Time to replace Shane Battier in the starting rotation?

Hey look its Gasol! He is a champion. He had Battier on his team and they never got past the first round too... Odd. He finds Ariza and Artest and he wins a Championship or two. :grin: Battier comes here with Yao and Tmac and we get first round exits.

 

say what?

 

You right guys. Battiers shistory with Gasol and then Yao and Tmac over years with first round exits and then Ariza and Artest getting it done for the second round for us and Championship for others has no bearing whatso ever. Thats just years of coincidences.

 

i'll just have some fun with you after reading some of your posts. Obviously you blame Battier when our team isn't playing good ball. You think he's useless and boring.

Well, the fact is that he is one of the smartest players in the league. It's not all about athleticism and putting up huge numbers with every single player on a team. Battier is one of the most respected players in the league for a reason. No, he's not a good offensive player, and he has slowed down a lot on defense, but he still brings his leadership mentality and does so many positive things for the team, that we would be much worse without him.

 

Can someone do an IP check of this poster with Kwame's or leebigez's IP...thanks.

 

Replace Battier in the starting line-up? YES.

Knee jerk reaction? If by knee jerk you mean 50 threads each season like this for the past three seasons, then yes.

Battier is to our wing as Hayes is to our front court. Good for 10-15 minutes of defense but don't count on any offense. Battier, Hayes and Jeffries constitute our defensive rotation, something that could work well in the postseason.

 

Check it. Some of you guys roll together at times. Dont try to discredit if you cant bring the facts that win the argument. Dicredit is just further the argument that i had alot of good points when people have to go there next.

 

Thats a rational thought. I agree his leadership is valuable. I just think we could somehow do better by replacing him still. Leadership is always valuable. If we get one when we replace him? Problem solved.

 

Your thoughts are kind of like a teabagger, b****ing and moaning but not really having any viable solution or reasoning for your thoughts.

Here is you, or types like you..."I only cheer for champions, that is all that matters"

Well duh....and no one is a champion until they win one...lol.

And Battier is not the best player on the team, he is the 5th option out of the starting 5.....why are you hating on our defensive role player?

He did his role, the Lakers wings were somewhat contained when he was guarding them.

That is his ROLE.....

Ugh, why do I bother?

DD

 

not that easy, my friend. There's a thing called chemistry.

 

Holy S**T, you are r****ded. You think it's Gasol+Artest that was the winning combination for the lakers?
:grin: :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin:

 

Just want to interject a little corrective about the (mis)use of stats in this thread.

But before that, I'll caveat this by saying that I agree with DD's main point that Battier wasn't the problem out there and that we need Battier's defense in the starting line-up more than Budinger's offense. For whatever reason people often assume that the best offensive players should always play in the starting lineup. If that were true, why has Popovich kept Manu in the second unit all these years? Unless you believe that your basketball acumen is actually better than a winner of 4 championships.

Okay, back to the misuse of stats. First, I don't really see from all the anti-Battier posters where they get that Battier has suddenly lost his 3pt shooting abilities. Whether he shot 6 for 6 or 0 for 6, for anyone to conclude that Shane has lost his ability to shoot threes after one game is beyond ridiculous. The guy shot 1 for 3 after one game. ONE GAME. You can't conclude anything after one game, unless it's something obvious like if he's limping around with a broken ankle.

Second, the use of +/- in DD's post is misleading. This is called a degrees of freedom problem in statistics. Basically, the gist here is that there are too many variables that could be affecting any one player's +/- numbers to conclude that the team's net production when a player is on the floor is attributable to his individual contribution. Battier plays with Scola, Brooks, Martin, and Yao usually. His net effect can't be separated out from any of the other players on the team. Maybe his numbers reflects how correlated his playing time is to Martin's. It can't even be separated out from the effect of the various lineups Battier played against last night. Maybe his numbers reflect how poorly his counterpart was doing while he was doing. His favorable +/- and Bud's unfavorable +/- could be due to any number of reasons including any of the 8 or 9 other Rockets that were on the floor at the same time as Battier and Bud. It could also be due to a range of combinations that were played or the players and combinations of the Lakers. The only way you could really be sure whether the +/- is a good measure of each player's net effect is to randomly (I mean truly randomly) throw together the Rockets as well as opponents' line-ups over a large number of games. Obviously this won't ever happen because coaches put lineups together strategically, not randomly. The main point is that +/- may be correlated with a player's net contribution, but you can't assume that it really reflects his net contribution to the team.

Just saying...

 

Sure there are alot of solutions. i have always stated them you merely dont listen or shoot them down. I literally gave solutions on many occasions. You reasoning is go with what dont works. Which you know the saying is for that? You know the one about insanity of doing something over and over again that doesnt work? Thats from a much smarter guy than me or you.

 

For clarity's sake, I don't want the best offensive player in the starting lineup. I want the best player. Chase Budinger is a better player than Shane Battier.

That is all.

 

Iggy is basically asking for a trade. Reported by Chris Broussard.

 

Please let us get Iggy- that would be awesome.

 

And we are NOT doing the same thing over and over, we added:

Lee
Hill
Miller
Martin
Patterson
Ish

In the last 6 months....that is 40% turnover from last season......why not wait to see how this plays out BEFORE you say it is a failure.

BTW- I was not calling you a MFer, I was using it to emphasize my points...and venting, mostly you caught the brunt of a lot of frustration, you don't deserve all of that....so my apologies to you good sir, even if you are completely wrong.



DD

 

nah, i'm pretty sure he's not them....thetatomatis has a history, a short one at that, of moodswings. He can't really be labeled anything. One day he can hate a player and the other he may love him. He rolls with his emotions based on the outcome of the game and what the knee jerkers are saying.

Right now he's on the "melo to replace shane" train.

 

No problem DD. You and me have agreed on alot of things before now. I am just adamant about this one thing. I usually am not this adamant except for when it came to getting Carmelo Anthony which was actually about the same thing we are talking about now in a round about way. thats not my main focus anymore though. Battier is if he doesnt perform and how to upgrade. I agree in with some of your post. See how it turns out. With Budinger or Lee perhaps getting more minutes with all of that turn around or Adelman getting his rotation that works to win games.

 

i'd take him over Melo....i think Melo just takes us a round deeper, but he's redundant in a way, so we'd still come up short. Iggy gives us a better shot...assuming we're only losing battier, picks, hill, etc.