PDA

View Full Version : Best Backcourt in the League? Waiters/Irving, Beal/Wall or Curry/Thompson



Pages : [1] 2

HeatFan
09-30-2014, 07:26 PM
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11618576/dion-waiters-cleveland-cavaliers-says-kyrie-irving-nba-best-backcourt

So Waiters is saying that he and Irving are best backcourt while Beal says he and Wall are. How about Curry/Thompson? I certainly prefer Curry/Thompson over any current starting backcourt combo. Who you got?

goingfor28
09-30-2014, 07:27 PM
Beal and Wall for me

abe_froman
09-30-2014, 07:27 PM
bledsoe/dragic/thomas beats all 3

HeatFan
09-30-2014, 07:37 PM
If I would have to put it in rankings, maybe top 5, I would say:
1. Curry/Thompson
2. Beal/Wall
3. Dragic/Bledsoe (I like this one and hadn't thought about it)
4. Parker/Green
5. Lillard/Matthews (maybe not top five but I like better than Irving/Waiters)

dalton749
09-30-2014, 07:39 PM
Lowry/ derozan is the one to beat from last year

abe_froman
09-30-2014, 07:41 PM
If I would have to put it in rankings, maybe top 5, I would say:
1. Curry/Thompson
2. Beal/Wall
3. Dragic/Bledsoe (I like this one and hadn't thought about it)
4. Parker/Green
5. Lillard/Matthews (maybe not top five but I like better than Irving/Waiters)
i'd throw lowery/derozen and lawson/afflalo into the mix as well

HeatFan
09-30-2014, 07:42 PM
i'd throw lowery/derozen and lawson/afflalo into the mix as well

But doesn't Derozan count as a SF? If not, I agree. Lawson/Afflalo is nice too. Afflalo seems to get goods numbers but I haven't seen him play that much to give an opinion.

jaydubb
09-30-2014, 07:48 PM
Kobe and Nash :drool:

Jus kidding... I personally like curry/Thompson mostly because I like seeing a back court that could drain threes all day.. Though Bradley beal and John wall are a close second because Imma big fan of john walls game

Goose17
09-30-2014, 07:52 PM
Didn't we already have this thread?

Anyway, the correct answer is of course; Curry & Thompson.

HeatFan
09-30-2014, 07:58 PM
Didn't we already have this thread?

Anyway, the correct answer is of course; Curry & Thompson.

Yeah I saw one similar right after posting. My bad.

JEDean89
09-30-2014, 08:27 PM
Hmmm, Paul and Reddick were really good last year when Reddick was healthy. Rose Butler will be really good. Parker and Danny Green are always good. to me

Curry/Thompson
Wall/Beal
Dragic/Bledsoe
Lawson/Afflalo (they made the playoffs in the western conference as the starting backcourt)
Rose/Butler
Lowery/DeRozen
Paul/Reddick (Paul is worth more to a team than Irving/Waiters combined)
Irving/Waiters (Irving is a good not great PG right now, he will definitely be great one day but not yet. Waiters literally hasn't done anything to prove he was worthy of that 4th pick)

Arch Stanton
09-30-2014, 08:32 PM
Last year it was - (of the 3)
1. Curry and Thompson
2. Wall and Beal
3. Irving and Waiters

This season I could see Irving and Waiters as good or better than Wall and Beal.

flea
09-30-2014, 08:40 PM
Teague/Korver deserves a mention, I'd rather have them than Irving/Waiters for next season. Best to me is Curry/Thompson but I think Lowry/DeRozan has a good chance to supplant.

DemarDerozan
09-30-2014, 09:46 PM
Hmmm, Paul and Reddick were really good last year when Reddick was healthy. Rose Butler will be really good. Parker and Danny Green are always good. to me

Curry/Thompson
Wall/Beal
Dragic/Bledsoe
Lawson/Afflalo (they made the playoffs in the western conference as the starting backcourt)
Rose/Butler
Lowery/DeRozen
Paul/Reddick (Paul is worth more to a team than Irving/Waiters combined)
Irving/Waiters (Irving is a good not great PG right now, he will definitely be great one day but not yet. Waiters literally hasn't done anything to prove he was worthy of that 4th pick)

Wasn't Waiters projected to go like #20 until a couple weeks before the 2012 draft? He's lived up to that.

DemarDerozan
09-30-2014, 09:59 PM
I would go with either the three headed monster in Phoenix or Wall/Beal...

Klay and Steph are the best scoring duo. After that Lowry/DeRozan.

Mathews/Lilliard, Lawson/Afflalo, Williams/Johnson are all pretty good.

I think Calderon/Ellis and Jennings/Meeks may surprise some people this year.

I think Chalmers has a pretty big chip on his shoulder and Wade claims he will play all 82 games... So look out for that.

Jamiecballer
09-30-2014, 11:08 PM
I would go with either the three headed monster in Phoenix or Wall/Beal...

Klay and Steph are the best scoring duo. After that Lowry/DeRozan.

Mathews/Lilliard, Lawson/Afflalo, Williams/Johnson are all pretty good.

I think Calderon/Ellis and Jennings/Meeks may surprise some people this year.

I think Chalmers has a pretty big chip on his shoulder and Wade claims he will play all 82 games... So look out for that.
Calderon/Ellis?

You are right, that really would be a surprise since they are on different teams!

BallIsAll
09-30-2014, 11:08 PM
I like how lawson/afflalo are getting mentioned but definitely the curry/Thompson after that its a toss up

Waiters is a joke though he doesn't even start he's trying to ride Irvin's hype.

Jamiecballer
09-30-2014, 11:10 PM
Agreed. Irving and somebody decent maybe gets you in the top 10 of backcourts ATM.

THE MTL
09-30-2014, 11:13 PM
Curry and Thompson followed by Beal and Wall

prodigy
09-30-2014, 11:56 PM
Curry and clay for me are best. But waiters and Irving can be really good. Don't think they will have numbers like the other duos because of lebron and love. But they will be good.

mightybosstone
09-30-2014, 11:58 PM
While everyone is just stating the back court of their favorite team, I think the answer is clearly Beverley/Harden.

NBA-GMaster
10-01-2014, 02:31 AM
1. Curry and Thompson
2. Bledsoe and Dragic
3. Lowry and DeRozan

Sorry Wall and Waiters.. Both of you are not in top 3!!

Goose17
10-01-2014, 02:48 AM
Calderon/Ellis?

You are right, that really would be a surprise since they are on different teams!

LOL. You didn't hear? Felton got made into a cartel drug Lords ***** and had to take his name when he became his house wife.

Raymond Calderón and Monta Ellis.

IKnowHoops
10-01-2014, 03:53 AM
Teague/Korver deserves a mention, I'd rather have them than Irving/Waiters for next season. Best to me is Curry/Thompson but I think Lowry/DeRozan has a good chance to supplant.

No disrespect to you, but this is one of the worst if not the worst thing Ive seen on PSD. Korver is slower than you are. He can't stay in front of his own shadow.

IKnowHoops
10-01-2014, 03:56 AM
Agreed. Irving and somebody decent maybe gets you in the top 10 of backcourts ATM.

His numbers mirror Beals. How can he not be decent? This dude is getting underrated so hard. People are going to be surprised if they really feel this guy isn't even decent.

Dade County
10-01-2014, 08:03 AM
Lbj & Irving
Curry & Thompson
Dragic & Bledsoe



While everyone is just stating the back court of their favorite team, I think the answer is clearly Beverley/Harden.


lol

Arch Stanton
10-01-2014, 08:36 AM
I might put Dragic/Bledsoe #2.

Rivera
10-01-2014, 08:41 AM
Payton and oladipoooooo

flea
10-01-2014, 09:05 AM
No disrespect to you, but this is one of the worst if not the worst thing Ive seen on PSD. Korver is slower than you are. He can't stay in front of his own shadow.

He's the best shooter in the league perhaps, at least this side of Curry. And his defensive limitations are no worse than other SGs like Harden, Gordon, Ellis, Waiters, etc. Teague is also probably the fastest player in the league, for my money. Much better combo than the Cleveland chuckers.

Goose17
10-01-2014, 09:22 AM
He's the best shooter in the league perhaps, at least this side of Curry. And his defensive limitations are no worse than other SGs like Harden, Gordon, Ellis, Waiters, etc. Teague is also probably the fastest player in the league, for my money. Much better combo than the Cleveland chuckers.

Let's be clear. He's (arguably) the best spot up shooter in the league. There is a difference.

Arch Stanton
10-01-2014, 09:41 AM
It's got to be Norris Cole and Mario Chalmers (AKA Aaron Rodgers) at #1. :)

lamzoka
10-01-2014, 09:42 AM
TP / Manu
Curry / thompson
Wall / Beal















Kyrie / Waiters

smith&wesson
10-01-2014, 09:54 AM
But doesn't Derozan count as a SF? If not, I agree. Lawson/Afflalo is nice too. Afflalo seems to get goods numbers but I haven't seen him play that much to give an opinion.

since when is derozan a sf :confused:

sammyvine
10-01-2014, 12:59 PM
Parker and Ginobli?

Corey
10-01-2014, 01:02 PM
Dragic and Bledsoe hasn't been seen enough yet, but I think they could be at the top by the end of the year.

Right now it's Curry and Thompson followed by Beal and Wall for me.

Corey
10-01-2014, 01:03 PM
since when is derozan a sf :confused:

Since he played 78% of his minutes at the 3 last season.

chi-townlove1
10-01-2014, 01:27 PM
Boys and girls. Soon to be...

Derrick Rose and Jimmy Butler.

Can't stop derrick. And can't score on jimmy.

How does that not crack anyone's top 5.. Stop focusing on offense so much. Defense wins championships.

Oefarmy2005
10-01-2014, 01:29 PM
I think this is a preference thing. Wall and Beal for me, but either of the other two can be easily argued.

Oefarmy2005
10-01-2014, 01:29 PM
Boys and girls. Soon to be...

Derrick Rose and Jimmy Butler.

Can't stop derrick. And can't score on jimmy.

How does that not crack anyone's top 5.. Stop focusing on offense so much. Defense wins championships.

Because not all of us are blind homers.

kdspurman
10-01-2014, 01:31 PM
came across this on twitter:

517362671726108672

chi-townlove1
10-01-2014, 01:32 PM
Boys and girls. Soon to be...

Derrick Rose and Jimmy Butler.

Can't stop derrick. And can't score on jimmy.

How does that not crack anyone's top 5.. Stop focusing on offense so much. Defense wins championships.

Because not all of us are blind homers.

Blind homers. Hmm.. Please. Tell me apoint guard that can stop derrick 1v1. And I'm pretty sure jimmy is as legit as a defender that there is in this league.

kingsdelez24
10-01-2014, 01:41 PM
New Orleans has the one of the best collection of backcourt players, but they're all people who need to have the ball in their hands to be effective, which is their downfall

kingsdelez24
10-01-2014, 01:42 PM
Boys and girls. Soon to be...

Derrick Rose and Jimmy Butler.

Can't stop derrick. And can't score on jimmy.

How does that not crack anyone's top 5.. Stop focusing on offense so much. Defense wins championships.

Because not all of us are blind homers.

Blind homers. Hmm.. Please. Tell me apoint guard that can stop derrick 1v1. And I'm pretty sure jimmy is as legit as a defender that there is in this league.

I feel comfortable saying someone like Patrick Beverly could pester the living hell out of Rose

flea
10-01-2014, 01:48 PM
Let's be clear. He's (arguably) the best spot up shooter in the league. There is a difference.

He's a lot more than just a spot up shooter. He's good with one or two bounces, and he's a pretty effective p&r man. He's not a guy just camping in the corner without the ball either. He should be in everyone's top 10 SG, and with a potential argument for top 5.

TheGame
10-01-2014, 01:56 PM
wow, is this the stat of the NBA backcourts today???

Don't like inefficient chuckers wall and beal. Neither show up everynight especially beal, he's a chucker and high volume shooter that haf the time you look at the box score and is like 4-12 for 12 points and not much else.

Don't like one dimensional Curry and Thompson. Plus I know that they were only good last season becasue Mark put a physical defensive team around them and they were afforded lots of freedom because fo them.

I'm going with
Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, Danny Green, Marco Belinelli and Mills.

Goose17
10-01-2014, 04:04 PM
He's a lot more than just a spot up shooter. He's good with one or two bounces, and he's a pretty effective p&r man. He's not a guy just camping in the corner without the ball either. He should be in everyone's top 10 SG, and with a potential argument for top 5.

Yeah but fading off the pick and spotting up is just catch and shoot.

He's not on the level of Steph who can create shots clean off the bounce, break defenders down to create space with dribble moves, pull from 30 feet and drain it, and he certainly doesn't have that step back.

Korver is a damn good shooter. He's just not THAT level. Not even close.

IKnowHoops
10-01-2014, 05:45 PM
Blind homers. Hmm.. Please. Tell me apoint guard that can stop derrick 1v1. And I'm pretty sure jimmy is as legit as a defender that there is in this league.

Lets wait a little bit on that. He has the same range as Shaq right now. Once he proves he has a jumper then we can talk about him and Jimmy.

IKnowHoops
10-01-2014, 05:49 PM
He's the best shooter in the league perhaps, at least this side of Curry. And his defensive limitations are no worse than other SGs like Harden, Gordon, Ellis, Waiters, etc. Teague is also probably the fastest player in the league, for my money. Much better combo than the Cleveland chuckers.

The guy can't get a shot off when he's got the ball in his hands. He sucks. Mike Miller is better because at least he can defend and rebound. If Korver is a little bit better shooter than Miller, but literally is worse at every other phase of the game, how is he good? Dude sucks. He's only good in a few situations. He cannot get his own shot. Ill take Mike Miller over him any day. Korver is a slow, soft, weak athlete with a great shot. Trash.

HandsOnTheWheel
10-01-2014, 06:03 PM
bledsoe/dragic/thomas beats all 3

This.

flea
10-01-2014, 06:16 PM
The guy can't get a shot off when he's got the ball in his hands. He sucks. Mike Miller is better because at least he can defend and rebound. If Korver is a little bit better shooter than Miller, but literally is worse at every other phase of the game, how is he good? Dude sucks. He's only good in a few situations. He cannot get his own shot. Ill take Mike Miller over him any day. Korver is a slow, soft, weak athlete with a great shot. Trash.

Yet again your username proves ironic.

IKnowHoops
10-01-2014, 06:47 PM
Yet again your username proves ironic.

Yours is spot on as I am constantly brushing you off.

GodsSon
10-01-2014, 06:51 PM
Since he played 78% of his minutes at the 3 last season.

Ya, no.

DeRozan is definitely a 2.

Goose17
10-01-2014, 06:52 PM
Yours is spot on as I am constantly brushing you off.

LOL... nice.

flea
10-01-2014, 06:54 PM
At least I'm an all world bassist.

SeoulBeatz
10-01-2014, 07:01 PM
Curry and Thompson are the best. I realize defense matters but the damage they can do offensively negates whatever defensive shortcomings both players have. One of the best shooting backcourts of all-time.

flea
10-01-2014, 07:10 PM
The guy can't get a shot off when he's got the ball in his hands. He sucks. Mike Miller is better because at least he can defend and rebound. If Korver is a little bit better shooter than Miller, but literally is worse at every other phase of the game, how is he good? Dude sucks. He's only good in a few situations. He cannot get his own shot. Ill take Mike Miller over him any day. Korver is a slow, soft, weak athlete with a great shot. Trash.

As far as being objective, Korver was 3rd in WAR last season behind only Harden and Dragic at SG. 5th in RPM, and 12th in DRPM (in spite of being "slowest player in the league). For reference, that's well ahead of God awful guys like Harden, and still ahead of Beal, Stephenson and Thompson (whose d gets overrated IMO).

But don't let that stop you from making baseless assertions.

flea
10-01-2014, 07:15 PM
Even Grantland had a long article detailing his value this offseason. For strictly next season, I don't see how he's not top 5-7. He's not even that old for his skillset, either.

benzni
10-01-2014, 07:22 PM
Obvious choice:

Rubio/Mo/& Lavine

flea
10-01-2014, 07:27 PM
Yeah but fading off the pick and spotting up is just catch and shoot.

He's not on the level of Steph who can create shots clean off the bounce, break defenders down to create space with dribble moves, pull from 30 feet and drain it, and he certainly doesn't have that step back.

Korver is a damn good shooter. He's just not THAT level. Not even close.

Didn't say he was a PG, but he's not just a screener. He handles the ball on P&R a decent amount because he's a good passer.

HeatFan
10-01-2014, 07:37 PM
Curry and Thompson are the best. I realize defense matters but the damage they can do offensively negates whatever defensive shortcomings both players have. One of the best shooting backcourts of all-time.

I thought that Klay was known for good defense. I know Curry isn't all that good but Klay is for sure.

IKnowHoops
10-01-2014, 08:21 PM
As far as being objective, Korver was 3rd in WAR last season behind only Harden and Dragic at SG. 5th in RPM, and 12th in DRPM (in spite of being "slowest player in the league). For reference, that's well ahead of God awful guys like Harden, and still ahead of Beal, Stephenson and Thompson (whose d gets overrated IMO).

But don't let that stop you from making baseless assertions.

Yet not one GM would trade any of those players for Korver. All you have done is prove that those particular stats don't effectively judge who is better at all.

Jamiecballer
10-01-2014, 08:26 PM
The guy can't get a shot off when he's got the ball in his hands. He sucks. Mike Miller is better because at least he can defend and rebound. If Korver is a little bit better shooter than Miller, but literally is worse at every other phase of the game, how is he good? Dude sucks. He's only good in a few situations. He cannot get his own shot. Ill take Mike Miller over him any day. Korver is a slow, soft, weak athlete with a great shot. Trash.
Lol

You think Waiters, who has been a total bust, is good, and think Korver, who is very very good, sucks. You have no right to that username.

IKnowHoops
10-01-2014, 08:27 PM
As far as being objective, Korver was 3rd in WAR last season behind only Harden and Dragic at SG. 5th in RPM, and 12th in DRPM (in spite of being "slowest player in the league). For reference, that's well ahead of God awful guys like Harden, and still ahead of Beal, Stephenson and Thompson (whose d gets overrated IMO).

But don't let that stop you from making baseless assertions.

You got nerve throwing this advanced stats out at me. I bring up PER or Winshares 48 and you throw a fit. No surprise that Korver's PER and WS48 is lower than all 4 players. You like stats that make crappy players shine. I don't get it. Oh well.

flea
10-01-2014, 08:54 PM
Yeah, you don't get it. I've already made enough posts about PER. Google it or search my post history if you care to know why I, and many others, dismiss it.

JLeBeau76
10-01-2014, 09:30 PM
Lol

You think Waiters, who has been a total bust, is good, and think Korver, who is very very good, sucks. You have no right to that username.

In what way has Waiters been a "total bust"? Honest question because outside of documented locker room issues from a year ago, his on the court production has been consistently in line with Beal.

Granted, its probably just a hater type comment but I'm just curious.

prodigy
10-01-2014, 09:42 PM
Turns into a Irving and waiters bash thread. Shocked smh... its cool just gotta wait and see what happens.

People who bash waiters then praise beal really confuse me lol.

prodigy
10-01-2014, 09:45 PM
The guy can't get a shot off when he's got the ball in his hands. He sucks. Mike Miller is better because at least he can defend and rebound. If Korver is a little bit better shooter than Miller, but literally is worse at every other phase of the game, how is he good? Dude sucks. He's only good in a few situations. He cannot get his own shot. Ill take Mike Miller over him any day. Korver is a slow, soft, weak athlete with a great shot. Trash.
Lol

You think Waiters, who has been a total bust, is good, and think Korver, who is very very good, sucks. You have no right to that username.

He avg'ed 16pts a game is that really a bust? Even if he never improves he's still not a bust. Bust is a guy who's out the league is few years or buried on the bench. Waiters is not and will never be either of those.

Jamiecballer
10-01-2014, 10:02 PM
In what way has Waiters been a "total bust"? Honest question because outside of documented locker room issues from a year ago, his on the court production has been consistently in line with Beal.

Granted, its probably just a hater type comment but I'm just curious.
Fair enough. He's been a bust but its maybe early for "total" bust. Despite high usage he's not an efficient scorer nor does he do anything else particularly well. The attitude definitely hurts but haven't we seen guys with attitude issues squander their talent often enough to be pretty pessimistic there? I think we have.

The comments about Beal are fair enough. He's been better but not great by any means. I'm not particularly high on him either.

Jamiecballer
10-01-2014, 10:10 PM
He avg'ed 16pts a game is that really a bust? Even if he never improves he's still not a bust. Bust is a guy who's out the league is few years or buried on the bench. Waiters is not and will never be either of those.
When you are a high draft pick and play for a really bad team you are given every opportunity to show what you can do. PPG is about the worst possible way to evaluate a player in such a situation.

The numbers Waiter produced last season could be replicated by half the leagues guards and swing men if afforded the chance.

Arch Stanton
10-01-2014, 10:24 PM
Fair enough. He's been a bust but its maybe early for "total" bust. Despite high usage he's not an efficient scorer nor does he do anything else particularly well. The attitude definitely hurts but haven't we seen guys with attitude issues squander their talent often enough to be pretty pessimistic there? I think we have.

The comments about Beal are fair enough. He's been better but not great by any means. I'm not particularly high on him either.

He's only 22, and has played for 3 separate coaches now. I think you need to give him a couple more years before determining that he's a bust.

JLeBeau76
10-01-2014, 10:32 PM
When you are a high draft pick and play for a really bad team you are given every opportunity to show what you can do. PPG is about the worst possible way to evaluate a player in such a situation.

The numbers Waiter produced last season could be replicated by half the leagues guards and swing men if afforded the chance.

On the flip side, when you are playing on a particularly bad team and you are a primary scoring threat (a title he and Irving shared) then you are going to be getting the lions share of the oposing teams attention.

Yes, his efficiency wasn't great for the most part but there are more factors to that than just the narrow view that he was the sole issue.

No, IMO, in no sense has Waiters been a bust. He has areas that need improvement, of course, but who doesn't.

Corey
10-01-2014, 10:50 PM
Ya, no.

DeRozan is definitely a 2.

Yes, he is a 2. But he played a lot at the 3 defensively last year. He defended a lot of 3's with Ross at the 2.

BIG worm
10-01-2014, 11:11 PM
Wait, so Waiters isnt Garbage now?

prodigy
10-02-2014, 12:03 AM
When you are a high draft pick and play for a really bad team you are given every opportunity to show what you can do. PPG is about the worst possible way to evaluate a player in such a situation.

The numbers Waiter produced last season could be replicated by half the leagues guards and swing men if afforded the chance.

On the flip side, when you are playing on a particularly bad team and you are a primary scoring threat (a title he and Irving shared) then you are going to be getting the lions share of the oposing teams attention.

Yes, his efficiency wasn't great for the most part but there are more factors to that than just the narrow view that he was the sole issue.

No, IMO, in no sense has Waiters been a bust. He has areas that need improvement, of course, but who doesn't.

This

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 12:05 AM
Lol

You think Waiters, who has been a total bust, is good, and think Korver, who is very very good, sucks. You have no right to that username.

This is funny how Waiters has been a bust yet Beal is very good yet there numbers are exactly the same. Please help me understand this logic oh wise one. What does Korver do thats even average beside shoot the 3? Dude is a defensive liability because he can't even man up. At least Harden is being lazy when he gets beat. If Korver gives maximum effort he's still getting killed. Korver is garbage.

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 12:08 AM
Yeah, you don't get it. I've already made enough posts about PER. Google it or search my post history if you care to know why I, and many others, dismiss it.

Show me the top 20 in any of those stats you through out, and I'll show you the top 20 PER. I'll bet you whatever that PER will show a more accurate picture of the top 20 players than any of this e BS stats you brought up. If not then you admit they don't work.

BALLER R
10-02-2014, 12:52 AM
Yes, he is a 2. But he played a lot at the 3 defensively last year. He defended a lot of 3's with Ross at the 2.

Ross played the 3.

BALLER R
10-02-2014, 12:53 AM
Since we're on the topic this goes a little bit further. Who has the best back court depth in the league?

NetsPaint
10-02-2014, 01:01 AM
Calderon/J.R. Smith

PacersForLife
10-02-2014, 02:19 AM
It's obviously Hill and Stuckey guys...

For real though, I'll say Curry and Thompson followed by Wall and Beal.

illastrate
10-02-2014, 03:56 AM
The blatant disregard for CP3/Redick is hilarious. Their efficiency is off the charts. You have the best PG plus one of the best shooters in the league coming off a career year. Come on now.

Goose17
10-02-2014, 04:06 AM
Show me the top 20 in any of those stats you through out, and I'll show you the top 20 PER. I'll bet you whatever that PER will show a more accurate picture of the top 20 players than any of this e BS stats you brought up. If not then you admit they don't work.

You can't just rely on one stat to tell you who the better player is, you need to pull as much information as possible to make the best evaluation (that includes more than just stats as well).

As for people dismissing PER, Hollinger himself admitted a while back that PER is only really valuable when measuring a players offensive ability. It isn't really measuring defense at all. The way it is calculated also lends itself to favoring volume scorers, you don't need to be uber efficient at scoring to have a strong PER (although obviously it can help, but if you're strong in other areas offensively, scoring about 42% from the field is enough to give you a decent PER if you're taking a large volume of shots).

kobe4thewinbang
10-02-2014, 04:09 AM
Klay and Steph brought GSW back into so many games via a barrage of 3PTers, so they're the best. Wall & Beal are on the rise, though.

dalton749
10-02-2014, 04:18 AM
Since we're on the topic this goes a little bit further. Who has the best back court depth in the league?

Toronto obv

Goose17
10-02-2014, 04:31 AM
Since we're on the topic this goes a little bit further. Who has the best back court depth in the league?

Phoenix? Dragic - Bledsoe - Thomas - Green
Chicago? Rose - Butler - Hinrich - Snell
Clippers? CP3 - Redick - Crawford - Farmar

MisterRoddy
10-02-2014, 04:37 AM
I'll use a rating system of the 3 and decide from there
Player Overall Skill and how well they fit together on scale of 1-10.

Kyrie (8.5), Dion (5), Fit (5) = 18.5
Wall (7), Beal (5), Fit (7) = 19
Curry (9), Thompson (7), Fit (9) = 25

It's Curry/Thompson easily.

Goose17
10-02-2014, 04:42 AM
Steph made comments on what Beal said,



“What was he supposed to say? I would have said the same thing (about us). It was just like the thing with LeBron this summer. What are you supposed to say? I would say we’re the best backcourt. He’s going to say it. Russell (Westbrook) said he was the best PG yesterday. Everybody has got to be confident. If he would have said he had the second-best backcourt in the league, I probably would have gone over there and ragged on him all day.”

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 04:55 AM
You can't just rely on one stat to tell you who the better player is, you need to pull as much information as possible to make the best evaluation (that includes more than just stats as well).

As for people dismissing PER, Hollinger himself admitted a while back that PER is only really valuable when measuring a players offensive ability. It isn't really measuring defense at all. The way it is calculated also lends itself to favoring volume scorers, you don't need to be uber efficient at scoring to have a strong PER (although obviously it can help, but if you're strong in other areas offensively, scoring about 42% from the field is enough to give you a decent PER if you're taking a large volume of shots).

I do understand this, but at the same time, PER and Winshares by themselves paint a better picture of the top players than any other stat that Ive seen. And all you have to do is compare the stats top 30 players. But I know it cannot be relied on by itself. But If someone is going to make an argument about why Korver is better and then use only the advance stats that support there argument, and dismiss the advance stats that don't...there is where I have a problem. And as far as volume scorers and or chuckers getting a high number...the efficient scorers always have a higher PER than the inefficient scorers. ALWAYS. Compare Kobe, AI, and Melo to Lebron, Durant, and Jordan. All score close to the same, but Lebron, Durant, and Jordan all have significantly higher PER's.

Still, I think that guys that can score 30pts a game on 50% TS should have higher points towards his PER than someone who scores 9 pts a game on 55% TS. Reason being, most of the time if you only score 9 points a game, then it means you can't create your own shot, and others are doing this for you. If one of these guys tried to score 30pts there TS% would probably be around 40%.

I also feel a guy who scores 30pts a game with a TS of 50% should have higher points towards his TS% than a guy who scores 20pts a game on the exact same efficiency. I think a bigger problem with PER is with people that play 3 minutes and go 2 for 2 from 3pt land and then get a crazy high PER. For Instance, Micheal Beasley had the same PER as Melo last year for much of the year. He didn't play much or shoot much, but when he did he was ver efficient.

I don't think chuckers are rewarded to the extent you are saying. Otherwise there is no way Melo and Beasley have the same PER numbers.

PER is great because it will distinguish 30 pts scorers. I'd much rather go by PER than any other one stat out there. But like I said, I agree with you that it can't be used by itself. I remember Brook Lopez was like number 5 in PER like two years ago at one point, and he isn't a high volume shooter. He definitely wasn't the 5th best player in the NBA either.

But eye test, with PER and Winshare 48, plus pts/reb/asst/blk/st/T.O. is all that is needed to assess who is better.

WashingtonFB
10-02-2014, 05:01 AM
Klay/Steph now, Beal/Wall in the future.

Goose17
10-02-2014, 05:17 AM
the efficient scorers always have a higher PER than the inefficient scorers. ALWAYS. Compare Kobe, AI, and Melo to Lebron, Durant, and Jordan. All score close to the same, but Lebron, Durant, and Jordan all have significantly higher PER's.


If you check out the wagesofwin site you'll be able to find a few articles that were written about the flaws of PER, including the way scoring is valued;


"Hollinger argues that each two point field goal made is worth about 1.65 points. A three point field goal made is worth 2.65 points. A missed field goal, though, costs a team 0.72 points. Given these values, with a bit of math we can show that a player will break even on his two point field goal attempts if he hits on 30.4% of these shots. On three pointers the break-even point is 21.4%. If a player exceeds these thresholds, and virtually every NBA player does so with respect to two-point shots, the more he shoots the higher his value in PERs. So a player can be an inefficient scorer and simply inflate his value by taking a large number of shots."

On top of that just look at the highest PERs of all time;

The top 10-20 looks okay. But...

Stoudemire is in the top 30 ALL TIME, and in the top 50 you have guys like Iverson and John Drew. Are they top 50 players all time? Was Iverson ever efficient?




But eye test, with PER and Winshare 48, plus pts/reb/asst/blk/st/T.O. is all that is needed to assess who is better.

I disagree with this, what about when discussing who is the better shooter? Who is better at drawing fouls? Who is better at defending well without fouling? Who is the better defender? Who is the better distributor? You can't answer those questions and many others with just the stats you mentioned.

dalton749
10-02-2014, 05:22 AM
Phoenix? Dragic - Bledsoe - Thomas - Green
Chicago? Rose - Butler - Hinrich - Snell
Clippers? CP3 - Redick - Crawford - Farmar

Lowry equal to dragic
Derozan better than Bledsoe
Vasquez started over Thomas
Lou Williams could be anywhere from 6th man candidate to what he was last year recovering from an acl tear
Ross and green will have to play out of position but I'm taking Ross

Toronto>

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 06:03 AM
If you check out the wagesofwin site you'll be able to find a few articles that were written about the flaws of PER, including the way scoring is valued;



On top of that just look at the highest PERs of all time;

The top 10-20 looks okay. But...

Stoudemire is in the top 30 ALL TIME, and in the top 50 you have guys like Iverson and John Drew. Are they top 50 players all time? Was Iverson ever efficient?




I disagree with this, what about when discussing who is the better shooter? Who is better at drawing fouls? Who is better at defending well without fouling? Who is the better defender? Who is the better distributor? You can't answer those questions and many others with just the stats you mentioned.

The thing is the break even point doesn't matter, because the stats are all relative. So if the break even point is at 30% it won't penalize players who shoot better than others. All you are discussing is where the bar is set, but the better the efficiency, the better the score period.

I do believe AI is a top 50 player easily. I think AI is massively underrated. When he was playing, Shaq called him a top 5 player of all-time. I don't agree with that either, but AI is a beast and PER does him no justice.

Amare was a beast that year before he got injured. He outplayed a prime Duncan in the playoffs and he deserves every bit of the PER he got that year.

Better defender? Eye test plus steals/blocks/rebs will tell you what going on with that. Thats all I needed to look at to tell you that Gary Payton was the best defensive PG of the 90's Drob and Hakeem were the best defensive centers, Pippen was the best defensive 3. Jordan was the best defensive 2. Best defensive 4's were KG and Duncan. Thats from eye test and steals/reb/blks. And I know I am right.

My computer crapped out on me when I was trying to edit the above so you answered some of what I said. I respect your point of view though.

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 06:18 AM
If you check out the wagesofwin site you'll be able to find a few articles that were written about the flaws of PER, including the way scoring is valued;



On top of that just look at the highest PERs of all time;

The top 10-20 looks okay. But...

Stoudemire is in the top 30 ALL TIME, and in the top 50 you have guys like Iverson and John Drew. Are they top 50 players all time? Was Iverson ever efficient?




I disagree with this, what about when discussing who is the better shooter? Who is better at drawing fouls? Who is better at defending well without fouling? Who is the better defender? Who is the better distributor? You can't answer those questions and many others with just the stats you mentioned.

I addressed the defensive part but I forgot to address the rest. You are right about this stuff, but all this stuff is moot when I am discussing who the better player is. For instance. Lets say player A is better than Player B at all of the above. But Player B averages 35pts a game on 60%TS and Player A averages 15pts on 55%TS. At this point it doesn't matter if player A gets to the line more, and it doesn't matter if he defends better without picking up fouls. We know that Player B is better just from his pts and efficiency.

I could say TS% is also a stat to look at, but at the same time PER accounts for this so I really don't need it. If two guys have the same production, whoever has the highest PER will have the better efficiency.

PhillyFaninLA
10-02-2014, 08:02 AM
Blind homers. Hmm.. Please. Tell me apoint guard that can stop derrick 1v1. And I'm pretty sure jimmy is as legit as a defender that there is in this league.

First Rose should be a shooting guard not a point guard...it would serve him and the Bulls better long term. Let's see if Rose is the player he was and if he can stay healthy before we judge him.....but of course no blinders there at all

MILLERHIGHLIFE
10-02-2014, 08:35 AM
Warriors or Suns back court. Waiters comments would of been ignored. But since LeBron is in town everyone gets to be over hyped here on out.

prodigy
10-02-2014, 09:55 AM
Warriors or Suns back court. Waiters comments would of been ignored. But since LeBron is in town everyone gets to be over hyped here on out.

Apparently ur new in town. Since lebron got to Cleveland Irving is not a top 20 pg and waiters is a ''total bust''. This according to quite a few people. So who's over hyped? Lol

Confusious
10-02-2014, 10:05 AM
Dragic and Bledsoe is really beastly. Throw in Thomas and it becomes a massacre.


Lowry equal to dragic
Derozan better than Bledsoe
Vasquez started over Thomas
Lou Williams could be anywhere from 6th man candidate to what he was last year recovering from an acl tear
Ross and green will have to play out of position but I'm taking Ross

Toronto>
In what world is Lowry equal to Dragic? Oh yes, in your own little deluded TORONTO RAPTORS ARE THE BEST BREH world.

Man what a ****** world that must be.

Also DeRozan is a SF as much as he is a guard. And even still, I'd take Bledsoe over him. Sorriez.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
10-02-2014, 10:18 AM
Apparently ur new in town. Since lebron got to Cleveland Irving is not a top 20 pg and waiters is a ''total bust''. This according to quite a few people. So who's over hyped? Lol

Well if Irving was top 20 last year he would of been in the playoffs? Shouldn't be considered top 16 till he makes the playoffs. Just like the best big's thread. Duncan got snubbed by many yet he has the last laugh and another ring to show for it. It'll be a matter of time when Irving and AV gets dinged up and LeBron starts pointing fingers yet again he's not pleased to carry entire team on his back.

Heard this story last year when Wade got hurt. Wouldn't be shocked if and when that happens. Cavs be shopping the Cavs back court of Irving and Waiters and Thompson tossed in to boot to make a new big3. I didn't say Waiters was a "bust". But I did mention "headcase". I believe the early reports of a "bust" went to other gift wrapped lottery pick Bennett amongst the majority here.

dalton749
10-02-2014, 10:19 AM
Dragic and Bledsoe is really beastly. Throw in Thomas and it becomes a massacre.


In what world is Lowry equal to Dragic? Oh yes, in your own little deluded TORONTO RAPTORS ARE THE BEST BREH world.

Man what a ****** world that must be.

Also DeRozan is a SF as much as he is a guard. And even still, I'd take Bledsoe over him. Sorriez.

Jesus Christ this post is stupid. Did you edit that in?

Confusious
10-02-2014, 10:37 AM
Jesus Christ this post is stupid. Did you edit that in?
Last edited by Confusious; Today at 10:07 AM.

And my post is stupid. GOOD OBSERVATION CAPTAIN ****FACE.

Byronicle
10-02-2014, 11:29 AM
Last edited by Confusious; Today at 10:07 AM.

And my post is stupid. GOOD OBSERVATION CAPTAIN ****FACE.

Maybe stupid isn't the right world. Your post was petty in making a generalization and your maturity really shows with the name calling.

With that said, where exactly are you from? I am curious to how someone from Canada becomes a Cavaliers fan

prodigy
10-02-2014, 12:10 PM
Apparently ur new in town. Since lebron got to Cleveland Irving is not a top 20 pg and waiters is a ''total bust''. This according to quite a few people. So who's over hyped? Lol

Well if Irving was top 20 last year he would of been in the playoffs? Shouldn't be considered top 16 till he makes the playoffs. Just like the best big's thread. Duncan got snubbed by many yet he has the last laugh and another ring to show for it. It'll be a matter of time when Irving and AV gets dinged up and LeBron starts pointing fingers yet again he's not pleased to carry entire team on his back.

Heard this story last year when Wade got hurt. Wouldn't be shocked if and when that happens. Cavs be shopping the Cavs back court of Irving and Waiters and Thompson tossed in to boot to make a new big3. I didn't say Waiters was a "bust". But I did mention "headcase". I believe the early reports of a "bust" went to other gift wrapped lottery pick Bennett amongst the majority here.

Well you need 5 starters and a bench to be a successful team. Cavs had 2 guys then either really young guys or bums. So no he doesn't need to make the playoffs to be considered a top 20 pg and that way of thinking is kinda dumb. Not trying to insult you but it really is.

Cavs are not trading those 3 guys get real man. I could see 1 of waiters or Thompson being moved next season because contracts and what not. But no to all three being dealt. Waiters has been called a bust quite a few times by different posters. Granted that's most likely just hater talk but it was still said.

Jamiecballer
10-02-2014, 01:03 PM
On the flip side, when you are playing on a particularly bad team and you are a primary scoring threat (a title he and Irving shared) then you are going to be getting the lions share of the oposing teams attention.

Yes, his efficiency wasn't great for the most part but there are more factors to that than just the narrow view that he was the sole issue.

No, IMO, in no sense has Waiters been a bust. He has areas that need improvement, of course, but who doesn't.
Right. But your justification is largely due to the fact you are a cavs fan no?

Jamiecballer
10-02-2014, 01:05 PM
This is funny how Waiters has been a bust yet Beal is very good yet there numbers are exactly the same. Please help me understand this logic oh wise one. What does Korver do thats even average beside shoot the 3? Dude is a defensive liability because he can't even man up. At least Harden is being lazy when he gets beat. If Korver gives maximum effort he's still getting killed. Korver is garbage.
Beals numbers are not exactly the same unless you look no deeper than basic box score stats. Nonetheless, I don't think Beal is very good so there is that.

Jamiecballer
10-02-2014, 01:09 PM
This is funny how Waiters has been a bust yet Beal is very good yet there numbers are exactly the same. Please help me understand this logic oh wise one. What does Korver do thats even average beside shoot the 3? Dude is a defensive liability because he can't even man up. At least Harden is being lazy when he gets beat. If Korver gives maximum effort he's still getting killed. Korver is garbage.
He does the things he does, exceptionally well. Waiters does nothing at a high level, at least well. Pretty simple. There is next to no value in a high usage player who does nothing particularly well. An exceptional role player has wayyy more value.

JLeBeau76
10-02-2014, 01:37 PM
Right. But your justification is largely due to the fact you are a cavs fan no?

Actually no. I am a Cavs fan which afforded me the opportunity to have watched every Waiters game but I'm very neutral when it comes to observations and opinions.

Waiters has had many cringe-worthy moments on the court, mainly with shot selection and free throw shooting, but for every one of those there is an equal number of plays that shows he was worthy of where he was selected.

I mearly reject your notion of him being a bust because I'm sure if you went back through past NBA drafts and look through top 5 picks, you would find a surprising amount of players that actually fit that word.

It isn't easy to produce the statline that Waiters has done through two years in the league, inefficienly or not.

Besides, I put an asterisk beside his year two because of having Mike Brown as a coach. Brown payed zero attention to the offensive end and is known for not caring much for young players. Improvement is very difficult in that environment.

Now I'm not sitting here and spouting that Irving and Waiters are a top combo in the league, they haven't proved that, but I am comfortable in saying that the word "bust" isn't justifiable to use in any real sense in this case.

But then again, I trying to make a point against people whose justification of their opinions comes from just rehashing nonsensical arguments from stats that can be twisted to support either side of this debate and listening to columnists and news stations trying to sensationalise every little thing for rating hits.

Jamiecballer
10-02-2014, 01:52 PM
Actually no. I am a Cavs fan which afforded me the opportunity to have watched every Waiters game but I'm very neutral when it comes to observations and opinions.

Waiters has had many cringe-worthy moments on the court, mainly with shot selection and free throw shooting, but for every one of those there is an equal number of plays that shows he was worthy of where he was selected.

I mearly reject your notion of him being a bust because I'm sure if you went back through past NBA drafts and look through top 5 picks, you would find a surprising amount of players that actually fit that word.

It isn't easy to produce the statline that Waiters has done through two years in the league, inefficienly or not.

Besides, I put an asterisk beside his year two because of having Mike Brown as a coach. Brown payed zero attention to the offensive end and is known for not caring much for young players. Improvement is very difficult in that environment.

Now I'm not sitting here and spouting that Irving and Waiters are a top combo in the league, they haven't proved that, but I am comfortable in saying that the word "bust" isn't justifiable to use in any real sense in this case.

But then again, I trying to make a point against people whose justification of their opinions comes from just rehashing nonsensical arguments from stats that can be twisted to support either side of this debate and listening to columnists and news stations trying to sensationalise every little thing for rating hits.
There are no stats that can be used to support your assertion that he is good. That's simply not true. But thanks for acknowledging your bias.

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 02:11 PM
He does the things he does, exceptionally well. Waiters does nothing at a high level, at least well. Pretty simple. There is next to no value in a high usage player who does nothing particularly well. An exceptional role player has wayyy more value.

Waiters is entering his 3rd and is a young kid who has gotten better in both years. Korver has hit his very low ceiling and is garbage at everything on the court accept for catching a pass and hitting a 3. He is absolute garbage accept for hitting a 3. He is in the class of the trent tuckers, and james jones's of the world. Great company.

JLeBeau76
10-02-2014, 02:17 PM
There are no stats that can be used to support your assertion that he is good. That's simply not true. But thanks for acknowledging your bias.

Lol, whatever dude. Reverting back to the "well....umm...you're a fan of the team so you can't have a real opinion, so THERE" argument is the classic fallback for those with no real legs to stand on.

Thanks for acknowledging your own bias.

Arch Stanton
10-02-2014, 02:21 PM
There are no stats that can be used to support your assertion that he is good. That's simply not true. But thanks for acknowledging your bias.

It depends on what your definition of good is? But does 'not being good' mean he is a bust? I don't think it's that black and white. I think he is a young shooting guard, who has talent and has shown flashes of greatness. But he's played slightly below average at his position, and has only played two NBA seasons in a dysfunctional organization. Consistency is his biggest issue and if he can overcome that, which I think he will. He can become an above average (or pretty good) NBA player IMO.

ewing
10-02-2014, 04:47 PM
curry and thompson are clearly best of the 3

papipapsmanny
10-02-2014, 07:16 PM
Beal is a lot better than Waiters, and lets remember Waiters will be 23 in roughly 2 months, Beal just turned 21 roughly 3 months ago.

Jamiecballer
10-02-2014, 07:20 PM
Waiters is entering his 3rd and is a young kid who has gotten better in both years. Korver has hit his very low ceiling and is garbage at everything on the court accept for catching a pass and hitting a 3. He is absolute garbage accept for hitting a 3. He is in the class of the trent tuckers, and james jones's of the world. Great company.
Your ignorance is astounding. Keep it up.

Jamiecballer
10-02-2014, 07:23 PM
Lol, whatever dude. Reverting back to the "well....umm...you're a fan of the team so you can't have a real opinion, so THERE" argument is the classic fallback for those with no real legs to stand on.

Thanks for acknowledging your own bias.
No, you can have an opinion. But when you are in the extreme minority in your view and you are a fan of that players team it is reasonable to suggest that the two are related. Especially when the other people sharing that minority view are also fans of said team.

DemarDerozan
10-02-2014, 07:35 PM
Null

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 07:45 PM
Your ignorance is astounding. Keep it up.

Thank you for the in depth analysis. I guess I'll just believe what you say because...well...you said it. Korver is nice in it.

PS. Most of James Jones advanced stats and per 36 numbers are better than Korvers last year. And trent tuckers advanced stats and per 36 numbers mirror Korver's for a career. Just food for thought.

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 07:54 PM
He does the things he does, exceptionally well. Waiters does nothing at a high level, at least well. Pretty simple. There is next to no value in a high usage player who does nothing particularly well. An exceptional role player has wayyy more value.

Could you elaborate on these things. The only things that I know he does are hit assisted 3's and hit free throws. And everything else he is very very poor at. Korver is a wing and he is more dependent on someone passing him the ball than a center. He literally cannot score without someone creating for him.

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 08:21 PM
Lol

You think Waiters, who has been a total bust, is good, and think Korver, who is very very good, sucks. You have no right to that username.

His 6mil a year veteran contract disagrees whole heartedly with you. Which also means every GM in the NBA disagrees with you.

IKnowHoops
10-02-2014, 08:46 PM
Beal is a lot better than Waiters, and lets remember Waiters will be 23 in roughly 2 months, Beal just turned 21 roughly 3 months ago.

I think your making to much of a 1.2 year difference. There is a bigger gap between Wall and Kyrie in age and in numbers all favoring Kyrie, but none talks about that.

mike_noodles
10-02-2014, 10:20 PM
No matter the right answer, Irving and Waiters don't belong in the conversation. There are several duos above those two.

DemarDerozan
10-02-2014, 10:23 PM
It is good to see the Wizards/Cavs rivalry heating back up. The Caron Butler/Jamison/Arenas vs Bron/Hughes and company days were pretty good

WITZ
10-02-2014, 10:50 PM
It is good to see the Wizards/Cavs rivalry heating back up. The Caron Butler/Jamison/Arenas vs Bron/Hughes and company days were pretty good

Yea Wall came with some aggression in his response to Waiters. And I wouldn't put Hughes in with Bron he was *** his cavs career.

prodigy
10-02-2014, 10:54 PM
It is good to see the Wizards/Cavs rivalry heating back up. The Caron Butler/Jamison/Arenas vs Bron/Hughes and company days were pretty good

Hopefully wizards put up a better fight on the court this time around.

Cracka2HI!
10-02-2014, 11:02 PM
The 1st thing that came to my mind was how many backcourts are better than Irving/Waiters. I know I'd much rather have CP3/Reddick/Crawford. I think Curry and Thompson are the best and after that there are 10-12 very good backcourts.

tmacsc2
10-02-2014, 11:03 PM
What about the lillard and matthews back court???

IKnowHoops
10-03-2014, 04:18 AM
No matter the right answer, Irving and Waiters don't belong in the conversation. There are several duos above those two.

But would you take Teague and Korver over them?

I agree with you though. They are definitely not the best back court as they have not done anything to prove it. That being said, I think with the new focus and drive the entire Cavs team has this year, I expect them to make a huge push for that #1 spot this year. I would be shocked if they are not consensus top 3 back courts 3/4 of the way through this year.

mike_noodles
10-03-2014, 07:24 AM
But would you take Teague and Korver over them?

I agree with you though. They are definitely not the best back court as they have not done anything to prove it. That being said, I think with the new focus and drive the entire Cavs team has this year, I expect them to make a huge push for that #1 spot this year. I would be shocked if they are not consensus top 3 back courts 3/4 of the way through this year.

Hmmm... Probably not. I see Korver as more of a one trick pony.

And I agree, Irving and Waiters could be up there by the end of the year. But they have a lot to prove. I wouldn't be surprised if Waiters isn't even starting there.

Darren Farris
10-03-2014, 01:38 PM
Spurs have the best backcourt.

kingkenny01
10-03-2014, 01:52 PM
Bledsoe and dragic number 1

Jamiecballer
10-03-2014, 02:16 PM
Thank you for the in depth analysis. I guess I'll just believe what you say because...well...you said it. Korver is nice in it.

PS. Most of James Jones advanced stats and per 36 numbers are better than Korvers last year. And trent tuckers advanced stats and per 36 numbers mirror Korver's for a career. Just food for thought.

Kyle Korver in addition to being a deadly shooter is generally considered one of the most intelligent players in the game. that's probably the reason Korver is on the court way more than either of those guys you mention. Just something you might like to consider as well.

IKnowHoops
10-03-2014, 03:04 PM
Kyle Korver in addition to being a deadly shooter is generally considered one of the most intelligent players in the game. that's probably the reason Korver is on the court way more than either of those guys you mention. Just something you might like to consider as well.

But if all that intelligence gets you to produce like James Jones and Trent Tucker then what does it matter? And if you are producing at that level, then your not "very very good" period.

Byronicle
10-03-2014, 03:12 PM
But if all that intelligence gets you to produce like James Jones and Trent Tucker then what does it matter? And if you are producing at that level, then your not "very very good" period.

You mean gets Korver to produce hypothetical stats like James Jones and Trent Tucker, since you are mainly going by per36.

ewing
10-03-2014, 03:28 PM
Thank you for the in depth analysis. I guess I'll just believe what you say because...well...you said it. Korver is nice in it.

PS. Most of James Jones advanced stats and per 36 numbers are better than Korvers last year. And trent tuckers advanced stats and per 36 numbers mirror Korver's for a career. Just food for thought.


you talking **** about Trent Tucker now? You don't know ****

ewing
10-03-2014, 03:29 PM
You mean gets Korver to produce hypothetical stats like James Jones and Trent Tucker, since you are mainly going by per36.


just like the hypothetical games he saw trent tucker play in

IKnowHoops
10-03-2014, 03:39 PM
just like the hypothetical games he saw trent tucker play in

And the hypothetical basketball camp I attended hosted by Trent Tucker.

IKnowHoops
10-03-2014, 03:43 PM
You mean gets Korver to produce hypothetical stats like James Jones and Trent Tucker, since you are mainly going by per36.

The stats between Tucker and Korver in any form aren't that different. Korver is a 10pts per game career scorer. Tucker is an 8pt per game scorer. Not that hypothetical bro

IKnowHoops
10-03-2014, 03:46 PM
you talking **** about Trent Tucker now? You don't know ****

Hahahaha, getting it from all sides. Some think Im disrespecting Korver, some think I'm disrespecting Tucker. They get the same mutual respect from me. Who do you think is better between the two?

DemarDerozan
10-03-2014, 03:46 PM
Yea Wall came with some aggression in his response to Waiters. And I wouldn't put Hughes in with Bron he was *** his cavs career.

I remember he was supposed to be a lot better when he came to Cleveland but turned out to be just average offensively. He did make all defense first team one year.

ewing
10-03-2014, 04:13 PM
Hahahaha, getting it from all sides. Some think Im disrespecting Korver, some think I'm disrespecting Tucker. They get the same mutual respect from me. Who do you think is better between the two?


Kover is bigger and more versatile plus his skill set is used more in today's game but i have a soft spot for Trent

dalton749
10-03-2014, 04:59 PM
http://instagram.com/p/tp9bx7KhvG/

lol derozans having none of it

xbrackattackx
10-03-2014, 05:24 PM
Curry/Thompson
Beal/Wall
Bledsoe/Dragic
Lawson/Affalo
Parker/Green
Kemba/Lance
Irving/Waiters
Westbrook/Jackson
Holiday/Gordon

Jamiecballer
10-03-2014, 05:29 PM
But if all that intelligence gets you to produce like James Jones and Trent Tucker then what does it matter? And if you are producing at that level, then your not "very very good" period.
Intelligence has zero correlation to production. Some of the most productive players in the sport play stupidly.

Intelligent play correlates much more closely with winning because it is inherently unselfish.

N3TS
10-03-2014, 06:06 PM
Curry and Thompson IMO.

N3TS
10-03-2014, 06:06 PM
Curry/Thompson
Beal/Wall
Bledsoe/Dragic
Lawson/Affalo
Parker/Green
Kemba/Lance
Irving/Waiters
Westbrook/Jackson
Holiday/Gordon

No Lowry/Derozan on your list?

IKnowHoops
10-03-2014, 07:46 PM
Intelligence has zero correlation to production. Some of the most productive players in the sport play stupidly.

Intelligent play correlates much more closely with winning because it is inherently unselfish.

I disagree. If Bird had the intelligence of micheal Beasley, he would not be nearly as productive. And if Beasely had the intelligence of Larry Bird, he'd be averaging 28pts a game with great efficiency.

You would have to agree you are wrong here.

Jamiecballer
10-03-2014, 08:00 PM
I disagree. If Bird had the intelligence of micheal Beasley, he would not be nearly as productive. And if Beasely had the intelligence of Larry Bird, he'd be averaging 28pts a game with great efficiency.

You would have to agree you are wrong here.
Are we talking about basic intelligence or basketball intelligence? Because if we are talking about basketball intelligence I would definitely disagree with you.

Here are a few guys who could certainly use an infusion of basketball IQ. Carmelo Anthony, Russell Westbrook, Allen Iverson. All 3 would probably "produce" less by playing smarter.

Chronz
10-03-2014, 08:06 PM
Cp3 n whoever

IKnowHoops
10-03-2014, 08:20 PM
Are we talking about basic intelligence or basketball intelligence? Because if we are talking about basketball intelligence I would definitely disagree with you.

Here are a few guys who could certainly use an infusion of basketball IQ. Carmelo Anthony, Russell Westbrook, Allen Iverson. All 3 would probably "produce" less by playing smarter.

Your kind of making my point with this. You said "intelligence has no correlation to production". Well if your saying there will be a drop in production here then it does correlate. Secondly intelligence can effect production in different ways. A guy like Beasley would produce more with Bird like intelligence. Guys that you mentioned may produce less, but who knows. I think efficiency increases with intelligence no matter what. Now a guy like Melo instead of taking hard shots, knows where to move, and pass to set up easier shots for himself and teammates. Its going to depend on how the play. But again, if it didn't correlate with production then you wouldn't be able to say others would have less production with higher intelligence. That statement right there proves it does correlate.

xbrackattackx
10-03-2014, 08:24 PM
No Lowry/Derozan on your list?

Knew I forgot someone, Heck yea they on my list fourth or Fifth!

FlashBolt
10-03-2014, 09:20 PM
Wall is too cocky for his own good. He couldn't lead his team to jack for God knows how long..

Jamiecballer
10-03-2014, 09:22 PM
[/B]
Your kind of making my point with this. You said "intelligence has no correlation to production". Well if your saying there will be a drop in production here then it does correlate. Secondly intelligence can effect production in different ways. A guy like Beasley would produce more with Bird like intelligence. Guys that you mentioned may produce less, but who knows. I think efficiency increases with intelligence no matter what. Now a guy like Melo instead of taking hard shots, knows where to move, and pass to set up easier shots for himself and teammates. Its going to depend on how the play. But again, if it didn't correlate with production then you wouldn't be able to say others would have less production with higher intelligence. That statement right there proves it does correlate.
Perhaps I would have been better to say that intelligence doesn't necessarily manifest itself in the form of higher levels of "production". It doesn't change my point and I'm pretty sure you understood it anyways. You suggested Korvers intelligent play had no more value than the stats that he accrues. I don't agree.

prodigy
10-03-2014, 09:50 PM
Pretty sure waiters will be making the playoffs this year. Also safe bet says wall will be sitting at home while waiters is still in the playoffs. Lol

IKnowHoops
10-03-2014, 11:06 PM
Perhaps I would have been better to say that intelligence doesn't necessarily manifest itself in the form of higher levels of "production". It doesn't change my point and I'm pretty sure you understood it anyways. You suggested Korvers intelligent play had no more value than the stats that he accrues. I don't agree.

No what I said is that with his intelligence his production is still meh. All the tools a player has factors into that players production. So having a high b-ball IQ is one of many factors that gives a player his production on the court.

Bragging about an IQ of a guy who produces meh. Is just like bragging about a guys hops who produces meh.
Or bragging about a guys jumper who produces meh, or bragging about a guys handle who produces meh, or bragging about a guys strength who produces meh.

Understand now?

To take it a step farther, Popovich has more basketball intelligence than any player, but what good would he do on the court? Nothing at all, because he would have no production!

Now you gotta understand this.

mrblisterdundee
10-04-2014, 12:31 AM
The Stephen Curry-Klay Thompson back court may perform better over the entire season, but Eric Bledsoe and Goran Dragic would have the advantage in the direct match-up. Bledsoe's about the perfect guy you want to have defending Curry, and at the same time would tear right past Curry on the offensive side. If not him, then Dragic, who's better offensively than Thompson and defensively better than Curry.

Jamiecballer
10-04-2014, 01:34 AM
No what I said is that with his intelligence his production is still meh. All the tools a player has factors into that players production. So having a high b-ball IQ is one of many factors that gives a player his production on the court.

Bragging about an IQ of a guy who produces meh. Is just like bragging about a guys hops who produces meh.
Or bragging about a guys jumper who produces meh, or bragging about a guys handle who produces meh, or bragging about a guys strength who produces meh.

Understand now?

To take it a step farther, Popovich has more basketball intelligence than any player, but what good would he do on the court? Nothing at all, because he would have no production!

Now you gotta understand this.
What you said - with his intelligence his production is still meh

What I said - basketball intelligence is added value that does not necessarily manifest itself clearly in box score stats.

Nope pretty sure we are understanding each other but just have a difference of opinion on this one.

Goose17
10-04-2014, 04:09 AM
Intelligence has zero correlation to production. Some of the most productive players in the sport play stupidly.

Intelligent play correlates much more closely with winning because it is inherently unselfish.

The most basic form of basketball I.Q would be taking smart shots and not forcing up bad ones. How would that not effect a players production?

Imagine Westbrooks eFG% or TS% if he wasn't just chucking every now and then. Or even better, imagine J.R Smiths eFG% if he would just accept his role instead of trying to play hero ball.

I mean that's the basics of basketball I.Q but surely guys who understand the game at a higher level tend to play smarter and therefore end up being more efficient? (Not just on offense but on defense also).

And do we place "court vision" into basketball I.Q? Because that definitely effects production. You think guys like Nash or Magic without that court vision would have been half as productive?



You're right that some of the most productive players played stupidly. That doesn't mean they would have been less productive if they hadn't though... does it? Surely you need to balance the skill level with the intelligence. I mean no matter how high Derek Fishers basketball I.Q was, he was never going to produce like Melo. But that's not due to the I.Q its due to a lack of talent to go with it.

SPURSFAN1
10-04-2014, 07:02 AM
Spurs have the best backcourt.

:cheers: parker patty green and manu rotation. WOW! Too much freaking awesome.

HeatFan
10-04-2014, 10:42 AM
:cheers: parker patty green and manu rotation. WOW! Too much freaking awesome.

At the least you can boast that they have four options that could be starters in most teams in this league. Not something many teams can pull off. If one is not hot, you can plug in the other and not lose much ability.

Jamiecballer
10-04-2014, 04:00 PM
The most basic form of basketball I.Q would be taking smart shots and not forcing up bad ones. How would that not effect a players production?

Imagine Westbrooks eFG% or TS% if he wasn't just chucking every now and then. Or even better, imagine J.R Smiths eFG% if he would just accept his role instead of trying to play hero ball.

I mean that's the basics of basketball I.Q but surely guys who understand the game at a higher level tend to play smarter and therefore end up being more efficient? (Not just on offense but on defense also).

And do we place "court vision" into basketball I.Q? Because that definitely effects production. You think guys like Nash or Magic without that court vision would have been half as productive?



You're right that some of the most productive players played stupidly. That doesn't mean they would have been less productive if they hadn't though... does it? Surely you need to balance the skill level with the intelligence. I mean no matter how high Derek Fishers basketball I.Q was, he was never going to produce like Melo. But that's not due to the I.Q its due to a lack of talent to go with it.
I agree with you in everything you are saying 100%. You should read the rest of the posts in this exchange for context.

IKnowHoops
10-04-2014, 04:14 PM
I agree with you in everything you are saying 100%. You should read the rest of the posts in this exchange for context.

Really, what he said doesn't sound like your quote of "intelligence has zero correlation with production". Unless your now saying you were 100% wrong with this statement.

smith&wesson
10-04-2014, 04:18 PM
best back courts

Curry & Thompson
Parker & Gino
Lowry & Derozan
Dragic & Bledsoe
Paul & Crawford
Wall & Beal
Walker & Stephenson
Lillard & Mathews
Beverly & Harden
Irving & Waiters
Lawson & Afflalo
Conley & Allen
Jackson & Westbrook (should be the back court for okc)
D.will & J.Johnson ?
Kobe & Nash ??

IKnowHoops
10-04-2014, 04:24 PM
best back courts

Curry & Thompson
Parker & Gino
Lowry & Derozan
Dragic & Bledsoe
Paul & Crawford
Walker & Stephenson
Lillard & Mathews
Beverly & Harden
Irving & Waiters
Lawson & Afflalo
Conley & Allen
Jackson & Westbrook (should be the back court for okc)
D.will & J.Johnson ?
Kobe & Nash ??


Forgot about Dwill and Joe. If Dwill could be what he was in his prime, Id say those two pretty easily. Dwill has just fallen off so much its crazy.

Jamiecballer
10-04-2014, 04:31 PM
Really, what he said doesn't sound like your quote of "intelligence has zero correlation with production". Unless your now saying you were 100% wrong with this statement.

perhaps i am reading too much into his post. in his first sentence he mentions that he believes one of the basic forms of basketball intelligence is taking smart shots and passing up bad ones. i agree. but just as we can imagine a situation where a player replaces the poor shot selection that is part of his game with the discipline to take better shots(where the net result would probably be a boost in production, although not necessarily), isn't it just as easy to imagine a smarter player passing up the shot attempt entirely in favor of hoping that someone (not necessarily himself) gets a better look later in the possession? this may not lead to more productivity in this narrow terms you seem to define it. but it sure has it's value.

the point is, there is zero direct correlation between basketball IQ and production because it can express itself in many forms. i will give you a very simple example. as a raptor fan i got the pleasure first hand of watching Jamario Moon hoist 3's on a regular basis despite him having little shooting ability. had he been smarter he would have stopped forcing the issue and taking ill-advised shots and done only what the team asked of him, which was defense. he would have been a better player.

Goose17
10-04-2014, 07:15 PM
perhaps i am reading too much into his post. in his first sentence he mentions that he believes one of the basic forms of basketball intelligence is taking smart shots and passing up bad ones. i agree. but just as we can imagine a situation where a player replaces the poor shot selection that is part of his game with the discipline to take better shots(where the net result would probably be a boost in production, although not necessarily), isn't it just as easy to imagine a smarter player passing up the shot attempt entirely in favor of hoping that someone (not necessarily himself) gets a better look later in the possession? this may not lead to more productivity in this narrow terms you seem to define it. but it sure has it's value.

the point is, there is zero direct correlation between basketball IQ and production because it can express itself in many forms. i will give you a very simple example. as a raptor fan i got the pleasure first hand of watching Jamario Moon hoist 3's on a regular basis despite him having little shooting ability. had he been smarter he would have stopped forcing the issue and taking ill-advised shots and done only what the team asked of him, which was defense. he would have been a better player.

I totally see what you're saying now. I should have read the other posts before responding. Knee jerk reaction. My bad.

IKnowHoops
10-04-2014, 07:17 PM
perhaps i am reading too much into his post. in his first sentence he mentions that he believes one of the basic forms of basketball intelligence is taking smart shots and passing up bad ones. i agree. but just as we can imagine a situation where a player replaces the poor shot selection that is part of his game with the discipline to take better shots(where the net result would probably be a boost in production, although not necessarily), isn't it just as easy to imagine a smarter player passing up the shot attempt entirely in favor of hoping that someone (not necessarily himself) gets a better look later in the possession? this may not lead to more productivity in this narrow terms you seem to define it. but it sure has it's value.

the point is, there is zero direct correlation between basketball IQ and production because it can express itself in many forms. i will give you a very simple example. as a raptor fan i got the pleasure first hand of watching Jamario Moon hoist 3's on a regular basis despite him having little shooting ability. had he been smarter he would have stopped forcing the issue and taking ill-advised shots and done only what the team asked of him, which was defense. he would have been a better player.

I don't think you could be any more wrong with this statement. There are so many NBA players who are good scorers in part because they know how to read defenses. They know when and where to roll to the basket. (Duncan) They know how draw defenders away to set up other players for open shots to accumulate assists. (Paul) They understand how to read shots and get correct position to accumulate rebounds.(Love) As Ive said before, Beasley is probably just as talented as these other guys, but is no where close to as productive simply because his basketball IQ is as low as it gets. Your just flat out wrong.

Shlumpledink
10-04-2014, 07:40 PM
Curry/Thompson are the best.

Thompson is the best defender out of those three, and probably of any shooting guard that isn't tony allen

Curry is the best shooter, with Thompson being the third best.

FriedTofuz
10-04-2014, 07:52 PM
curry and thompson. both of their players made team USA. Beal and wall both got Cut.
DErozan and Lowry needs to be added to the discussion. Both backcourt players scored 18+ PPG and had 4 AST each, no other backcourt in the nba has done that last season.

Jamiecballer
10-04-2014, 08:09 PM
I don't think you could be any more wrong with this statement. There are so many NBA players who are good scorers in part because they know how to read defenses. They know when and where to roll to the basket. (Duncan) They know how draw defenders away to set up other players for open shots to accumulate assists. (Paul) They understand how to read shots and get correct position to accumulate rebounds.(Love) As Ive said before, Beasley is probably just as talented as these other guys, but is no where close to as productive simply because his basketball IQ is as low as it gets. Your just flat out wrong.
If I'm wrong its because you keep moving the goal posts on me.

It was you that defined Kyle Korvers "production" as the sum total of his counting stats. All i said was that simply playing smarter does not guarantee an increase in counting stats and provided several examples to back up my opinion. Deferring or sacrificing to superior players is one expression of basketball intelligence that is highly coveted by coaches and rarely benefits the individuals personal statistics.

Higher basketball intelligence undoubtedly makes one a better basketball player but those weren't the terms you chose to debate.

j-bay
10-04-2014, 08:18 PM
best back courts

Curry & Thompson
Parker & Gino
Lowry & Derozan
Dragic & Bledsoe
Paul & Crawford
Walker & Stephenson
Lillard & Mathews
Beverly & Harden
Irving & Waiters
Lawson & Afflalo
Conley & Allen
Jackson & Westbrook (should be the back court for okc)
D.will & J.Johnson ?
Kobe & Nash ??

No Wall or Beal?! WTF!?

j-bay
10-04-2014, 08:21 PM
By the way isn't Derozan a SF?

SPURSFAN1
10-04-2014, 08:33 PM
Jalen Rose just said Tony and Manu are the best backcourt in the NBA. He didn't even mention patty or green who are monsters in their own rights.

smith&wesson
10-04-2014, 09:02 PM
No Wall or Beal?! WTF!?

fixed!

smith&wesson
10-04-2014, 09:04 PM
By the way isn't Derozan a SF?

he has been starting at sg since his rookie season. sure he plays some 3 but he is naturally a 2gaurd.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/demar_derozan/

SPURSFAN1
10-04-2014, 09:25 PM
Curry/Thompson are the best.

Thompson is the best defender out of those three, and probably of any shooting guard that isn't tony allen

Curry is the best shooter, with Thompson being the third best.

Thompson is not a better defender than green or a 3point shooter.

IKnowHoops
10-04-2014, 09:31 PM
If I'm wrong its because you keep moving the goal posts on me.

It was you that defined Kyle Korvers "production" as the sum total of his counting stats. All i said was that simply playing smarter does not guarantee an increase in counting stats and provided several examples to back up my opinion. Deferring or sacrificing to superior players is one expression of basketball intelligence that is highly coveted by coaches and rarely benefits the individuals personal statistics.

Higher basketball intelligence undoubtedly makes one a better basketball player but those weren't the terms you chose to debate.

Your the one that chose to use, and re-use the phrase "there is no correlation between IQ and production". Thats where your wrong and it has nothing to do with "me" moving the goal posts.

marjon
10-04-2014, 11:24 PM
No Kemba & Lance?? Wt the hell is u people smoking????

Jamiecballer
10-04-2014, 11:34 PM
Your the one that chose to use, and re-use the phrase "there is no correlation between IQ and production". Thats where your wrong and it has nothing to do with "me" moving the goal posts.
You don't get it. Goose does but that's probably because he actually takes the trouble to read.

IKnowHoops
10-05-2014, 12:42 AM
You don't get it. Goose does but that's probably because he actually takes the trouble to read.

Trust me I get it, but Im not going to let you get away with being 50% right, and 50% nonsense, and spout off like its 100% gospel. You have to be able to admit where your wrong at, and if not, I'll let you know.

IKnowHoops
10-05-2014, 12:49 AM
You don't get it. Goose does but that's probably because he actually takes the trouble to read.

I agree that basketball IQ reaches farther than the stat sheet, but its absolutely ridiculous to think there is no correlation between basketball IQ and the stats you put up. Basketball IQ has a huge impact on your statistics and your production.

Jamiecballer
10-05-2014, 12:53 AM
Conversation is over dude. You have demonstrated that you haven't read a word beyond the one line you keep quoting. Let it go.

IKnowHoops
10-05-2014, 12:59 AM
Conversation is over dude. You have demonstrated that you haven't read a word beyond the one line you keep quoting. Let it go.

And you have demonstrated that even when you know your wrong you can't admit it. Happy to walk away from this.

Jamiecballer
10-05-2014, 09:52 AM
What am I to admit? I've acknowledged that basketball intelligence often leads to better production (particularly when applied to young players moving along the growth/maturity curve).

I am also certain that there are a class of players (Korver and Amir Johnson immediately come to mind) that stick to the one or two things that they do very very well and play their roles to perfection. They are important players and will never have a hard time finding a place to play despite their very ordinary counting stats.

The problem I have with this conversation is you started out ragging on Korver because he wasn't very productive in the very narrow terms you defined it.

By pointing to his numbers as evidence that despite being a smart player he still wasn't very good the implication was clear - that his intelligence was baked into the final result (the stats). I don't agree. Guys like Derek Fisher do not carve out careers that last well over a decade because their numbers impress anyone.

Derek Fisher could have been a more productive player if he'd looked out more for himself. His career also IMO would have been shorter.

I am sure now that you will resume bringing up examples of players who are complete boneheads (Beasley anyone?) who would have been better players if they were smarter. I never said that was not case.

HeatFan
10-06-2014, 06:46 PM
I haven't really seen much of Waiters. Is he top 10 even in his own position?

flea
10-06-2014, 08:04 PM
I haven't really seen much of Waiters. Is he top 10 even in his own position?

No, and it's the weakest position in the NBA.

JLeBeau76
10-06-2014, 08:22 PM
I haven't really seen much of Waiters. Is he top 10 even in his own position?

Wherever you rank Beal put Waiters right there as there isn't much difference on the court between the two atm.

SoCal Bob
10-06-2014, 08:58 PM
I haven't really seen much of Waiters. Is he top 10 even in his own position?

Post all-star break Dion is definitely a top 10 shooting guard. I consider Waiters a better shooting guard than Bradley Beal and not far behind DeRozan. He's a guy who can put up 20 a game nightly.

After All-Star break: 19.2 PPG on 45.2% from the field, 37.7% from 3, and 74.1% from the line in 33.0 MPG.

IKnowHoops
10-06-2014, 09:38 PM
Post all-star break Dion is definitely a top 10 shooting guard. I consider Waiters a better shooting guard than Bradley Beal and not far behind DeRozan. He's guy who can put up 20 a game nightly.

After All-Star break: 19.2 PPG on 45.2% from the field, 37.7% from 3, and 74.1% from the line in 33.0 MPG.

Agreed

prodigy
10-06-2014, 11:08 PM
I haven't really seen much of Waiters. Is he top 10 even in his own position?

Post all-star break Dion is definitely a top 10 shooting guard. I consider Waiters a better shooting guard than Bradley Beal and not far behind DeRozan. He's a guy who can put up 20 a game nightly.

After All-Star break: 19.2 PPG on 45.2% from the field, 37.7% from 3, and 74.1% from the line in 33.0 MPG.

I been trying to find those numbers good stuff. I think people just hear about him acting out alittle and figure he's no good. That's OK I don't expect many people have watched cavs games over the last few years. Guy is very talented. I think he's going to have a very good year because every team will game plan for Irving, lebron and love.

IKnowHoops
10-06-2014, 11:13 PM
Irving+Waiters 1
Wall+Beal 0

FlashBolt
10-06-2014, 11:32 PM
This is so stupid. The Cavs would be a lost cause for any player outside the name KD, CP3, and LeBron. The team just sucked because of management.

JLeBeau76
10-07-2014, 01:24 AM
This is so stupid. The Cavs would be a lost cause for any player outside the name KD, CP3, and LeBron. The team just sucked because of management.

More because of mismanagement. Lol.

That being said, they did set themselves up nice as far as assets go. Getting Riley to cave on two firsts and two seconds for a departing LeBron when all they were originally was offering was one second.

Spending the money on Baron Davis for the first round pick that became Irving as well as aquiring other first round picks through good trading and the willingness of the owner to spend money.

Even the picks of Irving, Bennett, Waiters and Thompson are going to (have) pay dividends in their own way.

While the Cavs never did manage to pull it all together while James was gone, they were able to present a nice incentive to get him back and have put together (with James's help of course) a championship caliber team.

flea
10-07-2014, 01:39 AM
Post all-star break Dion is definitely a top 10 shooting guard. I consider Waiters a better shooting guard than Bradley Beal and not far behind DeRozan. He's a guy who can put up 20 a game nightly.

After All-Star break: 19.2 PPG on 45.2% from the field, 37.7% from 3, and 74.1% from the line in 33.0 MPG.

Harden, Wade, DeRozan, Dragic, Thompson, Ginobili, Green, Stephenson, Matthews, Martin, Johnson, Reddick, Ellis, and Korver are unquestionably better. Anyone that takes Waiters over any of them for 2014-15 is a ridiculous homer.

Waiters is around guys like Beal, Oladipo, Bradley, Gordon, Evans, T. Allen, Lee, Crawford, Butler, Smith, and Knight. He has more upside than some of those, but isn't as good as most. So maybe if you're very generous he's the 15th best in the league. For me he's somewhere between 22-28, there are plenty of bench players as good as he is.

IKnowHoops
10-07-2014, 02:06 AM
Harden, Wade, DeRozan, Dragic, Thompson, Ginobili, Green, Stephenson, Matthews, Martin, Johnson, Reddick, Ellis, and Korver are unquestionably better. Anyone that takes Waiters over any of them for 2014-15 is a ridiculous homer.

Waiters is around guys like Beal, Oladipo, Bradley, Gordon, Evans, T. Allen, Lee, Crawford, Butler, Smith, and Knight. He has more upside than some of those, but isn't as good as most. So maybe if you're very generous he's the 15th best in the league. For me he's somewhere between 22-28, there are plenty of bench players as good as he is.

Green, Mathews, Martin, Reddick and Korver? Like its Gospel? "Reaching kid, through time and space"

I'll bet you waiters has a better year than half those guys you put in the first tier. Won't be surprised at all if he's better than most of them.

HeatFan
10-07-2014, 09:26 AM
Green, Mathews, Martin, Reddick and Korver? Like its Gospel? "Reaching kid, through time and space"

I'll bet you waiters has a better year than half those guys you put in the first tier. Won't be surprised at all if he's better than most of them.

Some of the names there are probably a stretch to be considered better than Waiters. I mean, has Korver even started much in the pros?

prodigy
10-07-2014, 09:35 AM
Harden, Wade, DeRozan, Dragic, Thompson, Ginobili, Green, Stephenson, Matthews, Martin, Johnson, Reddick, Ellis, and Korver are unquestionably better. Anyone that takes Waiters over any of them for 2014-15 is a ridiculous homer.

Waiters is around guys like Beal, Oladipo, Bradley, Gordon, Evans, T. Allen, Lee, Crawford, Butler, Smith, and Knight. He has more upside than some of those, but isn't as good as most. So maybe if you're very generous he's the 15th best in the league. For me he's somewhere between 22-28, there are plenty of bench players as good as he is.

Green, Mathews, Martin, Reddick and Korver? Like its Gospel? "Reaching kid, through time and space"

I'll bet you waiters has a better year than half those guys you put in the first tier. Won't be surprised at all if he's better than most of them.

Agreed. I also thought dragic was a pg? Everyone in the other thread listed him as one. Plus a lot of those guys are just 3pt shooters.

Goose17
10-07-2014, 10:38 AM
Agreed. I also thought dragic was a pg? Everyone in the other thread listed him as one. Plus a lot of those guys are just 3pt shooters.

literally not one of the players in that first tier he made are "just" 3 point shooters.

JLeBeau76
10-07-2014, 12:44 PM
literally not one of the players in that first tier he made are "just" 3 point shooters.

Come on now. Korver and Green both are basically told to spot up outside the three point line and wait for a pass. They are really considered "one trick ponies " and that's ok because they both are really good at that one trick.

flea
10-07-2014, 01:00 PM
Come on now. Korver and Green both are basically told to spot up outside the three point line and wait for a pass. They are really considered "one trick ponies " and that's ok because they both are really good at that one trick.

Incredibly wrong about both.

Jamiecballer
10-07-2014, 01:05 PM
literally not one of the players in that first tier he made are "just" 3 point shooters.

forget it man. some of these people don't put any value on smart fundamental basketball. none.

JLeBeau76
10-07-2014, 01:53 PM
http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/2201974-ranking-the-top-10-shooting-guards-in-the-nba-heading-into-2014-15

.......

Dion number 10.

http://www.nba.com/magic/gallery/cohen-8ball-projecting-best-nba-shooting-guards-2014-15

..........

Dion number 10

http://www.fearthesword.com/2014/8/19/6045327/espn-projects-dion-waiters-as-a-top-5-shooting-guard

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

ESPN has Dion #5


...........

Not knocking anyone who thinks Dion is garbage, I respect your opinion, but just putting out there that it's not just homers who thinks he's pretty good or going to be.

DanRumors
10-07-2014, 01:57 PM
This whole situation is somewhat irrelevant. The only reason a "backcourt" is a thing is because people decided to group the two smaller players that start together. We could make up a new term called "middlecourt" and it would refer to players who played the 2-3-4. Or the "oddcourt" - point guard, small forward, center.

HeatFan
10-07-2014, 02:41 PM
This whole situation is somewhat irrelevant. The only reason a "backcourt" is a thing is because people decided to group the two smaller players that start together. We could make up a new term called "middlecourt" and it would refer to players who played the 2-3-4. Or the "oddcourt" - point guard, small forward, center.

Wow you really took it to another level!!

Goose17
10-07-2014, 03:35 PM
Come on now. Korver and Green both are basically told to spot up outside the three point line and wait for a pass. They are really considered "one trick ponies " and that's ok because they both are really good at that one trick.

:pity:

Jamiecballer
10-07-2014, 04:55 PM
This whole situation is somewhat irrelevant. The only reason a "backcourt" is a thing is because people decided to group the two smaller players that start together. We could make up a new term called "middlecourt" and it would refer to players who played the 2-3-4. Or the "oddcourt" - point guard, small forward, center.
My oddcourt rankings will be up shortly

prodigy
10-07-2014, 05:01 PM
Agreed. I also thought dragic was a pg? Everyone in the other thread listed him as one. Plus a lot of those guys are just 3pt shooters.

literally not one of the players in that first tier he made are "just" 3 point shooters.

Like the other guy said krover and green def are. Reddick is to me also. He attempted 398 shots last season 185 were 3's. Half of Matthews shots were 3's also.

prodigy
10-07-2014, 05:06 PM
BTW all those guys are very good 3pt shooters and are told to spot up and hit open looks. By no means am I bashing or degrading that skill set.

Goose17
10-07-2014, 05:25 PM
Like the other guy said krover and green def are. Reddick is to me also. He attempted 398 shots last season 185 were 3's. Half of Matthews shots were 3's also.

You can't be serious. First of all they all do more on offense. Even if they specialise in threes. Secondly there's two sides to the game.

And let's not even get into how Korver works the pick.

All these guys do more than just stand around waiting to shoot a 3.

prodigy
10-07-2014, 05:46 PM
Like the other guy said krover and green def are. Reddick is to me also. He attempted 398 shots last season 185 were 3's. Half of Matthews shots were 3's also.


All these guys do more than just stand around waiting to shoot a 3.

On offense not really...

SPURSFAN1
10-07-2014, 06:27 PM
Come on now. Korver and Green both are basically told to spot up outside the three point line and wait for a pass. They are really considered "one trick ponies " and that's ok because they both are really good at that one trick.

Green plays great defense, but I wouldn't expect you to know that.

IKnowHoops
10-07-2014, 09:04 PM
You can't be serious. First of all they all do more on offense. Even if they specialise in threes. Secondly there's two sides to the game.

And let's not even get into how Korver works the pick.

All these guys do more than just stand around waiting to shoot a 3.

LOL. Does Korver have an afro?

You know your game is lacking when the second best thing you do is set picks.

Jamiecballer
10-07-2014, 09:09 PM
LOL. Does Korver have an afro?

You know your game is lacking when the second best thing you do is set picks.
And your appreciation or understanding of the fundamentals.

NBA Jam, am I rite??

IKnowHoops
10-07-2014, 09:14 PM
And your appreciation or understanding of the fundamentals.

NBA Jam, am I rite??

I wonder why Bird, Magic, Kareem, West, Jordan, Dream, etc, etc, never got props for there "pick" game. Oh I know they were playing NBA jam with me. Your so right!!!!:violin:

JLeBeau76
10-07-2014, 09:37 PM
And your appreciation or understanding of the fundamentals.

NBA Jam, am I rite??

don't take this wrong, just crossed my mind and thought it was funny, but every time you say fundamentals I picture Iversons practice speech.

"Fundamentals. Fundamentals. You talking about fundamentals"

Lol.

And i grew up with NBA Jam, the old school one, fun game!

FriedTofuz
10-07-2014, 11:40 PM
You guys should recall that Curry is the only one who's made the ALL NBA team, and the only player who consistently gets his team to the playoffs and GS is the best team out of the two others.
Ya'll are overhyped over Irving's flashy scoring but ability to defend and pass. Get over it. Curry and Thompson easily. no questions.

/end thread

prodigy
10-07-2014, 11:44 PM
You guys should recall that Curry is the only one who's made the ALL NBA team, and the only player who consistently gets his team to the playoffs and GS is the best team out of the two others.
Ya'll are overhyped over Irving's flashy scoring but ability to defend and pass. Get over it. Curry and Thompson easily. no questions.

/end thread

Classic case of someone who can't read. I think most people in here have curry and Thompson as the best backcourt.

FriedTofuz
10-08-2014, 12:39 AM
Classic case of someone who can't read. I think most people in here have curry and Thompson as the best backcourt.

Classic case of someone making assumptions. There have been many people in this thread saying how beal/wall or waiters/ Irving were better, when clearly they werent.

Goose17
10-08-2014, 02:03 AM
LOL. Does Korver have an afro?

You know your game is lacking when the second best thing you do is set picks.

You claim to know hoops and yet I've never seen one post from you that confirms this.

Let me guess unless he's dropping 30 or posterizing someone he's not impressing you right? Smh.

I'm done arguing with casual fans who clearly have no respect for players that do the small things right and play good solid fundamental basketball.

This really is the era of instant replays. Flashy showmanship and highlights, if you don't have that you're nothing apparently.

FriedTofuz
10-08-2014, 02:06 AM
You claim to know hoops and yet I've never seen one post from you that confirms this.

Let me guess unless he's dropping 30 or posterizing someone he's not impressing you right? Smh.

I'm done arguing with casual fans who clearly have no respect for players that do the small things right and play good solid fundamental basketball.

This really is the era of instant replays. Flashy showmanship and highlights, if you don't have that you're nothing apparently.

Well said, Goose!

JLeBeau76
10-08-2014, 03:18 AM
You claim to know hoops and yet I've never seen one post from you that confirms this.

Let me guess unless he's dropping 30 or posterizing someone he's not impressing you right? Smh.

I'm done arguing with casual fans who clearly have no respect for players that do the small things right and play good solid fundamental basketball.

This really is the era of instant replays. Flashy showmanship and highlights, if you don't have that you're nothing apparently.

You, and those who make reference to fundamentals, are not wrong in pointing them out as a vital part of players like Korvers game.

Much of what they do is immeasurable when it comes to stat lines but they contribute to wins almost as much as putting the ball in the hoop themselves.

I guess, for me anyway, when I rank Waiters ahead of the Greens and Korvers, Im looking at potential as well as current levels.

offensively, Waiters has shown that he can be above average. While his shot selection wasn't great and he has an annoying tendency to jump back instead of up on his jumpers, he showed big improvements as the year progressed.

His athleticism and strength gives him the tools available to be a good defender, its just a matter of applying them.

Anyway, for a guy with only a couple years under his belt, I think hes doing pretty good. I also think he deserves to be in the top 10sg conversation also.

He does need to improve his overall basketball IQ and I think that he will.

IKnowHoops
10-08-2014, 04:22 AM
Classic case of someone making assumptions. There have been many people in this thread saying how beal/wall or waiters/ Irving were better, when clearly they werent.

Who, please find it, I have not seen this.

Shareeb_omac2
10-08-2014, 04:23 AM
Wall & Beal

IKnowHoops
10-08-2014, 04:27 AM
You claim to know hoops and yet I've never seen one post from you that confirms this.

Let me guess unless he's dropping 30 or posterizing someone he's not impressing you right? Smh.

I'm done arguing with casual fans who clearly have no respect for players that do the small things right and play good solid fundamental basketball.

This really is the era of instant replays. Flashy showmanship and highlights, if you don't have that you're nothing apparently.

Ive seen plenty of Kyle Korver and I just think he is a liability in almost every aspect of the game except for 3pt shooting. If he was not a lights out 3pt shooter, he'd have no place on an NBA team. If he doesn't set perfect pics, or always pass when he's not open, he'd get cut. And the reason he passes when he isn't open, is because he cannot take anyone off the dribble. All the showmanship highlight stuff...common dude, no one is saying that. But Korver is a one trick Pony if there has ever been one. Without his 3, he's not in the NBA.

IKnowHoops
10-08-2014, 04:39 AM
The Iknowhoops name was just a quick generic name to get signed up man. I expect that 95% of the people on here know hoops. I didn't take the time to think of a name that meant something. I just wanted to get on and talk sports. Never did I think so many people would be so offended by it. Im not bragging with this name, its the Kmart of screen names people.

prodigy
10-08-2014, 08:14 AM
Classic case of someone who can't read. I think most people in here have curry and Thompson as the best backcourt.

Classic case of someone making assumptions. There have been many people in this thread saying how beal/wall or waiters/ Irving were better, when clearly they werent.

Lol the argument right now is about beal and waiters. 95+% people in here went with curry/Thompson already. But warriors won't make it anywhere so it don't matter.

prodigy
10-08-2014, 08:16 AM
LOL. Does Korver have an afro?

You know your game is lacking when the second best thing you do is set picks.

You claim to know hoops and yet I've never seen one post from you that confirms this.

Let me guess unless he's dropping 30 or posterizing someone he's not impressing you right? Smh.

I'm done arguing with casual fans who clearly have no respect for players that do the small things right and play good solid fundamental basketball.

This really is the era of instant replays. Flashy showmanship and highlights, if you don't have that you're nothing apparently.

If u are starting a team right now and you took korver over waiters your a moron sorry. Plain and simple. Every gm would agree.

Goose17
10-08-2014, 10:56 AM
You, and those who make reference to fundamentals, are not wrong in pointing them out as a vital part of players like Korvers game.

Much of what they do is immeasurable when it comes to stat lines but they contribute to wins almost as much as putting the ball in the hoop themselves.

I guess, for me anyway, when I rank Waiters ahead of the Greens and Korvers, Im looking at potential as well as current levels.

offensively, Waiters has shown that he can be above average. While his shot selection wasn't great and he has an annoying tendency to jump back instead of up on his jumpers, he showed big improvements as the year progressed.

His athleticism and strength gives him the tools available to be a good defender, its just a matter of applying them.

Anyway, for a guy with only a couple years under his belt, I think hes doing pretty good. I also think he deserves to be in the top 10sg conversation also.

He does need to improve his overall basketball IQ and I think that he will.

We'll have to agree to disagree on Waiters, I respect your opinion though.



If u are starting a team right now and you took korver over waiters your a moron sorry. Plain and simple. Every gm would agree.

Did you take a census or something?

flea
10-08-2014, 12:19 PM
If u are starting a team right now and you took korver over waiters your a moron sorry. Plain and simple. Every gm would agree.

If it's just for next season or the next 2, every GM takes Korver. Better on both sides of the floor and doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective (though he can).

TrueFan420
10-08-2014, 03:44 PM
You, and those who make reference to fundamentals, are not wrong in pointing them out as a vital part of players like Korvers game.

Much of what they do is immeasurable when it comes to stat lines but they contribute to wins almost as much as putting the ball in the hoop themselves.

I guess, for me anyway, when I rank Waiters ahead of the Greens and Korvers, Im looking at potential as well as current levels.

offensively, Waiters has shown that he can be above average. While his shot selection wasn't great and he has an annoying tendency to jump back instead of up on his jumpers, he showed big improvements as the year progressed.

His athleticism and strength gives him the tools available to be a good defender, its just a matter of applying them.

Anyway, for a guy with only a couple years under his belt, I think hes doing pretty good. I also think he deserves to be in the top 10sg conversation also.

He does need to improve his overall basketball IQ and I think that he will.

See the problem with giving him points for potential when grading him is he hasn't earned them yet.

I got into a big agrument with a lot of warrior fans who would have rather sent Klay out in a deal for Dwight/love instead of Barnes based on barnes potential. neither have shown they can do what their potential says they might be able to. Only reason everyone's talking about waiters and ESPN is giving him positive coverage now is cause Lebron is on the team. Last year they were not talking about him in a great light and nothing has changed other than who he plays with.

He still hasn't shown good shot selection, or that he can play defense, or distribute which as a combo guard he should be able to handle a little of and most of all can he be consistent. Yes he's young we know but until then he's not better. He's not top 10 based on last year.

Let me put it like this. He might have a higher ceiling korver did but if you switched the two players korver gets them closer to a championship.

TrueFan420
10-08-2014, 03:48 PM
If u are starting a team right now and you took korver over waiters your a moron sorry. Plain and simple. Every gm would agree.

Any team with an eye for winning the championship in the next couple years would go with korver. Any team looking to win down the road would probably gamble on waiters.

prodigy
10-08-2014, 04:20 PM
If u are starting a team right now and you took korver over waiters your a moron sorry. Plain and simple. Every gm would agree.

If it's just for next season or the next 2, every GM takes Korver. Better on both sides of the floor and doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective (though he can).

No way Jose lol. They would take a guy who is going into his 12 season with a career avg of 9 points a game over a 23 year old who puts up 15 a game in 4 more minutes? Also about the same fg %. Maybe if u have a young stud at SG already then maybe a gm would take korver to hit 3's off the bench. But if your building a team no way you take korver and you know that.

prodigy
10-08-2014, 04:24 PM
If u are starting a team right now and you took korver over waiters your a moron sorry. Plain and simple. Every gm would agree.

Any team with an eye for winning the championship in the next couple years would go with korver. Any team looking to win down the road would probably gamble on waiters.

What's the gamble? At worse he puts up 16 a game. I doubt you seen waiters play much. But now I'm sure you will be watching a lot of cavs games. So toon in and watch him.

HeatFan
10-08-2014, 05:03 PM
See the problem with giving him points for potential when grading him is he hasn't earned them yet.

I got into a big agrument with a lot of warrior fans who would have rather sent Klay out in a deal for Dwight/love instead of Barnes based on barnes potential. neither have shown they can do what their potential says they might be able to. Only reason everyone's talking about waiters and ESPN is giving him positive coverage now is cause Lebron is on the team. Last year they were not talking about him in a great light and nothing has changed other than who he plays with.

He still hasn't shown good shot selection, or that he can play defense, or distribute which as a combo guard he should be able to handle a little of and most of all can he be consistent. Yes he's young we know but until then he's not better. He's not top 10 based on last year.

Let me put it like this. He might have a higher ceiling korver did but if you switched the two players korver gets them closer to a championship.

I think that it depends on your team's needs. If you need someone who can create and play athletic I'd go with Waiters (with the limited play I've seen from him) and if you don't need someone who can create and run up and down the floor like a lunatic, then maybe Korver makes sense.

Also, one stat to throw out there, Korver has 738 games and started only 170 while Waiters has 70 games and has started 24. Proportionately Korver has started 23% of games while Waiters 35%. Korver has been with 4 teams who didn't see so much value with him as this thread does, although at least you know what you get at this point in his career. Waiters is more of a question mark.

Jamiecballer
10-08-2014, 05:21 PM
don't take this wrong, just crossed my mind and thought it was funny, but every time you say fundamentals I picture Iversons practice speech.

"Fundamentals. Fundamentals. You talking about fundamentals"

Lol.

And i grew up with NBA Jam, the old school one, fun game!
No offense taken :)

Jamiecballer
10-08-2014, 05:24 PM
I wonder why Bird, Magic, Kareem, West, Jordan, Dream, etc, etc, never got props for there "pick" game. Oh I know they were playing NBA jam with me. Your so right!!!!:violin:
Every single one of those players were outstanding at the fundamentals of the game. Every one. Which leads me to believe that you had no actual point.

Jamiecballer
10-08-2014, 05:28 PM
You, and those who make reference to fundamentals, are not wrong in pointing them out as a vital part of players like Korvers game.

Much of what they do is immeasurable when it comes to stat lines but they contribute to wins almost as much as putting the ball in the hoop themselves.

I guess, for me anyway, when I rank Waiters ahead of the Greens and Korvers, Im looking at potential as well as current levels.

offensively, Waiters has shown that he can be above average. While his shot selection wasn't great and he has an annoying tendency to jump back instead of up on his jumpers, he showed big improvements as the year progressed.

His athleticism and strength gives him the tools available to be a good defender, its just a matter of applying them.

Anyway, for a guy with only a couple years under his belt, I think hes doing pretty good. I also think he deserves to be in the top 10sg conversation also.

He does need to improve his overall basketball IQ and I think that he will.
Great post. If you are ranking based on physical potential then its hard to argue against that. Very well said.

Jamiecballer
10-08-2014, 05:32 PM
Ive seen plenty of Kyle Korver and I just think he is a liability in almost every aspect of the game except for 3pt shooting. If he was not a lights out 3pt shooter, he'd have no place on an NBA team. If he doesn't set perfect pics, or always pass when he's not open, he'd get cut. And the reason he passes when he isn't open, is because he cannot take anyone off the dribble. All the showmanship highlight stuff...common dude, no one is saying that. But Korver is a one trick Pony if there has ever been one. Without his 3, he's not in the NBA.
So if he didn't have his strengths, he'd be a poor player. Take away elite athleticism and half the guards in today's game wouldn't be either.

Jamiecballer
10-08-2014, 05:34 PM
If u are starting a team right now and you took korver over waiters your a moron sorry. Plain and simple. Every gm would agree.
I don't think there is any chance you're right about that one.

SoCal Bob
10-08-2014, 06:17 PM
If it's just for next season or the next 2, every GM takes Korver. Better on both sides of the floor and doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective (though he can).

Every GM would not take Kyle Korver. :laugh2: You also have to factor in the teams that are rebuilding and the organizations that are right in the middle. Rebuilding and middle of the pack teams are definitely not taking a soon to be 34 year old one trick pony over a talented 22 year old who can give you 20-25 points on any given night. Being that there are more teams in this league that aren't contenders ready to win it all. I would say the majority of the GM's would take Waiters over Korver.

flea
10-08-2014, 06:28 PM
Every GM would not take Kyle Korver. :laugh2: You also have to factor in the teams that are rebuilding and the organizations that are right in the middle. Rebuilding and middle of the pack teams are definitely not taking a soon to be 34 year old one trick pony over a talented 22 year old who can give you 20-25 points on any given night. Being that there are more teams in this league that aren't contenders ready to win it all. I would say the majority of the GM's would take Waiters over Korver.

He provides similar production as a mid 30s Ray Allen and might be the better defender. I think most GMs take Heat era Allen/last couple Celtics seasons Allen over Waiters. Waiters ends up like Jamal Crawford in a best case scenario - miscast as a starter for years before finally accepting a bench role.

Korver can probably start in this league another 5 years with his skillset, and transition to a great bench piece like Ray after that. Waiters doesn't have the length defensively for some 2s, and will be borderline unplayable when he loses quickness.

SPURSFAN1
10-08-2014, 07:04 PM
Waiters is trash. He could shoot all day, because the team was trash. His defense is trash too. He would be a 4rd string type of player behind marco on the spurs. Same for any contenting team. Playing in the east helps though.

SoCal Bob
10-08-2014, 07:59 PM
Waiters is trash. He could shoot all day, because the team was trash. His defense is trash too. He would be a 4rd string type of player behind marco on the spurs. Same for any contenting team. Playing in the east helps though.

The irony of your post is that Dion wasn't really playing well until after the all-star break when the Cavs started to turn their season around and were winning enough games to be in the playoff hunt till the end of the season. So your theory that he only puts up good numbers because the team was bad is false. Dion is a big reason why Cleveland went on a run and won 9 straight games against some playoff teams last season. He's also better than any shooting guard on that Spurs roster and would be the 3rd best scoring option in front of Kawhi leonard.

IKnowHoops
10-08-2014, 09:10 PM
If it's just for next season or the next 2, every GM takes Korver. Better on both sides of the floor and doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective (though he can).

No Korver is not effective with the ball in his hands. He's super slow, can't dribble. And waiters doesn't need the ball either. He shot 47% from 3pt range in April of last season.

IKnowHoops
10-08-2014, 09:14 PM
I think that it depends on your team's needs. If you need someone who can create and play athletic I'd go with Waiters (with the limited play I've seen from him) and if you don't need someone who can create and run up and down the floor like a lunatic, then maybe Korver makes sense.

Also, one stat to throw out there, Korver has 738 games and started only 170 while Waiters has 70 games and has started 24. Proportionately Korver has started 23% of games while Waiters 35%. Korver has been with 4 teams who didn't see so much value with him as this thread does, although at least you know what you get at this point in his career. Waiters is more of a question mark.

:clap:

IKnowHoops
10-08-2014, 09:16 PM
Every single one of those players were outstanding at the fundamentals of the game. Every one. Which leads me to believe that you had no actual point.

The point is no one pointed out there pick stats because thats only a stat you point out on terrible players as that could only be the strongest part of a terrible players game.

IKnowHoops
10-08-2014, 09:19 PM
So if he didn't have his strengths, he'd be a poor player. Take away elite athleticism and half the guards in today's game wouldn't be either.

A 3pt shot is only one aspect of many. Elite athletic ability powers multiple aspects of the game. A 3pt shot can be learned, where as Elite athletic ability is God given. There is a huge difference.

Jamiecballer
10-08-2014, 09:21 PM
No Korver is not effective with the ball in his hands. He's super slow, can't dribble. And waiters doesn't need the ball either. He shot 47% from 3pt range in April of last season.
Hard to shoot without the ball in your hands. Real hard.

Jamiecballer
10-08-2014, 09:23 PM
The point is no one pointed out there pick stats because thats only a stat you point out on terrible players as that could only be the strongest part of a terrible players game.
Just because it's a nuance doesn't mean it's not highly valuable.

IKnowHoops
10-08-2014, 09:24 PM
Obviously no one is going to agree so, does anyone want to put there money where there mouth is and bet something. I have never bet anything, but I am a man of my word and will honor any bet. I will bet that Waiters out performs Korver next season. Anyone want to step up?

flea
10-08-2014, 09:27 PM
No Korver is not effective with the ball in his hands. He's super slow, can't dribble. And waiters doesn't need the ball either. He shot 47% from 3pt range in April of last season.

He's a very good passer and, as a result, runs pick and rolls some. His driving game isn't great because he's not a finisher but he's a good enough passer to where it doesn't matter. He's fairly crafty for a wing with the dribble but he won't shoot much off it (again, he's a smart player who knows his strengths and not a chucker like Waiters).

mjt20mik
10-08-2014, 09:55 PM
Clearly it is Curry and Thompson, with DeRozan and Lowry being second. Wall and Beal will be there this year, but Waiters and Irving... really lol