Having Korver makes the Jazz a significantly better team.

[Pai Gow]

-= original quote snipped =-



Why would I go with a made up statistic?

It's interesting, nobody wants to pay attention to +/- statistic, which shows that Giri is a hell of a lot more effective and beneficial to the Jazz than Harpring, but a statistic which takes into account some shots, but for some inexplicable reason leaves others off, is supposed to make all the difference?

Uh, what are you talking about, it accounts for ALL shots, so I don't understand where you say it "inexplicably leaves others off" comes from?

Here is the definition from the site:

Effective Field Goal Percentage; the formula is (FG + 0.5 * 3P) / FGA. This statistic adjusts for the fact that a 3-point field goal is worth one more point than a 2-point field goal. For example, suppose Player A goes 4 for 10 with 2 threes, while Player B goes 5 for 10 with 0 threes. Each player would have 10 points from field goals, and thus would have the same effective field goal percentage (50%).

So clearly, if you can read, it does not take any of your shots away from you but gives you a clearer perspective of who is shooting well and who is not a lot better then FG%

+/- is a dumb statistic because how do we know if Gordan is playing well or if the other players he's playing with (which is usually the case) are carrying the team. Gordan got to play with the first unit a hell of a lot more then Harps because of his position and how unsteady we were at the 2-gaurd position anyways. Harps has to back-up Andrei and has not started a game for God knows how long so of course the +/- is going to favor a guy who plays with the first unit a little more then a guy who doesn't. Also WHY bring Harpring into this? We're arguing about Giri/Korver, you're really really reaching here.

If Korver is such a great shooter from the 2 range, how come he doesn't take more shots from that range? The answer is pretty simple, he's not good at getting his shot off close to the basket, unlike Giri...... That's why he takes so many jumpshots.......

That's why only 23% of Giri's points have come off threes, while Korver's percentage stands at a whopping 56%....... Got an explanation for that?

Wow, now all you're trying to do is argue that Gordan **** Gircek is a better player then Korver, just ridiculous, your obsession with Giri is absolutely extreme now, you must be related to him or something. Korver is a 3-point specialist, EVERYONE knows this, so why should he take more shots inside the arc when he does so well outside of it? Doesn't make much sense especially considering how desperately we need a 3-point threat to compliment Okur and Deron. And please, Gordan is not good at getting shots off close to the basket, he usually doesn't make it that far cause we're heading the other way because of ANOTHER travel call.

[Pai Gow]

-= original quote snipped =-



So are you saying that Giri had a high confidence? Did Sloan give Giri the green light to go out and shoot the ball when he was open, but Giri just made bad decisions in spite of his overwhelming confidence in his game that Sloan gave him? I don't buy that either.

What are you trying to say?

No, I'm saying Gordan made bad decisions because he has a low basketball IQ and overall was not a good player, if you don't understand what we wanted in this offense for 3 years, you are just a poor mental player, pretty simple. We want the ball inside, Gordan travels, how many times did we have to deal with that? 2 years too many.

[red4hf]

Wow, now all you're trying to do is argue that Gordan **** Gircek is a better player then Korver, just ridiculous, your obsession with Giri is absolutely extreme now, you must be related to him or something.

Do you need reading lessons you moron? Where did I say that Giricek was a better player than Korver? I said he's a better at getting his shot off closer to the basket, hence he takes more shots closer to the basket, hence he doesn't bomb away from long distance like Korver........

People on this board are freaking (Please Use More Appropriate Word).......

Korver is a 3-point specialist, EVERYONE knows this, so why should he take more shots inside the arc when he does so well outside of it?

Does so well? He's shooting 35%, for crying out loud...... He's a career 40% shooter from 3...... He's considered a specialist because he takes so many threes, and frankly he takes so many threes because he has to...... Because he's not really good at scoring any other way...... Hence the 56% of his points that come from threes.......

And please, Gordan is not good at getting shots off close to the basket, he usually doesn't make it that far cause we're heading the other way because of ANOTHER travel call.

That's another great observation, backed up by sound facts...... Let's try this again, please be so kind as to show us these stretches when Giricek got "steady" minutes and did not perform........ I don't think your last post covered this.......

[loserX]

Wow, now all you're trying to do is argue that Gordan **** Gircek is a better player then Korver, just ridiculous, your obsession with Giri is absolutely extreme now, you must be related to him or something.

Do you need reading lessons you moron? Where did I say that Giricek was a better player than Korver? I said he's a better at getting his shot off closer to the basket, hence he takes more shots closer to the basket, hence he doesn't bomb away from long distance like Korver........

ENOUGH with the insults. Seriously, I've had enough of this. It's really not that difficult to have disagreements without sinking to this level. Consider this a last warning.