I don't see the stats for Banchero, just Chet & Jabari and they are mislabeled ... Jabari says Chet and Chet Jabari. Still interesting information - Chet's offensive numbers are insane while Jabari's defensive numbers are quite surprising.
LOL thanks for once again showing everybody how much of a joke you are, you can't even post any stats to back you up. If Chet dominated the paint why did most of Memphis scoring come in the paint. Just look at Memphis scoring chart in the link. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game/_/gameId/401408613 They scored over 50% of their points in the paint. Why do you continue to embarrass yourself?
That rando was not Chad Ford it was some dude nobody ever heard of. It's amazing that now you are resorting to straight up lying. This is the actual tweet you are lying about and even this guy is saying he might be Poku.
I think Billups had a 7-yr prime where he played at an All-NBA level and was among the best PGs at that time He also played 10 other seasons nowhere near that level Same as Vince, Tmac, Kemp, Vin Baker, Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer and a long list of guys who reached a superstar peak form, but didn't maintain it long enough to become a true NBA legend Basketball has always been unique in that a superstar can have a more direct, complete, and consistent impact on wins and losses than in any other sport That's why you can account for nearly every title winner with a very short list of the all-time legends, bc players that reach that level usually win at least 1 ring, and most win several during their primes The criteria for that exclusive club is very simple ... Be the best player on a championship team If you didn't do both simultaneously, you cannot get in, period And among the HoF caliber talents, it is the ultimate separator It is why Kareem, Hakeem, and Shaq will always be ahead of Ewing, Robinson and Mourning Chauncey is the most glaring exception to this rule I have ever seen He is inarguably at the very bottom of this list, and the gap between him and everybody else is Grand Canyon sized NBA teams cannot win a title without a top-10 player in his prime leading the way ... except for Billups' Pistons It's just a fluke anomaly that really has no modern comparison or reasonable explanation You may be right about him getting into the Hall, but that barrier to entry for that honor is often laughably low for basketball's HoF Yao is in essentially for growing the league brand in the Chinese market On the court (when he could even suit up) Yao had, what, 2 or maybe 4 HoF caliber seasons I wish basketball would raise the bar and reserve it's highest honor for only the true iconic legends of the game At some point HoF inductions will carry the pretige of NFL ProBowl honors once the 1000th member is enshrined Off the top of my head, these are the PGs I've seen play that I instantly rate as better at their best than Billups at his peak without hesitation: Magic Isiah Stockton Payton Tim Hardaway (Run TMC forever) Kidd Penny Nash Marbury Baron Davis (just for taking down #1 Mavs in 1st round) Paul Deron Steph Trae Ja That's 15 guys instantly at the same position that I would take over Billups to run my team Certainly that is completely subjective, and a case can easily be made that Billups was as good or better than some of those 15 I would point out that: - I have completely ommitted the first 3 decades of NBA PGs bc I never saw them play, which would certainly drop him several spots down in the ranking (Oscar, Cousy, Frazier) - I could probably come up with another 15 guys like Parker, Rod Strickland, KJ, Russ, Holliday, etc that I'd rate as comparable, and possibly better, than Pistons Billups - There are undoubtedly several currents PGs that will reach heights down the road nobody could have foreseen at this point, adding even more names ahead of him I guess the point of all that is to say ... What is the value of getting into the Hall if your career achievements don't even make you one of the 30, 40, or even 50 best to play at just your position? I'm curious ... how many have you seen run point better than Billups? Looking forward to any feedback
He also in his podcasts makes the KG comparison. It’s not unfounded. Same as Paolo being compared to Julius Randle or Boozer, which you refute even thought that’s what scouts are saying.
Chet Holmgren | Ranking: No. 1 | 7-foot-1 center, Gonzaga | 19 years old, freshman Round of 64 vs. Georgia State: 19 points, 17 rebounds, five assists, seven blocks, two steals, 8 of 11 field goals Round of 32 vs. Memphis: Nine points, nine rebounds, four blocks, two assists, 4 of 7 field goals Overall, I thought the weekend was positive for Holmgren. Every eyeball in the evaluation community was on the showcase matchup we got Saturday night when Gonzaga and Holmgren took on Memphis and potential lottery pick Jalen Duren. It was the perfect evaluation opportunity. Every question about Holmgren this year has been about his size and strength, given his 7-foot-1, 190-pound frame. In the 6-foot-11, 250-pound Duren, scouts got the chance to see how Holmgren would perform against such power. I thought he was pretty dominant defensively and every bit of who we thought he was on that end. The first two possessions made that clear. The first play came on a dump-off to Duren in the dunker spot, where he tried to go up through Holmgren. Holmgren contested with his length to force the Duren miss, then held his ground to grab the contested rebound. On the second defensive possession, Memphis ran a post-up for Duren, who spun back and got a small edge, but Holmgren sealed that up quickly and swatted the shot away with relative ease. In total, Holmgren ended up with nine defensive rebounds and four blocks (plus countless other contests at the rim). But his impact goes beyond that. Holmgren is an outstanding drop coverage defender. His sense of playing within the gap between his man and the ballhandler is elite for his age. He had a few enormous weakside rim rotations to force misses. Overall, Memphis scored 52 points in 51 possessions when Holmgren was in, about a 1.02 points per possession clip. When he was out for 17 possessions, Memphis scored 26 points, at an obscene 1.52 PPP clip. Holmgren didn’t just hold up on defense. He was outstanding on defense. He wasn’t going to be punked. All season long, that’s been the most underrated part of who Holmgren is as a player and what makes him so enticing as a prospect. He’s skinny, but he is tough. He’s the most competitive player I’ve seen in college hoops this year. He doesn’t quit on plays and tries to block everything. I do think this matchup showcased some of his limitations on offense, though. Up against superior athletes on Memphis, I didn’t think his explosiveness with ball in hand looked all that impressive. He didn’t have a lot of juice off the bounce. In the second half, Gonzaga tried to run a few pick-and-pop slip actions to where he could catch on the wing and drive an open lane. A couple of times, he had the open lane, but Memphis was able to recover, close off his driving angle and force him into a turnaround pivot to escape pass out of trouble. On top of that, his jumper has gone away slightly the last few games, as he missed all three 3-point attempts. But he still ended up making an impact. He’s constantly moving and probing, trying to find an angle for his drivers to hit him for a dump-off pass, or finding a way to get behind defenders. Because he’s a threat from distance, that movement has an impact on opposing defenses. They always have to account for where he is. He scored nine points and dished out two assists, so he did contribute. But I did think this showcased a minor concern regarding his ability to create as a half-court driver, something that has been showcased at times throughout the season. It’s also worth noting that in the first round against Georgia State, Holmgren put up a masterpiece against inferior competition. He had 19 points, 17 rebounds and seven blocks. He impacted the game in every way imaginable — grabbed rebounds, blocked out the rim (especially in the second half) and showed offensive firepower. It was an elite performance. I don’t know how much it’s worth reading into, though, given Georgia State is a relatively small team. That size was further compromised when the team’s starting center and defensive force, Eliel Nsoseme, was hurt eight minutes into the game and didn’t return. Still, it shows how dominant Holmgren’s game can be when he’s not even challenged with size. From the Athletic, all you had to do was look it up. It’s in this thread. Chet dominated defensively against Memphis
And as @Nook told you in the other thread. Memphis shot 32% against Chet. You want to bring up counting stats without individual standards or an advanced approach to it. If you want to go by just counting numbers, Chet is still better than Paolo.
NBADraft net update has us with #1 selecting Jaden Ivey. They also have Chet dropping to #4 to OKC. I am not a racist. I have white friends. I like white people. They're a joy to be around. They smell like lemon juice and furniture cleaner and they took us out the jungle....buuuttt i might be slightly racist if we faced a team from Oklahoma led by Chet and Giddey for the next decade. Goofiest duo ever. Flashes of Stockton and Horny multiplied by Live Laugh Love. And OKC coach looks like a young Jerry Sloan. I can picture him 2 decades older. I can feel him mouth breathing on my ear whispering "pick...and roll." Ok. I hate it. I hate it.
So when is he going to gain that 20 t0 30 pounds? Nobody can believe you if its concerning Holmgren , you don't have a good relationship with the truth. It's very telling you never use the Poku comparison, which is actually in the tweet. I don't remember him saying that and even if he did, I don't believe it because I watched the game and the shot chart does not reflect that, so either Chet did not dominate the paint because he was not in there that much or a lot of those baskets came against him, you can't have it both ways. So what is it going to be? You know what never mind, been there done that I know this just goes around and around with you, just glad to show once again you twist everything concerning Holmgren a guy who does not actually affect your life at all. You need to probably see somebody about your obsessions. It's really weird my guy 85% percent of your post are white knighting for the Texans and Chet.
White knighting? Dude you are so far up Paolo ass you could talk for him. Your eyes aren’t better than the actual stats, that is a guarantee. You just look dumb. I stick up for all of our young talent in Houston. And want all Houston teams to be successful.
Yeah its weird the way its posted. I was able to snag it from a conversation over on Reddit. Supposedly the guy posting it is some NCAA assistant coach or something like that since these metrics are usually reserved for personnel scouts and the such (from what i understand). Wonky the way he formatted it. Upper left on each graph is the detail You see an "exceptional" offensive player in Chet, and I see a 3&D guy. Matter of perspective I suppose. Chet is not initiating a thing for Gonzaga. He will take a rebound on occasion and do the 'wow' coast to coast stuff, but the offense for the Zags runs through Timme and the guards. Paolo Banchero is the offensive fulcrum for Duke - there is just no way to dispute that. Holmgren is the best help defender in the country and the ultimate glue guy.
My view on Chauncey Billups has really evolved over the years. I remember when he was drafted, I remember him being dealt and becoming a journeyman and then becoming an all star and very good player. Billups had a very non-conventional career, there is no real question that he blossomed later than almost any other star player. The reality is that after 3-4 years, if a player hasn't become a star, then they 99% of the time do not become stars. However, I mostly am focusing on Billups in his "prime", which was really from about 26 years old until 32-33 years old. In that span he was a superstar as far as actual impact is concerned, more so than a lot of raw stat accumulators. Look at his Ortg/Drtg spreads in that span.... his WS, his VORP, his TS and other advanced statistics..... they are all elite and if you were to erase Billups name you would think it was some other first ballot Hall of Famer. Hell even his career Ortg/Drtg is an elite +11 per hundred possessions. His raw numbers were suppressed due to the pace and style that the Pistons ran. For his career with the Pistons he averaged 27 points per 100 possessions..... per 100 his numbers with the Pistons were 27/10/6/2 on only 17 shots a game.... and defended very well. Career-wise, Billups arguably was as good or better than Isiah Thomas.... which I know is hard to believe, but look really deep into the numbers and Billups is better by most measures. Magic Johnson Oscar Robertson James Harden Steph Curry Chris Paul John Stockton Clyde Frazier Gary Payton These guys are clearly better than Chauncey Billups was...... so that is 8 guys, and I am sure there is someone I am forgetting. Isiah Thomas Jason Kidd Steve Nash Bob Cousy Tim Hardaway Tony Parker This is the next tier, and I would argue that Billups has a strong case that he is as good or better than everyone on this list. Even with a slow start to his career, Billups is in the top 5 all time in win shares and has essentially the same PER as Gary Payton and Walt Frazier. It is all an interesting discussion..... there just are some players, like Sydney Moncrief and Adrian Dantley.... Walt Frazier.... Dan Issel that seem to have a greater impact on winning than the raw numbers, or they are overlooked for different reasons. In the case of Billups the largest reason I can find is because the pace the Pistons played was criminally slow. So was Billups someone like Magic or Bird or Olajuwon? No he wasn't but in his prime he was similar in impact to Dirk Nowitzki or anyone on that old Celtics team that won a title..... or even arguably anyone on the Bad Boy Pistons.
Reading thru this first part of your reply, it hit me ... There is a perfect, modern comp for Chauncey's career that I somehow spaced right past ... Kyle Freaking Lowry Almost identical trajectory, very similar players with similar games, and both started at point for one of the most unlikely champions in recent memory With one MAJOR difference ... Kawhi is no Rasheed Wallace That's the closest I can get to another Billups-like anomaly, but even this one still upholds the rule: Lowry and Derozan led a scrappy playoff team that flamed out year after year Then they swapped one for Kawhi, and instantly take the final steps to a title that previous Raps squads could not Why? Because Lowry and Derozan we're never top-10 superstars Kawhi has been for awhile, and he made all the difference You see Lowry as a HoFamer?
Lowry is a guy that I think has a chance to make the Hall of Fame if he either campaigns for the HOF or stays involved in the game in some way. The fact that Billups was on television and now is a coach will keep him relevant and help his chances. Like you said, the NBA Hall of Fame is the easiest of the big sports to get into. I like the Raptors comparisons.... both the Raptors and Pistons took advantage of injuries and disfunction to win a title.... I think that is good for the game, it isn't a lot of fun going into the season and knowing that only one of 3-4 teams will win the title every season.
They also got once of the most insane bounces (or 4) for a Game 7 buzzer beater that will ever occur. The butterfly effect on that bounce if 76ers can go onto the next series and win is fascinating -- Ben Simmons is probably still there.
You must not watch Gonzaga much ..... While Timme is the focal point, Holmgren makes some really dynamic plays when the opportunity presents itself, particularly in transition or out of the high post. Otherwise he plays a solid complimentary role and does it about as efficiently as is possible. He could be the fulcrum of the offense if asked. He's a legit 3 level scorer as a 7 footer and is a fantastic distributor to top it off.