Your Unpopular Basketball Opinions? [PC Board Edition]

[Goudelock]

I enjoy watching Jamal Crawford as much as any player in the NBA.

[Narigo]

Wade is not a clear cut better player than Drexler all-time. They are extremely comparable statistically. One can argue that Drexler is actually better.

[Clyde Frazier]

I think the '06-07 Suns win the title if the NBA behaved reasonably after Robert Horry's body check of Nash.

I don’t think that’s unpopular, at least for those who watched the series at the time. They certainly would’ve been favored over the cavs if they made it out of the west.

[Doctor MJ]

So you're a Basketball reasons truther?

Wasnt the whole deal the league said they wouldnt interfere, and went back on it because they didnt think the return helped/couldnt sell it if paul was there? So they essentially went back on their word though if they never gave it they would have been fine since it was league owned at the time right?

If so I think it's shady for certain

Sent from my SM-T550 using RealGM mobile app

Well it is that they went back on their word, but it's a fallacy to think "if only they hadn't said anything" because the moment they took over NO, the owners needed to know precisely what that meant. They set up people with one set of expectations, and they engaged in the risk of putting players on the trade block because of this.

But again, to me the truly dirty thing is that I don't think they do this with other teams. I think they went back on their word precisely because the other owners got outraged, and I don't think the owners get outraged like this for other franchises.

To be fair, I don't think the league, or the outrage, would be the same if they Lakers then were in the state of the Lakers now. It had everything to do with the fact that the Lakers had already won 5 titles with Kobe Bryant and seemed poised with Paul to possibly when more.

Also, with David Stern there was a recurring theme of decisions being made based on appearances rather than fairness. I think to this point Adam Silver has been considerably more reasonable.

[Doctor MJ]

I think the '06-07 Suns win the title if the NBA behaved reasonably after Robert Horry's body check of Nash.

I don’t think that’s unpopular, at least for those who watched the series at the time. They certainly would’ve been favored over the cavs if they made it out of the west.

I think those watching at the time with proper perspective agree, but there was a reason the Suns basically gave up on the SSOL model after that year. There were legions of voices proclaiming that the Suns simply couldn't beat the Spurs playing with that "gimmick".

I do think that Sarver is one of the stupidest owners of all-time. There are a lot of ways to screw up a franchise, but it's pretty crazy to me to basically have the prototype for what would become the dominant way of playing basketball and to give up on it so quickly after being so close to beating the champs.

[Wooderson]

Spoiler:

One
As I've pointed out previously, Lebron collectively for nearly his whole career ('05-present) has been well above average from 3-10 feet, including the single-best efficiency that I've yet found from that range. I know, I know....you're going to say you're not saying "bad" compared to the average player, but "bad" compared to top 10 players. But actually, that isn't true either.

Compared to top 10(ish) players, he more or less holds his own in this range (for reference, Lebron collectively in the rs----from '05-present, so I can't be accused of cherry-picking years----was 43.6% from 3-10 ft)........
You'd posted some numbers for Michael Jordan (I think it was like a 3 or 5 year sample??, and I didn't question the source) as 50% from 3-10 feet......so he's clearly better than LEbron.
I don't have any shooting stats for Larry Bird, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say he's better during his prime, likely by a similar margin as Jordan. Ditto Kareem; with that sky-hook, I'm going to assume he's significantly better in this range (probably the GOAT, actually).
Kobe (I don't have him in my top 10, but some do) from '01-'13 was 45.2% from this range....so he's just a slightly better.
I have no numbers, but I'll speculate (for the sake of argument, if for no other) that Magic is maybe a little better too (probably in similar range as Kobe); though this is unproven. EDIT: And Kevin Garnett '01-'12 was 44.6% from this range (so, slightly better).

And that's basically it for top 10(ish) players who are clearly better from this range. Tim Duncan from '01-'13 was 44.0% from 3-10 ft. I speculate that Hakeem was roughly similar to Duncan from this range, considering that outside of his rookie season (53.8% FG's), he was <53% FG's every year of his career (and avg 51.4% from '86-'96).....so unless his finishing % from <3 ft is actually really pedestrian, it's reasonably safe to assume that he wasn't any higher than maybe 45% from 3-10 ft (was 37.9% from this range in his final two seasons, for whatever that's worth).

Shaquille O'Neal was 42.5% ('01-'05) from 3-10 ft; so Lebron appears at least equal if not marginally better than Shaq in this range. Based on watching film, total FG% and assumed finishing % at the rim, etc, it's a reasonable assumption that Wilt's conversion rate in the 3-10 ft range was no better than Shaq.

And based on watching some film, his total FG% and assumed finishing %'s at the rim, it's a VERY easy assumption that Bill Russell was significantly worse from this range.

So actually still not bad, even compared to top 10 company; more or less middle of the pack here.


Two
I've asked previously (and not received a reply) if you hold various aspects of other top 10(ish) players to similar standards, or if this is simply a double-standard you hold to Lebron alone.
Example: Magic was a mediocre to poor defender. And not mediocre to poor compared to his top 10 competition; mediocre to poor relative to a league-average guard. But this is apparently totally cool, yes?


Three
For the sake of argument, let's just assume the hyperbolic "cannot shoot" statement were true.....I'd previously asked (and again not received an answer) why it matters when he nonetheless manages to be an all-time great level scorer?

For example, let's make a statistical comparison of him to Larry Bird (whom I think we can all agree was an amazing shooter from all ranges) as a scorer (using per 100 possession numbers btw).....
Larry Bird '86-'88 (best 3-year span)
34.4 pts @ 60.0% TS, 3.8 tov in rs
29.5 pts @ 57.6% TS. 3.3 tov in playoffs

Lebron James '12-'14
37.8 pts @ 63.3% TS, 4.6 tov in rs
37.4 pts @ 60.4% TS, 4.3 tov in playoffs

Larry Bird '82-'88 (solidly in prime, 7 years)
32.2 pts @ 58.0% TS, 3.8 tov in rs
29.2 pts @ 56.2% TS, 3.6 tov in playoffs

Lebron James '06-present (solidly in prime, 12 years)
37.7 pts @ 59.4% TS, 4.7 tov in rs
36.4 pts @ 56.8% TS, 4.6 tov in playoffs


I mean, this "inability" to shoot would really only effect his game as a scorer......and yet he's clearly managed to be a better scorer [and for a longer period of time] than Larry Bird (a fantastic shooter). So I ask again, why does it matter? When the very thing it pertains to is something he's still elite at (in an all-time sense), why does it matter?

Excellent post, again.

So I take it General Manager didn't respond to your other detailed post similar to this one in the thread that got locked? I had him on ignore but given the numerous posts he made after your response in that thread I assumed he must have replied. I took him off ignore for a second and see that he still hasn't given you a response. Why am I not surprised?

[mikejames23]

I don't understand the obsession with TS%. Truly. I use it myself to measure efficient scoring... but it has gone to determining a player's true worth. This shouldn't be happening.

[COSBY]

I'd be interested to hear your reasoning (Malone is a guy I have trouble placing).

Objectively, I understand how Hakeem is better. The rings, versatility, etc. However my reason stems from extensively watching the NBA in the 90s. Malone's big number consistency and Jazz winning culture seemed so dominate. Malone never got hurt and never had a bad season. He was remarkable. His only fault was losing to Jordan's Bulls. Meanwhile, Olajuwon had some subpar seasons and some injury plagued seasons that hurt his legacy IMO. Plus he had the luxury of bypassing Jordan in the finals. I think those 97 and 98 Jazz teams could beat the Championship Rocket teams.

The Rockets were one of the weakest champions of all-time, no doubt in my mind.

How do you view Stockton?

.

The best teammate of all time. Much like Malone, great consistency and longevity. Top 20-25 player of all time. All time leader in assist and steals, I don't think we will see another player to be the all time leader in 2 of the 5 major stat categories. It's fun watching these TNT round tables where retired players talk about the game; Payton, Webber, Kerr all praise Stockton for his toughness and greatness.

[ThaRegul8r]

I enjoy watching Jamal Crawford as much as any player in the NBA.

This isn't an opinion though, it's your subjective preference. No one can reasonably take issue with what players someone likes to watch.

[Clyde Frazier]

I don't understand the obsession with TS%. Truly. I use it myself to measure efficient scoring... but it has gone to determining a player's true worth. This shouldn't be happening.

I mean, this really just goes back to looking at 1 metric as a poor way of evaluating players. It does answer the question, “how efficiently did this person score?” It’s then up to the person looking at it to understand context of that efficiency and that there are obviously other skills that go into a good player.

[BasketballFan7]

Heres one that i view as being unpopular...

Todays generation of fans are so accustomed now to guard dominant scoring play....that players arent adored as much unless that player contributes in multiple categories or that player doesnt have the ball run through them as much. Also TS% is getting slightly over rated in player comparisons.

Fantasy sports era. I agree.

[sp6r=underrated]

1. Dirk was better than Kobe.
2. If you believe Nash was better offensively than Kobe you should rank Nash well above Kobe from 05-10.
3. Wilt wasn't as bad mentally as people believe. His primary problem mentally was the NBA really was a minor league for parts of the 60s.

[Quotatious]

Gap between 1989-91 Kevin Johnson and 2005-07 Steve Nash is rather small (sans for 1991 playoffs for KJ, where he sucked). KJ would be even better in the current era, because he would develop a 3-point shot earlier in his career and would be able to get to the rim more easily. I think Johnson was MUCH better than Tony Parker, and see how successful TP has been in the current era (they are pretty similar players stylistically, KJ is just clearly better).

Kevin Johnson is equal or a bit better than Isiah Thomas as a player.

Terry Cummings was the best player in 1982 draft class, over Wilkins and Worthy, and he's one of the most underrated players of all-time (look at his numbers from 1983 to 1992, when he was healthy and in his prime, and see how well his game translated to the playoffs).

Scottie Pippen and Pau Gasol are very comparable both in terms of peak and career. Gap between them on all-time lists shouldn't be larger than 5 spots.

[GeneralManager]

Spoiler:

One
As I've pointed out previously, Lebron collectively for nearly his whole career ('05-present) has been well above average from 3-10 feet, including the single-best efficiency that I've yet found from that range. I know, I know....you're going to say you're not saying "bad" compared to the average player, but "bad" compared to top 10 players. But actually, that isn't true either.

Compared to top 10(ish) players, he more or less holds his own in this range (for reference, Lebron collectively in the rs----from '05-present, so I can't be accused of cherry-picking years----was 43.6% from 3-10 ft)........
You'd posted some numbers for Michael Jordan (I think it was like a 3 or 5 year sample??, and I didn't question the source) as 50% from 3-10 feet......so he's clearly better than LEbron.
I don't have any shooting stats for Larry Bird, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say he's better during his prime, likely by a similar margin as Jordan. Ditto Kareem; with that sky-hook, I'm going to assume he's significantly better in this range (probably the GOAT, actually).
Kobe (I don't have him in my top 10, but some do) from '01-'13 was 45.2% from this range....so he's just a slightly better.
I have no numbers, but I'll speculate (for the sake of argument, if for no other) that Magic is maybe a little better too (probably in similar range as Kobe); though this is unproven. EDIT: And Kevin Garnett '01-'12 was 44.6% from this range (so, slightly better).

And that's basically it for top 10(ish) players who are clearly better from this range. Tim Duncan from '01-'13 was 44.0% from 3-10 ft. I speculate that Hakeem was roughly similar to Duncan from this range, considering that outside of his rookie season (53.8% FG's), he was <53% FG's every year of his career (and avg 51.4% from '86-'96).....so unless his finishing % from <3 ft is actually really pedestrian, it's reasonably safe to assume that he wasn't any higher than maybe 45% from 3-10 ft (was 37.9% from this range in his final two seasons, for whatever that's worth).

Shaquille O'Neal was 42.5% ('01-'05) from 3-10 ft; so Lebron appears at least equal if not marginally better than Shaq in this range. Based on watching film, total FG% and assumed finishing % at the rim, etc, it's a reasonable assumption that Wilt's conversion rate in the 3-10 ft range was no better than Shaq.

And based on watching some film, his total FG% and assumed finishing %'s at the rim, it's a VERY easy assumption that Bill Russell was significantly worse from this range.

So actually still not bad, even compared to top 10 company; more or less middle of the pack here.


Two
I've asked previously (and not received a reply) if you hold various aspects of other top 10(ish) players to similar standards, or if this is simply a double-standard you hold to Lebron alone.
Example: Magic was a mediocre to poor defender. And not mediocre to poor compared to his top 10 competition; mediocre to poor relative to a league-average guard. But this is apparently totally cool, yes?


Three
For the sake of argument, let's just assume the hyperbolic "cannot shoot" statement were true.....I'd previously asked (and again not received an answer) why it matters when he nonetheless manages to be an all-time great level scorer?

For example, let's make a statistical comparison of him to Larry Bird (whom I think we can all agree was an amazing shooter from all ranges) as a scorer (using per 100 possession numbers btw).....
Larry Bird '86-'88 (best 3-year span)
34.4 pts @ 60.0% TS, 3.8 tov in rs
29.5 pts @ 57.6% TS. 3.3 tov in playoffs

Lebron James '12-'14
37.8 pts @ 63.3% TS, 4.6 tov in rs
37.4 pts @ 60.4% TS, 4.3 tov in playoffs

Larry Bird '82-'88 (solidly in prime, 7 years)
32.2 pts @ 58.0% TS, 3.8 tov in rs
29.2 pts @ 56.2% TS, 3.6 tov in playoffs

Lebron James '06-present (solidly in prime, 12 years)
37.7 pts @ 59.4% TS, 4.7 tov in rs
36.4 pts @ 56.8% TS, 4.6 tov in playoffs


I mean, this "inability" to shoot would really only effect his game as a scorer......and yet he's clearly managed to be a better scorer [and for a longer period of time] than Larry Bird (a fantastic shooter). So I ask again, why does it matter? When the very thing it pertains to is something he's still elite at (in an all-time sense), why does it matter?

Excellent post, again.

So I take it General Manager didn't respond to your other detailed post similar to this one in the thread that got locked? I had him on ignore but given the numerous posts he made after your response in that thread I assumed he must have replied. I took him off ignore for a second and see that he still hasn't given you a response. Why am I not surprised?

As I explained to trex, I will get back to you.

None of us are dying tomorrow. Time is on our side, relax.

[Quotatious]

I enjoy watching Jamal Crawford as much as any player in the NBA.

I have an irrational love for Andrew Wiggins as a player. Objectively he's not very good, but he's SO fun to watch on offense. Sort of similar to the enjoyment you get from watching Crawford.

[bondom34]

Not sure how unpopular here but to the general NBA population it seems so. I find the Clippers likable. Enjoy watching them and root for them most times.

[GeneralManager]

Not sure how unpopular here but to the general NBA population it seems so. I find the Clippers likable. Enjoy watching them and root for them most times.

More likeable than this Jazz team?

I think this Jazz team is the most likeable in the league. I am rooting for them.

[THKNKG]

I enjoy watching Jamal Crawford as much as any player in the NBA.

This isn't an opinion though, it's your subjective preference. No one can reasonably take issue with what players someone likes to watch.

Is subjective preference not an opinion?

[bondom34]

Not sure how unpopular here but to the general NBA population it seems so. I find the Clippers likable. Enjoy watching them and root for them most times.

More likeable than this Jazz team?

I think this Jazz team is the most likeable in the league. I am rooting for them.

I like them too. Don't really care who wins that series.

[HeartBreakKid]

That Dr. J one is though. Any reason behind that line of thinking?

I haven't put a whole lot of thought into this (I mostly threw it out there because I was tired of the LeBron-centric "discussion" and wanted to change the topic of conversation), but here goes: So Dr J was not someone that you could rely on to hit an open jumper at all. He catapulted it towards the rim and it never looked like it was going in. His facilitating was good, but nothing out of this world. For someone who looked like he could've been a Pippen or Leonard caliber defensive player, he never displayed that level of defensive dominance on a consistent basis. Lastly, he seemed to be frustratingly passive at times, and would just float around for stretches at a time (similar to Durant). He didn't take control of games in the way that I thought that he would, with the exception of the 77 Finals.

I haven't as much Dr. J footage as I could've, so maybe I just haven't seen enough and am wildly off base? So feel free to pick holes in my post if you want.

Doesn't this describe Giannis?