rrravenred wrote:Well... if you take Offensive APM for Nash (sorry for the sidebar, Your Honor), the AVERAGE rotation player he worked with (20mpg or more) was running at +0.6. Reasonable, but not outstanding. His peak year for offensive assistance was 2007, with an average +1.5, with the low being (pretty obviously given Amare's absence) the previous year where his teammates were basically neutral on O (slight negative).
Bringing it back to Garnett, his average defensive teammate in 03 was running at just under -1 wheras the following year at +0.5.
How does any of this undermine the point about this board's hypocrisy over Nash+ORTG versus Garnett-DRTG?
The hypocrisy in evaluation of RealGM's favorites -- Garnett v Nash -- remains.
A very, very curious point coming from people that so often claim to be dispassionately predisposed to those stats, yet only seem interested in them when it supports their favored players.
Either these stats are reliable or they are not, If they aren't -- which I very much agree with -- then much of the meme for Nash around here is automatically undone.
It appears that you're attempting to talk around this issue rather than replying to it.
However, I wouldn't have thought you could infer from that that either player had a world-beating supporting cast.
Speaking of inference, it's rather ironic here since you're the one pretending an argument was made that, simply, wasn't -- if you can find where I said that Garnett had world-beating teammates (for most of his run in Minny) in that post I'll be very impressed.
Logically, if teammates are to blame for Garnett's DRTG troubles, then they should, likewise, be praised when the number moves in the right direction in Boston. Yet that's not the case on RealGM.
However, it does return to the general meme of this board: the teammates are always to blame in regards to any failure -- stat-wise or otherwise -- while any triumph is due to Garnett, "the best defensive player of his generation!!!" or Steve Nash, "offensive G.O.A.T.". So if nothing else, you're staying on point -- as far as general board rhetoric -- while missing it here, willfully or otherwise.
In other words, when it comes time to ignore an inconvenient stat, or at least scapegoat from it -- like Garnett's record with team DRTG while an ostensible alpha -- the teammates are a big deal, yet they are only lucky to have Garnett's (or Nash's) presence when the stat shows something distinctly positive.
Again, the most striking aspect around here is how liberally and subjectively certain stats are thrown around or simply thrown out, depending on whether they support the favored player or rule against him.
That's the point in bringing up teammates in regards to Garnett. I hope I'm understood.