ImageImageImageImageImage

Brian Shaw (Merged)

Moderators: og15, TrueLAfan

User avatar
adiedanny
Senior
Posts: 721
And1: 5
Joined: Jul 07, 2006
Location: Covina,Ca

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#41 » by adiedanny » Sat Jun 8, 2013 8:39 pm

og15 wrote:
adiedanny wrote:Wait a min lol Rodman is the most under rated player ever! If he had a straighter head and was offering to teach what he could do the line would be ridiculous. Look at that mans rebounding numbers and his defense was crazy. Every team he played on contended and his rings prove that. This is man that said I'm going to go out tonight and out-rebound everybody and he did every game. That's amazing! Anybody can say I'm going to go out and outscore everybody tonight and even if you jack up everything you touch you may not outscore everybody every night but you have the opportunity with the ball in your hands. To out-rebound everybody you have to go and get the ball. Yeah he is my favorite player of all time because of of what he did on the court. Now you can bet you will never see a player you can compare him to ever.

Well technically Reggie Evans is the less talented version of Rodman, so we are seeing the lesser version

rebounds per game
1990-91 NBA 12.5 (2)
1991-92 NBA 18.7 (1)
1992-93 NBA 18.3 (1)
1993-94 NBA 17.3 (1)
1994-95 NBA 16.8 (1)
1995-96 NBA 14.9 (1)
1996-97 NBA 16.1 (1)
1997-98 NBA 15.0 (1)
Career NBA 13.1 (10)
1988-89 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
1989-90 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
1990-91 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
1991-92 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
1991-92 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
1992-93 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
1993-94 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1994-95 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
1994-95 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
1995-96 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
Career 13.1 (11)
Thats just a portion of his career
og15
Forum Mod - Clippers
Forum Mod - Clippers
Posts: 50,753
And1: 33,552
Joined: Jun 23, 2004
Location: NBA Fan
 

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#42 » by og15 » Sat Jun 8, 2013 10:30 pm

Did you miss the less talented part? Reggie is a slightly worse rebounder, his rebound per game numbers aren't there because no one wants to play Reggie so much, but rebound rate is in a similar range. He's worse at everything else, not really a good man to man defender, okay, and a less versatile defender, so hence the less talented part.

I don't think you're grasping less talented very well here. What exactly would Rodman be if he has less talent, probably someone like Reggie Evans.
User avatar
Neddy
RealGM
Posts: 15,865
And1: 3,908
Joined: Jan 28, 2012
     

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#43 » by Neddy » Sun Jun 9, 2013 12:12 am

saying player A is same as player B other than being less talented is an epitome of generalization.

may i also then say, stacey augmon was the same player as clyde drexler, except being less talented, or say harold minor was just like michael jordan, except being less talented?

i understand your argument that reggie's rebounding rate is comparable in some way to how dennis rodman played, but dennis was a lot more than just a rebounder, it's just that he was the most dominant rebounder of our generation ( which is the 35-45 crowd) dennis rodman was a 6-7 small forward coming out of college, was more of a all around defensive player who could be matched up against any position, while shooting corner 3s (poorly, i might add) who averaged a double digit scoring in his second year playing limited minutes just like DJ. for those who have actually watched his detroit years, he was a SF who guarded magic, bird, michael, to bernard king. he was not a bonafide PF who went up against much bigger centers and PFs yet. reggie on the other hand is a PF rebounder. always has been, and always will be. there is no perimeter game what so ever.

in other words, since michael jordan was a gifted athlete who was able to drive in on most defenders of his time, can i claim darius miles who also thrived as a slasher to be, just like michael jordan, except being less talented?

not saying you somehow failed, but rather your generalization is vague at best that i am certain danny isn't wrong.
ehhhhh f it.
User avatar
adiedanny
Senior
Posts: 721
And1: 5
Joined: Jul 07, 2006
Location: Covina,Ca

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#44 » by adiedanny » Sun Jun 9, 2013 12:43 am

og15 wrote:Did you miss the less talented part? Reggie is a slightly worse rebounder, his rebound per game numbers aren't there because no one wants to play Reggie so much, but rebound rate is in a similar range. He's worse at everything else, not really a good man to man defender, okay, and a less versatile defender, so hence the less talented part.

I don't think you're grasping less talented very well here. What exactly would Rodman be if he has less talent, probably someone like Reggie Evans.

He is a lot more than slightly. Talented? He was pure power, hustle, desire, mental and speed. talent is when it comes with ease. He was always working his butt off. The first to be on a bike while not playing and now you see others doing that. at the time ppl just thought he was a crazy freak. Don't get me wrong he was a freak but that guy worked really hard to get where he was as an NBA player
User avatar
adiedanny
Senior
Posts: 721
And1: 5
Joined: Jul 07, 2006
Location: Covina,Ca

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#45 » by adiedanny » Sun Jun 9, 2013 12:45 am

og15 wrote:Haha, nope, maybe if he had good man to man and better help defense and wasn't so bad on offense. DeJaun Blair is a FA if we really want a short tenacious rebounder. His rebounding has declined every year in the league though.

I do agree on DeJaun Blair. I would love to go after him. Just don't agree on you comparing a journeyman to a HOF Legend.
User avatar
adiedanny
Senior
Posts: 721
And1: 5
Joined: Jul 07, 2006
Location: Covina,Ca

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#46 » by adiedanny » Sun Jun 9, 2013 12:50 am

Neddy wrote:saying player A is same as player B other than being less talented is an epitome of generalization.

may i also then say, stacey augmon was the same player as clyde drexler, except being less talented, or say harold minor was just like michael jordan, except being less talented?

i understand your argument that reggie's rebounding rate is comparable in some way to how dennis rodman played, but dennis was a lot more than just a rebounder, it's just that he was the most dominant rebounder of our generation ( which is the 35-45 crowd) dennis rodman was a 6-7 small forward coming out of college, was more of a all around defensive player who could be matched up against any position, while shooting corner 3s (poorly, i might add) who averaged a double digit scoring in his second year playing limited minutes just like DJ. for those who have actually watched his detroit years, he was a SF who guarded magic, bird, michael, to bernard king. he was not a bonafide PF who went up against much bigger centers and PFs yet. reggie on the other hand is a PF rebounder. always has been, and always will be. there is no perimeter game what so ever.

in other words, since michael jordan was a gifted athlete who was able to drive in on most defenders of his time, can i claim darius miles who also thrived as a slasher to be, just like michael jordan, except being less talented?

not saying you somehow failed, but rather your generalization is vague at best that i am certain danny isn't wrong.
Damn I didn't read this post before i posted my last two. But you're right. Let's not forget shutting down one of the most dominant players in Shaq in the play-offs. So undersized but he showed Shaq in his young career what true power was. I was amazed at how he overpowered him and got in his head and just shut him down. Or his magical block of Ewing coming down full speed to rim for a dunk. That was one of the most amazing blocks I've ever seen but sorry for throwing the subject off topic. Let's get Shaw lol
User avatar
Neddy
RealGM
Posts: 15,865
And1: 3,908
Joined: Jan 28, 2012
     

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#47 » by Neddy » Sun Jun 9, 2013 12:54 am

adiedanny wrote:Let's get Shaw lol


ah... no... man...... :-?
ehhhhh f it.
og15
Forum Mod - Clippers
Forum Mod - Clippers
Posts: 50,753
And1: 33,552
Joined: Jun 23, 2004
Location: NBA Fan
 

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#48 » by og15 » Sun Jun 9, 2013 1:56 am

adiedanny wrote:
og15 wrote:Did you miss the less talented part? Reggie is a slightly worse rebounder, his rebound per game numbers aren't there because no one wants to play Reggie so much, but rebound rate is in a similar range. He's worse at everything else, not really a good man to man defender, okay, and a less versatile defender, so hence the less talented part.

I don't think you're grasping less talented very well here. What exactly would Rodman be if he has less talent, probably someone like Reggie Evans.

He is a lot more than slightly. Talented? He was pure power, hustle, desire, mental and speed. talent is when it comes with ease. He was always working his butt off. The first to be on a bike while not playing and now you see others doing that. at the time ppl just thought he was a crazy freak. Don't get me wrong he was a freak but that guy worked really hard to get where he was as an NBA player

There's talent to defense and rebounding, and actually if you look at their rebound rates, it's not too far.

Rodman career: 23.4 TRB%, Career high: 29.7 TRB%
Reggie career: 21.9 TRB%, Career high: 26.7 TRB%

Reggie career per 36:
7.5 pts, 13.3 rebs, 1.0 ast, 1.3 stl, 2.0 tov, 4.4 fouls, 46.7% FG, 52.1% FT, .502 TS%, 11.7 PER

Rodman career per 36:
8.3 pts, 14.9 rebs, 2.0 ast, 0.8 stl, 1.9 tov, 3.5 fouls, 52.1% FG, 58.4% FT, .546 TS%, 14.6 PER

When you look at simple production, Reggie is the poor man's version of Rodman, but Rodman is quicker, faster, can jump higher, just a vastly superior athlete, so yea he has more talent. Then add that Rodman produces better everywhere, but then because of the athletic anility is also a better man to man defender, and a more versatile defender, and a better finisher. Reggie has the hustle and desire, that's all will, the speed and power and athletic ability (talent), Reggie has little of that. Hence, Reggie is Rodman if you strip away the speed, quickness, jumping ability.

Neddy come on, these are actually comparable guys in production. Stacey Augmon had a career high of 14.8 pts, a per minute high of 17.4 pts/36 in his second season. His career per 36 is: 13.3 pts, 5.3 rebs, 2.6 assists, 1.6 stls. Great length, nice defender, but Drexler has career per 36 numbers of: 21.3 pts, 6.4 rebs, 5.9 assists, 2.1 stls, there's a bit more of a gap in production ability than when we compare Reggie and Rodman.

Similarly Darius Miles, he averaged 14 pts as his career high. Now, you could say Vince Carter is a less talented version of Micheal Jordan including the mental approach, and that's accurate. Vince had the hops, but never had the speed and quickness or the handle of Jordan in addition to never being a killer on the basketball court. Maybe if Darius Miles had career averages of like 24/5/4 but wasn't a mediocre defender, an average closer, had a bit less athletic ability and feel for the game, yea, we could say he's a less talented Jordan.

You could say Michael Conley is the upper middle class version of Chris Paul, those are comparisons more in line with this. Comparing players who aren't just far away in the not so obvious things, but nowhere in the as,e stratosphere in actual statistical production is not in the same as this.

Like I said, Rodman in addition is actually a good man to man defender, he's also more versatile defender, he could guard 3-5, he fouled less, had a lower turnover% though both are meh there, could finish and was a better FT shooter (despite both being bad) so he wasn't inefficient with the shots he did take. He was also still a better rebounder despite how good Reggie is. Some of those things are because he can move quicker laterally and jump higher than 2 inches. Rodman was also able to get more on court minutes and have better statistical production because he wasn't bad on offense in comparison (114 Ortg to 103 Ortg), he had spacing issues, but he didn't hurt the offense while Reggie has the spacing issues and hurts the offense because of really low percentages. Also because his man to man defense was much better yes due to smarts, but all the smarts without his physical tools can only do so much.

It's funny I just made this exact same post but from the other angle on the general board explaining why though Reggie and Rodman are similar in production, well raw production, Rodman was basically better at everything and at all the more intangible things.
User avatar
mttwlsn16
Head Coach
Posts: 7,090
And1: 1,983
Joined: Jan 30, 2012
Location: Charlotte
     

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#49 » by mttwlsn16 » Sun Jun 9, 2013 2:15 am

Wow. Dmiles and MJ comparison :lol:

I miss D
Image
User avatar
Neddy
RealGM
Posts: 15,865
And1: 3,908
Joined: Jan 28, 2012
     

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#50 » by Neddy » Sun Jun 9, 2013 2:22 am

it's apples and oranges, again, rodman was a SF who later played out of position as an undersized PF who was able to cover many positions, and reggie is a legit sized PF who is limited in his versatility.

here is an example of your logic

harold miner per 36 .522 TS career FG% 46%, per36 scoring 17.3 and .311 3pt and .785 FT for his career
ron harper per 36 TS @ .511 career FG% 44.6%, per36 scoring 16.1 and .289 3pt and .720 FT for his career

can you logically say according to these hypothetical per 36 stats that they were similar players, based on these stats? i have watched both players from beginning to the end of their careers, even played against harold miner in a pick up game in the valley north of LA in early 90s. and there is no doubt in my eyes or anyone who have watched their games that they were completely different players with different styles, and harper was a far superior player over miner.
ehhhhh f it.
User avatar
Neddy
RealGM
Posts: 15,865
And1: 3,908
Joined: Jan 28, 2012
     

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#51 » by Neddy » Sun Jun 9, 2013 2:23 am

mttwlsn16 wrote:Wow. Dmiles and MJ comparison :lol:

I miss D


my point exactly.
ehhhhh f it.
og15
Forum Mod - Clippers
Forum Mod - Clippers
Posts: 50,753
And1: 33,552
Joined: Jun 23, 2004
Location: NBA Fan
 

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#52 » by og15 » Sun Jun 9, 2013 4:52 am

Neddy wrote:it's apples and oranges, again, rodman was a SF who later played out of position as an undersized PF who was able to cover many positions, and reggie is a legit sized PF who is limited in his versatility.

here is an example of your logic

harold miner per 36 .522 TS career FG% 46%, per36 scoring 17.3 and .311 3pt and .785 FT for his career
ron harper per 36 TS @ .511 career FG% 44.6%, per36 scoring 16.1 and .289 3pt and .720 FT for his career

can you logically say according to these hypothetical per 36 stats that they were similar players, based on these stats? i have watched both players from beginning to the end of their careers, even played against harold miner in a pick up game in the valley north of LA in early 90s. and there is no doubt in my eyes or anyone who have watched their games that they were completely different players with different styles, and harper was a far superior player over miner.

...but Reggie IS a similar player to Rodman in terms of where his impact comes from. Hustle, energy, defense, he just doesn't have the tools. Reggie basically the size of a SF himself at 6'8, Rodman 6'7 was the skinny guy as a Piston who got bigger and stronger and played PF, but he wasn't like Marion when he was playing PF in terms of size bulk wise.

The problem again with the Minor and Harper comparison is that you only picked one stat, scoring and their shooting numbers. Harper could play point, he was a ball handler, he was a good passer, he was a shut down defensive player. Minor was not any of those things. Now if they had a similar style, just that Minor was less versatile, then you actually could say Minor is a less talented version. If we go beyond scoring, it's a 16/5/5/2stl guy and a 17/4/2/0.8 stl guy, they are no longer so comparable, those are VERY different players now. Not to mention that if we are looking more at pre-injury Harper, it's more of a 19/5/5/2 stl player per 36 that we are talking about.

...and again, we are missing the less talented part, Reggie is a hustle, energy, rebound machine, guy who thinks he can defend. Rodman is a hustle, energy, rebound machine who CAN defend, and has athletic and physical traits that make him far more versatile.

I guess a more "accurate" true poor man's Rodman would be Junk Yard Dog Jerome Williams as he was closer in athletic ability, also more capable of stepping out and guarding 3's as he was a SF/PF, but he wasn't the defensive rebounder that these guys are (but that's why he's the poor version) and better than both offensively. Also not truly undersized at 6'9 height wise, but he was lankier when he first came to the league, and of course not as good a defender as Rodman was. He had the athletic ability and versatility too as well as the energy / hustle type game. Someone did call him something like "Rodman without attitude", soo...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puTbE7hFN_4[/youtube]
User avatar
adiedanny
Senior
Posts: 721
And1: 5
Joined: Jul 07, 2006
Location: Covina,Ca

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#53 » by adiedanny » Sun Jun 9, 2013 8:27 am

og15 wrote:
Neddy wrote:it's apples and oranges, again, rodman was a SF who later played out of position as an undersized PF who was able to cover many positions, and reggie is a legit sized PF who is limited in his versatility.

here is an example of your logic

harold miner per 36 .522 TS career FG% 46%, per36 scoring 17.3 and .311 3pt and .785 FT for his career
ron harper per 36 TS @ .511 career FG% 44.6%, per36 scoring 16.1 and .289 3pt and .720 FT for his career

can you logically say according to these hypothetical per 36 stats that they were similar players, based on these stats? i have watched both players from beginning to the end of their careers, even played against harold miner in a pick up game in the valley north of LA in early 90s. and there is no doubt in my eyes or anyone who have watched their games that they were completely different players with different styles, and harper was a far superior player over miner.

...but Reggie IS a similar player to Rodman in terms of where his impact comes from. Hustle, energy, defense, he just doesn't have the tools. Reggie basically the size of a SF himself at 6'8, Rodman 6'7 was the skinny guy as a Piston who got bigger and stronger and played PF, but he wasn't like Marion when he was playing PF in terms of size bulk wise.

The problem again with the Minor and Harper comparison is that you only picked one stat, scoring and their shooting numbers. Harper could play point, he was a ball handler, he was a good passer, he was a shut down defensive player. Minor was not any of those things. Now if they had a similar style, just that Minor was less versatile, then you actually could say Minor is a less talented version. If we go beyond scoring, it's a 16/5/5/2stl guy and a 17/4/2/0.8 stl guy, they are no longer so comparable, those are VERY different players now. Not to mention that if we are looking more at pre-injury Harper, it's more of a 19/5/5/2 stl player per 36 that we are talking about.

...and again, we are missing the less talented part, Reggie is a hustle, energy, rebound machine, guy who thinks he can defend. Rodman is a hustle, energy, rebound machine who CAN defend, and has athletic and physical traits that make him far more versatile.

I guess a more "accurate" true poor man's Rodman would be Junk Yard Dog Jerome Williams as he was closer in athletic ability, also more capable of stepping out and guarding 3's as he was a SF/PF, but he wasn't the defensive rebounder that these guys are (but that's why he's the poor version) and better than both offensively. Also not truly undersized at 6'9 height wise, but he was lankier when he first came to the league, and of course not as good a defender as Rodman was. He had the athletic ability and versatility too as well as the energy / hustle type game. Someone did call him something like "Rodman without attitude", soo...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puTbE7hFN_4[/youtube]

Nope another fail. Rodman is a HOF legend. Do you think any of your players you brought up will get any HOF votes?
User avatar
Neddy
RealGM
Posts: 15,865
And1: 3,908
Joined: Jan 28, 2012
     

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#54 » by Neddy » Sun Jun 9, 2013 5:17 pm

now that i sobered up this morning and had a chance to read back the posts, i see that we've been arguing over semantics of "less talented" versus "poorman's version" description.

who cares, guys. let's move on. this looks pretty petty when EtOH isn't running through my brain.
ehhhhh f it.
og15
Forum Mod - Clippers
Forum Mod - Clippers
Posts: 50,753
And1: 33,552
Joined: Jun 23, 2004
Location: NBA Fan
 

Re: Brian Shaw 

Post#55 » by og15 » Sun Jun 9, 2013 5:41 pm

Nope another fail. Rodman is a HOF legend. Do you think any of your players you brought up will get any HOF votes?
You're still totally missing the point, Neddy's got it though, of course the poor man's version shouldn't get any HOF votes. If they did they wouldn't be a poor mans's version, lol.
RiversideClips
Rookie
Posts: 1,093
And1: 72
Joined: Jul 29, 2009

Re-boot Brian Shaw 

Post#56 » by RiversideClips » Tue Jun 11, 2013 7:56 pm

Hey Folks, last month I posted about the possibility of Brian Shaw becoming the next Clipper's Head Coach; there was so much feed back, positive & negative. As the coaching search is intensifying I would love to hear some more discussion on who should get the job.
I am not a Brian Shaw backer, I just find it interesting that he has been on the radar of about 4 other teams, maybe he is the flavour of the month. Thanks in advance
mkwest
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 26,910
And1: 5,728
Joined: Dec 18, 2005
   

Re: Re-boot Brian Shaw 

Post#57 » by mkwest » Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:54 am

RiversideClips wrote:Hey Folks, last month I posted about the possibility of Brian Shaw becoming the next Clipper's Head Coach; there was so much feed back, positive & negative. As the coaching search is intensifying I would love to hear some more discussion on who should get the job.
I am not a Brian Shaw backer, I just find it interesting that he has been on the radar of about 4 other teams, maybe he is the flavour of the month. Thanks in advance


I merged the topic to keep the discussion on Shaw all in once place.

Atm it seems like Shaw, Scott, Hollins and McMillan are the primary candidates. They're each being interviewed this week and supposedly the Clippers will be done interviewing all candidates by Thursday. We have not heard anything about Karl being interviewed in person. I'm not sure if that means he's not being considered or not, since he's one of few coaches that you don't interview, if you want him you just offer him a contract.

I think that if the Clippers want him, they'll get him. His first choice is to coach this team. The emergence of Kidd in Brooklyn really puts the Clippers in the driver's seat to control their own destiny amongst the remaining candidates.

For a few years, he's been someone that many players and people within the league have believed should be one of the next assistants to become a head coach. He's been able to relate to players really well, while also being able to confront them when necessary. Pacer players rave over him. Shaq and Kobe have said that he's the reason that they probably don't get all of those championships if he wasn't there to keep things calm. If you don't follow those teams in detail, then the anecdotes and opinions of those players may not hold much weight.

As is the case with most first-time coaches, there are a bunch of questions and a lot of uncertainties. Most people will look at Shaw and the first thing that will come to mind is the Triangle. He says that the Triangle may or may not be included in his offensive scheme, but that he is far from married to it. Just how much was he responsible for Indiana's defensive schemes? We won't truly know the answers to these concerns until we actually see him in action for a reasonable amount of time.

Due to the uncertainty, it is a risky hire. If you want to know what you're getting into beforehand, then he's probably not that appealing. I just want to see the team get better. If he can do that, then I'm happy. Some of the candidates that have a history, it's hard for me to get excited about because they are who they are at this point in their coaching career. With Shaw (and the other assistants that were available), there's untapped potential that you may be hiring the next great coach a la Tom Thibodeau.
User avatar
QRich3
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,844
And1: 3,947
Joined: Apr 03, 2011
 

Re: Brian Shaw (Merged) 

Post#58 » by QRich3 » Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:09 pm

Even if I don't know crap about his coaching skills I think I'd be ok with him as our coach. Either he has the GOAT publicist or he's gonna be a good coach for years to come in this league. There hasn't been this much hype for an assistant coach since Thibbs, and we all know how that turned out.

He seems like a players coach and he apparently has a lot of respect from his colleagues, which is gonna be important when assembling his team of assistants. Who, let's be honest, are the ones who make a difference on the way a team plays.

It's important that he's been credited a lot for the Pacers success, a defense first team that runs nothing resembling the triangle. I hope he can be a versatile coach that can adapt to the strengths of his roster and creat or adjust a system around the players, instead of trying to do the opposite.
GetItDone
Analyst
Posts: 3,304
And1: 212
Joined: Jan 28, 2012

Re: Brian Shaw (Merged) 

Post#59 » by GetItDone » Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:01 pm

If these reports of Rivers possibly leaving Boston, I want him.

Bring Pierce and KG, too.
ThatsWhatIShved wrote:Disrespectfull thread. I would take 06 Arenas over Lebron. Other than traveling and suspected PED use, what does Lebron have over Gil?

Return to Los Angeles Clippers