Why did we cut Tolliver again?

[MIXUM]

Um I remember begging for him to get playing time when he was in Portland.

The wise HCP said he was a practice player and thats it. wow Tolliver made HCP look like an ass.

And um yah I would take Tolliver over Pendergraph any day of the week. Considering he owned Camby and LA tonight, i would say Tolliver can play. Not to mention shoots a better three ball then anyone not named rudy on our team.

 

[EGame]

Yup, this proves what I have already suspected of you.

 

[MIXUM]

anyone who disagrees needs to watch that game again

 

[LameR]

Because KP reads the forums and wanted to piss you off.

 

[THE HCP]

Is this not enough proof?

 

[Driew]

Because Tolliver is horrible on defense. Just horrible.

 

[Nate Dogg]

I do agree that Tolliver is bad on defense.

But I do agree with Mixum, on why we let this guy go. Here's his stats.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/gamelog?playerId=3276

 

[VanillaGorilla]

Probably cause we didn't need a soft PF who just jacks up three's and is also a terrible defender.

 

[Webster's Dictionary]

He really is Zach Randolph super light, and with less D... I'll gladly take Dante and Pendergraph over him until he learns to guard somebody.

 

[MickZagger]

Because in basketball, there's two important aspects of the game. Offense and defense. Tolliver is one of the shittiest defenders I've ever seen. Can't keep his man in front of him and gets abused in the post.

Learn the game, then post.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

He was atrocious on defense. Just horrible. Possibly the worst big man defense I have ever seen. Also Nicolas and Martell shoot three pointers better than him, as well as Rudy (as you mentioned). He is shooting 34 percent this year with a career average of 29 percent. Nicolas is shooting 44 percent, Rudy 37.5, and Martell 37.1 this year; Nic's career average is 39 percent, Martell's is 37.2, and Rudy's is 39.1. In addition while Roy's three point shooting is down to 33.7 percent this year he is a career average of 35.7 which is better than Tolliver's 34 percent this year. Tolliver is also shooting a scintillating 41.1 overall from the field. Keep in mind this is actually below Jerryd Bayless' overall shooting percentage, although two percent above both Rudy and Martell (but lower three point percentage, remember). His effective field goal percentage this year is 47% with Golden State. His defensive rating is 112 (lower is better, higher is bad). The only player on the Blazers who is worse is Patty Mills at 115. Our best are Marcus Camby and Greg both at 100.

This is why we did not keep Tolliver. Tolliver is a product of a system that can make anyone look good due to pace (number of possessions), and style - they are ranked first in pace, Portland last with a 12.3 difference. Golden State attempts 85.7 field goals a game, Portland attempts 78.1. Stop being purposefully obtuse.

 

[RISE WITH IT]

In Golden State's offense, Travis Diener would be a borderline all star.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Because Tolliver is horrible on defense. Just horrible.

And it's defense that wins championships. There's a reason he can only play for Golden Shower, errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, State.

 

[andalusian]

Since Tolliver joined GSW they are won a blistering 6 games while dropping 20. Since you seem to enjoy seeing the Blazers lose - I can understand your disappointment.

 

[jwhoops11]

I do agree that Tolliver is bad on defense.

But I do agree with Mixum, on why we let this guy go. Here's his stats.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/gamelog?playerId=3276

Offensive stats are awesome, but when you give up as many points (if not more) than you score then that's the problem.

....Suppose that's Golden St. in a nut shell though, so no wonder Tolliver is starting for them.

 

[hasoos]

anyone who disagrees needs to watch that game again

No they don't. I am supposed to agree with you because the Blazers defense was horrible for 3.5 quarters and anybody from the D League could have scored on them? The play of Golden State says more about the lack of effort from the Blazers than anything about the talent level of some scrub from the NBDL.

 

[FeloniusThunk]

Poor shooter, bad rebounder for his position, bad defender. Last night was one of his better games and still wasn't that good. Why would Portland (or any team not depleted by injury) keep him?

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

Wasn't Tolliver an injury exception anyways? We couldn't keep him if we'd wanted to without cutting Mills...

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

Hey MIXUM,

Honest question - Who did you want us to cut? Who was worth cutting to keep Tolliver? I like Tolliver, offensively, but he's not better than the people in front of him, and I'd rather take a flyer on Patty Mills than Tolliver.

We had 15 players under contract, and could only keep Tolliver if we cut someone else. We were only able to sign him because of an injury exemption.

First off, I know you posted this crap cuz you forgot this fact. But anyhow, since you started this crap thread, at this point, go ahead and tell us who you think we should have cut in favor of keeping Tolliver. The only player I can see on our roster you can answer with is Mills. And again, the way he tore up Team USA, at his age (20-21), you have to take a flyer on the kid. Talented PG's don't just grow on trees - scoring SF's who can't play D do - just ask Travis Outlaw.

Learn the game, then post. Hell, learn the roster, then post.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

Wasn't Tolliver an injury exception anyways? We couldn't keep him if we'd wanted to without cutting Mills...

Dammit. Finish reading a thread, then post.

 

[oldmangrouch]

For guy who was only here a few days, he sure made his share of enemies!

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

For guy who was only here a few days, he sure made his share of enemies!

Huh? MIXUM is here everyday??

 

[Fender]

Huh? MIXUM is here everyday??

Unless you're being sarcastic, he's talkin about Tolliver.