I hope you're a magnificent troll because the alternative would be that you're a blithering moron, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
Those regular season awards don't become null in the postseason, once you get them a certain exspectation happens. Just because others have underperformed does not make it ok. He also gets blame because you cannot run offense through him at the end of games because he can't shoot FT's. Most people are giving him grief because he did not check Durant while he was going supernova in the 4th. The Star of the team gets the most blame just like all of the players you have mentioned.
Which is precisely why I stated Giannis deserved some of the blame in both the post that you quoted. It also included this line, which you cut out for some reason only to write a variation of it yourself. 'As the saying goes "the best player and leader should get the blame when the team loses and the credit when the team wins."
You realize you keep moving the goalposts of your arguments, right? Well, maybe you don't realize it. You keep moving the goalposts of your arguments.
I did not cut anything off and I don't really see we disagree on much so I don't understand where you are going with this? The degrees of blame? Now I don't agree those awards mean nothing in the post season.
I totally understand awards adds expectations for the player. I just meant those regular season award don't mean much to me when it comes to predicting the postseason. Not an excuse for under-performance, more like I wouldn't bet on regular season greatness to translate to the postseason.
I absolutely never said that. I initially wrote: "A 100 ORtg on 35 Usg% is not a particularly good offensive game for anyone." I included both ORtg and Usg. I subsequently said: "ORtg is an efficiency stat. To assess how good his stats were, you look at efficiency coupled with usage." ORtg is the individualized form of Offensive Rating for teams. Just as Offensive Rating is points per 100 possessions for teams, ORtg for individuals is Points Produced per 100 Used Possessions . It takes into account all the numbers in the box score to give a comprehensive offensive efficiency metric. You can't just look at ORtg for an individual without also considering how many used possessions the player had. Chuck Hayes had a super high ORtg in some years. That didn't mean he was an elite offensive player. Jordan's combination of efficiency (adjusted for league average at the time) and usage was historically great, particularly for the playoffs. By no means does ORtg say otherwise, unless one doesn't understand what that stat is saying.
You are moving the goalpost to deflect from the fact that you used this stat to **** on what Harden did in game 7 of the Clippers series. So I used the same stat and it says that Harden was a better playoff performer than Hakeem and Kareem and that Jamal Murray and Horace Grant are better playoff performers than Jordan. So which is it should we use this stat to judge playoff performance or not? NBA & ABA Career Playoff Leaders and Records for Offensive Rating All-Time Offensive Rating Leaders https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/off_rtg_career_p.html
I said that 100 ORtg on 35 Usg% is not a very good offensive game, statistically. It doesn't follow that ORtg, on its own, can be used to rank players offensively. Similarly, citing 3P% and 3-point attempts to assess how good a game a player had from long distance doesn't mean you should be able to rank 3-point shooters purely on 3P%. An appropriate comparison between players would look at ORtg (preferably adjusted relative to league avg) on one axis and Usage on another axis. You have to look at both when doing player comparisons. https://kenpom.com/blog/offensive-ratingpossession-usage/ A very important aspect of offensive rating is that it must be used in conjunction with the possession usage (%Poss) column to have any value. The average player will use 20% of his team’s possessions while he is on the court. The majority of players fall between 15% and 25%. A player that has a high offensive rating and uses a lot of possessions is especially valuable (example: Adam Morrison, 122.8 ORtg, 31.4% possessions used). https://www.rockchalktalk.com/2015/1/25/7886797/graph-time-with-sax-efficiency-x-usage
LOL. WTF does that graph have to do with anything? Traylor? Withy? Releford? So Wiggins is a superstar? Who knew.
"An appropriate comparison between players would look at ORtg (preferably adjusted relative to league avg) on one axis and Usage on another axis. You have to look at both when doing player comparisons."
Like I thought is has jack and **** to do with anything. Anyway I am done, This is derailing the thread
It has to do with you thinking that ORtg can be used to rank players while ignoring usage. I can't possibly make it any more clear that you can't ignore usage, so whether you get it or not at this point I'm also done with this.
This is what I thought when I saw the Kyrie play. He definitely invaded Kyrie's landing space. He is a punk.
