PDA

View Full Version : Pacers and George close to extension



Pages : [1] 2

Ezio
09-22-2013, 10:23 PM
Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA 24s
Y! Sources (w/ @SpearsNBAYahoo): Indiana finalizing a 5-year, $90 million-plus max extension with Paul George. http://yhoo.it/1dCdSX5

SPURSFAN1
09-22-2013, 10:23 PM
lol
what about danny granger and their bench?

Tmath
09-22-2013, 10:34 PM
Overpay, but I guess they have too.

UPRock
09-22-2013, 10:48 PM
Holy Broccoli, that's a lot!

tredigs
09-22-2013, 11:02 PM
Only 4 more then Iggy + Curry combined for the next 4 years - Booya! I'm surprised he went for more than 15 to be honest, but I guess that's what it takes to keep a player in cities like Indy. And he's a stud, so I doubt too many of their fans are complaining. Also, it secures their title chances for at least 2 more seasons while their core is in tact.

Chronz
09-22-2013, 11:13 PM
LMFAO

He better improve ALOT to be worth this kind of cheddah

GunFactor187
09-22-2013, 11:25 PM
This could eerily turnout to be Rudy Gay 2.0. If not, I rest my case.

THE MTL
09-22-2013, 11:26 PM
I guess he grew another 2 inches lol.

But seriously, the NBA better NEVER EVER EVER have a lockout again. I thought the lockout happened to prevent stuff like this. 18+ million per year on average, I thought that money was reserved for superstars.

tredigs
09-22-2013, 11:30 PM
This could eerily turnout to be Rudy Gay 2.0. If not, I rest my case.

Offensively similar, but he's a better playmaker. And already way ahead of Rudy defensively.

ChiSox219
09-22-2013, 11:32 PM
With George's talent, character and upside, plus his performance over the past two years, he's the kind of RFA you max out.


This could eerily turnout to be Rudy Gay 2.0. If not, I rest my case.

Here's a comparison of the two after three years played: http://bkref.com/tiny/bhORD

bholly
09-22-2013, 11:36 PM
I'm surprised how much surprise there is. Dude was always getting a max.

ChiSox219
09-22-2013, 11:37 PM
I'm surprised how much surprise there is. Dude was always getting a max.

+1

5ass
09-22-2013, 11:37 PM
Wow, I thought his max was 14 mill. Him and hibbert are going to be taking up like 32 mill capspace. Thats going to be a problem down the line IMO. They better draft wisely.

SPURSFAN1
09-22-2013, 11:40 PM
Am I the only one unimpressed with his winshares?

Gators123
09-22-2013, 11:43 PM
I knew he was going to get the max, I didn't realize his max was $90M though. Thats a ton of money. Hes not worth that yet.

Sadds The Gr8
09-22-2013, 11:47 PM
I'm surprised how much surprise there is. Dude was always getting a max.

+2

SPURSFAN1
09-22-2013, 11:49 PM
More than kevin Durant FYI.

tredigs
09-22-2013, 11:54 PM
I'm surprised how much surprise there is. Dude was always getting a max.

Saw him more in the Lopez/M Gasol/Westbrook/Hibbert range. 14-16 per, max. If 18+ is what it takes to keep him, you almost have to do it, but it's a stretch for his value.

GunFactor187
09-23-2013, 12:02 AM
Now I'm REALLY interested to seeing how much Greg Monroe will get. George (2010 Draft class) and Hibbert (fellow big man) set the bar.

mdm692
09-23-2013, 12:26 AM
Every other team with the exception of Mia and OKC would pay that much to get him so I don't see why everybody is overreacting.

Tony_Starks
09-23-2013, 12:44 AM
Good for him! At least he's not trying to be a free agent drama queen..

dhopisthename
09-23-2013, 12:56 AM
Good for him! At least he's not trying to be a free agent drama queen..

he would be a restricted free agent there would be no drama

homestarunner93
09-23-2013, 01:06 AM
But I thought he was a done deal to the Lakers already?

Stunner
09-23-2013, 02:32 AM
Lol Paul George the NBA version of Flacco

beasted86
09-23-2013, 02:53 AM
George and Hibbert is a weak 1-2 punch to both have on max contracts.

They are good players, but for a cash strapped market like Indy this is a bad move.

Dade County
09-23-2013, 02:57 AM
Seriously, I think he got that much money because of his performance against the HEAT...

If the Pacers didn't have the perception that they are close to making it to the Finals, I doubt he gets a deal that big.

I don't no if anyone else notices whats going on in the brother hood of NBA players... D Wade tells the Knicks (2010 free agency), if they sign another all star type player, he will sign with them; the Knicks run out and sign stat, D Wade is no where to be find.

Lbj doesn't play up to his standards in every game against the Pacers (forcing a game 7), and the Paul George hype begins and Hibbert looks like the best center ever lol to that one.

I think this is just another made star by the NBA...smh

George is a good player, but he is not a super star kind of player; but to each their own. Another Reggie Miller hype type of player, in the make'en (not saying that Miller wasn't good, just not a super star level kind of player; but he did hit some big shots though).

tredigs
09-23-2013, 03:21 AM
George and Hibbert is a weak 1-2 punch to both have on max contracts.

They are good players, but for a cash strapped market like Indy this is a bad move.

What angle would you have recommended they take?


Seriously, I think he got that much money because of his performance against the HEAT...

If the Pacers didn't have the perception that they are close to making it to the Finals, I doubt he gets a deal that big.

I don't no if anyone else notices whats going on in the brother hood of NBA players... D Wade tells the Knicks (2010 free agency), if they sign another all star type player, he will sign with them; the Knicks run out and sign stat, D Wade is no where to be find.

Lbj doesn't play up to his standards in every game against the Pacers (forcing a game 7), and the Paul George hype begins and Hibbert looks like the best center ever lol to that one.

I think this is just another made star by the NBA...smh

George is a good player, but he is not a super star kind of player; but to each their own. Another Reggie Miller hype type of player, in the make'en (not saying that Miller wasn't good, just not a super star level kind of player; but he did hit some big shots though).

So, the Pacers aren't finals contenders next year?

TrueFan420
09-23-2013, 04:21 AM
he would be a restricted free agent there would be no drama

He could refuse to sign a deal. Take the tender and hit the market the following year.

TrueFan420
09-23-2013, 04:26 AM
George and Hibbert is a weak 1-2 punch to both have on max contracts.

They are good players, but for a cash strapped market like Indy this is a bad move.

They weren't gonna get a top tier player to go sign there and they have something good going. What else could they have done other than bank of both George and hibbert to raise their game up to another level.

beasted86
09-23-2013, 05:07 AM
What angle would you have recommended they take?

Match an offer sheet and seek 4 years so both expire same time.

sammyvine
09-23-2013, 05:33 AM
Seriously, I think he got that much money because of his performance against the HEAT...

If the Pacers didn't have the perception that they are close to making it to the Finals, I doubt he gets a deal that big.

I don't no if anyone else notices whats going on in the brother hood of NBA players... D Wade tells the Knicks (2010 free agency), if they sign another all star type player, he will sign with them; the Knicks run out and sign stat, D Wade is no where to be find.

Lbj doesn't play up to his standards in every game against the Pacers (forcing a game 7), and the Paul George hype begins and Hibbert looks like the best center ever lol to that one.

I think this is just another made star by the NBA...smh

George is a good player, but he is not a super star kind of player; but to each their own. Another Reggie Miller hype type of player, in the make'en (not saying that Miller wasn't good, just not a super star level kind of player; but he did hit some big shots though).

he also doesnt have that superstar aura

blake griffin is overrated but people come to see him dunk etc...
the same cant be said for paul george.

c.c.
09-23-2013, 05:35 AM
When the Pacers can't afford good pieces to put around him and Hibbert in the future, this will be the blame. So I don't wanna see them crying and such when this day come. If two players take up so much of the cap, they should be able to carry the load.

Kashmir13579
09-23-2013, 06:49 AM
Good job Pacers.

Dade County
09-23-2013, 08:47 AM
So, the Pacers aren't finals contenders next year?

They are perceived contenders... What that means is, HOPE. The NBA sales hope every year, there is always a team that is favored (HEAT), and so their has to be a team that gives of the perception they can take the champs down (or the favored team).

Realistically, if Bosh doesn't get hurt, two years ago in the playoffs & Lbj actually plays every game of that ECF series like he can play, we wouldn't be talking about George & the Pacers as contenders/max contract.

Not saying that the Pacers are not a good team; it's just that the HEAT have two Super Stars/hof'ers on their team... And I am not fooled one bit, when Lbj forgets how to dribble and attack the basket (& Wade shenanigans); NBA = Entertainment.

The HEAT have the best two players, so no matter what it seems like, or how the media spins it; they will win the playoff series at the end of the day and move on... But along the way, they will keep giving other teams fans false hope.

Kashmir13579
09-23-2013, 09:29 AM
They are perceived contenders... What that means is, HOPE. The NBA sales hope every year, there is always a team that is favored (HEAT), and so their has to be a team that gives of the perception they can take the champs down (or the favored team).

Realistically, if Bosh doesn't get hurt, two years ago in the playoffs & Lbj actually plays every game of that ECF series like he can play, we wouldn't be talking about George & the Pacers as contenders/max contract.

Not saying that the Pacers are not a good team; it's just that the HEAT have two Super Stars/hof'ers on their team... And I am not fooled one bit, when Lbj forgets how to dribble and attack the basket (& Wade shenanigans); NBA = Entertainment.

The HEAT have the best two players, so no matter what it seems like, or how the media spins it; they will win the playoff series at the end of the day and move on... But along the way, they will keep giving other teams fans false hope.
You're the most pompous and arrogant Heat fan on this site. Thanks for winning with class.

Clippersfan86
09-23-2013, 09:55 AM
I don't get how he qualified for super max? I thought you had to start for two all star teams, win an MVP or make two all NBA teams? Smaller market teams HAVE to pay max they can though to keep stars because free agents don't line up to play for places like Indiana. Feels like LA, Chicago, NY and Miami have a free agent monopoly in the league right now. Then again if George doesn't peak as high as people expect (won't surprise me) and finished as say a 20/8 type, slightly improved Luol Deng... then they will be looking at a crippled salary cap for a great 2nd option type, not a 1st option who can lead you far.

Ezio
09-23-2013, 10:16 AM
"Extremely happy to be in Indiana another five years. Glad it's behind me and I can focus on the season," @Paul_George24 told Yahoo! Sports.

Can a mod change the title to Pacer's George signs a 5 year max deal?

Clippersfan86
09-23-2013, 10:24 AM
NVM I figured it out. He's getting 5 years, 80 mill or so UNLESS he can qualify for the Derrick Rose rule that Blake Griffin got last year, which allows a 2nd deal super max. He will need to make another all NBA team, start for two all star games or win an MVP in the next two years. I believe those were the requirements.

Dade County
09-23-2013, 12:21 PM
You're the most pompous and arrogant Heat fan on this site. Thanks for winning with class.

WTF... I am saying that the higher ups, are manipulating fans and you spin this into, I am a cocky HEAT fan!?

PurpleLynch
09-23-2013, 12:27 PM
They are perceived contenders... What that means is, HOPE. The NBA sales hope every year, there is always a team that is favored (HEAT), and so their has to be a team that gives of the perception they can take the champs down (or the favored team).

Realistically, if Bosh doesn't get hurt, two years ago in the playoffs & Lbj actually plays every game of that ECF series like he can play, we wouldn't be talking about George & the Pacers as contenders/max contract.

Not saying that the Pacers are not a good team; it's just that the HEAT have two Super Stars/hof'ers on their team... And I am not fooled one bit, when Lbj forgets how to dribble and attack the basket (& Wade shenanigans); NBA = Entertainment.

The HEAT have the best two players, so no matter what it seems like, or how the media spins it; they will win the playoff series at the end of the day and move on... But along the way, they will keep giving other teams fans false hope.


Oh my goodness. Seriously? I admire the Heat,but they're not dominant as you think:yes they have the best player in the league in James and a very good supporting cast. But come on,they went to game 7 with a less experienced Pacers team. And they were thisclose to lose against SA,you Heat fans have to thanks Allen who hit that wild and awesome three. I'm not underrating the Heat,they are really fun to watch and really strong. But not as dominant as you think.

jstone0716
09-23-2013, 12:35 PM
he also doesnt have that superstar aura

blake griffin is overrated but people come to see him dunk etc...
the same cant be said for paul george.

Have you seen how graceful he is with the ball in his hand? I'd much rather watch George bring the ball down the court and either Jack up a 3 or make a play for someone than watch the overrated albino man do some stupid predictable dunk


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOiCkTvs64k

dhopisthename
09-23-2013, 01:23 PM
NVM I figured it out. He's getting 5 years, 80 mill or so UNLESS he can qualify for the Derrick Rose rule that Blake Griffin got last year, which allows a 2nd deal super max. He will need to make another all NBA team, start for two all star games or win an MVP in the next two years. I believe those were the requirements.
you just need to make an star team twice or be on an all nba team both of which he has already done. so assuming he can do do one of those two things this year he will get it

Clippersfan86
09-23-2013, 01:33 PM
Blake's a better player than George, dunks or not.

gbrl
09-23-2013, 01:33 PM
WTF... I am saying that the higher ups, are manipulating fans and you spin this into, I am a cocky HEAT fan!?

So nba higher ups are the reason LeBron lost to the mavs or any playoff series and why wade is injury prone and Bosh is soft

STL Pride
09-23-2013, 02:37 PM
Well as long as they have a big 3 of George, West, Hibbert, they will be a force to be reckoned with for years and years to come. Paul George is moving quickly on his rise towards the top of the pack and will likely continue improving this upcoming season. He's on the verge of becoming a big scorer and an elite defender. He just needs to continue working on that jump shot and figure out a method or two on defense that can maybe help him slow down Bron Bron.
With that said, I would of liked to see him hit FA next offseason so that my Lakers could pursue him because I look at George as a franchise player who eventually will be capable of leading his team deep into the playoffs.

Nonetheless, these Pacers are my favorites to beat the Heat in the East. They came as close as you can to defeating them last season and now with the return of Granger and the additions of CJ Watson, Chris Copeland and Luis Scola, they should have what it takes to beat them in a 7 game series.
You know Miami has Indiana at the bottom of their wish list of teams to play this season. They better PRAY Wade can somehow stay healthy throughout the season and be ready for the playoffs.

Stunner
09-23-2013, 02:44 PM
Pacers will have ~$53 million tied up between George, Hibbert, West and Hill from 2014-16.

I just don't think that's a championship core.
I agree

beasted86
09-23-2013, 02:53 PM
Well as long as they have a big 3 of George, West, Hibbert, they will be a force to be reckoned with for years and years to come. Paul George is moving quickly on his rise towards the top of the pack and will likely continue improving this upcoming season. He's on the verge of becoming a big scorer and an elite defender. He just needs to continue working on that jump shot and figure out a method or two on defense that can maybe help him slow down Bron Bron.
With that said, I would of liked to see him hit FA next offseason so that my Lakers could pursue him because I look at George as a franchise player who eventually will be capable of leading his team deep into the playoffs.

Nonetheless, these Pacers are my favorites to beat the Heat in the East. They came as close as you can to defeating them last season and now with the return of Granger and the additions of CJ Watson, Chris Copeland and Luis Scola, they should have what it takes to beat them in a 7 game series.
You know Miami has Indiana at the bottom of their wish list of teams to play this season. They better PRAY Wade can somehow stay healthy throughout the season and be ready for the playoffs.

West is 33 years old already... and on top of that, that's not really a big 3 by most standards.

Isn't it more likely that Indiana is praying that Wade ISN'T healthy? Because they just beat them with him banged up and playing below average.

THE MTL
09-23-2013, 03:03 PM
George was always a max RFA. But how he is able to get such a high max. I thought 15mil was the cut off. And honestly George shouldnt be so greedy and think about the future of his team. He'll be making a significant portion of the cap and along with Roy Hibbert they are crippling that team who also is a small market.

NYMetros
09-23-2013, 03:45 PM
But he was supposed to go to the Lakers??

IndyRealist
09-23-2013, 04:35 PM
George can get that amount due to the Derrick Rose rule, if he goes to the all-star game this year. They Pacers agree to make him a max player, but because it is a percentage of the salary cap it will not be determined until next summer. If he goes to the ASG it's 30% of the cap, otherwise it's 25%.

Pacerlive
09-23-2013, 05:30 PM
George can get that amount due to the Derrick Rose rule, if he goes to the all-star game this year. They Pacers agree to make him a max player, but because it is a percentage of the salary cap it will not be determined until next summer. If he goes to the ASG it's 30% of the cap, otherwise it's 25%.

I believe he has to not just go to the ASG but be a first selection. The reason why he qualifies for it this year is because he was all NBA 3rd team so he needs to do one or the other or both to qualify for the ROse rule.

From Bird..


Bird said he “never heard” the five-year, $90 million number.

“I wish that was my number instead of his,” Bird said with a smile. “That’s a big number.”

JasonJohnHorn
09-23-2013, 05:42 PM
Am I the only one who LOVES Paul George but still thinks that is too much! lol

ManningToTyree
09-23-2013, 06:00 PM
I'm a huge fan of George's game and may be in the minority in thinking he has superstar potential. That said this contract is excessive for his current abilities. Not to say he can't live up to it, but he isn't a max player quite yet. I guess I can't blame the Pacers. They couldn't risk losing him.

IndyRealist
09-23-2013, 10:51 PM
Am I the only one who LOVES Paul George but still thinks that is too much! lol

+1. Most of these borderline stars look really overpaid when they sign their first big deal. The team hopes they continue to improve and end up justifying the contract. Most of the time they do not. I would have hoped for something starting around $10-12M/yr, but with all of the LA hype -someone- was going to give him max if he hit free agency.

tredigs
09-23-2013, 11:03 PM
They are perceived contenders... What that means is, HOPE. The NBA sales hope every year, there is always a team that is favored (HEAT), and so their has to be a team that gives of the perception they can take the champs down (or the favored team).

Realistically, if Bosh doesn't get hurt, two years ago in the playoffs & Lbj actually plays every game of that ECF series like he can play, we wouldn't be talking about George & the Pacers as contenders/max contract.

Not saying that the Pacers are not a good team; it's just that the HEAT have two Super Stars/hof'ers on their team... And I am not fooled one bit, when Lbj forgets how to dribble and attack the basket (& Wade shenanigans); NBA = Entertainment.

The HEAT have the best two players, so no matter what it seems like, or how the media spins it; they will win the playoff series at the end of the day and move on... But along the way, they will keep giving other teams fans false hope.

Lmao. This is so pathetic in so many ways.

Dade County
09-24-2013, 12:22 AM
Lmao. This is so pathetic in so many ways.

?...

( I hope I didn't come off as a cocky HEAT fan... I just think the league is rigged, & certain players cash in on that; but the worse thing is that the fans are manipulated, & I don't like that. )

Rndy
09-24-2013, 12:36 AM
NOO! Go to the West or Bulls please you're a terrible player go away! :(

b@llhog24
09-24-2013, 01:53 AM
:laugh:

sixersblue
09-24-2013, 03:38 AM
Pacers have to keep PG anyway.

jstone0716
09-24-2013, 11:02 AM
Blake's a better player than George, dunks or not.

Couldn't disagree more. What part of Blake's game is better? His offense? If so it's by a very very very slim margin. The only reason he scores more is because the type of game the Clippers play and the fact that he plays along side one of the best PG's to ever step on the court. Paul's defense far outweighs that small offensive margin. Blake's height, strength and athleticism amount to nothing more than alley oops and meaningless highlights where as Paul's athleticism leads them into title contention. I guarantee you the clips would swap Blake for George in a heartbeat.

MonroeFAN
09-25-2013, 01:06 PM
Yikes... I like Paul George, but let's be honest here... the guy shot 41% as "the man".

Is he really a max talent? That team is cap strapped like woah, hope they can make the push.

colinskik
09-25-2013, 01:32 PM
I'm with a lot of people on here who really love his game but think he's now over payed. However, the Pacers don't really have another choice besides giving him the money, so in the end it's the right move.

To sum up, I think PG is still developing so this could turn out to be well worth the money. But if he stays at his current level then it's too much.

Such is the plight of small market teams.

bholly
09-25-2013, 03:10 PM
Yikes... I like Paul George, but let's be honest here... the guy shot 41% as "the man".

Is he really a max talent? That team is cap strapped like woah, hope they can make the push.

For a team with two All-Stars and a really good supporting cast, a conference finals team, they're in pretty good financial shape.

Goose17
09-25-2013, 04:53 PM
If they didn't give him the money someone else would have. Small Markets have always had this problem.

Is he talented? Undoubtedly. Overpaid? Yep. Was it a bad move for Indiana? No.

Goose17
09-25-2013, 04:54 PM
... I just think the league is rigged

*Note to self, ignore this guy from now on, he's clearly an idiot^*

rjkgr
09-25-2013, 06:51 PM
about time! hes the next big thing

Dade County
09-25-2013, 07:09 PM
*Note to self, ignore this guy from now on, he's clearly an idiot^*

smh... keep on being a dumb consumer; blind people want to stay blind.

Htownballa1622
09-25-2013, 07:22 PM
That James Harden deal looks like a bargain :)

I like PG but like i've been saying, I think that he's been a little over rated lately. ($$$)

More-Than-Most
09-25-2013, 07:53 PM
this is why I am glad we traded holiday. I hate how very good players get paid the same as superstar players... PG is very good but he is now over paid. There is about 6 guys that should be max players and that is it.

Pacerlive
09-25-2013, 09:39 PM
That James Harden deal looks like a bargain :)

I like PG but like i've been saying, I think that he's been a little over rated lately. ($$$)
PG still has to make a the criteria for the Rose rule so it can be the exact same deal as Harden if he doesn't.

Chronz
09-25-2013, 11:15 PM
*Note to self, ignore this guy from now on, he's clearly an idiot^*

I wouldn't ignore him, laughing is good good for your health

Chronz
09-25-2013, 11:16 PM
Couldn't disagree more. What part of Blake's game is better? His offense? If so it's by a very very very slim margin. The only reason he scores more is because the type of game the Clippers play and the fact that he plays along side one of the best PG's to ever step on the court. Paul's defense far outweighs that small offensive margin. Blake's height, strength and athleticism amount to nothing more than alley oops and meaningless highlights where as Paul's athleticism leads them into title contention. I guarantee you the clips would swap Blake for George in a heartbeat.

Nothing you said was true.

Sadds The Gr8
09-25-2013, 11:25 PM
80m for him is much more worth it for him than 90m

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 01:25 AM
Couldn't disagree more. What part of Blake's game is better? His offense? If so it's by a very very very slim margin. The only reason he scores more is because the type of game the Clippers play and the fact that he plays along side one of the best PG's to ever step on the court. Paul's defense far outweighs that small offensive margin. Blake's height, strength and athleticism amount to nothing more than alley oops and meaningless highlights where as Paul's athleticism leads them into title contention. I guarantee you the clips would swap Blake for George in a heartbeat.

Let's adjust for minutes.

20 ppg, 10 rpg, 4 apg, 1.3 spg. PER of 22.4, TS% of 57, WS/48 of .196

vs

16.7 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 4 apg, 1.7 spg. PER of 16.8, TS% of 53, WS/48 of .145


Yup... looks like George is better :shrug:

Both have played 3 seasons, Blake is a little less than a year older. You said Blake is basically better at nothing but offense by a slim margin but it's quite the opposite. Blake is better at pretty much everything besides defense. Clippers play a slow tempo and Blake scores as much or more when CP3 isn't playing (especially before CP3 was acquired) so the idea that the team inflates Blake's scoring is idiotic.

I don't think a massive efficiency edge, +3.3 ppg, +2.7 rpg is a small advantage in the slightest.

Chronz
09-26-2013, 01:29 AM
smh... keep on being a dumb consumer; blind people want to stay blind.

Whats the point of your sig btw? You do realize that FG% is meaningless compared to efficiency.

shep33
09-26-2013, 01:42 AM
Well he was going to get paid either way

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 11:11 AM
Let's adjust for minutes.

20 ppg, 10 rpg, 4 apg, 1.3 spg. PER of 22.4, TS% of 57, WS/48 of .196

vs

16.7 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 4 apg, 1.7 spg. PER of 16.8, TS% of 53, WS/48 of .145


Yup... looks like George is better :shrug:

Both have played 3 seasons, Blake is a little less than a year older. You said Blake is basically better at nothing but offense by a slim margin but it's quite the opposite. Blake is better at pretty much everything besides defense. Clippers play a slow tempo and Blake scores as much or more when CP3 isn't playing (especially before CP3 was acquired) so the idea that the team inflates Blake's scoring is idiotic.

I don't think a massive efficiency edge, +3.3 ppg, +2.7 rpg is a small advantage in the slightest.

Meh, Blake is good and both are ranked 4th for their position in efficiency but looking at the team structure I think the combination of Blake and Jordan kills the Clippers. You simply can't rely on a go to scoring big man if he can't make his foul shots at high clip and thats what you have with Blake.

He is a great PF but I am not sure what areas he can improve upon. Blakes looks like his range will be limited as a PF which isn't good if you want the guy around beyond his athletic years. Thats my concern with him as a player. The foul shooting and his range speaks to him having a problem with his form and maybe you can tell me if he has that problem because Clippers games are normally past my bedtime most nights.

Defense and foul shooting are a must in this league if you want to win close games in the fourth and this is what I see as Blakes negative affect on his team.

MonroeFAN
09-26-2013, 11:21 AM
What does Blake Griffin have to do with Paul George? One is a 2-3, the other is a 4. They're completely different players and not comparable at all.

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 11:24 AM
What does Blake Griffin have to do with Paul George? One is a 2-3, the other is a 4. They're completely different players and not comparable at all.

Well you can compare them but its just flawed to do so. I think the underlining question is who would you rather have?

MonroeFAN
09-26-2013, 11:26 AM
Paul George, there isn't even a question in my mind.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 11:45 AM
What does Blake Griffin have to do with Paul George? One is a 2-3, the other is a 4. They're completely different players and not comparable at all.

Ask the guy who randomly said "I'd rather pay this kind of money to George than that albino Griffin who does nothing but dunk".

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 11:51 AM
Meh, Blake is good and both are ranked 4th for their position in efficiency but looking at the team structure I think the combination of Blake and Jordan kills the Clippers. You simply can't rely on a go to scoring big man if he can't make his foul shots at high clip and thats what you have with Blake.

He is a great PF but I am not sure what areas he can improve upon. Blakes looks like his range will be limited as a PF which isn't good if you want the guy around beyond his athletic years. Thats my concern with him as a player. The foul shooting and his range speaks to him having a problem with his form and maybe you can tell me if he has that problem because Clippers games are normally past my bedtime most nights.

Defense and foul shooting are a must in this league if you want to win close games in the fourth and this is what I see as Blakes negative affect on his team.

Both aren't ranked 4th in efficiency. Blake has the best efficiency at his position this year and made the All NBA 2nd team for the 2nd year in a row above other PF's. You're saying you don't know what he can improve on but he's improved at literally everything besides rebounding each year. Efficiency, jumper, post moves, defense, passing.. all climbing steadily. That was under a very bad coach who didn't know how to use him in the slightest. Now he's getting Rivers/Alvin Gentry to mold him and shooters around him that can diminish some of those double teams.

Blake was our 3rd or 4th most consistent defensive player last year and shot 70 percent from the line most of the season. He even shot 80 percent from the line in the playoffs.

I can't think of many players with this resume in their first 3 years.

3x All star
2x All NBA 2nd team selection
Averages of 20.5 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 3.7 apg

This is with fantastic efficiency, being completely unselfish and sacrificing big minutes and shots. I can't think of another player in the league outside of Wade in the last few years who's had to sacrifice more for his team. Blake was THE man before CP3... then the team makes a monster trade, signs a ton of ball dominant players. Blake suddenly plays way less minutes, gets less shots, gets less touches and never complains once. George on the other hand is getting more and more responsibility every year and still can't match Blake on paper.

The underrating of Blake Griffin has gone much too far. Now people are ranking players above him who aren't even comparable and acting like he's not a franchise player type talent, who's surpassed all expectations he had coming out of the draft. I can't wait till this season because I just KNOW Blake is going to explode and make everybody eat their words.

todu82
09-26-2013, 01:27 PM
Good move here for the Pacers. George is a good player.

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 01:39 PM
Both aren't ranked 4th in efficiency. Blake has the best efficiency at his position this year and made the All NBA 2nd team for the 2nd year in a row above other PF's. You're saying you don't know what he can improve on but he's improved at literally everything besides rebounding each year. Efficiency, jumper, post moves, defense, passing.. all climbing steadily. That was under a very bad coach who didn't know how to use him in the slightest. Now he's getting Rivers/Alvin Gentry to mold him and shooters around him that can diminish some of those double teams.

Blake was our 3rd or 4th most consistent defensive player last year and shot 70 percent from the line most of the season. He even shot 80 percent from the line in the playoffs.


The underrating of Blake Griffin has gone much too far. Now people are ranking players above him who aren't even comparable and acting like he's not a franchise player type talent, who's surpassed all expectations he had coming out of the draft. I can't wait till this season because I just KNOW Blake is going to explode and make everybody eat their words.

I hate to say it again but both are ranked 4th in overall efficiency for the 2012/13 seaon at their position. Does Blake have a overall better efficiency? Sure but its the difference of 19.4 vs 21. Thats not earth shattering by any means but I do agree that Rivers should atleast help Blake with his defense and really the overall teams defense.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 01:56 PM
I hate to say it again but both are ranked 4th in overall efficiency for the 2012/13 seaon at their position. Does Blake have a overall better efficiency? Sure but its the difference of 19.4 vs 21. Thats not earth shattering by any means but I do agree that Rivers should atleast help Blake with his defense and really the overall teams defense.

What "overall efficiency" are you citing? PER is the most used efficiency metric and it's a huge 22.4 vs 16.8 edge. Not saying PER is end all but for offensive purposes it's a pretty good one it seems.

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 02:37 PM
What "overall efficiency" are you citing? PER is the most used efficiency metric and it's a huge 22.4 vs 16.8 edge. Not saying PER is end all but for offensive purposes it's a pretty good one it seems.

I am not arguing just offensive purposes is the point. I know the previous poster did but thats not the point of the overall value of a player. Even if I disagreed with him about PG being slightly worse from the offensive end his assement of PG making up for his offensive game on the defensive side of the floor is completely accurate.

No wing in the NBA guarded the top offenisive threat more than PG did last year which why defenisve metrics don't do him justice since overall this isn't the story for a lot NBA wings who are the first options on offense as well.

To me its still an apples to oranges comparison since the positions are completely different in how they are played. Blake will always be taking higher statistical shots than PG since one he will be assisted more and two he is a low post player. There is nothing wrong with that but its the nature of the different postions being played and how each player is assuming their individual role on the floor.

If you were to leave potential improvement out of the discussion I would take Blake over PG. That however is not why PG got this contract and its why some on here would gladly take PG over Blake.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 05:10 PM
It is apples and oranges, which is why people shouldn't make stupid comments degrading Griffin in a George thread. That being said I think Griffin has more upside and will have the better career. George will likely end up being Scottie Pippen lite, an elite 2nd option on a contender. Blake has shown more upside in his career and is only 9 months older with the same years experience. His career has been vastly superior and shown more signs of a dominant HOF type player. What people prefer means jackshit, just bias opinions and underrating of Griffin. George needs to prove more than 17 ppg and 8 rpg to be put in the talks as a franchise player or superstar.

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 05:36 PM
It is apples and oranges, which is why people shouldn't make stupid comments degrading Griffin in a George thread. That being said I think Griffin has more upside and will have the better career. George will likely end up being Scottie Pippen lite, an elite 2nd option on a contender. Blake has shown more upside in his career and is only 9 months older with the same years experience. His career has been vastly superior and shown more signs of a dominant HOF type player. What people prefer means jackshit, just bias opinions and underrating of Griffin. George needs to prove more than 17 ppg and 8 rpg to be put in the talks as a franchise player or superstar.

Well thats what I expect a Clippers fan to say which is why I pointed out what Blake needs to improve upon especially in late game situations.

I think also people are down on Blake since he had a so so playoff series most of which he was healthy for. Either way he is good player but to me PG doesn't need to improve upon his ppg or rpg. He needs to improve his efficiency for sure but overall this team is built to pound it inside. If he had the same stats yet his fg% was a respectable 45% then I will be happy for now.

jstone0716
09-26-2013, 05:39 PM
It is apples and oranges, which is why people shouldn't make stupid comments degrading Griffin in a George thread. That being said I think Griffin has more upside and will have the better career. George will likely end up being Scottie Pippen lite, an elite 2nd option on a contender. Blake has shown more upside in his career and is only 9 months older with the same years experience. His career has been vastly superior and shown more signs of a dominant HOF type player. What people prefer means jackshit, just bias opinions and underrating of Griffin. George needs to prove more than 17 ppg and 8 rpg to be put in the talks as a franchise player or superstar.

Dude you are the most Griffin bias person on this forum - please don't talking about being bias. Stats mean nothing in the whole grand scheme of things. Paul lead his team to the conference finals and took the defending champs to 7 games ( and did it the year before as well ). Blake is the only thing holding the Clips back from even reaching the damn conference finals - the entire organization even agrees on that. I don't know how you can possibly say his career has been "vastly superior" that's just a big ole load of bias BS. George proved himself the leader of a legit title contender and worthy of a 90 million extention - Blake so far has done nothing but put up sub par offensive numbers.... HOF type player... are you kidding me?

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 05:52 PM
You can't compare the situations one bit. George was the first option shooting a ton of shots Griffin has never had. If you think one good playoff run offsets 3 superior seasons, that's on you. George is fantastic and I wanted us to draft him but people are really taking the hype far after one playoff run. Same knee jerk fans that label players the best at their position after one good playoff run. I remember the playoffs couple years back when Rondo dominated and all the sudden he was "easily" the best PG and all that crap. Blake has had a much better start to his career at this point and earned a max deal a hell of a lot more than George did. So that **** can die right now. If you think George has more upside fine, but he's NOT better now.

jstone0716
09-26-2013, 06:07 PM
You can't compare the situations one bit. George was the first option shooting a ton of shots Griffin has never had. If you think one good playoff run offsets 3 superior seasons, that's on you. George is fantastic and I wanted us to draft him but people are really taking the hype far after one playoff run. Same knee jerk fans that label players the best at their position after one good playoff run. I remember the playoffs couple years back when Rondo dominated and all the sudden he was "easily" the best PG and all that crap. Blake has had a much better start to his career at this point and earned a max deal a hell of a lot more than George did. So that **** can die right now. If you think George has more upside fine, but he's NOT better now.

I think he's a much better player right now - and was for the entire 12-13 season. Is your head so far up blake griffins *** that you can't see how horrible he is defensively? George is a 2 way player and he's clutch in the 4th. Griffin plays offense for 3 quarters and then disappears. He's even a liability to his team to be in the game late because they can just foul him. Oh and by the way - George and the Pacers took the Heat to 7 games each of the last 2 years... ya know the 2 years they were the best team in world and won the championship. PG > BG by a long shot

jstone0716
09-26-2013, 06:12 PM
I bet you thought Rudy Gay was the second coming of MJ too right?

Chronz
09-26-2013, 06:13 PM
I hate to say it again but both are ranked 4th in overall efficiency for the 2012/13 seaon at their position.
Proof? Do you know what the term efficiency implies?


Does Blake have a overall better efficiency? Sure but its the difference of 19.4 vs 21.
Guess you dont know what efficiency implies. Lemme guess, is this the chocobar stat? Which isn't a measure of efficiency at all, but a (poor) attempt at a linear metric.


Thats not earth shattering by any means but I do agree that Rivers should atleast help Blake with his defense and really the overall teams defense.
LOL. Not earth shattering is putting it nicely, its also an unsubstantiated claim. Efficiency only means one thing, possession efficiency or at the very least, scoring efficiency. If you're citing a stat, plz have the understanding to cite proper terminology.

That gos for both of you, PER is not a measure of efficiency even tho it has the word efficiency in its name, its abit of a misnomer, its a player (statistical) rating system, thats it.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 06:21 PM
Stone so outside of defense where was George better this year? Griffin was a better scorer, rebounder, passer, had superior efficiency and was more consistent game to game. Forgive me for not acting like 16/8 players are superstars and proven HOF type talents.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 06:23 PM
Even if PER isn't a good use of efficiency Griffin has an edge in PPP, EFG and TS.

Chronz
09-26-2013, 06:41 PM
Even if PER isn't a good use of efficiency Griffin has an edge in PPP, EFG and TS.
Rating systems aren't the same as efficiency descriptors. Thats all I was saying, I already know Griffin is the better offensive player. Why didn't you jump on him for saying Blake was healthy for most of the playoffs?

Chronz
09-26-2013, 06:44 PM
Well thats what I expect a Clippers fan to say which is why I pointed out what Blake needs to improve upon especially in late game situations.

I think also people are down on Blake since he had a so so playoff series most of which he was healthy for. Either way he is good player but to me PG doesn't need to improve upon his ppg or rpg. He needs to improve his efficiency for sure but overall this team is built to pound it inside. If he had the same stats yet his fg% was a respectable 45% then I will be happy for now.

Everything you said may be true and all but Blake was not healthy for the playoffs. He struggled with back problems to close the season out and tweaked his knee or leg or something come playoff time.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 06:45 PM
Rating systems aren't the same as efficiency descriptors. Thats all I was saying, I already know Griffin is the better offensive player. Why didn't you jump on him for saying Blake was healthy for most of the playoffs?

I was mobile, reading off my phone, must have missed it.

Chronz
09-26-2013, 06:50 PM
Dude you are the most Griffin bias person on this forum - please don't talking about being bias.
True, but at least he is backing his claims with logic (for the most part).


Stats mean nothing in the whole grand scheme of things.
Based on wat? I guess you better call NBA GM's and tell them to stop wasting time studying them and their importance, let them know you have it all figured out.



Paul lead his team to the conference finals and took the defending champs to 7 games ( and did it the year before as well ).
What makes you think he led them, cuz he dunks? Oh right, you're ignoring that Hibbert was their most productive player/defender and that West is seen as their emotional rock. I guess that **** doesn't matter when you have a pretty game like PG.

This ignores the fact that plenty of inferior players "led" their teams further. Look at CP3, you really think a guy like Mike Conley is better than him?


Blake is the only thing holding the Clips back from even reaching the damn conference finals - the entire organization even agrees on that.
Why, because they have higher expectations for him than Indy does for PG?


I don't know how you can possibly say his career has been "vastly superior" that's just a big ole load of bias BS. George proved himself the leader of a legit title contender and worthy of a 90 million extention -
Actually, by the very definition of "proving" himself worth that money, he has yet to qualify for that kind of money, you know... the kind of money Blake has already proven worthy of.



Blake so far has done nothing but put up sub par offensive numbers....
Only if you know nothing about numbers.


HOF type player... are you kidding me?
Check out HOF PF's and tell me how many of them actually produced at a superior rate so early in their careers....

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 06:52 PM
Well thats what I expect a Clippers fan to say which is why I pointed out what Blake needs to improve upon especially in late game situations.

I think also people are down on Blake since he had a so so playoff series most of which he was healthy for. Either way he is good player but to me PG doesn't need to improve upon his ppg or rpg. He needs to improve his efficiency for sure but overall this team is built to pound it inside. If he had the same stats yet his fg% was a respectable 45% then I will be happy for now.

Since when do PF's that play with ball dominant, incredibly clutch guards (especially PG's) get a chance to take over in late game situations? CP3 is possibly the most clutch player in the game so it's not a knock on Blake that he isn't in those situations, Paul is simply better. George was the guy with his hands on the ball in those situations and expected to create and take those big shots. Nevermind that Griffin was actually surprisingly clutch his rookie year when he DID have the ball more.

Blake was NOT healthy one bit in the playoffs this year and last year when he was healthy he put up an efficient 21/8 which while not amazing, isn't terrible for his first playoff run. As Chronz said this year he ended the season with very bad back spasms.. then in the playoffs he had a severe high ankle sprain from landing on Odom's foot in practice. Players usually play through sprains but not grade 2 HIGH ANKLE sprains which are pretty damn crippling. Nevermind that WITH those injuries he battled the best, most physical frontcourt in the league, making it worse. If you look at Zbo's stats before and after Blake's injury you'll be shocked. Before in games 1-3 Zbo was pretty much locked up and contained well. After that he started going off every game for 25+ it seemed.

Also you said George merely has to improve his efficiency but if he was a 17/8/4 player with improved efficiency you'd be satisfied to pay him 90 million based on that and deem him your franchise player? Would you pay Luol Deng 90 million a year? Because what you described is prime Luol Deng. Let alone compare him to a career 20.5/10.5/3.7 player with fantastic efficiency and that makes the All NBA 2nd team in consecutive years?

Upside is an opinion so I won't argue that. I'm just saying RIGHT NOW and to this point, Griffin has earned that contract more than George and is the better player.

Chronz
09-26-2013, 06:53 PM
I was mobile, reading off my phone, must have missed it.
You dont like the PSD app huh...

Chronz
09-26-2013, 06:58 PM
and last year when he was healthy he put up an efficient 21/8 which while not amazing, isn't terrible for his first playoff run.
He was actually pretty inefficient, below or at league average IIRC. But I thought he was injured then too. Remember he had to call off the Olympics because he reaggravated it or something.

EDIT) NVM - I just realized you said WHEN healthy. Which was for like the first few games or something right?


Also you said George merely has to improve his efficiency but if he was a 17/8/4 player with improved efficiency you'd be satisfied to pay him 90 million based on that and deem him your franchise player?
Depends on how much he improves that efficiency. CP3 for instance is what, a 17-9-3 guy last year? Its his otherworldly efficiency that helps his teams win.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 07:03 PM
He was actually pretty inefficient, below or at league average IIRC. But I thought he was injured then too. Remember he had to call off the Olympics because he reaggravated it or something.

EDIT) NVM - I just realized you said WHEN healthy. Which was for like the first few games or something right?


Depends on how much he improves that efficiency. CP3 for instance is what, a 17-9-3 guy last year? Its his otherworldly efficiency that helps his teams win.

Yea I think he was healthy games 1-3 last year vs the Grizzlies then got a tad bit healthier during the Spurs series and put up 21 ppg during that series, although it wasn't very efficient. Overall though Griffin has gotten boned come playoff time with injury AND the opponents he's facing. The Grizzlies and Spurs play Griffin better than pretty much any other team so unfortunately people see him struggle some and label him a playoff choke. If he got to play a team like OKC/Houston/GS it would have been a different story probably.

You bring up a good point that 17-8-4 or W/E with elite efficiency COULD be elite, I guess I just have a bias that PG's who control a game like CP3/Stockton can do a lot more with those stats than a wing player.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 07:04 PM
You dont like the PSD app huh...

Didn't know an app existed. Does it make a big difference?

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 07:18 PM
Everything you said may be true and all but Blake was not healthy for the playoffs. He struggled with back problems to close the season out and tweaked his knee or leg or something come playoff time.

I remember he twisted his ankle in game five which made the big difference and it was classified as a moderate sprain.

No one is healthy for 82 games and should I bring up PGs pinky since it hindered his driving ability. I don't because no one is 100 percent come playoff time but maybe Blake had some bigger issues that I don't know about.

Chronz
09-26-2013, 07:30 PM
Didn't know an app existed. Does it make a big difference?
Most people hate it thats why. I dont have many problems but it depends on the phone. I surf PSD on my GF's phone and it works better than the app on my phone.

Chronz
09-26-2013, 07:32 PM
I remember he twisted his ankle in game five which made the big difference and it was classified as a moderate sprain.
Classified by whom? It was much worse than a moderate sprain. Moderate sprains dont render a player unable to walk and force them to play with a noticeable limp. Maybe you took what the Clips initially said at face value but thats usually to fake out the opposing team. After the series was over the extent of his injury was revealed.


No one is healthy for 82 games and should I bring up PGs pinky since it hindered his driving ability. I don't because no one is 100 percent come playoff time but maybe Blake had some bigger issues that I don't know about.
There is a difference between playing hurt and playing injured. PG would look like a ***** if he sat out for a bad pinky, but Blake's injury would have kept him sidelined for weeks if it was the regular season.

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 07:33 PM
Even if PER isn't a good use of efficiency Griffin has an edge in PPP, EFG and TS.
Again I am not arguing whether or not Blake is a better offensive player. He clearly is based on his position and game but I question whether or not PG adds more overall. That's what I think PG does and I freely admit it's biased but it's also based on the facts defensively what he did at the sf position.

My thoughts about Blake are simple and I can state them again if you like. He is an above average offensive player that must extend his range and defensively he must become signficantly better in order to take the Clippers to the finals. That are my thoughts about him but I am not oblivious to Paul George flaws. He has to be more efficient offensively and play much better on the road but given that I think he is more versatile overall.

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 07:42 PM
Classified by whom? It was much worse than a moderate sprain. Moderate sprains dont render a player unable to walk and force them to play with a noticeable limp. Maybe you took what the Clips initially said at face value but thats usually to fake out the opposing team. After the series was over the extent of his injury was revealed.


There is a difference between playing hurt and playing injured. PG would look like a ***** if he sat out for a bad pinky, but Blake's injury would have kept him sidelined for weeks if it was the regular season.

http://www.nbainjurynews.com/2013/05/blake-griffin-injury-mri-reveals.html

http://fullyclips.com/2013/05/02/blakegriffinmri/

Do you need more?

It was a moderate sprain hyped by many. I have no doubt it hurt and I don't question its role in deciding the series but it did happen in game five.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 07:52 PM
http://www.nbainjurynews.com/2013/05/blake-griffin-injury-mri-reveals.html

http://fullyclips.com/2013/05/02/blakegriffinmri/

Do you need more?

It was a moderate sprain hyped by many. I have no doubt it hurt and I don't question its role in deciding the series but it did happen in game five.

PLEASE stop talking about sh** you don't know buddy. It was a grade 2, high ankle sprain directly from the DR's mouth and quoting blogs sharing the same source doesn't prove anything. Blake Griffin got treatment DAILY at the training facility on it for an entire MONTH after the season ended before it was fully healed.

It was far from moderate in terms of ability to play on it, and Dr Klapper who's known in LA for sports medicine said most players would sit out 2-3 weeks at least with this sort of injury, definitely not playing. Moderate in terms of medically how severe the MRI shows it doesn't mean moderate in terms of how it affects basketball. If it was a moderate sprain in the lower ankle like usual he would have been better but have you ever had a HIGH ankle sprain? I have and it's not even close to the same thing.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 07:54 PM
"Clippers coach Vinny Del Negro called the mishap "freakish," saying Griffin was working on a post move while going half-speed in a drill when he landed on teammate Lamar Odom's foot. Griffin received treatment until late Monday night, but wasn't sure he'd play when he arrived at Staples Center. He gutted out 19 minutes with the aid of pain killers."

Sounds like a real mild injury there... LMAO.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 08:02 PM
I don't know how many times I should share this but... There is only ONE player in NBA history that's had as many points+rebounds+assists in their first 3 years, KAREEM ABDUL JABBAR. He's also in a rare class of players who have averaged 20.5, 10.5, 3.5+ in their first 3 seasons. He's got 3 all star appearances, two All NBA 2nd team selections and in general has had an AMAZING start to his career. Sure we all want more sooner but it takes time and people need to stop getting impatient and turning on the guy.

He's been called THE hardest worker on the team by every teammate he's ever had and that alone is what's going to help him keep improving. It's idiotic to act like a guy that gifted, that young and that works so hard.. is tapped out. The guy was moderately hyped but most draft analysts had him being maybe an all star at his peak, very few expected a 20/10/3 career type. If he had Shaq/Jordan type hype coming out I'd understand the disappointment but that wasn't the case.

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 08:06 PM
please stop talking about sh** you don't know buddy. It was a grade 2, high ankle sprain directly from the dr's mouth and quoting blogs doesn't prove anything. Blake griffin got treatment daily at the training facility on it for an entire month after the season ended before it was fully healed.

It was far from moderate in terms of ability to play on it, and dr klapper who's known in la for sports medicine said most players would sit out 2-3 weeks at least with this sort of injury, definitely not playing. Moderate in terms of medically how severe the mri shows it doesn't mean moderate in terms of how it affects basketball. If it was a moderate sprain in the lower ankle like usual he would have been better but have you ever had a high ankle sprain? I have and it's not even close to the same thing.

You are confused. I don't care what it was classified as but merely when it occured. He asked where I got the notion where it was a moderate sprain and I gave some the websites that said it was but that doesn't change the fact that it happend in game five and he put up OK numbers before that. Certainly that supports the post I already stated that he had a so so playoff series.

Clippersfan86
09-26-2013, 08:11 PM
You are confused. I don't care what it was classified as but merely when it occured. He asked where I got the notion where it was a moderate sprain and I gave some the websites that said it was but that doesn't change the fact that it happend in game five and he put up OK numbers before that. Certainly that supports the post I already stated that he had a so so playoff series.

Okay so he had an average playoff series, so what? Did you not read my previous posts about the competition? He so happened to be matched up with the team that gives him the most problems the last two years in the playoffs. It's not a knock on him, it's an incredibly tough matchup. Had he faced OKC who he puts up 25/10 against pretty much automatically, we wouldn't even be talking about this. His career numbers against Memphis and SA are the worst of any opponent if I recall.

Two playoff runs, both injured at some point and both times against two teams that give him more problems than anybody. It doesn't mean a hell of a lot and your point was that he's inadequate come playoff time. There are reasons for this. Not because he simply folds under the spotlight.

Pacerlive
09-26-2013, 08:41 PM
Okay so he had an average playoff series, so what? Did you not read my previous posts about the competition? He so happened to be matched up with the team that gives him the most problems the last two years in the playoffs. It's not a knock on him, it's an incredibly tough matchup. Had he faced OKC who he puts up 25/10 against pretty much automatically, we wouldn't even be talking about this. His career numbers against Memphis and SA are the worst of any opponent if I recall.

Two playoff runs, both injured at some point and both times against two teams that give him more problems than anybody. It doesn't mean a hell of a lot and your point was that he's inadequate come playoff time. There are reasons for this. Not because he simply folds under the spotlight.

Again I only pointed out why posters would be down on Griffen and nothing more. He is a top pf talent but I think he has a lot to prove defensively and as far as longevity I think he has to have a midrange game beyond 9 feet.

Chronz
09-26-2013, 09:24 PM
please stop talking about sh** you don't know buddy. It was a grade 2, high ankle sprain directly from the dr's mouth and quoting blogs doesn't prove anything. Blake griffin got treatment daily at the training facility on it for an entire month after the season ended before it was fully healed.

It was far from moderate in terms of ability to play on it, and dr klapper who's known in la for sports medicine said most players would sit out 2-3 weeks at least with this sort of injury, definitely not playing. Moderate in terms of medically how severe the mri shows it doesn't mean moderate in terms of how it affects basketball. If it was a moderate sprain in the lower ankle like usual he would have been better but have you ever had a high ankle sprain? I have and it's not even close to the same thing.

You are confused. I don't care what it was classified as but merely when it occured. He asked where I got the notion where it was a moderate sprain and I gave some the websites that said it was but that doesn't change the fact that it happend in game five and he put up OK numbers before that. Certainly that supports the post I already stated that he had a so so playoff series.
Hes not playoff proven, I agree with that. By a moderate sprain I thought you were classifying it as a moderate injury comparable to a pitiful pinky injury when in reality, its the kind of injury that would keep him on the mend whereas nobody would respect pgs injury(thus proving your immense bias with the laughable comp), so yeah, theres still that.

Htownballa1622
09-26-2013, 10:52 PM
Has this really turned into a BG vs PG discussion?

Seriously...PG is a good, young player with room to grow but Blake Griffin is on another level.

FlashBolt
09-27-2013, 12:17 AM
Has this really turned into a BG vs PG discussion?

Seriously...PG is a good, young player with room to grow but Blake Griffin is on another level.

What? Blake Griffin is on another level, which is? Paul George is a better player than Blake. Who would you build around? Chances are, Paul George. He can shoot, drive, defend, rebound, and is actually a player who rises to the occasion.

FlashBolt
09-27-2013, 12:19 AM
I don't know how many times I should share this but... There is only ONE player in NBA history that's had as many points+rebounds+assists in their first 3 years, KAREEM ABDUL JABBAR. He's also in a rare class of players who have averaged 20.5, 10.5, 3.5+ in their first 3 seasons. He's got 3 all star appearances, two All NBA 2nd team selections and in general has had an AMAZING start to his career. Sure we all want more sooner but it takes time and people need to stop getting impatient and turning on the guy.

He's been called THE hardest worker on the team by every teammate he's ever had and that alone is what's going to help him keep improving. It's idiotic to act like a guy that gifted, that young and that works so hard.. is tapped out. The guy was moderately hyped but most draft analysts had him being maybe an all star at his peak, very few expected a 20/10/3 career type. If he had Shaq/Jordan type hype coming out I'd understand the disappointment but that wasn't the case.

Weren't you the guy preaching about playoff success in the KG vs Dirk debate, now you bring up regular season stats and ignore his failures in the playoffs? Admit it. The guy under-performs in bright lights and when he's up against a quality defender, he looks lost and out of rhythm.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 12:30 AM
Weren't you the guy preaching about playoff success in the KG vs Dirk debate, now you bring up regular season stats and ignore his failures in the playoffs? Admit it. The guy under-performs in bright lights and when he's up against a quality defender, he looks lost and out of rhythm.

Are you going to compare samples of 10+ seasons to 1 and 2 season samples? Blake Griffin was injured both years in the playoffs and George has just had one playoff run, so it's much too soon to make any blanket statements. Either that Paul is an amazing playoff performer, or that Griffin "shrinks".

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 12:33 AM
Has this really turned into a BG vs PG discussion?

Seriously...PG is a good, young player with room to grow but Blake Griffin is on another level.

Bingo.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 12:36 AM
What? Blake Griffin is on another level, which is? Paul George is a better player than Blake. Who would you build around? Chances are, Paul George. He can shoot, drive, defend, rebound, and is actually a player who rises to the occasion.

I build around the guy who EASILY has better career numbers, matched by few players in NBA history through 3 years. The guy who's proven himself a franchise player in the same 3 years. Not to mention dominant, HOF type bigmen are much more rare than wing players. Griffin's been better hands down this year, the two years prior and I don't see it changing any time soon. Especially now that Blake's got a great group of coaches to mentor him in Gentry and Doc.

You preach facts and knowledge yet make false statements like "Paul is a better player than Blake" despite mounts of evidence in stats saying otherwise. George isn't "far" behind Blake but he's definitely not an equal at this point. Blake Griffin rises to the occasion too and as a rookie when he actually had the ball in his hands in the clutch, he regularly hit big shots or got big rebounds. If George played with CP3 he wouldn't be taking the big shots either.

I guess people really are big on inefficient 16/8 type wings and label them superstars.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 12:57 AM
Has this really turned into a BG vs PG discussion?

Seriously...PG is a good, young player with room to grow but Blake Griffin is on another level.

What? Blake Griffin is on another level, which is? Paul George is a better player than Blake. Who would you build around? Chances are, Paul George. He can shoot, drive, defend, rebound, and is actually a player who rises to the occasion.
Based on what?

Care to refute anything provided by the 2clipper fans / objective measures / subjective awards given by the media?

b@llhog24
09-27-2013, 01:02 AM
Proof? Do you know what the term efficiency implies?


Guess you dont know what efficiency implies. Lemme guess, is this the chocobar stat? Which isn't a measure of efficiency at all, but a (poor) attempt at a linear metric.


LOL. Not earth shattering is putting it nicely, its also an unsubstantiated claim. Efficiency only means one thing, possession efficiency or at the very least, scoring efficiency. If you're citing a stat, plz have the understanding to cite proper terminology.

That gos for both of you, PER is not a measure of efficiency even tho it has the word efficiency in its name, its abit of a misnomer, its a player (statistical) rating system, thats it.

:clap:

b@llhog24
09-27-2013, 01:03 AM
And PG isn't better than Griffin.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 01:08 AM
Ballhog or Chronz what do you guys use for a more general offensive efficiency stat? I know most people big on stats say to use a combination but in a pinch, which one do you think assesses the most accurate efficiency or value? The RAPM? PER? WS?

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 11:24 AM
No ones arguing that Blake has put up better offensive numbers in his career. The point is they are empty statistics - he's a slightly better version of David Lee. There's 2 types of game changing players: 2 way players that make an impact on both sides of the court ( LBJ, PG, KG, Timmy ) and clutch players that can put the team on their backs when the game or season is on the line ( Kobe, LBJ, Dirk, PG, Pierce, Ray Allen..etc. ). That is what you build around. Not empty offensive numbers and a pretty good eye for lob passes. I mean honestly - in a tight game that comes down to getting stops on D and making free throws you just have to bench the guy.. he's useless. And you think that's a HOF/franchise player? Throw around all the statistics you want to try and prove me wrong on that but it's pretty clear who's the better player.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 12:12 PM
No ones arguing that Blake has put up better offensive numbers in his career. The point is they are empty statistics - he's a slightly better version of David Lee. There's 2 types of game changing players: 2 way players that make an impact on both sides of the court ( LBJ, PG, KG, Timmy ) and clutch players that can put the team on their backs when the game or season is on the line ( Kobe, LBJ, Dirk, PG, Pierce, Ray Allen..etc. ). That is what you build around. Not empty offensive numbers and a pretty good eye for lob passes. I mean honestly - in a tight game that comes down to getting stops on D and making free throws you just have to bench the guy.. he's useless. And you think that's a HOF/franchise player? Throw around all the statistics you want to try and prove me wrong on that but it's pretty clear who's the better player.

Lol.

KnickaBocka.44
09-27-2013, 12:35 PM
Lol.

He actually has a point. The only reason you're laughing is because he is your favorite player.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 12:57 PM
He actually has a point. The only reason you're laughing is because he is your favorite player.

Did you actually read his post? He said Blake Griffin needs to be benched in the clutch because he's a liability when he's actually in all of our best crunch time lineups on both offense and defense. Anybody who watched Griffin this year would know he actually became a solid defender. The clutch theory I've already destroyed because when you play with Chris Paul (the most clutch player in the NBA) it's not unreasonable to think you won't get the ball in those situations. In his rookie year when he had the ball in his hands most of those situations he delivered so it's an unfounded statement to act like he's simply a choke or something. He hasn't gotten the big opportunities next to CP3 in clutch moments, so nothing to deliver or not deliver on.

One great playoff run by George doesn't make him the better player. George as I said previously was THE guy on the Pacers who had the ball in those moments and this is why it's bad to compare a wing to a PF. Blake Griffin has never been benched because he was a liability in crunch time lol (because he never was a liability).

Stone has been getting schooled pretty badly in this thread because instead of trying to be logical he's made some pretty ridiculous, off the wall, unfounded claims with no evidence. The minute you post stats or impact related figures he says "stats don't mean anything". So how can we possibly argue something with a person like that? Stats aren't everything but they DO have big value in comparisons and the stats show that Griffin is unquestionably the better player, even with Paul's defensive edge factored.

Griffin is a slightly above average defender at this point, George is a well above average (not quite elite like people seem to think) defender. So to act like Griffin is one dimensional in comparison is flat out idiotic. Like I said give me 20/10/4 with top notch efficiency over 16/8/4 with mediocre efficiency ANY DAY.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 01:00 PM
No ones arguing that Blake has put up better offensive numbers in his career. The point is they are empty statistics - he's a slightly better version of David Lee. There's 2 types of game changing players: 2 way players that make an impact on both sides of the court ( LBJ, PG, KG, Timmy ) and clutch players that can put the team on their backs when the game or season is on the line ( Kobe, LBJ, Dirk, PG, Pierce, Ray Allen..etc. ). That is what you build around. Not empty offensive numbers and a pretty good eye for lob passes. I mean honestly - in a tight game that comes down to getting stops on D and making free throws you just have to bench the guy.. he's useless. And you think that's a HOF/franchise player? Throw around all the statistics you want to try and prove me wrong on that but it's pretty clear who's the better player.

Not going to get into the Blake Griffin stuff. But that crap about their being 2 types of game changing players? Nonsense. What about elite defenders that can score but aren't high caliber offensive players? Those guys can have just as big an impact as any name you mentioned, thinking of guys like Mark Eaton, Bobby Jones, Mutombo and Van Lier.

"Putting the team on your back" shouldn't be a phrase used exclusively to describe offensive-minded players.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 01:09 PM
BTW if I'm the one saying it I'm called an unreasonable homer.. yet why haven't any of the George backers addressed the last few people like Htown or Ballhog saying Griffin is better? Reality here is... it's not just me being a raging homer. George is what's hot right now and fresh in our mind after the playoffs, fans of course are going with their last memory of each player. Griffin having a mediocre playoff series, George doing great in a breakout playoff series.

Which takes away from the logical way of assessing an entire season or multiple seasons. As I said before every year in the playoffs SOMEBODY blows up and gets extremely overrated, and somebody struggles and gets extremely underrated. This is a perfect example of that. Like I said earlier I remember I think it was the 2011 playoffs when Rondo was DOMINANT. Everybody after the playoffs and during was arguing how Rondo was easily the best PG and all this trash. Yet completely disregarding his not even top 5 regular season.

George was very inconsistent during the season. Stretches of dominance, stretches of disappearing. He's young and has great upside so that's completely understandable. Just don't base your entire opinion of him off of a playoff series. People keep remember the Miami series but in the playoffs as a whole last year the guy averaged just 17/6.5/4.5 PER 36 on bad efficiency (slightly worse numbers than his regular season). It's not like he dominated.

Like I said earlier at this point he's a less efficient prime Luol Deng.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 01:11 PM
Not going to get into the Blake Griffin stuff. But that crap about their being 2 types of game changing players? Nonsense. What about elite defenders that can score but aren't high caliber offensive players? Those guys can have just as big an impact as any name you mentioned, thinking of guys like Mark Eaton, Bobby Jones, Mutombo and Van Lier.

"Putting the team on your back" shouldn't be a phrase used exclusively to describe offensive-minded players.

He's the man writing NBA theory here. You better pull up a chair and learn something son! :cool:. Also don't forget Ben Wallace. Highest impact player on the Pistons quite possibly while not matching any of his criteria for a high impact player. Awful scorer, huge liability at the line, didn't carry the offense in the clutch.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 02:20 PM
Not going to get into the Blake Griffin stuff. But that crap about their being 2 types of game changing players? Nonsense. What about elite defenders that can score but aren't high caliber offensive players? Those guys can have just as big an impact as any name you mentioned, thinking of guys like Mark Eaton, Bobby Jones, Mutombo and Van Lier.

"Putting the team on your back" shouldn't be a phrase used exclusively to describe offensive-minded players.

You're correct. And I wasn't disregarding defensive minded only players. In fact I was going to throw Tony Allen's VS Rudy Gay in there just to prove my point that Defense > Offense... they got BETTER throwing that garbage player away. And it goes without saying being clutch on the defensive side is just as important as being clutch on offensive. I just didn't want to exacerbate my point.. I was simply pointing out that PG is both a 2 way player AND clutch and Blake is neither.

...But now that you brought it up... Bruce Bowen, Tony Allen, Ben Wallace > Ben Griffin as well.

b@llhog24
09-27-2013, 02:38 PM
Ballhog or Chronz what do you guys use for a more general offensive efficiency stat? I know most people big on stats say to use a combination but in a pinch, which one do you think assesses the most accurate efficiency or value? The RAPM? PER? WS?

Had a write-up about this the other day but can't remember which thread it was in. In a nutshell the best overall offensive metric is Ortg(Offensive Rating). Which is great and all, but it can't be used by itself as a standalone stat in the same way the TS and eFG is used. It has to be factored in with USG%. Like Pablo Pigs had a higher Ortg than Melo, but you'd be an idiot to think that he's a better/more valuable to the Knicks offense than Melo. That's where USG comes in.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 02:40 PM
Had a write-up about this the other day but can't remember which thread it was in. In a nutshell the best overall offensive metric is Ortg(Offensive Rating). Which is great and all, but it can't be used by itself as a standalone stat in the same way the TS and eFG is used. It has to be factored in with USG%. Like Pablo Pigs had a higher Ortg than Melo, but you'd be an idiot to think that he's a better/more valuable to the Knicks offense than Melo. That's where USG comes in.

Ah okay thanks. But you do prefer Ortg over PER? I don't get why certain anomalies like Tyson Chandler though regularly dominate that stats despite average offensive games. I guess every formula has weird anomalies though.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 02:42 PM
You're correct. And I wasn't disregarding defensive minded only players. In fact I was going to throw Tony Allen's VS Rudy Gay in there just to prove my point that Defense > Offense... they got BETTER throwing that garbage player away. And it goes without saying being clutch on the defensive side is just as important as being clutch on offensive. I just didn't want to exacerbate my point.. I was simply pointing out that PG is both a 2 way player AND clutch and Blake is neither.

...But now that you brought it up... Bruce Bowen, Tony Allen, Ben Wallace > Ben Griffin as well.

Lol.. man you're misinformed. Your theory might have a little bit of weight if Griffin was one dimensional but he's not. Griffin is better in 3 of the 4 main categories in basketball (scoring, rebounding, passing), 4 of 5 if we count efficiency (we should). Bottom line is Blake is a better player right now. Blake Griffin has become much more of a two way player himself and is FAR more efficient. Tony Allen is better than Blake Griffin? I'll let other posters clown you for continuously making comments like this.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 02:44 PM
Tony Allen is more of a game changer than Blake Griffin. Hands down.

b@llhog24
09-27-2013, 02:57 PM
Ah okay thanks. But you do prefer Ortg over PER?

PER isn't necessarily an efficiency metric. Like Chronz said, it's a ranking system. It's more telling of overall player value than just how good someone is on offense. In layman's terms, remember when wayback you'd be like "Player A has more rebounds and points than player B so therefore he is better" But those points, rebounds, aren't created equal. If the "big 3" box score measurements were lined up in order of value it would probably be something like points>assists>rebounds (offensive rebounds are more valuable than defensive ones btw). The reason I like it is, it makes it easier to compare across positions and time. Like trying to explain to somehow how Cp3's 08 season was just as good (if not better) than Kobe's 06 season is a pain in the ***. PER takes out most of the guess work. I prefer ortg when talking about player value to offense, but then I prefer PER when we're talking about overall worth.


I don't get why certain anomalies like Tyson Chandler though regularly dominate that stats despite average offensive games. I guess every formula has weird anomalies though.

Does it confuse you with DeAndre? It's kind of the same thing.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 03:04 PM
I feel jstone is underrating Griffin but Clippersfan is underrating Tony Allen.

...just me?

Despite being a dubs fan, I actually don't mind the Clippers (unless we're playing them ;) ) and I like Griffin, sure he's not quite as good as people were making out he would be, but he's 24, he still has time to improve. Plus, let's not pretend that he isn't intimidating to a defense, he's probably one of the most intimidating due to his athleticism and poster dunks, nobody wants to be caught on that. If he can improve his defense and develop a reliable mid-range game, I would say he would then be worth the hype. Oh, and if he would stop flopping. Blake is easily a top 5 player in his position, but I'm not sure how much that means when the 4 is so shallow. I noticed people talking about PER and how effective it really is at measuring a player, but slice it any way that you want, Griffin didn't finish 12th in PER last season for nothing.

I think Blake gets a hard time from a lot of people, mainly because casual fans and the media hype him up, people grow tired of that sort of thing, the problem is although he may not be as good as certain people hype him up to be, he's still one of the best at his position and a very good player. People need to take a step back, breathe and just look at things in the most unbiased way that they can.

As for Allen, he's a stopper. Pure and simple. He has a bit of an ego on him but he's one of the top 5 wing defenders in the league, and he's consistent.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 03:12 PM
For the record I don't think Griffin is a bad player. He's just not a game changing one man offensive show like your AI's, T-macs, Kobes, Melos... those sorts of players... and well he doesn't really do anything else for his team. He's a solid 2-3rd option that can excite a crowd with a powerful throw down.. I just don't see much worth beyond that. He's definitely not a HOF player, I can say that pretty definitively.

b@llhog24
09-27-2013, 03:19 PM
For the record I don't think Griffin is a bad player. He's just not a game changing one man offensive show like your AI's, T-macs, Kobes, Melos... those sorts of players... and well he doesn't really do anything else for his team. He's a solid 2-3rd option that can excite a crowd with a powerful throw down.. I just don't see much worth beyond that. He's definitely not a HOF player, I can say that pretty definitively.

Tony Allen isn't even that.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 03:32 PM
Tony Allen isn't even that.

Yeah but who guards LBJ with 5 seconds left in game 7 of the finals, up 1 point? Allen. And he has a pretty good chance of stopping him from winning the game. Offense doesn't win championships man. That why teams like Indiana, Memphis.... the '11 Mav, '03-05 Pistons and the likes excel. Players like Griffin bring nothing game changing to the table... replace him with someone who can throw up 12 points a game and defend like a champ and you have a legit contender in the Clips.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 03:54 PM
For the record I don't think Griffin is a bad player. He's just not a game changing one man offensive show like your AI's, T-macs, Kobes, Melos... those sorts of players... and well he doesn't really do anything else for his team. He's a solid 2-3rd option that can excite a crowd with a powerful throw down.. I just don't see much worth beyond that. He's definitely not a HOF player, I can say that pretty definitively.

Melo isn't a game changers. There's a big difference between volume scorers and efficient scorers. You may as well include Gay and Monta in that list.

AI is debatable.

And you don't need to be a HOF type player to be a game changer.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 04:05 PM
Melo isn't a game changers. There's a big difference between volume scorers and efficient scorers. You may as well include Gay and Monta in that list.

AI is debatable.

And you don't need to be a HOF type player to be a game changer.

Melo with Gay and Monta? C'mon that's a little unfair. He's definitely on the outskirts of that group but he's a great scorer and a decent defender. He's always lead his teams into the playoffs - albeit with little success. He's never really had any second options to facilitate.. he's always had to be man.

Blake isn't a game changer or better than Melo though - so what's your point?

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:13 PM
He actually has a point. The only reason you're laughing is because he is your favorite player.

Actually that post was total BS.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:15 PM
...But now that you brought it up... Bruce Bowen, Tony Allen, Ben Wallace > Ben Griffin as well.

You heard it here first folks, Tony Allen is better than Ben Griffin

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:18 PM
Ah okay thanks. But you do prefer Ortg over PER?
O-RTG isnt a rating system like PER, thats like asking if we like FT% over PER. ORTG is a measurement of per possession efficiency, usage is a measure of possession usage. Think of it like looking at total yards and yards per carry in football.


I don't get why certain anomalies like Tyson Chandler though regularly dominate that stats despite average offensive games.
Its not an anomaly, thats like questioning FG% because Tyson Chandler dominates it. His style of play is exactly why he dominates it.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:20 PM
Tony Allen is more of a game changer than Blake Griffin. Hands down.

So then why isn't there a single shred of evidence to back you? Why is Blake winning all these awards? Why do GM's refuse to pay Tony Allen big money? Is the whole world wrong and only you know the true value of players, despite your utter lack of objectivity?

Goose17
09-27-2013, 04:20 PM
Melo with Gay and Monta? C'mon that's a little unfair. He's definitely on the outskirts of that group but he's a great scorer and a decent defender. He's always lead his teams into the playoffs - albeit with little success. He's never really had any second options to facilitate.. he's always had to be man.

Blake isn't a game changer or better than Melo though - so what's your point?


Blake isn't a game changer but that doesn't mean he can't become one. With his athleticism and build he could be a great defender. If he could defend at a high level and develop a decent mid-range game, he would be a great two-way player especially combined with his explosiveness in the open court. So my point is, your comment about him not being a HOF player is irrelevant, because that's not what we're discussing. I highly doubt Melo makes it into the HOF either.

As for Melo, I'm not saying Monta and Gay are on the same level as players, not in the slightest, Melo is far superior. I'm saying they're about the same level as difference makers, as in, they don't make a difference. Volume scorers.

Melo is a high caliber player, great on offense. Doesn't play D much but when he does it's decent. But he's not a game changer. You can be a high caliber player but not be a game changer. There's no way you're grouping him in there with Kobe and Lebron.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 04:22 PM
O-RTG isnt a rating system like PER, thats like asking if we like FT% over PER. ORTG is a measurement of per possession efficiency, usage is a measure of possession usage. Think of it like looking at total yards and yards per carry in football.


Its not an anomaly, thats like questioning FG% because Tyson Chandler dominates it. His style of play is exactly why he dominates it.

Oh okay, makes sense. I guess what I thought it was, wasn't what it really was. As you said PER the name itself is misleading because it stands for player efficiency rating.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 04:23 PM
So then why isn't there a single shred of evidence to back you? Why is Blake winning all these awards? Why do GM's refuse to pay Tony Allen big money? Is the whole world wrong and only you know the true value of players, despite your utter lack of objectivity?

Because I don't really care about advanced statistics. And it pisses all you metric nerds off.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 04:24 PM
Lol at Blake Griffin not being a game changer. Goose you're a reasonable guy, not sure why you'd jump on board with that troll's train of thought. I know you weren't attacking Griffin but you're definitely not giving him his due either. Griffin is a perennial all star and a proven franchise cornerstone who's had one of the greatest 3 year starts of any player in NBA history. He has future HOFer written all over him. Even if he never improved and just stayed a 20/10/4 type player for another few years.. he makes the HOF. At absolute worst he's a top 20 player, although I have him more around 12-15. You can't be a top 20 player and not be a game changer. He's not that far numbers/efficiency/impact wise from being a SUPERSTAR caliber player.

For example last year PER 36 he put up 20/10/4 with outstanding efficiency and much improved defense. How many players can say that? I'm not underrating Tony Allen at all. I think he's a very nice role player and the best perimeter defender in the game. That being said to give play to Stone's idea that he's even in the same REALM as Blake Griffin is idiotic.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 04:26 PM
Blake isn't a game changer but that doesn't mean he can't become one. With his athleticism and build he could be a great defender. If he could defend at a high level and develop a decent mid-range game, he would be a great two-way player especially combined with his explosiveness in the open court. So my point is, your comment about him not being a HOF player is irrelevant, because that's not what we're discussing. I highly doubt Melo makes it into the HOF either.

As for Melo, I'm not saying Monta and Gay are on the same level as players, not in the slightest, Melo is far superior. I'm saying they're about the same level as difference makers, as in, they don't make a difference. Volume scorers.

Melo is a high caliber player, great on offense. Doesn't play D much but when he does it's decent. But he's not a game changer. You can be a high caliber player but not be a game changer. There's no way you're grouping him in there with Kobe and Lebron.

Fair enough on grouping him with LBJ and Kobe - but Melo did take a pretty crappy knicks team and turn them into the second seed in the east. I would definitely call that game changing. Take away Blake and I don't think the Clippers fall much in the standing, replace him with Z-Bo or someone like that and you have a title contender.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 04:28 PM
You heard it here first folks, Tony Allen is better than Ben Griffin

:laugh: :laugh: I caught that too.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:30 PM
I feel jstone is underrating Griffin but Clippersfan is underrating Tony Allen.
How so?


and I like Griffin, sure he's not quite as good as people were making out he would be,
Where did you get this idea from? He was touted as a raw talent who would struggle adapting when he was drafted, the hope was eventual All-Star, far from the perennial All-Star hes become from year 1. His objective measures are all absurdly high for such a young prospect. He has far and away shattered expectations from when he was drafted. Since then hes improved, maybe you mean he hasn't improved as well as people were hoping but people have unrealistic expectations all the time. Hes developed well IMO, this is the year I actually expect huge strides.



Blake is easily a top 5 player in his position, but I'm not sure how much that means when the 4 is so shallow.
The 4 is actually a very deep position but I wish it werent because that would mean his presence gives his team a bigger positional advantage over the league.


I noticed people talking about PER and how effective it really is at measuring a player, but slice it any way that you want, Griffin didn't finish 12th in PER last season for nothing.
Thats a tool, thats it. Dont take it as gospel but yes, hes not in the top 10 IMO so somewhere outside that isn't too bad. But comparing him to Tony Allen of all people, LMFAO.... thats when you've deluded yourself into thinking your hate is rational.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:31 PM
For the record I don't think Griffin is a bad player. He's just not a game changing one man offensive show like your AI's, T-macs, Kobes, Melos... those sorts of players... and well he doesn't really do anything else for his team. He's a solid 2-3rd option that can excite a crowd with a powerful throw down.. I just don't see much worth beyond that. He's definitely not a HOF player, I can say that pretty definitively.
Hes not a HOF player because hes only 3 years in, what we're saying is that hes on a HOF pace. Sounds like you dont know much about the HOF if you deny that.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:37 PM
Yeah but who guards LBJ with 5 seconds left in game 7 of the finals, up 1 point?
So? What about the other end where the team takes him out of the game. Hell that guy doesn't even play starters minutes because his coaches know he cramps their offense, hes a niche player. Why would anyone care about such a minute portion of the game over its entirety? You do know winning and losing comes down to how you play the entire game right... no of course not. You'd rather give cliche drivven analysis without any factual backing.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 04:37 PM
Chronz you're 100 percent right. People are quick to act like Blake is some massive letdown yet disregard the fact that many viewed him as a project and AT BEST something like an 18/10 type player in a best case scenario. Nobody thought he would be a perennial all star, franchise player, HOF type talent that I listened to outside of David Aldridge.

I have a personal rule that I give a player 5 seasons before really judging where they have disappointed. People forget Blake hasn't even had one full, healthy summer yet until this one. The three prior summers to this one... two were spent with knee injuries/surgery and one on the lockout summer. I personally think this combined with Vinny Del Negro have slowed Blake's growth a bit. Today in an interview he said something very telling which was that for the first time of his career he knows exactly what to work on, what coaches want him to run and what is expected of him. He also said it's his first entirely healthy summer (besides his 3-4 weeks missed directly after season to heal ankle).

As Chronz said the PF position is actually very deep. Matter of fact after PG it's definitely THE deepest position in the NBA right now. SG/SF/C all have less talent currently at the top, although C has the most upside and young guys likely to explode, so that could change.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 04:39 PM
BTW I'm still waiting for you to show me Stone where George is such a dominant playoff performer. Outside of the Miami series he was pretty average with subpar efficiency. PER 36 the guy put up 16.8 ppg/6.5 rpg/4.5 apg in the playoffs on mediocre efficiency... which is basically the same as his regular season. So why would the playoffs suddenly vault him 10 spots or so in player rankings?

Not saying he was bad.. more wondering why you're labeling him some superstar playoff performer and Griffin a complete playoff failure?

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:40 PM
Blake isn't a game changer
Can I see your list of game changers?

Goose17
09-27-2013, 04:40 PM
Where did you get this idea from? He was touted as a raw talent who would struggle adapting when he was drafted, the hope was eventual All-Star, far from the perennial All-Star hes become from year 1. His objective measures are all absurdly high for such a young prospect. He has far and away shattered expectations from when he was drafted. Since then hes improved, maybe you mean he hasn't improved as well as people were hoping but people have unrealistic expectations all the time. Hes developed well IMO, this is the year I actually expect huge strides.



What? I want to know what media outlet you were following because he certainly wasn't portrayed like that by any articles I was reading, he was picked ahead of Harden and Curry but isn't nearly as good. He was way overhyped by mass media and casual fans. He was on the cover of NCAA Basketball 10.

He's a great player, I said that. Fantastic player. But he was overhyped by casual fans and media and when that happens it angers people and they then undersell his true abilities in an attempt to counter it. It happens all the time. That's why people claim he sucks when he doesn't. That's why people say "all he does is dunk".




The 4 is actually a very deep position

Not really. The PG position is deep. The 4 is shallow. It just seems deep because the 5 and wing positions are even more shallow.





Thats a tool, thats it. Dont take it as gospel but yes, hes not in the top 10 IMO so somewhere outside that isn't too bad. But comparing him to Tony Allen of all people, LMFAO.... thats when you've deluded yourself into thinking your hate is rational.

I didn't compare him to Tony Allen.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:41 PM
Oh okay, makes sense. I guess what I thought it was, wasn't what it really was. As you said PER the name itself is misleading because it stands for player efficiency rating.

Yeah the terminology for all this **** is so out of whack.

Player Efficiency Rating doesn't much value efficiency. And Offensive Rating isn't a rating system by any stretch, its a descriptor stat.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 04:44 PM
Lol at Blake Griffin not being a game changer. Goose you're a reasonable guy, not sure why you'd jump on board with that troll's train of thought. I know you weren't attacking Griffin but you're definitely not giving him his due either. Griffin is a perennial all star and a proven franchise cornerstone who's had one of the greatest 3 year starts of any player in NBA history. He has future HOFer written all over him. Even if he never improved and just stayed a 20/10/4 type player for another few years.. he makes the HOF. At absolute worst he's a top 20 player, although I have him more around 12-15. You can't be a top 20 player and not be a game changer. He's not that far numbers/efficiency/impact wise from being a SUPERSTAR caliber player.

For example last year PER 36 he put up 20/10/4 with outstanding efficiency and much improved defense. How many players can say that? I'm not underrating Tony Allen at all. I think he's a very nice role player and the best perimeter defender in the game. That being said to give play to Stone's idea that he's even in the same REALM as Blake Griffin is idiotic.

First of all I'm not saying Tony Allen is better, I've never said that.


And Griffin isn't a game changer imo... not yet. He can be, and I think he will be, I think he will round off his game and make himself a more balanced threat on offense, I think a guy with that sort of build and athleticism will eventually become a solid defender or more. But right now, he's a very young entertaining player with bucket loads of potential.

I guess it comes down to how you rate "game changers". IMO there's not very many true "game changers" in the league. I mean anyone can be a game changer for a short burst, but to be a consistent 82-games a season game changer. That takes something special. Truly special. Everyone is a game changer in some way, even roleplayers like Allen and Deng, they do "change the game" when they're on the court as opposed to when they're off it, they can lock guys up and improve the teams overall defense or whatever but that's not what I think of when people say "Game Changer".

I guess it's a perception thing.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 04:49 PM
So? What about the other end where the team takes him out of the game. Hell that guy doesn't even play starters minutes because his coaches know he cramps their offense, hes a niche player. Why would anyone care about such a minute portion of the game over its entirety? You do know winning and losing comes down to how you play the entire game right... no of course not. You'd rather give cliche drivven analysis without any factual backing.

He's not a niche player. He's an elite defender. Defense wins. Give me 5 guys with equal defensive and offensive talent as Allen and we're taking Miami in 5, and making absolute fools of the Clippers. You guys think your metrics are an end all be all... if we're talking FACTS then the biggest one of them all is that defense wins championships. I'm not being cliche - I'm just telling it like it is. Sports isn't a science.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 04:50 PM
Wait he's nowhere close to Curry/Harden? Curry is 10-15 ranked right there with Griffin and Harden is maybe in the low end of the top 10. The gap isn't that huge. I'm a huge Curry fan right now and think he has a chance to be a top 5 player in the next few years but you're taking it too far. Griffin plays next to CHRIS PAUL, not sure how many times I need to say that. Who does Curry or Harden play with that takes away possessions from them? Not saying CP3 is doing anything wrong but when you have a player that dominant, that good and so happens to be a ball dominant PG.. you can't expect him to outshine those two guys who handle the ball nonstop.

Curry and Harden get free rain to shoot 20+ shots any time they want and actually had decent coaches running the offense through them. If you watched Vinny coach or watched that the Clippers neglected Griffin pretty constantly, you'd understand it's not a fair comparison. Harden is an ATROCIOUS defender so I'd personally have him top 10-15 as well as Curry Griffin, but most seem to have him top 10 right now. I actually think Curry is a better all around player than Harden.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 04:52 PM
First of all I'm not saying Tony Allen is better, I've never said that.


And Griffin isn't a game changer imo... not yet. He can be, and I think he will be, I think he will round off his game and make himself a more balanced threat on offense, I think a guy with that sort of build and athleticism will eventually become a solid defender or more. But right now, he's a very young entertaining player with bucket loads of potential.

I guess it comes down to how you rate "game changers". IMO there's not very many true "game changers" in the league. I mean anyone can be a game changer for a short burst, but to be a consistent 82-games a season game changer. That takes something special. Truly special. Everyone is a game changer in some way, even roleplayers like Allen and Deng, they do "change the game" when they're on the court as opposed to when they're off it, they can lock guys up and improve the teams overall defense or whatever but that's not what I think of when people say "Game Changer".

I guess it's a perception thing.

You'd be better off using the word "true superstars" the way you're using it IMO. If that's what you mean then yes I agree Griffin isn't one yet. I think he's not far away though. I think if he can make a small jump this year offensively and a big one on defense again.. he will be there.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 04:56 PM
What? I want to know what media outlet you were following
All of them.


because he certainly wasn't portrayed like that by any articles I was reading,
Show me. Id love for you to prove that the expectations on him were instant All-Star and All-League within a year.



he was picked ahead of Harden and Curry but isn't nearly as good.
What does that have to do with anything? Players are drafted based on a variety of aspects, potential, fit (both in terms of personnel and culture).


He was way overhyped by mass media and casual fans. He was on the cover of NCAA Basketball 10.
In what way was he overhyped? Can you offer something more substantial than a video game cover? I mean JJ Reddick was a cover boy once. WTF does that matter? That has more to do with marketability than what we are talking about... cmon man get serious





Not really.
When we were voting for positions, most people agreed it was pretty deep.


The PG position is deep.
That gos without saying, its the strongest position. But even if we agreed it wasn't deep, your comment about not knowing how much it matters is easily answered, it would mean his impact is greater because it gives you a bigger competitive advantage.



The 4 is shallow. It just seems deep because the 5 and wing positions are even more shallow.

So you admit, its the 2nd strongest position. Thats all I was getting at. If its the 2nd strongest position, that makes it pretty strong IMO.




I didn't compare him to Tony Allen.
Just mocking the poster who did. Shows you his state of mind when hes so out of line with reality.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 04:58 PM
Goose you're dead wrong about Griffin's draft projections trust me. I listened to DOZENS of "experts" and "analysts" say Griffin is a double double guy but not a star. Here's one example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmJPs863bqE

Only David Aldridge called him a sure fire all star/franchise player type. Everybody else pretty much wasn't sold on him.

Steve Smith: "He's going to have to find a way to stay on the court".

Kenny Smith: He won't succeed because of who the Clippers are (paraphrased). Said his upside is Randy White or Otis Thorpe LMAO.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 04:59 PM
Wait he's nowhere close to Curry/Harden? Curry is 10-15 ranked right there with Griffin and Harden is maybe in the low end of the top 10. The gap isn't that huge. I'm a huge Curry fan right now and think he has a chance to be a top 5 player in the next few years but you're taking it too far. Griffin plays next to CHRIS PAUL, not sure how many times I need to say that. Who does Curry or Harden play with that takes away possessions from them? Not saying CP3 is doing anything wrong but when you have a player that dominant, that good and so happens to be a ball dominant PG.. you can't expect him to outshine those two guys who handle the ball nonstop.


First of all, Curry and Harden are primary ball handlers, if you ran that many possessions through Griffin he would break the record for turnovers.

And that's exactly my point, he plays with the best point guard in the league and one of the best we've seen in years. It's like Nash with Amare. Are you seriously telling me if you swapped Paul with Mario Chalmers, Griffin would still be as effective as he is now? This isn't a knock on Griffin, I'm just saying, playing with a guy of that caliber has it's benefits, especially if you're a big man that like the pick and roll.

Curry and Harden are both better than Griffin, I'm not even discussing that. Curry and Harden are game changers.



Can I see your list of game changers?

Depends on what definition you're asking for, like I said in my last post it's a pretty subjective term, all about perception. For example, Bogut was a game changer for us during the playoffs with his defense. But I wouldn't consider him a "game changer" in the traditional sense of the word. Game changers are the elite, think the top 8 or so guys in the league and you get a rough idea of what I'm saying.

But if you're talking game changers as in roleplayers or support guys that make big plays sometimes and can really impact the game (Iggy, Noah, Battier, Shump, Ginobili etc) then fair enough that list is a lot longer.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 05:05 PM
He's not a niche player.
So then why is it so hard for his coaches to find minutes for him? He literally plays less than half the game, whereas true game changers play starters minutes. I mean the guy doesn't even get up to 30MPG.


Elite defender.
No one ever denied this. Want to know why? Because we can all see it, hes also been awarded as an elite defender (All-Defensive teams) and the advanced metrics hint at an elite defender. When the subjective and objective measures agree with your eyes, you have a triple whammy of a defense. Now apply that same methodology to their performances on BOTH ends, and you will understand why your argument is so pitiful.


Defense wins.
Cliche drivven analysis gets you no where. Balance is what wins. You can have the best defense in the game and miss the playoffs if your offense is bad enough. FACT.



Give me 5 guys with equal defensive and offensive talent as Allen and we're taking Miami in 5, and making absolute fools of the Clippers.
LMFAO nah, that team would fail to score 70PPG and would allow 80PPG. Congrats, you just lost by 10. See, I can make **** up too....


You guys think your metrics are an end all be all...
Heres the thing, its not just the objective measures that back us. Its the subjective awards as well, remember that thing about the triple whammy? Well they all agree with us. The All-NBA selections are subjective awards, the stats are objective measures, and the minutes the coaches give them allude to their impact.


if we're talking FACTS then the biggest one of them all is that defense wins championships. I'm not being cliche - I'm just telling it like it is. Sports isn't a science.
Not buying this cliche sorry bro, been watching the game for too long. Defense is more important because its a consistent aspect of a players game, that doesn't mean every great defender is better than every great offensive player. Sorry but you have to look at BOTH sides in order to gauge a players COMPLETE IMPACT.

Until you realize this, you will always be out line with reality. You enjoy your cliches, Ill enjoy Blake's superior performance that is backed by the triple whammy.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 05:06 PM
I didn't say Curry and Harden aren't better. I said they aren't much better. If Griffin is 12-15th ranked.. Curry is 10-12th ranked, Harden is maybe 8th-10th. You're creating an imaginary gap that doesn't exist here. Although as Chronz said.. this doesn't matter anyways. Also if you've watched CP3/Griffin at all you'd understand that Griffin's playstyle isn't one like Amare/West where he thrives in pick and pop and things that benefit directly from a PG like Paul. So yes.. even with Mario Chalmers, Blake would thrive the same most likely, given that he's not utilizing CP3 much now.

I think they will get that synergy down but as of right now neither make each other better. It's more like Wade/Lebron in the sense that they help each other but don't boost each other's play individually.

jstone0716
09-27-2013, 05:10 PM
Well I'm flattered that I irked you 2 that much. Truth be told I would take Blake in a heart beat over Tony Allen. I was just trying to get a rise out of you morons. Worked. PG is still light years ahead of BG though. But alas the weekend is here and there is oodles of beer to be drunk.. so have fun with all the number crunching and ****.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 05:12 PM
Well I'm flattered that I irked you 2 that much. Truth be told I would take Blake in a heart beat over Tony Allen. I was just trying to get a rise out of you morons. Worked. PG is still light years ahead of BG though. But alas the weekend is here and there is oodles of beer to be drunk.. so have fun with all the number crunching and ****.

I'm about to eat country style, boneless BBQ ribs with corn on the cobb and home made garlic mash. Point is... I'm happy as a mofo, so don't worry you didn't irk me. I just hope a lot of what you said wasn't serious.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 05:18 PM
Show me. Id love for you to prove that the expectations on him were instant All-Star and All-League within a year.


Prove? What is this? A courthouse? I remember all the hype, I remember reading about it and watching ESPN and hearing about it. Somebody compared him to Karl Malone at one point, before he was even drafted smh. He was hyped, to say otherwise is crazy talk.




So you admit, its the 2nd strongest position. Thats all I was getting at. If its the 2nd strongest position, that makes it pretty strong IMO.
.

Not really. It's the second strongest but that doesn't make it strong. Being deeper than other positions and being deep are not the same thing. What's the 3rd strongest? Is it deep because it's deeper than the 4th strongest?

Goose17
09-27-2013, 05:21 PM
I didn't say Curry and Harden aren't better. I said they aren't much better. If Griffin is 12-15th ranked.. Curry is 10-12th ranked, Harden is maybe 8th-10th. You're creating an imaginary gap that doesn't exist here. Although as Chronz said.. this doesn't matter anyways. Also if you've watched CP3/Griffin at all you'd understand that Griffin's playstyle isn't one like Amare/West where he thrives in pick and pop and things that benefit directly from a PG like Paul. So yes.. even with Mario Chalmers, Blake would thrive the same most likely, given that he's not utilizing CP3 much now.

I think they will get that synergy down but as of right now neither make each other better. It's more like Wade/Lebron in the sense that they help each other but don't boost each other's play individually.

I'm not saying they play the same way as Nash/Amare, I'm saying Amare played better with Nash than he ever did anywhere else. I believe Griffin is incredibly talented, I've said it already, top player in his position, all star, will be a superstar if he improves certain aspects blah blah blah. But I also believe a large portion of his success is due to being partnered up with CP3.

He would still be a great player without CP3, but he wouldn't be as great imo.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 05:22 PM
Goose you're really going to argue with two Clippers fans how hyped Griffin was? We were the ones spending time reading/watching analysis on our rookie and watching shows on it. I doubt you were. Chronz follows a lot of teams I think so maybe he missed some of if but you should know by now how obsessed I am with my team. I'm the wrong guy to argue with about how a player was analyzed because I spend hours all the time reading about my team. In fact I have a habit where I check for Clippers news 10-15 times a day or more probably. It's literally an obsession for me. Although luckily I still function well with the GF, work, school as well so it's not a bad thing.

I won't try to tell you how hyped Curry is because most of the time you can really only accurate gauge that stuff as a fan of a team.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 05:24 PM
I'm not saying they play the same way as Nash/Amare, I'm saying Amare played better with Nash than he ever did anywhere else. I believe Griffin is incredibly talented, I've said it already, top player in his position, all star, will be a superstar if he improves certain aspects blah blah blah. But I also believe a large portion of his success is due to being partnered up with CP3.

He would still be a great player without CP3, but he wouldn't be as great imo.

I know where you're coming from and I know you're not attacking Griffin, which is why I'm not trying to be defensive. I'm just saying Chronz will likely back me up on this but it's been shown time and time again that CP3 and Griffin unfortunately don't make each other better. They produce the same with and without each other for the most part. In other words.. CP3 isn't responsible for Griffin's production, at least not in a huge way.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 05:49 PM
Prove? What is this? A courthouse?
Is that the only way for this conversation to move forward, we have to be put under oath? LOL


I remember all the hype, I remember reading about it and watching ESPN and hearing about it. Somebody compared him to Karl Malone at one point, before he was even drafted smh. He was hyped, to say otherwise is crazy talk.
Yes I get how you feel, draft comps are one thing, you have to compare prospects to somebody, but what people were saying about him attaining that level of play were pretty pessimistic. Funny thing is, hes actually well ahead of Karl Malone as far as development. Karl at the same stage in his career was far worse of a player though comparable as an athlete. He was far from hype because you wont be able to find many people who thought he would be an Instant All-Star and All-League within another year. Go ahead, try to find those people. Griffin being a #1 pick was a no brainer given his athleticism, but nobody saw this kind of skill. At least not anyone I listened to, plz educate me.


Not really. It's the second strongest but that doesn't make it strong.
Why not?


Being deeper than other positions and being deep are not the same thing. What's the 3rd strongest? Is it deep because it's deeper than the 4th strongest?
The 3rd strongest would be mediocre/average, because it is by very definition in the middle.

The 4th strongest would be the 2nd weakest and thus not a position of strength in the NBA. Same holds true for the worst position.

Im getting more confused with every line you utter.

Were you the foreign xenophobe several of us argued with last time? If so that makes sense, seems like you dont have a firm grasp of our language.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 05:51 PM
Well I'm flattered that I irked you 2 that much. Truth be told I would take Blake in a heart beat over Tony Allen. I was just trying to get a rise out of you morons. Worked. PG is still light years ahead of BG though. But alas the weekend is here and there is oodles of beer to be drunk.. so have fun with all the number crunching and ****.
I figured you were trolling us, nobody could be quite that ignorant, but I make a point to expose the trolls before placing less importance in their posts. As effortless as it was, from here on out, you will see me put even less effort into our spats.

:cheers:

Chronz
09-27-2013, 05:59 PM
But I also believe a large portion of his success is due to being partnered up with CP3.
On an individual level or team level?


He would still be a great player without CP3, but he wouldn't be as great imo.
Yea but its nothing like it was with Amare/Nash, where Amare was CLEARLY better alongside Nash. Not that its a bad thing, Amare was still great and theres something to be said for harboring perfect synergy with a teammate that it elevates both players and the team to new heights. Part of my problem with Blake is that hes not doing that for CP3.

CP3 on the other hand greatly suppresses his game for Blake's sake and makes a point to be more aggressive as a scorer when the team is without him on the floor.

You can look at it several ways but one thing is clear, Blake is equally productive, with or without CP3.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 06:01 PM
Im getting more confused with every line you utter.

Were you the foreign xenophobe several of us argued with last time? If so that makes sense, seems like you dont have a firm grasp of our language.

I wasn't the xenophobe, you were. It wasn't me that didn't want to see other countries prosper in basketball because it might harm my own countries league.


And being deep and being deeper than another position aren't the same thing.

The PG is a deep position. Every other position in the league is shallow, the 4 is just less shallow than the 2,3 and 5 but that doesn't make it deep. This is pretty simple, I don't really know how else to explain it.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 06:04 PM
And Chronz if you don't think he was hyped, what's your reasoning for all the hate he receives? "All he does is dunk" those sort of comments.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 06:07 PM
I wasn't the xenophobe, you were.
I think you mean to say, YOU GUYS WERE. Because I was not alone in pointing out your own hypocrisy. Which may I remind you was an argument you totally disappeared from.


It wasn't me that didn't want to see other countries prosper in basketball because it might harm my own countries league.
False, this was easily refuted when I admitted the country in which that league operated had NOTHING to do with my stance. I could be Brazilian and the league could be in France for all I care, all I want is a league in which the BEST OF THE BEST perform. THATS IT. Take it to the thread if you wish to rehash the argument because regurgitating your originally flawed argument here is going to get us both banned.



And being deep and being deeper than another position aren't the same thing.
Why not? It is by very definition and your admission, the 2nd strongest position in the league.


The PG is a deep position. Every other position in the league is shallow, the 4 is just less shallow than the 2,3 and 5 but that doesn't make it deep. This is pretty simple, I don't really know how else to explain it.
ok then.

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 06:10 PM
And Chronz if you don't think he was hyped, what's your reasoning for all the hate he receives? "All he does is dunk" those sort of comments.

You didn't ask me but I'll tell you why people hate Griffin, and yes it's as irrational as it you'd expect.

1. They thought it was somehow his fault that he got a bit of home cooking and won the dunk contest. This soured a lot of people I know to Griffin as petty and unfounded as it is. Not like the guy had any control over the result.

2. People don't dig deeper than PPG/RPG for bigs and they saw a 22.5/12 player as a rookie and think that because the raw numbers didn't go up that he's declined and was overrated to begin with. These same people aren't smart enough to factor that the Clippers went from lottery team talent to contending talent and Griffin's minutes, shots and role were reduced.

3. The press he gets because he's a very likable guy in commercials, interviews, special appearances irks people. They seem to think that because he's in commercials that HE thinks he's all that and are angry because they don't think he deserves this attention.

4. People hate the "hype" surrounding his upside and what he's done early in his career. Many people see how great he can be and that for some reason turns people against players.

5. The flopping he did in year 2. Didn't do it in year 1 or 3 but in the first year with CP3 he definitely started flopping a lot more.

6. The all you do is dunk crap stems from him having 2-3 plays every night in the top 10 plays thing basically and somehow people think that means Blake can't do anything else, although anybody who watches him knows he has a very nice skillset.


Notice anything? None of these are Griffin's fault or doing.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 06:11 PM
And Chronz if you don't think he was hyped, what's your reasoning for all the hate he receives? "All he does is dunk" those sort of comments.
The resurrection of a big market, the flopping, the endless marketability can turn people off, to the point where they base their opinion of a player on shallow highlight reels instead of appreciating the rare combination of skills he has in a player of his size/strength.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 06:31 PM
I think you mean to say, YOU GUYS WERE. Because I was not alone in pointing out your own hypocrisy. Which may I remind you was an argument you totally disappeared from.


I grow tired of that sort of thing, tend not to waste my time with discussions that aren't going anywhere.



Take it to the thread if you wish to rehash the argument because regurgitating your originally flawed argument here is going to get us both banned.


GTFO. You're the one who brought it up. You're trolling hard today I see.




Why not? It is by very definition and your admission, the 2nd strongest position in the league.


But that doesn't make it deep. Are you really this dense? It's still a shallow position, just not as shallow as 2,3 and 5. Are you being serious? How can you not comprehend this.

If I have five glasses,

X is full.

Y is 2/5 full.

Z is 1/5 full.

A is almost 1/5 full.

B. is almost empty.



Y has the second largest quantity, but is it a large quantity? No. It's only two fifths.

Being a little deeper than a position which is incredibly shallow doesn't make you deep.

Which team is deeper, Phoenix or Toronto? Your answer is irrelevant, whichever one you think is deeper, are they now a deep team in your mind simply because they have more depth than another team?

Goose17
09-27-2013, 06:32 PM
4. People hate the "hype" surrounding his upside

Pretty much my point. Hype from media and casual fans turns people off. That's why people think he's overrated when he's not.

Goose17
09-27-2013, 06:33 PM
5. The flopping he did in year 2. Didn't do it in year 1 or 3 but in the first year with CP3 he definitely started flopping a lot more.


Get out of here, he still does it. Constantly.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 07:01 PM
I grow tired of that sort of thing, tend not to waste my time with discussions that aren't going anywhere.
Then try taking it somewhere. You continued a retort that was EASILY refuted.


GTFO. You're the one who brought it up. You're trolling hard today I see.
I was askin if you were the guy, not to continue discussing it. It was relevant to me because I thought you came off as a foreigner/ESL and I instantly remembered that discussion and your infamous depiction of xenophobia.


But that doesn't make it deep. Are you really this dense? It's still a shallow position, just not as shallow as 2,3 and 5. Are you being serious? How can you not comprehend this. If I have five glasses,

X is full.

Y is 2/5 full.

Z is 1/5 full.

A is almost 1/5 full.

B. is almost empty.


OK I get it now. Sorry for being so dense.

Heres my thing, every cup has to be filled. Its not about quantity but quality. No matter the era, those rebounds have to be corralled, those points have to be scored. Im saying that its not shallow for that very reason, a rise in one position will mean a decline in another, a diminishing returns of sort. I get what you're trying to say, I just dont agree that its shallow to begin with.

I might be over thinking it but I've really never seen anyone do a study on positional strength to quantify their claims. And subjectively, what you are saying about the PF position went against what I remember most people saying, that its actually a fairly deep position. I think real life examples would help more but neither of us cares that much right now.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 07:02 PM
Get out of here, he still does it. Constantly.
Nope. He does it much less than he did Y2. He realized the refs were adapting and actually taking the benefit of the doubt away from him. Even tho he takes the most beatings of any player.

Chronz
09-27-2013, 07:55 PM
I thought about your argument some more, you're right, I was being dense. Sorry for not getting it but I still disagree with the premise of shallowness in the position. Now thats something I would rather focus on, I can envision what it is you were getting at tho

Clippersfan86
09-27-2013, 08:38 PM
Lol Chronz nice sig. "Ben Wallace > Ben Griffin as well." was up there as a classic line too.

Goose17
09-28-2013, 06:12 AM
Nope. He does it much less than he did Y2. He realized the refs were adapting and actually taking the benefit of the doubt away from him. Even tho he takes the most beatings of any player.

Okay, maybe he does it less but he still does it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0WK3TlHdXg




I thought about your argument some more, you're right, I was being dense. Sorry for not getting it but I still disagree with the premise of shallowness in the position. Now thats something I would rather focus on, I can envision what it is you were getting at tho

Fair enough.



To clarify I never said Griffin wasn't a good player. I clearly stated he was one of the best in his position and a top talent with tons of potential. But he also has a lot of areas he needs to improve on.

The disagreement seems to have arisen from the perception of what being a "game changer" really means.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 10:00 AM
Goose that's the most idiotic flop accusation ever. If you're ever in LA let me show you why. I'm a strong guy and Ill let you run one way while I yank your arm the other way mid jump. Then you can tell me how much body control you had to find the meams to intentionally flop midair. It goes against physics.

Pacerlive
09-28-2013, 10:29 AM
Goose that's the most idiotic flop accusation ever. If you're ever in LA let me show you why. I'm a strong guy and Ill let you run one way while I yank your arm the other way mid jump. Then you can tell me how much body control you had to find the meams to intentionally flop midair. It goes against physics.
If that were true I would agree with you but this play happens all the time in the NBA and I have never seen someone flip to the ground like that.

Blake is a flopper plan and simple and even if he does it less than he did before its still rubbs people the wrong way and why shouldn't it. He is too big and strong for that nonsense.

b@llhog24
09-28-2013, 01:32 PM
Yeah but who guards LBJ with 5 seconds left in game 7 of the finals, up 1 point? Allen.

Funny thing is, that's literally the ONLY thing I'd trust Tony Allen to do over BG in the last 5 seconds. Unless you're willing to argue that you'd trust TA over Blake to get a rebound, an assist, nor score a game winning shot.


And he has a pretty good chance of stopping him from winning the game.

Bron stops himself on single coverage. Hell if he's anything like your boy Paul George, then well. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jYB9-7zXIk)


Offense doesn't win championships man.

Then why does the team that scores the most points, win the game?


That why teams like Indiana, Memphis.... the '11 Mav, '03-05 Pistons and the likes excel. Players like Griffin bring nothing game changing to the table... replace him with someone who can throw up 12 points a game and defend like a champ and you have a legit contender in the Clips.

I'm sure I can find you more examples of teams that won ships with their elite offense over those that won with defense. It gets worse once we examine the league wide success rate of teams with elite offense vs defense.



Melo isn't a game changers. There's a big difference between volume scorers and efficient scorers. You may as well include Gay and Monta in that list.

AI is debatable.

And you don't need to be a HOF type player to be a game changer.

You're kidding me right?


You heard it here first folks, Tony Allen is better than Ben Griffin

Lmao.


Because I don't really care about advanced statistics. And it pisses all you metric nerds off.

You also don't seem to care about reality either, so why would anyone value to opinion of the delusional?

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 01:39 PM
Lmao, I'm still laughing about that Tony Allen is better than BEN Griffin line.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 01:42 PM
If that were true I would agree with you but this play happens all the time in the NBA and I have never seen someone flip to the ground like that.

Blake is a flopper plan and simple and even if he does it less than he did before its still rubbs people the wrong way and why shouldn't it. He is too big and strong for that nonsense.

Until you learn basic laws of momentum and physics you shouldn't post things like this. A human being cannot explode in one direction, violently be yanked midair in the opposite direction and then control HOW they fall. It.s dumb to suggest this and if you can find legit examples or proof of this, I'll retire from PSD. Do you know how gravity works? Blake Griffin flopped almost never in year 1 or 3 and a ton in year 2. So to say he flops constantly in general is dumb.

Goose17
09-28-2013, 02:15 PM
Goose that's the most idiotic flop accusation ever. If you're ever in LA let me show you why. I'm a strong guy and Ill let you run one way while I yank your arm the other way mid jump. Then you can tell me how much body control you had to find the meams to intentionally flop midair. It goes against physics.

Obviously you're going to defend it. Blake was clearly selling that. There was contact but he clearly jumped and started flailing around to sell it. It certainly wouldn't have been a flagrant on any non-flopping player. Would he have been pulled down? More than likely. Would he have been flailing around like that if it was anyone else? No. He was selling it pure and simple.

That's the thing about Blake, you think he flops less, I disagree, he's just smarter now, he rarely flops when there's no contact at all and instead exaggerates the contact on 50/50 calls by flailing around and launching himself into the air, it's very Manu-ish. Want some more examples of him doing this? Just search "Blake Griffin Flop" on youtube. His compilations with CP3 are hilarious.


I like him as a player, I love watching him and can't wait to see how he's developed his game this year. But he's a flopper and that's that.

Goose17
09-28-2013, 02:17 PM
You're kidding me right?


No. I'm deadly serious. He's as much of a game change as Rudy Gay or Monta Ellis. He's vastly superior to both of them as a player but as a game changer? I don't see it.

People overrate Melo.

b@llhog24
09-28-2013, 02:30 PM
No. I'm deadly serious. He's as much of a game change as Rudy Gay or Monta Ellis. He's vastly superior to both of them as a player but as a game changer? I don't see it.

If he's vastly superior to them, then how is he just as much of a game as them?


People overrate Melo.

More like Knicks fans and Espn. On average, I'd venture to say that he's pretty underrated seeing that some people are comparing him to Monta Ellis and Rudy Gay. But that depends on what you've seen.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 03:06 PM
Obviously you're going to defend it. Blake was clearly selling that. There was contact but he clearly jumped and started flailing around to sell it. It certainly wouldn't have been a flagrant on any non-flopping player. Would he have been pulled down? More than likely. Would he have been flailing around like that if it was anyone else? No. He was selling it pure and simple.

That's the thing about Blake, you think he flops less, I disagree, he's just smarter now, he rarely flops when there's no contact at all and instead exaggerates the contact on 50/50 calls by flailing around and launching himself into the air, it's very Manu-ish. Want some more examples of him doing this? Just search "Blake Griffin Flop" on youtube. His compilations with CP3 are hilarious.


I like him as a player, I love watching him and can't wait to see how he's developed his game this year. But he's a flopper and that's that.

Check the dates and you'll see your ignorance. I can't find a single legit, unquestioned flop from 2013. They are all from the season before pretty much. Don't argue this with a fan who hasn't missed more than a few games in the last decade plus.

Goose17
09-28-2013, 03:15 PM
If he's vastly superior to them, then how is he just as much of a game as them?



Again it depends on your definition, at the time of posting that I was thinking of Game Changers as in people that put the team on their back, Melo is too inconsistent and inefficient to be considered a game changer in that sense.

Look at his clutch stats for example in the clutch he averaged .37% from the field, in comparison Monta Ellis averaged .41% from the field in the clutch. The Knicks win % with Melo on the floor during clutch was 55.2%, the Bucks win % with Ellis on the floor during clutch was 61.5%

Then forget about the clutch, just look at a typical game and his on/off numbers. With Melo on the floor, the Knicks score, on average, 5.7 points per 100 possessions, but their defense also gets worse and they give up 2.5 more points with him on the floor than they would with him off. So really he only nets them 3.2 points per 100 possessions. Monta nets the Bucks 3.7 points per 100 possessions. With Ellis on the floor the bucks eFG% increases by 3.0%, with Melo on the floor the Knicks eFG% increases by less than 1%

Melo is a great player, especially offensively. But he's not what I would have classed as a "game changer".


Now, if you're talking about a "game changer" as in they can literally change the outcome of the game with their impact in general then sure, he's a game changer, just like Griffin is. They're not going to put the team on their back and win the entire game for them, but having them on the floor is going to increase your chances significantly as opposed to not having them out there.


Disclaimer; I want to reiterate I don't think Monta and Melo are comparable as individual talents, Monta is a chucker plain and simple. But in terms of "putting the team on their back", there's not a lot of difference between them.




@clippersfan, " I can't find a single legit, unquestioned flop from 2013." that's a cop out and you know it. All that means is you saw the videos but are defending them anyway because you're a Clips fan, just like the first video I put up which was blatantly him selling the foul. That's the whole point of exaggerating contact, it can't be an unquestioned flop because contact was made, the problem is he exaggerated it to get the call to go his way.

RLundi
09-28-2013, 03:19 PM
There goes the Lakers back-up plan for Melo or LeBron (which both aren't happening anyway).

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 03:28 PM
Why would I be lying and then flat out admit he flopped a bunch the season before? Makes zero sense. In 2012 Blake flopped a lot, no doubt. The play you keep talking about tells me you don't understand the concept of gravity. It's physically impossible for a human to control their fall midair after having their direction violently reversed. You can easily experiment with this at home and see for yourself. Once you're in the air, off balance you have zero control pretty much over your body. Especially if you get yanked to where you're face up like Blake was.

We aren't felines. They on the other hand can control a fall.

Chronz
09-28-2013, 04:33 PM
Not sure if thats a flop. Didn't like that your announcers ignored the fact that he did hit his head on the floor either. Sounds biased except for the guy who pointed it out and doesn't act like he knows if it was a flop or not.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 05:05 PM
Warriors fans,and broadcasters were completely biased douchebags towards the Clippers last year. If I recall the fans applauded the flagrant foul too. I hope we destroy that team this year.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 05:14 PM
Also can't forget how classless Mark Jackson and the Warriors bench acted a few times. They pissed off a few teams with the antics. Mark Jackson's face was priceless when we were up 38 on the Warriors last year. Just 3 days after he ran his mouth to the media about the Clippers and acted like a clown.

tredigs
09-28-2013, 06:55 PM
I'm not big on Warriors announcing in general and actually do like the Clippers, but it was nice taking 3 of 4 from them and outlasting them in the playoffs. Here's hoping to more of that.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 07:02 PM
I don't expect it to last. Look at the 3 point defense of teams coached by Vinny and compare it to Doc. The days of endless wide open 3's from opponents should be over. Warriors have a great squad and will be a challenge for anybody but I don't expect them to expose us the same anymore. I loved watching the Warriors play but the,fans actually in Oracle and Mark Jackson acted like punks when we played last year. Nonetheless the teams have some freaking great games. I was beyond excited to see the teams playung on X Mas.

It was pathetic how bad teams that could shoot 3's exposed Vinny's defensive scheme. Opponents were regularly wide open for 3-5 seconds at the 3 line. Can't play that kind of D vs Warriors, Spurs, Heat, Rockets etc. If you do, you get destroyed.

Pacerlive
09-28-2013, 07:16 PM
Until you learn basic laws of momentum and physics you shouldn't post things like this. A human being cannot explode in one direction, violently be yanked midair in the opposite direction and then control HOW they fall. It.s dumb to suggest this and if you can find legit examples or proof of this, I'll retire from PSD. Do you know how gravity works? Blake Griffin flopped almost never in year 1 or 3 and a ton in year 2. So to say he flops constantly in general is dumb.

Ya I believe I am more educated than you on advance math and laws of physics I took advance calculus in high school and tested out of college courses just for fun and took higher level math and physics that my degree didn't require so believe me when I say you come off like a complete homer to suggest he wasn't flopping but either way he has a reputation of it and I think it's pathetic. The same goes for Lebron.

I will repeat it once again he wasn't yanked midair. He was pulled well before jumping and threw his massive body around to sell a call he would have already have gotten.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 07:22 PM
Error.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 07:33 PM
Pacer my memory served me wrong, he was on the ground when it started at least but it continued after the jump. Nonetheless his momentum was going forward and he was gathering for a jump. No way he can intentionally flop when yanked off balance like that in the opposite direction. If that one video or instance is your evidence for flops last year, it's baseless and weak. I have't missed ONE game of Blake's career so I feel I'm more qualified to speak on this than you or others.

As I said earlier why would I be a homer about it if I admit in 2012 he flopped a bunch? Makes no sense.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 07:38 PM
Look at the Goran Dragic Jr Smith video if you want a good example. Jr barely grazed him and he went flying, not because he flopped. Anybody who's played sports or done martial arts has likely had examples of this. A flop isn't a dramatic landing. It's an intentional exaggeration to get a call out of refs. It was clearly a flagrant 1 with no play on the ballno matter how he landed. The NBA defined flops last summer and it doesn't match your idea of a flop, I can assure you of that. Griffin got zero flop warnings last year for a reason.

tredigs
09-28-2013, 07:40 PM
We had two of our worst 3pt shooting games against LAC actually. I expect that to improve with no Bledsoe.

Chronz
09-28-2013, 07:49 PM
I will repeat it once again he wasn't yanked midair. He was pulled well before jumping and threw his massive body around to sell a call he would have already have gotten.
I dont understand the point here, of course he jumped. The foul was still happening as he was going for the attempt.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 07:53 PM
How many did you make though? One game we had you on the ropes in Oracle but then Curry and Klay hit like 4 threes in the last 90 seconds or somethung stupid like that. It's been the outside shooting that's killed us, even if the total efficiency wasnt as good as usual. Doc's Celtics ranked an average of 3rd in 3 point defense in his time there I believe. Vinny with the Clippers? 27th. This team is running a new system on both ends. Point was I don't expext us to have the same strengths or weaknesses.

Warriors are dangerous for anybody but they will be facing an entirely new Clippers team. New system, upgraded roster. According to teammates and coaches Blake's jumper looks great and he's worked on faceup offense and defense all summer. I expect it to change the look of our team. No more 10 second backdowns.

tredigs
09-28-2013, 08:09 PM
We hit 4 in one game, 5 in another. 12 max. Warriors weren't that heavy of a 3pt shooting team though. They're just the best 3pt shooting team.

We'll see how much of that team D was Doc and how much was KG and co. soon I guess.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 08:33 PM
For sure. Although KG doesn't defend the perimeter. Our only defensive liability on the wing really is Crawford. Dudley, Barnes, Redick and CP3 should all thrive under Doc defensively on the perimeter. itThey are all better than average defenders. It very well could still be that the Warriors give us issues. I just expect different weaknesses and strengths in general. So hard to predict this.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 08:35 PM
Nonetheless I love rivalries and right now the games that feel like a rivarly to me are the Warriors and Grizzlies. New,and exciting rivalries I expect to last. I can't wait to play the Warriors and yell at the TV lol.

SPURSFAN1
09-28-2013, 08:48 PM
BG did not flop on that foul. He wasn't trying to sell anything either. BG had already beat his man through a screen and was getting ready for a monster dunk on lee and he didn't expect the other guy to pull him down. BG had both hands on the ball. So when he got pulled as he's going for the dunk, his whole body got turned. If BG didn't have both hands on the ball, it would be a flop. Just imagine you running and someone pulls you're arm. You kinda twist but not so much. Now imagine you are gripping a ball "tightly" and someone pulls your arm as you're running. Your whole body twists. Now imagine if you're running and jumping.

Clippersfan86
09-28-2013, 08:57 PM
Exactly. Nobody here saying Blake hasn't flopped a fair amount before. That particular play wasn't a flop though.

Goose17
09-29-2013, 03:54 AM
Also can't forget how classless Mark Jackson and the Warriors bench acted a few times. They pissed off a few teams with the antics. Mark Jackson's face was priceless when we were up 38 on the Warriors last year. Just 3 days after he ran his mouth to the media about the Clippers and acted like a clown.

Acted like a clown? Smh. And what did the bench do? Mock Griffin for bricking a wide open 3 on the side of the backboard LOL! Get outta here.

Our fans are douche bags? smh...

You know I was rooting for you guys to turn things around, our teams were becoming successful at the same time while the lakers fell apart. It was fun to watch. But I guess that "the enemy of my enemy" thing can only last so long.

I shouldn't expect you to be anything but biased. Would have been nice if you could at least try though. I still like a few guys on your team, but I'm starting to lose respect for you and the fan base you represent.

Can't wait for the season to begin.

Drummond#1
09-29-2013, 05:05 AM
He's good... but he's not that good. He's better than Rudy Gay but nowhere near KD or LeBrick. He had a good season... but the Pacers won due to team play and defense mostly. I am not convinced that George is a true elite player.

Drummond#1
09-29-2013, 05:07 AM
They would have been better off paying Tyler, Augustin, Green a little more and trading for Deng or another quality SF next year. This kills the future of their team. Indy cannot afford the luxury tax.

Pacerlive
09-29-2013, 08:51 AM
They would have been better off paying Tyler, Augustin, Green a little more and trading for Deng or another quality SF next year. This kills the future of their team. Indy cannot afford the luxury tax.

I am confused, did you actually watch the Pacers last year because that bench was one of the worse in the NBA. Every Pacer fan who follows the team knew this day would come where they would have to let Danny's contract expire and essentially give it to PG to stay under the cap. So as long as Lance doesn't play himself into a 7 million dollar contract (unlikely) the the Pacers will still have a solid core.

Clippersfan86
09-29-2013, 10:22 AM
Goose Mark Jackson was a straight up punk. He was acting all cocky in the Oracle win, then the next week in our blowout win he was all butthurt. Staring our players down, complaining post game about the reffing and flopping. Just not impressed with his attitude at all. As for the bench being classless of course I mean the celebrating Blake's miss. In my 15 years of watching the NBA, not once have I seen a bench act that disrespectful.

Then as I said every time Blake Griffin got flagrantly fouled and hit the floor in Oracle the fans cheered and chanted insulting things. So yes those specific people deserve to be called classless punks. Didn't generalize all Warriors fans.

Goose17
09-29-2013, 12:30 PM
Goose Mark Jackson was a straight up punk.

Okay tough guy, whatever you say. Go make a group with Illusion for people that let their bias cloud their opinion.



of course I mean the celebrating Blake's miss. In my 15 years of watching the NBA, not once have I seen a bench act that disrespectful.


LOL that wasn't classless it was hilarious, like the Clippers bench doesn't react when Griffin dunks on people? Neither are disrespectful, they're just guys winding up the other team, every team and every fan base does this, it's psychological warfare that's why people speak of "home advantage" in sports. Are you telling me if you're playing the Lakers up by 2 and Kobe has a chance to win it but throws an air ball that the Clips bench and YOU aren't celebrating and laughing at his choke job? It's not disrespectful to any individual, it's just "lol, come on man, you got to make that". Have you ever actually played ball?

Get a grip, you only think it's disrespectful because your "franchise corner stone"(smh @ that btw) was humiliated. Griffin got a good sense of humor though, he probably laughed it up instead of getting all pent up about it like you.

The Clippers bench would never be as disrespectful as to celebrate a guy getting humiliated by a poster dunk or mocking their free throw technique.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh0AQw3WFkE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCBVN8xTCZ0




Then as I said every time Blake Griffin got flagrantly fouled and hit the floor in Oracle the fans cheered and chanted insulting things. So yes those specific people deserve to be called classless punks.

Which foul are you talking about? The flop that I posted?



I would call flopping disrespectful to the game.

tredigs
09-29-2013, 12:49 PM
The Warriors mockery of Blake had to do with the fact that A) they were pretty hilarious misses https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiDpz3WtCRY and B) David Lee, the Warriors and essentially the league/fans as a whole had turned on Blake due to his absurd flopping (that yes I agree he finally started to give up). It even came to fruition earlier in the year when Lee plants a flat forearm on his back for the rebound and Blake (6'9" musclebound freak) goes lunging forward: http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/20836711/video-warriors-david-lee-to-clippers-blake-griffin-stop-flopping.j D Lee literally just says, "STOP FLOPPING".

If it was anybody else in the NBA, the Warriors bench doesn't mock the shot. But it's Blake. Different rules given the recent history. I don't blame Clippers fans for being bitter about it. It's rude, but very funny if you're anybody but a LAC fan.

Clippersfan86
09-29-2013, 01:04 PM
Tre that's true but of course as a fan of Blake's team I thought it was messed up. Goose if you don't know the difference between cheering on a teammate and mocking an opponent, not sure what to tell you. I have no issue with benches celebrating when a teammate dunks on somebody, this wasn't the same thing obviously. I'm not being a tough guy, Mark Jackson WAS being a tool and even if he coached the Clippers I'd say the same.

For me it's all of it added up, not one thing. Most offensive of all to me was the crowd cheering and chanting every time Blake hit the deck in the games. I don't care how much I hate a player or team I'd never do that. Also David Lee's stop flopping thing was idiotic Tre. Griffin was in position and got shoved in the back with force. That's selling a call but not a flop if we go with the NBA's official definition.

Clippersfan86
09-29-2013, 01:10 PM
Point is a few fans, Mark Jackson and a couple players were annoying but I'm all for new rivalries. I just think you can also handle it with class and sometimes the Warriors were rowdy and didn't handle the newfound success well. It's no surprise they got into a bunch of scuffles with teams. That comes from the top, Mark Jackson and the identity he's trying to form. He encourages showboating and trying to mess with opponents heads. It worked well last season, so no reason to stop.

IndyRealist
09-29-2013, 01:22 PM
He's good... but he's not that good. He's better than Rudy Gay but nowhere near KD or LeBrick. He had a good season... but the Pacers won due to team play and defense mostly. I am not convinced that George is a true elite player.
Absolutely. But there's only so many Lebrons and Durants to go around.

They would have been better off paying Tyler, Augustin, Green a little more and trading for Deng or another quality SF next year. This kills the future of their team. Indy cannot afford the luxury tax.
Tyler would have been retained, but he asked to be released from restricted free agency so he could have a chance to start. Augustin couldn't run the offense or defend at all. Green was flat out horrible in virtually every aspect of the game.

I am confused, did you actually watch the Pacers last year because that bench was one of the worse in the NBA. Every Pacer fan who follows the team knew this day would come where they would have to let Danny's contract expire and essentially give it to PG to stay under the cap. So as long as Lance doesn't play himself into a 7 million dollar contract (unlikely) the the Pacers will still have a solid core.
We drafted to eventually replace Danny. They're pretty high on Solomon Hill as a solid if unspectacular starter level player. I personally think Orlando Johnson could be a starter as well. He's long, fast, built like a running back, and has point guard skills. We're calculating to lose one of Danny or Lance and not miss a beat. If we lose both we'll have to reload the bench again, but we have replacement starters.

Chronz
09-29-2013, 01:49 PM
Nothing wrong with being taunted man wtf.... class? Its not very classy to flop your way to the call but that wouldn't stop us from celebrating the win.

Goose17
09-29-2013, 01:51 PM
Tre that's true but of course as a fan of Blake's team I thought it was messed up. Goose if you don't know the difference between cheering on a teammate and mocking an opponent, not sure what to tell you. I have no issue with benches celebrating when a teammate dunks on somebody, this wasn't the same thing obviously.

How is not the same thing? Because it's your team doing the mocking? Neither should be considered disrespectful, but you can't consider one disrespectful and not the other, you think it's disrespectful to Blake because it was humiliating for him to brick that shot right? Is it not humiliating to Brandon Knight to be completely destroyed by a dunk? Both can be perceived as humiliating and if one is disrespectful to celebrate, so is the other. Either it's all okay or none of it is.

Your bias showing up again.

For me neither are disrespectful, they're part of the fun of the sport. But you can't claim one is and the other isn't. And what about mocking Noah's free throws? You're such a hypocrite.




Also David Lee's stop flopping thing was idiotic Tre. Griffin was in position and got shoved in the back with force. That's selling a call but not a flop if we go with the NBA's official definition.

LOL, again, your clouded judgement, your bias is just as bad as the Illusionist, is it something they put in the water in LA?

He exaggerated the contact to make a 50/50 judgement call fall his way. Lee was right to call him out on it.



I'm not being a tough guy, Mark Jackson WAS being a tool and even if he coached the Clippers I'd say the same.


No you wouldn't. You've shown your bias repeatedly in this thread. I no longer take your opinion seriously. I've lost all respect for your viewpoint, which is a shame because you seemed like a reasonable guy when this thread started. Oh well...

Goose17
09-29-2013, 01:54 PM
That comes from the top, Mark Jackson and the identity he's trying to form. He encourages showboating and trying to mess with opponents heads.

No he doesn't. Give me evidence to provide this B.S claim or quit with your biased drivel.



I just think you can also handle it with class and sometimes the Warriors were rowdy and didn't handle the newfound success well.

We didn't do anything any other team wouldn't have done. It's all in your head buddy.

Want to know what could be construed as blatantly disrespectful and lacking class? Flopping. There's a reason every team outside of LA refers to you as Flop City.

Clippersfan86
09-29-2013, 03:30 PM
Goose the feeling seems mutual. I don't think you're a bad guy, just ignorant and misinformed regarding the Clippers. Lots of wrong information and you started sounded like a sheep with some things. The Clippers flopped as little as any team this year and not a single player on our team got a flop warning that I remember.

Until you learn what the NBA defines as flopping stop accusing people of doing it.

Clippersfan86
09-29-2013, 03:34 PM
Duplicate.

Clippersfan86
09-29-2013, 03:49 PM
Nothing wrong with being taunted man wtf.... class? Its not very classy to flop your way to the call but that wouldn't stop us from celebrating the win.

I can definitely say an opponent flop is less offensive than chanting when a player on my team hits the deck. Maybe it's just me. I acknowledge I'm sensitive about this kind of stuff and get defensive. Bottom line as Vinny said after a Warriors loss... If you don't want teams celebrating or showboating, do something about it.

tredigs
09-29-2013, 04:58 PM
Goose the feeling seems mutual. I don't think you're a bad guy, just ignorant and misinformed regarding the Clippers. Lots of wrong information and you started sounded like a sheep with some things. The Clippers flopped as little as any team this year and not a single player on our team got a flop warning that I remember.

Until you learn what the NBA defines as flopping stop accusing people of doing it.

Haha not only were they fined, CP3 once again earned FlopOTY honors! http://nba.si.com/2013/04/16/nba-flops-chris-paul-reggie-evans-kevin-martin/

beasted86
09-29-2013, 05:07 PM
WTH does the Clippers have to do with the Pacers and Paul George?
I'm sick of this clown Clippersfan86 derailing all the threads to talk about his middle pack Clippers team.

Goose17
09-29-2013, 05:09 PM
Haha not only were they fined, CP3 once again earned FlopOTY honors! http://nba.si.com/2013/04/16/nba-flops-chris-paul-reggie-evans-kevin-martin/

What he said^


Get your head out of your *** buddy. I like watching your team, I especially like watching them lose to my team, but regardless, I like watching your team and I like quite a few guys on your roster. But if you think for a second that their reputation as floppers doesn't hold some merit, you're kidding yourself. There's no smoke without fire.


And as for what's offensive. I might find flopping offensive to the game, more so than anything you mentioned. It's all about perspective here.

And like I said, either it's all okay or none of it is. You can't condemn someone for laughing/celebrating at a guy who humiliated himself by bricking an awful shot and then ignore/condone people laughing/celebrating a poster dunk which humiliated a guy or the other example which you have conveniently not addressed, laughing at a guys shooting form and mocking him.

You still never confirmed what foul you were talking about? The one I posted? He was clearly exaggerating that to get the call to go his way, fans were booing him because he was flopping AGAIN. Can't really blame them. If he had been genuinely hurt I'm sure it would have been different. It's not like he broke his neck and everyone was cheering. You're overreacting because of your homerism.

Oh and as for the rules on flopping? You should read up on it, exaggerating minimal contact does come under flopping.

You're a hypocrite. A biased, hypocritical homer. End of.

Chronz
09-29-2013, 05:24 PM
Haha not only were they fined, CP3 once again earned FlopOTY honors! http://nba.si.com/2013/04/16/nba-flops-chris-paul-reggie-evans-kevin-martin/

That wasn't even a flop from my understanding. Just CP3 making fun of DMC for flopping all game or something. Horrible article

tredigs
09-29-2013, 05:28 PM
That wasn't even a flop from my understanding. Just CP3 making fun of DMC for flopping all game or something. Horrible article

I was watching the game. Regardless if it was a joke on his part, it cost him 5K and was the most blatant flop of the year.

Chronz
09-29-2013, 05:44 PM
I was watching the game. Regardless if it was a joke on his part, it cost him 5K and was the most blatant flop of the year.
Disagree, its too blatant of a mockery to be a true flop. He knew he wasn't going to get a call, there was absolutely nothing to sell, just him mocking a guy who had been flopping. What does money have to do with this when its of no consequence, if indeed he wound up paying it.
I dont know if you remember the play live or if the vid you saw shows it, but after the faux flop, he points to cousins and says "Thats YOU".

Clippersfan86
09-29-2013, 05:50 PM
CP3 was mocking DMC who flopped a couple plays before. He got a warning, not a fine if I recall. Point stands that Blake Griffin didn't get a single flop warning and didn't flop in years 1 or 3 really.

Chronz
09-29-2013, 05:53 PM
A flop is by very definition when you try to deceive the refs or make sure they see the call. CP3 literally grabs Cousins and flails away, thats not how he flops. I mean really, you guys actually think he was trying to get a whistle right there? And according to a brief google search, he didn't pay any money for it..... TRY AGAIN

tredigs
09-29-2013, 05:56 PM
Disagree, its too blatant of a mockery to be a true flop. He knew he wasn't going to get a call, there was absolutely nothing to sell, just him mocking a guy who had been flopping. What does money have to do with this when its of no consequence, if indeed he wound up paying it.
I dont know if you remember the play live or if the vid you saw shows it, but after the faux flop, he points to cousins and says "Thats YOU".

I'm not saying it was a real one, I know he was just making fun of DMC. It's not as if we don't have an unprecedented rolodex of his true flops to compare it to.

Clippersfan86
09-29-2013, 05:57 PM
I knew it Chronz. He got just a warning. Ryan Hollins also got a warning I think. So we had two warnings all year, not one from Griffin. All this flop talk needs to end. As a whole most teams didn't flop last year, Clippers included. I also agree with your definition of a flop Chronz and it matches up with the NBA's definition.

Selling a hard foul or falling down dramatically (from legit contact) is NOT a flop. The Ezeli and Griffin one for example it's clear Griffin wasn't trying to work refs. Ezeli is a strong dude and Warriors fans know this.

tredigs
09-29-2013, 05:59 PM
A flop is by very definition when you try to deceive the refs or make sure they see the call. CP3 literally grabs Cousins and flails away, thats not how he flops. I mean really, you guys actually think he was trying to get a whistle right there? And according to a brief google search, he didn't pay any money for it..... TRY AGAIN
Oh, I was pretty sure they popped him for that.