Jump into the Poole Party: The Official Jordan Poole Thread

[penbeast0]

Definitely agree; much more fun to watch Sarr, Bilal, and Justin than to sit through games just hoping for an occasional moment of Jared Butler.

[DCZards]

Poole has been shooting well, no question. On the other hand, CJ McCollum just lit him up for 50 so, there's that.

CJ lit up multiple Zards. It wasn’t just Poole guarding him.

[nate33]

Lamelo and Poole are both losing players.

Probably true.

These days, if you're not a primary option of offense, you absolutely have to be a good defender if you want to be a starter on a good team. Neither Lamelo nor Poole are efficient enough on offense to be the primary option, and teams would rather play a better defender in a secondary role.

I don't know where this comes from and I couldn't disagree more. We literally saw Poole win a title as a 2nd option. LaMelo a basketball savant on a barren roster who's forced to carry an impossible load every night. LaMelo is a franchise quality player just stuck in an impossible situation and I respect him for not constantly complaining about it.

Poole won a championship as a 6th man, not a starter.

[TGW]

Poole won a championship as a 6th man, not a starter.

Right. And at no point was he ever a second option with the Warriors.

[Benjammin]

Poole played 27.5 minutes per game in the 22 playoffs in 22 games fwiw.

Sent from my Pixel 9 Pro XL using Tapatalk

[Kanyewest]

Probably true.

These days, if you're not a primary option of offense, you absolutely have to be a good defender if you want to be a starter on a good team. Neither Lamelo nor Poole are efficient enough on offense to be the primary option, and teams would rather play a better defender in a secondary role.

I don't know where this comes from and I couldn't disagree more. We literally saw Poole win a title as a 2nd option. LaMelo a basketball savant on a barren roster who's forced to carry an impossible load every night. LaMelo is a franchise quality player just stuck in an impossible situation and I respect him for not constantly complaining about it.

Poole won a championship as a 6th man, not a starter.

Yes and no. He started all 5 games against the Nuggets with Curry coming off an injury. Averaged around 17 ppg against the Grizzlies and Mavs. He did have a big regression against the Celtics though (13 ppg)

[nate33]

I don't know where this comes from and I couldn't disagree more. We literally saw Poole win a title as a 2nd option. LaMelo a basketball savant on a barren roster who's forced to carry an impossible load every night. LaMelo is a franchise quality player just stuck in an impossible situation and I respect him for not constantly complaining about it.

Poole won a championship as a 6th man, not a starter.

Yes and no. He started all 5 games against the Nuggets with Curry coming off an injury. Averaged around 17 ppg against the Grizzlies and Mavs. He did have a big regression against the Celtics though (13 ppg)

That Denver team started Monte Morris, Will Barton and Jeff Green.

Poole was, at best, the 5th best player on that roster (Curry, Klay, Draymond, Wiggins) and probably behind Porter and Looney as well. I think my point stands. Poole isn't a starter on a contender because he is a defensive liability. That's why they had him coming off the bench - to hide him because he is a problem if he is forced to guard a good player.

You only start a defensive liability if he is an elite offensive player, not merely a good offensive player. Maybe you can get away with it if you have a game-changing defender who is also a good offensive player (Wemby, Duncan, Davis), but that's about it. Otherwise, it's just too hard to cover up for a defensive liability when facing elite playoff competition.

[Kanyewest]

Poole won a championship as a 6th man, not a starter.

Yes and no. He started all 5 games against the Nuggets with Curry coming off an injury. Averaged around 17 ppg against the Grizzlies and Mavs. He did have a big regression against the Celtics though (13 ppg)

That Denver team started Monte Morris, Will Barton and Jeff Green.

Poole was, at best, the 5th best player on that roster (Curry, Klay, Draymond, Wiggins) and probably behind Porter and Looney as well. I think my point stands. Poole isn't a starter on a contender because he is a defensive liability. That's why they had him coming off the bench - to hide him because he is a problem if he is forced to guard a good player.

You only start a defensive liability if he is an elite offensive player, not merely a good offensive player. Maybe you can get away with it if you have a game-changing defender who is also a good offensive player (Wemby, Duncan, Davis), but that's about it. Otherwise, it's just too hard to cover up for a defensive liability when facing elite playoff competition.

Yes, that Nuggets team was not good (although Barton and Morris put up good numbers for those Nuggets teams relative to their Wizards peroformance). Then again Poole looked like the 3rd best player in that series- although proved to be less valuable in other series (ie Wiggins was better than Poole in the finals) .


It would have been an interesting thought experiment if the Warriors could have won with Poole starting in the playoffs (ie the Mavericks were able to pull it off with JJ Barrea starting- yes they had Tyson Chandler, the Warriors of course had Draymond Green). In nut crunch time in game 4 with the Warriors down 2-1, they ended up benching Draymond Green and went with Poole instead to spread the floor and ended up winning perhaps the most pivotal game so I don't think I would rule it out. Poole was elite offensively in that run with a 65 TS%.

Porter may have been more important to their regular season success and did play critical team defense though. Pretty much if you removed any of the warriors supporting players (2-7) they don't make it out especially with GPIII being injured.

But yes Jordan Poole's defense was pretty bad back then especially the following season. I would be interested to see if his defense is actually significantly better now as he's averaging a career high in steals and blocks per 100 possessions. He would certainly have to play with elite players and a deep team although same goes for pretty much any point guard that has won a title.

[Kanyewest]

The peak of young Jordan Poole may have been this close win against Memphis in game 1.
Had the Warriors lost, they may have gone on to lose the series especially if Ja doesn't get injured.

Watch on YouTube

;t=8s&ab_channel=NBAGLeague

He shot 36.6% from 3 that season. He is currently shooting 40.6% after shooting 32.6% from 3 last season.

[Kanyewest]

Poole is currently number 8 among guards in all star voting in the eastern conference.

[AFM]

fella had em dancin like fred astaire

Watch on YouTube

[Zonkerbl]

I think Poole is a good player, I just wish he was as productive as he is now but a completely different kind of player. We don't need a streaky Vinnie the Microwave combo guard, we need a pass first pg who can get people the ball in a position where they feel comfortable. Is Bubbington that guy? I don't know.

[payitforward]

I think Poole is a good player....

Nah.
He's better this year than last year, but that's not the same as "good."

Don't get me wrong -- he's definitely a good scorer. JP produces about 11 more points than average for a 2 by using just over 8 more possessions than average to generate them. That's good.

But, in those same minutes he costs you 3 extra possessions by turning the ball over way more than average & being a weak rebounder for a guard.

He gets a little of that back with more steals than average -- but, in turn, he fouls a lot. Gives the opponent extra FTs.

Overall, he isn't average or even particularly near to average.

[pancakes3]

I think Poole is a good player, I just wish he was as productive as he is now but a completely different kind of player. We don't need a streaky Vinnie the Microwave combo guard, we need a pass first pg who can get people the ball in a position where they feel comfortable. Is Bubbington that guy? I don't know.

I think we need both tbh.

We're really building around a core of Coulibaly and Sarr, who really aren't core players. We have Kispert, who's barely good enough to be the worst starter on a competitive team, and a laundry list of young guys who may or may not be good.

We're banking on Flagg but even with him, it's an ensemble cast so we need that floor general to get everyone to their spots where they can score. We don't have a guy who can get to his spot on his own to score. Even if Bub turns into John Stockton, a lineup of:

Bub, Kispert, Bilal, Flagg, Sarr is going to have problems in the 4th q scoring. I'd rather have Poole. Caveat, if this lineup plays perfect basketball for the next 5 years a la 2013 Spurs, or early 2000's Pistons, or early early 2000's Kings, sure, but the IQ isn't there, I don't think.

The problem with Poole is consistency, not talent. The last 5 games he scored 20, 13, 22, 26, and 30. He has stretches where he scores 20+ for a few games, and then he has stretches where he scores 8, 31, 13, 11, 39, and 9. The "off" nights are far too frequent, and far too "off."

If we don't get Flagg, and get Harper, and he's the scoring guy, great. We don't need Poole then, but we'll still have a hole at PF, and need to replace it with a Flagg-type player. I say we play with the bird in hand, with Poole, and draft Flagg (ping pong gods willing) but either way, we need a guy that can create for himself.

[tontoz]

Poole is currently 6th in the league in 3 pointers made per game .

[PaulinVA]

Read on Twitter

[payitforward]

Poole is currently 6th in the league in 3 pointers made per game .

How many 3-pointers a guy makes per game is NOT a measure of how good he is. Any more than how many points a guy scores per game is a measure of how good he is.

You win games by 1) having more possessions than the opponent &/or 2) scoring more efficiently in those possessions.

If you do both, you cannot lose. Period. That's just arithmetic.
If you do neither, you cannot win. Period. Ditto -- arithmetic.

No exceptions.

So it matters how many possessions you gain or lose for your team. & it matters how efficiently you score your points. Because, essentially, those are the only things you can do to help your team win.*

Jordan is scoring efficiently -- he's posting a .591 TS% on high usage. That's good.

But Jordan also turns the ball over a whole lot, gets 1/2 the offensive boards average for a 2 guard, & fouls 50% more often than average for a 2 guard.

The overall result is that he is way way worse than average for an NBA guard.

Is he better than last year? Sure! But, so what? He's not good. Period. There is no counter-argument.

* I say "essentially," because assists & blocks & defensive boards also help, of course. But they are relatively minor compared to the above.

[DCZards]

Poole is currently 6th in the league in 3 pointers made per game .

How many 3-pointers a guy makes per game is NOT a measure of how good he is. Any more than how many points a guy scores per game is a measure of how good he is.

You win games by 1) having more possessions than the opponent &/or 2) scoring more efficiently in those possessions.

If you do both, you cannot lose. Period. That's just arithmetic.
If you do neither, you cannot win. Period. Ditto -- arithmetic.

No exceptions.

So it matters how many possessions you gain or lose for your team. & it matters how efficiently you score your points. Because, essentially, those are the only things you can do to help your team win.*

Jordan is scoring efficiently -- he's posting a .591 TS% on high usage. That's good.

But Jordan also turns the ball over a whole lot, gets 1/2 the offensive boards average for a 2 guard, & fouls 50% more often than average for a 2 guard.

The overall result is that he is way way worse than average for an NBA guard.

Is he better than last year? Sure! But, so what? He's not good. Period. There is no counter-argument.

* I say "essentially," because assists & blocks & defensive boards also help, of course. But they are relatively minor compared to the above.

Tontoz posted a simple statistical fact. I don’t think he was suggesting that Poole is a good player.

Not sure why you think it required an explanation of what constitutes a good player.

[tontoz]

Poole is currently 6th in the league in 3 pointers made per game .

How many 3-pointers a guy makes per game is NOT a measure of how good he is. Any more than how many points a guy scores per game is a measure of how good he is.

You win games by 1) having more possessions than the opponent &/or 2) scoring more efficiently in those possessions.

If you do both, you cannot lose. Period. That's just arithmetic.
If you do neither, you cannot win. Period. Ditto -- arithmetic.

No exceptions.

So it matters how many possessions you gain or lose for your team. & it matters how efficiently you score your points. Because, essentially, those are the only things you can do to help your team win.*

Jordan is scoring efficiently -- he's posting a .591 TS% on high usage. That's good.

But Jordan also turns the ball over a whole lot, gets 1/2 the offensive boards average for a 2 guard, & fouls 50% more often than average for a 2 guard.

The overall result is that he is way way worse than average for an NBA guard.

Is he better than last year? Sure! But, so what? He's not good. Period. There is no counter-argument.

* I say "essentially," because assists & blocks & defensive boards also help, of course. But they are relatively minor compared to the above.

Tontoz posted a simple statistical fact. I don’t think he was suggesting that Poole is a good player.

Not sure why you think it required an explanation of what constitutes a good player.

Yeah, that's why I put that clown on the filter years ago. I made no comment about Poole's overall value as a player. I just gave him some props for shooting 3s well which is entirely appropriate in the Poole party thread.

I've criticized Poole a lot the last couple of years. I am well aware of his shortcomings as a player.

My post was simple enough for an average middle schooler to understand but it was obviously too much for pif to grasp.

[payitforward]

Poole is currently 6th in the league in 3 pointers made per game .

How many 3-pointers a guy makes per game is NOT a measure of how good he is. Any more than how many points a guy scores per game is a measure of how good he is.

You win games by 1) having more possessions than the opponent &/or 2) scoring more efficiently in those possessions.

If you do both, you cannot lose. Period. That's just arithmetic.
If you do neither, you cannot win. Period. Ditto -- arithmetic.

No exceptions.

So it matters how many possessions you gain or lose for your team. & it matters how efficiently you score your points. Because, essentially, those are the only things you can do to help your team win.*

Jordan is scoring efficiently -- he's posting a .591 TS% on high usage. That's good.

But Jordan also turns the ball over a whole lot, gets 1/2 the offensive boards average for a 2 guard, & fouls 50% more often than average for a 2 guard.

The overall result is that he is way way worse than average for an NBA guard.

Is he better than last year? Sure! But, so what? He's not good. Period. There is no counter-argument.

* I say "essentially," because assists & blocks & defensive boards also help, of course. But they are relatively minor compared to the above.

Tontoz posted a simple statistical fact. I don’t think he was suggesting that Poole is a good player.
I think I'd just had an afternoon coffee -- sorry tontoz!!

Not sure why you think it required an explanation of what constitutes a good player.