Westbrook is a goner

[DazedAndConfused]

The kid really needs to learn his place...fast.

The bottom line is the Thunder is Durant's team. In the clutch, HE should be the one with the ball in his hands on just about every possession. Instead, this Westbrook kid is fumbling the ball, throwing up bad shots, and not distributing to the open man.

I can't see him lasting too much longer in OKC if this continues. They have enough weapons on their team, they need someone to distribute the ball to them. Westbrook has the talent to be that distributor, but I don't think his ego will ever allow it since his other stats would dip considerably.

[Spurs da champs]

WTF are you talking about? Durant was off all fucking game, Westbrook got hot he had to shoot. He hit a big 3 in crunch time to cut the lead to 6. Durant 2 me just seems like he lacks that killer instinct at this stage of his career.

[Findog]

Westbrook likes to up his stats, then goes home and plays as himself on NBA2k11

[ChrisRichards]

I don't like the idea of being predictable and playing Kobe ball. The way I see it is Westbrook had the better stroke so it's only right he gets to eat first.


Plus you have to blame Scotty here for implementing the wrong idea here. He stated he doesn't really care who shoots the ball as long as player X thinks he's playing hard. That's the reason why you saw Harden and Cook bricking up shots in the last 2-3 minutes of the game.

[LkrFan]

Agreed. I don't care if KD was 1/20 going into the 4th: get him the damn ball. Dirk didn't particularly have a Dirk game, but he touched the ball at least every other time down the court in the 4th. The game's not that hard. The funny part: Westbrick is being outplayed by someone old enough to be his pops.

[DeadlyDynasty]

WTF are you talking about? Durant was off all fucking game, Westbrook got hot he had to shoot. He hit a big 3 in crunch time to cut the lead to 6. Durant 2 me just seems like he lacks that killer instinct at this stage of his career.

Yeah, hitting a 3 to trim the lead from 8 to 5 with 30 seconds left is oh so clutch. That game was in the bag at that point. His 4/7 assist/turnover ratio was even worse than the previous 2 games.

[DeadlyDynasty]

and how exactly was KD cold in the 4th? He was 3-3 from the field.

Westbrook was 4-9.

[ALVAREZ6]

Westbrook is horrendous

[Spurs da champs]

and how exactly was KD cold in the 4th? He was 3-3 from the field.

Westbrook was 4-9.

I didn't watch the 2nd half till the late 4th, but still Durant has to demand the fucking ball he's too nice for his own good.

[ALVAREZ6]

I didn't watch the 2nd half till the late 4th, but still Durant has to demand the fucking ball he's too nice for his own good.

Agreed but it could backfire at the same time. If he demands the ball from Russell, the little douche would definitely throw a hissy-fit, get a technical for cursing out his own teammate, and then make one of his stupid ass faces.

http://ftrsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/russell-westbrook-benched-150x150.jpg

I guess I shouldn't fault him for the last part because he's just a dumb looking dude in general.

[Findog]

Westbrick has been our sixth man out there on the court. Keep it up Russ!

[symple19]

:lol Westbrick

[2pac > Kobe]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_TwPmOAE2h1I/Sl39ifq7k3I/AAAAAAAAAv4/vxS_msiNFoY/s400/Ducky_301.gif

http://www.okcthunderfans.com/Images/Westbrook1.jpg

is it just me or do these foo's look alike

[DMC]

The game was lost after those 4 or so possessions with 2.5 minutes left where the Thunder just heaved bricks on the fly like the time was running out, and when Westbrook bricked one shot and then threw the ball into the stands as he drove into the lane out of control a couple possessions later. KD never touched the ball during that stretch.

They could have just gotten to the line or at least gotten a better look, but nope, they succumbed to the new team "gotta get all the points now" bug while Dallas just played their game. It's about poise after all the talent is fielded, and that's on Scott Brooks.

So, COTY seems to get ousted a couple years down the road in the last few years. Is Thibbs next when the Bulls falter this year and next (assuming they do), or is Thibbs the real deal?

[endrity]

Another thing I don't like about Westbrook is his attitude. Too much 'chip on his shoulder stuff'. I really think he might end up like another Marbury of Francis.

[HornetLoveJones]

WTF are you talking about? Durant was off all fucking game, Westbrook got hot he had to shoot. He hit a big 3 in crunch time to cut the lead to 6. Durant 2 me just seems like he lacks that killer instinct at this stage of his career.

Dirk was just as off yet he got the ball during crunch time when it matters. Guess what, he also made things happen. Kudos to Kidd and Terry for having the confidence to throw it to the German when they needed clutch scoring. That's what superstars are supposed to do, Westbrook is as erratic as a point guard I've seen in some time. I agree with the point that Durant is maybe a bit passive but it's still no excuse for his teammates to freeze him out like that.

[Axe Murderer]

They have enough weapons on their team

crofl no they don't.

Durant, Harden and.....

They would be extremely foolish to break up these two. The guy's only 22 and if he were to improve his jumper/shot selection then the Thunder would basically have two guys that are unguardable. I don't even like Westbrook but you can't deny the fact that he has enormous potential to dominate the league at the point guard position. The Thunder are also poised to take over the WCF for the next decade with these two, so it would be retarded to break them up unless you get a ridiculous trade offer.

lol @ Harden being the second option

[Kyle Orton]

lol @ dominate the league at the PG position

[DazedAndConfused]

When it comes down to crunch time you have to go with your closer, for better or for worse. When you have no closer, you end up with a bunch of unclutch numbskulls throwing up bricks.

I'll take Kobe ball in the last couple of minutes vs. any other option. Why? Because I know what I'm gonna get on most nights with Kobe, he's a proven commodity and he has delivered in the clutch time and time again. He's given Laker fans 5 glorious championships to celebrate.

Durant is certainly capable of doing the same. He just needs the fucking ball in his hands.

[Kyle Orton]

Tbh if they can they should trade Westbrook for an interior scorer. Harden will be a good 3rd option in the coming years, their 2nd option needs to be a PF or C.

[Axe Murderer]

lol @ dominate the league at the PG position

not that outlandish, imho

[21_Blessings]

Come home, Russell. Come home.

[HeatChamps]

Westbrook is a great player. Stupid haters.

[ALVAREZ6]

Westbrook is a great player. Stupid haters.

Great point guards don't average 4 turnovers per game throughout a regular season. In the playoffs, he's averaging 4.6 TO and only 6.3 assists per game. That's a horrible A/TO ratio, and while he has ton of athletic ability and talent, he is not a good decision maker and not a great point guard.

[jacobdrj]

Westbrook needs a Carlislesque coach to help reign him in....

[Booharv]

Westbrook showed me something. he really is an NBA player. Pound the rock. Dont pass til theres 5 seconds left on the shot clock. Nice job.

[jag]

The Thunder need to keep a star at the PG position. It makes things easier on Durant. A guy like Stephen Curry would be nice.

[Isitjustme?]

Westbrook showed me something. he really is an NBA player. Pound the rock. Dont pass til theres 5 seconds left on the shot clock. Nice job.
:lol

The Thunder need to keep a star at the PG position. It makes things easier on Durant. A guy like Stephen Curry would be nice.
Tbh I'm still a Westbrook fan but yeah I agree with this. Durant is not a big assist guy so they need someone who can create easy shots for others. Maybe a big can do that by drawing doubles though I guess would be the counterargument.

[Isitjustme?]

I'm sure other Spur fans have pointed this out but TP was benched repeatedly in the playoffs around the same age for Speedy Claxton and developed into a stud.

[jag]

I'm sure other Spur fans have pointed this out but TP was benched repeatedly in the playoffs around the same age for Speedy Claxton and developed into a stud.

Benched for very different reasons. Sebastian Telfair has been benched before. A lot of PGs have been benched.

[Axe Murderer]

Maybe a big can do that by drawing doubles though I guess would be the counterargument.

Only problem is that there aren't any low post players out there that are better than Westbrook, outside of Howard.

We live in a shitty era of big man, so I don't see how it would be possible to trade for a low post player of equal value

[cheguevara]

Westbrook is singlehandedly burying the OKC team. I really want Parker traded but I would not trade him for this ballhog.

[Axe Murderer]

The real problem is Brooks. He is getting exposed big time by Carlisle.

The guy is just a terrible X's and O's coach. Durant didn't even touch the ball 18 out of 27 possessions in the 4th. Even though you put some on Durant, how does a coach not see that? Brooks just seems like one of those motivators who says "C'mon guys we're a great team, now let's go play like it!!" and does almost nothing else

[Kyle Orton]

:lol "star at the PG position" like it's a good thing

[Isitjustme?]

The real problem is Brooks. He is getting exposed big time by Carlisle.

The guy is just a terrible X's and O's coach. Durant didn't even touch the ball 18 out of 27 possessions in the 4th. Even though you put some on Durant, how does a coach not see that? Brooks just seems like one of those motivators who says "C'mon guys we're a great team, now let's go play like it!!" and does almost nothing else

The one positive for him in that regard is that he says he will allow his players some leeway if they play hard and how thats the most important thing to him. There are drooling stories (written by Bill Simmons and others) about how hard they play and practice. If you bring in some Larry Brown or Scott Skiles type who runs like a regimented system the players always get disgusted with the micromanaging after a while. ideally you'd like someone like maybe Adelman but then a lot of Rick's teams were mediocre on defense I think.

[Cry Havoc]

ITT: Laker fan desperately hoping for a team to cast off it's young PG so they can buy him on the cheap and have a tiny shot at winning a title next year.

[Cry Havoc]

:lol "star at the PG position" like it's a good thing

http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/marbury(7).jpg

finds your attitude distasteful.

[Kyle Orton]

http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/marbury%287%29.jpg

finds your attitude distasteful.

But still proves my point

[Cry Havoc]

But still proves my point

Hence me posting Starbury, AKA agreeing with you.

[Booharv]

iswydt

[dbreiden83080]

Ego and a big one.. This guy wants to be the star in OKC and may wreck their chances at winning a few rings by not getting along with Durant..

[picc84]

Westbrick. :bang

Thunder shot themselves in the foot with the horrid shooting in the first. Mavs defense was solid but they missed a ton of open, hittable shots and next thing you know they were getting raped.

Gee, where have I seen that before. :wakeup

KD has to take some blame for that too.

[jag]

:lol "star at the PG position" like it's a good thing

Having a star player at the PG position is a bad thing?

[Axe Murderer]

Having a star player at the PG position is a bad thing?

http://images.wikia.com/marvel_dc/images/3/37/AndHereWeGo.gif

[jag]

http://images.wikia.com/marvel_dc/images/3/37/AndHereWeGo.gif

:lmao

[Kyle Orton]

Having a star player at the PG position is a bad thing?
Yes

[Booharv]

God, I hope this becomes an argument. If it does, please use a lot of advanced stats _Jag.

[Kyle Orton]

lol advanced stats geeks

[Kyle Orton]

And there is no argument here, the last 20 years make it that way.

[jag]

God, I hope this becomes an argument. If it does, please use a lot of advanced stats _Jag.

:lol


And there is no argument here, the last 20 years make it that way.

What about the last 10 years?

How many teams with "star" PGs have made the Finals? How many "star" PGs have played in the finals over the last 10 years?

[Kyle Orton]

:lol



What about the last 10 years?

How many teams with "star" PGs have made the Finals? How many "star" PGs have played in the finals over the last 10 years?

How many star PGs have won the finals?

[Kyle Orton]

I agree tho, if your goal is to win 50 games, make the playoffs, and lose, then having a star PG is the best and most effective way to do that. Just look at the Suns.

[jag]

How many star PGs have won the finals?

I'll answer both those questions.

From 2001 - 2010:

5 star PGs have won the Finals.

11 of the teams that made the Finals had star PGs.

9 of those teams did not have star PGs. But 6 of the teams without star PGs had Kobe Bryant. One of the teams had LeBron.

Kind of crazy to think having a star PG is a bad thing. Don't allow Steve Nash to keep doing this to your psyche.

[Kyle Orton]

Name them. And no, Tim Duncan is the star of the Spurs. Parker isn't.

[jag]

Name them. And no, Tim Duncan is the star of the Spurs. Parker isn't.

You can only be a star PG is you're the #1 option? I need to know your rules before we get into this...

[Kyle Orton]

Who are the other 2 anyway? I know you're gonna count Parker as 3 of the 5 (even tho he was the distant 3rd option in 2005 and wasn't a star at all in 2003), but who are the other 2?

[jag]

Who are the other 2 anyway? I know you're gonna count Parker as 3 of the 5 (even tho he was the distant 3rd option in 2005 and wasn't a star at all in 2003), but who are the other 2?

Rondo
Billups

[Kyle Orton]

Calling 2008 Rondo a star PG is revisionist history if I've ever seen it

[Kyle Orton]

lol 10.6 PPG and 5.1 APG being considered a "star PG"

The depths PGluvas go to to defend their selfish midgets is remarkable

[Kyle Orton]

But hey, I'm sure it's just a coincidence the winningest coach of all time used an offense that has the PG play almost entirely off ball.

[jag]

Calling 2008 Rondo a star PG is revisionist history if I've ever seen it

More or less..

Handled the ball more than any other player. Had the ball more than any other player. Even at that point he wasn't a role player PG.

[Kyle Orton]

More or less..

Handled the ball more than any other player. Had the ball more than any other player. Even at that point he wasn't a role player PG.
:lmao you seriously consider 2008 Rondo a star PG?

[jag]

But hey, I'm sure it's just a coincidence the winningest coach of all time used an offense that has the PG play almost entirely off ball.

Phil Jackson has never needed a good PG to win. But having Jordan, Kobe, Pippen and Shaw certainly helped.

Star players at any position are a good thing. If coupled with the right talent, star players at PG can win.

[Kyle Orton]

I guess by the criteria that handling the ball more than other players = star PG, Avery Johnson = star PG since he handled the ball more than David Robinson and Tim Duncan

[jag]

:lmao you seriously consider 2008 Rondo a star PG?

Over the entire series, no. But he had his moments. I don't even like Rondo, but the 08 Finals is when he became a "star".

[jag]

I guess by the criteria that handling the ball more than other players = star PG, Avery Johnson = star PG since he handled the ball more than David Robinson and Tim Duncan

Did avery have a 16 assist game in the Finals? Or even a 15 point 7 ast performance with 3 other stars requiring touches as well?

[Kyle Orton]

the 08 Finals is when he became a "star".
You're reaching
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200806100LAL.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200806120LAL.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200806150LAL.html

[Kyle Orton]

Did avery have a 16 assist game in the Finals? Or even a 15 point 7 ast performance with 3 other stars requiring touches as well?
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 2 good games in the finals makes him a star when he had 3 other games where he played like shit? OK!

lol playing well 40% of the time = star

[Kyle Orton]

:lmao a "star PG" getting benched in favor of studs like Eddie House in the 4th quarter of finals games

[jag]

You're reaching
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200806100LAL.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200806120LAL.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200806150LAL.html


Over the entire series, no. But he had his moments. I don't even like Rondo, but the 08 Finals is when he became a "star".

You act as if i haven't seen those boxscores.

He also had a 15 pt 7 ast game. 16 assist game. And a 21 pt, 7 rbd, 8 ast game.

He's not an avery johnson or derek fisher.

Please explain to me why having a star PG is a bad thing.

[picc84]

http://images.wikia.com/marvel_dc/images/3/37/AndHereWeGo.gif

every. single. time. :lmao

[Kyle Orton]

Did avery have a 16 assist game in the Finals? Or even a 15 point 7 ast performance with 3 other stars requiring touches as well?
He had a 14 point 10 assist game
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199906230NYK.html

So I guess one more good game woulda made him a star, however at least he played nearly 40 minutes in every game and never got benched for a backup like Eddie "lol" House

[jag]

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 2 good games in the finals makes him a star when he had 3 other games where he played like shit? OK!

lol playing well 40% of the time = star

Allen Iverson made a star career out of playing well 40% of the time.


:lmao a "star PG" getting benched in favor of studs like Eddie House in the 4th quarter of finals games

So Eric Maynor > Westbrook?

[Kyle Orton]

Please explain to me why having a star PG is a bad thing.
They dominate the ball and force the other 4 players on the court to play off them rather than develop their own offensive game. A team with 1 stud PGs and a bunch of guys who play off him is incredibly easy to defend.

lol 2008 Rondo being a star PG

[Kyle Orton]

Allen Iverson made a star career out of playing well 40% of the time.
Did he get benched for his backup the other 60% of the time?




So Eric Maynor > Westbrook?
No, but good job pointing out that benching their star PG led to an OKC win

[Kyle Orton]

He's not an avery johnson or derek fisher.


In 2008 he was.

PS - Derek Fisher would never get benched in favor of Eddie fuckin House

[Kyle Orton]

Idk why I'm arguing anymore, because I agree that you can win with a "star PG" who averages 10 points and 5 assists like 2008 Rondo.

[jag]

They dominate the ball and force the other 4 players on the court to play off them rather than develop their own offensive game. A team with 1 stud PGs and a bunch of guys who play off him is incredibly easy to defend.

lol 2008 Rondo being a star PG

I'm not pimping Rondo as a huge star in 08. At times he carried that team, even as young as he was. You can choose to ignore his impact on that series, which is fine, but he certainly shouldn't be lumped in with Jason Williams and Derek Fisher.

You have this idea that star PGs have to play like Steve Nash. That isn't the case. You also ignore all the successful teams in the past 10 years that have in one way or another relied on star PGs.

[Kyle Orton]

At times he carried that team
:lmao

[Kyle Orton]

I'm surprised the Hornets and Jazz haven't won anything if having a star PG is so good

[jag]

I'm surprised the Hornets and Jazz haven't won anything if having a star PG is so good

They didn't build around them properly. You do realize how easy it is to recreate this same argument with other positions right?

[Kyle Orton]

They didn't build around them properly. You do realize how easy it is to recreate this same argument with other positions right?

You mean have a stud backup like Eddie House who gets minutes in the 4th quarter of important playoff games over Paul and D-Will?

Not one single team has won a championship with a PG as its best player in the last 20 years. There are plenty of teams that have won with a SG as their best player, with a PF as their best player, and of course with a C as their best player. You can't build around PGs, it doesn't work.

[jag]

Relying solely on a PG for offense is obviously not a good thing. Relying solely on any position for offense is obviously not a good thing.

Your argument is that PGs dominate the ball are the sole catalyst on offense. In which case, having a star PG is a bad thing because it's easy to game plan against.

Star players at either PG, SG, or SF will dominate the ball in the half-court. If that's the lone form of offense then it will be easy to game plan for. Melo, Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Rose... all them dominate the ball. When the offense relied solely on those players, they didn't win.

It has nothing to do with what position a star player is at, it has everything to do with how they are built around. Not every team is the Run-n-gun Phoenix suns.

[Kyle Orton]

Then why is it plenty of SGs have won as the alpha dog in recent years while NO point guard has won as alpha dog in the last 20 years? Are you saying that's just a coincidence?

[jag]

You mean have a stud backup like Eddie House who gets minutes in the 4th quarter of important playoff games over Paul and D-Will?

Not one single team has won a championship with a PG as its best player in the last 20 years. There are plenty of teams that have won with a SG as their best player, with a PF as their best player, and of course with a C as their best player. You can't build around PGs, it doesn't work.

Chauncey Billups was the Pistons best player in 2004. Tony Parker was the Spurs best offensive player in 2007.

[Ghazi]

Ben Wallace > Chauncey :)

[Kyle Orton]

Chauncey Billups was the Pistons best player in 2004.
The 2004 Pistons had no best player. Wallace, Wallace, Hamilton and Billups were all equally important. It's also no surprise this team won in spite of a horrible offense. People just say Billups is the best player because they remember him being the guy who picked apart a terrible Lakers defense. The 2004 Lakers happened to be a bad matchup for him.


Tony Parker was the Spurs best offensive player in 2007.
This is extreme revisionist history. Tim Duncan averaged more points and shot a higher % in both the playoffs and regular season. He was the Spurs best player on either end of the court. You're not the first Spurs fan who disparaged Duncan's importance in 2007 just to try to convince me a team has won with a PG as its best player.

In the 4th quarter of games in 2007, who did you want handling the ball, Parker or Ginobili?

[picc84]

Ben Wallace won that series, not Billups.

[Red Hawk #21]

Over the entire series, no. But he had his moments. I don't even like Rondo, but the 08 Finals is when he became a "star".

Come on now...

[ALVAREZ6]

Then why is it plenty of SGs have won as the alpha dog in recent years while NO point guard has won as alpha dog in the last 20 years? Are you saying that's just a coincidence?

I'm not saying I disagree or agree with your point, but this isn't exactly a strong argument....there aren't too many Shaqs, Duncans, and Jordans....3 of the most dominant players (while in their primes) to ever play the game. All of those guys were going to win championships, and they make up a huge chunk of your sample size.

[Kyle Orton]

I'm not saying I disagree or agree with your point, but this isn't exactly a strong argument....there aren't too many Shaqs, Duncans, and Jordans....3 of the most dominant players (while in their primes) to ever play the game. All of those guys were going to win championships, and they make up a huge chunk of your sample size.
Yeah, none these "most dominant players to ever play the game" were PGs sans Magic Johnson (who woulda been an all star at any position), weird.

[Venti Quattro]

_Jag :lmao

2004 - that was a total team effort by Detroit
2007 - Nobody could guard Tony Parker, but Duncan provided the all-around performance
2008 - Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen say hi

[jag]

Billups was their best offensive player in that series.

Parker was the Spurs best offensive player in the Finals.


Then why is it plenty of SGs have won as the alpha dog in recent years while NO point guard has won as alpha dog in the last 20 years? Are you saying that's just a coincidence?

You're focusing too much on the offensive end. Defense wins championships. Many of the teams that have built around good PGs didn't play adequate defense to win titles. Also, many of the teams that have built around PGs have not placed good enough players around them to be successful. They have relied solely on those players for offense.

The Suns didn't win because they couldn't play defense.
The Hornets havent won anything because Chris Paul is being relied on for all the offense.
The Jazz never won anything with Williams because he was being relied on for all the offense.

John Stockton wasn't the problem in Utah. Jordan was the problem for Utah.
Kidd wasn't the problem in NJ. The Spurs and Lakers were the problem.

It's easier to build around a big man for defensive reasons. But having a star PG isn't a detriment to your team if he's built around properly.

[Kyle Orton]

Many of the teams that have built around good PGs didn't play adequate defense to win titles.
Gee, I wonder why

[Kyle Orton]

Billups was their best offensive player in that series.

Parker was the Spurs best offensive player in the Finals.

I wan't aware a 4-6 game finals series determines who the best players are. Especially when the real finals in 2007 was the Spurs vs. Suns series.

"But Parker dominated the 2007 Cavs :cry"

[jag]

Gee, I wonder why

That's it? That was your entire retort?

[jag]

I wan't aware a 4-6 game finals series determines who the best players are. Especially when the real finals in 2007 was the Spurs vs. Suns series.

"But Parker dominated the 2007 Cavs :cry"

So the Finals don't count and regular season stats obviously don't count...

So what would you like to go by?

[Kyle Orton]

That's it? That was your entire retort?
When you have a PG constantly trying to force the tempo, constantly making retarded passes, and constantly chucking retarded shots that lead to long rebounds, it's impossible to be a good defensive team. PG oriented teams and bad defense are intertwined.

[HarlemHeat37]

Still, his point is correct..offensive player or not, those PGs were not the best players on their teams..you can make an argument for Billups, but not for Parker..Duncan has him beat on every metric, regular stats, obviously defense, etc..

Ben Wallace was the best player on that Pistons team, and he's still constantly disrespected IMO..Detroit was +30.9 per 100 possessions with Wallace on the floor, during those playoffs, which is one of the highest numbers in NBA history..

[Kyle Orton]

So the Finals don't count and regular season stats obviously don't count...

So what would you like to go by?
:lmao what? Regular season stats do count. Duncan outscored Parker in both the regular season AND playoffs in 2007.

[Venti Quattro]

:lmao what? Regular season stats do count. Duncan outscored Parker in both the regular season AND playoffs in 2007.
:lmao :lmao :lmao

[jag]

When you have a PG constantly trying to force the tempo, constantly making retarded passes, and constantly chucking retarded shots that lead to long rebounds, it's impossible to be a good defensive team. PG oriented teams and bad defense are intertwined.

So we're no longer talking about quality PGs? Are we now talking about why having Stephon Marbury and Steve Francis as a starting PG is a bad idea?

[Kyle Orton]

So we're no longer talking about quality PGs? Are we now talking about why having Stephon Marbury and Steve Francis as a starting PG is a bad idea?
"Quality PGs" do everything I just mentioned. It's by far the most selfish position in the NBA. John Stockton was the king of forcing retarded passes.

[jag]

Having a star player at the PG position is a bad thing?


Yes


You can only be a star PG is you're the #1 option? I need to know your rules before we get into this...


:lmao what? Regular season stats do count. Duncan outscored Parker in both the regular season AND playoffs in 2007.

This argument was never about having a PG as the #1 option. You said having a star player at PG is a bad thing. You asked how many star PGs have won championships in the past 10 years so I showed you multiple teams that have won championships and made it to the finals with star PGs.



I'm not sure how you continue to think that having a star player at

[Kyle Orton]

This argument was never about having a PG as the #1 option.
The post about Duncan and Parker was pointing out how moronic it was to say Parker was the 2007 Spurs #1 offensive player. Do you now admit Duncan was?

[hater]

Westbrook is a gunner

[jag]

When you have a PG constantly trying to force the tempo, constantly making retarded passes, and constantly chucking retarded shots that lead to long rebounds, it's impossible to be a good defensive team. PG oriented teams and bad defense are intertwined.


"Quality PGs" do everything I just mentioned. It's by far the most selfish position in the NBA. John Stockton was the king of forcing retarded passes.

This argument could just as easily be made about the PG, SG and SF position for any star player.

[Kyle Orton]

When I think "star" I think a team's star player. You apparently think role player who averages 10 points and 5 assists while getting benched in favor of Eddie House at key moments. Difference of opinions I guess.

[jag]

The post about Duncan and Parker was pointing out how moronic it was to say Parker was the 2007 Spurs #1 offensive player.

Was parker not a star player?

[Kyle Orton]

Was parker not a star player?
I'll answer that after you admit Duncan was the 2007 Spurs #1 offensive player.

[jag]

When I think "star" I think a team's star player. You apparently think role player who averages 10 points and 5 assists while getting benched in favor of Eddie House at key moments. Difference of opinions I guess.

Jason Kidd and Chauncey Billups don't count now?


You can only be a star PG is you're the #1 option? I need to know your rules before we get into this...

I asked you to define "star" player because i knew this argument would turn to shit. Half of the teams that have made it to the Finals in the past 10 years have done it with star PGs. I fail to see how having a star PG is a detriment to a team.

[Kyle Orton]

Jason Kidd and Chauncey Billups don't count now?

No, the Billups who averaged 16.9 PPG on 39.4% shooting and 5.7 assists doesn't count. Billups wasn't a "star" in 2004. Once he became a "star PG", Detroit stopped going to the finals.

[jag]

I'll answer that after you admit Duncan was the 2007 Spurs #1 offensive player.

I'll do that as soon as you admit Tony Parker and Billups were star players.

[Kyle Orton]

I'll do that as soon as you admit Tony Parker and Billups were star players.
2007 Parker was a "star" player. 2003 Parker, 2004 Billups and 2005 Parker weren't star players.

[jag]

No, the Billups who averaged 16.9 PPG on 39.4% shooting and 5.7 assists doesn't count. Billups wasn't a "star" in 2004. Once he became a "star PG", Detroit stopped going to the finals.

Like the very next year?

[jag]

2007 Parker was a "star" player. 2003 Parker, 2004 Billups and 2005 Parker weren't star players.

So you think Parker was a detriment to the team?

[Kyle Orton]

Like the very next year?
Billups didn't become a "star" till 2006. Look at his numbers if you think I'm making this up.

[Kyle Orton]

So you think Parker was a detriment to the team?
No, cause he's a scoring PG. I think assist first (not pass first) PGs are detrimental moreso than anything else. A PG dribbling around being an assist whore like Nash, Paul, Westbrook, DWill, Stockton etc. are hurts the team.

[jag]

Billups didn't become a "star" till 2006. Look at his numbers if you think I'm making this up.

Would you like to go by playoff numbers or regular season numbers?

[Kyle Orton]

So you think Parker was a detriment to the team?
Btw, you can go ahead and admit Duncan > Parker offensively in 2007 now.

[Kyle Orton]

Would you like to go by playoff numbers or regular season numbers?
Regular season since it's a bigger sample size.

[jag]

No, cause he's a scoring PG. I think assist first (not pass first) PGs are detrimental moreso than anything else. A PG dribbling around being an assist whore like Nash, Paul, Westbrook, DWill, Stockton etc. are hurts the team.

So having a star PG on your team isn't a bad thing?


Having a star player at the PG position is a bad thing?


Yes

[jag]

Regular season since it's a bigger sample size.

So sample size lead you to determine the regular season is more significant than the playoffs?

[Kyle Orton]

So having a star PG on your team isn't a bad thing?
Parker is a SG in a PG's body. He's an exception. There are always exceptions. He's a complimentary star player, not the true "star" of a team.

[Kyle Orton]

So sample size lead you to determine the regular season is more significant than the playoffs?

No, but fluky stats can be put up over a 20 game period.

[Kyle Orton]

If 2008 Rondo is a star player, there's probably a 1500 page novel that can be written about every star player in NBA history.

[Ginobili2Duncan]

Some of you guys forget that Westbrook played SG at UCLA. And he was more of a defensive player rather than a scorer.

Can he play the PG position better? Yes. However, he is only 22 years old, so there are going to be some growing pains. Steve Nash didn't come into the league possessing the PG skills he has now. In fact, he was more of a scorer at Santa Clara.

So give Westbrook a few more years; he is only going to get better.

[Kyle Orton]

Nash also doesn't have the IQ of a banana

[jag]

The Thunder need to keep a star at the PG position. It makes things easier on Durant. A guy like Stephen Curry would be nice.


:lol "star at the PG position" like it's a good thing


Parker is a SG in a PG's body. He's an exception. There are always exceptions. He's a complimentary star player, not the true "star" of a team.

Wasn't it kind of assumed in my post that the star player I eluded to at PG would be a complimentary star player?

I don't recall this discussion ever being about a star PG being the "true star" vs a "complimentary star".

[Kyle Orton]

You made it about det trying to argue Parker and Billups were the best players on their respective teams.

Regarding the Thunder, I do believe Westbrook's mere presence on the court hurts them as a team.

[jag]

You made it about det trying to argue Parker and Billups were the best players on their respective teams.

Regarding the Thunder, I do believe Westbrook's mere presence on the court hurts them as a team.

You said having a star PG was a bad thing. Now you're telling me it depends on the type of star as if that wasn't something I had already said.

Westbrook has a lot to offer but he's hurting the team by trying to take over games when he should be deferring to Durant. He's shown really poor decision making and shot selection.

[jag]

"10 pts 5 assists = star"

:lol faggot

[FkLA]

John Stockton's Jazz didnt win because unfortunately they were going up against the GOAT. Kidd's Nets went up against the two best players of this generation in Duncan & Shaq. You can say thats easier to build around SGs and bigman which would probably be true...but saying its impossible to build around a PG is false imho. Its been done, and will probably be done in the near future considering the decline in quality big man and a solid PG generation.

[Kyle Orton]

Kidd's Nets were a joke and only made the finals because of a terribly weak Eastern Conference. Do you see that team having a chance against the current day Heat or Celtics?

[FkLA]

Probably not. But Rose's Bulls do.

[Killakobe81]

Chauncey Billups was the Pistons best player in 2004. Tony Parker was the Spurs best offensive player in 2007.

No, he wasnt. Parker was good that year but duncan was still better. Tony may have been better that Finals ...but tim was the MVP of that team on offense and defense. the coverage he drew allowed Parker to flourish ...

[Kyle Orton]

Probably not. But Rose's Bulls do.

Well Rose's Bulls are a much better team that isn't starting Nick Collins at center :lol

[Kyle Orton]

Or Jason Collins whatever his name is

[FkLA]

True. But theyre still built around a PG that dominates the ball.

[FkLA]

pretty sure it was todd mccollouf too tbh

[Axe Murderer]

http://images.wikia.com/marvel_dc/images/3/37/AndHereWeGo.gif

....3 pages later :lol

[Kyle Orton]

:lol saying OKC should keep Westbrick

[ALVAREZ6]

.BUMP.

LMAO Westbrook, he was atrocious down the stretch, along with Durant, par the course. Dude is a retard, tries dribbling through 5 players and wonders why it often leads to turnovers, getting fouled and missing both FTs, taking bad shots, etc.

And people want to compare him to Derrick Rose :lmao.

[DMC]

.BUMP.

LMAO Westbrook, he was atrocious down the stretch, along with Durant, par the course. Dude is a retard, tries dribbling through 5 players and wonders why it often leads to turnovers, getting fouled and missing both FTs, taking bad shots, etc.

And people want to compare him to Derrick Rose :lmao.
That's because, in the world of the PG, the two have common speed and athleticism. Rose has a higher BB IQ and trusts his teammates. He also doesn't seem as hell bent on playing the hero.

Westbrook needs to learn how to remain aggressive while still being in control of the floor, not just the ball. Those few times he's deferred have often been times that he's simply stopped being aggressive because he's butt hurt at coach or some other player. Then he gets aggressive again and gets a couple good looks, and the rest is turnover and offensive foul festival, or dribble for 20 seconds into the shot clock before dumping to someone else for the turnover.

Westbrook did some really good things last night, but he killed the team with his incessant selfishness and panic-mode style of play late in the game, and the blame for that is on Scrot Brooks.

[100%duncan]

:lol westbrook's lover

[ALVAREZ6]

That's because, in the world of the PG, the two have common speed and athleticism. Rose has a higher BB IQ and trusts his teammates. He also doesn't seem as hell bent on playing the hero.

Westbrook needs to learn how to remain aggressive while still being in control of the floor, not just the ball. Those few times he's deferred have often been times that he's simply stopped being aggressive because he's butt hurt at coach or some other player. Then he gets aggressive again and gets a couple good looks, and the rest is turnover and offensive foul festival, or dribble for 20 seconds into the shot clock before dumping to someone else for the turnover.

Westbrook did some really good things last night, but he killed the team with his incessant selfishness and panic-mode style of play late in the game, and the blame for that is on Scrot Brooks.
+ you forgot to mention Westbrook is a 9-year old temper tantrum throwing little douche bag who loses his cool all of the time.


And I wholeheartedly agree on Brooks, it's hard not to at this point, that guy is just making himself out to be a bitch (just like his PG) every time he talks in the post game press conference. His coaching style can work during the regular season when you have a couple of young stars but it's being exposed in the playoffs. He just seems like he has no control over his team during the games. The funny part is although OKC would be better off without Brooks and Westbrook, neither are likely to be sacked.




And LMAO, just now while typing this I heard Durant say their youth had nothing to do with the outcome :lmao :lmao :lmao. After the Spurs got eliminated the Thunder were one of the teams I was rooting for, but I just about hate them right now.