2013-2014 NBA Thread - IND @ WAS and OKC @ LAC on ESPN

[MambaMentality824]

I don't view things that way,

I always value peak production (over a players prime years) over longevity. I want to know what a player was at his best and I compare them that way,

If you like a longevity, thats you, think its irrelevant that's why its my list.


If tim duncan beats miami and wins a 5th ring my opinion of him stays the same, only interested in what they were at their best.


EDIT


Tmac is not comparable to melo.

That is a terrible way to evaluate a player when determining there all time ranking IMO. How is longevity not a HUGE HUGE factor? Look at it from the franchises perspective, having a guy who is cornerstone for 10-15 years is infinitely more valuable than a guy who may have been a little better in his prime, but that prime only lasted 5 years. Finding someone who was consistently an all time great is hard to find and the group is very small. The guy with the longevity is so much more valuable it's not even a comparison.No way T-Mac deserves to be in the same grouping as Wade and Kobe. TMac is currently younger than Kobe, dude hasn't been relevant for years. Yet he deserves to be in the same tier as those guys? No way. Longevity factor is the reason Kobe is clear cut ahead of Wade too. Both in their prime? Sure the difference is not too much, but overall how long a player can sustain their greatness ends up being a top factor in their all time ranking for me.

 

[urbetterthenme]

No Kerry Kittles?

List invalid.

lol man ur funny

 

[dman14]

tmac was a better and willing passer, defender (esp during his toronto days). their gms arent even similar. tmac was like a pippen player offensively. melo is one of the better scorers we have seen.

 

[urbetterthenme]

That is a terrible way to evaluate a player when determining there all time ranking IMO. How is longevity not a HUGE HUGE factor? Look at it from the franchises perspective, having a guy who is cornerstone for 10-15 years is infinitely more valuable than a guy who may have been a little better in his prime, but that prime only lasted 5 years. Finding someone who was consistently an all time great is hard to find and the group is very small. The guy with the longevity is so much more valuable it's not even a comparison.No way T-Mac deserves to be in the same grouping as Wade and Kobe. TMac is currently younger than Kobe, dude hasn't been relevant for years. Yet he deserves to be in the same tier as those guys? No way. Longevity factor is the reason Kobe is clear cut ahead of Wade too. Both in their prime? Sure the difference is not too much, but overall how long a player can sustain their greatness ends up being a top factor in their all time ranking for me.

OKK neveer uses facts. Best to ignore the troll

 

[nelson999]

Thunder vs Blazers on NBA TV 

 

[urbetterthenme]

tmac was a better and willing passer, defender (esp during his toronto days). their gms arent even similar. tmac was like a pippen player offensively. melo is one of the better scorers we have seen.

No Mac was a WAYYYY better scorer than Pippen. Not even close

 

[JD617]

T-Mac was a far better distributor than Melo while being as good of a scorer and a better defender. Their peaks are not really comparable, T-Mac's 3-year stretch from '01-'03 was easily better than Melo's from '12 to now. And Melo will never approach T-Mac's '02-'03 season.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

melo has had more team success than tmac, their Average pers are within 1.5. Apart from tmacs single 30 per season his top seasons are very simular in terms of per to melo. Melo has a higher true shooting %.

How are they not comparable? Do you watch basketball?

Ill do this once.

PER, has some blind spots obviously as any all in rating system does, it tends to overrated the value of "creating" a shot and underrated players who's impact is not necessarily contained within a box score. Guys like Steve Nash, Steph Curry, who's shooting and passing puts a immense amount of pressure on nba defensive schemes creating easier scoring opportunities for the entire offense that aren't necessarily tracked by an assits or FGM get underrated by PER.

Carmelo and Allen Iverson best skill happens to be the most inefficient play in basketball, it means you end up running the most inefficient play in basketball far more than than any offense should, and also end up making defensive sacrifices that make it very difficult to win championship.

Carmelo makes you play him at the four, it means you have no rim protection when Tyson is in pick and roll coverage.

So when you look at a statistic like Adjusted plus minus which attempts to capture, those non box score impacts you start seeing the effects of the trade offs that Allen Iverson and Carmelo Anthony force you to make.


so you take a look at guys who are the main cogs on their squads in allen iverson MVP year.

Name	                     Offense	Defense Off+Def 
Shaquille O'Neal	                 7.7	            3.5	11.1	
Tim Duncan	                 2.7	           5.7		8.4	
David Robinson	                 1.0	           7.1		8.0	
John Stockton	                 5.5	           1.5		7.0	
Kevin Garnett	                 1.9	           3.6		5.5	
Dirk Nowitzki	                 2.8	           2.6		5.4	
Vince Carter	                 5.4	           -0.3        5.2	
Karl Malone	                 3.6	           1.2		4.7	
Tracy McGrady	                 3.6	           1.1		4.7	
Ray Allen	                         5.4	          -0.7	        4.7	
Chris Webber	                 1.3	           3.0		4.3	
Paul Pierce	                 3.2	           1.0		4.2	
Kobe Bryant	                 4.3	           -0.2	4.0	
Jermaine O'Neal	                 -1.0	           4.7		3.7	
Jason Kidd	                 1.6	           1.8		3.3	
Steve Francis	                 3.5	           -0.2	3.3	
Allen Iverson	                 4.2	           -1.0	3.2

now none of these rating systems are perfect and Allen Iverson may get penalized moore becuase he took so many shots, but that is my point having one guy use that much of your offense and shoot 39% is NOT GOOD.

 

[urbetterthenme]

 
T-Mac was a far better distributor than Melo while being as good of a scorer and a better defender. Their peaks are not really comparable, T-Mac's 3-year stretch from '01-'03 was easily better than Melo's from '12 to now. And Melo will never approach T-Mac's '02-'03 season.

People forget T mac was what people wished Pippen wouldve became. A great defender and great scorer. T mac is better than Melo.

 

[urbetterthenme]

T mac was a 6 8 pg/sg/sf. Pretty much a better scoring LEbron

 

[lawdog1]

Thunder vs Blazers on NBA TV 

Go Thunder!

Heat v. Suns should be good too, for people in those areas or with League Pass.

 

[calibeebee]

Thunder vs Blazers on NBA TV 

Go Thunder!

Heat v. Suns should be good too, for people in those areas or with League Pass.

damn blazers have okc and clippers back-to-back. This could get ugly

 

[osh kosh bosh]

That is a terrible way to evaluate a player when determining there all time ranking IMO. How is longevity not a HUGE HUGE factor? Look at it from the franchises perspective, having a guy who is cornerstone for 10-15 years is infinitely more valuable than a guy who may have been a little better in his prime, but that prime only lasted 5 years. Finding someone who was consistently an all time great is hard to find and the group is very small. The guy with the longevity is so much more valuable it's not even a comparison.No way T-Mac deserves to be in the same grouping as Wade and Kobe. TMac is currently younger than Kobe, dude hasn't been relevant for years. Yet he deserves to be in the same tier as those guys? No way. Longevity factor is the reason Kobe is clear cut ahead of Wade too. Both in their prime? Sure the difference is not too much, but overall how long a player can sustain their greatness ends up being a top factor in their all time ranking for me.

it isn't for me, I accept that other people have a different view, and I think its just as valid


but it just isn't for me; when I sit back and remember a player a remember them at their best and to me thats what matters.

 

[sea manup]

My phone is at 3% so ill respond to all that tonight, if you would have posted those stats in the first place instead of typing pages and pages of garbage we would have saved a lot of time and phone battery

 

[osh kosh bosh]

My phone is at 3% so ill respond to all that tonight, if you would have posted those stats in the first place instead of typing pages and pages of garbage we would have saved a lot of time and phone battery

]
i've alrady made all these points a thousand times, im not going to do it everytime you can;t understand something that is very simple.

 

[kevi]

I can't keep up with what's being talked about in this post half the time as it moves super fast. not sure the scope of this all time shooting guard convo, but yall let Bron get away with this "i will be top 4 all time" ish? smh

is he not right tho?

 

[bonafide hustla]

is he not right tho?

NO

 

[ballinsam23]

Tmac was 7 feet tall stop.

 

[urbetterthenme]

NO

Lebron is right. Hes top 4 already tbh

 

[kal-el-8]

Tmac was 7 feet tall stop.

 

[kevi]

NO

el oh el

 

[bonafide hustla]

Lebron is right. Hes top 4 already tbh

el oh el

yall can slurp him like yall want and follow along with him trying to change up the rules of the game/carve his own lane, but I'm not. He still gets the same criteria as every other player that played in the NBA. I watched the likes of Jordan, Hakeem with my own eyes.

but he listed Magic, Jordan, Big O, and Larry Bird.
yall probably as unaware as him
I'm surprised he didn't list his boy A.I.

 

[blastercombo]

TMacs prime lasted as long as middle school if not shorter. He's out the picture

 

[antidope]

 

I can't keep up with what's being talked about in this post half the time as it moves super fast. not sure the scope of this all time shooting guard convo, but yall let Bron get away with this "i will be top 4 all time" ish? smh

 

[sea manup]

That is a terrible way to evaluate a player when determining there all time ranking IMO. How is longevity not a HUGE HUGE factor? Look at it from the franchises perspective, having a guy who is cornerstone for 10-15 years is infinitely more valuable than a guy who may have been a little better in his prime, but that prime only lasted 5 years. Finding someone who was consistently an all time great is hard to find and the group is very small. The guy with the longevity is so much more valuable it's not even a comparison.No way T-Mac deserves to be in the same grouping as Wade and Kobe. TMac is currently younger than Kobe, dude hasn't been relevant for years. Yet he deserves to be in the same tier as those guys? No way. Longevity factor is the reason Kobe is clear cut ahead of Wade too. Both in their prime? Sure the difference is not too much, but overall how long a player can sustain their greatness ends up being a top factor in their all time ranking for me.

it isn't for me, I accept that other people have a different view, and I think its just as valid


but it just isn't for me; when I sit back and remember a player a remember them at their best and to me thats what matters.

so lets take this a step further, because screw looking at players careers as a whole its better to pick and choose what defines a player.

Looking at kobes best two games he scored 81 points and 63 in three quarters. From this unbiased analysis (because I only care about players when they are at their best) I have come to the conclusion that kobe is better than jordan and arguably the greatest player of all time. Do I care that he only scored 30 the game after 81? Hell no I dont care about longevity.

Let me only look at the south and give you a proper analysis of the quality of american education.

Let me only look at Quebec and tell you the crime rates of canada as a whole

I have two people interviewing for a manager position at my coffee shop, they both seem to be great leaders but one can only work here for half a year while the other is willing to sign a two year contract. Im going to ignore that last part and flip a coin because longevity is pointless to me.