Everything Stevens said about Paul George is true. It does not mean that he is better than Brown. More complementary is not the same as better. They have to make up for that with the picks. And maybe what they get if they trade George.
They suggestion that he is one of the most impactful players when it comes to winning isn't only not true, it's laughable. I don't care what analytics say, guys need to be on the court to impact winning.
I agree with you that guys need to be on the court to impact winning, however, the number of games needed is a subjective point....remember KP missed lots of games but had an impact on winning. Also, a minor point, Brad did not say George is one of the most impactful players, he said said George is one of the more impactful players. I believe if George can stay healthy, a big if, the Cs should have a good season and, who knows, maybe make it to the finals again. I am approaching this season with a positive outlook...
What is the definition of "one of the more impactful" players? What percentile?
The past two seasons George has *combined* for 3.5 win shares total. That's less than Walsh or Scheierman gave last year alone.
It's just a stupid thing to say, and it's not true.
Take it easy Roy! You are trying to have it both ways...
First you said "I don't care what analytics say, guys need to be on the court to impact winning". Ok, I said I agree with you that guys need to be on the court to impact winning, however, the number of games needed is a subjective point....remember KP missed lots of games but had an impact on winning.
Then you followed with the following..."What is the definition of "one of the more impactful" players? What percentile?
The past two seasons George has *combined* for 3.5 win shares total."
Let's agree that we want George to play as many games as possible and that we hope his impact on winning will be positive. His impact on the game will be a subjective assessment, and that is not, as you like to say, "a stupid thing to say and it's not true". Let's wait till later during the season an assess what has happened before we imply someone has said a stupid thing....
How am I having it both ways? I'm not even sure what the other way is, in that George is both frequently unavailable (and thus, not only not positively impacting games, but presumably negatively impacting them by taking up a roster spot but not playing) *and* he sucks in terms of at least one manner of measuring impact, win shares. That's not both ways, that's one way stated twice.
And, I'm just saying that part of Brad's pitch is a big steaming pile of malarkey. But, you seemed to defend Brad's use of the term "one of the more impactful players", so what's that based upon? Subjective can be fine, but it has to be based on something. Otherwise, it's just an unfounded opinion.
You say I'm wrong. What's your criteria? A hope and a prayer? Or are you basing it on anything at all? The onus is on those making or defending the statement "one of the more impactful players in terms of winning" to defend that statement. Let's hear that defense.
The one Brad Stevens quote I buy into this off-season: "I might be wrong. I'm not gonna stand here and be defensive about that."
If Brad doesn't even have complete confidence in the trade, why should I? At this point, he's just spinning things like a politician.
