FIFY Sure his environment is more than ideal, but you really are discrediting one of the most unique and versatile players we've seen in a while. If Draymond played for the Rockets, you would adore him.
It sounds stupid. Not only does Iggy not have Thompson's shooting ability, he's also not a catch & shoot player. They're entirely different players. Replacing Thompson with Iggy would make the Warriors a much weaker team. If you replace Green with Barnes/Iggy, the Warriors would still be highly competitive. Do you really not see a difference between the shooting abilities of Beverley/Ariza and Curry/Thompson? Absolutely wrong. You really don't understand how much Green benefits from playing alongside Curry/Thompson. Entire defenses tilt in their direction. When Curry and Green run a pick and pop, why do you think Green is so wide open? It's because both defenders gravitate towards Curry. With the hypothetical lineup I gave, there's nobody who would draw excessive defensive attention away from Green. Plus, since he'd have a greater offensive role, his defense would likely suffer. And b/c of the extra defensive attention he'd face and inferior teammates, his stats/efficiency would drop.
1. Sounds stupid exactly. Neither of those guys are can do what DG does. it looks like its hard for you to see that. They can't reb as well as him. they can't guard every position on the floor as well as him. They aren't the playmakers he is. They aren't the biggest voice and leader on the team like he is. I could go on on why DG is easily the 2nd best and important player on that team. There is no championship without DG period. 2. shooting abilities lol. Trying to call someone absolutely wrong and you still don't get the fact that DG is a playmaker. You have it backwards there. why that's so hard for you is beyond me. you seem to think assists are obtained by just passing the ball to someone and dependent on someone who can shoot at the level of the splash bros. Why are cp3's assist numbers not higher on the LAC now then when he was with NO. He obviously has much better players around him and a great shooter in Reddick Everything you're trying to use to knock DG is actually a credit to him for being able to be great at everything he does. You're actually now going from your original claim of all his assist are obtained by the splash bros to now his overall play. You fail to see all the other aspects in which it takes to win in which DG most definitely brings to that historic team. Discredit him all you want. he's going to be an all star and in the defensive player of the year conversation for years to come. He may very well make his first all nba team appearance this year as well. but hey all of his accomplishments are because he's playing with the splash bros right.
A power forward who can guard every position on the floor, handle and pass like a guard, rebound well and shoot from three-point range is absolutely a system player. That skillset wouldn't play for most teams; how many teams really need an elite pick-and-roll player and elite pick-and-roll defender in a pick-and-roll league?
Absolutely wrong. Do the Warriors need a player who can guard every position? No, they don't. It's a nice luxury to have, but it's not integral to their success. Iggy/Barnes may not rebound as well as Green, but it's not a big drop off. Iggy/Barnes aren't the playmakers Green is, but they're capable of making the correct pass within the offense. And if Green were to get hurt, Curry/Thompson/Iggy/Livingston are all capable of assuming additional playmaking duties. Like I said, without Green, the Warriors would still be highly competitive. That's how Green gets the majority of his assists. And since that's how he gets the majority of his assists, its logical that if he were surrounded by inferior shooters, his assist numbers would decline. He's playing fewer minutes in LA than he did in New Orleans. Wrong again. You're the one who brought up the other facets of his game. I simply addressed your arguments.
just comical again trying to call others wrong. i can see you're pretty set on what you think DG is compared to what he really is. it'll be a waste of time to continue explaining further all the aspects you fail to see as it seems a little further outside of the box for you to comprehend. Whether that's just due to hate on DG or just failed recognition, you're probably the only person that really tries to downgrade his extreme importance to this historic team. Enjoy the rest of the season and another trophy hoisted up by GS in June.
Last one but obviously someone sure did miss the point on that one. Blaming the minuscule fewer minutes, something you see looking up in a box on espn just illustrated my point, that you really only see the most simple things when it comes to the complete game. His assist numbers have remained consistent. why? because at the end of the day hes a playmaker. This is regardless of who he played with. That's obviously the point you completely missed. Was NO a worse team. Of course they were but yet he still racked up career numbers in assist there. There wasn't this huge jump in difference just because he is now playing with better players that have better "shooting abilities". But according your logic, the numbers should of had an "inflated" effect. Why is Lillard numbers still pretty much the same now when they had better players last year? Obviously the team was better last year. Shouldn't his numbers have dipped bc he doesn't have Aldridge, batum, lopez, or matthews. You're just giving way too much credit to outside aspects here. When a player can just play and have certain established attributes, they will still have those capabilities regardless of who he is surrounded with. Now if you want to challenge whether it impacts winning or losing, that a different story. In this case DG GS's 2nd best player and important player, is the winning playmaker and vocal leader on a historic team that is not replaceable by anyone in this league.
Let's look at the stats related to a player's on-court value over the last 2 seasons (2014-2016): Value Over Replacement Player: Curry: 16.8 Green: 9.4 Thompson: 4.5 Box plus/minus: Curry: 11.1 Green: 5.3 Thompson: 1.5 Win Shares: Curry: 32.0 Green: 18.5 Thompson: 16.2 So the stats suggest that Draymond is more important to his team's success than Klay has been. Just for fun, here are those same stats for the 2015 playoffs: Value Over Replacement Player: Curry: 2.2 Green: 1.6 Thompson: 0.7 Box plus/minus: Curry: 8.7 Green: 6.0 Thompson: 1.5 Win Shares: Curry: 3.9 Green: 2.6 Thompson: 1.9
Look beyond the stats and consider the rest of the roster (Iggy/Barnes/Speights). In your opinion, which would be a better team: Warriors w/o Green or Warriors w/o Thompson?
Minuscule fewer minutes? Chris Paul is averaging 33 mpg this season. In New Orleans, he was averaging 38 mpg. A 5 mpg difference isn't "minuscule". I see. Yep, I missed that point, probably because it's irrelevant to Draymond Green. In both NO and LA, Chris Paul was a ball-dominant pg who the opposing defenses focused on. Opposing defenses aren't focused on Green. If Green were to leave GSW, he'd be surrounded by inferior shooters, play a larger offensive role, and defenses would pay more attention to him. Given that scenario, why is it unreasonable to think his production would drop? Not necessarily. Both Blake Griffin and Jamal Crawford get a lot of iso-touches. Why would they dip? He has the ultimate green light. That's why his stats have increased. That's where we disagree. Established attributes. You think he's a playmaker regardless of the situation. I don't. I think he benefits tremendously from playing with Curry/Thompson.
Can you make an argument supporting that? The way I see it, losing Green can be mitigated by giving more minutes to Iggy/Barnes/Speights/Bogut. Who on the Warriors can compensate for losing Thompson?
Anthony Mason is an OK but definitely flawed comparison. Mason's career assist average was 3.4, while Draymond is averaging 7.4 this season. Mason averaged .3 blocks per game, and Draymond is averaging 1.4 this season. And as already pointed out, Mason had no three point shot whatsoever and Green is shooting 39% from behind the arc this year. Green is still relatively young and improving so no telling where his career averages will end up. And yes he is worth the max under the current salary structure.
Were talking about assist and playmaking here. For some reason you're referencing overall numbers. Yet again, missing the point. His assist numbers didn't dip for some reason with worse players this year. why is that? that's not what's supposed to happen according to your logic. we obviously see that but everything else says otherwise. So that huge 5 mpg is only worth about 1 assist? yeah not really. The point yet again is an attribute regardless of who you're surrounded with. No blake since the end of december. why isn't cp3's assist numbers "inflated" then. They are actually still consistent with what he normally averages during this time span
argument? its established in every single value team stat who the 2nd best/important player is. you're the only other person trying to say something different. yeah they did a good job replacing everything DG does when they played without him against denver in which they lost. This isn't a video game.
You keep just using this line over and over. Draymond is Mr. Everything for that team. Defending, rebounding, passing, ball handling, 3PT shooting, drawing fouls, being the team's emotional leader. When the team isn't firing on all cylinders, he lays into them. He fires them up. It's his emotion and all-around skills, and Curry's unbelievable offensive skills that make that team what it is. Klay Thompson is an excellent shooter, great off-the-ball mover, and good defender. Can he pass? Not really. Can he rebound? Somewhat. Is he versatile? No. They would definitely miss his ability to space the floor and move without the ball, but that's far more replaceable than all the things Draymond brings. So, as for your question, they would replace his minutes with Iggy, Barnes, Livingston, and maybe Rush and they would need to adjust their offensive strategy to account for the dip in 3PT production. They would need to focus more on getting points in the paint than taking jumpshots.
That's b/c stats are a reflection of what actually transpired. In this instance, we're talking about a hypothetical situation. Its like saying that the Seahawks sans Lynch would be a horrible team b/c all the stats said that Lynch was an integral part of their offense. However, its impossible for stats to consider Wilson's increased usage and Rawls' emergence. You're basing this argument on one game?
