If even ESPN agrees is a bit like saying "if even the jews agree hitler was better at x", it's not just espn either si was the same, as would find for most near every team in the nba, it's why his teams never want to bring him back and he gets paid half what beverley does.
No. These lists are worthless no matter what u trying to say. You mean for example that teams would prefer to have waiters in their roster than capela? Because the list say so? 30/30 teams wouldnt. But lets take these guys opinion over common logic. Garbage list baseless argument.
Because a lot of them have no idea who Capela is, he's played 217 minutes in the nba, the same can't be said of Augustin and Beverley. Those lists are about who will be a better in 2015-16, not who would you prefer on your roster. Follow your own (lack of) logic, who is a better player right now? lebron or davis, who would you rather have on your roster?
I'm looking at how DJ played last year and how Bev played last year. This is because we are talking within the context of projecting who will have more impact for their team and be the better 2nd tier PG for their team next year. So DJ in Charlotte is skewing the data. Especially since DJ is a 7 year guy who has peaked and is declining, while Bev is a 3 year guy who has not shown signs yet of peaking. PPG: Bev 10.1 DJ 9.5 Bev scores more. Steals: Bev 1.1 DJ 0.6 Bev steals more. Boards: Bev 4.2 DJ 2.0 Bev rebounds more. Blocks: Bev 0.4 DJ 0.0 Bev gets you a block every other game. You'll never in your life see DJ punk-stuff a Lebron drive. Bev, yes. Assists, TOs, and Assist to TO ratio: For a guy you seem to trump up as some playmaking wizard, DJ doesn't even average a full assist per game over Bev. And how many possessions does DJ give back? A/T Bev: 2.39 A/T DJ: 2.27 DJ's A/T is within +/- 5% of Bev's A/T. So it's noise. Nothing to beat your chest about if you're DJ. Shooting Percentages: Bev FG% last year: .383 (a dip) DJ FG% last year: .399 (.371 if you look at his OKC stat. Things are a bit different in the West. Imagine that) Bev 3PT% last year: .356 DJ 3PT% last year: .337 So we've been looking mostly at offensive stats. I've introduced a few defensive stats (boards, steals, blocks), but so much of the defensive impact a player has on the game is not something you can read out of a stat sheet. A good Rockets historic example, Shane Battier. Battier was the king of intangibles. Beverley is sicced upon the toughest offensive player of an opponent each night. DJ, no. When a poll goes around the league of "Who is the toughest PG to go against in the league in terms of defending you?" Bev gets top mention. DJ, no. With regards to NBA rank, touché for you to disregard them just because it doesn't fit your narrative. I provided reasons why I feel your advanced offensive stats are selective and skewed. 2014 NBA player ranking: Bev: #103 DJ: #169 2015 NBA player ranking: BEV: yet to be ranked, which means he is at least in 0- to 200 (with current rankings released) DJ: #225 (a pretty huge slip) So currently DJ isn't even assessed as better than Jerryd Bayless (210), Mo Williams (213), Mario Chalmers (218), Rodney Stuckey (220). He is in the company of C.J. Watson (229) and Gary Neal (230). Also look at how DJ has played on 4 teams in 2 years. The last contract he could nab, and again this is for his 6th and 7th year in the league, was for a short 2 year deal for $6 mil ($3 mil/yr). This is a guy that was drafted 1st round, 9th overall. Beverley on the other hand has only played for 1 team, despite being drafted deep in the 2nd round, having won over the hearts of his city with stellar defense and grabbing notice around the league. He has only played 3 years but has managed to nab a substantial 4 year 'lock him up' deal for $25 mil ($6.25 mil avg/yr). As Ben Franklin says "proof is in the pudding", or more colloquially "Money talks and b****t walks." You may disregard ESPN's NBA Rank, but the fact that DJ can't stay put or get paid now 7 years in the league speaks volumes.
I can't stand when some of you guys are so offended by the Clippers being out ahead of us. You want to think we're definitely better fine, we did win the series last year. But get real. Game 6 was a fluke. Those saying we beat them without Dmo and Bev?? You're delusional. If Chris Paul wasn't hurt he would have played in Game 2 and it could have been a sweep. Josh Smith couldn't have played any better I seriously doubt Dmo would have been a bigger difference maker. They added Paul Pierce. Yes he's old. But clearly you don't watch other teams cuz I bet Washington fans will tell you he shows up when needed. They took one of our best players in that series with J Smoove. Stop being so sensitive.
Shut up. You know nothing. We would have humiliated and stomped over GSW 4-0 if we had Bev and DMo. Don't you know we were missing lesser Gary Payton and Dirk Nowitzki? Never mind GSW ran us 8-1
Haha. My head was gonna explode when I read we'd sweep the warriors before finishing the rest of your post.
The Rockets made adjustments that worked as the series progressed. They figured out how to compete with them and beat them. The Clippers had the Rockets' number for years until that series. They had trouble with the Clippers like the Rockets had with Golden State this year. I they finally solved the Clippers conundrum. Having said that, it's not crazy for someone to think the Clippers are better. I just happen to disagree with that.
This. With the acquisition of Lawson, this team (IF healthy) has no real weaknesses. We're 2 or 3 deep at each position, and the only issue that seems truly viable is an inability to guard 4's, and Montrezl and/or Capela can fix that.
You are comparing Beverley to Augustin to determine who should be rated first at PG, Houston or OKC? I like Beverley more than Augustin. But that doesn't matter. I would trade both Lawson and Beverley for Westbrook. Shoot... I hate, hate, hate watching the whiny, floppy play of Chris Paul. But I would trade both Lawson and Beverley for CP3 as well. If I was rating PG, I would have it as OKC, LAC, HOU, SAS. Parker's play has really seemed to take a dive.
I didn't disregard them just becaues they don't fit my narrative. I disregard them becaue I all the time disagree with most of the ranks and most of what the analysts post. I even posted in the other thread about the ranks my most blatant disagreements on those ranks. For example Convington's rank etc. They are just awful awful ranks. AS do many here. So if someone has double standards is someone who says "the espn analysts don't know crap" and then tries to show them as proof to fit their agenda. As for why Bev has stayed in this team for years that's an easy answer. He is a good fit, and it's hard to find a 3+D guard because most guards don't have good enough defence to cover for a sg. Same reason why George Hill stays in Indy for years and they paid so much to get him and why there is no way he's traded. It's called fit. It's different than talent or evaluating players on their own.
no. I compare their advanced stats because someone said that Beverly is CLEARLY better and also that Brewer is better than Danny green. Which sounds very homer. as for who is better Hou or LAC at pg well..Paul can't play 48 minutes and his backup Rivers is worse than Bev. Depth matters.
Spurs (with Kawhi Leonard) should be rated above us at SF. We should be rated lower at PG IMO. And I just don't understand your Center rankings at all. I know Tim Duncan is one of the all-time great PF's. But he is almost 40 years old. And he isn't a Center. And their backup, Boris Diaw, isn't a Center either. Neither of them are great rim protectors, or elite rebounders. I would much, much rather have Howard or Jordan at Center. In fact, I think the Spurs look to have a very good team, but their Center position is definitely going to be their weakness. IMO: PG: OKC, LAC, HOU, SAS (Parker's play has seemed to dive in the past year or two) SG: HOU, SAS, LAC, OKC SF: OKC, SAS, HOU, LAC PF: SAS, LAC, OKC, HOU C: HOU, LAC, OKC, SAS (yes... I don't like OKC's Center position. But I like it more than SAS)
Depth matters. I don't think anyone is arguing about that. But if you have a legit, superstar level talent as your starter, then that negates the importance of the backup. So, for these not-really-that-important ratings, Houston should be rated first at SG. Ginobili and Jamal Crawford are probably better backups than Thornton or McDaniels, but so what? Harden is that much better than JJ Redick or Danny Green. I think Beverley is probably going to be a great high-energy backup. I think I would take Beverley as a backup PG over any of the other team's backups. And Lawson should (hopefully) be a very good starting PG. But Westbrook and CP3 are superstars, and their play is that much better than our PG's that the difference in the play of the backups shouldn't matter.
This is the kind of post I like. He has his opinion. Doesn't think it's crazy if one disagrees with it. Props
