Succinct definition:
The guy you want taking the last shot.
.
Printable View
Succinct definition:
The guy you want taking the last shot.
.
[QUOTE=Loco 50]
Pau Gasol - again, what? Clear first option. Best offensive big in the second Laker's run. Kobetards trying to diminish his skills.
Shaq - :biggums: Kobetards are cancer. :biggums: Shaq carries you for 3 quarters; fouling out opposing bigs, so Kobe can clean up in the 4th and he's not a first option?
Ray Allen and Reggie Miller - too perimeter oriented for their day
[/QUOTE]
Pau Gasol was the first option on the Grizzlies, on the Lakers he was clear cut 2nd. Don't know how he could be considered 1st option. There's only one 1st, one 2nd, one 3rd and so on. There are no two first options. This also includes Klay.
You might want to check back on Shaq's 4th quarter scoring during the title runs.
Ray Allen was a legit slasher, who also was also sharpshooting until he arrived in Boston. You're acting like he was a Klay clone.
[QUOTE=jayfan]Succinct definition:
The guy you want taking the last shot.
.[/QUOTE]
On a team with Shaq and Robert Horry you'd want Robert Horry to take the last shot. Doesn't make him the first option.
A first option is the guy the coach runs most plays for. If the play fails the ball gets to the 2nd option, if that fails 3rd etcetc. That's the very definition in first option in anything.
You can be a team's 2nd option, but given circumstances become first for certain plays. That's mostly the clutch only guys. They're not a team's general first option.
[quote]
Klay
Pippen
[/quote]
Klay was never a first option, because his teams main goal is to get Curry a good look. He clearly eats 2nd. So did Pippen until MJ retired. Maybe that's where you're aiming at. First option type players, who have better players infront of them.
Of course Klay could be on a team like the Kings or some team with balanced talent like Boston.
On a team with a superstar scorer he definately is not. Same for Pippen.
Well that
[QUOTE=Overdrive]Pau Gasol was the first option on the Grizzlies, on the Lakers he was clear cut 2nd. Don't know how he could be considered 1st option. There's only one 1st, one 2nd, one 3rd and so on. There are no two first options. This also includes Klay.
[/QUOTE]
Nah, Gasol was 1B to Kobe's 1A, if only because Kobe's ego demanded it.
If I'm coach of that team I run the offense through Pau first, unless Kobe is having a hot offensive night. Pau's offense was much more efficient. Problem with that is, it gets me fired because Kobe starts to cry.
See: Shaq being forced out.
[QUOTE=Overdrive]
You might want to check back on Shaq's 4th quarter scoring during the title runs.
[/QUOTE]
I'm speaking in very vague generalities spanning their careers, not snapshots of specific moments.
[QUOTE=Overdrive]
Ray Allen was a legit slasher, who also was also sharpshooting until he arrived in Boston. You're acting like he was a Klay clone.
[/QUOTE]
No I'm not. Never said that. Allen had a more well-rounded game than Klay, that doesn't change the fact that like 90% of guards his offense was perimeter oriented and thus not as efficient with regards to old school NBA rules.
[QUOTE=Overdrive]
A first option is the guy the coach runs most plays for. If the play fails the ball gets to the 2nd option, if that fails 3rd etcetc. That's the very definition in first option in anything.
Klay was never a first option, because his teams main goal is to get Curry a good look. He clearly eats 2nd. So did Pippen until MJ retired. Maybe that's where you're aiming at. First option type players, who have better players infront of them.
Of course Klay could be on a team like the Kings or some team with balanced talent like Boston.
On a team with a superstar scorer he definately is not. Same for Pippen.[/QUOTE]
This isn't true for good teams with solid coaching and player's egos in check. For Kobe's teams, sure it's true. However, on a team like the Warriors this past year Curry/Durant were interchangeable as the first option. A good coach will see who's been rolling and what the matchups are to see how things shake up. Prior to Durant coming on board Klay/Curry were interchangeable.
Shaq and Kobe were fairly interchangeable. Eventually, Kobe couldn't handle it and chased him out. Pau had a much more passive personality that would allow Kobe to say and do whatever as long as it led to winning.
Bad teams get caught up in stupid concrete roles with no flexibility. Oh, he gets paid the most, therefore he gets the most shots. Oh, he's the star, he's gotta eat first. Stupid shit that costs teams success, unless it's an MJ talent we're talking about.
Kobe Bryant.
[QUOTE=Loco 50]Nah, Gasol was 1B to Kobe's 1A, if only because Kobe's ego demanded it.
If I'm coach of that team I run the offense through Pau first, unless Kobe is having a hot offensive night. Pau's offense was much more efficient. Problem with that is, it gets me fired because Kobe starts to cry.[/quote]
You surely would and it would cost your team success.
[quote]
I'm speaking in very vague generalities spanning their careers, not snapshots of specific moments.[/quote]
Kobe was a legit star player for like 5 seasons during Shaq's stay. That's the title run seasons and 1 finals run. That's not specific moments, but the part of their careers where primes overlap and Shaq's 4th quarter numbers were great.
[quote]
No I'm not. Never said that. Allen had a more well-rounded game than Klay, that doesn't change the fact that like 90% of guards his offense was perimeter oriented and thus not as efficient with regards to old school NBA rules.[/quote]
Present the stats, because I call bull. His fg% was average or above and he was 3 pt shooting, but he attacked the rim and used his midrange game.
[quote]
This isn't true for good teams with solid coaching and player's egos in check. For Kobe's teams, sure it's true. However, on a team like the Warriors this past year Curry/Durant were interchangeable as the first option. A good coach will see who's been rolling and what the matchups are to see how things shake up. Prior to Durant coming on board Klay/Curry were interchangeable.
Shaq and Kobe were fairly interchangeable. Eventually, Kobe couldn't handle it and chased him out. Pau had a much more passive personality that would allow Kobe to say and do whatever as long as it led to winning.
Bad teams get caught up in stupid concrete roles with no flexibility. Oh, he gets paid the most, therefore he gets the most shots. Oh, he's the star, he's gotta eat first. Stupid shit that costs teams success, unless it's an MJ talent we're talking about.[/QUOTE]
You seem obsessed with Kobe. Idgaf about him. Curry is the obvious first option between him and Klay. I already said 1st options can be circumstancial and feeding the hot hand is a thing, but when both have similar nights you'll find the ball in Curry's hands more often than Klay's.
[QUOTE=Loco 50]Nah, Gasol was 1B to Kobe's 1A, if only because Kobe's ego demanded it.
If I'm coach of that team I run the offense through Pau first, unless Kobe is having a hot offensive night. Pau's offense was much more efficient. Problem with that is, it gets me fired because Kobe starts to cry.
See: Shaq being forced out.
I'm speaking in very vague generalities spanning their careers, not snapshots of specific moments.
No I'm not. Never said that. Allen had a more well-rounded game than Klay, that doesn't change the fact that like 90% of guards his offense was perimeter oriented and thus not as efficient with regards to old school NBA rules.
This isn't true for good teams with solid coaching and player's egos in check. For Kobe's teams, sure it's true. However, on a team like the Warriors this past year Curry/Durant were interchangeable as the first option. A good coach will see who's been rolling and what the matchups are to see how things shake up. Prior to Durant coming on board Klay/Curry were interchangeable.
Shaq and Kobe were fairly interchangeable. Eventually, Kobe couldn't handle it and chased him out. Pau had a much more passive personality that would allow Kobe to say and do whatever as long as it led to winning.
Bad teams get caught up in stupid concrete roles with no flexibility. Oh, he gets paid the most, therefore he gets the most shots. Oh, he's the star, he's gotta eat first. Stupid shit that costs teams success, unless it's an MJ talent we're talking about.[/QUOTE]
So you're going to run your playoff offense and first option duties through the dude who is literally 0-16 in the playoffs in the first round as the first option.
Interesting :biggums:
[QUOTE=superduper]So you're going to run your playoff offense and first option duties through the dude who is literally 0-16 in the playoffs in the first round as the first option.
Interesting :biggums:[/QUOTE]
Correct, because unlike you I have no agenda.
In 2004, they got swept by the [B]previous champs[/B] in the Duncan, Parker, Manu Spurs.
Pau is supposed to overcome that with Mike Miller, Shane Battier and Jason Williams?
In 2005, they got swept by the [B]western conference finalist[/B] Phoenix Suns with Stoudemire/Nash/Johnson and Marion.
Pau is supposed to overcome that with the same team?
In 2006, they got swept by the [B]NBA finalist Mavericks[/B] with Dirk/Howard/Stackhouse and Terry. A team that managed to overcome the prior years champion Spurs.
Pau is supposed to overcome that with Miller and Battier and Eddie Jones?
In 2013, he got beat by the Spurs after Kobe suffered a season ending injury just prior to the playoffs starting. An idiot with an agenda might view that series and lay the blame on Pau.
It's funny arguing with Kobetards like you, SlurperDerper. I don't even like Pau Gasol.
Who the hell ever said Shaq wasn't a first option?
To me personally, I don't really use the phrase first option. It does mean a little more when a star player is the clear cut best player on a team and is obviously leading the team...for example, Kawhi with Toronto, Duncan with the Spurs, Dirk with the Mavs, Kobe with the Lakers (09&10) etc.
Did those guys still have very good players on their teams? Yes, but it's blatantly obvious that the star player led those teams. He was THE guy, Parker won a fmvp ffs but we still know Duncan was the first option there.
It means less for teams who have more than 1 top notch player. For example, Shaq with Kobe, Paul Pierce with KG/Ray, Lebron with Wade or Cavs title with Kyrie, KD with the Warriors...not that the win means less but the "first option" label means less.
[QUOTE=Loco 50]Correct, because unlike you I have no agenda.
In 2004, they got swept by the [B]previous champs[/B] in the Duncan, Parker, Manu Spurs.
Pau is supposed to overcome that with Mike Miller, Shane Battier and Jason Williams?
In 2005, they got swept by the [B]western conference finalist[/B] Phoenix Suns with Stoudemire/Nash/Johnson and Marion.
Pau is supposed to overcome that with the same team?
In 2006, they got swept by the [B]NBA finalist Mavericks[/B] with Dirk/Howard/Stackhouse and Terry. A team that managed to overcome the prior years champion Spurs.
Pau is supposed to overcome that with Miller and Battier and Eddie Jones?
In 2013, he got beat by the Spurs after Kobe suffered a season ending injury just prior to the playoffs starting. An idiot with an agenda might view that series and lay the blame on Pau.
It's funny arguing with Kobetards like you, SlurperDerper. I don't even like Pau Gasol.[/QUOTE]
Mike Miller, Shane Battier, Jason Williams >> Smush, Kwame, Walton, Mihm.
Kobe would have fared A LOT better with Pau's cast than his own back then. A whole lot of typing and a whole lot of nothing :sleeping
[QUOTE=Overdrive]You surely would and it would cost your team success.
[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, we'll never know.
[QUOTE=Overdrive]
Kobe was a legit star player for like 5 seasons during Shaq's stay. That's the title run seasons and 1 finals run. That's not specific moments, but the part of their careers where primes overlap and Shaq's 4th quarter numbers were great.
[/QUOTE]
You're looking for an argument that I never made. I chose the one quarter that overall, Kobe had a chance of winning stats-wise over Shaq, simply because Shaq occasionally had to be sat for the final two minutes. Also, it's clearly much easier to run the offense through guards during the closing minutes because feeding the post requires much more team coordination, competence, and obediance.
[QUOTE=Overdrive]
Present the stats, because I call bull. His fg% was average or above and he was 3 pt shooting, but he attacked the rim and used his midrange game.
[/QUOTE]
Again, what? Are you salty about something else? Ray Allen was great and had a very well rounded game while being one of the leagues best shooters ever. Yes, he slashed, yes he finished well. He did not have a post game, same as most guards in the NBA not named MJ. I'll admit, I'm biased in terms of posts nearly always being more efficient than guards on offense. That's the only reason I'd consider him flawed for a first option from my standpoint. He's a guard, simple as that.
[QUOTE=Overdrive]
I already said 1st options can be circumstancial and feeding the hot hand is a thing, but when both have similar nights you'll find the ball in Curry's hands more often than Klay's.[/QUOTE]
Agreed, therefore 1A over 1B. You insist on 2nd option over 1st. Whatever, that is semantics to me as we essentially agree on damn near everything you've posted.
1st option means first [U]scoring[/U] option
It's always meant that
But regarding the arguments about MJ having the most "1st option rings" - he also has the most rings as the team's best offensive player - so either way, he won the most as "the man", which is why he's goat..
Ultimately, there's never been a league MVP in the modern era that wasn't a dominant offensive player - the "offensive domination" requirement is why winning rings as "the man" (best offensive player) has become the holy grail of modern basketball accomplishment that defined the careers of Kobe (winning without Shaq), Dirk, Wade, Durant, and any star player in today's game..
Ultimately MJ won the most as "the man" (6 rings... 2nd place has only 3) which is why he's consensus goat..
[QUOTE=jayfan]Succinct definition:
The guy you want taking the last shot.
.[/QUOTE]
100% false. As someone else said earlier, Horry & Fisher get the last shot over Shaq, doesn't mean Shaq ain't the first option :lol
[QUOTE=Bosnian Sajo]Who the hell ever said Shaq wasn't a first option?
To me personally, I don't really use the phrase first option. It does mean a little more when a star player is the clear cut best player on a team and is obviously leading the team...for example, Kawhi with Toronto, Duncan with the Spurs, Dirk with the Mavs, Kobe with the Lakers (09&10) etc.
Did those guys still have very good players on their teams? Yes, but it's blatantly obvious that the star player led those teams. He was THE guy, Parker won a fmvp ffs but we still know Duncan was the first option there.
It means less for teams who have more than 1 top notch player. For example, Shaq with Kobe, Paul Pierce with KG/Ray, Lebron with Wade or Cavs title with Kyrie, KD with the Warriors...not that the win means less but the "first option" label means less.[/QUOTE]
You completely contradict yourself in this post. It was also blatantly obvious LeBron was THE guy on all 3 title teams
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents]You completely contradict yourself in this post. It was also blatantly obvious LeBron was THE guy on all 3 title teams[/QUOTE]
I guess it helps Bran's legacy that he sabotaged Wade's FMVP in 2011