Suns @ Wolves 1/17

[elindholm]

But even though I didn't intend to say exactly that, I would make the statement you're disagreeing with.

Well, our apparent disagreement is because you've decided, retroactively, to invoke a bunch of bizarre definitions.

Most starters do not average more than 30 minutes a game. But IMO most teams have 6 or 7 starters. But if you're just talking about those that are unquestionably starter quality, then we probably don't have a single starter by that definition.

If your point is, "The Suns don't have a player good enough to warrant 30 minutes a game," then just say that. There's no need to come up with a nuanced meaning of the word "starter" just so that you can be appearing to make some broader claim, but really aren't.

Example:

Person A: "Every All-Star has averaged at least 20 points per game."
Person B: "That's simply not true. I can give you plenty of counterexamples."
Person A: "Well, by 'All-Star,' I meant players who average at least 20 points per game. The others don't count."

 

[devilalum]

Warren's supposed to be the future of this team and he can't even hit 30 mins every game in this lost season?

Pitchers report right after the Super Bowl and the Dbacks should be awesome. FSN is even going to televise 10 spring training games this year.

Its a good year to pretend like basketball doesn't exist.

sent from a fone

 

[slinslin]

The bottom line is that every team has 2-3 guys averaging 30+ minutes.

For the Suns it should be Warren, Knight and Booker.

 

[Catlover]

Well, our apparent disagreement is because you've decided, retroactively, to invoke a bunch of bizarre definitions.If your point is, "The Suns don't have a player good enough to warrant 30 minutes a game," then just say that. There's no need to come up with a nuanced meaning of the word "starter" just so that you can be appearing to make some broader claim, but really aren't.

Honestly that's what I thought you had done. To me, each team has at least 5 starters. It was you that decided to narrow the definition of starter to something less than 5 per team.

 

[elindholm]

Honestly that's what I thought you had done. To me, each team has at least 5 starters. It was you that decided to narrow the definition of starter to something less than 5 per team.

"At least"? How does a team have more than five starters?

My narrowing to "legitimate starters" was to sharpen the point, but even if we leave that out, 80 is more than half of 150. And even if a few of the 30-minute guys come off the bench, then it is still incorrect that most starters average less than 30 minutes.

 

[Catlover]

"At least"? How does a team have more than five starters?

My narrowing to "legitimate starters" was to sharpen the point, but even if we leave that out, 80 is more than half of 150. And even if a few of the 30-minute guys come off the bench, then it is still incorrect that most starters average less than 30 minutes.

If you start the first game, you're a starter. If you start the first 5 games you're a starter. If you don't start the next game, do you stop being a "starter"? I don't understand why you're making something out of this? If seems clear to me that most teams have more starters in the course of a season than the minimum number.

 

[Catlover]

"At least"? How does a team have more than five starters?

My narrowing to "legitimate starters" was to sharpen the point, but even if we leave that out, 80 is more than half of 150. And even if a few of the 30-minute guys come off the bench, then it is still incorrect that most starters average less than 30 minutes.

I wanted to make sure this stood alone. Here's what I actually said:

Most players average less than 30 minutes a game in today's NBA and that includes young players and seasoned veterans, starters or not

I'm not an expert in communication so maybe I messed up here. But I didn't think that my comment translated to "most starters". I said and meant "most players", and players includes young and old whether they start or not.

 

[slinslin]

If you start the first game, you're a starter. If you start the first 5 games you're a starter. If you don't start the next game, do you stop being a "starter"? I don't understand why you're making something out of this? If seems clear to me that most teams have more starters in the course of a season than the minimum number.

Good lord why does it even matter, you claimed that 30mpg players are not in the league anymore.

Fact is 80 players in the leaguer play 30mpg or more. That is almost 3 per team.

CJ McCollum plays 35mpg
Andrew Wiggins plays 35mpg
Caldwell-Pope 38mpg
Jordan Clarkson 32mpg
Jalil Okafor 31mpg
Otto Porter 32mpg
Rodney Hood 30mpg
Victor Oladipo 30mpg

Those are players still on rookie deals too. There is no reason Warren and Booker shouldn't play 30mpg, especially given the situation.

Instead Sonny Weems plays 20 minutes or Tucker plays 35 minutes.

 

[elindholm]

I'm not an expert in communication so maybe I messed up here. But I didn't think that my comment translated to "most starters". I said and meant "most players", and players includes young and old whether they start or not.

Well, since there are at least 30*12=360 players in the league and only 240 minutes per game, it's pretty obvious that the average player logs less than 30. I assumed that you were attempting to say something with substance, but it's a mistake I won't repeat.

 

[Catlover]

Well, since there are at least 30*12=360 players in the league and only 240 minutes per game, it's pretty obvious that the average player logs less than 30. I assumed that you were attempting to say something with substance, but it's a mistake I won't repeat.

I was trying to say that this oft-repeated criticism about our young players not averaging 30 or 35 minutes (40 has even been mentioned) is out of line. Starters are not playing as many minutes as they used to. I haven't done the research, I'm simply repeating what I hear announcers say. But at first glance it appears to be true.

 

[Catlover]

Good lord why does it even matter, you claimed that 30mpg players are not in the league anymore.

I said nothing of the sort.

 

[elindholm]

I was trying to say that this oft-repeated criticism about our young players not averaging 30 or 35 minutes (40 has even been mentioned) is out of line.

I'd agree that 40 would be pushing it!

Starters are not playing as many minutes as they used to. I haven't done the research, I'm simply repeating what I hear announcers say.

Announcers aren't paid to know what they are talking about, and they certainly aren't experts on how the league works. However, in this case, they might be right.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/mp_per_g_top_10.html gives the league's top-10 in minutes per game, season-by-season. The very highest-minutes players will usually be outliers, but if you look at the guy who's 10th, that should be more representative. In the 1990s, the #10 guy in minutes per season was over 38, and sometimes as high as 40(!). In 2009-10, Joe Johnson was 10th at a shade under 38, and no #10 guy has been at 38 since then. Two years ago, it was Hayward at 36.4, last year it was Lillard at 35.7, and this year (so far) it's Middleton at 35.9. (Incredibly, at least to me, none other than Marcus Morris is currently fifth at 36.5.)

So it does appear to be true that the trend is away from having more than a few players in the upper 30s. As to whether that trend extends down into the low 30s, I wouldn't want to speculate.

All that said, for a team with no present and a highly uncertain future, I see no reason whatsoever to keep the minutes of promising young players under 30 per game, unless they are at unusual risk for injury. Warren and Booker should be playing more.

 

[Catlover]

All that said, for a team with no present and a highly uncertain future, I see no reason whatsoever to keep the minutes of promising young players under 30 per game, unless they are at unusual risk for injury. Warren and Booker should be playing more.

I've said the same thing many times. I see no reason that our young players aren't given the majority of minutes. I'm not sure 30 needs to be the target but I see nothing to be gained by playing Goodwin 5 minutes or only using Warren 15 minutes (as happens often).

 

[sunsfan88]

I've said the same thing many times. I see no reason that our young players aren't given the majority of minutes. I'm not sure 30 needs to be the target but I see nothing to be gained by playing Goodwin 5 minutes or only using Warren 15 minutes (as happens often).

Playing the 21 year old Goodwin is not the problem. It's playing heavy minutes for career scrubs/idiots like Sonny Weems, Brandon Knight and PJ Tucker that's the issue. If Tucker has to be played, give him Leuer's minutes. It's not like Tucker is any worse as a PF than Jon freaking Leuer.