If you were an unbiased coach... (all-star)
by dhod on Jan 18, 2011 7:52 PM PST
Email
PrintI know there are like a million all star posts, but this one is a little different.
The six people that are battling for probably four or five reserve spots are (in no order) Monta Ellis, Manu Ginobli, Tony Parker, Russel Westbrook, Steve Nash, and Eric Gordon. Each has a strong case to make it and if played in the Eastern Conference would be locks. However, the West is deep, as you can see, so who doesn't make it?
To put the numbers to the test and what coaches are most likely going to look at in voting in the reserves are the numbers you see below. Say you were a coach, a completely unbiased coach for that matter, and did not care about the reputation of anyone in the league, who would be your final four roster spots for the West based on these numbers below?
|
MPG |
FG% |
3PG% |
RPG |
ASG |
SPG |
PPG |
REC |
|
32.7 |
.520 |
.394 |
3.7 |
10.8 |
0.7 |
17.2 |
18-21 |
|
36.1 |
.435 |
.239 |
5.1 |
8.4 |
1.9 |
22.4 |
27-14 |
|
31.6 |
.442 |
.367 |
4.0 |
4.7 |
1.8 |
18.9 |
35-6 |
|
38.1 |
.467 |
.340 |
3.2 |
4.6 |
1.3 |
23.9 |
15-25 |
|
32.9 |
.517 |
.333 |
3.3 |
6.9 |
1.4 |
17.5 |
35-6 |
|
40.9 |
.471 |
.390 |
3.3 |
5.6 |
2.3 |
25.7 |
17-23 |
You all probably already can tell who is who, but if not (in order) Steve Nash, Russel Westbrook, Manu Ginobli, Eric Gordon, Tony Parker, and Monta Ellis. Keep in mind i am an unbiased coach...The person I mark out first without question is Eric Gordon. He is trailing Monta in basically every category, while having a worse team record. That leaves only five, and two least people must be cut from the list. The next person I take out is Tony Parker. While Parker is playing really well on a winning ball club, his numbers aren't eye-popping. Every all-star's numbers should be eye-popping if you are talking about the best in most exciting players in the league playing in one game.
The all star roster will then most likely look like this.
Dirk Nowitizki
Monta Ellis
Steve Nash
Manu Ginobli
Russel Westbrook
The Problem is that there are 14 people on that list with only 12 roster spots. Lets say a Melo deal goes down that ships him to NY/NJ. That means one person has to go from the list of four. Honestly, I would take out Ginobli next. His numbers are better than Parker's, but not like the other 3. Which would make the reserve guards for the west Deron Williams, Steve Nash, Russel Westbrook, and Monta Ellis. The chances of that happening are slim though, because every coach is biased and also the team's record plays a huge role.
Hopefully, the coaches vote Monta in and then Ginobli could take Yao's spot instead of Duncan. That would be the only way for Monta to make it realistically and Melo also has to be traded. But if you were unbiased, wouldn't you put Monta in?
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
68 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Aldridge should be in the ASG before Kevin Love
Aldridge actually wins some games instead of padding stats by missing 3 tip ins in a row and grabbing the o-rebounds.
Nicolas Batum is the future of the Blazers
Check the story here. We’re trying to have an unbiased discussion. Kevin Love is better, that his teammates are horrendous at basketball doesn’t change that. Just to make sure we’re clear, here – despite “padding stats by missing 3 tip ins in a row and grabbing the o-rebounds”, Kevin Love still is a much, much more efficient scorer than Aldridge is, and that’s while scoring more than Aldridge does (20.7 points per 36 compared to 19.7 for Aldridge). He also gets 2 more defensive rebounds per 36 than Aldridge gets total rebounds….
by Missing Barry on Jan 18, 2011 8:10 PM PST up reply actions
no he isn't
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Sorry but because you're saying this,
You haven’t watched a Blazer game recently that wasn’t against the Warriors, for some reason, Aldridge never performs well against the dubs, but he destroys everybody else. Kevin Love is the definition of a stat padder who would not be putting up those godly numbers if he were playing for a half decent team so he didn’t have to shoulder all the rebounding and scoring for his team. Love quite frankly is just not that good, he’s got tons of effort, but the ASG is supposed to be for the BEST players in the league, and quite frankly, Aldridge>Love. i’m sure you’re thinking of the Aldridge of christmas past, when he was always dubbed as soft and lazy, if you watch him play now, you’ll probably change your mind. His 5 games of 25+pts 10+ rebounds was the first in 6 years, the last guy to do that was Shaq, just digest that fact for a minute. Kevin love has mastered the missed layup o rebound, missed tip in, o rebound, missed tip in, o rebound, score routine, his numbers are inflated by his admittedly clever stat padding, and the aformentioned fact that his team absolutely sucks so he has nobody to defer to.
Getting back to the original intent of this fanpost, i think Monta should make the ASG, he’s by far the second best SG in the west ever since the whole Roy’s knees disaster.
Nicolas Batum is the future of the Blazers
Sorry but because you're saying this
You haven’t watched an NBA basketball game recently. Aldridge also doesn’t really destroy everyone but the Warriors. The Lakers held him to 8 points and 2 boards in 35 minutes of action this season. He had 4 points and 5 boards before fouling out in 22 minutes vs the Clippers that was just part of a very uninspiring first two weeks of December. Several times this year he’s topped the 25 point marker yet managed to pick up 5 or fewer rebounds in the same game. Thats just not good big man production.
Love quite frankly is just not that good, he’s got tons of effort, but the ASG is supposed to be for the BEST players in the league, and quite frankly, Aldridge>Love….Kevin love has mastered the missed layup o rebound, missed tip in, o rebound, missed tip in, o rebound, score routine, his numbers are inflated by his admittedly clever stat padding, and the aformentioned fact that his team absolutely sucks so he has nobody to defer to.
You’re just wrong. Love averages more points per minute and more points per game while shooting about 2 fewer times per game. That last part sure doesn’t support your ridiculous assertion that Love only puts up the stats he does because the team needs him to or he has nobody to defer to. And if you want to be accurate Love actually defers to Beasley a lot more than Aldridge defers to anyone. Aldridge has taken 200 more shots than any other Blazer, while Love has taken about 100 fewer shots than Aldridge and 20 fewer than his teammate Mike Beasley. So again you’re just plain wrong. Aldridge’s TS% is below average, while Love’s is well above average. The rebounding difference is obvious. Alridge is again below average to average for a big guy here, while Love may be the most dominant rebounding force we’ve seen in the league since Dennis Rodman. As MB pointed out earlier, despite playing fewer minutes Love gets about 2 more defensive rebounds per game than Aldridge gets total rebounds. If were Love were padding his stats by giving himself offensive boards as you claim (he’s not doing this, by the way) then his offensive efficiency would be hurt and he’d only be padding his offensive rebounds. Since he holds the advantage in offensive efficiency anyway AND doesn’t even need any of his offensive rebounding to count to hold a sizable advantage over Aldridge in that category your argument is completely useless.
His 5 games of 25+pts 10+ rebounds was the first in 6 years, the last guy to do that was Shaq, just digest that fact for a minute.
I don’t think it does any good to create those kind of cutoffs because 1. points per game isn’t a very telling stat and rebounds per game is almost as useless when you’re talking about such a 1 or 5 game sample size and 2. why use 25-10 in consecutive games as the cutoff? Is a 25-10 game better than a 20-20 game? or a 35-9 game? BUT, if you really must use the 25-10 marker then does it really matter who does it five times in a row? You might notice that Kevin Love has posted 17 total games with 25 points and 10 boards so far this year. Aldridge has a total of 9. Let THAT digest for a minute. In his entire 4.5 year career Aldridge has had exactly 2 more 25 and 10 games than Kevin Love has had so far this year. Let THAT digest for a minute.
Kevin Love is just a much better basketball player than Aldridge, arguing otherwise is just silly and/or ignorant.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
by sam23 on Jan 19, 2011 4:22 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Kevin Love is the definition of a stat padder who would not be putting up those godly numbers if he were playing for a half decent team so he didn’t have to shoulder all the rebounding and scoring for his team.
The objective is actually strongly, strongly against this. First, Love’s usage isn’t even that high on the T’Wolves – it’s lower than Aldridge’s usage rate, and yet Love still racks up more points and assists per 36 than Aldridge, and does it while scoring very efficiently. Why? Because he’s better. That he gets his on such a low usage, and does it efficiently, strongly indicates he isn’t simply padding his stats on a bad team. It actually says the complete opposite. As for rebounding, the evidence suggests that teammate rebounding isn’t a big factor in a players own rebounding numbers. In other words, “having to shoulder all the rebounding” doesn’t actually hold true. Kevin Love is just a beast of a rebounder. He would be no matter what team he played on. Any reasonable person should expect some regression towards the mean going forward, but even so, Love is still unquestionably among the very elite rebounders in the NBA.
Kevin love has mastered the missed layup o rebound, missed tip in, o rebound, missed tip in, o rebound, score routine, his numbers are inflated by his admittedly clever stat padding, and the aformentioned fact that his team absolutely sucks so he has nobody to defer to.
Except once again, this isn’t true. As I said before, Kevin Love’s defensive rebounding alone is significantly higher than Aldridge’s total rebounding. He’s also scoring very efficiently. Both of these directly contradict what you’re saying, and unlike your opinion, which is based on….probably your desire to see Aldridge in the ASG, these things are based on reality. As in, things that actually happened. Kevin Love’s scoring and rebounding numbers aren’t some stat padding mirage – they’re real, and they’re pretty much the only positive thing that happens on the TWolves. It isn’t Love’s fault his teammates suck. If they were better, he would still rebound and score efficiently, though.
Getting back to the original intent of this fanpost, i think Monta should make the ASG, he’s by far the second best SG in the west ever since the whole Roy’s knees disaster.
You should watch Manu sometime. Just being objective here, but Manu’s been awesome this year.
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 7:02 AM PST up reply actions
I think Aldridge is a better defender than Love. Thing is, Kevin Love is better at every single other aspect of basketball. Better scorer? Check. Better passer? Check. Better rebounder? A check is an understatement. Kevin Love is rebounding at almost twice the rate Aldridge is. Do you realize how absurd that difference is? Love > Aldridge.
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 6:54 AM PST up reply actions
so much wrong
in such a short post
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
If you were an unbiased coach... (all-star)
I’d pick whoever I wanted and not read this stuff.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 18, 2011 8:12 PM PST reply actions
It’s hard to say what I would do as an unbiased coach because well, I’m not a coach. Who knows if coaches even bother to look at stats when they pick the all-star reserves? Maybe they go with the guy that completely torched their team… My reasoning as a coach would be “The game is played to win, so I will take the guys that help their teams win the most”. I feel like that might not be the best way to pick players for an exhibition game, but as a coach that is probably what I would do.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Jan 18, 2011 8:48 PM PST reply actions
Monta>Nash
PER 36 numbers blah blah blah. If he could play 40 minute per game he would.
Blah blah blah
Steve Nash is incredible. Monta is not. Case closed.
Keith Smart is challenging Red Auerbach to be the greatest coach of all time.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 18, 2011 10:20 PM PST up reply actions
"was" is the word you were looking for
by HerFavColor on Jan 18, 2011 10:44 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
And Nash is a worse defensive player than Monta
by HerFavColor on Jan 18, 2011 10:45 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Nash is about as good this year as he’s ever been, what are you talking about?
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Well, see, if Nash is as good as he's ever been then he clearly deserves to go ahead of Monta -
and Herfav can’t have that.
So it must be that Nash is horribly overrated.
The funny thing is Nash is still playing at the same level he has the past couple years, and this time it’s without Amare…
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 7:04 AM PST up reply actions
Didn’t I recently explain to you why you have to use per minute numbers, and how to properly take the MPG difference into account? Do you ever learn anything?
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 7:04 AM PST up reply actions
I agree with HerFav......Monta>Nash
PER 36 numbers blah blah blah. If he could play 40 minute per game he would.
HAHAHAHA!
by davidleeisabeast on Jan 19, 2011 9:15 AM PST up reply actions
He plays 32.7 minutes a game, to Monta’s 40.9. We’re not talking about extrapolating the minutes of a part-time player.
Why are we comparing Monta and Nash again? They’re totally different players, at different positions. Nash plays a premium position while Monta does not. But as long as we’re comparing … Nash is a much more efficient scorer (at a slightly lower volume), a better rebounder, and (obviously) a vastly better passer. He’s one of the most dominant offensive forces of his era, a two-time MVP who has consistently led his team to 50+ win-seasons. By plus-minus, he’s consistently been the most valuable player on an consistently (till this season) great Suns team — more valuable than Marion, more valuable than JRich, even more valuable than Amare. So far this season, the Suns have been+4.9 with him on the floor and -13.6 with him off the floor — an absurd plus of 18.4.
No comparison. Really.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jan 19, 2011 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
westbrook pulls down five a game?
that kid does WORK. props to him. most improved player of the year for sure
Steph + Monta for Prez
Monta behind Manu and Kobe
Manu is having a great year so far. Kobe is Kobe. I see Monta as the third best SG in the west this year. DWill, CP3, Westbrook, Nash, Parker, Gordon (who in my book is NOT an all-star this year) are all point guards. I understand gaurds are grouped but point guards and shooting guards require different skills, is it fair to group them? If you group them then Monta is not an all-star because of the depth of the west.
Gordon’s definitely a SG. His only skill is scoring. Plus there’s no real reason you can’t have 2 PG’s on the court at the same time….
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 7:09 AM PST up reply actions
If Blake Griffin makes All-Star...
Eric Gordon definitely will not. No way coaches or Stern will vote in 2 players from a losing team.
Eh, Gordon doesn’t deserve it anyways. No loss there.
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 11:20 AM PST up reply actions
But in my book Monta is an All-STAR this year. If Kaman made it last year Monta should make it this year.
Oh come on, let’s not use Kaman as the baseline here. Kaman sucks. If everyone better than Kaman deserves to be an All-Star, we’d need like 100 roster spots. Kaman was a terrible choice, and in addition to that, he plays C, and the ASG has some ridiculous position requirement that means crappy C’s get in because somehow Tim Duncan and Pau Gasol and players like that are more like Grant Hill than they are like C’s…..
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 7:06 AM PST up reply actions
But in my book Monta is an All-STAR this year
If you are DavidStern that might mean something.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 19, 2011 11:12 AM PST up reply actions
If I was a coach...my unbiased choice is Monta.
GSW needs to have representation in the All Star game. If it’s not now, when? the timing is just perfect to be supported by the NBA…new owner, new coach, new attitude and should have a new ALL STAR. After all, the Bay is one of the biggest markets in the league.
by davidleeisabeast on Jan 19, 2011 8:58 AM PST reply actions
I enjoyed how you said your unbiased choice would be Monta… and then went on to explain the bias behind it.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
just stating another case why Monta should be in.
what i don’t get is why there are warriors fans here who does not support our lone all star candidate. do u have another player in mind on the team more deserving or something?
by davidleeisabeast on Jan 19, 2011 9:06 AM PST up reply actions
I’d love for Monta to make the team, but if this post asked who we objectively think should make the team. I just don’t see a real strong case for Monta over Nash, Ginobili or Westbrook. Being able to see and accept the worth of non-Warriors doesn’t mean you don’t support the team or don’t think much of the season Monta is having.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
Monta is a great player. I don’t get how we have the luxury to watch him play and yet we don’t recognize how great he is but tend to nitpick his weaknesses. Again, I’ll put Monta way up there with the best players in the league. If Monta is not an All Star then it will be hard to see another player in this uniform become one in the near future.
by davidleeisabeast on Jan 19, 2011 9:47 AM PST up reply actions
In what way is a wing that can score some sort of amazing luxury among the very best players in the game? It’s not like he’s even the singular driving force behind an unstoppable offense or anything like that (Steve Nash, on the other hand, is)….
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 10:31 AM PST up reply actions
If Monta is not an All Star then it will be hard to see another player in this uniform become one in the near future
haha, two things that are not connected make a great argument.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 19, 2011 11:17 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
But Monta has a strong case than those guys imo. Those players above has a better team than Monta…they all have better supporting cast per se. If you put Monta on the Spurs, he’ll probably get MVP considerations the way he’s playing now.
by davidleeisabeast on Jan 19, 2011 9:20 AM PST reply actions
So Monta has a stronger case because his team is worse? So we should assume that even though Tyreke Evans is having a worse year than Ellis, maybe if his team was as good as the Warriors he’d be in this All-Star discussion too?
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
I think with his defensive issues Monta wouldn't get so much playing time on the Spurs.
Furthermore, there actually isn’t much evidence to suggest that playing with better players helps your stats. What evidence there is (which is weak, but not nonexistent) suggests the opposite: playing with better players tends to HURT your stats.
If Monta has someone like Duncan in the post? He can slice to the basket with more regularity. Hence his FG% will be better than the 47% clip his at now. And with the personnel the Spurs has, he won’t need to log in a lot of minutes and will have fresh legs to finish out games.
by davidleeisabeast on Jan 19, 2011 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
He doesn't need to log those minutes now -
- so I’m really not sure why Smart keeps him out there so long.
That being said, it’s not clear that his performance is hugely suffering yet because of the minutes.
He can slice to the basket with more regularity. Hence his FG% will be better than the 47% clip his at now.
This is the conventional wisdom. There appears to be no evidence supporting it as actually being correct, however. Just because something intuitively makes sense doesn’t make it true.
Furthermore, if Monta were to play like he plays for us (which I don’t think Poppovich would stand for) by taking long, contested twos and driving into a set defense, then Duncan’s presence on the court wouldn’t matter. When he does play off the other players in the offense, it’s not clear to me that playing off, say, Parker and Duncan would help him more than playing off Lee and Curry already does.
The reason why Parker and Duncan are better than Curry and Lee has very little to do with the offensive side of the court. It has a tremendous amount to do with the defensive side of the court.
Duncan has been a
minor part of that team’s offense this year.
That third guitar note you played just now was perfect, dogg. Maybe play it again a little later alright.
by Reverend_Randy on Jan 19, 2011 11:24 PM PST up reply actions
Monta is not a bad defender...you probably mistake him with Curry.
by davidleeisabeast on Jan 19, 2011 10:20 AM PST up reply actions
No, Monta is a bad defender.
He gambles a lot for steals, getting out of position and giving up easy buckets. This is a poor defensive strategy but since Monta often loses the physical battle against other SGs, he doesn’t have much of a choice.
He is a better defender than Curry, who seems basically indifferent to defense. Monta seems to care. But that’s not enough to make him a good defender. He’s not. He’s a bad defender.
he is a decent defender eventhough he has to match up vs bigger player on most nights.
by davidleeisabeast on Jan 20, 2011 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah
an unfortunate fact is that he’s too small to adequately defend the position he plays- he’s a 2 guard. He is bad at defense because he gives up so much size.
That third guitar note you played just now was perfect, dogg. Maybe play it again a little later alright.
by Reverend_Randy on Jan 21, 2011 9:37 AM PST up reply actions
Offensively our supporting cast really isn’t that weak.
by Missing Barry on Jan 19, 2011 10:32 AM PST up reply actions
Aldridge is so much better than Griffin/Love
Overpowered the no-d stat padders in 2 games in a row.
Well he isn't
but okay.
That third guitar note you played just now was perfect, dogg. Maybe play it again a little later alright.
by Reverend_Randy on Jan 21, 2011 9:37 AM PST up reply actions
Honestly, I hope to never see anyone use the argument “stat padder” again as support for Aldridge. Padding your stats is what Aldridge does – dude only scores a lot because he takes a lot of shots, all his numbers are inflated simply because he plays a lot of minutes (playing more minutes is good, but overstates a players effectiveness if you look at per game numbers, as most people do)….Aldridge is the exact kind of player that tends to “pad his stats”. The other guys are the exact opposite of that – guys that are extremely effective and would be in any situation. Stop with the “pad their stats” argument. It’s complete and utter BS.
by Missing Barry on Jan 21, 2011 10:14 AM PST up reply actions
FWIW
I had Aldridge ranked behind Love, Dirk, Z-Bo, Odom, Ibaka (probably a center, though), Blake, and David West in the West.
I take it you’re an actual reasonable person that understands Duncan and Pau are C’s?
by Missing Barry on Jan 21, 2011 12:50 PM PST up reply actions
Clearly you are not as smart as the people who make the All-Star ballots….
by Missing Barry on Jan 21, 2011 3:06 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Golden State Of Mind
Related FanShots on Golden State Of Mind
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
- David West hilariously denies each and every one of his young fans a high-five (VIDEO)
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat are moving on to the conference finals
