Brand or O'Neal?

Wouldn't it make sense that Brand, on a crappier team, is likely to score more because there are less scoring options on his team? In fact, because Indiana is so much better than LA, O'Neal should get the edge here because he manages to put up such good numbers despite Indiana's depth and plethora of offensive options (especially compared to the Clippers).

It's already been settled that JO takes more shots than Brand does, so no.

Jermaine took 418 more shots last season so that could contribute to the difference in there fg%. You also have to take into account that Jermaine is really experimenting with his offensive game since adding his outside jumpshot just this past season. Jermaine seems to always come out every season with a new addition to his game and always improving his fundamentals

He thinks he's a jumpshooter now, and kept taking way too many jumpers, he needs to go back inside, he isn't the greatest inside, but it's much better than seeing him launch up 15' jumpers and miss all day.

No.

Interesting......

Who says he'd take less shots at a worse team? Just because Elton Brand does doesn't mean Jermaine would too.

Yes, but if JO was on the Clippers he wouldn't be getting 20 shots a game, if you didn't know their was a guy called Q-Rich who took a lot of shots, JO would either get what Brand was which would bring his numbers down, or about the same as he currently is.

Yes.

So playing on a bad team allows you to block more shots? I mean rebounds could be argued to sort of make sense, but blocks?

defenitely jo,he has much more talent,is only 26 and has already played 8 seasons i´m sure he´ll raise his game the next few seasons

Much more talent? Elaborate. Brand is the better fundamental player, as mentioned by Fgrep, his post skills are like mini Duncan. Fundamentals is what his game is based upon. And yes, he does have a sweeter touch from the midrange spot compared to O'Neal. About him being "only" 26 & playing 8 seasons, what makes you think Brand won't improve? He's a year younger.

well tracy mcgrady> kobe statistically too. It's a team game, its easier to get good stats on a bad team since your one of the few if not the only option they have

Yes, that's one of the main reasons I'd pick McGrady over Bryant. Bryant has had it much easier with the big fella around. The defense has not concentrated on him as much as they would with McGrady. Again, please watch the finals when the Detroit team focussed on Bryant. They made him priority number 1 & Shaq priorty number zilch. They let him have his way. They focussed on shutting down Bryant and they succeeded. Prince isn't the best of defenders (he's good, but not awesome) so yeah, it clearly goes to show that Bryant can't produce if a team is focussed on him solely. Not yet atleast. That's something he as yet has to learn. McGrady doesn't, he's been there & done that.

Anyways, as we said...let's not go into a T-Mac vs Bryant discussion, it's been done enough.

So you're saying in Brand-J O'Neal agrument that playoffs don't matter, it's all about the indivdual. But in the KG-Duncan agrument you said being able to lead your team and winning a title is what seperates Duncan from KG.

You are obsessed with KG, like a Kobe fan is with Kobe.

Go look into the other thread, I said Playoffs don't matter, I said WINNING the playoffs matter in KG & TD situation. TD can win, Garnett has yet to do that with a good team. His team didn't suck last year, he should have won. If you're planning to bring up Cassell, save it. KG is the backbone of that team, not Cassell. He should have improvised and carried the team. He cannot. Duncan can. O'Neal made the playoffs because of many factors that do not apply for Brand. O'Neal has Artest, anyone know him? Defensive player of the year? Ok. Brand has Maggette. Take your pick. O'Neal has Reggie's 4th quarter shooting ability. Brand had Richardson.

Bottom line is that Brand's team was no where near as strong as O'Neal's team. If you feel they were equal, I suggest you see a shrink.

It's not like Brand has no talent either remember when he had Andre Miller, Lamar Odom, Michael Olowokandi, Corey Maggette, Quentin Richardson. Jermaine O'Neal's pacer team wasn't that talented.

Injuries should be taken into account in that season. O'Neal's team hasn't been hampered with injury as that Clippers team was.

think he got you there, though neither has won a title oneal has made it to the dance.

Give Brand an Artest & place him in the east & watch them waltz.

As it's been mentioned, good players on a shit team are more likely to post high numbers. T-Mac in Orlando, LeBron in Cleveland (yes) and Kobe in LA this season (hmm). Elton Brand has only ever played for Chicago and the LA Clippers, is there seriously two worse teams in the NBA than that? If he and Jermaine switched places it's safe to say Jermaine's statistics would be boosted significantly.

This argument is quite slippery, I could counter it saying that those players have all the focus upon them yet they produce the same as players on a deeper roster. I don't think O'Neal's number would be significantly higher given he's not played alone. (Well, neither has Brand but I can say that the Pacers team is much deeper.)

As has already been noted, Brand makes less FGA whilst O'Neal makes more.

If O'Neal manages to get 20.1 points per game based on 17.9 FGA's, Brand manages to get 20.0 points per game based on 14.2 FGA's a game. If you use the argument that placing O'Neal on the Clipps would boost his stats, I can say that if Brand took as many shots as O'Neal, his point production would be higher. His effeciency of making shots is higher than O'Neal's is.

I think Jermaine and Brand are pretty much equal in stats but so is Jason Kidd and Stephon Marbury and I dont think you would argue Jason isnt the better point guard.

Agreed, that's why I say Brand is better than O'Neal. His skills appeal to me more than O'Neal's do.

I think I'd take Jermaine O'Neal. He certainly has more help than Brand, but he's also demonstrated the ability to meld with other talent and be part of a winning team. You could say that he hasn't put his team on his back and carried them alone, but Brand certainly hasn't done that either.

Brand has never really had the opportunity.

so basicly the question would be, what is brands shots per game compared to oneals for last season? take that, shooting %, FTA and FT%, and ppg.

O'Neal:

FGA: 17.9
FGM: 7.8
FG%: .435

Points: 20.1

Brand:

FGA: 14.2
FGM: 7.0
FG%: .493

Points: 20.0

Knowing Brand a little bit more I'd naturally like him more. I've seen him do some smart things before, like going out of his way to knock the ball out of bounds just to eat up the clock (he did this once to win the game).

These are things I've based my opinion upon. His smartness is a level higher than O'Neal's is. You could say it's like with Duncan & KG, Duncan has better fundamentals. We've seen what having good fundamentals & a stable head on your shoulders can lead to. I'm not taking away from KG or JO. They are both hard workers & good (KG=great) players. Yet I prefer TD over KG & Brand over JO based on the fact that these two players stick to the basics. You can't go wrong with the basics.

Since I'm doing this based on the way things are posted, great post Fgrep15.

Wouldn't it make sense that Brand, on a crappier team, is likely to score more because there are less scoring options on his team? In fact, because Indiana is so much better than LA, O'Neal should get the edge here because he manages to put up such good numbers despite Indiana's depth and plethora of offensive options (especially compared to the Clippers).

Again, I can turn it around & say the defense focusses more on team-mates letting O'Neal get better shots thus producing better, right? Well the fact remains that Brand produces almost the same whilst taking LESS shots compared to O'Neal. Explain that one? I'd understand your argument if Brand in fact took more shots, but he doesn't. Doesn't that mean that in some way Brand is better? He does what O'Neal does on a crappier team WHILE taking less shots. Wowie.

fgrep15 wrote:
Wait, shouldn't a better team make your FG% go higher?

No.

Why not? The defense doesn't focus upon O'Neal as much as they do on Brand, right? Doesn't defensive pressure affect a players percentage? Again, I ask you to look at the finals & Bryant. When defensive pressure is focussed on you, you play differently. Your "usual" stats are different.

Nice of you to say no, but atleast give reasoning behind your thougths. Discussions wouldn't go very far if it was just a bunch of yes's and no's.

Yes, but if JO was on the Clippers he wouldn't be getting 20 shots a game, if you didn't know their was a guy called Q-Rich who took a lot of shots, JO would either get what Brand was which would bring his numbers down, or about the same as he currently is.

Let me just show you something in that quote:

Yes, but if JO was on the Clippers he wouldn't be getting 20 shots a game, if you didn't know their was a guy called Q-Rich who took a lot of shots, JO would either get what Brand was which would bring his numbers down, or about the same as he currently is.

You can't say for sure O'Neal would get the same amount of shots, he commands the offence more than Brand does and the fact of the matter is if the Pacers offered Jermaine for Brand straight up the Clippers would most likely take it in a heartbeat.

This argument is quite slippery, I could counter it saying that those players have all the focus upon them yet they produce the same as players on a deeper roster. I don't think O'Neal's number would be significantly higher given he's not played alone. (Well, neither has Brand but I can say that the Pacers team is much deeper.)

Jermaine has the focus on him, and they produce the same because they have the focus on them. I think you're actually proving my point if anything, he hasn't played alone yet his numbers are equal to Elton Brand who has. And yes I know about Quentin Richardson but he's not exactly a megastar is he? This season will be telling because Q-Rich is gone.

As has already been noted, Brand makes less FGA whilst O'Neal makes more.

If O'Neal manages to get 20.1 points per game based on 17.9 FGA's, Brand manages to get 20.0 points per game based on 14.2 FGA's a game. If you use the argument that placing O'Neal on the Clipps would boost his stats, I can say that if Brand took as many shots as O'Neal, his point production would be higher. His effeciency of making shots is higher than O'Neal's is.

You can't base your entire argument on statistics. I mean it might work in the Duncan vs KG rubbish but I think this is entirely different. It's difficult to compare a player like O'Neal who has been in the league for ages and is still young, also playing on a strong Eastern Conference team to Brand who has never played on a decent team and continues to play on a rubbish team in the West.

Nice of you to say no, but atleast give reasoning behind your thougths.

No.

So playing on a bad team allows you to block more shots? I mean rebounds could be argued to sort of make sense, but blocks?

From personal experience, if you're playing with a bunch of guys who don't block many shots, as a PF/C you feel more inclined to try and block more shots. Which would inevitably increase your block stats somewhat if you were a decent defender such as JO and Brand. Same goes for rebounding, if you put Ben Wallace, KG and Duncan in a starting lineup guaranteed those three guys wouldn't hold their current rebounding numbers. Same works visa versa, good rebounder on a bad rebounding team is going to get more rebounds.

JO talks too much shit, so I'd take Brand

Just to add something for the stastically part, a lot of stats are not counted like the pass before the assist, the tip before the rebound...etc. So i wouldn't choose a player only on stats. Not to mention leadership, personnality, experience...etc.

For the West/East argument it could also be said JO is facing better defenses in the East so it explains his (slightly) lower fg%.

defenitely jo,he has much more talent,is only 26 and has already played 8 seasons i´m sure he´ll raise his game the next few seasons

Much more talent? Elaborate. Brand is the better fundamental player, as mentioned by Fgrep, his post skills are like mini Duncan. Fundamentals is what his game is based upon. And yes, he does have a sweeter touch from the midrange spot compared to O'Neal. About him being "only" 26 & playing 8 seasons, what makes you think Brand won't improve? He's a year younger.

a fact of experience?!?->kobe (also 26 having played 8 seasons) maybe brand will have this kind of experience being about 30,if he ever reaches the playoffs...
i like elton brand,but obviously every nba-scout will tell you that he isn´t as talented as jo...
i think brand can improve in the future, but he is near the limit, while jo defentely has a lot room under his cap...and come on,one year of age is no year...
but no matter,believe in your opinion

.................................

Last edited by hmm on Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

dont know. i would probably go with Brand. He is first of all stronger and has a better size

He's a midget for his position.

a fact of experience?!?->kobe

College is what? Bullshit? No experience from there eh? Bah, stupid folks that go to college, how dumb can they be? Why not just rot away on the Jail Blazers' bench. Hell yeah, awesome experience opposed to actually playing.

You can't say for sure O'Neal would get the same amount of shots

Yes, I can.

You can't base your entire argument on statistics.

Again, yes, I can.

I mean it might work in the Duncan vs KG rubbish but I think this is entirely different.

No.

It's difficult to compare a player like O'Neal who has been in the league for ages and is still young, also playing on a strong Eastern Conference team to Brand who has never played on a decent team and continues to play on a rubbish team in the West.

Ofcourse I can, I just did.

He's a midget for his position.

As was Charles Barkley.

You're right Jae, this way of discussion is the pwn.

.................................

Last edited by hmm on Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

You're right Jae, this way of discussion is the pwn.

Lol you should know, you've been using "Duncan>KG" as your argument for ages

After Tim Duncan, Brand is the only other player in the league to rival him in post skill, he has unlimited moves down low, and knows how to score when he get's the ball deep. He doesn't have a go to move, but he has so many moves its hard to stop him down there.

It's also hard to stop JO down low. He doesn't nearly the same repertoire of moves that Brand has, but he has the height advantage. IMO, they're pretty equal in terms of how to stop.

Brand's mid-range FG% is 38.9%, Duncan's is 38.4%, and Jermaine O'neal's is 37.8%, he also takes a lot more mid-range jumpers (JO that is), 73% of his attempts, as opposed to 58% and 56% by Brand and Duncan. JO wan'ts to be KG, but can't make the shots like him .

I know where you're getting the stat from, and it's not a mid-ranged FG. They classify it as a "jump", which can be anything from a high post turn around fade to a 15 foot jumper. So IMO it's misleading (does JO still take more mid-ranged jumpers than Brand? yeah). A lot of these shots by JO are technically "jumpers", but they're "jumpers" made out of the post. He doesn't have time to set his feet, square up, and release. JO plays in the high post a lot more than Brand does.

I really question if the JO had a better supporting cast than Brand did or if JO just made them better. Brand had Maggette, QRich, Wilcox, Kaman, Jaric next to him, while JO had Artest, Little Al, Tinsley, and Miller, since I'm counting offense here (so no Foster). Hardly anyone else can be considered a significant contributor for both teams. The Pacers lacked players who could create shots. Tinsley, although he knows neither how to finish nor how to shoot, Artest to an extent, and Harrington. Of course JO as well. All the significant contributors of the Clips have an ability to create shots for themselves. You saw what happened when the Pistons not only placed a good defender on JO, but collapsed on him. Shooters weren't the only problem. Artest's creation was limited to backing down Prince. Harrington thrives in the post and with JO already down low, the post became even more crowded, especially when Artest played in the low post as well. I don't see the same problem with the Clips. I've seen Kaman knock down the 15 footer. Mags and QRich are more than able to create their own shot.

I have nothing to back this up, but JO has a larger impact on the floor IMO. Defenses collapse onto him more than anyone outside of Shaq, TD and KG. I feel JO made the Pacers go on offense and that's not fully the case for Brand.

You can't say for sure O'Neal would get the same amount of shots, he commands the offence more than Brand does and the fact of the matter is if the Pacers offered Jermaine for Brand straight up the Clippers would most likely take it in a heartbeat

What I'm saying is Q-Rich was a hog lol, the man didn't want to stop shooting.
Also I can promise you that even if it did ever happen, JO wouldn't take more shots than he is now, he's already getting 17.9 attempts a game, for a big man of his caliber, that's a fair amount of attempts.
If you look at all the other PF's:

Kevin Garnett - 19.7 attempts, 24.2 points
Tin Duncan - 17.1 attempts, 22.3 points
Amare Stoudemire - 15.7 attempts, 20.6 points
Zach Randolph - 16.9 attempts, 20.1 points
Juwan Howard - 14.4 attempts, 17.0 points
Elton Brand -14.2 attempts, 20.0 points

Look at Corey Maggette even, 13.9 attempts, 20.7 points, a PF shouldn't be a less effective scorer than a SF, and shouldn't score less than a SF taking 3.3 less shots a game.
Basically all you're saying is he'll score more by taking more shots, but he won't be shooting better, so what use is that for the team? I'd rather have even Maggette taking those shots then JO is he'll be shooting like that.

From personal experience, if you're playing with a bunch of guys who don't block many shots, as a PF/C you feel more inclined to try and block more shots. Which would inevitably increase your block stats somewhat if you were a decent defender such as JO and Brand. Same goes for rebounding, if you put Ben Wallace, KG and Duncan in a starting lineup guaranteed those three guys wouldn't hold their current rebounding numbers. Same works visa versa, good rebounder on a bad rebounding team is going to get more rebounds.

Yes, but Brand has had good frontcourt partners, he had Olowokandi all the previous years, and when he wasn't injured, he'd grab 9 rebounds and block 2 shots. This year he had Kaman and Wilcox playing center by comitee. Also the Clippers had one of the better rebounding 2 and 3's in the league, Maggette averaged 5.9 rebounds, Q-Rich averaged 6.4 rebounds, and Bobby Simmons averaged 4.7 rebounds a game in 24.6 minutes.

i like elton brand,but obviously every nba-scout will tell you that he isn´t as talented as jo...

I don't know about that one....

He's a midget for his position.

Bigger and Stronger, yet still quick, and has longer arms, and he still get's blocked less than JO even though he's 3 inches shorter

It's also hard to stop JO down low. He doesn't nearly the same repertoire of moves that Brand has, but he has the height advantage. IMO, they're pretty equal in terms of how to stop.

I don't know, actually Brand is not reppetitive, I'd say JO is more repetitive in his post moves as opposed to Brand. Brand doesn't have a go to move, but he uses a variety of moves, and has a lot in his low post arsenal.
JO was getting handled by Bosh in the post, common, that's embarassing, his post moves are not up top in terms of PF's.
He still doens't use that height advantage to an advantage, if that makes sense.

I really question if the JO had a better supporting cast than Brand did or if JO just made them better.

Injuries, like I said, Clippers were 18-20 when their starting lineup was playing, not neccesarily healthy because some players playerd injured.

Brand had Maggette, QRich, Wilcox, Kaman, Jaric next to him, while JO had Artest, Little Al, Tinsley, and Miller, since I'm counting offense here (so no Foster). Hardly anyone else can be considered a significant contributor for both teams. The Pacers lacked players who could create shots. Tinsley, although he knows neither how to finish nor how to shoot, Artest to an extent, and Harrington. Of course JO as well. All the significant contributors of the Clips have an ability to create shots for themselves. You saw what happened when the Pistons not only placed a good defender on JO, but collapsed on him. Shooters weren't the only problem. Artest's creation was limited to backing down Prince. Harrington thrives in the post and with JO already down low, the post became even more crowded, especially when Artest played in the low post as well. I don't see the same problem with the Clips. I've seen Kaman knock down the 15 footer. Mags and QRich are more than able to create their own shot.

I have nothing to back this up, but JO has a larger impact on the floor IMO. Defenses collapse onto him more than anyone outside of Shaq, TD and KG. I feel JO made the Pacers go on offense and that's not fully the case for Brand.

JO also had a real PG, not that Jaric is bad, but I and many others would prefer to see him as a backup, or playing the 2 guard position. He had someone to create shots and open oppurtunities for him, and he did get assisted a lot more on his made FG's as opposed to Brand.

Hey, what's with the knock on Tinsley, we all know he improved his shooting this year
I'll agree very much that the Clippers had players more capable of creating shots, even though the argument of some was that Brand was on a team with few or no scorers but him

I don't know, I just don't see anything in JO's favour really, except for his team not being injured near as much as Brand's.

Last edited by fgrep15 on Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

I don't know, actually Brand is not reppetitive, I'd say JO is more repetitive in his post moves as opposed to Brand. Brand doesn't have a go to move, but he uses a variety of moves, and has a lot in his low post arsenal.
JO was getting handled by Bosh in the post, common, that's embarassing, his post moves are not up top in terms of PF's.
He still doens't use that height advantage to an advantage, if that makes sense.

I said Brand is repetitive? I agreed that JO doesn't have the same variety of moves.

Injuries, like I said, Clippers were 18-20 when their starting lineup was playing, not neccesarily healthy because some players playerd injured.

I wasn't really aiming at record there.

I said Brand is repetitive? I agreed that JO doesn't have the same variety of moves.

My bad, was reading to quickly, read repertoire as repetitive

I wasn't really aiming at record there.

Impact on the team, I don't know, Brand does a lot of little things a player of his caliber wouldn't normally do, and he's a workhorse on the floor.
He's also a very good man to man defender, and I don't know, maybe if he wins he'll get more props, but the Clipper are always injured. Maggette has a history of injuries, Jaric is injury prone, Wilcox seems to always be injured, Kittles has never been the most durable guy, Livingston is fragile, and Brand since coming to the Clippers has expereiced injuries.
The year he didn't the team actually did good.

JO also had a real PG, not that Jaric is bad, but I and many others would prefer to see him as a backup, or playing the 2 guard position. He had someone to create shots and open oppurtunities for him, and he did get assisted a lot more on his made FG's as opposed to Brand.

I don't know how much a real PG really mattered on the Pacers. All they needed a PG to bring up the ball and call out the play. Throw the ball into JO or give up to Artest/Harrington. Heck, at times Anthony Johnson was doing better than Tinsley.
Although I agree Jaric needs to be on the wing.

Impact on the team, I don't know, Brand does a lot of little things a player of his caliber wouldn't normally do, and he's a workhorse on the floor.
He's also a very good man to man defender, and I don't know, maybe if he wins he'll get more props, but the Clipper are always injured. Maggette has a history of injuries, Jaric is injury prone, Wilcox seems to always be injured, Kittles has never been the most durable guy, Livingston is fragile, and Brand since coming to the Clippers has expereiced injuries.
The year he didn't the team actually did good.

You don't know eh? Don't worry, neither do I .

My bad, was reading to quickly, read repertoire as repetitive :Wink:

Not a problem...BTW love that Pietrus sig. W's were absolutely awesome with him the game last season.

Lol you should know, you've been using "Duncan>KG" as your argument for ages

I have given reason, have I not?

Instead of a bunch of yes's & no's. But I see the bigger picture now, from here on forward I shall do only this.

Go look into the other thread, I said Playoffs don't matter, I said WINNING the playoffs matter in KG & TD situation. TD can win, Garnett has yet to do that with a good team. His team didn't suck last year, he should have won. If you're planning to bring up Cassell, save it. KG is the backbone of that team, not Cassell. He should have improvised and carried the team. He cannot. Duncan can. O'Neal made the playoffs because of many factors that do not apply for Brand. O'Neal has Artest, anyone know him? Defensive player of the year? Ok. Brand has Maggette. Take your pick. O'Neal has Reggie's 4th quarter shooting ability. Brand had Richardson.

Jack, most of your posts seem pretty bias. KG got to the West Finals where Cassell went down with an injury. Did the Spurs win last year either? Nope.. Prior to last year, KG had never been on a good team. Duncan's had D-Rob when he won his Championships and other decent role-players.

Yes, I can see why my posts look biased. Perhaps I am biased.

Don't see how though, I like KG more than I like Duncan. I just KNOW Duncan is more dominant than KG.

Oh well...

Yes, I can see why my posts look biased. Perhaps I am biased.

Don't see how though, I like KG more than I like Duncan. I just KNOW Duncan is more dominant than KG.

Oh well...

A simple "No" would've done nicely

Shit, I was gonna do that. Damn it, I reverted to my old self...

Well Jae, no.

Correction: Duncan is more dominate than KG in the post. You can dominate in other areas of the game, as KG does.

No.

(TD is more dominant in winning, sorry Jae. )

I think I'd take Jermaine O'Neal. He certainly has more help than Brand, but he's also demonstrated the ability to meld with other talent and be part of a winning team. You could say that he hasn't put his team on his back and carried them alone, but Brand certainly hasn't done that either.

Brand has never really had the opportunity.

True, but as JO is more proven in that regard I would have more confidence in him being able to meld with other talent on a winning team. Regardless of whether he's had a chance or not, whether or not Brand could be part of a winning team is still unknown.

when in doubt, go with the taller guy. jermaines a safer choice, either way he's already proven he can win to at least some degree not matter how little, somethings better than nothing. If i had another star on my team i'd pick brand instead in a heartbeat because sometimes i dont like o'neals attitude.

duncan kg argument was about REALLY winning. You remember I said I don't believe in bronze medals blah blah blah, silver sucks, yadda yadda yadda. I also said when comparing two inarguable superstar players you look to team success/big 3. note, neither brand nor jo are superstars, and niether have won it all or have the big 3. I don't consider just making the playoffs vs not making them enough on its own to justify an argument, but that added with the height advantage would push me towards jo in this case.

Anyway its funny, because the way i see it, in this argument, if we were to compared it to td/kg (which we cant), td would be jo and brand would be kg (not in terms of player talent, but jo had a better team, etc, brand didnt, sob sob sob, etc.), but in this argument the people who were arguing for kg before are now arguing for jo, and vice versa using in general some of the same exact arguments used against them. Contradiction is funny....

anyway id pick jo cuz he taaaaaall, and cuz i dont see brand breaking out, and as is, he aint gonna win too much as the focal. He would definately kick jo's ass in a secondary role though.

Last edited by magius on Thu Sep 02, 2004 1:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.