Draymond Green vs The World...Day 1: Kyrie Irving

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Both probably gonna be hall of fame players

I like Draymond defense but idk if the warriors win a championship with Draymond as their 2nd best player

So Kyrie wins

The Warriors have already won a title with Draymond as their 2nd best player.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

If you are taking Green as your #2 then your team isn't going far.

You're aware that a team with Draymond as the 2nd most important player just came a minute away from back-to-back championships, and Green scored 32 in the 7th game of that effort, right?

That's my face when I look at all the posts in this thread.

Did I miss your post, or is this another one of those, "I'm going to hedge by vaguely critiquing everything while committing to nothing" Gil-Scott Heroine classics?

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Did I miss your post, or is this another one of those, "I'm going to hedge by vaguely critiquing everything while committing to nothing" Gil-Scott Heroine classics?

You'd know all about hedging after that 'I can't see the Warriors losing in G7' thread. Basically the mise en scene of your LeBron v Kobe story relied on the Cavs winning that game/series.

Nah, I just think the entire premise of this thread is nonsense. Nobody is really detailing both sides (I can't blame them really), because the OP never states what should be taken into account - which has left everybody at different ends discussing different takes of what makes a better player. Dudes bringing up 'all Kyrie does is score'; failing to understand just how much impact his scoring in a PS enviroment affects the game, and how he ups his playmaking/defensive activity in the PS too. Dudes bringing up 'Draymond's not even a 4th option', as if the majority of his impact isn't on defense, and how he's one of the best playmakers (not just forwards) in the game.

A lot of dishonest and distorted takes from both sides in this thread.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You'd know all about hedging after that 'I can't see the Warriors losing in G7' thread. Basically the mise en scene of your LeBron v Kobe story relied on the Cavs winning that game/series.

Nah, I just think the entire premise of this thread is nonsense. Nobody is really detailing both sides (I can't blame them really), because the OP never states what should be taken into account - which has left everybody at different ends discussing different takes of what makes a better player. Dudes bringing up 'all Kyrie does is score'; failing to understand just how much impact his scoring in a PS enviroment affects the game, and how he ups his playmaking/defensive activity in the PS too. Dudes bringing up 'Draymond's not even a 4th option', as if the majority of his impact isn't on defense, and how he's one of the best playmakers (not just forwards) in the game.

A lot of dishonest and distorted takes from both sides in this thread.

Classic GSH, as predicted. Even when I call you out on it ahead of time you can't help it.

Step 1: Insult me for a year-old thread that doesn't relate in any way to this one.

Step 2: Insult the OP.

Step 3: Insult all posters on the thread.

Step 4: Refuse to add anything substantial enough to even be subject to critique.

Ya might as well be Sheed with this, "Both guys played hard and I ain't answering yo damn questions" silliness. Except you STILL can't keep your mouth shut and are posting as much as anyone over the last page, without saying anything.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Classic GSH, as predicted. Even when I call you out on it ahead of time you can't help it.

Step 1: Insult me for a year-old thread that doesn't relate in any way to this one.

Kind of how like you just insulted me out of no where based on what you perceive to be my posting style in the past? Glass houses and stones and all that.

Step 2: Insult the OP.

Step 3: Insult all posters on the thread.

Step 4: Refuse to add anything substantial enough to even be subject to critique.

Ya might as well be Sheed with this, "Both guys played hard and I ain't answering yo damn questions" silliness. Except you STILL can't keep your mouth shut and are posting as much as anyone over the last page, without saying anything.

Oh gee, why I don't do the same faux-PA on how you pop up in every Kobe thread. Ohhh, you certainly got me there @The Dankster!

Or better yet, why don't I use more vapid talking points just to somebody who actually gave a detailed description of why he doesn't take this thread seriously after he was asked to do so.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Kind of how like you just insulted me out of no where based on what you perceive to be my posting style in the past? Glass houses and stones and all that.

YOU are the one who started by repeatedly insulting literally every single person who had posted on the thread so far, including me. You've done it three times now.

I merely responded by pointing out that you were refusing to even offer up a solid position of your own, something that is a pattern of yours and that other people have called you out on before.

I didn't "insult you out of nowhere", it was a direct response to your repeated insults, which came first.

You then tried to insult a thread I made a year ago that had an incorrect prediction in it, even though MOST of the predictions I made in that thread were correct. I said that I saw Lebron putting up something like 30-10-10 in Game 7, and he put up 27-11-11. I said that Kyrie might put some points on the board but no one else would be able to step up on the road – Kyrie put up some points but no one else stepped up. I said JR/Love/bench would suck on the road - and JR/Love/bench combined for to get 11-32 shooting. I thought that wouldn’t add up to enough points to overcome the Warriors at home – indeed, the Cavs only scored 93 points, but the only thing I got wrong was failing to predict that Curry/Klay/company would perform so poorly on offense that the Warriors would only manage 89 and thus 93 would be enough to win. I said the Warriors played poorly when expectations were on them but did better when expectations came off and thought they would come out with fire - that fire was the ONLY part I got wrong.

But you see what I did? I put up REAL positions, positions I believed, and was willing to throw them out and get them tested by reality. You spend most your energy nowadays just mocking everyone else’s stance, without even bothering to back it up much more anymore, and more often than not you don’t even stake out a position of your own.

The fact that you remembered the exact title of a thread I made a year ago shows I stay on your mind though.

Maybe losing all those arguments with me the previous year about Kyrie’s injury, the Cavs’ performance without him, etc. got ya salty and tentative.

Oh gee, why I don't do the same faux-PA on how you pop up in every Kobe thread. Ohhh, you certainly got me there @The Dankster!

What?

There are a group of Kobestans on this board who are easily the worst posters in The Coliseum, and I stay on their throats. I admit that. What does that have to do with anything?

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

YOU are the one who started by repeatedly insulting literally every single person who had posted on the thread so far, including me. You've done it three times now.

I never contested that, not to mention I never said that all the posts were bad/wrong - I just said I struggled to find a good one. There's a difference, and I was speaking in general terms. With that said, that's all besides the point, because I'm not accusing others of what I'm guilty of like you are, hence why I brought up that thread. You have the nerve to say I how bring up 'things that don't relate any way to this one' when 80+% of our arguments are centered around you bringing up past arguments of ours (you did it again in this very post), that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I merely responded by pointing out that you were refusing to even offer up a solid position of your own, something that is a pattern of yours and that other people have called you out on before.

I gave a solid position of where I stand on this matter -

Nah, I just think the entire premise of this thread is nonsense. Nobody is really detailing both sides (I can't blame them really), because the OP never states what should be taken into account - which has left everybody at different ends discussing different takes of what makes a better player. Dudes bringing up 'all Kyrie does is score'; failing to understand just how much impact his scoring in a PS enviroment affects the game, and how he ups his playmaking/defensive activity in the PS too. Dudes bringing up 'Draymond's not even a 4th option', as if the majority of his impact isn't on defense, and how he's one of the best playmakers (not just forwards) in the game.

A lot of dishonest and distorted takes from both sides in this thread.

I came to the thread late, and saw that nobody was really interested in listening to each other, but instead would rather argue their aimless positions without taking everything into account. That's why I said what I did initially. I didn't see the point in breaking down every single post (like I normally would do) which I found a problem with, especially given the fact that probably only one poster would reply, and with a one-liner. Sometimes I can't be bothered with it all. I say my piece and KIM.

I make long-winded posts and I'm accused of having a mental illness. I make brief posts about a collective opinion and I'm accused of being a snob. Please tell me what's a nikka to do.

something that is a pattern of yours and that other people have called you out on before.

You think I have a pattern of not providing a solid position on matters? I think you'll find it's quite the opposite. You've even accused me of such, as being too hard-headed with my position. Make up your mind. Do we really need to go down that path of what others have called us out on before? I've got a laundry list for you. Like I said, grow up nikka.

I didn't "insult you out of nowhere", it was a direct response to your repeated insults, which came first.

I wasn't even really specifically talking about you. But I guess hit dogs will holler and all that.

You then tried to insult a thread I made a year ago that had an incorrect prediction in it, even though MOST of the predictions I made in that thread were correct. I said that I saw Lebron putting up something like 30-10-10 in Game 7, and he put up 27-11-11. I said that Kyrie might put some points on the board but no one else would be able to step up on the road – Kyrie put up some points but no one else stepped up. I said JR/Love/bench would suck on the road - and JR/Love/bench combined for to get 11-32 shooting. I thought that wouldn’t add up to enough points to overcome the Warriors at home – indeed, the Cavs only scored 93 points, but the only thing I got wrong was failing to predict that Curry/Klay/company would perform so poorly on offense that the Warriors would only manage 89 and thus 93 would be enough to win. I said the Warriors played poorly when expectations were on them but did better when expectations came off and thought they would come out with fire - that fire was the ONLY part I got wrong.

You see what you're doing right here - it's the very thing you accuse me of all the time. I guess you really were describing yourself all this time. Frightening.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

But you see what I did? I put up REAL positions, positions I believed, and was willing to throw them out and get them tested by reality. You spend most your energy nowadays just mocking everyone else’s stance, without even bothering to back it up much more anymore, and more often than not you don’t even stake out a position of your own.

This is complete utter nonsense and clearly you don't pay enough attention to my posting if you think that. These are some of the posts lately of me spending my energy by putting up and backing my "REAL positions":

I. You claimed that when Bogut went out, Lebron raped his [Draymond's] ass - how could this possibly be when Draymond wasn't even LeBron's primary defender for those two games without Bogut in the '16 Finals? If you'd actually bothered to watch the games, Iggy and Barnes were predominantly guarding him. Not Draymond. How can you claim that LeBron "raped" Draymond when Bogut went out in the '16 Finals (conveniently when the Cavs won), but then when Bogut was out in the '15 Finals (conveniently when the Warriors won) that GS didn't win any of those games because Draymond was limiting LeBron?
II. Draymond held LeBron to below 40% shooting when he guarded him in the '15 Finals (only Iggy defended LeBron on more shots than he did); he blocked and altered his shot multiple times all throughout that series.
III. While Iggy was the main one guarding LeBron in the '15 Finals, it was Draymond which actually allowed Iggy to suffocate LeBron on post-ups; knowing that if LeBron blew by him Draymond would be able to meet him at the rim and/or provide help defense.
IV. Draymond was their most important and influential player on defense (in that series), and LeBron controlled the ball more than any other Cavs player, played more minutes than any Cavs player, took more shots/higher USG% than any other Cavs player in the '15 Finals and yet you seem to think anybody that makes the correlation that Draymond was limiting LeBron is "retarded". How could this possibly make sense to you?




Here are all his made FGs from those two games where LeBron supposedly "raped" him. As you can see he only scores a few baskets when Draymond is defending him, the rest are on other Warriors players.



All these lies and bullshytting ain't gonna get you anywhere when folk can fact check.

Cavs ORTG in G1 - 103.8 (with Bogut starting)
Cavs ORTG in G2 - 94.6 (with Bogut starting)
Cavs ORTG in G3 - 105.6 (with Bogut starting)
Cavs ORTG in G4 - 92.4 (Bogut benched with Draymond starting at the 5)
Cavs ORTG in G5 - 101.4 (Bogut benched with Draymond starting at the 5)
Cavs ORTG in G6 - 100.1 (Bogut benched with Draymond starting at the 5)

Fact - the Warriors' defense had more success when Bogut was benched and Draymond started at the 5.

It can't be viewed several ways. It can only be viewed as the Warriors having the best defense up to this point.

They actually lost to the Spurs because i) it was the first time they actually played together with their new unit ii) shot 21% from behind the arc - 7 out of 33 attempts iii) only had 24 assists to 16 turnovers - when their season average is now 31.3 assists to 15 turnovers iv) allowed the Spurs to shoot 50% from behind the arc - Spurs are shooting 41% on the season v) allowed the Spurs to have 24 fastbreak points when San Antonio only average 12 fast point breaks a game

They've lost to the Grizzlies this season because i) they were taken out of the game by the officials in the first quarter of their first matchup and never recovered - the Warriors only gave up 44 points in the paint during that game; the same amount they give up on average this season ii) shot 33% from behind the arc iii) only had 15 assists to 23 turnovers. In the second gmatchup they allowed the Grizzlies to get back into the game in the 4th quarter - a quarter where they only scored 13 points and the entire offense fell apart - miscommunication, players missing easy shots, players turning the ball over etc etc.

They didn't lose to either of those teams mainly because of lack of rim protection.

The game was decided by six points in double OT, the game was close throughout. The Rockets only shot 31% from behind the arc in that game - Warriors shot 27%. Houston didn't shoot them out of the gym.

The game was decided by ONE point. The Cavs weren't blasting shyt, especially since the team shot 39% from the field. Warriors just allowed a double-digit to slip due to their offense falling apart late in the piece. That was rectified in their second matchup when they tore Cleveland a new a$$hole.

The Raptors had the most efficient offense of all time up to the point of both of those games - they were putting up points against EVERY squad. Never mind the fact that they only shot 38% in their second matchup.



You can't count - that's only seven games (Spurs, Grizzlies x2, Rockets, Cavs and Raptors x2 - games they didn't lose). The Grizzlies aren't an elite team, and it's arguable that the Raptors aren't either, but for argument's sake let's say Toronto is. Out of those seven games, their lack of defense was their downfall in only half of those matchups, and that's not even taking into account that they didn't lose to the Raptors and that the Grizzlies aren't an elite team. I don't know what you're aiming to achieve here, when EVERY other top-5 defense has had notable losses against "elite" teams because their defense has been subpar.

Jazz (#2 ranked defense) lost to the Spurs, Grizzlies* x2, Rockets, Warriors x2, Toronto x2
Spurs (#3 ranked defense) lost to the Rockets, Clippers (when BG and CP were healthy) x 2 - one without BG
Hawks (#4 ranked defense) lost to the Warriors and Raptors
Grizzlies (#5 ranked defense) lost to the Rockets, Clippers x2, Cavaliers and Raptors

Not to mention all the other games those teams lost because of subpar defense to non-elite teams and/or games they won even when their defense was subpar.

The fact of the matter is this, the Warriors have had the best defense up to this point:

#1 in defensive rating
#1 in steals
#1 in blocks
#1 in deflections
#1 in opponent FG%
#1 in opponents 3-pt%
#1 in contested shots

This point of that they "statistically benefit from blowing nobody teams out the building early and not having to experience too much resistance" is nonsense given the fact that i) teams more often than not have this matchup circled in their schedule, where GS tend to get the best efforts from opposition teams given that they are one of, if not the grandee team of the NBA ii) they rank #1 in nearly every statistical defensive area - this is not coincidental with blowing out teams with little-to-no resistance - it's a mark of the fact that they keep the pressure turn't up all throughout each game, in every situation iii) we're half way through the season, meaning any team-related statistical fluctuation runs, variance of situation or anomalies are near non-existent at this point.

Draymond's assisted on defense because of McCaw, Looney and West - players whom he barely ever plays with....

Except you named a bunch of players he rarely ever plays with. Never mind the fact that he guarded more ISO attempts than any other player last season while holding opponents to 30% shooting/0.68 PPP and defended more field goal attempts than any other player by a wide margin. Explain how he's assisted by these type of players and the system as a whole, when he's guarding more shots by himself (in ISO), and in general than every other player in the game?

Here's the problem - every single player in the league is aided by help on defense - even the likes of Gobert who you mentioned as being able to translate his impact on other teams. Draymond is regularly tasked with on-an-island defensive possessions (see ISO defensive attempts), rarely ever does he need help (again, as evidence by all the ISO and general shot attempts he defends), and this is without taking into account that he's also the best help defender in the league - a skillset that would translate over to any team and situation and a skillset that is the system itself.

The entire Warriors defense functions on his ability to switch on ANY player, and provide help defense on ANY player, filling in any defensive holes/covering defensive miscues by his teammates. You can't say he's "very assisted" by that system on defense when he quite literally is the system, arguably more than any player on every other team. He's certainly assisted on offense because of the system - that much is true, but it's quite the opposite on the other end.

Draymond is regularly cleaning up defensive miscues, either from guards/wings/bigs getting caught up in PnR situations with players they can't guard in a general manner: being too slow to react, not knowing player tendencies, lack of ability v certain types, not physical enough, not big enough, not quick enough, not long enough etc etc. It's half the reason why he defends so many attempts in the first place, because they're not all from his own opp. matchups, they're from him needing to clean up for other teammates or help them when they're being screened off. You can't defend as many attempts as he does, and cover as much ground on the defensive end (while having the success he does) if you're being assisted by a system, it doesn't make any theoretical and practical sense.

Ish Smith is not a "really effective" PG - there's a reason why he's been on 11 different teams in seven seasons, while only starting 25% of the games he's played in (most of which have been on loterry-bound teams). He's a solid backup who can temporary fill the void when the starter goes down, but never completely replace even just the good PGs: Kemba, Bledsoe, Dragic and Holiday etc etc. Much less replace the offensive impact of the likes of Curry, Westbrook, Lowry, Wall and I.T2.

I can't believe you'd even use Ish Smith as a reference, not only for being a "really effective" PG, but to use in argument for stating that somehow he negates the opinion of @Malta and I. Hypothetically, even if he were to be a "really effective" PG, he'd be an exception and not the rule. And it's never been about simply pass-first PGs - it's more about the PGs who can't score or shoot while dominating the ball. Anybody with half a brain can see that a player who has the ball in his hands the majority of the time and can't score/shoot efficiently ain't worth shyt. Regardless if you're a pass or shoot-first PG.

It's not about being a pass-first or shoot-first PG per say, it's about balancing when to score and when to pass. By rule, you're always going to be more of a threat if you look to score before you look to pass (that doesn't actually mean shooting the ball, it just means looking to). Half of Reggie's troubles is the fact he's a rockbrain who can't make the correct decisions with the ball on the regular and that he's been inefficient, not because he's a shoot-first PG. And while the Pistons would be better off at this current time with Ish as his replacement, it really isn't saying much since the majority of PGs in the league (starters and bench) would be a better option - score-first and pass-first.

What exactly did @KOBE say that was untrue?

Head-to-head matchups during the regular season (18 games played), their surface stats read as follows:

Durant - 28.9 ppg on 20.5 shots, 6.8 rebounds and 3.7 assists
LeBron - 28.8 ppg on 20.8 shots, 7.1 rebounds, and 6.6 assists

Head-to-head matchups during the post-season (five games played), their surface stats read as follows:

By just simply referencing their team records seems to me y'all are suggesting there's been this great margin between their performances when they face each other. When in fact Durant has been LeBron's best rival throughout his career. No other player has been able to go toe-to-toe with him (and even outplay him on occasion - he's outplayed him both times this season) like Durant has, and that's without mentioning LeBron was 3-4 years deep before Durant was even in the league - he had nearly half a decade head start on him. While granted, Durant isn't quite the playmaker LeBron is, he damn sure as hell ain't no slouch in that area - his assist #s would look a lot different if he didn't play with a PG that dominated the ball as much as Westbrook did. I mean take a look at his #s when Westbrook was out for two months during his MVP-run in '13/'14:

He did all that without dominating the ball too. I can only imagine the #s he would've averaged if Westbrook was injured for the entire season.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Continued:

Then you have to take into account how LeBron wouldn't be able to operate from the post the same without shooters and how that would affect the entire offense. You have to take into account how teams treat Durant's shooting ability and off-ball play, and how LeBron's tendency to dominate the ball would affect the entire offense. Especially against a team like the '13/'14 Grizzlies who'd punish the shyt out of him by throwing a # of defenders and looks his way.

It isn't as simple as you're making it out to be.

Of course you're not using the box score because you can't use it in reference to LeBron dominating him in the manner that their team H2H record suggests. Not to mention, he couldn't stop Durant in the 2012 Finals when he was scratching the surface of what he could become, and LeBron was basically at his peak (half the reason why Battier took turns on him, because LeBron was basically ineffective when guarding him). So you can miss with all the regular season/playoff LeBron talk.

These are just an example from the 2012 Finals (where he averaged 30.6 ppg on 54% - more points on great efficiency than LeBron):

Heat vs. Thunder - Play-By-Play - June 12, 2012 - ESPN (Durant made two FTs after being fould when the Thunder had a nine-pt lead with 12 seconds left)
Heat vs. Thunder - Play-By-Play - June 14, 2012 - ESPN (game was decided by four points and OKC were within two points with 40 seconds left - basically there was no garbage time)
Thunder vs. Heat - Play-By-Play - June 17, 2012 - ESPN (game was within one point with about a minute to go, and OKC didn't score on the last three posessions - Miami won by 6)
Thunder vs. Heat - Play-By-Play - June 19, 2012 - ESPN (game was within three points with 40 seconds to go, OKC didn't score on the remainder of their possessions and Miami won by six points)
Thunder vs. Heat - Play-By-Play - June 21, 2012 - ESPN (Durant and the starters were taken out with around five minutes to go and down by 23 points - Durant's last bucket was with eight minutes remaining and down by 20)

Basically, Durant had all of TWO points across the entire Finals in garbage time/when the game was out of reach (LeBron had a lot more), and that was when he got fouled and sent to the line when the Thunder were in front - it wasn't like he was padding his stats.

I'm well aware of this, and I've said this many a time in the past. Besides I was only using that to show the drop in his DSA% from last season, not to crop out out all activity that happens on the defensive end. And again those individual defensive shot attempts aren't foolproof, you still need to apply the proper context of the play situation, surrounding teammates on that specific play and their roles and actions, primary matchup leaks etc etc. Not to mention my original statement in this very thread was - "But one thing I've noticed since Kawhi's taken on a larger offensive load (this date backs to the end of last season), his defense hasn't been as sharp and consistent as it was previously - he doesn't rotate and cut off driving lanes as he typically would, and he doesn't suffocate his matchup on/off the ball as often (mostly because he was/is still trying to balance a offensive and defensive workload)".

That's part of it, but the main reason why is because he actively involves himself on defense in any way that he possibly can, by taking on any matchup and any help defensive role. It's half the reason he has more defensive impact to begin with. Typically big men are going to defend more shots than wings/guards anyway, because obviously they're closer to the rim and are involved in more defensive possessions.

I understand where you're going with this analogy, but Gobert has defended 298 shots at the rim this season - the most of any player in the league and 46 more shots than the #2 ranked player (Whiteside comes in at #3 - another player whom one might suggest as being a rim deterrent). Basically it's not really down to how much of defensive threat you are to teams, but how active you are in involving yourself on that end and of course being a big man helps when you're closer to the paint/rim.

That's one of the main problems I have with this piece: using a few plays across 1000+ possessions to make a grand statement on how teams avoid Kawhi as if it's reflective of what happens throughout the majority of their games. From all the Spurs games I've seen this season I wouldn't say that's the case at all, certainly no more than the rest of the elite wing defenders in this league. Just in general, with all the PnR action that dominates play today and of course all the action that takes place in the paint - wing defenders are less likely to be involved on defense than any other position - especially ones who guard their direct opposite on a nightly basis.

I also mentioned earlier in this thread - "Not to mention he's defending the same amount of shots per game this season, as he did last season (9.4 defensive shot attempts in '15/'16 and 9.5 defensive shot attempts in '16/'17) - basically teams are not necessarily avoiding him any more than they did last season."

In general sure it does, but here's the thing with that, I've seen virtually no difference between how Kawhi defends when Gasol is on/off the court - which Kawhi has played close to 300 minutes without Pau on the floor. Pau despite having lost the majority of his lateral quickness still has a high defensive BBIQ and tends to position himself in the right spots to account for a regression in movement (his rim protection rate is respectable too, in line with the likes of Adams. Biyombo, M.Gasol, Len and Asik. And better than the likes of Drummond, Valanciunas, Noah, Nurkic and Mozgov). I see Kawhi pacing himself throughout the game, and more consistently focused on the offensive end rather than the other, as I've seen him make more defensive misreads on average this season than he's done in previous years. I do suspect as the season goes on he'll learn to find more of a balance.

You're preaching to the choir.

I posted this back in 2013:

To me advanced statistics won't be worth anything until they can measure a big man's defensive impact accordingly:

shots adjusted, passes deflected/intercepted, blocks and pockets picked on both perimeter/frontcourt players, points allowed through mis-rotation or being directly scored upon, how many times he's in isolation either in the post or perimeter, how many times he effectively plays help defense + the # of different attackers in one play he limits, how many times he has to deal with funneled attackers, how many times he has to deal with his man + stunt'n and helpin on teammate's man, how many times his hedging allows his teammate to recover, how many times he's successful at breaking up/guarding pick and rolls, how many times he closes out on pick and pops, how many times he forces players to a bad spot on the floor, how many times he boxes out offensive players when in the paint, how many times he aids defenders, how many times his direct opposite scores on him, how many times he shrinks space in the paint, how many times he traps perimeter players, how many times he forces the attacker into a bad decision, how many times he's inactive on the defensive end etc etc.

And they find a formula that can accurately calculate all that into an individual performance-stat for that player.

I think you're overemphasizing this by a great margin, especially when teams in general do this to help their big men. If there's any player in the league that receives less help from teammates and scheme it would be Draymond.

He was the #1 post defender last season.

He was the #1 isolation defender last season.

The problem with that is Kawhi typically only wrecks havoc on his opposite, rather than the entire offense itself. Sure he can take out one player out of the possession, but there's other defenders (even wings like MKG) who disturb the entire offensive flow by doing more than just blanketing their man. Which is one of the main reasons why there's no DRTG shift in his favor (as an anchor) when he's on/off court.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

@The Dankster there's many more (lately), but you get the picture.

The fact that you remembered the exact title of a thread I made a year ago shows I stay on your mind though.

Maybe losing all those arguments with me the previous year about Kyrie’s injury, the Cavs’ performance without him, etc. got ya salty and tentative.

The levels of hypocrisy, after you bring up just about every single argument we've had over the last couple of years on every opportunity that you can (even when I'm having a discussion with somebody else and that topic is unrelated) followed by a step-by-step guide of my posting habits. It is in fact YOU who has @Gil Scott-Heroin on his mind, not the other way around. Quite clearly it is you who's dealing with some insecurity issues and lack of ability to admit when wrong; that you need to keep emphazising on how I allegedly lost all those arguments every time we have a discussion, and even when we're not directly having a discussion. All things created in your head. You're a sound poster for the most part, but you need to look a little closer to home before pointing the finger on a # of issues.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

@The Dankster and I thought we had an agreement on not quoting each other if it was only going to end up in a debate about essentially nothing? SMH.

 

[Jesus Is Lord]

Upped

 

[The G.O.D II]

Jesus the autism on this page alone

 

[The G.O.D II]

Im sure if he could be a 20 plus scorer if he was the 2nd option. Hos D may/will suffer tho

Sad thing is a lot of people believed shyt like this

 

[Whips-n-Chains]

Gon’ be a loooong year for Dray on the Coli