Really? Lin is better off here. The knicks is in win now mode and they're going all in. If Lin shoot poorly in NY, I believe the NY media and some fans will bury him. In Houston, he has more time to come back into game shape from the surgery and develop himself along with the team.
I respect your opinion about Lillard but do not agree with your opinion about Lin still has a LOT of holes. To me, he played pretty well in the first 3 games with the Rockets. Control the flow of the game, team defense, steals, rebound well as a pg, assist to turnover ratio, PER (although bad last game), cutting down his so called "turnover machine" turn overs to about 3 (sorry I do not know anything about advance stats). Yes, he still shoots terribly and needs improvement apparently. I don't see how there are a LOT of holes. Mind share please?
Using the eye test, and watching them play each other directly, I agree with the other guy, I would rather have LIN (I am a LOF, haha).
Look I'm not interested in Lin bashing. One of the things I have to remember is that he's not 100% healthy. He doesn't have his legs, he doesn't have his explosion. That could be compounding the shooting woes. Perhaps saying he has a lot of holes in his game is overstating it. I think he over dribbles. I haven't seen him finish the way he did during Linsanity last year. His shooting is way below average. Those are the 3 major things I've noticed that I think he needs to improve. But I think he can improve in all tode areas. Most of all I love his attitude and his heart. He has another gear during clutch time; that's why he belongs in clutch city
I agree with you Lin has a lot to prove but so does Lillard its interesting to see how different these commentators are when it comes to these two. I will give them till the end of the year to really separate themselves. I want to see if Lin can be more than just an average starting point guard in the league. Even playing with injury he is worth that salary 8 million a year when you actually look at his stats.
Aruba I have to ask from a general perspective not in reference to any player. What is with your preference with PG's who can shoot. Parker Rondo are all great PG's none of which are great outside shooting threats. Jrue Holliday great outside shooting threat can't run an offense. I am just kind of confused by your preference of great PG's who have great perimeter shots. Like are you not a fan of Parker or Rondo because they can't shoot? Just curious.
This is exactly the kind of bias. After how many season in the league did Lowry finally become a good shooter? Do you know Dragic's shooting percentage in his last season in Phoenix before getting traded to the Rockets? After how many seasons and games in the league did Lowry/Dragic start being able to really run/control a team without getting flustered? What do you want out of your PG? Able to run a team or shoot higher percentages? It's similar to what the author was alluding to with Asik. Defense is more important for a center, just like running a team is more important for z PG.
Tony Parker shoots 49% career. Pretty good for a pg. yes, I like him. Rondo shoots 48% career. Not bad. Yes, I like him Neither are good 3pt shooters, but Rondo had Pierce, Allen, and Garnett; Parker had Duncan and Ginobli. Lin shoots 43% in his brief career. Not good. He's also a poor 3pt shooter. Our SF can't shoot, our center can't score...at all, and our PF is in flux but not a scoring strength. We need scoring from the pg position, especially when they play off Lin, give him wide open looks and dare him to shoot. I just think he needs to improve his shooting, and I'm sure he will. Nash did. Rondo did. Lin will. But don't act like its not important, especially with the current makeup of our team. Don't make me out to be a Lin basher please. I'm just stating the obvious.
Hold up Aruba let's just get this understood I'm not trying to make you out to be a Lin basher at all. Understand that, just trying to have a basketball conversation. Anyway I was trying to get some clarity as to your logic. Your post was fair and makes sense. I get where you are coming from. When you were talking about shooting I thought you just meant solely that a point guard needs to be a 3 point threat that is why I was baffled as to why you valued perimeter shooting so much as opposed to other skill sets that a PG needs to have.
when a pg torches the league for 2 months, "let's wait and see what he can do in a full season". but when another pg plays extremely well in his first 3 games of 4 games he ever plays in the nba, "he's superior" nope, no bias at all by the way here's Lillard's numbers for tonight.. Starters Pos Min FG 3Pt FT +/- Off Reb Ast TO Stl BS BA PF Pts D. Lillard G 32:47 2-13 1-8 8-8 -12 1 3 5 1 1 0 2 2 13
Fair enough. You're entitled to your opinion. Personally, I prefer to go off actual statistical data. Damian Lillard, Game 4 vs Dallas... 13 points (2/13), 1/8 3pt (.125), 8/8 ft (2 technical FT's), 5 asst, 3 reb, 1 stl, 1 TO TS% - .472 TS% without shooting the technicals - .351 I don't think I'm ready to tag him as a hall of famer/top 5 PG yet... and I certainly wouldn't hold this one night's poor performance against the Mavericks' mediocre PnR defense against Lillard. It is after all just a single game. I didn't hold Lin's single game against the #1 PnR Miami defense against Lin either.
Yeah, it's kind of ironic that the exact same bias pointed in the article is being played out in this thread. Because Lillard was taken so high, his success in 3 games 'validated' his pick position. One thing I just found out about Lillard is that he's actually 22 after being a 4-year player. I normally never check this stuff, since I just assume all top-10 picks are underclassmen. It certainly does explain why he's so polished. But considering Lin did his Linsanity stuff at the age of 23, seems to lessen the gap between their supposed ceilings.
FG%, which combines 2-pt and 3-pt shooting, is fairly meaningless measure of shooting ability or scoring efficiency. For example: Chauncey Billups has a career FG% of 41.6%, but is an extremely efficient scorer with a TS% of 58.1% due to the fact that he launches a lot of 3s and draws a lot of fouls. His TS% is higher than that of Parker (55%) or Rondo (51.4%) even though both of these guys have significantly higher career FG%. What what it's worth, Lin's TS% was 55.2% last year. He didn't shoot the 3 ball great (32%, which means he was good enough launch them when open, even if it drags down his FG%), but got to the line enough to pull his TS% up.
Your comments were quite generous to Lin although you still have doubts in him. won't blame you and you certainly is not a LOH. Don't be so sensitive (j/k)
I think the Llillard vs Lin comparisons are interesting in a good way & provide perfect fodder for discussion. There story lines are both quite similar. Both were top HS prospects. Both went to small conference schools. One was a top 10 pick the other undrafted. Both had significant success in there first chance at starter minutes & hype as well. Both were came into the NBA at an older age (22 for both I believe). The parallels are there so it will be interesting to see how the NBA treats both players. In relation to the validation of the top draft pick I find that kind of mentality very odd. Everybody knows that the draft is an imperfect science. You see players like Kwame, Oden, Felton, Darko all really high picks who underachieved. You also see players like Ben Wallace, JJ Barea all undrafted players who went on to have a lot of success. And yet people continue to rely on the draft when dishing out contracts. You see that all the time with Darko in the Celtics, Kwame in the Sixers, Felton with the Knicks. That has been something I have been struggling to wrap my head around. if the draft is an imperfect science & we mock draft busts, why rely so heavily on it. And as fans, why do we continue to fall into that trap. Just a thought.
