this is true, bev fits the rockets starting PG role perfect, hes like the perfect find for the spot playing next to harden. But there will be times like we’ve saw before that’s its best to close with another creator also next to harden, in the playoffs relying on harden majority of the time in the 4th in a 7 game series will not work. Coaches will adjust. just like the heat would be a great fit for the bev, pacers would be a great fit for lin I’m sure they would love to have someone who can push the pace with George/lance and score some points when their offense goes into stall mode which it does often. He would also always have west to toss to when the drive is not there. Not just guys standing around on the 3 point line watching.
Well talk is cheap. And failed predictions or rumors seem to never come home to haunt the poster. People here at times talk stir crazy bat**** talk.
The term "Point Guard" is anecdotally attributed to Dick Versace, a former NBA coach and collegiate coach. While it's not really clear, the common belief is that it was basically a twist on the term "point man", ie, the person that in military units that would "take the point" or the lead. It came into common usage in the 1970's. As for traditional definitions of the term "point guard"... http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/american/point-guard http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/point guard In the most literal terms (disregarding roster assignment of the 1 or 2 position), James Harden is the point guard.
There is no such thing as most systems - a system is tailored around the most talented players on your roster. There are no typical setups. You work around your great players, ours are Harden and Howard, and Bev is a great PG fit for those players. DD
It *might* not be the classic strawman, but its damn close. The argument against Beverly playing over Lin seems to be predicated on his abilities as a true point guard, which I have already stated is not required here. When you keep using that argument to say Beverly is not a good player for the Rockets at that position, it gets strawman-ish simply because that is not the metric that they are being judged by. Im not concerned with what argument yall were having in here prior to me popping in, my post was a direct reference to the situation in Houston surrounding the point guard position and who is more effective playing it.
All this nonsense was for you to try to make the point that Harden is the PG? If you want to get that literal then fine. Beverley brings the ball up the court and directs Harden to take the ball, by passing to him and instructs him to run the pick and roll or to run an isolation to create an open shot. Beverley does not try and create individually on offense because he knows the lineup cannot produce as well if he does. Alternatively, Lin chooses to attack himself, moreso than Beverley, and does not direct the ball more to Harden. As such the ball is scored less, turned over more and generally produces less. Thus, Beverley is the superior PG because he directs/leads a better offense than Lin.
Which is one of the few reasons why Bev is a better fit in the Rockets starting line up. The only other one is defense. Lin would have been perfect for the Rockets if they had never acquired Harden. Lin is, after all, a Harden ultra-lite. They have exactly the same strengths and weaknesses. Harden's strengths are just so much more prominent than Lin's. Which is why Harden will possibly be a HOF player while Lin is just destined to earn $60M+ as a good NBA player. Just saying, do not feel sorry for Lin.
Are you seriously going to argue semantics? We are talking about the #5 team in the Western Conference..... 75% winning percentage is "nothing special" for a team in the Western Conference in the 5 seed. Go look at the teams clustered around the Blazers, they have a similar winning percentage at home. Trying to argue that the Rockets would not be able to win a game in Portland, is just not any more true than it would be playing other similar quality teams... The Blazers are NOT anything special at home.
Michael Jordan's bulls had John Paxson and Steve Kerr as PGs - they were SGs. Larry Bird's Celtics had Danny Ainge and Dennis Johnson - also neither one a PG. There is no "Best system" - it is predicated on your best players......and BTW - Jeremy Lin is not a true PG either - he is a scoring PG, his passing is just not that great overall to be considered a typical PG. DD
While all this is interesting..... it is immaterial. It does not matter what the historical view of a point guard is. What matter is how the point guard position is viewed today, and in the modern game. Originally there were no real point forwards... but the game evolved.
I was looking forward to listen to Morey. Then I realized this thread has turned for the worst. Another topic, another battlefield --- that is the life on Clutch Fans.
I get a Nook post from your reference. I have not seen a publicly available stat that evaluates defense better than an xRAPM for guards and forwards.
Beverley defends better, doesn't turn the ball over and shoots the 3 better. When you look at high scoring SG's that control the ball, you typically see players that are superb role players... off the top of my head, the only exception I can think of was Terry Porter with Clyde Drexler. Look at Iverson with Snow....... Kobe with Fisher.... Jordan with Kerr/Paxson/Harper ...... Lebron with Chalmers/Jones ....... Wade with Jones ... Sometimes the more limited player is better if he is really good at what he does, and it is at a premium.
Nah.... it isn't arguing, it is discussing.... nothing ugly being exchanged... and respect for the other posters.
Bleh, I was referencing the thread. Just go to the thread discussion, it's on page 2. Basically I like xRAPM for some things, for others I have problems with the formulation, weighting, assumptions, and opaque nature of the adjustments involved. In terms of player v player comparison? I don't use it at all personally.
I enjoy your posts, but I cant agree with that statement. Lin as a 1st time starter playing next to the #1 ball dominant SG in the NBA only playing 30 mins put up above average assist numbers. so to make that claim is BS early in his career. To avg 8 as a starter with really controlling the ball shouldn’t be hard at all. Rockets All time Assists Average Leaders Player G Ast. Avg. 1. John Lucas Jr. 7.3 2. Steve Francis 6.3 3. Jeremy Lin 6.1 4. Art Williams 6.0 5. James Harden 5.8 6. Rafer Alston 5.7 7. Tracy McGrady 5.6 8.Kyle Lowry 5.6 9. Clyde Drexler 5.4 10. Sleepy Floyd 5.4
Bev is the much RARER player to find. An elite defender of point guards. Lin's skill set is a common skill set among smalls. He's very good at what he does but there are a lot of smalls that are very good also. It's much easier to find the next Jeremy Lin and a lot more difficult to find another elite point guard defender. There's just very few elite NBA point guard defenders in the league or anywhere in the world for that matter.
There is nothing better available to fans than dRAPM. ASPM may be its equal, but I honestly have not run a comparison. That being said, all PM stats are limited due to many different issues. Small sample size and its dependence on skewed unweighted "random" variables such as lineups are at the forefront.
Agreed. If I were to look at an inclusive defensive stat, dRAPM and ASPM are probably better starting points. That said, they all have their shortcomings and there's continual effort to further refine them. And unfortunately due to the interdependent nature of defense, it's really, really hard to separate the player from the defensive system so even those stats have to be taken with a grain of salt. For example, do players magically become better defenders when they join the Bulls? Or do the Bulls just maximize their effectiveness from strong team defensive concepts? No matter what composite stat you use, you still have to look at granular data and other models to get anything close to a real picture. As for PM based stats (RPM, APM, xRAPM, RAPM)... the inherent "dirtiness" of the base data presents never ending problems which is why people are running them through so many different types of regressions.
Synergy offers one imperfect method to delve deeper into a players defensive contributions. Unfortunately I have found no method to filter its results on any criteria. Do you have a subscription to synergy? Is it worth the money?
