They do it because it's a high percentage defensive strategy because he's so poor at making a team pay for doing it.
Duncan has a higher turnover rate. While he also has a higher usage rate, the differences in the two seem at worst commensurate. If doubling Aldridge led to a good chance for a turnover, and that's why teams double him a lot, I think you'd see a much higher turnover rate from LMA. Beyond stats, I disagree from an observational standpoint too. Aldridge is no Chris Webber, but he's a decent passer. The fact is, passing out of a double team isn't especially tricky unless you are trying to be the one to get an assist. A double of Aldridge leads to a compromised defense...an easy pass out to the perimeter, like to Miller, gives Miller a superior chance of beating the out of position defense.
Well, we'll have to disagree. Since Aldridge isn't such a good passer as to create the assist himself (the way a Sabonis or Divac might), this isn't something that can necessarily be verified with stats....but observationally, he's decent passing out of double-teams. More elaboration of my point in my response to Little Alex.
That makes no sense, whether you mean starters or everyone. Take a remedial arithmetic class. And toss in a writing class while you're at night school. You're saying that Blazerboy's first two sentences were about all PFs, even though his last sentence reversed that direction and was about starters. Most readers, after seeing that the last sentence is about starters, would interpret the first two sentences to also be about starters.
Bound to have a let down game? He's had a let down past couple years. He currently has a PER of 16.6 Thats good for 18th best among PF's. Lets face it folks, he's not that good.
He's shooting 43%, which is by far a career low. I would imagine that everyone is suffering from Roy being NewRoy. This is so far the worst LMA has played period, but I believe he's better than this season, and will improve as the starting lineup figures its shit out. No, he's "not that good"... and you and Nik can bang that fucking drum all you like; there's nothing to prove you wrong. But he's better than this season. I have having to log in just to turn on my ignore list.
You're not just now learning this are you, Mix? LA if you are the coach is someone you need to watch your back on. What he is doing or not doing out there has direct effect on the job you are doing. The times here of late are looking a little bleak and I'm not sure he has the coaches back. He talks a good game, case in point, in todays oregonlive article. But other than that, the real proof in what's going on, on the court. I don't think it matters to him either way. A win or a loss. It pays either way. It's why with personality types such as this one, the guaranteed contracts need to be revoked from the player. He is a guy that needs to prove his worth each and every day. If you give him an out, which you have, he will burn you. And he has.
lol. So I bring facts and you resort to telling me that I'm on your ignore list? okie dokie artichokie. Some people have a hard time dealing with reality. I always get a kick out of it when people feel the need to update the board with who's on their ignore list. Fact is, Aldridge has never had a good PER, he's always been overhyped by this fanbase.
So a 19 PER is not good. Good to know. He may have been overhyped, but he is still above average and better than this season would imply.
He has a career PER of 18.3 which isn't horrible, but certainly isn't great. Considering the hype train around here about the guy, I'd figure that number to go up as he hits his prime. Yet, they have gone down despite being called upon to produce more. And every year he tells Quick he feels he's been slighted for an All-Star game. I can think of 15 or more PF's I'd rather have over LMA.
You said "Aldridge has never had a good PER" 19.1 is a good PER. Don't twist your assertions around just because I countered your opinion with fact. He benefited greatly from a healthy Roy feeding him open shots, and without that (much of last year and all of this year), the weaknesses in his game have definitely been exposed. All of this I think we can agree on, yes? The thing is, I've always seen LMA as 3rd option in an offense where Option 2 has never really played. He gets 2nd Option touches because who else in our lineup would get them? In that respect, he's always been out of position, so to speak. I'd say he's made the best of it he could, given the type of player he is. And while my list of PF's I'd rather have is shorter than yours (probably around 10), I'm not out there saying he's perfect. In fact, I don't think anyone here really has been overhyping him, at least not int the last 365 days or so.
I don't recall saying teams double LA a lot. They don't because he isn't in the post a whole lot. No reason to double a guy who just drifted out to 22 feet from the basket. Really though, it isn't even close to fair to use Duncan as a yardstick to measure LA's impact. Best Power Forward of All Time compared to 18th Best Power Forward of 2010 isn't all that revealing. In his defense, LaMarcus has gotten better at offensive rebounding this year and does appear to no longer be allergic to the post. His help defense has also improved. But none of these things are enough to make LaMarcus the main focus of the offense. Which is too bad since Portland really, really needs a player to be that guy now that Roy is probably never going to be able to fill that role again.
If it is a higher percentage play for the defense to double team him than to NOT double team him, then he commands a double team. You're really stretching on this one.
I can see what he means: below average starting PF quality... 15th or better PER among starting PF's would make him above average. Now, I don't agree with it overall (right now? Yeah, he's pressing and not doing great), because he can be better than he's playing now.
