I'd change your thread title to "Kris Humphries is not THAT good, lol "
its unbelievable to me how many people overlook how good kris humphries is. the guy is a very good basketball player. he's a quality starting player, and a better rebounder than anyone on the celtics right now, and that's not an opinion - that's a fact backed up by stats. don't kid yourselves he was the player that played the best on the celtics last year. he had a per of 18, and if you don't like that metric look up his per 40 stats or his winscore.
and btw, because danny knew humphries was good, he tried to offload bass to golden state so he could keep humphries but golden state dropped out at the last second, so he had no option but to trade him to the wizards to get a trade exception to at least get something out of him. so yeah humphries is good.
and brooklyn traded him because they were getting paul pierce, kevin garnett, and jason terry - and when you trade for those people you need to do a fairly good job at matching salaries - hump and wallace had to go. plus billy king is notorious for being a bad GM.
actually, no. this is one of the many wonderful advantages to doing our homework and finding fun stats prior to posting.
this season's rebounding:
the hump = 6.3/g
sullen sully = 7.8/g
next, humphries has been in the nba 11 seasons and during those times he has averaged more than 10 points/game exactly TWICE. (that means two times. )
rebounding is a similar story. he has averaged more than 6.3 r/g TWICE in his 11 year career.
hump is a good player, but i am not as enamored with him as some posters. heck, his one year with the celtics he averaged 8.4 pt/g and 5.9 reb/g. nice numbers, but hardly the stuff to write home about. and he was doing this on a BAD team, where his abilities should have shown.
for further reference, this year:
olly is averaging 12 and 5.7,
sully 13.3 and 7.8, and
zeller is 9.6 and 5.5.
these performances rival, if not surpass, hump's efforts. and hump had been in the league 10 years, more than olly, sully, and zeller combined. these celtics still have upside.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/humphkr01.html
http://espn.go.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/bos/cat/avgRebounds/boston-celtics
EXACTLY - DO YOUR RESEARCH!!!
is it smarter to rank a players rebounding prowess by ranking per game or per36/40mins??
eg: if a player plays 25 mins per game, and another plays 36 mins per game, obviously the one playing 36mins per game is going to get more rebounds. is that fair? check out per 36mins on that same basketball reference site you linked - why not go onto draftexpress and check out per 40mins?
hump is a better rebounder than anyone on our team atm. to think otherwise isn't a way anyone, GM or fan, who knows about the game would seriously measure a players performance.
of course you could say - yeah well one player played one game for the season and lit it up compared to another player who played 82 games who played well but whose per 36mins stats arent as good... which is why, to be fair it's good to ensure that a player has played 500mins or even 1000mins at least in that season. on top of that hump started 30 games for the celts last season and when he wasn't starting he was often 1st off the bench , so he was often going up against the other teams starting lineup, so those stats are pretty legit. do your research.