Cousins would not let IT shake CP3's hand post game
- Thread starter GoSACtown
- Start date
K
Fantastic article regarding the siutation I will cut and paste the nice bits
http://cowbellkingdom.com/2013/11/2...cus-cousins-makes-a-stand-against-chris-paul/
http://cowbellkingdom.com/2013/11/2...cus-cousins-makes-a-stand-against-chris-paul/
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's a much harsher take. Astute fans will notice the example of bad D from cousins is against the wolves from last season, used as proof of his bad D this season. Uh huh.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1864157-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-demarcus-cousins
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1864157-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-demarcus-cousins
Last edited:
This article made what hair I have left try to stand on end. It is everything I dislike about statistics and their use. The author wanted to make a point and found a stat that "proved" his point instead of gathering all the statistics and trying to figure out what they show. This may be the difference between the way a fan uses stats and the way a scientist may use stats.
Let's throw out a few other ways of looking at these stats. The stats don't show the impact of IT on the team. They conclude that the team functions better when Cousins is off the floor while I might say that the bench out plays other teams' benches. This is no surprise. The way Malone is using the players is as two units until the fourth quarter. That's a general rule. Cuz is on the unit that man for man matches up worse against the opponents than IT's group. Did anyone need stats to come up with that conclusion?
Furthermore, the stats proved what we all know. Cuz is not a defender and the FO should have provided more defensive help for the team yet they got Landry. We don't know what Landry's impact on the stats might be but there are many ways (well, two) ways I will look at it. Landry will make the bench scoring even more efficient. The author of this piece will say that this makes Cousins look even worse and not the alternative that we have a decent bench and our starters suck. In short, the stats used compared our starters numbers playing against starters against a vastly improved bench playing against bench players. If we had IT as a starter, the numbers would look a lot different. Get it? These stats are as much a comment on IT's impact as Cousins' impact.
If we had a defensive big, Cousins major problem, defense, would have been less of a problem and maybe not even an issue although we all want the perfect player. I see nothing earth shattering about saying Cousins is not the best defender in the world. He's trying harder but that doesn't suit the point trying to be made.
Why is he picking on Cuz? This is the biggest question. Did Cuz pee in his Cheerios? Cuz has a big target on his back and that incident with CP3 and IT might have been twisted many ways. Well, it HAS been twisted many ways and this is the "let's make Cuz look like a weenie" way. The Big Aristotle would spin this action as simply being a PR move to increase fan attendance every time the Kings and Clippers play and therefor Cuz had a higher motivation and it was not meant in any other way. Shaq said that about his comments about the Queens, er, Kings. I doubt if Cuz meant anything like this by his actions other than to make sure both IT and CP3 understood that one player was fed up with CP3's play. This was not an issue of sportsmanship between players but one player's reaction to another trying to make a farce of the game. I can go just as far as any writer. See??
The target may never come off Cousins' back just as we like to take pot shots at most of the other great players (Kobe for example) in the game. It's what fans do. Cuz has made huge strides this year. To take one stat to try to make it appear differently is a cheap shot. Pick on Cuz for being great and that he is "pickable." That's all we are seeing. Cuz is fun to pick on and picking on him in this pseudo-scientific way may draw more people to read this guy's articles. For every article like this, we will see articles praising the change in Cousins' game AND leadership.
Bravo, Cuz. I don't need to go to the stat book to praise him.
Let's throw out a few other ways of looking at these stats. The stats don't show the impact of IT on the team. They conclude that the team functions better when Cousins is off the floor while I might say that the bench out plays other teams' benches. This is no surprise. The way Malone is using the players is as two units until the fourth quarter. That's a general rule. Cuz is on the unit that man for man matches up worse against the opponents than IT's group. Did anyone need stats to come up with that conclusion?
Furthermore, the stats proved what we all know. Cuz is not a defender and the FO should have provided more defensive help for the team yet they got Landry. We don't know what Landry's impact on the stats might be but there are many ways (well, two) ways I will look at it. Landry will make the bench scoring even more efficient. The author of this piece will say that this makes Cousins look even worse and not the alternative that we have a decent bench and our starters suck. In short, the stats used compared our starters numbers playing against starters against a vastly improved bench playing against bench players. If we had IT as a starter, the numbers would look a lot different. Get it? These stats are as much a comment on IT's impact as Cousins' impact.
If we had a defensive big, Cousins major problem, defense, would have been less of a problem and maybe not even an issue although we all want the perfect player. I see nothing earth shattering about saying Cousins is not the best defender in the world. He's trying harder but that doesn't suit the point trying to be made.
Why is he picking on Cuz? This is the biggest question. Did Cuz pee in his Cheerios? Cuz has a big target on his back and that incident with CP3 and IT might have been twisted many ways. Well, it HAS been twisted many ways and this is the "let's make Cuz look like a weenie" way. The Big Aristotle would spin this action as simply being a PR move to increase fan attendance every time the Kings and Clippers play and therefor Cuz had a higher motivation and it was not meant in any other way. Shaq said that about his comments about the Queens, er, Kings. I doubt if Cuz meant anything like this by his actions other than to make sure both IT and CP3 understood that one player was fed up with CP3's play. This was not an issue of sportsmanship between players but one player's reaction to another trying to make a farce of the game. I can go just as far as any writer. See??
The target may never come off Cousins' back just as we like to take pot shots at most of the other great players (Kobe for example) in the game. It's what fans do. Cuz has made huge strides this year. To take one stat to try to make it appear differently is a cheap shot. Pick on Cuz for being great and that he is "pickable." That's all we are seeing. Cuz is fun to pick on and picking on him in this pseudo-scientific way may draw more people to read this guy's articles. For every article like this, we will see articles praising the change in Cousins' game AND leadership.
Bravo, Cuz. I don't need to go to the stat book to praise him.
Last edited:
well, there has already been a few pages of discussion at kf.com, as well as a few outsider articles, on the simple act of demarcus cousins herding isaiah thomas away from a handshake with chris paul at the end of a close game. it was a small gesture with big implications. the kings haven't been worthy of "rivalry" status in many years. it's hard to lay claim to such a thing when you appear in the league's basement season after season. however, if the kings should rise up the standings in the coming seasons, if they should manage to become a worthy threat to the clippers, then "rivalry" status is automatically built into their regular season clashes...
demarcus cousins has almost single-handedly revived the nba's norcal/socal rivalry by buoying tensions between the kings and the clippers. DMC is a smart young man; he knows how to play the part of the showman when he wants to, and, what's more, it's not just for show; he means it, and he knows what it means to the fans. the fact that the nba has gone soft as a whole shouldn't distract from the reality that fans still get excited about physicality, trash talking, heated competition, the many ingredients that help to make a sports rivalry what it is...
brief as it was, the kings/lakers rivalry of the early-00's was still one for the ages. it set the entire league on fire and helped to put an up-and-coming small market team on the map. imagine a sacramento kings team in a couple of seasons with a winning record and a brand new arena earning a wider audience on national tv against a clippers team with a reputation for dirty play. what is to be gained? much, i say...
demarcus cousins has almost single-handedly revived the nba's norcal/socal rivalry by buoying tensions between the kings and the clippers. DMC is a smart young man; he knows how to play the part of the showman when he wants to, and, what's more, it's not just for show; he means it, and he knows what it means to the fans. the fact that the nba has gone soft as a whole shouldn't distract from the reality that fans still get excited about physicality, trash talking, heated competition, the many ingredients that help to make a sports rivalry what it is...
brief as it was, the kings/lakers rivalry of the early-00's was still one for the ages. it set the entire league on fire and helped to put an up-and-coming small market team on the map. imagine a sacramento kings team in a couple of seasons with a winning record and a brand new arena earning a wider audience on national tv against a clippers team with a reputation for dirty play. what is to be gained? much, i say...
Maybe to frustrated fans of a 1-14 team who wish they had a player with half Cuz's talent, but no, this does nothing to make him look like an immature, sore loser. If you know anything about the history of the game, many players have had the same approach previously. In the modern buddy-buddy era it's more rare, but has nothing to do with being immature or a sore loser.
Being pissed you lost and not wanting to give dap to the guys who just beat you doesn't make you a sore loser. It means you hate losing, and as our franchise player I prefer that mentality. Karl Malone wasn't out there to make friends and give out hugs after a loss, neither is Cuz. Malone/Stockton would actually start cheap-shotting opponents when things started going against them. Does that make them immature, sore losers? No, they just hated to lose and considered you their enemy once you stepped between the lines. It wasn't about making friends and solidifying dinner dates afterwards. I'd expect a Utah fan to understand that.
Being pissed you lost and not wanting to give dap to the guys who just beat you doesn't make you a sore loser. It means you hate losing, and as our franchise player I prefer that mentality. Karl Malone wasn't out there to make friends and give out hugs after a loss, neither is Cuz. Malone/Stockton would actually start cheap-shotting opponents when things started going against them. Does that make them immature, sore losers? No, they just hated to lose and considered you their enemy once you stepped between the lines. It wasn't about making friends and solidifying dinner dates afterwards. I'd expect a Utah fan to understand that.
I was making a flippant point. You basically stated that a scientist's treatment of the data-hypothesis relationship is somehow more rigorous and open-minded than that of the general public. As a scientist myself, I have seen enough instances, both amongst my colleagues and in the literature (myself not excluded), that run counter to that view. That's all I'm saying.
I didn't feel I needed to quote your entire post (which I basically agreed with) in order to make a point about how human nature afflicts even the best of us.
I didn't feel I needed to quote your entire post (which I basically agreed with) in order to make a point about how human nature afflicts even the best of us.
Everywhere Pat Riley has gone, the players have been fined by the team if they help an opponent off the floor. I enjoy that little bit of chippiness. I like seeing it from Cousins. You can be friends with these guys on Olympic teams an in the off-season. I don't want you being friendly when you're going to see them two more times this year.
I don't consider a person to be using a scientific method if he/she has a point they are trying to prove and sets up a study to do so. I remember a discussion with a professor who had set up this huge study to determine if lowering fat content in meals helped prevent heart attacks. Every student thought that was self evident but when he was asked directly what he thought, he simply said "I don't know." I've been a scientist for 50 years so I suspect I haven't run into the people you know OR more likely, I have redefined them in my own mind if they strayed from the path. I know there are people who call themselves scientists but really aren't. Sometimes I get too serious.
Another tidbit from Grantland about Paul/Cousins:
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-t...rew-bogut-and-chris-paul-hates-boogie-cousins
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-t...rew-bogut-and-chris-paul-hates-boogie-cousins
only one team can win any given game. a rivalry is made up of so much more than that. ask magic and larry. hell, did you watch the halftime segment during last night's game? shaq spelled it out: the lakers team he was a part of did everything they could to try and shake the kings up on and off the court, because they knew it would be difficult to win in sacramento in the playoffs. every edge makes a difference in a rivalry. every gesture has greater significance. whiteboard material matters. pat riley knows it better than most, and he's certainly a valid authority on nba rivalry. demarcus cousins and the kings aren't at that level yet, but they're helping to sew the seeds of a great rivalry if they do become a winner in the next couple of seasons...