PDA

View Full Version : Is a healthy starting Manu = Kobe & Wade level



310Casper
01-03-2012, 12:33 PM
Manu doesnt get as much hype as other elite shooting guards (kobe/wade). You could even argue that if he were 100% healthy all the time and was a starter instead of a 6th man with limited minutes, he's....dare I say it.....better or at their level without a doubt.

If my team is down 2 with 20 seconds left in the game, theres no other shooting guard I'd trust more with the ball than Manu. He's Mr. clutch, can hit 3's, can hit jumpers, can pass like nash, can maneuver around bigs and do crazy harlem-globe-troter-esque moves to get to the rim, he puts his body on the line no matter what it takes to get that ball in the hoop.

Greet
01-03-2012, 12:34 PM
Simply put, yes.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 12:35 PM
well, the fact that he has never been regarded the best player on his own team (wrongfully so) and never gotten more than 31 mpg just keeps him underrated.

roshan3ai
01-03-2012, 12:47 PM
Wade and Kobe level? No. He's the third best SG though, FWIW

PhillyFaninLA
01-03-2012, 12:49 PM
Manu is good and underrated but you're asking is he a top 10 all time player in NBA history.

lavilevi23
01-03-2012, 12:50 PM
Not close to being at Kobe's or Wade's superstar level. The guy was hardly an allstar. He was the 4th best SG when Barandon Roy was 100% healthy and is currently 3rd for a short time until Eric Gordon will pass him next year.

More-Than-Most
01-03-2012, 12:58 PM
Manu is good and underrated but you're asking is he a top 10 all time player in NBA history.

does this mean you assume wade is?

-Kobe24-TJ19-
01-03-2012, 01:01 PM
nope

-Kobe24-TJ19-
01-03-2012, 01:02 PM
Manu is good and underrated but you're asking is he a top 10 all time player in NBA history.

he's asking about present time not career wise

Heatcheck
01-03-2012, 01:03 PM
^ Id take him over roy anyday.

Heatcheck
01-03-2012, 01:04 PM
does this mean you assume wade is?

Of course. After Jordan and Kobe, who's been better than Wade? Drexler?

clehmun
01-03-2012, 02:25 PM
Of course. After Jordan and Kobe, who's been better than Wade? Drexler?

Jerry West?
Wade's a top 10 SG of all time, and a strong case for top 5.
But he's not a top 10 ALL TIME player.

beliges
01-03-2012, 02:33 PM
Wade's nowhere near the top 10 players of all time. With that said, Ginobili has been the 3rd best SG of this era after Kobe and Wade. The dude can ball with the best of them.

lavilevi23
01-03-2012, 02:33 PM
Jerry West?
Wade's a top 10 SG of all time, and a strong case for top 5.
But he's not a top 10 ALL TIME player.

Yet. ;)

ramz.n
01-03-2012, 02:46 PM
he can guard the opposing best player every night at the wing position..he got the toal package on offense, can shoot 3's , nice mid range game, can get to the basket, pass and is money at the free throw line..but without him being the 6th man on the spurs they have no offense coming off the bench.

beliges
01-03-2012, 02:49 PM
Yet. ;)

Hes got a long ways to go before he can get in the top 10. Dont know how possible it is at this point in his career.

Heatcheck
01-03-2012, 02:52 PM
I was talking about SGs and honestly, considering he's the total package as a player and his physical attributes, there's no reason he cant end up in the top ten alltime by the time he retires.

beliges
01-03-2012, 02:56 PM
I was talking about SGs and honestly, considering he's the total package as a player and his physical attributes, there's no reason he cant end up in the top ten alltime by the time he retires.

Who in the top 10 can he possibly pass? I think its very far fetched to say he will be top 10. You got MJ, Kareem, Russel, Wilt, Kobe, Magic, Bird, Shaq, Duncan and Hakeem. I dont see him possibly passing any of these players.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 03:07 PM
Wade and Kobe will never come off the bench.. So no.

Da Knicks
01-03-2012, 03:14 PM
yup

Dnovakovic099
01-03-2012, 03:18 PM
Wade and Kobe will never come off the bench.. So no.

There are plenty of superstars, allen iverson being a prime example, that wouldn't lessen their role on their team to help them win. Does that mean that these players are better than Duncan? I say that because he has lessened his role significantally. If Duncan wanted to he could average 20 and 10 right now if he wanted to. Instead he doesn't jack up shots and saves himself when he is most important, the playoffs. Would the Heat be better in the regular season if Wade came of the bench? Probably, because he would rape the second unit of any team.

Manu, like Duncan, and most Spurs is a team player and that is the reason Manu and the Spurs have three rings. Maybe if the Heat ever grasp the concept of giving up individual fame and popularity for winning then they might have a collection of rings for themselves. Until then, they can have fun loosing in the finals to players that are extremely inferior to them in basketball talent and ability.

Dolfan305
01-03-2012, 03:19 PM
Wade and Kobe are just having slow starts and have been a little injured, and they are still playing almost as well as Manu ever has.
Wade
Kobe



Manu

nrwskinny
01-03-2012, 03:21 PM
Manu is a Hall of Famer..wasn't the best player on his team, but he fit in and did his job. All Spurs fans know that Tim is the engine, but Manu is the sparkplug that fires the engine...

He is also one of only two players, along with Bill Bradley, to have won a Euroleague title, an NBA championship, and an Olympic gold medal.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 03:32 PM
Dudes, Manu is not better than Ray Allen and I'm a knicks fan-is he even better than carter in his prime? they were the same generation

beliges
01-03-2012, 03:35 PM
Dudes, Manu is not better than Ray Allen and I'm a knicks fan-is he even better than carter in his prime? they were the same generation

Manu is better than Ray Ray and yes, he is better than Carter in his prime. Theres not another SG id take outside of Kobe and Wade for this generation.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 03:43 PM
Manu is better than Ray Ray and yes, he is better than Carter in his prime. Theres not another SG id take outside of Kobe and Wade for this generation.

Completely disagree with this statement, as do win shares
Manu through 10 years
Manu Ginobili 11.1 11.0 10.6 9.9 9.7 9.1 8.8 5.0 4.2 0.9

VInce Through 10 years
Vince Carter 12.9 11.8 10.5 9.4 9.3 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.2

Ray Allen Through 10 years

Ray Allen 13.7 10.7 10.1 9.1 8.9 7.0 6.9 5.2 4.9

Manu is in the conversation but his top years arent really close to either ray or VC

beliges
01-03-2012, 03:48 PM
Completely disagree with this statement, as do win shares
Manu through 10 years
Manu Ginobili 11.1 11.0 10.6 9.9 9.7 9.1 8.8 5.0 4.2 0.9

VInce Through 10 years
Vince Carter 12.9 11.8 10.5 9.4 9.3 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.2

Ray Allen Through 10 years

Ray Allen 13.7 10.7 10.1 9.1 8.9 7.0 6.9 5.2 4.9

Manu is in the conversation but his top years arent really close to either ray or VC

No offense to you, but W/S and other made up statistics are not credible ways to compare players. To me, these types of stats hold no value whatsoever. They are fabricated formulas, not real statistics.

HarrisonBarnes
01-03-2012, 03:51 PM
Yes .. always thought that Manu is comparable to the Kobe/Wade superstar SG type WITHOUT the athleticism / durability. He basically has the same skill sets his speed, quickness and vertical and just severly behind due to his non black skin.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 03:59 PM
No offense to you, but W/S and other made up statistics are not credible ways to compare players. To me, these types of stats hold no value whatsoever. They are fabricated formulas, not real statistics.

do you want other numbers like ppg, shooting% etc? Bc those won't help your argument either. Or would you rather just be totally subjective in your argument and not base it on anything other than your opinion? If thats the case whats the point of even discussing something on a forum

Heatcheck
01-03-2012, 03:59 PM
Who in the top 10 can he possibly pass? I think its very far fetched to say he will be top 10. You got MJ, Kareem, Russel, Wilt, Kobe, Magic, Bird, Shaq, Duncan and Hakeem. I dont see him possibly passing any of these players.

now that u list them, none. He's not getting in the top ten, but as far as SGs its him and Kobe for second.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 04:01 PM
No offense to you, but W/S and other made up statistics are not credible ways to compare players. To me, these types of stats hold no value whatsoever. They are fabricated formulas, not real statistics.

well, NBA front offices pay attention to these made up stats. Why don't you agree with them? No offense, but I find a lot of Kobe and Melo fans hate them, because they show MJ or LeBron being a lot better than Kobe for instance.

Rentzias
01-03-2012, 04:13 PM
I think it's a difficult comparison because of what roles they take upon themselves, but in terms of being extremely efficient in that role, yes, he is at their level.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 04:17 PM
well, NBA front offices pay attention to these made up stats. Why don't you agree with them? No offense, but I find a lot of Kobe and Melo fans hate them, because they show MJ or LeBron being a lot better than Kobe for instance.

Kobe's had some great years and I think Melo's best are ahead of him but LeBron and MJ are both head and shoulders above Kobe and Melo, LBJ's 08-09 season was a statheads wet dream, the comparison its not even a question. Back on topic, I like Manu too but hes not as good as allen or VC

wjmoffatt
01-03-2012, 04:18 PM
Offensive wise YES, Defensive wise Heck No

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 04:20 PM
Kobe's had some great years and I think Melo's best are ahead of him but LeBron and MJ are both head and shoulders above Kobe and Melo, LBJ's 08-09 season was a statheads wet dream, the comparison its not even a question. Back on topic, I like Manu too but hes not as good as allen or VC

Prime Ray I agree was better, but not Vince. Manu is a better defender, and his intangibles take a dump on Vince's.

By the way, Melo is in year 9 man. He has been the same player for 6 years now, I don't think he is getting better. Not that its that big of a deal, he is already a top 10-12 player, but I don't see any big improvements unless he suddenly decides that defense and passing are important.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 04:34 PM
Prime Ray I agree was better, but not Vince. Manu is a better defender, and his intangibles take a dump on Vince's.

By the way, Melo is in year 9 man. He has been the same player for 6 years now, I don't think he is getting better. Not that its that big of a deal, he is already a top 10-12 player, but I don't see any big improvements unless he suddenly decides that defense and passing are important.

I dont think melo is top 10-12, hes more in the 15-20 range, but i also think hes committed defensively and the knicks have him in more of a point forward role this year so i expect his assits to go up, and even though in year 9 hes only 27, if you look at guys like MJ etc., there prime was 28-32, I think hes got a chance to be a 10-11 w/s guy. Vince is a guy that gets looked down on a lot bc he played in toronto but the numbers are undeniable his career best w/s is 13.7 which is better than Manu's best pretty significantly. VC also never had anyone like Duncan to lighten the load or anyone like parker to facilitate easy baskets. My biggest complaint about Manu is that he never had to be better than the second or third guy, truly great (we're talking top 3 or 4 at the position in the last 15 years) players are more than that

Lakerhead4ever
01-03-2012, 04:36 PM
yes. most of his career he has been a 6th man. he is greatly underrated

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 04:42 PM
well, NBA front offices pay attention to these made up stats. Why don't you agree with them? No offense, but I find a lot of Kobe and Melo fans hate them, because they show MJ or LeBron being a lot better than Kobe for instance.

I can be childish too and say they were made up by Lebron fans to show that he's better than Kobe. Those stats are absurd. Putting together a bunch of variables to come up with a stat is ridiculous.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 04:43 PM
I dont think melo is top 10-12, hes more in the 15-20 range, but i also think hes committed defensively and the knicks have him in more of a point forward role this year so i expect his assits to go up, and even though in year 9 hes only 27, if you look at guys like MJ etc., there prime was 28-32, I think hes got a chance to be a 10-11 w/s guy. Vince is a guy that gets looked down on a lot bc he played in toronto but the numbers are undeniable his career best w/s is 13.7 which is better than Manu's best pretty significantly. VC also never had anyone like Duncan to lighten the load or anyone like parker to facilitate easy baskets. My biggest complaint about Manu is that he never had to be better than the second or third guy, truly great (we're talking top 3 or 4 at the position in the last 15 years) players are more than that

okay, well flip that view. If Manu were the #1 on a team, his per game numbers would have been on par with any SG. Vince was better early, but his game change took away any advantage he may have had over Manu. Defensively Manu is better. He is at his best in the biggest situations, something Vince shrinks from. He has all the intangibles in the world, Vince has none.

Vince had the physical talent and skillset to be an all time SG. But Manu has had a stronger career, as an individual basketball player.

By the way, I was watching Harden the other night, and I am convinced he is a Manu clone.

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 04:47 PM
Those stats are absurd. Putting together a bunch of variables to come up with a stat is ridiculous.

why are win shares absurd, specifically.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 04:49 PM
I can be childish too and say they were made up by Lebron fans to show that he's better than Kobe. Those stats are absurd. Putting together a bunch of variables to come up with a stat is ridiculous.

How is it childish? Its a reality. Those who hate advanced stats do so because they don't favor their guy.

So you think that with 23 NBA teams using advanced stat guys to do draft evaluations, rotations, player value, etc, that they are stupid? Because you think someone made them to make LeBron look good (by the way, many of them were invented when Bron was around 15)?

When so many respected basketball people are using them, it kind of kills your, "only on PSD" bit.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 04:51 PM
why are win shares absurd, specifically.

Because Kobe has had 15+ once, and LeBron has had 4 seasons better than that, including 2 that crapped on that. Hence, they must be flawed...

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 04:52 PM
Swashcuff, you're in here. Please enlighten people on why you still bought into advanced stats even though they exposed your favorite player ever.

Its possible guys!

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 04:55 PM
How is it childish? Its a reality. Those who hate advanced stats do so because they don't favor their guy.

So you think that with 23 NBA teams using advanced stat guys to do draft evaluations, rotations, player value, etc, that they are stupid? Because you think someone made them to make LeBron look good (by the way, many of them were invented when Bron was around 15)?

When so many respected basketball people are using them, it kind of kills your, "only on PSD" bit.

I only rebutted your ridiculous claim that people who hate advanced stats do so because they are Kobe or Melo fans. That's silly. I don't look at them to know if they make my favorite player (Who right now is either Blake Griffin or Kevin Love). And why are only 23 teams using them? If they were so innovative, wouldn't all teams use them? Its dumb man. Especially if its a teams primary gauge on talent.

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 04:56 PM
Statistically speaking he has a strong case against them. Overall he's not and it isn't even close IMO. Wade and Kobe are both top 5 among SGs Manu isn't top 10. At least IMO opinion.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 04:58 PM
Because Kobe has had 15+ once, and LeBron has had 4 seasons better than that, including 2 that crapped on that. Hence, they must be flawed...

Once again, my favorite players in the league right now are Blake and Love..... My favorite TEAM is the Lakers.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 04:58 PM
okay, well flip that view. If Manu were the #1 on a team, his per game numbers would have been on par with any SG. Vince was better early, but his game change took away any advantage he may have had over Manu. Defensively Manu is better. He is at his best in the biggest situations, something Vince shrinks from. He has all the intangibles in the world, Vince has none.

Vince had the physical talent and skillset to be an all time SG. But Manu has had a stronger career, as an individual basketball player.

By the way, I was watching Harden the other night, and I am convinced he is a Manu clone.

Hardens got game no doubt..In terms of win shares, being the number 1 option doesnt neccessarily help you, it is likely that without a great point guard and post player Manu's shots would up, his TS% would go down (more defensive focus etc) which would negatively effect his W/S. You are right though if I was building a franchise for 10 years id probably take Manu, if it was for 3 years theres no doubt its vince, and Allen is better than either of them.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 05:00 PM
I can be childish too and say they were made up by Lebron fans to show that he's better than Kobe. Those stats are absurd. Putting together a bunch of variables to come up with a stat is ridiculous.

Break out the tin foil hates folks..LeBron is better than kobe and has been for some time. Kobes great but when its said and done LBJ will be as close as possible to Jordan's level, hes that good

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:00 PM
Break out the tin foil hates folks..LeBron is better than kobe and has been for some time. Kobes great but when its said and done LBJ will be as close as possible to Jordan's level, hes that good

Again, my favorite players in the league are Blake and Love... lol..
And Jordan won numerous Championships and NEVER, EVER, EVER Vanish in the 4th quarter of any finals. Let alone lose a finals series...

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 05:02 PM
Swashcuff, you're in here. Please enlighten people on why you still bought into advanced stats even though they exposed your favorite player ever.

Its possible guys!

Allen Iverson ranks atrociously bad in various advanced metrics and I am an advanced stats advocate. Quite frankly I am a fan of the game who welcomes all its advancements and wanted to learn more and expand my knowledge. A better understanding of the advanced metrics have helped me gain just that. It showed me that A.I. wasn't as great as I thought he was and players like Manu are better than I gave them credit for. Are they fool proof? No. But as compared to basic stats they are a million times better in helping one understand a players true worth.

If you ask me anyone who really wants to learn the game of basketball will embrace the advancements in the statistics. They don't have to agree with them because they do have their flaws just as anything else but it has been proven that they are indeed better indicators to a player's worth than just about anything else out there. Including the biased individual eye.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 05:05 PM
Again, my favorite players in the league are Blake and Love... lol..
And Jordan won numerous Championships and NEVER, EVER, EVER Vanish in the 4th quarter of any finals. Let alone lose a finals series...

How does that have anything to do with what I responded to? You made an incredibly ignorant statement concerning advanced stats (which are in every sport by the way, not just basketball) and I drew a comparison. I also don't believe in looking at like less than 1% of a players sample size in my evaluations. The bottom line is LBJ is one pace to challenge some heavyweights for top w/s of all time and is doing it in a game which allows zone defense, something guys like michael and magic never had to deal with.

kdspurman
01-03-2012, 05:05 PM
I think so... His BB IQ is very high, he's an incredible play maker, and shoots the ball probably better than Kobe/Wade, he's proven to be just as clutch.

He's never been as explosive as those guys, so I think to the average fan doesn't get as much love as he should.

And you can't really throw stats around comparing him to Vince/ Ray Allen. Manu has never played more than 31MPG in his NBA career... I do think he played somewhere else, and played more minutes, his stats and everything across the board will increase (although his career may end a little shortly cause he's always injured)

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 05:06 PM
Hardens got game no doubt..In terms of win shares, being the number 1 option doesnt neccessarily help you, it is likely that without a great point guard and post player Manu's shots would up, his TS% would go down (more defensive focus etc) which would negatively effect his W/S. You are right though if I was building a franchise for 10 years id probably take Manu, if it was for 3 years theres no doubt its vince, and Allen is better than either of them.

I can agree with this.

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 05:11 PM
I think so... His BB IQ is very high, he's an incredible play maker, and shoots the ball probably better than Kobe/Wade, he's proven to be just as clutch.

He's never been as explosive as those guys, so I think to the average fan doesn't get as much love as he should.

And you can't really throw stats around comparing him to Vince/ Ray Allen. Manu has never played more than 31MPG in his NBA career... I do think he played somewhere else, and played more minutes, his stats and everything across the board will increase (although his career may end a little shortly cause he's always injured)

Chronz and I have had this debate before to which he pointed out to me that based on various studies it hasn't been proven that there is a direct correlation between minutes logged and efficiency (more so advanced metrics). I read it once and was never able to find it again. My belief is that had Manu played in similar situations to Ray and Vince his efficiency would take a hit because of the fact that he'd be logged more minutes which would in turn affect his endurance.

What are your thoughts on that? Do you think if Manu played 5+ minutes more a game we'd see a dip in his production in some areas (mainly scoring efficiency).

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:11 PM
How does that have anything to do with what I responded to? You made an incredibly ignorant statement concerning advanced stats (which are in every sport by the way, not just basketball) and I drew a comparison. I also don't believe in looking at like less than 1% of a players sample size in my evaluations. The bottom line is LBJ is one pace to challenge some heavyweights for top w/s of all time and is doing it in a game which allows zone defense, something guys like michael and magic never had to deal with.

Yea, no one cares about that... lmao

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 05:12 PM
I can agree with this.

good talk

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 05:12 PM
I only rebutted your ridiculous claim that people who hate advanced stats do so because they are Kobe or Melo fans. That's silly. I don't look at them to know if they make my favorite player (Who right now is either Blake Griffin or Kevin Love). And why are only 23 teams using them? If they were so innovative, wouldn't all teams use them? Its dumb man. Especially if its a teams primary gauge on talent.

Ahem. why are win shares absurd, specifically.

spreadeagle
01-03-2012, 05:14 PM
Since when was Wade on Kobe's level

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:14 PM
Ahem. why are win shares absurd, specifically.

wtf man? You itching to have an argument with me? Why are they not absurd? I hate sports nerds.

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 05:14 PM
If a man who LOVES Allen Iverson can fully embrace the advancement in basketball stats despite the fact that they hurt him much more than they help why can't others just attempt to be rational about it and take 20 minutes to actually analyze what the stats are measuring (and quite accurately too)?

OnWisconsin2007
01-03-2012, 05:17 PM
Hell no, Ginobili is not on their level.

Lol

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 05:17 PM
wtf man? You itching to have an argument with me? Why are they not absurd? I hate sports nerds.

Why does everyone who care acknowledge the advancements in the sporting world have to be a nerd? :pity:

Why can't you take 20 mins to read, comprehend and understand? You do realize an understanding of the advanced statistics gives you a better appreciation for a player's game when you look at them play right.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 05:18 PM
wtf man? You itching to have an argument with me? Why are they not absurd? I hate sports nerds.

And some hate sports cavemen.

You have never actually stated what your problem is with them. Which everyone would like to know. You say they are absurd. Why?

And don't use some lame excuse like, "because stats are for nerds". Some of the best GM's in the NBA are so called stats nerds.

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 05:20 PM
And some hate sports cavemen.

You have never actually stated what your problem is with them. Which everyone would like to know. You say they are absurd. Why?

And don't use some lame excuse like, "because stats are for nerds". Some of the best GM's in the NBA are so called stats nerds.

Not just GMs.... players, scouts and coaches are among these so called nerds as well.

BigCityofDreams
01-03-2012, 05:20 PM
Since when was Wade on Kobe's level

Since always according to ppl on PSD Kobe has never been a great player

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:21 PM
If a man who LOVES Allen Iverson can fully embrace the advancement in basketball stats despite the fact that they hurt him much more than they help why can't others just attempt to be rational about it and take 20 minutes to actually analyze what the stats are measuring (and quite accurately too)?

This is why i get irritated with you people here about advanced stats. Because you want others to do what you do when it comes to taking in the game. I got NBA league pass. I watch players play, make cuts, take good shots, run offenses, play help defense, rebound correctly, etc. That's how I gauge a player. Advanced stats say nothing about Allen Iversons heart or will to win. You've admitted to having a particular view on a player, then changing it after learning advanced stats... lol.. That boggles my mind. If you know the game, then you know the game.

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 05:21 PM
wtf man? You itching to have an argument with me? Why are they not absurd? I hate sports nerds.

Actually I get the feeling that you hate them because either your favorite players are deemed inferior, or you dont understand them. But since you already said Kobe isnt your favorite I guess it cant be thew former. And i find it hard to take anything you say seriously if you decide stats like winshares are stupid, if you dont even understand how they are derived.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:24 PM
Actually I get the feeling that you hate them because either your favorite players are deemed inferior, or you dont understand them. But since you already said Kobe isnt your favorite I guess it cant be thew former. And i find it hard to take anything you say seriously if you decide stats like winshares are stupid, if you dont even understand how they are derived.

So your assuming that i don't understand advanced stats because I'm not a fan of them? Now I cant take anything YOU say serious..

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 05:24 PM
Actually I get the feeling that you hate them because either your favorite players are deemed inferior, or you dont understand them. But since you already said Kobe isnt your favorite I guess it cant be thew former. And i find it hard to take anything you say seriously if you decide stats like winshares are stupid, if you dont even understand how they are derived.

bingo

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:26 PM
lmao...

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 05:27 PM
Yea, no one cares about that... lmao

actually a lot of people do, its a major talking point here, just because u are ignorant of something doesnt make it nerdy or wrong, spend 15 minutes reading basic stat breakdowns, it will enhance ur appreciation of the game

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 05:27 PM
So your assuming that i don't understand advanced stats because I'm not a fan of them? Now I cant take anything YOU say serious..

Dude, you have never even made an attempt to explain why you don't like them outside the excuses. What exactly, mathematically, do you not like? If you do understand them, than demonstrate it.

Everyone here watches basketball. I will take my eye over yours anyday, and I embrace advanced stats, because its a tool that allows you to understand it even further.

You don't have to be so standoffish all the time man. I don't get why you are.

kdspurman
01-03-2012, 05:28 PM
Chronz and I have had this debate before to which he pointed out to me that based on various studies it hasn't been proven that there is a direct correlation between minutes logged and efficiency (more so advanced metrics). I read it once and was never able to find it again. My belief is that had Manu played in similar situations to Ray and Vince his efficiency would take a hit because of the fact that he'd be logged more minutes which would in turn affect his endurance.

What are your thoughts on that? Do you think if Manu played 5+ minutes more a game we'd see a dip in his production in some areas (mainly scoring efficiency).

That's a good point... He's a very efficient scorer for the most part, but I think his efficiency would dip a little as he progressed. For example his first few seasons you may not notice it as much, but in the latter part of his career it would take a hit. (like after 5-6 yrs or so) Because he has those extra minutes on his body, I think at that point you'd notice a dip.

I think his prime would've stood out a little more, but on the other hand it probably would've dropped much more quickly and he would not be as effective as he is now. Thus he might get the VC treatment of being called a bum for still playing when he cant contribute. (if that makes sense) That's my view on it.

Evolution23
01-03-2012, 05:30 PM
He's not on Kobe or Wade's level but he's really really good. Any team would be lucky to have him. The best word to describe him is crafty and he has a high basketball iq. He can create his own shot, has multiple go to moves on offense and is an above average defender. I have a lot of respect for Manu.

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 05:30 PM
So your assuming that i don't understand advanced stats because I'm not a fan of them? Now I cant take anything YOU say serious..

1st. Yous said winshares were absurd
2nd. I asked why winshares, specifically are absurd
3rd. You said "why arent they" and called me a nerd
4th. I assumed since you couldnt tell me why that stat is stupid and responded with name calling and a question to a question, that you didnt understand it.
5th. you tried to put words in my mouth and end the conversation without ever answering the original question

what about winshares, specifically, is absurd? go

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:32 PM
Dude, you have never even made an attempt to explain why you don't like them outside the excuses. What exactly, mathematically, do you not like? If you do understand them, than demonstrate it.

Everyone here watches basketball. I will take my eye over yours anyday, and I embrace advanced stats, because its a tool that allows you to understand it even further.

You don't have to be so standoffish all the time man. I don't get why you are.

Again. Im not gonna sit here and make some long *** post as to why i dont take into account advanced stats. Im just not. There is always gonna be someone that's gonna make a longer post picking mine apart and it turns into a bickering session (Kind of like now). As for you taking your eye over mine, is that supposed to be some sort of backhanded insult? Because i would hope you take your eye over mine. You dont know me, nor do i know you. But let me guess, if I took into account advanced stats you would take me serious right? And its tool that helps YOU understand basketball even more, not me. And im not standoffish, you guys should stop being so "clicky" here.

kdspurman
01-03-2012, 05:33 PM
He's not on Kobe or Wade's level but he's really really good. Any team would be lucky to have him. The best word to describe him is crafty and he has a high basketball iq. He can create his own shot, has multiple go to moves on offense and is an above average defender. I have a lot of respect for Manu.

Just out of curiosity (no beef here just want your take) what makes it so obvious that he's not on Kobe or Wade's level?

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:33 PM
1st. Yous said winshares were absurd
2nd. I asked why winshares, specifically are absurd
3rd. You said "why arent they" and called me a nerd
4th. I assumed since you couldnt tell me why that stat is stupid and responded with name calling and a question to a question, that you didnt understand it.
5th. you tried to put words in my mouth and end the conversation without ever answering the original question

what about winshares, specifically, is absurd? go

lol.. Hey man, this guy is baiting me...

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 05:35 PM
lol.. Hey man, this guy is baiting me...

Its baiting to ask you a question about your opinion on advanced stats in an NBA forum?

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 05:35 PM
Again. Im not gonna sit here and make some long *** post as to why i dont take into account advanced stats. Im just not. There is always gonna be someone that's gonna make a longer post picking mine apart and it turns into a bickering session (Kind of like now). As for you taking your eye over mine, is that supposed to be some sort of backhanded insult? Because i would hope you take your eye over mine. You dont know me, nor do i know you. But let me guess, if I took into account advanced stats you would take me serious right? And its tool that helps YOU understand basketball even more, not me. And im not standoffish, you guys should stop being so "clicky" here.

Honestly I haven't taken you seriously at any point. I don't see anything but fights going on when you are involved, so it really never interests me.

We can be done now.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:36 PM
Honestly I haven't taken you seriously at any point. I don't see anything but fights going on when you are involved, so it really never interests me.

We can be done now.

I guess you win Hawkeye! lol @ "We can be done now". .Some of you people here just plain silly...

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:37 PM
Its baiting to ask you a question about your opinion on advanced stats in an NBA forum?

To continuously ask me, yes. Its baiting or trolling.. Whatever you guys call it...

llemon
01-03-2012, 05:38 PM
Up to a point. That point being Manu cannot effectively play as many minutes as Kobe and Wade.

beliges
01-03-2012, 05:38 PM
Actually I get the feeling that you hate them because either your favorite players are deemed inferior, or you dont understand them. But since you already said Kobe isnt your favorite I guess it cant be thew former. And i find it hard to take anything you say seriously if you decide stats like winshares are stupid, if you dont even understand how they are derived.

Actually the reason why PER and W/S are useless and incredulous arguments is because they are fabricated statistical formulas based on one person's objective numbers. These are not real statistics. Get it? They are formulas made up to further an individual person's objectives and views. These so called statistics are generated by plugging in certain numbers into a fabricated formula. A completely subjective formula if I may add. They are "fun" stats to look at, kind of like novelty stats. But dont bring in these made up numbers when youre trying to discuss a point, unless you are merely having a light hearted conversation.

RLundi
01-03-2012, 05:39 PM
In before Swash and Cronz come in here...

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 05:42 PM
To continuously ask me, yes. Its baiting or trolling.. Whatever you guys call it...

We call it trying to learn whther to respect your opinion or not. You made a vague statement and I asked to explain why you felt that way. Then you started avoiding the question and called me a nerd,

Explain what you hate about winshares, specifically, and I stop posting

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 05:42 PM
Actually the reason why PER and W/S are useless and incredulous arguments is because they are fabricated statistical formulas based on one person's objective numbers. These are not real statistics. Get it? They are formulas made up to further an individual person's objectives and views. These so called statistics are generated by plugging in certain numbers into a fabricated formula. A completely subjective formula if I may add. They are "fun" stats to look at, kind of like novelty stats. But dont bring in these made up numbers when youre trying to discuss a point, unless you are merely having a light hearted conversation.

false. They were not generated with any specific player in mind, so I never get the "intention" portion some use. They are not perfect, but they are so much stronger than reading a boxscore, its not even funny. PER does help shot creators, and you can point out a flaw individually in any stat, but when you use a complication of advanced stats versus just picking one that makes your case and going with it, they are indeed much more telling and informative as trying to use archaic per game stats or percentages.

Which specific stats do you not buy into, and why? I never get why stat haters can't really make an effort to tell anyone what EXACTLY the problem is, instead just making blanket statements.

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 05:43 PM
Actually the reason why PER and W/S are useless and incredulous arguments is because they are fabricated statistical formulas based on one person's objective numbers. These are not real statistics. Get it? They are formulas made up to further an individual person's objectives and views. These so called statistics are generated by plugging in certain numbers into a fabricated formula. A completely subjective formula if I may add. They are "fun" stats to look at, kind of like novelty stats. But dont bring in these made up numbers when youre trying to discuss a point, unless you are merely having a light hearted conversation.

Then what numbers should be brought up?

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:43 PM
Actually the reason why PER and W/S are useless and incredulous arguments is because they are fabricated statistical formulas based on one person's objective numbers. These are not real statistics. Get it? They are formulas made up to further an individual person's objectives and views. These so called statistics are generated by plugging in certain numbers into a fabricated formula. A completely subjective formula if I may add. They are "fun" stats to look at, kind of like novelty stats. But dont bring in these made up numbers when youre trying to discuss a point, unless you are merely having a light hearted conversation.

Me and my buddy used to joke that the next advanced stat would be;

1. Color of player shoes + number of fans + college he attended = Advanced Stat

beliges
01-03-2012, 05:43 PM
well, NBA front offices pay attention to these made up stats. Why don't you agree with them? No offense, but I find a lot of Kobe and Melo fans hate them, because they show MJ or LeBron being a lot better than Kobe for instance.

LOL. No front office guys take W/S into much consideration at all. Thats not true whatsoever. And W/S are not credible stats because according to them, John Stockton is better than Shaq, Magic and Duncan. Karl Malone is better than Russell and Hakeem. Reggie Miller is better than Kobe, Bird and Lebron. And the list of how inaccurate and unreliable W/S are go on and on and on. Its just not a very accurate statistic, which is expected since it is a fabricated formula by an individual based on his own subjective views. No front office personell ever take PER or W/S into significant consideration.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 05:44 PM
We call it trying to learn whther to respect your opinion or not. You made a vague statement and I asked to explain why you felt that way. Then you started avoiding the question and called me a nerd,

Explain what you hate about winshares, specifically, and I stop posting

Hows about this... Don't respect my opinion... I don't know what I'm talking about..

beliges
01-03-2012, 05:46 PM
false. They were not generated with any specific player in mind, so I never get the "intention" portion some use. They are not perfect, but they are so much stronger than reading a boxscore, its not even funny. PER does help shot creators, and you can point out a flaw individually in any stat, but when you use a complication of advanced stats versus just picking one that makes your case and going with it, they are indeed much more telling and informative as trying to use archaic per game stats or percentages.

Which specific stats do you not buy into, and why? I never get why stat haters can't really make an effort to tell anyone what EXACTLY the problem is, instead just making blanket statements.

They were subjectively generated by an individual using whatever formula he wanted to use. And as I brought up in my post above, they are significantly inaccurate. If these stats were at least somewhat accurate, then I may give them a bit of credibility. But the fact that they are inaccurate to the point that their outcomes are a joke, I will not give these made up stats much weight. I also think people that do give it much weight are highly misinformed about their true nature.

beliges
01-03-2012, 05:48 PM
Then what numbers should be brought up?

Hmmmm I dont know. Real stats? Actual numbers? How a player performs on both ends of the floor? How much success an individual player has? You know, how the player actually performs. Not fabricated stats that are severely inaccurate.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 05:48 PM
LOL. No front office guys take W/S into much consideration at all. Thats not true whatsoever. And W/S are not credible stats because according to them, John Stockton is better than Shaq, Magic and Duncan. Karl Malone is better than Russell and Hakeem. Reggie Miller is better than Kobe, Bird and Lebron. And the list of how inaccurate and unreliable W/S are go on and on and on. Its just not a very accurate statistic, which is expected since it is a fabricated formula by an individual based on his own subjective views. No front office personell ever take PER or W/S into significant consideration.

I never said anything about win shares or any specific stat man. They use advanced metrics regularly to evaluate players, rotations, trades, and scouting.

And no, you are looking at win share totals. Stockton played for 80 years, of course he will have a higher total than a bunch of guys over him. Look year by year, peak, prime, etc.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 05:49 PM
They were subjectively generated by an individual using whatever formula he wanted to use. And as I brought up in my post above, they are significantly inaccurate. If these stats were at least somewhat accurate, then I may give them a bit of credibility. But the fact that they are inaccurate to the point that their outcomes are a joke, I will not give these made up stats much weight. I also think people that do give it much weight are highly misinformed about their true nature.

You were inaccurate. I showed you why.

And I would never say player A is better than player B because of one stat. But when your eyes are having problems telling you which one is better, and you see player A has better metrics across the board than player B, its pretty easy now.

Shammyguy3
01-03-2012, 05:50 PM
well, the fact that he has never been regarded the best player on his own team (wrongfully so) and never gotten more than 31 mpg just keeps him underrated.

This.


No offense to you, but W/S and other made up statistics are not credible ways to compare players. To me, these types of stats hold no value whatsoever. They are fabricated formulas, not real statistics.
This is a ****ing perfect way of putting it when someone uses one as a be-all end-all measurement. Look at all the stats given to you.


do you want other numbers like ppg, shooting% etc? Bc those won't help your argument either. Or would you rather just be totally subjective in your argument and not base it on anything other than your opinion? If thats the case whats the point of even discussing something on a forum

Wrong. http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=bryanko01&y1=2012&p2=wadedw01&y2=2012&p3=ginobma01&y3=2012&p4=allenra02&y4=2012&p5=cartevi01&y5=2012

When comparing Manu, Kobe, Ray Allen, Wade, and Vince Carter... Manu comes in at:

ts%- 1st
efg%- 2nd
trb%- t-1st
ast%- 3rd
tov%- 4th
assist/tov ratio- 1st
usg%- 4th
ORtg- t-1st
stl%- 1st
blk%- 4th

And the same players but in the playoffs:
ts%- 2nd
efg%- 2nd
trb%- 2nd
ast%- 4th
tov%- 4th
assist/tov ratio- 4th
usg%- 4th
ORtg- 2nd
stl%- 1st
blk%- 4th


Ginobili is definitely on the level of Kobe Bryant & Dwyane Wade, and is easily better than Vince Carter and Ray Allen imo.

CostanzaNumba0
01-03-2012, 05:53 PM
They were subjectively generated by an individual using whatever formula he wanted to use. And as I brought up in my post above, they are significantly inaccurate. If these stats were at least somewhat accurate, then I may give them a bit of credibility. But the fact that they are inaccurate to the point that their outcomes are a joke, I will not give these made up stats much weight. I also think people that do give it much weight are highly misinformed about their true nature.

Well you were saying objective ina previous post, now you are saying subjective..which is it? Because one is totally wrong, another is totally right, and I'm not convinced you know the difference. Look at w/s for example, look at the guys who are single season leaders its LBJ, Kareem, MJ, Magic, Wilt..to me that looks like it correlates nicely with general opinion. It is the undervalued player that makes it so interesting, Manu for example or even someone like battier.

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 05:54 PM
Hows about this... Don't respect my opinion... I don't know what I'm talking about..

Thats what I figured

beliges
01-03-2012, 05:56 PM
You were inaccurate. I showed you why.

And I would never say player A is better than player B because of one stat. But when your eyes are having problems telling you which one is better, and you see player A has better metrics across the board than player B, its pretty easy now.

Actually Im not inaccurate whatsoever. If W/S is such a reliable stat, then how can you say that just because one person is considered to have a "higher" W/S, that doesnt mean he is a better player? Then what exactly does W/S provide for you? And furthermore, since you mentioned W/S per game, well according to W/S per 48 min, David Robinson is better than Wilt, Kareem and Magic. Neil Johnson is better than LBK, Duncan and Bird. Barkley is better than Shaq and Kobe. Chris Paul is better than Magic and Stockton. And again, the list of complete and utter inaccuracies go on and on. I dont know, but if W/S were such a reliable statistic, I would think it would be at least somewhat accurate. But the fact that its completely inaccurate takes away all significance for me. Cool, a player has a high W/S. What does that mean. When we are debating whether a certain player is better than another and a person makes the PER or W/S argument, you know they have no other piece of evidence to back up their point because usually its only PER or W/S that back up their argument. No other real numbers or stats.

rickshaw
01-03-2012, 05:56 PM
Hmmmm I dont know. Real stats? Actual numbers? How a player performs on both ends of the floor? How much success an individual player has? You know, how the player actually performs. Not fabricated stats that are severely inaccurate.

So what stats would you use?

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 06:03 PM
Actually Im not inaccurate whatsoever. If W/S is such a reliable stat, then how can you say that just because one person is considered to have a "higher" W/S, that doesnt mean he is a better player? Then what exactly does W/S provide for you? And furthermore, since you mentioned W/S per game, well according to W/S per 48 min, David Robinson is better than Wilt, Kareem and Magic. Neil Johnson is better than LBK, Duncan and Bird. Barkley is better than Shaq and Kobe. Chris Paul is better than Magic and Stockton. And again, the list of complete and utter inaccuracies go on and on. I dont know, but if W/S were such a reliable statistic, I would think it would be at least somewhat accurate. But the fact that its completely inaccurate takes away all significance for me. Cool, a player has a high W/S. What does that mean. When we are debating whether a certain player is better than another and a person makes the PER or W/S argument, you know they have no other piece of evidence to back up their point because usually its only PER or W/S that back up their argument. No other real numbers or stats.


And this is why I said you can't just say, "player A is better than player B" and post their win shares.

Here we go again (you need to research before you throw it out there). Why do you think the Admiral has a higher per/48 win share? Well, he started in the NBA as a man, and retired before his level of play slipped, something alllllll those other guys had working against them. Wilt, Kareem, and Jabbar all played late into their careers, entering "ineffective world" which drug their stats down career wise. Take MJ for instance. If he wouldn't have come back and had his Washington days drag his numbers down, they would be even higher and impressive. BUT, we can now seperate seasons and periods of time to still establish his level of play being better than anyone's.

By the way, Chris Paul may actually be a better PG than Magic or Stockton. Unfortunately, he had crap around him and never got the chance early to be deep in the playoffs. His knee will probably take that level of play away over time.

beliges
01-03-2012, 06:09 PM
Well you were saying objective ina previous post, now you are saying subjective..which is it? Because one is totally wrong, another is totally right, and I'm not convinced you know the difference. Look at w/s for example, look at the guys who are single season leaders its LBJ, Kareem, MJ, Magic, Wilt..to me that looks like it correlates nicely with general opinion. It is the undervalued player that makes it so interesting, Manu for example or even someone like battier.

SUBJECTIVE. An individual person made up a formula based on his own personal thoughts. Furthermore, look at the ALL TIME W/S leaders and the ALL TIME W/S per game leaders. The vast majority of those results are so inaccurate that it makes these stats seem like what they are, a joke.

beliges
01-03-2012, 06:15 PM
And this is why I said you can't just say, "player A is better than player B" and post their win shares.

Here we go again (you need to research before you throw it out there). Why do you think the Admiral has a higher per/48 win share? Well, he started in the NBA as a man, and retired before his level of play slipped, something alllllll those other guys had working against them. Wilt, Kareem, and Jabbar all played late into their careers, entering "ineffective world" which drug their stats down career wise. Take MJ for instance. If he wouldn't have come back and had his Washington days drag his numbers down, they would be even higher and impressive. BUT, we can now seperate seasons and periods of time to still establish his level of play being better than anyone's.

By the way, Chris Paul may actually be a better PG than Magic or Stockton. Unfortunately, he had crap around him and never got the chance early to be deep in the playoffs. His knee will probably take that level of play away over time.

First off, CP3 is no way on the same level of Magic or Stockton. Magic is a top 6 player of all time. CP3, well, he is borderline top 50. Furthermore, what you are saying is that W/S is only accurate on certain players that could not continue a high level of play year after year. And it is inaccurate for players that had longevity and continued a high level of play for many many years. I know for a fact David Robinson is not on the same level as Kareem or Wilt. However, according to W/S, he is better. Or at least he has a higher W/S. Sorry, but MJ is considered the best player to ever play the game because not only does he have the highest PPG, meaning he is the best scorer ever, but he also is the greatest winner in the modern era of basketball. It has nothing to do with his W/S or his PER. Again, a statistic generated by some individual person's subjectively fabricated formula holds no weight to me. You may have a different opinion on this, and thats fine. But just understand how completely inaccurate these types of stats are.

Shammyguy3
01-03-2012, 06:18 PM
Chris Paul had arguably the best statistical season of any PG in the history of the NBA in 08/09 when he was healthy.

Chris Paul, if he maintains his level of play from the past 4 seasons, can go down better than any PG ever to play. Go look at his numbers. They're ridiculous.

Joshtd1
01-03-2012, 06:20 PM
I've watched Manu his whole Spurs career and as much as I love him he just isn't durable enough to be considered on Kobe and Wade's level. In terms of actual skill and talent..then yes, but him being injury prone and not as athletic as them keeps him back from them a bit.

He is arguably just as good of a passer as them, better 3 point shooter, and he is a damn good defender. The way we use him though Manu is basically a 6'6 PG playing the SG spot. Again though, he wasn't as athletically gifted as Kobe or Wade or VC or even Allen in his prime I believe. If he had that athleticism he would for sure be in competition for best SG (of his era)

And Hawk I agree with you, Harden reminds me exactly of Manu. Like 100%, its kind of weird.

beliges
01-03-2012, 06:21 PM
Chris Paul had arguably the best statistical season of any PG in the history of the NBA in 08/09 when he was healthy.

Chris Paul, if he maintains his level of play from the past 4 seasons, can go down better than any PG ever to play. Go look at his numbers. They're ridiculous.

Chris Paul has no chance whatsover to ever come remotely close to passing Magic. Not in this world, not in your world, not in any world. Sorry.

Joshtd1
01-03-2012, 06:22 PM
And fwiw, I don't think his efficiency would go down that much if he played 5 extra MPG. If anything his usage would go up, but he isn't just a pure scorer and since he runs the pick and roll so much, I doubt he would even get that many extra shots up in those extra 5 mins. Just my opinion though

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 06:23 PM
First off, CP3 is no way on the same level of Magic or Stockton. Magic is a top 6 player of all time. CP3, well, he is borderline top 50. Furthermore, what you are saying is that W/S is only accurate on certain players that could not continue a high level of play year after year. And it is inaccurate for players that had longevity and continued a high level of play for many many years. I know for a fact David Robinson is not on the same level as Kareem or Wilt. However, according to W/S, he is better. Or at least he has a higher W/S. Sorry, but MJ is considered the best player to ever play the game because not only does he have the highest PPG, meaning he is the best scorer ever, but he also is the greatest winner in the modern era of basketball. It has nothing to do with his W/S or his PER. Again, a statistic generated by some individual person's subjectively fabricated formula holds no weight to me. You may have a different opinion on this, and thats fine. But just understand how completely inaccurate these types of stats are.

The reason you don't like them is you don't know how to use them. You have proven that in the last 3 posts we have discussed.

I just told you why David Robinson has a higher WS/48 than players better than him, but you bypass it and tell me the same crap dude.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 06:24 PM
Chris Paul has no chance whatsover to ever come remotely close to passing Magic. Not in this world, not in your world, not in any world. Sorry.

not with his knee. But if he had a good knee, he sure as hell could be the best PG of all time if given the right team to make some playoff runs. His numbers from 07-09' take a dump on any PG that ever played.

beliges
01-03-2012, 06:39 PM
The reason you don't like them is you don't know how to use them. You have proven that in the last 3 posts we have discussed.

I just told you why David Robinson has a higher WS/48 than players better than him, but you bypass it and tell me the same crap dude.

You said Robinson has a higher W/S because he came into the league as the man and didnt play for long. Thats not remotely a good enough reason for David Robinson to be ahead of guys in reality he is not even remotely close to.

And CP3's 07-09 compaign is nowhere as good as the majority of Stockton's or Magic's seasons. CP3 is a great PG in today's NBA, but as far as ALL TIME PGs, sorry but his numbers and accomplishment are nowhere near guys like Stockton and Magic.

cubbies7177
01-03-2012, 06:49 PM
Not close to being at Kobe's or Wade's superstar level. The guy was hardly an allstar. He was the 4th best SG when Barandon Roy was 100% healthy and is currently 3rd for a short time until Eric Gordon will pass him next year.

WTF does "superstar" mean to you? Manu is hardly an All-Star? Have you ever seen him play or did you.... start... watching basketball last year because of the Heat? Manu is an established killer - he can finish a game and adds an unpredictable element to your offense because he's so non-traditional.

He can shoot 3's, make the "superstar" moves in the paint, has incredible vision, and is a proven winner and champion... to say he's not a "superstar" means that you are looking for a celebrity more than a basketball player.

He absolutely is a superstar... top 10 all time, probably not. But, in today's age, he's definitely developed into one of the greats of his era.

Heat fans are so starry-eyed. They don't see anything past superstars...

PrettyBoyJ
01-03-2012, 06:55 PM
I def can ball at high level like Kobe and Wade.. And he's ver versatile I think he goes un-noticed because of the role he played for years.. If he was the main guy in his prime he could easily put up 25-28 ppg

rhymeratic
01-03-2012, 07:02 PM
Manu is a good player that plays in the PERFECT system for him.

Sometimes these questions... but I understand they must be coming from a younger poster.

If you ever want to answer a question like this... take player X and say to yourself would player X be just as dominant or even more so if he played on another random team in the league OR if he played for one of the comparison player A/B/C's teams.

That should give you your answer right away.

Kobe = Was on a COMPLETELY separate playing level than everyone else for several years.

Lebron = Just as dominant as he was in Cleveland
D-Wade = He can still get his numbers on a number of bad teams but can't WILL them to win.

Shammyguy3
01-03-2012, 07:04 PM
Chris Paul has no chance whatsover to ever come remotely close to passing Magic. Not in this world, not in your world, not in any world. Sorry.

Sorry, it's so close that it is possible, in any world.

Here are John Stockton's, Magic Johnson's, and Chris Paul's career comparison numbers:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=stockjo01&y1=2003&p2=johnsma02&y2=1996&p3=paulch01&y3=2012

He's certainly right there, ESPECIALLY when you factor in what teammates they have had to play with. Chris Paul has had David West & Tyson Chandler. John Stockton had Karl Malone under Jerry Sloan. And Magic Johnson had Kareem Abdul-Jabar, James Worthy, Byron Scott.

There is absolutely an argument that one can make for Chris Paul being on their levels.

beliges
01-03-2012, 07:20 PM
Sorry, it's so close that it is possible, in any world.

Here are John Stockton's, Magic Johnson's, and Chris Paul's career comparison numbers:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=stockjo01&y1=2003&p2=johnsma02&y2=1996&p3=paulch01&y3=2012

He's certainly right there, ESPECIALLY when you factor in what teammates they have had to play with. Chris Paul has had David West & Tyson Chandler. John Stockton had Karl Malone under Jerry Sloan. And Magic Johnson had Kareem Abdul-Jabar, James Worthy, Byron Scott.

There is absolutely an argument that one can make for Chris Paul being on their levels.

When you look at their peak years, CP3 is not anywhere near better than Stockton and Magic. When you look at accomplishments, CP3 has not accomplished anything near Magic. When you factor in longevity, CP3 has nothing on Stockton. Maybe if CP3 plays for another 10+ years and dominated throughout, he may have a shot at passing Stockton.

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 08:38 PM
NYKAlltheway and Beasted are two advanced stats naysayers whose opinion I really respect on this topic. Reason being? They actually have done research on the stats and how they are calculated and what they represent and have formulated an opinion based on factual understanding (and a bit of misconception) of what the stats are displaying. Other guys who wont even attempt to say why they dislike the stats (because they CLEARLY don't have the faintest idea how they work) just result to insulting those who have an understanding bashing the stats because of a player's rank in a respective area.

All each stat says is which player is better than which in whatever given category. Absolutely NO advanced stats fan/expert would ever tell you that because John Stockton has more career WS than Shaq that he's a better player or that because Manu has a better career TS% that he's a more complete scorer than MJ. However those who don't even care to try to understand the stats would say just that. It's sad really at the more knowledgeable among us actually take the time to try to understand what the stats say before they bash them, which is why you can actually hold a debate with them. Other guys :pity:

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 08:42 PM
You said Robinson has a higher W/S because he came into the league as the man and didnt play for long. Thats not remotely a good enough reason for David Robinson to be ahead of guys in reality he is not even remotely close to.

And CP3's 07-09 compaign is nowhere as good as the majority of Stockton's or Magic's seasons. CP3 is a great PG in today's NBA, but as far as ALL TIME PGs, sorry but his numbers and accomplishment are nowhere near guys like Stockton and Magic.

You have to be kidding me. Look at Robinson's WS/48, year by year. He retired before his decline stage killed his stats. The others you listed played long enough for their absolute decline to hurt their numbers. I really don't know how to spell it out differently.

As for your second paragraph, I will have a MUCH easier time proving my view than you will yours. Paul's peak seasons are better as an individual than Magic or Stockton ever put up. Unfortunately, he didn't have Kareem, Worthy, Scott, Malone, Hornacek, Sloan, or Riley around.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 08:48 PM
When you look at their peak years, CP3 is not anywhere near better than Stockton and Magic. When you look at accomplishments, CP3 has not accomplished anything near Magic. When you factor in longevity, CP3 has nothing on Stockton. Maybe if CP3 plays for another 10+ years and dominated throughout, he may have a shot at passing Stockton.

completely untrue. In fact Paul's peak season takes a **** on Magic and Stockton's peak season.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=johnsma02&y1=1987&p2=stockjo01&y2=1989&p3=paulch01&y3=2009

Paul's season here is better than anything Magic or Stockton put up (I pulled their best statistical seasons).

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 08:50 PM
This is why i get irritated with you people here about advanced stats. Because you want others to do what you do when it comes to taking in the game. I got NBA league pass. I watch players play, make cuts, take good shots, run offenses, play help defense, rebound correctly, etc. That's how I gauge a player. Advanced stats say nothing about Allen Iversons heart or will to win. You've admitted to having a particular view on a player, then changing it after learning advanced stats... lol.. That boggles my mind. If you know the game, then you know the game.

Did you have league pass when Oscar Robertson played? Did you watch him make cuts, play help defense, run offenses, take good shots? How about Bob Cousy or Bill Russel?

Tell me something when you very first started following the game of basketball and you saw that Oscar averaged a triple double in one season what did you think? Didn't you think this guy HAS to be a top 5 player all time or how about when you saw that Elgin Baylor averaged 38 and 18 in a single season. Didn't you think OMG this guy has to be one of the greatest ever certain top 10 no way guys like modern day players could compare to those guys. Over time now haven't you learned to put those players in perspective? Well you really want to learn to gain a complete understanding of what they did and didn't do learn what advanced stats tell us and do some work of your own. You'd really be able to appreciate what these guys did for the game.

Of course you wouldn't however because that would make you a nerd right. PS myself, Hawkeye, Chronz, PSK (who makes his living off of his knowledge of sports and stats), Tredigs, Corey, Roshan, Bruno, etc all have league pass, watch players play, make cuts, take good shots, run offenses, play help defense, rebound correctly etc but what they also do is couple that with their comprehensive understanding of stats both basic and advanced, the fact that they read reviews, previews and reports and actually have an unbiased and open mind towards the game.

If you so love Basketball (sports on a whole) you'd at least be willing to open your mind to its advancements rather than being such a troll and attacking anyone who does. You don't have to like the stats hell you can hate them that's fine but until you actually have a clue what you're talking about never attack us for knowing things about the game that you're not even attempting to give your brain the chance to comprehend.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 08:56 PM
Did you have league pass when Oscar Robertson played? Did you watch him make cuts, play help defense, run offenses, take good shots? How about Bob Cousy or Bill Russel?

Tell me something when you very first started following the game of basketball and you saw that Oscar averaged a triple double in one season what did you think? Didn't you think this guy HAS to be a top 5 player all time or how about when you saw that Elgin Baylor averaged 38 and 18 in a single season. Didn't you think OMG this guy has to be one of the greatest ever certain top 10 no way guys like modern day players could compare to those guys. Over time now haven't you learned to put those players in perspective? Well you really want to learn to gain a complete understanding of what they did and didn't do learn what advanced stats tell us and do some work of your own. You'd really be able to appreciate what these guys did for the game.

Of course you wouldn't however because that would make you a nerd right. PS myself, Hawkeye, Chronz, PSK (who makes his living off of his knowledge of sports and stats), Tredigs, Corey, Roshan, Bruno, etc all have league pass, watch players play, make cuts, take good shots, run offenses, play help defense, rebound correctly etc but what they also do is couple that with their comprehensive understanding of stats both basic and advanced, the fact that they read reviews, previews and reports and actually have an unbiased and open mind towards the game.

If you so love Basketball (sports on a whole) you'd at least be willing to open your mind to its advancements rather than being such a troll and attacking anyone who does. You don't have to like the stats hell you can hate them that's fine but until you actually have a clue what you're talking about never attack us for knowing things about the game that you're not even attempting to give your brain the chance to comprehend.

Im not responding back to this condescending, passive aggressive ********.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 08:59 PM
I honestly can't believe you wasted all that time Swashcuff, you should have known that would be his response.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 09:03 PM
I honestly can't believe you wasted all that time Swashcuff, you should have known that would be his response.

I honestly cant believe it either.

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 09:16 PM
I honestly can't believe you wasted all that time Swashcuff, you should have known that would be his response.

Wasn't just to him it was in general. He'd never respond to any sensible post we know that already.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 09:19 PM
Wasn't just to him it was in general. He'd never respond to any sensible post we know that already.

It wasn't sensible at all.. It was aggressive and condescending. That's the way your click gets your point across about advanced stats. Like you have to MAKE people believe in them. And dont ask me who's in the click because you named them in your post.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 09:28 PM
haha, and you actually claimed to not be standoffish dude.

Swashcuff
01-03-2012, 09:32 PM
It wasn't sensible at all.. It was aggressive and condescending. That's the way your click gets your point across about advanced stats. Like you have to MAKE people believe in them. And dont ask me who's in the click because you named them in your post.

Sure and you calling all of us nerds isn't right? Don't even answer that because I'm done with you in this thread we're steering way off course back to the topic.

Manu isn't on Wade's or Kobe's level but he's unique in the sense that he's one of the most overrated and one of the most underrated players IMO. Sounds crazy but some think he isn't even better than Richard Hamilton and then there are those that think he's not only on their level but better than Kobe and Wade (never seen anyone said it here but I've seen it said by someone who knows a thing or two about the game).

_KB24_
01-03-2012, 09:35 PM
He's a magician on the floor, but sadly injuries have turned him into a "disappearing act" throughout his career. On his best day, he can bang with anyone else in the league.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 09:40 PM
lol@ him getting offended because i called him a sports nerd....

Law25
01-03-2012, 09:53 PM
well, NBA front offices pay attention to these made up stats. Why don't you agree with them? No offense, but I find a lot of Kobe and Melo fans hate them, because they show MJ or LeBron being a lot better than Kobe for instance.

I call b.s on this. I dont like them becuase they hold no true value. They say Lebron is alot better than Kobe now or have ever been and yet he never wins the prize at the end of the year. If Lebron was truly better than Bryant than why on gods green earth is Lebron 0-2 in the finals? If he gets Jordan type calls from refs and he's as good as all those stats say he is then why no ring? Is it still his teammates fault? This is not a Lebron bashing and Kobe praising from me either. This is why advance stats dont hold alot of water for me. You cant use only stats to measure ones greatness and will power. Lebron is in my opinion not on Kobe's level becuase he to this point lacks will power. Lebron averages 2pts 2ast and 2rebs better than Kobe despite all of what advance stats will tell you and I'll still take Kobe ahead of him becuase he's a better winner by far.

Lebron career
27.7pts 7.1rebs 7.0ast 1.7stls ( 0-2 finals)

Kobe career
25.3pts 5.3rebs 4.7ast 1.5stls ( 5-7 finals 2 Finals MVP)

smith&wesson
01-03-2012, 10:01 PM
gino is the man. i dunno about kobe good. but he is sick wit it.

Law25
01-03-2012, 10:14 PM
Oh and I hate Manu's game to the core but respect his play tremendously on the court. I know it sounds crazy but I hate him flopping so damn much and not getting called for it, but he's as clutch as they come and has an high skill set, but he is in no way on Kobe and Wade's level and he has never been. He should have the record for 6th man of the year awards though by far, but thats just my opinion.

Kashmir13579
01-03-2012, 10:25 PM
Post some stats. He is in some ways - better.

Chronz
01-03-2012, 10:45 PM
lol, Im in a click?

Coaches/GM's/Statisticians (hired by those same GM's) dont use advanced stats?


Wheres the green font?

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 10:46 PM
I call b.s on this. I dont like them becuase they hold no true value. They say Lebron is alot better than Kobe now or have ever been and yet he never wins the prize at the end of the year. If Lebron was truly better than Bryant than why on gods green earth is Lebron 0-2 in the finals? If he gets Jordan type calls from refs and he's as good as all those stats say he is then why no ring? Is it still his teammates fault? This is not a Lebron bashing and Kobe praising from me either. This is why advance stats dont hold alot of water for me. You cant use only stats to measure ones greatness and will power. Lebron is in my opinion not on Kobe's level becuase he to this point lacks will power. Lebron averages 2pts 2ast and 2rebs better than Kobe despite all of what advance stats will tell you and I'll still take Kobe ahead of him becuase he's a better winner by far.

Lebron career
27.7pts 7.1rebs 7.0ast 1.7stls ( 0-2 finals)

Kobe career
25.3pts 5.3rebs 4.7ast 1.5stls ( 5-7 finals 2 Finals MVP)


you kinda proved my theory...

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 10:50 PM
lol, Im in a click?

Coaches/GM's/Statisticians (hired by those same GM's) dont use advanced stats?


Wheres the green font?

Yea because no other sports forum I go to puts this much merit in advanced stats. They are acknowledged but no one claims to win arguments off of them. That's why i dont get into debates about them here. Its pointless.

Chronz
01-03-2012, 10:52 PM
I call b.s on this. I dont like them becuase they hold no true value. They say Lebron is alot better than Kobe now or have ever been and yet he never wins the prize at the end of the year. If Lebron was truly better than Bryant than why on gods green earth is Lebron 0-2 in the finals? If he gets Jordan type calls from refs and he's as good as all those stats say he is then why no ring? Is it still his teammates fault? This is not a Lebron bashing and Kobe praising from me either. This is why advance stats dont hold alot of water for me. You cant use only stats to measure ones greatness and will power. Lebron is in my opinion not on Kobe's level becuase he to this point lacks will power. Lebron averages 2pts 2ast and 2rebs better than Kobe despite all of what advance stats will tell you and I'll still take Kobe ahead of him becuase he's a better winner by far.

Lebron career
27.7pts 7.1rebs 7.0ast 1.7stls ( 0-2 finals)

Kobe career
25.3pts 5.3rebs 4.7ast 1.5stls ( 5-7 finals 2 Finals MVP)

Really bro, by far??

And why are you posting stats if you just said you dont care for them?

Chronz
01-03-2012, 10:57 PM
Yea because no other sports forum I go to puts this much merit in advanced stats. They are acknowledged but no one claims to win arguments off of them. That's why i dont get into debates about them here. Its pointless.
Really because that never happens in any of the sports forums I frequent.

As for how much stock is put into them, thats your opinion, one that is pretty hard to substantiate so I wont comment but there are lots of debates you wont engage in. Statistical or not.

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 11:09 PM
Really because that never happens in any of the sports forums I frequent.

As for how much stock is put into them, thats your opinion, one that is pretty hard to substantiate so I wont comment but there are lots of debates you wont engage in. Statistical or not.

Yea pretty much every debate here ends with someone from the click throwing in W/S or PER. I used to fall for that back when i first came to this site, but i know better now. But really its not a big deal. Obviously you people believe that your smarter when it comes to basketball related topics because you live and die by Advanced stats. Well that might not be fair, but someone here told me they give it a 75/25 ratio. Its think that's ludicrous. Any stat, advanced or otherwise shouldn't hold that much bearing when evaluating a player that plays a team game.

Chronz
01-03-2012, 11:17 PM
Yea pretty much every debate here ends with someone from the click throwing in W/S or PER.
We are talking about PSD right? I dont see what your seeing. Certainly not any different from every where else.


I used to fall for that back when i first came to this site, but i know better now. But really its not a big deal. Obviously you people believe that your smarter when it comes to basketball related topics because you live and die by Advanced stats. Well that might not be fair, but someone here told me they give it a 75/25 ratio. Its think that's ludicrous. Any stat, advanced or otherwise shouldn't hold that much bearing when evaluating a player that plays a team game.
Out of curiosity, what is an acceptable split? 25/75?

Can I say a player is an efficient scorer despite mountains of evidence to the contrary if I say I know what I saw? Stats be damned.

Can you show me a single post from a member of your click that has done what you describe?

Law25
01-03-2012, 11:25 PM
you kinda proved my theory...

Maye I missed something. Unless your theory is advance stats are pointless when determining a players greatness than i have know clue of what your talking about lol

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 11:26 PM
Maye I missed something. Unless your theory is advance stats are pointless when determining a players greatness than i have know clue of what your talking about lol

haha, dude, you KNOW I am a huge fan of advanced stats. You indeed read it wrong son!

nickdymez
01-03-2012, 11:27 PM
We are talking about PSD right? I dont see what your seeing.

Then your blind. It goes on here everyday.


Out of curiosity, what is an acceptable split? 25/75?

In my opinion? 60/40. Stats being 40% obviously. If your putting 75% of your player research on stats, then your conceding to the fact that you dont know basketball and are a better mathematician.


Can I say a player is an efficient scorer despite mountains of evidence if I say I know what I saw? Stats be damned.

Of course you can.. If your scouting a player and watch him play every game, then you know if the guy is efficient or not. Is this a trick question? Are you saying if you watch the guy play one game? I dont get what your trying to pull here..


Can you show me a single post from a member of your click that has done what you describe?

Not sure i know what this means either.. I've never claimed to have a click.

Law25
01-03-2012, 11:28 PM
Really bro, by far??

And why are you posting stats if you just said you dont care for them?

Yes by far. 0-2 and 5-7 is by far. And my point is advance stats dosent do it for me. I understand you need some stats to keep things in perspective. Thats why I didnt say Manu is better than Lebron becuase hes a better winner, get it?

beasted86
01-03-2012, 11:30 PM
Against the overwhelming PSD opinion... Give me Joe Johnson over Manu.

Better defender, and more versatile as he can slide over to SF and the team won't miss a beat. Also feel he's a better isolation scorer.

Hawkeye15
01-03-2012, 11:39 PM
Against the overwhelming PSD opinion... Give me Joe Johnson over Manu.

Better defender, and more versatile as he can slide over to SF and the team won't miss a beat. Also feel he's a better isolation scorer.

He is better until it matters.

rhymeratic
01-03-2012, 11:52 PM
He is better until it matters.

Yeah I'd say Manu is the better player in the clutch.

Chronz
01-04-2012, 12:39 AM
Yes by far. 0-2 and 5-7 is by far.
Too simplistic, by this logic you could argue Paul Pierce being a better "Winner" than Bron. Or Tony Parker and his 3-0 Finals vs Jason Kidd and his 1-3 record, or even better, Nash's 0/0.

While what Im saying is technically true, it only signifies how irrelevant of a barometer that is for the individual. Only 2 teams make the Finals, only 1 wins it all, that doesnt mean the only winners in the NBA are comprised of champions.

You have to have more consistent aspects of a players career to consider.



And my point is advance stats dosent do it for me. I understand you need some stats to keep things in perspective.
OK, what Im wondering is what makes you think your perspective is of more importance than those in the business? Why should anyone take your values of what stats are deemed acceptable over those who actually research the matter?


Thats why I didnt say Manu is better than Lebron becuase hes a better winner, get it?
No I dont but thats not your fault, here let me give you an example using the same information you gave me.

Player A: (1 Ring 1/2 Finals)
21.0PPG - 12.5REB - 1.8 AST - 2.0 BLKS

Player B: (0-2 Finals)
25PPG -10REB -3.6 Ast - .8 BLKS

What exactly would your stats tell me?

Chronz
01-04-2012, 12:49 AM
Then your blind. It goes on here everyday.

Has it gone on in this very thread?


In my opinion? 60/40. Stats being 40% obviously. If your putting 75% of your player research on stats, then your conceding to the fact that you dont know basketball and are a better mathematician.

Well assuming you had a point, what do you make of the fact that the NBA is actually hiring those mathematicians at a pretty rapid pace? Wouldnt someone who can actually measure quantifiable aspects of the game know more about the game than guys who think they know what they see?

As it is, you have no point, it was a rhetorical question, you dont see the glaring contradiction in attempting to quantify aspects you claim to be INTANGIBLE in nature. You cant give any % off the top of your *** with absolutely no research and expect it to fly. Not in your "clicks" house... lol


Of course you can.. If your scouting a player and watch him play every game, then you know if the guy is efficient or not. Is this a trick question? Are you saying if you watch the guy play one game? I dont get what your trying to pull here..

Really? LMFAO OK

Lets play this game, name me just 5 players you claim to have "scouted", I will ask you questions regarding how they fared in several categories. "Open 3's", Shots off the PnR, efficiency in ISO/POST set, or whatever else you think your computer like mind can adequately rank.



Not sure i know what this means either.. I've never claimed to have a click.

None of us have claimed ownership of this click, since your the one who conjured it up, I will refer to it as your click. I can call it your imaginary click if you wish.

Chronz
01-04-2012, 12:58 AM
Against the overwhelming PSD opinion... Give me Joe Johnson over Manu.

Better defender, and more versatile as he can slide over to SF and the team won't miss a beat. Also feel he's a better isolation scorer.
What do you think of Manus playoff performances vs JJ?

lakersfan01
01-04-2012, 01:03 AM
>Kobe, <Wade

nickdymez
01-04-2012, 04:03 AM
Has it gone on in this very thread?


Well assuming you had a point, what do you make of the fact that the NBA is actually hiring those mathematicians at a pretty rapid pace? Wouldnt someone who can actually measure quantifiable aspects of the game know more about the game than guys who think they know what they see?

As it is, you have no point, it was a rhetorical question, you dont see the glaring contradiction in attempting to quantify aspects you claim to be INTANGIBLE in nature. You cant give any % off the top of your *** with absolutely no research and expect it to fly. Not in your "clicks" house... lol


Really? LMFAO OK

Lets play this game, name me just 5 players you claim to have "scouted", I will ask you questions regarding how they fared in several categories. "Open 3's", Shots off the PnR, efficiency in ISO/POST set, or whatever else you think your computer like mind can adequately rank.



None of us have claimed ownership of this click, since your the one who conjured it up, I will refer to it as your click. I can call it your imaginary click if you wish.

lol.. Im not gonna do this with you man. I see you doing this **** all the time. I spoke my piece. You wanna continue to argue with me like a woman. You keep giving me scenarios that you want me to explain so you can call me dumb because i dont give two ***** about advanced stats, yet I still enjoy the game of basketball immensely. You win.. By the way, your boy swash(whatever) named all of the people in the "Click" scroll up and read it...
"we can be done now".

Raps18-19 Champ
01-04-2012, 12:07 PM
^Is that your comeback for everything?

"You ague like a woman".


This is your tax money at work America. This is the type of man you send to "war". I'm not from America but I'm sure they don't let 13 year old join the army.

But on a serious note. At least have some self respect man. These guys put their lives on the line. Don't mock it by faking that you have been to war and put your name alongside other war personnel.

nickdymez
01-04-2012, 12:23 PM
^Is that your comeback for everything?

"You ague like a woman".


This is your tax money at work America. This is the type of man you send to "war". I'm not from America but I'm sure they don't let 13 year old join the army.

But on a serious note. At least have some self respect man. These guys put their lives on the line. Don't mock it by faking that you have been to war and put your name alongside other war personnel.

lol.. Calm down man... Your taking this to serious

Chronz
01-04-2012, 01:47 PM
Whats all this war talk about?




lol.. Im not gonna do this with you man. I see you doing this **** all the time. I spoke my piece. You wanna continue to argue with me like a woman. You keep giving me scenarios that you want me to explain so you can call me dumb because i dont give two ***** about advanced stats, yet I still enjoy the game of basketball immensely. You win.. By the way, your boy swash(whatever) named all of the people in the "Click" scroll up and read it...
"we can be done now".

What am I doing? Asking you to defend your claims, yea thats pretty much the point of these forums to me. You claim not to need stats on the basis that you "Scout" players, meaning you can accurately pin point a players strengths and weaknesses relative to the league. Which is a statement that reeks of hubris to me, so I want to put your computer like mind to the test. Im only asking for 5 players. If thats not what you meant then what are you getting at when you say you dont need stats?

LOL at you knowing where this "scenario" is leading, the fact that you use technical terms like "Scouting" is what opens you up for criticism. Your not scouting anything, your ENJOYING the game of basketball, and Im absolutely positive you love it as much as I do, but you are NOT SCOUTING it. Scouts keep track of information in various forms, statistics play a large part in what teams do now a days to track player performance.

We do not have the tools they do, but that isnt to say we should stick to the most outdated of stats.

Kashmir13579
01-04-2012, 02:29 PM
Whats all this war talk about?





What am I doing? Asking you to defend your claims, yea thats pretty much the point of these forums to me. You claim not to need stats on the basis that you "Scout" players, meaning you can accurately pin point a players strengths and weaknesses relative to the league. Which is a statement that reeks of hubris to me, so I want to put your computer like mind to the test. Im only asking for 5 players. If thats not what you meant then what are you getting at when you say you dont need stats?

LOL at you knowing where this "scenario" is leading, the fact that you use technical terms like "Scouting" is what opens you up for criticism. Your not scouting anything, your ENJOYING the game of basketball, and Im absolutely positive you love it as much as I do, but you are NOT SCOUTING it. Scouts keep track of information in various forms, statistics play a large part in what teams do now a days to track player performance. We do not have the tools they do, but that isnt to say we should stick to the most outdated of stats.

Stern... but fair.

Kashmir13579
01-04-2012, 02:36 PM
He is better until it matters.

Am i missing something? IMO, Joe Johnson's peak seasons don't come close to some of Manu's worst seasons.

nickdymez
01-04-2012, 02:57 PM
Whats all this war talk about?





What am I doing? Asking you to defend your claims, yea thats pretty much the point of these forums to me. You claim not to need stats on the basis that you "Scout" players, meaning you can accurately pin point a players strengths and weaknesses relative to the league. Which is a statement that reeks of hubris to me, so I want to put your computer like mind to the test. Im only asking for 5 players. If thats not what you meant then what are you getting at when you say you dont need stats?

LOL at you knowing where this "scenario" is leading, the fact that you use technical terms like "Scouting" is what opens you up for criticism. Your not scouting anything, your ENJOYING the game of basketball, and Im absolutely positive you love it as much as I do, but you are NOT SCOUTING it. Scouts keep track of information in various forms, statistics play a large part in what teams do now a days to track player performance.

We do not have the tools they do, but that isnt to say we should stick to the most outdated of stats.

I was in the military for 13 years (Active duty 10, contractor for 3). I was telling that guy in another thread. Well eluded to it in another thread anyway. He's saying someone thats been on 4 deployments (like myself) should conduct themselves in a more respectable manner on a sports forum. I laugh at that. My point to him was this has nothing to do with war. Am i a little over spoken on here? Maybe. Its no big deal. Im sure you didnt lose any sleep worrying about how i would reply. I mean we are talking about Stats. lol.

nickdymez
01-04-2012, 03:12 PM
And to your point. If you want to nitpick my choice of words to prove your argument to be correct, so be it. I'm not a scout, sorry if i led you to believe that. But i do have opinions on players. If my favorite team were about to acquire a player, i would know something about that guy based on what I've seen from him. His stats wouldn't tell me how he is gonna fit in with the players on my favorite team. If Kevin Love went to the Magic and played with Dwight Howard, im not going to think he is going to average 15 boards a game. Thats a small point, but you get what mi saying. Stats don't tell you how someone does what they do, they just tell you what the outcome is. It doesn't tell a scheme that a team is running. Artest was almost invisible in the triangle offense, now he's getting back to forum in another offense. Just a small example.

Bravo95
01-04-2012, 04:18 PM
Manu's the #3 SG behind Bryant and Wade, IMO. Better than Prime Joe and Roy.