PDA

View Full Version : NBA All-Time Redraft 2nd Round - Seaside Seagulls vs Team RR



valade16
06-26-2019, 02:35 PM
Every year members of PSD get together and have a draft of all the players throughout history. They are then ranked and seeded where a "playoff" determines the winner of the game. This is that playoff. Look over the two teams and vote on which team you think would win in a 7 games series.

Team Seaside Seagulls (Homecourt advantage)

PG: Chris Paul / Kyrie Irving
SG: Jeff Hornacek / Gilbert Arenas
SF: George Gervin / Derek Harper
PF: Bobby Jones / Jermaine OíNeal
C: Hakeem Olajuwon / Brad Daugherty

vs

Team RR

PG: Terry Porter | Fat Lever
SG: Paul George | Hersey Hawkins
SF: Tracy McGrady | Dale Ellis
PF: Draymond Green | Dave Cowens
C: Wilt Chamberlain | Nikola Jokic

Redrum187
06-26-2019, 02:55 PM
I'll do a short write-up for now.

Team RR has an advantage in 4 positions (2-5). The offense is more deadly: better spacing, more diverse offense, superior slashers, more defined roles. Team Seaside has good defense, but it's overall inferior to Team RR's: Hornacek and Gervin weren't known defensive stoppers. Furthermore, Jeff Hornacek was 6'4 and 190 lbs... the guy he'll have to cover is 6'10 and 220 lbs. Paul George has a 6 inch and 30 lbs advantage and is also astronomically more athletic. I don't see Derek Harper or Gilbert Arenas capable of guarding Paul George either. Team RR has a defensive answer for everyone. Hakeem will still get his and Chris Paul is one of the best, but Porter and Wilt will absolutely make life difficult for them along with the overall team defense Team RR has. No one is a liability. Which brings us to benches... Team RR's bench devastates Team Seaside. Dale Ellis would be a much needed starter on Team Seaside over Hornacek... Jokic is light years better than Brad Daugherty, Cowens is an MVP hustle machine who puts Jermaine O'Neal to shame. Gilbert Arenas was a very ball dominant guard who jacked up shots and didn't play much defense while Hawkins was a 20 point, 40% 3 point shooting defensive guard.

valade16
06-26-2019, 04:44 PM
To reply to what RR is saying.

I actually plan to start Jermaine O'Neal against Draymond while putting Bobby Jones on the hotter of T-Mac and PG. As to his assertion he has better slashers, George Gervin averaged 34.1 Points Per 100 Possessions on .564 TS%. T-Mac is at 31.6 on .519 TS%. PG is at 29.6 on .563 TS%. Gervin actually scores more and is more efficient than either of them. And that's actually where my advantage is. RR's team is wildly inefficient:

Wilt .547 TS%
T-Mac .519 TS%
PG .563 TS%
Dray .535 TS%

The most efficient starter is the one who is not going to score at all (Porter).

As for his assertion he has a better bench, he does not. Cowens won an MVP in an era when they had the players vote on MVP and he was the best player on a well rounded top team. Gilbert Arenas and Kyrie Irving are both better than any of Fat Lever, Dale Ellis and Hersey Hawkins. Each has more all-NBA teams than all 3 of them combined. Even Brad Daugherty was a hyper efficient scoring C (.580 TS%) who does everything Jokic does except the passing.

GREATNESS ONE
06-26-2019, 05:00 PM
https://media0.giphy.com/media/tyqcJoNjNv0Fq/giphy.gif?cid=19f5b51a5d13dcd65853496355d56752&rid=giphy.gif

Redrum187
06-26-2019, 05:39 PM
To reply to what RR is saying.

I actually plan to start Jermaine O'Neal against Draymond while putting Bobby Jones on the hotter of T-Mac and PG. As to his assertion he has better slashers, George Gervin averaged 34.1 Points Per 100 Possessions on .564 TS%. T-Mac is at 31.6 on .519 TS%. PG is at 29.6 on .563 TS%. Gervin actually scores more and is more efficient than either of them. And that's actually where my advantage is. RR's team is wildly inefficient:

Wilt .547 TS%
T-Mac .519 TS%
PG .563 TS%
Dray .535 TS%

The most efficient starter is the one who is not going to score at all (Porter).

As for his assertion he has a better bench, he does not. Cowens won an MVP in an era when they had the players vote on MVP and he was the best player on a well rounded top team. Gilbert Arenas and Kyrie Irving are both better than any of Fat Lever, Dale Ellis and Hersey Hawkins. Each has more all-NBA teams than all 3 of them combined. Even Brad Daugherty was a hyper efficient scoring C (.580 TS%) who does everything Jokic does except the passing.

That's great news for Team RR then. With Hornacek benched and the least efficient player from both teams starting (Jermaine O'Neal), Chris Paul will literally be the only 3 point threat and limit his already questionable spacing as it is.

I know the rebuttal will be "while my guys didn't shoot 3's very well, they did space the floor"... Fine, I'll live with what is considered the worst shot in the modern NBA aka the long 2. Chris Paul won't be able to pass to himself for the open 3, Hakeem won't have the space inside he needs to attack the post, and Gervin played in an era where it was illegal to play zone defense. If teams were allowed to execute zone defense on Gervin, he wouldn't be nearly as efficient.

I'm not sure which years Team Seaside is using for Tmac, but the TS% numbers are a bit off, I'll fix it for him:

PG: Terry Porter TS% .600 (89-92) vs Chris Paul TS% .587 (07-10)
SG: Paul George TS% .580 (16-19) vs George Gervin TS% .591 (77-80 zone defense was illegal)
SF: Tracy McGrady TS% .542 (01-04) vs Bobby Jones TS% .602 (76-79)
PF: Draymond Green TS% .552 (14-17) vs Jermaine O'Neal TS% .509 (03-06)
C: Wilt Chamberlain TS% .574 (65-68) vs Hakeem Olajuwon TS% .568 (92-95)

As you can see, Seaside's assertions that Team RR is "wildly inefficient" is completely unfounded. If Team RR is considered "wildly inefficient", what does that say about his team who is even less efficient and starts the least efficient player of the lot, all the while destroying their offensive gameplay to try to match Team RR defensively?

Seaside has to change his line-up to guard Team RR which makes their offense complete trash. Team RR has the flexibility and versatility to guard all his players in addition to compliment the team offensively.

Let me reiterate:

Offense: Team RR has the superior passers/play-makers, the superior slashers, the superior shooters, superior 3-point shooters, the more efficient scorers, the more diverse arsenal, and light-years better spacing for Wilt to work in the post.

Defense: His team gets a slight defensive boost by starting Jermaine O'Neal... but he's guarding Draymond Green... Jermaine O'Neal guarding Green makes defense for Team RR exponentially more easy to gameplan for with how poorly Team Seaside's offense is. In conjunction with zone defense being legal post 2000, guarding his players would be a lot easier to do... even if he wants to shoot long 2's and pretend a long 2 is somehow equal to a 3.

Team RR doesn't have to sacrifice their elite offense to cover Team Seaside. That's really what this boils down to. As for the benches, I don't think anyone, including Team Seaside and the players on his squad in real life think they are superior to Team RR's bench. Not really worth rebutting unless someone actually believes it, in which case I will.

valade16
06-26-2019, 08:51 PM
First way to not bold Gervin even though he was more efficient than PG.

Second, Remember folks, this is the playoffs. Letís look at their playoff TS% for the yeas listed:

Porter .628 vs CP3 .587
PG .560 vs Iceman .591
T-Mac .557 vs Bobby Jones .596
Dray .547 vs OíNeal .478
Wilt .540 vs Olajuwon .564

So I ďwon at 3 positionsĒ. What is worse for RR is my 3 primary scorers are all more efficient than his. Hakeem more efficient in the playoffs than Wilt, Gervin more efficient in the playoffs than T-Mac and CP3 more efficient in the playoffs than PG.

Now I know RR is going to say wild things like everyone on his team is better at everything than everyone on my team. But the numbers soeak for themselves.

My team scores more and is more efficient, plays better D and raises their game in the playoffs.

Redrum187
06-27-2019, 12:13 PM
First way to not bold Gervin even though he was more efficient than PG.

Second, Remember folks, this is the playoffs. Letís look at their playoff TS% for the yeas listed:

Porter .628 vs CP3 .587
PG .560 vs Iceman .591
T-Mac .557 vs Bobby Jones .596
Dray .547 vs OíNeal .478
Wilt .540 vs Olajuwon .564

So I ďwon at 3 positionsĒ. What is worse for RR is my 3 primary scorers are all more efficient than his. Hakeem more efficient in the playoffs than Wilt, Gervin more efficient in the playoffs than T-Mac and CP3 more efficient in the playoffs than PG.

Now I know RR is going to say wild things like everyone on his team is better at everything than everyone on my team. But the numbers soeak for themselves.

My team scores more and is more efficient, plays better D and raises their game in the playoffs.

I mean, at least you're backpedalling now from Team RR being "wildly inefficient" when I showed their TS% side-by-side to "playoff TS%". However, looking at the numbers without applying context or skillsets is kind of insane, wouldn't you think?

Let's say I cloned DeAndre Jordan and started 5 of them. My efficiency would be way better than any other team in this. Nevertheless, having 5 DeAndre Jordans doesn't make my offense a juggernaut because they don't compliment one another whatsoever. Even if I concede that your players were more efficient (which I debunked and you're now moving the goal post to 'playoff efficiency'), starting Jermaine O'Neal annihilates your offense. You kill spacing for Hakeem and Iceman to work. Zone defense is a thing... we can't ignore it's effectiveness when we don't have people to spread the defenses out. This is something you skipped over entirely and instead focused on my not bolding Gervin's marginal advantage against Paul George (TS%).

Now to the context. Tmac and Wilt never played on a team this stacked or complimented each other. If they were dominant as the best player on a mediocre squad in real life, they would exponentially more efficient with the personnel around them. Porter is capable of leading an offense while playing off ball and playing great defense, Paul George is a multiple time All Defensive team player who is capable of being the leading scorer any given game and shooting lights out from 3, Draymond Green is one of the greatest point-forwards in the history of the game who shot 34%+ from 3 and was DPOY...

As for the wild things that my guys are better at certain skillsets, which do you refute? Do you think you have the better 3 point shooters? Do you think you have the better spacers? Do you have the better playmakers? Do Bobby Jones and Jermaine O'Neal compliment your offense in any way, shape, or form? Is spacing not going to hurt your offense in any way?

If they are wild, by all means, please debunk my "wild" notions.

valade16
06-27-2019, 12:42 PM
I mean, at least you're backpedalling now from Team RR being "wildly inefficient" when I showed their TS% side-by-side to "playoff TS%". However, looking at the numbers without applying context or skillsets is kind of insane, wouldn't you think?

Let's say I cloned DeAndre Jordan and started 5 of them. My efficiency would be way better than any other team in this. Nevertheless, having 5 DeAndre Jordans doesn't make my offense a juggernaut because they don't compliment one another whatsoever. Even if I concede that your players were more efficient (which I debunked and you're now moving the goal post to 'playoff efficiency'), starting Jermaine O'Neal annihilates your offense. You kill spacing for Hakeem and Iceman to work. Zone defense is a thing... we can't ignore it's effectiveness when we don't have people to spread the defenses out. This is something you skipped over entirely and instead focused on my not bolding Gervin's marginal advantage against Paul George (TS%).

Now to the context. Tmac and Wilt never played on a team this stacked or complimented each other. If they were dominant as the best player on a mediocre squad in real life, they would exponentially more efficient with the personnel around them. Porter is capable of leading an offense while playing off ball and playing great defense, Paul George is a multiple time All Defensive team player who is capable of being the leading scorer any given game and shooting lights out from 3, Draymond Green is one of the greatest point-forwards in the history of the game who shot 34%+ from 3 and was DPOY...

As for the wild things that my guys are better at certain skillsets, which do you refute? Do you think you have the better 3 point shooters? Do you think you have the better spacers? Do you have the better playmakers? Do Bobby Jones and Jermaine O'Neal compliment your offense in any way, shape, or form? Is spacing not going to hurt your offense in any way?

If they are wild, by all means, please debunk my "wild" notions.

First,

I did not backpedal from you being wildly inefficient, I will repeat it: your team is wildly inefficient. Wilt is your #1 scorer and he was inefficient. T-Mac is your #2 scorer and he was inefficient. Be it regular season or playoffs, they are not efficient scorers.

Second,

You debunked nothing. Even with your side by side comparison, you intentionally did not bold Gervin despite him being the more efficient player to PG. You tried to hide my advantage.

Third, As for context. T-Mac has already played with a big man, he still won nothing. Furthermore, you have Wilt, T-Mac and PG who are all best when the ball is in their hands. And yet it can only be in one's hands at a time. if you want to turn T-Mac into a spot up shooter to accommodate Wilt, go for it.

As for spacing, my team has more than enough. CP3 is a great 3-pt shooter. Gervin even shot 31% in the years in question, and as you point out, we are in a different era of basketball. He would be taking and making more 3's today than he did back then, so by all means use that argument. As for the argument my team has no spacing, Hakeem even in his old age shot 45% from 10-16 ft and Jermaine O'Neal also shot well from midrange, and both are capable of taking the ball off the dribble and going to the hoop for FTs or an easy drive should you sag off them (Hakeem in particular). Not to mention, any time you bring in your self described deep bench, I sub out Kyrie and Hornacek and instantly become a more dangerous 3pt shooting team than you. Hawkins and Lever were 6'3", Ellis is 6'6". I'm comfortable with Hornacek against any of them and Kyrie or Arenas against Hawkins and Lever. So either you use your self described incredible depth and allow me to become the dominant 3pt shooting team or you keep your depth on the bench, which helps you not at all. Your choice.

Redrum187
06-27-2019, 03:31 PM
First,

I did not backpedal from you being wildly inefficient, I will repeat it: your team is wildly inefficient. Wilt is your #1 scorer and he was inefficient. T-Mac is your #2 scorer and he was inefficient. Be it regular season or playoffs, they are not efficient scorers.

So if I concede that my team is "wildly inefficient", then you'll concede yours in the regular season is even more inefficient with a supporting cast that doesn't actually support or yield better efficiency, right?


Second,

You debunked nothing. Even with your side by side comparison, you intentionally did not bold Gervin despite him being the more efficient player to PG. You tried to hide my advantage.

If I wanted to "hide" it, I wouldn't have included it in the first place. You "hid" your own player's TS% intentionally and used incorrect TS% for my players. That's like a guy with a 3 inch pecker making fun of a guy having only a 6 inch pecker. I had no problem showing side-by-side comparisons of our player's TS% which absolutely debunks your notion that they are "wildly inefficient"... Your best case scenario is Team RR is "wildly inefficient", but according to the data in the regular season (which is where you tried to start out saying), my guys are noticeably more efficient collectively as well as compliment each other. This isn't even disputable as we can look to see if the numbers I posted were accurate or not.


Third, As for context. T-Mac has already played with a big man, he still won nothing. Furthermore, you have Wilt, T-Mac and PG who are all best when the ball is in their hands. And yet it can only be in one's hands at a time. if you want to turn T-Mac into a spot up shooter to accommodate Wilt, go for it.

First of all, Yao Ming is no Wilt Chamberlain. Secondly, Yao's foot was basically amputated during their time together. They didn't spend years after years together like CP3 has with stacked teams. You failed to mention CP3's postseason failures, but I'll be objective and say that while CP3 put up good playoff numbers, it wasn't conducive to wins/playoff success not unlike TMac, only TMac wasn't blessed to play with stacked teams in the same way.


As for spacing, my team has more than enough. CP3 is a great 3-pt shooter. Gervin even shot 31% in the years in question, and as you point out, we are in a different era of basketball. He would be taking and making more 3's today than he did back then, so by all means use that argument. As for the argument my team has no spacing, Hakeem even in his old age shot 45% from 10-16 ft and Jermaine O'Neal also shot well from midrange, and both are capable of taking the ball off the dribble and going to the hoop for FTs or an easy drive should you sag off them (Hakeem in particular). Not to mention, any time you bring in your self described deep bench, I sub out Kyrie and Hornacek and instantly become a more dangerous 3pt shooting team than you. Hawkins and Lever were 6'3", Ellis is 6'6". I'm comfortable with Hornacek against any of them and Kyrie or Arenas against Hawkins and Lever. So either you use your self described incredible depth and allow me to become the dominant 3pt shooting team or you keep your depth on the bench, which helps you not at all. Your choice.

1.) Gervin didn't shoot 31% in his 3-year peak that I listed for you. He shot one season at 31%. If we look at his next 2 years, which were arguably just as good, he shot 29.5% from 3. For his career, it's even worse sadly.

2.) I welcome midrange shots from your less efficient players. Jermaine O'Neal shot 17.5 times per game on garbage efficiency, I'm cool with that. That was in the regular season where we can just say the defenses thrown at him were average... Only in this matchup, Draymond Green is covering him... He'll have Jumpin' Joe Fulks type of efficiency.

3.) I almost don't want to say this because I don't want you to regret praising my team, but it wasn't just "self described"... Even Team Seaside knows it's deep.

Already said L+G has the best bench, but this is in serious consideration. Jokic would be great, Cowens is an MVP and Ellis and Hawkins were great shooters.


4.) We can pretend your players are more efficient when the regular season stats say otherwise, we can pretend you taking long 2 point shots are just as good as shooting the 3, we can pretend starting Bobby Jones and Jermaine O'Neal doesn't destroy your offense, and we can pretend your bench is superior. I'll just stick with facts that no one on your bench has sniffed the success Dave Cowens and Nikola Jokic has or that if Dale Ellis was on your squad, he would be an absolutely must starter over Hornacek/O'Neal.

5.) A zone defense with the defensive personnel Team RR has would absolutely stagnate your offense. As I said previously, Chris Paul can't pass the ball to himself to hit 3's, I'm more than okay with Gervin shooting less than 30% from 3, I'm even happier for Jermaine O'Neal to jack up shots and take space away from Hakeem.

6.) Which ever poison pill you want to swallow, I'm good with. If you want Hornacek in there trying to guard Paul George, have fun with that. Your offense would improve, I will concede, but your defense will get destroyed. If you sub Hornacek out for inefficient O'Neal, this will only hinder Hakeem's production as Bobby Jones and Jermaine O'Neal will occupy much of his space. Either way, you aren't able to have both a good offense and a good defense in the way Team RR can.

valade16
06-27-2019, 03:48 PM
So if I concede that my team is "wildly inefficient", then you'll concede yours in the regular season is even more inefficient with a supporting cast that doesn't actually support or yield better efficiency, right?

If I wanted to "hide" it, I wouldn't have included it in the first place. You "hid" your own player's TS% intentionally and used incorrect TS% for my players. That's like a guy with a 3 inch pecker making fun of a guy having only a 6 inch pecker. I had no problem showing side-by-side comparisons of our player's TS% which absolutely debunks your notion that they are "wildly inefficient"... Your best case scenario is Team RR is "wildly inefficient", but according to the data in the regular season (which is where you tried to start out saying), my guys are noticeably more efficient collectively as well as compliment each other. This isn't even disputable as we can look to see if the numbers I posted were accurate or not.

First of all, Yao Ming is no Wilt Chamberlain. Secondly, Yao's foot was basically amputated during their time together. They didn't spend years after years together like CP3 has with stacked teams. You failed to mention CP3's postseason failures, but I'll be objective and say that while CP3 put up good playoff numbers, it wasn't conducive to wins/playoff success not unlike TMac, only TMac wasn't blessed to play with stacked teams in the same way.

1.) Gervin didn't shoot 31% in his 3-year peak that I listed for you. He shot one season at 31%. If we look at his next 2 years, which were arguably just as good, he shot 29.5% from 3. For his career, it's even worse sadly.

2.) I welcome midrange shots from your less efficient players. Jermaine O'Neal shot 17.5 times per game on garbage efficiency, I'm cool with that. That was in the regular season where we can just say the defenses thrown at him were average... Only in this matchup, Draymond Green is covering him... He'll have Jumpin' Joe Fulks type of efficiency.

3.) I almost don't want to say this because I don't want you to regret praising my team, but it wasn't just "self described"... Even Team Seaside knows it's deep.

4.) We can pretend your players are more efficient when the regular season stats say otherwise, we can pretend you taking long 2 point shots are just as good as shooting the 3, we can pretend starting Bobby Jones and Jermaine O'Neal doesn't destroy your offense, and we can pretend your bench is superior. I'll just stick with facts that no one on your bench has sniffed the success Dave Cowens and Nikola Jokic has or that if Dale Ellis was on your squad, he would be an absolutely must starter over Hornacek/O'Neal.

5.) A zone defense with the defensive personnel Team RR has would absolutely stagnate your offense. As I said previously, Chris Paul can't pass the ball to himself to hit 3's, I'm more than okay with Gervin shooting less than 30% from 3, I'm even happier for Jermaine O'Neal to jack up shots and take space away from Hakeem.

6.) Which ever poison pill you want to swallow, I'm good with. If you want Hornacek in there trying to guard Paul George, have fun with that. Your offense would improve, I will concede, but your defense will get destroyed. If you sub Hornacek out for inefficient O'Neal, this will only hinder Hakeem's production as Bobby Jones and Jermaine O'Neal will occupy much of his space. Either way, you aren't able to have both a good offense and a good defense in the way Team RR can.

First Bolded: I did not use incorrect TS% for your players. Those are their career TS%. They are inefficient players. We play during a 3 year peak which increases their efficiency from inefficient to... slightly less inefficient. As for conceding the regular season. Sure, why not. This is a "who would win in a 7 game series" not a "who is better in the regular season". Fact is: my team is the better playoff team.

Second Bolded: Actually that is disputable, because your guys were not more efficient, but moving on.

3). OK, you have a deep team. But the second you bring your bench in, I get a 42.5% 3PT shooter, a 40.3% 3PT shooter, a 36.3% 3PT shooter and a 36.1 3PT% shooter. Those on top of my already 38% 3PT shooter. My team is literally swimming in 3PT shooters.

4). There you go with regular season again.

5). Basically your argument is that my guys who will not score much will be inefficient. My top 3 scorers (Hakeem, Gervin and CP3) will all be more efficient than your 3 (Wilt, T-Mac, PG). If you think Dray's 10 PPG will be the difference for you, good luck.

6). I could swallow whatever poison pill you want and I'd still win. Good luck with your bench, how many minutes will they play? Because that is the number of minutes my team will have 3 top level 3PT shooters on the floor to absolutely rain 3's down on you. And if not, well you still have to deal with a more efficient starting lineup.

Redrum187
06-27-2019, 06:49 PM
First Bolded: I did not use incorrect TS% for your players. Those are their career TS%.

Which is misleading because there are multiple variables as to why their career TS% maybe lower (injury, played so long they became a role player, etc...)


As for conceding the regular season. Sure, why not. This is a "who would win in a 7 game series" not a "who is better in the regular season".

I'll take the "sure, why not" as a clear concession that if my team is "wildly inefficient", then your team is even less than wildly inefficient and will be even more so with zone defense being legal and having your starting PG be the only 3 point threat.



Fact is: my team is the better playoff team.

It's actually a myth. Your players were on noticeably better teams in real life than my respective players and yet Team RR is still superior in 4 out of the 5 positions and more efficient collectively.


Second Bolded: Actually that is disputable, because your guys were not more efficient, but moving on.

We saw your concession that Team RR is more efficient [in the regular season which was your initial point].


3). OK, you have a deep team. But the second you bring your bench in, I get a 42.5% 3PT shooter, a 40.3% 3PT shooter, a 36.3% 3PT shooter and a 36.1 3PT% shooter. Those on top of my already 38% 3PT shooter. My team is literally swimming in 3PT shooters.

That's awesome. I'll gladly deal with your 3 point shooting bench players. While they shoot 3's less efficiently than my bench, your talent on the floor plummets. Team RR has the luxury of having the flexibility to play multiple players at different positions to ensure the talent level doesn't drop so significantly in comparison to the starting unit.


4). There you go with regular season again.

You actually started with the "wildly inefficient" critique followed by their TS%, I'm just debunking it. Don't hate the fact checker. :P


5). Basically your argument is that my guys who will not score much will be inefficient. My top 3 scorers (Hakeem, Gervin and CP3) will all be more efficient than your 3 (Wilt, T-Mac, PG). If you think Dray's 10 PPG will be the difference for you, good luck.

Not only were your guys not more efficient collectively in the regular season during their 3-year peak, they will be even less efficient as your team doesn't give the proper spacing to thrive offensively. I will admit, defensively, putting O'Neal in over Hornacek helps on that side of the floor, but it comes at the expense of your offense.


6). I could swallow whatever poison pill you want and I'd still win. Good luck with your bench, how many minutes will they play? Because that is the number of minutes my team will have 3 top level 3PT shooters on the floor to absolutely rain 3's down on you. And if not, well you still have to deal with a more efficient starting lineup.

It really depends on the minutes you play your bench. I am more than happy to match starter-for-starter and bench-for-bench. It's a 4 out of 5 advantage on starters and bench.

Dunkapolooza
06-28-2019, 01:40 AM
Lol how can you say gervin, Chris Paul and Hakeem are inefficient? At the very least gervin and Paul are two of the most efficient offensive players ever

Redrum187
06-28-2019, 03:33 PM
Lol how can you say gervin, Chris Paul and Hakeem are inefficient? At the very least gervin and Paul are two of the most efficient offensive players ever

Copy/paste where I said they were. Wilt was more efficient in his prime than Hakeem, Porter was more efficient than Chris Paul, and Paul George was marginally less efficient than Gervin in spite of zone defense being legal. These aren't opinions, these are facts when we look at the data.

I've said collectively, his starting squad was less efficient than mine in their 3-year peak, which he conceded. Furthermore, his players skillsets don't yield greater efficiency. An extreme example I used was having 5 DeAndre Jordans not making an offensive juggernaut.

Quinnsanity
06-28-2019, 05:18 PM
Toughest matchup by far for me in this. I can't emphasize that enough. This was practically a toss up. I view those front-courts as largely canceling each other out, so it came down to the perimeter. I like RR slightly more there, but man, this was agonizing.

Dunkapolooza
06-28-2019, 05:48 PM
Which is misleading because there are multiple variables as to why their career TS% maybe lower (injury, played so long they became a role player, etc...)

then your team is even less than wildly inefficient and will be even more so with zone defense being legal and having your starting PG be the only 3 point threat.



Sounds like youíre going to try and make the offensive pecking order here, Wilt, Porter Paul George? Or Wilt Paul George Porter? Tracy McGrady is going to demand a trade.

The Wilt you picked? 65 Ė 68? Thatís where you get the .574 ts%.... he only scores 22.6 pts per 36. 18.6 in the playoffs on a terrible .531 ts%. (66/68) really hurt him against Bill Russell. Heíll face similar defense in Hakeem.

Hakeem 92-95? 23.5 pts on .568 ts%. Sorry man but thatís equal at best. In the playoffs for Hakeem 92-92?... 25.1 pts on a solid .564 ts%.

Tracy must be a major part of your offense. Thatís why heís on your team. And heís clearly the most inefficient scorer out here. Gervin, Paul, and Hakeem will all be more efficient.

Your 5 DeAndre Jordan argument is not even remotely applicable here. I hope youíre not trying to make the comparison that Bobby Jones is like DeAndre Jordan? Really seems like thatís trying to mischaracterize a legend player that a lot of voters might not know about.

For those who donít know about Bobby Ė Heís not Ben Simmons, .766 career ft%? Yeah thatís almost 20% higher than Ben Simmons or DeAndre Jordan.

Redrum187
06-28-2019, 07:43 PM
Sounds like youíre going to try and make the offensive pecking order here, Wilt, Porter Paul George? Or Wilt Paul George Porter? Tracy McGrady is going to demand a trade.

The Wilt you picked? 65 Ė 68? Thatís where you get the .574 ts%.... he only scores 22.6 pts per 36. 18.6 in the playoffs on a terrible .531 ts%. (66/68) really hurt him against Bill Russell. Heíll face similar defense in Hakeem.

Hakeem 92-95? 23.5 pts on .568 ts%. Sorry man but thatís equal at best. In the playoffs for Hakeem 92-92?... 25.1 pts on a solid .564 ts%.

Tracy must be a major part of your offense. Thatís why heís on your team. And heís clearly the most inefficient scorer out here. Gervin, Paul, and Hakeem will all be more efficient.

Your 5 DeAndre Jordan argument is not even remotely applicable here. I hope youíre not trying to make the comparison that Bobby Jones is like DeAndre Jordan? Really seems like thatís trying to mischaracterize a legend player that a lot of voters might not know about.

For those who donít know about Bobby Ė Heís not Ben Simmons, .766 career ft%? Yeah thatís almost 20% higher than Ben Simmons or DeAndre Jordan.

That isn't my standard of "inefficient" though. Since "inefficient" is technically a relative term but there is data to help make it more objective (TS%), I was responding using Team Seaside's standard of what is "widly inefficient".

If their standard of "wildly inefficient" meets that of Team RR's starting unit, then it's by Team Seaside's own standard that his team has to be even more inefficient. If you are asking for my wording, I'll say that Team Seaside was fairly efficient, but not quite as efficient as Team RR (stats back this up as well as Team Seaside). The difference maker that goes beyond the stats aren't their individual efficiency numbers, but the skillsets of his supporting cast not being conducive to greater efficiency in the way Team RR's supporting cast is.

As far as pecking order, I wasn't making any sort of order. He was comparing their efficiency to Team RR's players, and I just debunked the myth that they are "wildly inefficient", or at least not as inefficient as his squad. I absolutely plan to punish Hornacek with Paul George. He can't hold him. He's too tall and too fast and too strong. So depending on how much time he lets his bench take over, any number of players on Team RR can go off. But lets not forget, Wilt is the bread and butter... I have the spacing around him which will yield better numbers for him than he does around Hakeem. I've shown the numbers and this isn't disputed unless you hate stats and percentages.

The 5 DeAndre Jordan's was an example to debunk that simply because a player has a higher TS%, doesn't mean they make up an offensive juggernaut. Surely you would agree. I'm not saying Team Seaside is the equivalent of 5 DeAndre Jordans, I first must establish that just because player x has a greater TS% than player y, it doesn't mean in this match up they will be more efficient. Once I do that, then I explain why player x will not be as efficient as player y (which I have done).

valade16
07-01-2019, 08:14 AM
Seaside Seagulls win