2018-2019 NBA Regular Season Thread

[dtgold88]

Shooting's a big part of the game? Are you sure? Well shit someone tell Westbick & his .425 shooting % this year.

#russ-is-always-mad

Are you saying it's not?

 

[Shanemansj13]

Did you know that Nance Jr. is only 2 yeas younger than Draymond?

Let's compare:
Player A:
3x All Star
2x All NBA
4x All NBA Defense
1x Defensive Player of the Year

Player B:

No question Draymond is a better defender but if he was on shit teams like Nance he most likely wouldn't have those accolades, but that is up for debate.

 

[CitySushi]

We are talking about a regressing Draymond Green. If he were playing like he had in the past it probably never gets brought up.....but he's not.

Even while regressing, Draymond could not score a single point for the team and yet be one of the top 3 most impactful guys on the court. That's the difference between him and Nance. I'm not saying Nance is trash. I'm just saying that even at Nance's peak, he's not on Draymond's level in a regression year.

 

[Wamu]

Are you saying it's not?

Damn you can't spot sarcasm can you? Okay just for the sake of an argument I'll say it's not.

And don't be using any deflection. Or gaffes. But you better talk to your inside sources before we get this argument rollin'.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Do you know it's easier to get numbers on a bad team than it is a good team?

True but Draymond is open ALL the time. He gets more open shots than anyone in the league. I mean every time I see him he is open.

 

[CitySushi]

who said "relied on him"? But he has taken more shots in the past. Is it your belief if he COULD hit shots he would not take more?

Well so you're suggesting that a guy who's not known for his shooting, should shoot more when he's not hitting them? Seems like a smart play to me, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Defensively it isn't close but I think offensively it isn't close. Draymond has just been a perfect fit with the W's

 

[CitySushi]

True but Draymond is open ALL the time. He gets more open shots than anyone in the league. I mean every time I see him he is open.

But the difference is, is that he has the basketball IQ to know it's not a net positive play for him to hit them. Yes it sucks that he's not able to hit them at a clip, but again, fortunately for him and the Warriors he can still impact the team positively when he's not hitting shots.

 

[CitySushi]

Defensively it isn't close but I think offensively it isn't close. Draymond has just been a perfect fit with the W's

Possibly, but also Draymond is probably one of the top 5 passing PF's in NBA history. Do you think Nance would be capable of filling that role?

 

[dtgold88]

Even while regressing, Draymond could not score a single point for the team and yet be one of the top 3 most impactful guys on the court. That's the difference between him and Nance. I'm not saying Nance is trash. I'm just saying that even at Nance's peak, he's not on Draymond's level in a regression year.

which is why when I first brought this up I believe my quote was "I THINK Nance could MAYBE BECOME a Draymond green type player (was referring to the current, not peak Green).

 

[dtgold88]

No question Draymond is a better defender but if he was on shit teams like Nance he most likely wouldn't have those accolades, but that is up for debate.

Hell ya might not even know who he is other than for his nutkicking theatrics.

 

[Shanemansj13]

But the difference is, is that he has the basketball IQ to know it's not a net positive play for him to hit them. Yes it sucks that he's not able to hit them at a clip, but again, fortunately for him and the Warriors he can still impact the team positively when he's not hitting shots.

He utilizes his role on the W's perfectly without a doubt, but that doesn't mean he is a better player than Nance currently. Nance can knock down the mid-range and 3 pointer pretty consistently. He isn't the rebounder or defender that Draymond is. Two years ago I would say Draymond was better, pretty easily even compared to the Larry Nance Jr. currently.

But currently, both players comparing wise are pretty close imo

 

[CitySushi]

which is why when I first brought this up I believe my quote was "I THINK Nance could MAYBE BECOME a Draymond green type player (was referring to the current, not peak Green).

That's plausible. And offensively, it's not without the realm of possibility. Nance may end up being a better scorer, but he won't be a better facilitator that's for sure. Defensively, it's not close though.

Again, I'm not saying Nance Jr. is trash, but Draymond, IMO, is a horrible comparison for him.

 

[dtgold88]

Damn you can't spot sarcasm can you? Okay just for the sake of an argument I'll say it's not.

And don't be using any deflection. Or gaffes. But you better talk to your inside sources before we get this argument rollin'.

why don't you instead roll along with your straw man comparisons. Hell, you can do better. I'm sure I said Nance > Pippen.

 

[dtgold88]

True but Draymond is open ALL the time. He gets more open shots than anyone in the league. I mean every time I see him he is open.

yep....and he still can't shoot better than a decent high school player on open shots.

 

[CitySushi]

He utilizes his role on the W's perfectly without a doubt, but that doesn't mean he is a better player than Nance currently. Nance can knock down the mid-range and 3 pointer pretty consistently. He isn't the rebounder or defender that Draymond is. Two years ago I would say Draymond was better, pretty easily even compared to the Larry Nance Jr. currently.

But currently, both players comparing wise are pretty close imo

Two years ago Draymond was easily a top 20 player in the NBA. This year, he's closer to 50.

I just think Draymond is a horrible comp for Nance Jr. It's like just trying to pick the low hanging fruit on the Warriors based off of statistical value, whereas I know for a fact that you see deeper impact than just the face value numbers.

 

[dtgold88]

Well so you're suggesting that a guy who's not known for his shooting, should shoot more when he's not hitting them? Seems like a smart play to me, but that's just my opinion.

No, I'm saying he is a terrible shooter, and shooting matters in the game of basketball. Even when left wide open he can't hit shots.

 

[shopson67]

You polled every single one of them?

No need. Common sense.

 

[dtgold88]

But the difference is, is that he has the basketball IQ to know it's not a net positive play for him to hit them. Yes it sucks that he's not able to hit them at a clip, but again, fortunately for him and the Warriors he can still impact the team positively when he's not hitting shots.

Agree. But would be more helpful if he wasn't such an awful shooter. sure, they have enough talent to hide his poor offense.

 

[CitySushi]

No, I'm saying he is a terrible shooter, and shooting matters in the game of basketball. Even when left wide open he can't hit shots.

Context also matters as well. There are tons of players in the NBA who are great shooters, that don't carry their own weight during the course of a basketball game. That's why there are other areas of a game that can be impacted OTHER than scoring and shooting.

If we limit the game and the value of players based on their ability to shoot and score, we can eliminate some of the all-time great players from contention. I mean take Harden and D-Wade for example. Harden is a much better scorer and shooter than Wade ever was. But there's not even a debate as to who the better player was.