The two arguments are completely non-sequitur.
This topic is about the Grizzlies losing their best perimeter defender, potentially for the whole series, which unarguably helps the Spurs.
Instead, you seem to think that it makes for a good opportunity to dog Danny Green's shooting percentages for no apparent reason.
It's like you're dreamin' about Gorgonzola cheese when it's clearly Brie time, baby.
Doesn't mean much
You can do better then this.
Threadwothy.
Muchos Gracias!
would you bet your life on Green actually hitting wide open jumpers in the playoffs? A simple "yes" or "no" will do
Tony Allen sucks now and in the playoffs SA can hide TP on him defensively. I actually think this makes MEM better.
True his offense is horrendous, but they let that dude play crazy physical in the playoffs. Good for Kawhi
Allen doesn't move the needle in this series. Spurs in 4 or 5 regardless.
Spurs in 3
I'm being serious. Like it doesn't change my opinion that SA will whoop up on MEM but I think TA is a negative player in modern playoffs.
The refs always let that guy get away with a ton of all the time. He is a positive player for the Grizz. Also has nothing to do with modern era playoffs.
Yes it does. You cannot win playoff series with guys like Allen. He was basically the reason they got swept by SA. They were undermanned obviously but you can't win in modern NBA playoffs with a guy like him. Especially when teams now have time to game plan for him.The refs always let that guy get away with a ton of all the time. He is a positive player for the Grizz. Also has nothing to do with modern era playoffs.
Omg
Kinda hard to have a raw positive plus minus when he was playing the ing spurs with a depleted team.Omg
That would mean his advance numbers would also be negative.
My man - his offense is so bad it clearly off sets his defense. Especially when game planned for. Being able to cheat off him and hide your worst defender on him is anti-gravity. He's very detrimental IMO in the new age.Kinda hard to have a raw positive plus minus when he was playing the ing spurs with a depleted team.
That would mean his advance numbers would also be negative.
We're right back where we've started.
And please stop spouting dumb .
What's dumb about it? I can literally prove, with actual statistics, that what I'm saying is true. You may not agree because you are an eyeball test guy, but you cannot say it's dumb.We're right back where we've started.
And please stop spouting dumb .
I'm saying throwing out to see if anything sticks. I'm pretty sure you can do better than "uhh he had negative impact dur dur dur".
And no, I aint an eye-test guy. I actually use many metrics to evaluate value to a team.
I'm saying throwing out to see if anything sticks. I'm pretty sure you can do better than "uhh he had negative impact dur dur dur".
And no, I aint an eye-test guy. I actually use many metrics to evaluate value to a team.
Let me explain to ya dumbasses. I ain't an eye test guy. I'm an eye test, total production, per minute, impact, role and many other things. I hope that explains things for ya.
And don't try to get at me.
It never works out well for the other guy.
What?I'm saying throwing out to see if anything sticks. I'm pretty sure you can do better than "uhh he had negative impact dur dur dur".
And no, I aint an eye-test guy. I actually use many metrics to evaluate value to a team.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote