The difference is, I don't adjust my opinion of their supporting casts based on temporary injury. I look at the big picture. What's the point in arguing about strength of supporting cast when, based on your perspective, that strength can change on a daily basis. It's nonsensical. Yes, do you realize that too? Because you've been talking about Oladipo. Not all members of a supporting cast are worth mentioning. And the fact that they are mentioned speaks to how poor the supporting cast is.
Big picture missing 35% of the available games isnt insignificant. What do you mean daily basis? Missing more than 1 out of every 3 games you played so far is a big deal stop pretending it isnt. You are the nonsensical one here acting like 9 games out of 26 is not part of the big picture lol. If we had a full season yeah ok, 9 games isnt a lot but we arent even at the halfway mark at this rate Wood and Wall on track to miss more than 25 games each how d hell is that not part of the big picture? You mean to tell me if a dude misses 70 games out of 80 he should still be counted as part of the supporting cast because his injury is temporary? Lol man just stop. You wanna argue about strength of supporting cast so how can the cast support when they arent on the court 35% of the time? If we were in class and a student missed 35% of the classes you think he will pass or fail the course? Collectively these 3 missed 23 games vs 4 games GSW trio missed but somehow thats not part of the big picture. More than 1/3 games missed is more than a daily change and you know it stop pretending. Lol. Tucker gets 30 mins a night if you are talking about supporting casts he belongs in the conversation cuz of how much he plays. Thats why you trying to say GSW is a lot worse than Houston is just wrong the supporting cast is currently trash.
are we sure? green is probably the most impactful out of all 6 guys, even including wood. the warriors were 6th in defense before the nets game, and that was including the early games without green where they were somewhere between abysmal and "brooklyn nets" on defense and just generally looked like a joke team. wiggins vs wall is certainly a conversation given wiggins' defense. gordon has been better than oubre. but there's not a huge difference in those trios.
You're determining the strength of the supporting cast on a daily basis based on the availability of Wood/Wall/Gordon. Also, your "on track to miss X games" argument is ridiculous unless you honestly think they'll continue to miss games at that rate. If a player misses 70 games, then he's missed almost the entire season. That's a season-ending injury. How could that be "temporary"?
Yup. Anyone who says Woods would be better(or more impactful) than Draymond in the playoffs or as a whole is just straight up ignorant. Draymond is criminally underrated.
Yes, we're sure. Out of Green/Wiggins/Oubre, the only one who can consistently generate points is Wiggins. And I would argue that Wood is more impactful than Green since Green is overly reliant on Curry whereas Wood is a standalone player. I agree that Wiggins and Wall is probably a wash, but I think Gordon is much better than Oubre.
Draymond Green is limited offensively and overly reliant on Curry. If Curry has a bad game, can you rely on Green to bail them out?
Stephanie is not a top 5 or even top 7 player but are we comparing him to wall who is not even top 40 ?
Look just answer me is missing 35% of your available games significant time missed or not? If you say that's not a lot of games missed then you are just extremely biased. When you miss more than 1/3 of the games that's not a daily basis assessment that's already a significant reduction in your performance. GSW only 3 more wins than the Rockets but Wood and Wall have missed 9 games each if they were both 100% healthy like Oubre and Wiggins pretty sure Houston would have a better record than GSW right now. We don't know how many more games Wood and Wall will miss the point is we are talking about supporting casts so far and SO FAR Wood and Wall have missed 9 games out of 26 and EG has missed 5 games out of the 26. We are talking about supporting casts and out of the 26 games we've had these trio is inferior to the GSW trio because they've been out so many games. Maybe things will change in the latter half of the season but that's not the case right now. So for you missing 80% of games is already missing the entire season so by that logic missing 35% played games is a big deal as well and massive reduction in performance. You can't tell me 35% is like evaluating players on a daily basis but 80% is missing the entire season already.
Yes, it's significant, but again, that's basing the strength of the supporting cast on a daily basis. It also ignores unnecessary rest due to the fact that we aren't contending this year. If we were, do you think Wall would've missed so many games for "soreness"? If we were jockeying for playoff positioning, do you think Oladipo would still miss b2b's? Incorrect. Missing 70 games is essentially a season-ending injury. For a player who suffered a season-ending injury, there's no reason to include him in the supporting cast. There's a big difference between missing 9 of the first 26 games and missing 70 of 72 games.
I always thought Draymond was the most important player on that team. With how stacked they were offensively everyone could be replaced but him. Cuz he did all the dirty work. I liken him to Dennis Rodman. A guy you need to win a ring.
Missing 70 of 82 games is equivalent to 22 of 26 games. 9 is only 40% of 22 so again if you think missing 70 games allows you to NOT BE INCLUDED in the supporting cast, a little less than half amount means your supoorting cast takes a hit in their performance. There hasnt been 82 games we only have 26 games so far. So thats the amount that should be considered the total not 82 cuz the season isnt even halfway done. We dont know how many unnecessary rest Wall has I mean the Rox were resting him even with 6 game win streak thats just speculation. What we do know is as far as supporting cast goes Wall and Wood have been missing significant chunk of the season so far, that is undebatable. If you compare a trio that is always there vs a trio that misses significant chunk of the season then obv the trio that is always there has the edge. Thats just logical and unbiased perspective. Durability is a factor in performance just ask Greg Oden. 1/3 of your games doesnt count as daily basis lol missing 1 week total thats a daily basis. Missing 35% isnt evaluating players in a daily basis thats major chunk of games missed already. No unbiased or logical person will say you dont take points off Player A vs Player B if Player A misses 35% of the total sample size. If the entire season is done and Wood and Wall didnt miss many games ok dont take that into account. But we only work with what we got this season, and so far this season GSW trio is CLEARLY better cuz they havent missed 35% of their team's games in addition to their production.
The roster is just as bad WTF? Oubre and Wiggins would be better starters than anybody not named wood and Wall and they have the number 2 pick in the draft as well as Draymond.
This is silly nonsense. Dennis Rodman is limited offensively. If a teams scoring threats have bad games you can’t rely on Rodman to bail you out. Yet he’s still has HOF impact on other areas. Do you think scoring is all that matters? If the GS rebounders and defenders have bad games can Curry bail them out? Or will they likely lose?
Honestly, would u trade Tate for Wiggins? I know i wouldn’t. Wiggins is a career loser and does nothing with the gift his body is. Oubre i used to like but that guy is a little bit like Danuel House where he does one good thing and follows it up with 5 boneheaded plays. Also, he cannot throw a ball in the ocean right now. I don’t even want to take part in that conversation but reading that made me cringe. These guys are terrible.
Like I said if anyone doesn’t think Draymond isn’t one of the best defenders or passers in the NBA they don’t know what they are talking about.
