The Disappointment Zone

Musings from a Cleveland sports fan

Cavaliers roster analysis: Part I: Point Guards

Posted by disappointmentzone on 28 August 2006

I’ve gone back and forth on how to best reveal/stumble through/present a roster analysis of the Cavs. On one hand I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time over the past couple of weeks calculating the Wins Produced of every player in the NBA last season (there is a lot to say about this alone, but I would be remiss if the first thing I did say about it wasn’t: thanks David Berri) and I now have that information stored in a tidy spreadsheet. Wins Produced is the best metric for player production in the NBA and, therefore, forms a large portion of what I have to say about the players on the Cavs’ roster. Of course, I have only a fleeting interest–at best–with how productive, say, PJ Brown was last season. The Wages of Wins Journal is unveiling the Wins Produced of a new team every few days and is going in alphabetical order (through Charlotte now), so if you care to know how productive PJ Brown was last season, then you ought to follow their blog. Pretty soon they’ll write about the Cavs and I’m of the opinion that whatever glory can/will be derived from unveiling the Wins Produced of the entire Cavs’ roster should be theirs alone. Since my analysis will be heavily rooted in Wins Produced, one option for how to reveal/stumble through/present a roster analysis of the Cavs–by unveiling in one quick post the Wins Produced for every Cavs’ player last season–is reserved for the WoWJ, although that which will appear on the WoWJ will be concerned primarily with the 2005-06 Cavs.

Another option is to do a player-by-player analysis, but a) I’m not sure how much there is to say about an Alan Henderson-type player, b) I’m not sure how much I’d want to write about an Alan Henderson-type player, c) I’m not sure there is much to say statistics-wise for the slew of rookies joining the team, and d) I could easily see myself losing interest in the player-by-player analysis after about player #7. So that option is out.

Therefore I’ve decided to present an analysis of the Cavs’ roster by breaking down the roster into positions and then discussing what the relative strengths and weaknesses are of each position and how any recent trades/contract extensions affect both the position and the team overall. This seems like the best compromise among the many conflicting interests afflicting my decision-making–you’ll get a brief jump on the rest of the world in knowing the Wins Produced of a few of the Cavs’ players; I’ll get to share a piece of the work I’ve done with people whose last names aren’t the same as my own; the gun won’t be jumped on WoWJ for the entire Cavs’ roster; and I can see myself being able to commit to writing the analysis in five parts with much more conviction and determination than writing the analysis in 17 parts.

Without further introduction, then, here is the first part in my pre-preseason (or very post-postseason) analysis of the Cavs’ roster.

Point Guards

The biggest weakness position-wise for the Cavs is point guard. Eric Snow will enter the 2007-08 campaign as the starting point guard, a job he was supposed to lose last preseason to Damon Jones. As I’ve said elsewhere, Eric Snow is a problem for the Cavs insofar as he’s owed a ton of money–about $20 million over the next three seasons. If Snow were only being made the minimum salary for NBA veterans he’d be a steal. Snow is the Cavs’ best defender and last season often found himself guarding the opposing team’s best player who wasn’t a center. In a game against the Nets in early December Vince Carter blew apart the Cavs’ defense–a lousy rotation of Hughes and James–for 26 points in the first half. In the second half Eric Snow often guarded Carter and held him to only 12 points. In the playoffs Snow guarded Rasheed Wallace–Detroit’s power forward–more often than one would expect from a point guard. Snow is also valuable to the Cavs as a mentor to the team’s younger point guards. Plus he’s an upstanding citizen who has never, as far as I can tell, caused any internal conflicts on any team for which he’s played. These qualities are valuable, just not at $20 million.

Is there hope that Snow will return to form (form being a slightly above average point guard)? The outlook is grim. Here are Snow’s Win Scores per minute for the last four seasons.

For reference the average guard will have a Win Score per minute of .130. In the last four seasons Snow’s Win Score has been cut in half. Snow is just not a productive player and there is no sign that he’ll improve next year. In fact, at his current pace Snow’s Win Score per minute next season will probably be about .61, by far the lowest of his career.

Why is his Win Score so low? For starters Snow does not shoot particularly well. His points per shot [(PTS-FTM)/FGA] last season was only .819, well below average for the NBA. If Snow were capable of knocking down the occasional three pointer his scoring deficiency might not be so pronounced, but Snow made only one three pointer last season, or the same number as Drew Gooden. Snow, however, had 10 attempts while Gooden attempted only three. Given the other players on the Cavs, in particular James and Larry Hughes, it is necessary that the Cavs have player capable of making jump shots. Eric Snow’s effective shooting percentage on jump shots last season was only .381. Snow also turned into an awfully foul-prone player last season. This might be attributable to the increased pressure on Snow to make up for the defensive lapses of his teammates.

Working for Snow is that he doesn’t turn the ball over for how many assists he records, which is a positive for any player and particularly a point guard, and he generates a high number of assists per minute on the court–.147, second only to LeBron James (.155). But, again, he doesn’t score–only 391 points in over 2300 minutes played. If Eric Snow learns how to shoot this off season it would go a long way to helping him improve as a player.

No one should expect Snow to improve as a shooter, however. This is precisely why last year GM Danny Ferry gave a lot of money (four years, $16.1 million) to Damon Jones to sign as a Cav.

In his first two full seasons as a starter–2003-04 with Milwaukee and 2004-05 with Miami–Jones’s points per shot were a respectable .964 and an outstanding 1.22, respectively. Since 2001-02 Jones’s effective shooting percentage has never dipped below 48% and topped out during his season in Miami at 61%. If Ferry were judging Jones solely on Jones’s season in Miami then certainly Ferry thought acquiring Jones at $4 million per season was a steal. Compared to Eric Snow’s contract, it sure looks like a steal. But is it?

Here are Damon Jones’s Wins Scores per minute for each of the past three seasons.

Two things are apparent from the chart above. First, Damon Jones had an above-average year in Miami. Second, Jones had an abysmal year last season with the Cavs. The good news for Cavs fans is that Jones is still a fairly good shooter despite his early season woes last year. In 2003-04 he scored .964 points per shot. In 2004-05 he scored 1.22 points per shot. In 2005-06 he scored 1.06 points per shot–about average. Jones’s effective shooting percentage on jump shots last season 53% and in the clutch (fourth quarter or overtime, neither team ahead by more than five) he shot a smooth 50%. And no one will forget his game-winning shot against the Wizards in the first round of the playoffs. The drop in Jones’s Win Score from the previous season is not explained by his lack of shooting. So what happened?

Jones stopped playing like a point guard and started playing like a shooting guard or small forward. Part of the reason is because he was periodically on the court with Eric Snow and during those times he played more shooting guard than point guard. But the rest of the time he just plain didn’t play the position he was brought in to play. To wit: In 2003-04 Jones dished out 478 assists and in 2004-05 he dished out 350 assists–both respectable assist totals for a point guard. Last season? 119 assists. His per-game assist total last season fell by more than half from 2004-05, from 4.3 to 2.1. If the primary aim of a point guard is to guide an offense by setting up teammates for quality shots, Jones was certainly lacking in this regard last season.

Unfortunately, while he was firing up shots like a SG or SF, he wasn’t rebounding like one. Last season Jones grabbed 133 rebounds, or 98 fewer than he grabbed in Miami. In fact, Jones had the lowest total of rebounds per minute of anyone on the Cavs last season, averaging .064 rebounds per minute. The mighty Mike Wilks, who is five inches shorter than Jones, averaged .11 rebounds per minutes, to cite but one person who was a more prolific rebounder than Jones. Had Jones equaled his rebounding numbers from his year in Miami, last season his Win Score per minute would have been .128, or about average. Had he dished out the same number of assists, his Win Score per minute would have been slightly above average (.145).

At no point in his career has Jones been a stud point guard (or a stud shooting guard masquerading as a point guard). Based on his previous efforts the best the Cavs can hope for from Jones is to be about average. The keys to Jones’s future success in Cleveland are being more aggressive on the boards and adequately guiding the offense in the half court. I wouldn’t worry too much about his assist numbers. After all, for the foreseeable future LeBron James will be leading the team in assists, and this is a good thing. As long as Jones doesn’t turn the ball over his assist totals, should they remain about average for his career (253 per 82 games), won’t be a problem. Oh, and if Jones stops acting like he learned to play defense at the Steve Nash Academy of There He Went it would go a long way to ensure that he’s on the court more often than he was last season.

Last and certainly least is Mike Wilks. Since he is no longer a Cav and since he didn’t play much last season (only 250 minutes) I’m not going to say much about him. In fact, I’m done discussing Wilks.

So how productive were the Cavs’ point guards last season? Here are the Wins Produced and Wins Produced per 48 minutes (WP48) for last season.
The Cavs received very little production from the point guards. In fact, the Cavs had the second-worst group of PGs in the entire NBA (only Utah was worse). Of all the areas in which the Cavs could really stand to improve, certainly on the short list is the point guard position. This off season no trades have been made (yet) to improve the team in this area, but the Cavs did draft Daniel Gibson, PG out of Texas, in the second round. Gibson will make the final roster and could see spot-duty at point guard, although this will depend almost entirely on his assist-to-turnover ratio, which was never high in college. As long as he’s a turnover liability he’ll struggle to contribute to the team next season.

WHAT WE’LL SEE NEXT SEASON: After starting the season as the starting point guard, Snow’s minutes will decline once it becomes clear that Damon Jones is the better option, although that’s not saying much at this point. It’s like chosing between death by suffocation or drowning–there really is no winner. In late-game situations Snow will be the primary point guard because of his superior defense. In end-of-game situations (last-second plays) on offense Jones will be tapped because he is a much better shooter than Snow. A lot of people are down on Damon Jones and probably don’t expect him to improve, but I wouldn’t be shocked if his numbers increase a fair amount next year–if anything I’d expect to see increases in both rebounds and assists. Of course, increases in rebounds and assists might simply be the function of increased minutes, but I think Jones will increase both his assists/min and rebounds/min totals. This is assuming Jones remains with the Cavs through next season. Jones being traded is entirely possible, however, because Eric Snow will never be traded–no one will absorb his contract, except maybe the Knicks, who have a track record of acquiring such burdensome contracts. If the Cavs were able to trade Snow and his monumental salary keeping Jones wouldn’t be such a huge problem. As it is, keeping two point guards for a combined $10+ million, both of whom are, at best, average, is not financially wise. If the Cavs have to trade one of them, it’s Jones, if only because he’s younger, cheaper, and better. But even his contract won’t set Ferry’s phones ablaze with offers. $4 million per season is on the high end for a player of Jones’s ability. What will Gibson do? Not much. Probably 500 minutes, 55 assists, 40 turnovers, 50 rebounds, and 85 points. I’m 75% certain that these numbers will be within a 25% margin of error.

13 Responses to “Cavaliers roster analysis: Part I: Point Guards”

  1. Josh said

    I watched probably 70 games of the 04-05 Heat and probably close to 75 of the 05-06 Heat. This doesn’t make me an expert and I readily acknowledge my eyes do at times decieve me.

    Damon Jones was a disaster for Miami. Yes, he hit open jump shots off of Shaq’s double team but that’s about all he did. He was unable to dribble without turning his back to the basket. He literally was the only point guard in the NBA who could not execute a fast break running forwards. This is why Riley let him go and never really made him a serious offer. While he might be effective in a certain type of offense, he will be unable to assist the Cavs if they wish to play a more up-tempo game, which seems like the style which most explots Varejo’s athleticism and LBJ’s all around game.

    Jason Williams (the white one, not the one on the motorcycle or the one with the guns) might be a below average point guard and he might not be a good fit on 23 of the 30 teams in the league, but he was able to effectively give the Heat an uptempo style which complimented Wade’s game and improved the Heat’s versatility on offense. Their ability to play transition basketball as opposed to a more plodding Jones-led style was a big reason why they were able to finally beat the Pistons.

    I really think these numbers from Berra are insightful but only tell half the story.

  2. You are certainly more of an expert on the 2004-05 Heat than I am.

    I don’t mean to suggest in my analysis that Damon Jones is a good PG–he isn’t. The average point guard last season was considerably more productive than Damon Jones. But there is hope that Jones will improve next season. If he regresses back to average in assists and rebounds he’ll help the Cavs a fair amount, mostly because he’ll be more productive but also because there is no other viable option at this point. He’s not ideal (for some of the reasons you suggest), but he’s what the Cavs have right now and there is reason to think that he won’t be as bad as last season.

    I understand what you are saying about Jason Williams, but I think it’s important to point out that how good of a fit a player is with a team will be reflected in his Wins Produced. There are a few players with transcendent talent–LBJ, KG, Kobe, etc–who will be highly productive players no matter which team they play for. But most players fall into the category of a Jason Williams–well-suited for some teams, poorly-suited for others.

    How is one to judge how suited a player is for a team other than through statistics? Without relying on statistics we get into the troublesome ‘arbitrary algorithms’ that we all use on occassion to critique players. If Jason Williams is well-suited for this Heat team, then it should be apparent in his statistics. His Wins Produced for 2005-06 (4.6) is the result of a lot of what he does on the court (assists, steals, turnovers, points, free throws, etc). Jason Williams, of course, is not some sort of inherent 4.6 WP player. If he played for a Larry Brown team I’d imagine his WP would drop. But he plays for a Pat Reilly team that benefits from playing a style that meshes with Williams’s skills. I don’t know how talented Williams actually is–it’s probably all relative. But WP captures this. I don’t see how it tells only half the story.

    To return to Damon Jones…I’m not as familiar with Jones as you, having only watched him closely in one season. But I trust that you are right when you say that a weakness of his is the transition game. I don’t expect to see Jones as the captain of the Cavs’ open-court game. But I don’t think this will be a problem. If Larry Hughes is good at anything it’s playing a slashing, fast-paced game. He’s not a good jump shooter. With LeBron I think these are two people well-suited to guiding the team in transition. Whether Jones can guide the team in the half-court will ultimately decide whether he remains a Cav. The half-court is where LeBron is best when he doesn’t constantly have the ball (unless it’s late in the shot clock). When LeBron brings the ball up the court in quarters 1-3 the offense stagnates. Running a half-court offense is not James’s strength. If Jones (or Snow or Gibson) can be the guy providing the lubricant for the half-court offense in the first three quarters then the Cavs will be fine…Or so I hope.

  3. Josh said

    It tells half the story in that a player can be productive playing a certain type of game but if his game isn’t diverse enough to play many different styles, the team could potentially stagnate or limit the potential looks they present to another team, thereby becoming easier to match up and strategize against

    I’ll give you another reason I don’t think these numbers tell us too much — antoine walker. Mind you,I hate his game. I want to choke him when I watch him play for his awful shot selection, the way he dribbles with his head down, etc. I’m not familar with his WP but I’d venture to say during the regular season it was pretty bad. But Walker wasn’t brought to Miami to play an all around efficent game. The only reason he was brought here was, when Shaq and Wade weren’t being super prodcutive or were in foul trouble, he needed to be able to score in bunches. This was something the Heat missed when it had Eddie Jones, who was a better all around player in the regular season but could never get a basket when he had to in crunch time. In the NBA playoffs when needed Walker produced this scoring, not necessarily in quantity but in quality at specific moments in the game. Is Antoine Walker better then Eddie Jones. Nope. Could the Heat have won with Eddie instead of Antoinne. I don’t think so.

    Also, I wonder if WP values the regular season too much. Most of the Heat barely gave a shit during the season. The team that beat Detroit, NJ and Dallas did not resemble the reguar season team. So if your goal is to build a playoff ready team, can regular season stats tell us much?
    In other words, Peja Stojkaovic might have good WP but any Sacramento or Lakers fan can tell ya he can’t find the rim in a tight playoff game. I’d rather take my chances with Al Harrington, who hasn’t proven a thing, then Peja who we know all too well what he can do.

    One last ?: What was PJ Brown’s WP for 94-96 on Miami. I always thought he was a great player. He set screens, rebounded offensively. I’m not sure what he has left in the tank but I think if he has anything left he will help Chicago.

  4. If a player isn’t diverse to play different styles and his team’s offense stagnates when they attempt to change styles against another team, then that player’s productivity will drop and that will be reflected in his WP. WP might be a beast of a metric to calculate, but its basis is very simple: 2p, 3p, rebounds, blocks, assists, free throws, turnovers, steals, etc. If a player isn’t good enough to play, say, a fast-paced game, he either won’t get the minutes (and thus not the stats and thus not the WP) or the minutes he does get won’t be productive. If he’s not productive that’ll be reflected in his stats, and therefore in his WP. The reverse of this is true as well.

    If you have a player who’s good at fast breaks and not good in the half court but all his coach plays is a plodding half court game, the player won’t produce many wins for his team. Does this mean that player is incapable of producing wins? No. But it does mean he’s not a good fit for his team (or rather, the style is team plays).

    You are right: Antoine Walker was not very productive in the regular season. His scoring efficiency (pts/shot) was just below average for forwards (1.07 vs 1.05). He took a lot of threes. Fortunately, he made a fair number. His effective field goal percentage was .512, or about average for the Heat. When you say that Walker was brought in to score in bunches for the Heat when Wade or Shaq were unable to play (fouls, injury, rest) what makes you think that Walker was able to summon some greater talent that enabled him to score at a more prolific rate than he usually scored at? I don’t have Walker’s stats for when either Wade or Shaq was not in the game, but my strong guess is that it’s the same as his season totals. Walker may be able to score in bunches, but he’s just as likely to go cold for long periods of times. When he goes cold for long stretches he’s really hurting his team. If you’d have put an average-shooting forward on the court in place of Walker he’d have been more productive scoring than Walker across the entire season.

    I find it hard to believe that Walker was able to score at specific times of the game. If it were late in the game and the Heat were down by six and Walker scored 13 points in the final six minutes and the Heat won this would be a good example of what you are talking about, right? But there is a compelling argument to be made that the Heat never would have been down by six late in the game if Walker were a better shooter during the previous 3.8 quarters.

    This is the same argument I counter with against those who will watch David Ortiz go 0-4 in a close game, stranding four runners on base and hitting into a double play, and then, in the bottom of the ninth, hit a game-winning homer, and call it clutch. A big reason why Ortiz was in a position to get a ‘clutch’ hit was because he wasn’t able to get a clutch hit at any other moment of the game, and had Ortiz blown the game open in the fourth inning with a hit when the bases were loaded he would have better served his team (less bullpen fatigue, for one).


    WP does not value the regular season too much in that the WP I’m reporting are based on regular season stats. If the Heat dial it down with a month to go in the season and win only 52 games instead of 60 then this will be reflected in WP. WP has a reasonably small error. All WP does is tie individual statistics (and a small team adjustment) to wins. If Dwayne Wade decides that he’s not dialing it down his WP will increase, but if everyone else on the Heat crap out over the last month their stats will drop. The aggregate WP for the Heat, however, will still be very close to the actual WP. That’s all WP is a measure of. It can’t tap into some well of inner talent each player has an quantify it. If players don’t try to win then their WP will be low irrespective of how talented they are.

    PJ Brown was fairly productive last season, producing about 4.6 wins. I don’t have his WP for 94-94. He’s still a below-average center, but he’s not a stiff. There is reason to believe that he can help Chicago next season.

  5. Josh said

    Thanks for your reply here. This all is fascinating to me.

    I guess my point is what if a style of basketball is never played because a player is incapable of playing it (ex: the Heat didn’t run a transition offense because Damon Jones couldn’t push the ball in transition). Aren’t you then left without a metric to determine his true effectiveness relative to how other different styled point guards (and their teammates) would perform on the team?

    When the offense ran through Walker it meant (i have no data backing this up except casual observation which might be in fact incorrect) he took higher percentage shots and drove to the basket more, as opposed to taking three point shots off of Wade’s penetration or O’Neils posting up. As a complimentary player he was at times awful but he had a fearlessness that previous 3rd wheels eddie Jones and Jamal Mashburn never had.

    Would WP have predicted Miami wins in the Dallas or Detroit series? If not, why not and what happened? I guess if I hadn’t had this Heat experience I would be more accepting of this metric.

  6. I’m still not sure I fully understand what you mean when you talk about styles of play. WP does adjust for team tempo, but not to the point where individual games are taken into account (though this is what I’ll be working on this season), or segments in games. WP simply ties player statistics (with a few small adjustments for team statistics) to team wins. With WP48 (wins produced per 48 minutes) I think one can move towards thinking critically about whether a coach got the most out of his team. For instance, if a team had a PG who played only 1500 minutes and had a .300 WP48 and another PG who played 2300 minutes and had a .175 WP48 then I think it’s reasonable to question whether the coach was right to play the less productive PG as much as he did.

    I think it’s incorrect to think about player productivity in terms of “true effectiveness”. Everything is relative. The difficultly with basketball for statheads is that the game is extremely hard to break down on an indivudual level. It’s not like baseball. About the only aspect of basketball that is truly independent of team influence is free throws. Beyond that teammates and tempo and everything else influences how productive a player is. Take Steve Nash as an example.

    WP only explains about 70% of future performance. This is pretty good.

    Today I calculated the WP of every player in the 2006 NBA playoffs. Without getting too far into detail, there are a few (likely small) adjustments that could/should further be made, but as is the average error is about 1 win (not great but not bad). With this in hand I can tell you that if you were to go by the productivity of each team, Dallas should have beaten Miami. For Miami Dwayne Wade was outstanding, accounting for nearly half of the team’s wins. Shaq was good and so was Posey. After that there ain’t much. Haslem declined from his production in the regular season, Walker was far worse in the playoffs than in the regular season, and that’s that. One great player, two good players, the rest various degrees of junky.

    Dallas, however, had one extremely great player, Dirk, one very good player in Howard, and a slew of good players who made small but meaningful contributions (Dampier, Diop, Howard, Griffin). Given their stats I would have thought Dallas beat Miami.

    As for Detroit…Detroit was not very good. Ben Wallace was above average. McDysess was pretty good. But everyone else was at best average and in a few cases far below average. Richard Hamilton, for instance, actually had a negative WP, and Billups was just above the threshold (about .2 WP).

    Miami beat Detroit, then, by simply being better–there difference between Miami and Detroit isn’t close enough to lead me to believe that Miami got lucky–and then got lucky against Dallas.

    Caveat: This analysis is entirely based on WP, and my WP for the playoffs might need a little adjustment. Also, I was out of the country in June and didn’t seem a moment of the NBA Finals, so I can’t really speak to the actual games, only the numbers.

  7. […] Consequently this post is about the Cleveland Cavaliers.  Over at The Disappointment Zone, Joel Witmer has already used Win Score to analyze the Cavalier’s point guards (Witmer’s analysis has also been re-posted at Swerbs Blerbs).  Witmer is in the process of offering a position-by-position discussion of the Cavaliers, with a focus on next season.  In this forum we are primarily concerned with what happened last season.  For those interested in a view towards the future, and a more detailed treatment of this team, one should look at what Witmer offers. […]

  8. Randall said

    Congrats on perhaps the best Cavaliers website around. I’ve been watching with great interest as the “new math” has started taking hold in the NBA. Of course, as you pointed out, even the best statistical analysis will not give as complete a picture as it would in, say, baseball. Thankfully, this is something I think most basketball statheads agree upon. Statistic-based systems tend to undervalue defense (much like Win Shares in baseball) and other intangibles away from the ball. Improved statistical measures in basketball are definately a very positive development. They should be viewed as a very useful tools, but not the only or even dominant ones. I see these systems best used for contractual issues, when teams are trying to determine relative worth amongst players at the same position.

    As for the Cavaliers point guard situation, I commend the brass for apparently thinking outside the box. They seem to have decided to abandon traditional positional philosophy and focus more on collections of skills and matchups on the floor at any given moment. They obviously feel that they have enough players who can handle the ball (read: Lebron, occassionally Hughes) even when their true point, Snow, is not on the floor (which is likely to be more often this season). The drafting of Shannon Brown and the aquisition of Wesley gives them something they did not have last year: a viable DEFENSIVE replacement for Snow. They always knew they could have Lebron or Hughes handle the ball for extended stretches, but when Snow was off the floor the team was very vulnerable defensively against quicker backcourts.

    Perhaps the now fitter Damon Jones will be able to log more time on the floor with Hughes handling the ball, but I think Jones will again be the odd man out more often than not. He will be used in very specific situations when his long distance abilities are needed (think Steve Kerr).

    Of course, we shouldn’t give the Cavs too much credit for adopting this outlook — what choice did they have? The free agent market at the point position has been sparse for two seasons running and for at least one more to come. The 2006 draft was deep at the point position, but without standouts (not that they would have gotten a hypothetical standout with the 25th pick anyway). This leaves the trade market, which, barring a blockbuster deal, wouldn’t be likely to land us a significant improvement. And we haven’t even mentioned our impossible cap situation yet, have we?


  9. While using Juicy Couture 2011 associated with artist jeans, lots of humans choose to choose off cast jeans and

    added accouterment items accessible inside the marketplace.

  10. Nachhaltiger Tourismus…

    Cavaliers roster analysis: Part I: Point Guards « The Disappointment Zone…

  11. Option Premium…

    […]Cavaliers roster analysis: Part I: Point Guards « The Disappointment Zone[…]…

  12. For accounts receivables incremental analysis helps decision-making using
    accounting data that tracks changes in money owed to a business.
    Even if a business is just beginning, any software package that will enable the capture of income and expense
    information will lower your CPA invoice at year end.
    This is because the information presented by management accounting is proposed for internal viewers and is
    not available to the public like the information presented in
    financial accounting (Accounting for Management, 2009).

  13. Why people still make use of to read news papers when in this
    technological world everything is available on web?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: