# why the hell wont sergio get more minutes ???



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

jarrett jack was pathetic again tonight,2 assists in 26 minutes,yet rodriguez had 3 assists and a stea1 in 4 minutes

Jack has been playing badly for a few games now and sergio remains glued to the bench,whats going on in the coaches head 

In the last 5 games jack averages 2.8 assists in 30 mins

i am biased because im a very big fan of sergio`s but simple mathematics tell you that jack is`nt getting the job done and when rodriguez gets burn he DOES get the job done


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

No one really knows. I think, if given Jack's minutes, he would get about 10-13 points and 8-10 assist. Might turn the ball over more, but he would open the game up.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

I agree. Sergio needs more burn. However, Nate McMillan seems scared to give him any real meaningful playing time. If he got 25-30 min. per, I wouldn't be suprised to see Sergio avg. 8+ assists. He needs to work on his offense though. He has trouble finishing.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Well it's not Nate's fault. He knows what he's doing. Sergio did something terribly wrong at half time it appears. My guess is that he and LaMarcus looked Nate in the eye and, well....there you go.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

A couple of bad games is all it takes to turn on a player? Good grief. Just a few games back Jack was becoming an extremely good PG. If anything his confidence has probably been shaken a bit by Nate running Sergio at the end of games...


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

My point is that jack averages 10 points and 3 assists in 30 minutes = 16 points(assist = 2 pt for arguments sake)

If rodriguez averaged 8 assists(16 pts) and 0 points a game in 30 minutes he`d be equalling jacks output,

i know for a fact that rodriguez can score more than 0 points in 30 mins no matter how offensivly challenged he is


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Watch Sergio on the defensive end...there is your answer IMO.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

www.starbury.com said:


> My point is that jack averages 10 points and 3 assists in 30 minutes = 16 points(assist = 2 pt for arguments sake)
> 
> If rodriguez averaged 8 assists(16 pts) and 0 points a game in 30 minutes he`d be equalling jacks output,
> 
> i know for a fact that rodriguez can score more than 0 points in 30 mins no matter how offensivly challenged he is


Might want to consider turnovers and what the TEAM does when each player is on the floor rather than just their individual statistics.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

rodriguez averages 1 to in 10 mins per game 

in the 10 games hes played more than 10 mins(19 mins per game average) he`s averaged 1.4 to`s 

jack averages 2.5 to`s in 30 mins per game 

no matter which way you look at it,rodriguez is`nt gonna average a significant amount more to`s in 30 mins than jack does.

assist wise he`s equalling jacks 33 min average(3.0) in 10 mins


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Sorry but you're a Marbury fan...thus you lose all rights to judge what is or is not a good PG. :biggrin: 

j/k:biggrin:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I think NAte is an old school coach who has issue wioth playing Rookies significant minutes....Or rather he is reluctant to do so. Roy is simply head and shoulders our best 2 guard and it's hard to justify not playing him. I think you could almost make an argument that ROy is our best player on the team.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Schilly said:


> I think NAte is an old school coach who has issue wioth playing Rookies significant minutes....Or rather he is reluctant to do so. Roy is simply head and shoulders our best 2 guard and it's hard to justify not playing him. I think you could almost make an argument that ROy is our best player on the team.




THEN WHY WAS HE HIRED TO COACH A REBUILDING, YOUTH MOVEMENT TEAM!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Sergio's usually in with the second unit, which means he's in with Dixon ... do you think Nate really enjoys playing a midget back court? No. So he needs to bring in Jack or Roy, and a lot of the time, it's Jack to play PG. I'd like to see Nate bring in Roy to play PG with Dixon at the SG position, but having a short back court is pretty much why Nate doesn't give Sergio more time.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

so you`d rather have a rookie SG who can score very well playing pg along with a midget SG(dixon) who`s not very good at anything?

rodriguez and jack should be getting 20 mins each at pg with roy getting 35 at SG and dixon 5-10 backing him up

Whats the point in having a great low post scorer in randolph and a good SG in Roy if you`ve got a pg who averages 3 assists(jack) in 33 minutes

It actually surprises me that randolph puts up the numbers he does offensivly because it sure as hell aint jarrett jack feeding him the ball 

roy and randolph = points
rodriguez = assists

jack and dixon = bench


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

We say that Sergio would average 8+ assists/game. His rate is in excess of 15 assists/48. These are Nash-like numbers.

There is no doubt that Dixon needs to sit. Sergio makes other players look better -- even Dixon and Mags (and certainly Webster, Aldridge and Udoka). He would do the same thing for Roy and Zach if they played much together.

And it is true that Sergio's defense is poor and needs to improve. But in this team, that is hardly an exceptional problem. Plenty of our players are not decent defenders.


iWatas


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

it is a little weird that a guy who almost never started last year (Jack) seems firmly cemented as a starter this year, despite us losing 5 of our 6 recent games with mediocre-to-bad performances from Jack. and that includes losses to really bad/depleted Toronto, Philadelphia and Boston squads. 

to Nate's credit, in the past three games Jack logged 28, 24 and 26 minutes, well down from his season average of 34. so when Jack looks bad he is getting yanked out earlier. 

I think the big issue is that Roy and Jack just don't compliment each. they both are strong, driving guards who thrive on creating contact and are not inclined (or very good at) taking threes. both would be considered good playmakers at SG, but not terribly good for PG's. 

maybe there's just too much overlap in skill sets there. we've lost 5 of 7 games since Roy came back. nobody thinks it's because Roy is a lousy player. everybody pretty much agrees Jack was playing well prior to Roy's return. 

sometimes two good players just don't play as well together because the fit just isn't there. Nash and Nowitzki really came into their own when they got separated, for a more extreme example. 

to those who say Sergio is a rookie, remember that Jack is also only a second year player. before this year, he'd only started a handful of games. that's pretty young to be permanently handed the keys to running an NBA team. 

Nate's really got to see if Sergio would be a better combination with Roy. maybe not start Sergio yet, but bring him in as the first sub for Jack, just to see how Roy, Sergio, Randolph, Przybilla and Ime play together.


----------



## aaabbbccc (Aug 26, 2006)

Jack vs Sergio (per 48 min)


+---------+ Jack -+ Sergio
+---------+-------+-------+
| PP48M --| *17.56* | 11.16 |
+---------+-------+-------+
| RP48M --| 3.60 -| *5.02* -|
+---------+-------+-------+
| AP48M --| 7.41 -| *14.70* |
+---------+-------+-------+
| STP48M -| 1.80 -| *2.60* -|
+---------+-------+-------+
| BLKP48M | 0.13 -| *0.19* -|
+---------+-------+-------+
| TOP48M -| *3.30* -| 4.28 -|
+---------+-------+-------+


Sergio deserves more PT...


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

aaabbbccc said:


> Jack vs Sergio (per 48 min)
> 
> 
> +---------+ Jack -+ Sergio
> ...



I am all for Sergio getting more time, but what those numbers of yours don't take into account is this. 

Jack is a much better defender
Sergio isn't on the floor as much with Zach
Nate want's his starting unit to set the tone for the game. Nate likes to bore the hell out of everyone, so Sergio wouldn't work.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

sa1177 said:


> Watch Sergio on the defensive end...there is your answer IMO.


Jarrett Jack is not a good defender. That's a myth that was put on him because of his size. Roy and Jack let guards blow past them all game and constantly get beat down the floor on the fast break.


Jack needs to be a backup PG, Roy needs to be moved to SF where his lack of athletism will be masked.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> Roy needs to be moved to SF where his lack of athletism will be masked.


Roy is one of the better athletes on the team; no lack of athleticism there...


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Sergio isn't on the floor as much with Zach


I just don't understand the thinking that a pass-first point guard would be hampered by a low post scorer. I can't think of any instance on any other team where this has ever happened. I can think of several where the opposite is true. Nash/Amare, Stockton/Malone, Kidd/Martin, Williams/Boozer--all duos where the PG put up better performances because he could feed a scorer in the post. 

if you can site even one example, I could be persuaded.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

mook said:


> I just don't understand the thinking that a pass-first point guard would be hampered by a low post scorer. I can't think of any instance on any other team where this has happened. I can think of several where the opposite is true: Nash/Amare, Stockton/Malone, Kidd/Martin, Williams/Boozer.
> 
> if you can site even one example, I could be persuaded.


Well for one thing, each and every combo you gave in your statement got up and down the court and got some easy assists on fast breaks. I mean how many times did you see Malone fly up the floor and get a pass from Stockton, the same for Amare, Martin and Boozer. Zach is slow and doesn't like to run the break....(see Nate's comments about building around an 18 wheeler rather than a sports car last off season) The other thing that those players do that Zach does not is make their move off of the assist. When Zach gets the ball he takes a long time to make his move, or takes one too many dribbles...Thus voiding the assist. It's not that Zach isn't a good low post scorer, he just isn't the best player to have on the floor if you want to raise your assist totals


----------



## aaabbbccc (Aug 26, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> Sergio isn't on the floor as much with Zach


Sergio played 18 minutes witch Zach against the Hawks and that was one of his best games...


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

aaabbbccc said:


> Sergio played 18 minutes witch Zach against the Hawks and that was one of his best games...



yes, that was the game where Webster, Aldridge, and Magloire had about as many assists to them from Rodriguez as Zach did. I also thought that Sergio got his assists off Zach jumpers, and not his low post scoring. I realize there were a couple, but 2 of them were from jumpers.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> Well for one thing, each and every combo you gave in your statement got up and down the court and got some easy assists on fast breaks. I mean how many times did you see Malone fly up the floor and get a pass from Stockton, the same for Amare, Martin and Boozer. Zach is slow and doesn't like to run the break....(see Nate's comments about building around an 18 wheeler rather than a sports car last off season) The other thing that those players do that Zach does not is make their move off of the assist. When Zach gets the ball he takes a long time to make his move, or takes one too many dribbles...Thus voiding the assist. It's not that Zach isn't a good low post scorer, he just isn't the best player to have on the floor if you want to raise your assist totals


so I take this response to mean that you can't come up with a single example in the past of a low post scorer (especially one putting up 25 a night) hampering a pass-first point guard. 

and even though you can't think of any time in the past where it's ever happened, your sure it'd happen this time. 

pretty convincing argument.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Well for one thing, each and every combo you gave in your statement got up and down the court and got some easy assists on fast breaks. I mean how many times did you see Malone fly up the floor and get a pass from Stockton, the same for Amare, Martin and Boozer. Zach is slow and doesn't like to run the break....(see Nate's comments about building around an 18 wheeler rather than a sports car last off season) The other thing that those players do that Zach does not is make their move off of the assist. When Zach gets the ball he takes a long time to make his move, or takes one too many dribbles...Thus voiding the assist. It's not that Zach isn't a good low post scorer, he just isn't the best player to have on the floor if you want to raise your assist totals


Zach can and used to run but probably figures what's the point when Jack simply won't push or pass the ball when the opportunity presents itself.

Last year, Zach and Steve had more fast break successes together despite Zach just coming off surgery.

In previous years Zach would score as soon as he got the ball but by the time Jack gives him the ball he's got 3 players draped all over him which tends to make it harder to score quickly, or at all.

I have been amazed at how well Zach has done this year despite being handcuffed by Jack's ploddingly slow ball-handling and telegraphed passes.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

Sergio isn't getting playing time because even though Sergio is very good at passing and handling the ball, Sergio's game is filled with huge gaping holes. Sergio's shooting is so poor his defenders collapse into the passing lanes. Sergio is a poor one-on-one defender.

Sergio's on-court perfomance per 100 possessions

Blazers score 105.7 points with Sergio on the floor.

Blazers give up 114.7 points on defense with Sergio on the floor. Ooops. :thumbdown: 

http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR2D.HTM

Jarrett Jack's on-court perfomance per 100 possessions

Blazers score 106.4 points with JJ on the floor.
Blazers give up 110.5 points on defense with JJ on the floor.

http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR3D.HTM

Take a look at the numbers for Blazers 5 man units. You'll see JJ is in all the best Blazers line-ups...

http://www.82games.com/0607/0607POR2.HTM


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

aaabbbccc said:


> Jack vs Sergio (per 48 min)
> 
> 
> +---------+ Jack -+ Sergio
> ...


No he doesn't. You have posted stats which do not show overall effect of Sergio's presence in the game. Sergio's units get torched on defense.

I'm comfortable with Sergio playing time around 10-12 mins a game until Sergio shows better shooting and defensive skills.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Sergio isn't getting playing time because even though Sergio is very good at passing and handling the ball, Sergio's game is filled with huge gaping holes. Sergio's shooting is so poor his defenders collapse into the passing lanes. Sergio is a poor one-on-one defender.


Poppycock.

Sergio not only has more blocks, steals and rebounds than Jarrett per 48 minutes, he has more steals than the *entire team*.

Comparing squads is futile as Sergio has yet to start or play any minutes with the starters as a group.

It's clear to me that once again management is calling the shots on PT and we're deliberately trying to stay in the lottery and shop our dead weight in hopes of a miracle offer from some other lost team.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

MARIS61 said:


> It's clear to me that once again management is calling the shots on PT and we're deliberately trying to stay in the lottery and shop our dead weight in hopes of a miracle offer from some other lost team.


If that's what you think the reasoning is, then your entire argument falls apart. Steve Patterson's contact expires at the end of THIS YEAR. Steve Patterson has clearly been motivated by saving his own butt all year. To do that, the Blazers must improve their on-court performance THIS YEAR. Patterson knows Kevin Pritchard is breathing down his neck to take over the GM job. Patterson knows he would be the sacrificial lamb to be sacrificed if this season winds up with the Blazers earning another high lottery pick. Patterson has been making decisions based on winning NOW. Patterson has to win now to get his contract renewed. That's why Magloire and Dixon are out there so much on the floor.

If the Blazers were trying to tank the season...

-Roy would have had the heel surgery done
-Magloire might have already been traded, and Aldridge would be getting those minutes 
-Webster would be getting Dixon's minutes 
-Sergio would be getting full back up PG minutes.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

maybe they should start sergio and see what happend? what can it hurt its not working with Jack being sick and ina slump.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Sergio isn't getting playing time because even though Sergio is very good at passing and handling the ball, Sergio's game is filled with huge gaping holes.


and Jack's game isn't filled with huge gaping holes? how about his complete inability to run a fast break, his inability to generate assists, and his inability to shoot from three point range? 

neither guy has anything close to a complete game. that's ok though--it's what you expect from first and second year players. 

pointing to 82games stats is somewhat valid--I've done so myself many times. however, you also have to acknowledge that Sergio is almost always used in a position to fail, and these numbers likely reflect that.

he's often thrown in out of desperation when our team is losing big time and completely dejected. 

he's almost never playing alongside the one guy on our team who can consistently score (Zach).

he's almost always playing alongside Outlaw and Webster, the very definitions of inconsistency. 

he almost never gets our best shot blocker covering his back (Przybilla). 

can anyone honestly say he's had a fair shake at running the team?


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

mook said:


> and Jack's game isn't filled with huge gaping holes? how about his complete inability to run a fast break, his inability to generate assists, and his inability to shoot from three point range?


-A good third of Jack's potential assists evaporate when Zach puts the ball on the floor. PGs do not get an assist on a play in which guy who gets the pass puts the ball on the floor before taking a shot. Dallas point guards watch Dirk do the same thing to their assist totals.

-Jack can run the fast break. Zach, Joel, Magloire, and Raef can't run. Webster and Outlaw can run, but they are usually starting the fast break from the deep far corners. Dixon is a poor choice to finish a break. That's all going to change when Magloire is traded and Aldridge is on the floor. Aldridge runs like a deer, and is an excellent fast break finisher.

-Jack is averaging almost 1 3 pt made a game for the last month


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

mook said:


> ...pointing to 82games stats is somewhat valid--I've done so myself many times. however, you also have to acknowledge that Sergio is almost always used in a position to fail, and these numbers likely reflect that.
> 
> he's often thrown in out of desperation when our team is losing big time and completely dejected.
> 
> ...


No, they can't.

And yet he makes the most of his meager opportunities in a way I've never seen before.

Give him only inconsistent players and scrubs to work with?
He averages team-bests of 14.5 assists and 2.57 steals per 48 minutes and a 3.43 assist-to-turnover ratio.

Throw him in cold with 4 secs on the clock?
He races through players and nails a 40 footer at the buzzer.

Give him only 4 minutes in a game?
He gets 3 assists and a steal.

Nate needs to do the right thing here, and the right thing is to give Sergio a friggin' shot at running this team.

Certainly nobody else has shown they can.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> -A good third of Jack's potential assists evaporate when Zach puts the ball on the floor.


Zach never used to have to put the ball on the floor.

He used to just catch spin and shoot. (So fast there was no time for comma's:biggrin: )

Putting the ball on the floor is something he has to do now to re-establish position after waiting so long for Jack to get him the ball that he has 3 defenders draped across his shoulders.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

MARIS61 said:


> No, they can't.
> 
> And yet he makes the most of his meager opportunities in a way I've never seen before.
> 
> ...


Wrong.

Sergio has terrible defensive numbers. -8.5 net points per 100 possessions. 

http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR2D.HTM

Sergio takes too many risks on defense, gets himself caught way out of position, and gets TORCHED.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> -A good third of Jack's potential assists evaporate when Zach puts the ball on the floor...Dallas point guards watch Dirk do the same thing to their assist totals.


a couple of months ago one of our posters pretty conclusively proved that great passers get their assists regardless of the lineup they are on. Jason Terry has never been a great passer--he's averaged 5.2 assists over his career, mostly while playing point. Devin Harris is a nice slasher, but again he's not really a creator. 

can you site for me an example of when a good passer (Kidd, Stockton, Payton in his prime, etc) had a really lousy assist year (not due to injury/age) because his teammates sucked or dribbled too much? I can't think of an example. 

Jack doesn't get fantastic assist numbers for the same reason Derek Fisher, Eric Snow and Jason Terry never get many assists. on most nights they just aren't very good passers for point guards. 

Sergio, on the other hand, gets stuck on all kinds of crappy lineups and still gets his assists in. he got more assists than Jack last night IN SIX MINUTES OF PLAY. and he did it alongside Magloire, who is no slouch in dribbling and holding onto the ball in the post either. 



> Jack can run the fast break. Zach, Joel, Magloire, and Raef can't run.


we are one of the very worst teams (if not THE worst team) in the league at running the fast break. do you honestly think this would be so with Sergio at the point? Jack just isn't as aggressive at pushing the ball--we all can see it. 



> Jack is averaging almost 1 3 pt made a game for the last month


13 makes out of 35 attempts. 37% shooting. I'm happy to see it. but after 111 games with a career average of 27%, you seem to be cherry picking data here.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Sergio has terrible defensive numbers. -8.5 net points per 100 possessions.
> 
> ...


How selective of you.

Here are the complete comparisons for a much more honest picture of who is really helping this team win games.

From YOUR source, BTW:
http://www.82games.com/0607/0607POR.HTM


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

MARIS61 said:


> How selective of you.
> 
> Here are the complete comparisons for a much more honest picture of who is really helping this team win games.
> 
> ...


lol. pwned.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Jack does not compliment Roy, but I dont think Sergio does either. A undersized 2 guard who can score the lights out would be the best compliment, IMO. Someone like Ben Gordon or Monta Ellis. This would allow Roy to play on the ball more and set people up.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

MARIS61 said:


> How selective of you.
> 
> Here are the complete comparisons for a much more honest picture of who is really helping this team win games.
> 
> ...


Rubbish ... I selected the complete comparison number. Net points per 100 possessions. The number emphasized with the big green highlights on the individual player page. You picked a number from the team page that is nowhere near as comprehensive.

You keep trying to select numbers that do not include Sergio terrible decision making on defense that leaves Sergio out of position over and over and over again.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

mook said:


> lol. pwned.


And I supposed since you took his word that the numbers he selected mattered, that means I am "un-pwned" and you two who are, indeed, now "pwned" themselves

:wink:


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> And I supposed since you took his word that the numbers he selected mattered, that means I am "un-pwned" and you two who are, indeed, now "pwned" themselves
> 
> :wink:


I think to be unpwned you'd need to explain why your chosen stat is somehow better than any of the other stats on that website. Rather than just asserting that it is. 

Especially since by your stat, Dan Dickau is by far the best PG we have.

barfo


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

MARIS61 said:


> Zach never used to have to put the ball on the floor.
> 
> He used to just catch spin and shoot. (So fast there was no time for comma's:biggrin: )
> 
> Putting the ball on the floor is something he has to do now to re-establish position after waiting so long for Jack to get him the ball that he has 3 defenders draped across his shoulders.


Yes, that must be it. It must be that Jack is taking to long to get Zach the ball.

Or maybe the fact that all of the defenses key in on Zach first because no one can make an outside shot. Your theory borders on the ridiculous.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

mook said:


> a couple of months ago one of our posters pretty conclusively proved that great passers get their assists regardless of the lineup they are on. Jason Terry has never been a great passer--he's averaged 5.2 assists over his career, mostly while playing point. Devin Harris is a nice slasher, but again he's not really a creator.
> 
> can you site for me an example of when a good passer (Kidd, Stockton, Payton in his prime, etc) had a really lousy assist year (not due to injury/age) because his teammates sucked or dribbled too much? I can't think of an example.
> 
> ...


It's interesting that one set of people completely blames Nate for this and you completely blame Jack for this.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Rubbish ... I selected the complete comparison number. Net points per 100 possessions. The number emphasized with the big green highlights on the individual player page. You picked a number from the team page that is nowhere near as comprehensive.
> 
> You keep trying to select numbers that do not include Sergio terrible decision making on defense that leaves Sergio out of position over and over and over again.


You don't know how to decipher stats, or how little they can actually tell you about the player or how his play affects the team's play.

I will demonstrate this CONCLUSIVELY by comparing 2 players using the above worshipped stat which you feel is so indicative of player value or lack thereof.

Brandon Roy = http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR4D.HTM

Dan Dickau = http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR1D.HTM

:eek8:


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

barfo said:


> I think to be unpwned you'd need to explain why your chosen stat is somehow better than any of the other stats on that website. Rather than just asserting that it is.
> 
> Especially since by your stat, Dan Dickau is by far the best PG we have.
> 
> barfo


Dickau doesn't have enough minutes played this season to make the sample accurate.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

MARIS61 said:


> You don't know how to decipher stats, or how little they can actually tell you about the player or how his play affects the team's play.
> 
> I will demonstrate this CONCLUSIVELY by comparing 2 players using the above worshipped stat which you feel is so indicative of player value or lack thereof.
> 
> ...


Again... Dickau doesn't have enough minutes played this season to make the sample accurate.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Dickau doesn't have enough minutes played this season to make the sample accurate.


Sergio doesn't either. 

barfo


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> And I supposed since you took his word that the numbers he selected mattered, that means I am "un-pwned" and you two who are, indeed, now "pwned" themselves
> 
> :wink:


huh? I look at the main page under Roland Rating, and it clearly shows Rodriguez to have the higher Roland Rating. here's the definition of Roland Rating:



> What's the best measure of a player's performance? While some are content with conventional stats like points, rebounds, and field goal percentage, I believe the best gauge of a player's worth to a specific team comes from looking at the difference in how the team plays with the player on court versus performance with the player off court.
> 
> Now this rating isn't an absolute measure of a player's ability, but it does represent how successful a player is with a given team. *In general the player with the best Roland Rating on a team is the difference maker (exclude the guys who play a statistically insignificant number of minutes). When the top guy is on the floor the team performs at a much higher level.*
> 
> ...


http://www.82games.com/rolandratings0304.htm

are you saying the summary page data is irrelevant, and that 82games.com has purposefully designed the site so that you can't compare anything without looking at the details of each player? 

if you go solely off the "green line" from the player page, it looks like Jarret Jack is nearly as good as Carmello Anthony:
http://www.82games.com/0607/06DEN7D.HTM
after all, his net is +0.8, compared to Jack's -0.8. 

I stand by my original pwnage for Maris, and I'm seriously considering declaring myself to have pwned you as well.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

yakbladder said:
 

> It's interesting that one set of people completely blames Nate for this and you completely blame Jack for this.


I'm not really blaming Jack. he is what he is--a quality young combo guard who doesn't currently seem to be fitting in with Roy for some reason. 

I'm highlighting his flaws here only to show that it's ludicrous to point out the "gaping holes" in Sergio's game as though Jack doesn't have his own set of gaping holes. 

do I think Rodriguez is the answer? I have no idea. and I won't until McMillan gives the guy an honest chance at proving himself. I think the arguments I (and others) present shows that he at least deserves a chance.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Dickau doesn't have enough minutes played this season to make the sample accurate.


:lol: 

Dan 105 minutes (Not enough minutes?)
Brandon 200 minutes (Not enough minutes or your whole point is nonsense?)
Sergio 206 minutes (Not enough minutes which means your point has been disproven OR Sergio sucks but is still much better than Brandon?)
Jarrett 973 minutes (Certainly plenty of minutes and by comparison to Brandon he is GOD but Dan is much, much better than GOD?)

Here's a tip next time you're going down with your ship.

Bail the water OUT of the boat, not INTO it.:biggrin:


----------



## More (Sep 3, 2006)

The point here in my opinion is what the Blazers are trying to do. If they are trying to play Magloire and Dixon for a future trade and make them look good, perfect. But if a trade will not occur what is the point in playing them over the young players of the team, who are the future of the team. The Blazers are a losing team, like it or not, so what is the point in keep yanking the young players when they make mistakes. Although I don't get to watch many games of the Blazers I truly believe that if the young players are worse than Magloire and Dixon as McMillan seems to show, why not play them if this team is not going anywhere if you don't start to make your future key players play now. Are the Blazers fighting for a playoff berth or create a future winning team? 
And my major point is that why draft Aldridge at #2 to play him 30 minutes in the last 9 games?

Another problem I see is why is the use of playing Roy the PG when you have Jack, Sergio and even Dickau. I havent seen him play much but I have read in this board that he struggles at the PG. 

This works for me at least

PG Jack/Sergio
SG Roy/Webster
SF Udoka/Outlaw/
PF Randolph/Aldridge
C Joel/Magloire/Aldridge


I dont really find so much PT for Dixon and no real playing time for Lafrentz either (well he isn't playing much).

Well this are my thoughts although they will probably something that you dont agree with since I don't get to see Blazers game often, I repeat.


----------



## rotgo (Dec 7, 2006)

From Sapin and with all respect for your team.
There are a couple of things (maybe more) I know for sure about Sergio.

1- He's got enough basket in him to earn those minutes you are talking about in the near future.
2- Deffensive skills can be learnt (that's what a coach is suposed to do with his rookies)
3- Look at his face when he plays (1 second or 15 minutes). He truly enjoys it.
4- I know it's not the best of comparisons, but when his playing I feel like when Nash is playing. I don't know what he is going to do next(whether it's good or bad).
5- this kind of player doesn't suit a chicken coach. And I am sorry, sometimes nate ****s in his pants when Sergio is in the air about to throw an outstanding assist.

to be continued....


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

My theory is that Magloire and/or Dixon are being shopped.

Methinks Jack has hit a slump from which he will emerge in time, but to me this is just another instance that justifies my belief that doofus Patterson shouldn't have given in to Larry Harris and sent Steve Blake to freakin' Milwaukee. I could have lived with that deal if Harris would have accepted Dixon instead.

Like it or not (and a hell of a lot of you don't), Blake was a very valuable Blazer and in instances like this, I miss his being there when backups like Dickau have been ineffective and Rodriguez ... there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with Rodriguez other than he needs a little more refinement. I know that some tag the multitalented Roy as the future PG ... but the fact that he can play more than one position is something I think should be exploited instead of locking him into one position.

I know I definitely would have wanted to see what Blake would have done this season alongside Roy and Aldridge in particular.


----------



## fer (Dec 6, 2006)

this issue will only be resolved when nate give him a chance... i think he deserves it, he has proven in many games in which he has played 20 min or so, at least a test in one game or 2, lets hope nate will give him a chance but im not sure he will


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

I said:



> there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with Rodriguez other than he needs a little more refinement.


And then fer posted:



> this issue will only be resolved when nate give him a chance... i think he deserves it, he has proven in many games in which he has played 20 min or so, at least a test in one game or 2, lets hope nate will give him a chance but im not sure he will


I don't see what it would hurt to try that.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

rotgo said:


> ...Deffensive skills can be learnt...


Shore kan.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

mook said:


> I stand by my original pwnage for Maris, and I'm seriously considering declaring myself to have pwned you as well.



You're about to look like a real idiot for saying that. You guys need to shut up about Roland Ratings.

Here what 82games.com says about Roland Ratings...

"In the past the "Roland Rating" has been simply the player's on court versus off court net team influence. *That's a good number, but certainly not the whole story. Ideally a player rating scheme should encompass

1. Individual player production
2. One-on-one defense
3. Team success influence*

The new charting experiments will allow us to evolve this rating over the course of the season to become more detailed and refined, for now we'll stick with some old standbys in a quick take on the season to date action!"

http://www.82games.com/0506/rolandratings0506.htm

So it turns out that even 82games.com says Roland Ratings don't measure individual production, and one-on-one defense well.

What's Sergio big gaping holes?

Individual production, and one-on-one defense!

Sergio's net points per 100 possessions... -5.4 points one of the worst on the team.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> You're about to look like a real idiot for saying that. You guys need to shut up about Roland Ratings.
> 
> Here what 82games.com says about Roland Ratings...
> 
> ...


I'm not sure what any of that proves. That page is from the 2005-2006 season. Not clear to me whether they did in fact change the stat as they planned or whether they gave up on the effort. In any case they aren't claiming it is invalid, they are merely saying they'd like to improve it.

If Sergio's -5.4 rating on your chosen stat is important and valid, then what do you make of Brandon Roy's worse rating on that same stat? Does it prove that Roy has bigger gaping holes in individual production and one-on-one defense?

barfo


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

barfo said:


> I'm not sure what any of that proves. That page is from the 2005-2006 season. Not clear to me whether they did in fact change the stat as they planned or whether they gave up on the effort. In any case they aren't claiming it is invalid, they are merely saying they'd like to improve it.
> 
> If Sergio's -5.4 rating on your chosen stat is important and valid, then what do you make of Brandon Roy's worse rating on that same stat? Does it prove that Roy has bigger gaping holes in individual production and one-on-one defense?
> 
> barfo


Roy and the numbers: Roy's performance early was not awe-inspiring. There's lots of good reasons for it. He was hobbling the first few games. He's had to go through 2 different "getting up to NBA speed" processes in 12 games. I'm not going to claim Roy was defensively solid in games he wasn't, though. Roy got lit up a few times early.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

to summarize: 

according to you Jarret Jack is almost as good as Carmello Anthony based on the green line from the player page. 

according to you, Dickau is our highest rated point guard, although it doesn't really count because he's only played 100 minutes (to Sergio's 200 minutes, which are magically statistically valid). 

according to you, we shouldn't take into account at all the fact that Jack plays alongside the only All Star candidate on the team (Randolph) and our only decent center (Przybilla) while Sergio is almost always stuck with "Mutombo Hook Shot" Magloire and/or "Deer in headlights" Outlaw and/or "Still thinking about my Prom" Webster. 

good luck with that.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

mook said:


> to summarize:
> 
> according to you Jarret Jack is almost as good as Carmello Anthony based on the green line from the player page.
> 
> ...


Carmelo Anthony has been overrated for a long time. Carmelo doesn't put out effort on the defensive end. 

Here's Sergio and Jack's 5 man unit numbers to compare...

JJ's...
http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR3B.HTM
Sergio's...
http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR2B.HTM

That proves both Jack and Sergio have played with everyone else on the Blazers roster. Now you can bottle that particular whine.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Roy and the numbers: Roy's performance early was not awe-inspiring. There's lots of good reasons for it. He was hobbling the first few games. He's had to go through 2 different "getting up to NBA speed" processes in 12 games. I'm not going to claim Roy was defensively solid in games he wasn't, though. Roy got lit up a few times early.


Ok, well, you are at least consistent. So, since Roy sucks, would you be in favor of benching him in favor of Dixon? Dixon has a much better rating on this stat (so I guess he is better at individual production and one-on-one defense than Roy). If this rating shows why Sergio shouldn't get playing time, then surely Roy should be riding the pine. 

barfo


----------



## fer (Dec 6, 2006)

ei Blazers Pantheon u have too many free time, stop with these useless statistics, sergio is playing well and thats all, he deserves more minutes and more confidence so he could play even better and improve his skills, look is like rudy gay in memphis, now he s gonna play and improve so now he s gonna be utile for his team, its the best that have could happen to memphis (fire fratelo). so is the same here, i d like to see sergio and lamarcus playing more time...


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

fer said:


> ei Blazers Pantheon u have too many free time, stop with this useless statistics, sergio is playing well and thats all, he deserves more minutes and more confidence so he could play even better and improve his skills, look is like rudy gay in memphis, now he s gonna play and improve so now he s gonna be utile for his team, its the best that have could happen to memphis (fire fratelo). so is the same here, i d like to see sergio and lamarcus playing more time...


Rudy Gay has played well. Sergio has not.

Not my fault that you don't recognize the importance of a player on the floor being about to shoot the ball and defend in the NBA.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Carmelo Anthony has been overrated for a long time. Carmelo doesn't put out effort on the defensive end.
> 
> Here's Sergio and Jack's 5 man unit numbers to compare...
> 
> ...


lol. wow, I thought you'd try to come up with something to refute the idea that Jack is almost as good as Carmello. you know, for the two or three people out there who still think you might have some credibility. 

anyway, I followed your links, and what jumps out to me first and foremost is that of the 124 minutes Sergio played in his top 10 combinations, only 28 of those minutes came along side our best player, Randolph. and NONE of those minutes came along side our best center, Przybilla. meanwhile, Dixon is in nearly every lineup. 

yeah, it sure sounds like Sergio's been put in a situation where he can succeed. 

keep 'em coming. you're doing an outstanding job of refuting your own points.


----------



## fer (Dec 6, 2006)

u re nate's familiar, right?

this is a waste of time, mook and barfo have exposed it very clear in a bunch of posts, nothing more to say...


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

mook said:


> lol. wow, I thought you'd try to come up with something to refute the idea that Jack is almost as good as Carmello. you know, for the two or three people out there who still think you might have some credibility.
> 
> anyway, I followed your links, and what jumps out to me first and foremost is that of the 124 minutes Sergio played in his top 10 combinations, only 28 of those minutes came along side our best player, Randolph. and NONE of those minutes came along side our best center, Przybilla. meanwhile, Dixon is in nearly every lineup.
> 
> ...


Let me get this straight...

You scream and rant for 5 pages about how Sergio NEVER getsa play with Zach...

...I provide proof Sergio does play some with Zach...

...and that proves you right?

BWA-hahhahaha:lol:


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

fer said:


> u re nate's familiar, right?


WTF are you babbling about?


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

barfo said:


> Ok, well, you are at least consistent. So, since Roy sucks, would you be in favor of benching him in favor of Dixon? Dixon has a much better rating on this stat (so I guess he is better at individual production and one-on-one defense than Roy). If this rating shows why Sergio shouldn't get playing time, then surely Roy should be riding the pine.
> 
> barfo


No... that's what panic button pushing idiots Weren't you complaining just yesterday about name-calling? Of a much milder variety than this? would do.

Reasonable people like me look at performances in proper perspective. Reasonable people think about rebuilding plans in the terms of years... not weeks. 

-Blazers made a decision to draft Roy. Blazers made a decision to start Roy. Roy should be given a few months to prove or disprove he should be the starter, not couple of weeks.

-Jarrett Jack was made the starter at the beginning of the season. He should be given a few months minimum to prove or disprove he's a solid starter. 

-Dixon... Dixon is a second unit player. Dixon is not being started by anyone. Dixon is getting minutes outside the second unit during the 4th Q. That's when you put the players on the court who have performed better than others in that game.

-Sergio... Sergio is a 19 Year old point guard. 19 year old point guards DON'T START. Ever. Particularly since the team has made a commitment to Jack as the starter this season. Re-open the competition for starting PG again next training camp.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

mook said:


> to summarize:
> 
> according to you Jarret Jack is almost as good as Carmello Anthony based on the green line from the player page.
> 
> ...


You forgot to mention that according to him, Outlaw is going to be a better player than Kevin Durant.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

People keep saying that Sergio is 19. He's actually 20 and turns 21 in June.

Its not a big deal, but something that just needed to be corrected.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

zagsfan20 said:


> You forgot to mention that according to him, Outlaw is going to be a better player than Kevin Durant.


Geez... you've just entered full meltdown mode.

I post Durant's real world field goal percentages, and show that Durant is currently overrated, and you just lose it so bad you start posting bald face lies about people.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Let me get this straight...
> 
> You scream and rant for 5 pages about how Sergio NEVER getsa play with Zach...
> 
> ...


you provided proof that Sergio has played 28 minutes this season with Zach. good for you. 

problem is I never claimed he has never once played with Zach, only that most of the time he doesn't. 28 minutes over 26 games ain't exactly doing much to dispel my point. (I was actually surprised the number was that low.)

Jack plays with Zach 28 minutes ON MOST NIGHTS. you don't think that has any impact on his +/-?


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> -Sergio... Sergio is a 19 Year old point guard. 19 year old point guards DON'T START. Ever.





zagsfan20 said:


> People keep saying that Sergio is 19. He's actually 20 and turns 21 in June.
> 
> Its not a big deal, but something that just needed to be corrected.


Wasn't Tony Parker 20 when he became starting point guard for a championship contending Spurs team? 

Tony Parker had a lot of international and Olympic experience though. Oh wait, so does Sergio. 

But Sergio is a suspect defender, has limited outside shooting range, and sometimes pulls a crazy stunt that drives the coach nuts. Oh wait, so did Parker. 

Hmmm. Is there anyone here who will dive into 82games.com for some obscure statistic which will prove that Tony Parker's situation is nothing like Sergio's?


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

mook said:


> Hmmm. Is there anyone here who will dive into 82games.com for some obscure statistic which will prove that Tony Parker's situation is nothing like Sergio's?


Well...how about basketball-reference.com instead?

Parker shot 42% that year, 32% from three point range. Rodriguez is shooting 39%, 28% from three point range. 

Also, the Spurs didn't already HAVE a starting PG and a solid rookie backup who was a lottery pick.

So...those things are different and I don't think shooting is particularly obscure.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

Fork said:


> Well...how about basketball-reference.com instead?
> 
> Parker shot 42% that year, 32% from three point range. Rodriguez is shooting 39%, 28% from three point range.


Well, heck. Those numbers are not so different. If Sergio had a good game or two he could match Parker's numbers. 

Parker's numbers as above were, of course, over his entire rookie season, not the first 200 minutes or so. So not (yet) apples to apples.

iWatas


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

Iwatas said:


> Well, heck. Those numbers are not so different. If Sergio had a good game or two he could match Parker's numbers.
> 
> Parker's numbers as above were, of course, over his entire rookie season, not the first 200 minutes or so. So not (yet) apples to apples.
> 
> iWatas


Exactamundo. Sergio could have one or two bad games and be much worse. Until something even marginally close materializes, on the order of +/-5% of time, let's not proclaim Sergio the next Parker.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

yakbladder said:


> Exactamundo. Sergio could have one or two bad games and be much worse. Until something even marginally close materializes, on the order of +/-5% of time, let's not proclaim Sergio the next Parker.



I don't think anyone is. Sergio will be a very different kind of player than is Parker. But Parker *is* an example of a rookie PG being handed the reins of a team -- and a much better one than the Trailblazers.

Tony Parker is useful inasmuch as he blows away any claim that Sergio cannot be starting since no rookie PG ever starts in the NBA.

iWatas


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

Iwatas said:


> I don't think anyone is. Sergio will be a very different kind of player than is Parker. But Parker *is* an example of a rookie PG being handed the reins of a team -- and a much better one than the Trailblazers.
> 
> Tony Parker is useful inasmuch as he blows away any claim that Sergio cannot be starting since no rookie PG ever starts in the NBA.
> 
> iWatas


Jeezuz...Tony Parker had Tim Duncan and David Robinson to pass to his rookie season. 

So I'll amend my rule to say... don't start a rookie point guard unless you have two future Hall of Famers on the floor playing in the post for your team.

Happy?


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Fans attending Johnson's first game witnessed the sort of exuberance he would display throughout his entire career. After a buzzer-beating shot by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar to defeat the San Diego Clippers on opening night, Johnson went berserk, distributing bone-jarring high-fives and bear hugs. At this rate, most observers thought, the kid would burn out in no time. Even Abdul-Jabbar had to tell the rookie to cool it, because there were 81 more games yet to play -- and that didn't count playoffs. 

That season's NBA Rookie of the Year Award went to Bird of the Boston Celtics. But the NBA champion was Los Angeles. The Lakers rolled to the Western Division title with a 60-22 record, the league's second best. (Paul Westhead took over as coach after McKinney was seriously hurt in a bicycle crash 14 games into the season.) In 77 games Johnson's numbers mirrored those of his days at Michigan State (18.0 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 7.3 apg). He became the first rookie to start in an NBA All-Star Game since Elvin Hayes 11 years earlier. 

In the 1980 NBA Finals against the Philadelphia 76ers, Johnson's performance in the series-clinching sixth game was the stuff of legend. Abdul-Jabbar was sidelined with a badly sprained ankle sustained during his 40-point effort in Game 5. Up 3-2, the Lakers could wrap things up on the 76ers' home court. 

Enter Johnson, the 20-year-old rookie. Assuming Abdul-Jabbar's position at center, Johnson sky-hooked and rebounded the Lakers to victory with 42 points, 15 boards, seven assists and three steals. He even jumped for the opening tap. Johnson became the first rookie ever to win the Finals MVP Award. The stunning effort exemplified his uncanny ability to do whatever the Lakers needed in order to win. 

:lol:


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/juan_dixon/index.html


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Juan 0-2 in his first minute.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

MARIS61 said:


> Fans attending Johnson's first game witnessed the sort of exuberance he would display throughout his entire career. After a buzzer-beating shot by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar to defeat the San Diego Clippers on opening night, Johnson went berserk, distributing bone-jarring high-fives and bear hugs. At this rate, most observers thought, the kid would burn out in no time. Even Abdul-Jabbar had to tell the rookie to cool it, because there were 81 more games yet to play -- and that didn't count playoffs.
> 
> That season's NBA Rookie of the Year Award went to Bird of the Boston Celtics. But the NBA champion was Los Angeles. The Lakers rolled to the Western Division title with a 60-22 record, the league's second best. (Paul Westhead took over as coach after McKinney was seriously hurt in a bicycle crash 14 games into the season.) In 77 games Johnson's numbers mirrored those of his days at Michigan State (18.0 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 7.3 apg). He became the first rookie to start in an NBA All-Star Game since Elvin Hayes 11 years earlier.
> 
> ...


Enough with calling people idiots

barfo

What would YOU call a person who is comparing Sergio Rodriguez to Magic Johnson, barfo?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

mook said:


> Wasn't Tony Parker 20 when he became starting point guard for a championship contending Spurs team?
> 
> Tony Parker had a lot of international and Olympic experience though. Oh wait, so does Sergio.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure what your intent was with this post, but I'm not bad-talking Sergio. In fact, before we even drafted Sergio, before he was even a thought of being drafted I said I liked him.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Geez... you've just entered full meltdown mode.
> 
> I post Durant's real world field goal percentages, and show that Durant is currently overrated, and you just lose it so bad you start posting bald face lies about people.


Ummmm, no.

I proved that Durant is not shooting a bad field goal percentage, in fact he's shooting a higher field goal percentage then Carmello's freshman year. The same freshman year when he led Syracuse to the title. He's shooting 47%, not the 45% you lied about.

I proved why he isn't overrated and you ignored me. Instead you post this thread about how I "melted down" after I proved you wrong. 

Your horrible at this stuff. Give up now.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I'm not sure what your intent was with this post, but I'm not bad-talking Sergio. In fact, before we even drafted Sergio, before he was even a thought of being drafted I said I liked him.


mook was responding to blazers pantheon here, not you. If you read back a few posts you'll see he was challenging the idea that "19 year old" PGs never start.

barfo


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

zagsfan20 said:


> Ummmm, no.
> 
> I proved that Durant is not shooting a bad field goal percentage, in fact he's shooting a higher field goal percentage then Carmello's freshman year. The same freshman year when he led Syracuse to the title. He's shooting 47%, not the 45% you lied about.
> 
> ...


You said I claimed Outlaw would be better than Durant. That's a bald-face lie. You can't make your case with facts so you start lying about people.


----------



## Blazers Pantheon (Jan 1, 2007)

zagsfan20 said:


> Ummmm, no.
> 
> I proved that Durant is not shooting a bad field goal percentage, in fact he's shooting a higher field goal percentage then Carmello's freshman year. The same freshman year when he led Syracuse to the title. He's shooting 47%, not the 45% you lied about.
> 
> ...


Durant was shooting 45% before the Texas-Arlington game. The stats got updated after Durant went 9/18 against Texas-Arlington game. The updated stats have Durant at 47%

http://www.texassports.com/doc_lib/000_stats/mbb/2006_07/teamcume.htm

Yes... Carmelo Anthony shot 45% his freshman year... for the entire season. That included Syracuse's conference schedule and the NCAA tournament.

Durant is now shooting .471 FG% and .349 from 3 during Texas' non-conference schedule. No conference opposition. No tournament games. We'll see how Durant is doing when he plays against the beef of the Texas schedule. As of right now, I stick by my statement that at this point in the season, putting Durant at #2 on mock drafts would be overrating him. First round pick? Yes. #2 overall? No. Not now.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> You said I claimed Outlaw would be better than Durant. That's a bald-face lie. You can't make your case with facts so you start lying about people.


You said Durant is nothing more than what Outlaw brings to the table. I got your words mixed up, but either way, you don't know what your talking about.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Blazers Pantheon said:


> Durant was shooting 45% before the Texas-Arlington game. The stats got updated after Durant went 9/18 against Texas-Arlington game. The updated stats have Durant at 47%
> 
> http://www.texassports.com/doc_lib/000_stats/mbb/2006_07/teamcume.htm
> 
> ...


So now you've revised your statement. 

Carmello shot 34% from behind the 3 point line during his freshman year at Syracuse as well.

Until Durant plays those games we will have to wait and see. But as of right now, its a nice cop out to say that "yeah, but it will go down during conference play."


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> So now you've revised your statement.
> 
> Carmello shot 34% from behind the 3 point line during his freshman year at Syracuse as well.
> 
> Until Durant plays those games we will have to wait and see. But as of right now, its a nice cop out to say that "yeah, but it will go down during conference play."


I like Durant and Carmello . . . but not if they take minutes away from Sergio. :biggrin:


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

OMG!

This insightful exchange of ideas was in danger of falling off the page into obscurity.

I will continue to monitor and rectify situations such as this until the board overseers get rid of all that hideously useless crap that fills the opening screen, leaving little space for the true purpose of this forum.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Iwatas said:


> Well, heck. Those numbers are not so different. If Sergio had a good game or two he could match Parker's numbers.
> 
> Parker's numbers as above were, of course, over his entire rookie season, not the first 200 minutes or so. So not (yet) apples to apples.
> 
> iWatas


They are VERY different. 

Over the course of a 20 shot game, that's the difference between 16.8 points ad 15.2 points. 1.6 points difference from one position is HUGE. 

Shooting percentage is THE key statistic to winning basketball games. 

And you mention the first 200 minutes of a career...in his first 199 minutes, Parker shot 43% overall, 44% from three point range. So, he got off to a much better start.

I think Rodriguez may be an excellent player someday...but he's not even CLOSE to where Parker was at 19 and the situation in Portland is vastly different than Parker's situation in San Antonio.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Jason Kidd in his first three seasons averaged 38% FG shooting. shooting is THE key statistic to winning games, but not necessarily THE key statistic for evaluating point guards. that's because a great passer at PG can raise the FG% of everyone else. 

Parker averaged 4 assists a game his first season. nobody who follows the Blazers thinks Sergio would pass that poorly if given minutes. 



> the situation in Portland is vastly different than Parker's situation in San Antonio.


I'd say conditions are much more favorable for Sergio now than it was for Parker back then. would you rather start a 20 year old point guard on a team contending for a title, or a team contending for a top 5 pick in the lottery? 

also, Sergio is a pass-first point guard with amazing court vision. Parker is a shoot-first point guard with amazing speed. which do you think is easier to integrate into a plodding half court team (as both this Blazer team and that Spurs team were)?


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

i still maintain that jarret jack is a backup SG and sergio is the real PG 

No point having talented youngsters sitting on the bench when your team is crap,thats exactly when you should be playing them.

LaMarcus alridge too...why the hell get a top 5 pick if all he`s gonna do is sit on the bench and not progress


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

Fork said:


> And you mention the first 200 minutes of a career...in his first 199 minutes, Parker shot 43% overall, 44% from three point range. So, he got off to a much better start.


Excellent rebuttal! You have shown that Parker was a much better shooter than Sergio during his first 200 minutes.

Please finish the comparison. How about the other stats? How many assists did Parker rack up in those 200 minutes compared to Sergio?

Thanks!

iWatas


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

That overrated Durant has upped his FG% to 48% since league play started. 

Including tonights game against Missouri, where he scored 34 point, grabbed 13 rebounds on 10-14 shooting.


----------

