NBA CHAMPIONSHIP: Who wins and in how many games

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

That tells me he plays a lot of minutes on a good team. It is a team stat because good players on bad teams are unfairly punished and bad players on good teams are unfairly helped. I don't know how his team being worse when James is off the floor (meaning a substitute is playing in his place) is a meaningful stat. Stats w/o context are a waste of time

Isn't your value to your team determined by how much better you are than your replacement?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Isn't your value to your team determined by how much better you are than your replacement?

No it is determined by how much prodution you give them. Not to mention the lineup you play with and against can impact the number as well. If James goes out of the game the other team is likely to take out its best defensive player (assuming that is who is guarding James) because you try to get him rest when James isnt in because he plays so much. So a player on the court for Miami is now playing against a lineup w/o its best defensive player which artificially inflates the replacements +/-. Plus in a 5 on 5 situation an individual player can only have so much impact on scoring and scoring prevention. In theory if everyone was equal on a given team then they would all contribute 20% to offense and defense while on the court. But obviously that isnt reality but even the top players like James/Durant/Kobe etc can only have so much impact on scoring or defending. Other factors are starters are begining the game facing other starters (usually the other teams best players with a few notable exceptions like Harden and Ginobelli) and are playing the tougher to score minutes at the end of games. Backups are getting more time against other backups and there is sometimes a huge difference between players 5,6 and 7 on bad teams and good teams.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No it is determined by how much prodution you give them. Not to mention the lineup you play with and against can impact the number as well.

Ok. I see what you're saying.

Still, it's hard to disregard the fact that Lebron James' teams get outscored every single year when he isn't on the court, and that they absolutely dominate like no other team in the NBA every single year when he is on the court.

This stat aside -- how well do you think his teams would have done without him for the entire last four seasons?

Do you think they would have been better than .500?

Which of his last four teams was the best team? The Cleveland team that went 66-16

The 2nd leading scorer on that team was Mo Williams (he played 54 games and made just one start this season) and the 3rd leading scorer was Zydrunas Ilgauskas (The Big Z!) and he was comically uncooridanted and is out of the NBA.

I don't know much basketball -- and I understand your point about all of the flaws that come into play with the +/- stat ... and I don't even like anything about Ledouche James ... but everything I look at points to him being clear-cut the best player in the NBA every single year for the last four years.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Ok. I see what you're saying.

Still, it's hard to disregard the fact that Lebron James' teams get outscored every single year when he isn't on the court, and that they absolutely dominate like no other team in the NBA every single year when he is on the court.

This stat aside -- how well do you think his teams would have done without him for the entire last four seasons?

Do you think they would have been better than .500?

Which of his last four teams was the best team? The Cleveland team that went 66-16

The 2nd leading scorer on that team was Mo Williams (he played 54 games and made just one start this season) and the 3rd leading scorer was Zydrunas Ilgauskas (The Big Z!) and he was comically uncooridanted and is out of the NBA.

I don't know much basketball -- and I understand your point about all of the flaws that come into play with the +/- stat ... and I don't even like anything about Ledouche James ... but everything I look at points to him being clear-cut the best player in the NBA every single year for the last four years.

You dont need the +/- to know that. His game is overanalyzed to the point of hysteria though the media has seemingly switched over to Westbrook since it has been pretty hard to fault Lebron.

Scott Brooks is being completely outcoached. Having Derek Fisher in the game for as long as he did last night was a huge mistake. But despite none of OKC's players playing particularly well they lost the game because Miami made FT's and they didn't.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Ok. I see what you're saying.

Still, it's hard to disregard the fact that Lebron James' teams get outscored every single year when he isn't on the court, and that they absolutely dominate like no other team in the NBA every single year when he is on the court.

This stat aside -- how well do you think his teams would have done without him for the entire last four seasons?

Do you think they would have been better than .500?

Which of his last four teams was the best team? The Cleveland team that went 66-16

The 2nd leading scorer on that team was Mo Williams (he played 54 games and made just one start this season) and the 3rd leading scorer was Zydrunas Ilgauskas (The Big Z!) and he was comically uncooridanted and is out of the NBA.

I don't know much basketball -- and I understand your point about all of the flaws that come into play with the +/- stat ... and I don't even like anything about Ledouche James ... but everything I look at points to him being clear-cut the best player in the NBA every single year for the last four years.

I doubt either of the Cavs teams make the playoffs without him. Miami does but doesn't make it to the finals. I think second round at best. Going back to the 2007 season, I don't even think the team he took to the finals gets out of the first round, if they even make the playoffs. The only thing I've seen that rivals that is Iverson taking the Sixers to the finals in 2001.

Most people who are objective have long since admitted he's the clear best player. He's not the best scorer or the best shooter or the best rebounder, etc., but he best combines all of those in addition to being the best passer and defender. There is no other player that gives you as much in so many areas of the game as James does.

[RockHardTen1985]

I bet Miami and figured they would drop game 3. This series is over. Could be 5.

Hmm. Might hop a plane to Vegas today.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

I bet Miami and figured they would drop game 3. This series is over. Could be 5.

This is very premature. OKC is right on par with Miami and it's extremely hard to beat a team at this level four straight times. If I were betting, I'd still go with OKC for the win although I'm much higher on Miami's chances now than I was at the start thanks to Scotty Brooks and James Harden.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

This is very premature. OKC is right on par with Miami and it's extremely hard to beat a team at this level four straight times. If I were betting, I'd still go with OKC for the win although I'm much higher on Miami's chances now than I was at the start thanks to Scotty Brooks and James Harden.

Of course it's premature but if he just acted normal no one would respond to him.

Everything is premature now. After game 1, everyone was saying Miami couldn't beat OKC. Now they are up 2-1.