Who's 3rd ? Topic

OKC is 21-4 with Westbrook
OKC is 22-8 without Westbrook

I don't see any merit in them somehow being better without him. If you look at their last 3 playoff seasons, last season they lost because Westbrook was out and the team offense was a disaster with Durant being DT the entire time. The previous season the lost in the Finals due to great 3 PT shooting by Miami and terrible refereeing. And previous to that they lost due to a Herculian effort by Dirk and co.
2/15/2014 3:13 PM
This is a discussion? Chris Paul
Who's fourth?
2/15/2014 8:39 PM
Posted by stinenavy on 2/15/2014 3:13:00 PM (view original):
OKC is 21-4 with Westbrook
OKC is 22-8 without Westbrook

I don't see any merit in them somehow being better without him. If you look at their last 3 playoff seasons, last season they lost because Westbrook was out and the team offense was a disaster with Durant being DT the entire time. The previous season the lost in the Finals due to great 3 PT shooting by Miami and terrible refereeing. And previous to that they lost due to a Herculian effort by Dirk and co.
Yes you correct with the record.. Ugh I look at things quickly and mess up..

Anyway the thing your not taking into consideration about last year is that they didnt have any time to work the kinks with Westbrook being out so suddenly.  Now they do.. Westbrook is a great player but he's just takes way too many shot (and doesnt make them).  If he can come back and modify his game, OKC will be even that much better.  But if he comes back and is the same player, they are never winning a championship

2/16/2014 6:46 AM
So, back to the original question - Who's 3rd?  Despite his injury issues and his team's success without him, does "everyone" still think it's Paul?  Having watched Griffin a few more times lately, I'm even more in his corner.  He's hitting that face-up jumper with regularity, passing much better, and even playing D. 
2/16/2014 10:33 AM
Yeah I excluded Paul because he was injured.  But if he wasn't he would be number 3...
2/16/2014 11:47 AM
2/18/2014 8:19 PM
Posted by steelers821 on 2/18/2014 8:19:00 PM (view original):
does anyone know how reliable the per 100 possessions stat is?
2/18/2014 8:21 PM
Posted by eleibowitz on 2/16/2014 6:46:00 AM (view original):
Posted by stinenavy on 2/15/2014 3:13:00 PM (view original):
OKC is 21-4 with Westbrook
OKC is 22-8 without Westbrook

I don't see any merit in them somehow being better without him. If you look at their last 3 playoff seasons, last season they lost because Westbrook was out and the team offense was a disaster with Durant being DT the entire time. The previous season the lost in the Finals due to great 3 PT shooting by Miami and terrible refereeing. And previous to that they lost due to a Herculian effort by Dirk and co.
Yes you correct with the record.. Ugh I look at things quickly and mess up..

Anyway the thing your not taking into consideration about last year is that they didnt have any time to work the kinks with Westbrook being out so suddenly.  Now they do.. Westbrook is a great player but he's just takes way too many shot (and doesnt make them).  If he can come back and modify his game, OKC will be even that much better.  But if he comes back and is the same player, they are never winning a championship

No need for him to modify anything, that's just said by people that don't watch the games.
2/18/2014 9:19 PM
Posted by all3 on 2/16/2014 10:33:00 AM (view original):
So, back to the original question - Who's 3rd?  Despite his injury issues and his team's success without him, does "everyone" still think it's Paul?  Having watched Griffin a few more times lately, I'm even more in his corner.  He's hitting that face-up jumper with regularity, passing much better, and even playing D. 
The question was who's the 3rd best player, not 3rd most valuable. The Clippers stayed afloat in good part because Paul's replacement, Darren Collison, had a very good stretch of games. Because Collison played well, doesn't make Paul more or less of a better player.
2/18/2014 9:26 PM
Posted by steelers821 on 1/31/2014 3:35:00 PM (view original):
3 cp3
4  paul George
5 James Harden
6 Aldrige
7 Griffen
8 westbrook
9  Love 
10 curry
consideration- dwight, hibbert, Bosh, wade, duncan, parker, melo
future possibilitys
wall, lillard, cousins, davis, drummond, parsons, (not kyrie)

after recent stretch and a better look at things
3 cp3
4 PG
5 Griffen
6 Aldrige
7 Love
8 Westbrook
9 Harden
10 Curry



2/18/2014 10:51 PM
Posted by stinenavy on 2/18/2014 9:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by all3 on 2/16/2014 10:33:00 AM (view original):
So, back to the original question - Who's 3rd?  Despite his injury issues and his team's success without him, does "everyone" still think it's Paul?  Having watched Griffin a few more times lately, I'm even more in his corner.  He's hitting that face-up jumper with regularity, passing much better, and even playing D. 
The question was who's the 3rd best player, not 3rd most valuable. The Clippers stayed afloat in good part because Paul's replacement, Darren Collison, had a very good stretch of games. Because Collison played well, doesn't make Paul more or less of a better player.
Collison played OK while starting, but Griffin truly elevated his game.  Numbers never tell the whole story, but in this case they sure give a good glimpse.
2/19/2014 9:35 AM
So Westbrook's WAR (wins above replacement) is essentially zero.    It's not are they better without him, it's why aren't they worse?   

Chris Paul
Paul George
Griffin
Aldridge
Love
Howard
Curry
Noah

Nowitzki would be ahead of all these guys if I were putting a team together to win a playoff run though.

2/19/2014 11:20 AM
The thing this conversation has brought out for me.. is the gap between 1,2 and 3. I think it is pretty huge.

I mean Paul and Griffin are both in nearly everyone's top 6.. and on the same team they are not even many people's final picks.

There was a discussion I heard yesterday about how many guys could be "The Guy" on a championship team atm.

I think Past KD and LBJ.. Paul George is good enough to be THE GUY on that Indiana team but only because the team is very good everywhere else. He has to get better offensively. I don't see anyone else that I really think could win a title as THE GUY.

I do agree with badja somewhat though. I think Dirk could be your main offensive weapon on a title team.. not on the team he is on but put Dirk on a team like the 2000s  Pistons and he could be the guy to bring it home. Dirk on a team like Golden State instead of David Lee would be scary. Or if the Mavs had gotten Howard..
2/19/2014 12:46 PM
On 2 tangents about the Mavs/Howard thing:

If they had gotten Howard, they wouldn't have had the money to do a lot of the things that make them good right now. They wouldn't have been able to sign Calderon, Monta, or Blair, all important rotation players. But I heard rumors that Dirk was willing to take a major pay cut in order to put together a contending squad (take notes, Kobe), so that might not matter.

Secondly, imagine the Calderon, Ellis/Carter/Marion (wing rotation), Dirk, Howard all in their primes simultaneously. It's almost as scary as the 10-11 Celtics lineup if they were in their primes at the same time: Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, Shaquille O'Neal.
2/19/2014 3:05 PM
Yeah, I wasn't saying in real life because yeah.. they couldn't have gotten all of those guys. Though they wouldn't have signed Dalembert obviously.. and they had some flexibility as I recall they wanted D. Will and Howard at one point.

But if you traded Dalembert for Howard right now.. they would be a real contender. Or Dalembert for Marc Gasol.
2/19/2014 3:15 PM
◂ Prev 123 Next ▸
Who's 3rd ? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.