User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 3.5597 seconds
40 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
I can picture him in all those places before the Knicks. I just don't see where any of the Knicks talk comes in. They're terrible, and Lebron wants to win. And he's good, but he's already been through building a team, why would he CHOOSE to do it again? He's seen the success that Jordan and Kobe had at this point in their careers, he wants some trophies.
They'd have 2 good, young building blocks in Rondo and Martin.
Martin's a nice player, but if he's your #2 guy, your team probably isn't that good. I agree they'd be younger, but they'd be the Heat. A #5 or 6 seed.
I like Bosh, and his numbers (except for FG%) are very good, but I'm not sure he's a max player and I suspect he'll get a max deal. Additionally, if the Lakers trade Bynum for him, it will be worst trade in Laker history- and I say that as someone who still gets choked up when the Eddie Jones deal gets mentioned.
This is one reason I brought it up, and I agree to a point. Boozer is a pretty good post-up guy and that is another reason he fits well. I would still take Bosh and try to make it work, though, if I were the Bulls.
As Spivey suggests, I think there will be some FA "team-ups" in which someone gets 2 guys as kind of a package deal. I don't know about its being Joe Johnson, but if the Bulls could get Boozer and another good player, that might work better for them than getting Bosh or even Wade.
Won't happen. As you know, I'm sure, Jim Buss has a monster mancrush on Andrew and supposedly takes credit for getting Kupchak to draft him. Plus, neither Pau nor Bosh is a true 5. The Lakers may try to move Ammo's contract for some kind of help, but I think that will be it.
I think you are severely underrating Bosh. If he isn't worth the max, then there's only perhaps 5 players in the NBA that do.
And he most definitely can play with his back to the basket, although the current Toronto offense doesn't put him down there all the time.
I haven't seen him do that much, if he can it would definitely change the equation. I might be underrating Bosh a bit, but I'm not necessarily saying that Boozer is better, just a better piece for Chicago. A large part of that is that I really like Noah and I see him as an adequate replacement for a lot of what Bosh provides. For that reason I'd want someone who can do the things Noah doesn't do (scoring from the low post) and I think Boozer might make more sense in that context. Also, given the contract Bosh is likely to command, I could see Boozer being a much better deal (though Boozer could make a fortune as well.) A Rose/Deng/Noah/Boozer group would be very good offensively and, potentially, cheap enough to allow for one more player.
As far as Bynum, given age and contract status, I wouldn't trade him for any front-court guy except Howard.
I don't think that Boozer will be that much cheaper. He'll take 5 years, and close to max deal. Considering that he's going to miss ~20 games a year, I'm not going for it.
If he was that much of a lock to get this kind of deal, I think he would have opted out last year instead of picking up the one-year player option. He won't be cheap but I think he needs to finish this season like gangbusters to be getting a max or near max deal.
Hot spots, at least, does show direction...
Oh, I know it was linked here. Good idea to link it every dozen pages or so, you know?
That most fascinating thing I saw - and I wasted a good hour or so there - is how good LeBron is at the rim. Durant, too. Both better than Dwight Howard there. (sorted by att at rim/game).
It's amazing how much Derrick Rose has improved on his mid range jumper.
Also, seeing Lee shooting that good across the board is something.
I think he can improve his shot. Dude's still 20 or 21. I think it's amazing that even with team's trying to stop him from getting to the rim, he gets there. The best comparison I heard was Brandon Roy. He can be a player like that, and that's pretty darn good.
I was having a discussion with a friend about Evans vs. Jennings and who we would rather have long term this morning. Would love to hear some thoughts from the group here before chiming in with a summary of what my friend and I were saying.
Celtics spokesman Jeff Twiss says Pierce will miss tomorrow night's home game against Philadelphia and the five-game road trip that starts Tuesday in Denver. Twiss wasn't sure if Pierce would travel with the team, but says he won't play.
___
He'll miss 2-3 weeks apparently and there are rumors--and that is all they are--that it is actually a break.
Honestly, it'd probably be better for him if it was a true break. Broken bones are easy to heal.
My preliminary ruling is in Evans' favor. I haven't watched Jennings enough to draw a firm opinion, but I think that Evans' physical gifts seriously outweigh Jennings' advantages in pace and jump shooting. Take that as a literal statement; Evans is a bear. And he's the quickest King (save Martin, perhaps), both in foot speed and lateral movement. I'm not sure how Jennings profiles as a defender, but Evans is already quite accomplished. Evans occasionally forgets about his teammates (Jennings can be accused of the same thing), and is deficient from range. That's all I can contribute without seeing a few more Bucks games...
Evans had a notable game the only time the two met head-to-head.
The market is probably going to be very different this off-season than last though. Not many teams wanted to add large contracts last off-season that would take them out of the running this off-season. There are going to be teams with a lot of cap space who do not get any of the top players. If Boozer is still out there, what is to prevent them from overspending on him so they can show the fans they got someone?
They're two completely different players. Evans isn't a point guard, it's just not going to happen. So, if you need a point guard, then Jennings is your guy. Evans is the better defensive player now, and he'll probably keep that because of his size. Both can get to the hoop, Jennings uses speed and Evans uses moves and size. I like Jennings, but I've always like point guards more. Plus, I think Jennings is a better shooter now, and will improve that as he gets older. And the speed, Jennings is lightning.
Oh, and I like Jennings' high top fade.
Edit: Especially since Evans has never really needed a jumper at lower levels of basketball.
Evans is not an overwhelming percentage shooter either at the moment, but at least he is getting to the foul line a lot more and he is a better defender than Jennings. I take Evans in a heartbeat and don't think twice about it.
I take Maynor or Lawson over either. ;)
Here's the Google docs salary page I mentioned above. Again, I prefer Sham - though this updates a skotch faster and both are very helpful.
I haven't seen Jennings much and my friend hasn't seen Evans much. I felt that I would take Evans now, but felt Jennings had a higher ceiling. In the brief snippets I've seen of Jennings he's looked like an excellent ball handler with an ability to find the open man, I don't know that I've seen him shoot much, but the stats showed me he was struggling outside of 3s. Evans meanwhile is a guy I have a tough time falling for completely just because it's kind of a mystery to me how he gets it done. I don't think he's particularly athletic or quick. I don't think he's an even average shooter, so while I know he's been very effective...I'm not sure why.
RB and I once went to a Miami/Gtown game when both were terrible. there were 6k people there. we had club seats though.
People are not happy.
Evans is *very* athletic. He just doesn't jump too high. Athleticism and leaping ability do not necessarily go hand in hand. And Evans is quite quick, especially with the ball in his hands... I've seen him out race all manner of defenders from mid court. They just can't keep up with him.
Largest NCAA crowd ever
This is the game I am waiting for.
Aren't we all? Villanova will have lost to G'town by then.
Hopefully though, Syracuse and Nova will both be in the top 5.
Villanova's remaining schedule is brutal.
@G-town
@WV
Providence
Uconn
@Pitt
USF
@Syracuse
@Cinn
WV
Even if they lose twice before the BE tourney they still should be ranked in the top 5.
IIRC, yes*. The conditions was (if I remember correctly) is that it had to be the very last selection in the draft (or some such thing - one of the last two? - whatever the rule is). Cash was also sent to LA.
It was a good deal for both teams - the Clipper got a free, useful (though not very good) player - the Hornets saved a ton on luxury payments.
* - Having said that, I prefer deals where, instead of a heavily conditional 2nd rounder, you deal the rights to a player who will never come over. Doron Sheffer was acquired for Will Perdue+$ in such a way in 2001, despite having a retired a year prior.
**
Evans/Jennings: Evans is better and likely to remain so, though that I suspect that Jennings will improve more than Evans will over the coming years. Don't really see a Roy comp - Roy could shoot a bit from day 1. Evans reminds me more of a stronger, smarter Larry Hughes, with less range but more playmaking ability.
I don't think G-town matches up well with Syracuse, Monroe can be shut down with size and 'Cuse has Onuaku and Jackson to throw at him.
He's very inconsistent. Thanks for reminding me, I have to email my friend who bet me that Beasley would be a better player then Rose when they were drafted.
That's the thing with Beasley. It's always been his head. The guy is hugely talented, but his head is just never in the game. Or, he's just not that smart of a player. It's one of the two. And it will hold him back. I'm not sure there's anyone to get past that, either.
The students actually show up, and the upper decks are usually split 50/50. In the GMAC era, they were all Syracuse fans. That was good times.
Anyway, I will be in section 400. I will be in a sherman douglas throwback. look for me.
I think it is hard to predict how point guards develop. Deron Williams and Chris Paul have had what I consider to be pretty normal aging patterns, but it seems like you have alot of guys who are not any good until they are like 25 (Nash, Billups, Gary Payton) or who peak when they are 21 or 22 and then decline or don't get any better (Bibby, Damon Stoudamire, Kenny Anderson, Steve Francis). Maybe this is common with other positions too.
Even if Evans never develops as a point guard, he will still be a very good 2. I have no idea about Jennings.
Evans is *very* athletic. He just doesn't jump too high.
I agree with this.
Evans, and it's not close. Look at Evans on this list (you many have to sort by FGA in the At Rim column). He's first in the NBA in attempts per game at the rim! And he doesn't have a jump shot yet (look at his FG% in the other categories)! And only 27.9% of those are assisted; IOW he's getting to the rim on his own. He's taking about 6.5FTA a game!
Jennings was a temporary curiousity. If he's a PG and Evans isn't, it's not showing up as a difference in their assist rates this year. Jennings is fast and small, like Ford, but not as pure of a point and may not be as good of a shooter. EDIT: (this paragraph may be going a bit too far in retrospect)
I'm not ready to put Evans in the list of the 10 ten guys to build around (discussed a couple of pages ago), but suggesting him for that was much less ridiculous than Jennings. (And I haven't even talked about defense or defensive potential yet).
I'm also worried about the GU-Cuse matchup. Maybe it's just because that last game fell apart so badly, but the point about Monroe struggling with power is true. They need to adapt to get more open jumpers and make them, and they aren't the most willing team to adapt. The USF game doesn't worry me. I'm not happy about it, of course, but USF was making circus shots for the last 8 minutes against good defense, and the Hoyas were missing open 3's (Wright, Clark) and tons of FT's. Call it a trap game, call it cold shooting- it's not good, but it hardly makes me think the team can't win. The Nova game will mean more, and I think we have a better than 50/50 shot at that one.
Well, I think his offensive game is a little raw as well. When I've watched, he does a lot of face the basket driving, whereas he worked with his back to the basket a lot more in college.
No, I'm not making that up.
Wow. They must really hate Simmons.
Clippers--the gift that keeps on giving?
And basketball -- nay, life itself? Seriously, that would be an epically bad decision. Link?
After working up a makeshift methodology, Doolittle crunches the numbers and finds... it's center for the Celtics. But, as he notes, there are also good cases to be made for center on the Lakers and small forward on the Celtics. There's obviously no science for settling such an imprecise and subjective argument, but it's still fun, if you ask me.
It is always odd to me how so many people seem to care about whether the Lakers lose (unless you happen to be a Nuggets fan).
They're either the Yankees or the Red Sox of the NBA, no? And most non-Boston/New York fans want those teams to lose. Plus a fair number of people have a sort of general dislike for LA itself.
As a Celtics fan, it never surprises me when someone wants the Celtics to lose, no matter where they're from. Like the Lakers, they've won plenty, and lots of people dislike Boston generally.
Yankees at this point, I think. The Celtics were the Yankees until about 1990, and the Lakers were more like the Dodgers. The Lakers were the NBA Red Sox until 1972. The Lakers are also like the Dallas Cowboys in some ways.
So, yeah, you're right, but I think it's at a different level now, mostly because of Kobe Bryant and the internet, presumably. Having him as the signature player on the team is a lot different than having Magic Johnson or Shaquille O'Neal.
Really cool web site. Looking at Evans' numbers, a question occurs to me. His % of assisted 3PT FG's is relatively low, according to that page. If we sort by % of assisted 3PT shots, guys with similar levels of %assisted 3PT'ers are people like Derrick Rose, Steve Nash, Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, LeBron James, Baron Davis, and Deron Williams. These are all guys who are primary ball handlers for their teams. They are guys who are creating their own shots (and are likely to be jacking up some of their shots as the shot clock is winding down). Evan's 3pt percentage is similar to Rose, Wade, and Davis; the other guys are better from 3PT range. I haven't seen Evans play much in the pros. How much of his poor distance shooting is related to the types of shots he is taking? Or is he just a bad shooter?
You seem to have a pretty decent handle on all-things Big East, so what did you think of Marquette? Pomeroy absolutely loves them -- this from his twitter:
I still can't believe that they lost to ####### DePaul. But I've ####### about that enough. They're 6-5 and are done with the 'Cuse, G'Town, WVU and 'Nova (1-4 in those games, but were in every one of them and were unlucky to not have taken one from 'Nova and the game at WVU). Furthermore, their more difficult games the rest of the way are at home:
vs USF, Pitt
@ Cincy, SJU, SH
vs L'Ville, ND
if they play to their projections they should take 4-5 of those games, and there's a definite possibility of pulling out six-of-seven. I would hope that 11-7 in the Big East gets them into the tourney. Even if they don't, just competing for a tourney spot has been a pleasant surprise -- they're making a smooth transition from James, McNeal and Matthews.
Win over Xavier is nice, but not much else out of conference. Of course, that is more out of conference than South Florida has. I think they have a shot at the tourney. they can play, they can compete.
I've been fouling the college game for years. The problem is, I only get five fouls in the college game. So when I am fouling the college game, I very often foul out early. But still, I love fouling the college game. And to those who don't fowl the college game, I say you are chickens.
Here's a barely annotated PBP for the last three-and-a-half minutes of today's game - a 2-point home win over a subpar NCSU club.
We pick up on the inbounds play with 3:32 remaining, as State has just hit a pair of free throws to cut our lead to 12.
03:29 GT 'TURNOVR' by Bell, DAndre03:28 ST STEAL by Gonzalez, Javier
03:27 ST GOOD! LAYUP by Gonzalez, Javier (fastbreak) GT 69 - ST 59 (GT by 10)
03:22 GT 'TURNOVR' by Bell, DAndre
03:22 GT FOUL by Bell, DAndre (4)
03:22 ST STEAL by Horner, Dennis
03:22 ST GOOD! FT SHOT by Horner, Dennis GT 69 - ST 60 (GT by 9)
03:22 ST GOOD! FT SHOT by Horner, Dennis GT 69 - ST 61 (GT by 8)
03:22 GT TIMEOUT 30sec
Wow. That was a really bad 10 seconds - we lost 6 points off our lead (counting from before the FT that led the setup their press.), so Hewitt called a timeout to get them to stop throwing crazy passes. Oh wait...
03:22 ST 'TURNOVR' by (TEAM)...Paul Hewitt timeouts NEVER work. The last time he called one in an important late game situation, it was mid-pass to an open 3-point shooter - our best one - who nailed it (didn't count, of course). Instead, we got a broken play bumble to the goal and flung brick ... and we lose. (I'm not anti- the coach, necessarily - he's just a very mixed bag. This is part of the big bunch of bad.)
Okay, at least defend here.
03:08 ST GOOD! LAYUP by Smith, Tracy GT 69 - ST 63 (GT by 6)ASSIST by Gonzalez, Javier
Nice play by State to get him (their best offensive player) relatively open. Ok - need to burn some clock and make smart plays.
02:53 ST FOUL by Horner, Dennis (2)02:53 GT MISSED FT SHOT by Peacock, Zachery
REBOUND (OFF) by (DEADBALL)
02:53 GT GOOD! FT SHOT by Peacock, Zachery GT 70 - ST 63 (GT by 7)
Well, Zach (one of the best 6th men in basketball, star of this game, and rare decent free throw guy for us) at least hit one. Now, please defend guys.
02:45 ST GOOD! DUNK by Smith, Tracy (fastbreak) GT 70 - ST 65 (GT by 5)ASSIST by Gonzalez, Javier
All by himself under the basket. Again, he's their best offensive player. This took them 8 seconds.
02:37 GT TIMEOUT 30secOk. Please run a decent play this time, misdirection, something. Give the ball to a tall dude - anyone but Bell (defensive specialist SF), who is ###### up lately.
02:37 GT 'TURNOVR' by Bell, DAndre02:37 ST STEAL by Horner, Dennis
I hate you sometimes Paul.
02:24 ST GOOD! LAYUP by Gonzalez, Javier GT 70 - ST 67 (GT by 3)Oh ####, we're only up 3. Please Hewitt - these are talented, if young, guys - let them fix this on their own - don't work your timeout magic...
02:16 GT TIMEOUT TEAMNo.
02:11 GT 'TURNOVR' by Bell, DAndre02:08 ST STEAL by Mays, Julius
02:07 ST GOOD! LAYUP by Mays, Julius GT 70 - ST 69 (GT by 1)
At this point, I think I taught my toddler some new words. She'd learn more...
02:06 GT FOUL by Udofia, Mfon (5)02:06 GT 'TURNOVR' by Udofia, Mfon
If you're scoring, our possessions have been: turnover, turnover, turnover, hit 1-of-2 free throws, turnover, turnover, turnover (four turnovers by the same guy). Good Lord.
Things get a little better, I guess, as we pick up some steals and hit a pair of free throws (though Bell misses his - this was not his day) - the next minute and a half is sloppy, but press-free.
01:47 ST MISSED 3 PTR by Wood, ScottREBOUND (OFF) by Gonzalez, Javier
01:34 ST TURNOVR by Gonzalez, Javier
01:34 GT STEAL by Bell, DAndre
01:34 ST FOUL by Smith, Tracy (3)
01:34 GT MISSED FT SHOT by Bell, DAndre
REBOUND (OFF) by (DEADBALL)
01:34 GT MISSED FT SHOT by Bell, DAndre
REBOUND (DEF) by Wood, Scott
01:04 ST TURNOVR by Gonzalez, Javier
01:04 GT STEAL by Shumpert, Iman
01:04 ST FOUL by Smith, Tracy (4)
01:04 GT GOOD! FT SHOT by Peacock, Zachery GT 71 - ST 69 (GT by 2)
01:04 GT GOOD! FT SHOT by Peacock, Zachery GT 72 - ST 69 (GT by 3)
00:37 ST MISSED 3 PTR by Gonzalez, Javier
REBOUND (DEF) by Favors, Derrick
00:35 ST FOUL by Horner, Dennis (3)
00:35 GT MISSED FT SHOT by Favors, Derrick
REBOUND (OFF) by (DEADBALL)
00:35 GT GOOD! FT SHOT by Favors, Derrick GT 73 - ST 69 (GT by 4)
00:31 ST TIMEOUT TEAM
00:19 ST MISSED LAYUP by Smith, Tracy
REBOUND (OFF) by (DEADBALL)
00:19 GT FOUL by Rice, Glen (1)
00:19 ST GOOD! FT SHOT by Horner, Dennis GT 73 - ST 70 (GT by 3)
00:19 ST GOOD! FT SHOT by Horner, Dennis GT 73 - ST 71 (GT by 2)
Wait - this was State's first chance to setup their press in over a minute. However shall we respond?
00:15 GT 'TURNOVR' by Lawal, Gani00:15 ST STEAL by Mays, Julius
They missed a pair of shots afterward, one at the buzzer - so we won - but UGH.
Oh, and Tyrus Thomas was suspended by the Bulls for conduct detrimental to the team again. I obviously haven't said this enough - TRADE HIM. It's clearly not going to work out, both sides win if they trade him.
As I said at the end of the post.
For all Nate Robinson fans: he packed Shaq last night in the 4th. Got him from him behind on the baseline.
Well, they're asking for the moon, which is a standard negotiating tactic. I'm sure they know they won't get much of it -- and I don't see requests like these hurting them in the court of public opinion too much.
Also, to hear Bill Simmons tell it (and not him alone, IIRC), Antoine Walker is hardly the only NBA player with a cash flow problem. There's a theory that Stern is extremely confident going into this negotiation because too many NBA players simply can't afford a prolonged work stoppage.
Next year will be interesting, though. I'd be shocked if Boozer is back, and while I'm a huge fan of Millsap, it will still be a big loss. Getting a high pick from the Knicks could help, and maybe David Lee (is he a legitimate center or more of a PF?) could be a fit if they have the cap space.
There's asking for the moon, and then there's being unreasonable. If that's where the NBA thinks they can start, then the PA has to wonder if it's even worth talking with them.
Also, to hear Bill Simmons tell it (and not him alone, IIRC), Antoine Walker is hardly the only NBA player with a cash flow problem. There's a theory that Stern is extremely confident going into this negotiation because too many NBA players simply can't afford a prolonged work stoppage.
Supposedly, a lot of owners are in trouble, too.
Yes, but a different kind of trouble, right? They're losing money on their franchises, so a work stoppage might actually be a good thing, temporarily, no? (I have no idea how the finances work in these situations.)
Here's Chris Sheridan's take:
Based on PER, these 5 guys deserve to be All-Stars and are not: These All-Stars all have a PER lower than those five non-Stars:
PER does not, by all accounts, do much to incorporate defense (at least not in its featured on ESPN form) and that top 5 list is made up of, for the most part, pretty bad defenders. (David Lee, for one.) If we were doing something like, PER - defensive PER - or a measure incorporate adjusted +/- - we'd get pretty different lists.
Josh Smith, offhand, is the biggest omission (caveat: I'm a Hawks fan. Unlike the other four on that list (depending on how you assess Landry, I guess), Smith is the only plus defender and has been putting up huge +/- figures on the season. Alas (for him), it's the West that needs bodies now.
I too (as I think I said earlier) support Gasol over Kaman.
Unrelated: basketballvalue.com appears to be broken.
Hey look, he's almost up to 40% shooting! (Fart!)
Der K 2, I totally agree about Smith - I was shocked to see that Horford was the second Hawk taken. I guess it's just the positions available, but he's easily the best guy in that group of non-All-Star's Rich posted.
Gasol should also be in over Kaman. It's not totally egregious, and I don't mind rewarding Kaman for a fine season, especially at the expense of that swarthy bastard, but even I can see Gasol was clearly the right choice there.
Derrick Rose...has had a great month, but don't you need to have more than a great month to make the All-Star team? I mean, I'm fine with him being there, but I'd take Josh Smith over him as well. Can't Joe Johnson play the point in a pinch anyway? (Especially in an All-Star game).
I'd really hate to see an NHL/lose a whole season situation in the NBA, but I'm increasngly afraid that that's where we're heading. I would not mind seeing it happen to the NFL, however.
He only had one bad month this year - November, when he was getting over his ankle injury - and he's been great since then. One good point that Bill Simmons always made is that the All Star games should definitely have true PGs - it makes the game more entertaining, and I agree, so I'd say having Joe Johnson play the point in a pinch is less than ideal, from an entertainment standpoint. With the total fan ###### of electing Iverson, that would mean Rondo is the only PG on the team, and quite frankly that's borderline unexceptable.
I think it's good for the league to have Rose in the All-Star game, for a number of reasons. I hate the discussion about players having to be on winning teams to make the team, but there's some truth in the argument about too many players from one team. I think Smith should have made it over Horford, and obviously Iverson.
Quite frankly, I don't care too much. But am defensive of Rose making the team, for obvious reasons.
We've been talking about this almost the whole page, if you view the All-Star game as a reward for the first half, then Rose is debatable. Even though he's been awesome, and his past month and a half make up for the poor month to start, easily. But, if you view the All-Star game as the best players playing the best, then Rose easily makes it.
Josh Smith should be in, but he's paying the penalty for his showboat attempt during last season's playoffs.
I totally agree with this. There's no reason to even talk to the owners if that's where they think the deal should be. They can call the players back when they want to seriously discuss a deal.
* the East is largely devoid of good points - Derrick's pretty clearly the #2 guy among healthy bodies at the spot.
* it is probably in the league's best interest for him to go to the game, even beyond gameplay considerations, which are sufficient in and of themselves...
***
The players better have a plan B for next year.
Yeah, I agree. I mean, this isn't a "Shea Hillenbrand had a hot month and made the All-Star team" scenario - Rose will easily be a top 2-3 point guard in the East for the next several years, barring injury or every good PG in the West being traded to the East, and clearly I'd expect him to play more like those last two months than like November going forward.
Whatever - at the end of the day, we can all at least agree that Iverson, for better or worse, is the one in the way. Rose, Horford, and Smith are all deserving All-Star selections, even if we'd nitpick over which two of those three we'd personally go with.
That's all you need.
I love it, and want more. This is the streak or attitude I said he was lacking earlier in this thread. He should be finishing stronger because he can, and it'll help him get to the line more (and also, give him more open looks).
Personally, I don't view Derrick Rose as an All-Star calibre player yet - he will be, I think, but he's not a particularly good defender, nor that efficient on offense (doesn't contribute from deep, or get to the line much), nor has he been anything special as a playmaker. That said:
* the East is largely devoid of good points - Derrick's pretty clearly the #2 guy among healthy bodies at the spot.
* it is probably in the league's best interest for him to go to the game, even beyond gameplay considerations, which are sufficient in and of themselves...
Agreed, on the defense. Disagreeing on his offensive efficiency, to a point (he does need to get to the line more, and his mid-range to long-range jumper is actually really good, it's only his 3pt shooting that is lacking). Also, he is a good playmaker that is very limited due to his team's offense and players (I don't think this fully absolves him of this charge, but he is constantly hurt on the break and in their half-court "offense" that I feel it's unfair to judge him too harshly on this point; I reckon that had D'Antoni been his coach these two years, he'd be close to double digits in assists right now).
Whatever - at the end of the day, we can all at least agree that Iverson, for better or worse, is the one in the way. Rose, Horford, and Smith are all deserving All-Star selections, even if we'd nitpick over which two of those three we'd personally go with.
I can agree with this.
That's all you need.
Heh.
* Granted, these shots are easy to undervalue if you're just looking at the stats - taking them opens up the floor for others but... you know.
I think he's, minimally, a solid playmaker - and I watch him waaaaaaaay less than you - just not great, not "All-Star level" in this regard. I don't know how much of this is VDN v. DR.
All this said, Rose wasn't one of the five or six best points in the game last year and I don't think he is now (the West is loaded, after all). Yeah, he's really interesting, but let's not count our chickens yet.
Freshmen. And, aren't they not great shooters? It's hard to survive in college ball without a few great three shooters. Unless you have amazingly awesome athletes like Calipari's teams. Texas doesn't have those guys.
Moses, I wanted to thank your boys for the last week. Now, everyone's all bunched together again.
Also, Stern is on Simmons' podcast today. Always good.
Can you briefly summarize?
The next day, Stern is on Mike and Mike. They play the clip of Vitale for Stern. Stern sighs and then says, "How much time do I have?" You know he's bringing it now. This is one of those moments that makes Stern who he is. He then lays out how the rule is an NBA only rule that you have to be one year out of high school and that's it. He continues that the NCAA is not involved at all, it's 100% bargained between the NBA and the NBAPA, and that Vitale should know that (and he did say, "Dick should know that.") He then goes on and says if kids aren't going to school, that's not his fault or the NBA's fault, it's the universities' faults. They need to do the enforcement and they need to change their rules and not worry about the NBA rules. You could tell that he was pissed that he had to address it.
Later in the show, Bilas was on, and he supported Stern. Then, Bilas went on a rant about the NCAA - because Bilas hates the hypocrisy of it. Pretty awesome.
It just hammered the point home that Vitale is a fossil that is out of touch. Not only does he ruin games, but he has zero concept of the business behind the sport.
This is going to be overstatement, but screw it. I was talking with a buddy today and we both agreed that - aside from the NCAA - one would be hardpressed to find a person more responsible for the current diminished state of college basketball than Vitale. He has facilitated this garbage by being a showman and fawning over cheaters and cheating programs. If he wants to help the situation, call out the cheaters. Hammer Calipari for ####### over 2 prior programs. Hammer Wall (and other "diaper dandies") for not attending school. But, he won't. He'll take potshots at the NBA instead, when it is not the problem. Dickie V and his inane commentary and utter lack of knowledge about basketball are parts of the problem.
Dick Vitale has become a circus act and an artifact of the conversion of ESPN from a quality network to what the NY tabloid guys rightly call the "Bristol Clown Factory." Like everyone else on ESPN, he cherishes his role as "personality" and exalts it above anything to do with sports. I recently saw an ABC game from 1990 where Vitale worked with Keith Jackson and Vitale didn't sound anything like the Vitale of today; the persona of today is entirely an act.
A couple years ago, tiring of ESPN, I took to turning on the XM radio feed of college games with the ESPN picture. It rammed home just how shockingly little of an ESPN telecast is devoted to the game the network is currently broadcasting. Vitale started it with freelancing his opinions on the five best freshman, the best coaches, and on an on, and now they all do it. Vitale long ago lost any notion of his own honest and deliberate opinion; everything he says not is in service of ESPN and his clownish persona. They aren't worth the air he expends bloviating.
To start the new decade, I turned my sports watching into an ESPN-free zone, literally blocking all ESPN-related channels on my cable system. I now go to the game(s) I want, all broadcast on networks dedicated to broadcasting the game.(**) I've already regained at least 15 IQ points.
(**) Any fan of HD sports who has a quality HDTV understands just how piss poor ESPN's HD quality is.
My Boilers have been on ESPN a good amount this year, so I've actually watched their presentations. Yes, their HD sucks. NBC blows everyone out of the water, but Fox and Big Ten aren't far behind. Yeah, you heard me, Big Ten's HD is really pretty. But, since Purdue's in the midwest, Vitale stays away and we get Lavin/Knight and Musberger most games. I think they do a pretty good job. They wander occasionally, but no more than anyone else. They usually keep the fawning of the coaches and players to ones in the game unless a highlight was shown. Knight is actually very informative to listen to, if only Musberger would tone down his fawning over Knight. Bilas is the best, but he rarely goes out and does games.
I can't wait until I have a job that will allow me to afford the sports packages, because I have wanted to do the same for years.
Unblock ESPN Classic at least for Home Run Derby. It'a a hoot -- where else can you see a young Willie Mays, Hank Aaron and Frank Robinson?
This probably is and isn't ESPN's fault, but why don't college hoop broadcasts cut to the PA guy introducing the starting lineups anymore? For obvious reasons (it's cool, it's informative -- height, class, hometown), that used to be a staple of college broadcasts and even pro broadcasts (NBC cut to Ray Clay, the Bulls PA guy, throughout the Jordan era).
The reasons must boil down to (1) more time for another commerical; and (2) in our "multimedia" age, the networks must think fans already know the player info. (1) is greedy, but understandable; (2) is stupid -- even if fans do already know the information, hearing the PA guy announce it is still cool.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main