BALTIMOREFLACCO

Gobert is a steal. He was arguably the best rim protector in the game last year and he's just 23. He was my big man target if I didn't land Drummond.

I don't think that guy exists anymore

Magic have the second most intriguing young corps in the league IMO. Good things coming for your boys soon.

Gannis has to work on that shot, but he's only 20, so he has time. I like Harris over him, but good pick nonetheless. Love the Harris pick. He was on my short list for my last pick.

That's definitely fair.

Chef Curry's Kitchen Selects: Chris Bosh, F

I was referring to when you said that they are little more than an analyst's tool. They are very much a tool for NBA front offices and coaching staffs, hence the ridiculous money that went into SportVU.

Dwight was unable to stay healthy pretty much the whole year, but when he played in the playoffs he was excellent for the most part. That's a heck of a front line defensively.

Who are you, Charles Barkley? Analytics didn't hold the 76ers back, the fact that they're tanking did. The 76ers actually have one of the more interesting systems in the league with Brett Brown, they just have no offensive talent. Look at the rest of the teams who are known for emphasizing analytics in their gameplans and talent evaluation: Spurs, Rockets, Mavericks, Celtics, Warriors and Hawks. The Spurs are the real pioneers of analytics, and I'd say it works pretty well for them. Analytics are a major part of basketball whether people like it or not.

Someone want my board just in case?

If this game took place before the All Star Break, Lowry would probably already be off of the board. He had a rough second half, but good value here nonetheless.

Would have taken Bledsoe with my pick if I didn't take Curry to begin with. Problem with taking a PG in the first round is that there's so much depth at the position.

Haha alright man. Turnovers are bad. We don't seem to be getting much farther than this despite an abundance of other stats, both raw and advanced, on both sides of the ball that put Cousins at or near the top of the league (and often decisively ahead of Blake). I respect your opinion, but I disagree.

Got the top offensive rebounder in the league to grab Steph's three point misses and kick it back out. Just wish he had more of an offensive game, but he's only 21.

Andre Drummond, C

Someone hasn't watched a lot of Boogie.

You have one stat that really works in your favor and that's turnovers. Everybody gets that Cousins is turnover prone. I really don't understand why we're still talking about it. Everyone knows thats a weakness of his. He's not a PG, so that comparison doesn't make any sense. Cousins' job isn't to distribute. That's not how you evaluate big men. If his turnovers were so detrimental to his game, he wouldn't be at or near the top of the league (and ahead of Griffin) in WARP, PER, EF--F (ignore the dashes it got deleted for being a profanity without them) and Real Plus Minus. Some more appropriate numbers to evaluate big men are rebounding, points in the paint, second chance points, post offense, points off of screens, points as the roll man, post defense and rim protection. Cousins surpasses Blake in all but post efficiency. If you really think that AST/TO ratio is more important for a big man than these traits, then I don't know what to tell you. You continue to ignore an entire body of work in the areas that are valued in an NBA center just to focus on Cousin's one negative stat. In terms of efficiency and being a "volume scorer", Cousins' TS% is .545 and Blakes is .551. That's a tiny difference. Blake actually gets more touches per game, Cousins just accounts for a larger part of his team's offense for good and bad (more points per touch but also more turnovers). Given the very small difference in conversion rate, if Cousins is a volume scorer, then what does that make Blake? Additionally, 67% of Blake's FG's come assisted. He has the best playmaker in the game setting him up for easy buckets. Cousins has nothing like that. He's given the ball and forced to work because that's what his team needs. Despite what you say, Cousins would benefit a ton from CP3. It's false that he doesn't run the floor and that Chris Paul would suffer from him in transition, as he's third in the league among centers in fast break points (higher than DeAndre Jordan). That's not as much as Blake, but it's still very good and it's not as big of a part of his game.

Also, I like all the past few picks, especially the Butler, Green and Wiggins picks.

I'm sorry, I wanted to put this to rest, but when you say things like this I just can't. You've chosen to ignore pretty much everything but turnovers and scoring efficiency. I'm looking at the bigger picture here. His rebounding and defense are better than Blake's– it's not really close–and he's still a top tier offensive player. Cousins is better than Blake in total Scoring, Rebounding, Blocks, Steals, PER, Opponent FG% overall and at the rim, Opponent eFG%, Free Throws, Foul Drawn, Free Throw %, Real Plus Minus, Defensive Real Plus Minus, Box Plus Minus, Defensive Win Shares, Wins Above Replacement (This is similar to Win Shares but w/ the team accounted for, it's used heavily for evaluating draft prospects), Points Per Possession, Points Per Shot, Hands On Buckets Percentage Blake is better in: Turnover Percentage, True Shooting Percentage, eFG%, Assists, Assist Percentage, Assist Ratio, Offensive RPM, Value Above Replacement, Offensive Win Shares, Total Win Shares, Pure Point Rating, STL/TO Ratio But I'm ignoring stats? I have addressed turnovers and efficiency a number of times. We get it. Cousins turns it over more. Blake is more efficient passing and scoring. There's no reason to keep talking in circles about this. Cousins is not a better offensive player than Blake, but he's still elite, and I don't know if anyone would agree with you that's he's not an elite offensive player. We've established this probably 100 times in this thread. Cousins has never had the chance to play in the playoffs and take his game to the next level. He's never had any semlence of a supporting cast around him, nor has he had competent coaching and management. If Cousins and Blake switched teams, would Blake make the Kings better than they are with Cousins? I highly doubt it. The head case thing I can understand, but in terms of all around production, it's Cousins.

Fixed. We are clearly not getting anywhere here, so I'll sum up my argument by saying that Cousins is slightly less efficient offensively and turns the ball over more--partly because he gets more touches, is doubled more often and draws more focus due to inferior teammates. Turnovers considered, he's still an elite offensive player in both advanced and raw stats, yet he's marginally worse than Blake. His defense and rebounding are significantly superior though, which makes up for being turnover prone in my eyes. I take Cousins any day of the week.

This is all true, but going back to your other post I just can't accept that Cousins isn't an elite all around player. Advanced stats aside, he averages 24 pts, 12.7 reb, 3.6 ast, 1.5 stl and 1.7 blks and is top-3 in fouls drawn, top-5 in ppg, top-3 in rebounds per game and top-3 among centers for assists–though he does turn it over a lot. That's elite production any way you spin it. While he's less efficient offensively than Blake, which I've repeated over and over, he's still a top offensive player in the league and that's undeniable. You've acknowledged that he's a better defender and rebounder, and the advanced stats other than turnovers love him. Cousins is an elite player and the best all around big in the game besides Davis.

Cousins averaged more points on a marginally worse TS% (.545 vs. .551). He turned the ball over more and had less assists, but look at who he is passing the ball to. His usage is higher because he's the ONLY legitimate offensive player on his team. You don't think that if he had Chris Paul, JJ Redick, Jamal Crawford and DJ around him that his usage would be lower and his efficiency would be a little better? I agree that Blake is a better offensive option, but the difference isn't as much as you're saying.

I've already acknowledged countless times that Blake is the better offensive player. That goes back to my original post. Cousins is the more complete player and the marginal difference on offensive production vs. the big difference in supporting cast isn't enough for me to value Blake over Cousins. PER is a flawed stat, as most advanced stats are, but so are win shares. That's why I posted a ton of different stats.

Look at the formula you just posted. If a team performs better offensively, that team has more total offensive win shares. It skews the stats. Same thing on defense. Like I just posted, team performance directly correlates. The majority of advanced stats point to Cousins as the better all around player. If you want to focus on the two (one that is flawed when comparing players on different teams) that favor your guy, so be it. If I wanted to milk a total rating for a player, I could easily point to PER, where Cousins decisively trumps Blake.