Anyway I'm dropping the subject after this last point: It's just so hilariously asinine to me. It's like the "this isn't a real recovery, the unemployment rate is made up. Because, because, because. LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION".
Clutchness is defined as winning chips and having the confidence to make, and actually making game winning shots. Somehow that changed to a definition where a chump who underperforms in the playoffs is more clutch than a 5 time champion because of 10-20-30 shot sample sizes.
You've never said an insightful or intelligent thing though? Just because you can read a mean table on BR doesn't actually make you knowledgeable.
Clutchness is defined as winning chips and having the confidence to make, and actually making game winning shots. Somehow that changed to a definition where a chump who underperforms in the playoffs is more clutch than a 5 time champion because of 10-20-30 shot sample sizes.
By Red Blaster Go To Post'basketball people' are why guys like byron scott still have a job in 2016
not my problem that others choose not to abide by factual, objective reality
You've never said an insightful or intelligent thing though? Just because you can read a mean table on BR doesn't actually make you knowledgeable.
This definition of clutch being how many championships you have won is a pure fallacy that you conjured up.
is this gonna be the first 2k where the cover player is absolute garbage? because Kobe is gutter trash in 2k. Matches his real life counterpart perfectly.
By reilo Go To PostClutchness is not defined as winning chips. You defined it that way. Just you. Only you.
For decades clutchness hasn't been defined as winning chips? Interesting. Find me ONE 5 time champion - or fuck, 2 or 3 time champion who is considered un-clutch. Go ahead I'll wait.
The definition of clutch as being efficiency related is a new phenomenon by the analytics community where large determinations are made with small sample sizes.
Because you're right. Everyone for decades has been familiar with Larry bird's and Hakeem's and Jordan's and West's fg% in the final 24 seconds of a game. that's how determinations have been made for decades.
If clutchness was correlated to winning chips, Tracy McGrady would have more than Kobe. Or at least more than zero.
3SP, You're conflating the clutchability (i made this word up yes) of super stars with winning rings. One assists the other but is not the other.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostAnyway I'm dropping the subject after this last point: It's just so hilariously asinine to me. It's like the "this isn't a real recovery, the unemployment rate is made up. Because, because, because. LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION".
Clutchness is defined as winning chips and having the confidence to make, and actually making game winning shots. Somehow that changed to a definition where a chump who underperforms in the playoffs is more clutch than a 5 time champion because of 10-20-30 shot sample sizes.
You've never said an insightful or intelligent thing though? Just because you can read a mean table on BR doesn't actually make you knowledgeable.
i never claimed that i was some courageous intellectual for saying pau was better than kobe--that's what the facts say and i'm just repeating it.
of course, laker fans realize that the above statement is still a pro-laker one--given that you're a knicks bandwagoner who also loves kobe i can understand why it might grate on you though
By reilo Go To PostClutchness is not defined as winning chips. You defined it that way. Just you. Only you.
This is true. Though the stat argument is pretty lame too. Everyone knew Kobe was gonna shoot the shot and played accordingly. The time table on when a shot is and isn't clutch is just as arbitrary in the stat argument as well.
By Red Blaster Go To Posti never claimed that i was some courageous intellectual for saying pau was better than kobe–that's what the facts say and i'm just repeating it.
It's good you're not making that claim after making these statements. You have some level of selfawareness
By reilo Go To PostIf clutchness was correlated to winning chips, Tracy McGrady would have more than Kobe. Or at least more than zero.
You can be successful without becoming a billionaire. You can't be a failure if you're a billionaire though. Maybe change your definition.
Uhm, you can be a billionaire and have inherited all that wealth without ever holding a job or going to college. You know this. Come on.
Now we're getting into some real weird semantics because how a person defines success is entirely a subjective exercise.
By SSJ2TeenGohan Go To PostHere I thought clutchness just meant hitting timeley shots with the game on the line.You shush and go back to your hot pockets. <3
By Red Blaster Go To Posti never claimed that i was some courageous intellectual for saying pau was better than kobe–that's what the facts say and i'm just repeating it.
of course, laker fans realize that the above statement is still a pro-laker one–given that you're a knicks bandwagoner who also loves kobe i can understand why it might grate on you though
The data doesn't say that at all. Certain pieces of data do. But that data flies in the face of common sense when watching that team. Saying that would, and should, get you laughed out of any room where anyone who understands basketball would be. You're confusing hand picking a stat that's contrarian as evidence.
By SSJ2TeenGohan Go To Postand here I thought clutchness just meant hitting timely shots with the game on the line..
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostThe only player that I can say with 100% confidence that he's clutch is Big Shot Bob
Yup.
can we all just switch our focus to hating on draymond green? at least he's been relevant since we moved over to slaent
By reilo Go To PostUhm, you can be a billionaire and have inherited all that wealth without ever holding a job or going to college. You know this. Come on.
Which is why i said "becoming". I chose my words carefully.
The idea that someone isn't clutch and won 5 rings is illogical. Now you can say a more clutch person on a bad team doesn't have to win 5 rings. But to say that someone won 5 and is unclutch is just, it escapes reason.
If you define clutch as fg% in a super small sample size, maybe change your definition.
You'd probably be better off making the stipulation that clutch shots aren't as necessary when you're just pounding fuckers into the dirt rather than "dude is clutch because he won stuff."
By 33MillionDollarMen Go To PostYou'd probably be better off making the stipulation that clutch shots aren't as necessary when you're just pounding fuckers into the dirt rather than "dude is clutch because he won stuff."
Over a 10-20 year period, most players will have a large enough sample size of close games and pressure situations. To consistently win in the most pressure of situations eliminates the idea that you're not clutch. Dude having a plethora of game winners on his resume should reinforce that.
Or we can limit our query to a 19-50 shot sample size, but I'm amazed that people don't realize how silly that is.
To consistently win in the most pressure of situations eliminates the idea that you're not clutch.Eh it means you're no victim of pressure but if people want a specific term to mean the ability to clinch a win with a shot then you're basically redefining it for your own purposes and ignoring theirs.
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostI've enjoyed the Kobe era. But more than glad to see it go.bron carrin' the torch.
eh, the whole clutch argument is stupid.
only because clutch in context can be used in a lot of basketball situations, not just the "24 sec" parameter.
only because clutch in context can be used in a lot of basketball situations, not just the "24 sec" parameter.
Well I can see more and more the argument for clutch being able to produce in the last moments of the game than just another synonym for "nerves of steel whenever." But everyone is just better off elaborating on what they mean regardless.
Clutch is a weird thing to quantify anyway. Iggy is like one of the most clutch dudes in the league by FG% iirc...and I remember a lot more dribble dribble fadeaway misses than anything. The whole clutch thing is weird since for the most part the main scorer of the team takes the last shot anyway.....and Kobe has been in the league for 20 years and shit..so yeah he has a shitton of misses more than likely.
What if Embiid's foot healed timeline is pretty positive for Hinkie:
https://twitter.com/PompeyOnSixers/status/720371606892199936
https://twitter.com/PompeyOnSixers/status/720371606892199936
clutch plays to me are plays produced during "crunch time", which is the last few minutes of a close game.
By Kabro Go To Postclutch plays to me are plays produced during "crunch time", which is the last few minutes of a close game.You're a Kobe fan, you aren't supposed to let the world know this.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostThe data doesn't say that at all. Certain pieces of data do. But that data flies in the face of common sense when watching that team. Saying that would, and should, get you laughed out of any room where anyone who understands basketball would be. You're confusing hand picking a stat that's contrarian as evidence.
the data does support that though, as i literally demonstrated. pau's had a significant lead in ows, dws, ws/48, bpm and value above replacement for both championship years. kobe had a slightly higher per but that's because he accumulated more volume stats.
as demonstrated from 04-07, kobe is just like any other all-star 2 guard when he doesn't have all-nba bigmen teammates around him
By reilo Go To PostYou're a Kobe fan, you aren't supposed to let the world know this.fine. i'll just go back to watching kobe vids and cry until the final seconds of tonight's game.
By Kabro Go To Posteh, the whole clutch argument is stupid.
only because clutch in context can be used in a lot of basketball situations, not just the "24 sec" parameter.
Bingo.
By 33MillionDollarMen Go To PostEh it means you're no victim of pressure but if people want a specific term to mean the ability to clinch a win with a shot then you're basically redefining it for your own purposes and ignoring theirs.
If the argument is "is Kobe the best player to shoot a last second shot in all scenarios" than yea, probably not. But my point is that fg% in the last 10-24 seconds isn't a definition I accept for the word clutch. Which is why I keep saying "change your definition" because it's allowing you to reach conclusions based on small sample sizes that end up being kind of silly.
08 Gold medal game where Kobe took over. But no final game winning shot under 30 seconds, is that an argument that says he wasn't clutch?
By IWMTB19 Go To PostWhat if Embiid's foot healed timeline is pretty positive for Hinkie:get hyped knux. a brave new world awaits
https://twitter.com/PompeyOnSixers/status/720371606892199936
By Red Blaster Go To Postthe data does support that though, as i literally demonstrated. pau's had a significant lead in ows, dws, ws/48, bpm and value above replacement for both championship years. kobe had a slightly higher per but that's because he accumulated more volume stats.
as demonstrated from 04-07, kobe is just like any other all-star 2 guard when he doesn't have all-nba bigmen teammates around him
Why don't you compare Pau's stats before playing with Kobe to after? Hmmmm?
By Red Blaster Go To Postthe data does support that though, as i literally demonstrated. pau's had a significant lead in ows, dws, ws/48, bpm and value above replacement for both championship years. kobe had a slightly higher per but that's because he accumulated more volume stats.
as demonstrated from 04-07, kobe is just like any other all-star 2 guard when he doesn't have all-nba bigmen teammates around him
Players can't win without at least one other all star and surrounded by d-league level talent. Stop the presses.
You're so right. All other all star 2 guards are all NBA first team offense an defense while scoring 81 in a game. The lengths you go to argue that Kobe is overrated is fascinating.
By Kabro Go To Postclutch plays to me are plays produced during "crunch time", which is the last few minutes of a close game.It doesn't have a career aggregate, but nba.stats.com has that kind of clutch stats for every player in any given season since the 96-97 season: http://stats.nba.com/league/player/#!/clutch/
It defines "clutch" as any action during the last five minutes of a game where neither team is ahead by more than five points.
e: glancing at other sites that offer similar things, that seems to be the accepted definition of the "clutch" period in a game
e2: made the definition more reader friendly
Dr. J: "Kobe is as good as anyone who's ever played"
RedBlaster: Kobe is Steve Francis tier with better teammates.
Yea ok.
RedBlaster: Kobe is Steve Francis tier with better teammates.
Yea ok.
Not that I agree with rb, but resorting to appeals to authority usually means you don't have a legitimate point to stand on.
lol appeals to authority
same clowns who insist the 80s was full of hard-nosed defense
im sure many all-star 2 guards could get 81 if they shot 46 times in a game. hell everyone shits on james harden and he scored 51 on 25 attempts.
same clowns who insist the 80s was full of hard-nosed defense
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostPlayers can't win without at least one other all star and surrounded by d-league level talent. Stop the presses.
You're so right. All other all star 2 guards are all NBA first team offense an defense while scoring 81 in a game. The lengths you go to argue that Kobe is overrated is fascinating.
im sure many all-star 2 guards could get 81 if they shot 46 times in a game. hell everyone shits on james harden and he scored 51 on 25 attempts.
By Trey Go To PostNot that I agree with rb, but resorting to appeals to authority usually means your don't have a legitimate point to stand on.
If my point is he thinks he's smarter than the consensus of basketball people because he can read a table and that leads him to reach silly conclusions. I think I showcased my point well.
By Red Blaster Go To Postlol appeals to authority
same clowns who insist the 80s was full of hard-nosed defense
im sure many all-star 2 guards could get 81 if they shot 46 times in a game. hell everyone shits on james harden and he scored 51 on 25 attempts.
Because 60/50/90 on that volume is super easy. Yea, that makes sense.
