Spurs: The importance of Repeating.

[ambchang]

Forget staring only at the numbers, remember the 1995 playoffs? You're a Spurs fan, you should know all too well what went down. And not just that but from about 1993-97, Olajuwon was on another level.

Yeah, I remember how the rockets spaced the floor with actual shooters rather than a point guard that hit one playoff three pointer his entire career who also happened to be the best Spurs point guard in the 90s.

I remember how rodman left horry opened possession after possession and allowed him to shoot 43% from three, averaged 14 ppg, have an offensive rating of 119 and ts% rating of 58%

[ambchang]

Ouch!!!

Shut up old man, this debate is for people to have original ideas rather than parroting the same illogical bull over and over again.

Stop trying to coattail like your hero. And you aren't even coattailing the right side.

[ambchang]

That's just because you're born ignorant and you ain't been nurtured otherwise in the intervening temporal.

You don't know. You eked yours out one at-a-time, piss pot style. You had your chance, but, were too busy pre nupin' - custodying, divorcin', stabbin' each other in the back.

Big shots.

Shut the up you hypocrite. If you want to repeat, repeat about how it is only about making the playoffs and winning the last game.

[ambchang]

This.

The best posters like ambchang can do is say that if you extrapolate Duncan's numbers out you would have similar results. But we dont know if there would be diminishing returns as Duncans was asked to carry a larger work load.

Duncan was a good PF/C hyrbrid but he was never dominant like Shaq or Hakeem.

Per 100 possessions isn't about extrapolating. It's about normalizing. You are thinking of per 36 minute stats.

Advanced stats showed Duncan to be as or even more dominant than shaq and Hakeem. You are just really stupid without realizing it.

[djohn2oo8]

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.

Here you go with the per 100 stats. I get it you can't make a case for Duncan's raw stats against Hakeem's. He just simply had to do more than Tim and he still elevated his game in the playoffs.

[djohn2oo8]

Amb is melting down.

[spurraider21]

Can you explain your objection to per possession stats?

[da_suns_fan]

Can you explain your objection to per possession stats?

Well look at James Harden. His per possessions stats were ridiculous in OKC, IIRC, but he couldnt maintain them when asked to play 40+ night in and night out.

Its not Duncans fault Pop played him so "little", but whos to say his production wouldnt drop off if he was asked to play more.

[spurraider21]

Well look at James Harden. His per possessions stats were ridiculous in OKC, IIRC, but he couldnt maintain them when asked to play 40+ night in and night out.

Its not Duncans fault Pop played him so "little", but whos to say his production wouldnt drop off if he was asked to play more.

his per possession stats have been better on houston, so i'm not even sure where you're going with that




besides, you're clearly confusing per minute stats with per possession stats

[ambchang]

Here you go with the per 100 stats. I get it you can't make a case for Duncan's raw stats against Hakeem's. He just simply had to do more than Tim and he still elevated his game in the playoffs.

Did you read the first line or are you just stupid?

[ambchang]

Amb is melting down.

any time someone roasts your ass you go dude melting done .

[ambchang]

Well look at James Harden. His per possessions stats were ridiculous in OKC, IIRC, but he couldnt maintain them when asked to play 40+ night in and night out.

Its not Duncans fault Pop played him so "little", but whos to say his production wouldnt drop off if he was asked to play more.

Again, you are thinking per 36 stats. Per possession stats is normalization taking pace into factor.

[djohn2oo8]

Did you read the first line or are you just stupid?

I read it and you still can't substantiate that Hakeem's peak wasn't much better than Tim's. It was. You lose.

[djohn2oo8]

any time someone roasts your ass you go dude melting done .

You're the one lashing out at Cully because he doesn't agree with you meltdown

[djohn2oo8]

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.

Is that why Hakeem's PPG, steals, FT%, FG&, and Blks per 100 possessions are higher averages than Duncan's in the playoffs? you are not good at this

[djohn2oo8]

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. .

Duncan shot 45% during that first run. He actually shot in the mid 40 percent 3 times in the playoffs during his prime, so Hakeem was obviously the better shooter in the playoffs, just like the regular season.

[ambchang]

Also loved how you left out Hakeem's playoff numbers from those two years

28.9/11/4 blocks
33.0/10.3/2 blocks

And how Dream was one assist away from recording two quadruple doubles in the same season, all while fasting during Ramadan. Top 10 in steals, and blocks. Has a higher FG% and FT% than Tim. Hakeem > Tim.

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.

I read it and you still can't substantiate that Hakeem's peak wasn't much better than Tim's. It was. You lose.

Read it again then. You are being intellectually dishonest.

[djohn2oo8]

Read it again then. You are being intellectually dishonest.

ignoring the stats i posted that dispute your claims. You lose.

[djohn2oo8]

"intellectually dishonest" must be amb's way of countering when someone else is statistically honest.

[Thread]

"intellectually dishonest" must be amb's way of countering when someone else is statistically honest.

A. He's never wrong.

B. He's never wrong.

[ambchang]

You're the one lashing out at Cully because he doesn't agree with you meltdown

Cully has been hiding away from me for months, I'm just publicly humiliating him to see if he has the guts to stand up for himself. Seems like he's just tucking his tails between his legs again.

[ambchang]

Also loved how you left out Hakeem's playoff numbers from those two years

28.9/11/4 blocks
33.0/10.3/2 blocks

And how Dream was one assist away from recording two quadruple doubles in the same season, all while fasting during Ramadan. Top 10 in steals, and blocks. Has a higher FG% and FT% than Tim. Hakeem > Tim.

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.

Is that why Hakeem's PPG, steals, FT%, FG&, and Blks per 100 possessions are higher averages than Duncan's in the playoffs? you are not good at this

That's much better? It's like rebounding and assists are no longer important even though YOU first posted the rebounding numbers as some king of argument.

Duncan shot 45% during that first run. He actually shot in the mid 40 percent 3 times in the playoffs during his prime, so Hakeem was obviously the better shooter in the playoffs, just like the regular season.

So FG% is that important now? I guess shaq is the greatest of them then.

ignoring the stats i posted that dispute your claims. You lose.

What have you won?

I have consistently included every single stat.

"intellectually dishonest" must be amb's way of countering when someone else is statistically honest.

Like how Duncan is better in two out of five categories is him being much worse than Hakeem?

[whitemamba]

Ambchang must have a ton of time on his hands , he has to be in the social security age.

[dbreiden83080]

I'd rather win 5 over the long run then 2 in 1999 and 2000 and never again.. The Rockets went back to back in 94 and 95 and were never heard from again..

[djohn2oo8]

That's much better? It's like rebounding and assists are no longer important even though YOU first posted the rebounding numbers as some king of argument.

You are the one who brought up per 100 stats to make Duncan's numbers in his peak seem closer to Hakeem's, which his per 100 stats are still better than Duncan's. You lose here.

So FG% is that important now? I guess shaq is the greatest of them then.

You bring it up when Kobe had bad shooting performances. So NOW it's not important because it pertains to Tim?

What have you won?

I have consistently included every single stat.

You can't win on raw stats so you moved to per 100 stats which you still lose.

Like how Duncan is better in two out of five categories is him being much worse than Hakeem?

And one of those categories, Duncan is only better by 0.3. It simply shows Hakeem had to do more for his team.