Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 169
  1. #126
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991


    We're done here folks.
    Did you just quote yourself randomly?

  2. #127
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,736
    Says the guy who tried to argue that you're right because some posters "call me out"
    If several different people start calling you out you should start contemplating the fact that maybe it is for a reason.

    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.
    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?

    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.
    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.

    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.
    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?

    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.
    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?

    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).

    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).
    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.

    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.

    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.
    What?

    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 .

    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.
    "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.
    Last edited by DAF86; 12-11-2017 at 01:50 AM.

  3. #128
    MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Post Count
    21,348
    Did you just quote yourself randomly?
    I was repeating my statement after yours.

  4. #129
    Spur for life YGWHI's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    6,332
    Should have continued to read then. But of course, taking people's quotes out of context has been your shtick for years now.
    Only a blind man would say the offense is better/they'are playing better, when every number says otherwise.

    But we already know that some guys are blinded by their hate.

    I've said this before, your real issue isn't Kawhi's usage, his game, whatever, your "deal is with Kawhi" like others said.

    It has always been futile to try to talk facts about him with you. It doesn't matter what stats say, you're desperate for finding a way to discredit them because...it's Kawhi.

  5. #130
    R.C. Drunkford TimDunkem's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    13,924

    "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.
    That's Chinook all the time. No one spins stats to suit his arguments quite like him.

  6. #131
    R.C. Drunkford TimDunkem's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    13,924
    That "The team's offense as it was won't work. Even if it looks fine statistically" quote though. Again, he's always been one to spin numbers to fit his arguments - he'll cite an extremely small sample size and say that's enough to make a case for someone, then turn around and say seasons worth of data means nothing in this particular case - or he'll do it to make himself look like the smartest guy in the room, but I'm surprised he just outed himself like that. The next best thing would have been a full-fledged admission of spinning stats.

  7. #132
    Spur for life YGWHI's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    6,332
    Dont wonder too much . David Robsinon set the bar Tim Duncan continued that team first mentality. It wont be an issue as Kawai learnt from the best. Only player fans thinks its an issue. Winning & les overcomes hurt feelings.
    Spurs never hurt David Robinson feelings, neither Tim's. Why will they do it with Kawhi? Only in your mind a team would want to hurt its best player's feeling.

  8. #133
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    All right. These posts will be whole pages if we don't start cutting them down.

    If several different people start calling you should start contemplating the fact that maybe it is for a reason.
    This and the next part is the same. I think you don't know stats and that most don't look. I have been completely clear on that, and you ting all over yourself whenever you try to make arguments about the numbers rather than just citing them is evidence enough.

    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.
    Yeah, it was because of Manu. Even if you think Tony was bad, the Spurs routinely had an elite bench in comparison to other benches. Manu was just that good, with all-time impact numbers.

    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 some of his worst shooting seasons ever?

    And those who are indeed playing better are not playing better because of the "cancer" Kawhi not being better. They are playing better because of self improvement (Forbes), more playing time (Kyle) and self admitted more effort (LA).
    This and the next are pretty much the same thing as well. First, stop acting like I said Kawhi was a cancer. In the last three exchanges I've gone out of my way to say that I have no issue with Kawhi and thing he's a fantastic offensive player. Repeated incorrect accusations doesn't make me look bad. It makes it seem like you can't follow an argument.

    Danny and Patty are playing better because they are using more parts of their games than they had been. LMA is playing better because he's getting better quality looks that force him to make faster decisions. If they had those things while also having a great scorer with them, it would be perfect. But they can't go back to 2016 mode (for whatever reason you want to give) just because Kawhi is an all-world scorer right now.

    What?

    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 .
    You incorrectly cited a stat from a random site as proof of your statistical superiority. It made me question the quality of all the evidence you've been giving. I'm usually a guy who looks up stats the morning after every game just to see if any trends are forming. But I don't fall all over the stats when having a dispute. So if someone cites a stat, I usually grant it. Only when the stats become the fulcrum of the conversation do I check them. I had just looked up the Spurs 2016-2017 ORtg for my last post), so I knew it wasn't sixth. So I couldn't just grant your claim and had to check. That's how I found out you were wrong. I hadn't been doing that. For all I know, Kawhi's iso count is way higher than three per game or whatever. I just assumed you correctly reported what you found.

    "Even if the facts show that is elite, it trully isn't because I say so".
    They weren't elite -- they were ninth.

  9. #134
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    That "The team's offense as it was won't work. Even if it looks fine statistically" quote though. Again, he's always been one to spin numbers to fit his arguments - he'll cite an extremely small sample size and say that's enough to make a case for someone, then turn around and say seasons worth of data means nothing in this particular case - or he'll do it to make himself look like the smartest guy in the room, but I'm surprised he just outed himself like that. The next best thing would have been a full-fledged admission of spinning stats.
    Bruh, you're the dude who ed all off-season about the quality of Kawhi's teammates. You clearly you didn't think they were okay offensively. So don't give me this bull now. Obviously, the supporting cast is fine. So if it wasn't them, where'd the belief that they were terrible come from?

  10. #135
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    Only a blind man would say the offense is better/they'are playing better, when every number says otherwise.

    But we already know that some guys are blinded by their hate.

    I've said this before, your real issue isn't Kawhi's usage, his game, whatever, your "deal is with Kawhi" like others said.

    It has always been futile to try to talk facts about him with you. It doesn't matter what stats say, you're desperate for finding a way to discredit them because...it's Kawhi.
    Yeah dude, you have made your ST living cutting sentences in half to find something to get mad about. I'm a hater in your eyes because you only read the parts that sound negative. I rep Kawhi to other fan bases more than most people here do. You can ask any of the STers who also read RealGM. I'm always fighting posters who try to discredit Kawhi. There's no hate from me, just butt-hurt from you.

  11. #136
    Spur for life YGWHI's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    6,332
    Yeah dude, you have made your ST living cutting sentences in half to find something to get mad about. I'm a hater in your eyes because you only read the parts that sound negative.
    Of course. "You" know better than "me" what parts "I" read and what parts not.

    Your God complex is starting to scare me...

  12. #137
    R.C. Drunkford TimDunkem's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    13,924
    Bruh, you're the dude who ed all off-season about the quality of Kawhi's teammates. You clearly you didn't think they were okay offensively. So don't give me this bull now. Obviously, the supporting cast is fine. So if it wasn't them, where'd the belief that they were terrible come from?
    Having disappointment in Kawhi's teammates only supports my notion that Kawhi's offense is what makes this team great on that end of the floor. Do you even know what you're arguing anymore? Go to bed.

  13. #138
    The St. Croix Boy duncan2k5's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Post Count
    5,962
    I'm not trying to pat myself, I'm just bringing down your re ed arguments so that that dumb doesn't get spread around.

    Your whole go to move on this was to say that your dumb subjective opinions are more important than actual facts. Do you realize just how ing laughable that is?

    "It doesn't matter than numbers suggest that the offense runs better without Parker on the floor for the past 4 seasons, I think that it runs better when he is on so that is the true".

    "It doesn't matter that Kawhi isos just 3 times per game I feel like he isos more so he should cut that down".

    "I don't care that the Spurs are ranked 18th on offense right now, I feel they have played better than when Kawhi is in".

    "I don't care that Patty is having one of the worst shooting seasons of his career and most Spurs fans are ing about his play to start off the season, I need to say that he has been playing better just to justify my re ed take"

    Look dude, I don't know what your deal is with Kawhi but you are wrong about him. You were wrong back in the day when you thought LA should be the number one option over him and you are even more wrong now that you can't accept clear cut facts that prove that a Kawhi centered offense is the best offense for the Spurs. Your basketball takes are bad, like really, really bad. That's why you should pay more attention to stats instead of saying what it is in your mind despite having facts to refute your reasoning.

    P/S: I still think Parker and LA aren't the answer on a playoffs series vs the Warriors. Time will tell if I'm wrong.
    I've never seen someone so right in me entire life

  14. #139
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    Of course. "You" know better than "me" what parts "I" read and what parts not.

    Your God complex is starting to scare me...
    That's because you're a sniveling vag who hides behind doctored quotes. I think you read it all and just lie like a ing snake, honestly. Otherwise, you wouldn't get the "juicy" half-quotes from the middle of the posts to use for your righteous indignation. However, whether you selectively read, selectively quote or selectively understand doesn't really matter. It all ends up the same.

  15. #140
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    Having disappointment in Kawhi's teammates only supports my notion that Kawhi's offense is what makes this team great on that end of the floor. Do you even know what you're arguing anymore? Go to bed.
    But clearly the teammates who needed to be traded are good enough to be on a 57-win pace without him. Their talent isn't the problem, and neither is their offense. , their defense is even less of a problem. So at this point, you either have to admit that you were just plain wrong about the cast, or you have to admit that they looked worse last year than they do now. There's really no middle ground.

  16. #141
    Spur for life YGWHI's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    6,332
    Tony and Pau and Manu and Patty all can probably give up offensive numbers at this point with little ego problems. Maybe Rudy can too. But LMA, needs his touches or he pouts. And to get him those touches, you don't want an OKC offense where everyone takes turns. You need to get LMA his points in the flow of the offense, which again means less Kawhi isos.
    While less isos doesn't mean less shots, it's fine.

    I guess no one would care if Kawhi gets other ways to score since he's one of most versatile and efficient offensive players in the league.

    But I wouldn't sacrifice Kawhi's FGAs for LMA, the least thing this team needs is a passive Kawhi on the offensive end. They could make the WCF with LMA underperforming but won't do the same if that guy is Kawhi.

  17. #142
    The St. Croix Boy duncan2k5's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Post Count
    5,962
    But clearly the teammates who needed to be traded are good enough to be on a 57-win pace without him. Their talent isn't the problem, and neither is their offense. , their defense is even less of a problem. So at this point, you either have to admit that you were just plain wrong about the cast, or you have to admit that they looked worse last year than they do now. There's really no middle ground.
    Be honest... Without Kwahi... Do u think this team wins 50 games? U do realize we have mostly played bad teams... Right?

  18. #143
    Spur for life YGWHI's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    6,332
    I think you read it all and just lie like a ing snake, honestly.
    A-So you were dishonest when said I read only the parts that sounds negative...That integrity, Chinook.

    B-You sound mad af...I wonder why.

  19. #144
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    Be honest... Without Kwahi... Do u think this team wins 50 games? U do realize we have mostly played bad teams... Right?
    That argument made some sense before last week happened. They had two quality wins and had to essentially cut all their limbs off to not have a nine-game win streak going.

  20. #145
    ಥ﹏ಥ DAF86's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Post Count
    44,736
    All right. These posts will be whole pages if we don't start cutting them down.


    This and the next part is the same. I think you don't know stats and that most don't look. I have been completely clear on that, and you ting all over yourself whenever you try to make arguments about the numbers rather than just citing them is evidence enough.
    When did I ever all over myself when trying to make an argument about the numbers instead of citing them? What does that even mean? What are you saying son?

    Yeah, it was because of Manu. Even if you think Tony was bad, the Spurs routinely had an elite bench in comparison to other benches. Manu was just that good, with all-time impact numbers.
    If it's all about Manu and the bench why does other starters, like Kawhi for example, don't share the same fate as Tony when it comes to his offensive impact and bench players, like Simmons last year, don't share Manu's offensive "positivism"?

    This and the next are pretty much the same thing as well. First, stop acting like I said Kawhi was a cancer. In the last three exchanges I've gone out of my way to say that I have no issue with Kawhi and thing he's a fantastic offensive player. Repeated incorrect accusations doesn't make me look bad. It makes it seem like you can't follow an argument.
    You are passive-agressive as when it comes to Kawhi. And yeah, you didn't call him a cancer but you do downplay him more than pretty much any other Spurfan.

    And no, LA isn't and never was a better offensive option than Kawhi. That about being easier to build an offense around bigmen and PG's in today's NBA is one of the most re ed I have heard lately too.

    Danny and Patty are playing better because they are using more parts of their games than they had been. LMA is playing better because he's getting better quality looks that force him to make faster decisions. If they had those things while also having a great scorer with them, it would be perfect. But they can't go back to 2016 mode (for whatever reason you want to give) just because Kawhi is an all-world scorer right now.
    Danny's improved ball-handling skills is a testament of his work during the summer. If he hadn't worked on that he wouldn't be making basket at the rim at a better % than in previous years no matter how much more opportunities he gets per game to display those abilities.

    And Patty is shooting worse than last season. Scoring the same despite taking more shots and assisting exactly on the same amount of opportunities despite having the ball on his hands more. He did uppped his turnovers per game though. But yeah, I'm sure you can see this Patty improvement without Kawhi thanks to your awesomely unique basketball watching abilities that nobody else possess.


    You incorrectly cited a stat from a random site as proof of your statistical superiority. It made me question the quality of all the evidence you've been giving. I'm usually a guy who looks up stats the morning after every game just to see if any trends are forming. But I don't fall all over the stats when having a dispute. So if someone cites a stat, I usually grant it. Only when the stats become the fulcrum of the conversation do I check them. I had just looked up the Spurs 2016-2017 ORtg for my last post), so I knew it wasn't sixth. So I couldn't just grant your claim and had to check. That's how I found out you were wrong. I hadn't been doing that. For all I know, Kawhi's iso count is way higher than three per game or whatever. I just assumed you correctly reported what you found.
    If you were such a big stats guy as you say you are you would know that Offesive efficiency or offensive rating vary from sites to sites depending on what each site considers to be a possession. Most basketball sites have the Spurs closer to the 5th place on offensive efficiency in previous years than to the 10th like yours.

    They weren't elite -- they were ninth.
    Not according to most sites, including the official NBA one.
    Last edited by DAF86; 12-11-2017 at 02:58 AM.

  21. #146
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    [QUOTE=YGWHI;9215012]
    I think you read it all and just lie like a ing snake, honestly./QUOTE]
    A-So you were dishonest when said I read only the parts that sounds negative...That integrity, Chinook.

    B-You sound mad af...I wonder why.
    You're tiresome. Obviously, my main habit is to ignore you.

    I obviously don't care about never being wrong, or never saying anything tongue-in-cheek. But I think you're the biggest Kawhi homer here (a real achievement given Apa) and read any criticism as hate. So whether you know I'm not a hater and just lie or whether you're so biased that you simply forget the positive things I say is a distinction without a functional difference. It both amounts to you only caring to read the negative parts.

  22. #147
    Spur for life YGWHI's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    6,332
    You're tiresome.
    Could be. But I'm not the guy who is mad enough to call other a liar like a ing snake. I never do it, never use offensive terms here, because it's just a sport forum.

    You shouldn't take things personally, most times you're hypersensitive to criticism. Would be nice if you find better ways to handle it.


    But I think you're the biggest Kawhi homer here (a real achievement given Apa)
    Thanks. Like almost 80% of Spurs fans, Kawhi is my favorite player now. And I'm very proud of it.

    you simply forget the positive things I say
    Yeah... "while Kawhi goes back to his old self (something I'm concerned about being able to do in the first place"...You has been so positive about him all night.

  23. #148
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    When did I ever all over myself when trying to make an argument about the numbers instead of citing them? What does that even mean? What are you saying son?
    Like assuming offensive efficiency and ORtg are the same thing. Like arguing for sample size when it's something you don't like (the team's offense since Tony returned) but ignoring it for something you don't (Murray's DRtg in relation to the rest of the team). Arguing certain players are better than others because of stats, giving them more power than their underlying arguments assert. Not knowing there are more ways to iso than the classic category.

    f it's all about Manu and the bench why does other starters, like Kawhi for example, don't share the same fate as Tony when it comes to his offensive impact and bench players, like Simmons last year, don't share Manu's offensive "positivism"?
    Because Manu and Tony play the same role in the offense and thusly help each other the least. You're right there are other factors like playing against bench players and often having a freer system with the main options not being on the floor. But Manu is sort of the nexus of all that. Of course, I had just taken your word that Tony had negative offensive on-offs. I just checked and he was neutral, slightly negative and slightly positive the last three years. Pretty good, actually, considering the aforementioned Manu stuff.

    You are passive-agressive as when it comes to Kawhi. And yeah, you didn't call him a cancer but you do dow play him more than pretty much any other Spurfan.

    And no, LA isn't and never was a better offensive option than Kawhi. That about being easier to build around an offense around bigmen and PG's in today's NBA is one of the most re ed I have heard lately too.
    I've made thousands of posts over the years bemoaning how Pop leverages Kawhi's talents, especially in contrast to how he leveraged Tony's before. That's my main issue. This summer, it was a lot of defending the supporting cast, which is something I feel good about given how well they've played without him. I've had just as vigorous exchanges with folks saying Kawhi was below Harden and Westbrook and Giannis. It's just people don't say stupid like that here.

    Anyway, the reason why it's hard to build around wings is because most NBA schemes weren't made with wings in mind. You had a front court and back court, with guards and forwards, but two-guards and small-forwards weren't similar. So when people drew up rules like how to play transition D or do movements off post-ups or whatever, they did so with the idea that certain positions would be in certain places on the court. I assume that all makes sense to you. The way it affects the game today is that you need to have a big who can play like a wing in order to have a wing who can play like a big. Like if Kawhi plays in the post, then you need LMA or Pau beyond the arc. But then when the other team gets the rebound, you have a seven-footer trying to get back to stop the break when by design that should be a guard. Or in a kick-out situation, you have a slower player who's probably more reluctant to shoot and thusly easier to close out on. Both of those examples (and more) just lead to it being harder for a team to function when guys playing the middle positions dominate the ball.

    Danny's improved ball-handling skills is a testament of his work during the summer. If he hadn't worked on that he wouldn't be making basket at the rim at a better % than in previous years no matter how much more opportunities he gets per game to display those abilities.

    And Patty is shooting worse than last season. Scoring the same despite taking more shots and assisting exactly on the same amount of opportunities despite having the ball on his hands more. He did uppped his turnovers per game though. But yeah, I'm sure you can see this Patty improvement without Kawhi thanks to your awesomely unique basketball watching abilities that nobody else possess.
    Well we'll see. If they start to look like their 2016 selves again, I'll feel vindicated. If Kawhi gets back to playing to his old form while the others keep it up, I'll feel I was wrong. That seems fair.

    If you were such a big stats guy as you say you are you would know that Offesive efficiency or offensive rating vary from sites to sites depending on what each site considers to be a possession. Most basketball sites have the Spurs closer to the 5th place on offensive efficiency in previous years than to the 10th like yours.
    BBRef is about as reputable as it gets. They will explain their methodology.

    Not according to most sites, including the official NBA one.
    NBA.com has them at seventh, and closer to 10th than fifth. , even that random site you posted has them closer to 10th than fifth.

  24. #149
    The St. Croix Boy duncan2k5's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Post Count
    5,962
    That argument made some sense before last week happened. They had two quality wins and had to essentially cut all their limbs off to not have a nine-game win streak going.
    U didn't answer my question... Good teams lose to inferior teams all the time... But those teams still end up with the 8th seed or missing the playoffs

  25. #150
    Machacarredes Chinook's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Post Count
    30,991
    U didn't answer my question... Good teams lose to inferior teams all the time... But those teams still end up with the 8th seed or missing the playoffs
    I didn't answer your question. I addressed your weird self-answer thing. Yes, I think the team wins 50 without Kawhi, especially if they had had an off-season to prepare and a replace-level small-forward. As it is, I hope they don't have to try. But GS and Cleveland are the only two teams I'd hands-down take in a series over SA without Kawhi. I'd be hesitant to take either if the Spurs were whole.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •