Comparison's for Davis have been Marcus Camby, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Bill Russel, David Robinson. Many centers and hybrid 4/5s on the list, very few pure PFs. I'm starting to think McNamara's call of David Robinson was the right one. The Admiral was strong but never bulky and he was elite on both sides of the ball in the era of dominant centers like Olajuwan, Ewing and Shaq.

quote:
Why 38? Why not 35 or 36? Cause, in my mind, there are certain thresholds. Guys that shoot over 35 and then the next level up, guys that shoot 40+.

35% = Adequate. Defenders still sagging off you, but you're good enough at open 3s that you'll take it.

37.5% = Good. Defenders stick with you and you create space.

40%+ = Elite. Teams game plan for you and try and keep you from getting the ball.

quote:
So why wasn't this guy, that averaged 24.3 ppg, shooting more 3's? Did it make him less of a player or a shooter?

I think there's 2 things. There is something to be said for having a varied game to keep the defense off balance and give you the space to be efficient from 3. Second, this is the era of advanced stats which is part of why "positions are dead". You have roles now, not positions, and if you're a legit complete player great, if not, just give me what you're best at and let someone else better do the things you're not as good at. Like vs. Dallas there was a point where Rivers passed up a pretty wide open 3 to give the ball to an open Anderson. That's a smart decision that might not have been made in previous eras where there wasn't as much focus on maximizing efficiency.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by corndeaux

Member since Sep 2009

9634 posts

Posted on 10/11/13 at 5:33 pm to brmark70816

I didnt agree w/ Fleur earlier, but after this post I'm quite sure you are trolling.

Congrats. You got me. Best of luck to you.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by GynoSandberg

Member since Jan 2006

71954 posts

Posted on 10/11/13 at 11:09 pm to brmark70816

quote:
Let me ask you this. The greatest shooter I watched growing up, played a lot of PF. His career numbers on 3's were 1.9 attempts per game and a career 37.6%. You have never mentioned him and none of your stats included him (a top 20 all time player and regarded as one of the greatest shooters of all time). So why wasn't this guy, that averaged 24.3 ppg, shooting more 3's? Did it make him less of a player or a shooter? Especially when you are basically saying or implying that Anderson is in a special club that this guy couldn't get into..

Jesus Christ.

Bird played SF the majority of his career. He rarely shot 3s in his early years as a PF.

Once he transitioned to SF full time, he led the fricking league or was top 5 in 3PM and 3PA multiple times

You are a dolt to even mention the two in the same breath. I guess this is why you think Anderson should play SF

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by brmark70816

Atlanta, GA

Member since Feb 2011

9757 posts

Posted on 10/12/13 at 12:15 am to GynoSandberg

quote:
You are a dolt to even mention the two in the same breath.

Way to jump in on the tail end of an argument, cherry pick a point or two and then name call like a child. He just put a ton of effort into researching and producing stats to back up his point and I was making a counter point. A simple point that all his research left out one of the greatest shooters of all time. A player that played a lot (not exclusively) of the same position as the guy he is defending.

quote:
Bird played SF the majority of his career. He rarely shot 3s in his early years as a PF.

I didn't say that he did. I said that Bird played a lot of PF. Playing 5-6 years of a 13 year career is a lot. Don't you think? I don't think that is stretching the facts. He played PF a lot.

quote:
I guess this is why you think Anderson should play SF

I would love it if he could play there. You would too or at least I hope you do. If he could swing it, it would solve a ton of problems, right? His numbers would put him as almost a top 5 SF. I know he can't handle it defensively, but I can dream..

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by GynoSandberg

Member since Jan 2006

71954 posts

Posted on 10/12/13 at 1:14 am to brmark70816

quote:

His career numbers on 3's were 1.9 attempts per game and a career 37.6%. So why wasn't this guy, that averaged 24.3 ppg, shooting more 3's? Did it make him less of a player or a shooter?

quote:
I didn't say that he did. I said that Bird played a lot of PF. Playing 5-6 years of a 13 year career is a lot. Don't you think? I don't think that is stretching the facts. He played PF a lot.

So what's the deal here? You're answering your own question on why he didn't take a lot of 3s on average for his career; he was a PF for 5 years. Yet he was at the top of the league throughout his time as a SF.

That's like saying Barry Bonds didn't hit a lot of home runs because he only averaged 20 a year when he played for the pirates

quote:
A simple point that all his research left out one of the greatest shooters of all time. A player that played a lot (not exclusively) of the same position as the guy he is defending.

Again.. He was a PF for half his career. He did not shoot many threes during that period. Thus resulting in his 1.9 career attempt average. Thus not qualifying him for the prerequisite attempt amount in the other posters search query. If you took only his numbers as a SF, he would be on the silly list.

Which is why this is more of your stupid drivel

quote:
Let me ask you this. The greatest shooter I watched growing up, played a lot of PF. His career numbers on 3's were 1.9 attempts per game and a career 37.6%. You have never mentioned him and none of your stats included him (a top 20 all time player and regarded as one of the greatest shooters of all time). So why wasn't this guy, that averaged 24.3 ppg, shooting more 3's? Did it make him less of a player or a shooter? Especially when you are basically saying or implying that Anderson is in a special club that this guy couldn't get into..

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by brmark70816

Atlanta, GA

Member since Feb 2011

9757 posts

Posted on 10/12/13 at 1:49 am to GynoSandberg

quote:
Again.. He was a PF for half his career. He did not shoot many threes during that period. Thus resulting in his 1.9 career attempt average. Thus not qualifying him for the prerequisite attempt amount in the other posters search query. If you took only his numbers as a SF, he would be on the silly list.

You didn't read his posts, because Bird still wouldn't have been. He never attempted enough, in any season, to have been included. His highest, 3.3, was in his last couple of seasons. His search parameters were looking for guys 4.5 or higher and then Bird didn't shoot a high enough % (37.6<38), with the search he was preforming.

quote:
So what's the deal here? You're answering your own question on why he didn't take a lot of 3s on average for his career; he was a PF for 5 years. Yet he was at the top of the league throughout his time as a SF.

It was a fluid debate. I was making a point, that volume 3pt shooting is a new fad and not as impressive as he was making it out to be. It's not a coincidence that almost every guy he named happened in the past decade. He was trying to put it in historical context that I didn't think was appropriate (best 3pt shooting seasons ever). By including one of the greatest 3pt shooters ever and pointing out that his numbers were lacking, according to his standards, I tried to devalue his stance. Thus proving my point.

quote:
Which is why this is more of your stupid drivel

Once again, you couldn't have read anything he said. You just saw a chance to attack/insult me and went for it. I guess you guys are friends or something, but he killed me pretty much the whole time anyway. So not sure why you needed to pile on.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Overbrook

Member since May 2013

6075 posts

Posted on 10/12/13 at 11:34 am to Jwho77

quote:
Anderson is a stretch PF with rare shooting prowess for his size while Thornton is a dime-a-dozen undersized two-guard who can't run the point. Ryno is looked at around the league as a piece for a contender while Thornton is seen as a chucker for a losing team.