RealGM Top 25 Player Poll-#12 2018-19

[HoopsterJones]

Just because you quoted the entire post doesnt mean you didnt cherrypick. But w/e, water under the bridge. Glad you agree re:Irving

Yo half your post is about the General Board being wrong about Kyrie predictions as being why you think Celtics fans don’t care about the General Board opinion. HALF.
Cherrypick what?

Whatever, I’m done with you.

Ok lol. Chill dude

You posted an entire paragraph throwing low key shade at the opinion of the General Board and how Celtics fans don’t care about it because they were wrong about Kyrie. So that paragraph is off limits for discussion because in your mind that’s cherry picking?

I can’t take anything you say seriously if that’s how your mind works. Here’s your L. Run along.

[iggymcfrack]

I voted Jokic for the 3rd time in a row and am nominating Simmons for the 2nd time in a row.


And holy hell on Kyrie Irving's votes. I have a feeling Yabusele will be voted in by the end of this.

Assuming Jokic holds on (which isn't looking like a safe bet right now), I'm sure his votes will be peppered evenly between Draymond, Gobert, Lillard, and Oladipo next round meaning the silent Kyrie bloc will grab #13. Unless those of us who think all four of the aforementioned players are better than Kyrie create our own bloc and agree to vote for the one of those four who ends up with the most votes at the end of this round.

I know it’s a little late to change the format now, but it would have been nice to have a run-off vote for the Top 2 guys whenever there wasn’t a majority or near-majority. It would make the threads more entertaining for those who are committed to a candidate that’s not going to go anytime soon, and would make for better discussion with people open to being swayed in a vote between two candidates that aren’t “theirs” looking at the arguments from either side.

Also makes the vote better in situations like this where there are a lot of voters who wouldn’t have Kyrie in their Top 5 or 6 picks right now, but he’s getting propped up by a lot of first place votes among those who like him.

[Luigi]

Kyrie is the right answer here, rooting for him to pull ahead.

He's proven a lot in NBA playoff games.

Draymond has honestly proven more in playoff situations if we’re going that route.

If Jokic had been on the Cavs and Kyrie on the Nuggets, we'd be talking about how Jokic had proven himself in the playoffs and Kyrie can't even lead a team to the playoffs. Having being given the opportunity to perform on the big stage doesn't make one better.

And if Jokic had proven himself, he'd get the nod.

Having actually performed when tested matters. It matters more than potential. Potential means you haven't done anything yet. There's the opportunity, then there's the performance.

[ITYSL]

Yo half your post is about the General Board being wrong about Kyrie predictions as being why you think Celtics fans don’t care about the General Board opinion. HALF.
Cherrypick what?

Whatever, I’m done with you.

Ok lol. Chill dude

You posted an entire paragraph throwing low key shade at the opinion of the General Board and how Celtics fans don’t care about it because they were wrong about Kyrie. So that paragraph is off limits for discussion because, because in your mind that’s cherry picking?

I can’t take anything you say seriously if that’s how your mind works. Here’s your L. Run along.

Thought you said you were done with me, but apparently you can't help yourself. You need to relax bud.

Your reply was about a miniscule portion of my post where I speculated why Celtics fans might not be replying much in this thread. If I knew it would lead to you having a temper tantrum, I would have left it out. Sorry I set you off.

I am glad we agree about Kyrie as a legit top 12 player in the league, however.

[ElectricMayhem]

I know it’s a little late to change the format now, but it would have been nice to have a run-off vote for the Top 2 guys whenever there wasn’t a majority or near-majority. It would make the threads more entertaining for those who are committed to a candidate that’s not going to go anytime soon, and would make for better discussion with people open to being swayed in a vote between two candidates that aren’t “theirs” looking at the arguments from either side.

Also makes the vote better in situations like this where there are a lot of voters who wouldn’t have Kyrie in their Top 5 or 6 picks right now, but he’s getting propped up by a lot of first place votes among those who like him.

Yup! I said the exact same thing a couple rounds ago.

I don't expect it to be done because the poll system here doesn't allow for it and I don't even know if there are any external poll systems that allow you to create your own, but for these types of polls where the winner often gets a plurality and not a majority, it would be interesting to see ranked choice/instant runoff voting used (sorry for the egregiously long run-on sentence). That way, if a majority of people were voting based on advanced stats and they split the vote, they could still come out on top. If a majority of people were using the eye test and focused on two people, whereas there was only one advanced stats darling, they could come out on top.

[HoopsterJones]

Ok lol. Chill dude

You posted an entire paragraph throwing low key shade at the opinion of the General Board and how Celtics fans don’t care about it because they were wrong about Kyrie. So that paragraph is off limits for discussion because, because in your mind that’s cherry picking?

I can’t take anything you say seriously if that’s how your mind works. Here’s your L. Run along.

Thought you said you were done with me, but apparently you can't help yourself. You need to relax bud.

Your reply was about a miniscule portion of my post where I speculated why Celtics fans might not be replying much in this thread. If I knew it would lead to you having a temper tantrum, I would have left it out. Sorry I set you off.

I am glad we agree about Kyrie as a legit top 12 player in the league, however.

Minuscule portion =\= entire paragraph. It’s half your post. No temper tantrum, just baffled at the poor display of cognitive skills.

[ITYSL]

Kyrie is the right answer here, rooting for him to pull ahead.

He's proven a lot in NBA playoff games.

Draymond has honestly proven more in playoff situations if we’re going that route.

If Jokic had been on the Cavs and Kyrie on the Nuggets, we'd be talking about how Jokic had proven himself in the playoffs and Kyrie can't even lead a team to the playoffs. Having being given the opportunity to perform on the big stage doesn't make one better.

Link? Oh wait, that's right. You can't link to hypothetical parallel universes that exist solely in your mind.

[ITYSL]

Minuscule portion =\= entire paragraph. It’s half your post. No temper tantrum, just baffled at the poor display of cognitive skills.

It really wasnt, but whatever. Agree to disagree, it doesnt matter that much re:the topic of this thread and is unnecessarily derailing it. Last word is yours if you'd like it, even though you said you were done with me five posts ago.

[iggymcfrack]

Kyrie’s actually tied with Jokic now? This is absurd. RPM isn’t perfect but it’s the best publicly available metric we have. Here’s Jokic vs. Kyrie by year:

2017/18: Jokic +5.97 (5th), Kyrie +2.39 (45th)
2016/17: Jokic +6.73 (6th), Kyrie +2.05 (53rd)
2015/16: Jokic +6.03 (9th), Kyrie -0.60 (186th)

That’s a really consistent tale that RPM’s telling, and the impact of the 2 players is not remotely close. It’s not like you’re comparing some low minute bit player to a superstar. Jokic was carrying pretty much the exact same scoring load as Kyrie in the second half of the season last year. They’ve played similar roles as the lead scorer/playmaker on their respective teams and over a large sample, Jokic is just much better. No matter how large you think the margin of error is for RPM, it’s not large enough for results that far apart to be ordered incorrectly in terms of who’s actually the better player. I feel a lot of people don’t give RPM credit because they don’t understand it so that’s why sometimes I like to show just simple plus/minus which is the primary input into RPM’s development:

Jokic: +9.8, +11.9, +9.5
Kyrie: +3.1, +7.2, -0.2

Jokic’s teams were on average 10.4 points better with him on the floor than the bench. Kyrie’s teams were on average 3.9 points better with him on the floor than the bench. That’s a massive difference. That’s like the difference between the Warriors and the Pistons. And 3 years is not a small sample. These are extremely significant results.

[ElectricMayhem]

Draymond has honestly proven more in playoff situations if we’re going that route.

If Jokic had been on the Cavs and Kyrie on the Nuggets, we'd be talking about how Jokic had proven himself in the playoffs and Kyrie can't even lead a team to the playoffs. Having being given the opportunity to perform on the big stage doesn't make one better.

Link? Oh wait, that's right. You can't link to hypothetical parallel universes that exist solely in your mind.

I actually can link to hypothetical parallel universes that exist solely in my mind and that's just what I was about to do. It was going to be a momentous day for humanity opening up realms of unknown worlds and infinite possibilities. It would have smashed modern religious and dogmatic paradigms and been something as revolutionary as the discovery of fire. However, due to your snippiness, I've decided to keep it to myself.

[spicy6]

Kyrie’s actually tied with Jokic now? This is absurd. RPM isn’t perfect but it’s the best publicly available metric we have. Here’s Jokic vs. Kyrie by year:

2017/18: Jokic +5.97 (5th), Kyrie +2.39 (45th)
2016/17: Jokic +6.73 (6th), Kyrie +2.05 (53rd)
2015/16: Jokic +6.03 (9th), Kyrie -0.60 (186th)

That’s a really consistent tale that RPM’s telling, and the impact of the 2 players is not remotely close. It’s not like you’re comparing some low minute bit player to a superstar. Jokic was carrying pretty much the exact same scoring load as Kyrie in the second half of the season last year. They’ve played similar roles as the lead scorer/playmaker on their respective teams and over a large sample, Jokic is just much better. No matter how large you think the margin of error is for RPM, it’s not large enough for results that far apart to be ordered incorrectly in terms of who’s actually the better player. I feel a lot of people don’t give RPM credit because they don’t understand it so that’s why sometimes I like to show just simple plus/minus which is the primary input into RPM’s development:

Jokic: +9.8, +11.9, +9.5
Kyrie: +3.1, +7.2, -0.2

Jokic’s teams were on average 10.4 points better with him on the floor than the bench. Kyrie’s teams were on average 3.9 points better with him on the floor than the bench. That’s a massive difference. That’s like the difference between the Warriors and the Pistons. And 3 years is not a small sample. These are extremely significant results.

No offense but you're diving to deep into things. If an argument doesnt work in your favor when it comes to these stats how exactly are you going to counter?

[HoopsterJones]

Minuscule portion =\= entire paragraph. It’s half your post. No temper tantrum, just baffled at the poor display of cognitive skills.

It really wasnt, but whatever. Agree to disagree, it doesnt matter that much re:the topic of this thread and is unnecessarily derailing it. Last word is yours if you'd like it, even though you said you were done with me five posts ago.

Ah the not so high road backhanded post. Not very clever.

But hey at least we agree about Kyrie. It’s tied between him and Jokic now. Maybe they’ll decide to have a run off vote.

[bondom34]

Objectively Kyrie shouldn't be leading or close. Lillard, Green, Jokic, Oladipo, Gobert, and Lowry at minimum would have a better case.

[iggymcfrack]

Kyrie’s actually tied with Jokic now? This is absurd. RPM isn’t perfect but it’s the best publicly available metric we have. Here’s Jokic vs. Kyrie by year:

2017/18: Jokic +5.97 (5th), Kyrie +2.39 (45th)
2016/17: Jokic +6.73 (6th), Kyrie +2.05 (53rd)
2015/16: Jokic +6.03 (9th), Kyrie -0.60 (186th)

That’s a really consistent tale that RPM’s telling, and the impact of the 2 players is not remotely close. It’s not like you’re comparing some low minute bit player to a superstar. Jokic was carrying pretty much the exact same scoring load as Kyrie in the second half of the season last year. They’ve played similar roles as the lead scorer/playmaker on their respective teams and over a large sample, Jokic is just much better. No matter how large you think the margin of error is for RPM, it’s not large enough for results that far apart to be ordered incorrectly in terms of who’s actually the better player. I feel a lot of people don’t give RPM credit because they don’t understand it so that’s why sometimes I like to show just simple plus/minus which is the primary input into RPM’s development:

Jokic: +9.8, +11.9, +9.5
Kyrie: +3.1, +7.2, -0.2

Jokic’s teams were on average 10.4 points better with him on the floor than the bench. Kyrie’s teams were on average 3.9 points better with him on the floor than the bench. That’s a massive difference. That’s like the difference between the Warriors and the Pistons. And 3 years is not a small sample. These are extremely significant results.

No offense but you're diving to deep into things. If an argument doesnt work in your favor when it comes to these stats how exactly are you going to counter?

Unlike a lot of people, I don’t decide which side of the argument that I like and then try to find stats to fit it. I use the information out there to shape my opinions and then defend them on the solid ground they’re founded from. If there are 2 players in a similar role and one improves his team 6+ points more than the other I’m always gonna have him as the better player unless there’s some other major factor like of he’d just torn his ACL or something.

[Homerclease]

If postseason performances mean anything then it’s Kyrie by a mile followed by Draymond and Paul George. Granted Kyrie didn’t play in last years postseason but his playoff resume is well established and his game rising on the grandest stage is well established. There are a select few men in the NBA that can go straight inferno in a postseason game and steal it for you and Kyrie is one of them. That’s what separates him from the pack here

[spicy6]

Kyrie’s actually tied with Jokic now? This is absurd. RPM isn’t perfect but it’s the best publicly available metric we have. Here’s Jokic vs. Kyrie by year:

2017/18: Jokic +5.97 (5th), Kyrie +2.39 (45th)
2016/17: Jokic +6.73 (6th), Kyrie +2.05 (53rd)
2015/16: Jokic +6.03 (9th), Kyrie -0.60 (186th)

That’s a really consistent tale that RPM’s telling, and the impact of the 2 players is not remotely close. It’s not like you’re comparing some low minute bit player to a superstar. Jokic was carrying pretty much the exact same scoring load as Kyrie in the second half of the season last year. They’ve played similar roles as the lead scorer/playmaker on their respective teams and over a large sample, Jokic is just much better. No matter how large you think the margin of error is for RPM, it’s not large enough for results that far apart to be ordered incorrectly in terms of who’s actually the better player. I feel a lot of people don’t give RPM credit because they don’t understand it so that’s why sometimes I like to show just simple plus/minus which is the primary input into RPM’s development:

Jokic: +9.8, +11.9, +9.5
Kyrie: +3.1, +7.2, -0.2

Jokic’s teams were on average 10.4 points better with him on the floor than the bench. Kyrie’s teams were on average 3.9 points better with him on the floor than the bench. That’s a massive difference. That’s like the difference between the Warriors and the Pistons. And 3 years is not a small sample. These are extremely significant results.

No offense but you're diving to deep into things. If an argument doesnt work in your favor when it comes to these stats how exactly are you going to counter?

Unlike a lot of people, I don’t decide which side of the argument that I like and then try to find stats to fit it. I use the information out there to shape my opinions and then defend them on the solid ground they’re founded from. If there are 2 players in a similar role and one improves his team 6+ points more than the other I’m always gonna have him as the better player unless there’s some other major factor like of he’d just torn his ACL or something.

This is a hypothetical but in the 2016 finals if you were to replace this years jokic with that kyrie (he hasnt really gotten better or worse) would you think the cavs win that finals? Another example I would have is russ in the 2017 first round against the rockets when his plus-minus when on and off the floor was staggering but we all know about the 4rth quarter issues so here im asking do you think he was to blame despite the much higher plus/minus difference i think it was like +16 to -50 or 60 something in the series.

[Luigi]

If postseason performances mean anything then it’s Kyrie by a mile followed by Draymond and Paul George. Granted Kyrie didn’t play in last years postseason but his playoff resume is well established and his game rising on the grandest stage is well established. There are a select few men in the NBA that can go straight inferno in a postseason game and steal it for you and Kyrie is one of them. That’s what separates him from the pack here

I mostly agree. Especially for Irving.

But Gobert and the Jazz defense just got done punking Paul George in the playoffs. George was a better player before the injury. Hmmm, I might have just convinced myself to wait until I see Kyrie play this season...

[ITYSL]

If Jokic had been on the Cavs and Kyrie on the Nuggets, we'd be talking about how Jokic had proven himself in the playoffs and Kyrie can't even lead a team to the playoffs. Having being given the opportunity to perform on the big stage doesn't make one better.

Link? Oh wait, that's right. You can't link to hypothetical parallel universes that exist solely in your mind.

I actually can link to hypothetical parallel universes that exist solely in my mind and that's just what I was about to do. It was going to be a momentous day for humanity opening up realms of unknown worlds and infinite possibilities. It would have smashed modern religious and dogmatic paradigms and been something as revolutionary as the discovery of fire. However, due to your snippiness, I've decided to keep it to myself.

Dumb arguments deserve snippy replies.

If Kyrie was on GSW and Curry was on the Hawks, Kyrie would be a five-time champion and Curry would be out of the league. Therefore, put Kyrie at #1 and remove Curry from the rankings and this poll.

[Luigi]

Draymond has honestly proven more in playoff situations if we’re going that route.

If Jokic had been on the Cavs and Kyrie on the Nuggets, we'd be talking about how Jokic had proven himself in the playoffs and Kyrie can't even lead a team to the playoffs. Having being given the opportunity to perform on the big stage doesn't make one better.

And if Jokic had proven himself, he'd get the nod.

Having actually performed when tested matters. It matters more than potential. Potential means you haven't done anything yet. There's the opportunity, then there's the performance.

You should be responding to this one, ElectricMayhem.

[Homerclease]

If postseason performances mean anything then it’s Kyrie by a mile followed by Draymond and Paul George. Granted Kyrie didn’t play in last years postseason but his playoff resume is well established and his game rising on the grandest stage is well established. There are a select few men in the NBA that can go straight inferno in a postseason game and steal it for you and Kyrie is one of them. That’s what separates him from the pack here

I mostly agree. Especially for Irving.

But Gobert and the Jazz defense just got done punking Paul George in the playoffs. George was a better player before the injury. Hmmm, I might have just convinced myself to wait until I see Kyrie play this season...

Difference is Gobert has never gotten out of the second round and has put together back to back abysmal performances against golden state and Houston. Honestly I’d take Mitchell over him RIGHT NOW but that’s for a different thread. Paul George’s performances in a losing effort vs Lebrons Cavs while still on the Pacers trump anything Gobert has ever done IMO