OT: Ranking the 30 Best NBA teams from 2000-'12

[FirstTimer]

The drop-off has continued from 2000-2012.

Again: the **** does the 80's and 90's have to do with ranking teams that played in the NBA from 2000-2012?

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Again: the **** does the 80's and 90's have to do with ranking teams that played in the NBA from 2000-2012?

It doesn't. I made a point to someone that when you look at the team-play of the 80's, you can definitely tell that (in general) the teams of the century so far have not been up-to-par.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

It doesn't. I made a point to someone that when you look at the team-play of the 80's, you can definitely tell that (in general) the teams of the century so far have not been up-to-par.

the teams also played at a much higher tempo, and the defense was quite a bit worse

 

[FirstTimer]

It doesn't.

Then STFU about it.

 

[FirstTimer]

the teams also played at a much higher tempo, and the defense was quite a bit worse

No code. None of that matters. Rami "looked" at teams from then and made the decision.

 

[clonetrooper264]

the teams also played at a much higher tempo, and the defense was quite a bit worse

Except for the hand checking. :elephant:

But overall yeah.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Again, you can't make that comparison and completely ignore the systems and the situations around each player. BTW, James shot pretty much right on par with what Nash did in his best season this year from the field. And Nash was in a much more friendly offense for efficiency of stats for a PG. Then again things like this would be incredibly obvious to anyone with a clue about basketball. Nash played in a system that helped to inflate numbers in some ways. To just arbitrarily look at the numbers and ignore the surrounding causes and factors is lazy stupid analysis. It'd be like arguing Andre Ware was a "more efficient passer" than Peyton Manning in college based on stats. The entire premise is flawed and misses the mark wildly.

Ast:Tov is the best tool we have to measure passing skill. And for the most part it tells the right story. Nash is clearly a better passer than LBJ or Wade so that is an upside for Nash that is undeniable.

LBJ and Wade average much more points than Nash and still are efficient overall shooters. I said that despite Nash's undeniable efficiency, he was still a lesser scorer than either of the two. But his passing ability at least puts him in the conversation with Wade and LBJ offensively- combined with averaging (50+% from two, about 40% from three, and 88+% on FT's on about 15 points per-game is also extremely impressive and a relatively high volume of shot-attempts).

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Then STFU about it.

I brought it up 1 time. You're just -in'

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

Except for the hand checking. :elephant:

But overall yeah.

true...

when did the hand check rule come in place?

need to look that up

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

true...

when did the hand check rule come in place?

need to look that up

I believe 2002.

 

[FirstTimer]

Ast:Tov is the best tool we have to measure passing skill.

Umm, no it's not.

That's more of a "decision making" marker than anything.

Saying it measures the players actual ability to pass the ball is rather odd....especially when ignoring systems.

Your entire summation is Special person. Nash played in an incredibly PG/passing friendly system with better players during his peak than Lebron did when Lebron's point-forward days were at there peak(to this point in their respective careers). So not only does Nash have a better surrounding cast to boost makes that lead to assists he also plays in a system that lends itself t better looks for even bad players, let alone good ones.

You ignoring the system that each player played in when they accumulated the respective numbers is basketball Special person.

 

[FirstTimer]

I brought it up 1 time.

One time too many it seems.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

i think it was like 2004-2005 ish

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

Ast:Tov is the best tool we have to measure passing skill. And for the most part it tells the right story. Nash is clearly a better passer than LBJ or Wade so that is an upside for Nash that is undeniable.

LBJ and Wade average much more points than Nash and still are efficient overall shooters. I said that despite Nash's undeniable efficiency, he was still a lesser scorer than either of the two. But his passing ability at least puts him in the conversation with Wade and LBJ offensively- combined with averaging (50+% from two, about 40% from three, and 88+% on FT's on about 15 points per-game is also extremely impressive and a relatively high volume of shot-attempts).

you could always use your eyes

while nash is a better passer than lebron, you don't think in a high octane, fastbreak system that lebron's Ast:TOV ratio would go up?

 

[FirstTimer]

you could always use your eyes

while nash is a better passer than lebron, you don't think in a high octane, fastbreak system that lebron's Ast:TOV ratio would go up?

No. Clearly systems don't matter here. Only Rami's ridiculous statistical analysis.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Umm, no it's not.

That's more of a "decision making" marker than anything.

Saying it measures the players actual ability to pass the ball is rather odd....especially when ignoring systems.

It isn't an exact marker of passing ability but it often parallels it. Nash is a better passer than both player regardless and that is inarguable.

Your entire summation is Special person. Nash played in an incredibly PG/passing friendly system with better players during his peak than Lebron did when Lebron's point-forward days were at there peak(to this point in their respective careers). So not only does Nash have a better surrounding cast to boost makes that lead to assists he also plays in a system that lends itself t better looks for even bad players, let alone good ones.

You ignoring the system that each player played in when they accumulated the respective numbers is basketball Special person.

In Dallas and Phoenix, after the D'Antoni years up including last season, Steve Nash was still a more efficient scorer than LBJ and Wade.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

No. Clearly systems don't matter here. Only Rami's ridiculous statistical analysis.

mike brown was an offensive guru

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

you could always use your eyes

while nash is a better passer than lebron, you don't think in a high octane, fastbreak system that lebron's Ast:TOV ratio would go up?

Yes, it absolutely should. AST:TOV does have a lot to do with passing ability though. Typically, the best passers do better with that statistic.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

Yes, it absolutely should. AST:TOV does have a lot to do with passing ability though. Typically, the best passers do better with that statistic.

never said it didn't have to do with passing ability at all, but by a technical standard, it indicates efficiency

some guys are great passers, but turn it over because they have a high usage or they are ball dominate or get gung ho if you know what i mean

D will was 52nd in the league in A/TO ratio this year, is he even close to being the 52nd best passer?

 

[FirstTimer]

Nash is a better passer than both player regardless and that is inarguable.

More of Rami's stupid "black/white" arguments.

Yes it is arguable.

Hence the issue.

You're currently basing your "inarguable fact" on faulty logic and reasoning.

Strong stance.

:rofl:

In Dallas

No he wasn't.

Ignoring systems and surrounding casts(which is stupid anyways)

Lebron's best "point forward season"
29.7 (50% shooting)
8.6/3.4


Nash's
14.5 PPG(47%)
8.8/2.7

Sorry but in my basketball world(and most others) an added 15ppg at a better shooting rate with a comparable assist total is more "efficient" especially when you take into account who James had(or didn't have) to pass the ball to in direct comparison to Nash.

and Phoenix, after the D'Antoni years up including last season, Steve Nash was still a more efficient scorer than LBJ and Wade.

You do realize the Suns are still running a close variant of the D'antoni system right?