Reply With Quote
Yeah well, dunno if you watched the finals but Kobe did a pretty fair job of shooting his team out of an NBA championship.
Do not forget Kobe gets to the line alot. So that 43% is better than Caron Butler or Tony Parkers 43%. 2FTs is a nice thing to get.And I don't know what's so efficient about Kobe shooting 43-44% from the field in the playoffs
Yeah well, dunno if you watched the finals but Kobe did a pretty fair job of shooting his team out of an NBA championship.
Nikos, you are just a negative fvck.
Whottt, who's Raffy?
In the finals he didn't get to the line or hit threes. Therefore was inefficient. My point was that FG% is not neccesarily indiciatve of efficiency as Points Per Shot is.Yeah well, dunno if you watched the finals but Kobe did a pretty fair job of shooting his team out of an NBA championship.
Thanks.Nikos, you are just a negative fvck.
Yeah well, getting to the line isn't always indicative of a players ability to be efficient either...sometimes they get help, and sometimes they get hindered.
Rafael Palmeiro. My favorite active baseball player...Roid Free.
You know me. I mean it in a nice way, dude.
Any kind of prediction is as useful as a bad orgasm.
Its certainly a nice way to see who is efficient. Players who get to the line a lot and shoot a good % are ALWAYS reasonably efficient.Yeah well, getting to the line isn't always indicative of a players ability to be efficient either...sometimes they get help, and sometimes they get hindered.
Sure they get help, but at some point you have to ask yourself, what really makes one player better than the other, or helps you distinguish between two players with similiar abilities and talents. Crawford seems more athletic than most Sgs in the entire league. He can score when hot with ANYONE. But he is inefficient. He NEVER gets to the line.
Point is efficiency is a nice indicator of a how well a player is scoring given their amount of shot attempts and role in the offense etc....
You get the idea. Its not the END ALL BE ALL, but it does tell a nice chunk of the story.
I'm not saying it's a bad stat...but don't try and tell me there are many guys that challenge interior d(the major key to getting to the FT line) as much as Manu does...including Kobe...maybe a few years ago Kobe did it often..but he doesn't do it as much as he used to...he doesn't do it as much as Manu does now IMO. Manu does it alot. AI does it more...but he knows he'll get the calls for doing it as well.
As for Parker...it's not really his game...doesn't mean he's not as efficient as some guy whose game is predicated on getting to the line.
Genrally speaking the longer a guy is around the more likely he is to get those types of calls, the flipside is, the longer a guy is around the less likely he is to want to do it...if he's a guard.
And Superstars get the calls...see AI. Parker does not get as many calls as he should, and Manu really doesn't. So I wouldn't judge their efficiency so much based on a stat that has such a large margin for human error as a FT derivative stat does.
You guys are all on crack:
Look to win 70 games you dont need any of the following(lesson 1)
1) To be a top tier offense
2) To have an extreamly efficent backcourt
3) To have a player with KG numbers
What you need is a very,very, very large points differential.
Why you might ask? Well that is the best possible measurment of how your team stacks up against the opposition, it doesnt really matter if you cant score but 80 ppg as long as your opposition cant score but 60.
If you look at the Spurs' points differential of the last 7 games then yes if they keep that up 70 games is not a possibility, it is an absoultly set in stone, going to happen occurance.
I am not disagreeing with Manu's ability to drive the lane and draw attention. As a matter of fact I think he gets to the line for about 50% of his FGA, which is awesome for a guard.
All I am saying is Manu may have shot .418 last year or whatever, but to the outside observer they would think he was inefficient on O. He wasn't, he had the highest PPS on the team. Does not mean he is better than Duncan, but it says for his shot attempts and role in the offense, he was more efficient at scoring the ball. This was mainly due to TDs FT shooting but thats another story. And obviously TD sucks the entire D in as well and gets easier shots for others etc....
There are many factors. But I like PSA/PPS better than pure FG%.
You're new here, aren't you?
63 magic number, as Pop totally ices Duncan, Ginolbi after clinching 1st seed throughout.
Mark it down been on the nose win total = 2/3 last years!
MadDoc
Pop won't ice them down that much. He's a big beliver in momentum. He doesn't even like having too may days off at the AS break if the team is playing well.
You can't just start coasting going into the playoffs.
Nikos, Manu has the best season average grades from Timvp's ranking system. Even better than TD.
He has to be doing something right . . .
And I hear you, he has to try to keep it up for 82 games and most importantly, the playoffs.
But don't start getting concerned about it. He will.
And the Spurs will go 65 - 17.
You're new here, aren't you?
Wow, the master of sarcasm misses the mark, he must be pretty slow
(i was pocking fun at myself for mis-interpreting you earlier)
So nothing you post should be taken seriously. No prob, I was already operating under that assumption.
great because no one takes anything you say seriously either, i guess its only right you would reciprocate.
The only difference is I don't care. This is the problem with posters like you: you take yourself too seriously.
Tell that mofo
if you honestly think i care about what someone 2,000 miles away thinks about me you dont read my posts very well marcus bryant, speaking of which you seem to take yourself pretty seriously though
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
