# How Good is Kevin Love?



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Has there ever been a player as good as him statistically without really being that big of a threat on the court? I can't remember one. 

Of course, I expect some disagreement, and some would argue that he really is as good as his numbers suggest.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

I think if the Wolves somehow make the playoffs then Love should be a MVP candidate. He's that good this year. His defense might be lacking but he makes up for it in rebounding.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Comparison:

Kevin Lewis

Kevin McHale

Kevin Garnett


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I said this last year. People underrated him and act like his rebounds are somehow easier because hes on the Wolves.

Hes a star in this league.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Ballscientist said:


> Comparison:
> 
> Kevin Lewis
> 
> ...


Kevin Arnold.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

I would agree that he is a star. He has his defensive and physical shortcomings, but he is a double-double machine with a wide array of skills. The kid is a damn good ball player.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

His stats are huge - not sure he has the impact on a game the way his stats seem to indicate though. Terrific hands, has a knack for finishing inside and an ever improving outside touch.

I will say he is underrated by the BBF faithful though. He's a very good player.

Funny how we all thought the Wolves screwed up when they dealt Mayo for Love on draft night :laugh:, hindsight is 20/20 I suppose.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Kevin Lewis is Lone Wolf;

Kevin Garnett is Wolf King

Kevin McHale dances with Wolves.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Kevin Arnold skips with Winnie??


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Absolute poetry.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I would let someone else give him his next contract. Rebounds are the most overrated thing in the game. If Love did not get a rebound it would not disappear into a black hole, someone else would get it and that someone is just as likely to be on his team as not. So you're starting out on a bad assumption when you start paying him based on rebounding stats.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

^ What about his 25ppg stats though?

Do you think he's a rich man's David Lee?


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Diable said:


> I would let someone else give him his next contract. Rebounds are the most overrated thing in the game. If Love did not get a rebound it would not disappear into a black hole, someone else would get it and that someone is just as likely to be on his team as not. So you're starting out on a bad assumption when you start paying him based on rebounding stats.


The guy also gets 4-5 offensive rebounds a game. He led the league last year in that category and is leading the league again this year. 

I think he's a max player. I wouldn't have any problem giving him that sort of money.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Love was an all-star last year. Who would argue he's not a star?


----------



## lakeshows (Mar 17, 2009)

seifer0406 said:


> The guy also gets 4-5 offensive rebounds a game. He led the league last year in that category and is leading the league again this year.
> 
> I think he's a max player. I wouldn't have any problem giving him that sort of money.


If Nene freaking Hilario got his contract and Marc freaking Gasol got his contract there is no way KLove is not going to get max money. 

Although I agree his impact on games is not as deep as his stats. The new Chris Webber (not skills wise, but impact wise)???


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

This same question has been debated for years with guys like Pau Gasol, Kevin Garnett, Elton Brand, and others.

What does Kevin Love have in common with these guys? All big men who put up great stats for years, but on bad teams with crappy backcourt play.

Love is a GREAT player. It is just very hard to carry a team by yourself if you're a big man, regardless how great you are. Give him an elite backcourt presence and the Wolves would take a collossal step forward, IMO, along with his reputation. We've already seen via Gasol and Garnett how this can happen.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

yodurk said:


> This same question has been debated for years with guys like Pau Gasol, Kevin Garnett, Elton Brand, and others.
> 
> What does Kevin Love have in common with these guys? All big men who put up great stats for years, but on bad teams with crappy backcourt play.
> 
> Love is a GREAT player. It is just very hard to carry a team by yourself if you're a big man, regardless how great you are. Give him an elite backcourt presence and the Wolves would take a collossal step forward, IMO, along with his reputation. We've already seen via Gasol and Garnett how this can happen.


Kevin Love is highly overrated. Those 3 PFs you mentioned did not languish on teams as bad as the Wolves have been. The Grizzlies just beat them with Sam Young playing big PF minutes.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Ohhhh, MemphisX doesn't like Kevin Love. How surprising.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Is Love a 1st option on a championship team type of player?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

No. I don't think anyone would argue he is.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

He is a good player and I've been a huge fan since his UCLA days, but he is not nearly as good as his numbers would suggest. Not even close.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

VanillaPrice said:


> He is a good player and I've been a huge fan since his UCLA days, but he is not nearly as good as his numbers would suggest. Not even close.


So hes faking his production?


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

He a decent 2nd option/ very good 3rd option on a championship team IMO.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

I actually really like his game, but he has a complimentary skillset. He isn't a 1st option, and he isn't a defensive anchor. The ridiculous numbers he is putting up put him in the same category with some legendary big men statistically, but he just doesn't impact the game like that. 

Despite that, a power forward who can get a ton of offensive rebounds and bang in the paint, as well as stretch the defense for another post player or penetration, would be valuable in a lot of settings.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

R-Star said:


> So hes faking his production?


I'll just say this - no team will ever win a championship with Kevin Love as their best player, although his numbers suggest that he is one of the top five or so best players in the league. I'll even take it a step further and say that no team with Love as their second best player will ever win a championship. He's a complimentary player that would be a very very good third/fourth option, but that's the extent of his impact.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

VanillaPrice said:


> I'll just say this - no team will ever win a championship with Kevin Love as their best player, although his numbers suggest that he is one of the top five or so best players in the league. I'll even take it a step further and say that no team with Love as their second best player will ever win a championship. He's a complimentary player that would be a very very good third/fourth option, but that's the extent of his impact.


Hes a second option on a good championship team. 

Not a 2 superstar, rest of the team sucks type of squad, but a deep, quality rotation team.

3rd or 4th option? You're underrating the shit out of this guy.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

R-Star said:


> Hes a second option on a good championship team.
> 
> Not a 2 superstar, rest of the team sucks type of squad, but a deep, quality rotation team.
> 
> 3rd or 4th option? You're underrating the shit out of this guy.


What championship team? Put Love on any of the past 10 champions in place of their second best player and they are a worse squad and probably don't win that year.

He's a good player. Hell, a very good player. But he's a 6'10 guy that doesn't have a real post up game and is a straight up liability on defense. He makes up a lot of ground with his rebounding ability, but not enough to call him a star in this league. He's more of the ultimate glue guy or something.


----------



## Laker Freak (Jul 1, 2003)

If we put Love on the 05-07 Spurs would he be the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th option?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

lakeshows said:


> Although I agree his impact on games is not as deep as his stats. The new Chris Webber (not skills wise, but impact wise)???


Webber had his team a playoff contender from the moment he joined the NBA. This assessment of him is completely false.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Chris Webber is arguably the greatest passing big man ever. Love is in no way, shape, or form comparable to him.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

VanillaPrice said:


> What championship team? Put Love on any of the past 10 champions in place of their second best player and they are a worse squad and probably don't win that year.
> 
> He's a good player. Hell, a very good player. But he's a 6'10 guy that doesn't have a real post up game and is a straight up liability on defense. He makes up a lot of ground with his rebounding ability, but not enough to call him a star in this league. He's more of the ultimate glue guy or something.


Now you're overrating Pau Gasol.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

R-Star said:


> Now you're overrating Pau Gasol.


Pau Gasol D'd up Dwight Howard to the tune of 15 PPG over five games. Kevin Love couldn't do that. Gasol sure as hell wasn't perfect, but his back to the basket game and defense were considerably better than Love's at this point, and that is a huge reason as to why the Lakers won two straight championships.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Laker Freak said:


> If we put Love on the 05-07 Spurs would he be the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th option?


Probably 2nd considering Manu comes off the bench. Tony Parker had an incredibly efficient year from the field that year (best of his career actually), though I think some years Love could have been the 1st option for that team. Love's 3 point shooting ability, passing, and rebounding would have fit in perfectly with that squad. They may have lost a little defense, but let's be real...Rasho Nesterovic or Nazr Mohammed was the other starting big alongside Duncan. Team would have been exponentially better with Love on it.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> Kevin Love is highly overrated. Those 3 PFs you mentioned did not languish on teams as bad as the Wolves have been. The Grizzlies just beat them with Sam Young playing big PF minutes.


He went 27/14, and was big down the stretch. What more do you want him to do? Seriously?
Oh I forgot, he's white so you wont give a damn.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

My stand on Love is the same as it is on Griffin. I don't evaluate your numbers absent victories, especially as a big man. I hold LaMarcus Aldridge in high regard because his numbers have a direct impact on whether or not the Blazers can win basketball games. As soon as Love's numbers correlate to the T'Wolves being .500 or better, he will have my props. A big man who puts up big numbers should be expected to win. I mean we see how many bad big men are in the league, so a "great" one should lead to W's right? I do not think this is a bad request. You can't win 25% of your games and get props for your numbers. Or at least you shouldn't IMO.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

How many more wins would the best players get the t-wolves? They don't have a ton of talent. He is a better player than I thought he would be, but I would choose him to have the ball at the end of a game or shot clock. I guess I just wouldn't build my team around him. 18 straight losses though man...that is a ton.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

If Love is an impact player then there is enough talent on that team and there has been. At the least that team should make you think they might make the playoffs. If Love is really as good as his numbers that team should have been winning and they should not always need another top five pick every year. Rubio looks like more of an impact player to me, when he plays well that team is going to win. I wouldn't give him a max contract yet either. Love puts up these numbers all the time and they don't seem to make any difference.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Tom said:


> How many more wins would the best players get the t-wolves? They don't have a ton of talent. He is a better player than I thought he would be, but I would choose him to have the ball at the end of a game or shot clock. I guess I just wouldn't build my team around him. 18 straight losses though man...that is a ton.


See this is making an excuse as far as I'm concerned. Every other big time numbers person on bad teams never gets respect for it, Abdur-Rahim, Elton Brand, Z-Bo (pre-Grizz), and now Kevin Love gets a pass? No. If you win and you put up numbers, he should get all the praise in the world. I don't think that is an unfair standard to apply to professional basketball players. 

Because there is a difference between Dwight Howard's numbers and Kevin Love's numbers, at least up till now. One affects the W-L record and another didn't, at least in the past, I won't judge him on this season yet, although they are 2-4 overall and have played 5 home games and 1 road game. If they are 2-8 after the road-home thing evens out, should you get props on a team that is winning 20% of it's games? I don't believe you should.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

Diable said:


> I would let someone else give him his next contract. Rebounds are the most overrated thing in the game. If Love did not get a rebound it would not disappear into a black hole, someone else would get it and that someone is just as likely to be on his team as not. So you're starting out on a bad assumption when you start paying him based on rebounding stats.


This is the stupidest thing I've read all week.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

The fact that people are still downplaying his abilities is laughable. If people just don't like the guy they just don't like the guy. Thats on them to be honest with themselves or not. The guy is a tremendous talent in the league.



I remember reading plenty of these exact same posts on forums about Dirk Nowitzki in the early 2000s and onward. Love is a better player than Dirk was 2 years into the league by far.


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

HKF said:


> See this is making an excuse as far as I'm concerned. Every other big time numbers person on bad teams never gets respect for it, Abdur-Rahim, Elton Brand, Z-Bo (pre-Grizz), and now Kevin Love gets a pass? No.


This is a fair argument. 

I think that Rubio and Love will at least make them fun to watch. Need some better play on the wings and a defensive anchor and they'll have something.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

OneBadLT123 said:


> He went 27/14, and was big down the stretch. What more do you want him to do? Seriously?
> Oh I forgot, he's white so you wont give a damn.



Yeah, it has nothing to do with losing, it s all about him being white.

It is curious though that a shot jacker that gives zero defensive effort on losing team is elevated to super star status.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

We figured this out last year. Good rebounder, good range for his size. However he can't create a shot against elite defenders, can't post up, poor team defender. That's not someone you can build around that's just a unique skillset that builds around someone else.

Go ahead and give him 16 million and expect him to exploit a playoff defense scouted against him. Someone tell me how they expect that to occur. 

Can he run around off screens like Dirk? No.
Can he consistently faceup and drive past and to the basket against the top defenses in the league like Amare? No.
Can he postup from the high or low? No.
He stands around and gets opportune shots just like all the other Wolves players, he just gets the lion share of them and posts a cute average. 

And for real for real against comparable rebounders he's not even that same guy. At least Rodman or Wallace were going to get their 16 regardless. And if he's not doing that what is he doing? Letting his man get by him while he thinks about which side of the wing hes going to stand on for his next jumper.

He plays on a mediocre team that let Mike Beasley score nearly 20 a game. We all realize Mike's getting inflated stats and isn't that good, yet theres a big mystery about whether Love's numbers are true...gee I wonder why.

I don't even think he's a bad player but I just don't understand how people could think he's a championship level 4.

Its not even about 2nd or 3rd banana or any of that, if you're a starting 4 on a title team you have to be a very good defender, because interior defense wins titles. 

Dirk and Toine are the anomalies because they had great anchors behind them (and faced teams with minimal lowpost scorers anyway). Dirk was playing fine in that zone and is an infinitely better offensive player which offsets that anyway. Toine probably still was too honestly. 

Wallaces, Chandler, Gasol, Perkins, Duncan, Robinson, Bynum, Garnett, Shaq...then Love? Nah

Only person that could hide Love is Dwight, who would get all the rebounds, so why do you have Love? Oh, to be a white 18 point set shooter and keep the dream alive. FOH with this.

You know whats ill we're gonna keep having these stupid debates because unlike truly great players he'll never have the moments that shut these discussions down. His failures will actually feed further speculation, which I guess is good for him.

What 25 and 12 or w.e big man has ever led a team absolutely none thinks will get to the second round? Can you recall that in history?


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

We figured this out last year. Good rebounder, good range for his size. However he can't create a shot against elite defenders, can't post up, poor team defender. That's not someone you can build around that's just a unique skillset that builds around someone else.

Go ahead and give him 16 million and expect him to exploit a playoff defense scouted against him. Someone tell me how they expect that to occur. 

Can he run around off screens like Dirk? No.
Can he consistently faceup and drive past and to the basket against the top defenses in the league like Amare? No.
Can he postup from the high or low? No.
He stands around and gets opportune shots just like all the other Wolves players, he just gets the lion share of them and posts a cute average. 

And for real for real against comparable rebounders he's not even that same guy. At least Rodman or Wallace were going to get their 16 regardless. And if he's not doing that what is he doing? Letting his man get by him while he thinks about which side of the wing hes going to stand on for his next jumper.

He plays on a mediocre team that let Mike Beasley score nearly 20 a game. We all realize Mike's getting inflated stats and isn't that good, yet theres a big mystery about whether Love's numbers are true...gee I wonder why.

I don't even think he's a bad player but I just don't understand how people could think he's a championship level 4.

Its not even about 2nd or 3rd banana or any of that, if you're a starting 4 on a title team you have to be a very good defender, because interior defense wins titles. 

Dirk and Toine are the anomalies because they had great anchors behind them (and faced teams with minimal lowpost scorers anyway). Dirk was playing fine in that zone and is an infinitely better offensive player which offsets that anyway. Toine probably still was too honestly. 

Wallaces, Chandler, Gasol, Perkins, Duncan, Robinson, Bynum, Garnett, Shaq...then Love? Nah

Only person that could hide Love is Dwight, who would get all the rebounds, so why do you have Love? Oh, to be a white 18 point set shooter and keep the dream alive. FOH with this.

You know whats ill we're gonna keep having these stupid debates because unlike truly great players he'll never have the moments that shut these discussions down. His failures will actually feed further speculation, which I guess is good for him.

What 25 and 12 or w.e big man has ever led a team absolutely none thinks will get to the second round? Can you recall that in history?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre is cheating his way to beating HB and Basel to 100k posts.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Its my phone....one for the 3G one for the network modem :2ti:


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> Yeah, *it has nothing to do with losing, it s all about him being white.*
> 
> It is curious though that a shot jacker that gives zero defensive effort on losing team is elevated to super star status.


With you? Yea. With others? Probably not.

That's why no ever has, or will take you serious around here.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Dre said:


> We figured this out last year. Good rebounder, good range for his size. However he can't create a shot against elite defenders, can't post up, poor team defender. That's not someone you can build around that's just a unique skillset that builds around someone else.
> 
> Go ahead and give him 16 million and expect him to exploit a playoff defense scouted against him. Someone tell me how they expect that to occur.
> 
> ...


How do you average the points he does a game by "standing around waiting for opportune shots"? 

And I also love hearing everyone say if he played with another good rebounder they'd steal all his rebounds. Thats funny, seeing as how as I've stated before, the Wolves were 1st in the league last year in rebounding. Guess where they are right now? 2nd.

If you're going to come up with arguments against the guy, at least be intelligent about it. Some of these posts are just asinine.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I'll take Love over Bustgout any day though


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

R-Star said:


> How do you average the points he does a game by "standing around waiting for opportune shots"?
> 
> And I also love hearing everyone say if he played with another good rebounder they'd steal all his rebounds. Thats funny, seeing as how as I've stated before, the Wolves were 1st in the league last year in rebounding. Guess where they are right now? 2nd.
> 
> If you're going to come up with arguments against the guy, at least be intelligent about it. Some of these posts are just asinine.


How many Wolves games have you watched?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Dre said:


> How many Wolves games have you watched?


2 this year. Yourself?


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

All of them actually. I wanted to watch Rubio.

Im speaking on what I've seen not what I could guess off highlights and stats like others in here.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

All of them actually. I wanted to watch Rubio.

Im speaking on what I've seen not what I could guess off highlights and stats like others in here.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Dre said:


> All of them actually. I wanted to watch Rubio.
> 
> Im speaking on what I've seen not what I could guess off highlights and stats like others in here.


Oh.... so you're the Timber Wolves expert then correct?

Funny, you said every Wolves player "only take opportune shots". You do know that's probably the dumbest shit I've heard in quite some time right? 

And this is about the third time you've changed the argument over the past year when I bring up the Wolves being 1st in rebounding last year. 

I'll ask a direct question to clarify this for you. If the Wolves are the #1 rebounding team in the league, why exactly would Loves rebounding drop significantly if he played for any other team? Lets say he went and played for the 15th rebounding team in the league. His rebounds would go down somehow? Sorry, but you have nothing to back that up, and on my end, stats and probability would prove the exact opposite.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

Would love to have Love on the Pacers. Indy would worship him.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Love is an elite level stretch 4 who can score above and below the rim, is a very capable passer, and oh yeah is a top 1-2 rebounder in the league.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

BlakeJesus said:


> Love is an elite level stretch 4 who can score above and below the rim, is a very capable passer, and oh yeah is a top 1-2 rebounder in the league.


Yea.... but the stats are fake.


----------



## marcus_sr (Jan 1, 2012)

I think Love is a top 5 PF in the game right now. I had a hard time thinking of other PF's I would put ahead of him, and I'm still not sure really. Maybe Stoudemire, Chris Bosh, Dirk, ???


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

I would take Love over dumbass Josh Smith any day


----------



## marcus_sr (Jan 1, 2012)

LOL me and a friend of mine was just talking the other day, about how Atlanta needs to deal Josh in order to get better he is the only player that would be considered a good piece that Atlanta can afford loosing and get better from making the trade...they have been very stagnant for the past few years.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ATLien said:


> I would take Love over dumbass Josh Smith any day


Reggie and Chuck sure tore a strip out of him yesterday.

What the hell is that idiot doing jacking up 3's in close games?


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

I've never hated a player more. Other than being good at jumping around and acting tough he brings nothing to a team


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

ATLien said:


> I've never hated a player more. Other than being good at jumping around and acting tough he brings nothing to a team


Well the good thing about him being traded would be that people would see he's not the problem. The problem begins with Joe Johnson being paid 20 million a year. Not to mention whatever Marvin Williams makes. It's always interesting how everything in Atlanta is Josh Smith's fault. He's the only one who passes it to Horford, he blocks shots, rebounds, defends, but because he takes jumpshots he's a bad player. Get the **** out of here with that nonsense.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

We'll take Smoove in PHX.


edit: Oh, and Kevin Love for sure.


----------



## marcus_sr (Jan 1, 2012)

HKF said:


> Well the good thing about him being traded would be that people would see he's not the problem. The problem begins with Joe Johnson being paid 20 million a year. Not to mention whatever Marvin Williams makes. It's always interesting how everything in Atlanta is Josh Smith's fault. He's the only one who passes it to Horford, he blocks shots, rebounds, defends, but because he takes jumpshots he's a bad player. Get the **** out of here with that nonsense.


He may not be the root problem, but he is certainly apart of it. A player who's game is primarily built on driving to the whole, and defending...a glorified dirty work guy should not be taking long two's in crunch time that is the worst shot you can take, especially for someone with his skill and can easily make it to the basket and draw fouls. When you miss those two's it creates fast break points for the other team. He is far more productive then a Marvin Williams, but Joe Johnson overpaid or not and Horford are all that team has on some nights.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

If you look at game threads from the playoffs, nobody likes Josh. Opposing fans sure don't like him. Bulls fans, Heat fans. Nobody likes Josh, because he's a good player but has terrible habits and no IQ. He reminds me of Vick in Atlanta who needed to go to a team with actual structure and coaching to succeed.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The things you guys are complaining about are confusing. Dude plays the power forward. If the team had some type of structure, he would be more consistent. I am just trying to figure out why Josh is always to blame. Even when he plays great, people still blame him. It's the organization. Good grief.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

love is a good player but he's not a superstar...i doubt he starts on most contenders


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> love is a good player but he's not a superstar...i doubt he starts on most contenders


Would you like posters to name the contenders he'd start on?

I knew seeing that you posted that you'd come in here to say you don't like him. You're about as predictable as it gets around here. That's why its great that you hardly post.


----------



## JKILLroy (Jan 4, 2012)

It's no knock on Kevin Love, his numbers at first glance are quite enticing, great "fantasy guy" ... the kid is decent but there is no way in hell he has the actual in game impact on the court that his stats suggest.

If his stats actually were THAT impactful, the Wolves wouldn't be so GOD awful. And even though he hits those 3 balls, I still cringe when he takes them. 

And that's probably why he continues to get them, teams still don't consider him an actual game changer. He's a hustle dork, who knows how to position himself for rebounds very well, in a League that is now totally devoid of hard workers, intelligent players, hustlers, gritty players, and total LACK of actual true power forwards and centers. That's the actual truth of the matter.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

JKILLroy said:


> It's no knock on Kevin Love, his numbers at first glance are quite enticing, great "fantasy guy" ... the kid is decent but there is no way in hell he has the actual in game impact on the court that his stats suggest.
> 
> If his stats actually were THAT impactful, the Wolves wouldn't be so GOD awful. And even though he hits those 3 balls, I still cringe when he takes them.
> 
> And that's probably why he continues to get them, teams still don't consider him an actual game changer. He's a hustle dork, who knows how to position himself for rebounds very well, in a League that is now totally devoid of hard workers, intelligent players, hustlers, gritty players, and total LACK of actual true power forwards and centers. That's the actual truth of the matter.


What? No it isn't. Half the guys getting decent rebounds out there are "hard work" guys. And to try and play it off as "Hes not a great rebounder, he just tries hard at it" is ridiculous.

And I'm sorry, but you're saying what? That coaches are stupid? "Ha, look at that, that goofy white kid is taking a 3..... dang, he made another. Oh well, I'm not telling my boys to guard him, hes a hustle dork."

Hes top 5 in the league in scoring, yet you guys act like hes left open all game.
Hes 2nd in rebounding, but you guys act like by some magic way his rebounds don't matter. 

Its like the twilight zone or something. Nope, I stand corrected, its more when Pau Gasol played for the Griz.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Would you like posters to name the contenders he'd start on?
> 
> I knew seeing that you posted that you'd come in here to say you don't like him. You're about as predictable as it gets around here. That's why its great that you hardly post.


lets see a decent to good scoring , great rebounding , no defense playing 4...not many contenders would start a player at the 4 or 5 who plays poor defense and not at least its 1st or 2nd best scorer.

would he start for the lakers? ,over Pau no
mavs? over Dirk no 
celtics? over Garnett no 
heat ? over Bosh no 

spurs ? yes 
bulls? yes 

thunder? doubtful 
grizzlies ? no


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> lets see a decent to good scoring , great rebounding , no defense playing 4...not many contenders would start a player at the 4 or 5 who plays poor defense and not at least its 1st or 2nd best scorer.
> 
> would he start for the lakers? ,over Pau no
> mavs? over Dirk no
> ...


Heat? Yes
Celtics? Yes
Spurs? Yes
Bulls? Yes
Thunder? Yes
Grizzlies? Yes

Are you trying to say Zach Randolph is better? You understand we're talking about KG of today not whatever memories you have of him right? And even so you understand the could both play don't you?

Doubtful on the Thunder? Are you kidding me?

You saying hes "decent to good" for scoring shows how ignorant you are right from the get go of your post.

I'd start him over Gasol at this point as well.


----------



## JKILLroy (Jan 4, 2012)

R-Star said:


> What? No it isn't. Half the guys getting decent rebounds out there are "hard work" guys.


The only hard work guys in the rebounding leader board are Love and Haslem.

Two of the few left in the league who are just that, hard working role players, without delusions of grandeur.

The rest of the rebounding leaders are an either athletic freak with NO competition at his position (Dwight Howard), or just really tall guys with little skill / bball IQ in an ever shrinking league (Spencer Hawes, Marc Gasol).


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

JKILLroy said:


> The only hard work guys in the rebounding leader board are Love and Haslem.
> 
> Two of the few left in the league who are just that, hard working role players, without delusions of grandeur.
> 
> The rest of the rebounding leaders are an either athletic freak with NO competition at his position (Dwight Howard), or just really tall guys with little skill / bball IQ in an ever shrinking league (Spencer Hawes, Marc Gasol).


Wow. You understand there's more guys rebounding in this league than the top 5 on the ESPN stat page right?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

HKF said:


> Well the good thing about him being traded would be that people would see he's not the problem. The problem begins with Joe Johnson being paid 20 million a year. Not to mention whatever Marvin Williams makes. It's always interesting how everything in Atlanta is Josh Smith's fault. He's the only one who passes it to Horford, he blocks shots, rebounds, defends, but because he takes jumpshots he's a bad player. Get the **** out of here with that nonsense.


Weren't you the guy calling Marvin Williams the next Jamal Mashburn?


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

People saying Kevin Love is a glorified role player whose numbers dont translate to wins, are probably the same people fawning over Blake Griffin last year...whats the difference?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Heat? Yes
> Celtics? Yes
> Spurs? Yes
> Bulls? Yes
> ...



this is funny , thanks for the laugh.

let me know when love leads his team through a playoff series like zach did , or better yet after 24 , 17 and 15 win seasons , keep it coming about how much better he is than established stars when his team has lost 65 or more games the last 2 seasons ....let them lose less than 58 before you make him out to be the next great thing.

but i'm glad *you* would would start him over Pau...keep proving your genius , and i'll keep laughing.


----------



## JKILLroy (Jan 4, 2012)

R-Star said:


> You understand there's more guys rebounding in this league than the top 5 on the ESPN stat page right?


No, I didn't know that other players got rebounds besides these five players.

-_-

I'm using the cream of today's crop as an example for the argument.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Wade County said:


> People saying Kevin Love is a glorified role player whose numbers dont translate to wins, are probably the same people fawning over Blake Griffin last year...whats the difference?


Highlight real dunks.


No one defends Love. They are too busy double teaming all the talented scorers the Wolves have built around him. And even though hes getting a ton of rebounds, many of which are offensive, they really don't matter. Hes just trying harder than everyone else so that means they count for less.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> this is funny , thanks for the laugh.
> 
> let me know when love leads his team through a playoff series like zach did , or better yet after 24 , 17 and 15 win seasons , keep it coming about how much better he is than established stars when his team has lost 65 or more games the last 2 seasons ....let them lose less than 58 before you make him out to be the next great thing.
> 
> but i'm glad *you* would would start him over Pau...keep proving your genius , and i'll keep laughing.


So, the age of Randolph, not to mention his history as a black hole and cancer prior to one successful season aren't being thrown into the equation?

:laugh: Nope. Why bother looking at that. Just talk about last year, not take their supporting casts into account, and while we're at it, lets act like last year wasn't Loves 3rd year, compared to Randolphs 11th.

Keep it up.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> So, the age of Randolph, not to mention his history as a black hole and cancer prior to one successful season aren't being thrown into the equation?
> 
> :laugh: Nope. Why bother looking at that. Just talk about last year, not take their supporting casts into account, and while we're at it, lets act like last year wasn't Loves 3rd year, compared to Randolphs 11th.
> 
> Keep it up.


its getting funnier , age is a detriment when discussing Garnett but now its an excuse for love vs zach.

if love is so good why do his teams always such so bad i've seen alot of stars pull absolute crap into the playoffs , its pretty much unheard of for a superstar to lose 65+ in back to back seasons , even as rookies and 2nd year guys...

but hey what do facts matter to you?

thats why its funny


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Wade County said:


> People saying Kevin Love is a glorified role player whose numbers dont translate to wins, are probably the same people fawning over Blake Griffin last year...whats the difference?


They are. 

People here were saying Griffin was "not even on the same level" as Love (as in he was well above Love overall), yet hasn't really shown he is any better, if at all then Love. 

I wonder if it would be the same if Love was in "Lob City" instead.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

And R-Star is the one in here defending him tooth and nail...eck ****ing xactly....


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

Minnesota needs to just start Rubio and Williams over Ridnour and Beasley already.

Ridnour should be the back up regardless and Beasley has no redeeming qualities as an NBA player other than being good for a few chuckles whenever I see him play.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Weren't you the guy calling Marvin Williams the next Jamal Mashburn?


I said that's the best he could ever hope for and got criticized for it. I was never a Marvin Williams fan. Ever.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

T-Wolves are 2-5 (just lost to the Cavs), 6 of those games at home. Love's getting numbers, team is losing. I mean why do you guys want people to give respect to players on losing teams? We have never done this before.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Can't rebound made shots


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

It is logical to blame the guy with 29 of the teams 87 points for the loss.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

chilltown said:


> It is logical to blame the guy with 29 of the teams 87 points for the loss.


See this is just lazy on your part. No one is blaming him for the loss. However, if they won, you would have given him all the credit, yet when they lose, it's Luke Ridnour's fault right? You can't be the star and get all of the credit for wins and none of the blame for losses.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

The guy is a poor defensive player. That much is blatantly obvious, and it is something that the Wolves will have to make up for as they go... but his abilities in other facets of the game greatly outweigh his defensive deficiencies. They do not, however, outweigh many other failures of the 12 man roster.

Namely:

They get virtually zero production from the off guard position.
Not one player on that team outside of Darko Milicic even resembles a defensive player.. and he isn't that good either. 
Luke Ridnour simply isn't good. I don't know if Rubio is, but he sure looks a hell of a lot better.
Supercool Beas is what he is. A moron.
Not one player on that roster can be considered a threat to score from the perimeter except....


...Kevin Love. Which in itself is a problem. He does play too pussified for my taste... but that is coming from a guy who is force-fed Channing Frye on a nightly-basis. He is a hell of a talent though regardless of his lacking defense. And I can't pick but more than a handful of power forwards that I would take ahead of him.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

HKF said:


> See this is just lazy on your part. No one is blaming him for the loss. However, if they won, you would have given him all the credit, yet when they lose, it's Luke Ridnour's fault right? You can't be the star and get all of the credit for wins and none of the blame for losses.


It was partially lazy. I posted that and continued on the other post.

But for the record I would definitely blame Ridnour ahead of Love 100 times out of 100 after watching tonights game... except for the fact that it is Luke Ridnour, and I don't expect anything from him because he simply isn't very good and they are asking too much of him. It would feel like piling on.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

And (furthering this shameless run of post-padding) I likely wouldn't have given Love all the credit for the win. I generally agree with the fact that his offensive production is greatly inflated due to the current team he plays for. Someone has to score some points on that team without shooting them out of the ballgame, and to his credit, Love does score efficiently and gets to the line a good amount.

What I don't get is how people can say his rebounding is all fake. How do you fake rebounds? Rebounding is 3 things: Effort, Positioning, and Athleticism. Love is a master of getting in the right place at the right time and (as has been mentioned in this thread albeit sardonically ) puts in the effort to track the ball down. His rebounding numbers probably wouldn't ever dip a ton unless he is playing with another superb rebounder.. and even then, I would put money down that Love would still be amongst the league leaders in the category.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Wade County said:


> People saying Kevin Love is a glorified role player whose numbers dont translate to wins, are probably the same people fawning over Blake Griffin last year...whats the difference?


Love doesn't demand double teams. That's what is so unusual for a guy where stats like PER would normally put a player into an MVP type of conversation. Watching the Wolves though unlike a guy like Blake teams don't have to double team him downlow. His jumper allows him to space the floor but the jumper isn't good enough nor does he have the agility required to be a Dirk like top of the key player. This is why the Wolves seem to respond more to a guy like Rubio as teams, such as the Cavs worried a lot more about his dribble penetration then Love. 

The Cavs basically played straight man to man on Love with either Varejao or Samuels. He's a good player but I'd be wary of putting a max contract on him because he's going to need superstars around him to win titles (i.e. he's not going to pull an Hakeem, Dirk, or Lebron and get a mediocre supporting cast into the Finals). Same can be said about a guy like Blake but I could see him carrying the offensive load for a Finals team with complementary defensive/rebounding pieces around him.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

chilltown said:


> And (furthering this shameless run of post-padding) I likely wouldn't have given Love all the credit for the win. I generally agree with the fact that his offensive production is greatly inflated due to the current team he plays for. Someone has to score some points on that team without shooting them out of the ballgame, and to his credit, Love does score efficiently and gets to the line a good amount.
> 
> What I don't get is how people can say his rebounding is all fake. How do you fake rebounds? Rebounding is 3 things: Effort, Positioning, and Athleticism. Love is a master of getting in the right place at the right time and (as has been mentioned in this thread albeit sardonically ) puts in the effort to track the ball down. His rebounding numbers probably wouldn't ever dip a ton unless he is playing with another superb rebounder.. and even then, I would put money down that Love would still be amongst the league leaders in the category.


rebounding is like most stats, points , assists ,steals , blocks, if you do it the right way it helps , if not you can be selfishly stat padding....love actually is a great rebounder but he clearly sacrifices defense for rebounding opportunities, and he has been known to steal rebounds from teammates.

i'll give a glaring example . david lee

in the last 3 seasons his teams have rebounded the ball better when he was on the bench and the reason is simple why ...david lee does not box out , he avg. good #'s but in the end he doesn't help all that much

love is a great rebounder and he helps his team but not enough to justify the praise he's getting, he's good but not that good


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

HKF said:


> I said that's the best he could ever hope for and got criticized for it. I was never a Marvin Williams fan. Ever.


http://www.basketballforum.com/nba-draft-forum/165592-nba-player-comparisons-draft-prospects.html

Looks like the only one critcizing a Marvin Williams comparison was you criticizing my comparing him to Rodney Rogers.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> http://www.basketballforum.com/nba-draft-forum/165592-nba-player-comparisons-draft-prospects.html
> 
> Looks like the only one critcizing a Marvin Williams comparison was you criticizing my comparing him to Rodney Rogers.


Well, this dude will never reach that. Seven years later. WOW. He's a bum.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Here is the deal with Love. Either you think he is a top 5-10 player in the league or you have to admit that his numbers are partly bogus. Nobody is saying Love is a bum but I do know he is not even close to being Zach Randolph right now because I have watched that matchup. When you have people thinking Love is as good as Chris Bosh, Love is overrated.

The truth is that nobody knows what he really is right now because he has not played a meaningful game in the NBA yet.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

What is the difference between Love and Monta?


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Da Grinch said:


> rebounding is like most stats, points , assists ,steals , blocks, if you do it the right way it helps , if not you can be selfishly stat padding....love actually is a great rebounder but he clearly sacrifices defense for rebounding opportunities, *and he has been known to steal rebounds from teammates.*
> 
> i'll give a glaring example . david lee
> 
> ...


Proof? Says who?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

OneBadLT123 said:


> Proof? Says who?


Says Da Grinch. So does fellow white rebounder David Lee.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> its getting funnier , age is a detriment when discussing Garnett but now its an excuse for love vs zach.
> 
> if love is so good why do his teams always such so bad i've seen alot of stars pull absolute crap into the playoffs , its pretty much unheard of for a superstar to lose 65+ in back to back seasons , even as rookies and 2nd year guys...
> 
> ...


Age matters for all the players being compared. That was the point being made, you just seem to be having a terrible time keeping up.

You're comparing where ZBo is on his 11th season as to Loves 4th. All the while leaving out that ZBo was viewed as a me first, black hole cancer up until his very deep team made a playoff run recently.

And I'm not sure the confusion with KG. Hes averaging 13 and 7 right now, but when asking if Love would start over him right now, you want us to use his prime years as an example? Yea, that makes sence.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Kevin Love reminds me of Antawn Jamison on the warriors. Same game but love is a better rebounder.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Would Carlos Boozer be a fair comparison? Great rebounder, poor defender, nice jumper, decent post game. Obviously Love is better at some things and vice versa. 

Also, people questioning Love's rebounding ability are crazy. Watch the way he carves out space with his hips and nuetralizes more athletic players. He is a fundamentally dominant rebounder through technique, not simply hard work and opportunity.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I'd say Love is an all around better player than Boozer.


----------



## JKILLroy (Jan 4, 2012)

R-Star said:


> I'd say Love is an all around better player than Boozer.


You say that as if it's an accomplishment.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

JKILLroy said:


> You say that as if it's an accomplishment.


You're a real asset to this thread with your insight.


----------



## JKILLroy (Jan 4, 2012)

R-Star said:


> You're a real asset to this thread with your insight.


Stick to fantasy sports. 

I already described verbatim why Kevin Love is decent, but his "stats" don't reflect his actual impact on the game.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

JKILLroy said:


> Stick to fantasy sports.
> 
> I already described verbatim why Kevin Love is decent, but his "stats" don't reflect his actual impact on the game.


I don't play fantasy basketball. 

You explained Love as a hustle guy who isn't really a good rebounder, he just tries harder than everyone else, and is an ok scorer. Thats laughable for a guy trying to call other posters out on their knowledge.


----------



## JKILLroy (Jan 4, 2012)

R-Star said:


> I don't play fantasy basketball.
> 
> You explained Love as a hustle guy who isn't really a good rebounder, he just tries harder than everyone else, and is an ok scorer. Thats laughable for a guy trying to call other posters out on their knowledge.


Actually I described why he's a good rebounder, his intelligence, use of angles, hard work ... the throw back style. I just kept it in check with context.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

JKILLroy said:


> Actually I described why he's a good rebounder, his intelligence, use of angles, hard work ... the throw back style. I just kept it in check with context.


In context he's one of the leagues best rebounders.

That isn't debatable.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

JKILLroy said:


> You say that as if it's an accomplishment.


This site's hatred for Carlos Boozer has always been funny to me. It's always been the cool thing to do to hate on him act like he's trash for some reason.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

hobojoe said:


> This site's hatred for Carlos Boozer has always been funny to me. It's always been the cool thing to do to hate on him act like he's trash for some reason.


There are people that irrationally hate certain players on this site for sure. Randolph was another guy, people mocked the Grizzlies for acquiring him.

They don't like elite scorers that are weak defensively. Back in the day people used to get hard ons for guys like Kirilenko and Shawn Marion on here.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I used to like Boozer but hate him after watching the Pacers play the Bulls in the playoffs last year. The guy would make a terrible defensive blunder, miss a shot, get beat on a rebound, etc and then make a face of agony "Oowwww it hurts so much! I'm a warrior for being out here though!". Then when he'd make the occasional basket he run around in circles yelling like hes tough, basically doing backflips forgetting hes faking an injury out there.

At the end of the day, I guess what I'm saying is Carlos Boozer is a worthless piece of shit.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Yeah, he's not the most likable guy in the world. He does rebound and can be a handful when his shot is falling, though.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

King Joseus said:


> Yeah, he's not the most likable guy in the world. He does rebound and can be a handful when his shot is falling, though.


Yep. He can produce. When hes on, the Bulls are an actual contender. 

I'm not too concerned about that though. After watching last years playoffs I doubt he'll ever put in the effort.

I won't waste everyones time by turning this into a Boozer thread though.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

That's the other thing -- the myth that Carlos Boozer shrinks in the big moments and can't come through in the playoffs. He didn't play well last year with a new team, but how quickly people forget the terrific playoffs he had in 2007 and 2010 with Utah and how he and Deron Williams led the Jazz on deep playoff runs.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> There are people that irrationally hate certain players on this site for sure. Randolph was another guy, people mocked the Grizzlies for acquiring him.
> 
> They don't like elite scorers that are weak defensively. Back in the day people used to get hard ons for guys like Kirilenko and Shawn Marion on here.



You can add Melo and Monta to list.


----------



## JKILLroy (Jan 4, 2012)

hobojoe said:


> This site's hatred for Carlos Boozer has always been funny to me. It's always been the cool thing to do to hate on him act like he's trash for some reason.


He's not that good. That's why. He's a walking oxymoron. Built like a tank, breaks hands "falling over a gym bag" ... it's pathetic, and always has been.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

MemphisX said:


> You can add Melo and Monta to list.


Melo really let me down. I thought he turned the corner during the Nuggets only deep playoff run in 09. That postseason he showed the ability to be an adept defensive player and really played well on that side of the floor in addition to his best all around offensive stretch ever.

Since them it has been the same old Melo. Now compounded by playing for a coach that hates defense more than anyone.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Says Da Grinch. So does fellow white rebounder David Lee.


its sad you want to make it about race .....its ironic , because it shows your true colors.


----------



## ChrisWoj (May 17, 2005)

One thing that people don't seem to state about Kevin Love is that the guy doesn't take nights off. Maybe I feel it is impressive because I'm stuck watching the Pistons go through the motions night in and night out, but can you really discount that fact? Kevin Love, whether his numbers are empty and whether he is a superstar or not in your eyes - goes out there and works every game. I'm not saying other players are just dicking off out there, but he is all-in every night. He had 53 double doubles in a row. He has gone at least 20-12 every night out this short season. Whether the numbers are empty or not in your eyes - he is scoring efficiently and hustling on the boards every single night, without fail. Like him or not, taking nights off is one thing that DEFINITELY hurts a team, and he doesn't do that.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> its sad you want to make it about race .....its ironic , because it shows your true colors.


So, you complaining about Love and Lee....... shows that _I'm_ a racist?


Dang. You got me there didn't you?

Classic Grinch. You've been made a fool so now you're going to call me a racist. This has happened just about every time.


Pathetic.


----------



## Noyze (Oct 7, 2010)

It's official, Kevin Love is out favor topic. The Kevin Love vs LMA or Blake Griffin thread got like 20+ pages of argument and now look at this one. Lol, we struggle so hard to determine whether this dude can actually play or not.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

ChrisWoj said:


> One thing that people don't seem to state about Kevin Love is that the guy doesn't take nights off. Maybe I feel it is impressive because I'm stuck watching the Pistons go through the motions night in and night out, but can you really discount that fact? Kevin Love, whether his numbers are empty and whether he is a superstar or not in your eyes - goes out there and works every game. I'm not saying other players are just dicking off out there, but he is all-in every night. He had 53 double doubles in a row. He has gone at least 20-12 every night out this short season. Whether the numbers are empty or not in your eyes - he is scoring efficiently and hustling on the boards every single night, without fail. Like him or not, taking nights off is one thing that DEFINITELY hurts a team, and he doesn't do that.


:2ti:

Did you see his defense his first 3 seasons? He was taking half the game off every night.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> :2ti:
> 
> Did you see his defense his first 3 seasons? He was taking half the game off every night.


Did you? Why is it you're acting like you're watching every game the past 3 years?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> So, you complaining about Love and Lee....... shows that _I'm_ a racist?
> 
> 
> Dang. You got me there didn't you?
> ...


i didn't come in here playing the race card, you did.

its cute watching you get so overprotective , you should be a comedian.

when you cant use facts you run to the race issues.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Did you? Why is it you're acting like you're watching every game the past 3 years?


I watched a lot of them. Obviously you did not but you can get on the bandwagon now.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Noyze said:


> It's official, Kevin Love is out favor topic. The Kevin Love vs LMA or Blake Griffin thread got like 20+ pages of argument and now look at this one. Lol, we struggle so hard to determine whether this dude can actually play or not.


This thread is on the 3rd page. Fix your settings.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> i didn't come in here playing the race card, you did.
> 
> its cute watching you get so overprotective , you should be a comedian.
> 
> when you cant use facts you run to the race issues.


Well, seeing as how I posted facts, and you quit talking and decided to once again try to call someone a racist around here instead of continuing the discussion, its pretty clear what's going on here.

I could care less either way, anyone who posts with me on here knows your posts about me are laughable, so feel free to continue. Probably easier than continuing the discussion for you.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> I watched a lot of them. Obviously you did not but you can get on the bandwagon now.


Everyone knows your exaggerating, or more likely just spouting things you've heard on here and pretending you've seen a ton of games.

But whatever. Not something I'm going to argue over.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> I could care less either way, anyone who posts with me on here knows your posts about me are laughable, so feel free to continue. Probably easier than continuing the discussion for you.





R-Star said:


> Everyone knows your exaggerating, or more likely just spouting things you've heard on here and pretending you've seen a ton of games.


This is the first time I remember you seeing you pull the "everyone/anyone here agrees with me, you're a joke" card while arguing with two different people. 

I have a lot to learn.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> This is the first time I remember you seeing you pull the "everyone/anyone here agrees with me, you're a joke" card while arguing with two different people.
> 
> I have a lot to learn.


Where did I call anyone a joke?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> This is the first time I remember you seeing you pull the "everyone/anyone here agrees with me, you're a joke" card while arguing with two different people.
> 
> I have a lot to learn.


whatever you learn from from him its best if you forget it immediately.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Well, seeing as how I posted facts, and you quit talking and decided to once again try to call someone a racist around here instead of continuing the discussion, its pretty clear what's going on here.
> 
> I could care less either way, anyone who posts with me on here knows your posts about me are laughable, so feel free to continue. Probably easier than continuing the discussion for you.


i see no facts.

i see a guy who scores well but not dominantly is an excellent rebounder who plays poor defense and his teams lost over 130 times the last 2 seasons with a record of 32 and 132 and is currently 2-5 on a pace for 19 and 47.

i dont see a superstar , i really dont a great player at all , I see an excellent role player .

great players dont lose this much no matter who is around them 

i also see a guy who cant refute these facts so he went to the race card.

which is hilarious.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> i see no facts.
> 
> i see a guy who scores well but not dominantly is an excellent rebounder who plays poor defense and his teams lost over 130 times the last 2 seasons with a record of 32 and 132 and is currently 2-5 on a pace for 19 and 47.
> 
> ...


Hes top 5 in scoring. That isn't "scores well". You're down playing him. 

And no one has called him a superstar. I don't think trading him out with Pau Gasol, Chris Bosh, or many others hurts their teams. In most scenario's I'd think it would make the team better.

And for someone who finds the race card funny, you sure throw it out a lot.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Hes top 5 in scoring. That isn't "scores well". You're down playing him.
> 
> And no one has called him a superstar. I don't think trading him out with Pau Gasol, Chris Bosh, or many others hurts their teams. In most scenario's I'd think it would make the team better.
> 
> And for someone who finds the race card funny, you sure throw it out a lot.


i didn't play the race card at all *you* brought race into the discussion ....you may want to sit down and work on your memory or at the very least re-read your posts.

Most title contending teams dont want a 4 who isn't their 1st or 2nd option who cant play defense , 

if they aren't a 1st or 2nd option on offense their offense cant and wont outweigh their defensive shortcomings.

its really very simple ...you know if you knew anything about basketball.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> i didn't play the race card at all *you* brought race into the discussion ....you may want to sit down and work on your memory or at the very least re-read your posts.
> 
> Most title contending teams dont want a 4 who isn't their 1st or 2nd option who cant play defense ,
> 
> ...


My basketball knowledge isn't the problem. You're underrating of Love is the problem. If hes top 5 in scoring, why could he not play 2nd option next to a guy like Kobe?

Answer is, he could. Quite easily. As long as you don't pair him with a guard who is mainly a perimeter player, he'd do just fine.


----------



## ChrisWoj (May 17, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> :2ti:
> 
> Did you see his defense his first 3 seasons? He was taking half the game off every night.


Have you seen the 125+ NBA players that are worse defensively than he is, have few other redeemable skills, and take nights off on a regular basis?


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

ChrisWoj said:


> Have you seen the 125+ NBA players that are worse defensively than he is, have few other redeemable skills, and take nights off on a regular basis?



Wtf does that have to do with you sayi doesn't take nights off when he clearly takes every night off on every part of basketball that does not inflate his stats.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> Wtf does that have to do with you sayi doesn't take nights off when he clearly takes every night off on every part of basketball that does not inflate his stats.


How do you inflate offensive rebounds exactly?

Honestly. Answer one of the questioned posed instead of continuing the same dull "The stats are fake" why? "Well because they aren't real." Please explain. "Hes only inflating them." That's saying the same thing "He doesn't try hard on defense"


----------



## ChrisWoj (May 17, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> Wtf does that have to do with you sayi doesn't take nights off when he clearly takes every night off on every part of basketball that does not inflate his stats.


The guy sucks on defense, clearly has been coached and had it put into his head that rebounding and positioning for the rebound is incredibly important over his defense. But the fact is that he brings it on a nightly basis with consistent effort. What he needs is a coach that'll emphasize where to put that effort.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Everyone knows your exaggerating, or more likely just spouting things you've heard on here and pretending you've seen a ton of games.
> 
> But whatever. Not something I'm going to argue over.


You know, this is a message board argument that has run its course. In the age of league pass, archived games and mobile....it is just a lazy way to dismiss shit you have no argument against.

The dude gave zero effort on defense. Last year he kissed every MBA media members tail the entire season and proceeded to put up some of the most inflated numbers on a puss poor team and still parlayed that into an All Star birth over players with similar numbers who were leading teams to twice as many wins. He waits until his contract year to get in shape and gets a pass on that also.

Everything about his career screams a selfish, lazy loser. Oh and unlike others, I'll tell the truth and say that the only reason you are on his nuts is because he is a white boy. Before you say it is bullshit, give me an example of the other stat padding loser who was not white that you were jocking this hard....I'll wait.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> You know, this is a message board argument that has run its course. In the age of league pass, archived games and mobile....it is just a lazy way to dismiss shit you have no argument against.
> 
> The dude gave zero effort on defense. Last year he kissed every MBA media members tail the entire season and proceeded to put up some of the most inflated numbers on a puss poor team and still parlayed that into an All Star birth over players with similar numbers who were leading teams to twice as many wins. He waits until his contract year to get in shape and gets a pass on that also.
> 
> Everything about his career screams a selfish, lazy loser. Oh and unlike others, I'll tell the truth and say that the only reason you are on his nuts is because he is a white boy. Before you say it is bullshit, give me an example of the other stat padding loser who was not white that you were jocking this hard....I'll wait.


You'll wait? Won't take long. I was a SAR fanboy his whole career for one. Always supported Jamison. Go out of my way to defend Melo (although his team wins so that may not count), etc. The list can go on and on. 

You honestly what, think I'm a fan of the NBA, but only the white players? Before you keep trying this argument, feel free to answer about Loves offensive rebounds. No? Don't want to? Ok. I'm racist.


----------



## ChrisWoj (May 17, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> You know, this is a message board argument that has run its course. In the age of league pass, archived games and mobile....it is just a lazy way to dismiss shit you have no argument against.
> 
> The dude gave zero effort on defense. Last year he kissed every MBA media members tail the entire season and proceeded to put up some of the most inflated numbers on a puss poor team and still parlayed that into an All Star birth over players with similar numbers who were leading teams to twice as many wins. He waits until his contract year to get in shape and gets a pass on that also.
> 
> Everything about his career screams a selfish, lazy loser. Oh and unlike others, I'll tell the truth and say that the only reason you are on his nuts is because he is a white boy. Before you say it is bullshit, give me an example of the other stat padding loser who was not white that you were jocking this hard....I'll wait.


If it is just that easy to put up those numbers for a shitty team, why don't more guys do it? Why don't we see 20-15 on the regular from guys looking to scam one of the (many) idiot owners into a max deal? I mean, I'm not saying he's the best power forward in the league, but he's a hell of a basketball player - an incredible one overall. The number one thing he needs to do is get someone to put it in his head that playing defense at the expense of a few rebounds is a good idea. Is it his fault he doesn't know that? Of course. But is it really impossible he could, like many young players, become a far better defensive player as he establishes himself as an NBA player? Didn't it take until around LeBron's sixth season before he started playing defense?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> My basketball knowledge isn't the problem. You're underrating of Love is the problem. If hes top 5 in scoring, why could he not play 2nd option next to a guy like Kobe?
> 
> Answer is, he could. Quite easily. As long as you don't pair him with a guard who is mainly a perimeter player, he'd do just fine.


no he wouldn't he is not a good 2nd option on a good team . and the lakers are title contenders so certainly not for them.

good 2nd options you can run your offense through them and can their points and their teammates can get theirs ...The lakers can run their offense through Pau. Love isn't good enough for them to try with him, they would probably use bynum as its #2 if they made a straight up trade

Pau either gets doubled or he scores , Pau has been the best player on teams that have won 50 games as its #1 option at age 23(the same age love is now) where his 2nd leading scorer was james posey avg 13 a game , no team with Love as its 1st option has won more than 17 so dont give me crap about supporting cast .

love is a good player , but he's a supporting guy , not a star and as long as he is the best player on that team they wont be any good.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

R-Star said:


> Says Da Grinch. So does fellow white rebounder David Lee.


I like how he never was able to prove it.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> no he wouldn't he is not a good 2nd option on a good team . and the lakers are title contenders so certainly not for them.
> 
> good 2nd options you can run your offense through them and can their points and their teammates can get theirs ...The lakers can run their offense through Pau. Love isn't good enough for them to try with him, they would probably use bynum as its #2 if they made a straight up trade
> 
> ...


I don't agree, considering the points hes putting up, but I appreciate the effort put into the post this time.

I don't see Pau as any better of an offensive player than Love. He sure as hell isn't the rebounder Love is either, and Paus defence in his first years was bad as well compared to where it is these days.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

OneBadLT123 said:


> I like how he never was able to prove it.


I'm still waiting for anything....._anything_ from MemphisX. 

He was writing a response in here a few minutes ago, then ran away. Guess hes waiting to steal more material from Grinch.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

hmm superstars need help around them.

Pretty sure the Wolves' last few seasons with KG were abysmal... hence why he left.

Kevin Durant's Sonics/Thunder was awful until they finished drafting one of the deepest teams in the league.

The Nets are terrible with Deron Williams... but I'm sure that is Brook Lopez' fault this year.

Everyone loves Zach Randolph after one season. He had about 6 seasons 'leading' his team to terrible records... plus, he is a nutcase.


All teams can struggle without the proper pieces. Love shouldn't be a #1 offensive player, that is agreeable. The problem lies with his team not having another player on the roster that could even be a #4 guy right now. Williams and Rubio might be, but 1. they aren't getting the time and focus and/or 2. they are rookies and may need seasoning.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

chilltown said:


> hmm superstars need help around them.
> 
> Pretty sure the Wolves' last few seasons with KG were abysmal... hence why he left.
> 
> ...



there's bad and there is kevin love era t-wolves bad .

when did any of these guys lose 65 games in a year ?

and love was on teams that did it back to back.

garnett's worst season his rookie year they won 26 which is more than love has won in any season his whole career ...his next worst in 06-07(when he was by everyone's opinion not himself battling knee injuries) he went 32-50....32 games thats how much love has won the last 2 seasons combined.

who where his teammates ?

ricky davis was his 2nd leading scorer and mark blount was his 3rd.

you can try to argue how much better blount and davis are as supporting players thats they won 15 more games than the kevin love wolves won last season with beasely and ridnour as his 2nd and 3rd if you want but if I were you I wouldn't bother .


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

So is Deron a loser as well then, or does his team just suck that bad?

I'll already go ahead and point out that yea, different sample size, but the crux of the point is still there. They've been terrible with him on board.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

Beasley and Ridnour = Davis and Blount more or less. I refuse to pick any combination out of the 4 of them because I would rather leave them all. 

Kevin Garnett in his prime > Kevin Love. I seriously doubt anyone here is arguing that... Nor would I say that Love is on Durant's level. I feel I've been very clear in my stance that while I think Love is a hell of a basketball player, he is not equipped to be THE guy on a great team. Few people are. But the fact is bad seasons are bad... to write off one of them when compared to others is ridiculous.

In Durant and Randolph's worst seasons compared to the Wolves, I'm not going to discriminate between horrible seasons when the difference is 8 games won or w/e. Terrible is terrible.

The point stands that good players with minimal help will have bad seasons.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> So is Deron a loser as well then, or does his team just suck that bad?
> 
> I'll already go ahead and point out that yea, different sample size, but the crux of the point is still there. They've been terrible with him on board.


not 65 losses bad

most franchises in their history haven't lost that much

http://www.nbauniverse.com/statistics/worst_seasons.htm


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

R-Star said:


> So is Deron a loser as well then, or does his team just suck that bad?
> 
> I'll already go ahead and point out that yea, different sample size, but the crux of the point is still there. They've been terrible with him on board.


Up until last year D-Will had never played on a losing team (and never demanded to be traded). Utah added him and went 41-41, after being the 6th worst team in the league, the year before. I keep repeating this over and over again, but no one seems to even respond to my posts. When the team starts winning more than they lose, then Love will get props. Until then, his stats are meaningless.

Shareef Abdur-Rahim's career was largely irrelevant. Playing over a decade of meaningless basketball. Playing in zero games that matter. If you're not even competing for a playoff spot, you're just playing out the string.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

The 2008 Heat were right above them on that list. Doesn't make Wade a loser does it?

He kept faking injuries that year though and it was more of a tank job.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

Da Grinch said:


> not 65 losses bad
> 
> most franchises in their history haven't lost that much
> 
> http://www.nbauniverse.com/statistics/worst_seasons.htm


Okay.. Durant lost 62 games and 59 games his first 2 seasons. C'mon man. This is silly.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

And Durant didn't get props until he started winning. Damn. Why are we rewriting the narrative here?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HKF said:


> Up until last year D-Will had never played on a losing team (and never demanded to be traded). Utah added him and went 41-41, after being the 6th worst team in the league, the year before. I keep repeating this over and over again, but no one seems to even respond to my posts. When the team starts winning more than they lose, then Love will get props. Until then, his stats are meaningless.
> 
> Shareef Abdur-Rahim's career was largely irrelevant. Playing over a decade of meaningless basketball. Playing in zero games that matter. If you're not even competing for a playoff spot, you're just playing out the string.


I'm not arguing SAR was a winner. He wasn't. He was never a #1 guy and he got shoe horned into that role for the peak of his career.

Love isn't going to Lebron or Kobe his team to the playoffs. He isn't that guy. Could he side kick a team to that if there was another star on his team? I think so, although I obviously have nothing to back it up.

As far as Deron, those Utah teams were pretty good, a hell of a lot better than the Wolves. Hes back to losing now after proving he can win. Why? Because the team is terrible. He can't do it on his own. Neither can Love. Neither could Kobe sometimes, same goes with Wade. Love hasn't had the luxury to have a solid team to play with like the other guys listed.

Again, he isn't a #1 option superstar, but I could see him as a capable second banana.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HKF said:


> And Durant didn't get props until he started winning. Damn. Why are we rewriting the narrative here?


Meh, I don't know about that. People were calling him the best of his draft early on here, and saying he was headed for stardom. No ones re writing history. Just like no ones calling Love a winner.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

HKF said:


> And Durant didn't get props until he started winning. Damn. Why are we rewriting the narrative here?


Right. But no one was saying he was a worthless P.O.S. either.

I get it though. Fandom is all subjective. People will like who they like and hate who they hate.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Who called him a worthless piece of shit? People feel his numbers are inflated on a bad team. Until he proves them wrong by putting up those same numbers and them winning, they are right.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HKF said:


> Who called him a worthless piece of shit? People feel his numbers are inflated on a bad team. Until he proves them wrong by putting up those same numbers and them winning, they are right.


Well that isn't going to happen on the team hes on.


It's not like Danny Granger should be consider a proven winner. The Pacers just drafted and signed a very solid team around him. You replace Granger with Love and its not like the Pacers are a worse team. (Pre West obviously)


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Who thinks Granger is a star though? The better the talent gets around him, the lower his numbers go. He's obviously not a star. The interesting reference to D-Will, the better the talent he plays with, the better his numbers get, although that's not surprising for a point guard. We both watch the Pacers, Granger has been awful, but the team is winning. If you up Love on the Pacers, do you truly believe he would average the same numbers? I don't see him scoring the same amount at all. Pacers are also one of the best rebounding teams in the league as well. 

People are blowing him up because of his insane stats. Those stats wouldn't be as insane playing with better teammates.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

chilltown said:


> Beasley and Ridnour = Davis and Blount more or less. I refuse to pick any combination out of the 4 of them because I would rather leave them all.
> 
> Kevin Garnett in his prime > Kevin Love. I seriously doubt anyone here is arguing that... Nor would I say that Love is on Durant's level. I feel I've been very clear in my stance that while I think Love is a hell of a basketball player, he is not equipped to be THE guy on a great team. Few people are. But the fact is bad seasons are bad... to write off one of them when compared to others is ridiculous.
> 
> ...



my point is no matter what his stats say he is not a star and as long as he is THE MAN on that team they will be bad no matter who is on that team with him.

in durant's worst season he was 19 a rookie and out of position as a 2guard and his 2nd leading scorer was chris wilcox and he still got to 20 wins.

in durant's rookie season no one was saying he was a star player , he was a good player with a great future.

no one was arguing he was a star , its really this simple star players dont play on teams that suck so bad, because if they were so good their teams would win more.

deron's team is bad and they will not be close to the playoffs but they'll win more than the equivalent of a 65 loss season(which is 14-51 games) of this i'm pretty sure unless deron gets hurt and misses alot of time.

zach was one of the more maligned players in the league when his teams were bad , no one in their right mind would have argued zach was a top 20 player when his teams were losing more than 50 ....but people want to do it for Love despite his teams are actually worse than any team zach played for and some have even dared to say top 10, its a double standard and its stupid. so in a way you actually made my argument for me by mentioning him.

and you can be a top 20 player pretty easily without being a top level 1st option scorer, but love isn't there not like guys like deke mutumbo and ben wallace who were also dominant rebounders but also dominant defenders, love plays no defense and thats half the game...and that was the difference between those wolves teams that sucked with garnett...and the team thats sucks with love, similar rebounders and scorers but garnett was one of the better defenders in the game and love isn't .


----------



## Noyze (Oct 7, 2010)

Jamel Irief said:


> This thread is on the 3rd page. Fix your settings.


Oops, you're right, thx for the heads up


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HKF said:


> Who thinks Granger is a star though? The better the talent gets around him, the lower his numbers go. He's obviously not a star. The interesting reference to D-Will, the better the talent he plays with, the better his numbers get, although that's not surprising for a point guard. We both watch the Pacers, Granger has been awful, but the team is winning. If you up Love on the Pacers, do you truly believe he would average the same numbers? I don't see him scoring the same amount at all. Pacers are also one of the best rebounding teams in the league as well.
> 
> People are blowing him up because of his insane stats. Those stats wouldn't be as insane playing with better teammates.


, but he'd undoubtedly be the teams best player. 

With Hibbert, Foster and Hansbrough I agree, his rebounds would go down. And the Pacers play team offense so his points would drop, but he'd undoubtedly be the teams best player.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> my point is no matter what his stats say he is not a star and as long as he is THE MAN on that team they will be bad no matter who is on that team with him.
> 
> in durant's worst season he was 19 a rookie and out of position as a 2guard and his 2nd leading scorer was chris wilcox and he still got to 20 wins.
> 
> ...


No ones comparing Love to a prime KG though. Hell, I don't think there's 4 in the game right now as good as a prime KG


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

We'll see. We've both made our sides clear. You guys won't respect him until he puts up wins, and there's nothing wrong with that. I think hes a solid #2 on a contender, but the difference between our two aruments is you guys have something to point at, and all I can say is "I think if he played with xxxx he'd prove hes a solid second option on a contender". 

Its pretty easy to pick which is the better argument at this point in time.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Meh, I don't know about that. People were calling him the best of his draft early on here, and saying he was headed for stardom. No ones re writing history. Just like no ones calling Love a winner.


that's right *headed* for stardom , and well yeah he was the best in that draft, I think he's pretty much locked that one up by now , but there is a world of difference in saying how good you think a guy will be and saying how good you think he is right now.

i'm not gonna get into whether or not love is a winner or not , his team is too bad and he's still on his rookie deal , alot of guys in that situation get called out for selfish play and stat padding when the games dont mean anything , but turn out to be team guys after they get their money.

the truth is team's should pay guys based on their contribution to winning basketball , but they dont they argue stats and revenue at the negotiation table, so players often play flashier and pad their stats

that narrative is virtually the same for any young talented player on a bad team his whole career.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> that's right *headed* for stardom , and well yeah he was the best in that draft, I think he's pretty much locked that one up by now , but there is a world of difference in saying how good you think a guy will be and saying how good you think he is right now.
> 
> i'm not gonna get into whether or not love is a winner or not , his team is too bad and he's still on his rookie deal , alot of guys in that situation get called out for selfish play and stat padding when the games dont mean anything , but turn out to be team guys after they get their money.
> 
> ...


Can't really argue that. The coming years will show what kind of player he is.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> No ones comparing Love to a prime KG though. Hell, I don't think there's 4 in the game right now as good as a prime KG


I agree a 28 yr. old KG wipes the floor with any big in the game right now.

trust me I dont think they are really comparable either , all KG needed was another good starter in the crap years and he's in the playoffs. when he had cassell and spree he won 58 and they were both past their prime.

thats my point one's a legit star and it takes very little for a legit star to make the playoffs and with absolute filth around him he still won 30+

If love was so good his team would win more , just like SAR, david lee, a face up 4 who boards well and plays no defense but is not really the guy you want to be feeding down the stretch of games , he's not that level of scorer so his teams usually lose if he's the man on it.

he's already making the wolves sweat on an extension , he knows he's getting the max , he's gonna make them upgrade the roster or he's gone.

and he wont be picking a crap team. we'll see how does on a decent team very soon one way or the other.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Have to credit for Love transforming his body. He definitely pudgy when he came into the league but now the dude is ripped. His footspeed and agility look much improved without the weight.


----------



## simply_amazing (Aug 23, 2009)

Chris Bosh, Dirk Nowitzki and Blake Griffin are all better than Love. I'd have to rank Pau Gasol and maybe Amare ahead of Love as well.

Love is one of the top half dozen power forwards in the league.


----------



## simply_amazing (Aug 23, 2009)

Agreed: completely silly to compare Garnett with Love. Garnett is so far superior it's a joke. 



Da Grinch said:


> I agree a 28 yr. old KG wipes the floor with any big in the game right now.
> 
> trust me I dont think they are really comparable either , all KG needed was another good starter in the crap years and he's in the playoffs. when he had cassell and spree he won 58 and they were both past their prime.
> 
> ...


----------



## Laker Freak (Jul 1, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> I agree a 28 yr. old KG wipes the floor with any big in the game right now.
> 
> trust me I dont think they are really comparable either , all KG needed was another good starter in the crap years and he's in the playoffs. *when he had cassell and spree he won 58 and they were both past their prime.
> *
> ...



Kind of off topic, but Cassell was an absolute beast his first year in Minnesota. He put up the best numbers of his career that season and was incredible in the clutch. They would have had a great chance to win the title that year if Sam had stayed healthy.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Laker Freak said:


> Kind of off topic, but Cassell was an absolute beast his first year in Minnesota. He put up the best numbers of his career that season and was incredible in the clutch. They would have had a great chance to win the title that year if Sam had stayed healthy.


Yea Cassell was in his mid-30s but that was arguably the best season of his career.


----------

