Author Topic: Wizards not that good!!!  (Read 5948 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Wizards not that good!!!
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2014, 10:49:27 AM »

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17835
  • Tommy Points: 2661
  • bammokja
Seriously, the more I watch this team, the less I think about them.  they seem to have a lot of lapses in their game when they ease up and give other teams a chance to come back.  that is if we don't miss every lay up and half our free throws.  I mean, what was up with Zeller???  I don't think I have ever seen anybody blow that many lay ups!!! I think he's got the Rondo blues.
for some reason I felt confident, even down 20, that we had a chance to beat these guys.
WHEN I READ YOUR FLAMBOYANT MESSAGES COMBINED WITH THE ANARCHIST AVATAR I FEEL LIKE...
great image!!! i loved it, thanks a tp for putting anarchism into cb.  ;D i would ask all anarchists to unite, but that might create an oxymoron.  ;)
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: Wizards not that good!!!
« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2014, 11:17:13 AM »

Offline Rosco917

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6108
  • Tommy Points: 559
With the teams in the east, the Wizards could be the last team standing.
They toyed with the celtics, did you see Steven's face when he said, "they weren't going to let us back in this time" He knew the last time they fell asleep on us, then couldn't just turn it back on again.

If the Wizards are healthy they can win the east. When they added PP it was a great move. 

Re: Wizards not that good!!!
« Reply #17 on: December 28, 2014, 03:24:35 PM »

Offline TheFlex

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2791
  • Tommy Points: 367
Seriously, the more I watch this team, the less I think about them.  they seem to have a lot of lapses in their game when they ease up and give other teams a chance to come back.  that is if we don't miss every lay up and half our free throws.  I mean, what was up with Zeller???  I don't think I have ever seen anybody blow that many lay ups!!! I think he's got the Rondo blues.
for some reason I felt confident, even down 20, that we had a chance to beat these guys.
WHEN I READ YOUR FLAMBOYANT MESSAGES COMBINED WITH THE ANARCHIST AVATAR I FEEL LIKE...
great image!!! i loved it, thanks a tp for putting anarchism into cb.  ;D i would ask all anarchists to unite, but that might create an oxymoron.  ;)

Watch out, CB could become the secret online meeting place associated with America's next revolutionaries ;)



Draft: 8 first rounders in next 5 years.

Cap space: $24 mil.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague/

Re: Wizards not that good!!!
« Reply #18 on: December 28, 2014, 03:46:01 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9666
  • Tommy Points: 324
To the OP: I understand your frustration, but the Wizards seem to be a good team. Their frontcourt, I think, is underrated—I've been trumpeting Gortat for a long time and would have loved for him to join the Cs. And Humphries is a solid rotation big coming off the bench. They have an explosive, up-and-coming backcourt. They're quite a ways ahead of the Celtics.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: Wizards not that good!!!
« Reply #19 on: December 28, 2014, 03:53:18 PM »

Offline jyyzzoel

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 410
  • Tommy Points: 47
I'd change your thread title to "Kris Humphries is not THAT good, lol :'("


its unbelievable to me how many people overlook how good kris humphries is. the guy is a very good basketball player. he's a quality starting player, and a better rebounder than anyone on the celtics right now, and that's not an opinion - that's a fact backed up by stats. don't kid yourselves he was the player that played the best on the celtics last year. he had a per of 18, and if you don't like that metric look up his per 40 stats or his winscore.

and btw, because danny knew humphries was good, he tried to offload bass to golden state so he could keep humphries but golden state dropped out at the last second, so he had no option but to trade him to the wizards to get a trade exception to at least get something out of him. so yeah humphries is good.

and brooklyn traded him because they were getting paul pierce, kevin garnett, and jason terry - and when you trade for those people you need to do a fairly good job at matching salaries - hump and wallace had to go. plus billy king is notorious for being a bad GM.
actually, no. this is one of the many wonderful advantages to doing our homework and finding fun stats prior to posting.

this season's rebounding:
the hump = 6.3/g
sullen sully = 7.8/g

next, humphries has been in the nba 11 seasons and during those times he has averaged more than 10 points/game exactly TWICE. (that means two times.  ;) )

rebounding is a similar story. he has averaged more than 6.3 r/g TWICE in his 11 year career.

hump is a good player, but i am not as enamored with him as some posters. heck, his one year with the celtics he averaged 8.4 pt/g and 5.9 reb/g. nice numbers, but hardly the stuff to write home about. and he was doing this on a BAD team, where his abilities should have shown.

for further reference, this year:
olly is averaging 12 and 5.7,
sully 13.3 and 7.8, and
zeller is 9.6 and 5.5.

these performances rival, if not surpass, hump's efforts. and hump had been in the league 10 years, more than olly, sully, and zeller combined. these celtics still have upside.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/humphkr01.html

http://espn.go.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/bos/cat/avgRebounds/boston-celtics

EXACTLY - DO YOUR RESEARCH!!!
is it smarter to rank a players rebounding prowess by ranking per game or per36/40mins??
eg: if a player plays 25 mins per game, and another plays 36 mins per game, obviously the one playing 36mins per game is going to get more rebounds. is that fair? check out per 36mins on that same basketball reference site you linked - why not go onto draftexpress and check out per 40mins? hump is a better rebounder than anyone on our team atm. to think otherwise isn't a way anyone, GM or fan, who knows about the game would seriously measure a players performance.

of course you could say - yeah well one player played one game for the season and lit it up compared to another player who played 82 games who played well but whose per 36mins stats arent as good... which is why, to be fair it's good to ensure that a player has played 500mins or even 1000mins at least in that season. on top of that hump started 30 games for the celts last season and when he wasn't starting he was often 1st off the bench , so he was often going up against the other teams starting lineup, so those stats are pretty legit. do your research.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2014, 04:10:26 PM by jyyzzoel »

Re: Wizards not that good!!!
« Reply #20 on: December 28, 2014, 04:16:00 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 36776
  • Tommy Points: 2961
With out Durrant .......they aren't winning a title

Pretty good in a BAD conference.


Wizzards have a good team ...compared to their stuff in past 25 years . So credit them.

In the West ,  they might be a sixth seed .


Re: Wizards not that good!!!
« Reply #21 on: December 28, 2014, 04:58:50 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Humph has it in for Sully and always strives to make him look bad after this tweet.

http://nesn.com/2014/11/jared-sullinger-chirps-kris-humphries-about-ohio-state-minnesota-football-game/

It was not the one about Sully that was bad but the fan one that followed.

Re: Wizards not that good!!!
« Reply #22 on: December 28, 2014, 08:38:21 PM »

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17835
  • Tommy Points: 2661
  • bammokja
I'd change your thread title to "Kris Humphries is not THAT good, lol :'("


its unbelievable to me how many people overlook how good kris humphries is. the guy is a very good basketball player. he's a quality starting player, and a better rebounder than anyone on the celtics right now, and that's not an opinion - that's a fact backed up by stats. don't kid yourselves he was the player that played the best on the celtics last year. he had a per of 18, and if you don't like that metric look up his per 40 stats or his winscore.

and btw, because danny knew humphries was good, he tried to offload bass to golden state so he could keep humphries but golden state dropped out at the last second, so he had no option but to trade him to the wizards to get a trade exception to at least get something out of him. so yeah humphries is good.

and brooklyn traded him because they were getting paul pierce, kevin garnett, and jason terry - and when you trade for those people you need to do a fairly good job at matching salaries - hump and wallace had to go. plus billy king is notorious for being a bad GM.
actually, no. this is one of the many wonderful advantages to doing our homework and finding fun stats prior to posting.

this season's rebounding:
the hump = 6.3/g
sullen sully = 7.8/g

next, humphries has been in the nba 11 seasons and during those times he has averaged more than 10 points/game exactly TWICE. (that means two times.  ;) )

rebounding is a similar story. he has averaged more than 6.3 r/g TWICE in his 11 year career.

hump is a good player, but i am not as enamored with him as some posters. heck, his one year with the celtics he averaged 8.4 pt/g and 5.9 reb/g. nice numbers, but hardly the stuff to write home about. and he was doing this on a BAD team, where his abilities should have shown.

for further reference, this year:
olly is averaging 12 and 5.7,
sully 13.3 and 7.8, and
zeller is 9.6 and 5.5.

these performances rival, if not surpass, hump's efforts. and hump had been in the league 10 years, more than olly, sully, and zeller combined. these celtics still have upside.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/humphkr01.html

http://espn.go.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/bos/cat/avgRebounds/boston-celtics

EXACTLY - DO YOUR RESEARCH!!!
is it smarter to rank a players rebounding prowess by ranking per game or per36/40mins??
eg: if a player plays 25 mins per game, and another plays 36 mins per game, obviously the one playing 36mins per game is going to get more rebounds. is that fair? check out per 36mins on that same basketball reference site you linked - why not go onto draftexpress and check out per 40mins? hump is a better rebounder than anyone on our team atm. to think otherwise isn't a way anyone, GM or fan, who knows about the game would seriously measure a players performance.

of course you could say - yeah well one player played one game for the season and lit it up compared to another player who played 82 games who played well but whose per 36mins stats arent as good... which is why, to be fair it's good to ensure that a player has played 500mins or even 1000mins at least in that season. on top of that hump started 30 games for the celts last season and when he wasn't starting he was often 1st off the bench , so he was often going up against the other teams starting lineup, so those stats are pretty legit. do your research.
good to see you bringing out data to support your view. that helps enormously.

as to whether hump is a very good, or simply good, player is in the eye of the beholder.
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva