PDA

View Full Version : Is Russell Westbrook the biggest ballhog in NBA history?



sheesh
11-04-2015, 11:16 PM
Since I've started watching the league he is far and away the biggest ballhog I've seen. Surpassing Kobe, Marburry, Iverson and even Ricky Davis who would actually wave off LeBron.

I've never seen anything like him ever before in the NBA.

GiantsSwaGG
11-04-2015, 11:18 PM
Dude has 16 assist

sheesh
11-04-2015, 11:21 PM
Dude has 16 assist

Which actually is incredible. He will lead the league in USG% and be top 3 in assists.

Does the ball ever leave his hand?

KG2TB
11-04-2015, 11:33 PM
He's also averaging 9 assists and 30 points while shooting lights out. Whatever he's doing, he shouldn't stop.

BHF
11-04-2015, 11:34 PM
Which actually is incredible. He will lead the league in USG% and be top 3 in assists.

Does the ball ever leave his hand?

He is a point guard so no it does not and should not leave his hands.

R. Johnson#3
11-04-2015, 11:35 PM
You clearly never saw MJ play on the Bulls.

Gagan136
11-04-2015, 11:39 PM
Im not even a OKC fan but watching the last 5 minutes of the game tonight i was actually frustrated for them

KnicksorBust
11-04-2015, 11:42 PM
Iverson and Vc come to mind immediately but there are worse.

ewing
11-04-2015, 11:43 PM
no.

RAPS424
11-04-2015, 11:51 PM
You clearly never saw MJ play on the Bulls.

Or Iverson with Philly

tredigs
11-05-2015, 01:22 AM
Well, his Usage% last season was the 2nd highest in NBA history. More than young Jordan, AI, anyone. Except Kobe in '06.

IKnowHoops
11-05-2015, 02:14 AM
Well, his Usage% last season was the 2nd highest in NBA history. More than young Jordan, AI, anyone. Except Kobe in '06.

I was going to say Kobe and Ivo are 1,2 easy. But I guess not easy. I'm surprised his usage was higher than Iverson's.

Shady66
11-05-2015, 03:33 AM
What bothers me most is that he usually finishes with more shot attempts than Durant.

Hes up there.

FlashBolt
11-05-2015, 03:34 AM
Who handles the ball if not him? Waiters? KD isn't mentally there yet.

PowerHouse
11-05-2015, 04:16 AM
Who handles the ball if not him? Waiters? KD isn't mentally there yet.

I don't think KD has the handles to be a primary ball handler. Guys don't wait around until they're 30 to start handling the rock because 'now they're ready'.

slashsnake
11-05-2015, 06:50 AM
Well, his Usage% last season was the 2nd highest in NBA history. More than young Jordan, AI, anyone. Except Kobe in '06.

Yeah, but last year, who would you rather have controlling the ball on that team? Same with Kobe in 06. The only time Kobe should have given up the ball was to just beat the everloving **** out of Walton and Kwame for finding ways on that squad.

HandsOnTheWheel
11-05-2015, 08:50 AM
Iverson was such a ball hog especially late in his career.

2-ONE-5
11-05-2015, 10:05 AM
he had 16 assists last night. but yea what a ballhog

valade16
11-05-2015, 10:29 AM
You can point to his assist totals, but I'd point to his TO's. 6.0 most in the league. So it seems like his assists are more so a product of his having the ball all the time... Which is kind of the OPs point.

On the other hand, a 53% Assist rate is pretty darn good.

ewing
11-05-2015, 10:33 AM
You can point to his assist totals, but I'd point to his TO's. 6.0 most in the league. So it seems like his assists are more so a product of his having the ball all the time... Which is kind of the OPs point.

On the other hand, a 53% Assist rate is pretty darn good.

well you have to have the ball in your hands a lot and you have be trying to make plays a lot to have a high assist total. Ideally Russ should probably have both lower assists and TO totals. Sometime he does too much but i honestly think that is who he is as a basketball and its a tough thing to rein in.

sheesh
11-05-2015, 10:59 AM
well you have to have the ball in your hands a lot and you have be trying to make plays a lot to have a high assist total. Ideally Russ should probably have both lower assists and TO totals. Sometime he does too much but i honestly think that is who he is as a basketball and its a tough thing to rein in.

So basically he is the biggest ball hog in league history?

High usage, high turnovers, high assists, dribbling constantly. I mean when does he not have the ball?

I know PGs handle the ball. But they don't turn it over like machines and have a 40 percent usage and dribble the ball for 75 percent the shotclock.

Take a look at Tony Parker. Takes 2-3 dribbles, scores or passes. That's how you play point guard.

R. Johnson#3
11-05-2015, 11:11 AM
Or Iverson with Philly

True but Iverson didn't really have anybody to pass to. I mean yeah, he could give the ball to Eric Snow but then the defense could just quadruple team Iverson and then Philly wouldn't be able to score.

ewing
11-05-2015, 11:20 AM
So basically he is the biggest ball hog in league history?

High usage, high turnovers, high assists, dribbling constantly. I mean when does he not have the ball?

I know PGs handle the ball. But they don't turn it over like machines and have a 40 percent usage and dribble the ball for 75 percent the shotclock.

Take a look at Tony Parker. Takes 2-3 dribbles, scores or passes. That's how you play point guard.


I honestly don't know and don't know how to measure. Steve Nash had the ball more then anyone at one point. He certainly wasn't a ball hog. Magic had the ball a ton. Russ does try to do too much sometimes. He is a great player despite it but i don't know how to optimize him. He has been in the league like 7 years now. I think he is who he is.

AIMelo=KillaDUO
11-05-2015, 11:23 AM
Or Iverson with Philly

You realize AI had nobody to pass to. In order for them to win Iverson had to score 30 every single night... While still averaging, 7 assists, and leading the league in steals, and in minutes played. Iverson was literally asked to everything. The best offensive player Iverson played with on the Sixers was Keith Van Horn. Think about that... To me "ball hog" is a bad word as far as basketball is concerned, so I try not to throw it around loosely, but Iverson did what he had to do in order to win ball games. Basically what I'm saying is, AI wasn't a ball hog, because of selfishness, he was a ball hog due to lack of talent.

KG2TB
11-05-2015, 11:26 AM
So basically he is the biggest ball hog in league history?

High usage, high turnovers, high assists, dribbling constantly. I mean when does he not have the ball?

I know PGs handle the ball. But they don't turn it over like machines and have a 40 percent usage and dribble the ball for 75 percent the shotclock.

Take a look at Tony Parker. Takes 2-3 dribbles, scores or passes. That's how you play point guard.

This is silly. Two different kinds of players on two different teams. Russ doesn't have Duncan, Leonard, Aldridge, Manu, green etc. Not to mention, Russ is the better player who has a different game and skill set than Parker. You play your game and to your strengths. You don't play to fit into a traditional PG roll. Westbrook isn't perfect, but he's a top 10 player in the league. Maybe even top 5-7.

THE MTL
11-05-2015, 11:27 AM
KD shots 20 times per game. So how is Westbrook the biggest ballhog in history?

29ppg 8rpg 10apg are his averages so far. So keep doing what you doing Westbrook.

koreancabbage
11-05-2015, 11:32 AM
i don't know, for the most part, he was trying to make the assist which ended up as a turnover. taking risks.

over handling of the ball, sure. but if someone else turned the ball over, people will be screaming why they didn't give it to Durant or Westbrook.

sheesh
11-05-2015, 11:50 AM
I honestly don't know and don't know how to measure. Steve Nash had the ball more then anyone at one point. He certainly wasn't a ball hog. Magic had the ball a ton. Russ does try to do too much sometimes. He is a great player despite it but i don't know how to optimize him. He has been in the league like 7 years now. I think he is who he is.

None of those guys are an apt comparison to Westbrook because none of them were extremely high USG players.

sheesh
11-05-2015, 11:52 AM
This is silly. Two different kinds of players on two different teams. Russ doesn't have Duncan, Leonard, Aldridge, Manu, green etc. Not to mention, Russ is the better player who has a different game and skill set than Parker. You play your game and to your strengths. You don't play to fit into a traditional PG roll. Westbrook isn't perfect, but he's a top 10 player in the league. Maybe even top 5-7.

Parker is absolutely a better player than Westbrook. And Russ plays with arguably the 2nd best pure scorer in NBA history. So don't say he has nobody to pass to.

ewing
11-05-2015, 11:57 AM
None of those guys are an apt comparison to Westbrook because none of them were extremely high USG players.

If you are defining ball hog by that stat way don't you just look it up. If you are talking about guys who had the ball a high % of the time when their team was in possession I think Nash did. I think your whole thread had an agenda :nod:

-Kobe24-TJ19-
11-05-2015, 12:06 PM
Carmelo Anthony.

KG2TB
11-05-2015, 12:09 PM
Parker is absolutely a better player than Westbrook. And Russ plays with arguably the 2nd best pure scorer in NBA history. So don't say he has nobody to pass to.

I didn't say he had nobody to pass to. I implied he had less people to pass to. SA is a much deeper team.

Also completely disagree that Parker is better than Westbrook. Don't think it's even that close, really.

sheesh
11-05-2015, 12:13 PM
If you are defining ball hog by that stat way don't you just look it up. If you are talking about guys who had the ball a high % of the time when their team was in possession I think Nash did. I think your whole thread had an agenda :nod:

I should have clarified better. It's not one or the other, it's the combination of everything he does.

It's the USG, the turnovers, the excessive dribbling, the assists, the shooting, etc. It's everything he does with the ball that leads me to believe he's the biggest ball hog in league history.

Hawkeye15
11-05-2015, 12:46 PM
by all metrics, yes.

Scoots
11-05-2015, 12:49 PM
Also completely disagree that Parker is better than Westbrook. Don't think it's even that close, really.

If I had to pick one for my team it would be Westbrook. But Parker is CLEARLY better in one very important team stat ... titles. That is the final answer in almost all such debates.

Westbrook is an amazing talent, but watching him I still wonder what he's thinking sometimes ... and not like once a week, but a couple times a quarter. He's so incredible with what he CAN do that it covers up some of the bad things he does do.

There are no perfect players, and Westy is one hell of a great NBA player even with his faults. What I don't know is ... are his faults keeping the team from winning a title? The last few years it seems to be bad luck rather than anybody's questionable play holding the team back, but history tends to forget about luck.

Gibby23
11-05-2015, 12:50 PM
Parker is absolutely a better player than Westbrook. And Russ plays with arguably the 2nd best pure scorer in NBA history. So don't say he has nobody to pass to.

No he isn't

Hawkeye15
11-05-2015, 12:53 PM
Parker is absolutely a better player than Westbrook. And Russ plays with arguably the 2nd best pure scorer in NBA history. So don't say he has nobody to pass to.

Tony Parker? Currently? He isn't even a top 10 PG.

KG2TB
11-05-2015, 01:01 PM
If I had to pick one for my team it would be Westbrook. But Parker is CLEARLY better in one very important team stat ... titles. That is the final answer in almost all such debates.

Westbrook is an amazing talent, but watching him I still wonder what he's thinking sometimes ... and not like once a week, but a couple times a quarter. He's so incredible with what he CAN do that it covers up some of the bad things he does do.

There are no perfect players, and Westy is one hell of a great NBA player even with his faults. What I don't know is ... are his faults keeping the team from winning a title? The last few years it seems to be bad luck rather than anybody's questionable play holding the team back, but history tends to forget about luck.

Sure. On a team with Tim Duncan, Robinson, Manu, and Greg Popovich as coach. Not to take anything away from Parker...he was/is a great player but the title argument doesn't mean as much to. Especially when Parker was never the best player on the team.

sheesh
11-05-2015, 01:03 PM
Tony Parker? Currently? He isn't even a top 10 PG.

Prime for prime I'd rather have Parker running my offense.

sheesh
11-05-2015, 01:04 PM
Sure. On a team with Tim Duncan, Robinson, Manu, and Greg Popovich as coach. Not to take anything away from Parker...he was/is a great player but the title argument doesn't mean as much to. Especially when Parker was never the best player on the team.

Perhaps he was trying to say that Parker's play style was more conducive to effective team play?

The way Westbrook plays is very reliant upon great individual play for both himself and KD. A great PG like Parker can mask problems and deficiencies on the entire roster.

KG2TB
11-05-2015, 01:09 PM
Perhaps he was trying to say that Parker's play style was more conducive to effective team play?

The way Westbrook plays is very reliant upon great individual play for both himself and KD. A great PG like Parker can mask problems and deficiencies on the entire roster.

Parker was and still is great for that team, no doubt. But I'd wager Westbrook would have a number of titles if he were drafted in the same situation Parker was.

Hawkeye15
11-05-2015, 01:10 PM
Prime for prime I'd rather have Parker running my offense.

Eh, tough to gauge. It's so hard to really know how any of the non-Duncan SA stars fair out of that system. It's also why I have a hard time really ranking KL right now. Is he a top 10 player anywhere outside the Spurs? I just don't know...

But, I also know Westbrook is tough to rank, because he is such an individual player, rather than a team player.

I will leave it at this-I would take Westbrook on a team over prime Parker, if my team is dependent on my PG carrying a huge load. But in a system, where my PG might be asked to pick and choose his spots to quietly take over, I might very well take Parker.

Gibby23
11-05-2015, 01:47 PM
Perhaps he was trying to say that Parker's play style was more conducive to effective team play?

The way Westbrook plays is very reliant upon great individual play for both himself and KD. A great PG like Parker can mask problems and deficiencies on the entire roster.

I think he would be better and the team would be better if Kanter and Marrow were starting. They need to have that 3 point threat out there with Westbrook and KD, and Kanter and Westbrook play really well together.

Jamiecballer
11-05-2015, 01:59 PM
Iverson, then Westbrook, then Kobe. It's possible there is someone that predates my basketball fandom as well.

ewing
11-05-2015, 02:09 PM
Eh, tough to gauge. It's so hard to really know how any of the non-Duncan SA stars fair out of that system. It's also why I have a hard time really ranking KL right now. Is he a top 10 player anywhere outside the Spurs? I just don't know...

But, I also know Westbrook is tough to rank, because he is such an individual player, rather than a team player.

I will leave it at this-I would take Westbrook on a team over prime Parker, if my team is dependent on my PG carrying a huge load. But in a system, where my PG might be asked to pick and choose his spots to quietly take over, I might very well take Parker.


I agree with this. TP was great on the drive and finishing and might have been called on to do more of it outside SA. He also might have been called on to do what people are saying he does so well here, run and offense and not have the luxury of one of the greatest play making post bigs of all time.

ewing
11-05-2015, 02:10 PM
I don't think there is anyway to judge this question but if you asked me is Russ a ballhog, i'd say yes.

sheesh
11-05-2015, 02:16 PM
I don't think there is anyway to judge this question but if you asked me is Russ a ballhog, i'd say yes.

I agree that there is no way to objectively answer this question. As nothing in basketball except for maybe free throw shooting is an exact science.

It's a subjective question about basketball, which like just about every other question ever posed about basketball is.

Scoots
11-05-2015, 02:19 PM
Sure. On a team with Tim Duncan, Robinson, Manu, and Greg Popovich as coach. Not to take anything away from Parker...he was/is a great player but the title argument doesn't mean as much to. Especially when Parker was never the best player on the team.

I'm not sure Parker was never the best player ... there were some series where he dominated the game.

Also, history tends to forget everything but titles.

If you ask people about the greatest teams in history the Bucks don't come up with casual fans, even long time casual NBA fans ... because they didn't win the title. For the most part teams and players who don't win it all slowly fade away.

LakersIn5
11-05-2015, 02:21 PM
I should have clarified better. It's not one or the other, it's the combination of everything he does.

It's the USG, the turnovers, the excessive dribbling, the assists, the shooting, etc. It's everything he does with the ball that leads me to believe he's the biggest ball hog in league history.

Okay just to shut you up. Okay yes westbrook is the biggest ballhog in history of the world. Happy?

LakersIn5
11-05-2015, 02:23 PM
I'm not sure Parker was never the best player ... there were some series where he dominated the game.

Also, history tends to forget everything but titles.

If you ask people about the greatest teams in history the Bucks don't come up with casual fans, even long time casual NBA fans ... because they didn't win the title. For the most part teams and players who don't win it all slowly fade away.

I remember john stockton more than avery johnson

sheesh
11-05-2015, 02:29 PM
Okay just to shut you up. Okay yes westbrook is the biggest ballhog in history of the world. Happy?

I mean damn, man. Didn't see that one coming...

ewing
11-05-2015, 02:30 PM
he really should have just said "sheesh"

flea
11-05-2015, 02:38 PM
I don't know but he is what he is. Some guys aren't very good except at the one thing they do well, in his case it's driving the ball over and over and over. He's got mediocre touch and a poor jumpshot but finishes well because of the rules and his strength. He should be a defensive monster but he's barely average, if that, because he expends too much effort offensively. Good player but nothing terribly special.

I saw him trying to post up in the first game of the year and he actually hit a shot but IDK if he can base his game around it like some old slashers can. Think he's listed 6'3 but it's a short 6'3 and I don't think he's length like, say, Wade does. Doubt he's all that useful once he hits 29-30.

FlashBolt
11-05-2015, 03:38 PM
Westbrook is more of a two-guard than a PG. It's why he has the ability to carry a team. Parker is more of a PG than a two-guard so if your team is stacked to the max and you want a PG who knows when to distribute the ball/score when he has to, Parker is easily the best choice (why I wanted CP3 instead of Westbrook). But I don't think there is any debate as to why Westbrook is better than Parker if you had to rely on that one player all game.

ewing
11-05-2015, 04:19 PM
Westbrook is more of a two-guard than a PG. It's why he has the ability to carry a team. Parker is more of a PG than a two-guard so if your team is stacked to the max and you want a PG who knows when to distribute the ball/score when he has to, Parker is easily the best choice (why I wanted CP3 instead of Westbrook). But I don't think there is any debate as to why Westbrook is better than Parker if you had to rely on that one player all game.

I don't think Westbrook is a 2 guard at all. He does everyone off the dribble and needs the ball. KD is more a 2 guard then Westy

Hawkeye15
11-05-2015, 04:39 PM
I don't think Westbrook is a 2 guard at all. He does everyone off the dribble and needs the ball. KD is more a 2 guard then Westy

20 years ago, Westbrook, Rose, Curry, for example, are SG's. Game has changed.

ewing
11-05-2015, 04:44 PM
20 years ago, Westbrook, Rose, Curry, for example, are SG's. Game has changed.



Westy and Rose need the ball all the time. If you want to pair them with a John Paxson and call Paxs the PG even though he doesn't do anything but stand at the 3 point line that's fine but i still think those dudes need to run the show to be stars.

Scoots
11-05-2015, 08:26 PM
Since we're talking about Parker and the closest PG I've seen to Russ is Rose ... heard a rumor that Rose wants a trade to the Spurs. I don't believe it, but I wonder if Pop could get Rose right?

JasonJohnHorn
11-05-2015, 10:01 PM
Is he a ball hog? Yes? Does the biggest ball hog of all time ever et 16 assists in a game? NO!

tredigs
11-05-2015, 10:07 PM
Is he a ball hog? Yes? Does the biggest ball hog of all time ever et 16 assists in a game? NO!

Kobe and AI have both done the same.

ewing
11-06-2015, 10:16 AM
Is he a ball hog? Yes? Does the biggest ball hog of all time ever et 16 assists in a game? NO!

yeah, i've always thought i a ball hog as a guy that shoots every time he touches it. Not a guy that dominates the ball. I think the biggest ball hog i've seen was Lee Nailon. He shot every time he touched it

GoferKing_
11-06-2015, 10:28 AM
Of course he is, every time I see OKC I see Westbrook with the ball.

ThaDubs
11-06-2015, 04:40 PM
Yes

Hawkeye15
11-06-2015, 05:29 PM
yeah, i've always thought i a ball hog as a guy that shoots every time he touches it. Not a guy that dominates the ball. I think the biggest ball hog i've seen was Lee Nailon. He shot every time he touched it

more than Shimmy?

FlashBolt
11-06-2015, 06:02 PM
Can we differentiate what ball hog means in certain situations? I don't think Westbrook is the biggest ballhog. Sure, he hogs the ball but most likely, it's because he has to. KD isn't there mentally yet. There were mental collapses that he would never do in his MVP year. And are we forgetting that Westbrook is an absolute beast? James gets a pass for ballhogging in the Finals because guys knew he had to ballhog for his team to win. His USG% is 34.2 right now. High, but Steph Curry's USG% is 33. I do think he should give the ball up to KD at certain spots but he's a top five player at the end of the day.

tredigs
11-06-2015, 06:09 PM
If we're mentioning guys like that than Nick Young is the current favorite for resident ball-hog of the NBA. Though Kobe did have almost as many shots as passes 3 games into the season (think I saw it as 51 to 55). That seems almost impossibly hard to do on his volume of shots/usage%.

tredigs
11-06-2015, 06:13 PM
Can we differentiate what ball hog means in certain situations? I don't think Westbrook is the biggest ballhog. Sure, he hogs the ball but most likely, it's because he has to. KD isn't there mentally yet. There were mental collapses that he would never do in his MVP year. And are we forgetting that Westbrook is an absolute beast? James gets a pass for ballhogging in the Finals because guys knew he had to ballhog for his team to win. His USG% is 34.2 right now. High, but Steph Curry's USG% is 33. I do think he should give the ball up to KD at certain spots but he's a top five player at the end of the day.

Curry plays off the ball a TON though. His USG% is just high because he's taking so many shots (because he's making so many shots). That very likely drops as his volume/efficiency drops down to a more mortal level. The USG% Westbrook has right now is well within a pace for top 50 All Time. Probably top 25. Also well within what we can realistically expect from him all year (no diff from 2 years ago. and last year he had the 2nd highest ever).

FlashBolt
11-06-2015, 06:44 PM
Curry plays off the ball a TON though. His USG% is just high because he's taking so many shots (because he's making so many shots). That very likely drops as his volume/efficiency drops down to a more mortal level. The USG% Westbrook has right now is well within a pace for top 50 All Time. Probably top 25. Also well within what we can realistically expect from him all year (no diff from 2 years ago. and last year he had the 2nd highest ever).

Yeah, but how many guys on that roster can control the ball? Relative to what OKC has, GSW just needs Curry to drop bombs. Westbrook HAS to be the guy to do this. Besides KD, we don't have a ball handler who can create the offense. Dion Waiters? Augustine? Waiters might be the biggest ballhogger by definition that I've ever seen. I'd rather take Perkins stinky contract than that guy. And maybe it's just me but Westbrook does so much besides "ballhogging." The guy rebounds, passes, defends all at a high level.

tredigs
11-06-2015, 07:34 PM
Yeah, but how many guys on that roster can control the ball? Relative to what OKC has, GSW just needs Curry to drop bombs. Westbrook HAS to be the guy to do this. Besides KD, we don't have a ball handler who can create the offense. Dion Waiters? Augustine? Waiters might be the biggest ballhogger by definition that I've ever seen. I'd rather take Perkins stinky contract than that guy. And maybe it's just me but Westbrook does so much besides "ballhogging." The guy rebounds, passes, defends all at a high level.

Well I mean, he's never had a good offensive coach (and OMG is Donovan bad. Which sucks), so he does what he knows best. Which is essentially go full bore and create based on what's given to him from said full-bore attack. I think KD's a better playmaker than anybody on GS outside of Curry, but it is what it is. 90% of the time I'm fine with how Westbrook plays.

AirPippen33
11-08-2015, 07:28 PM
right there with carmelo and kobe as the worst ever.

flea
11-08-2015, 07:41 PM
Well I mean, he's never had a good offensive coach (and OMG is Donovan bad. Which sucks),

How is Donovan bad? He's been essentially the best offensive coach in college since Bobby Knight's heyday in Indiana. He runs the system that has become hugely popular in the NBA over the last several years post-Nash. He's clearly letting his players do what they're comfortable with while installing portions of his motion offense bit by bit.

I guarantee Kerr and his assistants watch Billy Donovan game tape for sideline-out plays. Most of the NBA does, he regularly had NBA coaches come and watch his practices.

Scoots
11-08-2015, 08:19 PM
How is Donovan bad? He's been essentially the best offensive coach in college since Bobby Knight's heyday in Indiana. He runs the system that has become hugely popular in the NBA over the last several years post-Nash. He's clearly letting his players do what they're comfortable with while installing portions of his motion offense bit by bit.

I guarantee Kerr and his assistants watch Billy Donovan game tape for sideline-out plays. Most of the NBA does, he regularly had NBA coaches come and watch his practices.

OKCs offense has shown flashes ... but down the stretch it looks like same old same old. I wonder why Billy has put so little of his offense in. Kerr put a lot more of the pace and space offense in by week 1.

flea
11-08-2015, 08:28 PM
OKCs offense has shown flashes ... but down the stretch it looks like same old same old. I wonder why Billy has put so little of his offense in. Kerr put a lot more of the pace and space offense in by week 1.

His offense is not easy to just pick up, there are a lot of blind passes out of P&Rs and it features passing bigs which the Thunder don't really have right now except when Durant plays the 4. Plus the Thunder's offenses ranked 6th, 2nd, 2nd, and 4th before last year (11th last year without Durant). Difficult and somewhat stupid to revamp everything when you've basically got a top 5 offense without changing a thing.

Donovan's biggest impact this year will be situational playcalling and defense, but he is rolling out his offense slowly. EG Westbrook has posted up more this year than I have ever seen before, and a strong post threat or two is a always a feature of Billy Donovan offenses (they are well-balanced). I wouldn't be surprised to see Durant doing more of that too.

Bruno
11-08-2015, 10:17 PM
if you don't like watching Russell Westbrook play then you don't like NBA basketball.

JasonJohnHorn
11-08-2015, 11:20 PM
Only guy I know who leads the league in assists and gets called selfish.

lol

AIRMAR72
11-08-2015, 11:48 PM
Since I've started watching the league he is far and away the biggest ballhog I've seen. Surpassing Kobe, Marburry, Iverson and even Ricky Davis who would actually wave off LeBron.

I've never seen anything like him ever before in the NBA.

Its kobe trust me

AirPippen33
11-09-2015, 08:00 AM
Only guy I know who leads the league in assists and gets called selfish.

lol

he passes about 15 times a game. By which his team mates make sure they dunk the ball right away because they are never getting it back the rest of the game.

Alayla
11-13-2015, 11:09 PM
Since I've started watching the league he is far and away the biggest ballhog I've seen. Surpassing Kobe, Marburry, Iverson and even Ricky Davis who would actually wave off LeBron.

I've never seen anything like him ever before in the NBA.

More like the most underrated player in NBA history people have been giving this guy **** his entire career but hes out there almost averaging a triple double! If his name was Derrick Rose people would be screaming greatness from the rooftops and thats ironic because even preinjury ive always preferred Westbrook to Rose.
Can people stop sucking durant off for 5 minutes and appericate what westbrook has done for ONCE in his career I really feel like he is one of those players people will appericate years after hes retired but no sooner.

PowerHouse
11-13-2015, 11:34 PM
Its kobe trust me

Unlike those other four guys Kobe ballhogged his way to 5 rings.

slashsnake
11-14-2015, 05:48 AM
17 boards... wow. It's like the 2nd coming of Fat Lever last night.

Doubt it will hold up, but through 9 games he's averaging 25 points, 11 assists and 8.6 boards a game. He now gets more boards than Ibaka. Seriously, Anthony Davis is getting less than half a board more than Westy... That's sick.

Honestly, when Durant is out, if the ball isn't in his hands I'd call that a wasted possession if he's out there right now.

Sure, call it ball hogging, but what would you rather he be doing on offense? Giving it up for Ibaka, Adams, and Kanter to show off those post moves? Let Roberson and Waiters take guys off the dribble?

Ball hog sounds bad... when Durant isn't in there, what option do you like better than Westbrook creating with the ball in his hands?

Alayla
11-14-2015, 11:09 PM
17 boards... wow. It's like the 2nd coming of Fat Lever last night.

Doubt it will hold up, but through 9 games he's averaging 25 points, 11 assists and 8.6 boards a game. He now gets more boards than Ibaka. Seriously, Anthony Davis is getting less than half a board more than Westy... That's sick.

Honestly, when Durant is out, if the ball isn't in his hands I'd call that a wasted possession if he's out there right now.

Sure, call it ball hogging, but what would you rather he be doing on offense? Giving it up for Ibaka, Adams, and Kanter to show off those post moves? Let Roberson and Waiters take guys off the dribble?

Ball hog sounds bad... when Durant isn't in there, what option do you like better than Westbrook creating with the ball in his hands?

This he strikes a nearly perfect balance between creating enough offensive himself to force the defense to respect him and passing it off to a teammate when hes in over his head. His teammates are only open as often as they are because hes such a strong offensive force that if you relax or decide not to double or help on him its a free basket but if you do help on him hes going to find that open man.

When your challenging Westbrook your damned no matter what you do.
People still seem to think of the point guard role as strictly for Kidd type players
While that may be ideal that's only if you have capable threats everywhere else that need to be respected equally
This isn't middle school basketball if you have a player with standout talent like that you play to that strength. There is a big reason no NBA HC would dare tell Westbrook to handle the ball less.

Redrum187
11-15-2015, 04:52 AM
he passes about 15 times a game. By which his team mates make sure they dunk the ball right away because they are never getting it back the rest of the game.

I'm actually really laughing out loud. :laugh:

ewing
11-15-2015, 07:55 AM
This he strikes a nearly perfect balance between creating enough offensive himself to force the defense to respect him and passing it off to a teammate when hes in over his head. His teammates are only open as often as they are because hes such a strong offensive force that if you relax or decide not to double or help on him its a free basket but if you do help on him hes going to find that open man.

When your challenging Westbrook your damned no matter what you do.
People still seem to think of the point guard role as strictly for Kidd type players
While that may be ideal that's only if you have capable threats everywhere else that need to be respected equally
This isn't middle school basketball if you have a player with standout talent like that you play to that strength. There is a big reason no NBA HC would dare tell Westbrook to handle the ball less.

I agree. Westbrook cant just decide to be Magic Johnson tomorrow. we can talk about the strengths and flaws in his game but he can no more just decide to be Magic at the point then Kanter can decide to be Hakeem in the post.

FlashBolt
11-15-2015, 04:54 PM
I'm guaranteeing about half of you have never watched an OKC game this season. If you did, you would see that if KD isn't on the court, they have zero creators offensively. He has to ballhog or else Dion Waiters is going to jack up shots. Talk about ball hogging, Dion is a bigger one than Westbrook. "He can't be like Magic Johnson." Why does he have to? They need him to ballhog if they want to win when KD is out. END OF.

CELTICS4LYFE
11-16-2015, 10:51 AM
I've been a big fan of Westbrook but lost a little for him after the game last night, he was throwing shade on Smarts big night against him! Sore loser man

tredigs
11-16-2015, 11:26 AM
Westbrook was pretty tough to watch down the stretch last night. He's asleep at the wheel when he gets in his one man army mode and he's not nearly a good enough shooter to pull it off.


Hadn't checked the line until just now but 5 for 20. Yikes. At least he's able to run into people and get a ton of whistles and knock those down.

FlashBolt
11-16-2015, 05:14 PM
I've been a big fan of Westbrook but lost a little for him after the game last night, he was throwing shade on Smarts big night against him! Sore loser man

I don't think that is true. He's just really competitive to the point where he took it as a slight against him. No doubt, Smart had a great game but it would seem out of character for him to behave like a sore loser.

phantasyyy
11-16-2015, 08:59 PM
I've been a big fan of Westbrook but lost a little for him after the game last night, he was throwing shade on Smarts big night against him! Sore loser man

Yeah he is a sore loser.. big time hhaha, you can see with most post game interviews after a loss, he just aint having it. Its part of his competitive nature and something I think you can appreciate whether or not your an okc fan or not.

At the end of the day he is putting up, 25ppg/10.3ast/8.1reb/2.2stl w/ 4.9to on 20.6fga shooting 43.7%(32.7%).
Like im not sure if anyone recognizes how ridiculous it is for a PG to avg 8 rebounds.. Its that motor that allows him to do so and sometimes that spills over to the offensive side of the court when he takes some brutal and inopportune shots - but that's just who he is. When he makes them its okay, but often times down the stretch when he misses them it gets magnified further.

Also with KD in/out of the lineup, it puts a bigger workload on Westbrook to carry the team as like other posters have stated they flat out have no other creators - which is crazy with all the talent that has come/gone to the franchise. Thus Ibaka is thrusted into a secondary scoring role he isn't equipped to handle..

Also one thing that irks me is that after having such career resurgence/role after being trade to OKC averaging 18.7ppg/11reb in 31m a game he has been cut down to 12ppg/8.1reb in 20m a game. He shooting identical %'s but been relegated to the bench. You'd think Donovan could get more production on the newly signed max center.

tredigs
11-16-2015, 09:06 PM
^Problem is Kanter gives it all right back defensively, which is trouble seeing as he's the last line of defnse. He's probably a net-neutral player all in all. That said, why pay him max just to be on the low end side of a time share with Steven Adams??

TheNumber37
11-16-2015, 11:26 PM
Westbrook is the both athletic PG in NBA history, he should take advantage of that by attacking the basket constantly. That's just playing to your strengths

Chrisclover
11-17-2015, 07:53 AM
How dare you to ignore my man Kobe Bryant???

valade16
11-17-2015, 10:04 AM
^Problem is Kanter gives it all right back defensively, which is trouble seeing as he's the last line of defnse. He's probably a net-neutral player all in all. That said, why pay him max just to be on the low end side of a time share with Steven Adams??

I was very happy when OKC matched Portland's offer for Kanter.

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 10:15 AM
It's one thing to be a ballhog and not as good as you think you are, it's another to be productive and helping your team. Westbrook is the latter. Kobe has tip toed that line plenty in his career, Iverson seemed to hang more in the former arena, MJ in the latter.

I don't mind a hog, if he is helping his team win. I hate a hog when he is hurting his team

valade16
11-17-2015, 10:32 AM
It's one thing to be a ballhog and not as good as you think you are, it's another to be productive and helping your team. Westbrook is the latter. Kobe has tip toed that line plenty in his career, Iverson seemed to hang more in the former arena, MJ in the latter.

I don't mind a hog, if he is helping his team win. I hate a hog when he is hurting his team

Based on? He was drafted by a bad Philly team and made them a perennial playoff team and took them to the Finals. Then went to Denver and helped Melo go to the WCF where previously they couldn't get out of the 1st round. Are you suggesting the 76ers or Nuggets would have had more success without AI during those times?

JLynn943
11-17-2015, 10:33 AM
Sometimes being a ball hog is the best option for your team. That's how AI's teams in Philly were. This Thunder team is a lot less so than those 76ers teams were just because there are other scoring options, but I don't mind Westbrook doing it if he's being as productive as he's been most nights and they're getting wins.

JLynn943
11-17-2015, 10:35 AM
Based on? He was drafted by a bad Philly team and made them a perennial playoff team and took them to the Finals. Then went to Denver and helped Melo go to the WCF where previously they couldn't get out of the 1st round. Are you suggesting the 76ers or Nuggets would have had more success without AI during those times?

That's the story when it comes to Iverson though. Absolutely no respect for him and no recognition for how his game adapted when he finally had capable offensive players around him. He's too polarizing of a personality for people to look at objectively. If anyone in NBA history ever had every right and responsibility to be a ball hog, it was Iverson in Philly.

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 10:56 AM
Based on? He was drafted by a bad Philly team and made them a perennial playoff team and took them to the Finals. Then went to Denver and helped Melo go to the WCF where previously they couldn't get out of the 1st round. Are you suggesting the 76ers or Nuggets would have had more success without AI during those times?

The dude shot 42% from the field, 31% from 3, and 78% from the line

In his career, he scored 105 points per 100 possessions when the league was scoring 106

He was an inefficient chucker who didn't spread the floor at all and shot below league average his entire career.

When you look at his career vs a guy like Nowtizki, Kobe, LeBron, etc....he isn't even in the same arena.

He ball hogged, chucked, and thought he had style.

Probably my least favorite NBA player of all time. Massively over-rated, and a total ball hog who didn't help his teams nearly as much as people say. What helped those teams was the massive defensive loads being carried by great wing and low block defenders (and AI wasn't a bad perimeter defender when he wanted to be).

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 10:59 AM
That's the story when it comes to Iverson though. Absolutely no respect for him and no recognition for how his game adapted when he finally had capable offensive players around him. He's too polarizing of a personality for people to look at objectively. If anyone in NBA history ever had every right and responsibility to be a ball hog, it was Iverson in Philly.

In 01-02, AI took 27 shots per game and shot 39.8% from the field.

The worst performance of anyone on the court for Philly, yet he shot more than twice as often as anyone else.

He absolutely shouldn't have been shooting as much as he did.

valade16
11-17-2015, 10:59 AM
That's the story when it comes to Iverson though. Absolutely no respect for him and no recognition for how his game adapted when he finally had capable offensive players around him. He's too polarizing of a personality for people to look at objectively. If anyone in NBA history ever had every right and responsibility to be a ball hog, it was Iverson in Philly.

I wonder how people justify his transition to Denver? His shot attempts dropped from a 23 per game average in Philly (and 24.4 in the last 3 seasons before he left) to 18.8 in Denver. Similarly, his FG% went from 42% to 45% and his TS% went from 51.3 in Philly (and 53.8 in the 3 years before his exit) to 55.9 in Denver.

As soon as he got some offensive help he shot less and became more efficient.

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 11:01 AM
I wonder how people justify his transition to Denver? His shot attempts dropped from a 23 per game average in Philly (and 24.4 in the last 3 seasons before he left) to 18.8 in Denver. Similarly, his FG% went from 42% to 45% and his TS% went from 51.3 in Philly (and 53.8 in the 3 years before his exit) to 55.9 in Denver.

As soon as he got some offensive help he shot less and became more efficient.

He was shooting less because he wasn't getting the ball as much. A more spread out offense, and he wasn't allowed to shoot as much in Denver.

His usage went from 33 to 26

That's how you argue it. Less opportunities, less stupid shots.

JLynn943
11-17-2015, 11:08 AM
In 01-02, AI took 27 shots per game and shot 39.8% from the field.

The worst performance of anyone on the court for Philly, yet he shot more than twice as often as anyone else.

He absolutely shouldn't have been shooting as much as he did.

If you actually watched those teams, the bad shots being taken by Iverson were usually the best shots available. People fall in love with percentages and efficiency, but those players didn't have the offensive talent to maintain their numbers if they shot more or if teams could ease off of Iverson.

valade16
11-17-2015, 11:14 AM
He was shooting less because he wasn't getting the ball as much. A more spread out offense, and he wasn't allowed to shoot as much in Denver.

His usage went from 33 to 26

That's how you argue it. Less opportunities, less stupid shots.

But if he was as big a ball hog as you say wouldn't he have continued to shoot stupid shots? in short, you're explaining positives in the transition of his game and giving him no credit for those changes.

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 11:15 AM
If you actually watched those teams, the bad shots being taken by Iverson were usually the best shots available. People fall in love with percentages and efficiency, but those players didn't have the offensive talent to maintain their numbers if they shot more and if teams could ease off of Iverson.

You just assume I didn't watch these games?

I was born in 83, after Jordan....we had Kobe and AI to watch. AI and Kobe were both ball hogs, at least Kobe made it happen more often (of course, he had Shaq for a lot of it).

Just because I don't agree with you, doesn't mean I didn't watch the games. I remember plenty of possessions were AI just ran down the court and threw up a floater without distributing or looking for anyone else.


The only times anyone argues for AI, it's over subjective memories and opinions, and never with anything objective, statistical, or even factual.

He was an inefficient chucker, way over-rated all-time.

Most players, if they take 25 shots per game, will average 25+ points per game. You get enough opportunities in 40 minutes to take 25 shots if you really want to. The question is, is it good for the team?

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 11:16 AM
But if he was as big a ball hog as you say wouldn't he have continued to shoot stupid shots? in short, you're explaining positives in the transition of his game and giving him no credit for those changes.

When he is getting the ball 25% less often on the court, of course not. He doesn't get the chance to shoot it in the first place because he doesn't even touch it.

valade16
11-17-2015, 11:18 AM
The dude shot 42% from the field, 31% from 3, and 78% from the line

In his career, he scored 105 points per 100 possessions when the league was scoring 106

He was an inefficient chucker who didn't spread the floor at all and shot below league average his entire career.

When you look at his career vs a guy like Nowtizki, Kobe, LeBron, etc....he isn't even in the same arena.

He ball hogged, chucked, and thought he had style.

Probably my least favorite NBA player of all time. Massively over-rated, and a total ball hog who didn't help his teams nearly as much as people say. What helped those teams was the massive defensive loads being carried by great wing and low block defenders (and AI wasn't a bad perimeter defender when he wanted to be).

Can you name an offensive option on his Philly team outside AI? Defense was indeed where they made their name, but a team that only plays defense isn't going to win. At some point you need offense. AI was their offense.

valade16
11-17-2015, 11:20 AM
When he is getting the ball 25% less often on the court, of course not. He doesn't get the chance to shoot it in the first place because he doesn't even touch it.

But he took better shots. He incorporated his game into the offense and the team flourished. You can't say none of that was on AI.

The reason you think he is overrated is because everything positive he did you dismiss and you only mention the negative things. That is the definition of a hater.

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 11:22 AM
Can you name an offensive option on his Philly team outside AI? Defense was indeed where they made their name, but a team that only plays defense isn't going to win. At some point you need offense. AI was their offense.

Offenses don't have to rank in order of options.

When you don't have a guy that creates his own shots with any efficiency like a LeBron or Jordan, it's just fine having a ball movement team that allows players to get open through screens and movement.

And that's what Philly should have been. But AI thought he was Jordan, and he was allowed to play like that.

McKie, Snow, Dikembe, etc can help you get plenty of points if you are willing to spread the ball around and move it. AI could still take 20+ shots per game as a fast floor scrambling PG coming off screens from big men.

Instead, he used his handles and 'skillz' to try to create one on four shots for himself and he didn't make nearly enough of them. And then managed to look around at everyone else like it was their fault he took the shot.....

I can't tell you how many times I remember him taking a dual defended shot with 7+ seconds left on the shot clock.

JLynn943
11-17-2015, 11:25 AM
You just assume I didn't watch these games?

I was born in 83, after Jordan....we had Kobe and AI to watch. AI and Kobe were both ball hogs, at least Kobe made it happen more often (of course, he had Shaq for a lot of it).

Just because I don't agree with you, doesn't mean I didn't watch the games. I remember plenty of possessions were AI just ran down the court and threw up a floater without distributing or looking for anyone else.


The only times anyone argues for AI, it's over subjective memories and opinions, and never with anything objective, statistical, or even factual.

He was an inefficient chucker, way over-rated all-time.

Most players, if they take 25 shots per game, will average 25+ points per game. You get enough opportunities in 40 minutes to take 25 shots if you really want to. The question is, is it good for the team?

Well, you either didn't watch the games or refuse to look at the team with any sort of critical eye. Usually you're good about not taking things at face value, but you've eaten up the narrative and are looking back at his play with whatever the opposite of rose-tinted glasses is.

I'm not saying he didn't take bad shots. I'm not saying he shouldn't have passed more. There's a balance to be struck, and I'd say he was on the side of shooting too much. However, I don't think it was far off. He drew all of the attention which is why he could (and did) kick it out and get the assists that he did. You couldn't trust anyone other than Iverson to take the load on offense. McKie and Mutombo contributed, but not enough. There just weren't better options on those teams. Eric Snow was nowhere near good enough.

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 11:30 AM
But he took better shots. He incorporated his game into the offense and the team flourished. You can't say none of that was on AI.

The reason you think he is overrated is because everything positive he did you dismiss and you only mention the negative things. That is the definition of a hater.

I absolutely dislike AI.

I dislike him because of his self-absorbed style of play and personality.

But I rank him lower all-time because statistically he is way over-rated.


238 NBA players took 10,000 shots all-time.

AI's .425 is tied with Latreel Spreewell for 25th worst in that group.

The only active player on this list is Jamal Crawford.

It's not just blind hate. It's understood because of how inefficient he was.

On this same list, his .518 TS% is 78th worst

But people want to talk about him in the top 25 or 50 conversations?

No way.

And of the guys that shot this poorly, but took 20 shots per game? He is the only one to play in the last 40 years.

He was a ball-hog

JLynn943
11-17-2015, 11:34 AM
He was shooting less because he wasn't getting the ball as much. A more spread out offense, and he wasn't allowed to shoot as much in Denver.

His usage went from 33 to 26

That's how you argue it. Less opportunities, less stupid shots.

He wasn't allowed to shoot as much? Why not he didn't have to shoot as much? It would also explain the high amount of assists that he had. That team freed him up to have a better year because it took the pressure off of him and gave him players who could space and score.

Jeffy25
11-17-2015, 11:36 AM
Westbrook for example.

He started shooting with a higher volume in 11-12

Since then, he takes 19.4 shots per game, makes 44% of them, and has a true shooting of .538%

In the seasons that AI took at least 19 shots per game, he made 44% twice (06-07 and 04-05) and 06-07 is the only year he had a .538 TS% (.540)

Westbrook has been out playing ever year of AI's career for the last 4+ years...and we are just now talking about him?

JLynn943
11-17-2015, 11:41 AM
I absolutely dislike AI.

I dislike him because of his self-absorbed style of play and personality.

But I rank him lower all-time because statistically he is way over-rated.


238 NBA players took 10,000 shots all-time.

AI's .425 is tied with Latreel Spreewell for 25th worst in that group.

The only active player on this list is Jamal Crawford.

It's not just blind hate. It's understood because of how inefficient he was.

On this same list, his .518 TS% is 78th worst

But people want to talk about him in the top 25 or 50 conversations?

No way.

And of the guys that shot this poorly, but took 20 shots per game? He is the only one to play in the last 40 years.

He was a ball-hog

That's why your take on him is useless. You're biased and won't look at context (or the years where his team was offensively capable).

valade16
11-17-2015, 11:41 AM
Offenses don't have to rank in order of options.

When you don't have a guy that creates his own shots with any efficiency like a LeBron or Jordan, it's just fine having a ball movement team that allows players to get open through screens and movement.

And that's what Philly should have been. But AI thought he was Jordan, and he was allowed to play like that.

McKie, Snow, Dikembe, etc can help you get plenty of points if you are willing to spread the ball around and move it. AI could still take 20+ shots per game as a fast floor scrambling PG coming off screens from big men.

Instead, he used his handles and 'skillz' to try to create one on four shots for himself and he didn't make nearly enough of them. And then managed to look around at everyone else like it was their fault he took the shot.....

I can't tell you how many times I remember him taking a dual defended shot with 7+ seconds left on the shot clock.

Eric Snow is a career 42.4 FG% and 20.8% 3PT shooter (.492 TS%) whose best shooting years were actually with AI.

McKie is a career 43.8 FG% and 35.0% 3PT shooter (.514 TS%) whose best shooting years were actually with AI.

So you criticize AI for his bad shooting % and suggest he defer to guys who actually have worse shooting percentages than him? (keep in mind Snow and McKie's shots were set shots more often than AI's which were more difficult shots, only compounding their offensive ineptitude).

Sorry, that is a dumb idea. got any other bright ideas?

JLynn943
11-17-2015, 11:49 AM
Westbrook for example.

He started shooting with a higher volume in 11-12

Since then, he takes 19.4 shots per game, makes 44% of them, and has a true shooting of .538%

In the seasons that AI took at least 19 shots per game, he made 44% twice (06-07 and 04-05) and 06-07 is the only year he had a .538 TS% (.540)

Westbrook has been out playing ever year of AI's career for the last 4+ years...and we are just now talking about him?

If you can't/won't see the difference in Westbrook's situation versus Iverson's, you're hopeless. There is more to it than numbers. There aren't enough statistics in basketball to account for all of the context.

JLynn943
11-17-2015, 11:51 AM
Eric Snow is a career 42.4 FG% and 20.8% 3PT shooter (.492 TS%) whose best shooting years were actually with AI.

McKie is a career 43.8 FG% and 35.0% 3PT shooter (.514 TS%) whose best shooting years were actually with AI.

So you criticize AI for his bad shooting % and suggest he defer to guys who actually have worse shooting percentages than him? (keep in mind Snow and McKie's shots were set shots more often than AI's which were more difficult shots, only compounding their offensive ineptitude).

Sorry, that is a dumb idea. got any other bright ideas?

So you mean playing with a ball-dominant, offensively-skilled guard that drew the attention of the defense helped lesser players around him have better percentages? No way.

Chronz
11-17-2015, 01:36 PM
Can you name an offensive option on his Philly team outside AI? Defense was indeed where they made their name, but a team that only plays defense isn't going to win. At some point you need offense. AI was their offense.

But they built that team with AI in mind, he clashed with some of the more offensive minded players precisely because he didn't pass as much. AI had some great years and he became more efficient with more help (this tends to happen to most stars) but he wasn't the kind of guy to make his teammates better outside his volume chucking. Look at a guy like Andre Miller, he got more out of his teammates by delivering the ball on point. If you look at Iggy and Melo's efficiency with Dre vs with AI, its a startling difference that illustrates just how much AI forced it.

BTW, AI never took the Nuggs to the WCF, that was Billups who approached the game in a team oriented fashion and could actually influence the game without the ball. He got Melo to play defense and allowed him to focus on his own play without having to worry about leading the troops. Billups was a true floor general, superior to even the best from AI imo.

Chronz
11-17-2015, 01:41 PM
But he took better shots. He incorporated his game into the offense and the team flourished. You can't say none of that was on AI.

The reason you think he is overrated is because everything positive he did you dismiss and you only mention the negative things. That is the definition of a hater.

Flourished is a strong word, they improved because he was better than Andre Miller but what Jeffy is getting at is his chuckingness was detracting from teammates who could have done more to help the offense out, even if its by virtue of making AI more efficient in a smaller capacity (which he wasn't always willing to do). And when he lacked the talent around him, it was because management knew what they had. Either get offensive players who wont be optimized around AI or find him guys that can impact the game while allowing him to chuck to his hearts content. They had their most success when they crafted an elite defense to make up for him.

Chronz
11-17-2015, 01:51 PM
So you mean playing with a ball-dominant, offensively-skilled guard that drew the attention of the defense helped lesser players around him have better percentages? No way.

Of course he helped their efficiency, he was taking all the shots leaving them with the scraps. High% scraps indeed but thats not the only way to slice this pie, there are less ball dominant, offensively skilled players that could have accomplished similar feats. Like did AI really have to stunt Iggy's growth? I always felt Iggy and Korver were capable of more when they were with him. But I guess its hard to blame AI for what Mo Cheaks allowed Webber to do. If anyone was highjacking the offense it was Webber trying to regain his prior form. AI actually played extremely well that year but I think you understand my point.

valade16
11-17-2015, 03:33 PM
Flourished is a strong word, they improved because he was better than Andre Miller but what Jeffy is getting at is his chuckingness was detracting from teammates who could have done more to help the offense out, even if its by virtue of making AI more efficient in a smaller capacity (which he wasn't always willing to do). And when he lacked the talent around him, it was because management knew what they had. Either get offensive players who wont be optimized around AI or find him guys that can impact the game while allowing him to chuck to his hearts content. They had their most success when they crafted an elite defense to make up for him.

I'm not saying AI didn't have his faults. We all know what they were. I'm saying guys like Jeffy act like he was garbage that never helped the team. He helped the 76ers tremendously. It's weird to me how when it's AI people say "you have to craft the team in a very specific way to highlight his playing style" and say the exact thing about LeBron but for AI it's a criticism and for LeBron it's not.

How many times have we heard what LeBron needs are off-ball shooters and defensive rim protectors? Yes, LeBron is way better than AI, but it's only used as a negative for AI. We could go through all the guards like Magic, Kobe, etc., heck even the 2nd level guys like Reggie, Allen, AI and list specifically how the team would need to be built to maximize their performance.

But we saw AI excel in a situation tailored to his talents. That holds value. AI was a low efficiency scorer who took too many shots, but he was still a good player that positively impacted the game for his team and gets too much hate for his faults compared to other good players with flaws.

Not to constantly bring up LeBron, but everyone defended him in the Finals despite his atrocious scoring efficiency by pointing out everything else he did and that they needed him to take on that scoring load even with the reduced efficiency.

If we can understand how a low efficiency scorer can still be a net positive with LeBron, why can't we do the same with AI?

Kashmir13579
11-18-2015, 12:34 AM
Biggest? No.
Best ballhog? Maybe...

Jeffy25
11-18-2015, 12:41 AM
I'm not saying AI didn't have his faults. We all know what they were. I'm saying guys like Jeffy act like he was garbage that never helped the team. He helped the 76ers tremendously. It's weird to me how when it's AI people say "you have to craft the team in a very specific way to highlight his playing style" and say the exact thing about LeBron but for AI it's a criticism and for LeBron it's not.

How many times have we heard what LeBron needs are off-ball shooters and defensive rim protectors? Yes, LeBron is way better than AI, but it's only used as a negative for AI. We could go through all the guards like Magic, Kobe, etc., heck even the 2nd level guys like Reggie, Allen, AI and list specifically how the team would need to be built to maximize their performance.

But we saw AI excel in a situation tailored to his talents. That holds value. AI was a low efficiency scorer who took too many shots, but he was still a good player that positively impacted the game for his team and gets too much hate for his faults compared to other good players with flaws.

Not to constantly bring up LeBron, but everyone defended him in the Finals despite his atrocious scoring efficiency by pointing out everything else he did and that they needed him to take on that scoring load even with the reduced efficiency.

If we can understand how a low efficiency scorer can still be a net positive with LeBron, why can't we do the same with AI?

I didn't say he was garbage, I said he was over-rated

I think his hogging hurt his overall team. If he could have played as a team orientated player, I think he could have had more success.

PowerHouse
11-18-2015, 01:57 AM
What is it that defines "ballhog" anyways?

Shouldnt we be including Michael Jordan in this convo?

I mean the dude jacked up a ****-ton of shots in his career did he not?

There wasnt any specifications/detail about it. Are we talking about the least efficient ballhog? Ballhogs with the highest USG%? Most successful ballhogs? Least successfull ballhogs? Is there a difference between ballhog and a shot-chucker?

The term ballhog is just too vague for me to wrap my head around it.