Comments on: Brandon Knight makes the All-Rookie First Team

By: tarsier

tarsier — Sun, 27 May 2012 23:28:15 +0000

Potential has nothing to do with it–that’s my point. But people like to argue against Wilt on the basis that he didn’t maximize his potential. That is irrelevant. What matters is what he did achieve (which can hardly be summarized just in number of championship–don’t forget that championships are team accomplishments, not individual accomplishments).

11 championships, after all, is just another impressive stat.

By: ray

ray — Sat, 26 May 2012 21:18:11 +0000

COACHES VOTED! NUFF SAID PROPS TO BK

By: Max

Max — Sat, 26 May 2012 11:27:54 +0000

And what does talent/ceiling/potential have to do with once the players careers are over? Harold Miner and Isaiah Rider might have had more of those things than Rip Hamilton or Andre Miller but things didn’t work out that way in the NBA. Derrick Coleman probably had more of those things going on than nearly anyone in the hall of fame but so what? Bill Russell is the greatest winner in the history of team sports and it is very important when assessing these players as individuals to remember that it is a team sport. All of Russell and Chamberlain’s contemporaries as players thought Russell was a better player. Who are we to argue based on impressive stats?

By: Max

Max — Sat, 26 May 2012 11:18:17 +0000

11-2. Not very equal.

By: Max

Max — Sat, 26 May 2012 11:15:36 +0000

Kobe has many character flaws but was always much more serious about winning than Wilt and patterned himself on one of the greatest winners ever in Jordan. Whatever Kobe’s faults though, I just don’t even consider Parker to be on Kobe’s tier. I also still basically think Duncan is the most important player.
I am not denying Parker’s greatness and think of him as a lock hall of famer but to say Parker did not have much help is crazy. If you look at the Spur’s over the past several seasons, Parker and Ginobili have basically played semi-complete seasons every year and Duncan takes nights off and yet the Spurs are at or near the top every regular season and this year they have more depth than ever before.

By: tarsier

tarsier — Sat, 26 May 2012 10:55:20 +0000

I’m continually amazed by your analysis. Your rejection of Parker’s greatness this season seems to fly right in the face of the whole taking Walton over Chamberlain thing. Yeah, Parker put up maybe 3rd team stats this year. But he wasn’t just a member of the best team. He carried the Sours this season to enormous success without much help. Duncan didn’t miss many games, but nor did he play big minutes. And his time on the court during the regular season was decidedly mediocre. Ginobili was out. And much of the rest of the supporting cast were rejects from other teams who had contributed next to nothing before being in San Antonio.

Kobe is the perfect comparison to Wilt. I mean, obviously he is not as good and he plays a different position. But he always wants to be and plays to be the hero. He plays stupid basketball, often taking the wrong shot or making the wrong play because he has way too much hubris. But he is so damn good that he makes massive contributions anyway. He claims to be all about winning, but really he is all about winning his way. It’s why the Lakers are renowned amongst stat geeks for having one of the league’s worst offenses in crunch time relative to the rest of the game. Kobe will always play predictable hero ball and give the opponent a great shot at stopping him. Then, occasionally, his talent will supercede his poor decision making and he’ll get the win anyway.

By: tarsier

tarsier — Sat, 26 May 2012 10:42:04 +0000

That may make Russel blow Wilt out of the water as a basketball role model, but not as a better player. In fact, on the latter count, that is more of an equalizer. Because Wilt clearly had more potential/talent/ceiling/whatever.

When it comes down to it, the core of the debate is that Russel did everything in his power to make his team win more. Wilt didn’t. But when Wilt did, he had a greater impact. Then the question is whether Wilt playing sub-optimally for team success contributed more than Bill playing optimally. And that is a very close call either way.

By: Max

Max — Sat, 26 May 2012 09:50:05 +0000

One reason I think you and Patrick are very wrong is that coaches have access to stats they study that we don’t even receive and they do consider such stats to be important. I have even heard coaches say that the box scores are garbage but my point is that individual coaches know how many deflections certain players average per game and consider it an important stat. We don’t even have access to such numbers.

By: Max

Max — Sat, 26 May 2012 09:43:20 +0000

Not calling you crazy, but I don’t really understand your claim regarding Wade or Parker but can make sense of the argument that Paul simply and non-controversially had a better season. Wade put up the worst stats since his rookie season and only played in 49 games. Kobe may have only played 9 more in the shortened season but he played a much higher percentage of the games, came in second in scoring in the whole league and significantly upped his scoring average from the previous year, He also was the absolute attention magnet and go to guy on his team and you can’t say the same of Wade or Parker. And what exactly did Parker do to even put himself in an argument for the first time of his career with Kobe? Average his career best 7.7 assists or play for the best team in the league? These are not exactly astounding accomplishments like scoring 28 points a game at the age of 33.

By: Max

Max — Sat, 26 May 2012 09:33:05 +0000

@Patrick….do you really think Vinny Del Negro understands less about basketball and is a worse judge of players than the average person on that panel who never played a minute in the NBA? Whatever Del Negro’s faults as an actual NBA coach, he was a starting player for a championship squad and he must have convinced the Bulls and the Clippers regarding his acumen.