|
Post by jlawdrummer - GSW on Feb 3, 2009 23:13:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pistons521 - MIA on Feb 4, 2009 1:40:32 GMT
I disagree. Again, like Chandler and Young with the similar numbers. These players should be 69-71 in rating, with a MAYBE 72. 70 is good for Azubuike.
|
|
|
Post by jlawdrummer - GSW on Feb 4, 2009 14:03:16 GMT
Just don't agree, sorry. All 3 of these guys mentioned should be higher than a 70ish.
|
|
|
Post by Denver Nuggets on Feb 8, 2009 19:22:13 GMT
yup they should be low to mid-low 70ish
|
|
|
Post by jlawdrummer - GSW on Mar 9, 2009 18:59:30 GMT
Same with Kelenna here...he should be 72-74 range as well if Chandler is going up to a 74.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Mar 9, 2009 19:39:35 GMT
a 72 or 73 wouldn't be bad, I suppose
|
|
|
Post by New Jersey Nets on Mar 9, 2009 19:47:02 GMT
I actually agree with Miami on this one
Azubuike is clearly the result of a system that has given us "great players" such as stephen jackson, baron davis, and al harrington.... all of whom are VERY overrated
I would say 70 is fine for him
|
|
|
Post by jlawdrummer - GSW on Mar 19, 2009 12:43:03 GMT
I find that "system" argument kind of a load of crap honestly. Every team has a system, and every General manager knows that system, and then goes and gets players who fit their teams' system.
Tim Duncan would probably not be as good if it weren't for Popovich's system. I think we should lower his rating.
There are times when players perform well because of the system they're in...hell if GM's are doing their jobs, EVERY PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE is putting up whatever numbers they're putting up because of the system they are in. In a fast-paced system, you want more athletic players who can run all day. Yao Ming would not work under Donnie Nelson. Sure if Donnie decided to, he could change his style a little, but then it would be a new system. The players and the team that GS has lets them play a certain way.
The players should NOT be punished for playing WELL under a system that fits their talent. It's ridiculous.
Also, the system doesn't have an effect on the great %'s he's putting up. 47% FG, 79% FT, and especially 46% 3pt...those are numbers that Azubuike and Azubuike only has an effect on, not the system.
give some credit where credit is due. I'm really kinda tired of the "system" argument, if you couldn't tell. lol
|
|
|
Post by Golden State Warriors on Mar 20, 2009 17:02:27 GMT
I actually agree with Miami on this one Azubuike is clearly the result of a system that has given us "great players" such as stephen jackson, baron davis, and al harrington.... all of whom are VERY overrated I would say 70 is fine for him If your going to use being a "result of a system" for Azubukie then I think you need to consider the same thing for Chandler who plays on a Mike D'Antoni coached team which will inflate anyones offensive numbers.
|
|
|
Post by jlawdrummer - GSW on Mar 22, 2009 3:17:54 GMT
Ugh lol. If you know how to actually look at stats as a whole, mainly % numbers, the system doesn't mean anything. If a guy is scoring 20ppg but shooting like 42%, then his 20ppg are a result of the system and his coach just not giving a shit about how much his guys shoot and miss. But if these players are scoring well, and putting up other good "counting" numbers, BUT ALSO have good/great percentages to go along with those numbers (azubuike's %'s are great), then the system is not boosting their numbers all that much. They are GOOD PLAYERS!
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Apr 4, 2009 20:39:56 GMT
I'll go for a conservative 73 for now. If Azubuike keeps it up, he'll eventually get the attention he deserves.
|
|