Can't think of a superstar that fits better than Kevin Love

[JimiCliff]

Bold: Interesting point. Defensively, I guess the big difference is btw JV and Chandler. If JV could get even close to Chandler's levels defensively, then I'd have to agree with you that the Raps lineup could be just as good as that Mavs lineup.

And I don't think this is possible.

But - if Ross could get near Marion's level (which I think is possible considering that this is latter-stages-of-career Marion we're talking about, not Phoenix-matrix Marion)...

and if Lowry and DeRo could out-defence the Mavs' guards (basically assured)...

then the drop-off from Chadler's to Val's defence wouldn't hurt so much.

And then consider that on O, both Val and Ross would be massive upgrades over Chandler and Marion, Lowry would be a massive upgrade over Kidd-on-his-last-legs, DeRo would be anywhere from a slight to massive upgrade over Terry (although most probably not in crunch-time)...

so the drop-off from Dirk to Love wouldn't hurt so much.

[salmon]

I responded with stats that specifically disprove your cherry-picked, data-mined arguments. If you are going to stick to your viewpoint without considering objective reality that's on you.

"Lalalalala I can't hear you" isn't really a great way to defend your assertions.

whoaaaa, I didn't think my response came close to eliciting such vitriol. Cheers

[JawsGT]

And I don't think this is possible.

But - if Ross could get near Marion's level (which I think is possible considering that this is latter-stages-of-career Marion we're talking about, not Phoenix-matrix Marion)...

and if Lowry and DeRo could out-defence the Mavs' guards (basically assured)...

then the drop-off from Chadler's to Val's defence wouldn't hurt so much.

And then consider that on O, both Val and Ross would be massive upgrades over Chandler and Marion, Lowry would be a massive upgrade over Kidd-on-his-last-legs, DeRo would be anywhere from a slight to massive upgrade over Terry (although most probably not in crunch-time)...

so the drop-off from Dirk to Love wouldn't hurt so much.

Bold: That is a major concern for me when considering Love, as Amir is the guy that picks up the slack defensively. Basically, with Love starting and JV no where near Chandler's level of defensive capability, we would have very weak rim and paint protection. Amir is the guy that usually steps up to disrupt a shot when our perimeter players get beat, which happens more often than I'd like. So having Love means that JV has to become a pretty good defender IMO, or DeRo has to prevent his guy from penetrating, and he hasn't shown to be very capable at that. Lowry and Ross are good at limiting penetration, so it would really come down to JV and DeRo being better than they currently are.

I think this is very important to consider for the Raps. Usually, the East is the slower pace, defensive minded conference, and if you are weak defensively it's usually very tough to get out of the East or compete for a conference finals. In the West, you can get away, to a certain extent, playing a faster pace with a priority on offence. Again, this isn't about Love, because I bet he can excel in a slower paced game with half court execution dominating the offence. It really just comes down to whether the Raps can adjust their defence to make up for Amir's loss in the starting lineup. But the more I think on it, the more I'd be willing to take a chance on Love...I mean, it would be almost foolish not to.

[ball4life]

If you are gonna want Kevin love in this roster you better hope JV turns into a defense first guy but then that's gonna take a while if its ever gonna happen. Only bet is flip JV for Kevin love and get a defensive center like ... Just saying .. Larry sanders(young, gettable albeit horrendous contract, he will actually be a perfect fit next to Kevin love and in this roster...just saying


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TSF]

]Larry sanders(young, gettable albeit horrendous contract, he will actually be a perfect fit next to Kevin love and in this roster...just saying[/B]

jesus christ please god no. I love LARRY SANDERS! but you do not go with someone whose proven to be a dumbass sometimes unless you have a stable veteran core/system you can rely on. Love for JV? It's a possibility, but I just don't see it happening. There'd have to be a trade that ships out Pek somewhere if it happened because Rubio+Pek+JV is almost detroit levels of bad spacing

[Scraptor]

Love with 37/12/10 on 20 shots, carrying the team yet again. On the season he's getting close to 60%TS, +18 on/off, career high in win shares.

Funny thing is they have a better differential as well as a better record against the East than we do.

Wish Masai could snag this dude but it's probably impossible.

[TSF]

And I don't think this is possible.

But - if Ross could get near Marion's level (which I think is possible considering that this is latter-stages-of-career Marion we're talking about, not Phoenix-matrix Marion)...

and if Lowry and DeRo could out-defence the Mavs' guards (basically assured)...

then the drop-off from Chadler's to Val's defence wouldn't hurt so much.

And then consider that on O, both Val and Ross would be massive upgrades over Chandler and Marion, Lowry would be a massive upgrade over Kidd-on-his-last-legs, DeRo would be anywhere from a slight to massive upgrade over Terry (although most probably not in crunch-time)...

so the drop-off from Dirk to Love wouldn't hurt so much.

Phoenix-Matrix is my new favorite nickname/indie band name/video production company name. Someone needs to start using this

[salmon]

Love with 37/12/10 on 20 shots, carrying the team yet again. On the season he's getting close to 60%TS, +18 on/off, career high in win shares.

Funny thing is they have a better differential as well as a better record against the East than we do.

Wish Masai could snag this dude but it's probably impossible.

Meh. "Funny" what some people look at. "Funnier" thing is the Raptors have a much better record than them against the West. Also "funny" that their point differential isn't doing much for them. 4 teams above them in the West have the same or less of such differential.

[BigCamB]

All I know is that he's freaking good. Triple double was nice, but what about 42-16 against the mighty Pacers.

[Scraptor]

Meh. "Funny" what some people look at. "Funnier" thing is the Raptors have a much better record than them against the West. Also "funny" that their point differential isn't doing much for them. 4 teams above them in the West have the same or less of such differential.

If they played as many games against the east as they did the west, their winning percentage would be .525. Ours would be .530.

They have a great differential because last I checked they were 1-12 in games decided by 4 points or less. This is largely attributable to having ridiculously limited alternate scoring options, as I showed in a previous page.

Unlike other "big empty stats on bad team" guys, Love's advanced stats hold up (2nd in league win shares, 3rd in PER). His defence is sub par, but he gives so much elsewhere that the Wolves would be absolutely nowhere without him. He has a plus 17.8 on/off this year, way better than KD, Lebron, and others. With him in the lineup the last three years the Wolves are 60-65 (27-25 this year), without him 24-54 (0-3 this year).

You just want to continue your narrative that Love "makes nobody better", though you can't defend your arguments and use false outrage when called on it. It's not vitriol, it's facts.

[Scraptor]

On a side note, I'd hate to split up these two:

[salmon]

If they played as many games against the east as they did the west, their winning percentage would be .525. Ours would be .530.

They have a great differential because last I checked they were 1-12 in games decided by 4 points or less. This is largely attributable to having ridiculously limited alternate scoring options, as I showed in a previous page.

Unlike other "big empty stats on bad team" guys, Love's advanced stats hold up (2nd in league win shares, 3rd in PER). His defence is sub par, but he gives so much elsewhere that the Wolves would be absolutely nowhere without him. He has a plus 17.8 on/off this year, way better than KD, Lebron, and others. With him in the lineup the last three years the Wolves are 60-65 (27-25 this year), without him 24-54 (0-3 this year).

You just want to continue your narrative that Love "makes nobody better", though you can't defend your arguments and use false outrage when called on it. It's not vitriol, it's facts.

bold 1: there was nothing of the kind in my post. I simply responded to yours. Who is wanting to continue a narrative outside the topic that you created currently?

bold 2: What was a I called on here? Where is my outrage? Yes, you are delivering nothing but vitriol here. Calm down, kid. Try and stay in the moment a little, not apply whatever previous feelings you had, because I showed that your post is a little lame, as in your most recent post that I responded to.

As far as your "If they played as many..." goes, neither life nor NBA basketball is linear. You have zero way of knowing such a thing, but then stats study doesn't really tell you that. Nice talking with you, but try expanding the mind a tad beyond stats.

PS. If people want to whine about condescending, this is a case where it's well earned. Attack someone, ya gotta expect to take a hit.

[TSF]

On a side note, I'd hate to split up these two:

I'd split them up in a second as long as we get closer to this...

[Letter N]

It'd be cool if a team that won their first championship gave the players the old school 60's design.

[stooley]

bold 1: there was nothing of the kind in my post. I simply responded to yours. Who is wanting to continue a narrative outside the topic that you created currently?

bold 2: What was a I called on here? Where is my outrage? Yes, you are delivering nothing but vitriol here. Calm down, kid. Try and stay in the moment a little, not apply whatever previous feelings you had, because I showed that your post is a little lame, as in your most recent post that I responded to.

As far as your "If they played as many..." goes, neither life nor NBA basketball is linear. You have zero way of knowing such a thing, but then stats study doesn't really tell you that. Nice talking with you, but try expanding the mind a tad beyond stats.

PS. If people want to whine about condescending, this is a case where it's well earned. Attack someone, ya gotta expect to take a hit.

You should teach him about the limit of stats. There are ways to express it. If you make a good point that passes the eye test, I'm sure he'd listen. You aren't wrong, but also haven't really backed it up enough.

Generally stats are just a certain reflection of reality, they don't capture the whole picture. So a deep understanding of what each one measures and how is needed to understand what they're truly saying. How much of the whole picture are they representing? Where are the biases?

Stats aren't everything, but they do mean something. The nice thing about them is they can be used to validate the eye test, to confirm one's own unbiased-ness.

To me, Scraptor's point is pretty convincing, I'm not sure where I'd point out the inconsistencies. But for example, continuing down the line of thought in which Kevin Love is not a two way player, I might point out that KL plays almost exclusively with the starting lineup (I actually don't know if this is true or not) and explain his plus-minus as more of a result of a terrible bench than Kevin Love's singular greatness.

Just saying that his team is losing, so he isn't good is an even more crude and basic use of stats. It REALLY doesn't show the whole picture, because a lot of good players have played on bad teams before.

And just picking out parts of his game to criticize isn't really enough in my opinion. Whether or not the points made are true, I'd need some kind of proof that I can see to be sure you aren't coming from a crazy point of view. We don't know you or your background or how trustworthy you are, etc. You have no reputation here, so even some video clips, or some numbers would be enough to back up your point.