...just got another big win without Durant. Wonder if they'll be shopping him in the off season? How soon before the fans complain that they didn't take Horford?
I guess Durant's irrelevance to a team is not new. I was just looking at the record of the U-Texas basketball team: 2005-6 (with LaMarcus): 30-7, 13-3 in the Big 12 (tied first), made it to the Elite 8. 2006-7 (Durant's year): 25-10, 12-4 (3rd), out in the second round 2007-8 (D.J. Augustin): 31-7, 13-3 (tied first), Elite 8 again Not quite the effect Oden had on Ohio State, is it?
It's still early to decide whether or not Durant is actually good. When someone puts up a lot of points on a losing team, you don't learn very much. Someone has to score the points. Look at Shareef Abdur-Rahim or Mitch Richmond. Scored a lot on a loser. Durant may be the same.
We've evolved in the way that we evaluate players with the creation of TS%. Kevin Durant is scoring 26.0 PPG on 58.7 TS%. He is scoring both very high in volume, at a very high efficiency. He is a legitimate top scorer in the league. Compare this to say Jalen Rose with the Bulls in 02-03, he averaged 22.1 PPG but on 50.8 TS%. That's no good, that's just scoring a lot because you're taking a lot of shots, not because you're a good scorer. That doesn't describe Durant. Or Zach Randolph in Portland. His last year, when he was averaging 23.6 PPG, he got his TS% up to an "okay" 53.7 TS%. Nothing special, just scoring because you're taking quite a lot of shots. His other years in Portland? He was bad in scoring efficiency. And they wonder why his teams suck...because in addition to his bad defense, he was never a good offensive player. Or Al Jefferson in Minnesota, yes, he is averaging over 20 points a game, but his TS% has just been in the 53's TS%. That's just "okay", that doesn't make him an allstar level scorer. No mystery why Minnesota sucks despite having a big man who scores 23 points and grabs 11 rebounds, because that guy is only an average scorer efficiency wise. Kevin Durant on the otherhand is a very special scorer. The jury's not out, he has proven he's a really good basketball player, at least on the offensive end.
Personally, I think Durant will be good. I doubt he'll ever win a 'ship w/o a dominant big man though.
+1 I haven't given up hope on Oden for the Blazers sake, but I do think that Durant is going to be a very special player on this league. He's already shown his ability to score with the best of the players in the league. Let's not forget that LeBron James, for all of his ability, was not considered a particularly strong defender until he decided to put effort into it recently. Durant is long and could become a very good defender, like we all project Batum to be. To be honest, at this point I am disappointed that we did not draft Durant. Putting him on one side of the floor and Roy on the other would be devastating and I think that offensively the Blazers would have so much flexibility that it would be ridiculous. Durant is the real deal, not just a good player on a bad team.
The thing about Durant is that he hasn't made his team better. LeBron immediately made his team better. Durant has had no impact. None. In fact, they've played better without him.
Dude, give it up on this pointless bullshit. You try to hate on other players in defense of Oden. So lame. edit: I mean what I say, but Im not as pissed as how it sounds
Ummm... my post had nothing to do with Oden. Durant has had zero impact on the Thunder. None. Oden hasn't had much impact on his team either, but he hasn't played enough for us to know. Durant has played nearly 2 full seasons and his team hasn't gotten better. LeBron joined a 15-67 team and immediately made it better. Durant is a just high scorer on a bad team.
Good use of statistics to show that his point was wrong! Oh wait a minute, that's what someone who knows what he's saying would have done.
Oh have we? It's worth remembering that "evolved" doesn't mean "got better". That is indeed good. Good for 42nd in the league (behind a lot of big men, who of course take shots closer in). However, there are a few shooters who are better: 6. Ray Allen (63.5%) 8. Matt Bonner (62.9%) 13. Jose Calderon (61.4%) 15. Jameer Nelson (61.2%) 17. Mehmet Okur (60.9%) 18. Steve Nash (60.7%) 19. Troy Murphy (60.7%) 25. Greg Oden (60.0%) (Not a shooter, but someone who could do with getting more shots, perhaps.) 27. Manu Ginobili (59.9%) 29. Brent Barry (59.7%) 30. Steve Novak (59.7%) 31. Mo Williams (59.7%) 36. Kevin Martin (59.5%) 37. Eric Gordon (59.5%) 38. Chris Paul (59.4%) 40. Mike Miller (59.1%) So Durant isn't SO super-duper special, is he? I keep hearing this stat with the suggestion that Durant is like leading the league in it or something, but Nash, Ginobili, Williams, Martin, and even the rookie Eric Gordon are much more impressive, particularly as they're short, and in the case of people like Calderon, Nash, Williams and Chris Paul, are controlling the ball rather than being given it in a position to shoot (like someone like Steve Novak).
