|
On February 14 2012 14:40 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 14:29 MilesTeg wrote:On February 14 2012 11:52 cLutZ wrote:On February 14 2012 10:02 slyboogie wrote:
Fundamentally flawed. Presumes players get better or worse near the end of a game. Sample sizes are too small, though on a whole, I believe, that it is generally understood that players get worse as the game gets near its end. 25 is also arbitrary. No more accurate than 10 or 13 or 4 (well...it is, technically, but not in any significant way.)
Still, it tells us a couple of things. It tells us that Chris Bosh, semi-surprisingly, shot a ton of shots in the clutch, though I bet 6 of them are from the Atlanta game. It also tells us that Kobe Bryant takes a lot of difficult shots near the end of games.
I believe clutch is a real thing. I get nervous playing basketball at the park or Magic the Gathering or Starcraft 2 or slow-toss baseball. I don't think it can be quantified by pseudo-sport-intellectuals like Henry Abbot. It mostly tells us about the quality of looks the person is getting. Bosh: Surrounded (in crunch time) by 1+ outstanding penetrators/passers and shooters (for spacing). AKA always wide open or loosely guarded by 1 man. Kobe: Surrounded (in crunch time) by 2 POS players and two good big men. AKA always double teamed. And that is, to me, the definition of being clutch (or "unclutch" in the case of Bryant). Being clutch is the ability to remain calm when other players freak out, and make good decisions. It isn't a magic force that allows you to make shots with a better percentage. Bryant doesn't really make those good decisions, he always takes fadeaways. No one is going to completely deny those shots. Sometimes it goes in, and everyone seems to think he's exceptional (and he is, in a way, since no one can shoot those fadeaways better), while it's really just a statistical fact that if he keeps taking them it's going to go in sometimes. People just don't understand the random aspect of the game. If you want to see a clutch performance, look at Dirk in the last finals. On some possessions he was shooting, others passing, sometimes driving inside, and he was always making the right play while everyone else in the world was losing their minds (I was so nervous just watching that game!) Did you just say that people don't understand the random aspect of the game and then throw out a 7-game series as evidence of being clutch? Seriously guys....clutch is one of the most ill defined things in sports. When you win, you're clutch. When you lose, you aren't clutch. Even if clutch exists, over the course of 1200 games or 15 seasons, it's worth maybe...60? Sure, some of those games are in the playoffs and are inherently higher leverage situations, but it's not even worth talking about. The "Who do you want to take the last shot, obviously Kobe," narrative is stupid. But so is the ridiculous need for every semi-educated basketball watcher to jump on the opposite side as if they've done an actual study. If you've crunched numbers over people's career or developed a weight on shots, I'd LOVE to see it. I really would. But otherwise, I've seen most of the papers and remain unconvinced that there is significant data to prove anyone's clutchness in the empirical sense. The eye test and basketball knowledge is probably just as good in these situations. For record, I do believe that Kobe is a clutch player, though there is no statistical evidence that I would accept to prove that he is. Also, Paul Pierce, Dwyane Wade and Chris Paul.
You didn't understand my post. What I did was bring up the random aspect of the game, then show an example of a guy who is trying to settle for the highest percentage. He could've missed too, but he made the right play (IMO, it's a completely subjective analysis). By the way I didn't say he was clutch, I said it was a clutch performance.
What you're talking about is an objective analysis of how clutch a player is, based on whether the shot was made. In that case of course you need a ton of data, but it's not what I tried to do. In fact when you talk about the eye test and basketball knowledge being better in this case, that's what I used so I'm not sure why you disagree with me.
|
I'm fairly certain no one has ever documented "clutch" when that is defined as getting better in high pressure situations, however there have been some documented "chokers". Clutch is basically not choking + winning (probably because you are already pretty freaking good i.e. Jordan, Bird, etc), that is it.
|
On February 14 2012 14:31 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 14:13 VENDIZ wrote:
Nevermind ;D
David Lee having a huge night So Curry busted his ankle again?!? Did he leave the game? I dunno about this one man.
Dubs are the definition of clutch: 3 GAME WIN STREAK BABY! Curry busted his other ankle I think.
|
On February 14 2012 14:31 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 14:13 VENDIZ wrote:
Nevermind ;D
David Lee having a huge night So Curry busted his ankle again?!? Did he leave the game? I dunno about this one man.
He came back in as normal, right after the incident he was seen doing a big jump to chest bump Nate after the latter hit a big 3PT, and he played the last 6-7 minutes of the 4th quarter, so I don't think it was serious ;p
|
On February 14 2012 15:01 MilesTeg wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 14:40 slyboogie wrote:On February 14 2012 14:29 MilesTeg wrote:On February 14 2012 11:52 cLutZ wrote:On February 14 2012 10:02 slyboogie wrote:
Fundamentally flawed. Presumes players get better or worse near the end of a game. Sample sizes are too small, though on a whole, I believe, that it is generally understood that players get worse as the game gets near its end. 25 is also arbitrary. No more accurate than 10 or 13 or 4 (well...it is, technically, but not in any significant way.)
Still, it tells us a couple of things. It tells us that Chris Bosh, semi-surprisingly, shot a ton of shots in the clutch, though I bet 6 of them are from the Atlanta game. It also tells us that Kobe Bryant takes a lot of difficult shots near the end of games.
I believe clutch is a real thing. I get nervous playing basketball at the park or Magic the Gathering or Starcraft 2 or slow-toss baseball. I don't think it can be quantified by pseudo-sport-intellectuals like Henry Abbot. It mostly tells us about the quality of looks the person is getting. Bosh: Surrounded (in crunch time) by 1+ outstanding penetrators/passers and shooters (for spacing). AKA always wide open or loosely guarded by 1 man. Kobe: Surrounded (in crunch time) by 2 POS players and two good big men. AKA always double teamed. And that is, to me, the definition of being clutch (or "unclutch" in the case of Bryant). Being clutch is the ability to remain calm when other players freak out, and make good decisions. It isn't a magic force that allows you to make shots with a better percentage. Bryant doesn't really make those good decisions, he always takes fadeaways. No one is going to completely deny those shots. Sometimes it goes in, and everyone seems to think he's exceptional (and he is, in a way, since no one can shoot those fadeaways better), while it's really just a statistical fact that if he keeps taking them it's going to go in sometimes. People just don't understand the random aspect of the game. If you want to see a clutch performance, look at Dirk in the last finals. On some possessions he was shooting, others passing, sometimes driving inside, and he was always making the right play while everyone else in the world was losing their minds (I was so nervous just watching that game!) Did you just say that people don't understand the random aspect of the game and then throw out a 7-game series as evidence of being clutch? Seriously guys....clutch is one of the most ill defined things in sports. When you win, you're clutch. When you lose, you aren't clutch. Even if clutch exists, over the course of 1200 games or 15 seasons, it's worth maybe...60? Sure, some of those games are in the playoffs and are inherently higher leverage situations, but it's not even worth talking about. The "Who do you want to take the last shot, obviously Kobe," narrative is stupid. But so is the ridiculous need for every semi-educated basketball watcher to jump on the opposite side as if they've done an actual study. If you've crunched numbers over people's career or developed a weight on shots, I'd LOVE to see it. I really would. But otherwise, I've seen most of the papers and remain unconvinced that there is significant data to prove anyone's clutchness in the empirical sense. The eye test and basketball knowledge is probably just as good in these situations. For record, I do believe that Kobe is a clutch player, though there is no statistical evidence that I would accept to prove that he is. Also, Paul Pierce, Dwyane Wade and Chris Paul. You didn't understand my post. What I did was bring up the random aspect of the game, then show an example of a guy who is trying to settle for the highest percentage. He could've missed too, but he made the right play (IMO, it's a completely subjective analysis). By the way I didn't say he was clutch, I said it was a clutch performance. What you're talking about is an objective analysis of how clutch a player is, based on whether the shot was made. In that case of course you need a ton of data, but it's not what I tried to do. In fact when you talk about the eye test and basketball knowledge being better in this case, that's what I used so I'm not sure why you disagree with me.
I do disagree with you, though in sort of semantic ways. If being clutch means remaining calm in a highly leveraged highly stressful situation, then Kobe Bryant is clutch. He is absolutely calm. His motion remains sound, he never travels or pick up his dribble unnecessarily. He's incredibly calm. And more importantly, his behavior doesn't change at all. He takes these shots though the entirety of the game. And they are low percentage, ridiculously high difficulty shots over double teams and longer defenders. He takes them quarters 1 through 4.
To equate making the right play and being clutch isn't something I agree with. It is, effectively, saying that clutch isn't actually a thing. Rather it's a "non"-thing: The capacity for retain good decision making as the game progresses into an end state. I suppose you could say Kobe never has good decision making, though I'd disagree. But that doesn't mean he isn't clutch.
Basically, I'm saying that making the right play isn't the definition of clutch. It is a partial definition of "good basketball." Clutch is something else. Bad decision makers can be clutch and good decision makers can be chokers. As the game wears to a close, there is a deterioration of skill and execution due to a number of factors. These can range from fear, to fatigue or stress. To excel in these situations is clutch, regardless of how you do it.
EDIT: Hrm, "Excel" is probably not even the right word. I'll clarify when I'm less tired. Unless this conversation is getting stupid.
|
On February 14 2012 15:14 cLutZ wrote:
I'm fairly certain no one has ever documented "clutch" when that is defined as getting better in high pressure situations, however there have been some documented "chokers". Clutch is basically not choking + winning (probably because you are already pretty freaking good i.e. Jordan, Bird, etc), that is it.
Funny thing: Bird has "choked" just as badly as Lebron has, in the Finals. No one talks about it though because he eventually won. Being clutch really depends on how people perceive you when it comes to the casual fan.
|
On February 14 2012 16:23 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 15:01 MilesTeg wrote:On February 14 2012 14:40 slyboogie wrote:On February 14 2012 14:29 MilesTeg wrote:On February 14 2012 11:52 cLutZ wrote:On February 14 2012 10:02 slyboogie wrote:
Fundamentally flawed. Presumes players get better or worse near the end of a game. Sample sizes are too small, though on a whole, I believe, that it is generally understood that players get worse as the game gets near its end. 25 is also arbitrary. No more accurate than 10 or 13 or 4 (well...it is, technically, but not in any significant way.)
Still, it tells us a couple of things. It tells us that Chris Bosh, semi-surprisingly, shot a ton of shots in the clutch, though I bet 6 of them are from the Atlanta game. It also tells us that Kobe Bryant takes a lot of difficult shots near the end of games.
I believe clutch is a real thing. I get nervous playing basketball at the park or Magic the Gathering or Starcraft 2 or slow-toss baseball. I don't think it can be quantified by pseudo-sport-intellectuals like Henry Abbot. It mostly tells us about the quality of looks the person is getting. Bosh: Surrounded (in crunch time) by 1+ outstanding penetrators/passers and shooters (for spacing). AKA always wide open or loosely guarded by 1 man. Kobe: Surrounded (in crunch time) by 2 POS players and two good big men. AKA always double teamed. And that is, to me, the definition of being clutch (or "unclutch" in the case of Bryant). Being clutch is the ability to remain calm when other players freak out, and make good decisions. It isn't a magic force that allows you to make shots with a better percentage. Bryant doesn't really make those good decisions, he always takes fadeaways. No one is going to completely deny those shots. Sometimes it goes in, and everyone seems to think he's exceptional (and he is, in a way, since no one can shoot those fadeaways better), while it's really just a statistical fact that if he keeps taking them it's going to go in sometimes. People just don't understand the random aspect of the game. If you want to see a clutch performance, look at Dirk in the last finals. On some possessions he was shooting, others passing, sometimes driving inside, and he was always making the right play while everyone else in the world was losing their minds (I was so nervous just watching that game!) Did you just say that people don't understand the random aspect of the game and then throw out a 7-game series as evidence of being clutch? Seriously guys....clutch is one of the most ill defined things in sports. When you win, you're clutch. When you lose, you aren't clutch. Even if clutch exists, over the course of 1200 games or 15 seasons, it's worth maybe...60? Sure, some of those games are in the playoffs and are inherently higher leverage situations, but it's not even worth talking about. The "Who do you want to take the last shot, obviously Kobe," narrative is stupid. But so is the ridiculous need for every semi-educated basketball watcher to jump on the opposite side as if they've done an actual study. If you've crunched numbers over people's career or developed a weight on shots, I'd LOVE to see it. I really would. But otherwise, I've seen most of the papers and remain unconvinced that there is significant data to prove anyone's clutchness in the empirical sense. The eye test and basketball knowledge is probably just as good in these situations. For record, I do believe that Kobe is a clutch player, though there is no statistical evidence that I would accept to prove that he is. Also, Paul Pierce, Dwyane Wade and Chris Paul. You didn't understand my post. What I did was bring up the random aspect of the game, then show an example of a guy who is trying to settle for the highest percentage. He could've missed too, but he made the right play (IMO, it's a completely subjective analysis). By the way I didn't say he was clutch, I said it was a clutch performance. What you're talking about is an objective analysis of how clutch a player is, based on whether the shot was made. In that case of course you need a ton of data, but it's not what I tried to do. In fact when you talk about the eye test and basketball knowledge being better in this case, that's what I used so I'm not sure why you disagree with me. I do disagree with you, though in sort of semantic ways. If being clutch means remaining calm in a highly leveraged highly stressful situation, then Kobe Bryant is clutch. He is absolutely calm. His motion remains sound, he never travels or pick up his dribble unnecessarily. He's incredibly calm. And more importantly, his behavior doesn't change at all. He takes these shots though the entirety of the game. And they are low percentage, ridiculously high difficulty shots over double teams and longer defenders. He takes them quarters 1 through 4. To equate making the right play and being clutch isn't something I agree with. It is, effectively, saying that clutch isn't actually a thing. Rather it's a "non"-thing: The capacity for retain good decision making as the game progresses into an end state. I suppose you could say Kobe never has good decision making, though I'd disagree. But that doesn't mean he isn't clutch. Basically, I'm saying that making the right play isn't the definition of clutch. It is a partial definition of "good basketball." Clutch is something else. Bad decision makers can be clutch and good decision makers can be chokers. As the game wears to a close, there is a deterioration of skill and execution due to a number of factors. These can range from fear, to fatigue or stress. To excel in these situations is clutch, regardless of how you do it. EDIT: Hrm, "Excel" is probably not even the right word. I'll clarify when I'm less tired. Unless this conversation is getting stupid.
You're right I disagree, I do believe clutch is a "non-thing". What I don't like is the idea that somehow players are able to get higher percentages in critical situations. It's like they think Kobe doesn't care during the whole game, and suddenly decides "all right now I'm really going to focus for that next one!".
It's true Kobe remains calm, but then again he doesn't have to make any decision. What he does is take a shot that he will always be able to take, that's the whole point of fadeaways. I guess it doesn't make him unclutch contrary to what I said, it just doesn't prove anything.
Anyway my point is (and it doesn't have anything to do with Kobe), the best you can do in those situations, is to not let your emotions affect you. I guess it's easy to fall for the narrative that because Jerry West made a shot from the halfcourt line he's a winner, but it's just a shot that happens to go in sometimes. No pressure, everyone expects you to miss anyway.
I give more "clutch credit" to a guy who's able to make 20/20 free throws with the game on the line, than a guy who makes a couple lucky tough shots and misses most.
|
On February 14 2012 16:59 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 15:14 cLutZ wrote:
I'm fairly certain no one has ever documented "clutch" when that is defined as getting better in high pressure situations, however there have been some documented "chokers". Clutch is basically not choking + winning (probably because you are already pretty freaking good i.e. Jordan, Bird, etc), that is it. Funny thing: Bird has "choked" just as badly as Lebron has, in the Finals. No one talks about it though because he eventually won. Being clutch really depends on how people perceive you when it comes to the casual fan.
The funny thing about Lebron is that he used to do the right thing. But when he passed the ball people would call him a coward. Now that he forces bad shots I guess ESPN & co should be happy?
|
Well, reportedly Phil Jackson was always exasperated when Kobe abandoned the triangle offense so he could do his own thing. That's pretty much matches Kobe's behavior in closing time. So yes, I think making stupid decisions that overall hurt your team have to be included.
I think when Lebron hits a few shots, then starts shooting 3's over 2 people 10 feet from the 3 point line, and bricks, he's probably brimming with confidence and shooting with good form. But he's still being stupid and hurting his team, so that counts against him.
Second, let's say there's a >10 foot tall basketball player who can dunk it 100% of the time, even outside the paint, and you can't stop him from getting somewhere next to the paint and you can't stop him from catching the ball. Let's say he has no shooting skills whatsoever, no moves, nothing (except he hits 100% of his free throws I guess, maybe he just kind of drops them in), and he's lazy, out of shape, and unmotivated (but doesn't get injured). Let's say during clutch situations he gets nervous and he can only dunk it 75% of the time. He's still the best basketball player of all time and the most clutch one. Why? Because he outperforms everyone else.
|
The only problem with your example is that it's ultra rare to see Lebron shoot over 2 people. I'm not sure he's even done that 20 times in his career 
On February 14 2012 17:31 MilesTeg wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 16:59 Ace wrote:On February 14 2012 15:14 cLutZ wrote:
I'm fairly certain no one has ever documented "clutch" when that is defined as getting better in high pressure situations, however there have been some documented "chokers". Clutch is basically not choking + winning (probably because you are already pretty freaking good i.e. Jordan, Bird, etc), that is it. Funny thing: Bird has "choked" just as badly as Lebron has, in the Finals. No one talks about it though because he eventually won. Being clutch really depends on how people perceive you when it comes to the casual fan. The funny thing about Lebron is that he used to do the right thing. But when he passed the ball people would call him a coward. Now that he forces bad shots I guess ESPN & co should be happy?
That's how ESPN feeds the casual fan's idiocy. I've talked about this years ago, but the problem with guys like Lebron, Wade and Chris Paul is that they are going up against era bias, nostalgia and marketing. You can be a team player all you want but you'll always be "inferior" to the guys that came before you. Nevermind that it's much harder to win a championship these days relative to the 80s and mid 90s, or the 24/7 news cycle which just kills athletes.
I've said it before but for all the praise MJ, Magic and Bird get they have a fair share of "choke jobs". God forbid we had 1984-1990 Michael Jordan in this era. You think Lebron gets it bad? Think Kobe in 04 got eaten alive by the media?
MJ would have been media enemy #1. Easily.
|
On February 14 2012 17:33 igotmyown wrote:
Well, reportedly Phil Jackson was always exasperated when Kobe abandoned the triangle offense so he could do his own thing. That's pretty much matches Kobe's behavior in closing time. So yes, I think making stupid decisions that overall hurt your team have to be included.
I think when Lebron hits a few shots, then starts shooting 3's over 2 people 10 feet from the 3 point line, and bricks, he's probably brimming with confidence and shooting with good form. But he's still being stupid and hurting his team, so that counts against him.
Second, let's say there's a >10 foot tall basketball player who can dunk it 100% of the time, even outside the paint, and you can't stop him from getting somewhere next to the paint and you can't stop him from catching the ball. Let's say he has no shooting skills whatsoever, no moves, nothing (except he hits 100% of his free throws I guess, maybe he just kind of drops them in), and he's lazy, out of shape, and unmotivated (but doesn't get injured). Let's say during clutch situations he gets nervous and he can only dunk it 75% of the time. He's still the best basketball player of all time and the most clutch one. Why? Because he outperforms everyone else.
So you contend that a player who's capacity to perform gets empirically worse as the game nears its end is clutch?
|
United States22883 Posts
On February 14 2012 17:33 igotmyown wrote:
I think when Lebron hits a few shots, then starts shooting 3's over 2 people 10 feet from the 3 point line, and bricks, he's probably brimming with confidence and shooting with good form. But he's still being stupid and hurting his team, so that counts against him.
That's not an issue of clutchness though. Lebron has always been in love with his own 3 and will get caught up in it, whether it's the end of a game or the first quarter. Maybe not over 2 people, but he takes more contested and 25ft 3s than he should.
But 'clutch' to most people really just is about perception. Yeah, Chauncey hit a few ridiculous shots against the Nets but he missed a lot of game winning shots, probably a higher % than Kobe and others. What he did well at the end of games, however, was draw fouls and grind out points through FTs or open jumpshots so you could still call him clutch in the 4th quarter, but I wouldn't necessarily want him taking all the last shots. Tayshaun and maybe Sheed probably had a better % than him.
I think most of Lebron's criticism stems from how people want his attitude to be, and not how he actually plays. People expect him to be a tough guy like MJ or Kobe so when he fails, just the same as they do/did, they say he doesn't have the right mindset or something like that. Never mind him putting on one of the awesomest 4th quarter performances of all time.  Holding it against him on that current team is just silly, though. They're better when it can go both ways.
And MJ did get a lot of criticism for a while. The championships changed most of that.
|
On February 14 2012 17:33 igotmyown wrote:
Well, reportedly Phil Jackson was always exasperated when Kobe abandoned the triangle offense so he could do his own thing. That's pretty much matches Kobe's behavior in closing time. So yes, I think making stupid decisions that overall hurt your team have to be included.
I think when Lebron hits a few shots, then starts shooting 3's over 2 people 10 feet from the 3 point line, and bricks, he's probably brimming with confidence and shooting with good form. But he's still being stupid and hurting his team, so that counts against him.
Second, let's say there's a >10 foot tall basketball player who can dunk it 100% of the time, even outside the paint, and you can't stop him from getting somewhere next to the paint and you can't stop him from catching the ball. Let's say he has no shooting skills whatsoever, no moves, nothing (except he hits 100% of his free throws I guess, maybe he just kind of drops them in), and he's lazy, out of shape, and unmotivated (but doesn't get injured). Let's say during clutch situations he gets nervous and he can only dunk it 75% of the time. He's still the best basketball player of all time and the most clutch one. Why? Because he outperforms everyone else.
Said player would never be in a "clutch" situation. His team would be winning by like 40 points at the end of the fourth.
On February 15 2012 03:27 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 17:33 igotmyown wrote:
I think when Lebron hits a few shots, then starts shooting 3's over 2 people 10 feet from the 3 point line, and bricks, he's probably brimming with confidence and shooting with good form. But he's still being stupid and hurting his team, so that counts against him. That's not an issue of clutchness though. Lebron has always been in love with his own 3 and will get caught up in it, whether it's the end of a game or the first quarter. Maybe not over 2 people, but he takes more contested and 25ft 3s than he should. But 'clutch' to most people really just is about perception. Yeah, Chauncey hit a few ridiculous shots against the Nets but he missed a lot of game winning shots, probably a higher % than Kobe and others. What he did well at the end of games, however, was draw fouls and grind out points through FTs or open jumpshots so you could still call him clutch in the 4th quarter, but I wouldn't necessarily want him taking all the last shots. Tayshaun and maybe Sheed probably had a better % than him. I think most of Lebron's criticism stems from how people want his attitude to be, and not how he actually plays. People expect him to be a tough guy like MJ or Kobe so when he fails, just the same as they do/did, they say he doesn't have the right mindset or something like that. Never mind him putting on one of the awesomest 4th quarter performances of all time. Holding it against him on that current team is just silly, though. They're better when it can go both ways. And MJ did get a lot of criticism for a while. The championships changed most of that.
1. Chauncey has to be one of the most overrated players of this generation. He was probably the 3rd most important players on those Pistons teams. Sheed was a monster.
2. Lebron's critics stem their arguments partly from his attitude, but I think the overwhelming feeling about Lebron is disappointment. Sure he is unquestionably the best player in the league right now, but he also should be 30% better, at a minimum.
|
The hell? He's already been unquestionably one of, if not the best player in the NBA for 5 years running now. People that are disappointed in him have unreal expectations about basketball players or just don't understand how good the guy is. I mean...come on? 30% better HOW? Even before this year he obliterated every offensive, defensive and advanced rating system built. No one except for Wade was even coming close to his levels of production. What do you want, a guy better than Jordan when Jordan was just becoming "Jordan" at this point in his career?
Like I've said before the only reason some of the modern superstars don't get respect is era bias. Even Magic and MJ in this current league would have a tough time with getting credit the way some fans and media hawk at everything.
|
On February 15 2012 07:12 Ace wrote:
The hell? He's already been unquestionably one of, if not the best player in the NBA for 5 years running now. People that are disappointed in him have unreal expectations about basketball players or just don't understand how good the guy is. I mean...come on? 30% better HOW? Even before this year he obliterated every offensive, defensive and advanced rating system built. No one except for Wade was even coming close to his levels of production. What do you want, a guy better than Jordan when Jordan was just becoming "Jordan" at this point in his career?
Like I've said before the only reason some of the modern superstars don't get respect is era bias. Even Magic and MJ in this current league would have a tough time with getting credit the way some fans and media hawk at everything.
Lebron is 30% more physically imposing than Jordan, in my estimation.
edit
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/sports/2012/02/14/mayweather-criticizes-lin-coverage/
Mayweather is insane. If anything, Lin would have been a first round draft pick if he wasn't asian.
|
On February 15 2012 07:50 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2012 07:12 Ace wrote:
The hell? He's already been unquestionably one of, if not the best player in the NBA for 5 years running now. People that are disappointed in him have unreal expectations about basketball players or just don't understand how good the guy is. I mean...come on? 30% better HOW? Even before this year he obliterated every offensive, defensive and advanced rating system built. No one except for Wade was even coming close to his levels of production. What do you want, a guy better than Jordan when Jordan was just becoming "Jordan" at this point in his career?
Like I've said before the only reason some of the modern superstars don't get respect is era bias. Even Magic and MJ in this current league would have a tough time with getting credit the way some fans and media hawk at everything. Lebron is 30% more physically imposing than Jordan, in my estimation. edit http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/sports/2012/02/14/mayweather-criticizes-lin-coverage/Mayweather is insane. If anything, Lin would have been a first round draft pick if he wasn't asian.
I don't know, man.. I honestly think the fact that he played college ball for Harvard, who played in a worse division than the other first-rounders in large part :p
|
On February 15 2012 07:50 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2012 07:12 Ace wrote:
The hell? He's already been unquestionably one of, if not the best player in the NBA for 5 years running now. People that are disappointed in him have unreal expectations about basketball players or just don't understand how good the guy is. I mean...come on? 30% better HOW? Even before this year he obliterated every offensive, defensive and advanced rating system built. No one except for Wade was even coming close to his levels of production. What do you want, a guy better than Jordan when Jordan was just becoming "Jordan" at this point in his career?
Like I've said before the only reason some of the modern superstars don't get respect is era bias. Even Magic and MJ in this current league would have a tough time with getting credit the way some fans and media hawk at everything. Lebron is 30% more physically imposing than Jordan, in my estimation. edit http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/sports/2012/02/14/mayweather-criticizes-lin-coverage/Mayweather is insane. If anything, Lin would have been a first round draft pick if he wasn't asian.
And Lebron being more physically imposing than Jordan means...? They don't even have playstyles that resemble each other. You have some ridiculously high standards you're holding him up to.
Lin would not have been a first round draft pick even if he wasn't Asian. It's a 5 game small sample size of a player in the right situation overcoming incredible odds and bad talent assessment to produce great results. But to say he'd be a 1st rounder...come on. Let's be serious here.
|
United States22883 Posts
On February 15 2012 07:50 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2012 07:12 Ace wrote:
The hell? He's already been unquestionably one of, if not the best player in the NBA for 5 years running now. People that are disappointed in him have unreal expectations about basketball players or just don't understand how good the guy is. I mean...come on? 30% better HOW? Even before this year he obliterated every offensive, defensive and advanced rating system built. No one except for Wade was even coming close to his levels of production. What do you want, a guy better than Jordan when Jordan was just becoming "Jordan" at this point in his career?
Like I've said before the only reason some of the modern superstars don't get respect is era bias. Even Magic and MJ in this current league would have a tough time with getting credit the way some fans and media hawk at everything. Lebron is 30% more physically imposing than Jordan, in my estimation. edit http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/sports/2012/02/14/mayweather-criticizes-lin-coverage/Mayweather is insane. If anything, Lin would have been a first round draft pick if he wasn't asian.
Not at PG, and not in 2010.
I guess people expect Lebron to have more of a post up game like Jordan and Kobe have developed, but that'll come. His biggest flaw is probably free throws.
|
I think Lebron's career FT% is 75%? Which is okay. I mean, he's not a great shooter. He kind of just muscles that sucker in there. I think Lebron's biggest problem, and it's a nitpicky one, is that his offensive game is pretty unrefined. I don't love him in isolation(as much as I should, I guess, he's still excellent) or even in a two man game with Wade. When I say "offensive game" I mean scoring, primarily; he's a wonderful passer. I think he's just not a "natural" scorer. He isn't like Durant or Carmelo - he doesn't have a Lebron-"move."
That's a lot of quotation marks...I mean he's still the best player in the game but no one is perfect.
|
If I ever got three wishes, one of them would be "make Boozer play defense".. I'm getting tired of seeing Noah playing defense for two people
..and someone has to tell Ronnie Brewer not to shoot on the way down.. latest release in NBA >_<
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
