tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:You draft again the following year

Only in New York people have zero patience for developing talent

15yrs and counting of being laughing stocks. Maybe it's time to do things differently

the 99 team was pretty much all non knicks drafted players except for the aged Ewing.

I am a big proponent of the draft and we have phucked ourselves again and again but if 25 y/o Love is a available for our first rounder 2018 and a few of our other stiffs then I am in big time.

Love is doing things that are unprecidented and he is still getting better!

Problem is that Celtics are probably willing to part with the #5 pick plus players so we don't stand a chance.

You can't stick to one philosophy, each move has to be judged for itself and must smart and logical.

unprecidented, yet what is the impact? one thing he isn't doing is elevating his team.. and if he can't do that, then I pass.... If I were the knicks.. another team, a better team, in a better situation may be a better fit...

The guy is a good, not great player.... He is a jump shooting big man... and lets be fair, he has had his share of injuries as well.. his teams lack of success is just not them being bad.. but being injured and he has been a culprit..

He elevated them to 40 wins in an extremely tough conf (how many wins would they have gotten in the east? And, would they have made the playoffs?). Without him maybe they win 20 games this year (and I am sure they can looking forward to stinking next year).

Jump shooting big man, dunking big man, hook shooting big man ... its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

He played 77 games this year so we can't blame this years record on injury.

I do worry about his injuries to his hands and I would certainly not sign him unless I did a lot of research and spoke to all of his doctors to make sure that his injuries were one time flukes and not nagging or recurring ones.

Here is a good article on KLove:

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24492752/kevin-loves-game-and-improvement-are-as-unique-as-they-come

knicks1248 wrote:

Nalod wrote:Love is 25!

Lets try drafting and getting our own Affalo's and good players instead of trading for them.

You rather draft an unkown, and hope he turns out respectable as oppose to a sure thing..suppose we draft a greg oden type or some below avg players we thought had potential...then what would do?

The "sure thing" starphuch model ensures you don't get guys on rookie contracts which hurts cap, and the assets to trade for one is a high price to pay.

Im not saying exclusively one vs the other but a mix. Even Miami got Wade! THey got lucky at that spot. Portland gets Lillard, Denver with Affalo, etc. Good guys (not always stars) can come via draft and via Euro's.

You saw we emptied the cupboard to get Melo which in turn made us desporate to reach for a risk like Bargnani!

Golden State built its self from free agents, trade and Draft. Its not a novel approach, its balanced.

If we can turn a walking Melo into Love because he is younger and seen as a better fit for the system then it should be attempted.
Is Love a max guy? I think so. Would he take less to be on a winner? I don't know. Melo said he would.

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:You draft again the following year

Only in New York people have zero patience for developing talent

15yrs and counting of being laughing stocks. Maybe it's time to do things differently

the 99 team was pretty much all non knicks drafted players except for the aged Ewing.

I am a big proponent of the draft and we have phucked ourselves again and again but if 25 y/o Love is a available for our first rounder 2018 and a few of our other stiffs then I am in big time.

Love is doing things that are unprecidented and he is still getting better!

Problem is that Celtics are probably willing to part with the #5 pick plus players so we don't stand a chance.

You can't stick to one philosophy, each move has to be judged for itself and must smart and logical.

unprecidented, yet what is the impact? one thing he isn't doing is elevating his team.. and if he can't do that, then I pass.... If I were the knicks.. another team, a better team, in a better situation may be a better fit...

The guy is a good, not great player.... He is a jump shooting big man... and lets be fair, he has had his share of injuries as well.. his teams lack of success is just not them being bad.. but being injured and he has been a culprit..

He elevated them to 40 wins in an extremely tough conf (how many wins would they have gotten in the east? And, would they have made the playoffs?). Without him maybe they win 20 games this year (and I am sure they can looking forward to stinking next year).

Jump shooting big man, dunking big man, hook shooting big man ... its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

He played 77 games this year so we can't blame this years record on injury.

I do worry about his injuries to his hands and I would certainly not sign him unless I did a lot of research and spoke to all of his doctors to make sure that his injuries were one time flukes and not nagging or recurring ones.

Here is a good article on KLove:

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24492752/kevin-loves-game-and-improvement-are-as-unique-as-they-come

I don't know how many wins that translates to in the east... but looking at their record vs the east teams which was 17-13 for vs a 23-29 record vs the west, if you switch the games played in the west (52) to east games and vice versa the wolves would have won 3 more games in the east roughly..

its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

here you go again.. with your Extremely efficiently.. listen shaq was extremely efficient playing near the basket... shooting 38% from three is not extremely efficient... and I find that funny because bradley beat shot 42% from three and you dogged him because of his shooting efficiency.. so which way are you going to move the goal post now?

kevin love I hope goes somewhere else, Honestly I don't even think he listed the knicks as a team he wants to go to, and thank god for that!

holfresh wrote:I like Love but I'm not sure we should get him as the guy to build around..If Melo walks then we should go into a full tank/reload type situation...

and you don't have to try and tank, if we really believe in all this stuff talked around here about shumpert and THJ.. let them play.. if they have a stellar season then it is a win, win situation, they will have value..... if they don't.. we get a lottery pick...

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:You draft again the following year

Only in New York people have zero patience for developing talent

15yrs and counting of being laughing stocks. Maybe it's time to do things differently

the 99 team was pretty much all non knicks drafted players except for the aged Ewing.

I am a big proponent of the draft and we have phucked ourselves again and again but if 25 y/o Love is a available for our first rounder 2018 and a few of our other stiffs then I am in big time.

Love is doing things that are unprecidented and he is still getting better!

Problem is that Celtics are probably willing to part with the #5 pick plus players so we don't stand a chance.

You can't stick to one philosophy, each move has to be judged for itself and must smart and logical.

unprecidented, yet what is the impact? one thing he isn't doing is elevating his team.. and if he can't do that, then I pass.... If I were the knicks.. another team, a better team, in a better situation may be a better fit...

The guy is a good, not great player.... He is a jump shooting big man... and lets be fair, he has had his share of injuries as well.. his teams lack of success is just not them being bad.. but being injured and he has been a culprit..

He elevated them to 40 wins in an extremely tough conf (how many wins would they have gotten in the east? And, would they have made the playoffs?). Without him maybe they win 20 games this year (and I am sure they can looking forward to stinking next year).

Jump shooting big man, dunking big man, hook shooting big man ... its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

He played 77 games this year so we can't blame this years record on injury.

I do worry about his injuries to his hands and I would certainly not sign him unless I did a lot of research and spoke to all of his doctors to make sure that his injuries were one time flukes and not nagging or recurring ones.

Here is a good article on KLove:

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24492752/kevin-loves-game-and-improvement-are-as-unique-as-they-come

I don't know how many wins that translates to in the east... but looking at their record vs the east teams which was 17-13 for vs a 23-29 record vs the west, if you switch the games played in the west (52) to east games and vice versa the wolves would have won 3 more games in the east roughly..

its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

here you go again.. with your Extremely efficiently.. listen shaq was extremely efficient playing near the basket... shooting 38% from three is not extremely efficient... and I find that funny because bradley beat shot 42% from three and you dogged him because of his shooting efficiency.. so which way are you going to move the goal post now?

kevin love I hope goes somewhere else, Honestly I don't even think he listed the knicks as a team he wants to go to, and thank god for that!

Slow down bud ...

I praised Beal's 3 point efficiency not dogged. 42% from 3 is phenomenal! Translates to > 60% efg!

I was talking about his overall efficiency during the regular season which was very suspect.

And again, 38.5 from 3 is extremely efficient no matter if the guy is big or small. It equates to 59% efg (which is a lot better than 50%).

So I guess that Love is another one of your hate guys? I don't get why.

it is not very efficient.. lets not translate it and make numbers work to fit an argument.. when you have guys shooting 45% from three, how is 38% highly efficient.. then please tell me, what is 43%? I am just asking because love takes around 6 threes a game... what I want a guy like love to do is to work on shooting better from two, if he is at 50% his goal should be to be around 55%, heck lebron did so.... I don't want him taking more threes to make up for shooting two's....

In the end, He shoots a bit too much from outside,and for a guy who can rebound like he does, why do you even want him out there? it is not like he is creating off the dribble for others or himself.. I think he is a good player with a flawed game to some extent and certainly not a player to build around but to add to a team that is already good..

but this is pretty much wasted talk... he gave no indication of wanting to come here anyway...

So I guess that Love is another one of your hate guys? I don't get why.

here you go again with this bullshyt... where did I say I hate the guy?

please do not start this twisting of my words, it is another moronic, and childish game you continue to play!!!

this is why I stop conversing with you, and why I was foolish to even do again.. so I will just stop..

smh... fool me once shame on you

fool me twice.. shame on me..

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:You draft again the following year

Only in New York people have zero patience for developing talent

15yrs and counting of being laughing stocks. Maybe it's time to do things differently

the 99 team was pretty much all non knicks drafted players except for the aged Ewing.

I am a big proponent of the draft and we have phucked ourselves again and again but if 25 y/o Love is a available for our first rounder 2018 and a few of our other stiffs then I am in big time.

Love is doing things that are unprecidented and he is still getting better!

Problem is that Celtics are probably willing to part with the #5 pick plus players so we don't stand a chance.

You can't stick to one philosophy, each move has to be judged for itself and must smart and logical.

unprecidented, yet what is the impact? one thing he isn't doing is elevating his team.. and if he can't do that, then I pass.... If I were the knicks.. another team, a better team, in a better situation may be a better fit...

The guy is a good, not great player.... He is a jump shooting big man... and lets be fair, he has had his share of injuries as well.. his teams lack of success is just not them being bad.. but being injured and he has been a culprit..

He elevated them to 40 wins in an extremely tough conf (how many wins would they have gotten in the east? And, would they have made the playoffs?). Without him maybe they win 20 games this year (and I am sure they can looking forward to stinking next year).

Jump shooting big man, dunking big man, hook shooting big man ... its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

He played 77 games this year so we can't blame this years record on injury.

I do worry about his injuries to his hands and I would certainly not sign him unless I did a lot of research and spoke to all of his doctors to make sure that his injuries were one time flukes and not nagging or recurring ones.

Here is a good article on KLove:

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24492752/kevin-loves-game-and-improvement-are-as-unique-as-they-come

I don't know how many wins that translates to in the east... but looking at their record vs the east teams which was 17-13 for vs a 23-29 record vs the west, if you switch the games played in the west (52) to east games and vice versa the wolves would have won 3 more games in the east roughly..

its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

here you go again.. with your Extremely efficiently.. listen shaq was extremely efficient playing near the basket... shooting 38% from three is not extremely efficient... and I find that funny because bradley beat shot 42% from three and you dogged him because of his shooting efficiency.. so which way are you going to move the goal post now?

kevin love I hope goes somewhere else, Honestly I don't even think he listed the knicks as a team he wants to go to, and thank god for that!

Slow down bud ...

I praised Beal's 3 point efficiency not dogged. 42% from 3 is phenomenal! Translates to > 60% efg!

I was talking about his overall efficiency during the regular season which was very suspect.

And again, 38.5 from 3 is extremely efficient no matter if the guy is big or small. It equates to 59% efg (which is a lot better than 50%).

So I guess that Love is another one of your hate guys? I don't get why.

it is not very efficient.. lets not translate it and make numbers work to fit an argument.. when you have guys shooting 45% from three, how is 38% highly efficient.. then please tell me, what is 43%? I am just asking because love takes around 6 threes a game... what I want a guy like love to do is to work on shooting better from two, if he is at 50% his goal should be to be around 55%, heck lebron did so.... I don't want him taking more threes to make up for shooting two's....

In the end, He shoots a bit too much from outside,and for a guy who can rebound like he does, why do you even want him out there? it is not like he is creating off the dribble for others or himself.. I think he is a good player with a flawed game to some extent and certainly not a player to build around but to add to a team that is already good..

but this is pretty much wasted talk... he gave no indication of wanting to come here anyway...

So I guess that Love is another one of your hate guys? I don't get why.

here you go again with this bullshyt... where did I say I hate the guy?

please do not start this twisting of my words, it is another moronic, and childish game you continue to play!!!

this is why I stop conversing with you, and why I was foolish to even do again.. so I will just stop..

smh... fool me once shame on you

fool me twice.. shame on me..

I did not mean that the way you took it.

"hate guy" is not a bad thing to have. I have many hate guys for many different reasons. I just don't understand why he could possibly be someones "hate guy" (or dislike) when he is so good at what he does. And, I can actually see why some would hate carmelo because of his inefficiency at times but not Love (unless it is just for his defense).

And again, you need to evaluate shots correctly. Any way he can get his eFg up over 55 percent (and a TS% >= 58) would be what I would look for. You would make a better case for stating that he should stop shooting long 2's.

Of course I would want him shooting 45 percent from 3 (which is probably > 65% efg). I wish all players could hit at the highest possible level. Just because Lebron is playing ridiculously efficient (better than even jordan dreamed of) does not mean that everyone else can do it.

Was Hakeem efficient? Yes. Was he as efficient as Shaq? Not even close.

And ... I don't translate numbers to make them fit. Its simple math. You need to evaluate overall points per shots not just shot attempts.

The argument that you made about him possibly getting more offensive boards when he is not shooting threes is an interesting argument. I am not sure what it equates to (I would assume about a rebound a game) but it is certainly something to look into.

Lets stick to basketball and not make it personal.

It is simple for me.. TS is useful, but not to center your argument around when evaluating a player.. for one thing it takes into account Free throws and doesn't take into account defense..

When I look at lebron james 55% shooting from the field, guess what I don't have to look at? his TS%

Of course I would want him shooting 45 percent from 3 (which is probably > 65% efg). I wish all players could hit at the highest possible level. Just because Lebron is playing ridiculously efficient (better than even jordan dreamed of) does not mean that everyone else can do it.

he is not the only one, wade, durant, those guys are very efficient, and I am not talking TS.. guys like david lee shot 52% from the field, marcin gortat, the list goes on and on... is kevin love not capable? is he really a SF in a PF's body? if so, then I want to see him actually play like a SF... do you know how many wing players shoot a better % than he does? A TON!! heck chandler parsons, lance stephenson, I mean the list goes on and on.. and guess what.. there are bout 50+ players that shoot better from three than love... he was at .376 from three... that is not stellar bro.. it is ok, decent, but not good enough for my PF to be shooting 6 per game...

so you have a guy who shoots a modest % from the field and a modest % from three and you are trying to sell him as "highly efficient using TS" if anything what helps love out a lot is that he attempts a lot of FT's per game.. over 8... that puts him at #6 in the league..

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:You draft again the following year

Only in New York people have zero patience for developing talent

15yrs and counting of being laughing stocks. Maybe it's time to do things differently

the 99 team was pretty much all non knicks drafted players except for the aged Ewing.

I am a big proponent of the draft and we have phucked ourselves again and again but if 25 y/o Love is a available for our first rounder 2018 and a few of our other stiffs then I am in big time.

Love is doing things that are unprecidented and he is still getting better!

Problem is that Celtics are probably willing to part with the #5 pick plus players so we don't stand a chance.

You can't stick to one philosophy, each move has to be judged for itself and must smart and logical.

unprecidented, yet what is the impact? one thing he isn't doing is elevating his team.. and if he can't do that, then I pass.... If I were the knicks.. another team, a better team, in a better situation may be a better fit...

The guy is a good, not great player.... He is a jump shooting big man... and lets be fair, he has had his share of injuries as well.. his teams lack of success is just not them being bad.. but being injured and he has been a culprit..

He elevated them to 40 wins in an extremely tough conf (how many wins would they have gotten in the east? And, would they have made the playoffs?). Without him maybe they win 20 games this year (and I am sure they can looking forward to stinking next year).

Jump shooting big man, dunking big man, hook shooting big man ... its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

He played 77 games this year so we can't blame this years record on injury.

I do worry about his injuries to his hands and I would certainly not sign him unless I did a lot of research and spoke to all of his doctors to make sure that his injuries were one time flukes and not nagging or recurring ones.

Here is a good article on KLove:

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24492752/kevin-loves-game-and-improvement-are-as-unique-as-they-come

I don't know how many wins that translates to in the east... but looking at their record vs the east teams which was 17-13 for vs a 23-29 record vs the west, if you switch the games played in the west (52) to east games and vice versa the wolves would have won 3 more games in the east roughly..

its all good if they are producing extremely efficiently.

here you go again.. with your Extremely efficiently.. listen shaq was extremely efficient playing near the basket... shooting 38% from three is not extremely efficient... and I find that funny because bradley beat shot 42% from three and you dogged him because of his shooting efficiency.. so which way are you going to move the goal post now?

kevin love I hope goes somewhere else, Honestly I don't even think he listed the knicks as a team he wants to go to, and thank god for that!

Slow down bud ...

I praised Beal's 3 point efficiency not dogged. 42% from 3 is phenomenal! Translates to > 60% efg!

I was talking about his overall efficiency during the regular season which was very suspect.

And again, 38.5 from 3 is extremely efficient no matter if the guy is big or small. It equates to 59% efg (which is a lot better than 50%).

So I guess that Love is another one of your hate guys? I don't get why.

it is not very efficient.. lets not translate it and make numbers work to fit an argument.. when you have guys shooting 45% from three, how is 38% highly efficient.. then please tell me, what is 43%? I am just asking because love takes around 6 threes a game... what I want a guy like love to do is to work on shooting better from two, if he is at 50% his goal should be to be around 55%, heck lebron did so.... I don't want him taking more threes to make up for shooting two's....

In the end, He shoots a bit too much from outside,and for a guy who can rebound like he does, why do you even want him out there? it is not like he is creating off the dribble for others or himself.. I think he is a good player with a flawed game to some extent and certainly not a player to build around but to add to a team that is already good..

but this is pretty much wasted talk... he gave no indication of wanting to come here anyway...

So I guess that Love is another one of your hate guys? I don't get why.

here you go again with this bullshyt... where did I say I hate the guy?

please do not start this twisting of my words, it is another moronic, and childish game you continue to play!!!

this is why I stop conversing with you, and why I was foolish to even do again.. so I will just stop..

smh... fool me once shame on you

fool me twice.. shame on me..

I did not mean that the way you took it.

"hate guy" is not a bad thing to have. I have many hate guys for many different reasons. I just don't understand why he could possibly be someones "hate guy" (or dislike) when he is so good at what he does. And, I can actually see why some would hate carmelo because of his inefficiency at times but not Love (unless it is just for his defense).

And again, you need to evaluate shots correctly. Any way he can get his eFg up over 55 percent (and a TS% >= 58) would be what I would look for. You would make a better case for stating that he should stop shooting long 2's.

Of course I would want him shooting 45 percent from 3 (which is probably > 65% efg). I wish all players could hit at the highest possible level. Just because Lebron is playing ridiculously efficient (better than even jordan dreamed of) does not mean that everyone else can do it.

Was Hakeem efficient? Yes. Was he as efficient as Shaq? Not even close.

And ... I don't translate numbers to make them fit. Its simple math. You need to evaluate overall points per shots not just shot attempts.

The argument that you made about him possibly getting more offensive boards when he is not shooting threes is an interesting argument. I am not sure what it equates to (I would assume about a rebound a game) but it is certainly something to look into.

Lets stick to basketball and not make it personal.

It is simple for me.. TS is useful, but not to center your argument around when evaluating a player.. for one thing it takes into account Free throws and doesn't take into account defense..

When I look at lebron james 55% shooting from the field, guess what I don't have to look at? his TS%

Of course I would want him shooting 45 percent from 3 (which is probably > 65% efg). I wish all players could hit at the highest possible level. Just because Lebron is playing ridiculously efficient (better than even jordan dreamed of) does not mean that everyone else can do it.

he is not the only one, wade, durant, those guys are very efficient, and I am not talking TS.. guys like david lee shot 52% from the field, marcin gortat, the list goes on and on... is kevin love not capable? is he really a SF in a PF's body? if so, then I want to see him actually play like a SF... do you know how many wing players shoot a better % than he does? A TON!! heck chandler parsons, lance stephenson, I mean the list goes on and on.. and guess what.. there are bout 50+ players that shoot better from three than love... he was at .376 from three... that is not stellar bro.. it is ok, decent, but not good enough for my PF to be shooting 6 per game...

so you have a guy who shoots a modest % from the field and a modest % from three and you are trying to sell him as "highly efficient using TS" if anything what helps love out a lot is that he attempts a lot of FT's per game.. over 8... that puts him at #6 in the league..

His 3 point percentage went down a full point in the last number of games and 37.6 is not stellar compared to others who attempt many 3's. It is however very good and far better than 50% from 2.

Having your big who can spread out is very euro and certainly opens up the floor. In the olympics he shot 22 3's out of 54 attempts. It works! Which is why Tyson was pretty useless in international play.

His TS% was not helped out by his FT attempts it was helped out by his percentage of FT makes.

Take Paul Pierce, if you would not look at his TS and just look at his FG (which is completely deprecated), you may think that he was inefficient which was far from the case when looking at his TS.

Why is Durant shooting 6 attempts from 3 when he is only 39% and he is 55% from 2? Because its still more efficient if you can get open looks from 3.

Do the math to see which one equates to more points and see for yourself. You just can't ignore the value of each shot.

THERE IS NOTHING about love's game being very euro..... and he really doesn't spread the floor out, lets not oversell that.... and honestly why is he spreading the floor out.. he is the teams best rebounder by far, he should be inside...

As far as Durant... not sure why he takes 6 threes a game, I would love to see him take even less considering he not only gets to the line a lot, but he shoots a great percentage from two...

the way you are putting it, all of his shots should come from three right? I am sure durant can get a lot of great looks from three.....

you know who should take a lot of threes.. Kyle korver he shoots 47% from three and 47% from two... he takes more threes in a game than he does two.. and guess what.. .You can justify that I guess.. 47% is great.... and he shoots it as good as he does his two point shots..

mreinman wrote:TKF,

You can only shoot as many 3's as the defense would give you. Obviously you would want Korver shooting 3's every time down if he could hit at that rate but he can only get x number of open looks before his pct starts plummeting (if he just jacks 3's every time down). Not sure why you keep misinterpreting that ("that means he should shoot 3's every time down").

Love still seems to get loads of rebounds so need to show me how him shooting 3's hurts his rebounding percentages (though it would be hard to prove that it proves it to be a detriment)

You are still not addressing the math question and point value differential as well as Paul Pierce being a low efficient player unless you look at his TS.

Replace Bosh with Love and Lebron has a wet dream! Every team is now clamoring for him and rightly so.

Would you rather have Aldridge? I would rather have Love.

Edit: and lets not ignore him getting 4.4 assists per game which is not either very prototypical power forward like

I am not misinterpreting it at all..

Obviously you would want Korver shooting 3's every time down if he could hit at that rate but he can only get x number of open looks before his pct starts plummeting (if he just jacks 3's every time down). Not sure why you keep misinterpreting that ("that means he should shoot 3's every time down").

obvious? he shoots more threes than two and shoots at the same percentage... 47%

Love still seems to get loads of rebounds so need to show me how him shooting 3's hurts his rebounding percentages (though it would be hard to prove that it proves it to be a detriment)

That is like lebron saying, I score loads of points so why should I worry about shooting 55% as opposed to 50? the key is to maximize your skills, what you do best... he is shooting 38% from three, that is not what he does best at all, actually looking around the league he is pretty average at best...

Would you rather have Aldridge? I would rather have Love.

I rather have blake griffin...

mreinman wrote:I am not getting you to contemplate the point value of 2's vs 3's you keep quoting them as if they are the same and they are not. Please take a look at Paul Pierce for a reference.

If he shoots 2's at 50 percent and 3's at 38 percent the what he does better is shoot 3's (is it relates to points). Now if he shot 60 percent from 2 and 38 from 3 then that would be different.

And again, if he wants to be even more efficient he should reduce the number of shots that he takes between 3 and 16 feet.

no he doesn't!!!!!!!!!!!!! he shoots twos better, the point value has nothing to do with what you do better... are you making this up?

the only time I would entertain that is if I were someone like kyle korver in which I shoot both at the same percentage... but when you start talking 10+% and higher I would like to think that you would find a way to take more of those shots... period.. Go take a look at kevin love game logs and you will see how many times he goes 1-8 or 1-9 or 0-6 from three.... my point is that guys like kevin love who led the league in rebounding at one point should be playing closer to the hoop. this is what he does best.. you do realize that taking shots closer also puts you in position to rebound as well... can you calculate the value in that? and guess what he isn't getting fouled taking three pointers, so to support your TS argument you cling to so desperately wouldn't it make sense for him to play closer to the hoop, increase your chances of getting to the line... that also figures in TS..

Lets stick to kevin love.. don't switch to paul pierce because that is not the argument we are making here.. Plus paul pierce doesn't shoot 50% from two point range.. he may have a couple of times in his career including this year, but for the most part he hasn't... and even in a year in which pierce has taken 18 shots per game, the most threes per game he has attempted is 5.. love has take almost 7 per game this year on the same 18 shots.. I am sorry, but that is too much for a guy who only shoots 37% and has the ability to rebound like he does..

H1AND1 wrote:

mreinman wrote:I am not getting you to contemplate the point value of 2's vs 3's you keep quoting them as if they are the same and they are not. Please take a look at Paul Pierce for a reference.

If he shoots 2's at 50 percent and 3's at 38 percent the what he does better is shoot 3's (is it relates to points). Now if he shot 60 percent from 2 and 38 from 3 then that would be different.

And again, if he wants to be even more efficient he should reduce the number of shots that he takes between 3 and 16 feet.

tkf wrote:no he doesn't!!!!!!!!!!!!! he shoots twos better, the point value has nothing to do with what you do better... are you making this up?

TKF:

Let me take a shot at explaining what mreinman is saying.

Let's say a player can only take 10 shots a game, either 10 2 pointers or 10 3 pointers but at different percentages for each. He can EITHER:

A) Take 10 shots and shoot 50% from 2

OR

B) Take 10 shots and shoot 38% from 3

In Scenario A) the player will score 10 points a game.

In Scenario B) the player will score 11.4 points a game.

So, to maximize his contribution to his team in a game where the goal is to score more points then their opponents, the player who has the option of shooting 50% from 2 or 38% from 3 should take the 3 point option.

I hate you wasted your time.. I completely understand that concept.. but that is not my point.. he said that love is highly efficient at 37% shooting from three and I said NO.. 38% is not highly efficient.. he then tried to use TS to prove that point and still hasn't..

the key is to take the shots you shoot significantly better at.. or better at.... in scenario B, tell me a player who takes 10 three pointers a game? There is a reason why players don't..

I completely understand the math.. my point is that Love should not be shooting almost 7 threes a game, especially since he shoots a pretty average % doing so... It is not highly efficient at all..

let me give you an example, since we are talking kevin love.. the year he led the league in rebounding he took only 2.9 three per game, and he shot it at 42%.. he also averaged almost 5 offensive boards a game..

now I can stop right here, I can use your argument that at 42% he should be taking more threes, since 42% is pretty efficient..

ok.. well guess what

HE DID!!

and guess what happened.. His shooting% went down 1.5%, his 3pt % went down 4%, his offensive rebounds went down 1.5 and total boards went down 3 per game, and over 82 games 246 rebounds.... since his offensive boards are close to 30% of his rebounds that is 74 more posessions his team could have had..
( and I am giving him the benefit of the doubt here, his offensive rebounding ratio's went down almost 7% which makes it even worse.)

these are things TS does not count in and to try to pawn off 37% as highly efficient doesn't fly...

So, to maximize his contribution to his team in a game where the goal is to score more points then their opponents, the player who has the option of shooting 50% from 2 or 38% from 3 should take the 3 point option.

now after what I posted, where I touched on where he can contribute in various areas, are you still going to say he maximized his contribution? I think not..

and you are righg the goal is to score more points.. you can do that by hitting most of your shots, rebounding and stopping them from scoring more than you do... at some point you have to factor in defense and rebounding..

tkf wrote:
and guess what happened.. His shooting% went down 1.5%, his 3pt % went down 4%, his offensive rebounds went down 1.5 and total boards went down 3 per game, and over 82 games 246 rebounds.... since his offensive boards are close to 30% of his rebounds that is 74 more posessions his team could have had..
( and I am giving him the benefit of the doubt here, his offensive rebounding ratio's went down almost 7% which makes it even worse.)

The above is loaded with Correlation = Causation attempts that just don't fly.

these are things TS does not count in and to try to pawn off 37% as highly efficient doesn't fly...

This is not TS this is eFg (effective field goal percentage). It is a very simple calc:

eFG% = (FGM + (0.5 x 3PTM)) / FGA

Its adjusted for 2's and 3's whereas FG does not differentiate.

So, to maximize his contribution to his team in a game where the goal is to score more points then their opponents, the player who has the option of shooting 50% from 2 or 38% from 3 should take the 3 point option.

If this is a question then the answer is yes.

The key is to take open shots not contested ones, and, to get the most points out of the shots that you take. You can't get that many shots from 0-3 feet, the defense will not allow it. And from 3-16 his %'s are not good so he is best off either from 0-3 or from 3. He does ok from 16-23 feet but why take long 2's if they are only worth 2 and he only shoots these at 40 percent?

It's just not that black and white.

MDA was right that he wanted Carmelo to sit out there and shoot lots of three's because that is what he is best at (assisted 3's). Love should be used the same way and interestingly, that is the way they were both used in the olympics. Both players have big parts of their mid range games that should be eliminated based on their percentages. Both should continue to shoots lots of threes and it is also far less taxing. Either way, you need to take what the defense will give you and very often they give you what your are least good at based on scouting.

I am a big proponent of either near the basket or beyond the arc for most players but it certainly does not work for everyone especially if they are bad around the basket or from 3.