Is Oden partly a victim of the Deron Williams treatment?

[Ed O]

Um, that is proof about me stating that it is a Nate vs. Sloan comparison on how they view rookies. I see nothing about whether or not Nate treats rookies fairly. Stop making stuff up about what I posted and stick to the words. You are in the wrong here by ascribing intent to my post that simply isn't there, and at this point it is clear you have some sort of problem with me.

Is there intent behind your words? What is it that I'm butchering so badly?

The plain language of what I'm reading indicates that your intent is how rookies are treated. That is, after all, the point of this fucking thread.

Are you talking about the fact that Nate is black and Sloan is white? That Nate played for the Sonics and Sloan for the Bulls? That Nate's name is Scottish and Sloan's is not? What basis, other than in their treatment of rookies, are you saying that they cannot be compared?

And by cannot be compared do you mean literally that there is no way to debate it? Or do you mean that they are entirely different? Presumably the latter.

This has NOTHING to do with you as a poster other than you whining more than the rest of SportsTwo.com combined. It does have to do with you relating your point so poorly.

Ed O.

 

[PapaG]

jesus christ its the internet he has nothing against you

I have no problem with you at all. I just don't appreciate having a strawman case constructed against me by a moderator who clearly didn't even read the first post of the thread and hasn't been on-topic once in it.

 

[PapaG]

Is there intent behind your words? What is it that I'm butchering so badly?

The plain language of what I'm reading indicates that your intent is how rookies are treated. That is, after all, the point of this fucking thread.

Are you talking about the fact that Nate is black and Sloan is white? That Nate played for the Sonics and Sloan for the Bulls? That Nate's name is Scottish and Sloan's is not? What basis, other than in their treatment of rookies, are you saying that they cannot be compared?

And by cannot be compared do you mean literally that there is no way to debate it? Or do you mean that they are entirely different? Presumably the latter.

This has NOTHING to do with you as a poster other than you whining more than the rest of SportsTwo.com combined. It does have to do with you relating your point so poorly.

Ed O.

LOL

Whatever, Ed. Way to jump into a thread, make up your own argument, and hijack it. Well done.

 

[Ed O]

LOL

Whatever, Ed. Way to jump into a thread, make up your own argument, and hijack it. Well done.

Seriously. What is the problem?

The thread is about Sloan's treatment of Williams and Nate's treatment of Oden. Right?

It is also about their more general attitudes towards rookies and how it manifests itself in those two specific cases.

Your point APPEARED to be that since Nate has a track record of using rookies that he treats rookies fairly, which makes him entirely different from Sloan. The logical application of that position is that Oden is being used fairly/well, since Nate does not have the same issues/hangups/strategy that Sloan does.

I then questioned whether Nate's track record is as good as you made it out to be. Even if your evidence is ENTIRELY discredited, there is a huge chance that Nate has, in other parts of his career, been entirely fair with rookies and therefore Rasta's original post is incorrect.

Can you tell me what the problem is with my thinking here? Where have I misrepresented your position? Where have I hijacked a thread?

I'm genuinely curious to see how we're seeing the same letters on the screen but you are seemingly so upset by this.

Ed O.

 

[PapaG]

Seriously. What is the problem?

The thread is about Sloan's treatment of Williams and Nate's treatment of Oden. Right?

It is also about their more general attitudes towards rookies and how it manifests itself in those two specific cases.

Your point APPEARED to be that since Nate has a track record of using rookies that he treats rookies fairly, which makes him entirely different from Sloan. The logical application of that position is that Oden is being used fairly/well, since Nate does not have the same issues/hangups/strategy that Sloan does.

I then questioned whether Nate's track record is as good as you made it out to be. Even if your evidence is ENTIRELY discredited, there is a huge chance that Nate has, in other parts of his career, been entirely fair with rookies and therefore Rasta's original post is incorrect.

Can you tell me what the problem is with my thinking here? Where have I misrepresented your position? Where have I hijacked a thread?

I'm genuinely curious to see how we're seeing the same letters on the screen but you are seemingly so upset by this.

Ed O.

Read the paragraphs you wrote above the bolded to find out where you misrepresented my position. The funny thing is, in another post you basically admitted that Nate does not view rookies in the same manner as Sloan, which was my original point as both I posted and then you directly quoted.

I'm not upset about it. I found it odd that you felt the need to pick out my post to respond to, when later on you agreed with my position without ever addressing the OP.

 

[noknobs]

I don't think Nate is giving Oden a baptism by fire just because he's a rookie. Nate did say that he's going to keep Roy/Lamarcus as the first options on offense and bring Oden along slowly on that end. So far he's done what he said he'd do. He also said awhile ago that he's working on Oden's footwork and moving his feet on defense and that in the short-term that would result in foul trouble, but that he's looking down the road.

I think Nate's just trying to ease the pressure off of Oden, probably for the entire year, as well as get him into some good habits on defense so that he'll ultimately be the defensive presence we all hope he'll be.

Nate's use of Roy his rookie season is a combo of the entire team sucking & being young that year, Roy having played 4 years of college ball (we see this with his use of Rudy as well who has a lot of international experience), and Roy being one of the most composed and mature rookies to come out of the draft in years. In general, I think most coaches who have a winning team would be averse to starting 3 rookies in a single game, but Nate has done that this year out of necessity. He'd probably just as soon limit the # of times he has to though, just like most coaches.

 

[LittleAlex]

That may be true, but then why isn't Przybilla racking up fouls at a similar rate while playing with worse defenders such as Outlaw and (when Blake gets back) Rodriguez?

Because right now Joel is a much more accomplished defender who knows out to stay out of foul trouble while covering for Outlaw and Sergio. It might have something to do with playing in the league 8 years instead of 4 months. No one in the right mind could argue that Oden is a better defender then Joel today. Heck, it might even be a stretch to say he will EVER be as good as Joel at team defense.

Oden doesn't look all that great right now because, he has 4 months experience and he is still getting into form after his surgery (it takes two years for complete recovery. At least for a player like Oden.). Nate has said many times that he will limit Oden's minutes for pretty much the entire year. I think this is a fine idea.

Next year is when we will see the real Oden. Until then I only expect to catch glimpses of what is to come.

 

[PapaG]

This has NOTHING to do with you as a poster other than you whining more than the rest of SportsTwo.com combined. It does have to do with you relating your point so poorly.

Ed O.

Me showing the we ultimately have the same opinion on how Nate and Sloan view rookies (by your own words) is me whining? As for relating my point poorly, my point was as clear as day. What isn't clear is how you convinced yourself that my point meant that I thought Nate used rookies fairly.

 

[PapaG]

Because right now Joel is a much more accomplished defender who knows out to stay out of foul trouble while covering for Outlaw and Sergio. It might have something to do with playing in the league 8 years instead of 4 months. No one in the right mind could argue that Oden is a better defender then Joel today. Heck, it might even be a stretch to say he will EVER be as good as Joel at team defense.

Oden doesn't look all that great right now because, he has 4 months experience and he is still getting into form after his surgery (it takes two years for complete recovery. At least for a player like Oden.). Nate has said many times that he will limit Oden's minutes for pretty much the entire year. I think this is a fine idea.

Next year is when we will see the real Oden. Until then I only expect to catch glimpses of what is to come.

I agree with all of that. I was replying to the poster who blamed the guards and forwards for Oden being in foul trouble, and I do see it as more a developmental issue than a coaching issue with Greg right now.

 

[LittleAlex]

I agree with all of that. I was replying to the poster who blamed the guards and forwards for Oden being in foul trouble, and I do see it as more a developmental issue than a coaching issue with Greg right now.

Well, the guards aren't helping. They just aren't the whole of the problem. If the guards played better D, Oden wouldn't be put in a position to fail as often. I don't want to sound like I think any one player is at fault. There are many players who are not doing what is needed right now on the defensive end.

 

[Ed O]

Me showing the we ultimately have the same opinion on how Nate and Sloan view rookies (by your own words) is me whining?

Your whining, as far as I'm concerned, are these assertions from this thread directed towards me:

"I know you're m.o. is to dispute pretty much any opinion I have"

and

"Or don't, and continue to let personal grudges impact your posting patterns"

and

"at this point it is clear you have some sort of problem with me"

and

"Did you just jump right to my post and pounce, because that what seems likely at this point"

Those are complaints and/or paranoia. It's funny but sad at the same time.

As for relating my point poorly, my point was as clear as day. What isn't clear is how you convinced yourself that my point meant that I thought Nate used rookies fairly.

Are you confusing me with someone else?

I have no opinion on how Nate uses rookies generally. I think that he's using Oden poorly, but I'm not sure that it's because of a similar attitude that Sloan has.

Where have I agreed with you in this thread?

Heck... you won't even tell me what you're talking about. You keep pointing me back to words that seem to be as clear as day to me but you keep telling me are misrepresentations of what you ACTUALLY mean.

Ed O.

 

[PapaG]

Your whining, as far as I'm concerned, are these assertions from this thread directed towards me:

"I know you're m.o. is to dispute pretty much any opinion I have"

and

"Or don't, and continue to let personal grudges impact your posting patterns"

and

"at this point it is clear you have some sort of problem with me"

and

"Did you just jump right to my post and pounce, because that what seems likely at this point"

Those are complaints and/or paranoia. It's funny but sad at the same time.



Are you confusing me with someone else?

I have no opinion on how Nate uses rookies generally. I think that he's using Oden poorly, but I'm not sure that it's because of a similar attitude that Sloan has.

Where have I agreed with you in this thread?

Heck... you won't even tell me what I'm talking about. You keep pointing me back to words that seem to be as clear as day to me but you keep telling me are misrepresentations of what you ACTUALLY mean.

Ed O.

I really don't care at this point. If it makes you feel better to continually misrepresent my position solely in order to argue with me, rock on.

 

[Ed O]

I really don't care at this point. If it makes you feel better to continually misrepresent my position solely in order to argue with me, rock on.

I've asked you to state wtf you're talking about. You are claiming that I am off-topic. You are claiming that I am agreeing with you.

I just have no idea what you're talking about. If you don't want to explain, that's fine. Don't treat it like I'm picking on you, though, because of it.

Ed O.

 

[ebott]

I'm gonna say no. If Nate was following the book that Sloan did with Deron, Greg wouldn't be starting. He'd be playing behind Joel and he'd get yanked at the first mistake and have that mistake explained to him over and over again while he watched Joel properly do the thing that he screwed up on.

Greg Oden sucks simply because Greg Oden sucks. At this point in his career that's just how it is.

That doesn't completely invalidate Rasta's theory though. It's entirely possible that Nate is having Oden play in some complicated offensive and defensive sets so that he can learn and grow and right now it's to the detriment of his game. Could be that Nate knows that he could be using Greg better by running some sort of zone defense where Greg's job is to stand in the key and try to block shots. Or change the offense so that it better suits Greg's current abilities rather than running an offense he believes in long term that Greg has to adjust to.

But, like Boise Blazer said, I just don't buy it. Nate is too much of a win now guy. He's not gonna specifically put Greg in situations where he's going to fail and it could cost us the game cause he thinks it's going to help is development long term. I don't think Nate, or any NBA coach really, thinks long term. He's thinking about the next game and that's that.