It's time for another round of "One on One", where we take too similar fantasy basketball players and compare and contrast the two based on the numbers. All statistics are based on the 2006-2007 season.
Today's matchup: Luol Deng vs Josh Howard
First off, and you'll probably hear me preaching about this a lot, when you're talking about anything fantasy, it's important to communicate how the scoring structure of your league works. For our purposes, I'm going to assume we're talking about rotisserie using Yahoo Fantasy Sport's default scoring system (why? because I think it's the best...that's why). The stat cats being points, rebounds, assists, 3's made, blocks, steals, fg%, ft% and to's.
In roto, you're looking to compare players stat-by-stat, since roto is really designed to level the playing field of statistics (for instance, by roto standards if a player gets about 2 steals per game, it's the equivalent in steals of a player scoring about 20-25 points per game).
So, let's compare stats.
Points per game:
Luol Deng 18.8
Josh Howard 18.9
Rebounds per game:
Luol Deng 7.1
Josh Howard 6.8
Assists per game:
Luol Deng 2.5
Josh Howard 1.8
Blocks:
Luol Deng 0.6
Josh Howard 0.8
Steals:
Luol Deng 1.2
Josh Howard 1.2
3s made:
Luol Deng 0.0
Josh Howard 1.3
FG% (and FG's attempted per game):
Luol Deng 51.7%/14.9 attempts
Josh Howard 45.9%/15.4 attempts
FT% (and FT's attempted per game):
Luol Deng 77.7%/4.4 attempts
Josh Howard 82.7%/4.2 attempts
Turnovers:
Luol Deng 1.9
Josh Howard 1.8
Games played in '06-'07:
Luol Deng 82
Josh Howard 70
The Verdict:
Howard wins...by an arm hair.
This might be the closest segment of One on One yet! The numbers are about dead even across the board. Though Deng can boast of a better FG% and did play all 82 games last season, Howard edges Deng out mainly because of his 1.3 threes per game, which is a whole lot better than the big goose egg Deng gets you. Moreover, the 12 extra games Deng played this season might be misleading. In the last three seasons, Howard has played in 76,59 and 70 games respectively for a total of 205, or an average of 68.33333333333(3333333) per season. Deng has played in 61, 78 and 82 games respectively for a total of 221, or 73.66666666666(etc...etc...) per season. Obviously, Deng's games are better on average, but I'd still take Howard's threes over the extra games.
In addition, Deng's FG% is nice, but Howard can boast of a better FT%, which sort of cancels out Deng's better FG%.
Howard has always done very well in the playoffs, but don't be fooled by that. Playoffs are playoffs. Those numbers don't give much indication about what a player will do for 82 games of the regular season. Players like Reggie Miller and Mike Bibby were always known for stepping their games up during the playoffs.
The FTs make me go hmm...
..because they're only shooting about 4 per game. But at least Deng is showing upward progress.
Another thing I was wondering... has either player reached his full potential?
Deng is in the midst of a stellar upswing, which has been fairly well covered. But Howard has also increased his scoring by 3+ points per year.
Can't wait to see who comes out on top this year. Hopefully I'll be seeing plenty of them in my leagues this season.
hmmmm...
Pound for pound, I'd have to say Howard's better. The Bulls have fewer offensive options than the Mavericks and have had less success, which means that Howard's done what he's done without necessarily having as many plays called for him. Still, the race will be interesting and in fantasy you can't overlook the health factor.
Great analysis!
I suspect Deng's FG percentages saved a lot of people's seasons late last year....especially since he was usually eligible at the SG spot.
It's almost a perfect tradeoff with these two, isn't it? 6 percentage points vs. 1.3 threes.
Deng/Howard
It really is eerie, huh? Though, I'd cancel out Deng's 6 percentage points for FG with Howard's 5 extra percentage points for FT. That basically means that the main difference is a slightly healthier Deng in the past few years or 1.3 more threes per game from Howard. I'd take the threes. Some might disagree with that. It's really close any way you look at it.