Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby halekulani on Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:46 pm

uh
look at iverson's career PER or winshares/48

they are a joke
he is about as good as you can be with great inefficiency

lol at your basic per game stats
the rest of the big boys use analytics and advanced metrics. try to keep up.
User avatar
halekulani

 
Posts: 8786
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:35 pm

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Rooscooter on Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:01 pm

Big boys.... :man10:

Oh just stop with the fantasy stuff..... This isn't Moneyball..... :man10:

Iverson was 5 times the player CP3will ever be. He took a crap team to the Finals..... CP3 cant get much better teams past the second round..... I'm sure if you look hard enough on basketball reference you can find some stat that will show that he did it inefficiently........ :man12:

I use advanced statistical analysis on a daily basis..... And I also know the limitations of simplistic statistical analysis. I also know that there is a limited predictability relevance in statistical projections. Looking back using it with preconceived bias you can see what you want without objective rational analysis.

PM me your e mail address and I'll send you a spreadsheet with over 3500 individual related formulas on 90 sheets for filtering demographic trends in healthcare utilization for a given population based on ICD 9 codes....... Big boys...... :man10:
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby charvin on Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:01 pm

Rooscooter wrote:Big boys.... :man10:

Oh just stop with the fantasy stuff..... This isn't Moneyball..... :man10:

Iverson was 5 times the player CP3will ever be. He took a crap team to the Finals..... CP3 cant get much better teams past the second round..... I'm sure if you look hard enough on basketball reference you can find some stat that will show that he did it inefficiently........ :man12:

I use advanced statistical analysis on a daily basis..... And I also know the limitations of simplistic statistical analysis. I also know that there is a limited predictability relevance in statistical projections. Looking back using it with preconceived bias you can see what you want without objective rational analysis.

PM me your e mail address and I'll send you a spreadsheet with over 3500 individual related formulas on 90 sheets for filtering demographic trends in healthcare utilization for a given population based on ICD 9 codes....... Big boys...... :man10:


Iverson was supernatural that entire Playoffs and was more than likely burned out in the finals. Playing 40+ minutes for all or almost each game.
charvin

 
Posts: 541
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:53 pm

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby thkthebest on Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:07 pm

Westbrook and Lowry bump knees. I hope Westbrook's okay, but it looks like he will be out again.

My signature
thkthebest

 
Posts: 3949
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:59 pm

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby John3:16 on Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:29 pm

Why is this generation so fixated on PER?

AI >>>> CP3. Plain and simple. Anyone who suggests otherwise either didn't watch both or is only looking at PER.
Image
User avatar
John3:16
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 31860
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 12:23 am
Location: Anywhere but LD after a loss.

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Doc Brown on Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:55 pm

That last part of the clip didn't look good. Was that his injured knee?
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19455
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Barnstable on Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:43 pm

John3:16 wrote:Why is this generation so fixated on PER?

AI >>>> CP3. Plain and simple. Anyone who suggests otherwise either didn't watch both or is only looking at PER.


This in spades.

Iverson was really really good. He could score on anyone in his prime, and he took over games (scoring wise) like no other PG I've ever seen.

Damn near Kobe level unstoppable in his prime. His prime was however short lived compared to the greats like Kobe.

Iverson was much better than CP3 in this respect. Defensively? Passing? I'm not so sure.
"league getting mitch-slapped"
User avatar
Barnstable
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 14327
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:01 pm
Location: Queens NY

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Chillbongo on Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:50 pm

John3:16 wrote:Why is this generation so fixated on PER?

AI >>>> CP3. Plain and simple. Anyone who suggests otherwise either didn't watch both or is only looking at PER.

Put cp3 on that team 76ers team and how far does it go?

LAWL win shares. :freak2:

Barns - CP3 is a better passer for sure. and defender (from what I remember). But I have a simple barometer for is "player X better than player Y?" And it is "If you were trying to win a championship who would you rather have on your team?"

AI was unstoppable.
Last edited by Chillbongo on Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Chillbongo

 
Posts: 3249
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Battle Tested20 on Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:51 pm

Doc Brown wrote:That last part of the clip didn't look good. Was that his injured knee?

yes
Image
"I just put my faith in God. Through him we can do all things"
- Kobe Bryant, March 24, 2004
User avatar
Battle Tested20

 
Posts: 11665
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:39 pm
Location: San Diego, CA (SDSU)

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Doc Brown on Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:57 pm

Battle Tested20 wrote:
Doc Brown wrote:That last part of the clip didn't look good. Was that his injured knee?

yes


Ouch. Would suck if he had to have another surgery on that knee.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19455
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Doc Brown on Fri Mar 21, 2014 9:01 pm

Darnell Mayberry ‏@DarnellMayberry 41m
Russell Westbrook was in great spirits after the game. Left the arena walking just fine. No brace. No crutches. Doesn't expect to miss time.
Expand Reply Retwe


Good news.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19455
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Rooscooter on Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:18 pm

Chillbongo wrote:
John3:16 wrote:Why is this generation so fixated on PER?

AI >>>> CP3. Plain and simple. Anyone who suggests otherwise either didn't watch both or is only looking at PER.

Put cp3 on that team 76ers team and how far does it go?

LAWL win shares. :freak2:

Barns - CP3 is a better passer for sure. and defender (from what I remember). But I have a simple barometer for is "player X better than player Y?" And it is "If you were trying to win a championship who would you rather have on your team?"

AI was unstoppable.


Put it this way..... AI is the only ball dominant PG to,get his team to the finals w/o any other stars.

As for defense. I'm not a fan of steals as a measure of total defense but both get/ got a lot of those..... Stockton got a lot more than anyone.... Not sure anyone puts him up,there as a defensive stopper.

Iverson went 100% at both ends. Paul is far less active defensively so while I think neither was a great defender I'd take AI over Paul there too. Pure passing and vision goes to Paul but AI could break a defense without multiple screens and create very easy opportunities for others. It's closer if you look at overall ability to create for others IMO

John..... The answer to your question is answered in two words.... beta Male
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby wcsoldier81 on Sat Mar 22, 2014 6:29 am

wcsoldier81

 
Posts: 6427
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:20 am

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby V.V.V.V.V. on Sat Mar 22, 2014 11:40 am

Iverson got a lot of flak for being a volume shooter, but he was one of the best at driving to the lane. He was like 5'10" and was still unstoppable. And no illegal dribbles like Wade and LeBron. He had incredible handles too.

The guy knew how to compete and how to win.
Vi Veri Vniversum Vivus Vici
V.V.V.V.V.

 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sun May 07, 2006 11:59 pm
Location: Hollywood

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby LakerFanIam on Sun Mar 23, 2014 10:28 am

Glad to hear Westbrook appears to be fine... Would've sucked for OKC to have him out for the Playoffs again..

http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2014/03/22/examination-reveals-no-issues-of-concern-with-westbrooks-right-knee/?ls=iref:nbahpts
Image
User avatar
LakerFanIam

 
Posts: 3679
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: Sec 117

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby XXIV on Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:00 am

Doc Brown wrote:
Darnell Mayberry ‏@DarnellMayberry 41m
Russell Westbrook was in great spirits after the game. Left the arena walking just fine. No brace. No crutches. Doesn't expect to miss time.
Expand Reply Retwe


Good news.


Glad he's alright. I want to see all teams healthy come playoff time.
XXIV

 
Posts: 6388
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 11:20 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby halekulani on Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:58 am

Rooscooter wrote:Big boys.... :man10:

Oh just stop with the fantasy stuff..... This isn't Moneyball..... :man10:

Iverson was 5 times the player CP3will ever be. He took a crap team to the Finals..... CP3 cant get much better teams past the second round..... I'm sure if you look hard enough on basketball reference you can find some stat that will show that he did it inefficiently........ :man12:

I use advanced statistical analysis on a daily basis..... And I also know the limitations of simplistic statistical analysis. I also know that there is a limited predictability relevance in statistical projections. Looking back using it with preconceived bias you can see what you want without objective rational analysis.

PM me your e mail address and I'll send you a spreadsheet with over 3500 individual related formulas on 90 sheets for filtering demographic trends in healthcare utilization for a given population based on ICD 9 codes....... Big boys...... :man10:

it was only a matter of time before you brought up your work history as a relevant point about basketball

where is this amazing iverson stat
User avatar
halekulani

 
Posts: 8786
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:35 pm

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Rooscooter on Mon Mar 24, 2014 6:35 pm

halekulani wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:Big boys.... :man10:

Oh just stop with the fantasy stuff..... This isn't Moneyball..... :man10:

Iverson was 5 times the player CP3will ever be. He took a crap team to the Finals..... CP3 cant get much better teams past the second round..... I'm sure if you look hard enough on basketball reference you can find some stat that will show that he did it inefficiently........ :man12:

I use advanced statistical analysis on a daily basis..... And I also know the limitations of simplistic statistical analysis. I also know that there is a limited predictability relevance in statistical projections. Looking back using it with preconceived bias you can see what you want without objective rational analysis.

PM me your e mail address and I'll send you a spreadsheet with over 3500 individual related formulas on 90 sheets for filtering demographic trends in healthcare utilization for a given population based on ICD 9 codes....... Big boys...... :man10:

it was only a matter of time before you brought up your work history as a relevant point about basketball

where is this amazing iverson stat

Your the one that brought up my understanding of statistics..... Not me kiddo.... I just responded with my experience in the area in response to you attempt at taking a debate you were losing to the personal side.

Why do you even watch the games? Basketball Reference and Elias update on agame by game basis now..... You could live entirely in fantasy land and not have to worry about your eyes conflicting with the math.....
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby halekulani on Tue Mar 25, 2014 12:40 pm

i brought up basketball analytics, which you dismissed immediately and the only stats that you brought to the table were ppg and assists per game, which are basically only touching the surface of what is meaningful.

put up or shut up. if there was any advanced stats supporting your argument for iverson, why don't you post it?

yes, you can have a background in medical statistics, but just because someone can calculate and interpret kaplan meier survival curves doesn't mean you know anything about relevant basketball stats. all stats are different, ie. a baseball stats specialist wouldn't know the first thing about capping nfl vegas odds.

you guys hold it against paul for not getting to the finals in 07-08 yet hold iverson in high regard
let's get one thing straight - the 2000-2001 76ers, bucks, and raptors would get murdered by the 07-08 spurs.

achievements such as championships, conf finals, etc are dependent on both the player, his teammates, and the strength of the opponents. paul has always competed in the toughest conference, and just because he hasn't won a ring or gotten to the finals doesn't make him any less valuable of a player. championships are more than about individuals. situation and timing are significant factors as well.

---
http://stats.nba.com/playerTrackingTouches.html?pageNo=1&rowsPerPage=25&sortField=TOP&sortOrder=DES

rondo plays 32.9 mpg, total time of possession 7.6 min
cp3 plays 35.1 mpg, total time of possession 7.1 min

not only does paul play more, he has the ball in his hands less than rondo does.

like srsly i cant even bro
it's like you're trying to tell me 100 lbs of feathers weigh less than 100 lbs of gold

does the offense for the clippers revolve around cp3 more than rondo on the celtics? absolutely. is that by design? YES. that is the game plan.
does this mean cp3 is incapable of playing off the ball? hell no. does this mean cp3 can't play sidekick to KD? hell no. paul has never had someone who could create their own shot as well as kd. to assume he can't play next to him is ridiculous.
Last edited by halekulani on Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:11 pm, edited 6 times in total.
User avatar
halekulani

 
Posts: 8786
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:35 pm

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby halekulani on Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:29 pm

John3:16 wrote:Why is this generation so fixated on PER?


has PER ever wrongly identified someone as inefficient?
i'm not really sure why stats are a bad thing. it brings anecdotal evidence to the table and puts it to the test. the true legends are always held favorably with PER, and if anything, PER highlights a few players under the radar.
User avatar
halekulani

 
Posts: 8786
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:35 pm

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:38 pm

What stat is it that shows heart, drive and the ability to raise your performance in situations that are hard? Rondo and Iverson have excelled in the past at that.... Paul hasn't. With him the apologists always point to his teammates. Again, what stat shows Paul has poor teammates? Which one shows his poor teammates blew those games in the last 4 or 5 possessions and not Paul? What stat shows that Paul needs a concerted offensive effort to free him to obtain those Per stats while Rondo gets his in a much different manner? NONE of this stuff is in these stats...none. Therefore the are nothing more than more detailed individual stats in a dynamic team game.

This idea that stats, advanced or rudimentary, can predict how good a player is in the mental intangibles of a dynamic organized activity with over 1000 independent variables is ignorant of the limits of predictive statistical analysis. Per is dependent on a handful if historic inputs that are purely individual and all inputs are historical and results.

Finally, when using stats to divide players into categories is an exercise in making a decision and the finding the stats to support it. I will still argue that stats are nothing more than a record of individual history and have little if anything to do with how well a player plays the GAME. Those who understand what I mean by the game will understand what I'm talking about.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby halekulani on Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:49 pm

well for one, there's a crunch time stat. are you suggesting paul hasn't ever come through in tough situations? hello? he literally turned around the hornets franchise single handedly. they finished 38-44 in his rookie season. what the hell did iverson do in his rookie season? they finished 22-60.

two, let's just say you concede the point that cp3 hogs the ball a lot more than rondo b/c it literally is impossible for you to defend your side at this point.

three, yes stats can't capture everything but to ignore them isn't wise either. like i don't know why you continue to refuse to bring up any advanced analytics at all. either you don't know them or you just dismiss them entirely. it's basically like if i don't agree with your assessments 100% based on pure observation, i'm just wrong and you don't have to defend your own decision at all. good job, bro. you might as well just have a forum by yourself.
User avatar
halekulani

 
Posts: 8786
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:35 pm

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby charvin on Tue Mar 25, 2014 9:13 pm

halekulani wrote:two, let's just say you concede the point that cp3 hogs the ball a lot more than rondo b/c it literally is impossible for you to defend your side at this point.


Over time, his argument has been just that. The point is: CP3 needs the ball to be effective, Rondo does not. He's also arguing that teammates have to go out of their way to get him free while Rondo operates within the context of the offence. In my opinion, when you are so reliant on one player to do everything for the team, chances are, you are not likely to win the championship. That's been the case for every ball reliant PG in the past decade (Nash, DWill, CP3). You force them to be the primary scorer and your job becomes much easier. Which is why (I think) Roo has argued in the past why San Antonio has been so effective against Nash. Popovich allowed Nash to be the primary option and it never yielded much success.

I am not a statistician aficionado and won't get into that for these two players. At the very least, I'll give CP3 two to three years to win a ring. If he can't, he isn't as "valuable" to his team as we think he is and that he does not provide the same impact Rondo does. I'm giving him 2-3 years because he now has the same coach as Rondo did when he won it, and this time allows them to get their [Swearing is not permitted at Clublakers. You must edit this post prior to submitting.] straightened out along with any roster moves they want to make to field a winning team.
charvin

 
Posts: 541
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:53 pm

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Mar 25, 2014 9:32 pm

halekulani wrote:well for one, there's a crunch time stat. are you suggesting paul hasn't ever come through in tough situations? hello? he literally turned around the hornets franchise single handedly. they finished 38-44 in his rookie season. what the hell did iverson do in his rookie season? they finished 22-60.

two, let's just say you concede the point that cp3 hogs the ball a lot more than rondo b/c it literally is impossible for you to defend your side at this point.

three, yes stats can't capture everything but to ignore them isn't wise either. like i don't know why you continue to refuse to bring up any advanced analytics at all. either you don't know them or you just dismiss them entirely. it's basically like if i don't agree with your assessments 100% based on pure observation, i'm just wrong and you don't have to defend your own decision at all. good job, bro. you might as well just have a forum by yourself.



Advanced Analytics, like Per and win shares etc. are phony Analytics..... They add little to the basics of ppt, assists etc. To believe that they somehow provide a different evaluation of a players statistical value is the fallacy. They are based on basic stats..... Not new information. They are combining stats and time, game score etc. nothing new.... Nothing advanced either.

Intangibles are just that. When I run numbers in a demography there is always a factor for things that cannot be quantified. You run the numbers with the factor and without it and then make an informed decision based on a reasonable evaluation of the facts. Critical thinking in other words.

As for refuting something..... This just shows that you haven't followed my argument and are arguing purely from a statistical point of view.

Doesn't using something as pedestrian as wins fly in the face of "advanced Analytics"?.... And if it means something in the regular season positively.....wouldn't it also mean something in the playoffs when wins turn into losses?

Finally.... Paul dominated the last 5 possessions in the final game of the year for the Clips the last two years in very close games. In each he came up small and tried several time to get the refs to decide the game rather than his ability. Per aside..... His efficiency was not good at all..... When it counted the most for his team. If you dissect his advanced Analytics in those two years they look good..... The RESULTS were not. That's the variable that is unquantifiable..... And the most important one of you ask me..... And why I don't put a ton of value in them.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Does Russell Westbrook throw off OKC's chemistry?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Mar 25, 2014 9:53 pm

charvin wrote:
halekulani wrote:two, let's just say you concede the point that cp3 hogs the ball a lot more than rondo b/c it literally is impossible for you to defend your side at this point.


Over time, his argument has been just that. The point is: CP3 needs the ball to be effective, Rondo does not. He's also arguing that teammates have to go out of their way to get him free while Rondo operates within the context of the offence. In my opinion, when you are so reliant on one player to do everything for the team, chances are, you are not likely to win the championship. That's been the case for every ball reliant PG in the past decade (Nash, DWill, CP3). You force them to be the primary scorer and your job becomes much easier. Which is why (I think) Roo has argued in the past why San Antonio has been so effective against Nash. Popovich allowed Nash to be the primary option and it never yielded much success.

I am not a statistician aficionado and won't get into that for these two players. At the very least, I'll give CP3 two to three years to win a ring. If he can't, he isn't as "valuable" to his team as we think he is and that he does not provide the same impact Rondo does. I'm giving him 2-3 years because he now has the same coach as Rondo did when he won it, and this time allows them to get their [Swearing is not permitted at Clublakers. You must edit this post prior to submitting.] straightened out along with any roster moves they want to make to field a winning team.


This exactly right..... The stats show that Paul and Rondo are similar players when vowed alone. One can use those stats to argue for their "favorite" of the two as well. The rubber hits the road with the ability of the ball dominant PGs to overcome the defensive adjustments in the playoffs. Nash, Stockton, CP3, DWill, DRose and even Wade (before Shaq) all have been thwarted when the opposing team has a chance to plan for them. Part of that is the players versatility and part is the systems versatility. My point with Paul is that the system he plays best in has been defused several times in the playoffs. What you disrupt him you also throw off the entire team because they rely on him so much. When he was hurt this season the rest of that team HAD to pick up the slack and do more. The result was more Ppg, more team assists and more wins.

Doc has been trying to not use the double and triple pick system that yields so many dunks because he knows it won't work deep in the playoffs. Paul has been working off the ball more since coming back as well. This,will be a test of whether or not he can be effective off the ball. Doc has the experience that most of Paul's coaches haven't had. Paul being able to adjust will be the issue. I don't think he's that Versatel and I have seen nothing in his past that suggests he won't try to flop his way past an opponent. That mentality alone is defeatist IMO and something that's beyond coaching.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

PreviousNext

Return to NBA Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.