PDA

View Full Version : Who Is More Talented? Klay Thompson vs Kevin Love



Shammyguy3
04-15-2015, 09:09 PM
This is generally a "Comparisons" thread, but I'd like it to stay in this main NBA forum if possible because i'm interested in hearing more thoughts on this. I've been debating that Kevin Love is more talented than Klay Thompson. Read again: talented. I think Love is more talented, I'm not saying he's having the better season. So can I get some answers on who other posters feel is more talented (NOT having the better season, heck not even just the better player); strictly from a talent point of view:

Who is more talented between these two guys?

Jeffy25
04-15-2015, 09:11 PM
In terms of just raw talent? Possibly Love, because a big guy that can shoot is pretty special talent.

But I would rather have Klay on my team than K Love.

Shammyguy3
04-15-2015, 09:19 PM
In terms of just raw talent? Possibly Love, because a big guy that can shoot is pretty special talent.

But I would rather have Klay on my team than K Love.

Yup

Tony_Starks
04-15-2015, 09:33 PM
Talent is a pretty vague term. What exactly are we talking about? IQ? Ability? Potential?

lol, please
04-15-2015, 09:46 PM
In terms of just raw talent? Possibly Love, because a big guy that can shoot is pretty special talent.

But I would rather have Klay on my team than K Love.

Good post. I agree with this.

slaker619
04-15-2015, 09:54 PM
Klay

KnicksorBust
04-15-2015, 10:08 PM
Love. Find me another big man who can shoot, rebound, and outlet pass like that.

MonroeFAN
04-15-2015, 10:14 PM
I agree that Love probably possesses more raw talent. But I would take Klay every time.

JEDean89
04-15-2015, 10:29 PM
I'd take Klay too. Though Love is a monster when he's on, he doesn't give the required two way effort. Klay has just been fabulous this year and hasn't had the health issues that love has.

Shammyguy3
04-15-2015, 10:52 PM
I'd take Klay too. Though Love is a monster when he's on, he doesn't give the required two way effort. Klay has just been fabulous this year and hasn't had the health issues that love has.

Are you basing this off of talent and talent only though?

JEDean89
04-15-2015, 10:59 PM
^^^ not really, love is mega talented for his size. but shouldn't talent be something you have on both ends of the floor?

aman_13
04-15-2015, 11:05 PM
In terms of just raw talent? Possibly Love, because a big guy that can shoot is pretty special talent.

But I would rather have Klay on my team than K Love.

+1

curtcocaine
04-15-2015, 11:08 PM
They both got the three but klay is more efficient at that. One can rebound and the other is an above average defender. Depends on what your team needs.

Shammyguy3
04-15-2015, 11:14 PM
^^^ not really, love is mega talented for his size. but shouldn't talent be something you have on both ends of the floor?

Yes, which is why I think it's a valid question. If Thompson wasn't a + defensively in terms of from a talent standpoint (meaning size/height/length/quickness) then this wouldn't be a good debate.

tredigs
04-15-2015, 11:22 PM
Can you explain what you mean by "talent", or what you're ultimately looking for with this question?

Talent as a general term is pretty damn tough to quantify or compare, a lot of it depends on your personal perception of what constitutes talent.

JEDean89
04-15-2015, 11:22 PM
of course not. look at some of love's stretches last year. he had some insane 30+ points 12+ rebound stretches. he just isn't the complete bball player that klay is.

Shammyguy3
04-15-2015, 11:30 PM
Can you explain what you mean by "talent", or what you're ultimately looking for with this question?

Talent as a general term is pretty damn tough to quantify or compare, a lot of it depends on your personal perception of what constitutes talent.

It's difficult to define because it varies for every person, i'm simply asking for people's opinions based on what a player could potentially become based on their talent level.

This debate started in the Bulls' forum where I mentioned which team I think has the most talent in the league. Trickle down the page, and it became a **** fest honestly because users were disregarding my initial thought process of who is more talented, not who is having the better season or who is more valuable to their respective teams.

How I define talent is pretty simple, I ask myself which player has a higher ceiling than the other.


of course not. look at some of love's stretches last year. he had some insane 30+ points 12+ rebound stretches. he just isn't the complete bball player that klay is.

I'd say that Bill Russell wasn't as complete of a basketball player as Klay, but I consider Russell surely more talented. So the question can be answered, maybe only after splitting many hairs. But I'm just wondering.

tredigs
04-15-2015, 11:42 PM
Klay's not very "complete" as a player really. He's not particularly good at ball handling, passing or rebounding. He's a highly elite shooter with an improving driving game and good D. Love's only true weakness is defense, but that's compounded playing in the post on D.

Overall, it's easy to argue Love's got more talent and on the day to day should be the better player, but Klay's shooting is so great that his peak on a good day is probably higher.

PowerHouse
04-15-2015, 11:51 PM
Klay's not very "complete" as a player really. He's not particularly good at ball handling, passing or rebounding. He's a highly elite shooter with an improving driving game and good D. Love's only true weakness is defense, but that's compounded playing in the post on D.

Overall, it's easy to argue Love's got more talent and on the day to day should be the better player, but Klay's shooting is so great that his peak on a good day is probably higher.

I wouldnt be so sure of that. Kevin Love's peaks are pretty insane too. He once had a 51 point 14 rebound game and another time had 31 point 31 rebound performance. Last year he had a 37 point 12 rebound 10 assist triple double.

SPURSFAN1
04-16-2015, 12:03 AM
They about the same level. Nothing to shout about. 25-30 range.

bgdreton
04-16-2015, 12:19 AM
They about the same level. Nothing to shout about. 25-30 range.

When you say 25 to 30 what do you mean? I'm surprised you haven't found a way to talk about Kawhi Leonard in here yet..

BornReady
04-16-2015, 12:58 AM
if you like someone who plays zero defense, shows no hustle, has body language of a high school player when something goes wrong, takes bad threes when he should be in the post, then yea go with K love all day

but if you want a SG who can basically do it all from amazing three point shooting to posting up, not to mention great defense then you'd probably make the smart choice and pick Klay

BornReady
04-16-2015, 12:59 AM
I wouldnt be so sure of that. Kevin Love's peaks are pretty insane too. He once had a 51 point 14 rebound game and another time had 31 point 31 rebound performance. Last year he had a 37 point 12 rebound 10 assist triple double.

stat padding is fun, bet the wolves lost all those games tho

tredigs
04-16-2015, 01:03 AM
I wouldnt be so sure of that. Kevin Love's peaks are pretty insane too. He once had a 51 point 14 rebound game and another time had 31 point 31 rebound performance. Last year he had a 37 point 12 rebound 10 assist triple double.

They are, but you've seen what Klay can do as well, and that's as a 2nd banana offensively. If he was a #1 on a bad squad for years on end like Love I'm pretty confident you'd see some truly insane performances from Klay here and there. He'd be a 25 ppg player who would go off for 50+ here and there against weaker perimeter D's, and I bet he'd get to 60 a few times. His hot streaks are about as unbelievable as it gets. Hell this week alone he just had 25 in the 1st half tonight (on 8 of 12. 5 for 7 from three) but didn't play the 2nd half, and I'm pretty sure he put up close to 40 in the 1st half a couple nights ago on like 17 FGA's. Love just can't get that hot.

PowerHouse
04-16-2015, 01:19 AM
They are, but you've seen what Klay can do as well, and that's as a 2nd banana offensively. If he was a #1 on a bad squad for years on end like Love I'm pretty confident you'd see some truly insane performances from Klay here and there. He'd be a 25 ppg player who would go off for 50+ here and there against weaker perimeter D's, and I bet he'd get to 60 a few times. His hot streaks are about as unbelievable as it gets. Hell this week alone he just had 25 in the 1st half tonight (on 8 of 12. 5 for 7 from three) but didn't play the 2nd half, and I'm pretty sure he put up close to 40 in the 1st half a couple nights ago on like 17 FGA's. Love just can't get that hot.

I have to agree that if Klay were on the T-wolves or some bad team I can see him going off for 1 or 2 60 point nights.

lol, please
04-16-2015, 02:39 AM
When you say 25 to 30 what do you mean? I'm surprised you haven't found a way to talk about Kawhi Leonard in here yet..
[emoji23]

MILLERHIGHLIFE
04-16-2015, 03:47 PM
Love was just a stat padder on a horribly managed Wolves team. Kinda like the old days of Shareef Abdur Rahim. He scored like 22 a night but continued to lose with Grizzlies.

SPURSFAN1
04-16-2015, 03:49 PM
Klay definitely showed the Spurs he really good. :confused:

lol, please
04-16-2015, 04:27 PM
Klay definitely showed the Spurs he really good. :confused:
We have jokes now? Klay is an elite SG no matter how you slice it.

SPURSFAN1
04-16-2015, 07:04 PM
We have jokes now? Klay is an elite SG no matter how you slice it.

Yeah. 25-30 range.

Saddletramp
04-16-2015, 07:20 PM
I've seen people say that Love might be the better talent but they'd rather have Klay. I'd agree with this. I think Love would carry a team to more wins as the top guy but Klay is a better fit to make a team gel better. Also, with Love as the top guy his team isn't a playoff team anyway so give me the better fit.

TDE
04-16-2015, 11:11 PM
I gotta go with Love on this one. It takes talent to score inside, have a legit shot, assist and rebound. Klay's true talent is his shooting touch other than that he's pretty depending on his athleticism.

lol, please
04-16-2015, 11:40 PM
I gotta go with Love on this one. It takes talent to score inside, have a legit shot, assist and rebound. Klay's true talent is his shooting touch other than that he's pretty depending on his athleticism.
Klay is an elite passer, and has elite basketball IQ. Also, his defensive skills aren't solely based on athleticism.

tredigs
04-17-2015, 01:29 AM
Klay is an elite passer, and has elite basketball IQ. Also, his defensive skills aren't solely based on athleticism.

C'mon now. Klay's legit, but average on a good day as a passer. K Love's outlet passing alone gives him the edge here.

BornReady
04-17-2015, 02:50 AM
K love is automatically a better passer bc he makes one or two outlet passes thru out a game that turn into fast break points. great logic :clap:

tredigs
04-17-2015, 03:17 AM
K love is automatically a better passer bc he makes one or two outlet passes thru out a game that turn into fast break points. great logic :clap:

No baby troll, he just happens to be elite at a facet of passing. Klay is not elite at any facet of passing. It would be tough to argue that he is above average at any facet of passing. Love's also a solid passer out of the post (even though he rarely gets to play there in Cleveland) and has a higher career + peak assist% than Klay. Very rare for a big to have that on a guard.

Beyond that, Klay's simply not a willing passer. It's a running joke at this point how rare it is for a pass to go from Klay back to Curry rather than the other way around. Doesn't exactly have his head on a swivel.

BornReady
04-17-2015, 03:20 AM
No baby troll, he just happens to be elite at a facet of passing. Klay is not elite at any facet of passing. It would be tough to argue that he is above average at any facet of passing. Love's also a solid passer out of the post (even though he rarely gets to play there in Cleveland) and has a higher career + peak assist% than Klay. Very rare for a big to have that on a guard.

Beyond that, Klay's simply not a willing passer. It's a running joke at this point how rare it is for a pass to go from Klay back to Curry rather than the other way around. Doesn't exactly have his head on a swivel.

It's a running joke at this point how rare it is for a pass to go from Love back to Lebron rather than the other way around

tredigs
04-17-2015, 03:36 AM
It's a running joke at this point how rare it is for a pass to go from Love back to Lebron rather than the other way around

That the best you can do? Maybe you should prepare a better rebuttal before you go running your mouth on here. Save yourself from getting put in your place and such.

BornReady
04-17-2015, 03:53 AM
That the best you can do? Maybe you should prepare a better rebuttal before you go running your mouth on here. Save yourself from getting put in your place and such.

Why you so mad

BornReady
04-17-2015, 04:00 AM
Everyone that disagrees with someone on this board is automatically a troll. like why? not everyone can agree on everything so why the insults right away?

tredigs
04-17-2015, 04:04 AM
Lol bro, don't dish it if you can't take it. Your little sarcastic "great logic" with the clapping isn't necessary, especially when it's accompanied with exactly zero insight on the topic. I made some rudimentary points to back up my comment, and you came back with more drivel. Just, try to focus more on substance, or at the very least avoid calling out posters who by and large make legitimate points with that trolling nonsense.

BornReady
04-17-2015, 04:08 AM
my bad bro

jayjay33
04-17-2015, 04:19 AM
Don't see how this is even a question. Kay has him beat in both all around skill AND physical ability.

tredigs
04-17-2015, 04:20 AM
All good -- I go off all the time when I should have better judgement which does not help. Anyway, back to bball ; ]


Don't see how this is even a question. Kay has him beat in both all around skill AND physical ability.
I sort of wonder if more than 1 out of 20 people would have had this opinion before Love went to Cleveland.

jayjay33
04-17-2015, 04:31 AM
All good -- I go off all the time when I should have better judgement which does not help. Anyway, back to bball ; ]


Don't see how this is even a question. Kay has him beat in both all around skill AND physical ability.
I sort of wonder if more than 1 out of 20 people would have had this opinion before Love went to Cleveland.


Isn't that's kinda the point? Klay would be klay in Cleveland or anywhere else. Because he's more talented.

BornReady
04-17-2015, 04:32 AM
Isn't that's kinda the point? Klay would be klay in Cleveland or anywhere else. Because he's more talented.

I mean you gotta remember than Love is their third option bro. He can't be going off for 25/12 like he used to

jayjay33
04-17-2015, 04:42 AM
Isn't that's kinda the point? Klay would be klay in Cleveland or anywhere else. Because he's more talented.

I mean you gotta remember than Love is their third option bro. He can't be going off for 25/12 like he used to


That doesn't make sense. How is that relevant to me saying klay would still be this good in Cleveland or anywhere else. My point was that even playing under the lebron, kyrie "conditions" he would still be who he is. Where as love lacks the "talent" to flourish next to them to the same degree.

BornReady
04-17-2015, 04:46 AM
That doesn't make sense. How is that relevant to me saying klay would still be this good in Cleveland or anywhere else. My point was that even playing under the lebron, kyrie "conditions" he would still be who he is. Where as love lacks the "talent" to flourish next to them to the same degree.

I agree and that's bc of three point shooting. Klay would flourish yes bc hes a great shooter, but Cleveland simply use Love the wrong way, he should be in the post doing work

tredigs
04-17-2015, 04:48 AM
Isn't that's kinda the point? Klay would be klay in Cleveland or anywhere else. Because he's more talented.

I don't know, would he? What if he was in Houston instead of Harden and Beverly or Jason Terry was his PG? Or on the Wolves with Rubio and his inability to space the floor for Klay w/ out a perimeter shot? As a #2, he's not close to as consistent as Love has proven to be as a #1, but I think Golden State (or Cleveland) are pretty ideal situation for his skill set. Love's a 6'10" big who can rebound at an elite level, score at an elite level (from all over), and can pass. He has weaknesses (defensively, I'd attribute a lot of that to effort over skill), but he's pretty damn impressive when tasked with a full workload.

Give me Klay on the Warriors any day, but I can't deny Love's talent. Just a bad year for him.

LakersIn5
04-17-2015, 05:04 AM
stat padding is fun, bet the wolves lost all those games tho

Whar a ****ing hater. Put klay on that wolves team instead of love and lets see what happens

BornReady
04-17-2015, 05:27 AM
Whar a ****ing hater. Put klay on that wolves team instead of love and lets see what happens

you're actually 100% right. didn't think about that situation, Klay would stat pad too and I really am a k love hater. his effort/body language/defense this year has really made me dislike him. my bad homie I take it back

jayjay33
04-17-2015, 05:30 AM
Isn't that's kinda the point? Klay would be klay in Cleveland or anywhere else. Because he's more talented.

I don't know, would he? What if he was in Houston instead of Harden and Beverly or Jason Terry was his PG? Or on the Wolves with Rubio and his inability to space the floor for Klay w/ out a perimeter shot? As a #2, he's not close to as consistent as Love has proven to be as a #1, but I think Golden State (or Cleveland) are pretty ideal situation for his skill set. Love's a 6'10" big who can rebound at an elite level, score at an elite level (from all over), and can pass. He has weaknesses (defensively, I'd attribute a lot of that to effort over skill), but he's pretty damn impressive when tasked with a full workload.

Give me Klay on the Warriors any day, but I can't deny Love's talent. Just a bad year for him.


Actually in those cases he'd probably be better. Because now their running plays for him screens, pin downs. that little 15 ft ISO face up where if they take away your midrange, you can explode to the rim in 1 "maybe" 2 dribbles, etc. His numbers actually would go up as a 1 or 2 that where your constantly running stuff for him. Either you've got better players who can open things up for him or you're running things for him. It's going to be one or the other. It would take both a team full of sub par teammates AND astonishingly poor coaching that freezes him out of the game for klay to fall of. Because he's just that talented.

Love on the other hand is excellent when he's the focal point. However he doesn't have the all round talent to thrive while playing with anybody. He can even become a liability at times. You'll NEVER see that with klay.

jayjay33
04-17-2015, 05:36 AM
Whar a ****ing hater. Put klay on that wolves team instead of love and lets see what happens

you're actually 100% right. didn't think about that situation, Klay would stat pad too and I really am a k love hater. his effort/body language/defense this year has really made me dislike him. my bad homie I take it back


Yep, Basically what I just said. Klay would still get his at the least. But most likely he'd get more than he does now in minny.

Shammyguy3
04-17-2015, 10:04 PM
Actually in those cases he'd probably be better. Because now their running plays for him screens, pin downs. that little 15 ft ISO face up where if they take away your midrange, you can explode to the rim in 1 "maybe" 2 dribbles, etc. His numbers actually would go up as a 1 or 2 that where your constantly running stuff for him. Either you've got better players who can open things up for him or you're running things for him. It's going to be one or the other. It would take both a team full of sub par teammates AND astonishingly poor coaching that freezes him out of the game for klay to fall of. Because he's just that talented.

Love on the other hand is excellent when he's the focal point. However he doesn't have the all round talent to thrive while playing with anybody. He can even become a liability at times. You'll NEVER see that with klay.


I'd consider that not talent, but style of play. Allen Iverson, all the talent in the world right? But he couldn't play with any given player. Pete Maravich, same concept.

Not that I agree with the bolded (that Love isn't capable of playing with different systems), but it's definitely not due to a talent level. You can't all of a sudden not have the talent to be a 2nd best player on a team after you've shown the talent to carry a team as a number one.

JasonJohnHorn
04-18-2015, 08:39 AM
Looking at what Love did LAST year, given how well he was making plays, and still being among the best rebounders, and also having a great 3-point shot, I'd have to say that his all-around skill set is more impressive than Klay's. If you asked me who the more gifted shootr is, I'd say Klay easily. But though his passing and rebounding game are decent, he doesn't do either as impressively as Love, even considering positional differences.

Obviously Love gets more rebounds, but if you compared Westy to Love in terms of rebounding, I'd say that they are equals when you take into consideration positional differences. Love get more, but he's a power forward. Looking at each though, they are both among the league leaders at their position.


With Klay, he was neither among the league leaders at his position with rebounds or assists, where as last year Love was.

I'd say Klay had a better year this yer, but that's because Blatt didn't let Kevin Love handle the ball much or take many shots, and he got fewer rebounds because of reduced minutes and spacing.

alexander_37
04-18-2015, 03:11 PM
they are both pretty average physical talents. They both have phenomenal diverse skill sets. That's where their talent lies.

On a 1 to 1 basis I give it to love, because it's almost impossible to find an elite rebounder who can shoot 3's and has an excellent post game.

Klay is an elite spot up shooter and great wing defender. 3 and D guys are far from rare.

I would take Klay on my team because I do not like Love at all in a team setting.

But Love has the size and a more diverse hard to find skill set.

jayjay33
04-18-2015, 06:52 PM
Actually in those cases he'd probably be better. Because now their running plays for him screens, pin downs. that little 15 ft ISO face up where if they take away your midrange, you can explode to the rim in 1 "maybe" 2 dribbles, etc. His numbers actually would go up as a 1 or 2 that where your constantly running stuff for him. Either you've got better players who can open things up for him or you're running things for him. It's going to be one or the other. It would take both a team full of sub par teammates AND astonishingly poor coaching that freezes him out of the game for klay to fall of. Because he's just that talented.

Love on the other hand is excellent when he's the focal point. However he doesn't have the all round talent to thrive while playing with anybody. He can even become a liability at times. You'll NEVER see that with klay.


I'd consider that not talent, but style of play. Allen Iverson, all the talent in the world right? But he couldn't play with any given player. Pete Maravich, same concept.

Not that I agree with the bolded (that Love isn't capable of playing with different systems), but it's definitely not due to a talent level. You can't all of a sudden not have the talent to be a 2nd best player on a team after you've shown the talent to carry a team as a number one.


Nope, you couldn't be more wrong. Style of play is dictated by talent. Guys with zero athleticism are not slashers, guys with a with no jump shot are not spot up 3 point shooters, guys who are 6ft3 aren't shot blockers. The truth is, if love could run and jump like klay and could defend like klay and slash like klay he would do so and thus he'd be great in Cleveland. But he doesn't do that because he doesn't have the talent to do so. His style of play, "based" on his talent doesn't allow him to play equally well with anyone anywhere.


It's a very simple concept. For example, A guy who can just spot up or just slash or just defend. Is not as talented is a guy who can do all 3. Klay just has a much wider variety of talent than love. Which allows him to flourish in a wider variety of situations.


And no iverson most certainly did not have all the talent in the world. Talent is a combination of skill, physical gifts and mental make up. The talent he had was of the highest degree. But there were so many talents he didn't have and his ability to over come those deficiencies to the degree he did is what made him special. But let's be real, Iverson was short, a poor defender, with and ok midrange shoot and a below average 3 point shoot. He was a great player no doubt. But if you add those missing "talents" ie...height, outside shooting , defense, to his game. That added talent would allow to adjust his style of play to better fit his team needs. The "more" talent you give him the more situations he'd be able to flourish in.

Do you see the running theme here? The more talent you have, the wider the variety of situations you can flourish in.

jayjay33
04-18-2015, 06:56 PM
they are both pretty average physical talents. They both have phenomenal diverse skill sets. That's where their talent lies.

On a 1 to 1 basis I give it to love, because it's almost impossible to find an elite rebounder who can shoot 3's and has an excellent post game.

Klay is an elite spot up shooter and great wing defender. 3 and D guys are far from rare.

I would take Klay on my team because I do not like Love at all in a team setting.

But Love has the size and a more diverse hard to find skill set.


You can't possibly think love and klay have anywhere close to the same athleticism.

alexander_37
04-18-2015, 07:43 PM
You can't possibly think love and klay have anywhere close to the same athleticism.

relative to their positions neither is great.

lol, please
04-18-2015, 07:49 PM
relative to their positions neither is great.

Relative to their positions they both are.

Shammyguy3
04-18-2015, 10:36 PM
Nope, you couldn't be more wrong. Style of play is dictated by talent.

Style of play can definitely be dictated by what specific talents a player has, but that doesn't mean Klay is more talented than Kevin Love. And I could easily say if Klay could rebound and pass like Love, and take a greater portion of the offensive load like Love he'd be having greater statistical seasons than Love. But Klay doesn't do that because he doesn't have the talent to do so.

You're right that style of play and talent have correlations, but just because a certain player isn't a perfect fit if you swap teams doesn't mean you can call that player superior in talent level than the other.

And I disagree with your last statement as well. The more talent you have doesn't mean that the more situations you can flourish in. You can be insanely talented at a couple of specific facets of the game but not flourish in multiple situations (insert Amare Stoudemire in his prime, who was 100% built for a pick & roll offense and is one of the most talented offensive bigs this NBA has seen in the last 20 years; that doesn't mean he'd have anywhere near the amount of success in systems that aren't so pick & roll heavy, such as the triangle/flex/read & react/etc etc

PurpleJesus
04-18-2015, 10:56 PM
Love is more talented, but has gotten away from he is as a player. His rebounding percentages were absurd going back to his rookie season, and he was tenacious on the offensive glass getting his team extra possessions, and then he started hitting the three, which was great, and now he is getting a little too comfortable on the outside, taking away his greatest skill as a player, which is rebounding.

jayjay33
04-19-2015, 02:11 AM
Nope, you couldn't be more wrong. Style of play is dictated by talent.

Style of play can definitely be dictated by what specific talents a player has, but that doesn't mean Klay is more talented than Kevin Love. And I could easily say if Klay could rebound and pass like Love, and take a greater portion of the offensive load like Love he'd be having greater statistical seasons than Love. But Klay doesn't do that because he doesn't have the talent to do so.

You're right that style of play and talent have correlations, but just because a certain player isn't a perfect fit if you swap teams doesn't mean you can call that player superior in talent level than the other.

And I disagree with your last statement as well. The more talent you have doesn't mean that the more situations you can flourish in. You can be insanely talented at a couple of specific facets of the game but not flourish in multiple situations (insert Amare Stoudemire in his prime, who was 100% built for a pick & roll offense and is one of the most talented offensive bigs this NBA has seen in the last 20 years; that doesn't mean he'd have anywhere near the amount of success in systems that aren't so pick & roll heavy, such as the triangle/flex/read & react/etc etc


1. As I said consider "talent" to a combination of skill, physical ability and mental make up. For example in my opinion Jordan, kobe and Hakeem are the most talented basketball players in history. Because they posses the greatest combination of those three things.


2. Ok, Based on your iverson so and amare ex, I think I see where your going off track. You are under the mistake impression that if a guy is as talented as it gets in certain aspects then he's as talented as anybody. You are incorrect. If we added the skills and physical ability.....for a amare to be a great post player he would be great in those other offense. And why is that? It's because he would have MORE talent.

Are you following me? A guy who shoot a basketball and hit a baseball is MORE talented than a guy who can just shoot a basketball. Your arguing a guy who's bad at literally half the game (defense) is more talented than a guy who's excellent at both. That makes zero sense.



3. I question your evaluation of klay if you think he can't carry as much of an offensive load as love. As a focal point like love was in minny he could do just as much as love did. And as a second or third piece he can contribute more than love has in Cleveland. Secondly, your right about the passing and rebounding, However you actually made my point, about your "style of play" theory. Klay doesn't have the "talent" to be a great rebounder and that's way he isn't. Not because he can be but that's just not his style.

jayjay33
04-19-2015, 02:16 AM
Fyi.....did anybody else notice that everything single person who's made a case for love ignores defense all together. Ijs

jerellh528
04-19-2015, 02:32 AM
Fyi.....did anybody else notice that everything single person who's made a case for love ignores defense all together. Ijs

Defense doesn't have too much to do with talent imo. It's more of a coaching and effort type thing. just my opinion.

jayjay33
04-19-2015, 03:01 AM
Fyi.....did anybody else notice that everything single person who's made a case for love ignores defense all together. Ijs

Defense doesn't have too much to do with talent imo. It's more of a coaching and effort type thing. just my opinion.


So let's say we're on the same team. And I have a high bball IQ you don't, I'm long your not, I'm strong your not, I'm quick your not, I can jump you can't. Now since we're on the same team we've got the same coach, so assuming we both give maximum effort will you'll be as good a defender as me?

No and you won't even be close. Yet everything I just named was talent based. Mental and physical acumen.

Kawai Leonard can try as hard as he wants. You make him 5'10, slow, with short arms. And his defense is gonna fall all the way of. I respect your opinion, but I disagree. Talent is important. I understand it seems that way because so many guys already have the talent, so it's about effort. But when you don't have the talent effort won't help you. Love just doesn't have the physical ability. To be a good defender. As oppose to say Melo who can be a good defender of he puts fourth the effort.

But I'm curious wouldn't your opinion also exclude loves rebounding which is no less effort based than defense. Making him far less "talented".

jerellh528
04-19-2015, 03:19 AM
So let's say we're on the same team. And I have a high bball IQ you don't, I'm long your not, I'm strong your not, I'm quick your not, I can jump you can't. Now since we're on the same team we've got the same coach, so assuming we both give maximum effort will you'll be as good a defender as me?

No and you won't even be close. Yet everything I just named was talent based. Mental and physical acumen.

Kawai Leonard can try as hard as he wants. You make him 5'10, slow, with short arms. And his defense is gonna fall all the way of. I respect your opinion, but I disagree.

Well yeah, the better athlete should be the better defender if everything else is equal. But that's probably never the case. I think in the situation were discussing between love and klay, it doesn't really apply because they're similar athletes, love is probably the better athlete for his size . But since you brought it up, what specifically did you want to mention about klays talent on defense vs love's? Imo klay has the edge due to putting forth more effort and focus on the defensive end. Some of the better defenders were not very talented, Bowen and battier come to mind. Where guys like Derozan or Gerald green kinda lack there despite their talents. Defense to me is more positioning, angles, anticipation, and effort vs size and athleticism. Kind of depends on your definition of talent too, to me talent is more of "God given" thing. As opposed to skill, where its coaching, practice and honing. They go hand in hand usually because every NBA player is highly talented and skilled. I think talents are better utilized on offense though to overcome the skills of savvy defenders. I think I went off on a tangent and don't really know where I'm going with this, but yes I agree with you. A more talented guy SHOULD be the better defender is everything else is equal.

nastynice
04-19-2015, 04:39 AM
When you say 25 to 30 what do you mean? I'm surprised you haven't found a way to talk about Kawhi Leonard in here yet..

lol

jayjay33
04-19-2015, 06:50 AM
So let's say we're on the same team. And I have a high bball IQ you don't, I'm long your not, I'm strong your not, I'm quick your not, I can jump you can't. Now since we're on the same team we've got the same coach, so assuming we both give maximum effort will you'll be as good a defender as me?

No and you won't even be close. Yet everything I just named was talent based. Mental and physical acumen.

Kawai Leonard can try as hard as he wants. You make him 5'10, slow, with short arms. And his defense is gonna fall all the way of. I respect your opinion, but I disagree.

Well yeah, the better athlete should be the better defender if everything else is equal. But that's probably never the case. I think in the situation were discussing between love and klay, it doesn't really apply because they're similar athletes, love is probably the better athlete for his size . But since you brought it up, what specifically did you want to mention about klays talent on defense vs love's? Imo klay has the edge due to putting forth more effort and focus on the defensive end. Some of the better defenders were not very talented, Bowen and battier come to mind. Where guys like Derozan or Gerald green kinda lack there despite their talents. Defense to me is more positioning, angles, anticipation, and effort vs size and athleticism. Kind of depends on your definition of talent too, to me talent is more of "God given" thing. As opposed to skill, where its coaching, practice and honing. They go hand in hand usually because every NBA player is highly talented and skilled. I think talents are better utilized on offense though to overcome the skills of savvy defenders. I think I went off on a tangent and don't really know where I'm going with this, but yes I agree with you. A more talented guy SHOULD be the better defender is everything else is equal.


Well then talent does matter. Your the one who said it didn't even though you obviously knew it did.

You don't include skill in your definition of talent and I do. That's to big a disparity for us to have a debate. Under those condition we could see the same guy as a great talent and a no talent at the same time.


However you might want to revaluate your definition of talent if you think Bruce Bowen wasn't talented. Bowen and battier. Both had good strength excellent lateral quickness and length for their height. This example is similar to your last post in that you don't seem to "realize" what your actually saying (they aren't talented). Because they don't have as much athletic ability as G. Green that doesn't mean they aren't talented. Theres a lot of room between supreme athletic ability like G.green and no talent. Additionally there's a guy like Ron Artest had amazing defensive talent... length, great strength, quick hands, lateral quickness. But he could never run or jump with green. In fact I would argue that if you took away some of greens hops and replaced it with strength he'd have more talent for playing defense. You seem to only be looking at straight line speed and jumping ability as talent. But I assure you it comes in many other forms.

And further more love is not a good athlete for his size. He's slow, can't jump, has zero lateral quickness and does not have great strength or length for his position. Klay on the other hand has excellent length, and lateral quickness and height. Plus decent jumping ability. That's talent that lends itself to playing defensive. He has the enough quickness to stay in front of guys from a distance his length can make up. Take away some lateral quickness making him have to give more ground OR take away some length making him have to get closer and regardless to effort or defensive IQ. He can't be the same defender because he lost some of his "talent". Now Kevin love on the other hand does not have the talent to play defense. At the minimum you need either lateral quickness, extreme length or great strength for your position. Love has none. Therefore he can't guard PF's who face up OR post up.


But what really has me baffled is you don't count skill as talent and rebounding is just as much about effort as defense. So based on you're statements Kevin love has ZERO talent....none. After you exclude rebounding and skill what's he got left?


But in fairness it's really apples to oranges. When I'm including skill and your not. But I do think your definition of talent is somewhat flawed since "hand eye coordination" is a god give talent that is vital to pretty much every athletic skill involving your hand and an a ball....ijs. But we each have our own way of looking and there's nothing wrong with your point of view. I guess I just don't see how, how well you do anything isn't dependent of your God given ability. I even consider high motor (effort) a talent. For example I don't think Westbrook's effort is just as a talent then Jordan's will. Their both built that way, and they'ed be lesser players if they weren't. But again it's just my opinion.

MTar786
04-20-2015, 04:29 PM
klay easily imo

Jayb587
04-20-2015, 04:53 PM
klay has quickly become one of the most overrated players in the league. Its love and its really not even close. ppl look at loves circumstances and think hes all of a sudden a bad player which is wrong.

lol, please
04-20-2015, 05:48 PM
klay has quickly become one of the most overrated players in the league. Its love and its really not even close. ppl look at loves circumstances and think hes all of a sudden a bad player which is wrong.

Please explain.

Jayb587
04-20-2015, 06:50 PM
Klay's not very "complete" as a player really. He's not particularly good at ball handling, passing or rebounding. He's a highly elite shooter with an improving driving game and good D. Love's only true weakness is defense, but that's compounded playing in the post on D.

Overall, it's easy to argue Love's got more talent and on the day to day should be the better player, but Klay's shooting is so great that his peak on a good day is probably higher.

This post which was ignored on this thread because everyone seems to be on klays nuts...explains it all