|
Post by Rubén Magnano on Jan 20, 2013 20:36:36 GMT
Current rating: 82
Suggested rating: 87-88
I am starting a thread for David Lee because Warriors GM should wont do it. He reserves his post of the month for special occasions.
|
|
|
Post by Alex English on Jan 20, 2013 21:55:08 GMT
Lee definitely deserves an increase, the only problem though is that he has always been a terrible defender. I would give him an 85-86.
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Jan 20, 2013 23:20:13 GMT
85-86 for me, as I already said as well.
|
|
Chris Mullin
Golden State Warriors
Starter
Posts: 1,303
Feb 19, 2024 21:58:28 GMT
|
Post by Chris Mullin on May 16, 2013 7:39:24 GMT
Don't know if anything ever happened with this so I'm going to bump it.
Id also agree 86-87 range
|
|
Chris Mullin
Golden State Warriors
Starter
Posts: 1,303
Feb 19, 2024 21:58:28 GMT
|
Post by Chris Mullin on May 20, 2013 1:52:38 GMT
Bump for more discussion please!
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on May 22, 2013 16:14:00 GMT
I don't really see how Lee is better than he was during his last season in New York.
|
|
Chris Mullin
Golden State Warriors
Starter
Posts: 1,303
Feb 19, 2024 21:58:28 GMT
|
Post by Chris Mullin on May 24, 2013 20:38:18 GMT
Since David Lee has been discussed somewhat today, any more input for this thread?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 4, 2024 14:09:23 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2013 13:20:17 GMT
You could make the cases the Warriors played better in real life WITHOUT Lee.
|
|
Glenn Robinson
Milwaukee Bucks
Starter
Posts: 1,226
Mar 2, 2024 5:20:47 GMT
|
Post by Glenn Robinson on May 25, 2013 13:38:59 GMT
You could make the cases the Warriors played better in real life WITHOUT Lee. +1 Warriors go as Curry goes. Lee made some contributions but overall Curry lead this team to where they got in the playoffs. Followed by Klay.
|
|
Chris Mullin
Golden State Warriors
Starter
Posts: 1,303
Feb 19, 2024 21:58:28 GMT
|
Post by Chris Mullin on May 26, 2013 6:57:35 GMT
Yes Curry is their best player but there is no way they are a better team without Lee in the lineup. Lee was 3rd team All NBA this season, surely his rating deserves to be increased from 82.
Lee made more than some contributions to the Warriors this year. Lee was top 5 in rebounding this year (11.2) and led the NBA in double double's this year with 56. Dwight Howard was 2nd with 48. Lee also shot 51% from the floor & 79% from the line. I would say the production Lee contributes on a nightly basis is extremely important to the Warriors.
What is your case that the Warriors were better without Lee?
Glenn, you made the statement in the Lee/Garnett trade thread that Lee was very valuable to the Warriors this year, now you're saying they were better without him?
There has to be some other GMs in this league that have different opinions about Lee.
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on May 26, 2013 14:44:45 GMT
Since it's been awhile I want to stand firm on my 86. His passing skills are among the best, if not the best, of NBA big men. Knicks used to run the offense through him, he still gets a good # of assists even with real PG on his team. He's a great rebounder, and a gifted offensive player. He struggles some on defense but has made some improvements in GSW, or else Mark Jackson would not play him much.
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on May 26, 2013 15:37:35 GMT
Let's not jump the gun here. David Lee is good, but he isn't the cornerstone of a franchise. He isn't even on the superstar level of big men in my opinion, he is more of like a roleplaying star. And, as Boston said, he hasn't really changed much since his last season in New York, so why are we increasing his rating? Because he got extra attention in the playoffs? I'd say 82 range is good for him.
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on May 27, 2013 2:56:14 GMT
IMO, no, playoffs don't influence me that much, I follow about the same all season as I do during the playoffs. Maybe more during the season since Fantasy Basketball is going on at that time :-p.
We would be increasing his rating b/c he is just too low and has consistently proven he is what he is, and what he is, is better than the rating he is still at right now.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 4, 2024 14:09:23 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2013 4:37:37 GMT
What is your case that the Warriors were better without Lee? The argument would be based around two facts. The first being that Carl Landry maybe just as good, if not better, than David Lee. Secondly, the Warriors played well against the Nuggets without Lee. While it would be impossible to totally prove that they did indeed play better without Lee, I think it could be a hypothesis worth exploring.
|
|
Chris Mullin
Golden State Warriors
Starter
Posts: 1,303
Feb 19, 2024 21:58:28 GMT
|
Post by Chris Mullin on May 27, 2013 6:06:41 GMT
What is your case that the Warriors were better without Lee? The argument would be based around two facts. The first being that Carl Landry maybe just as good, if not better, than David Lee. Secondly, the Warriors played well against the Nuggets without Lee. While it would be impossible to totally prove that they did indeed play better without Lee, I think it could be a hypothesis worth exploring. Sorry I disagree that Carl Landry is just as good as David Lee. Don't even think its close when you are talking all around player. I agree negative things have to be considered too but what about all the good things Lee does? I stated in a previous post Lee led the entire league in double doubles this year. He had 56 which was 8 more than next closest Dwight Howard. He had more than every other player in the NBA. Lee is a good passer and an efficient scorer and a good free throw shooter. Top 5 rebounder in the entire league and has been consistent over several years. I agree Lee is not a Superstar but he is an All Star. People take for granted the things Lee does on a nightly basis because they're not highlight plays
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on May 28, 2013 1:00:49 GMT
Vlade just has, and always has had, a boner for Carl Landry.
No one else feels as highly about him as he does so just ignore it :-p
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 4, 2024 14:09:23 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2013 2:08:17 GMT
Vlade just has, and always has had, a boner for Carl Landry. No one else feels as highly about him as he does so just ignore it :-p Landry is UNDERRATED!
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Jun 18, 2013 17:30:23 GMT
Um, pretty polarizing guy. I am being lazy but about half want him to stay at 82 and about half want him in the 85-87 range...so should we say 84 for now and be done with it?
|
|
Chris Mullin
Golden State Warriors
Starter
Posts: 1,303
Feb 19, 2024 21:58:28 GMT
|
Post by Chris Mullin on Jun 18, 2013 17:56:01 GMT
Um, pretty polarizing guy. I am being lazy but about half want him to stay at 82 and about half want him in the 85-87 range...so should we say 84 for now and be done with it? Based on the people that actually gave a rating, and using the drop the highest/lowest formula Lee comes out around 84.8 which would give him an 85. I know we are only talking a difference of 1 rating point but I don't understand how a guy that leads the entire NBA in Double Double's and is 3rdTeam All NBA this season, is rated lower than Paul Millsap who is an 84. I also find it funny how I've gotten a lot offers from GMs around the league wanting David Lee, yet he can't get any love when it comes to boosting his rating.
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Jun 18, 2013 18:32:19 GMT
That works then, I was being lazy as I said :-)
|
|
Chris Mullin
Golden State Warriors
Starter
Posts: 1,303
Feb 19, 2024 21:58:28 GMT
|
Post by Chris Mullin on Jun 18, 2013 18:51:05 GMT
That works then, I was being lazy as I said :-) It's all good! Just sticking up for my guys!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 4, 2024 14:09:23 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2013 19:53:02 GMT
I don't think Milsap nor Lee deserve 84's.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Sept 15, 2013 16:37:24 GMT
82 83 85.5 85.5 86.5
87.5
Lee gets an 85. The 83 rating was from me, I'm not so high on him than others.
|
|