Quote:
|
The fact is Martin's stats have been better than Redd's over the course of the entire 07/08 season which is the most recent one. An entire season isn't something you can just discount as not being long enough
|
It most certainly is. after last year how many players did ruben patterson do better than statistically? yes did that make ruben patterson a better player than those guys? brand in 05/06 did better than almost any other PF/C in the league that year. Should we right after that year have said that brand was better than those guys? Your logic is not sound in this argument.
Quote:
|
You don't have to agree or disagree with anything. Those were just facts that I presented. The Bucks have played better this year without their "franchise" player.
|
Wrong again. If you try to misapply an illustration is most certainly can be disagreed with. Your thesis was wrong, and has been proven many times to not be something that is sound. How a team does while a player is injured does not always mean much about that player. Just like i said, arenas and kobe's teams have done well with them out, that does not take anything away from their individual talent. To use facts in a wrong way is misleading. I could use facts such as "in the summer league paul davis this year put up consistently better stats than kaman, and the clippers did better as a unit when davis was in there." that would be a fact. But then if i tried to say, "thus kaman really isnt that good, he isnt the best player on the team, wed be better off with davis starting, etc. etc.", then id be misleading like you are doing. Bucks won/loss record without redd has little to no bearing on how redd's abilities should be viewed. Same as when the lakers did better with kobe out last year, did that mean kobe sucked? When the wizards did well without arenas, does that mean arenas isnt a star? Please.
Quote:
|
Didn't Martin win or come second for most improved last season? And he was in discussions for that award again for the first couple months of this season when he was averaging 27ppg before going down with the injury. Improving scoring averages by 9.2ppg one year, and 3.5ppg the next, I think most people would call that marked improvements
|
Like i said, he improved a great deal from his rookie year. I certainly dont recall any discussions for most improved award for martin over the first two months of this season when the first month he averaged, what? 24 poitns a game? Then the second month of the season he was injured pretty much the whole month. WHen you use phrases like, " improved markedly each of his seasons", again its misleading. For someone not in the know, they might assume you are referring t oa guy who has improved over the course of 4, possibly 5 years, year to year. We heard that term a lot with maggette who did it over 6 years.
Quote:
|
But then again as we've seen many times in this thread you prefer to use your own definitions for some words or expressions rather than those widely accepted by everyone else
|
Again, me calling redd a star, superstar, elite player, super shooter, whatever, are all terms used by analysts for the last few years, all reasons why teams were ready t opay him whatever they could when he was a free agent, and the reason the bucks made sure to keep him. Just because some people on a message board might not agree with them and myself does that mean that we can put the "everyone else" moniker on it. lol
Quote:
|
And yes, he is playing at a higher level than Redd. He was more productive, and led his team to more wins. I can't see what other ways that you can objectively measure you can use to say that redd played at a higher level.
|
again, flawed logic. Lets see what happens over 2 yers, 3 years, 4 years, when were talking about someone with the history of redd, and an up and comer like martin. Couple years ago mike james averaged 20 points and 6 assists. That was better than most PG's in the league. Did that make him better than those guys? No, what he did over the course of 3/4 years could determine that. And there have been guys who prove themselves better. Rey allens in the beginning of his career put up some nice numbers, but like kevin martin was not yet referred to as a star SG. He did better than one of the current star guards of the time, reggie miller. But most analysts used caution in calling him great, or a star yet until about his 4th season when it was obvious, yes, this guy had something special. Same with redd, you didnt hear him called a star, even after his 8 three pointers in the 4th, until around 05, when it was obvious...this wasnt just a fluke, this guy has incredible game, yes we think hes a star. I never said martin will never reach that level. on the contrary i have stated he very well could get there due to his age. But its premature to say hes at that level yet, or even surpassed someone like redd. I dont buy it, and you dont hear any analysts saying that neither. Next year, if martin averages say 25 points, plays most of the year, i guarantee you will start hearing him in that kind of context. Sorry if i offend you by taking the stance that one and a half years of nice 20+ point ball does not put someone on the level of a michael redd with his resume the last 5+ years.
Quote:
|
You were the one citing the reasons that some website stated as to why Redd's a star. bootstrenf just provided an example of another player who satisfies all those criteria, and who wouldn't be considered a star by anyone who knows anything about the game. Also, what's so special about being such a great pure shooter as Redd is, if you still shoot at such poor percentages during games?
|
The guy is a 39% career 3 poitn shooter. Kobe is 34%. Ray ALlen 39.7%. Reggie miller 39%. Tmac 33.7%. All guys who have been doing it a long time, and i would not call redd's percentages poor. I was the one citing noted experts on the game, saying the same things I wa ssaying. I wasnt posting the raving madness of people on other message boards, i am posting professional opinions which happened to be similar to mine. I thought it quite interested that it was just posted a few days ago. if you cannot see how bringing jason kapono into the argument when it is totally off topic as to the context of the discussion, then thats just a dissapointment coming from someone who portrays himself to be a logical thinker.
Quote:
|
Another subjective Yamaneko rule that a player can't receive credit for playing at a high level unless they've played at that level for over 2 seasons? So Dwight Howard, Deron Williams, Kevin Durant... none of these players would likely qualify as stars due this rule
|
Dwight howard shows special skill set that makes him an obvious star, a definate max player, and puts up numbers that very few guys in the last 20 years can do. You are seriously comparing kevin martin's game and stats to howard? Martin does have a part of his game that is really top top flight yet, hes just been a very well rounded player the last year and a half, nothing to scoff at, but nothing to compare him to dwight howard. Or lebron james for that matter, who just 2 months of watching him you could tell this guy had superstar talent. Kevin durant, correct, im not sure that guy is a superstar yet. At his age, i really think he could be, but id like to wait a year first .
Deron williams, im reluctant to call a star, but i do admit he probably should be considered one...but he also has 160 games under his belt already of 18 points, 10 assists to his name. How many guys in the league can say that for the last few years? Martin this year, did dang good in scoring, only 5 guys averaged more than him, but heck, only 1 piont a game more than maggette, and his rebound and assist werent exactly on the level of, well this guy had an incredible year, its obvious hes a superstar already level.
Michael redd himself wasnt one of those right away superstars. Took a while for us to say hes arrived. Mcgrady took a few ywars, but did have a ONE HIT year and boom he was a star, without having to look further, due to his averaging 27 points, 8 rebounds, 5 assists, 2 blocks, 2 steals. Sorry if im not going to put martin on that level where he can have a year and a half of 22 poitns a game, and then hes all of a sudden passed up guy slike redd?
Quote:
|
There are only a select few players in the NBA at any one time who can be called "franchise players".
|
im the one who makes up definitions of my own terms? Elton brand has been called a franchise player numerous times, so has most other max or near max players who are the best on their team. I am NOT saying redd is on the level of kobe, duncan, etc, matter of fact i have said the opposite. Id say this is a 50/50 term with many having their own definitions of it. Im willing to accept that some people say franchise player to refer to the kobes of the world. But the other half of the people, again, including media, also use the term to refer to who the best player on the team is, usually after the team invests heavily in such a player. Not sure what point youre trying to prove. Ive already said redd is not that definition of franchise player, of which probaby only 4 guys in the league are, but rather he is a franchise player in the definition of thats how the bucks viewed him when they signe dhim, hes by far the best player on the team, and the guy they have been trying to build the team around for a couple years. You cant really deny those facts, so not sure what point youre trying to make.
Quote:
|
Give me a player who can lead a team to 15 more wins in a season and not hit a single game winning shot, over a player who's hit 10 game winners but led his team to 15 less wins anytime.
|
thats a paradox there. You cannot always prove that a guy has "led" his team to 15 more wins in a season, as if you can statistically point to leadership qualities , and other intangibles that "leading" a team has to do with. And im not saying neither id pick robert horry over elton brand because horry hits game winners...again, were talking about stars here, guys considered elite at their positions. If you take two players with similar stats, you go for the one who is a clutch performer, a guy who can take over games down the stretch. Which is why id rather have a star guard or SF that we could pay max money to as opposed to brand.
Quote:
|
You must be joking.... you've been one contradiction after another with each post in this thread
|
nope, sorry!
Quote:
In what have been largely losing efforts over their careers. Ray Allen is the more talented of those two players, and even he has to play as 3rd fiddle on a team to be considered a contender.
|
yes. ray allen for years has been considered the top SHOOTING guard around (not SG per ce), and with good reason. He has incredible skills. but hes on the decline, and rightfully so as he is getting up there in years. I think redd might have passed, or is passing him up in star quality.
Quote:
This is hilarious! Especially coming from someone who said this about Kapono:
Quote:
Hes a decent shooter, but not sure that he has that quick of a release, that its consistent, nor that hes one of the best catch and shoot.
|
Dont know what so hilarious about it. Im the one sharing opinions of a lot of professionals out there. And yes, kapono is a decent shooter, and during the game he is not a lights out quick shooter like redd, if he could consistently score from outside during the flow of a game, wouldnt you say that hed be averaging more than 7 points a game? If he was one of the bes tin the league at catch and shoot, wouldnt you say hed do it more often? Again, the reason why kaponos name should not even be brought up in a thread like this.