Printable View
Jeff Teague's numbers this year: 22.7 PER, ridiculous 60% TS, 3.1 VORP, 7 APG, 31.5 MPG
The Hawks are 5-0 without Teague
2012-2013 Tony Parker's numbers(MVP-caliber season, according to many): 23 PER, 59% TS, 2.5 VORP, 7.6 APG, 32.9 MPG
The Spurs were 8-3 without Parker that season
Does the Pop/Bud system severely inflate the perception of the star PG/highest-usage players' impact on the game, tbh?
Oh hey, another thread that needed to be created.
Cool.
You guys wanted a serious basketball discussion..let's discuss:lol..
The numbers are there, the comparison is there..the Teague-led Hawks are on pace to win 60 games, like the prime Parker-led Spurs of 2012/2013..
Is it the PG or the system?
I think both teams are very good basketball teams.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
And I don't know if you caught many Hawks games before this year but Jeff has always been a pretty good point guard. His fg percentage(specifically mid range) is up likely due to Buds system.
I understand the comparison though.
Well, the players are certainly working for those numbers... I think the system probably helps them maximize their skills, but you gotta put forth the work, and that's on the player...
There's no smoke and mirrors here. Besides the talented PG, you also have a machinery around that helps a lot. You need the floor spacers, the ball movement, the pace, the defense. The system is always there, but finding the right players that buy in is just as important.
I don't think it has anything to do with the system, but PG's in general. Sure Curry, Westbrook, Lowry and Paul are studs, but most PG's this year and the year before have had minimal overall impact compared to stars of other positions for their teams while at the same time having the biggest usage rate. It's even worse for Middle of the pack and shittier teams as well...The suns system is the exception.
It's shocking that a team with five players capable of getting 20+ points in any game can go without one of those players for a time during the regular season, isn't it?
yeah the spurs are doing just fine without Leonard
8-8 last year
8-8 this year..
I understand the regular season is as important to you as your need to disparage Spurs players.Quote:
Originally Posted by apalisoc_9
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Quote:
Originally Posted by apalisoc_9
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Why does ChumpDumper derail every thread, tbh?
He's like Culburn with a larger vocabulary..
Because he's an armchair smartass. I haven't read a basketball take from him in years. It's usually just some pretentiously sarcastic response to the OP of a thread. Shame too. The guy probably has a lot to offer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik Hairston
I gave my basketball take.
Did you miss it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
It's not just the Pop/Bud system... The Bulls--the best team of the 90s-- started two SGs in the backcourt and had their SF bring the ball up court. The most dominant team before them was the Lakers, whose "PG" was a converted forward who was 6'9". The 80s Celtics also had a Forward who was more important than their PG. The Miami Heat never had a great PG on their three championship teams. I think versatility trumps one "floor general" who also happens to be the shortest guy on the court.
I definitely saw where you tried to be a smartass and got shit on by fucking apolisoc of all people :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Chump going HAM :lol
The Spurs won those championships in spite of their PG, not because of him. If we had a true distributing PG that could run the floor and hit the occasional 3, Spurs would have 7 right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bones
Both teams move the ball and create postion by that. Switch other guard to those lineups and ball still will be moved. It`s not like Clippers, a team which depends on Chris Paul creating opportunities or OKC playing isoball all the time.
^
This #21 got it.
If you are playing in some unselfish team and you try to stand out all the time to prove something you are hurting the team thats a fact and there is no way to spin it around. 5 rings is good I dont complain but that stupid attitude kept Spurs away from something bigger.
It was a basketball take. Your interpretation is colored by your personal feelings.Quote:
Originally Posted by unleashbaynes
If the regular season and your personal feelings are as important to you as they are to him, just say so. It's OK.
:lol relax. I actually think you're right but Leonard is the exception. Our defense is noticably worse without him. Backup SF is a luxury we do not have.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
In the playoffs if we are short any of our main players, we're sunk. I agree about Leonard's D especially when a guy like Parker isn't 100%. I've just been following the team way too long to be worried or draw conclusions in January.Quote:
Originally Posted by unleashbaynes
But again, I think the key has been versatility. The Spurs for a long time now have had Parker, a shooting guard in a PGs body, and Ginobili, a PG in a SGs body. That's a nice luxury to have.Quote:
Originally Posted by cantthinkofanything
Did you mean to say deflate? I think it's the perception of fans that inflates the high usage PG, not the Pop/Bud system. Of course, it's alway good to have the highest quality player possible at every position. But lots of passing/ball movement/cutting is really a return to old fashioned basketball as much as it's Pop's system... It's part Princeton Offense, part Triangle Offense , part "Euro," part UCLA High Post Offense, etc. In fact, I'd argue Pop doesn't necessarily have "a system," as in one single system. He has adapted numerous times throughout his coaching career. Early on, they pounded it inside relentlessly to Duncan. Later he let Tony and Manu make more decisions while others spread the floor by staying at the three point line. Last year, with three aging stars and a group of younger guys and Boris Diaw, ball distribution became the focus. If the Spurs were to land DeMarcus Cousins or Anthony Davis, I'm sure Pop would adapt again and start re-emphasizing passes into the post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik Hairston
I agree somewhat. I don't think Parker would have ever flourished as a SG because he isn't dangerous enough from beyond the arc. And I totally agree that having a passer like Manu makes up for Tony's deficiency there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bones
But just wondering if Spurs haven't been overpaying for a position that could have been filled by someone not as flashy. Or winning more rings with a true play maker at that position.
I definitely think paying a quick PG big money heading into his mid 30s was a case of rewarding his past performances. I always thought Duncan would follow Kareem as a guy who could still be effective far into his 30s-- both of them relied more on fundamentals & BBIQ than athleticism, but for as long as I've been watching basketball, the first players to lose effectiveness are the quicker, shorter guards. In Parker's case, I think a big thing he can do it shoot the three more frequently-- he has shown in the past three years the ability to hit it, and could be a more of a consistent threat than someone like Iverson, who after his quickness was gone was pretty bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by cantthinkofanything
Yep on rewarding him for the past. That being said, I have prematurely called an end to TP for a couple of seasons in a row and he came out and proved me wrong. His improvement in hitting the short jumper went a long way to extending his shelf life. But his reliance on quickness combined with his inability to pass is eventually (maybe now) bringing his usefulness to an end. IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bones
Hopefully, now that I said that, he'll come on strong the rest of the year. But the Spurs definitely missed the window to get some serious value out of him in a trade.
The Hawks are my second team. Yes, Teague is Parker like. Yes, Schroder is a vastly improved backup PG (#3 PG last year). But this year's Hawks improvement is mostly about Horford. The last time Horford was healthy, Johnson and Smith were fighting for the ball. This is the first time Horford has been healthy when the team was playing team ball.
Horford and Millsap are one of the better undersized front courts this league has ever seen. Last night was a typical Millsap game: 18 pts, 10 rebs, 3 assists, 2 steals, 2 blocks. He has been having games like this all year. He's essentially a bulky small forward with a swing player's versatility, but also enough toughness to guard PFs who are usually at least 3-4" taller than him. Pairing up him and Kawhi would be ideal, but every indication is he really likes his teammates and coach a lot and probably won't leave in free agency.
:lol teague carrying their asses in the grindhouse