Reply With Quote
You know, I've never liked the term "butthurt," but it applies. And it's not the wounded pride of Duncan's fans that it applies to.
LOL Dallas, the new Sacramento.
lame
You know, I've never liked the term "butthurt," but it applies. And it's not the wounded pride of Duncan's fans that it applies to.
LOL Dallas, the new Sacramento.
And yes, I know: "lame."
Pau is a beast-no doubt. I would still take Dirk over him. I'd have to agree that at this point Pau has surpassed Duncan because of Tim's age and wear/tear.
Yes, Pau > Duncan right now. He's been a stud this season for L.A.
Pau isn't too pussy to post up, Dirkie pooh is
He hasn't changed, he's just become more effective. He isn't considerably better on defense, he's just on a better defensive team plus he's regularly guarding guys 3 or 4 inches shorter. He uses his length and quickness well when guarding those shorter players.
He's matured physically by putting on extra weight, but he's still soft. Duncan isn't considered a physical defender, yet he can rattle Gasol by playing him close and bothering him.Oh. So why deny that he's changed?
Who's crying? I've always liked Gasol's game, but people want to overrate him because he's on a bigger stage and they ignored him in Memphis. He's become more efficient on offense and a more effective rebounder, but he still isn't the best PF/big man in the league. He still can't dominate on the defensive end and can be rattled on offense.He's better than Duncan. Deal with it. And yes, I liked watching Duncan back when he was a great player better than I like watching Gasol now, too. But crying and lashing out because you're sad is for 3-year-olds.
What does that mean?
I completely disagree. He was a terrible defender in his early years in Memphis, and these last two, three years he's been a good to very good one. Aside from Howard, Bogut, Haywood, Yao and Oden when they're healthy, there are not too many better defensive anchors in the NBA.He isn't considerably better on defense
I don't disagree.He's matured physically by putting on extra weight, but he's still soft.So who is? Who meets both of those requirements? Garnett, maybe. Yao, Bogut? Dirk, no to both. Duncan, no to the first. Howard, no to the second.he still isn't the best PF/big man in the league. He still can't dominate on the defensive end and can be rattled on offense.
He uses his length and boxes out much better than in Memphis. Rebounding is all about effort, Gasol just gives far better effort now then he did in Memphis. Also, it helps that he usually can rebound over his smaller opponent.
He was "terrible" because he was physically weaker than the player he was guarding. He's matured physically and has learned to better use his length on defense. Yet, he still isn't a good defender, he's just above average. Stronger players can power through him and smaller players can usually out-quick him. That doesn't show as much in L.A. with such a good core of defenders on the team and the considerable length that Odom, Bynum and Gasol possess.I completely disagree. He was a terrible defender in his early years in Memphis, and these last two, three years he's been a good to very good one. Aside from Howard, Bogut, Haywood, Yao and Oden when they're healthy, there are not too many better defensive anchors in the NBA.
Duncan and Garnett can still dominant on both ends when they're rested and healthy. I guess you didn't see the first-round series against Dallas? Duncan's lateral quickness and mobility is gone, but he can still anchor a defense if he's used correctly. Yao when healthy can be a dominant player on offense and defense. Bogut and Howard aren't dominant enough on offense, while Dirk has never been dominant on the glass or on defense.So who is? Who meets both of those requirements? Garnett, maybe. Yao, Bogut? Dirk, no to both. Duncan, no to the first. Howard, no to the second.
lameAnd yes, I know: "lame."
So he plays about two thirds of his minutes at C? You're right, what was I thinking referring to him as a C? Stupid me.
Not sure why your obsession with calling him a C (he plays about 35% min at PF, 65% at C) but hey, you win... call him a C. That helps him because the average C is less productive than the average PF anyway. Makes Gasol out to be even better.
And frankly, who cares what Bucher or some "Lakers fans" think about Gasol vs. Duncan or the price of tea in China?
BTW, I wonder what your beloved PER says about their respective production in the POs?
I'm just saying, this isn't some preposterous opinion based on bias.
Funny, when PER doesn't suit your side of the argument, then it's not credible. People always do that. Here's what I like about PER: If I were to come up with my top fifteen players, fourteen would be in the top twenty (the other top twenty-five) and if I were to come up with players having a breakout season, PER almost always bears it out.
So let me get this straight, 82 games, where team's play essentially the same schedule, that's not useful, but the small sample size that is the playoffs, is? And you're trying to make me seem like the biased one.
J_Paco has encapsulated my thoughts. 21_Blessings, this "closer" talk is nonsense. Guess what, Bryant wouldn't have been in position to "close" if not for O'Neal's dominance in the first forty-two minutes. Kenny Smith always uses this foolish argument as means to declare Bryant the best player in the world.
At this point, Gasol>Dirk>Timmy
Agreed.
That wasn't your original point, though. Your original point was "There is no such thing as a 7-1 PF, therefore he's a C." I called BS because Gasol played over 1000 minutes at PF.
What part of that is difficult to understand?
He plays both positions and plays them both very well, kinda like Duncan actually in that regard.
And...? You think I have a problem with PER? I think it is an OK way of looking at players, except:I'm just saying, this isn't some preposterous opinion based on bias.
Funny, when PER doesn't suit your side of the argument, then it's not credible. People always do that. Here's what I like about PER: If I were to come up with my top fifteen players, fourteen would be in the top twenty (the other top twenty-five) and if I were to come up with players having a breakout season, PER almost always bears it out.
a) IMO it rewards high usage, high scoring players without enough penalty for mediocre/poor efficiency
b) It takes defense into account very little
c) There are better ways of evaluating players IMO than a catch-all stat like PER that, even by Hollinger's own admission, is designed as a quick way to encapsulate a player's production but by no means the most accurate
Who said the 82 game sample isn't useful? (It is 65 and 78 games by the way, those are the number of games Gasol and Duncan played.)So let me get this straight, 82 games, where team's play essentially the same schedule, that's not useful, but the small sample size that is the playoffs, is? And you're trying to make me seem like the biased one.
80% of my argument was all about RS numbers. I quoted you Gasol's advantages vs. Duncan's advantages. You are the one who said it was "preposterous" to think Duncan's not the better player at this point. I asked you: what in their stats and production this season gives you that impression? What clear advantage does Duncan provide at this point?
Because I just don't see it.
For the record, yes, playoffs are a smaller sample size... but that doesn't make it an insignificant sample. And I'm sorry, but playoff games do mean more. If Duncan has nothing left in the tank by the time the POs roll around, we're not supposed to hold that against him in evaluating his value to his team?
That's a false dichotomy... Shaq and Kobe both needed each other. Shaq was more valuable but he doesn't win those 3 championships without Kobe. It is not as if Kobe was irreplaceable -- yep, Shaq probably could've won those three les if you swapped another elite wing for Kobe -- but Shaq was not irreplaceable either. Put an elite center in his place with Kobe and those role players -- say, Duncan -- and quite likely you get the same results.J_Paco has encapsulated my thoughts. 21_Blessings, this "closer" talk is nonsense. Guess what, Bryant wouldn't have been in position to "close" if not for O'Neal's dominance in the first forty-two minutes. Kenny Smith always uses this foolish argument as means to declare Bryant the best player in the world.
So Colin Cowheard gave major props to the Lakers for going after Gasol (who fits) and not someone like McGrady or Iverson.
I couldnt believe the revisionist history. As if Houston or Denver would have traded either of those two for Kwame Brown. As if the Lakers coming off their 2007 loss and Kobe trade demand wouldnt have given up any player outside of Odom for McGrady or Iverson.
Well, this whole "rested and healthy" thing is nearly the entire point now, isn't it?
No one is arguing that Pau at his peak is anywhere near Duncan's or KG's at theirs.
We're talking present day, and Duncan and KG are definitely off their peaks because of age and injury.
And I'm sorry, but the lingering impression I have of Duncan's defense this season is watching him absolutely get torched by Nash and Amar'e on the PNR over and over and over again down the stretch of Game 2 vs. Phoenix. First time I can ever recall him looking utterly helpless on defense for an extended period. And the rest of the series wasn't much better... Dragic made him look silly in Game 3. I don't think I have to go into detail about Game 4.
I don't think they would've wanted Iverson but I can't disagree about McGrady.
Sometimes teams fortunes are just as improved by the moves they don't make as the ones they do.
Charley Rosen: Gasol Is Better Than You Think
Charley Rosen
FOXSports.com
Whether the Lakers win or lose, the focus is always on Kobe Bryant -- and rightly so because he’s the best player in the known world. But more and more NBA watchers are discovering that Pau Gasol has usurped Tim Duncan and has become the league’s new Big Fundamental.
Not only that, Gasol has also meshed seamlessly with Kobe, and earned his respect. This was evidenced late in Game 2 when Gasol was prepared to set a wing-high screen for Kobe, until Bryant waved him back into the low post. “You,” Kobe said, then delivered a crisp entry pass and watched with pleasure as Gasol once again took Amar'e Stoudemire to school. This time with a double-spin move that led to a short jumper.
This is not the same Pau Gasol who toiled for Memphis. His movements are quicker and more defined. He has expanded his offensive repertoire and increased both his defensive range and understanding.
Even if Gasol is bumped off his favorite spot on the left box, he can still turn, face, shoot, pass or drive. And Gasol’s left hand is the best of any of his peers. It’s this versatility that is especially dangerous when opponents are of a mind to focus on Kobe with double teams and stacked defenses.
Also, although this was not demonstrated in Game 2 when he missed several springers, Gasol can step out past the stripe and knock down mid-range jumpers. This ability keeps the middle open for Kobe’s drives, allows Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom space to operate in the low post, and provides a scoring option when the defense collapses. Plus, because of his size and long arms, Gasol can easily deliver lob passes if Bynum or Odom are fronted in the pivot.
Moreover, Gasol’s slick passwork enables the Lakers to play inside-out offense that can take full advantage of turned heads, momentary defensive confusion, and aggressive dive cuts by his teammates. In Game 2, for example, Gasol made a kick-out pass to Kobe from the jaws of a double team that forced the Suns' defense to compromise its balance, thereby leaving Artest unguarded on the weak-side wing. Kobe got the assist when his pass to Artest led to a successful jumper, but Gasol executed the most underrated pass in the game — the pass that enables a subsequent assist-pass.
His length and ability to seal defenders also make fronting Gasol extremely risky, as he readily proved against the Suns on Wednesday.
In other words, Gasol’s versatility with the ball creates problems that no playoff opponent thus far has been able to solve. Indeed, the Celtics are the only potential rival that, in Rasheed Wallace, have the personnel to make life difficult for Gasol.
Adding to Gasol’s package is his sky-high basketball IQ. No other big man in the league moves so efficiently without the ball. In particular, Gasol is completely homed in on Kobe’s intentions. Notice how many times Kobe delivered assist-passes to Gasol on the move, and how often these two celebrated their cohesion with joyous high-fives.
Gasol is likewise especially attuned to Odom’s off-the-ball maneuvers. In Game 2, three of Gasol’s five dimes were dropped on Odom in the paint.
In addition, Gasol’s can set effective screens, then either roll hoopward, slip the screen, or fade to create space for his jumpers. Any defender whose head tends to swivel will be burned by a timely backdoor cut that inevitably eventuates in a layup or a dunk.
Nor is Gasol’s skill-set limited to the attack zone. When the Lakers were temporarily stymied by a full-court press sprung by Phoenix, Gasol quickly moved into a release spot to catch a pass and instantly relieve the pressure. Twice more, Gasol carried the ball across the time-line to foil full-court zone traps. On one of these excursions Gasol escaped an approaching defender by changing direction with a smooth behind-the-back dribble.
It’s Odom’s presence that has made Kobe diminish his domination of the ball and, in truth, forced him to wholeheartedly trust his teammates. As a result, the triangle is as effective these days as it ever has been since the heydays of MJ and Scottie Pippen.
Even more influential is Gasol’s screen/roll defense. By unofficial count, Gasol made 17 exceptional shows on the Suns high screen/rolls in Game 2. He stepped up, spread out, and forced (mostly) Nash to back up before even thinking of trying to turn the corner. One of Gasol’s shows so astounded Leandro Barbosa that the Brazilian Blur fumbled his dribble into the hands of Jordan Farmar — who got credit for the steal.
Gasol’s non-spectacular defense was another under-the-radar reason for the Lakers latest triumph. As when his long arms distracted Steve Nash and forced first a turnover, and then a crudely misfired 3-point shot. Or the third-quarter sequence when Gasol made Goran Dragic change his shot so much that he missed a layup. Not to forget an aggressive switch-out by that caused the hot-shooting Grant Hill to miss a rare jumper.
Gasol’s long-armed defense also discombobulated Stoudemire, blocking a layup, forcing a brick when he stood his ground in an iso situation, and generally discouraging Stoudemire from attacking him with the ball.
Simply put, Gasol is too talented, too resourceful, and too crafty for the comparatively unevolved Stoudemire to compete with on even terms. But Stoudemire has plenty of company.
For example, Gasol is taller and longer than Duncan, but not quite as strong. Neither is an exceptional face-up jump shooter or is possessed of exceptional hops. Gasol has a vastly superior left hand and more junk in his trunk in the low-post. Gasol’s handle is also better than Duncan’s, he moves more efficiently without the ball, and is a much slicker passer.
On defense, Gasol gets the edge in screen/roll and man-to-man defense, while TD’s help defense remains unchallenged among the NBA’s bigs.
Moreover, with his 34th birthday rapidly approaching, Duncan has lost a step and is past his peak. But Gasol is TD’s junior by approximately four years and is at the top of his game.
So, if there’s very little that’s fundamentally sound about Dwight Howard’s overall game, if Shaq is old and in the way, and if Yao is perpetually down and out, then Pau Gasol has emerged, not only as the NBA’s reigning master of basic basketball, but as the best center on the planet.
With the unequaled duo of Kobe and Gasol playing so well together, and obviously enjoying their partnership, the Lakers seem destined to repeat.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
