Woj: Pacers wanted to trade George for Irving straight-up, but Cavs declined it

[celticsclay]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

[Moranis]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

and yet Korver in his 19.3 mpg had one of the better +- in the series for the Cavs and got plenty of open looks (many of which he bricked as he just didn't shoot that well). 

[celticsclay]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

and yet Korver in his 19.3 mpg had one of the better +- in the series for the Cavs and got plenty of open looks (many of which he bricked as he just didn't shoot that well).

jesus dude.. + _  for under 100 minutes? You are better than this...

Dahntay Jones had the best plus minus in game 1 and 2 for the Cavs...

[Moranis]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

and yet Korver in his 19.3 mpg had one of the better +- in the series for the Cavs and got plenty of open looks (many of which he bricked as he just didn't shoot that well).

jesus dude.. + _  for under 100 minutes? Grow up man

Odd, that I use some actual facts to counteract you and come on here with no response at all.  And for the record, he was 6th on the Cavs for minutes played in the series (he also would have been 6th on the Warriors in minutes played as well).  it was a 5 game series with no overtimes, there were only 240 total minutes played. 

[Bucketgetter]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

and yet Korver in his 19.3 mpg had one of the better +- in the series for the Cavs and got plenty of open looks (many of which he bricked as he just didn't shoot that well).

jesus dude.. + _  for under 100 minutes? Grow up man

Odd, that I use some actual facts to counteract you and come on here with no response at all.  And for the record, he was 6th on the Cavs for minutes played in the series (he also would have been 6th on the Warriors in minutes played as well).  it was a 5 game series with no overtimes, there were only 240 total minutes played.

Why would he need to “grow up” when all he did was present a small, but relevant, fact?? Lol

[celticsclay]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

and yet Korver in his 19.3 mpg had one of the better +- in the series for the Cavs and got plenty of open looks (many of which he bricked as he just didn't shoot that well).

jesus dude.. + _  for under 100 minutes? Grow up man

Odd, that I use some actual facts to counteract you and come on here with no response at all.  And for the record, he was 6th on the Cavs for minutes played in the series (he also would have been 6th on the Warriors in minutes played as well).  it was a 5 game series with no overtimes, there were only 240 total minutes played.

It is a lazy fact. +- is a bad stat to begin with because there are too many confounding figures that go along with it. I have seen you post much more advanced stats than that. You maybe can derive some value from it over the course of 40 games, but over 5 games? It is stupid and you know that so you got much more of a response as throwing in garbage data deserved.

[celticsclay]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

and yet Korver in his 19.3 mpg had one of the better +- in the series for the Cavs and got plenty of open looks (many of which he bricked as he just didn't shoot that well).

jesus dude.. + _  for under 100 minutes? Grow up man

Odd, that I use some actual facts to counteract you and come on here with no response at all.  And for the record, he was 6th on the Cavs for minutes played in the series (he also would have been 6th on the Warriors in minutes played as well).  it was a 5 game series with no overtimes, there were only 240 total minutes played.

Why would he need to “grow up” when all he did was present a small, but relevant, fact?? Lol

He has a long history of polluting the arguments with random mostly irrelevant points to muddle a point that he himself doesn't really agree with. Is Korver going to rain 3's shooting over Curry all game? No, Korver has very limited athleticism and lateral quickness and is pretty poor at creating his own shot. He also is horrible defensively and would get roasted by Iggy, Curry, Klay and Durant (and has). These are pretty straight forward points that are not really debatable.

However, instead of just saying, yeah Korver is a bad matchup against the Warriors wings and guards he comes back in with a stat that Moranis knows has very little value over a tiny sample size.... Moranis will pull any stat or straw of an argument to put a positive spin on all things Cleveland.

As I have said before, If Lebron James farted during the national anthem and interrupted it, Moranis would either say it was the pre game chef's fault or say Michael Jordan did the same thing but worse (or mention an obscure irrelevant fact like Tony Kukoc true shooting percentage in 1996 to change the conversation)....

[Moranis]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

and yet Korver in his 19.3 mpg had one of the better +- in the series for the Cavs and got plenty of open looks (many of which he bricked as he just didn't shoot that well).

jesus dude.. + _  for under 100 minutes? Grow up man

Odd, that I use some actual facts to counteract you and come on here with no response at all.  And for the record, he was 6th on the Cavs for minutes played in the series (he also would have been 6th on the Warriors in minutes played as well).  it was a 5 game series with no overtimes, there were only 240 total minutes played.

Why would he need to “grow up” when all he did was present a small, but relevant, fact?? Lol

He has a long history of polluting the arguments with random mostly irrelevant points to muddle a point that he himself doesn't really agree with. Is Korver going to rain 3's shooting over Curry all game? No, Korver has very limited athleticism and lateral quickness and is pretty poor at creating his own shot. He also is horrible defensively and would get roasted by Iggy, Curry, Klay and Durant (and has). These are pretty straight forward points that are not really debatable.

However, instead of just saying, yeah Korver is a bad matchup against the Warriors wings and guards he comes back in with a stat that Moranis knows has very little value over a tiny sample size.... Moranis will pull any stat or straw of an argument to put a positive spin on all things Cleveland.

As I have said before, If Lebron James farted during the national anthem and interrupted it, Moranis would either say it was the pre game chef's fault or say Michael Jordan did the same thing but worse (or mention an obscure irrelevant fact like Tony Kukoc true shooting percentage in 1996 to change the conversation)....

come on man, I didn't do that at all and you know it, and I merely challenged your assertion that Korver is terrible.  He didn't shoot well at all in the series, but played well enough to be one of the more effective Cavs players in the series by the only thing that really matters i.e. the scoreboard.  If he was as bad as you are suggesting, then there is no way that happens, especially with him shooting so poorly overall.  At the end of the day, the Cavs were better overall in that series with Korver on the floor then with him off the floor.  That shouldn't be considered a negative, when it is in fact very much a positive.  And sure it was a short series, but that is the evidence we have, so your just writing it off as a small sample size, when you don't have a larger sample size to use, is just not a scientifically sound method.  You use the evidence you have to make your point, otherwise you are just spouting off biased unsupportable opinion.  At least try to back it up with evidence of things that actually happened.  Hmm, I wonder why you didn't do that.

[No Nickname]

As I have said before, If Lebron James farted during the national anthem and interrupted it, Moranis would either say it was the pre game chef's fault or say Michael Jordan did the same thing but worse (or mention an obscure irrelevant fact like Tony Kukoc true shooting percentage in 1996 to change the conversation)....

Haha. TP for the creativity!

[celticsclay]

the small ball lineup of Korver/JR Smith/George/Lebron/KLove would've been terrifying.

Nothing but rebound, LBJ and Paul as playmakers, and all are shooters.

This would've been my counter against GSW's lineup of death

Korver and Smith are very bad players against Golden State. Korver in particular can't even remotely attempt to cover Curry/Klay/Durant. They would score some points for sure, but would ultimately get dominated by the Warriors having 3 two way players in Durant, Green and Klay.

I think he would have guarded Iguodala in that particular lineup.  Smith on Curry, James on Thompson, George on Durant, Love on Green, with Korver on Iguodala.  The real problem with that lineup for the Cavs is they have no one that could even pretend like they could guard Curry as none of them have the foot speed to stay with them.  That would however force Curry to move more offensively and use his foot speed, which would lead to more contact on him and might eventually wear him down.  And I don't think Curry could guard anyone on the floor for the Cavs on the other end of the court (he would likely be on Korver, who could just shoot over him).  It would have been a much more interesting matchup though as George would be a real problem for Durant on both ends of the floor, and thus would have altered any series (I still think the Warriors would win, but it would have been closer).

In his limited Minutes (Korver can't play a ton either) Iggy would absolutely destroy Korver. Korver's foot speed is horrible and he can't jump at all. To your point Korver isn't going to shoot over anyone (except perhaps IT). Curry is 6'3 and a heck of a lot more athletic than Korver (not to mention way better conditioned) so the idea that Korver is just going to shoot over Curry is absolutely laughable. Not to mention, Korver is one of the worst players in the NBA at creating his own shot off the dribble. Honestly man your Cavs colored glasses never cease to amaze me.

and yet Korver in his 19.3 mpg had one of the better +- in the series for the Cavs and got plenty of open looks (many of which he bricked as he just didn't shoot that well).

jesus dude.. + _  for under 100 minutes? Grow up man

Odd, that I use some actual facts to counteract you and come on here with no response at all.  And for the record, he was 6th on the Cavs for minutes played in the series (he also would have been 6th on the Warriors in minutes played as well).  it was a 5 game series with no overtimes, there were only 240 total minutes played.

Why would he need to “grow up” when all he did was present a small, but relevant, fact?? Lol

He has a long history of polluting the arguments with random mostly irrelevant points to muddle a point that he himself doesn't really agree with. Is Korver going to rain 3's shooting over Curry all game? No, Korver has very limited athleticism and lateral quickness and is pretty poor at creating his own shot. He also is horrible defensively and would get roasted by Iggy, Curry, Klay and Durant (and has). These are pretty straight forward points that are not really debatable.

However, instead of just saying, yeah Korver is a bad matchup against the Warriors wings and guards he comes back in with a stat that Moranis knows has very little value over a tiny sample size.... Moranis will pull any stat or straw of an argument to put a positive spin on all things Cleveland.

As I have said before, If Lebron James farted during the national anthem and interrupted it, Moranis would either say it was the pre game chef's fault or say Michael Jordan did the same thing but worse (or mention an obscure irrelevant fact like Tony Kukoc true shooting percentage in 1996 to change the conversation)....

come on man, I didn't do that at all and you know it, and I merely challenged your assertion that Korver is terrible.  He didn't shoot well at all in the series, but played well enough to be one of the more effective Cavs players in the series by the only thing that really matters i.e. the scoreboard.  If he was as bad as you are suggesting, then there is no way that happens, especially with him shooting so poorly overall.  At the end of the day, the Cavs were better overall in that series with Korver on the floor then with him off the floor.  That shouldn't be considered a negative, when it is in fact very much a positive.  And sure it was a short series, but that is the evidence we have, so your just writing it off as a small sample size, when you don't have a larger sample size to use, is just not a scientifically sound method.  You use the evidence you have to make your point, otherwise you are just spouting off biased unsupportable opinion.  At least try to back it up with evidence of things that actually happened.  Hmm, I wonder why you didn't do that.

When you don't have enough of a data to make a debate on this, you have to go on basic understanding of basketball and the eye test.

Using incomplete and weak data is worse than using no data at all in my opinion in this case. For +_ for a guy playing a 20 minutes a game in a 5 game series off the bench against different bench units and with different players this is complete statistical noise. Korver also had his minutes cut as the series went on averaging 15 minutes in the last two games after averaging 22.5 the first three games. Do you think his minutes would have gone down instead of up if he was effective as you are pretending?

I also know I don't have to explain this to you, but since you are being willfully ignorant about this again, guys hold my beer, lets dig in.

In game 1 Korver was "Only -8" which was a lot better than all the starters that got completely blitzed in the 3rd quarter. Lebron James had the worst +- of the game for the Cavs at -22. Was he the worst player on the floor for the Cavs? The other best +- of the game for the Cavs? Richard Jefferson (-7), Deron Williams, noted for his awful finals play in a blooper reel, (-8), Iman Shumpert (-7). Notice anything Moranis? Do we want to get that game 1 the starters got blitzed for the Cavs and the bench players had "better" +-. Is there any value at all from this metric for game 1? Heck no...

In Game 2 the Cavs again got blitzed in the third quarter. The worst +- for the Cavs were the 5 starters led by Thompson, Irving and Smith all at -18 and -17. Lebron James again had -8 for the game worse than anyone off the bench and love was at -11.

Who was better at +_ game 2? Umm let's guess? The bench? Yea... Best plus minus for the game was Channing Frye. James Jones and Dahntay Jones let the team staying even in their 4 minutes of garbage time. Shumpert was at -5 and Korver was at -3. Is there any value at all from this metric for game 2? Heck no...

In game 3 there is a slight deviation from the starters just getting blasted because Lebron James was +7 when he was on the court. The rest of the starters for the Cavs were all the leaders in - led by Love at -11 and Irving at -9. Shumpert, Korver and Deron Williams were all positive or neutral for the game. Where did the positive +- for Korver come from in this game? He came into the game in the end of the 3rd quarter partway through a 19-7 run. Korver hit 1 3 pointer during this run that saw Draymond Green subbed out for Iggy and Thompson subbed out for McCaw. In the 4th quarter Korver hit 2 more shots as the run continued. However, the Cavs had Irving, Love and Lebron in the game while Clark was subbed in for Curry. Were the Cavs doing great, or was this a run aided by Lue opting to leave all his stars in the game to start the 4th while Curry was resting for Clark? The going for the jugular at the start of the 4th with Curry resting came back to bite them as the Warriors finished the game on a big run to win...
Value of +- for game 4 perhaps there was some here because Korver hit some shots that contributed to a run and was on the floor for a lot of the run, (there is also evidence of how much +- is impacted by who is on the floor at time and minor adjustments in rotations and Curry opting for rest in the beginning of 4th when the Cavs did not).

Game 4
The Cavs blew out the Warriors behind incredible shooting from teammates. Lebron completely dominated having +32 for the game and a triple double along with 32 points. Korver was irrelevant in this game playing 12 minutes and scoring 3 points to go along with 3 fouls a block and a turnover. Korvers +_  for the game was +3 which was tied for worst on the team for players that played double digit minutes. In general the bench players did worse than the starters in this game..

Is there any value in +- for game 4? Absolutely not

Game 5
Again Korver was a complete non factor scoring 3 points and having 3 fouls on 1-3 shooting. The Cavs got completely blitzed in the second quarter getting outscored by 15 points in the second quarter. The worst +- on the team for this game? Lebron James and Kevin Love (they got blitzed by the starters). Again the bench players did better with Deron Williams and Richard Jefferson leading the way actually being positive and Korver being neutral. Does this show anything beyond that the Cavs Starters got outscored when being led by Love and Lebron? Did Richard Jefferson and Deron Williams play good to get a positive score? 

Value of +- for this game, absolutely zero.

So in summary what did this garbage stat you try to put in show for this series exactly? In 4 of the 5 games I can say with absolute confidence that the +- on the Cavs were completely meaningless beyond showing that the Warriors starters smoked the Cavs starters at certain periods of the games and their bench players like Deron Williams and Korver were "less bad"
I don't know how anyone can look at these, yourself included, consistently see Korver and Deron having a better +_ than Lebron and pretend there is any value at all in the stat over a 5 game series.


You also knew all this without me digging in an proving what your numbers were actually measuring. Are you going to argue Deron Williams also had a good series and should be considered a positive cause his plus minus was one of the best on the team for the series?

This is why I told you to grow up, but I know that you know how meaningless what you are putting on the board is and you are pretending it is legit data and it is really frustrating.


 

[Moranis]

It isn't just straight numbers though because that doesn't account for minutes played.

Here is the total series analysis for the "big 4" and the 3 best bench players for the Cavs.

James -7, 212, lost 1 point every 30.29 minutes
Irving -32, 202, lost 1 point every 6.31 minutes
Love -35, 161, lost 1 point every 4.6 minutes
Thompson -41, 132, lost 1 point every 3.22 minutes
Korver -5, 97, lost 1 point every 19.4 minutes
Jefferson -3, 83, lost 1 point every 27.67 minutes
Deron -7, 61, lost 1 point every 8.71 minutes

Golden State scored 608 points, the Cavs scored 574, so a difference of 34 which over the 240 minutes equates to GS gaining 1 point every 7.06 minutes.  So the 3 bench players actually did better than the Cavs team as a whole and Irving, Love, and Thompson were well below the team average. 

Korver, Jefferson, and even Deron all took longer to lose a point then Irving, Thompson, and Love.  That certainly doesn't mean the former 3 are better than the latter 3 (they are not), but it does show their overall effectiveness in the series.  And actually watching the series, I could have told you that Thompson was the least effective player without looking at those numbers as Thompson was terrible virtually the entire series.  Love was also all over the board with some strong games and some awful games.  Irving was downright terrible in the first two games of the series before finally picking it up some in game 3 (though he was on the floor for the collapse at the end and not really on it when they built their lead).   The +- generally support those statements and this notion that Korver is terrible, is just silly. 

And of course you are correct that a big run one way or the other will greatly alter those numbers, especially with a limited sample size, but it still doesn't change those numbers or make them meaningless.  At the end of the day Korver was on the floor for 97 minutes and the Cavs were outscored by just 5 points.  In the 143 minutes Korver was on the bench, the Cavs were outscored by 29 points. 

[celticsclay]

It isn't just straight numbers though because that doesn't account for minutes played.

Here is the total series analysis for the "big 4" and the 3 best bench players for the Cavs.

James -7, 212, lost 1 point every 30.29 minutes
Irving -32, 202, lost 1 point every 6.31 minutes
Love -35, 161, lost 1 point every 4.6 minutes
Thompson -41, 132, lost 1 point every 3.22 minutes
Korver -5, 97, lost 1 point every 19.4 minutes
Jefferson -3, 83, lost 1 point every 27.67 minutes
Deron -7, 61, lost 1 point every 8.71 minutes

Golden State scored 608 points, the Cavs scored 574, so a difference of 34 which over the 240 minutes equates to GS gaining 1 point every 7.06 minutes.  So the 3 bench players actually did better than the Cavs team as a whole and Irving, Love, and Thompson were well below the team average. 

Korver, Jefferson, and even Deron all took longer to lose a point then Irving, Thompson, and Love.  That certainly doesn't mean the former 3 are better than the latter 3 (they are not), but it does show their overall effectiveness in the series.  And actually watching the series, I could have told you that Thompson was the least effective player without looking at those numbers as Thompson was terrible virtually the entire series.  Love was also all over the board with some strong games and some awful games.  Irving was downright terrible in the first two games of the series before finally picking it up some in game 3 (though he was on the floor for the collapse at the end and not really on it when they built their lead).   The +- generally support those statements and this notion that Korver is terrible, is just silly. 

And of course you are correct that a big run one way or the other will greatly alter those numbers, especially with a limited sample size, but it still doesn't change those numbers or make them meaningless.  At the end of the day Korver was on the floor for 97 minutes and the Cavs were outscored by just 5 points.  In the 143 minutes Korver was on the bench, the Cavs were outscored by 29 points.

Your metric shows that Deron Williams performed better than Irving and Love over the course of this series. Williams played so bad in this series he has been unable to even secure a contract this offseason and this was made about his play over the 5 games:

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/06/cleveland-cavaliers-nba-finals-deron-williams-mixtape-lowlights-sad-video

If this metric you have chosen shows that Deron Williams performed better than Love, Irving and Thompson and that 37 year old Richard Jefferson was the second most effective player  can you PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD just be an adult and say, yeah, your right. This is kind of a pointless metric for 5 games and it has been proven repeatedly here...

You do some posts that show smart analysis so I don't think you are a flat out moron. However, you are the most stubborn person I have encountered on this forum. You took a stab at trying to show Korver wasn't that bad in this series and it was a miss cause the metric has been shown to be absurdly flawed over such a small sample size (I actually went through each game and explained where the bench did better) You can just admit that and let people go on about their day or you can do your standard introduce more noise and nonsense until nobody knows what we are talking about...

 

[kraidstar]

It isn't just straight numbers though because that doesn't account for minutes played.

Here is the total series analysis for the "big 4" and the 3 best bench players for the Cavs.

James -7, 212, lost 1 point every 30.29 minutes
Irving -32, 202, lost 1 point every 6.31 minutes
Love -35, 161, lost 1 point every 4.6 minutes
Thompson -41, 132, lost 1 point every 3.22 minutes
Korver -5, 97, lost 1 point every 19.4 minutes
Jefferson -3, 83, lost 1 point every 27.67 minutes
Deron -7, 61, lost 1 point every 8.71 minutes

Golden State scored 608 points, the Cavs scored 574, so a difference of 34 which over the 240 minutes equates to GS gaining 1 point every 7.06 minutes.  So the 3 bench players actually did better than the Cavs team as a whole and Irving, Love, and Thompson were well below the team average. 

Korver, Jefferson, and even Deron all took longer to lose a point then Irving, Thompson, and Love.  That certainly doesn't mean the former 3 are better than the latter 3 (they are not), but it does show their overall effectiveness in the series.  And actually watching the series, I could have told you that Thompson was the least effective player without looking at those numbers as Thompson was terrible virtually the entire series.  Love was also all over the board with some strong games and some awful games.  Irving was downright terrible in the first two games of the series before finally picking it up some in game 3 (though he was on the floor for the collapse at the end and not really on it when they built their lead).   The +- generally support those statements and this notion that Korver is terrible, is just silly. 

And of course you are correct that a big run one way or the other will greatly alter those numbers, especially with a limited sample size, but it still doesn't change those numbers or make them meaningless.  At the end of the day Korver was on the floor for 97 minutes and the Cavs were outscored by just 5 points.  In the 143 minutes Korver was on the bench, the Cavs were outscored by 29 points.

Your metric shows that Deron Williams performed better than Irving and Love over the course of this series. Williams played so bad in this series he has been unable to even secure a contract this offseason and this was made about his play over the 5 games:

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/06/cleveland-cavaliers-nba-finals-deron-williams-mixtape-lowlights-sad-video

If this metric you have chosen shows that Deron Williams performed better than Love, Irving and Thompson and that 37 year old Richard Jefferson was the second most effective player  can you PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD just be an adult and say, yeah, your right. This is kind of a pointless metric for 5 games and it has been proven repeatedly here...

You do some posts that show smart analysis so I don't think you are a flat out moron. However, you are the most stubborn person I have encountered on this forum. You took a stab at trying to show Korver wasn't that bad in this series and it was a miss cause the metric has been shown to be absurdly flawed over such a small sample size (I actually went through each game and explained where the bench did better) You can just admit that and let people go on about their day or you can do your standard introduce more noise and nonsense until nobody knows what we are talking about...

TP, though you are wasting your time.

90% of the human population will not admit when they are wrong, regardless of the evidence.

[celticsclay]

It isn't just straight numbers though because that doesn't account for minutes played.

Here is the total series analysis for the "big 4" and the 3 best bench players for the Cavs.

James -7, 212, lost 1 point every 30.29 minutes
Irving -32, 202, lost 1 point every 6.31 minutes
Love -35, 161, lost 1 point every 4.6 minutes
Thompson -41, 132, lost 1 point every 3.22 minutes
Korver -5, 97, lost 1 point every 19.4 minutes
Jefferson -3, 83, lost 1 point every 27.67 minutes
Deron -7, 61, lost 1 point every 8.71 minutes

Golden State scored 608 points, the Cavs scored 574, so a difference of 34 which over the 240 minutes equates to GS gaining 1 point every 7.06 minutes.  So the 3 bench players actually did better than the Cavs team as a whole and Irving, Love, and Thompson were well below the team average. 

Korver, Jefferson, and even Deron all took longer to lose a point then Irving, Thompson, and Love.  That certainly doesn't mean the former 3 are better than the latter 3 (they are not), but it does show their overall effectiveness in the series.  And actually watching the series, I could have told you that Thompson was the least effective player without looking at those numbers as Thompson was terrible virtually the entire series.  Love was also all over the board with some strong games and some awful games.  Irving was downright terrible in the first two games of the series before finally picking it up some in game 3 (though he was on the floor for the collapse at the end and not really on it when they built their lead).   The +- generally support those statements and this notion that Korver is terrible, is just silly. 

And of course you are correct that a big run one way or the other will greatly alter those numbers, especially with a limited sample size, but it still doesn't change those numbers or make them meaningless.  At the end of the day Korver was on the floor for 97 minutes and the Cavs were outscored by just 5 points.  In the 143 minutes Korver was on the bench, the Cavs were outscored by 29 points.

Your metric shows that Deron Williams performed better than Irving and Love over the course of this series. Williams played so bad in this series he has been unable to even secure a contract this offseason and this was made about his play over the 5 games:

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/06/cleveland-cavaliers-nba-finals-deron-williams-mixtape-lowlights-sad-video

If this metric you have chosen shows that Deron Williams performed better than Love, Irving and Thompson and that 37 year old Richard Jefferson was the second most effective player  can you PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD just be an adult and say, yeah, your right. This is kind of a pointless metric for 5 games and it has been proven repeatedly here...

You do some posts that show smart analysis so I don't think you are a flat out moron. However, you are the most stubborn person I have encountered on this forum. You took a stab at trying to show Korver wasn't that bad in this series and it was a miss cause the metric has been shown to be absurdly flawed over such a small sample size (I actually went through each game and explained where the bench did better) You can just admit that and let people go on about their day or you can do your standard introduce more noise and nonsense until nobody knows what we are talking about...

TP, though you are wasting your time.

90% of the human population will not admit when they are wrong, regardless of the evidence.

Thanks for the TP and one back at you. I agree with you on that in general, and it is even more pronounced on message boards. That being said most people on this board do occasionally admit when they were wrong on something or at least admit their mind has changed a little bit.

To give you an example of this from myself a few days ago my general thought process was that Brandon Bass was totally cooked. A few posters and an article that really dug into his per minute stats last year showed me he actually was still performing well and his "decline" seems to be more a matter of Doc Rivers deciding not play him despite his overall positive performance and really solid advanced stats. This made me change my mind from thinking the guy doesn't deserve a minimum contract to thinking the Celtics could use him if we somehow lost Morris.

On the flipside of that I know a lot of people have changed their opinion on Jahill Okafor over the last year and no longer view him as a sure fire future star.

With stats it is a lot more cut and dry. There have been guys I have thought were good 3 point shooters, but when someone brought in more advanced stats like their contested shooting percentage, open looks or percentages on open 3's it can really change your view on someone being below average, average or great.

In the case of this debate Korver is a bad matchup again Golden State. If he can get in a spot where someone like Mccaw or Clark is in to spell Curry or Thompson he can do ok for a few minutes. However, in general he is a 37 year old that had slow foot speed when he was young trying to guard some of the fastest most athletic scorers in the game in Curry/Thompson/Durant on switches. This has been widely talked about by respected basketball minds like Lowe that analyzed the matchup and matched what I saw in the games (as well as common sense). Introducing a stat that has a ton of noise on it and ranks the Cavs players as the following for the series

1) James
2) Jefferson
3) Korver
4) Deron Williams
5) Irving
6) Love
 
Is obviously a really bad metric that should not be used. Similarly if I found some stat that showed Jerekbro was the second best player on the Celtics last year I would acknowledge it is an awful statistic and not try to use it an argument to show how great Jerekbro was last year. At some level we have to keep common sense in these debates.

[kraidstar]

Whatever mistakes the Cavs made this offseason pale in comparison to Pritchard jumping the gun and trading George for a bag of peanuts.

He took a terrible deal instead of waiting for a better opportunity, and now he looks like an absolute fool.

Interestingly, part of the reason Irving demanded a trade is because he was included in a lot of the Paul George/Jimmy Butler trade talks.

To those who haven't read it, this is a fantastic article on James, Irving, and Paul George.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/20127818/nba-weeks-dysfunction-surrounding-kyrie-irving-trade-demand

"In the week after the end of the Finals, two events took place: George informed the Indiana Pacers he did not plan to re-sign with them, and he entered the trade market full force. And Griffin and Gilbert were unable to come to terms on a contract. Griffin left the franchise, along with assistant GM Trent Redden.

What followed was a whirlwind, with the Cavs putting forth a series of trade packages looking to acquire either Butler or George. Some of these talks included Irving, which upset him even more when he found out about it, sources said. Previously, Griffin had worked to keep lines of communication with Irving open, but now Irving was in the dark.

....

The Cavs kept working with the Nuggets, trying to win a deal that would satisfy the Pacers and allow Denver to get Love and the Cavs to get George. Both were concerned about Boston, who could trump their offers for George but might have been waiting to see if it could secure Gordon Hayward in free agency after July 1.

On the afternoon of June 30, the sides thought they had a deal. On a conference call between the teams, everyone tentatively agreed. George to the Cavs, Love to the Nuggets, Harris and other pieces to the Pacers, sources said.

Plans were put in place for a call to be arranged between George and Gilbert, an important step before the trade would become final, sources said. The front office began making other plans to complement George as free agency was about to begin.

But then Pritchard, who had been on the conference call when the deal was tentatively agreed to, sent the message that his team was backing out, sources said. There was no deal."

One of the funniest things about this whole ordeal is that Pritchard backed out of the Cavs/Nuggets deal with a text. Way to be professional there, bud.