PDA

View Full Version : Stat filling losers ... is it ever possible to debate their games?



Scoots
04-01-2016, 11:25 AM
There have been a lot of players over the years that have put up great stats year after year, they make all-star games, they are on the top-player lists every year, and year after year their teams don't succeed. Is it ever possible to declare that they are the problem and not the coach, the quality of the team, injuries, bad matchups, etc, etc, etc.

Someone always has an excuse for some players ... but isn't it possible these players are just not winners?

Meanwhile other players who don't ever put up great numbers seem to always be around winning teams but they are just lucky?

Vee-Rex
04-01-2016, 11:47 AM
It's largely situational because you have to know that organization/coaching/roster has nothing to do with it, and that's kind of difficult to gauge sometimes. It's easy to mislabel someone as something when we, as fans, don't know the ins and outs of the entire situation. We're on the outside looking in.

Also, there's the fact that sometimes... teams just won't win. There's 30 teams in the NBA and we're in an era where everyone wants to join up and create multi-all-star superteams. It's a lot harder for just one all-star to carry a team to a playoffs, especially if the coaching/roster and organization is poor.

Scoots
04-01-2016, 12:12 PM
I guess that's what I was thinking ... particularly back in the day when star players almost never changed teams a player who is perceived as a superstar could make the playoffs 30% of the seasons of their career and still be considered great because we don't really have a way to judge them apart from the team.

BallDontLie
04-01-2016, 12:36 PM
Love and Cousins come to mind. In Minny Love was thought to be the best PF for a stretch but never accomplished anything, jsut looked good on paper. Even before this season people talked about Cousins being the best Center even though his poor shooting numbers suggest otherwise anyway.

Chronz
04-01-2016, 12:51 PM
On my phone but to put it simply, we're all just guessing. That's where the subjective fun comes into play.

I don't dismiss winning and losing but i try to isolate why teams win and lose and distribute the credit accordingly.

I try to grade rebounders by the rebounding and defensive success of their teams, playmakers by the offensive success of his squad, scorers by their efficiency and subjective degree of difficulty. You consider the teams play with and without said star

Chronz
04-01-2016, 12:52 PM
Love and Cousins come to mind. In Minny Love was thought to be the best PF for a stretch but never accomplished anything, jsut looked good on paper. Even before this season people talked about Cousins being the best Center even though his poor shooting numbers suggest otherwise anyway.
But even KG lost in Minny

Beltrans Mole
04-01-2016, 01:07 PM
There are certain guys who can adapt to winning cultures/organizations seamlessly and still be effective players, and then there are guys who CANNOT do that. I'll leave it at that.

Vinylman
04-01-2016, 01:15 PM
But even KG lost in Minny

he made the playoffs 7 straight years... he lost at the beginning of his career because they were an expansion team... he got drafted 5 years into their existence...

big difference between him and Love

Vinylman
04-01-2016, 01:19 PM
he made the playoffs 7 straight years... he lost at the beginning of his career because they were an expansion team... he got drafted 5 years into their existence...

big difference between him and Love

my mistake.... 8 STRAIGHT YEARS

Scoots
04-01-2016, 01:30 PM
KG is a good case of the opposite of a stat filling loser. Everywhere he went the team won at a better clip than their talent would imply. But KG was a great defensive player ... maybe that's the difference. Offense doesn't travel as well if there isn't D to go along with it ... offense always looks good but doesn't necessarily make the team a winner.

So if that is the case then the issue is fundamentally our inability to evaluate and agree objectively on an individual player's defensive level.

BallDontLie
04-01-2016, 01:31 PM
But even KG lost in Minny

he at least made the playoffs and made a WCF appearance.

Chronz
04-01-2016, 01:36 PM
he made the playoffs 7 straight years... he lost at the beginning of his career because they were an expansion team... he got drafted 5 years into their existence...

big difference between him and Love
5 years is still expansion territory? Shaq did major damage with Orlando then. Either way, if a guy as dominant as KG can miss out, why should we hold a lesser player to such a standard? KG was missing the playoffs when he was at the top of his game, would him making the playoffs as a young pup really mean more than that fact?

ewing
04-01-2016, 01:38 PM
But even KG lost in Minny

Kg wasn't that good

ewing
04-01-2016, 01:42 PM
KG is a good case of the opposite of a stat filling loser. Everywhere he went the team won at a better clip than their talent would imply. But KG was a great defensive player ... maybe that's the difference. Offense doesn't travel as well if there isn't D to go along with it ... offense always looks good but doesn't necessarily make the team a winner.

So if that is the case then the issue is fundamentally our inability to evaluate and agree objectively on an individual player's defensive level.

really?

ewing
04-01-2016, 01:44 PM
to answer the Op's question. Yeah some guys are losers. KG wasn't a loser. he is just overrated. Marbury is a guy that comes right mind as a loser. watching that guy as a knicks was brutal

Chronz
04-01-2016, 01:45 PM
he at least made the playoffs and made a WCF appearance.
Yeah, he's lost in r1, the finals, missed the playoffs entirely. I think KG is the perfect example of how much your teammates influence your winning legacy. It's why i don't value your team success as much as many i know. This is a sport where 1player can propel you into contention but it's also one where its best player can miss the playoffs altogether if he's missing that player

nycericanguy
04-01-2016, 02:02 PM
Leadership and IQ is underrated. Marbury was so talented but he was a horrible leader on the court at least. And his defense was suspect. Took plays off and would get frustrated and down instead of encouraging teammates. Then Jason Kidd came in and took the Nets to the finals even though he shot under 40% and didn't score anywhere near as much as Marbury.

Cousins is kind of in the same boat, though his team finally made it to 30 wins this year...lol. But you watch him on the court and he just seems interested only on offense, is always grumpy and has a negative attitude and just takes plays off alot of times.

When your best player sets a bad example its easy not to get the most of your talent... vs when your best guy is always demanding 100% and leading by example, it's hard not to follow suit.

BallDontLie
04-01-2016, 02:05 PM
since when is KG overrated?

BallDontLie
04-01-2016, 02:06 PM
Yeah, he's lost in r1, the finals, missed the playoffs entirely. I think KG is the perfect example of how much your teammates influence your winning legacy. It's why i don't value your team success as much as many i know. This is a sport where 1player can propel you into contention but it's also one where its best player can miss the playoffs altogether if he's missing that player

but im talking about guys like Love and Cousins who put up big numbers put never made any positive impact on the win column.

valade16
04-01-2016, 02:19 PM
but im talking about guys like Love and Cousins who put up big numbers put never made any positive impact on the win column.

Yeah, KG took a weak Minny team to the playoffs 8 years and then went to the WCF with Sprewell and Cassell. The year he is referring to is after that they missed the playoffs but even then they had a winning record (44-38) in a tough Western conference.

FlashBolt
04-01-2016, 02:21 PM
Are we really calling KG a stat-stuffer now? That's just disrespectful. His team back at Minny were just laughable. It was a total mess. The fact he was able to lead that team to the WCF is amazing considering the Lakers, Kings, Spurs, Suns, and Mavs were always great teams. Stat-stuffer was K.Love and D.Cousins. Those guys put up insane numbers but always lose. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Kings are this terrible. They should be making the playoffs by now.. no excuses.

Scoots
04-01-2016, 02:22 PM
Leadership and IQ is underrated. Marbury was so talented but he was a horrible leader on the court at least. And his defense was suspect. Took plays off and would get frustrated and down instead of encouraging teammates. Then Jason Kidd came in and took the Nets to the finals even though he shot under 40% and didn't score anywhere near as much as Marbury.

Cousins is kind of in the same boat, though his team finally made it to 30 wins this year...lol. But you watch him on the court and he just seems interested only on offense, is always grumpy and has a negative attitude and just takes plays off alot of times.

When your best player sets a bad example its easy not to get the most of your talent... vs when your best guy is always demanding 100% and leading by example, it's hard not to follow suit.

Cousins is still getting his numbers though :)

I think Rondo is a terrible influence on him too.

Vee-Rex
04-01-2016, 02:52 PM
Don't think I really like the negative connotation that "stat-stuffer" or "stat-filler" gives. Everyone wants to use it in a demeaning way towards Cousins and others.

Fine, Cousins isn't quite the takemyteamtotheplayoffs kind of player, but his stats aren't exactly meaningless either. From what I've seen, every Kings-w/o Cousins statistic shows that they are a much worse team when he's not on the court.

The only type of players that can carry a team on their back to the playoffs will do it defensively or by play-making for their teammates. The simple fact of the matter is that not every all-star level player is capable of doing this.

The question is - do we shrug and accept that some all-stars can't carry their teams on their backs and thus, can't reach that next level? Or do we bash them relentlessly, calling them losers while devaluing their impact on the court?

I'll go with the former. Unfortunately, many fans only prefer to bash.

Also, KG is not overrated... ewing you're out of your mind lol

beasted86
04-01-2016, 03:05 PM
I'm not sure there can be one player that causes a team to lose big time though. Maybe under achieve, but certainly not take an otherwise playoff team down to a bottom 6 record consistently.

To be fair and equal, I also don't believe you can put LeBron, Durant or Curry on the Sixers and drastically turn them around either without completely changing the system and players around them.

Scoots
04-01-2016, 03:37 PM
Don't think I really like the negative connotation that "stat-stuffer" or "stat-filler" gives. Everyone wants to use it in a demeaning way towards Cousins and others.

Fine, Cousins isn't quite the takemyteamtotheplayoffs kind of player, but his stats aren't exactly meaningless either. From what I've seen, every Kings-w/o Cousins statistic shows that they are a much worse team when he's not on the court.

The only type of players that can carry a team on their back to the playoffs will do it defensively or by play-making for their teammates. The simple fact of the matter is that not every all-star level player is capable of doing this.

The question is - do we shrug and accept that some all-stars can't carry their teams on their backs and thus, can't reach that next level? Or do we bash them relentlessly, calling them losers while devaluing their impact on the court?

I'll go with the former. Unfortunately, many fans only prefer to bash.

Also, KG is not overrated... ewing you're out of your mind lol

What I've noticed in addition to what you said is that good players on good teams get bashed for not being good enough, or being system players, while players who put up big numbers on bad teams are lauded and given awards.

On another note with players environments being important: Boris Diaw was under-appreciated, he worked for a coach who saw what he did best and had him do it and he was a revelation, then he worked for a coach who wanted him to be a PF again and he was below average, then he worked for a coach who saw what he did best and he became a good player again. Boris didn't change, but how he was perceived by fans and how he was used changed a lot over his career. We can look at players who have had changes in environment and drastic changes in fortune and it throws even more questions into this debate ... Rajon Rondo and Kevin Love come to mind as players who have thrived, then struggled in their careers with the biggest differences being their environments.

Chronz
04-01-2016, 04:20 PM
but im talking about guys like Love and Cousins who put up big numbers put never made any positive impact on the win column.
I know what you're trying to get at but the truth is they did make a positive impact in the win column. So what's the criteria? Love actually won more games than KG did at one point but he was no where near him as a player for reasons beyond their teams success. It's not like you couldn't build with Love and be a perennial playoff team, it's that much of a team game

FlashBolt
04-01-2016, 05:46 PM
Don't think I really like the negative connotation that "stat-stuffer" or "stat-filler" gives. Everyone wants to use it in a demeaning way towards Cousins and others.

Fine, Cousins isn't quite the takemyteamtotheplayoffs kind of player, but his stats aren't exactly meaningless either. From what I've seen, every Kings-w/o Cousins statistic shows that they are a much worse team when he's not on the court.

The only type of players that can carry a team on their back to the playoffs will do it defensively or by play-making for their teammates. The simple fact of the matter is that not every all-star level player is capable of doing this.

The question is - do we shrug and accept that some all-stars can't carry their teams on their backs and thus, can't reach that next level? Or do we bash them relentlessly, calling them losers while devaluing their impact on the court?

I'll go with the former. Unfortunately, many fans only prefer to bash.

Also, KG is not overrated... ewing you're out of your mind lol

Of course it means something but it can also mean that he's not a winner -- which is what happens when you can't mix a great player in a team capable of winning a championship. I mean just look at Love. That guy is all the proof you need. Coming to the Cavs hurt his numbers and exposed him due to his inability to play in a high level team.

YAALREADYKNO
04-01-2016, 06:29 PM
Love and cousins are the definition of stat stuffers and I hate it that everyone in the media seems to give cousins a pass for it where as love was criticized for not being able to lead the wolves to the playoffs

kobe4thewinbang
04-01-2016, 07:05 PM
Love and cousins are the definition of stat stuffers and I hate it that everyone in the media seems to give cousins a pass for it where as love was criticized for not being able to lead the wolves to the playoffsYeah, but Kings only decent roster is this year's. They're not going to make it, but if they'd won 5 more games, they might've. Cousins getting suspended doesn't help, and he's got issues, but he either drops 30 or has a bad game. He's got the fire of a winner. They never should've fired Malone. Love hasn't really done much for Cleveland post-Wiggins trade, so I think he's worse. He's still new to the team and that injury sucked, but we'll see come playoff time if he figures out a role or not.

Dade County
04-01-2016, 08:21 PM
Kg wasn't that good

Lol Yes he was

FlashBolt
04-01-2016, 09:08 PM
Love and cousins are the definition of stat stuffers and I hate it that everyone in the media seems to give cousins a pass for it where as love was criticized for not being able to lead the wolves to the playoffs

Agreed. Cousins is regarded as the best center but I don't think the best player in any position should have that bad of a team. Even with Harden, they are still in the playoff picture. Cousins is nowhere near any of that.. he's been in the league for six years already... At least Love was close to leading his team.

naps
04-02-2016, 02:21 AM
It's a team game first and foremost. I think there are just a handful of players that are capable of making significant impact when it comes to theoretically placing them in such and such teams and expect them to be significantly better. But in general though, I think some all-stars just never figure it out in their whole careers. They just don't adjust their games and focus on the winning plays and making teammates engaged more or they never see there are two ends of the game.

Then there are players that are not great statistically but you just know when you watch them they make winning plays and they are usually great leaders. Chauncey Billups fits this criteria perfectly. Probably the most underrated star/leader/winner of last 15 years.


Kg wasn't that good

Drop that pipe.

ghettosean
04-02-2016, 10:13 AM
Leadership and IQ is underrated. Marbury was so talented but he was a horrible leader on the court at least. And his defense was suspect. Took plays off and would get frustrated and down instead of encouraging teammates. Then Jason Kidd came in and took the Nets to the finals even though he shot under 40% and didn't score anywhere near as much as Marbury.

Cousins is kind of in the same boat, though his team finally made it to 30 wins this year...lol. But you watch him on the court and he just seems interested only on offense, is always grumpy and has a negative attitude and just takes plays off alot of times.

When your best player sets a bad example its easy not to get the most of your talent... vs when your best guy is always demanding 100% and leading by example, it's hard not to follow suit.

Well said sir!

True Sports Fan
04-02-2016, 01:22 PM
People who are bashing Cousins... Have you forgotten how terrible the teams have been around him? This year wasn't as bad, but no consistent shooting or scoring around him, he's had to take on the full load. It's typically Cousins dominates or Kings lose in a blowout.

basketballkitty
04-02-2016, 01:54 PM
People who are bashing Cousins... Have you forgotten how terrible the teams have been around him? This year wasn't as bad, but no consistent shooting or scoring around him, he's had to take on the full load. It's typically Cousins dominates or Kings lose in a blowout.



Cousins is a Loser. And he HAS had several past players, some even All-star players around him, and yet Sac has never Improved much. Cousins is the " Donald Trump " of the league. Meaning, all he likes to do is BULLY people around. Act like he is so tough. Talk about what his OWN personal achievements are...rather then focus on what is best for his TEAM.


If you truly wanna remember a Sac Legend who also was on some very bad teams, but at least conducted himself with CLASS...Look no further then Mitch Richmond.

mngopher35
04-02-2016, 02:02 PM
As others have already pointed out I think there are some indicators to look for if you think someone's stats aren't giving a good picture. Defense (which I think stats can be bad at judging), iq (example making right plays), influence (whether that be creating for teammates or changing the defenses approach), and of course context of the teams/coaches/systems/role for the player.

Basically I think it is possible for numbers to inflate a players value some but normally the context surrounding it can hint to that. Case by case context must be used, not just if the teams were winning x amount or not.

Heediot
04-03-2016, 07:50 AM
Kevin Love. Every time I watched the Cavs he is worthless. They should of kept Wiggins and acquired a guy like Milsap (who's stock wasn't too high at the time) or Thad Young. These guys would of gave the Cavs at worse the same production as the current Love.

Vinylman
04-03-2016, 03:16 PM
5 years is still expansion territory? Shaq did major damage with Orlando then. Either way, if a guy as dominant as KG can miss out, why should we hold a lesser player to such a standard? KG was missing the playoffs when he was at the top of his game, would him making the playoffs as a young pup really mean more than that fact?

look at the difference in rosters... if you don't understand you are beyond hope

JasonJohnHorn
04-03-2016, 03:46 PM
Iverson vs. Billups.

I'd takes Billups in his prime for 10 years over Iverson in his prime for 10 years.


You look at Denver and what they did with Billups in the short term, and compare it to what Iverson did in Detroit....


It's pretty clear that chemistry, leadership, and the humility to understand that basketball is a team sport is far more important than being able to chuck up 30 shots a game and lead the league in scoring.

smith&wesson
04-03-2016, 03:51 PM
I don't know how KG entered this convo when he is a champion..

I think were more so talking about players like Carmelo who put up great offensive numbers but his teams aren't successful.

Imo players like Melo could easily have a role on a championship team as their offensive ability is always valuable. But that doesn't mean you want to build your team solely around that one players offense. You still need game changers on the defensive end, and floor leaders to do more than just score etc. You just need a player like Melot to take good shots and not dominate the ball.

Funny enough, I think Melo and KG would have been a crazy pairing in their prime.

McAllen Tx
04-03-2016, 04:00 PM
Ive always thought of Elton Brand as a stat stuffer. A 20/10 machine but only made play-offs twice. Good guy and solid career but not a winner.

Chronz
04-03-2016, 04:17 PM
look at the difference in rosters... if you don't understand you are beyond hope

Yes, I understand the difference, it's why citing him making the playoffs whilst being an inferior version of himself, doesn't say much. My entire point here is that supporting casts matter so much more than one individual. The thread asks us how to grade losers and my response is the greatest player in the game can be a loser so we shouldn't automatically down play a guys contributions if he's on a losing team the way it seems some do for Love. To me, Love proved more as a number1 option than a guy like Bosh. But as a team player around a superior star, I'd rather have Bosh. If that doesn't make sense then you sir are beyond hope

Vinylman
04-03-2016, 04:44 PM
Yes, I understand the difference, it's why citing him making the playoffs whilst being an inferior version of himself, doesn't say much. My entire point here is that supporting casts matter so much more than one individual. The thread asks us how to grade losers and my response is the greatest player in the game can be a loser so we shouldn't automatically down play a guys contributions if he's on a losing team the way it seems some do for Love. To me, Love proved more as a number1 option than a guy like Bosh. But as a team player around a superior star, I'd rather have Bosh. If that doesn't make sense then you sir are beyond hope

but that isn't what you said... you compared KG to cousins and Love....

that is ludicrous

whether your other point above has merit is irrelevant to what i was responding to.

Chronz
04-03-2016, 05:50 PM
but that isn't what you said... you compared KG to cousins and Love....

that is ludicrous

whether your other point above has merit is irrelevant to what i was responding to.
Huh? That's what I've been getting at this entire time.
It's not ludicrous because it proves my point exactly.

G_S_W
04-05-2016, 04:01 PM
Known stat stuffers:

Uni-brow

Jamarcus Cousins

Kevin Love

Caramel Anthony

Westbrook (without KD)

James Hardon

Marco Ricky Rubio

BallDontLie
04-05-2016, 04:57 PM
how is Westbrook a stat stuffer without KD?

JasonJohnHorn
04-05-2016, 04:58 PM
Ive always thought of Elton Brand as a stat stuffer. A 20/10 machine but only made play-offs twice. Good guy and solid career but not a winner.

He was a solid player who was on a bad team. He started off on a team who was re-building, and whose re-build was set back by Jay Williams career ending injury. Then they dumped him on a team who had been perpetually re-building for 20 years. I mean, Jeff McInnis was their second leading scorer. His second season, him and Magette missed twenty games, and Odom missed about half the season.


It's not like that was a great team. And when they had a decent roster, they made it to the second round of the playoffs.

But the Clippers were always a team that struggled to build on success. They lost Odom ot free agency. Their owner didn't want to spend money.

By the time he got to Philly, he had a rough time with injuries.

McAllen Tx
04-05-2016, 08:04 PM
He was a solid player who was on a bad team. He started off on a team who was re-building, and whose re-build was set back by Jay Williams career ending injury. Then they dumped him on a team who had been perpetually re-building for 20 years. I mean, Jeff McInnis was their second leading scorer. His second season, him and Magette missed twenty games, and Odom missed about half the season.


It's not like that was a great team. And when they had a decent roster, they made it to the second round of the playoffs.

But the Clippers were always a team that struggled to build on success. They lost Odom ot free agency. Their owner didn't want to spend money.

By the time he got to Philly, he had a rough time with injuries.

All true but why does he get excuses and not Love & Cousins? When has either of them (talking about Loves T-Wolves team) played on good teams? Im not defending either Cousins or Love just not gonna make excuses for Brand. He made the play-offs twice in a 12 year career. And them play-offs came 5 years apart on 2 different teams. How much better can you say the Kings or T-Wolves were then Brands teams?

Also have seen Melo on here a bunch but he has lead a team to the play-offs ten straight years as the main guy. How long is that list of players to do that?

Shammyguy3
04-05-2016, 09:27 PM
It's a team game first and foremost. I think there are just a handful of players that are capable of making significant impact when it comes to theoretically placing them in such and such teams and expect them to be significantly better. But in general though, I think some all-stars just never figure it out in their whole careers. They just don't adjust their games and focus on the winning plays and making teammates engaged more or they never see there are two ends of the game.

Then there are players that are not great statistically but you just know when you watch them they make winning plays and they are usually great leaders. Chauncey Billups fits this criteria perfectly. Probably the most underrated star/leader/winner of last 15 years.



Drop that pipe.


Billups was GREAT statistically

JasonJohnHorn
04-05-2016, 10:04 PM
All true but why does he get excuses and not Love & Cousins? When has either of them (talking about Loves T-Wolves team) played on good teams? Im not defending either Cousins or Love just not gonna make excuses for Brand. He made the play-offs twice in a 12 year career. And them play-offs came 5 years apart on 2 different teams. How much better can you say the Kings or T-Wolves were then Brands teams?

Also have seen Melo on here a bunch but he has lead a team to the play-offs ten straight years as the main guy. How long is that list of players to do that?

I think with DMC the issue is his attitude. I get the impression that his priority is being the first option, and then winning. That isn't going to help any team. If he got under the coach this season, I think this team could have done a lot more, or if he backed up Malone, the team could have progressed. But he made it clear as soon as they brought Karl on that he wasn't happy about it.

With Love, I seem to recall a number of people criticising him for not taking Minny further, and still criticizing him on Cleveland. He was unlucky to be drafted by Minny, who then picked Rubio AND Johnny Flynn over Curry WTFF!!!). If you went back and re-drafted a couple of picks, Minny could be where GSW is right now. But c'est la vie.

They had some progress, brought in a great coach (Adleman), but they got hit by the injury bug, and then gave up.



As for Melo.... I think he's had the 'I want the ball' attitude in the past... he seems to have matured, but he's not on a very good team right now.

McAllen Tx
04-05-2016, 10:38 PM
I think with DMC the issue is his attitude. I get the impression that his priority is being the first option, and then winning. That isn't going to help any team. If he got under the coach this season, I think this team could have done a lot more, or if he backed up Malone, the team could have progressed. But he made it clear as soon as they brought Karl on that he wasn't happy about it.

With Love, I seem to recall a number of people criticising him for not taking Minny further, and still criticizing him on Cleveland. He was unlucky to be drafted by Minny, who then picked Rubio AND Johnny Flynn over Curry WTFF!!!). If you went back and re-drafted a couple of picks, Minny could be where GSW is right now. But c'est la vie.

They had some progress, brought in a great coach (Adleman), but they got hit by the injury bug, and then gave up.



As for Melo.... I think he's had the 'I want the ball' attitude in the past... he seems to have matured, but he's not on a very good team right now.
Point being just because Brand is a good guy, model citizen, great mentor etc etc... doesnt mean he should get a pass from being a stat stuffer. He was a 20/10 machine on horrible teams. He was a #2 overall selection, Im sure when he went that high in the draft everyone expected more then 2 playoffs appearances in his career.

nycericanguy
04-06-2016, 10:37 AM
I think with DMC the issue is his attitude. I get the impression that his priority is being the first option, and then winning. That isn't going to help any team. If he got under the coach this season, I think this team could have done a lot more, or if he backed up Malone, the team could have progressed. But he made it clear as soon as they brought Karl on that he wasn't happy about it.

With Love, I seem to recall a number of people criticising him for not taking Minny further, and still criticizing him on Cleveland. He was unlucky to be drafted by Minny, who then picked Rubio AND Johnny Flynn over Curry WTFF!!!). If you went back and re-drafted a couple of picks, Minny could be where GSW is right now. But c'est la vie.

They had some progress, brought in a great coach (Adleman), but they got hit by the injury bug, and then gave up.



As for Melo.... I think he's had the 'I want the ball' attitude in the past... he seems to have matured, but he's not on a very good team right now.

Melo has made the playoffs 10 out of 13 years, his DEN teams had a 60% winning percentage and even his first 3 years in NY he made the playoffs... Knicks haven't had the talent the last 3 years, but I do think they should have done better this year, that being said, he doesn't belong in the Love/DMC convo.

DMC's Kings have one of the worst records in the NBA since he joined the team, this is the 1st time they've even won 30 games... Love's winning % in MIN was like .300.

Vinylman
04-06-2016, 12:07 PM
I think with DMC the issue is his attitude. I get the impression that his priority is being the first option, and then winning. That isn't going to help any team. If he got under the coach this season, I think this team could have done a lot more, or if he backed up Malone, the team could have progressed. But he made it clear as soon as they brought Karl on that he wasn't happy about it.

With Love, I seem to recall a number of people criticising him for not taking Minny further, and still criticizing him on Cleveland. He was unlucky to be drafted by Minny, who then picked Rubio AND Johnny Flynn over Curry WTFF!!!). If you went back and re-drafted a couple of picks, Minny could be where GSW is right now. But c'est la vie.

They had some progress, brought in a great coach (Adleman), but they got hit by the injury bug, and then gave up.



As for Melo.... I think he's had the 'I want the ball' attitude in the past... he seems to have matured, but he's not on a very good team right now.

except he wasn't drafted by Minny... he was drafted by Memphis and traded for OJ Mayo...

the real question is how good would a Love/Gasol combo have been

geauxtigers1989
04-06-2016, 12:12 PM
If anything, it indicates just how difficult building a winning team is.

YAALREADYKNO
04-06-2016, 01:41 PM
Agreed. Cousins is regarded as the best center but I don't think the best player in any position should have that bad of a team. Even with Harden, they are still in the playoff picture. Cousins is nowhere near any of that.. he's been in the league for six years already... At least Love was close to leading his team.

I think before this year the most games he's won as the main guy on the team was like 29 or something around there

Scoots
04-07-2016, 09:50 AM
As an illustration, Enes Kanter as the main man on OKC resting half the team ... 33 pts, 20 rebs, 0 assists, loss.

He, and that game, is the perfect example of the issue. 13-18 from the floor and 20 rebounds is a great line so the reason they lost is that the players around him are bad ... but on a good team he doesn't play like that, doesn't play that much, because his D is way below par.

Kanter as a starter on a bad team may well put up superstar numbers, but on OKC we see him as a sixth man ... so which is he?

Shammyguy3
04-08-2016, 09:38 PM
As an illustration, Enes Kanter as the main man on OKC resting half the team ... 33 pts, 20 rebs, 0 assists, loss.

He, and that game, is the perfect example of the issue. 13-18 from the floor and 20 rebounds is a great line so the reason they lost is that the players around him are bad ... but on a good team he doesn't play like that, doesn't play that much, because his D is way below par.

Kanter as a starter on a bad team may well put up superstar numbers, but on OKC we see him as a sixth man ... so which is he?

How many of those games can Kanter actually post though? He's been on bad teams in the past and has not averaged superstar or star numbers over any period of time

joedaheights
04-08-2016, 10:31 PM
There have been a lot of players over the years that have put up great stats year after year, they make all-star games, they are on the top-player lists every year, and year after year their teams don't succeed. Is it ever possible to declare that they are the problem and not the coach, the quality of the team, injuries, bad matchups, etc, etc, etc.

Someone always has an excuse for some players ... but isn't it possible these players are just not winners?

Meanwhile other players who don't ever put up great numbers seem to always be around winning teams but they are just lucky?

Two words.. Kevin Love. Two more.. Elton Brand.

Look, you have no idea how many players you've seen who could just absolutely destroy a stat sheet if they removed the burden of actually having to fit their game into a winning concept.

Every team has tons of stats to go around if there aren't a lot of very talented players on the team. Additionally, a lot of players can put numbers up if they just hog the ball from players who could help the team do more.

The most worthless thing you can do as a star is put up big numbers on a lousy team. Better than that is bringing your numbers down a notch for your team to win big. The best is when you're winning and you still put up the huge numbers.

Scoots
04-08-2016, 10:45 PM
How many of those games can Kanter actually post though? He's been on bad teams in the past and has not averaged superstar or star numbers over any period of time
The Jazz put a priority on defense so he got limited opportunities. So while he was on a bad team he didn't have the freedom to stuff his stats as much as it might seem.

Chronz
04-09-2016, 02:19 PM
Kanter is actually an example of a player who went from a poor team to a contender and immediately started producing at a high AllStar level offensively. His stats have never been better than they currently are, that he's doing it off the bench makes it more valuable for his team imo