. The Bulls' team as a whole those years were 100.3 - 98.3 - 103.2 - 100.5; Does that mean Boozer was one of our best defenders? God no. Does that mean he's a better defender than Deng or had more of an impact than Deng? Because those very same years Deng's DRtgs were 102 - 100 - 105 - 107.... Obviously, analyzing a players' impact on the floor via DRtg and ORtg isn't a clear-cut science. It's actually lazy as ****, as shown by Boozer vs Deng. Once again, even though you didn't know the context, the context being used was Waiters under Thibs in Chicago.


And lets take a closer look at his TS% to see WHY he is so horrible offensively. His 3pt shooting is just about average for a SG, so that's not it. On 2pt FGs he only shoots 45.5% vs. 46.7% average, which is below average but not horrible. Where he really gets killed is at the line. Despite getting to the line slightly more than average, he shoots a paltry 68.5%, vs 79.9% average. This is when he is not being guarded, when he doesn't have to make decisions, all he has to do is shoot.

His ft% dropped from 74.6% to 68.5% this past year. His two years in college he shot 81.3% and 72.9%. I'd say it's likely that Waiters' ft% remains in that mid 70s% throughout his career. That's not the reason for his piss poor TS% though. The REAL reason why his efficiency is so bad right now, is because this guy is not getting any attempts at the rim. Last year he only took 36% of his shots less than 10ft from the rim and on those he only shot 52.5% at the rim (HORRIBLE, that will absolutely improve given the Bulls' system with their interior passing and offensive sets) and 28.8% from 3-10 feet (again, HORRIBLE).


Turnover rate is grossly misused here, because Dion Waiters TAKES A LOT OF SHOTS. He ends up being rewarded for chucking because as a percentage of his possessions used, his turnovers don't seem as horrible as they really are. He actually turns the ball over 33% MORE OFTEN than the average SG. His numbers look even worse if you compare him to a PG, as his assist-to-turnover ratio is horrible. So saying that he's a "ball handler" only implies that he handles the ball, not that he's good at it.

Turnover rate accurately depicts how many times a player turns the ball over on 100 possessions. It doesn't have anything to do with him chucking. Him making a shot or missing a shot has nothing to do with him turning the ball over. If his assist percentage wasn't solid, then you'd have a point. He's not turning the ball over frequently on offense. He's just not. You can't say that his 12.3% tov rate is a "bad" one. Because it's not. That's actually damn respectable for a guy that takes so many possessions on that end. I think you're the one that's misusing these rates honestly.

And Dion Waiters isn't a PG. He's a SG. I don't care what his rates stack up to point guards. Because they very well should not be anywhere near a point guard's rates. That's grasping at straws to prove a point, and it's invalid.

He is a ball-handler. He doesn't turn it over often. And he assists on over 18% of the possessions. So, if you're not turning the ball over but assisting on a good rate for your position, that is a good ball-handler. Scoring/ball-handling aren't the same thing. One could definitely say he sucked at scoring this past season. Sure. But he was at least average in the assist/tov rate department.


Now, he's only in year 2. Players can improve a lot in years 3 and 4. But improving from "borderline D-leaguer" to "might be able to crack the rotation" is not worth the money a #4 pick gets paid in those years. Maybe 5-7 years down the line, he might be an average SG. Does anyone want to pay him for the next 5 years so you can have an average guy? There's a reason rookie contracts have 2 team options at the end, so you can get out from under the deals of the Dion Waiters' of the league. The team made a bad pick, own up to it and cut ties. Continuing to pay this guy is throwing good money after bad. Never mind the number of wins you end up throwing away in those years, that you would have gotten from even an average player.

Waiters, don't want to come off the bench? Then don't suck.

I don't care about how much money he makes. Why does that matter? I don't care to pay him for the next 5 years. I care to have him on the Bulls' roster next season to potentially win a ring under that system and genius of a coach.

IndyRealist
07-16-2014, 10:11 AM
In the context of the Bulls it's a different story, obviously. But let's address these points.

Again, you're making the assumption that the lower usage = higher efficiency. That's just not necessarily true. With a lower usage he is just as likely to pass up bad shots that went in as bad shots that missed. So while in the scheme it's a better move, it doesn't necessarily improve HIS true shooting. And if he passes up good shots for better ones? Same thing, better for the team but it doesn't improve HIS true shooting.

Arguing the difference between "mediocre" and "bad" is semantics. I was trying to be nice.

As far as Ortg and Drtg, the they are what the TEAM does when that specific player is on the floor. Looking a Drtg for a good defensive team, like the Bulls, it can be reasoned that Boozer's Drtg is good because when he's on the floor, he's out there with good defensive players to cover his deficiencies. Conversely, when Deng is on the floor he's out there to compensate on more offensive, poor defending units. And Deng plays a crapload of minutes, so he's drastically affected by the team's win/loss point margin.

This is not the same as comparing the Ortg/Drtg for a team that is POOR in those categories. With the Bulls, you reason that they are doing it right, whereas with the Cavs, you reason that they are doing it wrong. Then you look at who they are giving minutes to versus who they COULD be giving minutes to. Just because I chose not to go through the full, boring analysis and went to the punchline does not make it lazy, it makes it a synopsis. What's lazy is saying "Drtg does not agree with my perception, so I couldn't care less about Drtg".

As far as FT% goes, you're proving my point. In 4 years his FT% was 81.3%, 72.9%, 74.6%, and 68.5%. The massive swings in his FT% indicate that he's wildly inconsistent with them, meaning he's a POOR FREE THROW SHOOTER, and he's also on a downward trend. He's not being defended, there are no variables. He's just shooting worse.

You accurately note that his TS% is low because he does not get to the rim often. But if you are assuming his TS% will go up, you are assuming he will get to the rim more? You are again making assumptions. One, that he doesn't because he's poorly coached (which is possible), and two that he is capable. In a poor offensive system ball dominant players, while taking their fair share of long 2s, will also generally try to get to the rim. I think he's simply incapable.

The exact same situation played out with OJ Mayo. In college a significant amount of his scoring came off the dribble at the rim, beating his man with his first step and either converting or drawing the foul. In the NBA though, Mayo's first step is only "mediocre" (see? being nice), and thus he's forced into taking a high percentage of contested long 2s because he can't get by his man. This is Dion Waiters in a nut shell. BUT, on average, his 2pt FG% is only slightly below average. If you encapsulate everything he does inside the 3pt line, he's below average but only a bit. Thus the effect on his TS% is smaller than you are making it out to be. It's his free throw shooting that is substantially below average, and getting worse.

As far as saying, "Dion Waiters isn't a PG. He's a SG. I don't care what his rates stack up to point guards" is confusing. You say he's a ballhandler, but don't want to compare him to other ballhandlers? Ok, let's compare him to Lance Stephenson, who is a SG "ballhandler". Lance gets 6.3 assists per 48 minutes, versus 3.7 turnovers. Waiters gets 4.8 assists versus 3.6 turnovers. It's simple math.

As for salary, how can you not care that he is a poor value? For the same money, a team could go out and get a SUBSTANTIALLY BETTER PLAYER that will generate more wins. Dion Waiters will make a hair over $4M this year. That's what CJ Miles and Thabo Sefolosha will make, and more than Doron Lamb, Kris Middleton, Kyle Singler, Terrence Ross, Gerald Green, or Marco Bellinelli. Go trade for one of those guys, who are already better players than Waiters and will only improve under a "genius" coach. Heck, Chris Douglas-Roberts, Wes Johnson, and Evan Turner are better players than Waiters, and they're free agents.

EDIT:
As for turnover rate, I wanted to double check to make sure that you were not using some new number I didn't know about.

TOV% is defined as 100 * TOV / (FGA + 0.44 * FTA + TOV), that is the number displayed on basketball-reference.com, which is the same 12.3% that you use. Your mistake is saying that is his turnovers per 100 possessions. It is not. TOV% is turnovers per 100 PLAYS THAT PLAYER USES which end in a shot, free throws, or a turnover. Thus, it is highly tied into him being a chucker. For example, let's take a player who takes 7 shots and has 3 turnovers, for a TOV% of 30. Now let's say that player is a chucker and takes 10 extra shots he was not supposed to. With 17 shots and 3 turnovers, his TOV% is now 15% despite making the EXACT same number of turnovers in a game. If that player had passed the ball instead of chucking up shots, he would have not ended those possessions and so his TOV% would still be horrible. But because he takes a ton of shots, per play his turnovers look smaller. Per game and per minute, his turnovers are still bad. Now obviously I exaggerated the numbers to illustrate the point, but it's clear that TOV% has a MAJOR flaw. TOV% can not, in and of itself, say a player turns over the ball a lot or not. TOV% is useful for comparing players of similar usage.

mike_noodles
07-16-2014, 10:27 AM
Just another example of a foolish young player. Would rather start (even though it literally means nothing) than take a run at a ship. Hope you get your wish young man, then in 10 years we can hear about you hoping and dreaming to win a ring. Moron.

IndyRealist
07-16-2014, 10:31 AM
Moved.

ottograham14
07-16-2014, 10:31 AM
Maybe he wants to play for Philly, he tweeted something about the 6ers.

He is from Philly. Thats where he gets his alpha mentality and where he would be properly praised for it with the fanbase IMO.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-16-2014, 10:37 AM
Wait, the Bulls own the Kings pick? It has to be lotto protected, right?

JLynn943
07-16-2014, 11:15 AM
Wait, the Bulls own the Kings pick? It has to be lotto protected, right?

Yeah, it's the one that we traded to Cleveland in that awful JJ Hickson trade and Cleveland then traded to Chicago (for what I don't know). Would be great if it ends up back with Cleveland lol

Stunner
07-16-2014, 11:50 AM
I'm sorry I lost interest in your entire post when you said Miles , Thabo , Lamb , Marco , CDR , Wes , Turner are better than Waiters . Again it's his skill set of being a ball handler is what the bulls need for the roster . Not only that Waiters is younger than most of the players you listed " so called better than him " .

WITZ
07-16-2014, 01:45 PM
Yeah, it's the one that we traded to Cleveland in that awful JJ Hickson trade and Cleveland then traded to Chicago (for what I don't know). Would be great if it ends up back with Cleveland lol

That pick is extremely protected & it was part of the Deng deal. The kings have to be out of the top 10 picks by 2017 otherwise it becomes a 2nd round pick and I think that is also top 50 protected lol

IndyRealist
07-16-2014, 02:10 PM
I'm sorry I lost interest in your entire post when you said Miles , Thabo , Lamb , Marco , CDR , Wes , Turner are better than Waiters . Again it's his skill set of being a ball handler is what the bulls need for the roster . Not only that Waiters is younger than most of the players you listed " so called better than him " .

Who cares if he's young if he is isn't a core piece that you want long term? He's horrid now, he MIGHT be average in 5 years, and you'd be paying him the whole time to cost your team wins. If you wana take that deal, I have a bridge for sale....

Stunner
07-16-2014, 02:32 PM
Who cares if he's young if he is isn't a core piece that you want long term? He's horrid now, he MIGHT be average in 5 years, and you'd be paying him the whole time to cost your team wins. If you wana take that deal, I have a bridge for sale....

Lol not helping your case we don't care how much money he's going to make and if Mike Dunleavy is all that takes to get a SG with a skill set we need for our current roster most would do it . Just stop it and I won't hurt the bulls get win that's just idiotic seeing how strong our locker room and head coach is . Bulls make the move if they feel he's a piece they will help them win , Mike isn't going to be here long term so whatever you're talking about just doesn't make sense to me seeing Waiters has a higher % staying with the bulls than Mike if he ended up here .

archdevil84
07-16-2014, 02:37 PM
cant they just start lebron at PF? and then start wiggins at SF and waiter at SG?

mRc08
07-16-2014, 02:45 PM
If lebron hasn't already, he'll put waiters in his place.

kobe4thewinbang
07-16-2014, 03:09 PM
Warriors reportedly still unwilling to part with Klay Thompson for Kevin Love, so who knows--it's amazing how neither team seems to want Kevin Love enough to part with Klay or Wiggins. Boston should be jumping all over it.

IndyRealist
07-16-2014, 03:54 PM
Lol not helping your case we don't care how much money he's going to make and if Mike Dunleavy is all that takes to get a SG with a skill set we need for our current roster most would do it . Just stop it and I won't hurt the bulls get win that's just idiotic seeing how strong our locker room and head coach is . Bulls make the move if they feel he's a piece they will help them win , Mike isn't going to be here long term so whatever you're talking about just doesn't make sense to me seeing Waiters has a higher % staying with the bulls than Mike if he ended up here .

I'm going to be as nice as possible and assume you posted this from a phone, because it's unintelligible. I have no idea what points you were trying to make. Anyone want to take a shot at translating?

prodigy
07-16-2014, 04:06 PM
Trade Waiters, Thompson, and Bennett and maybe some picks to Minnesota. Start Wiggins at SG (capable of playing that) and get Love on board. I'm not liking Waiters's attitude.

As cavs fan I pass on this. Once again wolves have no power. Any offer we make is pretty much better then GS. Because GS will not give up Thompson nor should they. If they trade Thompson for love that's stupid. Love and curry will never win.

But waiters would start at SG with roster as is. Let Wiggins learn off bench. Waiters is a proven scorer.

Shammyguy3
07-16-2014, 04:46 PM
In the context of the Bulls it's a different story, obviously. But let's address these points.

Again, you're making the assumption that the lower usage = higher efficiency. That's just not necessarily true. With a lower usage he is just as likely to pass up bad shots that went in as bad shots that missed. So while in the scheme it's a better move, it doesn't necessarily improve HIS true shooting. And if he passes up good shots for better ones? Same thing, better for the team but it doesn't improve HIS true shooting.

The bolded is an assumption as well. And it's only accurate if Waiters is making 50% of the bad shots he takes. If he is making 50% of those bad shots, then there's no way his efficiency would be this low. And by conventional arithmetic, if he's making less than 50% of those bad field goal attempts, and he starts passing up those shots, then his efficiency will rise alone because by definition alone a "good shot" is one that has a higher probability of going in.

If this is your main post for this efficiency/usage, then I don't know how else to respond because it makes no sense to me.


Arguing the difference between "mediocre" and "bad" is semantics. I was trying to be nice.

Semantics or not, the Cavs weren't a mediocre offense. If the 22nd best ORtg in a league of 30 is mediocre, then the 8th best ORtg in the league of 30 is elite. Which is another semantics argument sure, but it just doesn't make sense.


As far as Ortg and Drtg, the they are what the TEAM does when that specific player is on the floor. Looking a Drtg for a good defensive team, like the Bulls, it can be reasoned that Boozer's Drtg is good because when he's on the floor, he's out there with good defensive players to cover his deficiencies. Conversely, when Deng is on the floor he's out there to compensate on more offensive, poor defending units. And Deng plays a crapload of minutes, so he's drastically affected by the team's win/loss point margin.

This is 100% correct. But looking at +/-, RAPM, and different lineups gives a far better indication of what Waiters' value is on the court.


This is not the same as comparing the Ortg/Drtg for a team that is POOR in those categories. With the Bulls, you reason that they are doing it right, whereas with the Cavs, you reason that they are doing it wrong. Then you look at who they are giving minutes to versus who they COULD be giving minutes to. Just because I chose not to go through the full, boring analysis and went to the punchline does not make it lazy, it makes it a synopsis. What's lazy is saying "Drtg does not agree with my perception, so I couldn't care less about Drtg".

Your synopsis was lazy though. Was my synopsis about the Bulls' DRtg/ORtg comparison of Boozer/Deng lazy? Damn straight if i claimed Boozer's defense was better than Deng's, because the context wasn't provided if i did that. I just don't find your argument on Waiters' ORtg/DRtg comparison with his teammates that compelling, because Boozer's argument would shine the same amount of inaccurate shade of light to boot.


As far as FT% goes, you're proving my point. In 4 years his FT% was 81.3%, 72.9%, 74.6%, and 68.5%. The massive swings in his FT% indicate that he's wildly inconsistent with them, meaning he's a POOR FREE THROW SHOOTER, and he's also on a downward trend. He's not being defended, there are no variables. He's just shooting worse.

But that's not the biggest reason why he's not being efficient. He's not getting to the line at an insane rate like a James Harden or Dwight Howard where it has all that great of an impact on his ts%. It does have an impact, but it's nowhere near the main cause for his efficiency struggles in CLE.

**** Like I said, this entire process of mine applies only to Waiters' being traded to the Bulls; If it wasn't, I wouldn't be making such claims about Waiters' efficiency rising x% y% and z%.



You accurately note that his TS% is low because he does not get to the rim often. But if you are assuming his TS% will go up, you are assuming he will get to the rim more? You are again making assumptions. One, that he doesn't because he's poorly coached (which is possible), and two that he is capable. In a poor offensive system ball dominant players, while taking their fair share of long 2s, will also generally try to get to the rim. I think he's simply incapable.

In the Bulls system, yeah. He'd get more open looks at the basket due to the teams' offensive system and the passing prowess of Rose/Kirk/Pau/Noah predominantly.

You can think he's incapable, that's fine. I think he's totally coachable and capable if given the right situation (hedging my process again, the right situation is under Thibs)


The exact same situation played out with OJ Mayo. In college a significant amount of his scoring came off the dribble at the rim, beating his man with his first step and either converting or drawing the foul. In the NBA though, Mayo's first step is only "mediocre" (see? being nice), and thus he's forced into taking a high percentage of contested long 2s because he can't get by his man. This is Dion Waiters in a nut shell. BUT, on average, his 2pt FG% is only slightly below average. If you encapsulate everything he does inside the 3pt line, he's below average but only a bit. Thus the effect on his TS% is smaller than you are making it out to be. It's his free throw shooting that is substantially below average, and getting worse.

It's below average yes. But his free throw rate isn't high enough to have such a profound impact on his true shooting percentage. That's my point.


As far as saying, "Dion Waiters isn't a PG. He's a SG. I don't care what his rates stack up to point guards" is confusing. You say he's a ballhandler, but don't want to compare him to other ballhandlers? Ok, let's compare him to Lance Stephenson, who is a SG "ballhandler". Lance gets 6.3 assists per 48 minutes, versus 3.7 turnovers. Waiters gets 4.8 assists versus 3.6 turnovers. It's simple math.

Should we compare Kobe Bryant's assist rate to Steve Nash? They're both ball-handlers.
Lance Stephenson is a far better comparison than a point guard. He's arguably the best in the game right now at creating for others, so excuse me if I don't buy comparing him to the best player in the league at that position at this skill. That would be like me comparing Jimmy Butler to Lebron James just because.

Waiters' assist rate is perfectly fine. I don't get why you're criticizing him for it. Klay Thompson's was 10.2% this past season. It's easy to pick out one player that's a good SG and compare him to Dion Waiters and say Dion's better/worse. I don't care to do that. His 18% assist rate is exactly what the Bulls' and Thibs' could use in their system.


As for salary, how can you not care that he is a poor value? For the same money, a team could go out and get a SUBSTANTIALLY BETTER PLAYER that will generate more wins. Dion Waiters will make a hair over $4M this year. That's what CJ Miles and Thabo Sefolosha will make, and more than Doron Lamb, Kris Middleton, Kyle Singler, Terrence Ross, Gerald Green, or Marco Bellinelli. Go trade for one of those guys, who are already better players than Waiters and will only improve under a "genius" coach. Heck, Chris Douglas-Roberts, Wes Johnson, and Evan Turner are better players than Waiters, and they're free agents.

I'd love to get a player that outperforms his contract, but Waiters' contract had ZERO barring on my defending his perpetual rise in play if traded to the Bulls.


EDIT:
As for turnover rate, I wanted to double check to make sure that you were not using some new number I didn't know about.

TOV% is defined as 100 * TOV / (FGA + 0.44 * FTA + TOV), that is the number displayed on basketball-reference.com, which is the same 12.3% that you use. Your mistake is saying that is his turnovers per 100 possessions. It is not. TOV% is turnovers per 100 PLAYS THAT PLAYER USES which end in a shot, free throws, or a turnover. Thus, it is highly tied into him being a chucker. For example, let's take a player who takes 7 shots and has 3 turnovers, for a TOV% of 30. Now let's say that player is a chucker and takes 10 extra shots he was not supposed to. With 17 shots and 3 turnovers, his TOV% is now 15% despite making the EXACT same number of turnovers in a game. If that player had passed the ball instead of chucking up shots, he would have not ended those possessions and so his TOV% would still be horrible. But because he takes a ton of shots, per play his turnovers look smaller. Per game and per minute, his turnovers are still bad. Now obviously I exaggerated the numbers to illustrate the point, but it's clear that TOV% has a MAJOR flaw. TOV% can not, in and of itself, say a player turns over the ball a lot or not. TOV% is useful for comparing players of similar usage.

Yeah I confused myself with that. But someone that turns the ball over 12% IS NOT A BAD THING. That's not bad at all man. Especially for a guard that has such a high usage rate. And the more shots you take, the more possessions you're using that could end up in a turnover driving to the lane and creating, or whatnot. No single stat can tell you that a player is great/terrible, good/bad, "mediocre" ;) at anything. But tov% is a good indicator if paired with his ast%, usg%, and ORtg WHICH i used in this Bulls' hypothetical.

I still don't quite follow what your argument is about Waiters' tov% being tied into him being a chucker. It's a stretch, a long one imo. But i'm done defending this, because it's pointless. You're not understanding that this defense of Waiters' potential rise in production is under a very particular scenario.

I don't mean to insult you, because this was a good debate. But i'm tired of discussing this in the main forum for something that isn't likely to happen. So, if you'd like to respond you could but I won't come back to it and dig into this anymore

IndyRealist
07-16-2014, 04:57 PM
The bolded is an assumption as well. And it's only accurate if Waiters is making 50% of the bad shots he takes. If he is making 50% of those bad shots, then there's no way his efficiency would be this low. And by conventional arithmetic, if he's making less than 50% of those bad field goal attempts, and he starts passing up those shots, then his efficiency will rise alone because by definition alone a "good shot" is one that has a higher probability of going in.

If this is your main post for this efficiency/usage, then I don't know how else to respond because it makes no sense to me.



Semantics or not, the Cavs weren't a mediocre offense. If the 22nd best ORtg in a league of 30 is mediocre, then the 8th best ORtg in the league of 30 is elite. Which is another semantics argument sure, but it just doesn't make sense.



This is 100% correct. But looking at +/-, RAPM, and different lineups gives a far better indication of what Waiters' value is on the court.



Your synopsis was lazy though. Was my synopsis about the Bulls' DRtg/ORtg comparison of Boozer/Deng lazy? Damn straight if i claimed Boozer's defense was better than Deng's, because the context wasn't provided if i did that. I just don't find your argument on Waiters' ORtg/DRtg comparison with his teammates that compelling, because Boozer's argument would shine the same amount of inaccurate shade of light to boot.



But that's not the biggest reason why he's not being efficient. He's not getting to the line at an insane rate like a James Harden or Dwight Howard where it has all that great of an impact on his ts%. It does have an impact, but it's nowhere near the main cause for his efficiency struggles in CLE.

**** Like I said, this entire process of mine applies only to Waiters' being traded to the Bulls; If it wasn't, I wouldn't be making such claims about Waiters' efficiency rising x% y% and z%.



In the Bulls system, yeah. He'd get more open looks at the basket due to the teams' offensive system and the passing prowess of Rose/Kirk/Pau/Noah predominantly.

You can think he's incapable, that's fine. I think he's totally coachable and capable if given the right situation (hedging my process again, the right situation is under Thibs)



It's below average yes. But his free throw rate isn't high enough to have such a profound impact on his true shooting percentage. That's my point.



Should we compare Kobe Bryant's assist rate to Steve Nash? They're both ball-handlers.
Lance Stephenson is a far better comparison than a point guard. He's arguably the best in the game right now at creating for others, so excuse me if I don't buy comparing him to the best player in the league at that position at this skill. That would be like me comparing Jimmy Butler to Lebron James just because.

Waiters' assist rate is perfectly fine. I don't get why you're criticizing him for it. Klay Thompson's was 10.2% this past season. It's easy to pick out one player that's a good SG and compare him to Dion Waiters and say Dion's better/worse. I don't care to do that. His 18% assist rate is exactly what the Bulls' and Thibs' could use in their system.



I'd love to get a player that outperforms his contract, but Waiters' contract had ZERO barring on my defending his perpetual rise in play if traded to the Bulls.



Yeah I confused myself with that. But someone that turns the ball over 12% IS NOT A BAD THING. That's not bad at all man. Especially for a guard that has such a high usage rate. And the more shots you take, the more possessions you're using that could end up in a turnover driving to the lane and creating, or whatnot. No single stat can tell you that a player is great/terrible, good/bad, "mediocre" ;) at anything. But tov% is a good indicator if paired with his ast%, usg%, and ORtg WHICH i used in this Bulls' hypothetical.

I still don't quite follow what your argument is about Waiters' tov% being tied into him being a chucker. It's a stretch, a long one imo. But i'm done defending this, because it's pointless. You're not understanding that this defense of Waiters' potential rise in production is under a very particular scenario.

I don't mean to insult you, because this was a good debate. But i'm tired of discussing this in the main forum for something that isn't likely to happen. So, if you'd like to respond you could but I won't come back to it and dig into this anymore

No prob. We're just approaching this from two different perspectives. If the Bulls can get out of him what you think they can, they'd be crazy not to try.

IKnowHoops
07-16-2014, 05:58 PM
Nope.

Well, if Cavaliers reportedly refused to trade Wiggins, it looks like the Warriors might be back in the mix. In that case, I think Cavaliers should trade Waiters, especially now that Mike Miller is with the team and Ray Allen might join also.

Why trade depth. Mike miller isn't playing 82 games at 30 plus minutes. This team is really deep now. There is no reason to trade players because you have other good players in the same position. Don't act like you want the best for this team. You want them to trade Waiters because he is good.

IKnowHoops
07-16-2014, 06:10 PM
I'm sorry I lost interest in your entire post when you said Miles , Thabo , Lamb , Marco , CDR , Wes , Turner are better than Waiters . Again it's his skill set of being a ball handler is what the bulls need for the roster . Not only that Waiters is younger than most of the players you listed " so called better than him " .


Omg, please, those who thinks Waiters sucks, or think the above guys are better, please watch this and be educated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To0JIyG9UC0

Stunner
07-16-2014, 06:22 PM
I wouldn't post a YouTube video tho lol

IKnowHoops
07-16-2014, 06:22 PM
Who cares if he's young if he is isn't a core piece that you want long term? He's horrid now, he MIGHT be average in 5 years, and you'd be paying him the whole time to cost your team wins. If you wana take that deal, I have a bridge for sale....

Credibility=gone

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To0JIyG9UC0

IndyRealist
07-16-2014, 06:26 PM
Omg, please, those who thinks Waiters sucks, or think the above guys are better, please watch this and be educated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To0JIyG9UC0

Everyone looks good in a highlight reel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCrKPwi-YfI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIdhFeLiLx8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhwVGZ4eDeg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IngtBwg4lkQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecpCyBziEwA

IKnowHoops
07-16-2014, 06:43 PM
Everyone looks good in a highlight reel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCrKPwi-YfI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIdhFeLiLx8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhwVGZ4eDeg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IngtBwg4lkQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecpCyBziEwA

Anyone should be able to look at these highlight films and see that Waiter's skill set is above and beyond the rest of these guys. Not talking about the guy who's just blocking shots cause its not even applicable. And half of morrisons highlights are college so fail.

IndyRealist
07-16-2014, 07:46 PM
IKnowHoops disagrees with me, I think that means I win the debate.

Jamiecballer
07-16-2014, 09:19 PM
Waiters is a talented guy whose attitude and way of playing the game makes him a lousy pro so far. We good?

hugepatsfan
07-16-2014, 09:28 PM
If you post highlight videos to defend a player then that automatically makes your opinion on anything and everything invalid.

Shammyguy3
07-16-2014, 09:47 PM
IKnowHoops disagrees with me, I think that means I win the debate.

:laugh2: so true man

prodigy
07-17-2014, 09:58 AM
Waiters is a talented guy whose attitude and way of playing the game makes him a lousy pro so far. We good?

He shows a lot of heart and passion out there I love it. I mean he's like 22 or 23 who just had a good second half and season. He can be a queen sometime, but who isn't its pro sports lol.

WITZ
07-17-2014, 11:48 AM
I don't understand why Waiters gets so much flack when he has essentially the same numbers as Beal who was touted as a great shooter coming out of college. But he is labeled a future allstar for years to come while the others is labeled a inefficient chucker.

Vee-Rex
07-17-2014, 12:13 PM
I don't understand why Waiters gets so much flack when he has essentially the same numbers as Beal who was touted as a great shooter coming out of college. But he is labeled a future allstar for years to come while the others is labeled a inefficient chucker.

Waiters is on a Cleveland team, and Cleveland players don't get much recognition. It took a good while before Joe Haden was considered a top 5 cornerback in the NFL even though he was performing at that level for some time before.

Waiters has tremendous upside and passion. He could start on few NBA teams or be a good bench rotation player on every team. Anyone calling him trash is undeniably ignorant.

prodigy
07-17-2014, 02:22 PM
I don't understand why Waiters gets so much flack when he has essentially the same numbers as Beal who was touted as a great shooter coming out of college. But he is labeled a future allstar for years to come while the others is labeled a inefficient chucker.

Waiters is on a Cleveland team, and Cleveland players don't get much recognition. It took a good while before Joe Haden was considered a top 5 cornerback in the NFL even though he was performing at that level for some time before.

Waiters has tremendous upside and passion. He could start on few NBA teams or be a good bench rotation player on every team. Anyone calling him trash is undeniably ignorant.

This