PDA

View Full Version : Champs whos best player wasn't their leading scorer or a "Main Option"



Chronz
08-04-2017, 05:26 PM
In honor of the Draymond Green thread going on, I listed potential best players on their teams who have won it all without their elite scoring. I left it open for interpretation to see what you guys believe, some would list KG here but I wouldn't simply because I think he was something of a main option for Boston and had proven to carry that load at a credible level for other teams, albeit non-contenders.



2014 Spurs - Such a team effort, hard to gauge much here but given their dominance it really shows you what having several of these non primary options like Kawhi and I hope its not sacrilegious/contrary to list Duncan here. TP/Manu both had pretty high ball handling/scoring duties still.


04 Pistons - Ben Wallace or Chauncey, both were underrated superstars for various reasons IMO, its why I disagree with the notion that they had none. That Ben could make it a debate is worthy of inclusion here but its prolly still Chauncey's team.


89-90 Pistons - Yes I said it, Dennis revolutionized that team. I might be wrong but I want you people to realize that there is at least a debate to be had here. They got rid of one of the games most efficient offensive scorers/post players and Dennis gave them the championship grit required to win and slow down the opposition. If you look at his teams records over the years a startling trend emerges, if we had +/- data back then I have no doubt Dennis would rate as one of the games most influential pieces.

Some stats from Elliot Kalb's baller book;


88 Pistons win 54 games, go 20-4 with Rodman starting, lost in 7 to Lakers on a bad call.
90 Pistons win 59 and go 34-9 with Rodman starting, win 2nd title.
93 Pistons win 40 games but went 4-20 without Rodman
turns the Spurs into contenders
95 Spurs win league best 62 games but were 42-7 with Rodman vs 20-13 without and they lose to the Rockets with Rodman basically not complying

Joins MJ and wins a record breaking amount of games





78 Bullets ??? Elvin Hayes was technically their all-star and shot taker but the dude was mr invisible in big games/moments and had a propensity for bouts of tunnel vision, thats why ringless PF's like Malone/Chuck exceed him in every way imaginable. That leaves the door open for Wes Unseld.


Maybe young Russell's Celtics but the way the game was played back then, its hard to tell what was a result of circumstance/pace of play.


My point being every single one of these players can be described as role players offensively but are great players none the less and had seasons superior to guys we would describe as elite offensively. Draymond might be one of those superstars guys, thats how stacked GS is. They have the best mix of talent and system, hence they cruised to a title (yes I truly think they all cruised, all year).

Lakers + Giants
08-04-2017, 05:41 PM
Big Ben on that 04 Pistons team. I legit think he was just as important as Billups.

Lakers + Giants
08-04-2017, 05:41 PM
2011 JJ Barea gave us the D and he shut down Lebron in the Finals...

Heediot
08-04-2017, 05:44 PM
Robert Horry 00-02 Lakers 3 peat.

According to Jordan 7 Rings > 5 > 4.

I'm not serious and please let's not turn this into a 5 page kobephile vs. lebronite thread.

WaDe03
08-04-2017, 05:51 PM
2011 JJ Barea gave us the D and he shut down Lebron in the Finals...

This.

TrueFan420
08-04-2017, 06:18 PM
2011 JJ Barea gave Bron the D and he shut down Lebron in the Finals...

Fixed

JordansBulls
08-04-2017, 06:28 PM
Ben Wallace on the 2004 Pistons he was the only allstar as well.

LA4life24/8
08-04-2017, 07:37 PM
Pops on the last 3 spurs chips lol

I know you said player

Big bens a great example as is JJ

Honestly its usually the best players being the best in the playoffs/finals.

Guys hit clutch shots artest,horry,fish,kerr, shuttlesworth, etc

Or have a big game but not the entirety of

LA4life24/8
08-04-2017, 07:38 PM
Ben Wallace on the 2004 Pistons he was the only allstar as well.

Sure? Wasnt there a year when they had billups hamilton prince and big ben in the all star game at the same time? Or was that 05?
Like i distinctly remember an all star game where those 4 were on the floor together at one time

TrueFan420
08-04-2017, 07:44 PM
Sure? Wasnt there a year when they had billups hamilton prince and big ben in the all star game at the same time? Or was that 05?
Like i distinctly remember an all star game where those 4 were on the floor together at one time

I thought they had the full 5 including sheed

KnicksorBust
08-04-2017, 08:36 PM
Boring. You gave all my obvious answers. Let us do some work.

Hawkeye15
08-04-2017, 08:42 PM
Was DJ the Sonics feature player? Or was it one of Gus/Sikma?

Scoots
08-04-2017, 08:49 PM
The Pistons were the first team I thought of too. Actually in 2015 there was plenty of talk about the Warriors being the first PG lead team to win a title since 04 ... but that Pistons teams was a TEAM not just Billups. And the Warriors are a TEAM, and none of them would be as good away from each other ... except KD.

eDush
08-04-2017, 09:12 PM
Ben Wallace on the 2004 Pistons he was the only allstar as well.He was the catalyst to that team's defensive makeup. No one wanted to play them during their dominance where it was all about defense :nod:

eDush
08-04-2017, 09:17 PM
Sure? Wasnt there a year when they had billups hamilton prince and big ben in the all star game at the same time? Or was that 05?
Like i distinctly remember an all star game where those 4 were on the floor together at one time

I thought they had the full 5 including sheedThe following and they also had the best intro with the best PA guy Mason. No one come close other then the Bulls who had the best intro during MJ reign. Even now the Bulls has the best intro by far https://youtu.be/my_jzvMSGIc

BALL DON'T LIE!!!!! :clap:

LionsFan..LOL
08-04-2017, 09:41 PM
Sure? Wasnt there a year when they had billups hamilton prince and big ben in the all star game at the same time? Or was that 05?
Like i distinctly remember an all star game where those 4 were on the floor together at one time


I thought they had the full 5 including sheed
2005-2006. It was the team that lost to the Heat in the ECF. Tayshaun was the one guy left off the roster.

JordansBulls
08-04-2017, 10:33 PM
Sure? Wasnt there a year when they had billups hamilton prince and big ben in the all star game at the same time? Or was that 05?
Like i distinctly remember an all star game where those 4 were on the floor together at one time

In 2004 it was only Ben Wallace, it was 2 years later where the others made the team.

Chronz
08-04-2017, 11:28 PM
Was DJ the Sonics feature player? Or was it one of Gus/Sikma?

Thats what makes it kind of interesting, it depends on your definition of what a main option should look like. Like what is the cut off point for a player to be deemed a main option. DJ wasn't all that productive IIRC, he was more of a defender/facilitator. Sonics are a great mention

tredigs
08-05-2017, 12:34 AM
Bill Russell, fellas. 5X MVP. 11X champion. Celtics 4th option.

*drops mic*

Jeffy25
08-05-2017, 12:57 AM
Don't know if this counts, but Pau was just as important as Kobe for those two rings.

FlashBolt
08-05-2017, 01:04 AM
Don't know if this counts, but Pau was just as important as Kobe for those two rings.

He should have been the Finals MVP against Boston in their ring together. He absolutely outplayed KG. Metta also gets zero mention. Dude was sensational when he was on the court.

Vinylman
08-05-2017, 02:15 PM
Was DJ the Sonics feature player? Or was it one of Gus/Sikma?

right guy wrong championship team for this topic...

He was instrumental on that sonics team but was one of their go to guys

However, in boston was the 4th best player but was THE reason they beat the Lakers in 1984... KC Jones switched him onto Magic Johnson in game 4 and that is all she wrote... Boston stormed back and won that game ... turned around and Heated the GArden up to 100 degrees (literally) for game 5 which wore out old man KAJ... dude needed oxygen...

That series is why Magic can't be considered the greatest of all time IMO...

Vinylman
08-05-2017, 02:17 PM
He should have been the Finals MVP against Boston in their ring together. He absolutely outplayed KG. Metta also gets zero mention. Dude was sensational when he was on the court.

delusional...

this narrative is utter and complete garbage ... he basically played well for 1.5 quarters in game 7

After game 6 most people thought kobe was the series MVP whether they won game 7 or not.

Vinylman
08-05-2017, 02:24 PM
Thats what makes it kind of interesting, it depends on your definition of what a main option should look like. Like what is the cut off point for a player to be deemed a main option. DJ wasn't all that productive IIRC, he was more of a defender/facilitator. Sonics are a great mention

Dennis was the clear cut second option on that team... Sikma was nice but he had just become a starter at the 5 that season because Webster was sent to the Knicks

FlashBolt
08-05-2017, 02:58 PM
delusional...

this narrative is utter and complete garbage ... he basically played well for 1.5 quarters in game 7

After game 6 most people thought kobe was the series MVP whether they won game 7 or not.

Game 1: Kobe 30/7/6. 46% shooting
Pau 23/14/3 and 3 blocks. 57% shooting

Game 2: Kobe 21/5/6 4 steals. 40% shooting
Pau 25/8/3 6 blocks. 70% shooting

Game 3: Kobe 29/7/4 2 steals 3 blocks 35% shooting
Pau 13/10/4 2 blocks 46% shooting

Game 4: Kobe 33/6/2. 46% shooting
Pau 21/6/3 2 blocks 46% shooting.

Game 5: Kobe 38/5/4 48% shooting
Pau 12/12/0 42% shooting

Game 6: Kobe 26/11/3 4 steals, 48% shooting.
Pau 17/13/9 3 blocks. 43% shooting.

Game 7: Kobe 23/15/2 25% shooting
Pau 19/18 4 blocks 38% shooting.

I don't know why you think it's delusional. You buy into the media hype that Kobe had a sensational Finals performance when it was lackluster. 29/8/4 on 41% shooting would be considered a horrible "choking" NBA Finals for LeBron. Nevermind the fact Kobe has had worse NBA Finals performances and still managed to win. It wasn't out of the picture for Gasol to win Finals MVP but the narrative in the NBA media for marketing and media purposes can't give it to anyone other than Kobe because he's Kobe. If the gap was much higher, it'd be impossible not to give it to Gasol but it was close enough that Kobe won. Personally, I felt Gasol should have won the FMVP. Kobe might be the better player but the better players don't always win FMVP. Look at Iggy and Curry. Gasol's impact was totally underrated. He was by far at the very least, 2nd best player in that Finals.

PowerHouse
08-05-2017, 03:33 PM
The answer is Bill Russell as somebody already mentioned.

But there was also Magic Johnson who 4 out of 5 championship years was not top scorer or main option. That was Kareem or Worthy or Scott (in 88).

Vinylman
08-05-2017, 04:27 PM
Game 1: Kobe 30/7/6. 46% shooting
Pau 23/14/3 and 3 blocks. 57% shooting

Game 2: Kobe 21/5/6 4 steals. 40% shooting
Pau 25/8/3 6 blocks. 70% shooting

Game 3: Kobe 29/7/4 2 steals 3 blocks 35% shooting
Pau 13/10/4 2 blocks 46% shooting

Game 4: Kobe 33/6/2. 46% shooting
Pau 21/6/3 2 blocks 46% shooting.

Game 5: Kobe 38/5/4 48% shooting
Pau 12/12/0 42% shooting

Game 6: Kobe 26/11/3 4 steals, 48% shooting.
Pau 17/13/9 3 blocks. 43% shooting.

Game 7: Kobe 23/15/2 25% shooting
Pau 19/18 4 blocks 38% shooting.

I don't know why you think it's delusional. You buy into the media hype that Kobe had a sensational Finals performance when it was lackluster. 29/8/4 on 41% shooting would be considered a horrible "choking" NBA Finals for LeBron. Nevermind the fact Kobe has had worse NBA Finals performances and still managed to win. It wasn't out of the picture for Gasol to win Finals MVP but the narrative in the NBA media for marketing and media purposes can't give it to anyone other than Kobe because he's Kobe. If the gap was much higher, it'd be impossible not to give it to Gasol but it was close enough that Kobe won. Personally, I felt Gasol should have won the FMVP. Kobe might be the better player but the better players don't always win FMVP. Look at Iggy and Curry. Gasol's impact was totally underrated. He was by far at the very least, 2nd best player in that Finals.

raw stats are meaningless...

the whole narrative that kobe shouldn't be the mvp is because he shot 25% from the field

I won't waste my time since there already is a great article on it but the defense in that series and especially in game 7 was historical...

context is everything... since the kobe haters always love to bring LBJ into you might want to note the blip about him in the linked article against those same Celtics

https://www.silverscreenandroll.com/2010/6/21/1525036/kobe-bryants-game-7-in-perspective

JasonJohnHorn
08-05-2017, 04:28 PM
Obviously (as mentioned), Ben Wallace... but Bill Russell is likely the best example. His first title, three Celtics scored more than him, and another scored nearly as much (16.6 to 16.5). And three guys scored more for his second title.

A case could be made for the Sonics. You might argue Jack Sikma was the better/more important player than Gus Williams. And in hindsight, I think most would assume DJ was perhaps more valuable, though I think that is based on his rep acter that title.

Unseld is an interesting case. His outlet passes were huge, and he's generally seen as a stud rebounder and defender; however, Hayes got more boards, more blocks (over twice as many) as many steals, and almost 3 times as many points.

I think you might make a case for Magic as well. Though he was the ball handler, the offense was more set on Kareem and then transitioned to Worthy. The ball was in Magic's hand. Wilkes and Kareem outscored him the first year, and Nixon got almost as many points and slightly more assists. But that title was Magic. 82 was much the same: Wilkes and Kareem, and Nixon got more shots than MAgic, though Magic scored more. In 85, three guys got more shots per game than Magic (though he was the second leading scorer on the team). 88? Worth and Scott got more points and shots in 88.

87 was the only year Magic won and lead the team in scoring.


So yeah... lots of instances I'd say.

FlashBolt
08-05-2017, 05:05 PM
raw stats are meaningless...

the whole narrative that kobe shouldn't be the mvp is because he shot 25% from the field

I won't waste my time since there already is a great article on it but the defense in that series and especially in game 7 was historical...

context is everything... since the kobe haters always love to bring LBJ into you might want to note the blip about him in the linked article against those same Celtics

https://www.silverscreenandroll.com/2010/6/21/1525036/kobe-bryants-game-7-in-perspective

Raw stats are meaningless because they don't what? Show Kobe had an overwhelming advantage? We can go on and on about Kobe's impact. I already stated he was the best player in the series but it would not be "delusional" as you said to think Pau could have been the Finals MVP. It's only because he's Kobe and the gap wasn't that far off that it was unanimously given to Kobe. You don't have to waste your time. Kobe wasn't that great in those Finals, period.

Vinylman
08-05-2017, 05:07 PM
Raw stats are meaningless because they don't what? Show Kobe had an overwhelming advantage? We can go on and on about Kobe's impact. I already stated he was the best player in the series but it would not be "delusional" as you said to think Pau could have been the Finals MVP. It's only because he's Kobe and the gap wasn't that far off that it was unanimously given to Kobe. You don't have to waste your time. Kobe wasn't that great in those Finals, period.

no... what you said was HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE FINALS MVP AGAINST BOSTON

That is about as ABSOLUTE of a statement as one could make... no wiggle room

eDush
08-05-2017, 05:17 PM
Raw stats are meaningless because they don't what? Show Kobe had an overwhelming advantage? We can go on and on about Kobe's impact. I already stated he was the best player in the series but it would not be "delusional" as you said to think Pau could have been the Finals MVP. It's only because he's Kobe and the gap wasn't that far off that it was unanimously given to Kobe. You don't have to waste your time. Kobe wasn't that great in those Finals, period.

no... what you said was HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE FINALS MVP AGAINST BOSTON

That is about as ABSOLUTE of a statement as one could make... no wiggle roomhttps://youtu.be/kVu_yMEhUfM :nod:

Bostonjorge
08-05-2017, 06:09 PM
Game 1: Kobe 30/7/6. 46% shooting
Pau 23/14/3 and 3 blocks. 57% shooting

Game 2: Kobe 21/5/6 4 steals. 40% shooting
Pau 25/8/3 6 blocks. 70% shooting

Game 3: Kobe 29/7/4 2 steals 3 blocks 35% shooting
Pau 13/10/4 2 blocks 46% shooting

Game 4: Kobe 33/6/2. 46% shooting
Pau 21/6/3 2 blocks 46% shooting.

Game 5: Kobe 38/5/4 48% shooting
Pau 12/12/0 42% shooting

Game 6: Kobe 26/11/3 4 steals, 48% shooting.
Pau 17/13/9 3 blocks. 43% shooting.

Game 7: Kobe 23/15/2 25% shooting
Pau 19/18 4 blocks 38% shooting.

I don't know why you think it's delusional. You buy into the media hype that Kobe had a sensational Finals performance when it was lackluster. 29/8/4 on 41% shooting would be considered a horrible "choking" NBA Finals for LeBron. Nevermind the fact Kobe has had worse NBA Finals performances and still managed to win. It wasn't out of the picture for Gasol to win Finals MVP but the narrative in the NBA media for marketing and media purposes can't give it to anyone other than Kobe because he's Kobe. If the gap was much higher, it'd be impossible not to give it to Gasol but it was close enough that Kobe won. Personally, I felt Gasol should have won the FMVP. Kobe might be the better player but the better players don't always win FMVP. Look at Iggy and Curry. Gasol's impact was totally underrated. He was by far at the very least, 2nd best player in that Finals.

Kobe was clearly the MVP. Not only did Kobe lead the Lakers in scoring, he led in 6 out of 7 FINAL's Games(both teams)in scoring. Only game Kobe didn't lead the game in scoring was when Ray Allen went off in the best 3 point shooting finals game ever. He hit 8 threes most ever. Even over Curry "the best shooter ever". Thats what It took to keep up with Kobes scoring and not the "chucker" you claim he was. He also led also BoTH teams in Ast and steals.

Kobe also out rebound every Celtics player. So Kobe obviously(if it still needs more conformation) did more then just scoring. Kobe leadership turned Gasol into the best rebounding Gasol we ever seen from Gasol. Kobe and Gasol's rebounding, Kobes scoring, and Kobes leadership is why Lakers won so Kobe is the clear MVP.

Iggy simply out played Curry. It took Green till game 4 to start out playing Curry as well. Green was running the team defense and protecting the rim. Curry didnt do 60% of what Kobe did. So Iggy was the MVP.

FlashBolt
08-05-2017, 11:03 PM
no... what you said was HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE FINALS MVP AGAINST BOSTON

That is about as ABSOLUTE of a statement as one could make... no wiggle room

Yes, according to me, he should be the Finals MVP. Just like how according to me, Westbrook should be the MVP last season even though I had no qualms about Harden winning MVP either. Wow, interesting how an opinion works. You Kobe fans are just beyond reach. Did Kobe have a great Finals or not? It's a direct question. Anyone could see it was a rather underperforming Kobe that with the loss of Perkins, Lakers squeezed in a victory. Kobe wasn't great. LeBron would get blasted for some of the performances Kobe got away with. Pau Gasol should be MVP according to me (and a few others who do think Pau could and should be FMVP) but because there wasn't a huge overwhelming lapse of outperforming from Pau, Kobe was obviously going to win it.

Wiggle room? Yes, the wiggle room is that I have an opinion just like you do. Got it? Thank you.

basch152
08-05-2017, 11:24 PM
The people saying Ben Wallace was as important as Chauncey are insane.

The two years after Ben left the pistons went 53-29 and 59-23 and went to the conference finals both years.

The year Chauncey was traded they went 4-0 with him and then 35-43 without and were swept in the first round.

Then in Denver they were a first round sweep with AI, then with Chauncey they went to the conference finals in the West...

Chauncey is easily one of the most underrated players I've ever seen.

Redrum187
08-06-2017, 02:45 AM
Wes Unseld

He hardly scored because Hayes was busy jacking up shots but almost everyone knows Unseld was the heart and soul of the team. He won FMVP without needing to score because he literally did everything else.

JasonJohnHorn
08-06-2017, 10:41 AM
The people saying Ben Wallace was as important as Chauncey are insane.

The two years after Ben left the pistons went 53-29 and 59-23 and went to the conference finals both years.

The year Chauncey was traded they went 4-0 with him and then 35-43 without and were swept in the first round.

Then in Denver they were a first round sweep with AI, then with Chauncey they went to the conference finals in the West...

Chauncey is easily one of the most underrated players I've ever seen.

This is a willfully ignorant argument.


First, let me say that I will agree that Ben wasn't 'more' important, but he was AS important, and it isn't unreasonable, let alone insane, for anybody to suggest either was more important to the team.


Ben was the foundation. The team was built around him. He set the tone for the culture of the team. Concede to your short comings (in his case offense) and focus on doing what will help the team most. That led to an unselfish culture (much like what Curry has helped facilitate n GSW) that allowed Chauncey to thrive and help the coaching staff (which changed often) value the contribution of guys like Prince, and the encouraged guys like Hamilton to keep up with his catch-and-shoot and not try to reach beyond his style. It also helped keep Sheed in check (for the most part), because that dude has a tendency to turn into a chucker behind the arc any time his team sees a double-digit deficient.

In terms of on-court production, yes, Chauncey was is many respect as import for different reasons, but en set the tone for the team. No... I would be in the camp that leans toward Ben being more important, but I wouldn't argue that that is the only view.


Your 'win' argument fails to consider a number of elements. That 0-4 team wasn't only short Chauncey, it was also short Chauncey's replacement (Iverson) and they didn't have Ben either.

They had also lost McDysse, Sheed was over the hill and playing poorly by then, and Rip wasn't playing as well as he had. Also, they had ANOTHER new coaching staff that wasn't as good as any the three previous coaching staffs (Rick, Brown or

And they made it to the conference finals in a VERY WEAK Eastern conference.

Flip's).

Your comment speaks as if there were some sort of controlled environment where Chauncey is removed in one situation and the team drops to a first-round sweep, and only Ben is removed in the other and the team still gets to the conference finals. That is not quite what is going on there. A number of other factors contributed to the difference, as noted above.

Chauncey is underrated. Yes. I agree. But it is not insane to think that Ben was the most important element on that team and more than it would be insane to think that Chauncey was. They are both reasonable arguments. But the reasons you give are rife with logical fallacies. I mean... Chauncey had not replacement, whereas Ben's loss was offset by the addition of Chris Webber, who was a former All-Star, and Nazr Mo. As well as Jason Maxiell and Amir Johnson who saw increased minutes and productivity.


By your rationale, Chucky Atkins is as good as Chauncey, because when Chauncey replaced him as their point guard, there record ended up being exactly the same. IT wasn't until Prince, Darko, Rip and Sheed came in that they were good enough to get to the finals. And that would just be silly, even though the controlled environment is more exact and therefore would be a more valid argument than your own.

basch152
08-06-2017, 05:49 PM
This is a willfully ignorant argument.


First, let me say that I will agree that Ben wasn't 'more' important, but he was AS important, and it isn't unreasonable, let alone insane, for anybody to suggest either was more important to the team.


Ben was the foundation. The team was built around him. He set the tone for the culture of the team. Concede to your short comings (in his case offense) and focus on doing what will help the team most. That led to an unselfish culture (much like what Curry has helped facilitate n GSW) that allowed Chauncey to thrive and help the coaching staff (which changed often) value the contribution of guys like Prince, and the encouraged guys like Hamilton to keep up with his catch-and-shoot and not try to reach beyond his style. It also helped keep Sheed in check (for the most part), because that dude has a tendency to turn into a chucker behind the arc any time his team sees a double-digit deficient.

In terms of on-court production, yes, Chauncey was is many respect as import for different reasons, but en set the tone for the team. No... I would be in the camp that leans toward Ben being more important, but I wouldn't argue that that is the only view.


Your 'win' argument fails to consider a number of elements. That 0-4 team wasn't only short Chauncey, it was also short Chauncey's replacement (Iverson) and they didn't have Ben either.

They had also lost McDysse, Sheed was over the hill and playing poorly by then, and Rip wasn't playing as well as he had. Also, they had ANOTHER new coaching staff that wasn't as good as any the three previous coaching staffs (Rick, Brown or

And they made it to the conference finals in a VERY WEAK Eastern conference.

Flip's).

Your comment speaks as if there were some sort of controlled environment where Chauncey is removed in one situation and the team drops to a first-round sweep, and only Ben is removed in the other and the team still gets to the conference finals. That is not quite what is going on there. A number of other factors contributed to the difference, as noted above.

Chauncey is underrated. Yes. I agree. But it is not insane to think that Ben was the most important element on that team and more than it would be insane to think that Chauncey was. They are both reasonable arguments. But the reasons you give are rife with logical fallacies. I mean... Chauncey had not replacement, whereas Ben's loss was offset by the addition of Chris Webber, who was a former All-Star, and Nazr Mo. As well as Jason Maxiell and Amir Johnson who saw increased minutes and productivity.


By your rationale, Chucky Atkins is as good as Chauncey, because when Chauncey replaced him as their point guard, there record ended up being exactly the same. IT wasn't until Prince, Darko, Rip and Sheed came in that they were good enough to get to the finals. And that would just be silly, even though the controlled environment is more exact and therefore would be a more valid argument than your own.

Like I said, they were having the same success without Ben as with him the previous 2 years. Without Chauncey the team immediately fell apart. He was the leader and floor general. They replaced him with AI who was still close to a 20 ppg scorer and still finished around 20 wins lower. Yeah their were other causes as well, but it's pretty clear without Chauncey it completely changed how that team worked.

Again, they went from a 59 win team, starting 4-0 with Chauncey the next year, to 35 wins with AI.

FlashBolt
08-06-2017, 06:07 PM
Like I said, they were having the same success without Ben as with him the previous 2 years. Without Chauncey the team immediately fell apart. He was the leader and floor general. They replaced him with AI who was still close to a 20 ppg scorer and still finished around 20 wins lower. Yeah their were other causes as well, but it's pretty clear without Chauncey it completely changed how that team worked.

Again, they went from a 59 win team, starting 4-0 with Chauncey the next year, to 35 wins with AI.

Without Ben Wallace, Pistons would have gotten swept by the Lakers... He never gets the credit he deserves. You're pointing out records with/without but by that same logic, the Bulls after Jordan retired initially were just as good as when they had Jordan the previous season.. Different variables are involved every season. Comparing record for record is stupid. Cavs in 2008-2009 won 66 games. They haven't won that since LeBron came back in 2014. Not a single person would say that Cavs team was better than 2014-2017 Cavs.

basch152
08-06-2017, 08:00 PM
Without Ben Wallace, Pistons would have gotten swept by the Lakers... He never gets the credit he deserves. You're pointing out records with/without but by that same logic, the Bulls after Jordan retired initially were just as good as when they had Jordan the previous season.. Different variables are involved every season. Comparing record for record is stupid. Cavs in 2008-2009 won 66 games. They haven't won that since LeBron came back in 2014. Not a single person would say that Cavs team was better than 2014-2017 Cavs.

First of all, being swept by the Lakers is complete guesswork.

But even if, you're saying they're still an NBA finals team without him? You're making my point for me.

Without chauncey they never go to a championship.

Also, you are arguing a strawman.

I give Ben a TON of credit. He was a great help to that team and was an incredibly underrated player. I'm not saying any different. But the simple fact is he wasn't as important as Chauncey. That's the point I'm making.

The fact is, the team Chauncey left that year went from a conference finals team to a first round sweep, and the team he joined went from a first round exit team to a conference finals.

It's pretty easy to see Chauncey is the biggest difference in those two teams.

FlashBolt
08-06-2017, 10:47 PM
First of all, being swept by the Lakers is complete guesswork.

But even if, you're saying they're still an NBA finals team without him? You're making my point for me.

Without chauncey they never go to a championship.

Also, you are arguing a strawman.

I give Ben a TON of credit. He was a great help to that team and was an incredibly underrated player. I'm not saying any different. But the simple fact is he wasn't as important as Chauncey. That's the point I'm making.

The fact is, the team Chauncey left that year went from a conference finals team to a first round sweep, and the team he joined went from a first round exit team to a conference finals.

It's pretty easy to see Chauncey is the biggest difference in those two teams.

You're arguing that Chauncey was a bigger impact when I never said he wasn't. Who's using the strawman argument? Don't say someone is using a strawman because you think just by saying that, it defeats their argument. Secondly, I will ask again:

Were the 92-93 Bulls better or the 93-94 Bulls? 92-93 Bulls won two more games with MJ than two less games without in 93-94. Prove your case.

JasonJohnHorn
08-06-2017, 11:37 PM
Like I said, they were having the same success without Ben as with him the previous 2 years. Without Chauncey the team immediately fell apart. He was the leader and floor general. They replaced him with AI who was still close to a 20 ppg scorer and still finished around 20 wins lower. Yeah their were other causes as well, but it's pretty clear without Chauncey it completely changed how that team worked.

Again, they went from a 59 win team, starting 4-0 with Chauncey the next year, to 35 wins with AI.

It's like you didn't read a single word.

Your argument essentially says that because that Pistons won 50 games with Chucky Akins one year, and won the same number of game the next year with Billups, that they two are equal.

And you fail to consider that Ben was replaced by essentially four player: Nazr, Webber Johnson and Maxiell, vs. Billups, who was replaced by a WAY PAST HIS PRIME Iverson who couldn't even get a steady job the next year and missed almost 30 games. Not to mention that all those dudes (Sheed, Rip, Prince) were older, and not to mention they had a rookie coach.

You're like "Hey... I just made an argument that essentially says Chucky Akins and Chauncey are equal and then ignored the utter and complete lack of controls in the scenario where I'm trying to prove my 'point' and said Chauncey being swapped for a guy who missed over a third of the season and the playoffs is equal to a 31-year-old being replaced by Webber, Nazr, Johnson and Maxiell."

I mean, the Pistons won 11 fewer games the year Wallace left, and they have several quality guys who were brought in or given increased minutes.

You got no legs to stand on here. You'd be better off making a case for Chauncey's play making, scoring, and defence, than you would using ad hominems attacks by calling people insane and then comparing drops in wins in completely different context.

But hey... talk out your @$$ is you want and ignore the substance of whatès being said. That's cool.

ewing
08-07-2017, 09:42 AM
Without Ben Wallace, Pistons would have gotten swept by the Lakers... He never gets the credit he deserves. You're pointing out records with/without but by that same logic, the Bulls after Jordan retired initially were just as good as when they had Jordan the previous season.. Different variables are involved every season. Comparing record for record is stupid. Cavs in 2008-2009 won 66 games. They haven't won that since LeBron came back in 2014. Not a single person would say that Cavs team was better than 2014-2017 Cavs.

seems like he gets more credit then he deserves.

JasonJohnHorn
08-07-2017, 11:07 AM
The fact is, the team Chauncey left that year went from a conference finals team to a first round sweep, and the team he joined went from a first round exit team to a conference finals.

You keep saying this, but you continue to completely ignore the full context.

Billups was traded for Iverson. Iverson got injured and missed almost 30 games and all of the playoffs. So Billups essentially wasn't even replaced; they just lost him.

That is NOT what happened with Wallace. With Wallace, they brought in two guys (Webber and Nazr) and had two rookies from the previous season who stepped up in minutes and play (Johnson and Maxiell). So while Ben was replaced by essentially four guys, and the team still had the same veteran coaching staff, Billups was replaced by essentially nobody and the team was coached by a rookie coach.

Not too mention that all the core players were still in their prime when Ben (a 32-year-old) left the team, and when Billups left were all past their prime. That team was regressing even if Billups had stayed.

You ignore this because you have no argument with this. As I said... you are essentially arguing that Chauncey and Chucky Atkins are equals because when Chauncey replaced Atkins, the Pistons won the same number of games. Yet you aren't picking up on that because even though it is reasoned out with the EXACT same logic you are using, and is in a better control environment (more of the same hold-overs), it doesn't support what you are claiming.

The Pistons, even with having essentially four guys, including Webber, replace Wallace, they still won 11 fewer games, EVEN WITH CHAUNCEY. And that core of players never made an NBA finals teams without Wallace.

I'm fine with an argument where somebody says "Oh.. Ben was important for rebounds and defense, but Chauncey was not only important for defence and assists, but also scoring and taking the important shots that closed out games." Why don't you just argue that? That would make sense. But for some reason you are hanging on to what is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever read on here where you wilfully ignore extremely important factors that contributed to the scenario you are pointing to that had absolutely nothing to do with Billups.




At the end of the day, the best player in terms of overall skill on that team was likely Sheed to be perfectly frank. Neither Ben or Billups made it to the NBA finals without Sheed. He was a great defender, and solid rebounder and passer, and created match-up problems in the post because of his range, and that gave Ben the space he needed to be effective in the only location he could be effective on the offensive end (right next to the basket) and gave Billups the space and offensive options he needed to make defenses play him honest and give him space.

But Ben set the tone and culture for that team. He helped create a culture that allowed Billups to flourish (because he hadn't before coming to Detroit), and that same culture that kept Wallace in check and allowed Prince and Rip to thrive.


But hey.... I guess we can just ignore all other factor and focus on playoff wins only because everything else is irrelevant, right? In which case, Jeremy Lin is better than Billups because he won 1 playoff game in NY the season after Billups led the Knicks to a first-round sweep. Or Darren Collison is better than Billups, because when he was backing up CP3, they got to the second round, where as Billups helped the Clips get eliminated in the first round. Oh... wait, that is absolutley fawking rediculous because there were any number of other factors at play that account for the varying degrees of post-season success. Just like there was when Chauncey exited Detroit.

But hey... why consider that when you have a confirmation bias to uphold.

Raps18-19 Champ
08-07-2017, 02:53 PM
Garnett

hugepatsfan
08-07-2017, 03:25 PM
Garnett

He falls into the "or a main option" part of the OP's question.

KG: 13.9 shots per game, 18.8 points
PP: 13.7 shots per game, 19.6 points
RA: 13.5 shots per game, 17.4 points

He actually led the team in shots by an ever so small margin.

Next year KG kept up that shooting until the injury. Once he came back though was when he started to take less shots and become less of an offensive threat. He was never the same elite player after that knee injury.

Jeffy25
08-07-2017, 10:08 PM
Kobe was clearly the MVP. Not only did Kobe lead the Lakers in scoring, he led in 6 out of 7 FINAL's Games(both teams)in scoring. Only game Kobe didn't lead the game in scoring was when Ray Allen went off in the best 3 point shooting finals game ever. He hit 8 threes most ever. Even over Curry "the best shooter ever". Thats what It took to keep up with Kobes scoring and not the "chucker" you claim he was. He also led also BoTH teams in Ast and steals.

Kobe also out rebound every Celtics player. So Kobe obviously(if it still needs more conformation) did more then just scoring. Kobe leadership turned Gasol into the best rebounding Gasol we ever seen from Gasol. Kobe and Gasol's rebounding, Kobes scoring, and Kobes leadership is why Lakers won so Kobe is the clear MVP.

Iggy simply out played Curry. It took Green till game 4 to start out playing Curry as well. Green was running the team defense and protecting the rim. Curry didnt do 60% of what Kobe did. So Iggy was the MVP.

Kobe took 165 shots, and carried a 35.6 usage
Next behind him?

Pierce took 98 shots with a 23.3 usage

He chucks. He absolutely chucks.

What is Kobe going to do with out PG's 18.6/11.6 and 2.6 blocks and almost identical game score against a team that is balanced and explosive?

Garnett is who had to be stopped for LA to win, and PG did.

JasonJohnHorn
08-07-2017, 10:58 PM
He falls into the "or a main option" part of the OP's question.

KG: 13.9 shots per game, 18.8 points
PP: 13.7 shots per game, 19.6 points
RA: 13.5 shots per game, 17.4 points

He actually led the team in shots by an ever so small margin.

Next year KG kept up that shooting until the injury. Once he came back though was when he started to take less shots and become less of an offensive threat. He was never the same elite player after that knee injury.

Looking back at that, I am amazed that they managed to make things so even with those guys, and that they all managed to score 5 or more points than they did shots, though I am most surprised that Ray Allen had the fewest points per shot (though I suppose KG and PP got more foul shots, and PP was nearly as good a 3-pt shooter that year as Ray).

Bostonjorge
08-07-2017, 11:12 PM
Kobe took 165 shots, and carried a 35.6 usage
Next behind him?

Pierce took 98 shots with a 23.3 usage

He chucks. He absolutely chucks.

What is Kobe going to do with out PG's 18.6/11.6 and 2.6 blocks and almost identical game score against a team that is balanced and explosive?

Garnett is who had to be stopped for LA to win, and PG did.

Kevin Love got Cleveland 16.0/11.2 and 2.2 steals in the finals. Don't know how two players who got you almost the same production are labeled different?

Love is labeled as a joke for only getting Gasol numbers and labeled as not real help for James. James legacy even goes up some how because he has to carry a soft Love who can only get you Gasol amount of rebounds and scoring. We even question if Love's, Gasol like numbers 16.0/11.2 is even enough to be considered help. Love's numbers is why we hear it's James and no one in Cleveland.

Gasol giving you what Love gave Cleveland earns Gasol finals MVP? This Gasol in Cleveland is still not enough to be considered real help for James.

Jeffy25
08-08-2017, 12:11 AM
Kevin Love got Cleveland 16.0/11.2 and 2.2 steals in the finals. Don't know how two players who got you almost the same production are labeled different?
More information
Pau Gasol - 18.6 Game Score - .478 Shooting, 3.7 Assists, 0.7 Steals, 1.9 Turnovers, +12
Kevin Love - 14.7 Game Score - .388 Shooting, 1.0 Assits, 2.2 Steals, 1.0 Turnovers, -35

Does that help?

Bostonjorge
08-08-2017, 01:15 AM
More information
Pau Gasol - 18.6 Game Score - .478 Shooting, 3.7 Assists, 0.7 Steals, 1.9 Turnovers, +12
Kevin Love - 14.7 Game Score - .388 Shooting, 1.0 Assits, 2.2 Steals, 1.0 Turnovers, -35

Does that help?

Love TS%.528 and eFG%.478

Gasol TS%.556 and eFG%.478

Advance shooting stats said their shot effected the games the same or close enough.


I like Gasol and he was Kobe's main running mate who helped Kobe win a back to back. Kobe needed Gasol, Peace and Fisher to beat Boston for sure. Kobe was just the the leader and closer for his championship team. Kobe took over every game with his scoring against the best Defensive team in Boston. 5 elite/good defenders anchored by KG and Kobe still found a way to get his buckets.

For sure the Gasol vs KG matchup gave Kobe the biggest boost he needed.

FlashBolt
08-08-2017, 01:48 AM
Love TS%.528 and eFG%.478

Gasol TS%.556 and eFG%.478

Advance shooting stats said their shot effected the games the same or close enough.


I like Gasol and he was Kobe's main running mate who helped Kobe win a back to back. Kobe needed Gasol, Peace and Fisher to beat Boston for sure. Kobe was just the the leader and closer for his championship team. Kobe took over every game with his scoring against the best Defensive team in Boston. 5 elite/good defenders anchored by KG and Kobe still found a way to get his buckets.

For sure the Gasol vs KG matchup gave Kobe the biggest boost he needed.

LeBron played that same Boston team and put up 27/9/7 on 45% shooting/ 56% TS but yeah, Kobe took over every game with his 40% shooting.

abdulie13
08-08-2017, 02:51 AM
I would definitely have to say the teams with Shaq and Kobe in them. They both played great roles

More-Than-Most
08-08-2017, 02:58 AM
You cant sit here and say Kobe wasnt the main option or the best player with Gasol on his team in the finals... Here is why... Were they statistically close? yes and I have no issues saying Gasol was great for that series... But here is the thing... we sit here and push kobe down because he was 2nd fiddle to Shaq and because going in Shaq was whom everyone was focused on and trying to stop... And its true... But you are delusional if you think Kobe wasnt the focal point of the other team next to gasol and that should give him not just the nudge but the jump above Gasol because teams went in planning for kobe and trying to stop Kobe

Jeffy25
08-08-2017, 07:07 PM
You cant sit here and say Kobe wasnt the main option or the best player with Gasol on his team in the finals... Here is why... Were they statistically close? yes and I have no issues saying Gasol was great for that series... But here is the thing... we sit here and push kobe down because he was 2nd fiddle to Shaq and because going in Shaq was whom everyone was focused on and trying to stop... And its true... But you are delusional if you think Kobe wasnt the focal point of the other team next to gasol and that should give him not just the nudge but the jump above Gasol because teams went in planning for kobe and trying to stop Kobe

I'm sure he was.

But Kobe is clearly the tier down as a superstar volume closer compared to guys like Jordan and Bron (and many others)


Kobe was such a selfish player that it makes it easy to hate on him. And no way he wins without Gasol (either year) who carried a ton of load for those years and Finals series.

Vinylman
08-09-2017, 07:28 AM
I'm sure he was.

But Kobe is clearly the tier down as a superstar volume closer compared to guys like Jordan and Bron (and many others)


Kobe was such a selfish player that it makes it easy to hate on him. And no way he wins without Gasol (either year) who carried a ton of load for those years and Finals series.

yes.. gasol was superman...

you are truly clueless... they had to hide him at the 4 by starting a busted up Andrew Bynum 2 years in a row and he was EASILY the biggest benefactor of Perkins being hurt in game 7 in 2010...

of course those facts don't fit your narrative so keep on with the Gasol was Superman and Kobe was overrated trash...

PSD... where the greats are hated on daily!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeffy25
08-10-2017, 01:54 AM
yes.. gasol was superman...

you are truly clueless... they had to hide him at the 4 by starting a busted up Andrew Bynum 2 years in a row and he was EASILY the biggest benefactor of Perkins being hurt in game 7 in 2010...

of course those facts don't fit your narrative so keep on with the Gasol was Superman and Kobe was overrated trash...

PSD... where the greats are hated on daily!!!!!!!!!!!

I love when people randomly strawman.

I never said he was superman. I said he was integral and the under rated superstar of those teams.

Kobe needed Gasol. Badly.

FlashBolt
08-10-2017, 02:05 AM
yes.. gasol was superman...

you are truly clueless... they had to hide him at the 4 by starting a busted up Andrew Bynum 2 years in a row and he was EASILY the biggest benefactor of Perkins being hurt in game 7 in 2010...

of course those facts don't fit your narrative so keep on with the Gasol was Superman and Kobe was overrated trash...

PSD... where the greats are hated on daily!!!!!!!!!!!

Who's saying any of the stuff you're trying to make it seem we are saying? Does it make you feel better by projecting arguments that no one made so you can perceive your replies as bulletproof? All I'm and I believe Jeffy are signaling is that Gasol was instrumental to that Finals series. Him and Kobe won the Finals. It wasn't some lopsided Finals MVP separation like LeBron vs Wade (in those two rings) or when LeBron vs Kyrie last year. Legitimately, you could make a case for Gasol being the Finals MVP. And yes, the fact we mention it is just evidence Kobe didn't put up a great Finals performance. He has a reputation for not excelling in the Finals but no one mentions it because that would taint his Mamba Mentality persona..

Storch
08-10-2017, 08:43 AM
Sure? Wasnt there a year when they had billups hamilton prince and big ben in the all star game at the same time? Or was that 05?
Like i distinctly remember an all star game where those 4 were on the floor together at one time

It was everyone except prince

Hawkeye15
08-10-2017, 11:55 AM
Love TS%.528 and eFG%.478

Gasol TS%.556 and eFG%.478

Advance shooting stats said their shot effected the games the same or close enough.


I like Gasol and he was Kobe's main running mate who helped Kobe win a back to back. Kobe needed Gasol, Peace and Fisher to beat Boston for sure. Kobe was just the the leader and closer for his championship team. Kobe took over every game with his scoring against the best Defensive team in Boston. 5 elite/good defenders anchored by KG and Kobe still found a way to get his buckets.

For sure the Gasol vs KG matchup gave Kobe the biggest boost he needed.

as great as Kobe was, it is a failed argument to act like he didn't have superior help. Gasol was exponentially better than Kevin Love for one thing. But, there has been far better support than Gasol/Bynum/Odom, etc. No doubt.

Hawkeye15
08-10-2017, 11:58 AM
yes.. gasol was superman...

you are truly clueless... they had to hide him at the 4 by starting a busted up Andrew Bynum 2 years in a row and he was EASILY the biggest benefactor of Perkins being hurt in game 7 in 2010...

of course those facts don't fit your narrative so keep on with the Gasol was Superman and Kobe was overrated trash...

PSD... where the greats are hated on daily!!!!!!!!!!!

of course. But the 3 man rotation of Bynum/Gasol/Odom made them unbeatable when healthy. The C's suffered injuries up front as well during those finals remember. The point is (and this isn't a scenario only Kobe benefited from, far from that actually), that without Gasol's play, that team isn't going to be in a position to compete in that series. Kobe couldn't hit the board side of a barn in game 7, his team held Boston to within range, Kobe finally came around late. If you saw that kind of game from a LeBron for example, his team would be so far out by the time he came around, it wouldn't matter.

Vinylman
08-10-2017, 12:43 PM
of course. But the 3 man rotation of Bynum/Gasol/Odom made them unbeatable when healthy. The C's suffered injuries up front as well during those finals remember. The point is (and this isn't a scenario only Kobe benefited from, far from that actually), that without Gasol's play, that team isn't going to be in a position to compete in that series. Kobe couldn't hit the board side of a barn in game 7, his team held Boston to within range, Kobe finally came around late. If you saw that kind of game from a LeBron for example, his team would be so far out by the time he came around, it wouldn't matter.

I am not saying that Gasol wasn't a contributor ... that would be absurd... as absurd as saying he should have been the mvp over kobe

The analysis of game 7 is way off ... it was the greatest defensive battle in NBA history in the finals... the Boston D was off the charts in that series (and every other series that postseason)... it was less about kobe missing and more about boston making him miss... just look at how EVERYONE on the Lakers shot in that game... people want to single out kobe's FG shooting ... give me a ****ing break....

This whole conversation started out on how Gasol should have been the MVP and as usual has now morphed into he was a contributor which I don't feel compelled to even debate...

Pau Gasol is what he is ... never a top 15 player in the league any year he played... and probably no better than 75 all time and I think that is generous...

Jamiecballer
08-10-2017, 01:52 PM
I am not saying that Gasol wasn't a contributor ... that would be absurd... as absurd as saying he should have been the mvp over kobe

The analysis of game 7 is way off ... it was the greatest defensive battle in NBA history in the finals... the Boston D was off the charts in that series (and every other series that postseason)... it was less about kobe missing and more about boston making him miss... just look at how EVERYONE on the Lakers shot in that game... people want to single out kobe's FG shooting ... give me a ****ing break....

This whole conversation started out on how Gasol should have been the MVP and as usual has now morphed into he was a contributor which I don't feel compelled to even debate...

Pau Gasol is what he is ... never a top 15 player in the league any year he played... and probably no better than 75 all time and I think that is generous...

if Pau Gasol wasn't a top 15 player in 09/10 or 10/11 i'd say that's a reflection of how much our understanding of the game has evolved in a relatively short period of time. because he certainly was.

Bostonjorge
08-10-2017, 03:35 PM
if Pau Gasol wasn't a top 15 player in 09/10 or 10/11 i'd say that's a reflection of how much our understanding of the game has evolved in a relatively short period of time. because he certainly was.

1. Kobe
2. James
3. Wade
4 KD
5. Deron Williams
6. Nash
8. Dirk
9. Duncan
10. Dwight
11. Amare
12. Parker
13. Melo
14. Joe Johnson
15. Pierce
16. Paul

Then you have guys like Harden, Ray Allen, Bosh, Manu, Brandon Roy, Rashard Lewis, Stephen Jackson, Gerald Wallace, Westbrook, Rose, Aldridge, Horford and Shaq

I'm not saying all these players where better but it's arguable if Gasol was top 15. The championship gives Gasol the edge over guys who are right their with him.

Hawkeye15
08-10-2017, 04:10 PM
1. Kobe
2. James
3. Wade
4 KD
5. Deron Williams
6. Nash
8. Dirk
9. Duncan
10. Dwight
11. Amare
12. Parker
13. Melo
14. Joe Johnson
15. Pierce
16. Paul

Then you have guys like Harden, Ray Allen, Bosh, Manu, Brandon Roy, Rashard Lewis, Stephen Jackson, Gerald Wallace, Westbrook, Rose, Aldridge, Horford and Shaq

I'm not saying all these players where better but it's arguable if Gasol was top 15. The championship gives Gasol the edge over guys who are right their with him.

I would put Gasol above everyone bolded that year. You also have #1 wrong.

Bostonjorge
08-10-2017, 04:38 PM
I would put Gasol above everyone bolded that year. You also have #1 wrong.

Melo and D. Williams both made all NBA second team over Gasol. Joe Johnson and Brandon Roy both made 3rd with Gasol.

I also forgot to mention KG who took his team to the finals. His toughness made Cleveland walk off as a #1 seed(quit)in the same playoffs.

Hawkeye15
08-10-2017, 04:43 PM
Melo and D. Williams both made all NBA second team over Gasol. Joe Johnson and Brandon Roy both made 3rd with Gasol.

I also forgot to mention KG who took his team to the finals. His toughness made Cleveland walk off as a #1 seed(quit)in the same playoffs.

Joe Johnson was the most overrated player of his era (maybe Rondo, but he has enough people who think he is meh). He SUCKED come playoff time..

Jamiecballer
08-10-2017, 09:19 PM
I was just going to say, Joe fricken johnson? He has arguably not earned any of his all star appearances compared to a guy who is a lock for hof

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

basch152
08-10-2017, 09:47 PM
You're arguing that Chauncey was a bigger impact when I never said he wasn't. Who's using the strawman argument? Don't say someone is using a strawman because you think just by saying that, it defeats their argument. Secondly, I will ask again:

Were the 92-93 Bulls better or the 93-94 Bulls? 92-93 Bulls won two more games with MJ than two less games without in 93-94. Prove your case.

Except you quoted me talking about how Chauncey was a bigger impact arguing that Ben doesn't get enough credit, which again is something I never argued.

So yeah, you're the one using a strawman.

basch152
08-10-2017, 09:54 PM
It's like you didn't read a single word.

Your argument essentially says that because that Pistons won 50 games with Chucky Akins one year, and won the same number of game the next year with Billups, that they two are equal.

And you fail to consider that Ben was replaced by essentially four player: Nazr, Webber Johnson and Maxiell, vs. Billups, who was replaced by a WAY PAST HIS PRIME Iverson who couldn't even get a steady job the next year and missed almost 30 games. Not to mention that all those dudes (Sheed, Rip, Prince) were older, and not to mention they had a rookie coach.

You're like "Hey... I just made an argument that essentially says Chucky Akins and Chauncey are equal and then ignored the utter and complete lack of controls in the scenario where I'm trying to prove my 'point' and said Chauncey being swapped for a guy who missed over a third of the season and the playoffs is equal to a 31-year-old being replaced by Webber, Nazr, Johnson and Maxiell."

I mean, the Pistons won 11 fewer games the year Wallace left, and they have several quality guys who were brought in or given increased minutes.

You got no legs to stand on here. You'd be better off making a case for Chauncey's play making, scoring, and defence, than you would using ad hominems attacks by calling people insane and then comparing drops in wins in completely different context.

But hey... talk out your @$$ is you want and ignore the substance of whatès being said. That's cool.

Maxiell was already on the team, nazr and Webber weren't at the same time and nazr sucked, and the pistons were something like 26-37 or around there with Iverson. So he was replaced you could say with an extremely washed up Webber. Which with him they did just as good as they had with Ben the previous two years. The only difference is they went to a more offensive team.

And again, Chauncey led the team that was a first round exit with almost the exact same cast to the conference finals that year.

He's a far bigger difference maker. Period.

His leadership is off the charts in effect on gameplay.

Jeffy25
08-10-2017, 10:48 PM
I am not saying that Gasol wasn't a contributor ... that would be absurd... as absurd as saying he should have been the mvp over kobe

The analysis of game 7 is way off ... it was the greatest defensive battle in NBA history in the finals... the Boston D was off the charts in that series (and every other series that postseason)... it was less about kobe missing and more about boston making him miss... just look at how EVERYONE on the Lakers shot in that game... people want to single out kobe's FG shooting ... give me a ****ing break....


well Kobe was 0 fot 6 from 3 and 6 of 24 from the field

The team without him shot 36% while he shot 25%
And they were 4/14 from 3 without him.

He hit 11 free throws (on 15 attempts)


I give him credit for grabbing 15 boards and getting to the line plenty. But Gasol himself took 13 free throws and had 18 rebounds.


Kobe was solid in that 4th quarter, but it was a complete team effort. Vujacic hit two huge free throws with 11 seconds to go to turn it from a 2 to a 4 point lead.
Metta hit a 3 to take it from a 3 point lead to a 6 point lead with a minute to go.
Gasol had a lay up with a minute and a half to go. Gasol made 5 free throws down the stretch. Kobe may have had 10 points that quarter, but Gasol had 9.

The entire point is that Gasol was completely critical to these playoff runs and chips and Kobe desperately needed Gasol.


I can't remember a scenario where a guy shoots this badly, and is reigned as the superman of a series. If Bron did this, he would be crucified.

Have we ever had a Finals MVP only shoot 40% in a Finals series?




Here are some 4th quarter series stats for you:
Pau Gasol - 10/17 - 58%
Kobe Bryant - 12/41 - 29%

FlashBolt
08-10-2017, 11:17 PM
Except you quoted me talking about how Chauncey was a bigger impact arguing that Ben doesn't get enough credit, which again is something I never argued.

So yeah, you're the one using a strawman.

Read the post again, stubborn one. You'll see you're the one using a strawman argument. I quoted you in regards to you saying the Pistons had the same record or near without Ben Wallace. That's true but lots of factors that Jason eliquently detailed out for you was the cause of that. Strawman? All I said was Ben Wallace doesn't get enough credit. Where's the strawman? Can you answer my question? Since your entire belief is based on team record with/without a player, were the Bulls really just two wins less of a team without Jordan? So they are practically as good without Jordan? Is that what you are saying? Please reply to that.

FlashBolt
08-10-2017, 11:18 PM
well Kobe was 0 fot 6 from 3 and 6 of 24 from the field

The team without him shot 36% while he shot 25%
And they were 4/14 from 3 without him.

He hit 11 free throws (on 15 attempts)


I give him credit for grabbing 15 boards and getting to the line plenty. But Gasol himself took 13 free throws and had 18 rebounds.


Kobe was solid in that 4th quarter, but it was a complete team effort. Vujacic hit two huge free throws with 11 seconds to go to turn it from a 2 to a 4 point lead.
Metta hit a 3 to take it from a 3 point lead to a 6 point lead with a minute to go.
Gasol had a lay up with a minute and a half to go. Gasol made 5 free throws down the stretch. Kobe may have had 10 points that quarter, but Gasol had 9.

The entire point is that Gasol was completely critical to these playoff runs and chips and Kobe desperately needed Gasol.


I can't remember a scenario where a guy shoots this badly, and is reigned as the superman of a series. If Bron did this, he would be crucified.

Have we ever had a Finals MVP only shoot 40% in a Finals series?




Here are some 4th quarter series stats for you:
Pau Gasol - 10/17 - 58%
Kobe Bryant - 12/41 - 29%

So... Gasol is the cold-blooded killer while Kobe is the choker? Never knew. Wow, 30% from the field in the fourth quarter.. God knows if LeBron ever hit that low of a percentage.. if LeBron shoots below 45%, he's labeled a choker. Woooweee

Bostonjorge
08-11-2017, 01:14 AM
.......

ewing
08-11-2017, 08:04 AM
He never won in his prime but J Kidd was the best non primary scorer I've ever seen (I consider magic a primary scorer)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JasonJohnHorn
08-11-2017, 10:21 AM
I am not saying that Gasol wasn't a contributor ... that would be absurd... as absurd as saying he should have been the mvp over kobe

The analysis of game 7 is way off ... it was the greatest defensive battle in NBA history in the finals... the Boston D was off the charts in that series (and every other series that postseason)... it was less about kobe missing and more about boston making him miss... just look at how EVERYONE on the Lakers shot in that game... people want to single out kobe's FG shooting ... give me a ****ing break....

This whole conversation started out on how Gasol should have been the MVP and as usual has now morphed into he was a contributor which I don't feel compelled to even debate...

Pau Gasol is what he is ... never a top 15 player in the league any year he played... and probably no better than 75 all time and I think that is generous...


if Pau Gasol wasn't a top 15 player in 09/10 or 10/11 i'd say that's a reflection of how much our understanding of the game has evolved in a relatively short period of time. because he certainly was.

Pau was a top 15 player any number of years quite easily. He's always, for instance, been better than Melo, who has been ranked quite high. And he was the win-share leader both seasons LAL won the title with him (ahead of Kobe).

In the post season, he led the team in rebound, blocks and was second in points and assists. His FG% was 10% higher than Kobe in the playoffs, and his was scoring 18 points on 12 shots (1.5 pointspershot), while Kobe was jacking up 23 shots a game (1.3 pps). And that doesn't account for the possessions that led to fouls and points but didn't count as shots (which inflate Kobe's 1.3pps).

And Gasol's D was huge in both series. Slowing down Dwight, which the Cavs couldn't do, and then handling Garnett.... Those were pivotal in both series. What was Kobe's job against the Magic? Covering a rookie shooting guard named Courtney Lee? I mean... Kobe did a great job against a 34-year-old Ray Allen in 2010... I give him full credit for that. But Pau helped keep Garnett off the glass that series (Garnett had less than 6 boards per game) and kept his FG% slightly less than his regular season average.

I'm not making the argument that Pau was better than or more important than Kobe (though I would tentatively agree with the latter), but I would certain concede that a legit case could be made for either player being the most important on the team. I do think Kobe deserved the Finals MVP both seasons because he had a great series both times, but I wouldn't say this is an objective truth that isn't debatable or that there isn't a strong case for Gasol.

Anybody who suggests that one is clearly the more important player (as Vinylman is suggesting) simply refuses to recognize the subjective nature of this kind of analysis. Yes... there are players who are quantifiable better than others. You can't, for instance, make a case that Dwayne Schintzius was better than David Robinson. But in a case like this, the lines are muddied. Sure... a ppg average is a big difference, but that's just because one guy is taking more shots (and less efficient shots at that).

And anybody who says Pau was never a top 15 player when he was among the five best PF/Cs throughout his career... well... they just either put to much value in scoring averages or didn't watch him play. This is a guy who dragged the Memphis Grizzlies in the the post season several times in an extremely competitive Western conference when he had virtually no support on that roster. Two washed-up guard in their 30s (Jones and Stoudemire), and a couple of role players in Battier and Miller? I mean... he got into the playoffs three years in a row, in the West, with Mike Miller as a second option.

You try getting into the post season in the West not with a 'prime' Mike Miller as your second option. See how that flies