yeah, JJ 's why they lost the game, right?
as i said weeks ago, you idiots love to bash JJ and would trade him for a bag of chips. meanwhile he's ripping down 17 boards here and 14 boards there all while scoring pretty well also. does he still have hands issues? yep. but because of where he plays down low, he's still the best scoring option the cavs have. said it at the beginning of the year; saying it now. if andy had two games with over 14 rebounds in what? 4 or 5 games, you'd all be going ape-shit with praise. but because most of you made up yr mind's about JJ, it's dumb ass posts like the one above...JJ, sessions and eyenga are the only pieces worth keeping from this team.
No, no, and no.
If basketball was played on your average box score, Hickson would be playing really well. To bad it isn't. As horrible as Jamison is on defense, Hickson is EQUALLY BAD. Misses EVERY rotation. Challenges absolutely no one coming down the lane. Never gets out on a 3-point shooter. It's a freaking nightmare to watch the kid play defense.
Now, you mentioned his game the other night, where he went a stellar 8-23, scoring 23 points on 23 shots. Are we seriously going to praise that type of efficiency? Jamison might as well shoot 40 times and score 35 points on 40 shots if this is considered a good offensive night around here.
Boards, I give him credit. That's about though. His defense is still a total disaster, his hands are horrible, he gets tunnel vision, can't pass the ball, etc. Has he played better? Yes. Is he the best scoring option and worth keeping no matter what? Not even close.
I've pointed this out to you before, but I know you hate advanced statistics, so you'll just ignore. Don't care, I'll do it again. Both players have nearly identical USG%, but Jamison has a nearly 3% advantage in terms of TS%. What do take from this? Both players are involved in the offense nearly the exact same amount, except one player scores at was is easily a more efficient rate and that player is Jamison. If we look at eFG was factors in 3PM but not Free throws, the gap widens to 5%.
All of that ignores the fact that they don't even run plays through Hickson on aregular basis. Most of his stuff is coming off of rebounds. So to say that the guy who scores less efficiently when the half-court offense doesn't even flow through him is a better offensive option (less chances should = more efficiency) than the guy who does regularly initiate the offense is crazy.
Tonight just proved the point of why you can't run offense through Hickson. Here is a guy who is being asked to rebound the ball and play with energy...yet he manages to turn the ball over 9 times? How in the hell is that possible? They aren't throwing the ball to Hickson on the low block and asking him to make the correct read out of the double team, they are asking to him to go get the ball when it is rebounded or simply finish when given the ball off of a cut. Yet he can't handle this stuff w/o being a TO machine. Again, stats back me up on this as Hickson has a monsterous 15.13 TO rate. That is w/o counting in tonights 9 TO performance. Jamison has about a 6.
So, only do I not see how Hickson can be considered the best scoring option when watching the games, but in no way do the statistics say it either. It just isn't true.
/rant
