OKC ousted in 7; Russell Westbrook to Celts; swap lottery pick for Love

[slamtheking]

I think winning percentage can be a pretty interesting stat, especially if you're looking at a player who's purported to be the best player on the team. It says a lot, to me, if your best player can't lead your team to a .500 record. Especially if that's the case for more than one season.

On the other hand, I tend to apply that logic more to players who've already signed their second contracts, simply because by that point they're starting to define who they're going to be in the NBA.

So Kyrie's losing is starting to be an albatross, but it's much more concerning to me that someone like Kevin Love hasn't yet been on a winning team.

to your credit, you call out Kyrie and Love (2 players many have clamored for) for the same thing Rondo is criticized for here. 

[BballTim]

And if you can't see how taking 100 shots per game will likely result in higher individual scoring averages than taking 90 shots per game, I don't think I can explain it to you

  If you can't see that no team in the league takes 100 shots per game (only 1 team has even taken 90 a game since 2008) and the Celts weren't 10 shots a game below average in those years you can save that explanation. Also, you were talking pace, which is different than FGA.

Teams that play at a higher pace typically take more shots than teams that play at a slower pace. Do I really need to explain the concept of pace-adjusted vs. raw averages?! It applies for pretty much everything, including points and FGAs.

  No, you don't need to explain anything. What you really need to do is check out the pace numbers for the seasons in question, then do it again, then do it on a different website. Don't stop until you figure out that, while the Celts played at a slower pace, the difference in possessions per game between our team and the league average is only 1 possession per game. Pace adjust all you want, just drop all the nonsense about teams averaging 100 shots a game or even 90 shots a game or the difference in our pace causing some huge differential in shot totals. If you do that I'm fairly confident I won't need you to explain anything else.

[BballTim]

I think winning percentage can be a pretty interesting stat, especially if you're looking at a player who's purported to be the best player on the team. It says a lot, to me, if your best player can't lead your team to a .500 record. Especially if that's the case for more than one season.

  I'd like to hear exactly what you think it says about a player, since it pertains to players like Ray, PP and KG. They're all in the "more than one season" category, so explain that group in particular.


 

[Celtics18]

I think winning percentage can be a pretty interesting stat, especially if you're looking at a player who's purported to be the best player on the team. It says a lot, to me, if your best player can't lead your team to a .500 record. Especially if that's the case for more than one season.

On the other hand, I tend to apply that logic more to players who've already signed their second contracts, simply because by that point they're starting to define who they're going to be in the NBA.

So Kyrie's losing is starting to be an albatross, but it's much more concerning to me that someone like Kevin Love hasn't yet been on a winning team.

With an injured Mike Conley and a suspended Zach Randolph for Game 7, it's pretty much safe to say this topic is moot.

But now we can start the "NBA Rigged The Series so the thunder could advance" thread.

You need to add Deron Williams, Ray Allen, Dwayne Wade, Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce, Carmelo Anthony, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Kevin Garnett to your list of players who have had seasons in their primes where they have led their teams to sub .500 records. 

I'm sure there are some other notables who I've missed. 

[makaveli]

Westbrook for Rondo is a move that basicly everybody would love. Rondo can't score, and he has to be around a high profile players/scorers in order to be effective. Russell just won't work with Durrant, sure they might past a few playoff rounds every now and then, but they won't get the ring.
The only problem i see is that, they can get rid of RW to make a spot for Reggie Jackson, who has a tons of potential, and imo is a proven player, so they might want a different position player in return(SF most likely).
I would vote YES on this one, cause i just can't see us building around Rondo

[Eddie20]

I think winning percentage can be a pretty interesting stat, especially if you're looking at a player who's purported to be the best player on the team. It says a lot, to me, if your best player can't lead your team to a .500 record. Especially if that's the case for more than one season.

On the other hand, I tend to apply that logic more to players who've already signed their second contracts, simply because by that point they're starting to define who they're going to be in the NBA.

So Kyrie's losing is starting to be an albatross, but it's much more concerning to me that someone like Kevin Love hasn't yet been on a winning team.

With an injured Mike Conley and a suspended Zach Randolph for Game 7, it's pretty much safe to say this topic is moot.

But now we can start the "NBA Rigged The Series so the thunder could advance" thread.

You need to add Deron Williams, Ray Allen, Dwayne Wade, Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce, Carmelo Anthony, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Kevin Garnett to your list of players who have had seasons in their primes where they have led their teams to sub .500 records. 

I'm sure there are some other notables who I've missed.

How many of those teams had a better record without those players than with them? Because during the last 2 years that's exactly what the C's have done without their "star".

[pokeKingCurtis]

I think winning percentage can be a pretty interesting stat, especially if you're looking at a player who's purported to be the best player on the team. It says a lot, to me, if your best player can't lead your team to a .500 record. Especially if that's the case for more than one season.

On the other hand, I tend to apply that logic more to players who've already signed their second contracts, simply because by that point they're starting to define who they're going to be in the NBA.

So Kyrie's losing is starting to be an albatross, but it's much more concerning to me that someone like Kevin Love hasn't yet been on a winning team.

With an injured Mike Conley and a suspended Zach Randolph for Game 7, it's pretty much safe to say this topic is moot.

But now we can start the "NBA Rigged The Series so the thunder could advance" thread.

You need to add Deron Williams, Ray Allen, Dwayne Wade, Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce, Carmelo Anthony, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Kevin Garnett to your list of players who have had seasons in their primes where they have led their teams to sub .500 records. 

I'm sure there are some other notables who I've missed.

How many of those teams had a better record without those players than with them? Because during the last 2 years that's exactly what the C's have done without their "star".

Chris Paul this year, I believe?

[PhoSita]

How many posts can we get out of the Rondo vs Westbrook debate?

http://youtu.be/SiMHTK15Pik?t=10s

[BballTim]

Westbrook for Rondo is a move that basicly everybody would love. Rondo can't score, and he has to be around a high profile players/scorers in order to be effective. Russell just won't work with Durrant, sure they might past a few playoff rounds every now and then, but they won't get the ring.
The only problem i see is that, they can get rid of RW to make a spot for Reggie Jackson, who has a tons of potential, and imo is a proven player, so they might want a different position player in return(SF most likely).
I would vote YES on this one, cause i just can't see us building around Rondo

  If you build a good team you're going to have to add good players. Then you'll have a team where Rondo would be more effective and Westbrook wouldn't mesh any better than he does with Durant. Some people claim that Westbrook is a better fit for our current roster, but I'm fairly certain that Danny's goal isn't to build a team of mediocre scorers and a relatively inefficient pg jacking up 30 shots a game.

[gpap]

Westbrook for Rondo is a move that basicly everybody would love. Rondo can't score, and he has to be around a high profile players/scorers in order to be effective. Russell just won't work with Durrant, sure they might past a few playoff rounds every now and then, but they won't get the ring.
The only problem i see is that, they can get rid of RW to make a spot for Reggie Jackson, who has a tons of potential, and imo is a proven player, so they might want a different position player in return(SF most likely).
I would vote YES on this one, cause i just can't see us building around Rondo

That makes two of us. If Ainge could've made this move, he would've made it a long, long time ago.

Even Ainge said on the Sports Hub that 20 out of the 30 teams in the NBA aren't really interested in Rondo because they already have a point guard they're happy with.

If Rondo is such an amazing player, then how come none of those 20 teams have been interested in dealing their starting PG for Rondo?

I can only imagine what creative responses I am going to hear now......

[kozlodoev]

Westbrook for Rondo is a move that basicly everybody would love. Rondo can't score, and he has to be around a high profile players/scorers in order to be effective. Russell just won't work with Durrant, sure they might past a few playoff rounds every now and then, but they won't get the ring.
The only problem i see is that, they can get rid of RW to make a spot for Reggie Jackson, who has a tons of potential, and imo is a proven player, so they might want a different position player in return(SF most likely).
I would vote YES on this one, cause i just can't see us building around Rondo

  If you build a good team you're going to have to add good players. Then you'll have a team where Rondo would be more effective and Westbrook wouldn't mesh any better than he does with Durant. Some people claim that Westbrook is a better fit for our current roster, but I'm fairly certain that Danny's goal isn't to build a team of mediocre scorers and a relatively inefficient pg jacking up 30 shots a game.

Yes, instead he's got a team of inefficient scorers and a relatively inefficient PG that _doesn't_ jack 30 shots per game.

I'm sure no-one wants to build a mediocre team, but if I had to hazard a guess, I'd say it's easier to build around Westbrook than it is to build around Rondo.

[Celtics18]

Westbrook for Rondo is a move that basicly everybody would love. Rondo can't score, and he has to be around a high profile players/scorers in order to be effective. Russell just won't work with Durrant, sure they might past a few playoff rounds every now and then, but they won't get the ring.
The only problem i see is that, they can get rid of RW to make a spot for Reggie Jackson, who has a tons of potential, and imo is a proven player, so they might want a different position player in return(SF most likely).
I would vote YES on this one, cause i just can't see us building around Rondo

That makes two of us. If Ainge could've made this move, he would've made it a long, long time ago.

Even Ainge said on the Sports Hub that 20 out of the 30 teams in the NBA aren't really interested in Rondo because they already have a point guard they're happy with.

If Rondo is such an amazing player, then how come none of those 20 teams have been interested in dealing their starting PG for Rondo?

I can only imagine what creative responses I am going to hear now......

Did you take those comments to mean that there are roughly 20 point guards out there that Danny would gladly trade Rondo for?  If that's the case, I personally think you misinterpreted what he was saying.

[BballTim]

Westbrook for Rondo is a move that basicly everybody would love. Rondo can't score, and he has to be around a high profile players/scorers in order to be effective. Russell just won't work with Durrant, sure they might past a few playoff rounds every now and then, but they won't get the ring.
The only problem i see is that, they can get rid of RW to make a spot for Reggie Jackson, who has a tons of potential, and imo is a proven player, so they might want a different position player in return(SF most likely).
I would vote YES on this one, cause i just can't see us building around Rondo

That makes two of us. If Ainge could've made this move, he would've made it a long, long time ago.

Even Ainge said on the Sports Hub that 20 out of the 30 teams in the NBA aren't really interested in Rondo because they already have a point guard they're happy with.

If Rondo is such an amazing player, then how come none of those 20 teams have been interested in dealing their starting PG for Rondo?

I can only imagine what creative responses I am going to hear now......

   If Danny's saying that the league's full of teams with good pgs that aren't really looking to acquire point guards or trade for them then it shouldn't be that hard to figure out that Danny himself fits into that category and isn't looking to change point guards. He's said so himself many times.

[D.o.s.]

I think winning percentage can be a pretty interesting stat, especially if you're looking at a player who's purported to be the best player on the team. It says a lot, to me, if your best player can't lead your team to a .500 record. Especially if that's the case for more than one season.

  I'd like to hear exactly what you think it says about a player, since it pertains to players like Ray, PP and KG. They're all in the "more than one season" category, so explain that group in particular.


 

I don't know if it says one thing about all players across the board -- that was the Kyrie/Love example: Irving gets more leeway from me because it's still only his third year in the league. I pay the most attention to it when it becomes a trend: Love is a good example of that because he's only had losing seasons since he's been in the league. But there are different factors at play there -- Kevin Love's Timberwolves being perpetually bad may not be for the same reasons as Irving's Cavs.

You need to add Deron Williams, Ray Allen, Dwayne Wade, Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce, Carmelo Anthony, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Kevin Garnett to your list of players who have had seasons in their primes where they have led their teams to sub .500 records. 

I'm sure there are some other notables who I've missed.

There's a difference between being the best player on a team that's had one or two losing seasons and being the best player on a perpetual losing team That's the nuance your list is missing. So KG was on losing teams for the first two years of his NBA career -- and then his last two years in Minnesota, with eight seasons of high level play in between (Not to mention an MVP award).

So what does that say about Garnett? That he's a guy who needed quality teammates, but could still be the alpha dog on a 55 win team. Aldridge's career so far has been similar.

Carmelo Anthony has only had one losing season -- this year, and you can look at the data any way you want and see that it largely wasn't on him, he played his ass off. Again, aberration against a ten-year professional career.

Wade's injury history has to be taken into account when you look at the seasons the pre-lebron heat had, etc.

And so on and so on. You can't just lump them all into a pot and say "losing seasons."

[BballTim]

Westbrook for Rondo is a move that basicly everybody would love. Rondo can't score, and he has to be around a high profile players/scorers in order to be effective. Russell just won't work with Durrant, sure they might past a few playoff rounds every now and then, but they won't get the ring.
The only problem i see is that, they can get rid of RW to make a spot for Reggie Jackson, who has a tons of potential, and imo is a proven player, so they might want a different position player in return(SF most likely).
I would vote YES on this one, cause i just can't see us building around Rondo

  If you build a good team you're going to have to add good players. Then you'll have a team where Rondo would be more effective and Westbrook wouldn't mesh any better than he does with Durant. Some people claim that Westbrook is a better fit for our current roster, but I'm fairly certain that Danny's goal isn't to build a team of mediocre scorers and a relatively inefficient pg jacking up 30 shots a game.

Yes, instead he's got a team of inefficient scorers and a relatively inefficient PG that _doesn't_ jack 30 shots per game.

  I'm sure the fact that you think this is a problem is related to your preferring Westbrook to Rondo. Rajon did what he always did, leading the league in assists from February on. The team scores much more efficiently off of Rondo's passes than they normally do yet here you are complaining that he doesn't shoot more.

I'm sure no-one wants to build a mediocre team, but if I had to hazard a guess, I'd say it's easier to build around Westbrook than it is to build around Rondo.

  If you're not adding any decent scorers to the team it will be fairly mediocre. Once you start adding good players to the team Rondo becomes much more valuable while Westbrook's fairly inefficient volume shooting that you're so enamored with becomes something of a boat anchor. I suppose you're hoping to build one of those AI Philly teams from 10-15 years ago?