Is Ike Diogu The Roberto Petagine Of The NBA?

[Boob-No-More]

So does Frye. Frye doesn't bring defensive value. Diogu's PER isn't inflated, because it's a measure of productivity, not defense. Diogu is productive and lacks defense. Frye is unproductive and lacks defense.

Frye's DRtg this season was 108 - about average for the team.

Ike's DRtg with the Blazers was 111 - tied for worst on the team. It was even worse with Sacrasmento (115 - which is absolutely abysmal).

Ike Diogu is a horrible, horrible defender. Yes, he was a more productive offenseive player and a better offensive rebounder than Cahnning Frye, but Frye, in spite of not being very good, was a better defender and a better defensive rebounder.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what I think. Soomeone who is paid millions of dollars to know more about basketball than me thought Frye was more deserving or minutes, and ultimately more deserving of a roster spot than Ike. His previous coaches didn't think much of Ike either. Were they ALL wrong, too?

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

You are obviously getting emotional about it.. I don't know why you care so much and it is just unnecessary to call him a fat, lazy ass.

Agreed, that was a bit harsh. Perhaps husky and unmotivated would have been more diplomatic.

Or, perhaps Ike just needs a little tough love to provide the motivation he has lacked thoughout his NBA career.

Yeah, he's a had a few minor injuries (FWIW, Frye had an absolutely devasting injury near the end of his rookie season, and came back early from surgery last fall, but no one around here seems to cut him any slack for his injury issues), but that hasn't kept him from coming into training camp in top physical condition. The fact that he comes into camp overweight and out of shape year after year shows a lack of motivation on his part. If he wants more minutes, all he has to do is get into better shape and put in a little effort on the defensive end. The guy definitely has some offensive talent, but until he puts in a little effort on the other end, he won't get to display it on a regular basis.

BNM

 

[Minstrel]

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what I think. Soomeone who is paid millions of dollars to know more about basketball than me thought Frye was more deserving or minutes, and ultimately more deserving of a roster spot than Ike. His previous coaches didn't think much of Ike either. Were they ALL wrong, too?

They might be. There are frequently mistakes made on players, in all sports. Am I certain that his coaches have been wrong to bury him? No, of course not. But I do think his numbers suggest that he might be overlooked as a useful reserve player. He clearly has weaknesses. He's a poor defender and a poor passer. But he's got clear NBA-caliber tools when it comes to offensive rebounding, scoring around the hoop and drawing fouls. Those are all things that could be valuable in a bench player.

Perhaps if he played more, he'd be exposed and his production in short bursts would be proven illusory. I'm open to that possibility. That said, Diogu seems like a promising candidate for an overlooked bit of value. Even coaches are wrong sometimes and the players they are wrong about tend to be players like Diogu: ones who don't have prototypical size, impressive athleticism or pretty skills. Diogu is not a very impressive player to watch, but he's ugly-effective.

 

[Boob-No-More]

They might be. There are frequently mistakes made on players, in all sports. Am I certain that his coaches have been wrong to bury him? No, of course not. But I do think his numbers suggest that he might be overlooked as a useful reserve player. He clearly has weaknesses. He's a poor defender and a poor passer. But he's got clear NBA-caliber tools when it comes to offensive rebounding, scoring around the hoop and drawing fouls. Those are all things that could be valuable in a bench player.

Perhaps if he played more, he'd be exposed and his production in short bursts would be proven illusory. I'm open to that possibility. That said, Diogu seems like a promising candidate for an overlooked bit of value. Even coaches are wrong sometimes and the players they are wrong about tend to be players like Diogu: ones who don't have prototypical size, impressive athleticism or pretty skills. Diogu is not a very impressive player to watch, but he's ugly-effective.

If you read the article, the author provides some numbers to back up what I've been saying about Ike all along - he's a selfish offensive player that doesn't help his team or play a lick of defense. Here's some quotes from the article (and keep in mind the author was trying to make a case for Diogu as a overlooked, under appreciated possible back-up for his team):

"Offense

It may say something that his team’s offense has performed worse with him on the floor in each of his four seasons in the league, according to 82games.com. "

"His career assist rate of 5.1 (meaning he assists of 5.1 percent of teammates’ baskets when he’s on the floor) is well below average, suggesting he may not be a good team offensive player."

About Diogu’s defense: His team has been worse defensively with him on the floor, in terms of points allowed per 100 possessions, in three of his four seasons. The exception? The 42 games he played in ‘06-07 for Indiana, when the Pacers defense, for whatever reason, was 4.6 points stingier per 100 possessions with Ike in the line-up, according to 82games. But it’s been all down hill since then, as his individual defensive rating has jumped to nearly 115 (really, really bad) over the last two seasons."

"And it’s worth noting that despite those two monster games with the Kings, the team still performed worse on both ends overall with Diogu on the floor."

Throughout his career, according to 82games.com, Diogu's teams have consistenly performed WORSE on both ends of the court when he's in the game. He puts up good individual numbers on offense, but hurts his team's over all offensive production. And, he's just flat out terrible on defense.

If it had only happened one or two places, I could buy that he just didn't get a fair chance, but it's been going on for four years and with four different teams and five different coaches. As a result, I have a hard time buying the "unlucky coincidence" argument.

BNM

 

[Minstrel]

If you read the article, the author provides some numbers to back up what I've been saying about Ike all along - he's a selfish offensive player that doesn't help his team or play a lick of defense.

None of which I've disputed. I specifically said defense and passing were his weaknesses. The reason the author was making a case for Diogu (and finished still believing that he might be a decent option if the Celts didn't have Glen Davis, who's also undersized), is because we're talking about a possible reserve.

If he was a good defender and passer, in addition to his abilities as an offensive rebounder, inside scorer and drawer of fouls, he'd be a very good starter. It's hard to use a poor passing offensive player as a starter, but it's a lot easier to use such a player as a bench weapon, since most teams have trouble finding scoring with their second string. Diogu is an awful choice as someone to rely on as a go-to guy, since he doesn't pass (whether that's due to selfishness or inability is not my concern). As a reserve meant to suck up some minutes while the players you rely on to win are resting, he makes a potentially nice option. He gets you some rebounds, scores a few points, maybe draws a few fouls on opposing big men and then he's out of the game again.

If your contention is that Diogu has serious flaws, there's no question about that. Most reserve players have clear flaws or else they'd start somewhere. But I don't think those flaws preclude him from providing value off the bench.

 

[LittleAlex]

did you even check the article?

"With Diogu, it’s not his work ethic or his attitude. His coaches and teammates have praised his attitude in college and in the pros. So let’s look at some numbers, after the jump."

Yup, read the article. However I tend to give more credence to what I can see with my own eyes. His behavior before games gave me the impression he could give two shits about playing or not.

I do not believe everything I read. Do you?

 

[Boob-No-More]

If your contention is that Diogu has serious flaws, there's no question about that. Most reserve players have clear flaws or else they'd start somewhere. But I don't think those flaws preclude him from providing value off the bench.

His flaws are serious enough that he hurts his team at both ends of the court - even though he plays most of his minutes against other back-ups. To me, that sounds like a below average back-up. If I have a winning team, I want my back-ups out performing the other team's back-ups. That doesn't mean they have to be "starter quality" players, just avgerage to better than average back-ups. Ike, thoughtout his career, if you believe the stats at 82games.com, has "helped" his teams underperform at both ends of the court, even against weak competition.

To me, that sounds like he should be a back-up on a bad team (like the Kings), not a 54-win playoff team. In the right situation (bad team), I have no doubt he could post some gaudy individual stats. However, I remain convinced that it's very unlikely he will ever be even a minor rotation player on a 50+ win team - especially one that goes deep in the play-offs where his poor defense would be a serious liability.

BNM

 

[Minstrel]

His flaws are serious enough that he hurts his team at both ends of the court - even though he plays most of his minutes against other back-ups. To me, that sounds like a below average back-up. If I have a winning team, I want my back-ups out performing the other team's back-ups. That doesn't mean they have to be "starter quality" players, just avgerage to better than average back-ups. Ike, thoughtout his career, if you believe the stats at 82games.com, has "helped" his teams underperform at both ends of the court, even against weak competition.

I think we're giving different levels of importance to his offensive/defensive +/- numbers. I think +/- is an interesting concept, but a lot of statisticians have said that those types of numbers are too noisy to be very informative until a large sample (like several seasons of significant minutes) has been built up. Such a sample is what we don't have with Diogu, so I put more weight on his direct numbers (like PER, TS%, etc) rather than indirect numbers like +/-.

As I said, I'm open to the possibility that his production would be exposed as not valuable if given consistent minutes. I wouldn't give him much more than the veteran's minimum. But I think there's a decent chance that he could be a useful backup, one who likely hurts the team on the defensive end but more than makes up for it on the offensive end.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I think we're giving different levels of importance to his offensive/defensive +/- numbers. I think +/- is an interesting concept, but a lot of statisticians have said that those types of numbers are too noisy to be very informative until a large sample (like several seasons of significant minutes) has been built up. Such a sample is what we don't have with Diogu, so I put more weight on his direct numbers (like PER, TS%, etc) rather than indirect numbers like +/-.

These aren't just simple +/- stats. They are relative stats - how his team performs with him on the court vs. how they perfom when he's not on the court. And yes, sample size is always a concern. However, Ike has over 2300 minutes of playing time, on four different teams, and he has consistently hurt his teams on both ends of the court. His performance in Portland, if it was an isolated case, could be chalked up to a statistical anomaly. However, when a consistent pattern emerges over four seasons, 2300 minutes and four different teams, it's much harder to discount as just a small sample size.

Perhaps his production has been impacted by the cumulative effect of his injuries. Perhaps he just hasn't been in the right situations. Given the consistency of the results, I'm more inclined to conclude that perhaps he just isn't very good.

BNM

 

[Minstrel]

These aren't just simple +/- stats. They are relative stats - how his team performs with him on the court vs. how they perfom when he's not on the court.

That's exactly what +/- is. A relative measure of how the team performs when a player is on the court versus when he is off the court. Such statistics generally require several seasons of solid minutes to be informative, a sample size which we don't currently have for Diogu.

Therefore, I don't consider that to be a very good measure of Diogu's impact on a team. Direct measurements of individual impact, like PER, need a much smaller sample size to be useful. Those measures are quite positive on Diogu. Thus, I'm more inclined to believe he's a useful player when it comes to offense and rebounding.

I don't think he's a useful defensive player, from having watched him play a fair amount (I live in the Bay Area, I saw him as a Warrior, as well as a Blazer). I'm not alleging that he is. There are quite a few defensively-lacking starters, let alone reserves. You're just not going to find a lot of players who are valuable on both ends, especially among reserves. A player who's not very good defensively but is good at rebounding and scoring inside can still be a useful reserve, and I think Diogu is quite possibly such a player. Rather, I think he has been such a player in the few minutes he's played over the years in the NBA and quite possibly could continue to produce at that level over more minutes.

 

[Ed O]

Well then, you think wrong. Disagree with me all you want, but don't belittle my opinion as "getting a bit emotional about it".

Are you denying that you're being emotional for some reason here? Do you really think that comments like

My point? Since you're incaple of figuring it out yourself:

and

Channing Frye SUCKS. Channing Frye > Ike Diogu.

That simple enough for you?

are detached, reasoned positions to take?

Really?

I was sort of trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here that you were just riled up, for some reason, rather than acting like a nine year-old.

As for belittling an argument: you had made no argument at that point. You'd just thrown out the same stuff that had been articulated before he was traded to Sacramento... which is, essentially, that since he's not playing that he doesn't DESERVE to play. Which is not logic that I find that helpful or interesting.

Ed O.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I was sort of trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here that you were just riled up, for some reason, rather than acting like a nine year-old.

As opposed to acting like a condescending jerk?

As for belittling an argument: you had made no argument at that point. You'd just thrown out the same stuff that had been articulated before he was traded to Sacramento... which is, essentially, that since he's not playing that he doesn't DESERVE to play. Which is not logic that I find that helpful or interesting.

The arguments I've made against Diogu are well documented and reinforced by the article linked in the first post of this thread. If I have an "emotional" bias against Ike Diogu, it's nothing person, just my general dislike of selfish players who don't play defense. If you think that's an "emotional" argument, go look at his assist rate and defensive stats at basketball-reference.com and 82games.com and prove me wrong. I happen to value things like defense and team play. I think it's what separates winners from losers. My opinion, which is backed up by the stats, is that Ike Diogu is far, far below average in these two areas. Therefore, I don't want him on my team. It's as simple as that.

Once upon a time, we had a MUCH, MUCH better selfish, stat padding, no defense playing undersized, overweight power forward on our roster. When we traded him, our supposed "best player" at the time, we gave him away for practically nothing - and yet the team isntantly got a whole lot better, didn't it. I seem to recall you predicting all kinds of doom and gloom at the time. So, forgive me if I don't simply bow down and accept your opinion on the value of Ike Diogu. But hey, feel free to start your own Ike Diogu fan club if it makes you happy.

BNM

 

[Wheels]

Yup, read the article. However I tend to give more credence to what I can see with my own eyes. His behavior before games gave me the impression he could give two shits about playing or not.

I do not believe everything I read. Do you?

No sir I do not.. I just dont presume to think that watching someone goof around during warmups, means I have any idea about someone's attitude. Just me though maybe.

 

[Wheels]

Frye's DRtg this season was 108 - about average for the team.

Ike's DRtg with the Blazers was 111 - tied for worst on the team. It was even worse with Sacrasmento (115 - which is absolutely abysmal).

Ike Diogu is a horrible, horrible defender. Yes, he was a more productive offenseive player and a better offensive rebounder than Cahnning Frye, but Frye, in spite of not being very good, was a better defender and a better defensive rebounder.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what I think. Soomeone who is paid millions of dollars to know more about basketball than me thought Frye was more deserving or minutes, and ultimately more deserving of a roster spot than Ike. His previous coaches didn't think much of Ike either. Were they ALL wrong, too?

BNM

So now we are worrying about stopping the backup PF's of the world? We are worried about the Josh Powell's, Joe Smith's, Stromile Swift's, and Darko Milicic's of the nba? Look just because someone doesnt agree with you.. doesnt mean you need to get all riled up and talking down to people.

 

[Wheels]

As opposed to acting like a condescending jerk?



The arguments I've made against Diogu are well documented and reinforced by the article linked in the first post of this thread. If I have an "emotional" bias against Ike Diogu, it's nothing person, just my general dislike of selfish players who don't play defense. If you think that's an "emotional" argument, go look at his assist rate and defensive stats at basketball-reference.com and 82games.com and prove me wrong. I happen to value things like defense and team play. I think it's what separates winners from losers. My opinion, which is backed up by the stats, is that Ike Diogu is far, far below average in these two areas. Therefore, I don't want him on my team. It's as simple as that.

Once upon a time, we had a MUCH, MUCH better selfish, stat padding, no defense playing undersized, overweight power forward on our roster. When we traded him, our supposed "best player" at the time, we gave him away for practically nothing - and yet the team isntantly got a whole lot better, didn't it. I seem to recall you predicting all kinds of doom and gloom at the time. So, forgive me if I don't simply bow down and accept your opinion on the value of Ike Diogu. But hey, feel free to start your own Ike Diogu fan club if it makes you happy.

BNM

good lord lol

 

[Ed O]

As opposed to acting like a condescending jerk?

You were being condescending, yes, but I don't know that I'd go so far as to say that you were being a jerk.

The arguments I've made against Diogu are well documented and reinforced by the article linked in the first post of this thread. If I have an "emotional" bias against Ike Diogu, it's nothing person, just my general dislike of selfish players who don't play defense. If you think that's an "emotional" argument, go look at his assist rate and defensive stats at basketball-reference.com and 82games.com and prove me wrong. I happen to value things like defense and team play. I think it's what separates winners from losers. My opinion, which is backed up by the stats, is that Ike Diogu is far, far below average in these two areas. Therefore, I don't want him on my team. It's as simple as that.

So why do you need to treat people that disagree with you like morons?

Once upon a time, we had a MUCH, MUCH better selfish, stat padding, no defense playing undersized, overweight power forward on our roster. When we traded him, our supposed "best player" at the time, we gave him away for practically nothing - and yet the team isntantly got a whole lot better, didn't it. I seem to recall you predicting all kinds of doom and gloom at the time. So, forgive me if I don't simply bow down and accept your opinion on the value of Ike Diogu. But hey, feel free to start your own Ike Diogu fan club if it makes you happy.

All sorts of doom and gloom?

You thought that I thought the team would be worse after adding Oden and having second-year players in Aldridge and the RotY Roy?

Maybe I was, but I doubt it.

I thought it was a terrible trade and I still think it's a bad trade, pending the Blazers using the salary cap space to get something, which might change my mind.

We took on a terrible contract in Francis and a terrible player in Channing Frye. The only thing we got out of the deal was a trade exception that was used to get Rudy, and I'm pretty confident we would have been able to get the pick to take him even without that. The team would have been better served to hold onto Zach for another year and make a deal like the Knicks did.

Ed O.

 

[Boob-No-More]

So why do you need to treat people that disagree with you like morons?

This is what I responded to:

"and Bayless couldnt beat out Sergio for meaningful minutes.. whats your point?"

That's a total non-argument in my book and has NOTHING to do with the value Ike Diogu. If someone posts a repectable argument, I will respond in kind. If they don't, well they get what they deserve.

You thought that I thought the team would be worse after adding Oden and having second-year players in Aldridge and the RotY Roy?

Maybe I was, but I doubt it.

I could be wrong, but I could swear you predicted the Blazers would win FEWER games than the 32 they won the year before - and that was before Oden got injured.

I thought it was a terrible trade and I still think it's a bad trade, pending the Blazers using the salary cap space to get something, which might change my mind.

We took on a terrible contract in Francis and a terrible player in Channing Frye. The only thing we got out of the deal was a trade exception that was used to get Rudy, and I'm pretty confident we would have been able to get the pick to take him even without that. The team would have been better served to hold onto Zach for another year and make a deal like the Knicks did.

We also got a year's worth of James Jones, and while we didn't end up keeping him, he had a big impact while he was here. The Blazers had a much better record in games he played in than in games he didn't. And Frye wasn't so terrible his first year with the Blazers. Although I admit I was hugely disappointed in his performance this year. Of course, the big prize was Rudy. Sure, we might have been able to have acquired him some other way without giving up Zach, but what would it have cost us to do so? Who knows.

And what exactly of great value did the Knicks get for Zbo? They got Tim Thomas (an expiring contract) and Cutino Mobley, who couldn't even pass his physical and was forced to retire. Sounds like the Knicks got even less for Zbo than the Blazers did. He was basically given away for cap space for a second time. Getting traded once for crap may not indicate the true worth of a player, but getting traded a second time for even stinkier crap starts to define a trend.

BNM

 

[Ed O]

And what exactly of great value did the Knicks get for Zbo? They got Tim Thomas (an expiring contract) and Cutino Mobley, who couldn't even pass his physical and was forced to retire. Sounds like the Knicks got even less for Zbo than the Blazers did. He was basically given away for cap space for a second time. Getting traded once for crap may not indicate the true worth of a player, but getting traded a second time for even stinkier crap starts to define a trend.

I would rather have had two years of Zach than two years of Steve Francis (which was nothing) and Frye (which was, in some ways, worse than nothing). Assuming we could have made the same deal that the Knicks did (which was sort of a worst-case scenario, as the Knicks were eager to get out from under his deal after stinking for the 11,234rd straight season), I would rather have taken my chances keeping Zach for another year and seeing if it would have worked out.

Ed O.

 

[Wheels]

This is what I responded to:

"and Bayless couldnt beat out Sergio for meaningful minutes.. whats your point?"
That's a total non-argument in my book and has NOTHING to do with the value Ike Diogu. If someone posts a repectable argument, I will respond in kind. If they don't, well they get what they deserve.



I could be wrong, but I could swear you predicted the Blazers would win FEWER games than the 32 they won the year before - and that was before Oden got injured.



We also got a year's worth of James Jones, and while we didn't end up keeping him, he had a big impact while he was here. The Blazers had a much better record in games he played in than in games he didn't. And Frye wasn't so terrible his first year with the Blazers. Although I admit I was hugely disappointed in his performance this year. Of course, the big prize was Rudy. Sure, we might have been able to have acquired him some other way without giving up Zach, but what would it have cost us to do so? Who knows.

And what exactly of great value did the Knicks get for Zbo? They got Tim Thomas (an expiring contract) and Cutino Mobley, who couldn't even pass his physical and was forced to retire. Sounds like the Knicks got even less for Zbo than the Blazers did. He was basically given away for cap space for a second time. Getting traded once for crap may not indicate the true worth of a player, but getting traded a second time for even stinkier crap starts to define a trend.

BNM

So my comment offended you so much that you've been on a 6 hour meltdown? I just found your point about Frye getting time over him moot.. because both hardly played at all.. same with Sergio and Bayless.

 

[Boob-No-More]

So my comment offended you so much that you've been on a 6 hour meltdown? I just found your point about Frye getting time over him moot.. because both hardly played at all.. same with Sergio and Bayless.

Awww... did the big bad boob man hurt your wittle feelings

Good lord. You wanted more information and you got it. You asked my point. I gave it and backed it up. Next time, if you don't want it, don't ask for it. Or better yet, put me on ignore.

Stop the self-pity party and *edited*.

BNM

 

[LittleAlex]

No sir I do not.. I just dont presume to think that watching someone goof around during warmups, means I have any idea about someone's attitude. Just me though maybe.

Since none of the other players were, and supposedly Ike was fighting for playing time, I believe it was telling. It sure as hell showed on the defensive side of the ball when he did play. There was a very good reason he couldn't get off the bench.

 

[Boob-No-More]

So now we are worrying about stopping the backup PF's of the world? We are worried about the Josh Powell's, Joe Smith's, Stromile Swift's, and Darko Milicic's of the nba? Look just because someone doesnt agree with you.. doesnt mean you need to get all riled up and talking down to people.

You completely missed the point (again). Ike Diogu, on EVERY team he's ever played on has given up more points than he's produced. The stats at 82games.com show that his team has consistently preformed worse on both ends of the court when he's in the game. I don't need my back-up power forward to be a lock down defender, but I would like him to do more good than harm when he's on the court. Ike Diogu simply isn't that guy. The stats show that he consistently hurts his team more than he helps them. And yes, the sample size with the Blazers is small, but he's played over 2300 minutes in the NBA and the results have been the same everywhere he's played.

That's not a meltdown, it's cold hard facts. Disagree all you want, but please either dispute the arguments I've presented against Diogu, or present some in his favor - that you can back up with facts.

BNM

 

[Wheels]

You completely missed the point (again). Ike Diogu, on EVERY team he's ever played on has given up more points than he's produced. The stats at 82games.com show that his team has consistently preformed worse on both ends of the court when he's in the game. I don't need my back-up power forward to be a lock down defender, but I would like him to do more good than harm when he's on the court. Ike Diogu simply isn't that guy. The stats show that he consistently hurts his team more than he helps them. And yes, the sample size with the Blazers is small, but he's played over 2300 minutes in the NBA and the results have been the same everywhere he's played.

That's not a meltdown, it's cold hard facts. Disagree all you want, but please either dispute the arguments I've presented against Diogu, or present some in his favor - that you can back up with facts.

BNM

Look just like most would agree.. numbers dont mean everything when they could be skewed.. like us giving up in the top 5 or so in defensive ppg as a team... yet you and I both know that we werent a good defensive team. So in Diogu for example.. I dont have numbers to say how many of those minutes were garbage time minutes when the team is up by quite a bit. But I would venture to guess thats when he played a lot of his time, and much of the time in garbage time that lead shrinks some.. even by double digits. You know how a lot of the time you hear announcers say at the end of the game "and the score wasnt really indicative of how close (or not close) the game was" so if youre in during those times, naturally youre going to have stats like that. Unless you were expecting Ike to pick up the intensity for all 5 men on the floor when down or up by 20.

The meltdown comment was more on your reactions to people who just dont agree with you.

 

[Wheels]

Since none of the other players were, and supposedly Ike was fighting for playing time, I believe it was telling. It sure as hell showed on the defensive side of the ball when he did play. There was a very good reason he couldn't get off the bench.

fair enough, I guess its all speculative on both our sides, because neither one of us has any idea really on his attitude, since we arent around him, or werent with the team when he was here.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Look just like most would agree.. numbers dont mean everything when they could be skewed.. like us giving up in the top 5 or so in defensive ppg as a team... yet you and I both know that we werent a good defensive team. So in Diogu for example.. I dont have numbers to say how many of those minutes were garbage time minutes when the team is up by quite a bit. But I would venture to guess thats when he played a lot of his time, and much of the time in garbage time that lead shrinks some.. even by double digits. You know how a lot of the time you hear announcers say at the end of the game "and the score wasnt really indicative of how close (or not close) the game was" so if youre in during those times, naturally youre going to have stats like that. Unless you were expecting Ike to pick up the intensity for all 5 men on the floor when down or up by 20.

The meltdown comment was more on your reactions to people who just dont agree with you.

I don't mind people disagreeing with me at all, but I appreciate it when they actually back up what they say.

You jumped all over LittleAlex for what "he saw with his own eyes" and now you're trying to rationalize why Ike has had a consistently negative impact at both ends of the court on every team he's every played on based on some assumptions with no data to back them up.

When Ike plays in garbage time, it's garbage time for both teams. Nobody really plays defense - which may explain why Ike scores as much as he does. The garbage time argument works both ways. He's playing against the other teams' end-of-the-bench guys - and has consistently gotten out played by them.

And not all of Ike's minutes have been garbage time. He played more significant minutes is rookie year - and the results were still the same - his team suffered on both ends of the court when he was in the game. It's not an anomaly, it's a pattern.

BNM

 

[Wheels]

I don't mind people disagreeing with me at all, but I appreciate it when they actually back up what they say.

You jumped all over LittleAlex for what "he saw with his own eyes" and now you're trying to rationalize why Ike has had a consistently negative impact at both ends of the court on every team he's every played on based on some assumptions with no data to back them up.

When Ike plays in garbage time, it's garbage time for both teams. Nobody really plays defense - which may explain why Ike scores as much as he does. The garbage time argument works both ways. He's playing against the other teams' end-of-the-bench guys - and has consistently gotten out played by them.

And not all of Ike's minutes have been garbage time. He played more significant minutes is rookie year - and the results were still the same - his team suffered on both ends of the court when he was in the game. It's not an anomaly, it's a pattern.

BNM

Jumped all over him? I would hardly say that I jumped on him, I never went to belittling him for disagreeing with me.. that was the route you went. And I agree with you about it goign both ways with him scoring against garbage guys.. but Scoring wasnt one of the things that I was lobbying for our backup PF to do, at the beginning I mentioned at him not being inept at scoring. but Rebounding is what we need at backup PF IMO and he offers that. And on Ike not playing all garbage minutes.. you bring up his rookie year. So its Rookie stats and garbage stats that its based on. I dont think many expected him to come in and dominate as a rookie. So I apologize that I dont have actual stats to support my thoughts, there really arent any stats to backup my argument on this one.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

Awww... did the big bad boob man hurt your wittle feelings

Good lord. You wanted more information and you got it. You asked my point. I gave it and backed it up. Next time, if you don't want it, don't ask for it. Or better yet, put me on ignore.

Stop the self-pity party and *edited*.

BNM

I don't see where he implied you hurt his feelings.. I just see him talking about your meltdown, which is obviously still on.

 

[Wheels]

I don't see where he implied you hurt his feelings.. I just see him talking about your meltdown, which is obviously still on.

lol wow I didnt even see that part.. by the time I got back in on this thread it was on page 3.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I don't see where he implied you hurt his feelings.. I just see him talking about your meltdown, which is obviously still on.

Since when is stating a rational argument and backing it up with cold hard facts a "meltdown"? If it is, then we need more meltdowns around here. I've backed up my position with facts - not just opinions and gut feelings. I have a low tolerance for those who eschew the former and base their positions on the latter. If that makes me a bad guy, so be it. Whatever.

BNM

 

[VanillaGorilla]

lol wow I didnt even see that part.. by the time I got back in on this thread it was on page 3.

haha yeah there was about 5 new posts from when I saw that and when I posted mine

I'm just skimming through for the insults, everyone loves a good, pointless cyber-argument