A lot of the conversation around him talks about him being the best pure scorer. What does that even mean? If the argument is that he is the best player at putting the ball in the basket, does anyone REALLY believe that? If the argument is that he's the best at being ONLY a scorer... I suppose that's possible. But is that really a good thing?

Although everybody should know by now what a crippling thing it is to have a dead-weight max contract, it sometimes seems like GMs can't help themselves. Orlando and Atlanta are playoff clubs, hopefully better managed than the bottom of the league. But I can't help but second-guess moves like trading for Arenas and his contract, or signing Joe Johnson to a new one that might end up being 40% of your total player salary.

I ask, though, could the Knicks even actually afford to sign both?

Well all defensive stats can be affected by scheme that's not really the problem.

I'll take defensive rating with a larger grain of salt. Counterpart per for non-tweeners is quite useful.

Over a large sample size it can be just fine, think of it like adjusted plus-minus, which is even goofier in my opinion.