2019 Historical: How Does My Team Look Thread

[Donoghus]

I have a rematch of the '77 Finals.

I think Portland & Los Angeles are the cream of the crop in the West.  However, the east is a real bloodbath.  I keep re-ordering #2-5.  Very competitive.

[Who]

So to stop Steph from getting abused by Drexler (presumably - good post player but worse than Magic or Worthy), the Lakers would have double team constantly. KG and Cowens are quick and mobile on doubles. Drexler is a gifted passer. Portland would lack for outside shooting with Drexler on the interior but they have guys who can drive and finish (or pass) well inside.

On the other end, Drexler would be the one that would have to defend Steph. I don't think there is any way Drexler can keep up with Steph off the ball when Steph is running him through screens. Steph covers more ground off the ball than any other PG in the league. But then Steph is still taking outside shots vs more inside shots. Or forcing switches and having to go one-on-one.

Strange matchups in a Portland vs Lakers series. Magic used to have Byron Scott or Michael Cooper next to him to defend PGs. He doesn't have that in Portland. But he does have a much more potent offensive threat next to him in Drexler who can punish smaller guards much better than Scott or Cooper could.

Steph is small and tires easily when he is guarded physically or made to work defensively.  If you look at the 2 series against the Cavs before Durant and against the Raptors this year, Curry wasn't very effective at all.  He was brutalized physically and just wore down in those series.  His all time great outside shooting became average.  His 2 point % was also much worse.  Now I get that his teammates are much better in this exercise, but his opponents are also much better. I think Curry is one of the players that will suffer the most in this just given his very small frame and body.  I don't think his shooting really holds up under the physical strain and without the shooting Curry's value is significantly diminished.

Steph struggles when defenses are geared to stop him and surround him with big bodies, which was what happened in the early Cavs series and this year's finals against Toronto. I do think that he'd be up against a man defense against most teams in this due to the teammates surrounding that demand defensive attention, as you really can't leave them to double on Steph like how the Cavs and Raptors did.

Yeah, in this exercise I don't think teams can load up on Steph the way Toronto and Cleveland could in the Finals. The talent around Steph is too good. Defenses over-helping like that would be easily exposed in this league.

[Who]

Very little between the two teams.

At first I leaned towards LA with their superior interior and help defense as a separating factor ...

But when it comes down to taking hold of a tight game and being decisive, I just trust Magic more than anyone else. Magic came through more often in big moments & tough situations than anyone else on either team.

[Moranis]

So to stop Steph from getting abused by Drexler (presumably - good post player but worse than Magic or Worthy), the Lakers would have double team constantly. KG and Cowens are quick and mobile on doubles. Drexler is a gifted passer. Portland would lack for outside shooting with Drexler on the interior but they have guys who can drive and finish (or pass) well inside.

On the other end, Drexler would be the one that would have to defend Steph. I don't think there is any way Drexler can keep up with Steph off the ball when Steph is running him through screens. Steph covers more ground off the ball than any other PG in the league. But then Steph is still taking outside shots vs more inside shots. Or forcing switches and having to go one-on-one.

Strange matchups in a Portland vs Lakers series. Magic used to have Byron Scott or Michael Cooper next to him to defend PGs. He doesn't have that in Portland. But he does have a much more potent offensive threat next to him in Drexler who can punish smaller guards much better than Scott or Cooper could.

Steph is small and tires easily when he is guarded physically or made to work defensively.  If you look at the 2 series against the Cavs before Durant and against the Raptors this year, Curry wasn't very effective at all.  He was brutalized physically and just wore down in those series.  His all time great outside shooting became average.  His 2 point % was also much worse.  Now I get that his teammates are much better in this exercise, but his opponents are also much better. I think Curry is one of the players that will suffer the most in this just given his very small frame and body.  I don't think his shooting really holds up under the physical strain and without the shooting Curry's value is significantly diminished.

Steph struggles when defenses are geared to stop him and surround him with big bodies, which was what happened in the early Cavs series and this year's finals against Toronto. I do think that he'd be up against a man defense against most teams in this due to the teammates surrounding that demand defensive attention, as you really can't leave them to double on Steph like how the Cavs and Raptors did.

Yeah, in this exercise I don't think teams can load up on Steph the way Toronto and Cleveland could in the Finals. The talent around Steph is too good. Defenses over-helping like that would be easily exposed in this league.

I don't think the teams in this need to load up on Steph.  I don't think they need to over-help.  They are stacked with excellent offensive and defensive players that are by and large significantly larger than Steph.  In normal basketball, Steph can hide defensively, he can't in this.  And let's be clear they hide him not only because he is a poorer defender but also so he doesn't get worn out or tired.  Steph is quite simply going to have to guard someone and he is going to have to guard someone that is a superb offensive player that is almost certainly bigger and stronger then him.  I really think Steph would struggle immensely in this game and that the physical strain will wear him down and make much less effective.  I had him much lower down my list then he would be on an all time list for that reason. 

[Silky]

That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

Literally the first result on google for best PGs of all-time:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankPGs/ranking-top-10-point-guards-ever

lol.

trash list

Any list that puts Kidd above Payton is a terrible list.
Any list that puts Kidd above Walt is just not even worth looking at.

Every single list on the first page of google’s search results has Kidd ranked higher.

The hyperbolic schtick is actually hurting your team, because nobody takes your ability to evaluate players seriously. Nobody else is throwing out wild statements and completely disrespecting other teams.

I've used ESPN a lot in this.  They have Kidd at 35 and Payton at 41.  Same general range, not much difference, but with Kidd the slight edge.  That seems right to me.

Taking entire career into consideration, sure, but this game is to take a season.

Remember this?

Payton is better. That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

You’ve killed your credibility.  Goukii was willing to concede it was a draw, and you chose to act the fool instead.  I don’t think that’s helpful.

Full disclosure, I ranked your team in the bottom quadrant. I wish your had spent more time talking about how Kobe can be more efficient in this exercise, rather than some of the hyperbole.

^this tbh. I would've ranked your team quite a bit higher if you spent more time convincing me how your pieces would fit, and how your two ball dominant superstars would scale back their offenses while maintaining their offensive value.
FYI your team was ranked near the middle in my rankings, I still rate your team.

I shouldnt have to convince people that Koibe and Hakeem are great basketball players, 2 top 15 guys EASILY, that are capable of playing with others.

That seems a waste of time and a foolish thing to do.

Kobe had a 24 assist rate that year, Bird had a career average of 23.7.
But somehow Bird was a great teammate and a willing passer but Kobe was a selfish ballhog.

You cannot debate against pre-conceived notions.

That's where the eye test comes in. Bird played a relatively "off-ball" game compared to other offensive megastars, which assist % can't really quantify. And you should try and explain why both of them can mesh, they have very ball dominant games in the sense that they need to hold the ball for a long time to do their thing on offense.

+

And McGrady, Gilmore, erving, Garnett, Goodrich, Marion and Brand dont?


Kobe's and Hakeems time per possession was just behind that of Lebron and Jordan.

Why dont those teams have to justify those players fit?

Gilmore, KG, Goodrich and Marion are ball dominant players? I absolutely agree that McGrady, Erving and Brand need the ball to be effective, but the other 4 being ball dominant is quite laughable imo. And maybe because those teams actually have players who fit nicely with them? If they don't they're penalised in my rankings, iirc one of them was ranked in your range.

Yeah. Gilmore and kg were.

Any player that utilizes post ups in their game have a longer time per possession.

That is pretty basic

Both weren't post up heavy players though when they were paired with good teammates, especially Gilmore, who was criticised for passing up easy looks as he was such a willing (but mediocre) passer-it's why he had such a high FG%, he only took very high efficiency shots. You're grasping at straws here, both players were very scalable offensively either due to their shot selection (Gilmore) or ability to stretch the floor and play like an oversized point forward (Garnett).

sigh

Steph Curry 2015-2016 - 32.6
Tracy McGrady 2002-2003 - 35.2
Julius Erving 1975-1976 - 29
Kevin Garnett 2003-2004) - 29.6
Dave Cowens 1975-1976 - No data

Usage for starters - 126.4 (not including Cowens)


Gary Payton 1995-96 - 24.4
Kobe Bryant 2007-08 - 31.4
Bob Dandridge 1972-73 - (career 23)
Dave Debusscherre 1967-68 no stats
Hakeem Olajuwon 1993-94 - 31.7

Starters Usage 110.5 (Not Including Dave)


Usage is the easiest metric to use to show time of possessions over multiple years.

SO my lineup has less issue than yours

Throwing out another very flawed stat lol, usage rate measures shot attempts than the actual amount of time a player holds the ball. Curry, Garnett and the Doctor weren't shot clock eaters the way Kobe and Hakeem were, the only guy on my team who's actually more ball dominant than shot dominant is McGrady.

That is not what that stat means at all.

"An estimate of the percentage of team plays used by a player while he was on the floor."


You are spinning the meanings of statistics. And incorrectly at that.

Rajon Rondo has a career usage of 21.5 yet only takes 9.5 fga per game, by your logic his usage should be alot lower because usage means how many shots you take.

[saltlover]

That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

Literally the first result on google for best PGs of all-time:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankPGs/ranking-top-10-point-guards-ever

lol.

trash list

Any list that puts Kidd above Payton is a terrible list.
Any list that puts Kidd above Walt is just not even worth looking at.

Every single list on the first page of google’s search results has Kidd ranked higher.

The hyperbolic schtick is actually hurting your team, because nobody takes your ability to evaluate players seriously. Nobody else is throwing out wild statements and completely disrespecting other teams.

I've used ESPN a lot in this.  They have Kidd at 35 and Payton at 41.  Same general range, not much difference, but with Kidd the slight edge.  That seems right to me.

Taking entire career into consideration, sure, but this game is to take a season.

Remember this?

Payton is better. That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

You’ve killed your credibility.  Goukii was willing to concede it was a draw, and you chose to act the fool instead.  I don’t think that’s helpful.

Full disclosure, I ranked your team in the bottom quadrant. I wish your had spent more time talking about how Kobe can be more efficient in this exercise, rather than some of the hyperbole.

^this tbh. I would've ranked your team quite a bit higher if you spent more time convincing me how your pieces would fit, and how your two ball dominant superstars would scale back their offenses while maintaining their offensive value.
FYI your team was ranked near the middle in my rankings, I still rate your team.

I shouldnt have to convince people that Koibe and Hakeem are great basketball players, 2 top 15 guys EASILY, that are capable of playing with others.

That seems a waste of time and a foolish thing to do.

Kobe had a 24 assist rate that year, Bird had a career average of 23.7.
But somehow Bird was a great teammate and a willing passer but Kobe was a selfish ballhog.

You cannot debate against pre-conceived notions.

That's where the eye test comes in. Bird played a relatively "off-ball" game compared to other offensive megastars, which assist % can't really quantify. And you should try and explain why both of them can mesh, they have very ball dominant games in the sense that they need to hold the ball for a long time to do their thing on offense.

+

And McGrady, Gilmore, erving, Garnett, Goodrich, Marion and Brand dont?


Kobe's and Hakeems time per possession was just behind that of Lebron and Jordan.

Why dont those teams have to justify those players fit?

Gilmore, KG, Goodrich and Marion are ball dominant players? I absolutely agree that McGrady, Erving and Brand need the ball to be effective, but the other 4 being ball dominant is quite laughable imo. And maybe because those teams actually have players who fit nicely with them? If they don't they're penalised in my rankings, iirc one of them was ranked in your range.

Yeah. Gilmore and kg were.

Any player that utilizes post ups in their game have a longer time per possession.

That is pretty basic

Both weren't post up heavy players though when they were paired with good teammates, especially Gilmore, who was criticised for passing up easy looks as he was such a willing (but mediocre) passer-it's why he had such a high FG%, he only took very high efficiency shots. You're grasping at straws here, both players were very scalable offensively either due to their shot selection (Gilmore) or ability to stretch the floor and play like an oversized point forward (Garnett).

sigh

Steph Curry 2015-2016 - 32.6
Tracy McGrady 2002-2003 - 35.2
Julius Erving 1975-1976 - 29
Kevin Garnett 2003-2004) - 29.6
Dave Cowens 1975-1976 - No data

Usage for starters - 126.4 (not including Cowens)


Gary Payton 1995-96 - 24.4
Kobe Bryant 2007-08 - 31.4
Bob Dandridge 1972-73 - (career 23)
Dave Debusscherre 1967-68 no stats
Hakeem Olajuwon 1993-94 - 31.7

Starters Usage 110.5 (Not Including Dave)


Usage is the easiest metric to use to show time of possessions over multiple years.

SO my lineup has less issue than yours

Throwing out another very flawed stat lol, usage rate measures shot attempts than the actual amount of time a player holds the ball. Curry, Garnett and the Doctor weren't shot clock eaters the way Kobe and Hakeem were, the only guy on my team who's actually more ball dominant than shot dominant is McGrady.

That is not what that stat means at all.

"An estimate of the percentage of team plays used by a player while he was on the floor."


You are spinning the meanings of statistics. And incorrectly at that.

Rajon Rondo has a career usage of 21.5 yet only takes 9.5 fga per game, by your logic his usage should be alot lower because usage means how many shots you take.

Usage doesn’t show time used of possessions.  It predates when we have play-by-play data that includes time.  It does account for assists, turnovers, and fouls that result in a shot but no FGA, in additions to FGAs.  But no time of possession.

[Silky]

That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

Literally the first result on google for best PGs of all-time:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankPGs/ranking-top-10-point-guards-ever

lol.

trash list

Any list that puts Kidd above Payton is a terrible list.
Any list that puts Kidd above Walt is just not even worth looking at.

Every single list on the first page of google’s search results has Kidd ranked higher.

The hyperbolic schtick is actually hurting your team, because nobody takes your ability to evaluate players seriously. Nobody else is throwing out wild statements and completely disrespecting other teams.

I've used ESPN a lot in this.  They have Kidd at 35 and Payton at 41.  Same general range, not much difference, but with Kidd the slight edge.  That seems right to me.

Taking entire career into consideration, sure, but this game is to take a season.

Remember this?

Payton is better. That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

You’ve killed your credibility.  Goukii was willing to concede it was a draw, and you chose to act the fool instead.  I don’t think that’s helpful.

Full disclosure, I ranked your team in the bottom quadrant. I wish your had spent more time talking about how Kobe can be more efficient in this exercise, rather than some of the hyperbole.

^this tbh. I would've ranked your team quite a bit higher if you spent more time convincing me how your pieces would fit, and how your two ball dominant superstars would scale back their offenses while maintaining their offensive value.
FYI your team was ranked near the middle in my rankings, I still rate your team.

I shouldnt have to convince people that Koibe and Hakeem are great basketball players, 2 top 15 guys EASILY, that are capable of playing with others.

That seems a waste of time and a foolish thing to do.

Kobe had a 24 assist rate that year, Bird had a career average of 23.7.
But somehow Bird was a great teammate and a willing passer but Kobe was a selfish ballhog.

You cannot debate against pre-conceived notions.

That's where the eye test comes in. Bird played a relatively "off-ball" game compared to other offensive megastars, which assist % can't really quantify. And you should try and explain why both of them can mesh, they have very ball dominant games in the sense that they need to hold the ball for a long time to do their thing on offense.

+

And McGrady, Gilmore, erving, Garnett, Goodrich, Marion and Brand dont?


Kobe's and Hakeems time per possession was just behind that of Lebron and Jordan.

Why dont those teams have to justify those players fit?

Gilmore, KG, Goodrich and Marion are ball dominant players? I absolutely agree that McGrady, Erving and Brand need the ball to be effective, but the other 4 being ball dominant is quite laughable imo. And maybe because those teams actually have players who fit nicely with them? If they don't they're penalised in my rankings, iirc one of them was ranked in your range.

Yeah. Gilmore and kg were.

Any player that utilizes post ups in their game have a longer time per possession.

That is pretty basic

Both weren't post up heavy players though when they were paired with good teammates, especially Gilmore, who was criticised for passing up easy looks as he was such a willing (but mediocre) passer-it's why he had such a high FG%, he only took very high efficiency shots. You're grasping at straws here, both players were very scalable offensively either due to their shot selection (Gilmore) or ability to stretch the floor and play like an oversized point forward (Garnett).

sigh

Steph Curry 2015-2016 - 32.6
Tracy McGrady 2002-2003 - 35.2
Julius Erving 1975-1976 - 29
Kevin Garnett 2003-2004) - 29.6
Dave Cowens 1975-1976 - No data

Usage for starters - 126.4 (not including Cowens)


Gary Payton 1995-96 - 24.4
Kobe Bryant 2007-08 - 31.4
Bob Dandridge 1972-73 - (career 23)
Dave Debusscherre 1967-68 no stats
Hakeem Olajuwon 1993-94 - 31.7

Starters Usage 110.5 (Not Including Dave)


Usage is the easiest metric to use to show time of possessions over multiple years.

SO my lineup has less issue than yours

Throwing out another very flawed stat lol, usage rate measures shot attempts than the actual amount of time a player holds the ball. Curry, Garnett and the Doctor weren't shot clock eaters the way Kobe and Hakeem were, the only guy on my team who's actually more ball dominant than shot dominant is McGrady.

That is not what that stat means at all.

"An estimate of the percentage of team plays used by a player while he was on the floor."


You are spinning the meanings of statistics. And incorrectly at that.

Rajon Rondo has a career usage of 21.5 yet only takes 9.5 fga per game, by your logic his usage should be alot lower because usage means how many shots you take.

Usage doesn’t show time used of possessions.  It predates when we have play-by-play data that includes time.  It does account for assists, turnovers, and fouls that result in a shot but no FGA, in additions to FGAs.  But no time of possession.

It measures a percentage of total teams plays when the player is on the court.

A high usage is indicitive of time with ball in hands.

Pace plays into it. But it a reasonable enough stat to detrmine time.

And in the case if me using it it works as a statistical rebuttal of points made against my team.

Not that any of it matters at all im the long run

[Yoki_IsTheName]

So, if you guys don't mind, just to stroke my ego, or destroy it, where do you guys rank Detroit in all of this? 

[Moranis]

That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

Literally the first result on google for best PGs of all-time:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankPGs/ranking-top-10-point-guards-ever

lol.

trash list

Any list that puts Kidd above Payton is a terrible list.
Any list that puts Kidd above Walt is just not even worth looking at.

Every single list on the first page of google’s search results has Kidd ranked higher.

The hyperbolic schtick is actually hurting your team, because nobody takes your ability to evaluate players seriously. Nobody else is throwing out wild statements and completely disrespecting other teams.

I've used ESPN a lot in this.  They have Kidd at 35 and Payton at 41.  Same general range, not much difference, but with Kidd the slight edge.  That seems right to me.

Taking entire career into consideration, sure, but this game is to take a season.

Remember this?

Payton is better. That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

You’ve killed your credibility.  Goukii was willing to concede it was a draw, and you chose to act the fool instead.  I don’t think that’s helpful.

Full disclosure, I ranked your team in the bottom quadrant. I wish your had spent more time talking about how Kobe can be more efficient in this exercise, rather than some of the hyperbole.

^this tbh. I would've ranked your team quite a bit higher if you spent more time convincing me how your pieces would fit, and how your two ball dominant superstars would scale back their offenses while maintaining their offensive value.
FYI your team was ranked near the middle in my rankings, I still rate your team.

I shouldnt have to convince people that Koibe and Hakeem are great basketball players, 2 top 15 guys EASILY, that are capable of playing with others.

That seems a waste of time and a foolish thing to do.

Kobe had a 24 assist rate that year, Bird had a career average of 23.7.
But somehow Bird was a great teammate and a willing passer but Kobe was a selfish ballhog.

You cannot debate against pre-conceived notions.

That's where the eye test comes in. Bird played a relatively "off-ball" game compared to other offensive megastars, which assist % can't really quantify. And you should try and explain why both of them can mesh, they have very ball dominant games in the sense that they need to hold the ball for a long time to do their thing on offense.

+

And McGrady, Gilmore, erving, Garnett, Goodrich, Marion and Brand dont?


Kobe's and Hakeems time per possession was just behind that of Lebron and Jordan.

Why dont those teams have to justify those players fit?

Gilmore, KG, Goodrich and Marion are ball dominant players? I absolutely agree that McGrady, Erving and Brand need the ball to be effective, but the other 4 being ball dominant is quite laughable imo. And maybe because those teams actually have players who fit nicely with them? If they don't they're penalised in my rankings, iirc one of them was ranked in your range.

Yeah. Gilmore and kg were.

Any player that utilizes post ups in their game have a longer time per possession.

That is pretty basic

Both weren't post up heavy players though when they were paired with good teammates, especially Gilmore, who was criticised for passing up easy looks as he was such a willing (but mediocre) passer-it's why he had such a high FG%, he only took very high efficiency shots. You're grasping at straws here, both players were very scalable offensively either due to their shot selection (Gilmore) or ability to stretch the floor and play like an oversized point forward (Garnett).

sigh

Steph Curry 2015-2016 - 32.6
Tracy McGrady 2002-2003 - 35.2
Julius Erving 1975-1976 - 29
Kevin Garnett 2003-2004) - 29.6
Dave Cowens 1975-1976 - No data

Usage for starters - 126.4 (not including Cowens)


Gary Payton 1995-96 - 24.4
Kobe Bryant 2007-08 - 31.4
Bob Dandridge 1972-73 - (career 23)
Dave Debusscherre 1967-68 no stats
Hakeem Olajuwon 1993-94 - 31.7

Starters Usage 110.5 (Not Including Dave)


Usage is the easiest metric to use to show time of possessions over multiple years.

SO my lineup has less issue than yours

Throwing out another very flawed stat lol, usage rate measures shot attempts than the actual amount of time a player holds the ball. Curry, Garnett and the Doctor weren't shot clock eaters the way Kobe and Hakeem were, the only guy on my team who's actually more ball dominant than shot dominant is McGrady.

That is not what that stat means at all.

"An estimate of the percentage of team plays used by a player while he was on the floor."


You are spinning the meanings of statistics. And incorrectly at that.

Rajon Rondo has a career usage of 21.5 yet only takes 9.5 fga per game, by your logic his usage should be alot lower because usage means how many shots you take.

Usage doesn’t show time used of possessions.  It predates when we have play-by-play data that includes time.  It does account for assists, turnovers, and fouls that result in a shot but no FGA, in additions to FGAs.  But no time of possession.

It measures a percentage of total teams plays when the player is on the court.

A high usage is indicitive of time with ball in hands.

Pace plays into it. But it a reasonable enough stat to detrmine time.

And in the case if me using it it works as a statistical rebuttal of points made against my team.

Not that any of it matters at all im the long run

No it is not.  Ending a possession is no where near the same thing as dominating a possession (whether you end it or not). 

You can look at the time of possession league leaders and see there really isn't a ton of correlation between that and usage (I mean other than Harden leading in both).  Solidifying this point, Durant had the 2nd highest USG last year but was tied for 35th in time of possession. 

https://stats.nba.com/players/touches/?sort=TIME_OF_POSS&dir=1&CF=TOUCHES*GE*60:GP*GE*40&Season=2018-19

[Silky]

That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

Literally the first result on google for best PGs of all-time:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankPGs/ranking-top-10-point-guards-ever

lol.

trash list

Any list that puts Kidd above Payton is a terrible list.
Any list that puts Kidd above Walt is just not even worth looking at.

Every single list on the first page of google’s search results has Kidd ranked higher.

The hyperbolic schtick is actually hurting your team, because nobody takes your ability to evaluate players seriously. Nobody else is throwing out wild statements and completely disrespecting other teams.

I've used ESPN a lot in this.  They have Kidd at 35 and Payton at 41.  Same general range, not much difference, but with Kidd the slight edge.  That seems right to me.

Taking entire career into consideration, sure, but this game is to take a season.

Remember this?

Payton is better. That is why every ranking of point guards ever made has Payton above Kidd.

You’ve killed your credibility.  Goukii was willing to concede it was a draw, and you chose to act the fool instead.  I don’t think that’s helpful.

Full disclosure, I ranked your team in the bottom quadrant. I wish your had spent more time talking about how Kobe can be more efficient in this exercise, rather than some of the hyperbole.

^this tbh. I would've ranked your team quite a bit higher if you spent more time convincing me how your pieces would fit, and how your two ball dominant superstars would scale back their offenses while maintaining their offensive value.
FYI your team was ranked near the middle in my rankings, I still rate your team.

I shouldnt have to convince people that Koibe and Hakeem are great basketball players, 2 top 15 guys EASILY, that are capable of playing with others.

That seems a waste of time and a foolish thing to do.

Kobe had a 24 assist rate that year, Bird had a career average of 23.7.
But somehow Bird was a great teammate and a willing passer but Kobe was a selfish ballhog.

You cannot debate against pre-conceived notions.

That's where the eye test comes in. Bird played a relatively "off-ball" game compared to other offensive megastars, which assist % can't really quantify. And you should try and explain why both of them can mesh, they have very ball dominant games in the sense that they need to hold the ball for a long time to do their thing on offense.

+

And McGrady, Gilmore, erving, Garnett, Goodrich, Marion and Brand dont?


Kobe's and Hakeems time per possession was just behind that of Lebron and Jordan.

Why dont those teams have to justify those players fit?

Gilmore, KG, Goodrich and Marion are ball dominant players? I absolutely agree that McGrady, Erving and Brand need the ball to be effective, but the other 4 being ball dominant is quite laughable imo. And maybe because those teams actually have players who fit nicely with them? If they don't they're penalised in my rankings, iirc one of them was ranked in your range.

Yeah. Gilmore and kg were.

Any player that utilizes post ups in their game have a longer time per possession.

That is pretty basic

Both weren't post up heavy players though when they were paired with good teammates, especially Gilmore, who was criticised for passing up easy looks as he was such a willing (but mediocre) passer-it's why he had such a high FG%, he only took very high efficiency shots. You're grasping at straws here, both players were very scalable offensively either due to their shot selection (Gilmore) or ability to stretch the floor and play like an oversized point forward (Garnett).

sigh

Steph Curry 2015-2016 - 32.6
Tracy McGrady 2002-2003 - 35.2
Julius Erving 1975-1976 - 29
Kevin Garnett 2003-2004) - 29.6
Dave Cowens 1975-1976 - No data

Usage for starters - 126.4 (not including Cowens)


Gary Payton 1995-96 - 24.4
Kobe Bryant 2007-08 - 31.4
Bob Dandridge 1972-73 - (career 23)
Dave Debusscherre 1967-68 no stats
Hakeem Olajuwon 1993-94 - 31.7

Starters Usage 110.5 (Not Including Dave)


Usage is the easiest metric to use to show time of possessions over multiple years.

SO my lineup has less issue than yours

Throwing out another very flawed stat lol, usage rate measures shot attempts than the actual amount of time a player holds the ball. Curry, Garnett and the Doctor weren't shot clock eaters the way Kobe and Hakeem were, the only guy on my team who's actually more ball dominant than shot dominant is McGrady.

That is not what that stat means at all.

"An estimate of the percentage of team plays used by a player while he was on the floor."


You are spinning the meanings of statistics. And incorrectly at that.

Rajon Rondo has a career usage of 21.5 yet only takes 9.5 fga per game, by your logic his usage should be alot lower because usage means how many shots you take.

Usage doesn’t show time used of possessions.  It predates when we have play-by-play data that includes time.  It does account for assists, turnovers, and fouls that result in a shot but no FGA, in additions to FGAs.  But no time of possession.

It measures a percentage of total teams plays when the player is on the court.

A high usage is indicitive of time with ball in hands.

Pace plays into it. But it a reasonable enough stat to detrmine time.

And in the case if me using it it works as a statistical rebuttal of points made against my team.

Not that any of it matters at all im the long run

No it is not.  Ending a possession is no where near the same thing as dominating a possession (whether you end it or not). 

You can look at the time of possession league leaders and see there really isn't a ton of correlation between that and usage (I mean other than Harden leading in both).  Solidifying this point, Durant had the 2nd highest USG last year but was tied for 35th in time of possession. 

https://stats.nba.com/players/touches/?sort=TIME_OF_POSS&dir=1&CF=TOUCHES*GE*60:GP*GE*40&Season=2018-19

You realize this was only a trackable statistic from 2013 right?

And in my original post I stated that the next closest thing is usage to determine fit between teammates. But it does show, when comparing offensive talents, if there is enough ball to go around. And it proves that kobe and hakeem is just fine as a duo because everone else is low in the lineup.

I cannot track time of possession prior 2013 season.

And this was all in rebuttal to the claim that kobe and hakeem wouldnt work together because they are bith so ball dominate.

Why am i getting the feeling that its all just become a gang up on silky thread

That everyone is going to look into each minute detail and anything that i may have possibly misrepresented when posting out of natural language in am effort to rebutt any claim i make.

In kobes ballhigging years he had came behind lebron, paul, simmons etc for time of possession but he is a ball hig and the others arent.

Lebron took more shots than kobe that year. Tmac, iverson and wade just behind....but kobe was a ballhog.

Ranked 4th in assist% that year among sgs but he was a ballhog.

[nickagneta]

ANNOUNCEMENT

WITH 5 hours or so until the deadline for having ballots in, I have 8 legal ballots from owners, one not legal ballot from an owner,
and 4 ballots from non-participants.

I am owed ballots from the following:

greenrunsdeep41
Celts Fan 508
RPGenerate

I am owed a legal ballot(I need a power ranking list) from:

Yoki_IsTheName

[gouki88]

Why am i getting the feeling that its all just become a gang up on silky thread

Lol. You come out with all these hyperbolic statements about how your guys will crush everyone, and then when people reasonably disagree, you double down. And it's ganging up? Give me a break

[Silky]

Why am i getting the feeling that its all just become a gang up on silky thread

Lol. You come out with all these hyperbolic statements about how your guys will crush everyone, and then when people reasonably disagree, you double down. And it's ganging up? Give me a break

Sure.

Hyperbole

Sure.

I am done with it.

As soon as bird was picked it was over.

[Roy H.]

As soon as bird was picked it was over.

I've yet to hear anybody say "I like Philly because they drafted Larry Bird, even though the rest of their team sucks".  We've done this league a lot of different times, in a lot of different variations.  Not once has Larry been an automatic win cheat code.  Heck, he wouldn't have even been my pick where Philly took him (that was Magic).

Have you noticed that in a 12-team league, you're the only one acting like a sore loser?  Just take some self-satisfaction in the fact that you built a team you like.

[gouki88]

Why am i getting the feeling that its all just become a gang up on silky thread

Lol. You come out with all these hyperbolic statements about how your guys will crush everyone, and then when people reasonably disagree, you double down. And it's ganging up? Give me a break

Sure.

Hyperbole

Sure.

I am done with it.

As soon as bird was picked it was over.

If that was the case why would Portland be receiving just as much praise as me? The team that picked the biggest thorn in Larry's side?

Your inability to take any sort of criticism, no matter how constructive, is really not helpful to the game.