Xixak wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Everything Derozan
Collapse
X
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostCircles. That is all this is. I'm tired of it. I bet others are too. We'll all see soon enough. I hope nothing but the best for DD but I'm not betting on it.
Comment
-
JimiCliff wrote: View PostAnd the guy who really sticks out on that team for me was Rasheed. PF/Cs who can shoot 3s and defend the rim - qualities that directly made up for Hamilton's weaknesses - are incredibly rare. Almost non-existent. Could be that without those specific qualities that Sheed brought to the table, the Pistons wouldn't have reached anywhere near the levels they did.
Of course, it's more complicated than that. Ben Wallace was a really unique player, which adds another big, fat wrinkle to any analysis of what was going on with that Detroit team. But I think there's real merit to the idea that if you have a Hamilton/Derozan-esque player as your 2, having a stretch 4/5 who can block shots is essential. Which, as has been said before, would help to explain why BC insisted on hanging on to Bargnani.@Chr1st1anL
Comment
-
I ran across an interesting thing yesterday that seriously discounts all the love for Danny Green as a great defender, usually used as pointing out how much better he'd be for the Raps than DD. Synergy Sports' very focused stats gathering says that Green is very good in TEAM defense situations (within Pop's arguably best team defense of the past 15 years, anchored by Mr Tim Duncan), but in iso and spot up defense, he's ranked 303rd in the league, allowing 1.09 points per possession. It would seem he's nowhere near the great defender that most fans and media tout him as.
Comment
-
Xixak wrote: View PostHow is it talking in circles. You just consistently fail to present counter-arguments supported with any real evidence. You said DeMar and Gay don't mesh... I showed you statistics proving that they increased both their volume AND efficiency when they played together. You then proceed to reach for a cop out as usual.
Comment
-
p00ka wrote: View PostI ran across an interesting thing yesterday that seriously discounts all the love for Danny Green as a great defender, usually used as pointing out how much better he'd be for the Raps than DD. Synergy Sports' very focused stats gathering says that Green is very good in TEAM defense situations (within Pop's arguably best team defense of the past 15 years, anchored by Mr Tim Duncan), but in iso and spot up defense, he's ranked 303rd in the league, allowing 1.09 points per possession. It would seem he's nowhere near the great defender that most fans and media tout him as.
Comment
-
p00ka wrote: View PostI ran across an interesting thing yesterday that seriously discounts all the love for Danny Green as a great defender, usually used as pointing out how much better he'd be for the Raps than DD. Synergy Sports' very focused stats gathering says that Green is very good in TEAM defense situations (within Pop's arguably best team defense of the past 15 years, anchored by Mr Tim Duncan), but in iso and spot up defense, he's ranked 303rd in the league, allowing 1.09 points per possession. It would seem he's nowhere near the great defender that most fans and media tout him as.
(For, as we here know from seven years of evidence, team defence and individual defence are mutually exclusive skills.)"Stop eating your sushi."
"I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
"I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
- Jack Armstrong
Comment
-
-
Xixak wrote: View PostThis is interesting. Being on a great defensive team definitely does wonders for your defensive numbers. Do you have DD's PPP allowed stats?JimiCliff wrote: View PostDid it suggest that Green is better than other Spurs players w/r/t team defence? Or just that Spurs tend to rank higher than non-Spurs in general, because their system is better?
(For, as we here know from seven years of evidence, team defence and individual defence are mutually exclusive skills.)Last edited by p00ka; Tue Aug 13, 2013, 01:16 PM.
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostSure.
When you get up to 13,600 posts, lets see how willing you are to engage in the same argument over and over.
I've had my fill.
If you want to proclaim victory, go right ahead.
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostSure.
When you get up to 13,600 posts, lets see how willing you are to engage in the same argument over and over.
I've had my fill.
If you want to proclaim victory, go right ahead.Xixak wrote: View PostFunny you seemed really eager to give long-winded responses in the "Signs of Tanking" thread.
Comment
Comment