Originally Posted by BarberSchool
The real question is, does the fact that Kevin Love scores more of his points off of cuts, free throws, and open 3's make him less of an asset or more of an asset ?
It certainly makes him less of a noticeable superstar, as you'll never see a highlight of him in isolation, crossing someone over then dunking on them.
But let's really think about this, and please I'd like everyone to respond:
1. When has a guy had a season under his belt of 26ppg on good efficiency, and is looking like he will have another season at that rate, all of it done WITHOUT NEEDING THE BALL IN HIS HANDS MUCH ? AND WITHOUT NEEDING MANY PLAYS RUN FOR HIM?
2. Does a team benefit MORE from having multiple 20+PPG talents who both need the ball in their hands to succeed? Or does it benefit more when ONE 20+PPG talent needs the ball in their hands to succeed, and another does not need the ball in their hands to succeed?
1. that's not a question.
2. I think it's a bit arbitrary to say good players NEED to have the ball in their hands. I know using Lebron as an example is a bit silly seeing how god-like he is, but on the Cavs (shitty team and coaching) he was better off dominating the ball. On the Heat that is not necessarily the case.
Now let's say Rubio goes down and the Wolves suddenly have no good distributors. Obviously, the fact Love doesn't have much of an iso game would become a liability to him and the team at that point. In fact I reckon his stats would falter pretty hard with no one feeding him.