PDA

View Full Version : Is CP3 still the best PG after tonight?



Pages : [1] 2

creamed corn
05-16-2012, 12:14 AM
Chris Paul was absolutely terrible tonight, and he has to play much better if the Clippers want a chance in this series. Putting the multiple regular season beatdowns aside, DRose would never all this kind of loss against the spurs. Rose is clearly better than Paul when healthy.

bucketss
05-16-2012, 12:15 AM
Chris Paul was absolutely terrible tonight, and he has to play much better if the Clippers want a chance in this series. Putting the multiple regular season beatdowns aside, DRose would never all this kind of loss against the spurs. Rose is clearly better than Paul when healthy.

chris paul is the best pg in the nba.


im waiting .__.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:16 AM
LOL the same Rose that struggled vs Miami (the team that didnt win the Finals) and shot in the teens in the 4th quarter? Anyone stupid enough to rank a player off of 1 game doesnt have a dick so quit lying.

flea
05-16-2012, 12:17 AM
Please cut your dick off because not only is he the best, it's not even really close (unlike SG, SF, and PF which are close). Positionally there is no questioning that Howard is the best center and CP3 is the best PG.

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 12:17 AM
sound like you want to do it, sicko.

kozelkid
05-16-2012, 12:18 AM
Please cut your dick off because not only is he the best, it's not even really close (unlike SG, SF, and PF which are close). Positionally there is no questioning that Howard is the best center and CP3 is the best PG.

Are you high?

How is Lebron vs Durant any closer than Paul vs Rose?

As far as OP goes, cut your dick off, bro.

chi-townlove1
05-16-2012, 12:19 AM
LOL the same Rose that struggled vs Miami (the team that didnt win the Finals)

Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:19 AM
Cp3 is the best point guard.

creamed corn
05-16-2012, 12:20 AM
Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.

The hatred flows through the blood in their eyes and constricts them. They just can't see the truth through all the hate.

mvb815
05-16-2012, 12:20 AM
cp3 is the best pg in the world

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:21 AM
Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.

:facepalm:

flea
05-16-2012, 12:21 AM
Are you high?

How is Lebron vs Durant any closer than Paul vs Rose?

As far as OP goes, cut your dick off, bro.

I take it you're a Bulls fan, because Rose is basically the same player as Russell Westbrook and you'd be kidding yourself if you think that's more valuable than CP3. Lebron versus Durant is actually pretty close, but that's a testament to Durant's skill more than anything since Lebron is unquestionably the best in the game.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:22 AM
The hatred flows through the blood in their eyes and constricts them. They just can't see the truth through all the hate.

Aren't you supposed to be in the hospital by now?

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 12:23 AM
LOL what is this joker up to

Giraffes Rule
05-16-2012, 12:23 AM
Yes, he still is. Spurs made a concentrated effort to shut him down, just as the Clippers made a concentrated effort to shut Tony Parker down. This is the playoffs, that's how it works.

SpaceJamJordans
05-16-2012, 12:23 AM
YEAH BECAUSE HE'S SUPPOSE TO BE PERFECT AND EVERYTHING. HE'S SUPPOSE TO BE FLAWLESS. YEAAAAAAAAAH.

you're such a noob

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:24 AM
I take it you're a Bulls fan, because Rose is basically the same player as Russell Westbrook and you'd be kidding yourself if you think that's more valuable than CP3. Lebron versus Durant is actually pretty close, but that's a testament to Durant's skill more than anything since Lebron is unquestionably the best in the game.

Honestly Cp3 vs Rose is alot closer then Bron and KD.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:24 AM
its the Spurs.. nuff said. Rose has never sniffed Paul and neither has Deron Williams or any other PG for that matter

Donuts365
05-16-2012, 12:24 AM
start cutting

bucketss
05-16-2012, 12:24 AM
Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.

lol nice excuse, atleast say he was inexperienced wth

kozelkid
05-16-2012, 12:24 AM
I take it you're a Bulls fan, because Rose is basically the same player as Russell Westbrook and you'd be kidding yourself if you think that's more valuable than CP3. Lebron versus Durant is actually pretty close, but that's a testament to Durant's skill more than anything since Lebron is unquestionably the best in the game.

Statistically you have no evidence to suggest Durant is any closer to Lebron than Rose is to Paul. I have always acknowledged that Paul is better Rose. However, it isn't nearly as much as a 100% healthy and prime Paul once was nor is it any more than Lebron versus Durant.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:25 AM
Honestly Cp3 vs Rose is alot closer then Bron and KD.

Yes but thats only because Lebron is an absolute animal. Doesnt mean Rose is even in the same stratosphee

Punk
05-16-2012, 12:26 AM
Paul went 3/13 tonight, Parker went 1/9? How does that automatically make him not the best just off a bad game?

Clippers were at the bottom of the West, they are 5th in the West and in the 2nd round with the addition of Chris Paul.

C'mon son. Paul is #1. Rose isn't close either.

SpaceJamJordans
05-16-2012, 12:28 AM
The Bulls didn't even need Rose during the season for them to get the best record

Swashcuff
05-16-2012, 12:30 AM
Could people stop saying it isn't close. Rose has certainly closed the gap on Chris Paul over the past two season on both ends of the floor. CP3 is still superior and is going to bounce back from this game but Rose isn't John Wall. He's a quality top tier player in the NBA just as is Paul.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:30 AM
The Bulls didn't even need Rose during the season for them to get the best record

Its always been their defense that makes the Bulls so good.. its never been Rose. If you swap Rose and Westbrook the Bulls would still be just as good as they are

raiderposting
05-16-2012, 12:31 AM
everyone here is a ****ing idiot, posting on a basketball forum yet no mention of Smush Parker

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:33 AM
Yes but thats only because Lebron is an absolute animal. Doesnt mean Rose is even in the same stratosphee

Same stratosphere as 08-09 Paul? No. But currently Paul isn't that much better than Rose.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:37 AM
Same stratosphere as 08-09 Paul? No. But currently Paul isn't that much better than Rose.

Even now CP3 makes his entire team better which is something Rose doesnt do. You put Rose in the place of CP3 tonight and he shoots another 9% on a bunch of shots like against the Heat.

Even on a game like this where he struggles offensively CP3 controls the game with his amazing playmaking abilities.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:37 AM
Its always been their defense that makes the Bulls so good.. its never been Rose. If you swap Rose and Westbrook the Bulls would still be just as good as they are

Its actually been a combination of depth, coaching, defense and the improvements of Rose from his sophomore season. Also Rose you're acting as if Rose is Nash on defense or something.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:40 AM
Its actually been a combination of depth, coaching, defense and the improvements of Rose from his sophomore season. Also Rose you're acting as if Rose is Nash on defense or something.

That too but still.. their success is not because of Rose. You swap Rose and Westy and the Bulls wouldnt suffer.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:41 AM
Even now CP3 makes his entire team better which is something Rose doesnt do. You put Rose in the place of CP3 tonight and he shoots another 9% on a bunch of shots like against the Heat.

Even on a game like this where he struggles offensively CP3 controls the game with his amazing playmaking abilities.

Who is denying Paul is better than Rose my beef is you're exagerrating the gap between them. Also you have no way to quantify the bolded statement.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:43 AM
That too but still.. their success is not because of Rose. You swap Rose and Westy and the Bulls wouldnt suffer.

Maybe because Westbrook is that good? It still doesn't take away from Rose as a player.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:43 AM
Who is denying Paul is better than Rose my beef is you're exagerrating the gap between them. Also you have no way to quantify the bolded statement.

Did you even watch the Spurs play tonight? That defense would shred Rose to pieces on offense. CP3 did ok cuz he is the best and can create plays for others but Rose would just chuck away with a random assist here or there

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:45 AM
Maybe because Westbrook is that good? It still doesn't take away from Rose as a player.

Thats my point though. Rose is closer to Westbrook than he is to Paul.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:46 AM
Did you even watch the Spurs play tonight? That defense would shred Rose to pieces on offense. CP3 did ok cuz he is the best and can create plays for others but Rose would just chuck away with a random assist here or there

Or maybe he would continually shred double teams and opposing point guards like he routinely does? The hypothetical game can work both ways.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:47 AM
Thats my point though. Rose is closer to Westbrook than he is to Paul.

And he is closer to Paul that Durant is to Lebron.

JeffG20
05-16-2012, 12:47 AM
Chris Paul was absolutely terrible tonight, and he has to play much better if the Clippers want a chance in this series. Putting the multiple regular season beatdowns aside, DRose would never all this kind of loss against the spurs. Rose is clearly better than Paul when healthy.

so 1 game makes a career? yea ok

naps
05-16-2012, 12:49 AM
Stop lying. You wish you had a dick.

nysportsfan02
05-16-2012, 12:49 AM
This thread sucks.

One game? CP3 is still the best. Did you even take a look at the opponent? An elite team like the Spurs im sure would have no problem shutting down Rose either, just like the Heat did when Rose finally played an elite defensive playoff team. Hell, Rose would probably shoot like 9-25 if he was playing tonight. The gameplan by SAS was flawless. Parker also went 1/9 and did nothing. So, where does he rank now?

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:49 AM
Or maybe he would continually shred double teams and opposing point guards like he routinely does? The hypothetical game can work both ways.

:laugh2: Except the Spurs wouldnt let any one player beat them and since Rose is not the playmaker CP3 is Rose could never have lead the Clippers past the Spurs. Its ok thought your denial is entertaining :)

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:50 AM
And he is closer to Paul that Durant is to Lebron.

Thats not much of an argument. Lebron is eons away from whoever the second best player in the NBA is... let alone Durant.

Jarvo
05-16-2012, 12:51 AM
Hop off CP3 nuts, Just last year most of you were all on Rose, Then Rondo when the Celtics were going to the finals and Then Nash when he was a two time MVP then some were saying Irving will surpass Paul in a year or two lol just stop it ! :facepalm: Truly I'll take Nash over all them. And stop saying Paul is the best by far because he really isnt.

kozelkid
05-16-2012, 12:54 AM
:laugh2: Except the Spurs wouldnt let any one player beat them and since Rose is not the playmaker CP3 is Rose could never have lead the Clippers past the Spurs. Its ok thought your denial is entertaining :)

Except Rose's career high was against San Antonio...

And he has some of his best career splits against SA. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/4387/splits?year=career&type=Fielding

There's no denial. Ballhog's posts seem pretty logical to me.

You act as if Bull's success is purely cause of Thibs which is simply not true. Thibs is a great coach, but that shouldn't take away from the impact Rose brings to the team. Nor should comparing Rose to Westbrook make Rose seem any worse. Rose, Westbrook and Paul are all elite guards.

The facts and stats are there for you; current Chris Paul isn't better than Rose by a "stratosphere". 07-09 Paul? Sure. Current Paul? Much more debatable. More debatable than Lebron vs Durant, even if from an MVP race, many tried to make it seem close. As great of a scorer as Durant is, Lebron is nearly as good and then clearly separates at it being an elite playmaker and defender while Durant is rather average as a playmaker and a good defender (but is by no means in Lebron's league in that regard).

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:54 AM
Hop off CP3 nuts, Just last year most of you were all on Rose, Then Rondo when the Celtics were going to the finals and The Nash when he was a two time MVP just stop it ! :facepalm: Truly I'll take Nash over all them. And stop saying Paul is the best by far because he really isnt.

:laugh2:

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 12:57 AM
Except Rose's career high was against San Antonio...

And he has some of his best career splits against SA. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/4387/splits?year=career&type=Fielding

There's no denial. Ballhog's posts seem pretty logical to me.

You act as if Bull's success is purely cause of Thibs which is simply not true. Thibs is a great coach, but that shouldn't take away from the impact Rose brings to the team. Nor should comparing Rose to Westbrook make Rose seem any worse.

The facts and stats are there for you; current Chris Paul isn't better than Rose by a "stratosphere". 07-09 Paul? Sure. Current Paul? Much more debatable.

Not THIS Spurs team.. this team is on a mission. BTW my question was whether Rose could have done better in place of CP3 tonight with the Clippers, not whether the Bulls would. Rose doesnt have the playmaking ability to elevate the Clippers the way CP3 does

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 12:59 AM
:laugh2: Except the Spurs wouldnt let any one player beat them and since Rose is not the playmaker CP3 is Rose could never have lead the Clippers past the Spurs. Its ok thought your denial is entertaining :)

Who's in denial? I'm personally neutral to Rose (would probably love the kid if it wasn't for Bulls homers constantly shoving him down your throat) all I'm saying is in ONE game you have no way to quantify you're statement. Look at the head to head matchup when Rose faces SA

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=rosede01&p2=parketo01

He had one of the best games of his career against them (42pts, 8asts and 5rebs).


Thats not much of an argument. Lebron is eons away from whoever the second best player in the NBA is... let alone Durant.

Then it would make sense not to further continue this off-topic debate.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 01:02 AM
Who's in denial? I'm personally neutral to Rose (would probably love the kid if it wasn't for Bulls homers constantly shoving him down your throat) all I'm saying is in ONE game you have no way to quantify you're statement. Look at the head to head matchup when Rose faces SA

http://http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=rosede01&p2=parketo01

He had one of the best games of his career against them (42pts, 8asts and 5rebs).



Then it would make sense not to further continue this off-topic debate.

There is no debate. Your wrong. CP3 is on another level and Rose can even sniff him. Lets see if he can even come back with his one knee

kozelkid
05-16-2012, 01:02 AM
Not THIS Spurs team.. this team is on a mission. BTW my question was whether Rose could have done better in place of CP3 tonight with the Clippers, not whether the Bulls would.

Who cares? The question obviously can't be answered.

The only thing I'll tell you regarding Paul is that he had a bad game. Any player can have it. Rose could just as well had a good game. And he did against SAS this season at SA (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore;_ylt=Avj7L.BvIKHyBApGKvNV_q3MPaB4?gid=201 2022924).

Regardless, it's one blimp. As almost everyone here has said, Paul having a bad game shouldn't mean he'll consistently have bad games. Or else, maybe he is battling injuries from previous series.


Rose doesnt have the playmaking ability to elevate the Clippers the way CP3 does

That's a little subjective. I've said it before; I believe Paul is better. However, what makes you so sure Rose can't do enough for this Clipper team?

I don't see your point at all, much like I don't see the OP's point. It's one game.

kozelkid
05-16-2012, 01:03 AM
There is no debate. Your wrong. CP3 is on another level and Rose can even sniff him. Lets see if he can even come back with his one knee

You have yet to prove that though. Especially considering two seasons ago their stats were nearly identical. And last season they were as well until Rose began suffering injuries (yes, yes I know. Injuries are apart of a game, but since we are discussing this in a vacuum anyway...).

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 01:04 AM
Not THIS Spurs team.. this team is on a mission. BTW my question was whether Rose could have done better in place of CP3 tonight with the Clippers, not whether the Bulls would. Rose doesnt have the playmaking ability to elevate the Clippers the way CP3 does

Well you're comparing LAST years Rose to this years version who has proven to be a faily capable passer and before the injuries he's had this year a reasonable arguement could've been made that Rose>=Cp3.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 01:04 AM
Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.
Sorry thats not a good excuse, if all it takes for someone to be shut down is putting Bron on them then thats a poor excuse. Theres more to it than that, and you know it. If your a player who is stopped by 1 on 1 defense then your not the best. Thats what your saying happened to Rose right lol

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 01:06 AM
There is no debate. Your wrong. CP3 is on another level and Rose can even sniff him. Lets see if he can even come back with his one knee

And this is where I stopped reading. :facepalm:

Mr_Amaziing
05-16-2012, 01:16 AM
Ehhh, idk

Cp3, Rose, Westbrook are all great PGs

Soo it can be any of those three. But my guess would be Westbrook

greg_ory_2005
05-16-2012, 01:19 AM
So 1 bad game makes him not the best PG anymore?

MintBerryCrunch
05-16-2012, 01:22 AM
Ehhh, idk

Cp3, Rose, Westbrook are all great PGs

Soo it can be any of those three. But my guess would be Westbrook

That's because you're A Thunder fan. Hahaha. Westbrook honestly isn't even close.

1. Cp3
2. Rose





3. Westbrook

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 01:22 AM
so we're just going to keep posting in the thread started by the guy who is presumably busy trying to cut off his own penis without passing out?

Gritz
05-16-2012, 01:24 AM
ban everyone talking about weiners

smiddy012
05-16-2012, 01:44 AM
CP3 is the best PG in the world... unless he's matched up vs. DRose, in which case he historically gets his lunch handed to him... makes sense.

5ass
05-16-2012, 01:44 AM
He had a "bad" gane but hes not healthy. Atleast wait till the series finisheds before making this thread.

5ass
05-16-2012, 01:46 AM
Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.

Haha wow.

GOON MUSIC
05-16-2012, 01:50 AM
WTF is all this cut off the dick nonsense

meloman1592
05-16-2012, 01:51 AM
Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.

u easily lost all your credibility

meloman1592
05-16-2012, 01:55 AM
Ehhh, idk

Cp3, Rose, Westbrook are all great PGs

Soo it can be any of those three. But my guess would be Westbrook

fail fail fail fail fail

1 Cp3
2 Rose
.....
......
.......
.........
......
.....
..........
.............
.........


Yup keep waiting
...
....
.............
..
...
.....
.......
........
........
....

Nope westbrook isn't here yet

...
......
..............





...

....
....
.....
....


Scroll a little more..
...
...

....
......
.....
.......



..
.....
........ Deron Williams
...
....

.....
....

....
...
......
..
............

Westbrook

flea
05-16-2012, 02:04 AM
Yeah you're dreaming if you think Rose is that much better than Westbrook. They're essentially the same player. I will agree that Rose is probably slightly better, and I would take him if I had to choose, but it's very close and for the future I might take Westbrook's defense.

Especially after Roses's injury.

JLynn943
05-16-2012, 02:05 AM
Chris Paul is easily the best. He can fill whichever role is needed at PG, whether it be that of the facilitator or the scorer, and be great at it. Rose is arguably not even second best. While he's an elite scoring PG, I'd argue that at the very minimum at least Deron is a more complete player. Arguments could be made for a couple of others as well.

Meaze_Gibson
05-16-2012, 02:10 AM
CP3 is the best PG in the world... unless he's matched up vs. DRose, in which case he historically gets his lunch handed to him... makes sense.

You are right on but this will go unnoticed.

Chris Paul always had problems with getting outshined in games by other elite pgs. (Rose, Williams)
Tony Parker gets outshined by other elite pgs.(Williams, Rose)
Deron Williams (Rose, jeremy Lin lol j/p)

Key point is since 2010-2011 season Rose is dominating the NBA's elite pgs (CP, Williams, Parker, Rondo) and that should count for alot.
Pre-injuries, Rose was the best pg in nba.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 02:26 AM
CP3 is the best PG in the world... unless he's matched up vs. DRose, in which case he historically gets his lunch handed to him... makes sense.

What? Unless you only look at wins (which would be stupid) you'd see that Paul gets the better of Rose whenever they matched up.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=rosede01&p2=paulch01


WTF is all this cut off the dick nonsense

The OP originally had something along the lines of "If Cp3 is called the best Pg in the league after tonight I'll cut off my dick."


Yeah you're dreaming if you think Rose is that much better than Westbrook. They're essentially the same player. I will agree that Rose is probably slightly better, and I would take him if I had to choose, but it's very close and for the future I might take Westbrook's defense.

Especially after Roses's injury.

Agreed, good post.

Rain City
05-16-2012, 02:32 AM
hahaha, the best pg debate is subject to change on a weekly basis but i dont think its a bad thing the pg position is loaded with talent.

Meaze_Gibson
05-16-2012, 02:32 AM
What? Unless you only look at wins (which would be stupid) you'd see that Paul gets the better of Rose whenever they matched up.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=rosede01&p2=paulch01



Starting with 2010 season, Paul has been getting ate by Rose.

JLynn943
05-16-2012, 02:43 AM
Starting with 2010 season, Paul has been getting ate by Rose.

Head-to-head, Rose has bested Paul 2 out of 5 times. That's hardly enough to give either a clear edge over the other when facing each other.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 03:16 AM
Starting with 2010 season, Paul has been getting ate by Rose.

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Paul wasn't healthy in 2010? :confused: Or maybe because the supporting cast around CP3 wasn't as good.

smiddy012
05-16-2012, 03:25 AM
Head-to-head, Rose has bested Paul 2 out of 5 times. That's hardly enough to give either a clear edge over the other when facing each other.

The first matchup Rose got owned, he was fresh to the league. The next two were even, although I'd consider keeping the 2009 CP3 to 15 pts and 7 assists a win, and you might consider their 3rd matchup a win due to CP3s assists. The most recent two Rose destroyed him though.

So yeah, my initial comment was somewhat off-base, but Rose has gotten the better of CP3 matchup wise over time for sure. The most recent two games, over this season and last, Rose really did hand CP3 his lunch.

John Walls Era
05-16-2012, 03:29 AM
Please cut your dick off because not only is he the best, it's not even really close (unlike SG, SF, and PF which are close). Positionally there is no questioning that Howard is the best center and CP3 is the best PG.

:laugh: WTF

JJ_JKidd
05-16-2012, 03:31 AM
Best PG-flopper :clap:

Patman
05-16-2012, 03:37 AM
Sure because a bad game in the playoffs he isn't the best anymore. Just stupid a game does not make a player. Damn CP3 is the best and it's no discussion.

GoferKing_
05-16-2012, 04:41 AM
I would say that Tony Parker is the best PG this year, he did wonders for the Spurs.

GoferKing_
05-16-2012, 04:43 AM
CP3 best flop-first PG.xD (don't get me wrong he is a beast at his best, but you have to admit his flopping is ridiculous).

thenaj17
05-16-2012, 05:45 AM
Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.

Rose who has shot 44% the last 2 years and virtually never dishes more than 10 assists with Deng and Boozer on the team? OK then...

Chris Paul is clearly better assisting teammates and making them better, he's a better shooter, has 5% points higher 3 point shooting, has more than double the steals per game that Rose has, turns the ball over less and even though Cp3 is 3 inches shorter and less athletic than Rose, he averages more rebounds per game.

Cp3 is more clutch, he plays more under control and is is just a better player.

The only category Rose is better in is points per game and that's only 3 points over their careers. Bear in mind it takes Rose more shots to get those points.

I would also debate Deron Williams is also better than Rose and Westbrook is awfully close.

basketfan4life
05-16-2012, 06:05 AM
Please cut your dick off because not only is he the best, it's not even really close (unlike SG, SF, and PF which are close). Positionally there is no questioning that Howard is the best center and CP3 is the best PG.

i don't get how it is not close? people live with assumptions.

ask yourself this, if rose was on clips instead of paul, how would they be? if you can't say much worse/ really worse than it is close. And i say they'd de as good at least. But i'm sure some people wouldcome up with paul has a better PER, so it's a never ending issue.

bagwell368
05-16-2012, 06:44 AM
Chris Paul was absolutely terrible tonight, and he has to play much better if the Clippers want a chance in this series. Putting the multiple regular season beatdowns aside, DRose would never all this kind of loss against the spurs. Rose is clearly better than Paul when healthy.

Off of one game? Paul trounced Rose this year, it wasn't even close.

superior
05-16-2012, 07:28 AM
The Bulls didn't even need Rose during the season for them to get the best record

lol...What does that say about the rest of the league?

superior
05-16-2012, 07:39 AM
its the Spurs.. nuff said. Rose has never sniffed Paul and neither has Deron Williams or any other PG for that matter

???

PAUL'S BEST SEASON = 22.8 ppg - 11 apg.....Rec. 49-33....NO MVP..1st rd.
ROSE'S BEST SEASON = 25.0 ppg - 7.7 apg...Rec. 62-20....MVP.....ECF

He hasn't even "sniffed" Paul? lol prime example of whats wrong with these psd posters

blacknell
05-16-2012, 08:17 AM
to me he was never the best PG in the NBA. I prefer Rose, Williams, and Rondo over Paul

-Kobe24-TJ19-
05-16-2012, 09:04 AM
no, and after game 2 when he has 30 points he will be the best again

69centers
05-16-2012, 09:19 AM
2012 playoffs

Rondo 15 PPG, 12.7 APG, 44%FG, 3.7 TO's

Paul 18.6 PPG, 7.5 APG, 43%FG, 3.7 TO's

Parker 18.2 PPG, 7.4 APG, 45%FG, 2.8 TO's

Westbrook 23.3 PPG, 5.2 APG, 49%FG, 2.2 TO's

There's an argument that every other top PG in the playoffs is doing better than Paul right now.

Swashcuff
05-16-2012, 09:26 AM
2012 playoffs

Rondo 15 PPG, 12.7 APG, 44%FG, 3.7 TO's

Paul 18.6 PPG, 7.5 APG, 43%FG, 3.7 TO's

Parker 18.2 PPG, 7.4 APG, 45%FG, 2.8 TO's

Westbrook 23.3 PPG, 5.2 APG, 49%FG, 2.2 TO's

There's an argument that every other top PG in the playoffs is doing better than Paul right now.

Point being?

69centers
05-16-2012, 09:29 AM
Point being?

That the OP asked if Paul was the best PG after the last game. I put up the stats showing he's actually behind the other 3 top PG's. Wow, does everything have to be so simplified for you, dude? Try reading the post title, the OP and the responses better. :pity:

Jumi
05-16-2012, 09:29 AM
The "Best PG" in the game argument falls on it's face when you think about the question for half a second. First the criteria has to be set, without all the analysis. Nash and Rondo fit into a different category than Rose and Westbrook. Parker and CP3 do the things that make THEIR team function at a higher level. Paul is a perfect fit for the Clippers because the need leadership and a facilitator to get the ball to Blake. TP goes to the lane and finds open teammates for the easy shot! Rondo dishes to his HOFers in their favorite spots and makes their games compliment one another. Sometimes it just makes sense to let what works, work and leave it at that! There's no need for constant comparisons!!!!!

Swashcuff
05-16-2012, 09:37 AM
That the OP asked if Paul was the best PG after the last game. I put up the stats showing he's actually behind the other 3 top PG's. Wow, does everything have to be so simplified for you, dude? Try reading the post title, the OP and the responses better. :pity:

You're just trying to promote an agenda just like the OP. He's trying to prove that Rose is by far the best PG in the NBA and you're trying to promote a Rondo based agenda. Rose played one post season game so his argument was not that Paul's play this post season as compared to others was sub par that was your argument.

BKLYNpigeon
05-16-2012, 09:46 AM
Forget about the Numbers.

Chris Paul is the best point guard in the NBA. Look at the crappy Hornets team that he took to the playoffs. Plug in any other PG on that team and they would be heading to the lottery.

CP2 has a bad game, he falls to 4th best. Westbrook had a great game now he's #2. Rose is injured for a year, and probably wont ever be the same player is #1 now. next week it will be someone different and a new thread about that.

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 10:00 AM
yes, he is the best PG in the game. Has been for 5 years.

69centers
05-16-2012, 10:01 AM
You're just trying to promote an agenda just like the OP. He's trying to prove that Rose is by far the best PG in the NBA and you're trying to promote a Rondo based agenda. Rose played one post season game so his argument was not that Paul's play this post season as compared to others was sub par that was your argument.

A Rondo agenda?? The stats I put up showed that Westbrook is leading in the most categories. A Rondo agenda just because I listed his stats with everyone else's? Wow, that's a stretch.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 10:07 AM
???

PAUL'S BEST SEASON = 22.8 ppg - 11 apg.....Rec. 49-33....NO MVP..1st rd.
ROSE'S BEST SEASON = 25.0 ppg - 7.7 apg...Rec. 62-20....MVP.....ECF

He hasn't even "sniffed" Paul? lol prime example of whats wrong with these psd posters

If you're referring to their individual best seasons then that's right he's no where close actually.


to me he was never the best PG in the NBA. I prefer Rose, Williams, and Rondo over Paul

You're in the minority with that thinking.


2012 playoffs

Rondo 15 PPG, 12.7 APG, 44%FG, 3.7 TO's

Paul 18.6 PPG, 7.5 APG, 43%FG, 3.7 TO's

Parker 18.2 PPG, 7.4 APG, 45%FG, 2.8 TO's

Westbrook 23.3 PPG, 5.2 APG, 49%FG, 2.2 TO's

There's an argument that every other top PG in the playoffs is doing better than Paul right now.

Well Paul has been injured. :shrug:

Kashmir13579
05-16-2012, 10:18 AM
lmfao

BK-TY
05-16-2012, 10:28 AM
1. Paul
1a.Rondo
2. Rose
3. Westbrook
4. Parker
5. D.Will

Right now.

D1JM
05-16-2012, 10:30 AM
The OP is most likely a dupe and a troll. This is why we should have a post limit in order to create a thread

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 10:31 AM
Paul
Parker
Westbrook

they have clearly seperated themselves this season (Rose's injuries have temporarily removed him from the top tier)

Rose

Nash
Rondo

that is my tier.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 10:33 AM
???

PAUL'S BEST SEASON = 22.8 ppg - 11 apg.....Rec. 49-33....NO MVP..1st rd.
ROSE'S BEST SEASON = 25.0 ppg - 7.7 apg...Rec. 62-20....MVP.....ECF

He hasn't even "sniffed" Paul? lol prime example of whats wrong with these psd posters

False

But that was a CP3 who doesnt exist anymore so its pointless.

Still CP3 this year had a better year than any from Rose

Chronz
05-16-2012, 10:33 AM
2012 playoffs

Rondo 15 PPG, 12.7 APG, 44%FG, 3.7 TO's

Paul 18.6 PPG, 7.5 APG, 43%FG, 3.7 TO's

Parker 18.2 PPG, 7.4 APG, 45%FG, 2.8 TO's

Westbrook 23.3 PPG, 5.2 APG, 49%FG, 2.2 TO's

There's an argument that every other top PG in the playoffs is doing better than Paul right now.

Based on what?

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 10:33 AM
Paul
Parker
Westbrook

they have clearly seperated themselves this season (Rose's injuries have temporarily removed him from the top tier)

Rose

Nash
Rondo

that is my tier.

Deron?

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 10:35 AM
Deron?

injured last year, played pretty poorly this year, for elite convo that is.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 10:36 AM
i don't get how it is not close? people live with assumptions.

ask yourself this, if rose was on clips instead of paul, how would they be? if you can't say much worse/ really worse than it is close. And i say they'd de as good at least. But i'm sure some people wouldcome up with paul has a better PER, so it's a never ending issue.

Your crazy.. nobody except Butler on the Clippers can get their own shot. Without Paul's amazing playmaking and leadership the Clippers wouldt even be in the playoffs. He might get a few assists but Rose is nowhere near the PG that Paul is at running an offense and elevating his team.

69centers
05-16-2012, 10:37 AM
Based on what?

Based on less turnovers, better shooting percentage, more assists, and more points. So sorry you only go by advanced stats these days, but there are those who still use the basics as measuring sticks.

b@llhog24
05-16-2012, 10:38 AM
injured last year, played pretty poorly this year, for elite convo that is.

Fair enough.

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 10:39 AM
Based on less turnovers, better shooting percentage, more assists, and more points. So sorry you only go by advanced stats these days, but there are those who still use the basics as measuring sticks.

And this is a failed argument. Basics are just that. Basics. They don't show any expansion on how efficient that player is, or how their play ends up affecting the W/L column. By using basics, we get Monta Ellis as an elite SG.

Chill_Will_24
05-16-2012, 10:42 AM
injured last year, played pretty poorly this year, for elite convo that is.

Knocking him out of the top 5 is a little harsh and premature imo. You cant blame him for his next best player being Humphries for most of the season. The Nets missed the most games to injury in the entire league and had the most season ending injuries as well.

I dont think any player except Lebron could have elevated that team to much more than what it managed to do.

Swashcuff
05-16-2012, 10:44 AM
Talent, skill and ability wise Deron is still a top 3 PG in the NBA imo. Based on his production of last season however he has fallen out of the top 3 discussion at the moment. A healthy a committed D-Will is indeed a top 3 PG in the NBA but I get what Hawkeye15 is saying. D.Will's D this past season was almost as poor as Nash's as he just seemed not to be very committed on that end of the floor.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 10:47 AM
Based on less turnovers, better shooting percentage, more assists, and more points. So sorry you only go by advanced stats these days, but there are those who still use the basics as measuring sticks.
Oh so based on less accurate stats, ok thanks. Just making sure, sorry your not up to speed but nobody that knows the game rates players that way.

Based on all relevant info, Westbrook has played the best but CP3 has arguably played as well or better than anyone else, and thats with him being hurt.

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 10:48 AM
Knocking him out of the top 5 is a little harsh and premature imo. You cant blame him for his next best player being Humphries for most of the season. The Nets missed the most games to injury in the entire league and had the most season ending injuries as well.

I dont think any player except Lebron could have elevated that team to much more than what it managed to do.

Oh I understand the conditions at which he played, but he also plays a position where you absolutely can't play poorly for stretches without sliding, there are so many elite PG's.

He has top 3 potential, no doubt. But he simply didn't play as well, individually, as 5-6 other PG's.

Kashmir13579
05-16-2012, 10:50 AM
I don't get how kneejerk threads from a dupe account can stay open.. I don't care if CP3 shot 0-18 with no assists.. The man has a track record that is more than sufficient for his title.

Carey
05-16-2012, 10:51 AM
Of course he's still the best PG in the league, he's running into not only a very good team but the best coach in basketball. Pop is not gonna let CP3 beat him, especially not in the pick and roll where he's so dominate.

basketfan4life
05-16-2012, 10:52 AM
Your crazy.. nobody except Butler on the Clippers can get their own shot. Without Paul's amazing playmaking and leadership the Clippers wouldt even be in the playoffs. He might get a few assists but Rose is nowhere near the PG that Paul is at running an offense and elevating his team.

Yeah cause rose never lead his team to best record in the nba.

Also, you are right, boozer, noah, brewer, korver , always creates their own shots. To me in 10/11, rose was the best pg in the game. This year he is out of equation with all these injuries.

With people's logic of PER, we can open a website and tell who was the best player 30 years ago without watching them. Hollinger and some other wannabee's are curse to you americans.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 10:53 AM
Lots of PG's have played better than CP3 in their series, that wouldnt deter me from claiming his superiority. Ty Lawson for instance was absolutely devastating against the Lakers, sometimes matchups matter alot. Im not that impressed by Westbrook tearing up the Mavs as I am CP3 willing his crippled team to victory over the Grizzlies.

So its not about raw stats when your dealing with a limited sample set. Gotta account for the opposition somehow.

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 10:54 AM
For the record, the OP isn't a dupe account. I have checked.

Moving on.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 10:55 AM
Yeah cause rose never lead his team to best record in the nba.

Also, you are right, boozer, noah, brewer, korver , always creates their own shots. To me in 10/11, rose was the best pg in the game. This year he is out of equation with all these injuries.

With people's logic of PER, we can open a website and tell who was the best player 30 years ago without watching them. Hollinger and some other wannabee's are curse to you americans.

Where did he say Rose was never part of a team with the best record in the league?

Funny how Boozer was more productive before Rose, suffered with Rose, and was more productive as his teammate when Rose WASNT on the court. His point about playmaking is sound.

Where did he mention PER? You know you should actually wait for it to be mentioned before you go slamming advanced stats. No matter how hard you want it to be true, stats matter, and if your going to use stats you may as well use the most accurate/relevant. Otherwise I could say D-Fish is the best PG at one point because my EYES tell me.

Kashmir13579
05-16-2012, 10:57 AM
For the record, the OP isn't a dupe account. I have checked.

Moving on.

You were just hoping it was...

But lets call a spade a spade. Its a returning user from a different IP address. Sent from under his bridge to reek havoc on PSD. ;)

effen5
05-16-2012, 10:59 AM
Rose who has shot 44% the last 2 years and virtually never dishes more than 10 assists with Deng and Boozer on the team? OK then...

Chris Paul is clearly better assisting teammates and making them better, he's a better shooter, has 5% points higher 3 point shooting, has more than double the steals per game that Rose has, turns the ball over less and even though Cp3 is 3 inches shorter and less athletic than Rose, he averages more rebounds per game. And Rose rebounds less because we have Noah Boozer and Deng who are all excellent rebounders.

Cp3 is more clutch, he plays more under control and is is just a better player.

The only category Rose is better in is points per game and that's only 3 points over their careers. Bear in mind it takes Rose more shots to get those points.

I would also debate Deron Williams is also better than Rose and Westbrook is awfully close.

One: Did you even watch the playoffs? It is absolutely CLEAR that Rose sets up his teammates. You can tell how much the team struggles without him. But the difference is...Rose gets a lot of hockey assists because the Bulls team are an excellent passing team. I think the Bulls rank 1 in team assists?

Two: CP3 is a good defender (and a horrendous flopper but thats beside the point) but Rose doesn't need to get steals, you know why? Bulls are the best if not top three defensive teams in the NBA. Besides, steals is overrated. Rose also has more turnovers because he handles the ball more and needs to score while Paul doesn't need to take the load on scoring.

Three: I beg to differ that CP3 is more clutch then Rose. Maybe on the line but with the game on the line and with a last second shot, I would give the ball to Rose over CP3 any day of the week.

CP3 might be one of the best PG but Rose is clearly the better player.

D1JM
05-16-2012, 10:59 AM
Where did he say Rose was never part of a team with the best record in the league?

Funny how Boozer was more productive before Rose, suffered with Rose, and was more productive as his teammate when Rose WASNT on the court. His point about playmaking is sound.

Where did he mention PER?

What's even funnier is how good the bulls were in the playoffs when rose WASNT on the court and how far they got in the playoffs

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 11:01 AM
You were just hoping it was...

But lets call a spade a spade. Its a returning user from a different IP address. Sent from under his bridge to reek havoc on PSD. ;)

Nothing we can do if a guy moves and starts a new account haha. They slip up eventually.

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 11:02 AM
What's even funnier is how good the bulls were in the playoffs when rose WASNT on the court and how far they got in the playoffs

you want to see funny? Imagine New Orleans or the Clippers with no Chris Paul.....

Abel Ye
05-16-2012, 11:07 AM
Yeah really Rose being a better point guard then chris paul isn't even close. Give me a 5 year sample size where Derrick Rose out preforms Chris Paul before I call him a better point guard. The clippers weren't even a playoff team last year and this year Derrick Rose didn't even play for most of the season yet his team played great without him.

effen5
05-16-2012, 11:10 AM
Where did he say Rose was never part of a team with the best record in the league?

Funny how Boozer was more productive before Rose, suffered with Rose, and was more productive as his teammate when Rose WASNT on the court. His point about playmaking is sound.

Where did he mention PER? You know you should actually wait for it to be mentioned before you go slamming advanced stats. No matter how hard you want it to be true, stats matter, and if your going to use stats you may as well use the most accurate/relevant. Otherwise I could say D-Fish is the best PG at one point because my EYES tell me.

You can say whatever you want about Boozer's production, this guy was flat out inconsistent with Rose or without Rose on the floor.

See game 6 against Philly.

Baller1
05-16-2012, 11:10 AM
Chris Paul is still the top PG, but I don't think he's in another tier of PG's from the rest of the elites. In other words, I don't think he's on another level from Rose, Williams, Westbrook, Parker, and Rondo.

Just my opinion though.

effen5
05-16-2012, 11:11 AM
Yeah really Rose being a better point guard then chris paul isn't even close. Give me a 5 year sample size where Derrick Rose out preforms Chris Paul before I call him a better point guard. The clippers weren't even a playoff team last year and this year Derrick Rose didn't even play for most of the season yet his team played great without him.

I'd love to give you a five year sample but Rose hasn't been in the league that long....but you know he does have that MVP

D1JM
05-16-2012, 11:11 AM
you want to see funny? Imagine New Orleans or the Clippers with no Chris Paul.....

This year clippers or are you referring to last years?

effen5
05-16-2012, 11:13 AM
Chris Paul is still the top PG, but I don't think he's in another tier of PG's from the rest of the elites. In other words, I don't think he's on another level from Rose, Williams, Westbrook, Parker, and Rondo.

Just my opinion though.

I agree with you 100%. I have finally added Westbrook to my list because hes been fantastic.

Those are your top PG in the league.

Rose
Paul
Williams
Parker
Westbrook
Rondo

In no particular order.

Irving will be on that list very soon though :)

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 11:14 AM
This year clippers or are you referring to last years?

this years. Take Paul off the roster, what are they? Take Paul off any of the Hornets rosters he was on, what do you get?

You get really, really bad teams.

effen5
05-16-2012, 11:16 AM
this years. Take Paul off the roster, what are they? Take Paul off any of the Hornets rosters he was on, what do you get?

You get really, really bad teams.

If you take off Paul off of this team, they probably have equal or more talent then the Bulls without Rose.

Only difference, we don't have a horrendous coach like VDN.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:17 AM
You can say whatever you want about Boozer's production, this guy was flat out inconsistent with Rose or without Rose on the floor.

See game 6 against Philly.

No doubt, sadly he was more inconsistent with Rose. See his career with Rose.

12to85
05-16-2012, 11:17 AM
Thats not much of an argument. Lebron is eons away from whoever the second best player in the NBA is... let alone Durant.

Hyperbole much? Lebron is still up to his old antics of missing key shots with the game on the line. The guy missed 2 back-to-back free throws (under a min left) and didn't want anything to do with the basketball afterwards in game 2 vs the pacers. He passed it as soon as he touched it without ANY hesitation. Everyone keeps thinking that this flaw will change but IT HAPPENS EVERY YEAR AT ABOUT THIS TIME!!! I still believe they will get past the Pacers but if the Heat earns a ring it won't be because #6 lead them in the 4th q against a worthy opponent.


Lebron is the better player overall talent wise, physically, and has more power but he also has no heart. Give me Durant any day. He is Younger, has a better stroke and shot, better character, and seems to appreciate and respect the game far more then LeChoke/LePass. Both players have the ability to be dominant and the gap between them is not "EONS" away.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:18 AM
If you take off Paul off of this team, they probably have equal or more talent then the Bulls without Rose.

Only difference, we don't have a horrendous coach like VDN.

You cant be serious

D1JM
05-16-2012, 11:18 AM
Yeah really Rose being a better point guard then chris paul isn't even close. Give me a 5 year sample size where Derrick Rose out preforms Chris Paul before I call him a better point guard. The clippers weren't even a playoff team last year and this year Derrick Rose didn't even play for most of the season yet his team played great without him.

If they were so great without him they should of beaten the sixers then. With rose, the bulls looked like an elite team in game 1. The other games, not even close.

I get some of you are tired of bulls fans overrating rose, but some of you underrate him.

Abel Ye
05-16-2012, 11:19 AM
I'd love to give you a five year sample but Rose hasn't been in the league that long....but you know he does have that MVP

It's what I'm saying, I don't think anybody was giving Chris Paul the best point guard tag before he even completed 5 years.

Baller1
05-16-2012, 11:19 AM
I agree with you 100%. I have finally added Westbrook to my list because hes been fantastic.

Those are your top PG in the league.

Rose
Paul
Williams
Parker
Westbrook
Rondo

In no particular order.

Irving will be on that list very soon though :)

Yup, I see them all interchangeable with the exception of Paul who would be #1. Other than that, I could come up with my list and it'd probably be different from a lot of people's.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:19 AM
What's even funnier is how good the bulls were in the playoffs when rose WASNT on the court and how far they got in the playoffs
Take CP3 off the Clippers for the amount of time that Rose missed and we dont even make the playoffs.

Hawkeye15
05-16-2012, 11:19 AM
If you take off Paul off of this team, they probably have equal or more talent then the Bulls without Rose.

Only difference, we don't have a horrendous coach like VDN.

bahahahahaha

Baller1
05-16-2012, 11:20 AM
You cant be serious

I'm actually tempted to somewhat agree with him, not gonna lie Chronz.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:22 AM
I'm actually tempted to somewhat agree with him, not gonna lie Chronz.

Look at the roster again, look at their success (on both ends) without Rose and look at how productive CP3 had to be in 4th quarters to close out teams. Look at the teams efficiency with CP3 off the court. Look at the loss to Billups, how long it took to get some depth.

Coaches dont make that much of a difference.

Baller1
05-16-2012, 11:24 AM
Look at the roster again

Look at the coaches. I think if Thibs can get the #1 seed with Rose out, he could get the Clips a playoff spot without Paul.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:30 AM
Look at the coaches. I think if Thibs can get the #1 seed with Rose out, he could get the Clips a playoff spot without Paul.
Nah I like to look at the entire spectrum. Thibs wouldnt get that production out of our players. If Phil Jackson with the Lakers doesnt have that kind of impact I highly doubt Tibbs does on any team. No coach transforms a player, thats what it would take for us to make up for the disparity in talent.

Your acting as if Thibs didnt inherit players who were proven productive before him.

D1JM
05-16-2012, 11:31 AM
this years. Take Paul off the roster, what are they? Take Paul off any of the Hornets rosters he was on, what do you get?

You get really, really bad teams.

I think they would make playoffs still. I don't see a lot of people giving players like Bledsoe, Evans, Martin credit for beating out Memphis. Sorta what Chicago does in the regular season with their bench.

It's all a what if talk really and I don't like to get in discussions about that because it's all speculation. For example, if you swapped rose and Paul. In their perspective teams they have different roles, even though they play the same position.

kozelkid
05-16-2012, 11:31 AM
Nah I like to look at the entire spectrum. Thibs wouldnt get that production out of our players. If Phil Jackson with the Lakers doesnt have that kind of impact I highly doubt Tibbs does on any team.

Kind of an apples to oranges comparison, don't you think?

D1JM
05-16-2012, 11:33 AM
Nah I like to look at the entire spectrum. Thibs wouldnt get that production out of our players. If Phil Jackson with the Lakers doesnt have that kind of impact I highly doubt Tibbs does on any team. No coach transforms a player, thats what it would take for us to make up for the disparity in talent.

Your acting as if Thibs didnt inherit players who were proven productive before him.

How does pop make someone else trash into a treasure than?

effen5
05-16-2012, 11:34 AM
bahahahahaha

I said talent....Bulls players are much more productive because we don't have a ****** as a coach but the Clips have more talent.

Baller1
05-16-2012, 11:38 AM
Nah I like to look at the entire spectrum. Thibs wouldnt get that production out of our players. If Phil Jackson with the Lakers doesnt have that kind of impact I highly doubt Tibbs does on any team. No coach transforms a player, thats what it would take for us to make up for the disparity in talent.

Your acting as if Thibs didnt inherit players who were proven productive before him.

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I think there are plenty of coaches in this league that know how to get the most out of players. Personally, I think you give Pop or Jerry Sloan OKC's roster, you're looking at a team that could win 65+ consistently; I truly believe that.

Also, in my initial post I said somewhat agree. I think if you swapped Thibs and VDN, that Thibs could get the Clippers a playoff seed in the West which is equivalent to a top 4-5 seed in the East.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:40 AM
We'll just have to agree to disagree then.
Show me the player that Thibs has transformed.


I think there are plenty of coaches in this league that know how to get the most out of players. Personally, I think you give Pop or Jerry Sloan OKC's roster, you're looking at a team that could win 65+ consistently; I truly believe that.
Ill take the words of JVG here, the difference in the best and worst players is more significant than the best and worst coaches. There isnt a single coach in the league that could make up the talent disparity your talking about.







Lets review the difference in production (VIA PER) at every spot save for PG





Clippers - Bulls

SG: -.3 : +2.5
SF: -3.9 : +1.0
PF: +1.7 : +3.2
C: +.4 : +3.4



So we dont have a single more productive position than the Bulls, what we do have is an elite closer who can make the most out of an ordinary cast.

Ill buy the idea that he can improve our defense, perhaps even significantly. But without CP3 the offense would go to ****, no way around it. Unless +/- data is just a huge coincidence.


Also, in my initial post I said somewhat agree. I think if you swapped Thibs and VDN, that Thibs could get the Clippers a playoff seed in the West which is equivalent to a top 4-5 seed in the East.
Opinions are fine, but what are you basing it on. With Thibs and no CP3, we dont make the playoffs. The reliance on CP3 is FAR greater than any coach could overcome. This isnt a team that ripe with talent. We are undersized on the perimeter and our PF is among the worst defenders in the league.

NYY 26 to 7
05-16-2012, 11:40 AM
cp3. I prefer real point guards over combo shoot first pg's like Rose. As a player I'll take Rose but talking pure pg CP3 is the best PG in the world and one game or a few games doesn't change that.

D12 fan
05-16-2012, 11:42 AM
Sorry he had Lebron James - a 6' 9" beast of a man guarding him. When healthy Derrick rose is easily the best point guard in the NBA. everyone knows it, just the hatred they have built up in their veins blinds their vision and they choose to be unrealistic.

Oh now you decide to show up,when Drose is the Best pg in the NBA,but you can't see that Lebron deserved MVP,over Nash,Love,Pierce.LMAO

Bravo95
05-16-2012, 11:42 AM
That was more about Popovich and the Spurs defensive execution than CP3.

Chris Paul is still way ahead of the next best PG, without a doubt.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:44 AM
I said talent....Bulls players are much more productive because we don't have a ****** as a coach but the Clips have more talent.
Based on what?

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:49 AM
How does pop make someone else trash into a treasure than?
First of all Pop is the best, but lets not act like he transforms players. Last I checked he always has TP, Duncan, Manu to help integrate players. Under this hypothetical we LOSE CP3. By far the most instrumental player to any 1 team.

Hustla23
05-16-2012, 11:49 AM
No doubt, sadly he was more inconsistent with Rose. See his career with Rose.
What information are you using to back up this assertion?

SluggeR
05-16-2012, 11:49 AM
CP3 is still the man. He's playing hurt and playing for a coach that does not have an offensive system. While the spurs are running their system like a well oiled machine, you have CP3 basically having to ad-live on every possession.

Baller1
05-16-2012, 11:49 AM
Show me the player that Thibs has transformed.


Ill take the words of JVG here, the difference in the best and worst players is more significant than the best and worst coaches. There isnt a single coach in the league that could make up the talent disparity your talking about.







Lets review the difference in production (VIA PER) at every spot save for PG





Clippers - Bulls

SG: -.3 : +2.5
SF: -3.9 : +1.0
PF: +1.7 : +3.2
C: +.4 : +3.4



So we dont have a single more productive position than the Bulls, what we do have is an elite closer who can make the most out of an ordinary cast.

Ill buy the idea that he can improve our defense, perhaps even significantly. But without CP3 the offense would go to ****, no way around it. Unless +/- data is just a huge coincidence.


Opinions are fine, but what are you basing it on. With Thibs and no CP3, we dont make the playoffs. The reliance on CP3 is FAR greater than any coach could overcome. This isnt a team that ripe with talent. We are undersized on the perimeter and our PF is among the worst defenders in the league.

In '09-'10, the Bulls were a fringe playoff team. After adding Thibs and Ron Adams (former OKC assistant coach, once he left the Thunder's defense plummeted to a very mediocre production level) to the coaching staff, the Bulls were thrust into the top seed.

Of course all the credit can't be given solely to the coaches, but do you really believe that the addition of Boozer and Kyle Korver take the Bulls from an 8th seed to #1 seed over the course of an offseason?

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 11:50 AM
a fully healthy clippers team without paul > a fully healthy bulls team without rose.

there are many ways to think about this, they all lead you to the same conclusion. and paul is still the better player, he was this year, has been for his career and is not the guy coming off of a blown knee.

they are similarly constructed. but billups and griffin would be the two best players on the court when these two teams played each other. and the bulls usual bench advantage has no play here i think LAC is slightly deeper, certainly has played out that way in the playoffs.

Hustla23
05-16-2012, 11:53 AM
a fully healthy clippers team without paul > a fully healthy bulls team without rose.

there are many ways to think about this, they all lead you to the same conclusion. and paul is still the better player, he was this year, has been for his career and is not the guy coming off of a blown knee.
Sorry but that is completely false. The Bulls are an elite defensive team with or without Rose.

They also happen to be a good offensive team without Rose and a borderline elite offensive team with him.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 11:55 AM
Kind of an apples to oranges comparison, don't you think?
Well yea, thats why its easy to hide behind things like, "this coach will get you into the playoffs no matter WAHHT!!" You dont have to rely on any sort of tangible transitive evidence. Even though you have coaches like JVG saying talent matters more than coaching, and you have endless studies showing no coach transforms a team (which is what it would require to make up for the loss of CP3 and diminished production at every other position in comparison to the Bulls)

What Coaches do do is put a team over the top, like when Phil took a talented team that was already competing and made them into champs.

Its funny he mentioned Pops though, Pops has had a team that lost a superstar that was as influential as CP3. The first time (D-Rob) the team finished among the worse, the 2nd time (Duncan) the team was ousted in R.1

Is there anything we can point to to confirm or deny these claims? NOPE, thats why they are easy to hide behind, all information we have points to no coach having this kind of dramatic impact, hell you have inept coaches winning lots of games, but somehow coaches have more of an impact than talent?

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 11:58 AM
Sorry but that is completely false. The Bulls are an elite defensive team with or without Rose.

They also happen to be a good offensive team without Rose and a borderline elite offensive team with him.

please don't go there.

don't tell me any team is "elite" anything when they lose to the 8 seed as 1 seed minus 1 player. absolutely not. thibs did a fantastic job plugging holes in the regular season.

i'm sorry. but again i'm sure you will reference some decent numbers pre/post rose to articulate this point. what does it matter?what did it do for them when the playoffs began?

elite defensive, good offensive teams are championship contenders. last i checked chicago just shat the bed in the first round. i'm not knocking them, i expected it. but why was rose MVP last year if his team was so "elite" at this and that? can anyone tell me that?

honestly.

effen5
05-16-2012, 11:59 AM
Sorry but that is completely false. The Bulls are an elite defensive team with or without Rose.

They also happen to be a good offensive team without Rose and a borderline elite offensive team with him.

Well you're only taking a small sample so you really can't say they are a good offensive team. Besides, majority of the games Rose missed this year was against horrid teams, while against playoff teams without Rose, they were near 500.

effen5
05-16-2012, 12:00 PM
No doubt, sadly he was more inconsistent with Rose. See his career with Rose.

Which games are we looking at? the 50 games they played together in the last two years?

First year, Boozer was hurt majority of the season
Second year, Rose was hurt majority of the season.

Could that be why Booz was so inconsistent with Rose?

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:02 PM
In '09-'10, the Bulls were a fringe playoff team.
Look at the age of the core, look at the talent ADDED.



Of course all the credit can't be given solely to the coaches, but do you really believe that the addition of Boozer and Kyle Korver take the Bulls from an 8th seed to #1 seed over the course of an offseason?
An oversimplification, do you truly believe the ascent of Rose is COMPLETELY dependent on Thibs being the coach? LMFAO, plz, he inherited an ascending core, its why Doc Rivers strongly advised him to choose the Bulls, a team littered with lotto picks, added quality depth (Brewer, Taj, Asik).

He didnt transform the team.

effen5
05-16-2012, 12:05 PM
Look at the age of the core, look at the talent ADDED.



An oversimplification, do you truly believe the ascent of Rose is COMPLETELY dependent on Thibs being the coach? LMFAO, plz, he inherited an ascending core, its why Doc Rivers strongly advised him to choose the Bulls, a team littered with lotto picks, added quality depth (Brewer, Taj, Asik).

He didnt transform the team.

He absolutely transformed this team. Nobody including rose bought into what vdn was preaching but as soon as thibs walked in rose bought in which made everyone else buy into thibs system


With vdn coaching this team wouldn't surprise me if this team went 500 for a third straight season

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:07 PM
a fully healthy clippers team without paul > a fully healthy bulls team without rose.
Based on? I can somewhat understand if you give us everyone we have now healthy from day 1, and you give us a healthy Billups.



they are similarly constructed. but billups and griffin would be the two best players on the court when these two teams played each other. and the bulls usual bench advantage has no play here i think LAC is slightly deeper, certainly has played out that way in the playoffs.



Clippers - Bulls

SG: -.3 : +2.5
SF: -3.9 : +1.0
PF: +1.7 : +3.2
C: +.4 : +3.4

Blake and DJ were healthy all year and still couldnt raise our collective frontcourt production above the Bulls. Now if you add Billups from day one our backcourt would be ALOT closer but thats about it.

Baller1
05-16-2012, 12:11 PM
Look at the age of the core, look at the talent ADDED.



An oversimplification, do you truly believe the ascent of Rose is COMPLETELY dependent on Thibs being the coach? LMFAO, plz, he inherited an ascending core, its why Doc Rivers strongly advised him to choose the Bulls, a team littered with lotto picks, added quality depth (Brewer, Taj, Asik).

He didnt transform the team.

Blake Griffin had just entered his third year, DeAndre Jordan entering his third year (fourth maybe?)... Usually common years for young players to hit their stride. Caron Butler was added to the roster, Kenyon Martin, a comfortable Mo Williams. A leader in Chauncey Billups. Another young talent in Nick Young.

The Clippers (outside of CP3) added MUCH more talent than Chicago did the year they signed Thibs. You're giving too much credit to CP3 now. The Clippers were going to improve dramatically whether CP3 was added or not, and that's because of the talent and youth of the Clippers prior to him being on the roster.

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 12:11 PM
billups/williams/bledsoe
young/foye/billups
butler/gomes
griffin/martin/evans
jordan/evans

a bona fide all star, a finals mvp and bona fide two way depth at 4 positions. center is a concern but not against the likes of joakim noah and omer asik.

could you say the same about the bulls? ..

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:12 PM
He absolutely transformed this team. Nobody including rose bought into what vdn was preaching but as soon as thibs walked in rose bought in which made everyone else buy into thibs system

NOBODY? LMFAO your speaking as if Boozer, Korver, Brewer didnt just come from a flex based system the year prior and got transplanted. You can say he helped the Bulls but you must not know the definition of the word transformed. A transformation would be the kind of jump Rose made from Y2 to Y3 of his career, now are you willing to say Rose wouldnt have improved without Thibs? Thats not very likely, you see players have a career curve that comes with a development stage, a prime arc, and then a decline.


With vdn coaching this team wouldn't surprise me if this team went 500 for a third straight season
LMFAO, right because talent means nothing.

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 12:19 PM
Based on? I can somewhat understand if you give us everyone we have now healthy from day 1, and you give us a healthy Billups.





Clippers - Bulls

SG: -.3 : +2.5
SF: -3.9 : +1.0
PF: +1.7 : +3.2
C: +.4 : +3.4

Blake and DJ were healthy all year and still couldnt raise our collective frontcourt production above the Bulls. Now if you add Billups from day one our backcourt would be ALOT closer but thats about it.

this is from this season? i'll be buying synergy soon i think. some of this is probably a result of drubbing on eastern conference competition, which is better but still not as good as the west. i think we'll both agree that jordan is a guy who isn't out there for his statistical output.

but i'm a bit surprised by that number at the four and at the two. with +/- an excellent team defense can help every position. nick young and billups would also be manning the two spot, and there isn't a lot of data on either of those guys at that spot this season for obvious reasons. i think that combo, with mo and foye playing like he's playing is better than cj watson/rip/jl3/brewer. i mean didn't cj watson play out of his mind this season?? same with jl3. and again the team defense pumps up their +/- splits a bit, and definitely would make the match up competitive. but young/foye/martin/evans has become a really, really formidable bench for you guys. butler and jordan to an extent are really the only things holding this team back imo.

Hustla23
05-16-2012, 12:20 PM
please don't go there.

don't tell me any team is "elite" anything when they lose to the 8 seed as 1 seed minus 1 player. absolutely not. thibs did a fantastic job plugging holes in the regular season.

i'm sorry. but again i'm sure you will reference some decent numbers pre/post rose to articulate this point. what does it matter?what did it do for them when the playoffs began?

elite defensive, good offensive teams are championship contenders. last i checked chicago just shat the bed in the first round. i'm not knocking them, i expected it. but why was rose MVP last year if his team was so "elite" at this and that? can anyone tell me that?

honestly.
If you're not going to give credence to the numbers, then there's no point in debating with you.

And the Bulls lost their starting center as well.

And Philly isn't your ordinary 8th seed. They're an elite defensive team and their SRS pegs them as the 3rd best team in the east.

They were fully healthy and the Bulls were missing their superstar and their starting center.

I think it's fair to say in the situation where both teams are fully healthy, it wouldn't be surprising if the Bulls trounced them.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:21 PM
billups/williams/bledsoe
young/foye/billups
butler/gomes
griffin/martin/evans
jordan/evans

a bona fide all star, a finals mvp and bona fide two way depth at 4 positions. center is a concern but not against the likes of joakim noah and omer asik.

could you say the same about the bulls? ..
Sorry but that Finals MVP isnt even an All-Star anymore so whats the point. This is eerily similar to the logic JB uses when propping up Brons Cleveland teams "proven winners, DPOY's, Finals MVP etc...

Focus on the NOW and you will see the truth.

Who are the 2 way depth your speaking about. Thats really interesting.

But instead of listing just names, mind telling me what kind of production as a crew we could reasonably expect? Because again this is what we got from our frontcourt, not a hypothetical but ACTUAL PRODUCTION.


Clippers - Bulls
SF: -3.9 : +1.0
PF: +1.7 : +3.2
C: +.4 : +3.4

But yes, we have more talent LMFAO

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:33 PM
Blake Griffin had just entered his third year, DeAndre Jordan entering his third year (fourth maybe?)... Usually common years for young players to hit their stride.
Yea, let me know when it happens, the growth in comparison to Rose/Noah and the addition of quality talent isnt close.


Caron Butler was added to the roster, Kenyon Martin, a comfortable Mo Williams. A leader in Chauncey Billups. Another young talent in Nick Young.The Clippers (outside of CP3) added MUCH more talent than Chicago did the year they signed Thibs.
False, we added more names but we did not add more talent.

Look at the players you named. None of them were as productive as Boozer.

In fact lets add all the names you mentioned and compare their winshares. Just as a rough estimate to compare "talent" and its availability.

Boozer = 5.8

Collective WinShares of ALL the names you just listed : 6.6
Butler: 2.3, Billups 1.7, Reggie 1.3, K-Mart .9, Young .4.

Now you factor in the rest of the Bulls addition and growth and the talent comparison becomes a joke. And the Bulls got even better in Y2 of the Thibs era.



You're giving too much credit to CP3 now.
Im guessing +/- data is giving him too much credit as well, I suppose his #'s to close games were totally unnecessary for us to win as well.


The Clippers were going to improve dramatically whether CP3 was added or not, and that's because of the talent and youth of the Clippers prior to him being on the roster.
The youth showed little growth in comparison to the Bulls, the talent added was minuscule in comparison to the Bulls, the +/- data comparing the influence Rose and CP3 had for their teams were closer than anything but again in favor of CP3.

I know its irrelevant but lets not forget the fact that without CP3 we dont get several of those additions.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:33 PM
Which games are we looking at? the 50 games they played together in the last two years?

First year, Boozer was hurt majority of the season
Second year, Rose was hurt majority of the season.

Could that be why Booz was so inconsistent with Rose?
Yup.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:35 PM
If you're not going to give credence to the numbers, then there's no point in debating with you.

And the Bulls lost their starting center as well.

And Philly isn't your ordinary 8th seed. They're an elite defensive team and their SRS pegs them as the 3rd best team in the east.

They were fully healthy and the Bulls were missing their superstar and their starting center.

I think it's fair to say in the situation where both teams are fully healthy, it wouldn't be surprising if the Bulls trounced them.

Dont forget Dengs injury, but yes its pointless in debating with someone who disqualifies regular season results in one argument but claims to understand a coaches influence on that same topic in another.

effen5
05-16-2012, 12:43 PM
Dont forget Dengs injury, but yes its pointless in debating with someone who disqualifies regular season results in one argument but claims to understand a coaches influence on that same topic in another.

Pull up the production for Deng, Rose, Noah, and Taj for all four years under Vinny and Thibs since all four players have played for both coaches. I'm curious.

I'd love to research it but I'm working :X

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 12:54 PM
If you're not going to give credence to the numbers, then there's no point in debating with you.

no there is a difference. i am not afraid to dismiss the numbers when it's applicable. stats. are. just. a. tool. i can't say it enough on this board.


And the Bulls lost their starting center as well.

ok. so if the bulls were without noah and not rose philly still wins?


And Philly isn't your ordinary 8th seed. They're an elite defensive team and their SRS pegs them as the 3rd best team in the east.

i can agree with this to an extent. it's their defense and commitment to ball movement that make them different. they aren't as good, though, as say the mephis team that beat SAS last season. but you are dancing around something that sounds pretty silly if you would actually say it -- they had a shot to beat chicago with rose playing?


They were fully healthy and the Bulls were missing their superstar and their starting center.

again we are discussing the impact of the MVP/top5 player derrick rose.


I think it's fair to say in the situation where both teams are fully healthy, it wouldn't be surprising if the Bulls trounced them.

cool.

k-mart - career 15.5 PER
mo williams - 15.5 PER (weird)
butler - 15.9 PER
billups - 19.0 PER
griffin - 22.5 PER

vs.

watson - 13.5 career PER
hamilton - 16.7 PER
deng - 16.0 PER
boozer - 20.5 PER
noah - 17.7 PER

lets call butler and hamiltons numbers a wash cause they are both declining clearly. does the -slight- advantage noah/asik has over /denandre/evans make up for the advantage griffin/martin would almost certainly hold over boozer/gibson. those two just went blow for blow with a far, far superior memphis front court. we can all agree on that no?

deng would likely obliterate caron. and i really don't see cj wason and the corpse of rip hamilton taking advantage of what would be a really solid, PROVEN, trustable guard rotation in billups/williams/young/foye/bledsoe. they would annihilate the bulls guards.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 12:56 PM
this is from this season? i'll be buying synergy soon i think. some of this is probably a result of drubbing on eastern conference competition, which is better but still not as good as the west. i think we'll both agree that jordan is a guy who isn't out there for his statistical output.
We can separate the offensive #'s if you like but what I posted was the differentials. Meaning what we allow from the opposition and what we get in return so both ends are covered. Besides the Bulls have someone like DJ, his name is Asik, he comes off the bench, easily the best defensive center of any reserve. DJ is a better player but hes no Noah. Boozer is alot closer to Blake than DJ is to Noah. Then Deng vs Butler becomes an embarrassment. Our depth in the frontcourt is comprised of small but heart filled players, sadly the Bulls frontcourt bench is comprised of Taj, Asik.



but i'm a bit surprised by that number at the four and at the two. with +/- an excellent team defense can help every position.
We are an undersized team at every position save Center (hence DJ's importance), thats not a strong suit for great help defense but Ill let you know when Blake learns the meaning of the word. He has potential, and a coach like Thibs could bring out the best in him, but just like he didnt transform Boozer, his presence alone isnt going to transform Blake into a better defender, particularly when hes going to have to mask our deficiencies on the perimeter on top of all that.



nick young and billups would also be manning the two spot, and there isn't a lot of data on either of those guys at that spot this season for obvious reasons.
OK so are we arguing the talent they had to work with and how the two teams would fair without their PG's, or a scenario where EVERYONE is healthy except for Rose and CP3?



i think that combo, with mo and foye playing like he's playing is better than cj watson/rip/jl3/brewer. i mean didn't cj watson play out of his mind this season?? same with jl3. and again the team defense pumps up their +/- splits a bit, and definitely would make the match up competitive. but young/foye/martin/evans has become a really, really formidable bench for you guys. butler and jordan to an extent are really the only things holding this team back imo.
I dont understand the point in zeroing in on the post season and forgetting the playoffs. DJ was our 3rd best player all year, hes been exploited in the post season but we dont get there without regular season success. And what we are arguing is their ability to win in the regular season.

There is also the fact that we didnt have those guys from the start of the year and we dont have some of them now.

So you admit that as constructed and considering the availability of that talent, CP3 has had alot more carrying to do than Rose ever has.

Now if you want to argue that if both teams were completely healthy minus their stars I still wont agree but at least its not insane

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 12:56 PM
Dont forget Dengs injury, but yes its pointless in debating with someone who disqualifies regular season results in one argument but claims to understand a coaches influence on that same topic in another.

i didn't disqualify. i qualified. did i say you were wrong? did i say anyone was wrong? it's like you guys ad on the part where i say "so i think it's clear that your stats are wrong N00b." i'm just adding some context to your numbers, which is what numbers are for.

i'm just hear to say you don't have a corner on the facts. sorry to burst your bubble chronz, but it's true. no one does.

and everything i said can be true and cp3 can still be the better player.

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 01:15 PM
We can separate the offensive #'s if you like but what I posted was the differentials. Meaning what we allow from the opposition and what we get in return so both ends are covered. Besides the Bulls have someone like DJ, his name is Asik, he comes off the bench, easily the best defensive center of any reserve. DJ is a better player but hes no Noah. Boozer is alot closer to Blake than DJ is to Noah. Then Deng vs Butler becomes an embarrassment. Our depth in the frontcourt is comprised of small but heart filled players, sadly the Bulls frontcourt bench is comprised of Taj, Asik.

i get that. but denandre is going to have abnormally bad offensive stats and his defensive presence is probably not quantified as much because defense is terribly difficult to quantify statistically.

i frankly see no comparison between boozer and griffin at this point. one is declining and is years removed from his peak in most facets of his game. the other is one of your teams cornerstones. he just manned UP against an arguably better team in the playoffs, booz shrunk as usual against a team you guys are saying he should have beaten.


We are an undersized team at every position save Center (hence DJ's importance), thats not a strong suit for great help defense but Ill let you know when Blake learns the meaning of the word. He has potential, and a coach like Thibs could bring out the best in him, but just like he didnt transform Boozer, his presence alone isnt going to transform Blake into a better defender, particularly when hes going to have to mask our deficiencies on the perimeter on top of all that.

boozer isn't transforming for anyone. he is who he is as a player, at least he feels confident in that. griffin is raw but he's made some strides and has the competitive gene. it's just not up for debate to me, although yes blake's development would certainly accelerate under somone not named VDN. but i personally want taj gibson to start in chicago sooner rather than later, so that's how i feel about booz. he is what people say chris bosh is.




OK so are we arguing the talent they had to work with and how the two teams would fair without their PG's, or a scenario where EVERYONE is healthy except for Rose and CP3?

seems to me like that's the best way to distill the impact of the remaining players. once we start accounting for injured production it all goes out the window. let's keep the playing field level.




I dont understand the point in zeroing in on the post season and forgetting the playoffs. DJ was our 3rd best player all year, hes been exploited in the post season but we dont get there without regular season success. And what we are arguing is their ability to win in the regular season.

well right and i wouldn't use DAJ's post season stats to say he sucked either. but it's the other side of the coin when you get on me for dismissing stats -- i don't understand how you can't see the implications of things that actually happened, small sample size or not. you can gather SOME things from watching single games if you watch closely enough.


There is also the fact that we didnt have those guys from the start of the year and we dont have some of them now.

So you admit that as constructed and considering the availability of that talent, CP3 has had alot more carrying to do than Rose ever has.

well...yes and no. roses team is built better around him for sure. but cp3 has had to make it all work a lot more and luckily has the all around game and attitude to do so.


Now if you want to argue that if both teams were completely healthy minus their stars I still wont agree but at least its not insane

well yeah. again once we start accounting for injury and debating the length and extent and impact of them it just becomes pointless i feel so you have to put in place some hypothetical to make evaluating a hypothetical worthwile.

Meaze_Gibson
05-16-2012, 01:29 PM
Maybe the spot is rotational but I can't see CP being the overly superior pg over others. I remember him pulling a Lebron and letting Jannero Pargo try to save the Hornets vs spurs in game 7 2008. I remember him getting worked by Chauncey in 2009 Playoffs. His best moments were killing an over the hill Kidd and Fisher. I see this guy get dusted on national tv twice by elite pgs yet some say because of advance statistics he is the best. If it was up to advanced statistics shouldn't Bron have a ring?...The difference between a couple percentage points is not a better indicator than destroying elite competition and walking away with wins.

I watched the Clippers bench beat the Grizzlies in the 4th quarter of a game 7. The clips 3rd string pg played better than a starting c.j. watson. Please dead that talk of who has the better players.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 01:29 PM
Pull up the production for Deng, Rose, Noah, and Taj for all four years under Vinny and Thibs since all four players have played for both coaches. I'm curious.

I'd love to research it but I'm working :X

Deng has had an up and down career, Rose, Taj and Noah have obviously never played better than they have the last 2 years but wouldnt you expect that from guys who just entered the league?

Deng is a true mystery, his best year was clearly under Scot Skiles but he declined alongside him just the same (could be injuries) according to PER he was more productive under Vinny but given that vast increase in his per possession efficiency under Thibs its fair to say hes also played better.

So yes I get that Thibs is a great coach, Ive been saying that a long time before he even got to Chicago/Boston. Hell JVG has been trying to get Thibs a job for a decade, the guy knows as well as anyone the importance of a coach, and even he agrees its the players that make the biggest difference.

It really is this simple
Talent can win alot of games with a bad coach
A great coach CANT win **** without talent.

Hustla23
05-16-2012, 01:45 PM
no there is a difference. i am not afraid to dismiss the numbers when it's applicable. stats. are. just. a. tool. i can't say it enough on this board.

Okay. Fair enough. Sorry for rushing to judgment.


ok. so if the bulls were without noah and not rose philly still wins?

I don't know. I wouldn't count Philly out. Noah makes a huge difference.



i can agree with this to an extent. it's their defense and commitment to ball movement that make them different. they aren't as good, though, as say the mephis team that beat SAS last season. but you are dancing around something that sounds pretty silly if you would actually say it -- they had a shot to beat chicago with rose playing?

Sure. They had a shot. Anything can happen in the playoffs. But the chances of Philly winning definitely increased incrementally with each injury addition to the Bulls.



again we are discussing the impact of the MVP/top5 player derrick rose.

We're also discussing one of the best centers in the league. Chronz also pointed out that Deng was more or less half dead in the series.



cool.

k-mart - career 15.5 PER
mo williams - 15.5 PER (weird)
butler - 15.9 PER
billups - 19.0 PER
griffin - 22.5 PER

vs.

watson - 13.5 career PER
hamilton - 16.7 PER
deng - 16.0 PER
boozer - 20.5 PER
noah - 17.7 PER

lets call butler and hamiltons numbers a wash cause they are both declining clearly. does the -slight- advantage noah/asik has over /denandre/evans make up for the advantage griffin/martin would almost certainly hold over boozer/gibson. those two just went blow for blow with a far, far superior memphis front court. we can all agree on that no?

deng would likely obliterate caron. and i really don't see cj wason and the corpse of rip hamilton taking advantage of what would be a really solid, PROVEN, trustable guard rotation in billups/williams/young/foye/bledsoe. they would annihilate the bulls guards.

I'm finding it difficult to determine whether you're trying to evaluate the teams by themselves or in a head to head matchup.

I'll assume it's the former first. First of all, you're entirely disregarding defense. If you make the case that well, PER includes blocked shots and steals, then I hope you're intelligent enough to realize that defense is comprised of many more facets than just that. Secondly, I don't know why you're using career PER stats. If we're going to judge current talent, we should use current PER's. I think that's a reasonable proposition.

Frankly, PER is not the best metric to judge a player's worth offensively or defensively. Personally, I would look at OWS and ORtg for offense and Synergy for defense as well as some other metrics.

But I'll assume you're not entirely familiar with those metrics so I'll leave the comparisons with the usage of PER for now.

If we are going to use PER as a basis for evaluation, then a better use of it would be to observe the PER differential between a particular player and his opponent as a method of gauging overall performance, offensively, and defensively.




Bulls PER | Opponent PER | Net PER differential

Noah 19.6 15.3 +4.3
Boozer 19.3 17.3 +2.0
Gibson 16.8 12.6 +4.2
Asik 14.2 15.9 -1.7
Deng 12.6 11.3 +1.3
Korver 13.6 11.0 +2.6
Watson 12.8 17.6 -4.8
Lucas 15.3 7.7 +7.6
Hamilton 12.3 9.6 +2.7

Clippers PER | Opponent PER | Net PER differential

Bledsoe 11 16 -5
Foye 11 14 -2
Williams 14.5 14.4 +0.1
Butler 11.7 12.1 -0.4
Young 12.9 14.0 -1.1
Martin 10 13.9 -3.9
Griffin 23 14.7 +8.3
Jordan 17.4 20.2 -2.8
Evans 9.2 13 -3.8


So, if we take offense and defense into account as best as we can by using just PER as a tool for production measurement, then the Bulls roster outside of Rose has a net PER differential of roughly +2.0 whereas the Clippers roster has a net PER differential of -1.2

If you want to include Billups but include last year's Billups since he was injured this season, it still doesn't make a large enough dent in the overall differential to show the Clippers being better.

And again, this was shown using the metric that you chose.

If we used something besides PER, the same results hold true. The Bulls are the better team without Rose than the Clippers are without Paul.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 01:50 PM
i get that. but denandre is going to have abnormally bad offensive stats and his defensive presence is probably not quantified as much because defense is terribly difficult to quantify statistically.
We are looking at the end result, the totality of those contributions. If hes making an impact it would show up SOMEWHERE. In his case its by diminishing the effectiveness of the opposition aside from his own man.


i frankly see no comparison between boozer and griffin at this point. one is declining and is years removed from his peak in most facets of his game. the other is one of your teams cornerstones. he just manned UP against an arguably better team in the playoffs, booz shrunk as usual against a team you guys are saying he should have beaten.

I never said that, I thought it would be a great series without Rose, then when Noah got hurt I still thought it would be a battle, which it was. But there are various factors that go into favoring a team in a series, some of which are more important in the regular season than in the post season. For example, there has been a study that shows teams whos offensive strength relies upon quantity over quality (meaning offensive rebounding dominance) tend to regress on both ends more than any of the other 3 statistical factors. I have my theories on this but I wont bore you with the specific here, the point Im making is, do not put words in my mouth.

As for Boozer, Im not making the case that hes better than Blake but the comparison is far more valid than any other position. If you see no comparison between those 2 then I fail to see how you can see a comparison throughout the rest of the roster. The logic makes no deductible sense.



boozer isn't transforming for anyone. he is who he is as a player, at least he feels confident in that. griffin is raw but he's made some strides and has the competitive gene. it's just not up for debate to me, although yes blake's development would certainly accelerate under somone not named VDN. but i personally want taj gibson to start in chicago sooner rather than later, so that's how i feel about booz. he is what people say chris bosh is.

Thats fine, sometimes K-Mart helps our team more than Blake, especially lately, but whats that got to do with this?


seems to me like that's the best way to distill the impact of the remaining players. once we start accounting for injured production it all goes out the window. let's keep the playing field level.
So you admit, given the variables the Clippers have dealt with. CP3 had a far greater burden and we would be devastated by his absense even with a coach like Thibs



Well right and i wouldn't use DAJ's post season stats to say he sucked either. but it's the other side of the coin when you get on me for dismissing stats -- i don't understand how you can't see the implications of things that actually happened, small sample size or not. you can gather SOME things from watching single games if you watch closely enough.

Its meaningless with regards to regular season success. Ill put it very simply, if you take 2 comparable players (say Boozer and Bosh), throughout the regular season you would expect both to show up and produce at a similar rate. If your like me, when the playoffs start, thats when historical precedence comes into play and their playoff history should factor in determining the teams chances for success in any series. Like Mo Williams being a consistent playoff choker wouldnt change the fact that hes a pretty good regular season performer, and in an argument of how many wins a team would get in the regular season, thats all that matters.


well...yes and no. roses team is built better around him for sure. but cp3 has had to make it all work a lot more and luckily has the all around game and attitude to do so.

I really dont understand. Rose has a team that was able to withstand his loss, CP3 has a team that COMPLETELY relies on him to close games and he sports the highest +/- of anyone in the league. This doesnt sound close to me AT ALL.



well yeah. again once we start accounting for injury and debating the length and extent and impact of them it just becomes pointless i feel so you have to put in place some hypothetical to make evaluating a hypothetical worthwile.

I dont see where your coming from, in 1 instance we have how the team performed given those variables in your we are adding MORE hypothetical situations to the comparison. To me it makes more sense to focus on how the season actually played out as much as you can.

Spiderman 1nner
05-16-2012, 01:52 PM
My vote is for d will but to me him and cp3 are 1a and 1b. Derrick rose, while a very good player, is in a system where he can make up for his teammates offensive defficiencies by taking 25 shots a game since hes on the best overall rebounding team, and being able to space the floor and draw double teams, but they also make up for his defensive deficiencies. I havent seen him play pass first ball so i wont declare him the best. If cp3 was able to with the hornets, then he should be able to with the bulls. I think rubio is going to be the best in 2-3 years

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 01:59 PM
Okay. Fair enough. Sorry for rushing to judgment.



I don't know. I wouldn't count Philly out. Noah makes a huge difference.




Sure. They had a shot. Anything can happen in the playoffs. But the chances of Philly winning definitely increased incrementally with each injury addition to the Bulls.




We're also discussing one of the best centers in the league. Chronz also pointed out that Deng was more or less half dead in the series.




I'm finding it difficult to determine whether you're trying to evaluate the teams by themselves or in a head to head matchup.

I'll assume it's the former first. First of all, you're entirely disregarding defense. If you make the case that well, PER includes blocked shots and steals, then I hope you're intelligent enough to realize that defense is comprised of many more facets than just that. Secondly, I don't know why you're using career PER stats. If we're going to judge current talent, we should use current PER's. I think that's a reasonable proposition.

Frankly, PER is not the best metric to judge a player's worth offensively or defensively. Personally, I would look at OWS and ORtg for offense and Synergy for defense as well as some other metrics.

But I'll assume you're not entirely familiar with those metrics so I'll leave the comparisons with the usage of PER for now.

If we are going to use PER as a basis for evaluation, then a better use of it would be to observe the PER differential between a particular player and his opponent as a method of gauging overall performance, offensively, and defensively.




Bulls PER | Opponent PER | Net PER differential

Noah 19.6 15.3 +4.3
Boozer 19.3 17.3 +2.0
Gibson 16.8 12.6 +4.2
Asik 14.2 15.9 -1.7
Deng 12.6 11.3 +1.3
Korver 13.6 11.0 +2.6
Watson 12.8 17.6 -4.8
Lucas 15.3 7.7 +7.6
Hamilton 12.3 9.6 +2.7

Clippers PER | Opponent PER | Net PER differential

Bledsoe 11 16 -5
Foye 11 14 -2
Williams 14.5 14.4 +0.1
Butler 11.7 12.1 -0.4
Young 12.9 14.0 -1.1
Martin 10 13.9 -3.9
Griffin 23 14.7 +8.3
Jordan 17.4 20.2 -2.8
Evans 9.2 13 -3.8


So, if we take offense and defense into account as best as we can by using just PER as a tool for production measurement, then the Bulls roster outside of Rose has a net PER differential of roughly +2.0 whereas the Clippers roster has a net PER differential of -1.2

If you want to include Billups but include last year's Billups since he was injured this season, it still doesn't make a large enough dent in the overall differential to show the Clippers being better.

And again, this was shown using the metric that you chose.

If we used something besides PER, the same results hold true. The Bulls are the better team without Rose than the Clippers are without Paul.

ok cool. a few things here but yeah we are starting to see things on the same page.

i really don't like team metrics. they are too reliant on too many moving parts. the reason i chose career PER, with the context provided, was because it's the best way to get a snapshot sense of who these guys are as career players. they are all veterans with a big enough sample size that career PER is probably a pretty accurate individual measurement of their production as players, regardless of teammate, system, coaching, anything.

that goes double for synergy defensive stats. every one i've seen has proven it to be a dubious tool for player evals. i just stear clear.

still, there is a lot of veracity to those numbers. to tow my line, i would say this. you can account for thibs being a good coach by the system he runs. i think we'd both agree that if you plugged AAU players into a thibs system vs. a vdn system, thib's guys would be playing a better brand of basketball. we all remember how VDN struggled with creativity in chicago.

the same really holds true for del negro. he has been good motivating his guys and building good team chemistry, but have his subs and rotations and plays gotten better? i just think he's got the brilliant chris paul running the show for most of the game and that makes any offense work. he is a one man system. it's why i think mike d'antoni is so, so overrated. he had nash making his schemes look brilliant. it's easy when your point guard is probably a better basketball mind than you...if that makes some sense.

so i think thibs teams are better suited to lose their best player because he runs a better system. this is illustrated in these differentials and the commitment to defense that didn't change. but against a more talented team in a 7 game series that formula blew up. i think the clippers minus cp3 are still better than the sixers, presuming what i am about the players that are healthy.

my answer is different if we are comparing the players who were healthy and playing to start the playoffs. but that's no fun.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 02:12 PM
One thing I will say is I used to think Vinny was a moron with his sub pattern, most coaches have their 2nd unit start the 2nd quarter but Vinny basically plays CP3 the first 13-15 minutes of the game but its been pretty effective, you get a breather before you start the 2nd quarter, so he uses him as much as he can before giving him a long breather. He tries to stagger his rotation so that Blake comes in while CP3 is resting instead of both resting at the same time throughout.

Also one thing I find interesting is the fact that we have the most depth at PG, with Mo-Bledsoe its our position of strength, yet despite this fact, CP3 was STILL the leader in +/-, how can we have such great backups at his disposal yet still be so utterly reliant on him?

69centers
05-16-2012, 02:16 PM
And this is a failed argument. Basics are just that. Basics. They don't show any expansion on how efficient that player is, or how their play ends up affecting the W/L column. By using basics, we get Monta Ellis as an elite SG.

Basics?? The top 25 players on the PPG all time list are all in the HOF or will be. The top guy on the TS% all time list is Cedric Maxwell. Let's just chuck PPG though, because it's just the "basics".


Oh so based on less accurate stats, ok thanks. Just making sure, sorry your not up to speed but nobody that knows the game rates players that way.

Also, who does the NBA's scoring leader title go to? The player with the best PER, TS%, or PPG? You can try e-mailing the NBA and stressing how no one uses PPG anymore, and that you'd like an advanced stat to be the factor for deciding the scoring leader. See how far that will get you. :jumpy:

Guess who came out on top in MVP voting? And here's all his basic, less accurate stats that put him on top:

Link to Lebron being #1 in all the "less accurate" stats. (http://espn.go.com/nba/seasonleaders)

But, you're right, no one that knows the game rates players that way. ESPN and the NBA just have no clue.

Swashcuff
05-16-2012, 02:21 PM
Basics?? The top 25 players on the PPG all time list are all in the HOF or will be. The top guy on the TS% all time list is Cedric Maxwell. Let's just chuck PPG though, because it's just the "basics".

:laugh2:

Dude make an argument instead of putting garbage like this in the thread.

Are the top 25 guys in FG% in the HOF? You really can't make a single argument to defend your stance if that is what you're going to use.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 02:48 PM
Also, who does the NBA's scoring leader title go to?
IIRC in the past it used to go to the guy who scored the most points in a season, at some point it became the guy who had the highest scoring average with a minimum games played. Whats your point? Are you suggesting your the kind of fan dense enough to rate a player by tallies without regards to efficiency? LMFAO

Nobody who knows the game would say he has a scoring title so hes better than this guy. Facts are scoring is a byproduct of efficiency and shot attempts. Ill take the more efficient scorer over the guy who needs a zillion shots to put up similar stats, even if he wins a scoring title. THATS WHY your outdated, you still put stock in antiquated awards.



The player with the best PER, TS%, or PPG? You can try e-mailing the NBA and stressing how no one uses PPG anymore, and that you'd like an advanced stat to be the factor for deciding the scoring leader. See how far that will get you. :jumpy:
HUH? The player with the best PER didnt win the scoring title, he WON THE MVP. LMFAO.
Show me where I said scoring leaders should go to anything other than who scored the most. Your strawman arguments are indicative of someone way over his head.


Guess who came out on top in MVP voting? And here's all his basic, less accurate stats that put him on top:
Link to Lebron being #1 in all the "less accurate" stats. (http://espn.go.com/nba/seasonleaders)
LOL look at ESPN rating:
PTS + REB + 1.4*AST + STL + 1.4*BLK -.7*TO + FGM + .5*TGM -.8*(FGA-FGM) + .25*FTM - .8*(FTA-FTM)

Its a WEIGHTED/LINEAR METRIC. AKA its an ADVANCED STAT, and its one that is less credible one. How is that helping your point?

Anyways back to basic stats, he didnt win the scoring title, he didnt win the assist crown, he didnt win the rebounding title. Hey Im just using your own logic, I mean your the one who mentioned these. Thank you for proving my point.


But, you're right, no one that knows the game rates players that way. ESPN and the NBA just have no clue.
LOL lots of them dont, lots of them do, but notice how NONE of them run NBA teams. And notice how those that do run teams and factor stats into their decision making cite ADVANCED STATS in all its forms.

There is ZERO logic in your claims, I never said the scoring title didnt come from whoever had the most points, what I was criticizing was your use of outdated stats when CLEARLY superior stats have been invented. Notice how TS% has a much stronger correlation to victories than ANY of the stats you mentioned. You would know this if you had a clue, but your stuck in the old ways. Hell I bet you think rebounding has gone down because there arent any great rebounders anymore. LMFAO your done.

basketfan4life
05-16-2012, 03:01 PM
Yea, let me know when it happens, the growth in comparison to Rose/Noah and the addition of quality talent isnt close.


But i tought paul was making teammates better ?

Chronz
05-16-2012, 03:05 PM
But i tought paul was making teammates better ?
Thats why I suggest you stop taking cliches at face value and understand the impact a player has more intimately by the use of stats. You will notice that certain players mesh better with other players, some players dont need to be set up but lack the efficiency to be primary playmakers so their game suffers as a result of lack of touches (even if its best for the team), others desperately need players to attract attention.

For example, Chauncey Billups had a tendency to increase the efficiency of other perimeter players but not so much bigmen. My best guess was because he lacked the vision/midrange game in PnR situations to create for the roll man but his elite floor spacing benefited other ball handlers/pin down guys. He can occupy bodies, that helps a certain type of player but some players need more from their PG.

CP3 makes his TEAM better, not all of his teammates, I actually havent checked his history but Im willing to bet he helps quite afew, though I seriously doubt any 1 player transforms another. What happened to the days where we held individuals accountable, it seems more and more people want to blame/credit the coach or the teams best player for the ultimate fate of his teammates.

JordansBulls
05-16-2012, 03:08 PM
What do you mean "still" the best PG? He hasn't been since 2009.

Rose without an allstar made the Conference finals. CP3 with an allstar starter the furthest he will make it is round 2.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 03:17 PM
What do you mean "still" the best PG? He hasn't been since 2009.

Rose without an allstar made the Conference finals. CP3 with an allstar starter the furthest he will make it is round 2.
All-Star starter implies popularity, is that suppose to hold more weight? And what about the team strength? Why focus on 1 individual? The Bulls without that All-Star, and alleged best PG in the NBA for much of the year STILL ended up with the best regular season record. The Clippers without CP3 have worst stats in the league. What exactly is there to compare? CP3 would kill for that kind of support. Hell he would be happy with a healthy Clippers team, sadly thats not the case.

Ahem;

Clippers - Bulls

SG: -.3 : +2.5
SF: -3.9 : +1.0
PF: +1.7 : +3.2
C: +.4 : +3.4
That was the NET PER production comparison for the 2 teams outside of the PG position.

In case you didnt know, the + means positive, - = negative, so higher equals more production. Got it?

D-Leethal
05-16-2012, 03:17 PM
Rose plays the 1, but I have a hard time calling him a Point Guard.

I personally think Rondo is the best PG in the game, jumpshot or no jumpshot. You give that dude a consistent jumper and he might be the best overall player in the game.

Davidgta1
05-16-2012, 03:17 PM
I'd take rondo over him.

69centers
05-16-2012, 03:23 PM
HUH? The player with the best PER didnt win the scoring title, he WON THE MVP. LMFAO.
Show me where I said scoring leaders should go to anything other than who scored the most. Your strawman arguments are indicative of someone way over his head.

Pretty clear my comment went way, way over your head. It was a rhetorical question. And if you actually clicked on the ESPN link I posted, you would have seen that by all "basic" regular stats, ESPN came up with a points system and the MVP, Lebron, came out on top. No advanaced stats were used, least not PER.


There is ZERO logic in your claims, I never said the scoring title didnt come from whoever had the most points, what I was criticizing was your use of outdated stats when CLEARLY superior stats have been invented. Notice how TS% has a much stronger correlation to victories than ANY of the stats you mentioned. You would know this if you had a clue, but your stuck in the old ways. Hell I bet you think rebounding has gone down because there arent any great rebounders anymore. LMFAO your done.

Right, but you did say that no one used these "outdated" stats as you refer to them and I gave you 2 clear cut examples on how they still are used, both by the ESPN link, and by the scoring title winner. How much further are you going to beat around that bush and skirt around what I really said? Everything in this paragraph is completely irrelevant to what I said. Read posts, take them all in and digest them before spewing out answers that completely have nothing to do with what I am posting.


:laugh2:

Dude make an argument instead of putting garbage like this in the thread.

Are the top 25 guys in FG% in the HOF? You really can't make a single argument to defend your stance if that is what you're going to use.

Umm, you obviously can't read either. Go back and click on the ESPN link, too, and now you can actually give an answer my rhetorical question (which didn't need an answer until it went over Chronz's head).

What is scoring title judged by, PER, TS% or PPG??

Why did ESPN not use one single Advanced stat, yet by calculation of ALL basic stats, they came up with MVP winner Lebron James as the best in the league. This right here proves that advanced stats are not needed, because ZERO were used in determining the best player in the league this year.

5ass
05-16-2012, 03:24 PM
What do you mean "still" the best PG? He hasn't been since 2009.

Rose without an allstar made the Conference finals. CP3 with an allstar starter the furthest he will make it is round 2.

this makes it sound like u think clippers cp3 has a better supporting cast than drose. Is that what ur saying or are u just trying to discredit cp3 by using a vague statement? The bulls have a better and more complete team than the clippers. Fact is the clippers without cp3 got the #1 pick last year. Bulls without rose for most of the season got the 1st seed.
Also lets not forget that both Cp3 and Griffin are injured in the play offs.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 03:42 PM
Pretty clear my comment went way, way over your head. It was a rhetorical question. And if you actually clicked on the ESPN link I posted, you would have seen that by all "basic" regular stats, ESPN came up with a points system and the MVP, Lebron, came out on top. No advanaced stats were used, least not PER.
False, its a system of linear weights, aka its an advanced stat and one that is less credible in the eyes of APBR. Of course they are based on regular stats, but they are augmented to give different sets of values. Thats why they dont just pile them up 1+1+1 otherwise it would be very similar to the chocobar stat.



Right, but you did say that no one used these "outdated" stats as you refer to them and I gave you 2 clear cut examples on how they still are used, both by the ESPN link, and by the scoring title winner. How much further are you going to beat around that bush and skirt around what I really said? Everything in this paragraph is completely irrelevant to what I said. Read posts, take them all in and digest them before spewing out answers that completely have nothing to do with what I am posting.

Your example only strengthened my argument. And if you dont see the connection then it is you who needs to go back and read my OP, NOBODY uses basic stats over advanced stats. Hence the term ADVANCED. AKA the stats people in the business of running an NBA refer to.


Umm, you obviously can't read either. Go back and click on the ESPN link, too, and now you can actually give an answer my rhetorical question (which didn't need an answer until it went over Chronz's head).

LOL its very telling that you chose to ignore the posts that revealed your example to be an attempt at an advanced stat,


What is scoring title judged by, PER, TS% or PPG??
What is scoring title used to judge, who the best players are or the accumulation of pts on a per game basis? Thank you.


Why did ESPN not use one single Advanced stat, yet by calculation of ALL basic stats, they came up with MVP winner Lebron James as the best in the league. This right here proves that advanced stats are not needed, because ZERO were used in determining the best player in the league this year.

False it is itself an advanced stat, and a much less respected one among the APBR community. TRY AGAIN

69centers
05-16-2012, 03:44 PM
Oh so based on less accurate stats, ok thanks. Just making sure, sorry your not up to speed but nobody that knows the game rates players that way.


NOBODY uses basic stats over advanced stats.

Please e-mail nba.com, because just like me, they're not up to speed either. When you click on their "stats", advanced ones don't come up, only basic ones:

NBA.COM STATS (http://www.nba.com/statistics/)

I guess ESPN, Fox Sports, CBS Sports, and Yahoo sports aren't up to speed either:

ESPN NBA STATS (http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics)
YAHOO NBA STATS (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats)
CBS SPORTS NBA STATS (http://www.cbssports.com/nba/stats)
FOX SPORTS NBA STATS (http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/stats)

You're hands are going to get real tired emailing all these entities and trying to explain that "nobody rates players this way anymore". Good luck with that. Get Swashcuff to help. :p

69centers
05-16-2012, 03:47 PM
Getting back on topic: CP3 was the best PG of last year's playoffs, but I do believe, like Paul Pierce, his injury is a factor in this year's playoffs, hence other PG's having better games.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 03:47 PM
Please e-mail nba.com, because just like me, they're not up to speed either. When you click on their "stats", advanced ones don't come up, only basic ones:
Actually the NBA is up to speed, its why they employ statisticians. Those same people side with me.


NBA.COM STATS (http://www.nba.com/statistics/)

I guess ESPN, Fox Sports, CBS Sports, and Yahoo sports aren't up to speed either:

ESPN NBA STATS (http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics)
YAHOO NBA STATS (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats)
CBS SPORTS NBA STATS (http://www.cbssports.com/nba/stats)
FOX SPORTS NBA STATS (http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/stats)

You're hands are going to get real tired emailing all these entities and trying to explain that "nobody rates players this way anymore". Good luck with that. Get Swashcuff to help. :p

No need, I have GM's on my side. You have websites created for the casual fan. Check out that ESPN formula you cited and have now ignored.

69centers
05-16-2012, 03:50 PM
Actually the NBA is up to speed, its why they employ statisticians. Those same people side with me.


No need, I have GM's on my side. You have websites and examples that agree with me as well. Check out whatever version of the ESPN formula they have.

You're absolutely right that GM's and other paid team reps use the advanced stats. However, you're totally wrong in trying to blanket everything by saying "nobody" uses basic stats.

All 5 of the major NBA sports sites do in fact use ALL basic stats over advanced ones. I've proved and shown that. Combine the traffic that these sites get and there isn't a shred of doubt that the people who come to see the stats on these sites, far outnumber the GM's and team personnel that use them. Otherwise, why would all 5 entities show basic stats only if there was more of a demand for advanced ones?

Chronz
05-16-2012, 03:54 PM
You're absolutely right that GM's and other paid team reps use the advanced stats. However, you're totally wrong in trying to blanket everything by saying "nobody" uses basic stats.
OK nobody uses them above advanced stats. For example, if FG% says a player is inefficient but PPP disagrees, guess which one will hold more weight if your a GM. So why would I side with anyone but those who KNOW what they are talking about?


All 5 of the major NBA sports sites do in fact use ALL basic stats over advanced ones. I've proved and shown that. Combine the traffic that these sites get and there isn't a shred of doubt that the people who come to see the stats on these sites, far outnumber the GM's and team personnel that use them. Otherwise, why would all 5 entities show basic stats only if there was more of a demand for advanced ones?

Because the demand isnt for the CASUAL fan, its for the people who run NBA teams, make actual basketball decisions, AND Hardcore fans who want to know the NBA as intimately as stats will allow.

Also ESPN has an advanced stat section, as does NBA.com, so Im not seeing your point.

And pretending you did have a point, the fact will still remain I have GM's/Statisticians aka people who get paid to do this for a living for ACTUAL NBA TEAMS, they all side with me on this. Well actually I side with them but you know what I mean. So cling to websites all you want, the FACT will still remain they are less credible and less accurate barometers.

69centers
05-16-2012, 04:16 PM
If they are less credible and less accurate than advanced stats, why did espn's calculations using only basic stats come out correct with Lebron on top? This proves basic stats can be accurate.

Titan2k8
05-16-2012, 05:58 PM
you want to see funny? Imagine New Orleans or the Clippers with no Chris Paul.....

Why imagine it? It was a reality this year... 21-45 and 29th in scoring.

Chronz
05-16-2012, 06:15 PM
If they are less credible and less accurate than advanced stats, why did espn's calculations using only basic stats come out correct with Lebron on top?
Why wouldnt he? You would have to have a really bad formula not to have Bron around the top. But passing the sniff test doesnt determine a stats credibility, thats not how science works.


This proves basic stats can be accurate.
Sure they CAN, just like my left nut can produce sperm too bad it doesnt always cum through.

D1JM
05-16-2012, 06:20 PM
Rose plays the 1, but I have a hard time calling him a Point Guard.

I personally think Rondo is the best PG in the game, jumpshot or no jumpshot. You give that dude a consistent jumper and he might be the best overall player in the game.

why not give him a 90% ft shot too while you are it

NetsPaint
05-16-2012, 09:54 PM
Steve Nash is better than Chris "Takes Nights Off, But Is A Hard Worker Off The Court So People Give Him A Pass" Paul.

BULLSFAN0810
05-16-2012, 09:56 PM
Imo Basic stats are the way to go. Basic stats are cut dry without as many, factors that can make them wrong. Do you know advance stats are Basic stats exaggerated. Its the equal of me saying I go to the gym make 10 layups, and say if I was to shoot 20 ill make them all. Who really knows? Its a computer guessing basically using numbers to evaluate creatures who domain isn't number based. It doesnt take into effect mental our physical. I may can run off twenty points in ten minutes, but that doesn't mean I have the stamina or fortitude to deliver the same over twenty minutes game after game . Basic stats are simpler need less data and more accurate.

flea
05-16-2012, 10:01 PM
Imo Basic stats are the way to go. Basic stats are cut dry without as many, factors that can make them wrong. Do you know advance stats are Basic stats exaggerated. Its the equal of me saying I go to the gym make 10 layups, and say if I was to shoot 20 ill make them all. Who really knows? Its a computer guessing basically using numbers to evaluate creatures who domain isn't number based. It doesnt take into effect mental our physical. I may can run off twenty points in ten minutes, but that doesn't mean I have the stamina or fortitude to deliver the same over twenty minutes game after game . Basic stats are simpler need less data and more accurate.

heh

BULLSFAN0810
05-16-2012, 10:02 PM
why not give him a 90% ft shot too while you are it

I can buy that.. And I think rose is top 4...as portrayed by 2k12 who uses the same stat people you guys like.

BULLSFAN0810
05-16-2012, 10:15 PM
To piggy back off earlier statements, if advanced stats were any good James would be the player we think he can be plus more, but with his crazy advanced stats and people ACTUAlLY viewing his games you see he isn't as off the meter as people think. Imo people who use advance stats are the ones who may not be as knowledgeable about Xs and Os, and the mental aspects of the game at different times of the games, and then they would evaluate players correctly.

BULLSFAN0810
05-16-2012, 10:18 PM
To piggy back off earlier statements, if advanced stats were any good James would be the player we think he can be plus more, but with his crazy advanced stats and people ACTUAlLY viewing his games you see he isn't as off the meter as people think. Imo people who use advance stats are the ones who may not be as knowledgeable about Xs and Os, and the mental aspects of the game at different times of the games, and then they would evaluate players correctly.

And to answer if cp3 is the best pg.... No..rose..head to head Rose dominates him. He dominates Rondo (Rose). And D.Will

Swashcuff
05-16-2012, 10:26 PM
Please e-mail nba.com, because just like me, they're not up to speed either. When you click on their "stats", advanced ones don't come up, only basic ones:

NBA.COM STATS (http://www.nba.com/statistics/)

I guess ESPN, Fox Sports, CBS Sports, and Yahoo sports aren't up to speed either:

ESPN NBA STATS (http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics)
YAHOO NBA STATS (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats)
CBS SPORTS NBA STATS (http://www.cbssports.com/nba/stats)
FOX SPORTS NBA STATS (http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/stats)

You're hands are going to get real tired emailing all these entities and trying to explain that "nobody rates players this way anymore". Good luck with that. Get Swashcuff to help. :p

COMPLETELY WRONG

NBA.com has one of the most comprehensive and in depth advanced statistical databases in the world.

Here (http://www.nba.com/advancedstats/) is where you'll find it.


Welcome to NBA.com Advanced Stats

NBA Advanced Stats lets you run your own deep, custom analysis on NBA players, teams and matchups.

It's built on top of the official NBA play-by-play data that is tracked courtside during every game�this includes every point, rebound, assist, steal, block, turnover, missed shot, foul and substitution, the point in the game when each one these events occurred and which players were on the floor when it happened.

ESPN, Yahoo, CBS, FOX, etc etc etc are ALL working on their advanced stats database in an attempt to compete with the more accredited (by the league themselves) in all basketball circles. So hear what you can do by year's end go back to those very pages which all have sort advanced metric in one for of the other and you'll see that they all would have links to their advanced page.

Quite honestly if you think CHRONZ needs help with stats be it basic or advanced you know NOTHING about basketball or its stats. All you need to do is read 2 of Chronz stats related posts and you'd know he's the best statistical mind in all of PSD.

Swashcuff
05-16-2012, 10:32 PM
What gets me with these advanced stats naysayers is the fact that they have NEVER even attempted to understand the advanced metrics in an attempt to form a credible opinion. All you guys do is say they are all flawed without even understand what they represent.

ANYONE who appreciates the game of basketball and wants to get a deeper understanding of it uses advanced metrics that's why damn near every team have designated statisticians on staff. These statisticians are responsible for making important business decisions before a team commits on any and every roster move.

But hey lets forget about the league the PROFESSIONALS who actually do this for a living and when I say professionals I don't just mean the statisticians but everyone from players, to scouts, to coaches, to gms to owner who all use advanced metrics. Let's ignore that and instead focus on what's more important the casual NBA fan. :rollseyes:

MonroeFAN
05-16-2012, 10:36 PM
Rajon Rondo is the best point guard in the league.

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 10:58 PM
What gets me with these advanced stats naysayers is the fact that they have NEVER even attempted to understand the advanced metrics in an attempt to form a credible opinion. All you guys do is say they are all flawed without even understand what they represent.

ANYONE who appreciates the game of basketball and wants to get a deeper understanding of it uses advanced metrics that's why damn near every team have designated statisticians on staff. These statisticians are responsible for making important business decisions before a team commits on any and every roster move.

But hey lets forget about the league the PROFESSIONALS who actually do this for a living and when I say professionals I don't just mean the statisticians but everyone from players, to scouts, to coaches, to gms to owner who all use advanced metrics. Let's ignore that and instead focus on what's more important the casual NBA fan. :rollseyes:

people take what they don't understand as a threat to their intelligence. so they do everything and anything they can to disprove said idea instead of swallowing a little pride and learning something.

that's why i hate talking about stats on here. although i will also say it goes both ways and that some (some) posters lean way too much on the implications of statistics and forget that this game is played on a basketball court between human beings.

but in regards to this argument you are right on. it's strange silly and sad all at the same time.

BULLSFAN0810
05-16-2012, 10:59 PM
What gets me with these advanced stats naysayers is the fact that they have NEVER even attempted to understand the advanced metrics in an attempt to form a credible opinion. All you guys do is say they are all flawed without even understand what they represent.

ANYONE who appreciates the game of basketball and wants to get a deeper understanding of it uses advanced metrics that's why damn near every team have designated statisticians on staff. These statisticians are responsible for making important business decisions before a team commits on any and every roster move.

But hey lets forget about the league the PROFESSIONALS who actually do this for a living and when I say professionals I don't just mean the statisticians but everyone from players, to scouts, to coaches, to gms to owner who all use advanced metrics. Let's ignore that and instead focus on what's more important the casual NBA fan. :rollseyes:

I understand what your trying to say.. It us a tool by some GMs, but there is so many scenarios advanced stats don't cover. Left side of floor covered by player A. shooting a spot up within x amount of time on the clock ond home /away rims, time of dayand time on clock, etc...if your going to use advance stats as a athlete all of this matters. Gms are supposed to use any tools they'd be stupid not to, but I bet they all read it different, and that's the issue.

thekmp211
05-16-2012, 11:05 PM
What do you mean "still" the best PG? He hasn't been since 2009.

Rose without an allstar made the Conference finals. CP3 with an allstar starter the furthest he will make it is round 2.

JB you really don't think that has anything to do with conference strengh? CP3 had to go through the spurs, lakers, mavericks yearly. three best teams of the past 10 years.

rose had to go through ... miami? who has won ... still zero rings? so let's take that with a grain of salt.

experience and strength of opponent matter greatly. the EC and WC are not two apples, although they aren't as unbalanced as they were say 10 years ago.

Swashcuff
05-16-2012, 11:08 PM
I understand what your trying to say.. It us a tool by some GMs, but there is so many scenarios advanced stats don't cover. Left side of floor covered by player A. shooting a spot up within x amount of time on the clock ond home /away rims, time of dayand time on clock, etc...if your going to use advance stats as a athlete all of this matters. Gms are supposed to use any tools they'd be stupid not to, but I bet they all read it different, and that's the issue.

Do basic stats cover any of what you just mentioned? You yourself earlier said basic stats were the way to go and advanced stats were useless.

Also damn near everything you just mentioned is actually being tracked statistically (advanced) so I don't know what you're trying to get at. You're basically adding fuel to the stance of those who are for advanced stats as one of the most accurate ways of evaluating a player's ability.

BULLSFAN0810
05-17-2012, 05:07 AM
Do basic stats cover any of what you just mentioned? You yourself earlier said basic stats were the way to go and advanced stats were useless.

Also damn near everything you just mentioned is actually being tracked statistically (advanced) so I don't know what you're trying to get at. You're basically adding fuel to the stance of those who are for advanced stats as one of the most accurate ways of evaluating a player's ability.

No, what I'm saying is there are too many scenarios advance stats don't cover, or may evaluate wrong.. Ie mid range shot. Dirk shoots it one footed, lefty or right footed..same shot different foot. Or what if he fades? Then you add in defenders, height weight. Imo if you do advance stats you must rate every thing..and that's impossible.

b@llhog24
05-17-2012, 05:32 AM
Do basic stats cover any of what you just mentioned? You yourself earlier said basic stats were the way to go and advanced stats were useless.

Also damn near everything you just mentioned is actually being tracked statistically (advanced) so I don't know what you're trying to get at. You're basically adding fuel to the stance of those who are for advanced stats as one of the most accurate ways of evaluating a player's ability.

No, what I'm saying is there are too many scenarios advance stats don't cover, or may evaluate wrong.. Ie mid range shot. Dirk shoots it one footed, lefty or right footed..same shot different foot. Or what if he fades? Then you add in defenders, height weight. Imo if you do advance stats you must rate every thing..and that's impossible.
:laugh:

Swashcuff
05-17-2012, 06:06 AM
No, what I'm saying is there are too many scenarios advance stats don't cover, or may evaluate wrong.. Ie mid range shot. Dirk shoots it one footed, lefty or right footed..same shot different foot. Or what if he fades? Then you add in defenders, height weight. Imo if you do advance stats you must rate every thing..and that's impossible.

So that makes basic stats better? I would please love for you to answer this question.

I'll tell you with the the way shots and defenses are being tracked its only a matter of time before stuff just like this will be calculated.

This however is one of the strangest arguments I've ever heard. Now you want advanced stats (or any stat) to do things that they aren't. I mean seriously even if advanced stats tracked which foot Dirk shoots off of and whether he fades or not you're still going to find some other arbitrary constraint.

I can hear it now. "Advanced stats don't take into consideration how poorly a player plays when his left calf got injured in a paint ball accident with his kids last Christmas"

Your argument has to be one of the weirdest I've ever heard though. You want stats to tell you the weight of a defender and if it doesn't do that its no good. :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

I think essentially what you want is to stats to do the things that you're suppose to do on your own. As I've said countless times with a complete understanding of the stats you gain a greater appreciation for a player. For example Manu being such an efficient scorer despite the shot that he plays so erratically and takes so many circus shots or Tyson Chandler being such a solid defensive player though not being the best shot blocker or steals man in the NBA. When you watch the game and compare their advanced stats you really gain a greater appreciation for what players are able to do.

As I see it you want to take away watching basketball all together and have the stats do everything for you.

Swashcuff
05-17-2012, 10:31 PM
people take what they don't understand as a threat to their intelligence. so they do everything and anything they can to disprove said idea instead of swallowing a little pride and learning something.

that's why i hate talking about stats on here. although i will also say it goes both ways and that some (some) posters lean way too much on the implications of statistics and forget that this game is played on a basketball court between human beings.

but in regards to this argument you are right on. it's strange silly and sad all at the same time.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Its peeves me when posters use advanced stats and nothing else when trying to evaluate a player. However you'll never see such claims from guys like Chronz, Hawkeye15, PSK, Tredigs, ManRam, Corey etc because they look at the player holistically with a deep routed understanding of the basic and advanced stats and how the player goes about getting those stats.

These guys have taken the time to grasp the game for everything that it offers and have gained a better understanding of it as a result.

EVERYONE who has embraced advanced stats or at least tried to take the time to understand exactly what they are saying and exactly how/why they come about has expanded their knowledge and understanding of the game greatly. Why can't other guys just take the time to attempt to understand them with an open mind.

I am an ALLEN IVERSON fan. I should hate advanced stats since they don't really help most of my arguments in favour of A.I. in most cases they hurt them but because I have a comprehensive understanding of all the variables relating to A.I. I can make a solid case for him in almost any discussion citing the reasons as to why A.I.'s advanced stats reflect such.

If I can take the time to learn, understanding and support them anyone can.

Hawkeye15
05-17-2012, 10:37 PM
I understand what your trying to say.. It us a tool by some GMs, but there is so many scenarios advanced stats don't cover. Left side of floor covered by player A. shooting a spot up within x amount of time on the clock ond home /away rims, time of dayand time on clock, etc...if your going to use advance stats as a athlete all of this matters. Gms are supposed to use any tools they'd be stupid not to, but I bet they all read it different, and that's the issue.

When an athlete builds up an acceptable amount of the metrics you mention, you're damn right they should be a HUGE factor in whether you go after them or keep them.

Unless you attempted to list examples of scenarios that advanced stats don't cover, because your specific examples can be found easily.

bagwell368
05-20-2012, 09:33 PM
Rajon Rondo is the best point guard in the league.

Provide proof. I have him out of the top six.

bagwell368
05-20-2012, 09:40 PM
What gets me with these advanced stats naysayers is the fact that they have NEVER even attempted to understand the advanced metrics in an attempt to form a credible opinion. All you guys do is say they are all flawed without even understand what they represent.



Good read. I was hoping that 69Centers fellow would come back for more, but...

Swashcuff
05-21-2012, 04:52 PM
Good read. I was hoping that 69Centers fellow would come back for more, but...

No he ran. You can check my profile to see what he said. He'll never come back.

kubernetes
05-21-2012, 08:15 PM
I think it's hard to say who's the best PG because everyone has a different idea of what constitutes "best." It used to be a PG could be evaluated based solely on assists and passing and how well he ran the offense, but nowadays we have a ton of shoot-first PGs who are primary scorers.

I don't even know how you would compare a Westbrook or Rose versus Paul, because it's almost like they don't even play the same position. If Paul has a 15/15 game, is that better than Rose having a 30/8 game? Whether a PG is successful probably depends more on his team's needs than anything else. Rondo can't shoot to save his life, but that's okay because he's got a team full of great shooters. The Bulls, on the other hand, don't have any great scorers other than Rose, so he handles the load there. Rose or Westbrook would probably not look great if they played on the Heat. for instance.

creamed corn
05-21-2012, 08:52 PM
I got your back 69centers. Haters gonna hate, baiters gonna bait, just gotta keep on keepin' on.

PurpleJesus
05-21-2012, 09:16 PM
Chris Paul was absolutely terrible tonight, and he has to play much better if the Clippers want a chance in this series. Putting the multiple regular season beatdowns aside, DRose would never all this kind of loss against the spurs. Rose is clearly better than Paul when healthy.

One game does not take away a players greatness.

And to say Derrick Rose would not allow a bad loss against the Spurs is a completely mute point because you have nothing to base that assumption off of. What can be said, is that Chris Paul in the playoffs has been much better than Derrick Rose.

KaganRS
05-21-2012, 09:17 PM
LOL who is this "HAND" guy ...?

Longhornfan1234
05-21-2012, 10:54 PM
Rondo is better than CP3. He is in more control of his team...which to me is the number one job of a point guard.

Chronz
05-21-2012, 11:34 PM
Rondo is better than CP3. He is in more control of his team...which to me is the number one job of a point guard.
Thats funny considering that teams GM tried to trade Rondo for CP3, and the fact that Team USA would rather bring CP3 along, which pretty much gos against the idea that Rondo has more control of a team. It only seems that way because of the numerous outlet options he has, the truth is he cant defer, hes such a non-threat without the ball that he has to have it in his hands CONSTANTLY in order to maximize his effectiveness. The C's have other playmakers (look up Pierce assists numbers without Rondo on the court), but they cant play that style because it renders Rondo near useless.

The number 1 job of the pointguard is to lead an efficient offense and get the most out of his team. Then you consider all the intangibles CP3 brings and its not even close. Rondo isnt even on Westbrooks level. And if control of a team is all you care about then why is Rondo ahead of Nash?

thekmp211
05-22-2012, 12:23 AM
westbrook is just on fire right now. he and rondo are dueling styles. but westbrook looks....like the real deal.

basketfan4life
05-22-2012, 04:40 AM
Thats funny considering that teams GM tried to trade Rondo for CP3, and the fact that Team USA would rather bring CP3 along, which pretty much gos against the idea that Rondo has more control of a team. It only seems that way because of the numerous outlet options he has, the truth is he cant defer, hes such a non-threat without the ball that he has to have it in his hands CONSTANTLY in order to maximize his effectiveness. The C's have other playmakers (look up Pierce assists numbers without Rondo on the court), but they cant play that style because it renders Rondo near useless.

The number 1 job of the pointguard is to lead an efficient offense and get the most out of his team. Then you consider all the intangibles CP3 brings and its not even close. Rondo isnt even on Westbrooks level. And if control of a team is all you care about then why is Rondo ahead of Nash?

no offense to c.Paul's greatness but he seems like a guy who has to have the ball in his hands to maximize his game too.

billsftw
05-22-2012, 06:36 AM
whilst rose may be more athletic, i think paul makes his team better than rose would

Chronz
05-22-2012, 06:41 AM
no offense to c.Paul's greatness but he seems like a guy who has to have the ball in his hands to maximize his game too.
Not in comparison to a guy who cant shoot worth a lick outside 10ft, I dont know what would make you think that but we can both agree in comparison to Rondo, there is no comparison.

Cfrey
05-22-2012, 06:49 AM
give me rubio over paul now

69centers
05-22-2012, 08:26 AM
Why Rondo is too hard to judge with Advanced stats:

There is nothing that tracks potential assists. There are too many variables after the pass. Passing is not captured or tracked with advanced stats. Those who watch Rondo can attest to the amount of botched layups by someone on our team after a great pass. Also, the amount of people who aren't ready for Rondo's pass. He is so quick with his no look passes, teammates often have no clue the pass is coming, especially those on the 2nd unit or new guys on the team who aren't used to Rondo. Then there's the guy who gets fouled down low attempting a dunk on a perfect alley oop pass by Rondo.

Advanced stats can't take into consideration a teammates' action, and relies too heavily on personal scoring efficiency over say the chances of winning the game with a key play.

Efficiency rewards players who shoot more. Rondo rarely takes the most shots on his team, unlike other elite point guards. Non scoring stats are not well captured. Rondo is not, nor has ever been an elite scorer. His game goes well beyond scoring. And defense isn't well captured in advanced stats.

Shooting efficiency doesn't take into consideration last second heaves at the end of the shot clock vs. a wide open jumper with 12 to go on the shot clock. Rondo is king of the last second heaves to beat the shot clock.

Rondo is one of the most unique and unpredictable players and passers in the game, and with basketball being a game without any repeating patterns, it gets even less repetitive with a guy like Rondo out on the court. You can say a guy has an x% chance to hit a home run his next time at bat, but who on Earth can predict with any stat, the type of pass Rondo will use next.

Trending now: #advancedstatguruswhoalwaysclaimthosewhodontusethe mdontknowthem

bagwell368
05-22-2012, 08:56 AM
It (control of a team) only seems that way because of the numerous outlet options he has, the truth is he cant defer, hes such a non-threat without the ball that he has to have it in his hands CONSTANTLY in order to maximize his effectiveness. The C's have other playmakers (look up Pierce assists numbers without Rondo on the court), but they cant play that style because it renders Rondo near useless.

Precisely correct.


The number 1 job of the pointguard is to lead an efficient offense and get the most out of his team. Then you consider all the intangibles CP3 brings and its not even close. Rondo isnt even on Westbrooks level. And if control of a team is all you care about then why is Rondo ahead of Nash?

If some of the posters realized these things, there would be better discussions around here.

bagwell368
05-22-2012, 09:23 AM
Why Rondo is too hard to judge with Advanced stats:

There is nothing that tracks potential assists. There are too many variables after the pass. Passing is not captured or tracked with advanced stats. Those who watch Rondo can attest to the amount of botched layups by someone on our team after a great pass. Also, the amount of people who aren't ready for Rondo's pass. He is so quick with his no look passes, teammates often have no clue the pass is coming, especially those on the 2nd unit or new guys on the team who aren't used to Rondo. Then there's the guy who gets fouled down low attempting a dunk on a perfect alley oop pass by Rondo.

This only affects Rondo? Celts this year are:

Even though the Celts are awful at offensive rebounding; they are pretty careful with the ball (14th in TOV), and efficient when shooting (5th in FG%)

Watching objectively vs as a fan might help your possible perceptual bias.


Advanced stats can't take into consideration a teammates' action, and relies too heavily on personal scoring efficiency over say the chances of winning the game with a key play.

Why don't you consider what you get from them, and BTW, "normal" stats are not going to help you with this issue either.


Efficiency rewards players who shoot more. Rondo rarely takes the most shots on his team, unlike other elite point guards.

Hunh? Rondo doesn't shoot a lot because he is inefficient at it. The Celts would lose many more games this year if Rondo traded places with the shot leader of the Celts every night. Getting a few extra shots would not help him be a better shooter in the short run. Take a look at his foul shooting, one hopes he practices all the time (though there are tales that he does not). It doesn't help because his hands are too big, or he doesn't practice enough, or he simply lacks the feel of shooting in a game. Six years in the pros and his shooting is getting worse, not better.


Non scoring stats are not well captured. Rondo is not, nor has ever been an elite scorer. His game goes well beyond scoring. And defense isn't well captured in advanced stats.

Really? For a poster that denigrates and avoids advanced stats, now you are an expert. Please share.


Shooting efficiency doesn't take into consideration last second heaves at the end of the shot clock vs. a wide open jumper with 12 to go on the shot clock. Rondo is king of the last second heaves to beat the shot clock.

He's the King because you are a Celts fan. Any player that has the ball as much as Rono (or even near as much) has many cases of being stuck with a poor last second shot. PP is a classic example. With 12 seconds left in a quarter he gets the ball all the time, does nothing and takes a 24' shot falling away and usually misses. Who is crying about his shooting percentages? Lots of players face this, Rondo just happens to be among the poorest shots of all of them. So, we should penalize better shooters because Rondo sucks at shooting for a starting supposed "elite" PG?


Rondo is one of the most unique and unpredictable players and passers in the game

Back to being a fan. Sure he's unique. But if unique is less efficient then less unique and more efficient - then in the actual winning and losing of games less unique would be better - every time.


and with basketball being a game without any repeating patterns, it gets even less repetitive with a guy like Rondo out on the court. You can say a guy has an x% chance to hit a home run his next time at bat, but who on Earth can predict with any stat, the type of pass Rondo will use next.

But he is not able to make himself a complete offensive threat by shooting. He is with passing, dribbling, and sometimes rebounding. Therefore he is not a complete player. He is not efficient and he is not "great" or "elite".

Because of Rondo's limitations that other 4 Celts on the floor at times face:

more defensive pressure (help, double teams, quicker weak side rotations)
more molested passing lanes
more rebounders

Rondo's lack of efficiency means that in effect every time he shoots and the Celts (a poor rebounding team) does not come up with the ball, it's a turnover. And Rondo has a higher count of these than other Celtic starters that shoot a decent amount. Add that to his counted TOV, and his great TOV/Asst numbers would take a dive compared to other better shooting PG's.

69centers
05-22-2012, 09:33 AM
Because of Rondo's limitations that other 4 Celts on the floor at times face:

more defensive pressure (help, double teams, quicker weak side rotations)
more molested passing lanes
more rebounders

Which in turn should penalize Rondo's numbers even more.


Rondo's lack of efficiency means that in effect every time he shoots and the Celts (a poor rebounding team) does not come up with the ball, it's a turnover.

Wow, so now Rondo is to blame for the C's not rebounding??

bagwell368
05-22-2012, 11:23 AM
Which in turn should penalize Rondo's numbers even more.

Punish his numbers? Rondo's inept shooting punishes the whole team and is reflected in his numbers, and the team numbers. His inept shooting has major effects beyond FG% and FT% numbers.


Wow, so now Rondo is to blame for the C's not rebounding??

Where did I say that? Celts are poor rebounding team - fact. When Rondo misses a FG, and NO Celtic (not just your binky) gets the rebound - that's effectively a turnover.

Is there anybody here or elsewhere you trust that knows advanced stats? Please speak with them, I do not believe you realize how your posts look in this thread. I know we've had our differences and snarkiness. But this is really not good.

Chronz
05-22-2012, 02:14 PM
Why Rondo is too hard to judge with Advanced stats:

There is nothing that tracks potential assists. There are too many variables after the pass. Passing is not captured or tracked with advanced stats. Those who watch Rondo can attest to the amount of botched layups by someone on our team after a great pass. Also, the amount of people who aren't ready for Rondo's pass. He is so quick with his no look passes, teammates often have no clue the pass is coming, especially those on the 2nd unit or new guys on the team who aren't used to Rondo. Then there's the guy who gets fouled down low attempting a dunk on a perfect alley oop pass by Rondo.
Those who watch the NBA at large realize that Rondo is actually the player who doesnt miss many potential assists on a conversion rates basis because of the fact that he has elite outlet shooters all over the court. In fact there was a short study done on tracking the amount of assists Rondo missed, its a short span of games but its better than nothing:

(Credit: Mike Prada of Bullets Forever)

Rajon Rondo - Boston Celtics


DATE OPP SCORE MIN AST Missed Spot Up Missed P&R Roll Missed Other Missed Transition Total Missed Percentage Converted Assist Opportunities

Sun 12/25 @ NY L 104-106 41 13 2 1 6 0 9 59.09% 22

Tue 12/27 @ MIA L 107-115 44 12 2 1 1 1 5 70.59% 17

Wed 12/28 @ NO L 78-97 34 6 4 0 2 1 7 46.15% 13

Fri 12/30 vs DET W 96-85 28 5 0 1 0 0 1 83.33% 6

Sun 1/1 @ WSH W 94-86 34 14 0 2 1 2 5 73.68% 19

Mon 1/2 vs WSH W 100-92 38 13 2 1 3 1 7 65.00% 20

Wed 1/4 vs NJ W 89-70 32 12 1 1 2 0 4 75.00% 16

Fri 1/6 vs IND L 74-87 39 9 4 2 5 1 12 42.86% 21

Wed 1/11 vs DAL L 85-90 38 7 3 0 6 1 10 41.18% 17

Fri 1/13 vs CHI L 79-88 40 11 3 1 4 3 11 50.00% 22

Sat 1/14 @ IND L 83-97 36 9 2 2 4 3 11 45.00% 20

Mon 1/16 vs OKC L 88-97 40 9 2 3 5 0 10 47.37% 19

Wed 1/18 vs TOR W 96-73 28 2 2 1 1 1 5 28.57% 7

Fri 1/20 vs PHX L 71-79 DNP


Now lets compare those potential assists to a guy like John Wall: (This was a full season study BTW):

John Wall's total assists in 2011-12: 530.
John Wall's assists per game in 2011-12: 8.0
John Wall's total MISSED assists in 2011-12: 648
John Wall's MISSED assists per game in 2011-12: 9.81
John Wall's TOTAL assist opportunities per game in 2011-12: 17.81
John Wall's ASSIST CONVERSION percentage in 2011-12: 45.03 percent



Rondo's missed assists per game number is 7.6, which is far lower than Wall's 9.8 by a wide margin. If you add Rondo's assists with his missed assists (9.6 + 7.6 = 17.2) it's almost exactly the same number of assist opportunities as John Wall (7.6 + 9.8 = 17.4). Rondo's Boston teammates convert 55.9 percent of his assist chances into actual assists, while Wall's Wizards convert only 43.9 percent of his chances.


Cry me a river fanboy, lots of PG's miss out on potential assists Rondo misses many of them because hes never the recipient on the other end of the scope, nobody relies on Rondo to space the floor because hes awful without the ball. Now to be fair, not every PG plays like Rondo, (Wall actually shares some similarities because of what a piss poor scorer he is).
CP3 doesnt have the same potential assists opportunities because hes not dumb enough to rely on low% shots from our poor outlet shooters from the bigs, as JVG/ManRammer have harped many times, their lack of a midrange game stunts his assists. So what does CP3 do? He raises his scoring average without hindering his efficiency and improves his overall passing efficiency (an aspect of the game that hes already the best at). Thats the ideal PG, one who can QB an offense, play alongside another PG if need be, and be a triple threat player. Rondo isnt that well rounded. Hes a great passer but Ill take the better player.


Advanced stats can't take into consideration a teammates' action, and relies too heavily on personal scoring efficiency over say the chances of winning the game with a key play.
The problem with this is that stats arent suppose to account for intangibles so all the excuses you just laid can hold true for a variety of PG's, and in the case of CP3, he holds even more intangibles, to the point that when Team USA had to make a decision on a PG to LEAD A GROUP OF STARS, Rondo wasnt atop that list, hell he struggles to make the TOP5. Its why Ainge tried to trade him for CP3. Atleast with CP3 there are stats that suggest he is an elite closer. Rondos play actually levels off the tighter the game gets because hes scared of getting fouled.
His stats in the final 5 minutes of a 5PT game are horrid, most players level off during this time but Rondo is a special kind of choker as he shoots 26% and his assist rate drops just as dramatically. Now a smart person would say 98 minutes are a small sample of evidence, so lets review his ENTIRE CAREER.
2011: He plays 150 minutes under this same criteria and he shoots 34% and his assist rate drops. He also gets less FTA (I wonder why ;) ).
2010: 53% (hey we finally got some decent shooting)
2009: 43%
2008: 26%

So thats 3 years of PISS POOR shooting in tight games and his only decent years come on a microscopic scoring rate.

But hey, the base of your argument is that efficiency doesnt matter, so who cares if Rondo forces his team to go elsewhere. LOL must be nice to be able to ignore a key weakness of a players game.



Efficiency rewards players who shoot more.
False


Rondo rarely takes the most shots on his team, unlike other elite point guards. Non scoring stats are not well captured. Rondo is not, nor has ever been an elite scorer. His game goes well beyond scoring. And defense isn't well captured in advanced stats.

Thats the problem with Rondo, hes such an awful scorer that the team HAS to have Rondo pound the ball, hes near useless without it, there is no other way for his team to play. Hes a good enough PG that he helps his team obviously but the problem with your excuse is that you just admitted Rondo isnt a scorer and doesnt carry a huge scoring burden, yet despite this advantage hes still not as efficient on a per possession basis, so basically he gets to pick and choose his spots more than any other star PG and he still sucks? LMFAO


Shooting efficiency doesn't take into consideration last second heaves at the end of the shot clock vs. a wide open jumper with 12 to go on the shot clock. Rondo is king of the last second heaves to beat the shot clock.

LMFAO, man you really need to get up to speed on the stats available to the public. You could atleast check the facts before you spew these horrible excuses that dont exists.

Here are the #'s on shots with the clock winding down (less than 3 seconds)
Rondo: 20% of his FGA come in this range, to be fair thats actually a fairly high rate for someone who never shoots but lets compare that rate to a guy like CP3.

22% of CP3's offense come in that same time zone and thats a guy with a much larger scoring burden.

Would you like to know the efficiency of those shots? Im guessing not but here they are anyways:
CP3 :46%
Rondo: 38%

Hmmm...... so basically your full of it




Rondo is one of the most unique and unpredictable players and passers in the game, and with basketball being a game without any repeating patterns, it gets even less repetitive with a guy like Rondo out on the court. You can say a guy has an x% chance to hit a home run his next time at bat, but who on Earth can predict with any stat, the type of pass Rondo will use next.

Trending now: #advancedstatguruswhoalwaysclaimthosewhodontusethe mdontknowthem

Trending now:
#homerfanslovetomakeupexcusesthatdontexistandstats disprove

69centers
05-22-2012, 03:42 PM
The facts why advanced stats don't work not only apply to Rondo, but all players. I like how you take on the argument of how Rondo is not the only only one taking last second shots, but absolutely ignored this comment I made: "Shooting efficiency doesn't take into consideration last second heaves at the end of the shot clock vs. a wide open jumper with 12 to go on the shot clock." Way to turn the advanced stat argument into who takes more shots at the end of the shot clock. :clap:

Also, please post the link on last second shots.

And I'd love to know who this guy is trying to chart potential assists, because it's bogus. Where are the passes that lead to fouls and free throws? :laugh2: Nice try.

You've also proved my point because even though I used these reasons for Rondo, I also meant them as a reason not to judge anyone by just advanced stats.

And how on Earth can you say that efficiency doesn't reward players who shoot more? Even inefficient players' PER can be padded by taking more shots. FACT. The more makes will cover up their misses.

The offensive player will always have a higher PER than the defensive specialist.

Chronz
05-22-2012, 04:58 PM
The facts why advanced stats don't work not only apply to Rondo, but all players. I like how you take on the argument of how Rondo is not the only only one taking last second shots, but absolutely ignored this comment I made: "Shooting efficiency doesn't take into consideration last second heaves at the end of the shot clock vs. a wide open jumper with 12 to go on the shot clock." Way to turn the advanced stat argument into who takes more shots at the end of the shot clock. :clap:

Dont work? LMFAO they do work, they show what they are intended to show, if someone you have encountered has misused stats then blame the person responsible. And again, nowadays you can separate shots from whatever zone/time/playtype you want. The reason most people dont is because its not that different from any other star player. Stars take last seconds shots OMG I didnt know that. The fact that your argument only hurts Rondos productive worth even more was the point of my post, dont really care what else you get out of it but the facts are CP3 takes more of those shots and hits them at a higher rate.


Also, please post the link on last second shots.
82games.com


And I'd love to know who this guy is trying to chart potential assists, because it's bogus. Where are the passes that lead to fouls and free throws? :laugh2: Nice try.

Nah your unsubstantiated opinion is more bogus that actual research. I can give out opinions too, check the part of that post that was purely focused on what I have observed. Rondo isnt a special case of a guy who loses out in potential assists (%wise), hes a PG whos plethora of outlet options boost his assists more than any other PG Ive seen.


You've also proved my point because even though I used these reasons for Rondo, I also meant them as a reason not to judge anyone by just advanced stats.

Then you shouldnt mention Rondo in a thread regarding CP3 being the best. Your post was an attempt to exonerate Rondo by pointing out facts that hold true for all players. Well where does that take you? Back to focusing on aspects of the game that are in fact quantifiable. And sadly CP3 doesnt need the same weak excuses youve made for Rondo, so why would I care if stats dont capture Rondo's worth? They dont encapsulate ANY players worth completely, the difference is the areas of the game that ARE quantifiable show that CP3 is superior. The actions of Rondo's GM show that his team would rather have CP3. The olympic and All-NBA/MVP committees continue to choose CP3 over Rondo. Advanced +/- data used by NBA TEAMS are meant to shed light on things that boxscore metrics dont capture and they too suggest CP3 is a superior player. Simply put, when you combine all the evidence we have along with our own observations, thats when you have the most complete picture of a players worth.

If your point is stats dont = everything then you should take that point to a thread where its relevant, NOBODY has ever suggested that stats capture everything. Your post seemed more like an attempt to make Rondo seem like a special case, sadly, all you have done is hurt his case.


Nobody judges any player off any 1 thing, but your attempts to marginalize scoring efficiency (with no research mind you) and downplay actual quantifiable claims proves your fanhood is strong. Try being objective, thats when you will realize being unique isnt better than BEING BETTER.


And how on Earth can you say that efficiency doesn't reward players who shoot more? Even inefficient players' PER can be padded by taking more shots. FACT. The more makes will cover up their misses.

LOL then you should rephrase your comment because you have a very poor understanding of statistical terminology. PER doesnt equal Efficiency, its a system of linear weights that attempts to account for a variety of stats, some of which have nothing to do with efficiency (things like blocking shots and getting steals). OWS and WARP are other similar stats that have a different set of weights and goals. So when you use a general term like efficiency, specifically with regards to scoring/shooting efficiency then your speaking only about efficiency and its relationship with usage, if your talking about PER then SAY PER.


The offensive player will always have a higher PER than the defensive specialist.

Generally yes, but its a known fact that PER favors shot creation, its why we have different statistical tools that favor EFFICIENCY to provide a contrast, no matter the case they all favor CP3.

Defense is much more subjective and harder to assess statistically.

basketfan4life
05-22-2012, 05:17 PM
Not in comparison to a guy who cant shoot worth a lick outside 10ft, I dont know what would make you think that but we can both agree in comparison to Rondo, there is no comparison.

Actually, i've never seen either of them play without complete contol of the offense, with the ball in their hands. I couldn't watch a lot of celtics or cliipers games this year, but in the past it looked like this.

Chronz
05-22-2012, 05:22 PM
Actually, i've never seen either of them play without complete contol of the offense, with the ball in their hands. I couldn't watch a lot of celtics or cliipers games this year, but in the past it looked like this.
You missed out man, especially when Billups was around. It was beautiful how many different kind of playmakers we had in the early going. CP3 was able to play off the ball and be the recipient of many Blake/Chauncey passes. Hes a reluctant shooter but when hes set and WIDE OPEN, hes money.

Rondo cant play this style. So even though youve never seen it, it doesnt mean you shouldnt have an idea of how it would work. I mean you've seen how Kobe defends Rondo in the Finals right? Its hard to run traditional post sets when your PG isnt respected from a spacing standpoint. Rondo finds other ways to contribute, and hes a great PG, but we are talking about the best here.

basketfan4life
05-22-2012, 05:35 PM
You missed out man, especially when Billups was around. It was beautiful how many different kind of playmakers we had in the early going. CP3 was able to play off the ball and be the recipient of many Blake/Chauncey passes. Hes a reluctant shooter but when hes set and WIDE OPEN, hes money.

Rondo cant play this style. So even though youve never seen it, it doesnt mean you shouldnt have an idea of how it would work. I mean you've seen how Kobe defends Rondo in the Finals right? Its hard to run traditional post sets when your PG isnt respected from a spacing standpoint. Rondo finds other ways to contribute, and hes a great PG, but we are talking about the best here.

Oh no, in no way i'm claiming Rondo is the best, that goes to cp3 or may be a healthy Rose. And i know Rondo can't play that, i saw how Kobe defended him too. All i said was CP3 too seems to need ball a lot to maximize his effectiveness, you say he was great playing off the ball too in the early season, it's ok.

Swashcuff
05-22-2012, 05:42 PM
Oh no, in no way i'm claiming Rondo is the best, that goes to cp3 or may be a healthy Rose. And i know Rondo can't play that, i saw how Kobe defended him too. All i said was CP3 too seems to need ball a lot to maximize his effectiveness, you say he was great playing off the ball too in the early season, it's ok.

Yea in his last year in NOH he was particularly good off the ball especially early in the season. The system in which Monty Williams instituted was one based on everyone getting into the action and CP3 despite being injured played quite well.