GAME THREAD: BLAZERS @ KNICKS - FEB. 5TH, 2014, WEDNESDAY, 5:00 PM, ESPN & CSNNW

[PapaG]

Thanks for the new signature, Brian. LMA isn't helping the team. Got it. He doesn't spread the floor at all, and lead to open shots for others.

 

[Strenuus]

To be fair, I didn't bring it up, other than to say BfromWA is consistently negative in game threads.

In comparison to who? I don't find him to be negative at all. I guess where my negativity meter goes is trolling... when people bring stats (cherry picked or not) at least they are bringing something with their negativity.

Like me, I was just being a negative nancy last night. Once I calmed down, I realized it wasn't so bad. But, do we need improvements? Yeah.

For the record, I'm in neither camp.

 

[PapaG]

If supporting and defending LMA means I'm on the ban list here, then just ban me from this board.

 

[PapaG]

In comparison to who? I don't find him to be negative at all. I guess where my negativity meter goes is trolling... when people bring stats (cherry picked or not) at least they are bringing something with their negativity.

Like me, I was just being a negative nancy last night. Once I calmed down, I realized it wasn't so bad. But, do we need improvements? Yeah.

For the record, I'm in neither camp.

So you're not sure if LMA taking shots is hurting the team? I find that opinion to be stupid, based on how the offense is being run this year.

I think we're lucky to have him on the Blazers, from the perspective of a fan. Every coach in the West feels the same way. BrianfromWA thinks LMA is costing the Blazers some wins, and they should have 38 or 39 wins at this point. I say the Blazers could be 49-0 if they made every shot. I understand how to play the game, though. BrianfromWA just pulls up stats. Why wouldn't a team shoot 3 pointers every possession, if you're looking at stats? That bumps up the TS%, on paper. It doesn't take into account floor spacing, but for someone who doesn't know the game, it's an easy thing to post.

 

[Strenuus]

So you're not sure if LMA taking shots is hurting the team? I find that opinion to be stupid, based on how the offense is being run this year.

I think we're lucky to have him on the Blazers, from the perspective of a fan. Every coach in the West feels the same way. BrianfromWA thinks LMA is costing the Blazers some wins, and they should have 38 or 39 wins at this point. I say the Blazers could be 49-0 if they made every shot. I understand how to play the game, though. BrianfromWA just pulls up stats. Why wouldn't a team shoot 3 pointers every possession, if you're looking at stats? That bumps up the TS%, on paper. It doesn't take into account floor spacing, but for someone who doesn't know the game, it's an easy thing to post.

Ah. You read that wrong. I meant I am not taking sides, completely arbitary and "mediating" I guess. (Hopefully it doesn't go into the 'meddling' stage )

 

[BrianFromWA]

I do refute your posts, Brian. When you say the Blazers could have a better record if LMA played better, I can counter that the Blazers could have a worse record if LMA played worse. Those are OPINIONS, though, and that's a concept that you seem to struggle with when someone challenges your opinions.

I don't struggle with anything you say. You've said that you attempt to "ridicule" posters to "bring an energy" to the board, so your baseless invective doesn't bother me. I choose not to engage in that sort of nonsense, and my posts are generally built to educate and/or refute when necessary.

When you're posting hypothetical records, those aren't facts, Jack.

Absolutely, and I haven't asserted otherwise. I have asserted at least 4 times the logic chain that shows where that opinion comes from, and you have gone 0-4 in even attempting to refute the post, and instead attacking the poster.

Your constant derision of LMA should be called out by others, but instead, it's tolerated, and becomes the norm of the board

, You are welcome to go elsewhere if I'm so far into your head that you think I can changes board mores just because there's green under my name.

because you spend 45 minutes coming up with stats that seemingly back up your preconceived opinion.

Wait, "seemingly" or "somewhat?" Both of those mean that there's some truth or perception of it that's been backed up. Which parts are "not seemingly" or "not somewhat" backed up? Your crusade to put opinions on me ("bias!" "constant derision!") goes back 5 years and is just as irrelevant now as it was when you thought that Travis shooting 1-dribble 22-footers was a good thing. And which part of the stats back up your opinion that I'm wrong? FWIW, I don't have to spend 45 minutes. It takes 30 seconds to look up basketball reference.com to see if something's changed since the last time I looked at it. It takes less than a minute to pull up the shot chart from ESPN.com's box score. It takes less than 4 minutes (less if bandwidth is good) to bring up the videos showing every shot he's taken over a given subset on nba.com. And that's assuming I'm not at home pulling up the game on the DVR.

I admire your effort--you'd think after 5 years of attempting to get under my skin with baiting and invective that you'd give up, but you keep giving it the ol' college try! Perhaps someday we can talk basketball, and not fall down into the trap of you attempting to bring your own special energy to the board by ridiculing/posting dishonestly, baiting people and begging for ban martyrdom. I look forward to that day.

 

[Natebishop3]

If supporting and defending LMA means I'm on the ban list here, then just ban me from this board.

Why does it bother you so much? That's the part I don't understand. These guys aren't your children. You have to personal stake in it, so why do you get so worked up because someone has an opinion that you disagree with?

He isn't saying LA sucks. He isn't saying he wants him gone. He is pointing out that he thinks LA takes too many inefficient shots and he tries to support that claim with stats. Personally, I find that to be refreshing over any other poster simply saying, "omgerd LaMarshmallow you suuuuuuck!"

 

[PapaG]

Why does it bother you so much? That's the part I don't understand. These guys aren't your children. You have to personal stake in it, so why do you get so worked up because someone has an opinion that you disagree with?

He isn't saying LA sucks. He isn't saying he wants him gone. He is pointing out that he thinks LA takes too many inefficient shots and he tries to support that claim with stats. Personally, I find that to be refreshing over any other poster simply saying, "omgerd LaMarshmallow you suuuuuuck!"

There is no stat for spacing the floor via being double-teamed. Well, actually, there is, at least in part. It's called team offensive efficiency. Take a look at the Blazer's numbers when LMA is off the court compared to when he's on the court. It's silly to say the team would win more games with LMA changing his game. The stats say that without LMA, this would not be as good of a team.

Also, why does anybody care about the Blazers? You've got 38,000 posts. That's a lot of time spent on something that you shouldn't care about. I find it silly and tiresome to have the same stats posted over and over. Now, we've moved onto the Blazers having more wins if LMA was playing differently. That's a subjective opinion, and can't be proved statistically.

Also, please show me where the Knicks run their offense through Bargnani. It's a cherry-picked comparison that is only meant as a slam on LMA. You can ride Brian's coattails all you want, but when someone offers stats that make no sense in the real world, they should be called on it.

 

[PapaG]

Bargnani on/off -9.1
LMA on/off +12.9

This should stop any comparison between the two, but it won't, because Brian doesn't know how to use stats that measure a player's impact on the success of his team.

They have the same TS%, which means they are the same player and should be compared.