'17-'18 POY discussion

[dreamshake]

I did believe at the time the cavs’ full blowup at the deadline was a panic move. They didn’t really give IT enough time to get back in the swing of things after such a major injury. While he wasn’t great for the lakers, he was much more serviceable than he had been.

Huh? I watched a fair amount of Lakers/IT games and he looked just as terrible as he did with the Cavs. He's pretty much identical statistically with the Lakers as he was with the Cavs - which is to say terrible. I mean he was a 38% shooter taking 18 shots per 36 with the Lakers and a massive defensive liability as usal. The Cavs ceiling isn't high this year but I feel completely confident that it's higher than if they hadn't made those trades.

I think Love's injury is being looked over way too much in the discussion about the Cavs. He's the 2nd best scorer on the team and he's gone from 18pts on 61% TS to 11pts on 43% TS in the playoffs. If he's playing like his normal self, these playoff games look much different. And it's got nothing to do with LeBron "turning him into a roleplayer" or whatever, because he's had every opportunity - he's been fed in the high and low post frankly way too much and been useless there, and he's missing open shots way more than usual. I think the hand injury is the only explanation.

He played about the same number of minutes in CLE vs. LAL (406 vs. 456). His TS% improved from 49.3% to 52% and his awful net rating on the cavs (-16.2) improved to +.5 on the lakers. They still could’ve made the trades for hood and hill, but i would’ve kept IT on to see if you can make it work. He wasn’t a lost cause.

Agree to disagree I guess. I mean 52% TS is still awful - and 2.7% improvement isn't some drastic change. I'd rather have Clarkson out there jacking up shots than this year's IT and I'm no fan of Clarkson - at least he's less of a hole on defense though. Also, IT would have to come off the bench with them acquiring Hill - and nothing about his attitude suggested he was remotely open to that idea - especially since he seemed dead set on proving his worth given he's up for a new contract. I wanted no part of him on this Cavs team.

[Clyde Frazier]

Huh? I watched a fair amount of Lakers/IT games and he looked just as terrible as he did with the Cavs. He's pretty much identical statistically with the Lakers as he was with the Cavs - which is to say terrible. I mean he was a 38% shooter taking 18 shots per 36 with the Lakers and a massive defensive liability as usal. The Cavs ceiling isn't high this year but I feel completely confident that it's higher than if they hadn't made those trades.

I think Love's injury is being looked over way too much in the discussion about the Cavs. He's the 2nd best scorer on the team and he's gone from 18pts on 61% TS to 11pts on 43% TS in the playoffs. If he's playing like his normal self, these playoff games look much different. And it's got nothing to do with LeBron "turning him into a roleplayer" or whatever, because he's had every opportunity - he's been fed in the high and low post frankly way too much and been useless there, and he's missing open shots way more than usual. I think the hand injury is the only explanation.

He played about the same number of minutes in CLE vs. LAL (406 vs. 456). His TS% improved from 49.3% to 52% and his awful net rating on the cavs (-16.2) improved to +.5 on the lakers. They still could’ve made the trades for hood and hill, but i would’ve kept IT on to see if you can make it work. He wasn’t a lost cause.

Agree to disagree I guess. I mean 52% TS is still awful - and 2.7% improvement isn't some drastic change. I'd rather have Clarkson out there jacking up shots than this year's IT and I'm no fan of Clarkson - at least he's less of a hole on defense though. Also, IT would have to come off the bench with them acquiring Hill - and nothing about his attitude suggested he was remotely open to that idea - especially since he seemed dead set on proving his worth given he's up for a new contract. I wanted no part of him on this Cavs team.

All i was saying is he showed improvement on the lakers and i think they gave up on him too quickly. it was as if he wasn't coming back from major surgery. It was weak. Also with lue's indecision on starting lineups who knows how that would've gone. Hill easily could've ended up coming off the bench or they could've started together. JR came off the bench for 19 games this season. But whatever, what's done is done. Let's see if lebron can work his magic one more time here...

[bondom34]

My post was dead serious. I once believed the motivation behind many of these posts about Lebron was based on him not fitting their idea of modern "correct" basketball. I realize that was unfair of me to make that assumption, especially considering the quality of posters involved.

When in fact a much more rational assumption is he gets held to a higher standard because he is a higher standard.

I agree with this totally. And I disagree with the notion of a "correct" way to play as well. Lebron has done nothing.but what's best for his team in a given situation and him being bald to a standard where his team likely can't succeed seems like an irrational one to me. We have plenty of evidence that Clarkson Hood Nance and most of this cast aren't more than what they have shown. They simply aren't very good and it made the trade deadline even.more confusing to me.

Nice freudian slip

And this is the problem with autocorrect lol

[MisterHibachi]

Read on Twitter

I imagine we'll penalize Butler for this next year when Thibs plays Crawford in crunch time and he takes shots away from KAT?

[Doctor MJ]

Read on Twitter

I imagine we'll penalize Butler for this next year when Thibs plays Crawford in crunch time and he takes shots away from KAT?

I know you're being rhetorical here, but I suppose it's worth my just laying out how I'd potentially see this.

There are 2 fundamental areas of importance here:

1 - How much damage with the player do with his action?
2 - Is this part of a greater category of damage? And if so, what's the scale and shape of that collection?

For (1), I really doubt that anything involving Butler advocating for keeping an old vet around on a painfully immature team is going to catch serious damage, but if somehow it does, I will indeed need to think about how that affects his candidacy.

For (2), I don't see any greater category here, and so we'd be talking only (1). That's important because what I'm talking about with LeBron is something of a greater category, and it's because of that that it has the potential affect my ranking so.

[bondom34]

Read on Twitter

I imagine we'll penalize Butler for this next year when Thibs plays Crawford in crunch time and he takes shots away from KAT?

I know you're being rhetorical here, but I suppose it's worth my just laying out how I'd potentially see this.

There are 2 fundamental areas of importance here:

1 - How much damage with the player do with his action?
2 - Is this part of a greater category of damage? And if so, what's the scale and shape of that collection?

For (1), I really doubt that anything involving Butler advocating for keeping an old vet around on a painfully immature team is going to catch serious damage, but if somehow it does, I will indeed need to think about how that affects his candidacy.

For (2), I don't see any greater category here, and so we'd be talking only (1). That's important because what I'm talking about with LeBron is something of a greater category, and it's because of that that it has the potential affect my ranking so.

Knowing his coach, and Thib's tendencies to overplay washed up vets (Crawford and Rose this year), it's got a pretty big effect most likely.

Crawford, despite being 106 of 107 SGs via RPM, was 6th on the Wolves in minutes.

[ronnymac2]

You know, I'm watching this HOU game right now, and I have no doubt that as long as Golden State remains healthy, they're going to win the NBA title. I don't think Houston can beat them. It's too easy for their forwards to close out on Ariza/Tucker/Anderson/Gordon/Green and lower their eFG% enough to slow HOU's offense. HOU is good defensively, but not that good against a full-tilt GSW. No one to guard...let's see, Curry, Durant, Klay, or even Draymond (need a lithe, long, quick defensive PF). It's basically going to be Harden and whatever is left of Paul and then Capela, and even Capela can be taken out against all that frontcourt length.

I think this is a done deal. Philly? Too green. Cleveland? LeBron is amazing, but even with Kyrie last year they couldn't catch up. TOR? lol. Boston is weird, and if they get to the Finals...I don't know, Boston is weird and insane, maybe they can pull off an upset. But probably not.

[bondom34]

Utah's pretty good. But yeah, it's GSW a tier above everyone.

[ronnymac2]

Utah's pretty good. But yeah, it's GSW a tier above everyone.

I'd favor them over HOU if Rubio weren't hurt.

[bondom34]

Utah's pretty good. But yeah, it's GSW a tier above everyone.

I'd favor them over HOU if Rubio weren't hurt.

Been waiting for Houston to choke, I'd have taken Utah over the no Curry Dubs round 1.

[Dr Positivity]

It'd be one thing if they just got shut down tonight, but you can't give up 116 points to the Jazz if you're Houston. Shudder to think what GSW offense would do against them

[bondom34]

Also, Snyder is officially 1 in my COY vote.

[Doctor MJ]

Knowing his coach, and Thib's tendencies to overplay washed up vets (Crawford and Rose this year), it's got a pretty big effect most likely.

Crawford, despite being 106 of 107 SGs via RPM, was 6th on the Wolves in minutes.

I mean, he's a back up and people are bringing him up because of the analogy to Kyrie Irving. Given that starting point, you really think Crawford's doing massive damage?

I'm skeptical that it's even possible for a backup to do massive damage. You always wish your backup was better than he was, but if you thought he was really good, you'd be playing him more.

[Dr Positivity]

You know, I'm watching this HOU game right now, and I have no doubt that as long as Golden State remains healthy, they're going to win the NBA title. I don't think Houston can beat them. It's too easy for their forwards to close out on Ariza/Tucker/Anderson/Gordon/Green and lower their eFG% enough to slow HOU's offense. HOU is good defensively, but not that good against a full-tilt GSW. No one to guard...let's see, Curry, Durant, Klay, or even Draymond (need a lithe, long, quick defensive PF). It's basically going to be Harden and whatever is left of Paul and then Capela, and even Capela can be taken out against all that frontcourt length.

I think this is a done deal. Philly? Too green. Cleveland? LeBron is amazing, but even with Kyrie last year they couldn't catch up. TOR? lol. Boston is weird, and if they get to the Finals...I don't know, Boston is weird and insane, maybe they can pull off an upset. But probably not.

This makes me realize the 2017 Cavs were a pretty formidable opponent for GSW considering their reputation of always catching the breaks opponent wise. I don't think anything this year comes close to as scary as Lebron in GOAT mode, Kyrie, actual all-star Love and proven role players like Korver, JR, TT. There is a reason they went 12-1 in East

[INKtastic]

He played about the same number of minutes in CLE vs. LAL (406 vs. 456). His TS% improved from 49.3% to 52% and his awful net rating on the cavs (-16.2) improved to +.5 on the lakers. They still could’ve made the trades for hood and hill, but i would’ve kept IT on to see if you can make it work. He wasn’t a lost cause.

Agree to disagree I guess. I mean 52% TS is still awful - and 2.7% improvement isn't some drastic change. I'd rather have Clarkson out there jacking up shots than this year's IT and I'm no fan of Clarkson - at least he's less of a hole on defense though. Also, IT would have to come off the bench with them acquiring Hill - and nothing about his attitude suggested he was remotely open to that idea - especially since he seemed dead set on proving his worth given he's up for a new contract. I wanted no part of him on this Cavs team.

All i was saying is he showed improvement on the lakers and i think they gave up on him too quickly. it was as if he wasn't coming back from major surgery. It was weak. Also with lue's indecision on starting lineups who knows how that would've gone. Hill easily could've ended up coming off the bench or they could've started together. JR came off the bench for 19 games this season. But whatever, what's done is done. Let's see if lebron can work his magic one more time here...

You do remember that IT left the Lakers to get hip surgery, right? What was the point in giving him more time if the end result is missing the playoffs for surgery. He played well his first two games with Cleveland, but was awful after that. He'd drive with no idea what he was going to do and no ability to finish. And he completely alienated members of the team, including LeBron and Kevin Love. Alienating Kevin Love as quickly as he did after he started playing was really surprising, they were childhood friends.

The problem Cleveland had post trade is players kept getting hurt. At no point before or after the trade did the Cavs have everyone healthy the same game. Their playoff game 1 starting lineup not only started their first game together all season, they played their first game together all season. And then they lost a starter for half of the series. Their number of different starting lineups this season is now in the 30s. LeBron is the only constant.

[bondom34]

Knowing his coach, and Thib's tendencies to overplay washed up vets (Crawford and Rose this year), it's got a pretty big effect most likely.

Crawford, despite being 106 of 107 SGs via RPM, was 6th on the Wolves in minutes.

I mean, he's a back up and people are bringing him up because of the analogy to Kyrie Irving. Given that starting point, you really think Crawford's doing massive damage?

I'm skeptical that it's even possible for a backup to do massive damage. You always wish your backup was better than he was, but if you thought he was really good, you'd be playing him more.

Kyrie wasn't something Lebron asked for, and Crawford was bottom 7 in VORP. Not only that he was 3rd in USG on the Wolves (really 2nd as Rose was 1st). He does plenty of damage using more possessions than anyone but Butler.

[Doctor MJ]

Knowing his coach, and Thib's tendencies to overplay washed up vets (Crawford and Rose this year), it's got a pretty big effect most likely.

Crawford, despite being 106 of 107 SGs via RPM, was 6th on the Wolves in minutes.

I mean, he's a back up and people are bringing him up because of the analogy to Kyrie Irving. Given that starting point, you really think Crawford's doing massive damage?

I'm skeptical that it's even possible for a backup to do massive damage. You always wish your backup was better than he was, but if you thought he was really good, you'd be playing him more.

Kyrie wasn't something Lebron asked for, and Crawford was bottom 7 in VORP. Not only that he was 3rd in USG on the Wolves (really 2nd as Rose was 1st). He does plenty of damage using more possessions than anyone but Butler.

Seems like you're just conflating a bunch of things together, and I'm not even sure why.

Do you seriously believe the Butler-Crawford situation is worth discussing about in a POY debate right now, or are you just trying to trip me up?

[bondom34]

I mean, he's a back up and people are bringing him up because of the analogy to Kyrie Irving. Given that starting point, you really think Crawford's doing massive damage?

I'm skeptical that it's even possible for a backup to do massive damage. You always wish your backup was better than he was, but if you thought he was really good, you'd be playing him more.

Kyrie wasn't something Lebron asked for, and Crawford was bottom 7 in VORP. Not only that he was 3rd in USG on the Wolves (really 2nd as Rose was 1st). He does plenty of damage using more possessions than anyone but Butler.

Seems like you're just conflating a bunch of things together, and I'm not even sure why.

Do you seriously believe the Butler-Crawford situation is worth discussing about in a POY debate right now, or are you just trying to trip me up?

I think its consistent with what you'e been docking Lebron for. Its inconsistent.

[GSP]

Utah - If they lose as expected to GS, I doubt any Jazzman makes my top 5. Gobert though seems very worthy of consideration, and Mitchell just keeps improving.

Last thought: I honestly don't know when we had 2 such strong rookies as Simmons & Mitchell in the same year. Might be since Bird/Magic.

Utah is playing the rockets, not a big deal.

I think you're going a bit far with the mitchell simmons. Jordan and Hakeem? Hill Kidd? Now these two seem maybe to be in better playoff positions if that's where you were going.

[Doctor MJ]

Kyrie wasn't something Lebron asked for, and Crawford was bottom 7 in VORP. Not only that he was 3rd in USG on the Wolves (really 2nd as Rose was 1st). He does plenty of damage using more possessions than anyone but Butler.

Seems like you're just conflating a bunch of things together, and I'm not even sure why.

Do you seriously believe the Butler-Crawford situation is worth discussing about in a POY debate right now, or are you just trying to trip me up?

I think its consistent with what you'e been docking Lebron for. Its inconsistent.

Please be specific. What exactly am I being inconsistent about?