Lillard's invisible performance

[blazerboy30]

Ha! You love to look for conflict. It wasn't even a post directed at you, unless you think you're complaining about Lillard?

You're trying to create some type of slight when it was a generic post, not pointed directly at anyone.

The only person around here who seems to be hurt emotionally is you. Did you think I called you out BB? Did I hurt your feelings? Why are you in a "tissy?"

Apparently you are privy to forum rules that state you should only respond to posts directed at you? You didn't follow the rules.

Just calling out your nonsensical and emotional lack of reasoning.

It's easy to see who embodies the "soccer mom" title on this forum.

 

[blazerboy30]

Apples to Oranges man.

Drafts and trades are a part of the game. So are players ups and downs. No one is ever up all the time, so the expectation that he should be by some around here blows my mind.

Lol. This post makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Natebishop3]

Apparently you are privy to forum rules that state you should only respond to posts directed at you? You didn't follow the rules.

Just calling out your nonsensical and emotional lack of reasoning.

It's easy to see who embodies the "soccer mom" title on this forum.

Let's recap -

I posted

People complaining about Lillard should take a look at Kyle Lowry.

That dude is shooting 31.4% from the field, and 18.8% from three for the series. What's his excuse? The Pacers don't have Chris Paul.

You posted

Why does Lowry shooting 31.4% mean that Lillard didn't, IMO, a few too many ill-advised and bad shots?

Which post is nonsensical and lacking reasoning? Judges?

 

[blazerboy30]

Let's recap -

I posted



You posted



Which post is nonsensical and lacking reasoning? Judges?

The fact that you can't tell speaks volumes.

"If you don't know who is the sucker in the group... It's you".

 

[Strenuus]

The fact that you can't tell speaks volumes.

"If you don't know who is the sucker in the group... It's you".

ROUNDERS :MARIS61:

 

[blazerboy30]

ROUNDERS :MARIS61:

 

[Natebishop3]

The fact that you can't tell speaks volumes.

"If you don't know who is the sucker in the group... It's you".

Your reply had nothing to do with my post sweetcheeks. It was completely out of left field.

The title of the thread is "Lillard's invisible performance." Since I'm not replying specifically to anyone, and my post doesn't reference any particular poster, it stands to reason that I'm commenting on the essence of the thread, no?

So my posting that people who are complaining about Lillard should take a look at Kyle Lowry, another top tier point guard who was an All-Star this year, and see that he is actually playing worse than Lillard, would appear to have some relevance, no?

Your post, on the other hand, had nothing to do with my post at all. I didn't mention shot selection, which was the entire basis of your silly question. I was merely saying, "Hey, here's another really good point guard who is playing like crap."

Apparently that went over your head?

 

[Orion Bailey]

Lol. This post makes absolutely no sense.

To YOU it makes no sense. It makes perfect sense for those who like to think about things.

Sorry your not able to get it.

 

[blazerboy30]

Your reply had nothing to do with my post sweetcheeks. It was completely out of left field.

The title of the thread is "Lillard's invisible performance." Since I'm not replying specifically to anyone, and my post doesn't reference any particular poster, it stands to reason that I'm commenting on the essence of the thread, no?

So my posting that people who are complaining about Lillard should take a look at Kyle Lowry, another top tier point guard who was an All-Star this year, and see that he is actually playing worse than Lillard, would appear to have some relevance, no?

Your post, on the other hand, had nothing to do with my post at all. I didn't mention shot selection, which was the entire basis of your silly question. I was merely saying, "Hey, here's another really good point guard who is playing like crap."

Apparently that went over your head?

Cool story bro.

Anyone else playing poorly in these playoffs you'd like to list since, by your own admission, it doesn't have anything to do with the thread?

 

[Natebishop3]

Cool story bro.

Anyone else playing poorly in these playoffs you'd like to list since, by your own admission, it doesn't have anything to do with the thread?

Uhhhh........

"The title of the thread is "Lillard's invisible performance." Since I'm not replying specifically to anyone, and my post doesn't reference any particular poster, it stands to reason that I'm commenting on the essence of the thread, no?"

 

[blazerboy30]

To YOU it makes no sense. It makes perfect sense for those who like to think about things.

Sorry your not able to get it.

If you want to be super emotionally tied to the players and treat them like your children, that's up to you. But it's probably wise to stick to the circle-jerk threads instead of the threads identifying areas for improvement?

 

[Orion Bailey]

If you want to be super emotionally tied to the players and treat them like your children, that's up to you. But it's probably wise to stick to the circle-jerk threads instead of the threads identifying areas for improvement?

Who is emotionally tied? Im bringing common sense into the equation that you and some others are very sorely lacking.

Do you not admit that all humans have good days and bad days?

Do you not admit that Dame is human?

Do you not admit that there is no perfect person?

Do you not admit that all players have highs and lows?

IF you don't admit these things then there is no point in discussing anything more with you.

If you do admit these things then what the hell more do you want? A robot?

Get out of here with that emotional crap. IF anything the haters are more emotional and its proven by how many threads and posts of negativity there are.

Common sense tells me that all greats have bad days. Why kick a great when he has a bad day, why not just be happy we have a great?

IF you don't get that then I don't know what else to say to you, because you wont get anything.

Seems like your just on here to argue whether you make sense or not.

 

[Natebishop3]

If you want to be super emotionally tied to the players and treat them like your children, that's up to you. But it's probably wise to stick to the circle-jerk threads instead of the threads identifying areas for improvement?

LOL stop trying to make it out like this thread is some kind of unbiased analytical thread about Lillard's performance in the playoffs. This is the first post in the thread -

I'm excited that we won last night and that we now have a very good chance to win this series, but I'm also aware that Lillard played like crap last night. His shot selection was horrible, his passing was horrible, and he looked only barely involved out there (to say nothing of his non-existent defense). We're very fortunate that CJ, Plumlee, and others stepped up, because Lillard almost lost this game for us his by himself.

What's going on? Is it the relentless defense that has thrown Lillard off his game? I hope the real Lillard shows up soon.

You're going to hang your hat on this thread? This is your Alamo? You're standing with a guy who says that Lillard hasn't shown up yet? That he looked "barely involved" in game four? Good luck with that

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Your reply had nothing to do with my post sweetcheeks. It was completely out of left field.

The title of the thread is "Lillard's invisible performance." Since I'm not replying specifically to anyone, and my post doesn't reference any particular poster, it stands to reason that I'm commenting on the essence of the thread, no?

So my posting that people who are complaining about Lillard should take a look at Kyle Lowry, another top tier point guard who was an All-Star this year, and see that he is actually playing worse than Lillard, would appear to have some relevance, no?

Your post, on the other hand, had nothing to do with my post at all. I didn't mention shot selection, which was the entire basis of your silly question. I was merely saying, "Hey, here's another really good point guard who is playing like crap."

Apparently that went over your head?

To go a slightly different direction from BB30, why would people who think that Lillard could be making better decisions in this series care about what Kyle Lowry is doing? Yeah, he's having a crappy series against Indy, but that doesn't make Lillard's pedestrian numbers look any better?

Honestly, the only things Lillard is doing that have bothered me have been a few ineffective attempts to split traps that led to turnovers, multiple attempts at getting layups past Jordan resulting in embarrassing blocks, and ugly 3-point shots off the dribble with lots of time left on the shot clock.

The use of Plumlee over the past two games has significantly mitigated the first problem, and the third is something that we've all seen and had to put up with all year. The second one--well, I don't think that he's going to alter his game for a single series, so I don't think that changes over the next two games, but I'm certainly going to yell at my TV every time it happens...regardless of what Kyle Lowry is doing.

 

[Natebishop3]

To go a slightly different direction from BB30, why would people who think that Lillard could be making better decisions in this series care about what Kyle Lowry is doing? Yeah, he's having a crappy series against Indy, but that doesn't make Lillard's pedestrian numbers look any better?

Dame could absolutely play better, but I have already addressed that earlier in the thread.

The title of the thread is basically calling Lillard invisible. The OP said that Dame hasn't even shown up yet. My post was basically saying, if you think Dame is invisible, look at Lowry. It could be worse. I don't think Lillard is playing horribly. I think he is dealing with what LAC has given him. In game one, he did decently, in game two he played like crap, in game three he was great, and in game four he was just sub-par. It has been a series of ups and downs. Hardly invisible. Inconsistent, yes.

 

[Sinobas]

He had a bad shooting night, but he was much more decisive in getting the offense started. He'd get the ball to Plumlee who did a good job at finding open people. He only put up 15 shots.

 

[Natebishop3]

Here's another interesting comparison for my fans -

Isaiah Thomas... All-Star.....

Last night the Hawks ran a similar trapping defense on Thomas. I watched the game and it wasn't nearly as tough as what Dame is facing.

Thomas' line from last night: 7 points off 3-12 shooting, 0-4 from three, 3 assists, 3 turnovers, 1 rebound, and 4 fouls in 29 minutes of play in a huge loss to ATL.

Dame has struggled, but it could be SO....MUCH.....WORSE.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Some of you are over-thinking this. All BB30 is saying is that Blazer fans are more concerned with Blazer players than with some guy who is struggling in the Eastern Conference play-offs.

To be perfectly blunt, I don't give a hair shirt whether Lowery averages 50 ppg or 0. I *understand* the argument that lots of players struggle in the play-offs....I just DON'T CARE! Right now, my basketball universe consists of Blazers/Clips...period. Call it tunnel vision, or lack of perspective, or whatever.

And no, I don't agree with the OP either.

 

[Strenuus]

Here's another interesting comparison for my fans -

Isaiah Thomas... All-Star.....

Last night the Hawks ran a similar trapping defense on Thomas. I watched the game and it wasn't nearly as tough as what Dame is facing.

Thomas' line from last night: 7 points off 3-12 shooting, 0-4 from three, 3 assists, 3 turnovers, 1 rebound, and 4 fouls in 29 minutes of play in a huge loss to ATL.

Dame has struggled, but it could be SO....MUCH.....WORSE.

To be fair, they did lose Bradley for the playoffs.

 

[Strenuus]

Some of you are over-thinking this. All BB30 is saying is that Blazer fans are more concerned with Blazer players than with some guy who is struggling in the Eastern Conference play-offs.

To be perfectly blunt, I don't give a hair shirt whether Lowery averages 50 ppg or 0. I *understand* the argument that lots of players struggle in the play-offs....I just DON'T CARE! Right now, my basketball universe consists of Blazers/Clips...period. Call it tunnel vision, or lack of perspective, or whatever.

And no, I don't agree with the OP either.

I like you.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I like you.

 

[Natebishop3]

Some of you are over-thinking this. All BB30 is saying is that Blazer fans are more concerned with Blazer players than with some guy who is struggling in the Eastern Conference play-offs.

To be perfectly blunt, I don't give a hair shirt whether Lowery averages 50 ppg or 0. I *understand* the argument that lots of players struggle in the play-offs....I just DON'T CARE! Right now, my basketball universe consists of Blazers/Clips...period. Call it tunnel vision, or lack of perspective, or whatever.

And no, I don't agree with the OP either.

Come on OMG, we compare our players to other players ALL. THE. TIME.

If the whole point of the thread is to say that Dame is not producing, then I like to compare his production with other players of similar talent. It sets a baseline. And quite frankly, who gives a shit if some people care or don't care? It was a musing about people that like to complain about Lillard. The grass is always greener, etc etc etc.

 

[Strenuus]

Come on OMG, we compare our players to other players ALL. THE. TIME.

If the whole point of the thread is to say that Dame is not producing, then I like to compare his production with other players of similar talent. It sets a baseline. And quite frankly, who gives a shit if some people care or don't care? It was a musing about people that like to complain about Lillard. The grass is always greener, etc etc etc.

I know a certain poster who loved Lowry over Lillard... then I showed him stats about Lowry and he never responded. lol.

 

[Natebishop3]

I know a certain poster who loved Lowry over Lillard... then I showed him stats about Lowry and he never responded. lol.

Yup. And that particular poster was on my mind when I mentioned Lowry.... and then for some reason another poster decided that I was slighting him

 

[H.C.]

You conveniently left out Dame's shooting percentage, yet you highlighted free throws which is the most obvious sign ever that you yourself know you're spewing b.s. stats. Free throw percentage is a reflection of a defender's ability? Give me a freakin' break.

11/05/13: 7-17 FG
12/12/13: 1-10 FG
1/20/14: 7-17 FG
3/09/14: 7-13 FG

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lillada01/gamelog/2014/

That's a total of 22-57, or 38.6%. I'd say Beverly was pretty effective, especially through the first three.

'14-15 was after Beverly had been slowed by injury. He's never been the same player since, although he added some semblance of a 3-pt shot to remain somewhat relevant.

41%, 10%, 41%, 53%
Not bad just saying.
Actually I thought my post helped you because I included turnovers for you.
One could make the argument that all those turnovers were because of Beverly bothering Lillard.
But all in all if shooting % is the only thing you go by I refer you to a previous post.
What does it look like when Lillard has a bad game? 1-10 is pretty bad, but 40%+ shooting isn't really "giving a player trouble.
44% from the field if you take out the 1-10, which I would I mean... Every player has an off night. Says more about Lillard struggling in a single game than Beverly shutting him down if you look at the whole of regular season games that year.

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/field-goals/sort/fieldGoalPct/position/point-guards
CP3 however is holding Lillard to 36% shooting over 4 games. That to me is what it looks like when a player stops another player.
Having a good defensive game or two over 2-3 years isn't.

If you choose to post again talk about basketball.
Stop with the unnecessary stuff.
Otherwise I will end the discussion.
That's all I'm going to say on that.

 

[blazerboy30]

To go a slightly different direction from BB30, why would people who think that Lillard could be making better decisions in this series care about what Kyle Lowry is doing? Yeah, he's having a crappy series against Indy, but that doesn't make Lillard's pedestrian numbers look any better?

Honestly, the only things Lillard is doing that have bothered me have been a few ineffective attempts to split traps that led to turnovers, multiple attempts at getting layups past Jordan resulting in embarrassing blocks, and ugly 3-point shots off the dribble with lots of time left on the shot clock.

The use of Plumlee over the past two games has significantly mitigated the first problem, and the third is something that we've all seen and had to put up with all year. The second one--well, I don't think that he's going to alter his game for a single series, so I don't think that changes over the next two games, but I'm certainly going to yell at my TV every time it happens...regardless of what Kyle Lowry is doing.

Agreed.

I see this thread as 1) Lillard sucks and is invisible!!! and 2) Lillard has made more bad decisions and taken more ill-advised shots than normal.

Pretty much everyone has disagreed with 1), including myself. It's ridiculous.

2) I think is a valid criticism and has nothing to do with how badly Lowry or anybody else is playing.

 

[Natebishop3]

Agreed.

I see this thread as 1) Lillard sucks and is invisible!!! and 2) Lillard has made more bad decisions and taken more ill-advised shots than normal.

Pretty much everyone has disagreed with 1), including myself. It's ridiculous.

2) I think is a valid criticism and has nothing to do with how badly Lowry or anybody else is playing.

So why is it so crazy to think that maybe I was responding to the first point and not so much the second point? Did I say that your criticism was invalid? Did I say anything about your criticism at all? The world doesn't revolve around you brah.

 

[blazerboy30]

So why is it so crazy to think that maybe I was responding to the first point and not so much the second point? Did I say that your criticism was invalid? Did I say anything about your criticism at all? The world doesn't revolve around you brah.

You posting Lowry's shooting percentage is much more related to Lillard's bad shot selection than Lillard being invisible. If you don't see that, then I refer you to my earlier quote: "If you don't know who is the sucker in the group...it's you".

 

[PtldPlatypus]

So why is it so crazy to think that maybe I was responding to the first point and not so much the second point?

In fairness, you said "anyone complaining about Lillard". I could see how one could think that applied to both critic #1 and critic #2.

 

[Natebishop3]

You posting Lowry's shooting percentage is much more related to Lillard's bad shot selection than Lillard being invisible. If you don't see that, then I refer you to my earlier quote: "If you don't know who is the sucker in the group...it's you".

Shooting percentages don't necessarily have anything to do with shot selection. How many of Dame's shots are bad shots? He missed a few wide open layups the other night. Are those bad shots? Was that a bad shot selection? Correlation is not causation. You assumed that one was related to the other, and I was merely pointing out that if you're unhappy with Lillard, there are other star point guards who are struggling worse. Maybe you don't find comfort in that, maybe you do, I really don't care.

For me, personally, it makes me feel better when I look at Lowry or Thomas and see a guy playing worse than Dame against a much less difficult defense. It tells me that Dame is doing pretty well, all things considered. My post was pretty benign, but you decided to take it as an attack on your point. I guess that's your prerogative.