RealGM

RSCD3_ wrote:Poor gordon hayward

Seeing chris paul dominate like this really has me question games where he plays it safe

GSP wrote:

clyde21 wrote:Unbelievable what happens when you actually let your teammates play ball. OKC looking good.

Translation: when Okc shooters are hitting their wide open shots

HeartBreakKid wrote:How were the OKC/HOU and UTAH/LAC games?

E-Balla wrote:

kayess wrote:"Russell Westbrook is an amazing player", "he should have made better decisions that 4th quarter", "he was not the reason they lost", and "he could have played better" are all not mutually exclusive. Don't let the agenda of biased posters bring you down to their level of discussion.

Sure, you can't blame them if they don't trust their teammates in some games when they're not making shots - but is that really the best long-term strategy? It'd vary on the players, team environment, etc... But a lot of what we know about those situations is that the choice to continue shooting is not due to some decision to optimize winning chances, but a stylistic choice, e.g., "I would go 0-30 before going 0-10", driven by who they are at their cores. That's not necessarily a bad thing - but it's often implied that "it was what was best for the team", when that's not all that clear at all.

And please don't ever mention Melo in the same sentence as Kobe and GOATbrook again.

Everyone who's ever stepped on a court could make better decisions. Everyone who's ever stepped on a court ever could've played better. Quite frankly it's a dumb criticism.

clyde21 wrote:

GSP wrote:

clyde21 wrote:Unbelievable what happens when you actually let your teammates play ball. OKC looking good.

Translation: when Okc shooters are hitting their wide open shots

Well, of course they hit more shots tonight. That's what happens when there's more ball-movement and players are allowed to get comfortable and in more rhythm. It's not really a new concept.

kayess wrote:

E-Balla wrote:

kayess wrote:"Russell Westbrook is an amazing player", "he should have made better decisions that 4th quarter", "he was not the reason they lost", and "he could have played better" are all not mutually exclusive. Don't let the agenda of biased posters bring you down to their level of discussion.

Sure, you can't blame them if they don't trust their teammates in some games when they're not making shots - but is that really the best long-term strategy? It'd vary on the players, team environment, etc... But a lot of what we know about those situations is that the choice to continue shooting is not due to some decision to optimize winning chances, but a stylistic choice, e.g., "I would go 0-30 before going 0-10", driven by who they are at their cores. That's not necessarily a bad thing - but it's often implied that "it was what was best for the team", when that's not all that clear at all.

And please don't ever mention Melo in the same sentence as Kobe and GOATbrook again.

Everyone who's ever stepped on a court could make better decisions. Everyone who's ever stepped on a court ever could've played better. Quite frankly it's a dumb criticism.

Thanks for calling me dumb unprovoked, btw.

Yes, even Nash could have made better decisions - are we really comparing Nash's potential for better decision making vs. what Westbrook did in the fourth?

Idk why people are so hesitant to have nuanced views of what happened, on either side. If pointing out that someone could have played better and the ways they could have, why even discuss anything? Let's just spam GOATbrook and Draymond memes and be done with this place.

With the help of Twitter and crowd-sourcing we spent 10 days searching for the NBA’s 100 MVP votes in the hope of introducing the world to James Harden, 2017 MVP winner.

Like a mad scientist who began their research with the best intentions, we’re dismayed by our ultimate discovery: Russell Westbrook will win the 2017 NBA MVP award.

Our crowd-sourcing and canvassing has found 62 of the NBA’s 100 first place votes for 2017 MVP. There was no announced list, so we identified the votes and that a voter had a ballot using Twitter, interviews, podcasts, articles and TV broadcasts.

And Westbrook will edge Harden.

- - - - -

Before we got to 62 first place votes counted we asked an associate professor of statistics at Wheelock College, Dr. Samuel Cook, to give us the odds.

With 59 total first place votes counted, Dr. Cook projects if the remaining 41 first and second place votes only go to Harden and Westbrook, and each voter puts Harden in 1st with probability 50%, then in 10,000 simulations Westbrook wins 99.9% of the time.

This probability drops minimally to 98.9% if you assume Westbrook will get more 3rd place votes than Harden at the current trend.

At odds like that, even if we've made three or four mistakes in our canvassing, crowd-sourcing or estimations it's not enough to derail this prediction.

MisterHibachi wrote:This is a precedent setting win. We'll see a lot more <50 win MVP winners moving forward, I think.

eminence wrote:

MisterHibachi wrote:This is a precedent setting win. We'll see a lot more <50 win MVP winners moving forward, I think.

Yeah, while Westbrook isn't my pick for MVP (Curry), I'm still quite happy that we'll have set that precedent going forward. Best player isn't always on the best team.

MisterHibachi wrote:This is a precedent setting win. We'll see a lot more <50 win MVP winners moving forward, I think.

Colbinii wrote:

eminence wrote:

MisterHibachi wrote:This is a precedent setting win. We'll see a lot more <50 win MVP winners moving forward, I think.

Yeah, while Westbrook isn't my pick for MVP (Curry), I'm still quite happy that we'll have set that precedent going forward. Best player isn't always on the best team.

And MVP isn't about best player either.

Sent from my SM-G920P using RealGM mobile app