BlacJacMac wrote:winforlose wrote:dschroeder01 wrote: This seems way too strong. I'm not even sure where anyone would get the idea that most people wouldn't overwhelmingly take the OKC trio in a vacuum. They didn't perform as well because the OKC guys are better players.
I'm not saying coaching and scheme don't matter and that our guys can't play better, but to me it's wild to suggest that our 3 should be performing as well as the OKC trio.
Yeah, recency bias doesn’t play a role at all in that right? I especially love that people on the one hand tell me how great Randle is (All NBA, All Star, MIP, ect….) then tell me how he is far inferior to a first time all star/All NBA in JW playing on a 68 win team with the MVP. Is it possible we are conflating overall skill level and success within a well executed system on a very talented team? Put another way, take away SGA and Chet, is JW good enough to carry OKC?
P.S I said
“ But the notion that SGA, JW, and Chet are clearly superior to Ant, Randle, and Rudy is not one that most people would accept in a vacuum,” not “ I'm not even sure where anyone would get the idea that most people wouldn't overwhelmingly take the OKC trio in a vacuum” The chemistry between them effects the taking. Not the same conversation. Also the modifier clearly changes the degree from a little better to obviously superior.
I still disagree with this. The 3 OKC guys are all legit 2-way players. 2 of our guys are widely considered 1 way players.
If you're building a team and you can pick from those 6 guys, Ant is going to come in 1st or 2nd (with most people taking SGA first). But Williams is pretty much a lock for #3 and the only reason Chet might not be 4th is injuries.
I am gonna respond to both at once. Coaches establish rotation and scheme. Schemes exist to get players into their spots and create opportunities for them to thrive. An easy example is Rudy playing PNR and Rudy playing in an offense that doesn’t use much PNR. Rudy is primarily a lob and at the basket threat. When Rudy is not given the ball in the right place at the right time his offense is much less effective. Therefore it is the job of the coach to draw up plays and to find creative ways to get Rudy the ball near the basket. However, since Finch is not on the court, it is his job to get the players on the court to execute his plan. When Ant makes the pass Rudy thrives, but when Ant plays hero ball, Rudy’s offense stalls. Parking Jaden in the corner when he is a mid range threat is another example. Having Mike play off ball when his game is better on ball is another example. The list goes on. How many times do we see guys standing around and the offense is stagnant and either isolation or meaningless passing with no attack until the shot clock forces a bad shot. We also saw something similar defensively with a ton of miscommunication when trying to apply defensive zones. I don’t know what about this is so hard to grasp. Our scheme work is not where it needs to be to make the game easy for the players to execute, and that is a failure of coaching. Likewise all the slow starts and poor energy performances are a failure of leadership, both player and coach driven.
Regarding player talent. If you truly believe you saw the best versions of every wolf in the playoffs, and that the team played like a well oiled machine, then we are simply at an impasse. But, if you think we left a ton of meat on the bone, and that guys like Rudy and DDV truly underperformed, now the question is why. Some of it is not playing with a true PG to make things easier, some of it was poor performance variance (some games you just don’t have your shot,) and some of it is deficiency in their games. Donte for example needing high minute high volume shooting to be able to stay in rhythm, Rudy having bad hands and thus losing rebounds that he maybe gets otherwise, ect…
The above being true now let’s examine the impact on a game of Rudy and Chet. You say Chet is clearly superior to Rudy, I disagree completely. I can easily grant you that Chet is a better shooter, is better at creating his own offense, and better at floor spacing than Rudy. However, Rudy is a far better screener, is a better rebounder, is better at defending in space, better at defending bigs, better at generating never minds, and better at staying healthy. If you are building a team for a future run you almost always pick the young player. Chet has a bright future ahead and Rudy has already lived most of his glory days. But put them next to each other in a game 7 and say pick one, I don’t think most people will say give me Chet. I just don’t. Everyone may love to talk trash about Rudy, but he has driven winning for a very long time in multiple ways, and Chet hasn’t proven he can do the same yet. If his shot is off, Chet is not nearly as valuable as Rudy, and Rudy’s defense doesn’t have the same variance.
