Comments

The main non-financial argument in favor of Jamison is a significantly lower turnover percentage. Half of Stoudemire's for this season. 2nd best in the NBA right now and 3rd best in NBA history for a career. Jamison's mark on this has held up pretty well in the playoffs and is not a 1 season fluke. But Stoudemire has generally turned over a lower percentage in the playoffs. Overall they are both sort of hit and miss in the playoffs with 2 really strong PER performances and a couple blah ones. They are both challenged on defense but the 4 factor team impact split of Adjusted +/- shows their defensive strengths and weaknesses are very different.

Crow           108

Cavs sitting at 20th on own turnover % at team level so that factor might be a concern. Cavs have a fine overall defense but are 26th on forcing turnovers and 18th on opponent FTM/FGA. Stoudemire's Adjusted Factor data suggest he is one of the best at reducing opponent FTM/FGA but one of the very worst at forcing turnovers. Jamison is nearly average on the first and only slightly below average on the second.

Crow           109

Jamison, at in Washington, has one of the absolute worst estimated team impacts on opponent eFG%. To some extent the choice should consider not only the Cavs overall factor performance right now but also the factor match-ups both at team level and position level. They've got to get by KG and Lewis then face Gasol. Which will perform better on offense and defense against those specific guys? the overall season data is something to consider but isn't the end of the story. Checking the imperfect recent match-up histories Jamison doesn't fair well against these 3 at the individual boxscore stats level. Stoudemire has less recent games and is just splitting them.

Tom           110

Pretty good analysis overall, but I disagree with the notion that Zydrunas Ilgauskus has "zero three-point range whatsoever." He is shooting a tidy 50% beyond the arc this year, admittedly on limited attempts (only 22).

Crow           111

Stoudemire is the better offensive player overall and might be the better choice all things considered but the Adjusted Factor level data suggests he might aggravate 2 of the Cavs 3 weaknesses while Jamison doesn't aggravate any of them.

Tom           112

Pretty good analysis overall, but I disagree with the notion that Zydrunas Ilgauskus has "zero three-point range whatsoever." He is shooting a tidy 50% beyond the arc this year, admittedly on limited attempts (only 22).

Tom           113

Sorry for the double post. Apparently hitting refresh causes a repost...

Crow           114

Jamison would also probably help with their own turnover issue.

Crow           115

If they can get either of them for what they are willing to give up you count it as a gain. It is both a player choice and a deal choice.

Marc           116

FYI - Big Z is shooting 11-22 from 3-point range this year, so to say he has absolutely no range isn't quite accurate.

brady           117

Love how people are piling on with the big z thing. He only shoots them from the baseline and isn't a threat the way a true stretch 4 is, which is the point of the jameson analysis. In a playoff game down three big z is not a threat the way someone like jameson is. Great article, keep up the good work.

Kleez2            118

Great article, but Z does shoot 3's =] I want Amare for the long term, but I still have my worries about the now....we have won 13 straight, "If it ain't broke don't fix it". We swept LA, and beat Orlando twice....I think we look good, but then again JJ couldn't D up against the Nets....imagine him trying to man up against the healthy Celtics or Lakers...scary. Whatever happens, just don't blow it. Believeland!

Tom Haberstroh           119

Ilgauskas will make a wide open three once every five games. My deepest apologies, everyone.

Crow           159

The choice is Jamison for whatever combination of reasons related to deal-making and the player's individual and team stat impacts and their contract situations.