PDA

View Full Version : What Westbrook haters have to say now?



Shlomi
05-02-2013, 06:28 AM
this series is just about to prove how good and important this player is, top 5 in the world no doubt

LakersIn5
05-02-2013, 07:15 AM
not top 5 but definitely underated.

yaswaggin
05-02-2013, 07:18 AM
hes not top 5, but hes top 7

Heediot
05-02-2013, 07:21 AM
Doesn't prove ****. If you put any other top 15 PG on this team, they still beat the Rox easily.

eso
05-02-2013, 07:24 AM
He still looks like a Ninja Turtle.

JiffyMix88
05-02-2013, 08:02 AM
Rockets are shooting well and let's forget the fact Asik is owning their big men.... :shrug: but sure it's because Westbrook isn't there

sventhedog
05-02-2013, 08:36 AM
if it was a game against a great team or a team with multiple superstars, it would probably OKC missing westbrook. but the rockets? seriously???

no offense to rockets fans. but OKC lost because:

too much hack-a-asik.
durant got frustrated.
durant not setting up his teamates enough. he's not a pg but even a so-called ballhog kobe can do it, right?
bad defense on harden - rockets were able to limit durant and i'm pretty sure that is harder than defending a flu-ridden harden.
kevin martin struggles.

bucketss
05-02-2013, 08:52 AM
if it was a game against a great team or a team with multiple superstars, it would probably OKC missing westbrook. but the rockets? seriously???

no offense to rockets fans. but OKC lost because:

too much hack-a-asik.
durant got frustrated.
durant not setting up his teamates enough. he's not a pg but even a so-called ballhog kobe can do it, right?
bad defense on harden - rockets were able to limit durant and i'm pretty sure that is harder than defending a flu-ridden harden.
kevin martin struggles.

durant had 7 assists, he was dropping off some sweet passes to the big man idk if you watched the game.

TrAv=MaGiCfReAk
05-02-2013, 09:05 AM
Its scary how much he looks like a Ninja turtle ... I've always loved RW ... I I heard the thunder were willing to trade him to orlando in a deal for Dwight ... this was before Dwight was hated and still had his highest value but Dwight wouldn't give them any long term commitment so no deal could happen and for that I hate Dwight even more lol

But yea thunder not having westbrook is clearly hurting them

mightybosstone
05-02-2013, 09:05 AM
I do think Westbrook makes the Thunder a better, more dangerous basketball team. But at the same time, it's fairly evident to me that his absence has made Durant a much better player. Look as his numbers for the last three games. He's been absolutely unstoppable with the ball in his hands. That being said, I don't think you could make a case that the Thunder have been better without Westbrook on the floor. I do, however, think his absence is not as big of a deal as it would have initially seemed.

DumDum
05-02-2013, 09:17 AM
he's got to be top 10 on every-bodies list at the very least

colinskik
05-02-2013, 09:33 AM
He still looks like a Ninja Turtle.

Wrong. He looks like E.T. /

kobe4thewinbang
05-02-2013, 09:35 AM
He's a good player. But any team without one of their best players is going to struggle. Doesn't really prove anything that is not already obvious. :shrug:

Swashcuff
05-02-2013, 09:42 AM
He's a good player. But any team without one of their best players is going to struggle. Doesn't really prove anything that is not already obvious. :shrug:

Well I think he was addressing the haters. Like one poster in this thread who in another thread said the Thunder would be better now that Westbrook is gone.

ManRam
05-02-2013, 09:44 AM
he's got to be top 10 on every-bodies list at the very least

it's unfortunate that it might take the thunder struggling for people to realize that.

it should have been glaringly obvious. just because he's not a john stockton style "true point guard" doesn't mean anything. not in today's NBA. he's as important to that offense as anyone, yes, even durant.

he brings so much to the table that no one else on that team can.


and him being out doesn't make durant better. period. besides game 4, he hasn't played better, he's just seen more volume. play a whole season without westbrook, to get that sample size up, and he's not putting up the near historical numbers he did this year.

hell, even in game 4 that offense got so stagnant it turned to concrete late in the game.

kobe4thewinbang
05-02-2013, 09:50 AM
Well I think he was addressing the haters. Like one poster in this thread who in another thread said the Thunder would be better now that Westbrook is gone.Yeah, that's absurd. Game 5 proved that when Kevin Durant goes cold and the shooters aren't lighting it up, OKC is in trouble without their other star player.

blahblahyoutoo
05-02-2013, 09:51 AM
He still looks like a Ninja Turtle.

him and his huge hot dog bun lips.

DumDum
05-02-2013, 09:54 AM
him and his huge hot dog bun lips.

:laugh:

blystr2002
05-02-2013, 10:00 AM
The fact is Westbrook is very good, but all the flaws people say about him are true. He is a shooting guard playing the point and he plays selfish and immature sometimes. He is explosive and can score at will though. The problem is OKC has no other scorer on the team besides Durant right now. Losing Westbrook wouldn't be as big a deal if they had someone else who could make a shot. Any team that loses 1 of their 2 centerpieces would be hurt by it.

ManRam
05-02-2013, 10:11 AM
The fact is Westbrook is very good, but all the flaws people say about him are true. He is a shooting guard playing the point and he plays selfish and immature sometimes. He is explosive and can score at will though. The problem is OKC has no other scorer on the team besides Durant right now. Losing Westbrook wouldn't be as big a deal if they had someone else who could make a shot. Any team that loses 1 of their 2 centerpieces would be hurt by it.

the thing is, a "shooting guard playing the point" is looked at as a bad thing. why?

the notion that you need a john stockton at the point is just dumb. look at how chicago found their success offensively (hell, both Rose-led and Jordan-led). look at how the lakers and heat won their championships. even the pistons and spurs weren't winning with a huge pass-first PG playing for them (the notion that tony parker is such a more prolific passer is stupid, as well).

there's not set guideline for what a PG needs to be. a team that works well as a unit is better off than a team that relies on one player to set everyone up. positions should be looked at and defined much more loosely.

and dude had an assist% right in the ricky rubio region. 7th best in the NBA. his selfishness is just overblown because people aren't used to seeing a "point guard" play like this.

he has flaws, but they're NOT as serious as everyone thinks.

just pretend he's the wade of the team, and thabo is the chalmers. neither have a great passing PG. and it doesn't matter...nor does it make RWB less of a player.

OceanSpray
05-02-2013, 10:16 AM
All the WB haters are all idiots for thinking WB was a liability. He's in some cases a bigger asset than Durant just because WB gets his team going. Durant doesn't have that energy going.

jp611
05-02-2013, 10:17 AM
the thing is, a "shooting guard playing the point" is looked at as a bad thing. why?

the notion that you need a john stockton at the point is just dumb. look at how chicago found their success offensively (hell, both Rose-led and Jordan-led). look at how the lakers and heat won their championships. even the pistons and spurs weren't winning with a huge pass-first PG playing for them (the notion that tony parker is such a more prolific passer is stupid, as well).

there's not set guideline for what a PG needs to be. a team that works well as a unit is better off than a team that relies on one player to set everyone up. positions should be looked at and defined much more loosely.

and dude had an assist% right in the ricky rubio region. 7th best in the NBA. his selfishness is just overblown because people aren't used to seeing a "point guard" play like this.

he has flaws, but they're NOT as serious as everyone thinks.

just pretend he's the wade of the team, and thabo is the chalmers. neither have a great passing PG. and it doesn't matter...nor does it make RWB less of a player.

Great post. 100% agree... I've been pretty critical of Russell in the past, but I really think he's proven why he is so good for that team

The Thunder are best when they have an aggressive PG

Alayla
05-02-2013, 11:02 AM
if it was a game against a great team or a team with multiple superstars, it would probably OKC missing westbrook. but the rockets? seriously???

no offense to rockets fans. but OKC lost because:

too much hack-a-asik.
durant got frustrated.
durant not setting up his teamates enough. he's not a pg but even a so-called ballhog kobe can do it, right?
bad defense on harden - rockets were able to limit durant and i'm pretty sure that is harder than defending a flu-ridden harden.
kevin martin struggles.

All 3 of these are direct results of westbrook being out

Alayla
05-02-2013, 11:03 AM
Ive been saying for a long time westbrook is the most underrated point in the game

Avenged
05-02-2013, 11:08 AM
Funny how his selfishness is what gives him a bad rep but his selfishness is exactly what wins the Thunder games. It was evident last night. He can penetrate the ball at will, he can spot up mid-range anytime he wants, and he's good at setting his teammates up (despite his negative rep on that department).

Hard to beat the Thunder when you have 2 great shooters who hardly ever had a bad shooting night.. You take one away and suddenly you have only have 1 player trying to do everything and a bunch of role players folding under playoff pressure

b@llhog24
05-02-2013, 11:13 AM
this series is just about to prove how good and important this player is, top 5 in the world no doubt

Russy ain't top 5.

shep33
05-02-2013, 11:14 AM
Would've been a sweep if WB was around. Your talking about an NBA All-First Team Player this year

Blitzbolt
05-02-2013, 11:15 AM
Wesbrick is a GREAT player but he is not a true PG he is a SG its not his fault he fails to run a team and that's why people talk about him.

I blame the coaches.

ManRam
05-02-2013, 11:34 AM
Wesbrick is a GREAT player but he is not a true PG he is a SG its not his fault he fails to run a team and that's why people talk about him.

I blame the coaches.

how can you say he "fails to run a team"?

again, the archaic and silly definitions of what a point guard has to be, and the false belief that a team needs a "true PG" to be successful.

they had the freaking best offense (perhaps second to miami) in the NBA this year. clearly he's "failing" mightily :rolleyes:

FOBolous
05-02-2013, 11:37 AM
still think the Thunder would be better off with a real PG :shrug: should've traded Westbrook for Rondo when the Celtics offered it. Rondo/Harden/Durant wouldn't been lethal.

ManRam
05-02-2013, 11:44 AM
still think the Thunder would be better off with a real PG :shrug: should've traded Westbrook for Rondo when the Celtics offered it. Rondo/Harden/Durant wouldn't been lethal.

if they're keeping harden, they would have been much better off going after an offensive big man than a pass-first PG to pair with harden and KD. a "true PG" with those two isn't really necessary, nor is it going to make them much better. no reason to take the ball out of those two guys' hands for a guy like rondo.

OceanSpray
05-02-2013, 11:46 AM
Signing Ibaka was a huge mistake. He hasn't proven much except for that jumper.

ghettosean
05-02-2013, 11:48 AM
I do think Westbrook makes the Thunder a better, more dangerous basketball team. But at the same time, it's fairly evident to me that his absence has made Durant a much better player. Look as his numbers for the last three games. He's been absolutely unstoppable with the ball in his hands. That being said, I don't think you could make a case that the Thunder have been better without Westbrook on the floor. I do, however, think his absence is not as big of a deal as it would have initially seemed.

This is the stuff that I think a lot of people don't realise.

njnets
05-02-2013, 11:49 AM
horrible argument. many people think that durant should get more touches and looks. nobody said westbrook is a bad player. it just frustrates some people that he doesnt give durant the ball enough. losing him entirely from this team is a bad thing. dont confuse those two differences.

FOBolous
05-02-2013, 11:49 AM
how can you say he "fails to run a team"?

again, the archaic and silly definitions of "true PG" and the false belief that a team needs a "true PG" to be successful.

they had the freaking best offense (perhaps second to miami) in the NBA this year. clearly he's "failing" mightily :rolleyes:

i think the whole idea of a "true PG" and concept of each traditional position is that each player on the court has a role to fulfill. making sure you have a player at each position that fits the definition of what each position is traditionally suppose to do makes sure each role is fulfilled. not having a player that doesn't play like how they're SUPPOSE to play in each position makes it that much harder to get another player on the team that fills that role therefore making the team unbalanced.

for example, if you have a player who's suppose to be a center that sucks on defense and can't protect the rim like a center is suppose to...it's hard to find another player on the team to fill that role. if not the center, who else is suppose to do it? the PG? samething...if you have a PG who focuses more on scoring then distributing, it's hard to find another player to fill that role as a distributor.

so when people are criticizing Westbrook for not being a good traditional PG, they're actually criticizing the structure of the Thunders team. They're critiquing the Thunder for not having a distributor.

i personally think one of the mistake many people do when they designate a specific position to a player is designating that position base on the HEIGHT of the player versus the skill set of the player. people look at a guy that's 6'3" and say "oh! because he's short so he must be a PG!" when in reality, he has the skillset of a SG and should be playing at the SG instead of forcing him into a role in which he is not accustomed to. or they look at a guy that's 6'8" and think "oh! he must be a SF because he's that height!" when in reality, he has a skillset of a distributor and should be playing at PG.

what the Thunders need to do, to become a better team, is stop forcing Westbrook to play PG...move him back to his natural position of SG...and find a distributor for the team. a real distributor/Westbrook/Durant would be a lethal trio.

b@llhog24
05-02-2013, 11:49 AM
Wesbrick is a GREAT player but he is not a true PG he is a SG its not his fault he fails to run a team and that's why people talk about him.

I blame the coaches.

Still better than your pg.

blystr2002
05-02-2013, 11:55 AM
It isn't that he is aggressive and doesn't move the ball around. It is the fact that they don't have other players that can do that either and call him their PG. Other teams like the Bulls had point fowards. LeBron is the same with the heat right now and they have good ball movement. The Spurs are all passers and move the ball. I'm fine with Westbrook's style I guess it is more the makeup of the team. Every team needs facilitators whether it is a PG, Point Foward or a center like Gasol in Memphis. Their are times when he brings it up, holds it too long and doesn't make the pass he should.
the thing is, a "shooting guard playing the point" is looked at as a bad thing. why?

the notion that you need a john stockton at the point is just dumb. look at how chicago found their success offensively (hell, both Rose-led and Jordan-led). look at how the lakers and heat won their championships. even the pistons and spurs weren't winning with a huge pass-first PG playing for them (the notion that tony parker is such a more prolific passer is stupid, as well).

there's not set guideline for what a PG needs to be. a team that works well as a unit is better off than a team that relies on one player to set everyone up. positions should be looked at and defined much more loosely.

and dude had an assist% right in the ricky rubio region. 7th best in the NBA. his selfishness is just overblown because people aren't used to seeing a "point guard" play like this.

he has flaws, but they're NOT as serious as everyone thinks.

just pretend he's the wade of the team, and thabo is the chalmers. neither have a great passing PG. and it doesn't matter...nor does it make RWB less of a player.

b@llhog24
05-02-2013, 12:07 PM
i think the whole idea of a "true PG" and concept of each traditional position is that each player on the court has a role to fulfill. making sure you have a player at each position that fits the definition of what each position is traditionally suppose to do makes sure each role is fulfilled. not having a player that doesn't play like how they're SUPPOSE to play in each position makes it that much harder to get another player on the team that fills that role therefore making the team unbalanced.

That's only if all things are equal, however Rondo and Westbrook are not equals. Even if we played as if they were equal on defense, Westbrook obliterates Rondo on offense. In any event, a "true" pg is supposed to be able to hit above 70% on free throws.


for example, if you have a player who's suppose to be a center that sucks on defense and protect the rim like a center is suppose to...it's hard to find another player on the team to fill that role. if not the center, who else is suppose to do it? the PG? samething...if you have a PG who focuses more on scoring then distributing, it's hard to find another player to fill that role.

It's not "hard" per say. Positions are becoming more and more diluted as the game evolves. The prototypical model for a SG is in the Reggie Miller mold at least more so than Harden, I'm sure as **** you wouldn't take him over Harden.


so when people are criticizing Westbrook for not being a good traditional PG, they're actually criticizing the structure of the Thunders team. They're critiquing the Thunder for not having a distributor.


Problem is (like all things) people just throw out ridiculous trade scenarios as if its likely to happen. Obviously if you trade Westbrook for Cp3/Curry/Rose the Thunder wouldn't see much of a dropoff. But why would any of these teams make said trade?


i personally think one of the mistake many people do when they designate a specific position to a player is designating that position base on the HEIGHT of the player versus the skill set of the player. people look at a guy that's 6'3" and say "oh! because he's short so he must be a PG!" when in reality, he has the skillset of a SG and should be playing at the SG instead of forcing him into a role in which he is accustomed to. or they look at a guy that's 6'8" and think "oh! he must be a SF because he's that height!" when in reality, he has a skillset of a distributor and should be playing at PG.


Positions are typically "defined" by offensive roles, but what actually limits how many positions you can play is what your defensively capable of. Dirk shoots and plays very much like a wing player, but you damn sure aren't gonna ask him to check the Kobe Bryants, LeBron Jame and Dywane Wade's of the world.


what the Thunders need to do, to become a better team, is stop forcing Westbrook to play PG...move him back to his natural position of SG...and find a distributor for the team. a real distributor/Westbrook/Durant would be a lethal trio.

When it happens let me know.

Hawkeye15
05-02-2013, 12:28 PM
I do think Westbrook makes the Thunder a better, more dangerous basketball team. But at the same time, it's fairly evident to me that his absence has made Durant a much better player. Look as his numbers for the last three games. He's been absolutely unstoppable with the ball in his hands. That being said, I don't think you could make a case that the Thunder have been better without Westbrook on the floor. I do, however, think his absence is not as big of a deal as it would have initially seemed.

I think its a huge deal, because it allows the other team to shy away from traditional lineups that need to guard Westbrook as a lead ball handler. The Rockets are getting away with playing Parsons, Harden, Beverly, Garcia, and Asik, while barely playing a PF at all. The Thunder now only have one guy who attacks the rim, so Houston can play as small as crap.

OceanSpray
05-02-2013, 12:36 PM
Kevin Martin, lol.

Showtime Steve
05-02-2013, 12:57 PM
Not a hater, just think he needs his own team. All big 3 need hierarchy 1. Kg 2. Pierce 3. Allen. 1. Lbj 2. Wade 3. Bosh. Seems like Westbrook wants no.1 when Durant wants it.

Chronz
05-02-2013, 01:05 PM
if it was a game against a great team or a team with multiple superstars, it would probably OKC missing westbrook. but the rockets? seriously???

Rockets had an SRS and an Efficiency rating in line with a 50 win team. They aren't to be taken lightly.

Chronz
05-02-2013, 01:06 PM
Yeah, that's absurd. Game 5 proved that when Kevin Durant goes cold and the shooters aren't lighting it up, OKC is in trouble without their other star player.
Nah, that game proves how important defense is. Their offense was fine.

ChiSox219
05-02-2013, 01:34 PM
Whoever handles the ball the most should have a high iq and good court vision. Westbrook lacks both and has a poor shot selection to make things worse. So far this series hasnt proven much, other than KD is a monster and should be getting more touches than he does playing with Westbrook. If Kevin Martin plays average this series is over.

OceanSpray
05-02-2013, 01:36 PM
Whoever handles the ball the most should have a high iq and good court vision. Westbrook lacks both and has a poor shot selection to make things worse. So far this series hasnt proven much, other than KD is a monster and should be getting more touches than he does playing with Westbrook. If Kevin Martin plays average this series is over.

Yeah, that makes sense. They went from completely destroying Houston in the first two games to barely escaping the third game and beaten in the 4th. Yup, Westbrook isn't good.

ChiSox219
05-02-2013, 01:41 PM
Yeah, that makes sense. They went from completely destroying Houston in the first two games to barely escaping the third game and beaten in the 4th. Yup, Westbrook isn't good.

Westbrook is tremendous, this thread is stupid because no one thinks Westbrook isnt good, it's that his style is not optimizing his teammates, specifically Durant. Of course the Thunder arent going to be as good when you replace Westbrook with Reggie Jackson who has even more flaws and lacks Westbrook elite athleticism. But you gonna tell me that a Curry-Harden-Durant-Ibaka core isnt better? The Thunder offense has still performed at elite efficiency without Westbrook even with Martin going 9-31.

YoungOne
05-02-2013, 01:50 PM
harden still would have been the better choice to keep...

cuttydoesit6
05-02-2013, 01:54 PM
top 5...:facepalm:

OceanSpray
05-02-2013, 02:03 PM
Westbrook is tremendous, this thread is stupid because no one thinks Westbrook isnt good, it's that his style is not optimizing his teammates, specifically Durant. Of course the Thunder arent going to be as good when you replace Westbrook with Reggie Jackson who has even more flaws and lacks Westbrook elite athleticism. But you gonna tell me that a Curry-Harden-Durant-Ibaka core isnt better? The Thunder offense has still performed at elite efficiency without Westbrook even with Martin going 9-31.

Curry-Harden-Durant-Ibaka? How did you manage to add another superstar into this equation? Harden-Durant-Ibaka is just as good as Westbrook-Durant-Ibaka. Harden is putting up better numbers because he has to. Westbrook would put up huge numbers if he was in Houston as well. Why do people act like WB is a liability? Are you guys forgetting the fact that OKC are only 3-2 and will play against the crowd of Houston? WB is a top PG, probably the second best right now.

ShowtimeNo24
05-02-2013, 02:03 PM
A guy with same BB IQ as a peanut can not be considered TOP5. True PG or not, 90% of the starting guards are better at running the offense compared to WB.

LOOTERX9
05-02-2013, 02:12 PM
Well OKC is not use to playing without Westbrook and his ball dominant style so I can't kill them at the moment. They have not had any time to practice and create a new offensive scheme wiithout westbrook there

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 02:21 PM
Def top 5.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 02:23 PM
A guy with same BB IQ as a peanut can not be considered TOP5. True PG or not, 90% of the starting guards are better at running the offense compared to WB.

Disagree. westy is a top5 player overall in this league today. Give him his props.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 02:24 PM
Well OKC is not use to playing without Westbrook and his ball dominant style so I can't kill them at the moment. They have not had any time to practice and create a new offensive scheme wiithout westbrook there

most teams aren't use to playing with out their 2nd best player. Specially if that player is a border line superstar.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 02:26 PM
You can not deny how Westbrook impacts the game.

rhymeratic
05-02-2013, 02:42 PM
Russell Westbrook = More athletic Stephon Marbury. The end.

ShowtimeNo24
05-02-2013, 04:39 PM
Disagree. westy is a top5 player overall in this league today. Give him his props.

top5 by which standards exactly? Tell me one thing that separates Westbtooke besides his leaping ability? He is a top 5 athlete for sure, just very far from a top5 player. But well you have every right to your own opinion as do i.

LAKobeBryant
05-02-2013, 04:42 PM
give them a point guard like conley, lawson, lowry etc dont even need elite ones and they still be in the same position as when westbrook is there.

Heediot
05-02-2013, 04:42 PM
The issue is not that he isn't a top 5-10 player. The point is there are better fits that are in the top echelon of players for Durant.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 05:12 PM
top5 by which standards exactly? Tell me one thing that separates Westbtooke besides his leaping ability? He is a top 5 athlete for sure, just very far from a top5 player. But well you have every right to your own opinion as do i.

name me 5 players you take over him on your team ?

straight up if i had to build a team using the players that are in the league today, there is only maybe a handfull of players id take over westbrook. maybe!!

lebron
durant
cp3 maybe
harden
rose (healthy) maybe

whos your top 5 right now ?

if your going to include legacy then ya guys like tim duncan, kg, kobe etc are def in the converstation.. but lets talk about players today and moving forward. who would you take over westy ? serious question, im just curious.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 05:13 PM
give them a point guard like conley, lawson, lowry etc dont even need elite ones and they still be in the same position as when westbrook is there.

how does lowry, or conley fill the shoes of a westbrook exactly ?

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 05:17 PM
The issue is not that he isn't a top 5-10 player. The point is there are better fits that are in the top echelon of players for Durant.

this i can agree with.

Guppyfighter
05-02-2013, 05:20 PM
Westbrook's decision making is well documented. It's problematic to say the least. His high assist total and ratios is because he is on a historically good offensive team. I have posted an article on this, but once you adjust every position to league average players it's more like 5.6 assist a game. Of course, his passing doesn't pass the eye test.

Secondly, he is a very good player and does in fact create offense. I am not sure anyone actually believed Reggie Jackson and Derek Fisher would make the Thunder better. 30 minutes of Fisher? Awful.

Doogolas
05-02-2013, 05:20 PM
I have merely the following to say: Small. Sample. Size.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 05:33 PM
Westbrook's decision making is well documented. It's problematic to say the least. His high assist total and ratios is because he is on a historically good offensive team. I have posted an article on this, but once you adjust every position to league average players it's more like 5.6 assist a game. Of course, his passing doesn't pass the eye test.

Secondly, he is a very good player and does in fact create offense. I am not sure anyone actually believed Reggie Jackson and Derek Fisher would make the Thunder better. 30 minutes of Fisher? Awful.

give the man his credit. you cant take his assist away by saying he has great offensive players on his team. so does rondo, but i dont see any one deducting his assist totals.

take away durant& maybe martin, and who are the players that consist of this historically good offense ? sef ? perk ? ibaka ? westy & durant are the historically good offense.

Guppyfighter
05-02-2013, 05:45 PM
give the man his credit. you cant take his assist away by saying he has great offensive players on his team. so does rondo, but i dont see any one deducting his assist totals.

take away durant& maybe martin, and who are the players that consist of this historically good offense ? sef ? perk ? ibaka ? westy & durant are the historically good offense.

Ibaka, Martin, Durant, and Westbrook compose this historically good offense. But it can be better. Going over game footage, Westbrook constantly makes bad choices.

But he is a great player. Just one with a low basketball IQ.

The Celtics are in the lower echelon of offensive efficiency. I believe Rondo marginally improves the Celtics offense, but his per game stats exaggerate his impact on the court.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 06:07 PM
Ibaka, Martin, Durant, and Westbrook compose this historically good offense. But it can be better. Going over game footage, Westbrook constantly makes bad choices.

But he is a great player. Just one with a low basketball IQ.

The Celtics are in the lower echelon of offensive efficiency. I believe Rondo marginally improves the Celtics offense, but his per game stats exaggerate his impact on the court.


lets take in to account the seasons Rondo actually played in, rather than the one he just missed the majority of. in recent years past boston obviously had more offensive minded players and rondo was simply the facilitator and distributer on that team.

Sefalosha, perkins & ibaka are not offensivley gifted players. so some credit should go to the play maker, since the team as a whole is considered to have great offense even with players with less then stellar offensive ability.

You take westbrooks credit away by saying he plays on a team with great offense. he facilitates that great offense.

Guppyfighter
05-02-2013, 06:09 PM
I already said Westbrook is a great offensive player. That doesn't change the fact he makes bad choices with the ball. He could be a better player. His playmaking ability for himself is dynamite, setting others up, very meh.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 06:17 PM
I already said Westbrook is a great offensive player. That doesn't change the fact he makes bad choices with the ball. He could be a better player. His playmaking ability for himself is dynamite, setting others up, very meh.

his decision making can improve i agree.

but he is young also. most players in the league have room to grow somewhere.. Westy still an elite player and one of the best in the league.

uptown0364
05-02-2013, 06:19 PM
He still looks like a Ninja Turtle.

Ya think?

http://beermugsports.com/storage/ninjat.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=133976742684 2

Blitzbolt
05-02-2013, 06:19 PM
how can you say he "fails to run a team"?

again, the archaic and silly definitions of what a point guard has to be, and the false belief that a team needs a "true PG" to be successful.

they had the freaking best offense (perhaps second to miami) in the NBA this year. clearly he's "failing" mightily :rolleyes:Well I don't about you guys but I don't want my PG avg 7+ turnovers a game.That kills you in the playoffs.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 06:23 PM
Well I don't about you guys but I don't want my PG avg 7+ turnovers a game.That kills you in the playoffs.

3.3 turnovers for the season. chris paul averaged 2.3 turnovers and he is said to be the best facilitator and distributing pg currently in the league. d. rose averaged 3.05 turnovers in his mvp season.

poleandreel
05-02-2013, 06:27 PM
Well I don't about you guys but I don't want my PG avg 7+ turnovers a game.That kills you in the playoffs.

Makes sense....NOT. How about Westbrook vs Conley?

7.4:3.3 assists to turnovers. Conley is 6.1:2.4

So conley averages .9 fewer turnovers but 1.3 assists less and 10 fewer points.

Give me the guy that can score 25 a night and get 10 assists over the guy who gets 13/6. .9 turnovers is the difference. Its really not even close

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 06:35 PM
Makes sense....NOT. How about Westbrook vs Conley?

7.4:3.3 assists to turnovers. Conley is 6.1:2.4

So conley averages .9 fewer turnovers but 1.3 assists less and 10 fewer points.

Give me the guy that can score 25 a night and get 10 assists over the guy who gets 13/6. .9 turnovers is the difference. Its really not even close

exactly. lets completly ignore how the guy impacts the game and focus on the one flaw we can find. you dont need a pass first pg to win a championship in the nba..

calderon has the best assist to turn over ratio in the league. doesnt mean jack because he cant play d, and is unselfish to a fault. but im suppose to think he is a better pg then westbrook because he is a better decision maker?

westbrook could be compared to rose. For some reason rose doesnt get the same critisizm because he is the go to scorer on his team.. if westy was the go to scorer on his team no one would say he is a bad decision maker. its because he plays with durant and every one wants him to basically just feed durant, when in reality westbrook's presence opens the floor up for durant.

Kashmir13579
05-02-2013, 06:49 PM
Westbrick would've cost them the series in the WCF or Finals.

Blitzbolt
05-02-2013, 06:59 PM
Makes sense....NOT. How about Westbrook vs Conley?

7.4:3.3 assists to turnovers. Conley is 6.1:2.4

So conley averages .9 fewer turnovers but 1.3 assists less and 10 fewer points.

Give me the guy that can score 25 a night and get 10 assists over the guy who gets 13/6. .9 turnovers is the difference. Its really not even closeConley is scoring 17 with 9.8 assist and 0.2 turnovers so far vs CP3.

Every time I talk about a PG everyone brings up Conley for some reason I guess he is a easy target to pick on since he is not a volume shooter like most of this dudes.

This Combo Guards get all the glory at the PG position for some reason I rather have Rondo/Parker then Rose or Westbrook.Now Rose and Wesbrook are top 10 players but I personally think they are SGs like Harden.

KnicksorBust
05-02-2013, 07:03 PM
Yes he makes the Thunder a better overall team but this series doesn't change anything for me. Westbrook will always be held to a tougher standard because he's playing with one of the best scorers of all-time and still feels the need to lead the team in shots and usage. It goes against all logic. Then in the games where the most attention is upon him (the playoffs), he is chucking up shot after shot. Here's a player that shoots 2.9 threes per game in his playoff career and shots a pitiful 29%. It's low bball IQ and it's downright embarassing to watch Westbrook do his C+ version of a superstar impersonation at the end of games while the real superstar looks like a spectator.

Shlumpledink
05-02-2013, 07:05 PM
Overhated. He plays legit defense and stretches any defense out by making you put a good defender on him. Tough cover who can get to the basket and create a shot for himself and other players.

smith&wesson
05-02-2013, 07:18 PM
Westbrick would've cost them the series in the WCF or Finals.

will they even reach the wcf's with out him :confused:

mightybosstone
05-02-2013, 07:36 PM
I think its a huge deal, because it allows the other team to shy away from traditional lineups that need to guard Westbrook as a lead ball handler. The Rockets are getting away with playing Parsons, Harden, Beverly, Garcia, and Asik, while barely playing a PF at all. The Thunder now only have one guy who attacks the rim, so Houston can play as small as crap.

Yeahhh.... But they would have gone with the smaller lineup, anyway, dude. Didn't you watch a lot of Rockets games this year, and didn't you see game 2? Having Westbrook in the lineup or not, McHale would have gone small ball against this team. I don't really see that being a difference.

Hawkeye15
05-02-2013, 07:42 PM
Yeahhh.... But they would have gone with the smaller lineup, anyway, dude. Didn't you watch a lot of Rockets games this year, and didn't you see game 2? Having Westbrook in the lineup or not, McHale would have gone small ball against this team. I don't really see that being a difference.

And the Rockets would not have gotten away with it. Having only Asik to protect the rim with a Westy/KD duo is no bueno. Series would be over already.

Furthermore, think past this series. Do they really stand any chance now of getting to the WCF's? No, I don't think they do, because great defenses like Memphis or SA will load up on Durant, and I don't think Brooks is savvy enough to make adjustments.

Westbrook isn't underrated imo, but he sure as hell is as important as it gets for that team to win, outside Durant by an edge.

Hawkeye15
05-02-2013, 07:44 PM
Yes he makes the Thunder a better overall team but this series doesn't change anything for me. Westbrook will always be held to a tougher standard because he's playing with one of the best scorers of all-time and still feels the need to lead the team in shots and usage. It goes against all logic. Then in the games where the most attention is upon him (the playoffs), he is chucking up shot after shot. Here's a player that shoots 2.9 threes per game in his playoff career and shots a pitiful 29%. It's low bball IQ and it's downright embarassing to watch Westbrook do his C+ version of a superstar impersonation at the end of games while the real superstar looks like a spectator.

Not disagreeing with you at all, but without Westbrook, the Thunder this year aren't going anywhere.

Swashcuff
05-02-2013, 10:52 PM
Westbrook's decision making is well documented. It's problematic to say the least. His high assist total and ratios is because he is on a historically good offensive team. I have posted an article on this, but once you adjust every position to league average players it's more like 5.6 assist a game. Of course, his passing doesn't pass the eye test.

Secondly, he is a very good player and does in fact create offense. I am not sure anyone actually believed Reggie Jackson and Derek Fisher would make the Thunder better. 30 minutes of Fisher? Awful.

Could you please share this article because there is tonnes of statisticl evidence to dispute this claim. The Thunder have one weapon on offense outside of Westbrook and that's the best in the game Kevin Durant. Westbrook has one of the most efficient passing games in the NBA ranking in the upper 3rd of starting PGs in terms of passing rating. Your eye test? Sorry but I trust the facts more than I trust your eye test.

Swashcuff
05-02-2013, 11:03 PM
To the point of adjusting assists per teammates (an absolutely idiotic premise) how what do you guys think of Magic's assists or Nash's? These two guys ran the best offenses the league has ever seen but also had two of the best offensive supporting casts by which to do so. I guess we should essentially adjust their #s per cast and in actuality they averaged like 3 or 4 less assists per game. :rolleyes:

I mean seriously this is a two way street, no way Nash's teammates are so good/efficient offensively if he wasn't running the show and same with Magic. You think KD, Ibaka, Martin and Thabo are getting 15-20 (rough guesstimate after watching the Thunder for the past 3+ years) open looks a game by luck.

ShowtimeNo24
05-03-2013, 10:20 AM
name me 5 players you take over him on your team ?

straight up if i had to build a team using the players that are in the league today, there is only maybe a handfull of players id take over westbrook. maybe!!

lebron
durant
cp3 maybe
harden
rose (healthy) maybe

whos your top 5 right now ?

if your going to include legacy then ya guys like tim duncan, kg, kobe etc are def in the converstation.. but lets talk about players today and moving forward. who would you take over westy ? serious question, im just curious.

What your saying is that once old guys quit Westbrooke will be top5? There will always be players coming after Westrbrooke who will be better. Face it kid, Westbrooke will never be considered top 5 in the league or he maybe achieve something like that for one season, but i doubt it. The thing is, the players that you mentioned and even great players before are all more than just great physics. Westbrooke does not have the BB IQ or the leadership to carry a team.

lebron
durant
melo
cp3
rose
irwing
lillard

This is not my top 5, but as you said going forward i would pick them before westbrooke.

Guppyfighter
05-03-2013, 10:33 AM
Could you please share this article because there is tonnes of statisticl evidence to dispute this claim. The Thunder have one weapon on offense outside of Westbrook and that's the best in the game Kevin Durant. Westbrook has one of the most efficient passing games in the NBA ranking in the upper 3rd of starting PGs in terms of passing rating. Your eye test? Sorry but I trust the facts more than I trust your eye test.

http://www.keeperofthecourt.com/2013/01/01/russell-westbrook-and-the-value-of-the-assist/

HouRealCoach
05-03-2013, 10:38 AM
If Westbrook shot 46-49% nobody would have one bad word to say about him

BklynKnicks3
05-03-2013, 11:13 AM
Kevin Durant mvp canidate= lol Funny how i heard alot of people say thunder are better without westy. Dtruggling witht he rockets lol

ShowtimeNo24
05-03-2013, 11:13 AM
If Westbrook shot 46-49% nobody would have one bad word to say about him

Well if he could his name would not be RW.

mightybosstone
05-03-2013, 11:17 AM
And the Rockets would not have gotten away with it. Having only Asik to protect the rim with a Westy/KD duo is no bueno. Series would be over already.

Furthermore, think past this series. Do they really stand any chance now of getting to the WCF's? No, I don't think they do, because great defenses like Memphis or SA will load up on Durant, and I don't think Brooks is savvy enough to make adjustments.

Westbrook isn't underrated imo, but he sure as hell is as important as it gets for that team to win, outside Durant by an edge.

Oh, I'm not doubting Westbrook's ability or that he makes the team better. I'm just saying that because of he and Durant's strengths, neither guy will likely reach their full potential on the same team, which is why Durant has been so dominant this series and has kept OKC in games. But having two superstars to guard is always a huge positive, and Westbrook is the superior playmaker to Durant at this point in their careers. He is also essential to their transition offense, which has been completely non-existent since he went down.

If Westbrook were playing, Houston would have struggled to win a single game, but I do think the games still would have been close. However, with him out, I almost think Houston has become the better basketball team.

jam
05-03-2013, 12:07 PM
It's sad for the game of basketball that someone as dumb as westbrook has such a huge impact on a team's prospects.

Swashcuff
05-03-2013, 12:21 PM
http://www.keeperofthecourt.com/2013/01/01/russell-westbrook-and-the-value-of-the-assist/

Well written article to back the claim in which he was making he used facts to back his opinion and rightfully so, however he managed to ignore key facts in his analysis to tilt the ideal in his favour. In other words he was chosey in what stats he used in order to back his opinion and wasn't holistic in the very least. He made no mention whatsoever of the impact in which Westbrook has on his teammates FG% ranking where they are (called Ibaka a talented offensive player? Really more than half of Ibaka's ast'd FGs were assisted on by Westy) by completely ignoring the direct correlation between high usg% players and their teammates scoring efficiency. He also ignorantly used turnovers as a measure to as how bad a passer a player is when a great deal of TOs stem from offensive fouls, ball handling turnovers etc. Of Westbrook's 263 turnovers 137 of them were of the passing variety, the other 136 were as a result of charges (29) and ball handling (107).

At season's end he had a 4.4 assists for every bad pass he made (actually was up around 5 when that article was written). Now compare that to Rondo (4.1), Paul (7.1 the cream of the crop in the NBA as far as this goes) and Curry (3.6) and you'd know that Westbrook is actually a more efficient passer than many give him credit for.

IMO that premise is still extremely idiotic and I'd like to have a word with the writer of that article to express this. What's even more idiotic is attempting to use on/off offensive rating as a reason as to why Westbrook is an inferior passer? That makes no sense. Nash's offenses were great not because he was a great passer they've always been great passers with great offensive options his offenses were so good because he himself was an efficient offensive threat who ran an offense better than damn near anyone (the difference between him and Rondo). Offensive rating takes all offensive aspects of the game into consideration so how on earth can one use that as a measure to a player's value as a passer? :confused:

I'll just make a list of the top 20 point guards in terms of assists per game and their assists/bad ratio as well as their passing rating to see how Westy stacks up as a passer statistically compared to his peers.


Player APG Asts BP BP/Ast PRtg AST% USG%
Chris Paul 9.7 678 96 7.1 18.5 46.5 22.6
Greivis Vasquez 9.0 704 138 5.1 14.4 44.9 23.0
Rajon Rondo 11.1 420 103 4.1 13.8 49.3 21.7
Ricky Rubio 7.3 418 107 3.9 13.8 38.8 21.2
Jose Calderon 7.1 518 97 5.3 13.8 39.8 17.0
Tony Parker 7.6 499 82 6.1 13.5 40.4 27.7
R Westbrook 7.4 607 137 4.4 13.2 38.4 32.8
Ty Lawson 6.9 501 106 4.7 13.1 30.2 22.3
Deron Williams 7.7 604 134 4.5 13.0 37.5 24.4
John Wall 7.6 373 91 4.1 11.7 43.9 29.3
Goran Dragic 7.4 569 127 4.5 11.3 35.7 21.7
Kyle Lowry 6.4 435 101 4.3 11.2 34.6 20.3
Jeff Teague 7.2 579 126 4.6 11.1 36.1 23.0
Jameer Nelson 7.4 413 88 4.7 11.0 33.3 22.5
Jrue Holiday 8.0 625 156 4.0 10.4 36.5 26.6
Steve Nash 6.7 333 94 3.5 10.0 32.8 17.8
B Jennings 6.5 521 115 4.5 9.4 29.1 23.7
Mo Williams 6.2 285 79 3.6 9.4 33.2 22.3
Stephen Curry 6.9 539 148 3.6 9.0 31.1 26.4
Damian Lillard 6.5 531 159 3.3 7.4 28.8 24.2

So like I said earlier Westbrook ranks among the upper third in PGs in the league in terms of passing rating and #7 among the top 20 PGs in passing rating as well. When you consider his USG% as well it can be said that he's extremely under valued as a passer (in terms of effectiveness and efficiency) in the NBA today. Is this a list of the best passers in the NBA in order? NO but statistically speaking the man has to be given his respect. That article failed to capture these aspects and in doing so completely isolated the importance on the impact in which an individual has on his team making it seem as though its a one way street where the team affects the individual.

Guppyfighter
05-03-2013, 01:22 PM
Well written article to back the claim in which he was making he used facts to back his opinion and rightfully so, however he managed to ignore key facts in his analysis to tilt the ideal in his favour. In other words he was chosey in what stats he used in order to back his opinion and wasn't holistic in the very least. He made no mention whatsoever of the impact in which Westbrook has on his teammates FG% ranking where they are (called Ibaka a talented offensive player? Really more than half of Ibaka's ast'd FGs were assisted on by Westy) by completely ignoring the direct correlation between high usg% players and their teammates scoring efficiency. He also ignorantly used turnovers as a measure to as how bad a passer a player is when a great deal of TOs stem from offensive fouls, ball handling turnovers etc. Of Westbrook's 263 turnovers 137 of them were of the passing variety, the other 136 were as a result of charges (29) and ball handling (107).

At season's end he had a 4.4 assists for every bad pass he made (actually was up around 5 when that article was written). Now compare that to Rondo (4.1), Paul (7.1 the cream of the crop in the NBA as far as this goes) and Curry (3.6) and you'd know that Westbrook is actually a more efficient passer than many give him credit for.

IMO that premise is still extremely idiotic and I'd like to have a word with the writer of that article to express this. What's even more idiotic is attempting to use on/off offensive rating as a reason as to why Westbrook is an inferior passer? That makes no sense. Nash's offenses were great not because he was a great passer they've always been great passers with great offensive options his offenses were so good because he himself was an efficient offensive threat who ran an offense better than damn near anyone (the difference between him and Rondo). Offensive rating takes all offensive aspects of the game into consideration so how on earth can one use that as a measure to a player's value as a passer? :confused:

I'll just make a list of the top 20 point guards in terms of assists per game and their assists/bad ratio as well as their passing rating to see how Westy stacks up as a passer statistically compared to his peers.


Player APG Asts BP BP/Ast PRtg AST% USG%
Chris Paul 9.7 678 96 7.1 18.5 46.5 22.6
Greivis Vasquez 9.0 704 138 5.1 14.4 44.9 23.0
Rajon Rondo 11.1 420 103 4.1 13.8 49.3 21.7
Ricky Rubio 7.3 418 107 3.9 13.8 38.8 21.2
Jose Calderon 7.1 518 97 5.3 13.8 39.8 17.0
Tony Parker 7.6 499 82 6.1 13.5 40.4 27.7
R Westbrook 7.4 607 137 4.4 13.2 38.4 32.8
Ty Lawson 6.9 501 106 4.7 13.1 30.2 22.3
Deron Williams 7.7 604 134 4.5 13.0 37.5 24.4
John Wall 7.6 373 91 4.1 11.7 43.9 29.3
Goran Dragic 7.4 569 127 4.5 11.3 35.7 21.7
Kyle Lowry 6.4 435 101 4.3 11.2 34.6 20.3
Jeff Teague 7.2 579 126 4.6 11.1 36.1 23.0
Jameer Nelson 7.4 413 88 4.7 11.0 33.3 22.5
Jrue Holiday 8.0 625 156 4.0 10.4 36.5 26.6
Steve Nash 6.7 333 94 3.5 10.0 32.8 17.8
B Jennings 6.5 521 115 4.5 9.4 29.1 23.7
Mo Williams 6.2 285 79 3.6 9.4 33.2 22.3
Stephen Curry 6.9 539 148 3.6 9.0 31.1 26.4
Damian Lillard 6.5 531 159 3.3 7.4 28.8 24.2

So like I said earlier Westbrook ranks among the upper third in PGs in the league in terms of passing rating and #7 among the top 20 PGs in passing rating as well. When you consider his USG% as well it can be said that he's extremely under valued as a passer (in terms of effectiveness and efficiency) in the NBA today. Is this a list of the best passers in the NBA in order? NO but statistically speaking the man has to be given his respect. That article failed to capture these aspects and in doing so completely isolated the importance on the impact in which an individual has on his team making it seem as though its a one way street where the team affects the individual.

Of course Ibaka has half of his field goals assisted by Westbrook. Westbrook is a ball dominant PG and no one passes a lot on the Thunder. He passes it, little chance for another pass and he scores. That's an assist.

Westbrook doesn't pass the eye test when you think of him passing. Most of the time you wonder how he ended up with 9 assist.

I will share several videos that document his decision making.

It's clear he is a great player, but it's also clear he has a low basketball IQ.

Swashcuff
05-03-2013, 02:01 PM
Of course Ibaka has half of his field goals assisted by Westbrook. Westbrook is a ball dominant PG and no one passes a lot on the Thunder. He passes it, little chance for another pass and he scores. That's an assist.

Westbrook doesn't pass the eye test when you think of him passing. Most of the time you wonder how he ended up with 9 assist.

I will share several videos that document his decision making.

It's clear he is a great player, but it's also clear he has a low basketball IQ.

You cited me an article of that attempted torso e statistically that Westbrook isa passer I gave you better and more holistic evidence as to why he is, yet all you address is the point of Westy passing to Ibaka, and wrongly so? Then tell me he doesn't pass the eye test? Why on earth cite and article then? An article that statistically based with absolutely no mention of the "eye test".

I much rather trust the metrics that are used by the league and the league officials than your eye test. Everyone knows Westbrook doesn't possess the worst greatest vision or passing ability (much better than more than half the league starting PGs in that department however) but how on earth does that equate to him averaging 5 apg had he been on a worse offensive team. That ideal is utterly idiotic and makes no statistical nor common sense.

I can't lie though the first line of the response is pure comedy. No one passes the balk on the Thunder so that's why Westy has so many assists. Really. Dude you're in wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyover your head. Your eye test argument is weak (especially since you tried using a statistical argument as to why Westbrook is such a poor passer), your statistical argument is even weaker and all the passing facts states that Westbrook is one of the better and more efficient passers in the NBA at the PG position but you stick with your eyes.

Westbrook's problem running an offense isn't his passing ability anyone who has ever watched him play since college can tell you that. His problem is decision making and understanding how to fully control a game in all areas. Both a result of his poor IQ.

All the actual facts state Westbrook is a good passer. There is no evidence you can bring statistically or otherwise to dispute that.

He115ing
05-03-2013, 02:22 PM
His absence has proven how important he is to the team, however I still don't like him and do not miss his stupid 3 point celebration.