Brandon Jennings OR Jeff Teague?

Hypothetical Question - Dell has said he is looking to upgrade the PG position, could it be rivers, burke, bledsoe, whoever. Just out of curiosity out of these 2 guys if one happened to be the guy we go after which would u prefer if these were the ONLY 2 options?

Jeff Teague Averaging: 15 points - 7 asists - 2.5 rebounds - FG 45% - 3PT 37% - FT 88%
Brandon Jennings Averaging : 18 points - 6.5 assists - 3 rebounds - FG 40% - 3PT 37.5% - FT 82%

jennings averages more points but takes more shots and shoots a lower percentage, same assists basically, Same 3pt %, teague the better defender and FT shooter and cheaper. I'd rather teague personally. Teague also finishes around the rim at a MUCH higher percentage, Jennings is terrible at the rim, Teague finishes very well. Much rather teague who is the better defender and finisher for cheaper. Thats just me though.

...Another thread?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PelsFan2313

...Another thread?

---

Glad you like it.

Jennings is younger, but will probably command more money.
If for the same price i'd definitely take Jennings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AUSSIE_PELICAN

Jennings is younger, but will probably command more money.
If for the same price i'd definitely take Jennings.

---

He's only a year younger
I'd much rather Teague for 10 mil than Jennings for 15 mil personally.

We've already discussed this so you know I'd prefer Jennings. I'd prefer Bledsoe or Smart over Jennings or Teague.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PelsFan2313

...Another thread?

---

just wait til i make my shabazz otto porter thread, ur gonna love it.

Does anyone think that Atlanta make a big play for both CP3 and Howard next season?

They only have 18.5M in salaries next season.

CP3, Lou Williams, Horford and Howard.

That would almost certainly allow other teams to fight for Teague without Atlanta matching.

Not really a fan of either. But if i had to take one id take teague. Jennings talks to much and. Seems like a headcase. I knoe he doesnt have a lot to work with but basically calling his team losers and saying how much he wants out at every oppertunity is a red flag.

I don't especially like any of both. Jennings is just a volume scorer who needs many shots to put up his points. I don't know enough about Teague. But what I know is that both will command loads of money.
I prefer another PG like Burke, who can come cheaper.

Guru, in this kind of poll you should also add an option that says "None of them".

Neither one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple Haze

Neither one?

---

love your avatar.

Rivers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

love your avatar.

---

:coolg:

Getting Jeff Teague this offseason would be a dream come true. Even better than drafting Burke.

Teague
Gordon
1st rd pick or Wilson Chandler
AD
Lopez

Unfortunately I think we are going to be stuck with Lopez for 1 more year at least.

But i believe that line up would put us in contention for the playoffs.

would be content with either one, but i assume both will be resigned

Josh Smith is gone from ATL so I think they will extend Teague. Very underrated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by takezor

I don't especially like any of both. Jennings is just a volume scorer who needs many shots to put up his points. I don't know enough about Teague. But what I know is that both will command loads of money.
I prefer another PG like Burke, who can come cheaper.

---

Never understood that. Who are these guys that can score a lot without taking a lot of shots? Without having the ball? Called chucker. Every single point guard that scores more a game than Jennings also takes more shots than him.

So your real problem is that he's inefficient with poor shot selection?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NOLa.

Josh Smith is gone from ATL so I think they will extend Teague. Very underrated.

---

I want Josh Smith in a Pelicans uniform soooooo bad

How about neither? Sorry I can't get behind either of these guys seeing as their PERs are on par (Teague) or worse (Jennings) than GV.

Just draft Burke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

I want Josh Smith in a Pelicans uniform soooooo bad

---

Does everything Aminu can do, only way better.

Cant just look at PER, it's just one number.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

How about neither? Sorry I can't get behind either of these guys seeing as their PERs are on par (Teague) or worse (Jennings) than GV.

Just draft Burke.

---

Better slogan than nike's just do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NOLa.

Cant just look at PER, it's just one number.

---

Wit the amount of advanced stats that get thrown around here as scripture we are supposed to ignore PER?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

How about neither? Sorry I can't get behind either of these guys seeing as their PERs are on par (Teague) or worse (Jennings) than GV.

Just draft Burke.

---

PER is an extremely weak stat. Not to mention that the PERs I've found are 16.7, 16.4, and 16.4.

Would it matter if I told you which was which? I mean, when that is so equal, wouldn't other factors come into play?

And this is coming from someone that loves him some Burke.

Edit: Here's some advanced stats:

Greivis Vasquez: 50.4% True shooting, 47.6% Efficiency percentage, 105 Offensive Rating, 112 Defensive Rating, 3.1 Offensive Win Share, 0.8 Defensive Win Share, 3.8 Win Share, .069 Win Share per 48 minutes, 23.1 Usage

Link: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...vasqugr01.html

Jeff Teague: 54.1% True shooting, 49.4% Efficiency percentage, 106 Offensive Rating, 106 Defensive Rating, 3.3 Offensive Win Share, 2.6 Defensive Win Share, 5.9 Win Share, .111 Win Share per 48 minutes, 23 Usage

Link: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...teaguje01.html

Brandon Jennings: 51.2% True shooting, 47% Efficiency percentage, 106 Offensive Rating, 108 Defensive Rating, 3.6 Offensive Win Share, 2.2 Defensive Win Share, 5.9 Win Share, .099 Win Share per 48 minutes, 23.7 Usage

Link: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...jennibr01.html

Feel free to double check.

How about we trade GV, draft Burke, and forget about signing Jennings, and Teague to contracts that they will never live up to?

Win, win, win.

PER is an advanced stat so we can't dismiss it.

Can. And will. Doesn't take defense into account because it's nearly impossible to measure defense in anything but blocks and steals.

Also, it doesn't give you a real idea of what a player is capable. I don't know much about Teague. But I know that Jennings at his best can have damn near a 20/20 game. Or he could drop 40 points. Vasquez doesn't stack up.

Eyeballs and stats. Gotta use both.

Going by one you should wanna confirm the other. And going by stats, makes me wanna see what Teague is made of.

I thought having a triple double and solid numbers would sell people on the fact that GV is a top 20 pg. guess not.

The two optioned presented are more "grass is always greener on the other side" than actually better options.

Two options presented can actually get out in transition, get to the rim, play better defense, and I trust both with the ball more in clutch situations.

We need improvement on defense. Vasquez's offense may not be drive and kick, but his Offense can work on a team with other scorers. So if we are suggesting an upgrade, I want a PG that impacts on the defensive side of the ball. I don't think either one of these does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

Two options presented can actually get out in transition, get to the rim, play better defense, and I trust both with the ball more in clutch situations.

---

Pretty much sums it up. Much love for Gravy but he will never do any of these (and no, I don't count him driving in and flipping up a prayer off the glass "getting to the rim").

That's fine. I don't trust any of the three, so give me Burke.

Look, Jennings and Ellis are water and oil. It will be the same with him and Gordon.
The Hawks are going o match any contract Teague signs, so you will have to overspend for him.
GV is a solid bench guy, who can start in a pinch and knows your system.

Stay in house, and draft your pg of the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Wit the amount of advanced stats that get thrown around here as scripture we are supposed to ignore PER?

---

Nah man I said you just can't look at that one number. It's like reading the back of a paperback book. It summarizes an gives you the plot but you still don't know what the book is about.

Plus I don't see why ESPN and other websites makes a big deal about PER.

Hm. One quick search of Jeff Teague and defense and I ran across this article from 2 years ago when the Bucks beat the Bulls in the first game of their playoff series.

http://butthegameison.com/blog/32450/

If I remember right, Rose went off in subsequent nights, though. So whatever fortune Teague had didn't hold up against the beast that is Derrick Rose. The NBA needs this man to return.

hopefully neither

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NOLa.

Nah man I said you just can't look at that one number. It's like reading the back of a paperback book. It summarizes an gives you the plot but you still don't know what the book is about.

Plus I don't see why ESPN and other websites makes a big deal about PER.

---

Because it is an advanced metric system created by a University of Virginia alum, who wrote for the Wall Street Jornal, and is a regular at the MIT Sloan Sports Analytical Conference, and who currently works as the head of operations for one of the better NBA teams. With a resume like that it makes you wonder, why aren't we all using his metric system?

It's still just a number.

##

It is just a number. Just a bit more accurate and useful than most.

It's like Jimmy Johnson's draft chart that so many gm's and NFL people use today. They are just numbers, but they are way more useful than using the eye test.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Because it is an advanced metric system created by a University of Virginia alum, who wrote for the Wall Street Jornal, and is a regular at the MIT Sloan Sports Analytical Conference, and who currently works as the head of operations for one of the better NBA teams. With a resume like that it makes you wonder, why aren't we all using his metric system?

---

You're pretty gullible and reactionary man. Look more into the whole range of advanced stats (real shooting %, adjusted %s, etc.) and you'll understand why it's a poor man's advanced stat.

The paperback book analogy was perfect.

Maybe I am a simple man. But if that is the case I am going to follow the guy who knows what he is doing (as proven by the fact he actually is asked to speak on these metric systems) and runs an NBA team. Seems pretty fool proof to me. I am not going to take stock advice from a yahoo message board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Maybe I am a simple man. But if that is the case I am going to follow the guy who knows what he is doing (as proven by the fact he actually is asked to speak on these metric systems) and runs an NBA team. Seems pretty fool proof to me. I am not going to take stock advice from a yahoo message board.

---

But that's the point, you can still take it into account without taking it as the end-all-be-all of stats and baselines.

Hell useage rate alone blows up some PER rankings. It's just too easy to take a few more statistics into account to let PER be your fool proof watermark.

Simple men read into numbers? Confused, I always thought that was the eye test. Maybe you read too much into that Moneyball movie guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

PER is an extremely weak stat. Not to mention that the PERs I've found are 16.7, 16.4, and 16.4.

Would it matter if I told you which was which? I mean, when that is so equal, wouldn't other factors come into play?

And this is coming from someone that loves him some Burke.

Edit: Here's some advanced stats:

Greivis Vasquez: 50.4% True shooting, 47.6% Efficiency percentage, 105 Offensive Rating, 112 Defensive Rating, 3.1 Offensive Win Share, 0.8 Defensive Win Share, 3.8 Win Share, .069 Win Share per 48 minutes, 23.1 Usage

Link: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...vasqugr01.html

Jeff Teague: 54.1% True shooting, 49.4% Efficiency percentage, 106 Offensive Rating, 106 Defensive Rating, 3.3 Offensive Win Share, 2.6 Defensive Win Share, 5.9 Win Share, .111 Win Share per 48 minutes, 23 Usage

Link: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...teaguje01.html

Brandon Jennings: 51.2% True shooting, 47% Efficiency percentage, 106 Offensive Rating, 108 Defensive Rating, 3.6 Offensive Win Share, 2.2 Defensive Win Share, 5.9 Win Share, .099 Win Share per 48 minutes, 23.7 Usage

Link: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...jennibr01.html

Feel free to double check.

---

This made me want teague even more, better true shooting percentage, better overall win share, better defender.

Overshadowed by Josh Smith and Horford, and previously Joe Johnson but Teague was still young. I remember Teague playing at Wake, a constant headache for UNC when he played.

A lot of people saying hawks will m atch teague but they are rumored to be going after cp3 so immediately when free agency starts u throw ur contract at teague and hawks wont be able to match because they will be dealing with cp3 and dwight.

Really neither going to have to over pay for both. If I had to choose I'll choose Teague. He should be cheaper and is better on defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NOLa.

Simple men read into numbers? Confused, I always thought that was the eye test. Maybe you read too much into that Moneyball movie guy.

---

Who said simple men read into numbers. I didn't.

Draft Burke is all I am saying.

If I had to choose I'd choose Teague without batting an eyelash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

Draft Burke is all I am saying.

---

Haha needs to be your sig.