2/11 | G56: Portland Trail Blazers at Oklahoma City Thunder - 7PM CST

[slick_watts]

Either Felton is better in which case your argument of on/off is relevant, or Felton is not better in which case your argument just proves that on/off numbers can't be compared across seasons and lineups.

You can't show me numbers indicating how much better Feltons impact is than Schroders and then tell me Schroder is better in the very next post.

the performance of bench lineups is indicative of the middling impact schroder has had on their success, not a precision comparison between felton and schroder as players.

and these aren't "on/off numbers", these are "on'" numbers, really. just data on how bench lineups performed last year versus this year. if dennis schroder were as impactful as hoped, i think everyone would agree he'd have been able to lead the bench to a better place than it has been so far this season.

Na bruh, I'm sure most thunder fans, except the 5 regular doubters on here, are happy to have a weapon like that coming off the bench (not great every night, but a major game changer when he is). They've been missing a guy like that. Most thunder fans, again except like you, pillendreher, and tbolt, are and should be extremely happy with the way the team is playing. Blow it up at the halftime of the rockets game lol

like most casuals, all you care about are points per game. schroder averages 15 points per game so he's a "weapon". andre roberson doesn't score a lot so he's a liability. unfortunately, most casuals are like this and there's not much you can do to change beliefs. even presented the facts on schroder and roberson, your beliefs prevent you from acknowledging them.

[Pillendreher]

It's nonsensical to think a team wouldn't have any negative lineups. It's also nonsensical to think a bench lineup without George would be good, since our bench is pretty weak outside of Schroeder. Okc is way better with George on than off, obviously. The 'sum of the lineups (I can put words in quotes to)' is performing extremely well. That's the point.

You're actually missing the point, again. How the individual lineups perform is what determines the end result. If the bench sucks and gets outplayed, it's going to be harder to win the game. And that's why it matters what happens with certain lineups. It matters that we're giving Schröder minutes with the starters at the expese of the Ferguson minutes because we're actively losing points for every possession Schröder is on the floor with the starters instead of Ferguson relative to those Ferguson starters. I get that you can't play a single lineup 48 minutes a night, but if a guy is physically able to play more minutes then you should go with the guy that base lineup performs better with. It's as simple as that.

How many other backup pgs in the league make a bench lineup without George into a positive one? What are you even arguing here? Do you have a solution? Is your idea to not play schroeder at all? He has been a great addition to the bench.

If Schröder can't get the bench to perform at something close to a league average level, then he's simply not doing his job. His teammates don't have to be offensive juggernauts in order for the bench to perform at an NBA level offensively.

Answer one of the questions.........whats your solution? What other backup leaguewide could elevate that lineup?

Several. At least those of them that don't combine Harden like usage with Westbrook like shot making.

How much harder has it made it to 'win' games? They win alot more than they lose........thats good, right?

You're ignoring that the end result could improve. Just because they're winning at a 55 win pace so far doesn't prevent them from getting better. They're leaving so much on the table because they get destroyed every time Paul George is on the bench.

Look at it this way: If we could just break even with George on the bench (aka play like an average team), our NetRtG would improve by almost 3pp100p, putting us at a 61 win pace. Stuff like this matters, a lot.

[hardenASG13]

the performance of bench lineups is indicative of the middling impact schroder has had on their success, not a precision comparison between felton and schroder as players.

and these aren't "on/off numbers", these are "on'" numbers, really. just data on how bench lineups performed last year versus this year. if dennis schroder were as impactful as hoped, i think everyone would agree he'd have been able to lead the bench to a better place than it has been so far this season.

Na bruh, I'm sure most thunder fans, except the 5 regular doubters on here, are happy to have a weapon like that coming off the bench (not great every night, but a major game changer when he is). They've been missing a guy like that. Most thunder fans, again except like you, pillendreher, and tbolt, are and should be extremely happy with the way the team is playing. Blow it up at the halftime of the rockets game lol

like most casuals, all you care about are points per game. schroder averages 15 points per game so he's a "weapon". andre roberson doesn't score a lot so he's a liability. unfortunately, most casuals are like this and there's not much you can do to change beliefs. even presented the facts on schroder and roberson, your beliefs prevent you from acknowledging them.

So a guy who can put up a ton of points in a hurry isn't a weapon off the bench? Like, if the offense is stagnant, it's not a good thing to have a guy like that? Or if the offense is rolling, and he is on, they become practically unbeatable.....are you saying that's a bad thing? Just trying to figure out your point and solution to whatever problem you are envisioning..... (hint:it doesn't exist, they are really good, Schroeder is their top bench guy!)

And to bring up Roberson is laughable. They haven't missed the guy at all. When have you thought, man, this team really needs 1 more guy 30 mpg who can't shoot at all but is a really good defender? Is anyone wanting a guy like that for this team in the buyout market? Did they at the trade deadline?

The problem with your 'facts' is as always, you do a really poor job analyzing them on anything more than the surface level (Schroeder and the bench is a negative, so Schroeder stinks! Without thinking who could make that particular unit a positive that isn't an all star, and is that unit being bad preventing the team from succeeding?(It isn't, at all).

If Roberson were playing his 30mpg, would Ferguson have developed like this? You have scoffed at thing like 'continuity' , 'lineup cohesion ', player confidence developing with consistent minutes (well, dre never developed offensive confidence, but actual nba level guys), and momentum plays (like barrages of 3s that swing games). Have you noticed that the team has taken off once Ferguson got his confidence and began hitting open 3s? Is George driving into a wall like he did playing alongside roberson? Seems like the team is doing great without Roberson, as they are better than......basically every other team. If he was as important as your laughable stats depicted, wouldn't the team feel his absence alot more? You have painted him as some irreplaceable, necessary piece holding the teams D together all these years, and yet, here we are.

Oh and P.S. you are embarrassing yourself with the Westbrook bashing almost as much as the Schroeder bashing. It's almost on saying patterson is better than grant levels (when anyone with eyes can see that not to be the case). Paul George is the best player on the team, and maybe in the league this year. Westbrook is by far the second best on the team. He makes them go and sets the tempo every game. The tempo is vital to their success (they have taken off playing at the league's fastest tempo since new years). Is probably the best rebounding guard to ever play. But critique that ts%. It's isn't mattering, guys. Put down the calculators and enjoy the team.

Oh P.s.s I know you guys are the smartest people in the room (they are screwed without Roberson, gonna miss the Playoffs last year, gonna miss them this year, Westbrook stinks, Schroeder stinks, patterson is better than grant and should be starting, they are screwed with the schedule coming up in January, they are screwed with the schedule coming up in february......blow it up!), but before you denounce 'casuals', maybe consider what exactly you have been right about (roberson was better than a washed up Corey brewer, and that melo was washed up?). What makes you more than a casual, out of curiosity? Because you look up a bunch of stats and struggle to interpret them? What is your distinction here?

[slick_watts]

So a guy who can put up a ton of points in a hurry isn't a weapon off the bench? Like, if the offense is stagnant, it's not a good thing to have a guy like that? Or if the offense is rolling, and he is on, they become practically unbeatable.....are you saying that's a bad thing? Just trying to figure out your point and solution to whatever problem you are envisioning..... (hint:it doesn't exist, they are really good, Schroeder is their top bench guy!)

it's not about what someone can do. perry jones put up 30 points once. it's about what they actually do. thunder are scoring 105.3pp100 with schroder in the game and without george and westbrook. that sucks! schroder himself is over 37% usage and < 48% ts in those minutes. that sucks! yes, he has had a game here or there where he scored a bunch on excellent efficiency, but what is he doing more often than not? there is no solution. the trade has already been completed. but some of us saw this coming a mile away. that you and others believe schroder has been a good player for the thunder is founded solely on the basis that he scores a decent number of points. beyond that, you don't care. because you're a casual.

And to bring up Roberson is laughable. They haven't missed the guy at all. When have you thought, man, this team really needs 1 more guy 30 mpg who can't shoot at all but is a really good defender? Is anyone wanting a guy like that for this team in the buyout market? Did they at the trade deadline?

we've been over this enough. they have missed him defensively. and concluding nobody wants andre roberson because nobody traded for a player like andre roberson is asinine-- there's only one andre roberson. we've been over this, too.

The problem with your 'facts' is as always, you do a really poor job analyzing them on anything more than the surface level (Schroeder and the bench is a negative, so Schroeder stinks! Without thinking who could make that particular unit a positive that isn't an all star, and is that unit being bad preventing the team from succeeding?(It isn't, at all).

er, no. you're the one who wants to have this discussion on the surface level. what's more surface level than claiming 'the team is winning, so schroder has been great'. you can't be any more reductive than that. and i get it, as a casual, you don't want to be encumbered by stats and numbers and what have you. but the bottom line isn't that schroder bench units are a negative. it's that they aren't better than felton units! i posted the minutes distributions with grant and adams earlier. if jerami grant is a 12pp100 difference maker for bench units then he should be in the hall of fame. schroder has not been able to lead the bench appreciably better than raymond felton did last season, regardless of lineup composition.

You have painted him as some irreplaceable, necessary piece holding the teams D together all these years, and yet, here we are.

i mean, he was. the team got rid of carmelo anthony and replaced him with jerami grant which enabled them to defend better with the starters than they otherwise have without 'dre... but the defense with the starters is still worse than when 'dre was around, and there's nothing to suggest that it couldn't be even better now with him. the starters last year were about the same as the starters this year and they had melo in there.

nobody called 'dre irreplaceable or necessary-- every argument with you was agreeing that the thunder would be fine finding a better player like him. the arguments were against benching 'dre for abrines, brewer, or whoever else you were championing. move the goal posts all you want, everyone here remembers what you said.

But critique that ts%. It's isn't mattering, guys. Put down the calculators and enjoy the team.

this is why you're a casual, btw.

[hardenASG13]

So a guy who can put up a ton of points in a hurry isn't a weapon off the bench? Like, if the offense is stagnant, it's not a good thing to have a guy like that? Or if the offense is rolling, and he is on, they become practically unbeatable.....are you saying that's a bad thing? Just trying to figure out your point and solution to whatever problem you are envisioning..... (hint:it doesn't exist, they are really good, Schroeder is their top bench guy!)

it's not about what someone can do. perry jones put up 30 points once. it's about what they actually do. thunder are scoring 105.3pp100 with schroder in the game and without george and westbrook. that sucks! schroder himself is over 37% usage and < 48% ts in those minutes. that sucks! yes, he has had a game here or there where he scored a bunch on excellent efficiency, but what is he doing more often than not? there is no solution. the trade has already been completed. but some of us saw this coming a mile away. that you and others believe schroder has been a good player for the thunder is founded solely on the basis that he scores a decent number of points. beyond that, you don't care. because you're a casual.

And to bring up Roberson is laughable. They haven't missed the guy at all. When have you thought, man, this team really needs 1 more guy 30 mpg who can't shoot at all but is a really good defender? Is anyone wanting a guy like that for this team in the buyout market? Did they at the trade deadline?

we've been over this enough. they have missed him defensively. and concluding nobody wants andre roberson because nobody traded for a player like andre roberson is asinine-- there's only one andre roberson. we've been over this, too.

The problem with your 'facts' is as always, you do a really poor job analyzing them on anything more than the surface level (Schroeder and the bench is a negative, so Schroeder stinks! Without thinking who could make that particular unit a positive that isn't an all star, and is that unit being bad preventing the team from succeeding?(It isn't, at all).

er, no. you're the one who wants to have this discussion on the surface level. what's more surface level than claiming 'the team is winning, so schroder has been great'. you can't be any more reductive than that. and i get it, as a casual, you don't want to be encumbered by stats and numbers and what have you. but the bottom line isn't that schroder bench units are a negative. it's that they aren't better than felton units! i posted the minutes distributions with grant and adams earlier. if jerami grant is a 12pp100 difference maker for bench units then he should be in the hall of fame. schroder has not been able to lead the bench appreciably better than raymond felton did last season, regardless of lineup composition.

You have painted him as some irreplaceable, necessary piece holding the teams D together all these years, and yet, here we are.

i mean, he was. the team got rid of carmelo anthony and replaced him with jerami grant which enabled them to defend better with the starters than they otherwise have without 'dre... but the defense with the starters is still worse than when 'dre was around, and there's nothing to suggest that it couldn't be even better now with him. the starters last year were about the same as the starters this year and they had melo in there.

nobody called 'dre irreplaceable or necessary-- every argument with you was agreeing that the thunder would be fine finding a better player like him. the arguments were against benching 'dre for abrines, brewer, or whoever else you were championing. move the goal posts all you want, everyone here remembers what you said.

But critique that ts%. It's isn't mattering, guys. Put down the calculators and enjoy the team.

this is why you're a casual, btw.

So, it's not about what someone can do huh? What is it about then? Way to reference Perry Jones scoring 30, once. Schroeder averages over 15. That is very useful, reliable scoring coming off the bench. Nobody is saying he should be relied on to carry the team. You like stats, let's do some math

George 29 ppg
Westbrook 21
Schroeder 15
Adams 15
Grant 13

That is 93 points a night on average coming from 5 guys. Say Ferguson chips in 10, Noel 4, patterson 2, nader/burton combine for 6. That's 115 sustainable points per night which is what the team averages. They have shown they can consistently hold teams below that. This is what I've been trying to tell you for years. Reliable offense is a good thing! It's why they are winning lots of games. When you have 5 guys consistently dropping 13 plus, 2 of them over 20 and 1 around 30, it's a good thing. Schroeders reliable scoring is vital to sustained success (as is fegusons). Schroeder is almost averaging Robersons career high!

Re Roberson. We haven't been over anything, you just speculate that he'd propel them to all time defensive levels. Their D is fine without him, as I always claimed it would be, because they are able to spread the court and outscore teams. Deny it all you want, but it's happening.

Re trade deadline, I'm not talking other teams, I'm talking okc. Try to follow here. Is okc targeting a one way defender with high school offensive skills to play 30 mpg? Is it something the team could use?

The team had Carmelo 1 year......they had kd and ibaka before that and still trotted Roberson out there night after night, when another scorer would've made those teams the warriors. But they like you guys loved the stats saying Roberson was a net plus.

Those others, as bad as they were , were never given the consistent minutes Dre was. Not close. Look what Ferguson has done in just half a year with consistent minutes with starters! Same with grant. Consistency matters, like it or not. Dre was gifted minutes, and his lineups figured how to play. It's what happens. It's happening without him, deny it or not. No goalposts moving, those guys (lamb too!) Never got a shot at the consistent minutes.

It must suck to be beyond casual (again what's the separation? Because you do things like chart rebounds?) and be completely wrong on almost every take you have (roberson, patterson, Russ (he's still awesome), Schroeder (bench scorers are good to have), the team not being good, the impending collapse every month bc of schedule, etc.) Stay sophisticated, bruh

[sleestak33]

So a guy who can put up a ton of points in a hurry isn't a weapon off the bench? Like, if the offense is stagnant, it's not a good thing to have a guy like that? Or if the offense is rolling, and he is on, they become practically unbeatable.....are you saying that's a bad thing? Just trying to figure out your point and solution to whatever problem you are envisioning..... (hint:it doesn't exist, they are really good, Schroeder is their top bench guy!)

it's not about what someone can do. perry jones put up 30 points once. it's about what they actually do. thunder are scoring 105.3pp100 with schroder in the game and without george and westbrook. that sucks! schroder himself is over 37% usage and < 48% ts in those minutes. that sucks! yes, he has had a game here or there where he scored a bunch on excellent efficiency, but what is he doing more often than not? there is no solution. the trade has already been completed. but some of us saw this coming a mile away. that you and others believe schroder has been a good player for the thunder is founded solely on the basis that he scores a decent number of points. beyond that, you don't care. because you're a casual.

And to bring up Roberson is laughable. They haven't missed the guy at all. When have you thought, man, this team really needs 1 more guy 30 mpg who can't shoot at all but is a really good defender? Is anyone wanting a guy like that for this team in the buyout market? Did they at the trade deadline?

we've been over this enough. they have missed him defensively. and concluding nobody wants andre roberson because nobody traded for a player like andre roberson is asinine-- there's only one andre roberson. we've been over this, too.

The problem with your 'facts' is as always, you do a really poor job analyzing them on anything more than the surface level (Schroeder and the bench is a negative, so Schroeder stinks! Without thinking who could make that particular unit a positive that isn't an all star, and is that unit being bad preventing the team from succeeding?(It isn't, at all).

er, no. you're the one who wants to have this discussion on the surface level. what's more surface level than claiming 'the team is winning, so schroder has been great'. you can't be any more reductive than that. and i get it, as a casual, you don't want to be encumbered by stats and numbers and what have you. but the bottom line isn't that schroder bench units are a negative. it's that they aren't better than felton units! i posted the minutes distributions with grant and adams earlier. if jerami grant is a 12pp100 difference maker for bench units then he should be in the hall of fame. schroder has not been able to lead the bench appreciably better than raymond felton did last season, regardless of lineup composition.

You have painted him as some irreplaceable, necessary piece holding the teams D together all these years, and yet, here we are.

i mean, he was. the team got rid of carmelo anthony and replaced him with jerami grant which enabled them to defend better with the starters than they otherwise have without 'dre... but the defense with the starters is still worse than when 'dre was around, and there's nothing to suggest that it couldn't be even better now with him. the starters last year were about the same as the starters this year and they had melo in there.

nobody called 'dre irreplaceable or necessary-- every argument with you was agreeing that the thunder would be fine finding a better player like him. the arguments were against benching 'dre for abrines, brewer, or whoever else you were championing. move the goal posts all you want, everyone here remembers what you said.

But critique that ts%. It's isn't mattering, guys. Put down the calculators and enjoy the team.

this is why you're a casual, btw.

So, it's not about what someone can do huh? What is it about then? Way to reference Perry Jones scoring 30, once. Schroeder averages over 15. That is very useful, reliable scoring coming off the bench. Nobody is saying he should be relied on to carry the team. You like stats, let's do some math

George 29 ppg
Westbrook 21
Schroeder 15
Adams 15
Grant 13

That is 93 points a night on average coming from 5 guys. Say Ferguson chips in 10, Noel 4, patterson 2, nader/burton combine for 6. That's 115 sustainable points per night which is what the team averages. They have shown they can consistently hold teams below that. This is what I've been trying to tell you for years. Reliable offense is a good thing! It's why they are winning lots of games. When you have 5 guys consistently dropping 13 plus, 2 of them over 20 and 1 around 30, it's a good thing. Schroeders reliable scoring is vital to sustained success (as is fegusons). Schroeder is almost averaging Robersons career high!

Re Roberson. We haven't been over anything, you just speculate that he'd propel them to all time defensive levels. Their D is fine without him, as I always claimed it would be, because they are able to spread the court and outscore teams. Deny it all you want, but it's happening.

Re trade deadline, I'm not talking other teams, I'm talking okc. Try to follow here. Is okc targeting a one way defender with high school offensive skills to play 30 mpg? Is it something the team could use?

The team had Carmelo 1 year......they had kd and ibaka before that and still trotted Roberson out there night after night, when another scorer would've made those teams the warriors. But they like you guys loved the stats saying Roberson was a net plus.

Those others, as bad as they were , were never given the consistent minutes Dre was. Not close. Look what Ferguson has done in just half a year with consistent minutes with starters! Same with grant. Consistency matters, like it or not. Dre was gifted minutes, and his lineups figured how to play. It's what happens. It's happening without him, deny it or not. No goalposts moving, those guys (lamb too!) Never got a shot at the consistent minutes.

It must suck to be beyond casual (again what's the separation? Because you do things like chart rebounds?) and be completely wrong on almost every take you have (roberson, patterson, Russ (he's still awesome), Schroeder (bench scorers are good to have), the team not being good, the impending collapse every month bc of schedule, etc.) Stay sophisticated, bruh

You're never going to be able to talk any sense to these guys about Roberson. It's like arguing with somebody who believes earth is flat. You can show them a thousand reasons why it's not and they just won't budge. At the end of the day we have three main things on our side 1) when it came time for free agency no other teams wanted him...probably because they watched him go 3-21 on free throws against Houston in that playoff series and also the number of games where he was literally left unguarded because he sucks so bad offensively 2) No other team in the NBA starts or plays anybody remotely resembling Roberson that much because of the premium being put on outside shooting and scoring. Anybody can feel free to prove me wrong. I watch pretty much every Thunder game and don't see any wing player that only can play defense and is horrific on offense playing that many minutes. 3) The team hasn't missed a beat without him and now that Ferguson is actually hitting shots they're clearly much better.

[slick_watts]

[That's 115 sustainable points per night which is what the team averages.

your passage adding up points per game hearkens back to the early to mid 90's espn board days level of basketball discourse. reeks of sites like hoopshype where the casuals don't know what a possession is. what is the point, even? yes the thunder are averaging 115 points per game. adjusted for pace? they are averaging the same numbers of points this year compared to last year. there is no difference. 110.0pp100 v. 109.7pp100.

Re Roberson. We haven't been over anything, you just speculate that he'd propel them to all time defensive levels. Their D is fine without him, as I always claimed it would be, because they are able to spread the court and outscore teams. Deny it all you want, but it's happening.

you're moving the goal posts. you claimed that the thunder would not miss him on defense. they have.

are you saying their defense is better because they can spread the court? what does that even mean? our offense on the year isn't any better than last season.

Re trade deadline, I'm not talking other teams, I'm talking okc. Try to follow here. Is okc targeting a one way defender with high school offensive skills to play 30 mpg? Is it something the team could use?

they could definitely use a healthy andre roberson. he would for sure make the starters better right now over terrance ferguson. there is no question.

i don't think either of us knows who the thunder are targeting but it's pretty clear they value andre roberson's skillset.

The team had Carmelo 1 year......they had kd and ibaka before that and still trotted Roberson out there night after night, when another scorer would've made those teams the warriors. But they like you guys loved the stats saying Roberson was a net plus.

wait a minute. lol. are you calling terrance ferguson 'another scorer'? terrance ferguson would have put us over the warriors in 2016? andre roberson had a magnificent series in the wcf.

Those others, as bad as they were , were never given the consistent minutes Dre was. Not close. Look what Ferguson has done in just half a year with consistent minutes with starters! Same with grant. Consistency matters, like it or not. Dre was gifted minutes, and his lineups figured how to play. It's what happens. It's happening without him, deny it or not. No goalposts moving, those guys (lamb too!) Never got a shot at the consistent minutes.

almost all of them are out of the league now or on the precipice of being out of the league.

your theory is that if a lineup is given consistent minutes it will perform well? tell that to memphis.

It must suck to be beyond casual (again what's the separation? Because you do things like chart rebounds?) and be completely wrong on almost every take you have (roberson, patterson, Russ (he's still awesome), Schroeder (bench scorers are good to have), the team not being good, the impending collapse every month bc of schedule, etc.) Stay sophisticated, bruh

the team is right around where i predicted it would be. 4-5 srs.

[Pillendreher]

your theory is that if a lineup is given consistent minutes it will perform well? tell that to memphis.

Actually, the Grizzlies' most used 5 man lineup was pretty damn good at +9.7 NetRtG in 464 minutes.

[hardenASG13]

your theory is that if a lineup is given consistent minutes it will perform well? tell that to memphis.

Actually, the Grizzlies' most used 5 man lineup was pretty damn good at +9.7 NetRtG in 464 minutes.

With the 115 points thing. I know what a possession is. The number of them changes every game. I also know when you have 115 reliable points a game, as those are the guys averages, your team is tough to beat when you can consistently hold teams under 115, which okc does......without roberson. That's a good thing, Schroeder delivering nightly is a luxury off the bench few teams have.

Yea if they had a guy shooting like Ferguson has the last few months at the 2 all those prime westbrook/kd years, I think they would've beaten the warriors that year. I think they would've been the Warriors, nobody could have kept up with them offensively, they had ibaka and kd to lead the defense. Did you see the graph pilendreher posted about how his shooting has correlated directly to much better team offense, which has correlated to great w/l results? It's a thing, it's why milwaukee has improved, it's what houston did to become good, Philly has done it, boston, denver......when you have gravitational stars that suck in the defense you want to surround them with shooters, bc those guys will be open. Take a look around the league instead of things like 'charting every rebound of Russel Westbrook, and rating the ensuing possession.

Denying continuity (thanks pillendreher) only further illustrates your understanding of basketball as anything beyond researching stats and using them on their surface level, with no ability to consider the variables that go into them in a 5 person sport and interpret them. I've been called an idiot, and had others on here use stats to tell me the following:

Perkins makes an impact on D and I'm stupid for Saying he doesn't deserve 1 minute.

Andre Roberson is a better offensive player than Marcus smart and tj warren because his percentages are better.

Roberson improves the teams offense ( shows how pointless these stats are. It's an anomaly. The guy has 0 offensive NBA level skills, he plays next to hall of famers, almost exclusively, and with continuity. I think it's comical you guys can't see this, almost Perkins level).

Westbrook hasn't had an effective season (open your eyes, bruh)

Schroeder hasn't had an effective season (same)

Grant will never develop a shot bc his percentages say so.

Grant stinks at defense

Adams is good at defense, especially switching in the pick and roll. Same was argued on here about perk!

Patterson is a good defender.

Patterson is a much better fit than grant on this team, which never had any base.

At some point, at least consider using your eyes/brain? I personally will keep watching for ways they are missing Andre Roberson. I haven't noticed any. lll take paul george on the other teams best guy when it matters. George has demonstrated he can handle it, and still be fine offensively (possibly because they now play 5 on 5 instead on 4 on 5 for 30 minutes a night and guys, namely the stars dont have to work as hard on O? Notice westbrook with more energy on D now to or do yoy hate him too much to see that?) Can you name one way they are missing roberson other than your theory he'd propel them to some historic level on defense? Is it his elite cutting with nobody guarding or watching him at all (he's so, so good at that, not sure how he does it)