I don't think folks appreciate yet just how much of a sleeper Wright could be. He's got great per-36 numbers, but what does that mean when in actuality he's only been playing 18 minutes a game? It doesn't mean nothing, that's for sure. He's been averaging really impressive per-36 stats in 18 or so minutes a game for
four consecutive seasons. It's not a fluke. It's not just garbage time. Now, has he been helped a little by generally playing against reserve-heavy units? Sure, a little. And has it helped him to have teammates in his own reserve units who were more offensively gifted than you tend to see in the NBA? Sure, a little. He's probably gotten a bunch of extra-open looks, extra-clear paths to the hoop on pick-and-rolls. Here's a good article examining all this:
http://www.mavs.com/comprehending-brandan-wrights-statistical-compendium/But come on. His efficiency is...well, it's unreal. It
seems unreal, that is. What if it were real, i.e., actually transferable to starter-level competition and scaleable to starter-level minutes? Then he'd be pretty ****ed good, right? Let's look at all the games in the last four years when he got to play in, say, 30 or more minutes. Wait, did I say all the games? Oops, there are only 10. 10 games of 30+ minutes in four seasons, out of 198 total games. Here's how he did:
http://bkref.com/tiny/gxmvyNot only just 10 games, but only one game where he ever reached (exactly) 36 minutes, and only two more where he got as much as 34 minutes. So, how'd he do? Seven very-good to pretty-good games and three games we wouldn't have been angry about getting from peak-Perk on an average night.
Why so little playing time, then? Foul trouble? Nope. It's Dirk, basically. Hard to get any run when one of the best players of all-time is ahead of you on the depth chart. Aside from Dirk, he's been behind a slew of other bigger names in the frontcourt, Chandler, Dalembert, Brand, Kaman, guys who are more traditional in that they average 10 or more rebounds (per game or per 36) like big men are traditionally expected to.
So it's gotta be the rebounds, then? Must be. I see no other reason why a dude with Wright's scoring skill set (vertical, finishing moves and touch, midrange consistency) would be consigned to a limbo of always only ever playing about 3/8ths of the game, rarely more, rarely less. Why else wouldn't he get an opportunity to play bigger minutes? Anyone got any ideas? Because I don't. Injuries robbing him of random chances to prove himself, always consigning him to his steady bench role but nothing more? I don't know.
Here's a question: Would you trade an expiring Rondo right now for a mid-to-late first round draft pick, plus maybe another future pick, plus, oh, say...a clone of Larry Nance in his prime? Because if Wright's per-minute stats project into a full-time starter's role, that's basically what he'd be, minus a couple assists. And unlike a lot of rookies and sophomores and D-League surprises whose per-minute stats are flukes of small samples, whether it be only 20 games total or 10 minutes a game, Wright's have been racked up over about 200 games, at a steady clip of just under 20 minutes a game. Wright could be the exact kind of player per-36 rates are worth taking at face value.
In baseball, finding a guy like Wright might be the equivalent of finding a pitcher with a huge ERA-FIP discrepancy, perhaps a pitcher with a groundball rate upwards of 60%, who's been consigned to spot starts and long relief because everyone ahead of him in the rotation fits the prevailing prototype better, including two of the best starters of all time, but if he's given a chance might be an All-Star. Wright could be that kind of jewel in the market inefficiency bargain bin.
The guy might break Wilt's single-season record for FG% this year.
Wilt Chamberlain. He's well on his way. Thing is, I don't think that's a total fluke, either. Some guys just finish. Would you turn your nose up at Cedric Maxwell's FG% because most of his scoring was done near the basket? No, right? The point is to get the ball into and through the round orange hoop. Wright has an extraordinary knack at that. Not to mention a knack for blocking shots. And he's not that bad a rebounder. I mean, was Kevin McHale a bad rebounder? Or were there just a lot of other big guys just as capable of grabbing a board? Or does it not even matter because he was so efficient on offense?
Every so often there's a player whose career only really begins in his late 20's after finally being given an opportunity. What if Knight is that guy? What if he could score 20 a night just by pounding it down low to him semi-regularly or setting him up off screens? What if he's the sneaky best-player-available for Rondo?