If several different people start calling you out you should start contemplating the fact that maybe it is for a reason.
Dude, I already told you that I know what stats mean just fine. I'm not the one here trying all different kind of spins to try and make it fit with what I'm saying. Again, there's a reason this is a "you vs everybody" argument. Are you so ing conceited that you think you are the only one analyzing stats the right way and everybody else is wrong?No, my "go-to move" is to actually know what the arguments put forth by the stats are. They don't say what you want them to say, which has been your issue this whole time. You keep citing them and hoping they support your argument without really knowing anything about them.
It isn't just because of Manu son. The offense runs better without Tony because he can't shoot. At the end of games when you want your top player with the ball in his hands is better to have Mills than Tony as an off-ball threat.A lot of these just show you can't understand/remember a person's arguments.
-For the first one, it's obvious that you can't tell the difference between the offense running better with Manu versus the offense running better without Parker. We know Manu's a better facilitator than Tony. The bench usually has the superior differential, and that's one of the big reasons. But that doesn't mean that having Tony playing over Murray or even Mills isn't an improvement.
I already conceded that a post up could be seen as an isolation, or even some spot up plays could be seen as isolation plays too, but then again, if you up Kawhi's isolation numbers to consider those plays, the number of everybody else would increase and Kawhi will still be among the superstar players that uses isolation the less in the NBA. We have already gone through this. How ing slow are you?Two you know so little about basketball that you can only use one definition of iso to make an argument. Anyone else wouldn't have a problem with saying post-ups are usually also iso plays or that simply getting a screen and then shooting isn't functionally different.
Except they aren't. Scoring a bit more because you have to shoot more to make up for the absence of your best player doesn't mean you are playing better. It just means that you are shooting more. How is Patty playing better when he's having one of his worst shooting seasons ever?Yes, it's possible for a group of players to be playing better even though they aren't elite scorers. Danny could get worlds better on offense and still not be half as good as Leonard.
And those who are indeed playing better are not playing better because of the "cancer" Kawhi not playing. They are playing better because of self improvement (Forbes), more playing time (Kyle) and self admitted more effort (LA).
Of course there's more to basketball than shooting, but with designed shooters such as Patty shooting is kind of a big deal. Besides it's not like he has been diming left and right or playing stellar D out there to say that he has been making up for his sub-par shooting.Should be able to tell there's more to the playing than shooting, but even if you didn't, you should have known Patty's shooting has been fine since the start of November (40 percent from three).
Ane yeah, Patty is shooting 40% since November. How is that % better than what he has done playing alongside Kawhi. I expect Mills to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of Kawhi's come back.
What?So you're just going to come over that you knew so little about stats that you cited the wrong one earlier? , I might have to double-check all your links from now on, just to make sure they aren't fake. Even after all this, I gave you the benefit of the doubt to know how to look something up. But it was too much.
I don't know what the you are talking about, but everytime I cite a stat I provide a link. That's what got you so butthurt in the first place when I call you out on your re ed Kawhiso .
"Even if the facts show that is elite, it trully isn't because I say so". And that ladies and gentlemen has been Chinook throughout this thread.I don't have an issue with Kawhi. I have an issue with Kawhiso. That's not a nickname for the player. The team's offense as it was won't work. Even if it looks fine statistically,it created a unit where only one guy could score. That's how you got folks thinking the team was going to be horrible without Kawhi. I've said numerous times that a) Kawhi coming back will make the team contenders and b) Kawhi needs to iso to be his best. But that can't just be done the way it has been. It won't create enough movement to get other guys involved. That was something I've actually gone into detail explaining, but it apparently went way beyond you.