oohah wrote:Lee certainly could have made the team, but that would have been based solely on offensive numbers and ignoring defense and wins.So many on this forum have battered Zach Randolph for being a player who puts up offensive numbers on losing teams and plays no defense. How is this case any different except we like David Lee?
I would probably have to put Bogut on the team ahead of Lee as well. Bogut and Jennings have been playing basically by themselves this year.
oohah
ignoring wins?
i think that's an overly strong statement.
can we not argue that the knicks are that much better this year because of lee's improvement this year over last?
i am not certain that a player's team must be "winning" (i.e. with a winning record) in order for a player to be selected, but how they affect the outcomes of games.
nate has been criticized by some here because he is not consistent enough in helping win games. lee is ridiculously consistent, and his weaknesses are even less of an issue because he has improved in other areas, even defense.
why did devon harris make the team last year? the nets weren't THAT good.
i think if lee was putting up bigger numbers it would matter. his are very good, but not AMAZING. The perception that the Knicks play at a higher pace, inflating his stats also seems to be a bit weak, since the Knicks are apparently the 8th fastest paced team now.
it isn't so much lee's fault that we don't have joe johnson to help our team win games.
i'm not saying it's 100% certain he should go over horford (who i am guessing was his competition), but the criteria for choosing the players is not consistent. i also think they should expand the roster to 15.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...