PDA

View Full Version : Is Dwight Howard an NBA failure?



LaVar Ball
11-26-2017, 02:17 PM
People can bring up his DPOY awards, which seem like a life time ago. But recently he got fined 35k for a sexual gesture toward a fan. Hes now 31, 14th year in the league. Charlotte is his 5th team, and 4th team in 6 years. And hes still pulling antics like a 17 year old.

Is there any hope for him? What is your impression of him?

warfelg
11-26-2017, 02:20 PM
I mean. Hes 14 years into his career. Not a failure.

mightybosstone
11-26-2017, 02:23 PM
A failure? Hardly. The guy was a top 5 player in the league and arguably the NBA's best center for the better part of a decade. And he's a lock for the Hall of Fame. Does he lack maturity and sometimes come off as a massive tool? Absolutely. Did he have untapped potential that will ultimately cause most fans and analysts to put an invisible asterisk next to his career when he retires? Sure. But the guy was hardly a failure. He was an elite basketball player in his prime that led a mediocre supporting cast to an NBA Finals. That cements his legacy in spite of all of his other flaws.

LaVar Ball
11-26-2017, 02:25 PM
A failure? Hardly. The guy was a top 5 player in the league and arguably the NBA's best center for the better part of a decade. And he's a lock for the Hall of Fame. Does he lack maturity and sometimes come off as a massive tool? Absolutely. Did he have untapped potential that will ultimately cause most fans and analysts to put an invisible asterisk next to his career when he retires? Sure. But the guy was hardly a failure. He was an elite basketball player in his prime that led a mediocre supporting cast to an NBA Finals. That cements his legacy in spite of all of his other flaws.

2004-06 he was still learning the game.

2006-2012, if you want to say, then sure. But that's 5 1/2 years. Hardly a decade.

mightybosstone
11-26-2017, 02:30 PM
2004-06 he was still learning the game.

2006-2012, if you want to say, then sure. But that's 5 1/2 years. Hardly a decade.

"Better part of a decade" = at least six years. Kind of made my point for me, chief.

Chronz
11-26-2017, 02:32 PM
Maybe a disappointment and I hate seeing the guy laugh off adversity. Never took **** as seriously as I wished.

You need a perfect team to utilize his strengths at this point.

LaVar Ball
11-26-2017, 02:34 PM
"Better part of a decade" = at least six years. Kind of made my point for me, chief.


2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
Half of the 2011-12 (already a shortened season. his season ended early due to back surgery).


5 full and a 1/2 season buddy.

warfelg
11-26-2017, 02:35 PM
Maybe a disappointment and I hate seeing the guy laugh off adversity. Never took **** as seriously as I wished.

You need a perfect team to utilize his strengths at this point.

Dwight on GSW would wreck **** so hard.

prodigy
11-26-2017, 02:46 PM
def not. Dumb post

prodigy
11-26-2017, 02:48 PM
Dwight on GSW would wreck **** so hard.

or cavs lol

KnicksorBust
11-26-2017, 02:49 PM
A failure? Hardly. The guy was a top 5 player in the league and arguably the NBA's best center for the better part of a decade. And he's a lock for the Hall of Fame. Does he lack maturity and sometimes come off as a massive tool? Absolutely. Did he have untapped potential that will ultimately cause most fans and analysts to put an invisible asterisk next to his career when he retires? Sure. But the guy was hardly a failure. He was an elite basketball player in his prime that led a mediocre supporting cast to an NBA Finals. That cements his legacy in spite of all of his other flaws.

This. If they are getting into the Hall of Fame then calling that player's career a failure is comically stupid.

mightybosstone
11-26-2017, 03:25 PM
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
Half of the 2011-12 (already a shortened season. his season ended early due to back surgery).

5 full and a 1/2 season buddy.

You're playing semantics, but 5.5 out of 10 is still a majority, dude. And you could make a case for him in 12-13 and 13-14. Bottom line, he was the best center in the league for a good chunk of time and a top 5-10 player in the league. That's a damn solid career, regardless of whether he ever meant his potential or not. And this is coming from a Rockets fan who has really grown to loathe Howard's antics the last few years.

Scoots
11-26-2017, 03:52 PM
Dwight on GSW would wreck **** so hard.

No.

Scoots
11-26-2017, 03:53 PM
People can bring up his DPOY awards, which seem like a life time ago. But recently he got fined 35k for a sexual gesture toward a fan. Hes now 31, 14th year in the league. Charlotte is his 5th team, and 4th team in 6 years. And hes still pulling antics like a 17 year old.

Is there any hope for him? What is your impression of him?

No. No. He's weak mentally, but still was great when he was 100% healthy.

Chronz
11-26-2017, 03:57 PM
Dwight on GSW would wreck **** so hard.

Really wish he signed with them and not Houston. I wonder if Dwight would've ruined them. Maybe they win but yeah I think they could utilize current Dwight the most.

warfelg
11-26-2017, 04:01 PM
No.

3 point shooting galore with a shot blocking and rebounding force? Like I would love to see what Capella, Drummond, DJ, and a few of these other rebounding/shotblocking bigs could do with them.

Chronz
11-26-2017, 04:08 PM
3 point shooting galore with a shot blocking and rebounding force? Like I would love to see what Capella, Drummond, DJ, and a few of these other rebounding/shotblocking bigs could do with them.
Bell is giving us a glimpse of that. Javale at times

warfelg
11-26-2017, 04:12 PM
Bell is giving us a glimpse of that. Javale at times

And I personally think Dwight is better then them (even now). Man....what an amazing team it would have made with a prime Dwight.

****, it's crazy to think that Dwight is only 2 years older than KD and Curry....but Dwight's in year 14, Durant in year 10, and Curry in year 8.

lol, please
11-26-2017, 04:13 PM
Really wish he signed with them and not Houston. I wonder if Dwight would've ruined them. Maybe they win but yeah I think they could utilize current Dwight the most.Ahh yes, that was the beginning of the Rockets/Warriors rivalry on PSD, with a little help from yours truly.

Hindsight is 20/20 and I'm glad he went to Houston now.


That said, to answer OP, Dwight will always be a laughing stock to me, and I will never, and could never take asnyone seriously who genuinely believed the next Shaq hype. Extremely disrespectful towards Shaq as Dwight couldn't walk a day in his shoes, and the fact these same people haven't come around and apologized for such an asinine prediction is pathetic.


Then here is lol, P making stellar predictions like Durant coming to the Warriors over a year before it materializes, and I get no love. Smh.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

Meth
11-26-2017, 05:45 PM
People forget his stretch of dominance in his Orlando tenure. Just because of his elite play there alone is not a failure to me. Is he a disappointment? Probably so. There was so much potential with that guy to be even better... but too bad his stints with Houston and every team afterwards have been forgettable. Crazy how he's only 31 though, seems like he's been in the league forever

Scoots
11-26-2017, 05:47 PM
3 point shooting galore with a shot blocking and rebounding force? Like I would love to see what Capella, Drummond, DJ, and a few of these other rebounding/shotblocking bigs could do with them.

I don't want his brain in the locker room ... and he and Draymond would HAAAAAAAAATE each other. Kobe was political about it, Draymond would be talking to the press and saying that Dwight was bad.

The Warriors assign rookies to a specific veteran for their rookie year. Draymond, in the middle of his first practice with the team yelled that his veteran sucked and he needed a new one ... he was assigned David Lee and the team got rid of the vet shortly thereafter. Draymond has always been Draymond even as a fat, slow, short rookie 2nd round pick. That attitude and Dwight would not mesh well.

warfelg
11-26-2017, 05:54 PM
I don't want his brain in the locker room ... and he and Draymond would HAAAAAAAAATE each other. Kobe was political about it, Draymond would be talking to the press and saying that Dwight was bad.

The Warriors assign rookies to a specific veteran for their rookie year. Draymond, in the middle of his first practice with the team yelled that his veteran sucked and he needed a new one ... he was assigned David Lee and the team got rid of the vet shortly thereafter. Draymond has always been Draymond even as a fat, slow, short rookie 2nd round pick. That attitude and Dwight would not mesh well.

You never know what could happen there though. Kobe seems like he was a PITA in the lockerroom to everyone TBH.

Scoots
11-26-2017, 07:33 PM
You never know what could happen there though. Kobe seems like he was a PITA in the lockerroom to everyone TBH.

I'd rather have Cousins and I don't want him either :)

Game over Dwight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzszeBrAj5s

WaDe03
11-26-2017, 08:50 PM
Hell be in the hall of fame so I would say not.

rhino17
11-26-2017, 08:54 PM
The problem with Dwight is that he had all the athletic potential in the world and never put in any effort to improve his game. He NEVER developed even a basic post game, yet demanded the ball in the post. He either needed to develop an offensive game or accept his role on the team as a glorified DeAndre Jordan (especially the last 5 years or so). But he refused to do either. Lots of untapped potential that will continue to be untapped as he is still acting like a child on the court

Driven
11-27-2017, 09:06 AM
He's 31, has played 14 years, and still plays at a high level and can play another handful of years. Not a disappointment.

IndyRealist
11-27-2017, 09:50 AM
In the last 14 years he's been better than 95% of the players in the NBA and easily top 1% in the world, and he's still going at a high level. His middle years were marred by injury, coincidentally when he had the most exposure. That has colored a lot of people'ls opinions of him.

JasonJohnHorn
11-27-2017, 10:34 AM
He's 31 and is a starting centre in the league and elite rebounder.

Does he still act like a child? Yes. Is he a failure in the league? Only as much as anybody who hasn't won a title is a failure. Multiple time all-star; multiple time DPOY. Making 8 figures. I can't think of any context where that would constitute being a failure.

But yeah... still acting like a child.

Scoots
11-27-2017, 12:45 PM
He's 31 and is a starting centre in the league and elite rebounder.

Does he still act like a child? Yes. Is he a failure in the league? Only as much as anybody who hasn't won a title is a failure. Multiple time all-star; multiple time DPOY. Making 8 figures. I can't think of any context where that would constitute being a failure.

But yeah... still acting like a child.

As a father?

MILLERHIGHLIFE
11-27-2017, 02:15 PM
Howard shouldn't of cried his way out of Orlando. Seemed like he lost his Superman shirt after being traded from Magic.

TheDish87
11-27-2017, 02:28 PM
lol anything but a failure. you have to be clueless to even think that

smith&wesson
11-27-2017, 03:06 PM
He's been pretty good the lad couple seasons surprisingly .. his numbers aren't bad at all.

Jeffy25
11-27-2017, 03:40 PM
Def not a failure.

He wasn't Shaq. But he was a great player you could put on any team where he didn't need to be the focus and star.

People just had greater expectations than what he honestly was or could have become because he was so athletic.

europagnpilgrim
11-27-2017, 03:50 PM
People can bring up his DPOY awards, which seem like a life time ago. But recently he got fined 35k for a sexual gesture toward a fan. Hes now 31, 14th year in the league. Charlotte is his 5th team, and 4th team in 6 years. And hes still pulling antics like a 17 year old.

Is there any hope for him? What is your impression of him?

a failure by not winning any rings? I guess so but he has pretty much maximized what he came into the nba as, a raw super athletic big man who dunked a lot and grabbed a lot of rebounds his first 8yrs or so and then played injured/hurt with Lakers and left there and went to WCF with Rockets and now with Hornets after brief ATL stint

not to mention he was the alpha on his 09' Finals team and of course I have to mention his 3 years in a row DPOY and the Magic were flirting with it seemed like 60 wins a year for like a 3-4yr span

if that is a failure and he is still in the league putting up like 15 and 13 then sign me up, those numbers are better than Marc Gasol for his career and Howard is in like his 12th or 13th season or more so those are down numbers by his standard that he set in Orlando, good career and all these guys act how they act, Lebron is in his 15th season and he has to find a way to stay in the limelight with snapchap and whatever else garbage is out there to instantly falsely connect with people

will Lebron ever grow up since he clowned Love on there and basically ran off Kryie, will that ever change?

Dwight is who he always will be, I am pretty sure the fan said something or possibly made a gesture so should the fan be kicked out the building had he been caught on camera doing so? that's petty, as long as it doesn't end up in the malice at the palace then all is fair, Miller use to always interact with Spike/MSG crowd and it was all in line with the competition, sometimes hecklers need to be heckled here and there, so what

and speaking of 17yr olds, watch a nba game and hopefully its close and calls for a buzzer beater and watch all so called grown men start jumping and smiling and hugging and rolling all over the hardwood like a bunch of 8yr olds, I am pretty sure it has happened already since we have had some buzzer beaters, see Mavs(Barnes) and Rockets(Gordon) for visual proof, all those grown men act like a bunch of kids but you choose to try and single out Howard, go figure

JordansBulls
11-27-2017, 10:08 PM
After 2011 he hasn't really been that good.

LaVar Ball
11-29-2017, 12:41 PM
After 2011 he hasn't really been that good.

Thank you!

FlashBolt
11-29-2017, 01:02 PM
He's a semi-failure. Making it to the NBA and winning DPOY awards while being a top five player is special but on the other hand, his lack of development and attitude just held him back. He took lessons from Hakeem and didn't implement a single thing into his game. His go-to move was fake left, dribble, spin, and get close to the rim. He's so easy to guard and that's why teams don't really give him the ball. Disappointing player who had a lot of physical gifts that should have made him an all-time great NBA center. Sad that he's now looked at as a shell of a himself.

BKLYNpigeon
11-29-2017, 01:09 PM
Injuries derailed his career. If he was healthy and still dominate, nobody would question his character.

Hall of Famer at the end of the day.

IndyRealist
11-29-2017, 02:14 PM
After 2011 he hasn't really been that good.

Last year the Hawks were over .500, this year they are .200 (4-16).

FlashBolt
11-29-2017, 02:17 PM
Last year the Hawks were over .500, this year they are .200 (4-16).

That Paul Milsap guy sucks.

IndyRealist
11-29-2017, 02:24 PM
That Paul Milsap guy sucks.

Didn't say he was. No player is worth the 27 win difference between last year and this year. No Lebron, not Harden. But if you think Milsap was a better player than Howard last year, I've got a bridge for sale that you'll love.

FlashBolt
11-29-2017, 02:36 PM
Didn't say he was. No player is worth the 27 win difference between last year and this year. No Lebron, not Harden. But if you think Milsap was a better player than Howard last year, I've got a bridge for sale that you'll love.

A combination of the two. They also lost Tim as well so basically they got rid of 3/5 of their top players. And yes, Milsap was indeed a better player than Howard last season.. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise. Howard hasn't been of much use both defensively and offensively for years. He'll get his double-digit points because he's playing big minutes and he's still bigger than many centers. Rebounds, same story. Plenty of guys can rebound in double-digits with those minutes. He was a disaster for the Hawks in a signing where most thought he would reshape his career. Sucks in Hornets now, too.

IndyRealist
11-29-2017, 02:48 PM
A combination of the two. They also lost Tim as well so basically they got rid of 3/5 of their top players. And yes, Milsap was indeed a better player than Howard last season.. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise. Howard hasn't been of much use both defensively and offensively for years. He'll get his double-digit points because he's playing big minutes and he's still bigger than many centers. Rebounds, same story. Plenty of guys can rebound in double-digits with those minutes. He was a disaster for the Hawks in a signing where most thought he would reshape his career. Sucks in Hornets now, too.

What I got from your post was "he can still score and rebound against other centers". You're saying that because he got 2199 minutes last year, his numbers are inflated....but Milsap got 2343 minutes, so why aren't his numbers inflated? Milsap was below average on 2pt and 3pt FG%. I don't get why people think that "slightly below average at everything = above average player" Milsap had a net rating of +4, where Howard had a net rating of +15, on the same team.

FlashBolt
11-29-2017, 03:01 PM
What I got from your post was "he can still score and rebound against other centers". You're saying that because he got 2199 minutes last year, his numbers are inflated....but Milsap got 2343 minutes, so why aren't his numbers inflated? Milsap was below average on 2pt and 3pt FG%. I don't get why people think that "slightly below average at everything = above average player" Milsap had a net rating of +4, where Howard had a net rating of +15, on the same team.

I'd like evidence of that net rating. Second, I'm talking about impact here. Milsap could do many things out there while Dwight was on the paint and rebounding. It wasn't anything he did that was special or change how the team played. Guys who are tall will be able to get easy baskets and rebound. Milsap isn't the tallest or strongest guy out there but he could pass, rebound, score, and play defense. Dwight really doesn't do any of that. His scoring is terrible. Yeah, 16 points but how many of those were points were created by others? It's a totally different conversation. When Milsap played, Hawks were 40-29. When Howard played, Hawks were 37-37. When Howard missed 8 games, Hawks record was 6-2 without him. When Milsap missed 13 games, his team was 3-10. Tell me more about how Howard was a better player, please.

IndyRealist
11-29-2017, 03:11 PM
I'd like evidence of that net rating. Second, I'm talking about impact here. Milsap could do many things out there while Dwight was on the paint and rebounding. It wasn't anything he did that was special or change how the team played. Guys who are tall will be able to get easy baskets and rebound. Milsap isn't the tallest or strongest guy out there but he could pass, rebound, score, and play defense. Dwight really doesn't do any of that. His scoring is terrible. Yeah, 16 points but how many of those were points were created by others? It's a totally different conversation. When Milsap played, Hawks were 40-29. When Howard played, Hawks were 37-37. When Howard missed 8 games, Hawks record was 6-2 without him. When Milsap missed 13 games, his team was 3-10. Tell me more about how Howard was a better player, please.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ATL/2017.html

Milsap was a 108 off rating, 104 def rating, while Howard was 115/100. Normally I wouldn't compare two players off/def ratings, but since these two are on the same team, in the same system, with the same teammates it's applicable.

Milsap got more minutes, I'd say his numbers are far more inflated by volume than Howard's are, considering he was a below average scorer last year.

Small sample sizes don't mean squat. You'd think people here would know that by now.

FlashBolt
11-29-2017, 03:15 PM
https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ATL/2017.html

Milsap was a 108 off rating, 104 def rating, while Howard was 115/100. Normally I wouldn't compare two players off/def ratings, but since these two are on the same team, in the same system, with the same teammates it's applicable.

Milsap got more minutes, I'd say his numbers are far more inflated by volume than Howard's are, considering he was a below average scorer last year.

Small sample sizes don't mean squat. You'd think people here would know that by now.

Thanks. I wanted you to say it. So do you agree: Tristan Thompson was better than LeBron in 2016-2017? And can you answer why Hawks were 6-2 without Dwight? If his impact>Milsap, why is it Hawks were 3-10 without Milsap? These things correlate with what I'm trying to say: Dwight was not more impactful than Milsap.

FlashBolt
11-29-2017, 03:20 PM
More fun off/def rating:

Iggy/KD had the same off/def rating. Both played nearly the same minutes.
Pachulia had a higher rating than Draymond.

These ratings involve a multitude of factors involving lineups, opponents, change in players from opposing teams, etc., It's not even remotely capable of distinguishing between those factors. It's simply a mathematical formula.

IndyRealist
11-29-2017, 03:28 PM
Thanks. I wanted you to say it. So do you agree: Tristan Thompson was better than LeBron in 2016-2017? And can you answer why Hawks were 6-2 without Dwight? If his impact>Milsap, why is it Hawks were 3-10 without Milsap? These things correlate with what I'm trying to say: Dwight was not more impactful than Milsap.

SMALL SAMPLE SIZE. That's why you can't draw any conclusions until 20-30 games go by. If you were just going by 8 games, the Grizzlies would be the best team in the NBA this year, and the Warriors would be in real trouble.

Net rating is just one measure. That's what stats-ignorant people always fail to understand. No one is saying "This stat says player A is better than player B" you have to look at different measures. Net rating is how the TEAM did, not the player. And on the whole, Paul Milsap was a below average scorer and played more minutes. Dwight was an above average scorer, rebounded better, in less minutes.

If you want to try and compare that to Thompson/Lebron, when Thompson played less than 30mpg and Lebron played 38, well I don't think you're equipped to have this conversation.

EDIT: Don't mind me if I'm snippy, I'm sick.

FlashBolt
11-29-2017, 03:37 PM
SMALL SAMPLE SIZE. That's why you can't draw any conclusions until 20-30 games go by. If you were just going by 8 games, the Grizzlies would be the best team in the NBA this year, and the Warriors would be in real trouble.

Net rating is just one measure. That's what stats-ignorant people always fail to understand. No one is saying "This stat says player A is better than player B" you have to look at different measures. Net rating is how the TEAM did, not the player. And on the whole, Paul Milsap was a below average scorer and played more minutes. Dwight was an above average scorer, rebounded better, in less minutes.

If you want to try and compare that to Thompson/Lebron, when Thompson played less than 30mpg, well I don't think you're equipped to have this conversation.

EDIT: Don't mind me if I'm snippy, I'm sick.

1) That's a large sample size considering you're talking about value here. There's no reason the team should be 3-10 without Milsap if he's below average as a scorer.. and there's certainly no reason the team should be 6-2 with their best player not playing. That's not really correlating with what you're trying to advocate.
2) You say net rating is just one measure yet that's the ONLY measure you've included. So one measure points to TT being better than LeBron. In what universe is that even remotely correct? Answer the KD vs Iggy one, then. Why did both have the SAME net rating despite playing relatively the same amount of minutes. (It's not measured by MPG but minutes played, btw).
3) Paul Milsap is not a below average scorer. This is where you're just looking at stats and not what actually happened. With Horford gone and Dwight inserted there, Milsap had to spread the floor. They both can't be out in the paint because Dwight is incapable of scoring anywhere outside the rim. Milsap could. That's why he began taking farther shots from the basket. If he wanted, he could stick to the rim and get some easier baskets but then that would clog the lanes and Dwight wouldn't be able to get his easy baskets as well. Milsap HAD to make changes for Dwight. Dwight didn't really make or help Milsap in any way. VALUE, bud. That also explains Milsap averaging less rebounds because he's moving AWAY from the basket.

Are you really comparing how Dwight scores vs Milsap? One guy is spreading the floor for the team while the other stays in the paint and gets a play created FOR him.

IndyRealist
11-29-2017, 03:52 PM
1) That's a large sample size considering you're talking about value here. There's no reason the team should be 3-10 without Milsap if he's below average as a scorer.. and there's certainly no reason the team should be 6-2 with their best player not playing. That's not really correlating with what you're trying to advocate.
2) You say net rating is just one measure yet that's the ONLY measure you've included. So one measure points to TT being better than LeBron. In what universe is that even remotely correct? Answer the KD vs Iggy one, then. Why did both have the SAME net rating despite playing relatively the same amount of minutes. (It's not measured by MPG but minutes played, btw).
3) Paul Milsap is not a below average scorer. This is where you're just looking at stats and not what actually happened. With Horford gone and Dwight inserted there, Milsap had to spread the floor. They both can't be out in the paint because Dwight is incapable of scoring anywhere outside the rim. Milsap could. That's why he began taking farther shots from the basket. If he wanted, he could stick to the rim and get some easier baskets but then that would clog the lanes and Dwight wouldn't be able to get his easy baskets as well. Milsap HAD to make changes for Dwight. Dwight didn't really make or help Milsap in any way. VALUE, bud. That also explains Milsap averaging less rebounds because he's moving AWAY from the basket.

Are you really comparing how Dwight scores vs Milsap? One guy is spreading the floor for the team while the other stays in the paint and gets a play created FOR him.

That's not how sample sizes work. Anything can happen over 13 games.

Milsap was a below average scorer last year. Everyone knew that Milsap and Howard were a bad fit together. Howard certainly impacted Milsap negatively, but Howard was the better player. You want to blame that on Milsap accomodating Howard, that doesn't change that what Milsap did was below average.

I brought up net rating, yes, but I also brought up scoring %s, and rebounding rates. Again, you want to say Howard detracted from Milsap, that's fine. But what Milsap actually did wasn't good.

FlashBolt
11-29-2017, 04:07 PM
That's not how sample sizes work. Anything can happen over 13 games.

Milsap was a below average scorer last year. Everyone knew that Milsap and Howard were a bad fit together. Howard certainly impacted Milsap negatively, but Howard was the better player. You want to blame that on Milsap accomodating Howard, that doesn't change that what Milsap did was below average.

I brought up net rating, yes, but I also brought up scoring %s, and rebounding rates. Again, you want to say Howard detracted from Milsap, that's fine. But what Milsap actually did wasn't good.

1) Does it take a genius to see that LeBron not playing for the Cavs would make them lose games? Sometimes, it's obvious enough to where sample sizes aren't going to differentiate much. Bad teams don't need a large sample size for people to see they are bad.

2) I just told you why Milsap had more difficulties scoring the ball and you ignore it by saying the same garbage and then proceed to say Dwight was the better player. Milsap had to change his game and that's why his scoring efficiency decreased. He had to change his game because Dwight did nothing to change HIS own game. I guess you really refuse to accept basic fundamentals of basketball.

3) You're bringing up valid evidence that really means nothing. You haven't convinced me at all. I gave you actual reasons. You're just regurgitating your stats that took you ten seconds to do on basketball reference. Sorry bud, it's obvious you really have no idea how the Hawks operated. They benched Howard. They traded him for garbage in return. That's enough evidence that Howard wasn't that high of a value. I never said Milsap was great. I said he was better than Howard. I see you have STILL chosen to ignore Durant/Iggy's off/def rating.. just admit it, it's a dumb statistic to evaluate a player. It literally means nothing so the fact you brought it up raises questions as to your basketball evaluations.

So far, Howard is the better player because he had a higher REB/scoring% and because he coincidentally also has a higher off/def rating so that must align with him being better. That honestly is a bunch of gibberish. Sounds like you did your best to reach for an argument after making an obvious stupid assumption that Howard>Milsap.

IndyRealist
11-29-2017, 04:43 PM
1) Does it take a genius to see that LeBron not playing for the Cavs would make them lose games? Sometimes, it's obvious enough to where sample sizes aren't going to differentiate much. Bad teams don't need a large sample size for people to see they are bad.

2) I just told you why Milsap had more difficulties scoring the ball and you ignore it by saying the same garbage and then proceed to say Dwight was the better player. Milsap had to change his game and that's why his scoring efficiency decreased. He had to change his game because Dwight did nothing to change HIS own game. I guess you really refuse to accept basic fundamentals of basketball.

3) You're bringing up valid evidence that really means nothing. You haven't convinced me at all. I gave you actual reasons. You're just regurgitating your stats that took you ten seconds to do on basketball reference. Sorry bud, it's obvious you really have no idea how the Hawks operated. They benched Howard. They traded him for garbage in return. That's enough evidence that Howard wasn't that high of a value. I never said Milsap was great. I said he was better than Howard. I see you have STILL chosen to ignore Durant/Iggy's off/def rating.. just admit it, it's a dumb statistic to evaluate a player. It literally means nothing so the fact you brought it up raises questions as to your basketball evaluations.

So far, Howard is the better player because he had a higher REB/scoring% and because he coincidentally also has a higher off/def rating so that must align with him being better. That honestly is a bunch of gibberish. Sounds like you did your best to reach for an argument after making an obvious stupid assumption that Howard>Milsap.
Hahahahahahahaha. Ok man.

KingPosey
11-29-2017, 05:05 PM
2004-06 he was still learning the game.

2006-2012, if you want to say, then sure. But that's 5 1/2 years. Hardly a decade.
Better part. As in more than half. 5 1/2 years would be the better part of a deacade.

mrblisterdundee
11-29-2017, 06:47 PM
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
Half of the 2011-12 (already a shortened season. his season ended early due to back surgery).
5 full and a 1/2 season buddy.

Howard played 83 percent of the 2011-12 season and was the still best center, and 5.83 is the better part of 10, buddy.

TylerSL
11-30-2017, 05:04 AM
It's completely short sighted and unfair to consider his career a failure. After reaching super stardom early in his career, did he live up to his potential? That's the better question to ask and the answer is no, he did not. There is a myriad of reasons as to why he didn't maximize his potential, but to call his career a failure when he will go down as better than a majority of NBA players is quite insulting.

The number one reason he failed to reach his potential was injuries. When he was young, he relied on his athleticism. He was criticized for not having post moves and relying too heavily on his speed and athleticism to score. When injuries made him less mobile he wasn't skilled enough under the basket and he regressed. His defense fell off also with the loss of lateral movement.

The second reason was he was never a skilled player. As mentioned above, he relied on his athleticism and speed to wreak havoc in the paint. He was quick on defensive rotations and could jump to the moon to block shots. He could beat defenders on the offensive end and throw it down with force. That's about the full extent of his capabilities and he never got to a point where he could back people down and beat his opponents with any kind of skill set.

The third reason he wasn't maximized is because his position has been faded out in the modern NBA. Dwight Howard is a traditional NBA big man. Younger prime-Dwight was basically DeAndre Jordan on steroids. Today, centers need be able to shoot and play out on the perimeter. Howard has always been best getting the ball underneath the basket and as the league has sped up and teams take more 3's, his play style has been fazed out. That's not to say he can't succeed, but centers like Porzingis, Towns, Embiid, and even Cousins and Gasol are viewed more favorably. Take age out of the equation, if you make Howard and every one of the previously mentioned centers 25 years old they would all be viewed more favorably than Dwight, even when he was in his prime. A perimeter game is a prerequisite in the modern NBA.

The fourth and final reason he never reached his potential was his attitude. Wanting out of Orlando was one thing, but his inability to get along with star teammates drove him away from winning opportunities. He couldn't get along with Kobe because Kobe felt he didn't have a big enough heart, which he probably didn't to play with Kobe. I know what Howard has said about winning, but his actions speak louder than words and his will to win has always been an open question. He couldn't get along with James Harden because he felt like he was the super star and should have had the ball more. Anyone with a pair of eyes could see that Harden was the best player on the Rockets, Dwight refused to become the type of player those Houston teams needed him to be. After three years with Houston he signed a three-year deal with the Hawks before they dumped him on the Hornets, with most of the Atlanta players glad to be rid of him.

So all in all, Howard's career never lived up to the hype, it's been disappointing. However that's different than being a failure. Howard is a three-time Defensive Player of the Year and an eight-time All Star. He's in his 14th NBA season and is averaging 17.4/12.7/2.0 (pts/rebs/blks) for a career. That's not a failure, that's borderline Hall of Fame.

ballislife72
12-04-2017, 10:51 PM
I disagree. He would get no playing time. He never gives 100% effort. Steve Kerr wouldn't allow it.

Jamiecballer
12-04-2017, 11:07 PM
Ok, so the most important takeaway I got reading this whole thread was we have a disagreement on what "better part of" means. I was with the first guy, who was, like, 5.5 years dude. I see others agree that it fits. Because if it fits I have missed a lot of chances to say this expression!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120A using Tapatalk