His offensive schemes are stellar.

I think the NBA likes it...his schemes now are "Get the ball in Blake Griffin's hands and watch". Makes sure that there's 212 dunks for youtube videos.

He doesn't really. He offers up fantasy basketball analysis. He offers nothing about how the game is actually played.

 

No. Just because some dismiss statistical analysis as crap doesn't mean it's of no importance. I guarantee you if Rose was as efficient as Nash or Paul that EVERYBODY would be on it. But since he's not, all we get is, "Well, I watch every single minute of every single game," to hell with stats. I don't think stats are everything. But to completely dismiss them is ludicrous.

Edited April 22, 201114 yr by Jordan4life

No. Just because some dismiss statistical analysis as crap doesn't mean it's of no importance. I guarantee you if Rose was as efficient as Nash or Paul that EVERYBODY would be on it. But since he's not, all we get is, "Well, I want every single minute of every single game," to hell with stats. I don't think stats are everything. But to completely dismiss them is ludicrous.

 

When the counter-argument centers only on a stat, it is very easy to dismiss the argument. Its an oversimplified mess that misses the big picture of how the game of basketball is actually played.

No. Just because some dismiss statistical analysis as crap doesn't mean it's of no importance. I guarantee you if Rose was as efficient as Nash or Paul that EVERYBODY would be on it. But since he's not, all we get is, "Well, I watch every single minute of every single game," to hell with stats. I don't think stats are everything. But to completely dismiss them is ludicrous.

 

If Rose were as efficient as Nash, he's averaging well over 30 points a game.

If Rose were as efficient as Nash, he's averaging well over 30 points a game.

 

Wait, so you mean he's not the perfect player? That he is lacking in certain areas? Well good god damn. And I'm not being condescending towards you, Q. You and lostfan off the top of my head are pretty sound when it comes to Rose. It's a shame. I feel like a Rose hater when I'm not.

Wait, so you mean he's not the perfect player? That he is lacking in certain areas? Well good god damn. And I'm not being condescending towards you, Q. You and lostfan off the top of my head are pretty sound when it comes to Rose. It's a shame. I feel like a Rose hater when I'm not.

no one said he's perfect. He is, however, the most valuable player in the NBA.

Steve Nash has never averaged more than 20 points per game, how can you even argue how efficient he would be if he had to score 25 like Rose?

 

They play different games, the only way you can really judge is by watching the games.

 

I just have a feeling that Rose would be a lot more efficient if he had some one named Dirk who can shoot, than say Noah who is worthless on offense.

 

 

Steve Nash has never averaged more than 20 points per game, how can you even argue how efficient he would be if he had to score 25 like Rose?

 

They play different games, the only way you can really judge is by watching the games.

 

I just have a feeling that Rose would be a lot more efficient if he had some one named Dirk who can shoot, than say Noah who is worthless on offense.

 

OK, so what about LeBron and Wade? Rose doesn't sniff their efficiency and they both take a lot of shots and have to score a lot of points.

If Lebron and Wade werent on the same team, Id definitely say that those 2 should be in the equation for MVP.

 

But how can I argue they are better than Rose, when they are on the same team and their team lost more games than Roses, which doesnt have 2 amazingly "efficient" players.

 

What is the point of the stat if it doesnt equate to wins?

Edited April 22, 201114 yr by Soxbadger

If Lebron and Wade werent on the same team, Id definitely say that those 2 should be in the equation for MVP.

 

But how can I argue they are better than Rose, when they are on the same team and their team lost more games than Roses, which doesnt have 2 amazingly "efficient" players.

 

What is the point of the stat if it doesnt equate to wins?

 

What about prior to this year? Wade and LeBron from an efficiency standpoint have had multiple years that rival Jordan.

Didnt Lebron win the MVP last year?

 

Correct me if Im wrong but MVP is a year by year award, not career award??

Edited April 22, 201114 yr by Soxbadger

Didnt Lebron win the MVP last year?

 

Correct me if Im wrong but MVP is a year by year award, not career award??

 

Huh? What are you talking about? You imply that if Nash had to shoot/score as much as Rose does that his efficiency wouldn't be as high. I reference LeBron and Wade and you offer, like, nothing.

What about prior to this year? Wade and LeBron from an efficiency standpoint have had multiple years that rival Jordan.

Dude, what is your point here? You are making no sense.

I dont think Nash is as good of a player as Lebron or Wade, what else is there to say?

 

I think Lebron may be one of the top 3 players in the history of basketball when its all said and done, Rose isnt 1 or 2, so why would I argue that Rose is better than Lebron? That would be stupid, last I checked Im not stupid.

 

Wade (imo) was better than Rose, but Im not sure if Id take Wade today over Rose, so once again Im not sure what other year stats have to do with today.

 

Once again, Im talking about Rose being MVP this year.

 

I have no idea what you are arguing about.

Dude, what is your point here? You are making no sense.

 

I'm making perfect sense. You just don't want to see it because you're a homer. When folks bring up efficiency in regards to players like Nash and Paul, we hear, "Well, they don't shoot and have to score as much as Rose, if they did, their efficiency wouldn't be as high." Well, look at LeBron, Wade and even a Kevin Durant. They both shoot and score A LOT and maintain elite efficiency.

I dont think Nash is as good of a player as Lebron or Wade, what else is there to say?

 

I think Lebron may be one of the top 3 players in the history of basketball when its all said and done, Rose isnt 1 or 2, so why would I argue that Rose is better than Lebron? That would be stupid, last I checked Im not stupid.

 

Wade (imo) was better than Rose, but Im not sure if Id take Wade today over Rose, so once again Im not sure what other year stats have to do with today.

 

Once again, Im talking about Rose being MVP this year.

 

I have no idea what you are arguing about.

 

Basically. Who in their right mind would want to rely on wade for a full season or full playoff run?

Its just the nature of the efficiency stat. Which is why of the top 10, 9 of them are guys who are 6'7 and taller and therefore can get all of the positive stats (blocks) while reducing the amount of negative (turn over and shots blocked).

 

I guess I dont believe the stat is the end all be all, and would rather rely on what I see.

I dont think Nash is as good of a player as Lebron or Wade, what else is there to say?

 

I think Lebron may be one of the top 3 players in the history of basketball when its all said and done, Rose isnt 1 or 2, so why would I argue that Rose is better than Lebron? That would be stupid, last I checked Im not stupid.

 

Wade (imo) was better than Rose, but Im not sure if Id take Wade today over Rose, so once again Im not sure what other year stats have to do with today.

 

Once again, Im talking about Rose being MVP this year.

 

I have no idea what you are arguing about.

 

Dude, I'm not arguing over who's better. This was about efficiency. You want to pigeonhole Paul and Nash because they "don't shoot as much" when there are other players who shoot just as much as Rose and dwarf him from that standpoint. Basically, Rose is not super efficient because, well, he's just not super efficient. That doesn't mean he cant be. He's 22. But stop making excuses.

I'm making perfect sense. You just don't want to see it because you're a homer. When folks bring up efficiency in regards to players like Nash and Paul, we hear, "Well, they don't shoot and have to score as much as Rose, if they did, their efficiency wouldn't be as high." Well, look at LeBron, Wade and even a Kevin Durant. They both shoot and score A LOT and maintain elite efficiency.

It's impressive for Wade, but Lebron is an enormous man and should be able to score efficiently.

Its just the nature of the efficiency stat. Which is why of the top 10, 9 of them are guys who are 6'7 and taller and therefore can get all of the positive stats (blocks) while reducing the amount of negative (turn over and shots blocked).

 

I guess I dont believe the stat is the end all be all, and would rather rely on what I see.

 

Another lame excuse. So Paul and Nash don't shoot as much. And other guys, well, they're taller and can block more shots. lol.

Basically, Rose is not super efficient because, well, he's just not super efficient. That doesn't mean he cant be. He's 22. But stop making excuses.

 

Welcome to what everyone else is saying, now stop shooting for self satisfaction in your quest to pat yourself on the back because you are such a f***ing "realist".

Welcome to what everyone else is saying, now stop shooting for self satisfaction in your quest to pat yourself on the back because you are such a f***ing "realist".

 

Have you read through this thread?

NBA reviewing Jeff Foster hits

 

The NBA is reviewing two hits Indiana Pacers center Jeff Foster leveled against the Chicago Bulls during Game 3 of their Eastern Conference quarterfinals series on Thursday, according to a league spokesman.

 

Foster banged into Derrick Rose in the third quarter when the Bulls guard was driving the lane. Rose also was hit by Tyler Hansbrough on the play.

 

Rose responded emotionally by getting in the face of Foster, who was called for the foul.

 

"He's so fast, I just went in there and ended up hitting him," Foster said. "He reacted. It's the playoffs. I'm sure he's going to get hit plenty of times."

 

Rose called the foul "a little irritating" but didn't seem angry after the game.

 

"That's his job," Rose said. "But you have to stand up to it. I was just trying to go to the basket and create contact."

 

Later in the quarter, Foster dropped an elbow to the head of Luol Deng and drew a foul.

 

Neither play resulted in a flagrant call.

 

"This is the playoffs. There are going to be hard fouls," Bulls coach Tom Thibodeau said. "In my eyes, that's what they've been doing the whole series. They're fouling hard. That's part of the game. When it crosses over the line, I think the officials will make the call.

 

"I have a lot of respect for Foster. He's a hard-playing guy, a tough guy. He's been a good player in this league for a long time."

Have you read through this thread?

 

Yes. But I don't read selectively.

NBA reviewing Jeff Foster hits

 

That hit was "bad" but the Deng hit was embarrassing. He should be fined for that one. That Rose hit I somewhat come to expect.