He never said anything about being devoid of criticism. Did you read this? If he averaged 20 and 10, he would be better at rebounding than he is now, thus making is so there are less things to complain about.
Seriously..... all I said was if he averaged 20 and 10 you would hear very few people complaining about him. Did I write some kind of thesis paper I'm unaware of? It was an offhand comment in regards to Mags statement concerning "very few haters if he averaged numbers like this all season long." But you guys have to nitpick everything to death. One of the things most people complain about is his rebounding. If he averaged 10 or more boards per game, you don't think that would address some concerns about his rebounding? I never said anything about "devoid of criticism." Even mags pointed out that very few players average 20 and 10. Going for over 10 boards per game IS an achievement. It IS a milestone. If you average double digit rebounds for a season, doesn't that pretty much answer any questions about your ability to rebound consistently?
Nobody is saying you wrote a thesis, calm the fuck down. It's a discussion board. You said if he averaged 20/10, fewer people would be complaining about him. That would seem to say that someone complaining about him right now would stop if he got 1 more rebound per game. That seems a little ridiculous to me that 10 rebounds makes him immediately a good rebounder, absent of circumstances, and 9 he's hated for his soft rebounding.
He said " If he averaged 20 and 10 you would hear very few people complaining about him." Right now, we hear a ton of people complaining about him. So that one extra rebound , goes from a lot to very few. I would say if you were not complaining or criticizing someone, that would fall under being devoid of criticism. At least from those that stopped complaining with the extra rebound.
He isn't averaging 9. He's averaging 8.8. He has never averaged 9 or more rebounds per game. Yes, if he averaged 10 rpg FOR A SEASON, fewer people would complain about him. You guys like to round up and toss out that extra rebound per game like it means nothing, but if it meant nothing there would be a lot more people who did it. To average 10 or more rebounds for an entire season means being consistent. Aldridge has never been consistently good at rebounding. Thus, it would be an achievement if he hit the milestone of 10 or more for a full season. And don't pretend like there isn't the same three or four posters who rush to Aldridge's aid any time someone says something that might be construed as negative. It's the Aldridge QRF and they're fast roping in to shut you up with snide remarks and snark.
You use hyperbole non stop and then try to take every little thing he said completely literal. He obviously just meant that less people would be complaining about him, not that actually only a few people would. I'm pretty sure he doesn't think that someone who, right now, says LaMarcus is a shitty rebounder constantly would suddenly never criticize him again were he to increase his rebound total by 1.2
A ton of people complaining about him? I sure don't see it. Not with the way he's been playing. Of course, your definition of "complaining" might be different than mine.
I'm not trying to nitpick, ok, less would. Great. People would seemingly stop because of an extra rebound. Seems odd to me, that 20/10, people stop complaining, but 21 and 9, they complain is all.
Aldridge ranks 19th in the league in rebounding. There are nine players averaging 10 or more this season, with two others that are at 9.9 per game. That one rebound is significant over the course of the season. That would be worth an extra 64 rebounds (roughly 1/6 of his total boards). It shows consistency, and it would elevate him into the top ten in rebounding. If someone wants to seriously throw out his name as one of the top 3 or 4 power forwards in the game, how can he seriously be 19th in rebounding?
Blake Griffin is consistently mentioned in that group of top 3/4. He is below Aldridge in rebounding. Not a ton of true PFs in the top 20, and none I'd take over LMA at PF. Lee, Evans, Faried, Thompson, Boozer are the PFs ahead of him. Who are the top 3 to 4 PFs in the game right now? Is one of them on your list?
Welcome to the "new" board where it's "LULZ" and hysteria for writing anything that deviates from the hive mind.
who's looking for lulz and hysteria? It's questioning why one rebound would stop people from complaining. Has nothing to do with hive mind and an oh never say anything bad about LMA attitude.
Right now, I would probably say the top four in no particular order are Kevin Love (when healthy), David Lee, Blake Griffin, and Aldridge. Zach Randolph is up there too when he's healthy. His scoring has dipped some this season. The biggest difference between Aldridge and those other three players? He's the only one who has never gone 20 and 10.
I'll take what Aldridge provides over David Lee's 20/10 any day, thanks. Lee's done it once, 4 years ago, playing at a pace Aldridge has never played at in Portland. And he did it playing C, not at PF.
Don't get me wrong. I would really love Aldridge to have a 20/10 average. It is a huge milestone! I will not say it isn't. 20/9 compared to 20/10 is a big difference. But Aldridge was our designated scorer for 3 straight years. Now that Lillard can be another scoring option; I see Aldridge spending more energy rebounding and defending. He doesn't have to score. In a perfect world; I would rather Aldridge give us 18-12-2 than 21/8/1. I think Lillard needs to be our +20 scorer in the new era. I think Aldridge will bulk up even more and work on his defense and rebounding this off season. He works on what is needed. Years ago, he was considered a skinny soft jump shooting center. Now he is considered an elite bulky strong inside presence. That's a huge milestone if you ask me.
You're stuck in the mindset that averaging 20/10 means more than it is. Aldridge can hit 20/10, just play him 42 minutes per game. Would that stop you from complaining? Probably not. You'll just find some other shit to complain about, like how it takes him 42 minutes to average 10 rebounds while David Lee only needs 36 minutes. Instead of focusing on what Aldridge doesn't do well (face it, he'll never be a great rebounder), why don't you focus on the things he does well? Or the things that he clearly has an advantage over other top PFs, like creating his own shot, defense, and being historically low at turning the ball over. The suggestion that never hitting the mystical benchmark of 20/10 is why he gets criticized is just hysterical.
That's a very valid complaint. He's not as good of a rebounder as Lee, it would be great if he was. He isn't going around the forum saying "but he sucks at rebounding" every time someone says something good about Aldridge. Do you think more people would criticize him if he averaged 20/10?
