Love, the PF, the starter
by Neil Annwn on Aug 29, 2010 3:31 PM CDT
Email
PrintThe CH board seems to be teeming over with dissatisfaction of Kevin Love. The basis for this dislike, from an on the court standpoint, seems to come down to two points:
1. You can't win with Love as a starting PF
2. You can't win with Love starting, period.
Of course, at face value, these are sort of ludicrous arguments. You wouldn't be sinning against nature by saying "you can't win with Derek Fisher as your starting PG", but the Lakers proved you can. This statement, of course, isn't a reflection of Fisher's abilities as much as it is the other players wearing purple and gold uniforms. Whether you can win with player X is a meaningless statement.
However, the real crux of these diatribes against Love originate from the fact that people on this board, in the local media and national media think he's a pretty good player, that Love haters don't agree.
Love haters want to argue that he's not a franchise player, to which I think most people with a brain would say "no sh|t sherlock." Nobody with an ounce of common sense thinks he's a player who will end up on the same caliber in the annals of NBA history as Moses Malone, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and other of the greatest PFs of all time. But just because he's not one of the greatest of NBA players to ever put on a uniform doesn't mean he's worthless and doesn't mean he can't play an important role and be a valuable contributor to a winning team.
In an attempt to make a meaningful evaluation of love, here is a list of prominent NBA power forwards. While obviously totally subjective, let's say the Wolves swapped Love for one of these players. Would this player represent a clear unambiguous upgrade or downgrade?
For the purposed of argument, we're going to keep contract out of the discussion. For instance, it is highly debatable whether David Lee is worth the contract he got and that naturally factors into a player's worth. We're not going to evaluate the fact that Lee is overpaid or Love is underpaid.
We're also going to factor out age to an extent. For instance, Kevin Love is going to probably improve as a player while it is likely Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett is going to decline. But because we're leaving out contracts (we're just trying to say can Love start or can you win with him) we're going to evaluate a snapshot of today.
Lastly, we're going to try to be somewhat liberal as far as positioning goes. For instance, as Antawn Jamison a PF? He could play it. Is Tim Duncan a PF? He could play it. Because of coaching systems and team needs, players often don't necessarily fit neatly into the 1-2-3-4-5 position holes. I'm going to try to keep this to players who could conceivably start at PF.
Players Who Would Represent a Clear Upgrade From Love on 8/29
Amare Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer, Al Horford, Chris Bosh, Dwight Howard, Pau Gasol, Dirk Nowitzki, David West, Tim Duncan,
Players Who Would Represent a Clear Downgrade From Love on 8/29
Troy Murphy, Anthony Randolph, Elton Brand, Amir Johnson, Chris Wilcox, Tyler Hansborough, Drew Gooden, Tyrus Thomas, Andray Blatche, Brandan Wright, Hakim Warrick, Carl Landry, Luis Scola, Kenyon Martin, Nene Hilario, Nick Collison, Serge Ibaka,
Players on the Bubble
Kevin Garnett, Antawn Jamison, Josh Smith, Blake Griffin, Zach Randolph, Al Jefferson, LaMarcus Aldridge, Paul Millsap, David Lee
Depending on how many bubble players you think are better than Love, Love is between the 9th and 18th best PF in the league.
We'll assume that teams have either a 2.5 man PF rotation (some teams have 2, some teams have 3) - Meaning there are 75 PFs in the league.
This would put him in approximately the top 15-25th percentile of power forwards in the NBA.
Bottom line, whether you can win with Love starting of course depends on a lot of factors not in his control. By any sort of conventional definition, however, dude's a starter caliber player, not a bench player.
102 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Age and years is an important consideration
Would you rather have a 29-year-old Boozer or a 22-year-old Love? Given that most players don’t reach their apex until their mid-to-upper twenties, as of 8/29, on a building team, Love is more valuable in my opinion.
Breaking down cognitive dissonance and group think since gasoline was cheap.
I think your pretty close.
I might quibble here and there on a player. I believe a healthy Love will be a top ten power forward this year. Some of the best and biggest PF are now in there 30"s
How many short 4s
have been the cornerstone of championship teams in the past decade or so?
Oh I forgot though…Love’s rebounding rate on Team USA says he’s Two Carlos Boozers in one person.
Love is a fantastic player but it’s starting to get ludicrous how some overrate him here. Anyway, he has the whole season up ahead to average 20 – 28 rebounds per game. I can’t wait.
have been the cornerstone of championship teams in the past decade or so?
Was that what I was arguing?
in the last decade how many power forwards have been the cornerstone of a championship team? KG, yes but I’m not picking confetti out of my hair from his time here.
by wet_nurse on Aug 29, 2010 5:51 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
He’s the exact same height as Udonis Haslem, who won a title starting for the Heat. He’s about the same height as Robert Horry who won a title playing more minutes for the Lakers at PF than anyone else. And Love is a better player either one. So yeah, “short” 4s (Love is about 6’9 in shoes, hardly tiny) can be important part of a title team. People who appreciate what Love brings to the table are not claiming he’s MJ—just that he can be an important part of a great team.
No one has argued that he’ll average more rebounds than anyone ever. Just pointing how impressive his rebounding rate has been in the past few games. Do you really think that any commenter on this board would make the claims you are sarcastically making? If not, take the strongest points that disagree with you and argue with them. Anything less makes discussion pointless.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Oh, and Detroit won a title with Ben Wallace, another player approximately Kevin Love’s height, playing center. Height will not prevent Kevin Love from contributing to a winner. If he doesn’t start, it’ll be because someone better than him is playing the 4. Someone like that might come along, but might not. If Kevin Love is your best power forward, he should start and starting Kevin Love does not mean that your team can’t contend.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
now, that depends entirely on his hair-do.....sometimes he LOOKS like a 7 footer.
Detroit won a title with Ben Wallace, another player approximately Kevin Love’s height
phuckin' machine took my quarter.
the afro
was definitely an intimidation factor in his favor.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 30, 2010 7:44 AM CDT up reply actions
This is where overall length and vertical matter
Ben Wallace was a dominant force early in this decade, rebounding at a rate pretty much equivalent to Love and blocking 3+ shots a game. He was a huge part of the Pistons title run. Love will never be the team defensive presence that Wallace was. However, he does offer more skills offensively, so perhaps between his rebounding, passing, and efficient scoring, he ends up eventually having a similar impact as Big Ben.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 29, 2010 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions
That’s basically what I would say. Love’s passing and ability to score are a huge edge over Ben, but Wallace’s D was phenomenal. Love will never be anywhere near his class as a defender.
And there are arguments to be made that Ben was anywhere from the best to 5th best player on that championship team. Ensemble teams like those Pistons are weird, but it still says a lot about how good Wallace was.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
You can win with Love, but ...
your comparison should include that Haslem and Horry weren’t close to being the key player for those teams. I do think Love is much better than Ben Wallace. I like Love, but no way he beats out even an old, run-down KG. Lovee will contribute. A lot. He will be important. Fact remains, he is overrated by some here. Local headlines accompanying Love’s contribution to the national team’s win over Slovenia would not be the same as national headlines about the same win. Their are several players contributing well for that team. And the biggest story is Durant, head and shoulders above anyone else. And national writers/posters like Love without regard to the “franchise” possibility. He’s simply a player they like to watch on a team they would otherwise ignore entirely. They have nothing invested in the Wolves as fans.
by ogishkemuncie on Aug 29, 2010 9:25 PM CDT up reply actions
I think the general consensus is that he can be one of the best players on a great team. He won’t carry you, but he won’t be your starting 5’s weak link either. How you define importance based on roles played probably determines how important you think Love is. He’s elite at what he does. It basically comes down to how important you think rebounding is.
I’m comfortable calling Love’s realistic ceiling anywhere from the 2nd to 4th best guy on a contender (again, depending on how you value rebounding). If his offense continues to mature and he remains one of the best rebounders in the game, he’ll be a very, very good player. I think most people could agree on that.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Aug 29, 2010 9:32 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I equate Love with Lamar Odom
Could Start, Could be first guy off the bench. Does whatever needs to be done. Odom would be the starting PF and Gasol the starting C if the Lakers were trying to put the most talented players on the floor, but they aren’t so he plays the 6th man in order to make his team better overall.
This isn’t to say that either can’t be a starter on a championship level team, but that under certain situations (depending on roster makeup) the impact on team performance by having someone like that lead a second unit is extreme.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 30, 2010 7:49 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think some of the best "big forwards are getting old
(Pau) (when Bynum at center) Duncan Kg and Dirk. Bosh plays a lot of center. I think we have two sides that like to Raz each other that are saying the same thing. I think Love will be a star (but I call any player who is above average for his position a star. (that makes 70 players in all) and It"s sort of ludicrous to say someone called him 2 Boozers in one when what he showed was one stat was double that of Boozers. As a fan I believe in being positive. Rubio and Love are both showing they belong on two of the best “world teams” and to me that’s a nice start. But again it takes more good players than some commentators would have you believe to be champions. Once again, Kobe and Odem could win only 34 games without Shaq when they were all at their peaks (25-26) or so. The Lakers added Gashol and Bynum.
aside from all of the rhetoric of who is a "love hater" on the blog...
i think that you can’t really discount age, experience level or contract when trying to make that evaluation for his relative worth against other players. primarily because he is so young and still has a lot to prove and will probably develop a lot more. how much remains to be seen, but he is looking like he can be a solid player to me. and, i think you need to take into account the context of this team in your assessment somehow. but i like the lists you arranged. i’d be inclined to tweak them for discussion’s sake, if the ctiteria were a little different.
phuckin' machine took my quarter.
primarily because he is so young and still has a lot to prove and will probably develop a lot more.
This is a big issue that’s been generally ignored on these boards. I really like Love’s odds to improve his offensive game substantially. He won’t ever be the kind of guy who drops 25PPG or anything, but his passing instincts are good and he has a decent perimeter game for a big. Those are the sort of things that really can improve with age. If Love becomes something like a 37% 3pt shooter (he shot 33% last year) and improves his passing into the 4.5/2.5 Ast/TO range (2.9/2.5 per36 last year), he’s suddenly a really impressive complementary offensive piece. Again, not a go to guy, but someone who’s very useful on offense.
His game is already to the point where you don’t need to hide him on offense, but I think his ideal role in a few years is a #3 option on a good offense. With Ricky coming, he can fill either the first or second option role (depending on how you define it, he won’t be your top scorer, but he’ll definitely run the show), the Wolves would really just need that elite scorer to look pretty dang good. Of course, we all already knew that and I think it’s part of the tension about Love, but that’s another point for another day…
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
well, to add, i think that love might feel he has something to prove
like he has a bit of a chip on his shoulder (in a good way). he seems naturally competitive and really pretty smart. his rebounding is about positionaing and anticipation. he seems to naturally/instinctually have this more than a lot of guys.
as for the rubster, i’ll avoid that one here as i think it can be a mute point in this interesting topic. i mean that the t-wolves still have to build and develop an entire team with this sort of clean slate approach that is underway.
phuckin' machine took my quarter.
Ben Wallace and Udonis Haslem???
Thanks for proving my point.
Ben Wallace was a pivotal piece in the Detroit runs but hardly the cog around which those runs were centered. He wasn’t the 1st, 2nd or 3rd most important person in those runs.
Don’t get me started on Udonis Haslem. Dude gave up nearly 30pts and 11 rebounds to Dirk in Miami’s only final appearance and played the least minutes of any of the starters. In fact Posey, who was a 6th man on that team played more minutes than him and that team happened to have Shaq, Wade, Zo, Whit-eboy and Walker.
Notice how even the Lakers and Celtics struggle to win when their bigs – Perkins and Bynum – are out injured in the finals. Don’t forget KG and Pau are amongst the best PFs the game has ever seen.
There is no way we’re winning a championship with Kevin “Two Boozers in One” Love being one of two pieces around which we’ve built our team. He either has to be the 4th – 5th best player on the team serving in a 6th man role or playing for the opponent. However unpopular that may seen and however anti-statistic it may appear.
He either has to be the 4th – 5th best player on the team serving in a 6th man role or playing for the opponent. However unpopular that may seen and however anti-statistic it may appear.
Please give actual reasons to support the argument that Kevin Love can’t be any more than the 4th best player on a championship team. This is not a statement of fact—it’s a statement of opinion, one that needs to be backed up with some sort of evidence if you want to keep saying it.
Ben Wallace anchored the defense on a team that won a championship because of its defense. You are underselling his role on that team.
I already said that I thought Love was better than Haslem and just pointed out that Haslem was about the same size as him, less talented and the starter on a championship team.
I don’t even understand the point of the Lakers/Celtics statement. Great teams struggle to win without players who get heavy minutes for them?
Here’s my point:
I’m comfortable calling Love’s realistic ceiling anywhere from the 2nd to 4th best guy on a contender (again, depending on how you value rebounding). If his offense continues to mature and he remains one of the best rebounders in the game, he’ll be a very, very good player. I think most people could agree on that.
If you only think guys who drop 20ppg are valuable, whatever, that’s your opinion and I don’t really care. If you think that players who do everything else matter, then you have to appreciate what Kevin Love does. If you want to start explaining why you feel that our friend Double Carlos (new nickname!) isn’t useful, please do so. Otherwise, turn it down it a few notches.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Consider this. How many teams boast a roster where Love would be the 4th best player? Precious, precious few.
How many teams boast a roster where Love would only be the 5th or 6th best player? I can’t think of any.
And yet, somebody’s going to win a championship, and several teams are going to make deep playoff runs. Go figure.
The only way to solve that one
is to list out all the team with their top 6 players and see where love fits. Then judge how close those teams are to contender status to see where love CURRENTLY stands in that regard. As with most players but the VERY VERY best, players require specific roles and situations to succeed on that level. Anything short of this is pure conjecture and useless for these types of discussions.
It basically become my opinion vs yours and no one ever comes out the wiser. Waste of words.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 30, 2010 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions
Good way of framing it...
I’d say right now Love would be….
the fourth best player on the Heat (although I think they might be better with Love in place of Bosh just for reasons of fit).
…in roughly a 3 way tie for third best on the Lakers with Odom and Bynum,
…the second best player on the Magic,
…worse than Rondo and then who knows how to order it on the Celtics
…third at least, and arguably second on the Thunder
…..
I think that covers the contenders.
I am higher on Love than most people, but there is no way you can drop him out of the top 4 on any of those teams. Not to mention HE’S 21 YEARS OLD.
This could be right...
but in discussions about contending teams, playoff matchups are most important. In a playoff series, Love would be defending some pretty tough power forwards. In the East, he would probably be either chasing Rashard Lewis out to the three-point line, or trying to stop Chris Bosh around the basket. In the West, he’d get Pau Gasol for extended minutes at the 4, and some Dirk Nowitzki as well.
That’s not to say Love would get killed by some or all of those guys — just that it’s really speculating at this point, when we’re going off his two seasons of meaningless games on a horrible team. The playoffs put a microscope on individual matchups and tend to change our opinions of certain players quite significantly.
Agreed on all points...
I just can’t wait until we actually get to see how teams try to take advantage of Love, and how he responds, when the Wolves make the playoffs in X years.
Ten years?
Ah crap! I was hoping to make the playoffs before that.
by princelyfrank on Aug 31, 2010 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Just out of curiosity, who would you say Love would be worse than on the Thunder besides Durant? Swap him and Jeff Green out and you get some serious improvement for that team (I think it was you who said that if he was no longer an elite rebounder, he’d basically just be Jeff Green) and you could pretty much hand them the 2 seed today. Love and Durant are a match made in heaven as far as fit on a team goes, and I’m not sure which other Thunder players would even be in the discussion with Love for second best player. Westbrook? That’s as close as I can find, and I’d still take Love hands down.
And, like you said, he’s 21 years old. Not half bad for a kid his age.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Westbrook definitely...
I probably take Love over Westbrook, but I really like Love. Westbrook is consistently good and occasionally awesome. Westbrook rates well in WP48 and is widely recognized as a nasty man defender. You could probably make that argument that Westbrook was more important than Durant against the Lakers in the playoffs. I don’t think anyone else on that team is even close to Durant, Westbrook, or Love, but I don’t think it is a simple case to put Love above Westbrook.
Fair point. I might have been underrating Westbrook. I hadn’t seen him on D enough to make real calls about that, but he looked really good, justt not super elite in that regard. If he’s as good as advertised on that end, then it’s probably a toss up.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I only really watched him in the playoffs..
but I know that coming out of college Westbrook was billed as a “can’t miss defender, that hopefully won’t hurt you on offense.”
I'd say
He’s about equal with LeBron, better than Wade (overpaid volume scorer) and miles ahead of Bosh.
Better than Howard because all Howard does is block shots.
Best player on Celtics, since Rondo can’t shoot.
Best player on Lakers, since Kobe is old.
Better than everyone but Durant on OKC.
So, I’d say Love is probably the 2nd or 3rd best player in the league, behind Durant and possibly behind Monta Ellis.
You are honestly going to put LeBron at Love's level?
Have you ever even seen LeBron pull off a full-court outlet pass?
It was a close call
but LeBron is a better dancer than K-Love, so I thought that put him over the top.
Did we start a new bit on CH, “Gettin’ Plastered in the Afternoon with Tim Allen”? Because if so, I’m upset I wasn’t included.
I mean, putting Kevin Love in the same class of player as Monta Ellis!? Monta Ellis said it himself, he’s the second best player in the league, and the crazy PPG backs up that claim.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
If I could design the perfect basketball player
it would start with Monta Ellis’ shoes and end with Monta Ellis’ haircut with a whole lot of Monta Ellis in between.
by TimAllen on Aug 30, 2010 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
PPG?!?
Why are you relying on that backwards stat?!? This is 2010 and we have advanced statistics like mpg, which show that Monta is indisputably the best player in the league.
how about shots per minute?
Don’t we all know by now that to be the best you have to throw up the most shots?
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 30, 2010 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions
added bonus
it also gets you drunk more quickly…which then enhances your play?
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 30, 2010 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't know
throwing up shots usually sobers me up pretty quickly…
You're not letting natural selection take its course! You're like the guy who invented the seatbelt...
Ah, no, but that's not how it works.
By putting Love on those teams, maybe he becomes the 4th, 3rd, or even the 2nd best player, but his mere presence in the lineup magically makes it so that the team will never win a championship. Do people not get that?
Love haters want to argue that he’s not a franchise player, to which I think most people with a brain would say “no sh|t sherlock.” Nobody with an ounce of common sense thinks he’s a player who will end up on the same caliber in the annals of NBA history as Moses Malone, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and other of the greatest PFs of all time. But just because he’s not one of the greatest of NBA players to ever put on a uniform doesn’t mean he’s worthless and doesn’t mean he can’t play an important role and be a valuable contributor to a winning team.
Kevin McHale tended to accumulate "old school" players
who fit the following profile:
- Tweeners or small for their true position
- Not very athletic
- Good BBIQ
- Above average offense
- Below average defense
Foye, Wally, Rhino, Hudson, Peeler, Jefferson, …
I think Love fits this profile too. He is a 4/5 tweener with 4 size and 5 mobility. He is not very athletic. He has good skills, a few post moves, and can shoot from outside. He is obviously a great rebounder. His defense is according to stats around average but looked below average when I watched, especially against mobile 4s.
McHale accumulated players like this because (1) they fit his view of the game and (2) they were available since other FOs more highly valued size, athleticism, and defense.
These players are valuable and useful, but they are hard to build around when they are starters. Who do you need to start next to Love to build a very good front court? A player who can defend both big 5s and mobile 4s. Would help if that player could either score in the post or play above the rim. Would also help if that player could grab offensive boards when Love drifts out to the 3 point line on offense. How many 5s fit that description?
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
Derrick Favors
I think a lot of us were very intrigued by him because it felt like a Love-Darko-Favors rotation up front would cover all the bases. We have Pekovic instead, who will probably be better in the short term than Favors, but yeah, it still feels like we are missing a key component up front.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 30, 2010 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Seriously people
go check out the NBA playbook writeup on Love in FIBA style basketball. I’m going to take some flak for this, but I believe it – if used correctly we will be witnessing a new kind of ‘it’ PF in the NBA in Kevin Love. 15 years ago it was KG and Dirk – long, lanky, 7’ PFs who could play SF and SG and had range to knock down shots. They played an athletic game but changed the mold of what we think a PF is. These days it has switched back to being more of a back to the basket or simply close to the basket type. At the time though people knew they were talented but weren’t sure how it was going to play out.
Kevin Love is, in my opinion, about to create a new mold for a playmaking PF. His insane rebounding, quick decision making, and ability to smoothly hit outside shots or find cutting teammates with perfect passes is unlike anything the NBA has seen. We keep trying to compare him to LMA or Pau or Rashard, but I would argue such comparisons only reveal the extent to which Love is a new kind of PF.
Does this mean that Love is a first ballot hall of famer? Don’t be ridiculous. I’m not saying that, and neither is anyone else so please don’t even go there. And is this to suggest that Love won’t get beat on occasion by talented players like Pau or Big Al? Ya, he will, just as KG did, as Tim Duncan did, as Shaq did – just as every player does over the course of an 82 game season. Overlooked, in my opinion, in all of this is the flip side of it – Pau may be able to win some battles with Love (or Rashard), but if Love is used correctly and realizes his potential how many battles will he be able to win against those guys defensively? People say that he’s undersized and too slow, but frankly his combine measurements suggests there’s oodles of innate or functional athleticism hidden in there, and Pruiti’s analysis also suggests that Love’s athleticism is always just enough in order to get those rebounds or taps to himself.
My point is that he can do enough, and he’s smart enough to know exactly how to dagger you if given the chance. In fact, he reminds me a bit of Sam Cassell in that regard – a PG who was never faster or longer or stronger than the opposition but just knew his spots and everyone else’s and would just kill teams more often than not (dude was a career 15.7 ppg scorer with 6 ast – 18.9/7.2 per36 career). It certainly was effective for Cassell, and I think if Rambis chooses to and allows him to this kind of offensive game could be equally as effective for Love.
Finally, the last thing I would like to offer about Love re: where he fits in on a championship caliber squad is that he is one of those unique guys who makes really good players even better. You put him on Orlando’s, Boston’s, the Lakers’, Thunder’s, or Heat’s roster and he can help elevate everyone’s game, including the requisite superstar. To harp on the fact that the Wolves don’t have a superstar is, in my opinion, to consciously miss the point – the dude is good, and if Rambis so chooses to embrace his unique gifts, could be a great player and catalyst who elevates Rubio’s and Beasley’s and Wes’ and everyone else’s play. I think Love will only get better as the talent around him improves.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
by biggity2bit on Aug 30, 2010 1:49 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Thanks
US is looking a bit out of sorts right now, but holy crap can Love rebound. He’s getting burned on his rotations defensively on the PnR, and this is something he needs to get a little bit better on. However, he’s just throwing guys around under the offensive glass in order to get the board, and even his last ‘rebound’ defensively was a tap out to another US player against Splitter. Nice work Mr. Love.
In other news, Bjelly just put up 12 and 6 (boards) in 19 minutes against Jordan, making up for his 2 point, 4 board clunker against Germany.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
You have to admit
that Splitter is the exact type of player that can really expose Love defensively. He is very tall and very mobile. Although Love will outwork him for a free rebound, he’s really a tough match up on the PnR because Love doesn’t have the defensive ranginess to recover back to Splitter after cutting off the guard. This is still the gaping hole in our frontline if you ask me – defensive ranginess. I think we got a bit of it on the wing now with Brewer/Webster/Wes Johnson. And once Rubio comes over we’ll have it at PG too. But our PF/C rotation of Pekovic/Darko/Love can still get really exposed, although at least Darko is > Jefferson defensively.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 30, 2010 9:18 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree about Splitter exposing Love
But I don’t think the hole is as gaping as you make it out to be. (None of this is intended to sound dirty. Dammit.)
It’s definitely the D weak spot for the team, on paper. And other teams will probably try to expose that. But Love and Pek can both make up for it offensively — Love has shown steady range in the FIBA tourney so far, which means he’ll be able to pull opposing 4s out of their comfort zone, which opens up the floor for our new crowd of slashers and shooters. Pek can do the opposite, getting to the hoop extremely quickly on a catch.
I think a mismatch one way is a mismatch the other way, too. I’m excited for our frontline to prove me right, and anxious about them proving me wrong.
Next thing you know, they'll take my thoughts away.
No I disagree
New “players molds” are ones that change the game. Love will not change the game the way KG and dirk have done. So no I don’t think scouts and GM’s will look for slow nonathletic white guys with high basketball IQ’s any time soon.
Kevin Love is about two good rebounding games away
from becoming the CH version of the Dos Equis guy.
“Sometimes he misses shots on purpose, just so he can get more offensive rebounds.”
“He rebounding rate is like that of two Carlos Boozers, three Mark Blounts and four Minnesota Zoo grizzly bears.”
“He gets his shot blocked just to level the playing field.”
“I don’t always try hard, but when I do, I prefer Team USA.”
His rebounding rate for those two games was absolutely silly. If he played that well every game, I think we could give him even higher praise than that.
That said, I haven’t really seen that much hyperbolic praise about his overall game on here. People have pointed out how ludicrously good his rebounding was in those two games (which is stating a fact) and are saying that he could be a key part of a great team (something not particularly controversial). Do you disagree with any of that?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
A massive exaggeration of the truth.
What’s been so crazy about Love on here?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I would say
that it’s hard to comment, as very clearly Love has not been a focus offensively for Team USA. They are all in on Durant and their PGs (Rose, Westbrook, and Chauncey) when it comes to offense.
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
by biggity2bit on Aug 30, 2010 10:06 PM CDT up reply actions
By the way,
Love looked really great in his cameo for Team USA in a “playoff” type game against Brazil today. Why didn’t he play more given that his rebounding in FIBA is the equivalent of 2 NBA Carloz Boozers?
this really isn't even funny anymore
Either you think it is funny…which is kind of sad and socially awkward. Or you have some axe to grind with a comment someone made, which I believe has been taken completely out of context. Either way, please stop.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 30, 2010 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions
It isn't meant to be funny.
It’s just even more proof that Love needs to be put in context.
I also praised him highly when he got his double-digit rebounds in the previous two games. Were those also “funny” or it’s only considered “funny” when his production is mediocre?
You aren’t putting anything into context. You’re just taking someone’s statement of fact (Love’s rebounding rate over two games was double Carlos Boozer’s last year) that was pretty much just pointed out as an interesting piece of trivia and pretending that people actually assume Love will continue to perform that well.
What is the context this needs to be put into? If the answer is “Love is just a 6th man” please give an argument as to why this might be the case. If you can’t do that, you aren’t even making a point, you’re just shouting.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I've made the point over and over again
It just doesn’t sit well with some of you for whatever reason.
Anyway, I’ll not make another statement about Love again until the season is underway.
did my comment above not make sense?
I thought it laid it out implicitly, but apparently I was wrong.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 30, 2010 9:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, you haven’t had any problem repeating that “Two Boozers” line over and over again. How about actually explaining why Kevin Love can only be a 6th man just one more time? You might have made an argument for this at some point, but I honestly don’t recall it and this is clearly something you feel strongly about. I’m not trying to be a dick about this, just asking why you hold that opinion. I don’t think asking for an explanation is unreasonable.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Love could be a starter
But not for the wolves. The reason is why if the wolves really want to run they need to have their main players have the ability to run. That is why I see him as a 6th man or on another team.
Fair enough. You and I have gone through this discussion enough times where re-opening it won’t help anything, but that’s at least a real reason.
And for what it’s worth, I don’t think the Wolves will run as much as they claim they will and they’ll be more of a quick decision team than anything, but that’s not really central to the points here.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I don't think that is Kahn wants to do.
Kahn wants to see certain product on the floor. Remember he is a business man 1st basketball person 2nd That is why he wants the wolves to run. It is a better product to sell than a slow half court game. That is why he wanted players such as lee, Anthony Randolph, and Derick Favors. These guys are 4’s that can run. I think if he does not see the wolves run much Rambis will be gone.
I think they’ll run, but not to the degree of a Phoenix or anything like that. They’ll be about both getting into space and making fast decisions in the half court. It’s an interesting team, and I’m excited to see how it looks in action once Rubio shows up.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I think last year's Phoenix is good example of how we should run
They did not run as much as they used to when they had the matrix at the 4 and stat at the five. This year will be a test of how we could run with Ridinour playing instead of Johnny
It’ll be closer to the finished product, but what we get when Rubio arrives is going to be the real test. I don’t know nearly enough about Ridnour to talk about his transition game.
And my point about the “running when you can, quick decisions in the half court when you can’t” was basically that, even those Kahn’s saying that this team is trying to be the Showtime Lakers, he’s not exclusively making moves to go get sprinters to surround Rubio. He’s also getting willing passers. Resigning Darko isn’t a move that a team whose whole identity is running makes. He’s also very interested in getting players who like to pass. I’m curious to see how things work out over the next few seasons and what moves he makes in the years to come, because at this rate, it seems like the Wolves are trying to be one of the best passing teams in the league, as well as a running team. If nothing else, the offense will never be boring.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Darko is good athlete for the center position.
And every player is either good or elite at their position with the exception of Love. That is why Kahn tried to get athletic fours and not all of them could pass. Derrick favors does not pass the ball but he is an elite athlete.
Darko’s really not a quick guy. I can’t imagine you’ll see him streaking down the court on the break much this year.
What Kahn might have tried to do and what he’s actually done are different things. I’m not saying that he definitely wanted to create a good passing team, but he got one. And it would be dumb for the team not to realize this and utilize that strength. Vision aside, what’s been built is a good passing team.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
darko is no d12
but he is good not elite athlete for the center position. Just like Rubio will be a good athlete for Point Guard position.
But realistically, Darko being an average-ish athlete (neither one of us really know exactly how athletic he is, so let’s give ourselves a range) doesn’t affect the running game much at all. You don’t re-sign Darko for his impact in transition, you re-sign him for his defense and passing.
Just breaking it down a little, the Wolves have 3 guys in the starting lineup who are built to run once Rubio arrives (Ricky, Wes, Webster) and at least 3 guys who are good passers for their position in the starting lineup (Darko, Love, Ricky and possibly Wes). The offense is built around Love grabbing a rebound and starting the break, while an awesome 3 man weave with Rubio, Wes and Webster gets rolling. When they can’t run, it’s built around quick decisions and smart passing in a serious ball movement based offense.
It might not break down that way, but if I’m Rambis, I’m at least happy with how well this team is going to move the ball and it’s ability to get out into space.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
best C to pair with Love
is Howard. I don’t think they would let an opponent get a board. Either Offensive or Defensive. Why is Howard not on the US Team again? Did he not want to play? I would have to almost assume, but who knows.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 31, 2010 7:18 AM CDT up reply actions
for the record
I stand by my sad and socially awkward comment. Not that you are socially awkward, but that this whole discussion thread across multiple posts is extremely awkward and I am not sure what anyone can say to correct the apparent miscommunication. No one is saying Love is twice the player that Boozer is. I sure as hell haven’t. Love has numerous areas of his game that he needs to work on like almost every single other player in the NBA.
There are areas that he will have to improve to ever be a starter on a championship level team. The debate seems to be, or should be on whether he can do that. Questions like “what does he need to do better” and “what areas are going to be exploited by opposing PFs and how can that realistically be worked around” add value.
Making crap up and attempting to make it appear that someone actually said Love is twice the player as Carlos Boozer is both dishonest and inane.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 30, 2010 9:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Honestly, I don't know what to do with you people.
I do the leg work to calculate his rebound rate. But knowing that certain charlatans would see 38.8% and merely blink at the number, I try to give it context in an interesting way. That’s it.
Consider this my formal statement: I don’t think Love is two Carlos Boozers. I don’t think he was in those games other than the fact that he grabbed twice as many rebounds as a single Carlos Boozer, given similar circumstances in a 2009-10 NBA game, would be expected to. I don’t mean to say it has any predictive power toward Love’s future performances either in FIBA or NBA play.
If anyone wishes to continue to imply any of the “I don’ts” about me or CH posters in general, please inform of them of their error by referring them to this post.
now i get it, i thought you were talking about two drunk mexicans.
.
phuckin' machine took my quarter.
From the CH Archives, March 1962
Commenter 1: “Wilt scored 100 points in one game last night! Absolutely crazy. Just for context, Elgin Baylor scored 34.8 PPG last year. Wilt almost scored triple that! Huge night for him.”
Commenter 2: “What? So now Wilt’s 3 times the player that Elgin is? Be realistic, he’s not going to do that every night.”
Commenter 1: “…”
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Meanwhile, back in the present
Dominate: “He used Wilt’s 100 point game in his metaphor about Love! He thinks Love’s FIBA rebounding is on par with Wilt’s 100 point game as an accomplishment!”
So here is my big question....
If Love completed an entire season with a 40% rebound rate (note: this will never happen), would he be the best player in the NBA? Holding all of his other skills constant. Mediocre D, decent play-making, nice shot, limited post game, and a 40% rebound rate…. Is that the best player in the NBA? Is that a player that will help his team more than LeBron, Wade, Kobe, Howard, Paul…?
Just a fun question to get at how people value rebounds. In my opinion he would be, but I am curious if anyone disagrees.
I need at least one more bit of information...
that being the win/loss record of his team. If you surround the league’s best player with Flynn/Ridnour, Webster, Johnson, Darko, Pekovic, etc, you may not have a 60-win team, but you’d certainly be approaching 50 or more. Like someone said (can’t remember who) “you put LeBron on any team in the league and they win 50 games…” (I may have even butchered the quote that I failed to properly cite, but you get my point…)
If Love had a historically-great rebounding season on a winner, I’d entertain some crazy praise for him. If it’s on a 25 or so win team, I’d question the importance of those rebounds and even whether they come at the expense of other important parts of the game, like defense.
For a counter-hypothetical, if Durant scored 40 points per game, does that automatically make him the best player in the NBA? I value scoring more than rebounding for my team’s best/highest-paid players, and I still answer “no” to that, if the Thunder are .500 or worse.
As far as "is he on a winning team?"
that is exactly what I am asking. Would he help his team win? If you don’t make a difference in terms of wins, you are not a good player. The actual win total for the team would be dictated by a lot of things out of Super-Love’s control, like whether or not he is playing alongside bad, decent, o good players that meshes with his game. However, I am asking would Supr-Love make a generic team better than LeBron or whoever else you think is the best player in the league.
The 40 ppg Durant needs more information. If he is doing it on 50 shots, I am far from impressed, and he is not helping his team win. If he is doing it at the same efficiency he scored at last year, I am very impressed… still it wouldn’t be as extreme of an outlier as a 40% rebounding rate. I can’t say definitively whether I think Super-Durant is better than Super-Love, but you are definitely siding with “scoring” being much more important than rebounding if you choose Super-Durant.
I would think it would significantly help his team win
But I have seen both Lebron and Wade pull a cast of misfits into the playoffs all by their lonesome before, so he wouldn’t be alone.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 31, 2010 7:23 AM CDT up reply actions
And just for a more tangible comparison, if Love were playing 40 minutes per night with a rebound rate like that, he’d be averaging about 30.5 rebounds per game. Super Durant would need to do more than score 40 a night (and for argument’s sake, he’s keeping the same efficiency) to put his scoring as equivalent to Love’s rebounding. I mean, Dwight led the league in rebounding last year with 13.2 RPG and Super Love is more than doubling that total. There would be no comparable human to Super Love’s rebounding, while Super Durant is only 10 points up on the next leading scorer.
If you want to say that scoring is the most important role, that’s fine, but Super Durant’s main skill is nowhere near the caliber of Super Love’s main skill. So if rebounding is even just “pretty important” Super Love would have to be the best player in the NBA. Sadly, we will never see the results of this experiment and never know how this affects team wins.
(Also, Andy’s point about how he’s getting those rebounds would have to be important too. If he’s not doing anything but sitting under the hoop waiting for rebounds, he’s probably not that helpful for your team, his defense and offense would both be pretty awful. That’s why your qualifier “holding all other skills constant” is necessary here.)
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
best player
really comes down to making your team go and giving them the best chance to win night in night out. Very subjective criteria. Under the assumption, Love’s team would have an absurd possession advantage every night, but can they score effectively enough to still win? I would hope so with that advantage. Ask me again midway through this season when I can see how his new cast of players can score and work his outlets and I will let you know.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 31, 2010 7:22 AM CDT up reply actions
For the most part I agree with your better and worse list...
except I think Love is better than David West and Carlos Boozer and worse than Josh Smith and Blake Griffin. I know Love puts up good PER and Wins Produced, but i don’t like guys who play the PF or C who can’t block shots and get blocked fairly easily. I am looking much more to seeing a Darko, Beasly, Wes Johnson, Brewer, Flynn/Ridnour lineup.
I say let's wait for Blake Griffin
to actually prove something…anything against grown men. A lot of people look great prior to playing significant minutes in the NBA. Then for some reason the production doesn’t translate. I doubt his athleticism will be 100% of what it was. He will probably get close, but it is a huge part of his game.
No one is getting Rubio's rights unless they pry them from our cold dead fingers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 31, 2010 7:38 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd rather have Love
than Horford all day every day.
Interviewer: Can you understand why teams value potential ahead of experience and accomplishment in the draft? Wes Johnson: "Yeah. I understand. It’s the youngness of everything – older guys like young women, so it’s the same way."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
