Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 166
  1. #121
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,846
    I don’t get why you mention “peak” and don’t mention 2011 Wade. Is it because Wade made the finals and lost? Every single season prior to 2011 was a less efficient shooting season for Wade. Every single season up to that point. Again every single season prior to 2011 was a lower efficiency season. Advance and regular stats. Basically your argument for Wade over Kobe is the same argument I’m using for 2011 Wade over 04,05,06,07,08,09 and 10 Wade. Wade averaged 5 less shots in 2011 then his highest scoring season and he was only 4 1/2 points behind his career high. Again efficient.

    It has to be because he lost in the finals right?

    Seasons you mentioned other then 06 he lost to much lesser teams. In 2011 he took down Boston big 3 and then MVP Derrick Rose. In fact beating Celtics in 5 is super impressive. Wade made the most shots without taking the most shots. This is the same Boston team that purposely got a #4 seed and called game on the eastern playoffs in 2010. So again how is 2011 not Wade absolute best season when he played his toughest opponents he’s ever played? Is it because he lost in the finals?

    Or maybe box scores don’t tell the whole story? Maybe BigMoves03 is right? Nah that’s not it. 2011 Wade was his best version. Wade averaged his most rebounds in his career in 2011.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,846
    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Yes, I think that was Kobe's best case because it was his most individually dominant season in both base stats and advanced metrics. 05-06 Kobe was clearly peak Kobe.
    This completely dismiss your “overall picture argument. So you basically going against your own train of thought. I on the hand agree with you original “bigger overall picture”


    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    OK, but I think the problem is that Kobe's best "overall" seasons in terms of titles and playoff production didn't necessarily correspond with his best individual years in the regular season. Like you could make a decent Kobe case for 08-09 because he won the title and Finals MVP with some damn impressive playoff production and some decent regular season numbers. But Lebron's numbers totally dwarf him that year, and the Cavs still made it to the ECF, so it's not like there's zero postseason success to speak of there.
    Basically what you did for 06 Wade. “Overall picture” again is being ignored. 09 Kobe was clearly a more impressive season. Kobe was to 09 what Leonard was to 2019. In 2015 James had lesser numbers but made the finals with injured Irving and Love. That lesser Lebron number wise season trumps 2009 or 2010 Lebron with better numbers.

    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    I don't think you can say '09 Wade had more help on this team than '15 or '17 Lebron. Like those Cavs teams in Lebron's second stint in Cleveland were not historically amazing by any stretch of the imagination, but he still had Irving, Love and some solid role players. Wade's best teammates in 09 were Shawn Marion and Michael freaking Beasley. No one else on that team aside from Wade averaged more than 14 points a game. That team was hot garbage.
    That’s why I specifically mentioned 2015 where Kevin Love got hurt and played zero Eastern finals games. Irving also got hurt. Shawn Marion is better then every Lebron teammate he had in the finals against GS. Jr Smith was the #2 on this team with Mozgof the #3. So Wade has no excuse to lose if the first if Lebron made the finals with less help. That’s why box scores don’t make your true best. Or “overall picture”.

    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    Because his team was trash? See note above.

    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    You keep bringing up this point. You know who else did that? James Harden. But if I asked the average fan who the best player was in the league in 2018-19, they'd easily pick Giannis or Kawhi over Harden, and honestly, they'd probably be right. (That's coming from a Rockets fan.) Points per game are not the end-all, be-all of barometers in these discussions.
    You exactly making my point why Kobe in 09 is not his best season. You said it best. I completely agree with you statement on Harden. Harden/Kobe/Wade best season is not the highest scoring season. If Harden gets 7 less points on average for the season and be at 30 a game and win a championship then thats Hardens “bigger picture”.


    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    Actually '09 Wade was statistically superior to '11 Wade by pretty much every single advanced statistical barometer: PER, WS, WS/48, BPM and VORP. Also, '11 Wade was the second best player on his own team. It's pretty hard to make a case for '11 Wade over '09 Wade when he's not even the best player on his own team, and he was a statistically inferior player.
    Actually 2011 was a better season statistically. Wade had a higher FG% and his true shooting % was higher. Both his offensive rating was higher and his defense rating was higher. His Net rating was significantly higher as well. He also had an amazing playoffs. Averaged 30 against Boston and a all time Finals performance as well. Second only to 2006 Wade finals. So I say 2011 Wade was a better Wade then 2009.
    Last edited by Bostonjorge; 07-11-2020 at 12:04 AM.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,841
    2010-11 was inflated in terms of efficiency because they formed a superteam playing against normal teams. While Wade player superb for most of that year, it wasn't his best. If you had combined that team in 2008-9, his stats would look even better.

    You guys need to stop looking at numbers to see if a player was great or better.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,139
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    2010-11 was inflated in terms of efficiency because they formed a superteam playing against normal teams. While Wade player superb for most of that year, it wasn't his best. If you had combined that team in 2008-9, his stats would look even better.

    You guys need to stop looking at numbers to see if a player was great or better.
    Why dont all players number / efficiency go up when playing with other superstars? I see everybody now starting to fling around inflation in a negative tone. Numbers says alot but if you are going to start arguing against the numbers your going to stray away from reality. This is not that i agree with Wade was better. But his fg% reflects in the type of shots he took when he took them. Wade was never a great shooter but a great shot maker. If you look at his carrer shot chart one will see wade made a living at the rim. This is clearly indicated in his numbers. You can tell exactly what kind of player Wade was just by looking at numbers but you cant just focus on 1 thing like fg%. The further he moved away from the basket the lower is % dropped the more he delined physically the more his % dropped. Give prime wade shooters his fg% and assist numbers would likely go up not necessarily stars.
    Last edited by ldawg; 07-11-2020 at 10:45 AM.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,124
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    2010-11 was inflated in terms of efficiency because they formed a superteam playing against normal teams. While Wade player superb for most of that year, it wasn't his best. If you had combined that team in 2008-9, his stats would look even better.

    You guys need to stop looking at numbers to see if a player was great or better.
    Yep, I definitely agree with the last sentence here. I get the sense that a lot of posters on here want to use numbers as a work around actually assessing players and their skillsets. When a lot of these guys say Player A is better than Player B, there is rarely ever any mention of how they actually impacted the game, what skills they brought, how they played with teammates, etc. They basically post a spreadsheet and say "see??! Player A had better numbers than Player B". That's simply not what those numbers assess.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    26,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    No, it has nothing to do with how it looked. It has everything to do with actually assessing the players and their skillsets and abilities. Looking at the numbers you guys are looking at isnt going to tell us much of anything.
    It is. You just spent 5 minutes in a previous post telling us how Kobe was better and then proceeded to describe all his movements.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,139
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Yep, I definitely agree with the last sentence here. I get the sense that a lot of posters on here want to use numbers as a work around actually assessing players and their skillsets. When a lot of these guys say Player A is better than Player B, there is rarely ever any mention of how they actually impacted the game, what skills they brought, how they played with teammates, etc. They basically post a spreadsheet and say "see??! Player A had better numbers than Player B". That's simply not what those numbers assess.
    i think its the opposite i think alot of people bend reality in context to argue against facts.
    Last edited by ldawg; 07-11-2020 at 10:37 AM.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,841
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    i think its the opposite i think alot of people bend reality in context to argue against facts.
    What facts?

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,139
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    What facts?
    numbers

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,139
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    It is. You just spent 5 minutes in a previous post telling us how Kobe was better and then proceeded to describe all his movements.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    get him put him in the context wheel.

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    It is. You just spent 5 minutes in a previous post telling us how Kobe was better and then proceeded to describe all his movements.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    No, those arent his movements dude. They're his skills. That's maybe what you don't quite realize and how that impacts the game. A guy who has a million ways to beat you is typically going to be a lot harder to defend than a guy who has 3-5 ways to beat you. The defense has to game plan around that. When you step onto the court for example, it doesnt entirely matter what the guy does or doesnt do on the court. It matters what you are aware they are capable of doing. If you see a guys form and it's clear he can shoot, you won't give him open looks even if you see that he's missed a few. If on the other hand you see a guy has horrible form and has made a few jumpers, you're okay with that. You'll cheat and give him those looks. As a defender and defenses in general, they defend your ability, not your production. Obviously there's some give and take there, like if a guy is ice cold, even if he has the ability to knock shots down the defense will start cheating a little, just as like a guy with horrible form will eventually get defenses to react if he hits enough of them, but in general, you're defending against what the player is capable of doing, not against what their production ends up being. The production is simply the outcome of the game. It doesnt directly correspond to who the better player is.

    When I describe kobe, im describing his skillset and how he's impacting the game and those are all things that defenses have to game plan very intricately to stop. That's why it's important.

  12. #132
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,124
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    numbers
    Yes, the numbers are facts...what are not facts is how you're interpreting those numbers Those are opinions and very shaky ones at that, which do not correspond with what those numbers are measuring.

  13. #133
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,124
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    i think its the opposite i think alot of people bend reality in context to argue against facts.
    You're missing a critical point...im pointing out that your interpretations from those numbers are unwarranted.

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,139
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Yes, the numbers are facts...what are not facts is how you're interpreting those numbers Those are opinions and very shaky ones at that, which do not correspond with what those numbers are measuring.
    no you cross reference those numbers.

  15. #135
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,124
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    no you cross reference those numbers.
    Doesnt matter dude, the numbers are just numbers. They don't say anything other than repressing numerical entities. You're drawing conclusions from those numbers. Whether those conclusions follow is what's in question here. Those conclusions are very much not factual. They are open for interpretation and 100% open for debate.

Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •