David Lee - best white American player?

Michael Jackson is black, he is genetically black, but his skin is white.

That has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Hmm, this topic is not going the way I intended. It has become a race discussion. I just wanted to show how much of a stud David Lee is but I now remembered that people here don't like objective analysis.

NLSC threads do stray from their original topic from time to time.

Michael Jackson is black, he is genetically black, but his skin is white.

That has absolutely nothing to do with this.

oh come on, give him a break. he's darko. growing pains.

Hmm, this topic is not going the way I intended. It has become a race discussion. I just wanted to show how much of a stud David Lee is but I now remembered that people here don't like objective analysis.

david lee could turn into a solid role player on a contending team if he works at it long enough but right now i dont see him as being some huge impact player thats gonna lead anyteam anywhere. the first thing he needs to do is get out of new york then maybe he can become a good player, so long as he is there he will only learn how not to play the nba game. come to think of it that might help him in the long run, seems alot of players need to learn how not to play lol

I'll attempt to demystify the race/color argument here.

To me, race and color are separate in themself in the same way that you can be Jewish but not have Jewish faith. Race is dependent upon your parents. You could have an african bloodline but appear to have only a moderate skin tone at most. At the same token, I know a kid whose parents are whiter than white, and he is often mistaken as being Native American or Mexican!

That said, I don't know what some of the players are in the NBA. Is Shane Battier African American, or what? He doesn't "look" black necesarily, but he is always on the Black History Month commericals and things, so I'm not sure - is he mulatto?

I always find it interesting how people generalize. Mike Bibby is half-black, Jason Kidd is half-black. Why are they never called half-white? I think it exposes an underlying notion to view people on the darkness of their skin (not to call anyone racist, but it's simply how we see others) rather than whiteness. Likely this is the same reason that all mixed race people that I know tend to assimilate with blacks as opposed to whites. Strange huh?

All that said, we can come to the conclusion that if you don't have a little bit of african blood in you, you can't play basketball. It's all genetics, really. Centuries ago, scandinavians didn't have to run from lions and tigers, so they didn't develop athleticism like africans did. Polar bears aren't quite as fast...

Hmm, this topic is not going the way I intended. It has become a race discussion. I just wanted to show how much of a stud David Lee is but I now remembered that people here don't like objective analysis.

any time you put 'best white american player' in a thread title, you better be prepared to open a can of worms

Polar bears aren't quite as fast...

But they have excellent footwork. Try running on ice foo!

Last edited by shadowgrin on Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Mike Bibby is half-black, Jason Kidd is half-black. Why are they never called half-white?

Because they are both good at basketball.

All that said, we can come to the conclusion that if you don't have a little bit of african blood in you, you can't play basketball. It's all genetics, really. Centuries ago, scandinavians didn't have to run from lions and tigers, so they didn't develop athleticism like africans did. Polar bears aren't quite as fast...

There are no polar bears in Scandinavia, and they are actually quite fast. The largest predator in Denmark is the fox.

That's the geography lesson of today.

Well that explains why H. Mottola is such a girly slow cry baby.

Put Lee on a team that has other rebounders, and see if he gets them - no matter what.

So, you're saying that on a team with two average rebounders, David Lee would never grab a rebound? Over a third of Lee's rebounds were offensive, for one.

If the Knicks were so bad on the glass, why did they outrebound opponents grabbing 52.7% of all rebounds in a game?
Knicks on defensive end: 74% of rebounds (11th in the league)
Knicks on offensive end: 31% of rebounds (2nd in the league)

The league averages were just 72.9% and 27.1%

Why does no one question Dwight Howards rebounding numbers when Orlando was 4th and 13th in rebounding? Or KG, when the Wolves were 24th and 19th?

Lee grabbed 27.6% of rebounds on the defensive end, 13.6% on the offensive end. Howard snagged just 9.6% of offensive rebounds. KG, just 7.5%. Chandler didn't have too many more at 14.3%.

Lee was one of the best offensive players last year. As KevC pointed out, he shot 65%, including 60% from the floor and 82% from the line. He was dominant on the offensive glass, saving a bundle of possessions for the Knicks. His turnover rate wasn't amazing, but it was fairly good for a big man, falling inbetween Yao and Amare. And he was one of the better players in the league at getting to the line, the fact that he made 82% there made him that much deadlier.

Lee is a perfect "four factors" player. Shoots great, doesn't overly turn it over, dominates the offensive glass and not just gets to the line, but makes free throws. Considering his numbers weren't too far off from his rookie season, and most players tend to improve over their rookie years, there is no reason we should not take them as legit.

If you don't like Lee because he's white, plays for the Knicks, the media hasn't told you to like him, or because you don't understand what wins basketball games, that's fine. But that doesn't mean he isn't really good.

Lee was one of the best offensive players last year.

If you don't like Lee because he's white, plays for the Knicks, the media hasn't told you to like him, or because you don't understand what wins basketball games, that's fine. But that doesn't mean he isn't really good.

Not at all. I love David Lee, and I have since he was the only Knick who ever got praised for hustle. That doesn't mean I have to agree that he is a top 3 shooter and rebounder, just because his stats tell me they are.

And yes I am fucking aware that stats are a good indicator of a person's skills, but there is no way Lee is a better rebounder than Garnett, Duncan or Howard. That puts him out of the top 3 without even going past the stars.
There is no way he is a better shooter than Allen, Hamilton or even Korver - and probably not as good around the basket as Amare, Lebron or Parker.
That pretty much eliminates him from top 3 shooting (and around the basket, which is where all his points come from)
He may have been one of the most efficient scorers last year, but there is no way he was one of the best.

But I'm sure you have some stats to prove he is better than everyone else, so please... get them out. I'd love to see them.

Sigh. Maybe if you actually would debate things instead of making grandiose statements, people would discuss with you.

That doesn't mean I have to agree that he is a top 3 shooter and rebounder, just because reality tells me he is.

Edited a bit, just to prove a point.

Also, I never argued he was a top three shooter or rebounder. I stated he was a great rebounder and he has a great shooting percentage. Both of these are true statements and cannot be argued without denial of reality.

And yes I am fucking aware that stats are a good indicator of a person's skills, but there is no way Lee is a better rebounder than Garnett, Duncan or Howard.

Really? Why? How is there no way he is better at rebounding than either of them? Why did he grab a higher percentage of rebounds than any of them then? Pure luck for 58 straight games?

There is no way he is a better shooter than Allen, Hamilton or even Korver - and probably not as good around the basket as Amare, Lebron or Parker.
That pretty much eliminates him from top 3 shooting (and around the basket, which is where all his points come from)

"Shooter" and "shooting percentage" are two seperate things to most people. If I want someone to take jump shots, of course I take those first three guys above him, and if I want someone to drive to the basket and get points, I take those last three guys. And if I want people who can do it more often a game, I take most of those guys too. But if I want someone who can score more points per SHOT ATTEMPT, I take Lee. He's better than all six of those at that.

He may have been one of the most efficient scorers last year, but there is no way he was one of the best.

Wait. What? Oh, by "best" you mean most prolific.

Anyway, Lax, you don't seem to realize what you are arguing. You don't percieve Lee to be a very good player, so the facts must be wrong. You're arguing that until the facts fit your perception, they are wrong. You percieve Lee to be a hustler who can't be better than "stars" at anything, so therefore he can't be.

Lee is better than most players at a number of things, such as getting points per shot attempt, or getting a high percentage of rebounds, he's not the best at anything, so he's not better than everyone else. He is better than a lot of players at a number of things, and he's a great all around package, and he's the best white American (the original point of this thread) because of that.

I'm sorry, but I don't see why you're arguing other than to be silly. You can't fathom that Lee made more of his shot attempts than most players or that he got a higher percentage of rebounds than some stars, so you refuse to believe the fact that he did and argue that "well, he simply can't be, because I said so".

If you have some way to "prove" that Lee did not make more shots per attempt than most players and grab a higher percentage of rebounds than most players be my guest. And if you can also make a logical argument that getting more rebounds is not the result of being a better rebounder, or that making more shots is not the result of being a more efficient shooter, also be my guest.

this entire arguement is pretty damn lame, what the hell as david lee done to warrent such a conversation? make the guy the main focus of a team, do that then lets see what he does. maybe the knicks can base thier entire team around lee, i am sure it will get them far

this entire arguement is pretty damn lame, what the hell as david lee done to warrent such a conversation? make the guy the main focus of a team, do that then lets see what he does. maybe the knicks can base thier entire team around lee, i am sure it will get them far

Probably further than they are now, especially in that impressive atlantic division they play in. Though obviously David Lee is no franchise player at this point in his career.

Also, I never argued he was a top three shooter or rebounder.

if youre going to butt into an argument, at least know what the argument is about

So, Lee is a top 3 rebounder and shooter

if youre going to butt into an argument, at least know what the argument is about

I'm sorry, I didn't know this was a private conversation, about one specific thing someone said, on a public message board.

Perhaps you should keep your comments to PM's, if you don't want others to "butt in" then.

And thank you, for proving my point. Again.

Last edited by benji on Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I like how you leave out the important phrase "in the simplest sense". By that phrase I meant literally by going with true shooting percentage and rebounding rate, if you know what those stats even mean. I thought people were smart enough to understand that since I posted a whole slew of stats before saying that but I guess I was wrong.

I'm waiting for something to compile so i'll join this thread against my better judgement.

I think Lee is an excellent roleplayer but he's a major offensive liability. His high FG% is based mainly around garbage buckets or assists. His actual "shooting" accuracy, based on jump shots, is 29%...and most of those are assisted and somehow 9% still get blocked.

http://www.82games.com/0607/06NYK10A.HTM

That's not to say that kind of player who can work the paint isn't valuable, he'll be around the league a good while IMO but he'll never be more than a MLE guy.

David Lee is an awsome player.. he can definately be a 17-18ppg, 14 rebound guy... with a block and a steal and a few assists....

However.. His STATS reminded me of Danny Fortson that like.. 1/5 season with the Warriors when he went nuts avging like 16/15 (why did he not play more)?

Also what happened to Marc Jackson.. he was okay, but then he never got to play...

Anyways.. I think Lee is a double-double man.. i've seen his jumper.. he is alright.. he is athletic, great rebounder, a great starter in the league... Brad Miller in his all-star form is better than Lee... Miller avged like 18 points, 10 rebounds, 4 assists 1 blocks and a steal didn't he? He could shoot and pass and rebound effectively..

Mike Miller is also really good.. he can really shoot from any range... and he isn't a bad slasher/ball handler/passer either.. i think he is quite underrated.. put him on a playoff team.. he can go off for 20+ pretty easily and grabbing u boards and dishing out a few assists a game..

I think Hinrich is da best white american player... he is near all-star calibre... defensively hes great.. hes a good pg... Mike Miller and David Lee would be a close second...

Obviously if Kidd was considered White American.. then he is da best..

you really think lee can average 18 and 14?

I think Lee has the potential to grab 14 boards a night given more playing time, but still, it's unlikely. Ditto for 18 ppg, since most of his points, iirc, are garbage points.

he is the thing with a player like lee. he does what he does cause the defense is so focused on others. if he became the focul point i dont see him being that great.

Are ya'll forgetting about Jason Williams??? Miami's point guard??