How the Eastern Conference looks for ’09-10, based on individual player ratings, by position

When evaluating where teams stand in relationship to their competition, it’s important to assess each player in the conference, by position, combining their individual skill-sets in all three main phases of the game … i.e. Offense, Defense & Rebounding.

By doing something like this …

Part I

EASTERN CONFERENCE PLAYER RATINGS BY POSITION FOR PROJECTED STARTERS, 2009-2010

#

PG

OG

SF

PF

C

1

Rose

Wade

James-L

Garnett

Howard

2

Rondo

Carter

Pierce

Smith-Jos

Horford

3

Harris

Johnson

Butler

Bosh

O’Neal-S

4

Calderon

Allen-R

Prince

Murphy

Lopez

5

Arenas

Hamilton

Granger

Lewis

Noah

6

Stuckey

Iguodala

Wallace-G

Jamison

Perkins

7

Williams-M

Bell

Young-T

Varejao

Chandler

8

Nelson

Parker

Deng

Diaw

Haywood

9

Ford

Hinrich

Turkoglu

Maxiell

Lee-D

10

Duhon

Lee-C

Pietrus

LRMAM

O’Neal-J

11

Williams-L

Chandler

Williams-M

Haslem

Bogut

12

Bibby

Redd

CDR

Harrington

Bargnani

13

Felton

Stevenson

Gallinari

Thomas-Ty

Dalembert

14

Chalmers

Jones

Beasley?

Brand

Foster

15

Jennings

DeRozan

Alexander

Jianlian

Brown-K

Part II

EASTERN CONFERENCE TEAM RATINGS BY POSITION

FOR PROJECTED STARTERS, 2009-2010

Team

PG

#

OG

#

SF

#

PF

#

C

#

TOT

#

BOS

Rajon

Rondo

2

Ray

Allen

4

Paul

Pierce

2

Kevin

Garnett

1

Kendrick

Perkins

6

15

1

CLE

Mo

Williams

7

Anthony

Parker

8

Lebron

James

1

Anderson

Varejao

7

Shaquille

O’Neal

3

26

T2

ORL

Jameer

Nelson

8

Vince

Carter

2

Mickael

Pietrus

10

Rashard

Lewis

5

Dwight

Howard

1

26

T2

MIA

Mario

Chalmers

14

Dwyane

Wade

1

Michael

Beasley?

14

Udonis

Haslem

11

Jermaine

O’Neal

10

50

12

ATL

Mike

Bibby

12

Joe

Johnson

3

Marvin

Williams

11

Josh

Smith

2

Al

Horford

2

30

4

PHI

Louis

Williams

11

Andre

Iguodala

6

Thaddeus

Young

7

Elton

Brand

14

Samuel

Dalembert

13

51

13

CHI

Derrick

Rose

1

Kirk

Hinrich

9

Luol

Deng

8

Tyrus

Thomas

13

Joakim

Noah

5

36

6

DET

Rodney

Stuckey

6

Richard

Hamilton

5

Tayshaun

Prince

4

Jason

Maxiell

9

Kwame

Brown

15

39

7

IND

TJ

Ford

9

Dahntay

Jones

14

Danny

Granger

5

Troy

Murphy

4

Jeff

Foster

14

48

11

MLW

Brandon

Jennings

15

Michael

Redd

12

Joe

Alexander

15

LRMAM

10

Andrew

Bogut

11

63

15

CHA

Raymond

Felton

13

Raja

Bell

7

Gerald

Wallace

6

Boris

Diaw

8

Tyson

Chandler

7

41

8

NJN

Devin

Harris

3

Courtney

Lee

10

Chris

D-R

12

Yi

Jianlian

15

Brook

Lopez

4

44

10

TOR

Jose

Calderon

4

DeMar

DeRozan

15

Hedo

Turkoglu

9

Chris

Bosh

3

Andrea

Bargnani

12

43

9

NYK

Chris

Duhon

10

Tyson

Chandler

11

Danilo

Gallinari

13

Al

Harrington

12

David

Lee

9

55

14

WAS

Gilbert

Arenas

5

DeShawn

Stevenson

13

Caron

Butler

3

Antawn

Jamison

6

Brendan

Haywood

8

35

5

Part III

EASTERN CONFERENCE PLAYER RATINGS BY POSITION FOR PROJECTED BACK-UPS, 2009-2010

#

PG

OG

SF

PF

C

1

Augustin

Salmons

Dunleavy

Bass

Wallace-R

2

Jack

Gordon

Miller

Villanueva

Gortat

3

House

Crawford-J

Moon

Pachulia

Miller-B

4

Foye

Hughes

Evans-M

Davis-G

Ilgauskas

5

Alston

Young-N

Daniels

Thomas-K

Speights

6

Johnson-A

Rush-B

Jeffries

Evans-R

Smith-Joe

7

Robinson-N

Green-W

Daye

Radmanovic

Nesterovic

8

Bynum

West-D

Johnson-J

Oberto

Blatche

9

Pargo

Allen-T

Barnes

Hansbrough

Hibbert

10

Ridnour

Redick

Wright-A

Smith-Jas

Wallace-B

11

Gibson

Henderson

Williams-T

Anthony

Milicic

12

Watson-E

Belinelli

Diawara

Hickson

Magloire

13

Teague

Dooling

Brown-D

Hill-J

Diop

14

Holiday

Cook

Warrick

Gibson-T

Elson

15

Quinn

Meeks

Kapono

Williams-S

Boone

Part IV

EASTERN CONFERENCE TEAM RATINGS BY POSITION

FOR PROJECTED BACK-UPS, 2009-2010

Team

PG

#

OG

#

SF

#

PF

#

C

#

TOT

#

BOS

Eddie

House

3

Tony

Allen

9

Marquis

Daniels

5

Glen

Davis

4

Rasheed

Wallace

1

22

1

CLE

Daniel

Gibson

11

Delnote

West

8

Jamario

Moon

3

JJ

Hickson

12

Zydrunas

Ilgauskas

4

38

9

ORL

Anthony

Johnson

6

JJ

Redick

10

Matt

Barnes

9

Brandon

Bass

1

Marcin

Gortat

2

28

3

MIA

Chris

Quinn

15

Daequan

Cook

14

Yakhouba

Diawara

12

Joel

Anthony

11

Jamall

Magloire

12

64

15

ATL

Jeff

Teague

13

Jamal

Crawford

3

Maurice

Evans

4

Zaza

Pachulia

3

Joe

Smith

6

29

T4

PHI

Jrue

Holiday

14

Willie

Green

7

Jason

Kapono

15

Jason

Smith

10

Mareese

Speights

5

51

14

CHI

Jannero

Pargo

9

John

Salmons

1

James

Johnson

8

Taj

Gibson

14

Brad

Miller

3

35

6

DET

Will

Bynum

8

Ben

Gordon

2

Austin

Daye

7

Charlie

Villanueva

2

Ben

Wallace

10

29

T4

IND

Earl

Watson

12

Brandon

Rush

6

Mike

Dunleavy

1

Tyler

Hansbrough

9

Roy

Hibbert

9

37

8

MLW

Luc

Ridnour

10

Jodie

Meeks

15

Hakim

Warrick

14

Kurt

Thomas

5

Francisco

Elson

14

58

12

CHA

DJ

Augustin

1

Gerald

Henderson

11

Derrick

Brown

13

Vladimir

Radmanovic

7

DeSagana

Diop

13

45

11

NJN

Rafer

Alston

5

Keyon

Dooling

13

Terrence

Williams

11

Sean

Williams

15

Josh

Boone

15

59

13

TOR

Jarrett

Jack

2

Marco

Belinelli

12

Antoine

Wright

10

Reggie

Evans

6

Rasho

Nesterovic

7

37

7

NYK

Nate

Robinson

7

Larry

Hughes

4

Chris

Jeffries

6

Jordan

Hill

13

Darko

Milicic

11

41

10

WAS

Randy

Foye

4

Nick

Young

5

Mike

Miller

2

Fabricio

Oberto

8

Andray

Blatche

8

27

2

Part V

EASTERN CONFERENCE TEAM RATINGS BY POSITION FOR STARTERS + BACK-UPS, 2009-2010

Team

STARTERS

BACK-UPS

TOTAL

RANK

BOS

15

22

37

1

CLE

26

38

64

5

ORL

26

28

54

2

MIA

50

64

114

14

ATL

30

29

59

3

PHI

51

51

102

12

CHI

36

35

71

7

DET

39

29

68

6

IND

48

37

85

9

MLW

63

58

121

15

CHA

41

45

86

10

NJN

44

59

103

13

TOR

43

37

80

8

NYK

55

41

96

11

WAS

35

27

62

4

Part VI

EASTERN CONFERENCE EXPECTED STANDINGS BASED ON PLAYER RATINGS BY POSITION, 2009-2010

No.

Team

1

Boston Celtics

2

Orlando Magic

3

Atlanta Hawks

4

Washington Wizards

5

Cleveland Cavaliers

6

Detroit Pistons

7

Chicago Bulls

8

Toronto Raptors

9

Indiana Pacers

10

Charlotte Bobcats

11

New York Knicks

12

Philadelphia 76ers

13

New Jersey Nets

14

Miami Heat

15

Milwaukee Bucks

… which compares:

* Each player to his counter-parts at the PG, OG, SF, PF & C position, respectively;

* Each group of “Starters” vs one another;

* Each group of “Back-ups” vs one another;

* Each group of “Starters + Back-ups” vs one another;

an accurate picture begins to develop, regarding the collective talents of these individual teams.

SUMMARY

ITEM 1
The chief reason many NBA observers see the Cleveland Cavaliers [Rated #5, above, based on player talent], as the No. 1 team in the EC standings this season, and the Miami Heat [Rated #14, above, based on player talent], as a legitimate playoff contender, at all, is due to the individual brilliance/dominance of ubiquitous players like Lebron James and Dwyane Wade, respectively.

ITEM 2
If the Cavaliers do indeed prove to be one of the three [3] elite level teams in the EC this season … i.e. along with the Celtics and Magic … and the Heat do indeed prove to be a mid-to-lower tier playoff team … i.e. #4-8 … then it will also mean that the following group of 9 teams:

Atlanta [#3], Washington [#4], Detroit [#6], Chicago [#7], Toronto [#8], Indiana [#T9], Charlotte [#T9], New York [#11] and Philadelphia [#12];

will be in a tight race for the remaining four [4] playoff positions.

Related:

Summer Forecast: ’09-10 East standings

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

56 Responses to “How the Eastern Conference looks for ’09-10, based on individual player ratings, by position”

  1. Scott G Says:

    Methodology is a bit crude… but I can’t argue with the end point.

    One small nit — you don’t think Hedo is better tha the 9th-best SF in the east alone? Might be what PER says, but I think it’s VERY close in spots 3-9 on your SF list, after which there’s a significant drop-off.

    Here’s a question — if CB4 were the C, I presume you’d have him at #2?

  2. khandor Says:

    Scott G.,

    The methodology is crude for a specific reason.

    It’s amazing how complex and, yet, simultaneously simple this game can be … when it’s played and coached and GMed properly.

    In general, the new-age stats gurus/practicioners do not think about the game in a way that reflects the in-game decision-making of NBA players and coaches.

    As much as possible, the basketball related entries which you see in this space try to accomplish this specific task … which is a contributing factor to the reason that those with considerable experience as players and/or coaches see the merits of much that appears here, while others [e.g. regular NBA fans, who think that they understand how the game works] may not.

    ————————————————

    re: Hedo Turkoglu as the No. 9 #3/SF in the Eastern Conference

    IMO, No. 9 is where he belongs on this list:

    1 Lebron James … not close
    2 Paul Pierce … not close
    3 Caron Butler … he can check Turk effectively; Turk cannot check him
    4 Tayshaun Prince … similar to Butler, as an individual check
    5 Danny Granger … similar to Butler, as an individual check
    6 Gerald Wallace … similar to Butler, as an individual check
    7 Thaddeus Young … similar to Butler, as an individual check
    8 Luol Deng … if he’s healthy, similar to Butler, as an individual check
    9 Hedo Turkoglu
    10 Mickael Pietrus … expect him to go by Turk on this list soon
    11 Marvin Williams … still struggling to establish himself in the NBA
    12 Chris Douglas Roberts … expect him to go by Turk on this list soon
    13 Gallinari … if he’s healthy, expect him to go by Turk on this list soon
    14 Beasley … personal problems?
    15 Alexander … significantly behind the others at this stage of his NBA career

    What Turk brings to the table works very well in the international game for a player of his size and skill-set and in the NBA when playing off a dominant interior Big like Dwight Howard. Combined with his willingness and ability to take and make a fair number of Big Shots for his team, he is a very useful basketball player. He is simply not a star, however; nor does he match-up very well with the type of superior athletes that patrol this position in THIS league on a nightly basis.

    There’s a reason Otis Smith/Dave Twardzik were more than happy to exchange Vince Carter for Hedo Turkoglu, with a $50.0 M price-tag, in Orlando … and, until I see HT prove them wrong, I am willing to give the Magic’s management team the benefit of the doubt, i.e. that, in this instance, they actually know what they’re doing when it comes to fielding a legit contender for the NBA championship.

    —————————————————

    re: Bosh at Center

    There is NO player in the Eastern Conference today who I would choose to play Center for my team ahead of Chris Bosh, with the exception of Kevin Garnett. :-)

    If he is used properly and surrounded by the right combination of players, CB4 has the capacity to be a dominant Center in the NBA. It’s a real shame that he hasn’t been afforded this opportunity to-date.

  3. JT Says:

    You have Tony Allen ranked as the 3rd best backup OG. You meant to have Tony Allen as the 13th best backup OG. While this does not change the final tallies, it makes it more reflective of how close the top teams are- rather than it looking like a clean Boston favorite.

  4. khandor Says:

    JT,

    Welcome aboard! :-)

    Thanks for catching and pointing out that typo. It will be corrected with Tony Allen listed as the No. 9 rated Back-up OG [not No. 3 or No. 13].

  5. Scott G Says:

    “There’s a reason Otis Smith/Dave Twardzik were more than happy to exchange Vince Carter for Hedo Turkoglu, with a $50.0 M price-tag”

    Indeed there is. VC is a far better player, and Hedo’s new deal lasts until he’s 35…

    But realistically, IMO you can swap in the name of any other eastern conf SF (Except LBJ) in place of Hedo in that quote above, and it remains true (assuming the substituted player is being paid Hedo’s current salary). VC is just that good, and the SF’s after Pierce are not. Pierce, like Hedo, is too old to merit the length deal that Hedo got.

    That said, it’s hard to argue with the analysis you present above. Right now, for this coming year alone, I think I’d take Turk over Deng, Wallace and Young, and possibly over Prince. Give it a couple years, though, and Turk declines.

    It’s interesting to me that you’d prefer CB4 to DH12 at the C spot. I suppose DH12 is pretty limited offensively, but what he brings to the table in terms of D/Reb more than makes up for it, IMO. But, CB4 is very talented offensively at the C spot (LOTS of FT’s), and perhaps less of a defensive liability than most would think because of the dearth of offensively talented power-based bigs. (ie if CB4 and DH12 played one-on-one, it wouldn’t be close) I’d love to hear your thoughts…

  6. khandor Says:

    Scott G.,

    I think you pretty much nailed every spike directly on the head right there. :-)

    Other things I’d mention about the Centers in the EC at the moment include these:

    1. If Bosh is No. 1 for me, Dwight Howard [1A] is not be very far behind.

    [i.e. Johnny Wooden taught everyone a long time ago that the most important physical measure of a player is his "relative quickness, at the position played", and it's simply amazing that all these years later SO many "regular basketball fans" still get mesmerized by a bigger player's physical size, without looking closely at each phase of his individual game.]

    2. Mr. Lopez has the capacity to join the above two players in the next few seasons.

    3. Al Horford is an oustanding player, in his own right, who is plenty good enough to win with in a major way, in the NBA.

    4. From a Raptors’ perspective:

    There are a whole bunch of Centers in the East that are way better basketball players than Andrea Bargnani, as soon as you bring Rebounding and Defense into the equation properly.

    To leave out fundamental skills like Rebounding & Defense [Team & Individual] when considering who the best Centers are in THIS League is preposterous … and something which ONLY unsophisticated basketball fans would ever think of doing.

    [Fortunately ... with your background in the game ... you do not suffer from this affliction. :-) ]

  7. DanH Says:

    Just a followup to JT’s post – I can see why he thought it would be #13 instead of #9, as there are 2 #10s in your backup OG list. Just thought you may want to know.

    An interesting way to put it all together. This makes me very optimistic about this coming season, simply because I am a natural optimist, and most of your posts have that inconvenient ring of realism to them. But this one seems more optimistic than usual, placing the Raps in the playoffs and within grasping distance of that 5th spot (avoiding the big 3) if someone (say, DeRozan or Bargs) outperforms your rankings.

    And, as a blind optimist, I regrettably must believe that they will. ;)

  8. KMike Says:

    Delonte West is the probable starter at the 2 for the Cavs not Parker.

    Irregardless, how could you have him as the 8th best backup OG?!? He was the second best Cavalier on the court for long stretches during the playoffs.

    What methodology did you use to determine the rankings?

  9. Raps Fan Says:

    I assume the distance between Bargnani and Dalembert isn’t that much? If you gave Bargnani say 50 points, Samuel gets 48? Hypothetically…?

  10. khandor Says:

    DanH,

    Thanks for pointing out the duplicate No. 10′s in the Back-up OG category. This typo has now been corrected.

    ————————————————-

    re: where the Raptors stand in terms of NBA talent

    In general, broad terms like optimism, realism and pessimism are not words which I use.

    Q1. Should Raptors fans be thrilled at this point that the team has enough talent this year to battle for a spot in the EC playoffs?

    A2. That depends on the perspective and experience which each person brings to the table him/herself as a fan of the team.

    What I would say, however, is that, IMO, it would be inaccurate for others to try and assert that:

    * This year’s team is substantially more talented than last year’s team, in comparison with the other teams in the EC this season.

    * This year’s team has a talent level which should guarantee a playoff position in the EC, in comparison with the other teams.

    * This year’s team has a talent level which should guarantee another NON-playoff season for Toronto, in comparison with the other teams.

  11. khandor Says:

    Raps Fan,

    IMO, and regardless of the specific “metric” used, for all practical intents and purposes, on a basketball court, there really isn’t much to separate between Andrea Bargnani and Samuel Dalembert, as a starting Center in the EC.

    i.e. Bargnani is a superior offensive player and an overall poor defender & rebounder. Dalembert is a superior defender & rebounder but an inferior offensive player.

    Relative to the positive contributions made by several of the other Centers in the East, neither one should be thought of as being very good, at this stage of his NBA career.

  12. Skye Says:

    I didn’t honestly think I’d ever hear anybody refer to Lebron James or Dwyane Wade as “ubiquitous”… transcendent maybe. Ubiquitous means widespread or commonplace… If you’re talking about their talent you’re waaaaaaaaay off base; if you’re referring to media saturation, amen brother.

    And it’s nice to see the Pistons appropriately placed in the playoff race, the fact that most NBA writers/bloggers are putting Chicago over them is laughable to me.

  13. khandor Says:

    Skye,

    Welcome aboard! :-)

    I prefer to use a slightly different definition for the word “ubiquitous” which refers instead to the word “omnipresent” … and, in the case of basketball, infers being everywhere on the court at-once, wherever and whenever his presence/effect is needed by his team, in order to succeed.

    ————————————————

    re: the Pistons

    Agreed.

  14. khandor Says:

    KMike,

    Welcome aboard! :-)

    If I’m Mike Brown, I would not choose to start Delonte West [6-3, 180], at the OG position, over a player like Anthony Parker [6-6, 215] … beside Mo Williams [PG], Lebron James [SF], Anderson Varejao [PF] and Shaquille O’Neal [C].

    DW is a better fit coming off the bench with this year’s Cavs team.

    He is not as proficient a shooter/assist-man/ball-handler as Williams [PG].

    He is not as proficient a defender/rebounder/shooter as Parker [OG].

    I would not dispute the notion that DW was in fact the 2nd best Cav on the floor at different times last season for Cleveland in the playoffs, or the year before, for that matter.

    I would merely suggest to you that Anthony Parker was not on either one of those Cleveland teams and neither was Shaquille O’Neal.

    Given the skill-sets, quickness, size, etc., of these two new players … it is my opinion that … DW is no longer one of the best 5 players the Cavs can put on the court together this season, especially, in a playoff game vs the Celtics, Magic, etc.

    The methodology I use to determine individual player ratings combines all three main phases of the game … i.e. offense, defense & rebounding … in conjunction with individual match-ups & mismatches at the position played with specific opponents on the high calibre teams in the league.

  15. Mr.Hunter Says:

    I think alot of those are wayyyyyyyyyyy offf. If this is a true projection onto 2009/10 then Arenas is at least second if not first, there’s no way in hell elton brand is second last (more like 3rd 4th or 5th), and Jamario Moon is not, i repeat not better than Matt Barnes. There are alot more but those stood out the most to me.

  16. khandor Says:

    Mr. Hunter,

    Welcome aboard! :-)

    re: Agent 0

    Unfortunately for Gilbert, individual scoring exploits are not the most important piece of criteria in the evaluation process when determining the most effective PG’s in the NBA … especially, in the case of a specific player who has missed a huge number of games the last 2 seasons due to serious knee injuries.

    ————————————–

    re: Moon isn’t better than Barnes

    Upon what basis would you make an observation like that?

    e.g. [A] An objective measure, like their respective PER values [i.e. Moon vs Barnes]; or, [B] your own basketball acumen; or [C] a combination of A + B.

    ————————————–

    re: Elton Brand

    He is less than 1 year removed from a serious knee injury and is now 30 years of age. At a generous 6-9, 254 there is a strong possibility that a “tweener” like Elton never regains the stature he once had in this league, circa 2005-2006, and instead continues his steady decline from the last 3 seasons. There are now a slew of solid, younger PF’s who are every bit as good as EB, and will only get better over the next few seasons.

  17. Don Says:

    These are just Predictions!!!! some of you guys are hilarious!!!! no one knows who’s gonna step up or decline next season. You’d be better off trying to formulate lotto numbers.

  18. Mr.Hunter Says:

    arent those all based on your personal acumens? so you arent nreccissarily correct, even if gilbert can put up onlny 20 instead of 28 now- he is still better than the spot u put him in, and i dont care if he is a yr removed due to injury Elton Brand is better than udonis haslam and about anyone up till 4th at least. hes a former all start who averaged 25 and 10 and ur not even gunna give him better than 14th when he is now healthy? ur system is seriously flawed….seriously

  19. khandor Says:

    Mr. Hunter,

    Here’s my simple challenge.

    If you’re interested … please pick a player on my list who you think is inferior to Elton Brand [and that I have listed above him], at this stage of their respective careers, as a starting PF in the EC.

    Tell me your specific rationale for making your assessment.

    In turn, I will then provide you with my specific perspective on that 1-vs-1 match-up.

    ——————————————————–

    Although Elton Brand was, at one point in his career a superior PF to Udonis Haslem, this may no longer be the case.

  20. Mr.Hunter Says:

    ur kidding me- we r talking about udonis haslem here. 14 and 9 at very very best, elton brand is when healthy a lock for 17 or 18 and 10, plus he has it on the defensive end as well. he will need time to get into game shape but even then he’s better. if the had the same pay an udonis for brand trade would be similar to gasol trade- at a lower extent. u got to factor in that udnois wont be getting the minutes he used to, with beasley, oneall. Brand just lost evans as a contender for the pf spot. cmon. udonis vs brand? they r the same age basically…..brand is better offensively and defensively- i dont see how this makes one lick of sense, i dont need to accept a challenge cuz nothing can make believe that udoniss haslem is going to be better than brand this season until i see undois perform better than the 8 points, 8 rebounds of last season. PERs rnt everrything, some players are just better period. and as for barnes, he isnt as athletic but as we have seen jamario doesnt use his athleticism welll. barnes is a beter shooter, rebounder per minutes, passer and man on man defender-plus he can adjust to a running game. its rediculous, what ur saying in these charts. crazy even. no words can discribe the little u know about basketball and u try to fill that in wit PERs and other stats when u havnt seen half these guys play. get nba season pass and you’ll realize how dumb u look in the eyes of me and my hommies. watch them play a bit- then make ur chart. udonis over brand? please.no way. why do u h ave a blog so useless anyways kid?

  21. khandor Says:

    Mr. Hunter,

    Let me see if I understand your position accurately.

    You think Elton Brand has been a better PF over the course of his NBA career than Udonis Haslem … because of Brand’s higher “seasonal averages” in points scored & rebounds per game.

    You think Elton Brand will be a better PF than Udonis Haslem this coming season, once again … because he has put up better “seasonal averages” in points scored & rebounds per game in the past.

    If these two observations of mine are, indeed, accurate, it would seem to be the case that it is YOU who has a heavy reliance on specific game stats [i.e. PPG & RPG] when making YOUR assessments about an individual player’s talent/ability.

    In which case …

    If I then show you the following stats for these two specific players:

    Last 2 years Stats for Player A vs Player B

    Would your assessment still be so cut & dried that one of them is superior to the other and is therefore guaranteed to have a better season this coming year?

    If so:

    Q1. Do you think Player A or Player B projects to have better stats during 2009-2010?

    Q2. Which set of stats do you think belong to Brand?

    It is always interesting to read when someone else thinks that I am someone who uses ONLY my “Basketball Acumen” when determining which players deserve to be rated above others, OR that I am someone who uses ONLY stats like PER when determining which players are better than their peers at a specific position in the NBA game.

    ——————————————————–

    Additional information you may want to consider regarding a specific match-up between Elton Brand & Udonis Haslem:

    Brand played all of 8 games during the 2007-2008 season … after rupturing an achilles tendon.

    Brand played all of 29 games during the 2008-2009 season … after dislocating a shoulder.

    As I’ve said already, above … at one time in hhis career Elton Brand was a better PF than Udonis Haslem BUT this might no longer be the case.

    ——————————————————–

    re: Barnes vs Moon

    Matt is an okay back-up player in the NBA.

    Jamario, however, is a more versatile defensive player, and a superior rebounder. Coming off a team’s bench, Moon is the preferred player by a fairly wide margin.

    ——————————————————–

    FYI …

    When it comes to “hommies” … suffice to say that some of mine are in fact the same people you just happen to be “watching” on League Pass. :-)

  22. Mr.Hunter Says:

    i dont relp on stats i was just trying to see it from ur viewpoint and point out how it still wouldnt make sense. ELTON BREAND is better than UDONIS HASLEM. iunno how else to put it. period. stats, actual play, projection for 09/10. whatever. udonis haslem isnt better than elton brand at all – but then by more than 1 position…please….gimme a break and dstop dreaming – u dont have hommies lol

  23. khandor Says:

    Mr. Hunter,

    I have asked you 3 questions in this thread and you have yet to provide an answer to any of them. What’s the reason for this?

    If need be, please re-read the questions above.

    Once you try to answer those then perhaps we can move further in this discussion.

    [e.g. what specific basketball skill do you believe Elton Brand will perform at a higher level this coming season compared to Udonis Haslem]

    Until then, there isn’t really much more for me to add.

    ——————————

    re: “u dont have hommies”

    LOL, :-)

  24. kiddy Says:

    elton brand is just better though, thats why when he was heakthy he made all-star teams and was top 10 nba, and when udonis was healthy he didnt do close to as much. healthy brand vs. healthy haslem= brand is better.. same age, i think udonis is healthy and so is brand. so its only comon sense that brand is better. he doesnt all of a sudden lose his talent, u get injured -u heal. ur game goes down a bit but he’s still at least potential all-star candidate- udonis is. i think u messd up there khandor. and again mr.hunter- calm down, this is just a guys blog, wether his charts r bad or not they r his opinions. u r right though brand is better, clearly.

  25. kiddy Says:

    i ment udonis isnt* in the middle bout potential all-stars

  26. khandor Says:

    kiddy,

    Welcome aboard! :-)

    It’s already been acknowledged that Brand was, at one time, a better PF than Haslem.

    What’s in question here, however … isn’t that distinction at all.

    Given the reality of:

    - Brand’s ruptured achilles tendon 2 years ago, AND
    - Brand’s dislocated shoulder last year, AND
    - the fact that Brand has only played 37 games, in total, over the past 2 seasons, AND
    - the fact that Philadelphia now has:
    i. a young Big like Jason Smith returning from an injury, and
    ii. a young Big like Marreese Speights beginning to emerge

    it should not be a foregone conclusion that Elton Brand is going to regain his former status as a better PF than Udonis Haslem.

    Time will tell if my opinion on this matter turns out to be right or wrong.

  27. kiddy Says:

    u have a bad reputation for making predictions like these

  28. khandor Says:

    kiddy,

    Those with a great deal of experience in the game are the ones who see best the correctness of my opinions.

    You are free to draw your own conclusions from that fact. :-)

    It’s also a fact that what I write on-line is not easily understood, or agreed with, by everyone … especially, regular fans or certain other so-called “NBA analysts”.

    That’s okay with me. My goal has never been to please others. :-)

  29. kiddy Says:

    but it doesnt take someone with experiance to see that ur bad at what u do. i didnt wanna be rude but its just how i think most ppl that read ur blog see it. (you’ve read the comments) -. stop tryin to go out on a limb with wild predictions and be reasonable to allow me to write good things. pretty much make the blog better-just cuz ur not a pro or an expert doesnt mean you cant make a decent blog. but u get alot of traffic for ur controversy so thats good.

  30. khandor Says:

    kiddy,

    LOL, :-)

    It could be the case that you fit into the category of someone without a great deal of elite level basketball experience … either as a player or a coach.

    It could also be the case that the people who disagree with my opinions about the game could be wrong … even though they might also be in the majority.

    Fact 1.
    Majority or minority opinion does not have a monopoly on Accuracy and/or Truth.

    Believe it or not … there are those who think that I don’t go “out on a limb” far enough, or at least not enough of the time; as well as those who think like you, i.e. that what I do here is purposely designed “to go out on a limb” as much as possible, in order to create “traffic” for my blog.

    LOL, :-)

    Fact 2.
    Neither of those two opinions happens to be accurate.

    re: just cuz ur not a pro or an expert

    Fact 3.
    Wrong, again, on both accounts. :-)

  31. kiddy Says:

    im a member of canadian national junoir team, i once played on the cb4 tournament 3 team. my dads the coach for york university and ive been in basketball all my life. my uncle is Cliff Ray and if you didnt know he is an assistant coach for the CELTICS. my family is all basketball! ive met billy hunter bryan colangelo and alex english. i can hold conversations about basketball at a uniqely high level and thats all i do pretty much……..and im saying that even though u will defend ur opinions relentlessly, you are plane an simple wrong on a few things and ur charts often dont make sense. and yes majority doesnt count for anything but when u make lists like urs – knowledgeable basketball minds such as i can tell you wether its decent or good or just bad…honestly. ive asked around ur battier over durant opinion and because i didnt mention it wasnt my opinion ppl think im stupid. dont think i havnt asked my father too. he feels its a dumb choice to put a ROY who averaged 26 and 6 last yr over a guy who plays good defense and has a decent 3pt shot but cant do much else. when you r 6’10″ and u have a wingspan of 7’3″ you can be effective when guarding SFs if u try or not. dont diss my basketball knowledge i have gone farther into basketball than you and im only 17. period. national team. cb4 tournament team. ive participated in a number of scrimages and practices and event with the raptors when my dad was brought in for training camp lastt year. my uncle was around me alot before he got the boston job so all i know is basketball and i think ur opinion isnt valuable enough to make me feel that ur charts make a bit of sense. ok . cool. which one of us is the inexperianced one now?

  32. khandor Says:

    kiddy,

    It’s not my goal to purposely embarass or make anyone else look bad on this blog.

    That said …

    If you’re trying to say that you’re a Canadian national junior team player who is 17 years old, currently in university, whose father is a coach at York University, whose uncle is Clifford Ray, etc., … I would first ask you these simple questions:

    Q1. Are you claiming to be one of the players on this list of invitees or, perhaps, a player on this roster?

    Q2. Are you claiming to be a child of one of the coaches in this picture or, perhaps, this picture?

    Q3. Are you claiming that your uncle is also this man, right here?

    If so … then, these would be very interesting claims for you to be making.

    If not … then, perhaps, you might want to clarify what you’ve actually said in your comment, before I go any further.

    ————————————-

    PS. Just to clarify: I’ll wait to read your answers to these 3 specific questions I have asked before responding further.

  33. kiddy Says:

    yes i am tom oliveri’s son, nephew of cliff ray- who if you do your homework- used to be involved with coaching the canadian senior team years back. I didnt say i was attending york univesity i just get opportunities to get involved in workouts and scrimmages and stuff like that. i made a mistake, technicaly im no longer a memeber of the junior team – im just used to saying ii am but im 17 now so im too old to be. I am on the tryout waiting list for the senior mens team however. you can check-ill be there. And i got on that waiting list because everymember of the junior team who moves on because of age requirements only get automaticaly placed on the list. u put up 08s list-check 09s or 2010 seniors list im not sure which one it would be under realy. and u put the womens list up as an insult eh?:P im not making this up…i have legit experiance in basketball- its what i am. so please dont insult how much knowledge i have for the game

  34. kiddy Says:

    can u say u have more creddible experiance? if not no big deal, just dont diss my intelligence.period

  35. khandor Says:

    kiddy,

    It’s not my goal to embarass anyone with this blog, but you should not be attempting to pass yourself off as someone who you are not.

    i.e. The coach who you picked out does not have a son in high school or university.

    That type of nonsense is not allowed on this blog.

    I will give you a fair chance to retract that claim before replying to:

    Whether or not you are really a youth player in the Canadian basketball development system;

    Whether or not you are really the nephew of Clifford Ray, Assistant Coach for the Boston Celtics;

    Whether or not you are really someone with a strong list of credible basketball experience.

  36. dandresden Says:

    khandor you are a fool and im pretty sure that despite your claims of these projections being stat based you just set a bunch of sheets of paper with players names written on them and see which one your dog shits on to get your results. in fact i know its true since i attempted this experiment and came up with the exact same list that you did.

  37. khandor Says:

    dandresden,

    Welcome aboard! :-)

    re: your dog’s evaluation of NBA players

    On the other hand, of course … it could also be the case that your pup happens to know more about the NBA game than you do. :-)

    It’s important to keep a good sense of humour at all times. ;)

    ———————

    PS. Personally, I don’t own a dog.

  38. Jamie Says:

    Why do u keep saying that anyone who strongly disagrees with you has either no knowledge about basketball, or that they just have less than you. Are you 100% right all the time? What basketball experiance do you have that is credible enough for you to insult the basketball knowledge of us readers? A good share of your blogs realy and honestly aren’t good in MY opinion. Possibly the opinion of alot of the other readers as well, but that doesn’t mean it’s only because we don’t know about basketball that we feel that way. You can’t judge us on our basketball IQ if you don’t know us. And you will probably say that you don’t do this blog to please our opinions but you do it for us to see, and there’s a comment box for a reason.

  39. mr.hunter Says:

    why do u think ur opinions represent someone with more intelligence than a person that disagrees. what kind of experiance do u even have that you can justify demeaning ur commentors by calling some unintelligent when you dont know them? ur opinions are no better than ours so….

  40. khandor Says:

    Jamie,

    Welcome aboard! :-)

    re: which opinions are more valuable than others

    Have you ever heard Jeff Van Gundy say something like this:

    “The players and the coaches in the NBA are the ones who should be voting on the League MVP Award Winner, etc., not anyone else who doesn’t have the specialized type of training and experience required to provide them with a reasonable expert opinion about the quality of what’s actually on display in the NBA game, night-in and night-out. It’s a joke that non-NBA players and coaches get the opportunity to make decisions like that.”

    Well … you know what?

    For the most part, I happen to agree with JVG about this topic.

    JVG … who I refer to on occasion as my illegitate half-brother, aka, The Undertaker … just happens to share a good many of the same opinions as I do when it comes to understanding how the NBA game actually works.

    I’ll leave you to ponder the specific reasons for this at your leisure. :-)

    There’s an old story told about Hank Iba, legendary coach at Oklahoma A & M that goes something like this:

    Coach Iba instructs other coaches at a clinic about a specific play which his teams used to win consecutive NCAA D1 national championships.

    At the end of his description, Coach Iba breaks away from following generally accepted protocol at coaching clinics of this sort and, upon being asked the following question by another coach in attendance:

    COACH X: If I run that play that way and it doesn’t happen to work for our team, then, what should I do next?

    DOES NOT respond with the standard reply that runs along the lines of:

    GENERIC EXPERT COACHING CLINICIAN: Well, just because it works for me, and my team, and my players doesn’t mean that it necessarily has to work for you in the same way; every situation is unique and you have to find out what works best for your specific scenario. Take from this what you think will work for you and file the rest away for an another day.

    BUT, instead, retorts with the following cryptic reply:

    COACH IBA: If you run this play, this way, with your own team and it doesn’t work this way for you, then … what you should do next is … ba-da-bing … STOP COACHING and FIND YOURSELF A DIFFERENT JOB. This play works. Next question, please.

    ——————

    IMO, there are a great many individuals in the sports blogging world today, in addition to the mainstream media, and the everyday fan, who think that what they see and understand about how the NBA game is just as valid and accurate [or not] as anyone else who puts forth their opinion, as well … because they, too, have spent a good deal of their time watching NBA basketball and/or their favourite teams play.

    In my book, this is simple folly.

    Q1. What makes anything that I have to say here or elsewhere on-line any different than these other people?

    A1. Well … perhaps you should ask someone like Scott G. to answer this question for you? Or, someone like Flux? Or, someone like Raps Fan? Or, someone like Dave? Or, someone like Mike D? … what’s the reason they choose to waste their time, dropping by this location, on occasion, to see what’s been written here and, perhaps, to contribute a comment or two, if it strikes their fancy.

    If what I write here [and elsewhere on-line] makes some sort of sense to you … then, that’s terrific.

    In my experience, that probably means that you are someone who in fact has a great deal of first-hand experience in the game as a player and/or coach at an elite level.

    If what I write here makes little sense to you … then, that’s terrific, also, as at least you are being exposed to a few different ideas about the game, itself.

    In my experience, this probably means that you are NOT someone who in fact has a great deal of first-hand experience in the game as a player and/or coach at an elite level.

    ——————————————————–

    Although this explanation might not be good enough for you … it’s what I’m willing to provide at this time.

    Keep On Truck’n :-)

  41. khandor Says:

    mr. hunter,

    In all that I have written on-line, I have never once said something that approaches this:

    “Those who happen to disagree with my opinion are themselves lacking in intelligence.”

    In fact … just yesterday, for example, there was a new commentor to this blog who happened to disagree with my opinion on the question of “Baron Davis vs Derek Fisher”. What I said to this individual was that s/he was welcome here, at any time, given the intelligent way in which her/his ideas were presented.

    Whether or not someone else agrees with me is irrelevant, in my book.

  42. mr.hunter Says:

    so……uhmm……what credible basketball experiance do you have again?…….and the only reason i stopped here the first time is because ur link was on raptorsrepublic. and ive only kept on replying because of this ongoing disagreement. theres few….very few people who agree with you here though, compared to the ones that find your opinions lopsided. but tell me, are you just another one of us fans -putting in our own imput……or are u someone with “credible basketball experiance” that you claim the people who disagree with you dont have, please tell me.

  43. khandor Says:

    mr. hunter,

    re: tell me, are you just another one of us fans -putting in our own imput

    Think about this in a strictly logical way.

    Based on what you’ve written here …

    1. Are you “just another one of us fans”?

    2. Do you agree with my opinions about the game?

    3. Do the majority of other “just another one of us fans” that you meet on-line, including those at RR, agree with your opinions about the game? [rather than with mine]

    4. Do you really think that someone like me … who disagrees with your opinions about the game, and with the opinions of the other “just another one of us fans” that you know … is likely to be “just another one of us fans”, in a mold which is similar to you?

    If your truthful answers to these four questions are, in fact:

    1. Yes
    2. No
    3. Yes
    4. No

    then I think there’s a fairly good chance you already know what the answer is to the question you have asked here about me.

  44. mr.hunter Says:

    then what sets you apart from us “just fans with opinions”? whats so special bout u. i have a blog too. im active on chatting sports sites, people generally dont strongly disagree with me if at all. what expperiance do u have??huh??

  45. khandor Says:

    mr. hunter,

    ——————————————————–
    re: then what sets you apart from us “just fans with opinions”? whats so special bout u. i have a blog too. im active on chatting sports sites, people generally dont strongly disagree with me if at all.
    ——————————————————–

    Several different factors are involved with this distinction; some of which is straight-forward, some of which is less so.

    For example, and as a starting point, please point the way to your blog and allow me to compare what it is that you do there with what it is that I do here. Then, perhaps, we can move on to discuss a few of the others.

  46. Noonan Says:

    khandor,

    I have been reading your blog on and off for a couple of months because you seem to have an alternative take on basketball than 90-95% of the sites that I have come across. Namely, you see past the “points + dunks + chest-thumping + gatorade commercials…= great NBA player” idea that is so pervasive among fans and much of the online media.

    I appreciate your attention to the less obvious, more subtle and nuanced aspects to the game and I do think that in many instances you provide insight that is rarely found in the blog-o-world.

    However, you can come across as condescending when you disagree with posters comments, often referring to your mysterious wealth of first-hand, high level basketball experience as the ‘trump card’ in your retorts.

    I do not claim to have a superior or even an equally intimate knowledge of the game as you. But it does seem to stifle debate and discourse on the subjects of your posts (which is ostensibly the point of creating a blog with a comments feature) if after a few back and forths you say, in essence:

    “You are entitled to your opinion, but it is less valid than mine because I know more about basketball than you.”

    Not that this will prevent me from reading or commenting, just an observation that I thought I would share.

  47. khandor Says:

    Noonan,

    Thanks for providing your feedback.

    In general, this is a complicated topic.

    I can try my best to explain my perspective on it to others who are sincerely interested, as I believe you are, and still come out sounding “condescending” … in a way that will not really help the situation improve.

    Regardless … and, by way of analogy:

    Are you familiar with this [in]famous work of art?

    Regardless what I might think of it, myself, as an individual piece, I would very simply be wrong, if I tried to assert to others that it isn’t worth in excess of $1.8 M today and doesn’t warrant inclusion in the National Gallery as a legitimate piece of work within the world of art.

    How come?

    Those with a great deal more education about this specific subject matter recognize it to be the case … based on a plethora of attributes and design features which they know about, in exacting detail, compared with me.

    Now, here’s where things begin to get a little bit tricky.

    Would my “wrongness” be, perhaps, less wrong … or, even thought by me to be “right”, in the first place … if tens, hundreds, thousands, or millions of other equally less educated individuals happened to be in agreement with me?

    Now, let’s say you then come along and do your best to explain to me, and my brethren, what it is that you actually see when you look at it, and experience it, yourself, using terms and a language which is highly specific and somewhat incomprehensible to me.

    When I then try to talk with you about a whole series of attributes and intricate new-age design features that both me and my brethren have been told by a specific school of critical thought which has arisen recently in the art world, and that actually verifies my opinion about “Voice of Fire”, in the first place … Do you think that you will be able to convince me that you are right in your judgment of this piece’s true worth using old-school concepts like “shape”, “texture”, “composition”, “balance”, “spacing”, “line”, etc.?

    If you then attempt to align yourself with a few of the “educated mainstream art critics”, who also happen to disagree with my opinion about this specific piece, would it matter in the least if you also told me that you were someone who has 20+ years of specialized training in this field of evaluation, in addition to being an artiste yourself, who is experienced with this type of work?

    Would it matter, if you then said something like this:

    “These ideas which I have are actually held by Artist X, Artist Y, and Artist Z, who are reknowned figures in the art world, despite the fact that each one is not a member of the recently arisen school of critical thought which seems to be in support of your current viewpoint.”

    Personally, I don’t think it would … if I am someone who believes that highly educated mainstream “art critics” … the kind that focuses on antiquated terms like “shape” & “texture” & “composition”, etc. … are, in fact, delusional themselves, in their current understanding of how this type of art works, in comparison with how me and my brethren now see it, supported by the new-age concepts of evaluation propogated by this new specific school of critical thought which has arisen recently.

    In fact, I think others who don’t happen to share your same appreciation for a piece of artwork like “Voice of Fire” would probably think that you are being condescending if/when you try to speak about differing levels of education & experience and suggest that your ideas … although seemingly “way out there” when compared to the masses … are actually consistent with the specific way that an accomplished set of artists and/or critics think and feel about this exact type of art.

    Do your efforts, in this regard, actually demonstrate that you are someone who is condescending?

    In my book, this need not be the case, at all.

    =================================

    IMO …

    Different individuals can disagree about how they think the NBA game works.

    These differences are not always resolveable.

    One of the beauties in sport, however, is that the games are actually decided by the outcomes on the court. :-)

  48. mr.hunter Says:

    ok……so heres the deal, we all know ur gunna be defensive no matter what-when it comes to what u write on this blog. what i think noonan was sayin was that you come across as being cocky with ur basketball thoughts, and sometimes even imply that the commentor had less basketball experiance or that you may have more-thus leading to an argument. which is true. but the only purpose of a comment box is for us readers to have a voice on ur own blog. it wasnt needed to do such a big comment justifying why you have those opinions or why u defend them in such a manner (especially when you compared urself to a art experct, anmd us commentors to the people who dont understand it). you arent getting what we r saying. anyways……what is your basketball experiance. im dying to know what makes you think you know more than us. tell me. pleeeaaassseeee, stop avoiding the question and tell me.

  49. khandor Says:

    mr. hunter,

    Here’s a condensed version for you:

    - what I wrote above was not “a defense” of some sort
    - what I wrote was an explanation of my POV for Noonan’s benefit, if s/he was sincerely interested in hearing it
    - I did not compare all commentors to uneducated art fans
    - I compared some commentors to uneducated art fans and others to expert art critics
    - I did not say that I know more than you
    - I said what I write about the game is consistent with the way elite level coaches, and players, etc., think and see and play it
    - the fact is:

    A. Some read what I write about the game and think my level of basketball experience must be non-existent and that I am someone who just lives in my parents’ basement;

    while,

    B. Others see/think it reflects an in-depth understanding which is different than 90-95% of the other blogs out there and most likely comes from extensive first-hand experience.

    At this point … from my POV … you [and others] are free to hold whichever perspective makes the most sense to you. :-)

  50. mr.hunter Says:

    can i just know what your “credible experiance” is with this game of basketball yet. jeeze.

  51. mr.hunter Says:

    and you absolutely do not write like a player, coach or CEO would see the game, becuase if you had anywhere near that kind of knowledge you would have a good job in the NBA or another asociation. and how can you tell if that blogger u linked me to i someone who lives in his momss house, or if he actualy has experiance? why do u think so highly of yourself. ive read a few of ur blogs. 75% of people who bother to comment disagreee with you. and you just defend it with comment essentialy saying “oh well, i just have more expeiance than you so im right, you’re wrong”. yet still you have avoided telling me what your experiance is the many times ive asked. something inside me questions ur status in the blogging world. here u are at a worldpress blog…..why not at a more authentic and professional blog ment for true-useful bloggers, with opinions with some stem of sense to follow. the impression i get from you is that criticism is not something you tolerate. well, hommie its a part of what comes with going public with a decision. even someone who agreed with one of you opinions felt as though it needed to be said that you act condesending. just let us know what kind of experiance you have that merits your ability to diss commentors and now other bloggers but see no faults in your own bullshit work.

  52. khandor Says:

    mr. hunter,

    It doesn’t seem as though you are getting my drift.

    It’s very easy for a blogger to advertise his/her achievements to-date in the “About” section of his/her web site. Those who choose to do this, have a specific intent in mind. Those who choose to go a different route, have a different approach in mind. To this point, I have made my choice clear.

    If you can accept that … that’s terrific!

    If you can’t accept that … C’est la vie.

    The ethernet is an interesting place to dwell and there are many different ways to accomplish a specific goal.

    ——————————————————–
    re: you absolutely do not write like a player, coach or CEO would see the game, becuase if you had anywhere near that kind of knowledge you would have a good job in the NBA or another asociation.
    ——————————————————–

    This is a simple mistake in judgment that many individuals make.

    e.g. The best basketball players are not all in the NBA. The best speech writers are not all members of a US Presidential staff. The best teachers are not all employed by schools throughout the world … etc., etc., etc.

    ——————————————————–
    re: and how can you tell if that blogger u linked me to i someone who lives in his momss house, or if he actualy has experiance?
    ——————————————————–

    I did not say anything about that blogger being someone who lives in his parents’ basement.

    What I wrote suggested that whoever thinks I am someone who lives in my parents’ basement might not know as much as they think they do … but, nevertheless, are free to hold whatever viewpoint they wish about me, since I am not someone who has chosen to publish an extensive profile about myself.

    ——————————————————–
    re: why do u think so highly of yourself. ive read a few of ur blogs. 75% of people who bother to comment disagreee with you. and you just defend it with comment essentialy saying “oh well, i just have more expeiance than you so im right, you’re wrong”.
    ——————————————————–

    And, if a great many people who are active on the internet disagree with my opinions, does that make my opinions wrong, to you?

    If so … know that I don’t happen to subscribe to that type of numerology.

    Second.

    If I take the time to explain something in-depth about how the game actually works and someone does not accept my rationale … Would you prefer that I waste my time and theirs as well arguing about it at length?

    When intelligent commentors … like Noonan, for example … say something with which I disagree, it makes sense to go back and forth exchanging different ideas in a pleasant discourse designed to advance knowledge and increase understanding on both sides. If something needs to be clarified further, it’s almost never a problem with an individual like Noonan [as just one example]. Either: I. common ground is found; or, II. the respective parties agree to disagree cordially and move on.

    ——————————————————–
    re: yet still you have avoided telling me what your experiance is the many times ive asked.
    ——————————————————–

    Then, perhaps, a little birdie in your ear should be whispering for you to stop asking that specific question … and, conversely, start looking for the answer you seek in the content of the words on my blog.

    Self-discovery is a great deal more fun when you get down to brass tacks. :-)

    ——————————————————–
    re: something inside me questions ur status in the blogging world. here u are at a worldpress blog…..why not at a more authentic and professional blog ment for true-useful bloggers, with opinions with some stem of sense to follow. the impression i get from you is that criticism is not something you tolerate. well, hommie its a part of what comes with going public with a decision. even someone who agreed with one of you opinions felt as though it needed to be said that you act condesending. just let us know what kind of experiance you have that merits your ability to diss commentors and now other bloggers but see no faults in your own bullshit work.
    ——————————————————–

    Someone who doesn’t tolerate criticism, responds in the following way when such feedback is presented to them:

    “Shut up, you idiot, and get lost. You know nothing and never will. You’re a !@#$%^&*.”

    Do you read reply comments like that, from me?

    If you think that I am being condescending then you need to realize that this speaks directly to your own mind-set about the game and what you may or may not know about it already.

    As my family members continually point out to me …

    There’s a pretty big difference between the meaning of these two words:

    A. condescending

    B. khandescending

    Those who cannot distinguish one from the other have their own problems to sort out.

  53. joeldavid Says:

    wouldn’t it simply be easier to just tell people in what way you are affiliated with basketball? as far as i can tell you base your experience in basketball on talking with other “elite” bloggers and emailing coaches. when you talk about your experience and then say that you can’t tell anyone about what it is you just come off as a little kid who says “i have a secret” and when you ask what it is they say “i can’t tell you its a secret. ” its just kinda dumb. if you don’t want people to question you about it, and want to keep the focus off yourself might i suggest that you stop answering questions with the “khandescending” response of that you know better than everyone else.

  54. khandor Says:

    joel,

    1. Welcome aboard! :-)

    2. Should I assume that you are a visitor from the DBB site of the same name? If not, be sure to let me know. I wouldn’t want to cast you in a poor light for no good reason.

    3. Yes, of course, it would just be “easier” to just tell people in what way you are affiliated with basketball“.

    The fact is, however, “easier” and “better” do not have the same meaning; nor does “easier” and “right”, “easier” and “most effective”, etc.

    I’m not sure where you may have gotten the notion that my experience in basketball is based on “talking with other ‘elite’ bloggers and emailing coaches” … since I have never said anything along those lines.

    i.e. Please note the difference between: A. me telling others to email this specific coach to solicit his feedback on a specific subject to see if his ideas about the game are consistent with mine, or not; and B. me being someone who relies on that as a means of operation.

    I’ve never said that I can’t tell anyone what my experience in basketball is.

    i.e. Please note the difference between: A. me saying … “nah, nah, nah, I can’t tell you,”; and B. to this point, I have chosen to go a different route, concerning what I write on-line and what information I am willing to provide for others.

    IMO, those who cannot accept that might need to reconsider whether it’s really them who are acting in a childish [aka "dumb"] manner.

    I have never used the words, “I know better than you do”, or “I know better than everyone else”, or other words to that effect.

    Those who think that I’ve said that … need to re-evaluate their own ability to read written english and comprehend correctly the meaning of said words according to the intent of the author.

    Let me give you an example of a common phrase that’s just hilarious to read from others on-line when they attempt to “interpret” what I’ve said in their OWN words while, simultaneously, attempting to re-configure what I’ve actually had to say.

    It starts something like this:

    “In other words …”

    LOL, :-)

    Pure, unadulterated, hilarity right there.

    No, not “in other words”.

    How about you [and other pseudo revisionists] simply decide to use the words I chose to use when I wrote something the first time!

    Why not?

    Because it isn’t as easy?

    Because it might be “more difficult”?

    Because it then becomes harder to distort the actual facts?

    Btw … here’s an example of what seems to qualify as a “statistical evidentiary fact” over at the good site DBB:

    Charlie Villanueva is a better rebounder than Jason Maxiell because he has a higher Rebounding average, a higher Rebound %, etc. … in comparison with might be said by someone like me that runs along the following lines instead:

    - here are the web sites for three former NBA head coaches
    - Email each one yourself
    - ask that coach to choose between Charlie V and Jason Maxiell, regarding which one he would want to have on the floor checking Lamar Odom on the defensive boards for the last possession of game 7 in the 2009-2010 NBA Finals, leading by a single point with 5 seconds left to play in regulation time, with the ball in LA’s possession, in a sidelines out-of-bounds situation attempting to score on the Pistons’ basket.
    If any of those three coaches tells you that he would choose Charlie V. over Jason Maxiell then all you have to do is post their reply comment or email to you, and what I have asserted instead will not stand up to scrutiny.

    If you can’t do that for yourself … even after I have provided you with the contact information of some former elite level coaches who happen to do work in the public domain of the internet today … upon what grounds would you or anyone else for that matter try to tell me that the elite level coaches who I happen to know in real life would, in fact, not share the same opinion as mine on that particular subject?

    [i.e. Because I don't happen to know every elite level coach in the entire world and, therefore, my "sample size" must surely be inadequate.]

    It really is amazing today what some folks think actually qualifies as legitimate basketball analysis in the age of the ethernet.

  55. mr.hunter Says:

    dont you find it wierd the number off people who sense the khandescending manner in which you reply to your commentors? cant you just stop taking jabs at our intellect if we disagree….

  56. khandor Says:

    mr. hunter,

    1. Am I to assume that this is now the moniker you will be using to post comments on my blog? [i.e. as opposed to "kiddy" and the other assorted names you've used to this point]

    2. Until you appropriately address your failed attempts to pass yourself off here as someone who you are not [e.g. Clifford Ray's nephew, Tom Oliveri's son, a 17 year old player on the Canadian Men's National Junior team] … whatever else you write in this environment is worthless.

    I’m a reasonable person and, therefore, will give you one more chance to apologize publicly for your misdeed, and then move on from there.

    If you do not do this, however, your posting privileges will be halted.

    The choice is yours.

    3. In general, those who perceive others to be condescending are, themselves, plagued by this same malady and/or low self-esteem.

    In contrast …

    Those with the ability to distinguish properly between the terms “condescending” and “khandescending” are gifted with a terrific sense of humour.

    ——————————————————–

    Disagreeing with me is not a problem here.

    If in doubt of this fact … simply ask the opinion of someone like Flux, or Dave, or Scott G., or Raps Fan, or Tom Liston, or Noonan, etc., about whether or not they think it’s important that they agree with me about a specific topic discussed in this space.

    If they tell you, “yes it is”, then you are free to say with certainty that you are “right” about this and I am “wrong”.

    If, on the other hand, what they tell you is, “No, it isn’t”, then … you know perfectly well what that means, including where the actual problem lies.