share

Greg Monroe and Okafor DOB

r377
r377's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/28/2010
Posts: 2599
Points: 7637
Offline
Greg Monroe and Okafor DOB

If Greg Monroe and Okafor were born 25 years ago, how do you think their pro career's would of turned out ?


r377
r377's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/28/2010
Posts: 2599
Points: 7637
Offline
edit. Sorry, if they had

edit.

Sorry, if they had played 25 years earlier

Bankroll PJ
Bankroll PJ's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/10/2015
Posts: 264
Points: 1043
Offline
They would probably both be

They would probably both be starting centers, but they would still have their struggles. Especially, since the early 90's had many great and well rounded centers such as Alonzo Mourning, Dikembe Mutumbo, Patrick Ewing, Shaq, David Robinson, and Hakeem Olajuwon.

holefillers1
holefillers1's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/12/2015
Posts: 750
Points: 1039
Offline
Good call. All those guys

Good call. All those guys where great defensive players. Most of them great two way players

binet
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2013
Posts: 401
Points: 58
Offline
Greg Monroe and Okafor are

Greg Monroe and Okafor are very different stories.

Monroe is performing very well this year. Yes, it's off-the-bench but his impact is very good and clearly better than starter John Henson, proven by his stats and advanced stats. His 104 DRtg is tied for first with Giannis (and it's not like they play together this much and he is helped by the greak since he comes off the bench), and his defensive box plus minus is third (behind Giannis and Henson at 1.8). Overall he is the second best player of this team in BPM, and also the second best in PER. His +/- impact on this bucks team is also stellar.

Basically, saying Monroe does not have a starter level or role or is not good in today's NBA is just wrong. He is among the Bucks 3 best players this year and it's proven by every metric. He just has a bad reputation because they were ready to deal him via trade. He would have started in the 90s sure, but he is a legit starter today also.

Okafor is very different. Apart from a decent PER, he is just trash and it's obvious when you see him play. The issue with him is not only his defense though,. Despite his 1v1 skill offensively, he puts up absolute trash offensive numbers. He is even worse offensively than defensively. He would have been bad in the 90s also. Effort is key today and was key back then. BBall IQ is key today and was key back then. He is not a starter in today's NBA and probably would have never been. He is still young and can improve, but he is miles away.

Mr. 19134
Mr. 19134's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/20/2010
Posts: 3615
Points: 3627
Offline
How is Okafor trash when he

How is Okafor trash when he put up historic rookie numbers off mostly unassisted buckets while being continually doubled and even tripled team.

He was one of a very few rookies in the last 25 years to shoot higher thend 50% from the floor and have a usage rate over 25%

binet
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2013
Posts: 401
Points: 58
Offline
Watch him play.Watch sixers

Watch him play.

Watch sixers offense with or without him.

If you can't see it with your eyes, even if it's so obvious to me, there are statistics called OBPM and ORtg than can show you this with numbers. Okafor can score 1v1 in the low post but he is a terrible offensive player. Philadelphia's offense is way worse with him than with any other big. Being able to shoot at a high volume and get some buckets does not make you a good offensive player. You need to play with your team, you need to help your team. Okafor is even more a liability on offense than defense.

Jr. ROXAS
Jr. ROXAS's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/26/2012
Posts: 868
Points: 2916
Offline
"Okafor can score 1v1 in the

"Okafor can score 1v1 in the low post but he is a terrible offensive player."

If that isn't an example of a contradiction, I don't know what is lol.

We know Jah's playing style does not fit today's game, but that does not make him a bad offensive player. That's the point of the post. If he played 25 years ago where teams did not have a lick of spacing and therefore would not have an advantage vs post oriented teams, he would fare really well.

You have to be blind not to acknowledge that Okafor is not a good offensive player. If not, then I definitely do not respect your basketball knowledge.

binet
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2013
Posts: 401
Points: 58
Offline
So don't respect me. Offense

So don't respect me. Offense is played 5 on 5. Whether it's today or back in the days, a player that is good 1 v 1 is not necessarily good 5 v 5. And that's true even at the lowest levels of BBall at a local playground etc. It helps but it's not enough. Okafor is a bad offensive player 5 on 5 (at the nba level) and that is obvious when you watch the sixers, the ball movement and the player movement, one of sixers strengths, when he is on the floor suddenly becomes atrociously bad. He is just clogging up the paint very slowly, is not able to put himself in good enough positions for himself most of the time and just is not able to react fast enough to his teammates cuts our double teams. Sixers play way better without him and with centers that just moves more like Rishaun Holmes.

1 v 1 skills only help you on iso which is one of the least efficient way to play basketball. It's known as the last resort offensive scheme when you can't do anything else better or players are too tired too think. You can be terrible even with an above average 1 v1 ability, and you should have seen this at any level of play. Basketball is a team sport after all.

Jr. ROXAS
Jr. ROXAS's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/26/2012
Posts: 868
Points: 2916
Offline
And yet we go back to the

And yet we go back to the point of the post. 25 years ago, when isolation was HEAVY and the ball, player movement and spacing you see now was non-existent, Okafor would have definitely been a good player, as you have acknowledged. Yea, 1v1 skill only helps you in isolations, but wasn't that all the offense back then?

Obviously ball-movement and player movement is the best offese right now, that's why I love watching the Heat or the Warriors. But what separates a "team player" like say, Wes Matthews, from Kawhi Leonard? Yup, it's the ABILITY TO CREATE FOR HIMSELF.

Okafor has elite post skills, and that alone should earn him a distinction as a "good offensive player". Does that mean he helps the team with this specific skill? Probably not, because great post offense is just not as important and utilized as it was 25 years ago.

And since your only distinction of being a good offensive player is that he sets good screens and moves well without the ball, I can then conclude that Tarik Black and Tyson Chandler are elite offensive players. Hmm, doesn't sound right, right?

Jr. ROXAS
Jr. ROXAS's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/26/2012
Posts: 868
Points: 2916
Offline
And yet we go back to the

And yet we go back to the point of the post. 25 years ago, when isolation was HEAVY and the ball, player movement and spacing you see now was non-existent, Okafor would have definitely been a good player, as you have acknowledged. Yea, 1v1 skill only helps you in isolations, but wasn't that all the offense back then?

Obviously ball-movement and player movement is the best offese right now, that's why I love watching the Heat or the Warriors. But what separates a "team player" like say, Wes Matthews, from Kawhi Leonard? Yup, it's the ABILITY TO CREATE FOR HIMSELF.

Okafor has elite post skills, and that alone should earn him a distinction as a "good offensive player". Does that mean he helps the team with this specific skill? Probably not, because great post offense is just not as important and utilized as it was 25 years ago.

And since your only distinction of being a good offensive player is that he sets good screens and moves well without the ball, I can then conclude that Tarik Black and Tyson Chandler are elite offensive players. Hmm, doesn't sound right, right?

Jr. ROXAS
Jr. ROXAS's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/26/2012
Posts: 868
Points: 2916
Offline
And yet we go back to the

And yet we go back to the point of the post. 25 years ago, when isolation was HEAVY and the ball, player movement and spacing you see now was non-existent, Okafor would have definitely been a good player, as you have acknowledged. Yea, 1v1 skill only helps you in isolations, but wasn't that all the offense back then?

Obviously ball-movement and player movement is the best offese right now, that's why I love watching the Heat or the Warriors. But what separates a "team player" like say, Wes Matthews, from Kawhi Leonard? Yup, it's the ABILITY TO CREATE FOR HIMSELF.

Okafor has elite post skills, and that alone should earn him a distinction as a "good offensive player". Does that mean he helps the team with this specific skill? Probably not, because great post offense is just not as important and utilized as it was 25 years ago.

And since your only distinction of being a good offensive player is that he sets good screens and moves well without the ball, I can then conclude that Tarik Black and Tyson Chandler are elite offensive players. Hmm, doesn't sound right, right?

Hitster
Hitster's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/17/2010
Posts: 5690
Points: 6402
Offline
Thinking of this, imagine if

Thinking of this, imagine if you put a young Shaq, Hakeem etc into today's NBA, they would be totally dominant IMO.

Mr. 19134
Mr. 19134's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/20/2010
Posts: 3615
Points: 3627
Offline
Okafor avgs more points and

Okafor avgs more points and blocks as a rookie then Monroe ever avg in his 7 year nba career. And Okafor did so efficiently shooting 51% going 1 on 3 with defenses game planning to only take him out and they still couldn't stop him.

Okafor and Monroe are clearly different tier prospects. Jah is stronger, more mobile, better footwork and has a deal breaking 6 inch wingspan difference.

In the 90s prior to zone with illegal defenses Jah Would Of dominated.

binet
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2013
Posts: 401
Points: 58
Offline
So Tyreke Evans is a better

So Tyreke Evans is a better player than Stephen Curry because he averaged more points as a rookie?

I hope for the sixers there are some GMs that are as high as you are on Okafor right now. I doubt it though. Okafor is only a "what if?" and potential upside right now, and that potential is looking very unlikely. Being talented in the low post yet is irrelevant when you are unable to move well, screen well, pass well, react well to double teams etc... Basketball is a 5 on 5 game. Until Jahlil is able to play something else than 1 on 1 down low, he does not contribute at all. I don't care the 17 and 7.

iguapops420
iguapops420's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 2358
Points: 1769
Offline
Mr.19134 Jahlil Okafor has a

Mr.19134

Jahlil Okafor has a 7'5" wingspan.

Greg No roe has 7'2 1/4" wingspan. Not quite the deal breaking 6" you claim. And I'm not sold on him being more mobile than Monroe either. Greg is also a MUCH better passer than Jah. Literally the only thing I would give Jah the edge in is post skills as a scorer. Dude has that bigger wingspan but is in no way the same level of rebounder that Monroe is.

Hitster
Hitster's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/17/2010
Posts: 5690
Points: 6402
Offline
That is the frustrating thing

That is the frustrating thing about Okafor, he has a huge wingspan, weighs around 280lbs so has the size to hold his own in the paint against the vast majority of NBA frontcourters. He seems to have a decent basketball IQ and spent a year under Coach K before playing under Brett Brown who knows a load about defence having been part of the Spurs factory for over a decade. But he still seems a total liability on defence and even the odd times Embeast has been sound and used for his 28mpg as a defensive anchor the Oak is still a huge liability.

JoeWolf1
JoeWolf1's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/28/2009
Posts: 8596
Points: 18010
Online
I think what people often

I think what people often miss is that teams are built around their best players. There were a lot of top notch 5's in the NBA during the 80's and 90's, but the teams that didn't have them built their teams around their best players.

Since 25 years ago was dropped, lets look at 1991-1992

Yeah, the Rockets, Spurs, Knicks, and Cavs were built around their great big men, but look at what the teams that didn't have them were doing.

The 91-92 Warriors had Mullen, Hardaway, and Richmond. They dropped 119 points per game and started 6'9'' Tyrone Hill at the 5...

The Team that won the Western conference, the Blazers built around Clyde Drexler and Terry Porter. They started Kevin Duckworth and won 57 games.

The Bulls won the title that year, building around Jordan and Pippen on the wings. They started Bill Cartwright.

Stockton and Malone's Jazz started a 35 year old Mark Eaton and won 55 games.

Sure, the style of the game was different, and there were more big/skilled centers, but the top teams in the league averaged between 108-119 points per game. This wasn't a really slow it down time period where every team needed a traditional big...Teams did what they've always done, built around their best players.

RSS: Syndicate content