Knicks · List of NBA Teams' Analytics Departments (page 3)
fishmike wrote:OK metrics guys...http://www.basketball-reference.com/play...
Is there anything in his first 4-5 years that showed Billups would turn into what he did? In terms of eff%, win shares, defense.. Am I missing something? It seems the numbers start to look good when everyone started to see that was pretty obvious.
If Billups was a great metrics player which one of those stats showed he was undervalued when Det signed him?
It was clear by his 5th year, and if Minn had been using the metrics we now have, they probably would have kept him for his career.
What point are you trying to make exactly? I'm pretty sure you're just trying to prove a conclusion like "the metrics being used are imperfect" that no one would disagree with anyway.
Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:OK metrics guys...http://www.basketball-reference.com/play...
Is there anything in his first 4-5 years that showed Billups would turn into what he did? In terms of eff%, win shares, defense.. Am I missing something? It seems the numbers start to look good when everyone started to see that was pretty obvious.
If Billups was a great metrics player which one of those stats showed he was undervalued when Det signed him?
It was clear by his 5th year, and if Minn had been using the metrics we now have, they probably would have kept him for his career.
What point are you trying to make exactly? I'm pretty sure you're just trying to prove a conclusion like "the metrics being used are imperfect" that no one would disagree with anyway.
His last 2 years in Minny were upticks.
Lowry is a good example in Houston. Before metrics, people would just ignore him but the metrics were very enlightening.
The metric ignorists were still ignoring and were left behind. Now they are all blah blah ing about Lowry.
Bonn1997 wrote:I get it... so even when I ask a real question you cant avoid being a dweeb?fishmike wrote:OK metrics guys...http://www.basketball-reference.com/play...
Is there anything in his first 4-5 years that showed Billups would turn into what he did? In terms of eff%, win shares, defense.. Am I missing something? It seems the numbers start to look good when everyone started to see that was pretty obvious.
If Billups was a great metrics player which one of those stats showed he was undervalued when Det signed him?
It was clear by his 5th year, and if Minn had been using the metrics we now have, they probably would have kept him for his career.
What point are you trying to make exactly? I'm pretty sure you're just trying to prove a conclusion like "the metrics being used are imperfect" that no one would disagree with anyway.
Jesus man... of course they are imperfect. EVERY method known for judging talent is imperfect. Why not just try to answer the question.
mreinman wrote:Thank you. I see the upticks his last year in Minn, not much before that. Despite Bonn projecting his own emotions into my point where I was going with this is who to do the metrics junkies view as unvalued and available.Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:OK metrics guys...http://www.basketball-reference.com/play...
Is there anything in his first 4-5 years that showed Billups would turn into what he did? In terms of eff%, win shares, defense.. Am I missing something? It seems the numbers start to look good when everyone started to see that was pretty obvious.
If Billups was a great metrics player which one of those stats showed he was undervalued when Det signed him?
It was clear by his 5th year, and if Minn had been using the metrics we now have, they probably would have kept him for his career.
What point are you trying to make exactly? I'm pretty sure you're just trying to prove a conclusion like "the metrics being used are imperfect" that no one would disagree with anyway.His last 2 years in Minny were upticks.
Lowry is a good example in Houston. Before metrics, people would just ignore him but the metrics were very enlightening.
The metric ignorists were still ignoring and were left behind. Now they are all blah blah ing about Lowry.
mreinman wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:OK metrics guys...http://www.basketball-reference.com/play...
Is there anything in his first 4-5 years that showed Billups would turn into what he did? In terms of eff%, win shares, defense.. Am I missing something? It seems the numbers start to look good when everyone started to see that was pretty obvious.
If Billups was a great metrics player which one of those stats showed he was undervalued when Det signed him?
It was clear by his 5th year, and if Minn had been using the metrics we now have, they probably would have kept him for his career.
What point are you trying to make exactly? I'm pretty sure you're just trying to prove a conclusion like "the metrics being used are imperfect" that no one would disagree with anyway.His last 2 years in Minny were upticks.
Lowry is a good example in Houston. Before metrics, people would just ignore him but the metrics were very enlightening.
The metric ignorists were still ignoring and were left behind. Now they are all blah blah ing about Lowry.
Well put.
Sorry if I misinterpreted your tone, Fish.
By Billups 5th year (when Minn let him go), his win shares was .156, which is higher than Ewing's career average.
mreinman wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:OK metrics guys...http://www.basketball-reference.com/play...
Is there anything in his first 4-5 years that showed Billups would turn into what he did? In terms of eff%, win shares, defense.. Am I missing something? It seems the numbers start to look good when everyone started to see that was pretty obvious.
If Billups was a great metrics player which one of those stats showed he was undervalued when Det signed him?
It was clear by his 5th year, and if Minn had been using the metrics we now have, they probably would have kept him for his career.
What point are you trying to make exactly? I'm pretty sure you're just trying to prove a conclusion like "the metrics being used are imperfect" that no one would disagree with anyway.His last 2 years in Minny were upticks.
Lowry is a good example in Houston. Before metrics, people would just ignore him but the metrics were very enlightening.
The metric ignorists were still ignoring and were left behind. Now they are all blah blah ing about Lowry.
Not really while his shooting %s went up
They were so low in previous yrs with exception to a couple
Only his 3pt% was fairly respectable
His stats across the board fluctuated from previous seasons
Some were high and others low
The main thing that sticks out is that he was a sure starter
From his previous yrs looking at games played
Lowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlbut his WS per 48 actually went up... is that a typo? That makes zero sense...Lowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100: There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
Exactly. .160 or .180 is good enough to be 3rd best on a championship team or 2nd best on a good team and maybe worth $12 mil per. On average, players have a sharp decline after age 30, though. If he's producing at a value of, let's say, $12 mil per now, you have to expect less in years 13 to 16. That's why I did not want to lose him for nothing but once we got to last summer, I thought it was better than giving him 25mm per through year 16.
Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
and Lowry had a better year last year metric wise. Mainly to his 3 point %'s (attempts rate and percentage) being down
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
If I remember right, you've asked what Melo is doing differently than a few years ago when we had the 54 win team. A lot of the difference in team wins is that we don't have the good supporting cast we had then. But you can see a decline in WS48 from .184 to .101. That decline is probably due to lower scoring efficiency (which is from a decline in 3s and FTs) and a significant decline in his defensive #s.
Bonn1997 wrote:but that pretty much was my point... that Melo is Melo but the talent level around him has really taken a nosedive.fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
If I remember right, you've asked what Melo is doing differently than a few years ago when we had the 54 win team. A lot of the difference is that we don't have the good supporting cast we had then. But you can see a decline in WS48 from .184 to .101. That decline is probably due to lower scoring efficiency (which is from a decline in 3s and FTs) and a significant decline in his defensive #s.
How is that # derived? Looking at Melo the difference between last year and the year before is minimal, yet one team won 37 vs. 54 the year before. I think most agree Melo was a better player 2 years ago.
Sorry for the dweeb comment. #hugs
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:but that pretty much was my point... that Melo is Melo but the talent level around him has really taken a nosedive.fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
If I remember right, you've asked what Melo is doing differently than a few years ago when we had the 54 win team. A lot of the difference is that we don't have the good supporting cast we had then. But you can see a decline in WS48 from .184 to .101. That decline is probably due to lower scoring efficiency (which is from a decline in 3s and FTs) and a significant decline in his defensive #s.How is that # derived? Looking at Melo the difference between last year and the year before is minimal, yet one team won 37 vs. 54 the year before. I think most agree Melo was a better player 2 years ago.
Sorry for the dweeb comment. #hugs
It basically takes into account total production and efficiency on offense and then it tracks the performance (scoring, rbs, etc.) of the man he's guarding on defense. I would never say that win shares is perfect, but it's one of the main sources I'd use to place players into rough categories (like super star, star, etc.). If you want the exact calculation, it's here but it's complicated!
http://www.basketball-reference.com/abou...
You're saying his performance wasn't that different when the team was .700 vs. .450. I agree. But that basically means he's not a main driving force behind his team's success and isn't the kind of player you want to give a huge salary to. I think nearly all the indicators of performance would point to the same conclusion.
35% of the cap space is just too much to give up on him. We can get more total win production from that much salary.
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:but that pretty much was my point... that Melo is Melo but the talent level around him has really taken a nosedive.fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
If I remember right, you've asked what Melo is doing differently than a few years ago when we had the 54 win team. A lot of the difference is that we don't have the good supporting cast we had then. But you can see a decline in WS48 from .184 to .101. That decline is probably due to lower scoring efficiency (which is from a decline in 3s and FTs) and a significant decline in his defensive #s.How is that # derived? Looking at Melo the difference between last year and the year before is minimal, yet one team won 37 vs. 54 the year before. I think most agree Melo was a better player 2 years ago.
Sorry for the dweeb comment. #hugs
I don't think that he was a better player to years ago then last year. The diff in wins were do to many factors.
We can all see that his shot is way off this season and many of them are gimme's that he used to make. That is why I do believe that there is a health issue here.
His 3 point eff is WAY down.
mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:but that pretty much was my point... that Melo is Melo but the talent level around him has really taken a nosedive.fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
If I remember right, you've asked what Melo is doing differently than a few years ago when we had the 54 win team. A lot of the difference is that we don't have the good supporting cast we had then. But you can see a decline in WS48 from .184 to .101. That decline is probably due to lower scoring efficiency (which is from a decline in 3s and FTs) and a significant decline in his defensive #s.How is that # derived? Looking at Melo the difference between last year and the year before is minimal, yet one team won 37 vs. 54 the year before. I think most agree Melo was a better player 2 years ago.
Sorry for the dweeb comment. #hugs
I don't think that he was a better player to years ago then last year. The diff in wins were do to many factors.
We can all see that his shot is way off this season and many of them are gimme's that he used to make. That is why I do believe that there is a health issue here.
His 3 point eff is WAY down.
He's also doing less damage from the FT line. His defensive #s are worse too. That's probably a combination of worse defense by him and not having Chandler's help defense.
Bonn1997 wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:but that pretty much was my point... that Melo is Melo but the talent level around him has really taken a nosedive.fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
If I remember right, you've asked what Melo is doing differently than a few years ago when we had the 54 win team. A lot of the difference is that we don't have the good supporting cast we had then. But you can see a decline in WS48 from .184 to .101. That decline is probably due to lower scoring efficiency (which is from a decline in 3s and FTs) and a significant decline in his defensive #s.How is that # derived? Looking at Melo the difference between last year and the year before is minimal, yet one team won 37 vs. 54 the year before. I think most agree Melo was a better player 2 years ago.
Sorry for the dweeb comment. #hugs
I don't think that he was a better player to years ago then last year. The diff in wins were do to many factors.
We can all see that his shot is way off this season and many of them are gimme's that he used to make. That is why I do believe that there is a health issue here.
His 3 point eff is WAY down.
He's also doing less damage from the FT line. His defensive #s are worse too. That's probably a combination of worse defense by him and not having Chandler's help defense.
all true.
just pointing to the main cause of the demise.
Bonn1997 wrote:well that is where we differ, but not by as much as you think. "Impact" players or "stars" (lets avoid a classify Melo thread) are usually going to be overpaid. Some of it is marketplace. Some of it is timing. As they say you only need one GM to love you and the market is set.fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:but that pretty much was my point... that Melo is Melo but the talent level around him has really taken a nosedive.fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:So the metrics knock on Melo is his WS48 of .160-.180 is pretty good as a Knick, but not $25mm a year good?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:ahh.. so WS is cumulative? So if he doesnt play another game his WS will stay at 5.4? Fair enough...fishmike wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lowryky01.htmlLowry's winshares went from 11.7 to 5.4 from last year to this, and most would say he's having a career best year and Toronto is a great. Hows that?
because he's played 1/3 the total games
WS48 is adjusted for playing time. Total win shares is not.
Yes, total win shares is an estimate of how many wins you have uniquely contributed to your team's total. WS 48 is an estimate of how many wins per game (per 48 min) you contribute. The average WS48 is .100. There are ten players on the court and each one on average is contributing one-tenth of a win. A player with a WS48 of .227 like Lowry is contributing almost a quarter of a win per game even though he's only one of the ten players on the court. Then, if you're WS48 is .227 and you play 10 games, you've contributed 2.27 total win shares. So that's the difference between total and per 48 #s.
If I remember right, you've asked what Melo is doing differently than a few years ago when we had the 54 win team. A lot of the difference is that we don't have the good supporting cast we had then. But you can see a decline in WS48 from .184 to .101. That decline is probably due to lower scoring efficiency (which is from a decline in 3s and FTs) and a significant decline in his defensive #s.How is that # derived? Looking at Melo the difference between last year and the year before is minimal, yet one team won 37 vs. 54 the year before. I think most agree Melo was a better player 2 years ago.
Sorry for the dweeb comment. #hugs
It basically takes into account total production and efficiency on offense and then it tracks the performance (scoring, rbs, etc.) of the man he's guarding on defense. I would never say that win shares is perfect, but it's one of the main sources I'd use to place players into rough categories (like super star, star, etc.). If you want the exact calculation, it's here but it's complicated!
http://www.basketball-reference.com/abou...You're saying his performance wasn't that different when the team was .700 vs. .450. I agree. But that basically means he's not a main driving force behind his team's success and isn't the kind of player you want to give a huge salary to. I think nearly all the indicators of performance would point to the same conclusion.
35% of the cap space is just too much to give up on him. We can get more total win production from that much salary.
Knicks overpaid for a scorer. I dont have a huge problem with that and I still think it makes sense for this team looking at the roster and prospects etc.
Rosters are very rarely a perfect balance between salary and production. The balance will come if and when Phil executes on this draft pick. If OK4 is there and we get him we are looking at 5+ years of production well below market or WS48 value.