Author Topic: For those bullish on Kyrie vs. IT  (Read 1918 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: For those bullish on Kyrie vs. IT
« Reply #15 on: September 22, 2017, 07:50:54 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4710
  • Tommy Points: 525
... when Kyrie was the second option ...

Why do people keep saying this?  It seems to be the conventional wisdom, but it's not accurate.

Kyrie led the Cavs in shots and usage. He wasn't by any means the second option.

He was 6th in the NBA in field goal attempts per game.
People say this because even though Kyrie took a lot of shots, LeBron ran the offense. LeBron was essentially their point guard.

My argument for Boston being better for Kyrie is that I expect him to get shots in the flow of the offense, an offense that he runs rather than the your turn my turn offense he ran in Cleveland last year.

I don't like the Kyrie trade, but there is an argument to be made for Kyrie being in a better system and getting more overall responsibility which leads to him improving his numbers from last year.
To your point: statistics show Irving attempted just slightly more FG's out of isolation than James (Irving 4.4 per game, James 4.2) but Irving also averaged more catch-and-shoot jumpers than James (2.7 for Irving to James' 1.9), indicating Irving played off the ball more.

The traditional stats back it up, too. While James averaged 1.5 fewer FG's per game, he attempted 2.6 more FT's per game, averaged 2.9 more apg, and turned the ball over 1.6 more times per game than Irving. All indicators that the offense revolved around James' decision making.

That's different than saying somebody was a secondary option, though.

Ricky Rubio was 6th in the NBA in time of possession. Was he Minnesota's primary option?  Or was that Wiggins, who had the ball 1/3 of the time of Rubio?

IT had the ball about 18 seconds more per game than Kyrie, averaging more passes and fewer shots. Using Kyrie's role (lead scorer and co-facilitator on a great team) to mitigate his inferior stats makes no sense.
Well you asked why they said Kyrie was the second option and I gave you the reason. They might have been confusing primary option with primary ball handler, but none the less that is the reasoning behind it.

So you don't believe that Kyrie will put up better numbers in Boston than he did in Cleveland? Personally, I hate watching isolation offense so the argument that Boston's offense will be a better fit for Kyrie than Cleveland is appealing to me. This is assuming Kyrie alters his shot selection to fit Brad's offense instead of the inverse.
It's also worth noting that someone like Ricky Rubio has the ball in his hands for different reasons than Lebron. They're both excellent passers but Lebron is also one of the best scorers all time. If he has the ball in his hands, the first option is likely: Lebron score. But because he's an excellent distributor he finds teammates for better shots. But that doesn't mean those teammates were the first option.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008, 2019