Originally posted by Jacob
View Post
Playoff experience, even if it is 3 years old, must be pretty valuable. Apparently it is more valuable than any of these other things:
PER - Howard 10.8, Burks 14.0
TS% - Howard 46, Burks 51
Ast% - Howard 7.9, Burks 9.5
TOV% - Howard 11.6, Burks 10.8
FTA rate - Howard .26, Burks .40
Net Production - Howard -6.4, Burks +0.7 (5th on the team)
Simple Rating - Howard -4.7, Burks +1.1 (4th on the team)
Game 1 - Howard sucked, Burks was solid
Citing the playoff experience as a primary reason to start Howard though he's been injured for a long stretch is disconcerting. Howard hasn't been in the playoffs for 3 years, he hasn't played well this season, and he missed an entire month to finish the season. Yet Corbin lets experience take priority over performance and production.
Favors playing more minutes is a far better option than having Howard on the court.
Burks playing more minutes is a better option than having Howard play.
And I would argue that against some of SA's sets, using Tinsley + Harris would be better than sticking Howard out there.
Is Howard a better option than Carroll? I would think so, but Jacob's point about the usage differences, especially when Howard spends a lot of his time on the court with Jefferson, Millsap, and Hayward makes me think at best Howard v. Carroll is a wash, but more likely it would be slightly more advantageous to have Carroll out there.
Mostly this is just another decision by Corbin that pisses me off because it makes me think he should be an asst coach still, and that has bad implications for a team that should have a bright future.
Comment