Lillard's and Aldridge's relationship. (He will come back Portland one day)

And once again, they start together (just like I suggested if Aldridge was on the Blazers next year) and then have a lot of their minutes staggered. Aldridge played 12 more minutes than Poeltl against us too and all 12 of those minutes were at center plus the times when he was on the court and Poeltl wasn't. It's really close to a 50/50 split for Aldridge between PF and C with Poeltl playing more.

 

Another thing too is that after buying out Gasol they really don't have much depth in terms of bigs making it hard to tell if Pop's lineups are more out of necessity or what's really the optimal positions. I'm not saying that is proof for either of our contentions, just that it is making the data a little harder to decipher.

 

My opinion is he has played center for lack of better options. On any team with a decent center he would likely play PF. Other than Poetl, they don't have very good options at center and even he is very inexperienced with lack of playing time.

 

sure 3X8 = 2X12. That's equivalency on a chalkboard. Basketball isn't played on a chalkboard. CJ shoots 46.3% on FG's while Dame shoots 45%; CJ shoots 50.8% on twos while Dame shoots 50.6%; CJ shoots 38% on three's while Dames shoots 36.8%. Well then that settles it....CJ is a better shooter...right?

then why does Dame score 1.36 points/shot while CJ scores 1.19? Why does Dame have a TS% of .591 while CJ is at .557? The reason why is context. That context being that the goal of shooting is to score points, it ain't to have a great shooting percentage. It's score points because...scoreboard. To me, CJ is not a better shooter than Dame because he doesn't score more points shooting, he scores less. How can player X be a better shooter than player Y when player Y scores more points on his shots. That's the thing, Dame shooting yields better results than CJ shooting. You can spit all the hairs you want about raw FG percentages but the actual results of a player's shooting game are measured by the points he scores on the shots he takes.

now, lanny was talking Aminu vs Aldridge and pointing out that 35% on three's wasn't a bad number. It's not great, a ways below average, but probably acceptable for a player that only shoots 3.4 a game. Of course, Aldridge has always been rather inefficient as a shooter, so the comparison between him and Aminu is close, even with Aminu's below average 3 pt shooting. When Aldridge was younger, he could stress an opposing defense and force adjustments when he had his game going well. I doubt he does that much anymore. And the only people Aminu stresses are Blazer fans when he tries to lead a fast break

 

That's nice, but has nothing to do what I or lanny were saying though. Do you really think Aminu is better than Aldridge over all? Also, Aldridge shooting less than a 1/2 three pointer a game isn't even hardly a factor or a concern. Please just give me an answer without a bunch of numbers that you have posted several times already

 

first thing, I don't give a shit if you say "please" when you try and limit somebody else's response, especially mine. You sure don't have any limits on how you post.

secondly, try and find any quote of mine where I said Aminu is better than Aldridge. That's just another in your endless useless parade of stupid straw men you trot out here, day after day, and use to try and instigate pointless arguments

I've made my case and explained my POV. Getting into an argument with you is a waste of time, and yes, I've just wasted some, my bad, but that's enough

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And here is an example of how a poster derails a thread.

IT WAS JUST A FUCKING QUESTION NOT A STATEMENT. NOW GFY






gfy stands for good for you

 

Im on my phone so I cant go look at numbers very easily. Heres my thoughts.

If LMA is coming as a center he’s obviously not the starter, that would be Nurk.

If he came over as the PF theres an interesting debate here. I think LMA is a better player then Aminu, not even all that close imo, could you imagine if teams played Aminu like they do LMA? He’s not a very good offensive player when left completely alone...

Aminu:
Better overall defender, especially guarding wings and switching. Better Chemistry guy, doesnt need the ball in his hands. Works harder then LMA who is kind of a lazy player at times in my opinion.

Aldridge:
Able to post up create his own shot, better defender against bigs and stronger players, also has become a good help defender in SA. The defense will not leave him open so will create space for others.

Depending on the cost and when they get him Id choose LmA, but Im in the minority and I understand that.

 

I get comparing our starting PF to one on another team. Aldridge is a way better player. What I don't get is why we'd have to choose one over the other. Aminu could in theory (maybe not under Stotts) play some SF too and Aldridge can definitely play some center. Aminu is also a free agent with Full Bird Rights so we could easily keep both, if the luxury tax wasn't an issue.

Ideally I'd rather have someone else than either of those two.

 

The Spurs would never trade LMA, he's their Duncan 2.0.

 

Well, yeah. I would ideally pick neither, but many of the posts were talking about Aminu vs LMA so I was addressing that.

I am kind of indifferent about keeping Chief around, he’s a decent role player, he has made some clutch shots for us, seems like a good person. Talent wise, I think he’s replaceable though. In fact I think Zach will replace him next year (depending on offseason moves of course).

 

I have absolutely no problem with Aminu being on the team, but he is a free agent after this season and may want to leave if he sees a possibility of losing his starting spot and also depends on what he would cost to retain. If he would be willing to take a reasonable 2 year contract then he might be worth investing in. That way he would be expiring when some of the bigger contracts will be coming due as well. Hate to get locked in with a long term contract for a role player.

 

Could be true, but Spurs are facing a crossroad as to what direction they want to go in. Do they resign Gay, or let him go so that they can go younger as he is expiring at the end of the year. That decision might be an indicator that Spurs will go youth movement as they have some nice young pieces.

 

I don't really think Gay has a huge bearing on their future. They should be able to get someone better than him with their Full-MLE if they choose to keep trying to stay good. Currently they have 11 players under contract next year, plus the 20th, 29th, and 50th picks in the draft (as of right now).

If they're going to blow it up it might make more sense to wait one more season to do so.

 

Strawman. I said that Aminu is giving that same rebounding production as Aldridge on a per minute basis (fewer ORB more DRB as I explained). The team as a whole is giving the same scoring production as LA on a per offensive possession basis (Aminu on a per shot basis). LA takes about 2x the shots as Aminu per minute. LA will not magically bring those extra shots with him. He will use up shots currently taken by Nurk, Dame, CJ, Harkeless. The shots LA replaces are already as efficient as LA's shots.

 

If you played LA on the second unit he'd be way more valuable to this team than as a starter over Aminu. Our starting unit is already quite good and balanced. Obviously it would be better if Aminu could hit 38% of his 3's and even moreso Harkless. But they are both good defenders and provide just enough offensive threat to be acceptable. Along with Nurk (mostly because of Nurk but they help) gone are the days when teams slashed us to pieces driving the ball. Our biggest weakness is our second unit and LA would provide more offense and defense than Kanter can provide.

 

Eliminate the name calling and i would gladly have a discussion with you.

 

I didn't call you any names. I said your argument is a strawman argument since I neither said nor implied that anyone is scoring 12ppg in 4 minutes. So why do you bring it up?

"Who is this magical superstar that is scoring at a 12ppg game clip in 4 minutes as Aminu only averages 9+ ppg?"

 

I think our biggest weakness is that our starters at forwards combine to be one of the worst groups of starting forwards in the NBA, they aren't individually "bad", and I think a good team/contender could start one of them, but starting both of them is a bit of a disaster at times. Now once in a while, Moe will look like a legit starter and not just a role player and I start thinking oh they can compete when he gets them 15 and 6, and he plays good defense. Way too many games where you look and see that their starting forwards combined for a 10p's and 10r's (or less) in a combined like 45-50 minutes. Hard to win when that happens. They have a few options off the Bench, Zach, ET, Hood, Layman, all who have played well at times but none of them have stood out as this is a guy who makes their starters really legit.
Just my opinion, and it could be wrong.

 

You started off your response to me with Strawman. and then went on to an explanation and never a mention of a strawman argument. It sure looked to me like you were calling me strawman as another poster has also been using that frequently. If I interpreted wrong, then I apologize. You also stated this and this is what I was responding to:

We are already getting 21/9/2 production on the same usage & minutes.

It appeared that you are saying that we are already getting pretty much the same production with our PF's that Aldridge has been putting up so I asked who that other player is that is filling in that 12 points. If that wasn't what you meant then an explanation would be nice. Words often get lost in translation.