The Brooklyn Nets are better off without Kyrie Irving (12-5 record without him) UPDATE:HE RESPONDS

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

​

You the same muh'fukka who thinks Rozier is better.

Go that way.

 

[CHICAGO]

You the same muh'fukka who thinks Rozier is better.

Go that way.

SHOW ME ONE POST
WHERE I SAID ROZIER WAS BETTER THAN KYRIE.

I SAID THE TEAM PLAYS BETTER WITH
ROZIER...

THE SAME WAY THE NETS ARE PLAYING BETTER WITH KYRIE OUT.



​

 

[CHICAGO]

Nets aren't structured properly to win games; they've got one of the worst frontcourts (talent-wise), and lack any real depth at the wing spot (they've been starting Joe muh'fukken Harris at the 3). Kyrie, Prince, and Allen are the only players with noticeable positive net-ratings, and in lineups with positive net-ratings; all the other players are either struggling to stay afloat or deep in the red. DeAndre's bum ass has played 132 minutes this season yet is -13.5.

And he's averaging 32 points on 55 eFG% and 61 TS%.

LOOK AT THIS CLOWN TRYING
TO shyt ON KYRIES TEAMMATES
TO PROP HIS ONE DEMENSIONAL ASS UP.

NOW THOSE SAME TEAMMATES ARE
PLAYING BETTER WITHOUT THE CANCER.

YOURE DONE.



​

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

LOOK AT THIS CLOWN TRYING
TO shyt ON KYRIES TEAMMATES
TO PROP HIS ONE DEMENSIONAL ASS UP.

NOW THOSE SAME TEAMMATES ARE
PLAYING BETTER WITHOUT THE CANCER.

YOURE DONE.



​

You're not even watching the games, so why the fukk do you think your opinion holds any weight?

 

[THE MACHINE]

There's nothing "dumbass" about it.

The foundations of this thread were created by manipulating small sample sizes of data with absolutely no regards to context. I debunked it all and highlighted that they've lost to the good teams they've played. Winning ONE game against a good team in an ideal spot (back at home, against a team they just lost to) doesn't disprove nor take away from my point, after all, the argument of this thread is that they're better without him, is it not?

One game doesn't prove anything. It is only one game. Or do your reactionary senses not allow you to make out that concept?

You've already made it abundantly clear in this thread that you're not.

Hence why you ignored all my posts tearing down your shyt earlier in the piece, and why you're getting behind a thread which fails to contextualize anything.

How the fukk are you gonna claim that I'm posting cherry-picked stats like this thread isn't built on them? Why do you have a problem with the perception of what you think I'm doing when OP is actually guilty of these tactics?

It's not as simple as that, and if you think it is, perhaps basketball isn't the game for you.

You made the claim that "as soon as they play a good team they lost", you based that off of one game and then they beat Boston. It was a simple counter to your 1 game argument.

As far as the OP, are you assuming I agree with him? I clearly stated that his impact on winning isn't as great as its being stated. I said its getting harder to argue that he makes teams that much better in wins and losses based on the team win/loss record. For the record, I think they need him but not as much as people think. He isn't the magic elixir and the last 5 years of TEAM success will prove that.


Are these the posts where you're "tearing shyt down"? OK lets play

The teams they've played without Kyrie:

Bulls
Pacers (L)
Hornets
Kings
Knicks
Cavs

Basically, while Kyrie has been out, they've been playing all the worst teams in the league, and the loss they had was against the only team in the playoff picture. If they were playing teams like the Lakers, Clippers, Nuggets, Raptors etc, needless to say, you wouldn't be making this dumbass thread.

Why do you keep posting this image which is only based on a small sample size of games?

2018/19 season:

Kyrie on court - 6.2 net rating
Kyrie off court - 1.6 net rating

Horford on court - 6.1 net rating
Horford off court - 2.8 net rating

The Celtics had a worse net rating when Kyrie was off the floor, more than any main rotational player, except for Tatum.

2017/18 season:

Kyrie on court - 5.6 net rating
Kyrie off court - 1.1 net rating

Horford on court - 7.3 net rating
Horford off court - -1.6 net rating

If you take it even further and look at the games that both Kyrie and Horford played in, the margin is almost identical.

Furthermore, you have to be some special type of dumbass to not see that Horford was basically their only big man playing significant minutes, whereas they had Smart, Brown, Rozier etc to replace Kyrie whenever he was off the court.

Except for the fact I just debunked all his cherry-picked sample size nonsense.

OT loss to T'Wolves (Allen missed two free throws with five seconds remaining - he makes one and they win)
OT loss Grizzlies (Kyrie and LeVert carried them; Dinwiddie misses a FT after Memphis intentionally fouls - lose game by one point)
Loss to Pistons (it was four-point game when Kyrie left the game in the 3rd quarter, and when he returned in the 4th it was a 13-point game; Kyrie then proceeded to score or assist on 19 of their last 28 points; Nets players also miss FT at the end of the game).

Regardless of all that, it was at the start of the season, on a new team, whereas most of these players on the Nets have played together for a while now. They're not going to have it all figured out in the first handful of games. You can't draw any conclusions out of such a small sample size of games.

Coincidentally the game he played he forced OT with a block, and had the highest net rating out of all the Cavs players. You mean that game?



Except it's not. Nor does Steph have any relevance here. Why even bring him up?

2014-2015
w/o Kyrie 1-6
w Kyrie 52-23

Playoffs w/o 4-3
Playoffs w Kyrie 10-3

2015-2016
w/o Kyrie 20-9
w Kyrie 37-16

2016-2017
w/o Kyrie 4-6
w Kyrie 47-25

goes to Boston
(Cavs would go 50-32 the next year and back to the Finals)
(Boston 53-29 with IT leading the team the year before and went to the ECF)

2017-2018
w/o Kyrie 14-8
w Kyrie 41-19

Playoffs w/o Kyrie 11-8 (ECF)

2018-2019
w/o Kyrie 12-3
w Kyrie 37-30

Playoffs 5-5

goes to Brooklyn
(Boston starts 13-4 w/ Kemba)
(BK 42-40 6th seed the season before)

2019-2020
w/o Kyrie 6-2
w Kyrie 4-7



57-34 the last 5+ regular seasons without Kyrie (3 different organizations) (.590 win percentage)
218-120 the last 5+ seasons with Kyrie (.550 win percentage)

Let me guess, 91 games is too small of a sample size?
Team loses him and goes to the Finals without him
Team he goes to goes to the ECF without him the year before he gets there
He gets there, misses 20 games and all of the playoffs and they go to the ECF
He plays the next year and they get bounced, embarrassingly, in the 2nd round and he is absolutely terrible. Not to mention Oladipo didn't play the first round.

But you dont like wins and losses. You like cherry picked stats so here you go:

Virtually every other member of the Celtics sees a usage increase with Irving off the floor this season, and their stats obviously take a leap as well. As Basketball Monster details, all but one player who’s tallied 350 or more minutes with Irving off the floor has seen their usage go up.

• Terry Rozier (1,040.7 minutes): 18.5 to 19.8
• Jaylen Brown (771.2 minutes): 22.4 to 24.7
• Gordon Hayward (751.8 minutes): 19.2 to 21.2
• Jayson Tatum (707.4 minutes): 22.4 to 23.6
• Marcus Smart (651.1 minutes): 14.3 to 17.8
• Marcus Morris (586 minutes): 20.9 to 24.5
• Daniel Thies (469.7 minutes): 16.0 to 15.4
• Al Horford (356 minutes): 18.8 to 19.1
• Semi Ojeleye (366.7 minutes): 13.8 to 14.0

Daniel Theis is the only name on that list who’s usage decreases, but players like Marcus Morris, Jaylen Brown, Gordon Hayward, Terry Rozier, and Marcus Smart all see nice bumps in their point-per-36 numbers. Obviously, when taking a player such as Irving off the floor, it will lead to statistical increases for other players, but the fact that those numbers have led to wins is what stands out.

And no, I don't co-sign calling JR Smith by that name

Cleveland.com’s Terry Pluto examined the Cavs’ best lineups before the team’s win over the Hornets on April 3. Here’s what he discovered about the Cavs’ best lineups…


playing at least 250 minutes together. The stats are per 100 possessions.

Here we go:

1. James, Love, Shumpert: plus-22
2. James, Dellavedova, Love: plus-20.5
3. James, Love, Thompson: plus-19.3
4. James, Dellavedova, Shumpert: plus-19.2
5. James, Dellavedova, Thompson: plus-17.6
6. Dellavedova, Love, Thompson: plus-16.5
7. James, Dellavedova, J.R. Smith: plus-15.6″

Delly’s name appears in five of Cleveland’s most efficient lineups.
Pluto immediatley asked where Kyrie Irving was on this list. “He doesn’t appear until No. 12 for the Cavs: It’s James, Thompson and Irving: plus-12.7,” Pluto wrote.
No, Delly isn’t a better player than Kyrie. But the stats don’t lie about who makes the Cavs better.

Lineups Advanced
Impact Advanced

So… Does Kyrie Irving Make The Boston Celtics Better?
Using this tool and this tool, I dug into Boston’s most used lineups in 2017-2018 and how they fared with Irving, and with Boston’s other point guards inserted instead of him. There’s a little bit less to work with than with other teams just because Brad Stevens plays so many different lineups (and, thusly, there are fewer lineups with meaningful sample sizes). But here is what I did find.

Lineup.............................................……..MIN OFFR DEFR NETR PACE
Brown, Tatum, Horford, Baynes, IRVING..354 111.6 98.3 13.4 96.42
Brown, Tatum, Horford, Baynes, SMART...43 114.2 99 15.2 92.83
Brown, Tatum, Horford, Baynes, ROZIER..115 108.4 92.2 16.2 96.41
Smart, Brown, Tatum, Horford, IRVING.....151 112.1 109.6 2.2 102.1
Smart, Brown, Tatum, Horford, ROZIER....25 103.4 69.3 34.1 105.51
Brown, Tatum, Morris, Horford, IRVING....148 104.4 114 -9.7 99.89
Brown, Tatum, Morris, Horford, ROZIER...20 100.6 81.4 19.2 104.28

And if wins/losses, best lineups on the teams he's on, success of teams before and after he's been there isn't enough, how about we go away from numbers and to team chemistry....oh wait

​

You see it too right

 

[NYC Rebel]

You made the claim that "as soon as they play a good team they lost", you based that off of one game and then they beat Boston. It was a simple counter to your 1 game argument.

As far as the OP, are you assuming I agree with him? I clearly stated that his impact on winning isn't as great as its being stated. I said its getting harder to argue that he makes teams that much better in wins and losses based on the team win/loss record. For the record, I think they need him but not as much as people think. He isn't the magic elixir and the last 5 years of TEAM success will prove that.


Are these the posts where you're "tearing shyt down"? OK lets play


2014-2015
w/o Kyrie 1-6
w Kyrie 52-23

Playoffs w/o 4-3
Playoffs w Kyrie 10-3

2015-2016
w/o Kyrie 20-9
w Kyrie 37-16

2016-2017
w/o Kyrie 4-6
w Kyrie 47-25

goes to Boston
(Cavs would go 50-32 the next year and back to the Finals)
(Boston 53-29 with IT leading the team the year before and went to the ECF)

2017-2018
w/o Kyrie 14-8
w Kyrie 41-19

Playoffs w/o Kyrie 11-8 (ECF)

2018-2019
w/o Kyrie 12-3
w Kyrie 37-30

Playoffs 5-5

goes to Brooklyn
(Boston starts 13-4 w/ Kemba)
(BK 42-40 6th seed the season before)

2019-2020
w/o Kyrie 6-2
w Kyrie 4-7



57-34 the last 5+ regular seasons without Kyrie (3 different organizations) (.590 win percentage)
218-120 the last 5+ seasons with Kyrie (.550 win percentage)

Let me guess, 91 games is too small of a sample size?
Team loses him and goes to the Finals without him
Team he goes to goes to the ECF without him the year before he gets there
He gets there, misses 20 games and all of the playoffs and they go to the ECF
He plays the next year and they get bounced, embarrassingly, in the 2nd round and he is absolutely terrible. Not to mention Oladipo didn't play the first round.

But you dont like wins and losses. You like cherry picked stats so here you go:


And no, I don't co-sign calling JR Smith by that name



Lineups Advanced
Impact Advanced


And if wins/losses, best lineups on the teams he's on, success of teams before and after he's been there isn't enough, how about we go away from numbers and to team chemistry....oh wait


You see it too right

And none of what you posted has anything to do with the 7-3 Nets since both he and Caris went down. Not a SINGLE ioda.

all of that datamining you harvested just to post shyt that has nothing to do with the Nets winning streak that you attributed to his absence.

good lord

 

[CHICAGO]

You see it too right

EVEN THE 33-49 2014 CAVS
WERE 5-6 WITHOUT KYRIE.





​

 

[DragonKnight]

Oh my god that post had more statistics than 100 rape cases

 

[NYC Rebel]

EVEN THE 33-49 2014 CAVS
WERE 5-6 WITHOUT KYRIE.





​

The hell does this have to do with the 2019 Nets? The Nets have lost two of their backcourt Stars going 7-3 in that span. Whats your point other than knowing you dont watch the Nets?

 

[CHICAGO]

The hell does this have to do with the 2019 Nets? The Nets have lost two of their backcourt Stars going 7-3 in that span. Whats your point other than knowing you dont watch the Nets?

@Gil Scott-Heroin TOLD ME THIS NET TEAM
ISNT BUILT TO WIN GAMES
SO WE SHOULDNT BE GIVING KYRIE
A HARD TIME FOR LOSING.

NOW THIS SAME NETS TEAM
THAT CLEARLY ISNT BUILT TO WIN GAMES
ARE WINNING GAMES WITHOUT KYRIE.

FACT IS KYRIES TEAMS
HAVE PLAYED JUST AS WELL
OR BETTER WITHOUT HIM
OVER THE LAST 5 YRS.



​

 

[NYC Rebel]

@Gil Scott-Heroin TOLD ME THIS NET TEAM
ISNT BUILT TO WIN GAMES
SO WE SHOULDNT BE GIVING KYRIE
A HARD TIME FOR LOSING.

NOW THIS SAME NETS TEAM
THAT CLEARLY ISNT BUILT TO WIN GAMES
ARE WINNING GAMES WITHOUT KYRIE.

FACT IS KYRIES TEAMS
HAVE PLAYED JUST AS WELL
OR BETTER WITHOUT HIM
OVER THE LAST 5 YRS.



​

I don’t care what that troll told you. Speak on what you’ve seen with the Nets.
I’ve been telling y’all for several years that Kenny Atkinson is a good coach but y’all letting this Kyrie not even on the Nets stats thing obscure how good that coach is.

 

[THE MACHINE]

And none of what you posted has anything to do with the 7-3 Nets since both he and Caris went down. Not a SINGLE ioda.

all of that datamining you harvested just to post shyt that has nothing to do with the Nets winning streak that you attributed to his absence.

good lord

My posts are about the history of teams with Kyrie on the roster, you brought in Caris as a deflection. Either that or you quoted the wrong person initially. You should be arguing your Caris point with op. There are 6+ years, thanks to the addition by @CHICAGO, of teams hes on doing better without him active. 102 games worth of data with him absent and the team's win percentage is better when hes absent. That's more than a season of missed games across 3 organizations.
Teams doing better before he gets there and after he leaves.
Teams with him active having better production with reserves playing with the starters
I don't give a damn about Caris in this argument,

My point is Kyrie doesn't impact winning as much as it seems, with 100+ games as evidence

 

[NYC Rebel]

My posts are about the history of teams with Kyrie

.

but NO NETS HISTORY as the thread title denotes.

ZERO

All of that shyt for nothing.

tell me how Kyrie and Caris absence has made the Nets better.

 

[THE MACHINE]

.

but NO NETS HISTORY as the thread title denotes.

ZERO

All of that shyt for nothing.

tell me how Kyrie and Caris absence has made the Nets better.

The history is you made the playoffs at 42-40 last year with an all-star guard. He was replaced by a better individual player. You come out the gates at 4-7, nobody in NY wants to upset Mr Sensitivity so its looked over. He goes down and all of a sudden it looks like the Nets team from a year ago, going 6-2 without him and Spencer getting EC-POTW. I was told its only because they are playing bums then they beat Boston. Its a running trend with Kyrie, I would need to see Caris active without Kyrie on this team to make any assertions about him. He might have a greater impact with this team if Kyrie is absent. You also stated Kenny is a good coach, so explain the 4-7 start with Kyrie (losing to Detroit w/o Rose and Blake, and a 25 point loss to Phoenix) and the 6-2 since. Its obviously not coaching right?

 

[NYC Rebel]

The history is you made the playoffs at 42-40 last year with an all-star guard. He was replaced by a better individual player. You come out the gates at 4-7, nobody in NY wants to upset Mr Sensitivity so its looked over. He goes down and all of a sudden it looks like the Nets team from a year ago, going 6-2 without him and Spencer getting EC-POTW. I was told its only because they are playing bums then they beat Boston. Its a running trend with Kyrie, I would need to see Caris active without Kyrie on this team to make any assertions about him. He might have a greater impact with this team if Kyrie is absent. You also stated Kenny is a good coach, so explain the 4-7 start with Kyrie (losing to Detroit w/o Rose and Blake, and a 25 point loss to Phoenix) and the 6-2 since. Its obviously not coaching right?

You didn’t make a single post in the Nets in game thread. Spencer was shytting the bed missing shot after shot to start the season. Go look at the Nets in game threads.

https://www.thecoli.com/threads/on-...klyn-nets-thread.740316/page-19#post-35452534

[URL]https://www.thecoli.com/threads/on-this-flat-earth-mentally-been-many-places-but-im-brooklyns-own-19-20-brooklyn-nets-thread.740316/page-14#post-35426382[/URL]


It didn’t have shyt to do with Kyrie. Spence was turning the ball over like a mad man. He just hit his stride the game before Kyrie went down and Caris the game before.

do you know anything about Kenny Atkinson’s offense? You don’t know shyt about the Nets, admitted you were a casual viewer and now want to name drop about shyt you don’t know.
Fake ass sports talk