IP Ranks The Pick-Two Teams By Divison (All Divisions Are Up)

[indeedproceed]

So you believe that Amare Stoudemire didn't bring significant value to the Phoenix Suns and NYK?

I believe that there's enough data to support that he might not bring as much value as one might think. I know that sounds like an on the fence answer, but I guess that's where I am.

I've seen him dominate games and play incredible. But there's certainly some evidence to support that the pluses might not outweigh the negatives. Even with a strong supporting cast, if he's as elite as we seem to think, you'd think that there would be a bigger impact overall.

So the Suns losing 14 more games the year after he left, and the Knicks gaining (who were the other major changes?), and the Knicks gaining 13 games after his arrival doesn't carry any weight?

The 'evidence' Nick listed was the season he missed when he was 23, and a down year for the Suns where he only played in 53 of 82 games (possible contributing to the 'down' nature of the year?).

I don't see that as any kind of proof. Amare left a team while he was in his prime where he was the high scorer, and leader in minutes played, and the next season they fall from a 3rd seed to the lottery.

I just don't even get how this is a 'thing'.

[Roy H.]

So, Cavs vs. Hawks.  Let's do this.

("This" being an analysis that ends in "Cavs in four".  Rondo can't contain Irving.)

[StartOrien]

Thunder - Clippers

On the surface this should be an absolute blow out. The scoring differential on the wings should honestly be about 50 points: Those wings won't be able to stop, nor counter the Sonics wings in any manner.

Blake and Scola should mostly counter each other, Blake might get the edge just because I think CP3 would force the pace and that could create a lot of easy baskets for Blake against a relatively slow Sonic front court. But Scola's still going to get his, and he should be able to get some help with great spacing.

And that should be it, but... the Clippers have Chris Paul. And you know, he's Chris Paul. He'll find ways to win.

Thunder 4, Chris Paul 2

------

Out of curiosity, would anyone else have selected DeAndre Jordan over Blake? Obviously Blake's the better talent, but I think it might've been easier to build around DeAndre and CP3.

[nickagneta]

So you believe that Amare Stoudemire didn't bring significant value to the Phoenix Suns and NYK?

I believe that there's enough data to support that he might not bring as much value as one might think. I know that sounds like an on the fence answer, but I guess that's where I am.

I've seen him dominate games and play incredible. But there's certainly some evidence to support that the pluses might not outweigh the negatives. Even with a strong supporting cast, if he's as elite as we seem to think, you'd think that there would be a bigger impact overall.

So the Suns losing 14 more games the year after he left, and the Knicks gaining (who were the other major changes?), and the Knicks gaining 13 games after his arrival doesn't carry any weight?

The 'evidence' Nick listed was the season he missed when he was 23, and a down year for the Suns where he only played in 53 of 82 games (possible contributing to the 'down' nature of the year?).

I don't see that as any kind of proof. Amare left a team while he was in his prime where he was the high scorer, and leader in minutes played, and the next season they fall from a 3rd seed to the lottery.

I just don't even get how this is a 'thing'.

That year he played 53 games they were 30-23 when he played and 16-13 when he didn't, a difference of 1 percentage point. That year is actually an excellent indicator of what a group of talent does with him on the team and without.

[StartOrien]

So you believe that Amare Stoudemire didn't bring significant value to the Phoenix Suns and NYK?

I believe that there's enough data to support that he might not bring as much value as one might think. I know that sounds like an on the fence answer, but I guess that's where I am.

I've seen him dominate games and play incredible. But there's certainly some evidence to support that the pluses might not outweigh the negatives. Even with a strong supporting cast, if he's as elite as we seem to think, you'd think that there would be a bigger impact overall.

So the Suns losing 14 more games the year after he left, and the Knicks gaining (who were the other major changes?), and the Knicks gaining 13 games after his arrival doesn't carry any weight?

The 'evidence' Nick listed was the season he missed when he was 23, and a down year for the Suns where he only played in 53 of 82 games (possible contributing to the 'down' nature of the year?).

I don't see that as any kind of proof. Amare left a team while he was in his prime where he was the high scorer, and leader in minutes played, and the next season they fall from a 3rd seed to the lottery.

I just don't even get how this is a 'thing'.

I think you could argue that the examples are extreme:

Amare, as well as Ronny Turiaf joined an absolutely pathetic Knicks front court, and the Suns replaced Amare with Hakim Warrick and Josh Childress.

I know what you're saying, but I think you could also make the argument that even an average PF would have similar effects here.

[nickagneta]

Love that Cav play Hawks and the question mark for the Cavs is Irving and last night he torched Rondo, a game that I am guessing most who visit this site witnessed.

Timing is everything in life.

[StartOrien]

Love that Cav play Hawks and the question mark for the Cavs is Irving and last night he torched Rondo, a game that I am guessing most who visit this site witnessed.

Timing is everything in life.

SAMPLE SIZE

 

[Who]

Out of curiosity, would anyone else have selected DeAndre Jordan over Blake? Obviously Blake's the better talent, but I think it might've been easier to build around DeAndre and CP3.

I'd be pretty shocked if you are not alone on that one.

[indeedproceed]

So you believe that Amare Stoudemire didn't bring significant value to the Phoenix Suns and NYK?

I believe that there's enough data to support that he might not bring as much value as one might think. I know that sounds like an on the fence answer, but I guess that's where I am.

I've seen him dominate games and play incredible. But there's certainly some evidence to support that the pluses might not outweigh the negatives. Even with a strong supporting cast, if he's as elite as we seem to think, you'd think that there would be a bigger impact overall.

So the Suns losing 14 more games the year after he left, and the Knicks gaining (who were the other major changes?), and the Knicks gaining 13 games after his arrival doesn't carry any weight?

The 'evidence' Nick listed was the season he missed when he was 23, and a down year for the Suns where he only played in 53 of 82 games (possible contributing to the 'down' nature of the year?).

I don't see that as any kind of proof. Amare left a team while he was in his prime where he was the high scorer, and leader in minutes played, and the next season they fall from a 3rd seed to the lottery.

I just don't even get how this is a 'thing'.

That year he played 53 games they were 30-23 when he played and 16-13 when he didn't, a difference of 1 percentage point. That year is actually an excellent indicator of what a group of talent does with him on the team and without.

That's a valid point (I did same math when i was making my initial rebuttal), but it doesn't factor what they could've done with a full season of Amare as well. Was it a weak portion of the schedule? Would they have won more games?

And it still doesn't support your theory that he's Derrick Coleman, and its only 1 year out of 6 full seasons of elite contention and elite performance from STAT, and you're pointing to a 23 game sample of 'what they could've done without him'.

Still, doesn't hold water. Not against the larger sample size of Stat's excellence, not against the rapid decline of the Suns when he was out the entire year.

Its like pointing to the 08-09 Celtics and saying that KG didn't make an impact because they went 17-9 without him, or that they could sustain that pace over an entire season if he was never there. (Actually the second statment is more similar, because the Celtics were 45-11 with KG in the lineup)

[Who]

Relative to his fellow star players, Amare Stoudemire is not a dominant player.

2nd or 3rd best player on a high quality team. Not capable of leading a squad to anything of significance.

[Roy H.]

------

Out of curiosity, would anyone else have selected DeAndre Jordan over Blake? Obviously Blake's the better talent, but I think it might've been easier to build around DeAndre and CP3.

No way.  Blake is a monster, Jordan is a decent but flawed player.  Now, I would have liked to see Bahku add a better center; I probably would have taken Batum in the first, and Pekovic in the second, but there were other options out there (Perk, Haywood, etc.)

I think you've got to go with elite front end talent, rather than "fit", when you're choosing your teams. 

[indeedproceed]

So you believe that Amare Stoudemire didn't bring significant value to the Phoenix Suns and NYK?

I believe that there's enough data to support that he might not bring as much value as one might think. I know that sounds like an on the fence answer, but I guess that's where I am.

I've seen him dominate games and play incredible. But there's certainly some evidence to support that the pluses might not outweigh the negatives. Even with a strong supporting cast, if he's as elite as we seem to think, you'd think that there would be a bigger impact overall.

So the Suns losing 14 more games the year after he left, and the Knicks gaining (who were the other major changes?), and the Knicks gaining 13 games after his arrival doesn't carry any weight?

The 'evidence' Nick listed was the season he missed when he was 23, and a down year for the Suns where he only played in 53 of 82 games (possible contributing to the 'down' nature of the year?).

I don't see that as any kind of proof. Amare left a team while he was in his prime where he was the high scorer, and leader in minutes played, and the next season they fall from a 3rd seed to the lottery.

I just don't even get how this is a 'thing'.

I think you could argue that the examples are extreme:

Amare, as well as Ronny Turiaf joined an absolutely pathetic Knicks front court, and the Suns replaced Amare with Hakim Warrick and Josh Childress.

I know what you're saying, but I think you could also make the argument that even an average PF would have similar effects here.

Hakim Warrick yr before Suns: 15.7 PER
First yr with Suns: 16.51 PER

League Average: 15.0

Hakim Warrick: Average PF.

[indeedproceed]

Relative to his fellow star players, Amare Stoudemire is not a dominant player.

2nd or 3rd best player on a high quality team. Not capable of leading a squad to anything of significance.

I'm okay with that. I think Amare could be the most talented player on a championship caliber team (cuz he was), and as long as the identity there allows him to play to his strengths they'd be fine.

I'm just sayin Amare ain't no Derrick Coleman.

[StartOrien]

So you believe that Amare Stoudemire didn't bring significant value to the Phoenix Suns and NYK?

I believe that there's enough data to support that he might not bring as much value as one might think. I know that sounds like an on the fence answer, but I guess that's where I am.

I've seen him dominate games and play incredible. But there's certainly some evidence to support that the pluses might not outweigh the negatives. Even with a strong supporting cast, if he's as elite as we seem to think, you'd think that there would be a bigger impact overall.

So the Suns losing 14 more games the year after he left, and the Knicks gaining (who were the other major changes?), and the Knicks gaining 13 games after his arrival doesn't carry any weight?

The 'evidence' Nick listed was the season he missed when he was 23, and a down year for the Suns where he only played in 53 of 82 games (possible contributing to the 'down' nature of the year?).

I don't see that as any kind of proof. Amare left a team while he was in his prime where he was the high scorer, and leader in minutes played, and the next season they fall from a 3rd seed to the lottery.

I just don't even get how this is a 'thing'.

I think you could argue that the examples are extreme:

Amare, as well as Ronny Turiaf joined an absolutely pathetic Knicks front court, and the Suns replaced Amare with Hakim Warrick and Josh Childress.

I know what you're saying, but I think you could also make the argument that even an average PF would have similar effects here.

Hakim Warrick yr before Suns: 15.7 PER
First yr with Suns: 16.51 PER

League Average: 15.0

Hakim Warrick: Average PF.

You could send me every stat in the world, there's no chance I will accept Hakim Warrick as an average power forward.

[Roy H.]

If anybody should appreciate Irving, it's Celtics fans.

He's averaging 22.7 points, 5.0 assists, 3.0 rebounds, 56.8% shooting, and 71.4% 3PT shooting against us.  All in 32.7 minutes per game.

Also, I like Amare.  If you put him on our team, and slid KG over to the center position, we easily win the title this year in my mind.  He's a guy who needs good players around him, but I think if slotted properly he could be a big piece on a championship team.