It seems like Pop is more intent on posting up Softridge & Kawhi is usually camping in the corner when Porker is running the show.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursistan
Printable View
It seems like Pop is more intent on posting up Softridge & Kawhi is usually camping in the corner when Porker is running the show.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursistan
Because it ignores free throws, which use possessions just like shots do. TS% already factors that in free throws, and when you look at that, you don't get the misleading numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawhitstorm
You're misinterpreting the stat. It's not the players individual PPP multiplied by 100. It's the average possession for the team when the player is on the floor multiplied by 100. Of course Kawhi is on par with Harden and Prime Melo. He spent half the season dominating the ball and is still the go-to guy.Quote:
Per 100 possessions, Kawhi's scoring efficiency is on par w/ what Harden did last season when he led the league in TOTAL points & he's getting to the line at the same rate as Carmelo was at the same age.
:tuQuote:
Originally Posted by spursistan
TS% is a good way to highlight elite shooters like Korver but not so when it comes to scorers such as DeRozan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
Usage is also tricky b/c guys like Korver could get more touches but it won't translate into usage percentage b/c they are just going to pass the ball rather than making plays which might lead to empty possessions. High usage/volume scorers who don't get to the line such as Softridge also get exposed by PPP.
Carmelo for example has a higher usage rate & average more FGAs than Kawhi but has a much lower PPP b/c he doesn't get to the line.
DeRozan is not an efficient scorer. He's not inefficient, but his 30.2 points on 29.7 possessions leaves a lot to be desired.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawhitstorm
Aldridge is doing just fine in terms of PPP he's averaging 18.4 points on 18.55 possessions. It's not great (.99 ppp) but it compares just fine with DeRozan (1.02). Kawhi is more efficient than either guy, getting 24.8 points on 23.05 possessions (1.08ppp), which is why I said his numbers were fine for a volume scorer. But that doesn't make points/shot less shitty of a stat.Quote:
Usage is also tricky b/c guys like Korver could get more touches but it won't translate into usage percentage b/c they are just going to pass the ball rather than making plays which might lead to empty possessions. High usage/volume scorers who don't get to the line such as Softridge also get exposed by PPP.
Melo's efficiency is fine as well for a volume guy, but he's not the shooter Kawhi is. That's a bigger deal than the free throws.Quote:
Carmelo for example has a higher usage rate & average more FGAs than Kawhi but has a much lower PPP b/c he doesn't get to the line.
Yap . Uglier is that no offense run, pull up three. Its falls short most times. If he pulls up around a screen where he gets a little breathing space then its usually money.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursistan
:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by LongtimeSpursFan
Last 5 gamesQuote:
He's not and never will be a scorer.
24.2 ppg
7.4 rpg
4.8 a pg
1.4 stls
1.8 TOs
36 mpg
He's averaging almost what Tim did in his best scoring seasons...But sure "Kawhi isn't a scorer"
:lmao
The issue is that Kawhi plays most minutes with LMA and he isn't a great screener. I like how Lee operates there with Kawhi and I'd like to see how Dedmon would do it...But in the starting lineup the shooters aren't getting great screening from bigs. Another area where we are missing Tim...and Splitter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slippy
We'll that was fun while it lasted. :lmao
Someone here can't deal with criticism.Quote:
Originally Posted by dabom
And I LOVE IT.
People getting so mad and lock threads for nothing.
:lol
That dpg faggot. :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by YGWHI
Most cuddled posters on this board tbh...
We have trolls here saying Kawhi's overrated, like threads where they called him retarded and...nothing was wrong.
I posted a list of Chinook's wrong takes in that thread and.... welll, we already know what happened with the thread.
So according to ST standards it's fine to insult a Spurs player but not to say a poster was wrong. Good to know it.
:lol
http://static.politifact.com.s3.amaz...-Ohio-True.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by YGWHI
Seriously, if you don't think Kawhi is a great offensive player you're a complete moron. You don't have to be a once in a lifetime offensive player like KD to be great.
:tuQuote:
Originally Posted by Slippy
:lmao Calling someone else out for this when you're constantly crying every time someone critiques Leonard.Quote:
Originally Posted by YGWHI
You guys are really pink ass spoiled if you're calling out KL. Nobody expected him to be this good, and I mean nobody. Consider it a gift.
Tell me when I locked a thread for people criticizing Kawhi?Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
Tell me when I was hating on a favorite player's poster because that guy criticizes Kawhi?Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
No, I didn't do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
I disagree with you when you say "I don't blame Kawhi BUT..." and then "Kawhi played well BUT..." Because that's incoherent. You can't say a guy plays well at the same time that you blame him for the loss.
I'm the first here to admit Kawhi's flaws but I'll continue posting that people are wrong every time if they say he's not a scorer or a top player, because HE IS one.
:lmao Melting down and further proving my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by YGWHI
What I said could only be deemed incoherent by someone that lacks basic reading comprehension.
Yg is a savage poster dude...Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
Leonard is better when he isn't the number one option.
Because blaming they guy who played well isn't incoherent, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
You were very quiet after Kawhi's great games in Charlotte and Boston, when he was the #1, and the team won on the road.Quote:
Originally Posted by LongtimeSpursFan
So it's good to have Kawhi as #1 just when Spurs win but not when they lose, right?
These stupid people...smh.