Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, July 02, 2012

OT: NBA basketball July Thread 2012

I estimate that only 10-12 Primates care about the NBA, but with our own thread, we won’t detract from what the site is really about: Jim Furtado trolling his own site when he’s bored.

Tripon Posted: July 02, 2012 at 04:21 PM | 2487 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: basketball

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.

Page 10 of 25 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 >  Last ›
   901. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:40 AM (#4181640)
The Worldwide Leader says Lakers are after Elton Brand, Antawn Jamison, and .... Jermaine O'Neal.

My source also tells me they have their eyes on Alton Lister, Kevin Willis, and Swen Nater.
   902. JL Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:46 AM (#4181645)
Is there a reason not to use the amnesty? Because I think the Pistons haven't used it yet, and they still have Villanueva at like 2 more yrs for $15.

It seems to me at some point teams that have not used the amnesty need to consider it as a building asset. The Pistons, for example, can use it take on another team's salary-dump in exchange for draft picks. My recollection is that the amnesty can only be used for contracts signed prior to the new agreement. So if they don't use it now, they essentially will lose it.
   903. JJ1986 Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:51 AM (#4181649)
It seems to me at some point teams that have not used the amnesty need to consider it as a building asset. The Pistons, for example, can use it take on another team's salary-dump in exchange for draft picks.


But they would have to pay the actual cash on both the amnestied contract and the dumped contract. If the Pistons take on Andris Biedrins or Hedo Turkoglu or some other awful contract, they're adding that much money to their payroll.
   904. Spivey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:52 AM (#4181650)
Re Dream Team v. the New Team: these comparisons are fun, but isn't it a bit unfair to the new guys to make the comparison rest on an older way of playing? That is, there's a lot of "who's going to guard the paint, who's gonna bang with Ewing, Robinson, etc?", but the reason there are so few guys now capable of doing that is the game is so different. It may be just as fair to ask, "How do you keep those guys on the floor against Durant, LBJ, Wade, etc.?" Was Brad Sellers still in the league?

I think this is true for some of the guys. Potentially Ewing too. But Robinson and Malone were in their prime and were ultra athletic. I think they could have found a way to match up fine. I give the edge to the 92 team, but that's assuming Magic wasn't playing too much against quick lineups and Bird wasn't playing at all. Jordan, Pippen, Drexler, etc. - these guys would be fine matching up. There would be guys on the 92 team though that would have been serious defensive liabilities, especially if there was no hand checking.

I'd also take the Howard of the last few years over Ewing in 92 (I think).
   905. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:57 AM (#4181657)
The Lakers have zero shot at Brand and little better at Jamison. O'Neal is realistic, but undesirable.

Howard > Ewing: Most def.

902: Only on contracts signed before the new agreement -and- the player had to have been on that team at the time. So, you can't trade for someone else's bad contract and amnesty it.
   906. robinred Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:57 AM (#4181658)
My source also tells me they have their eyes on Alton Lister, Kevin Willis, and Swen Nater.


Still pissed off that Nash is going to be playing with Bryant, huh? I am sure you can swing by
Hardwood Paroxysm
and find guys to commisserate about it with you there.

Brand would actually help the Lakers quite a bit but they won't get him. Whether Kupchak can add two half-decent bench players with the mini-MLE and a vet min deal (specifically, a backup big and a wing who can play a little defense and/or spot up) will actually be more important to the Lakers' chances than the "Can Nash and Kobe co-exist?" stuff. They should try to add a set of young legs, but with their roster, and in the market they are shopping in, that will be difficult. Bringing back Ebanks and letting him play some is likely the best they can do

Nash has made it clear that he wants Grant Hill, so we will see how that plays out as well.
   907. JJ1986 Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:58 AM (#4181660)
Is Jordan Hill gone?
   908. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:01 AM (#4181662)
Hill: Not yet, but will be. (imo)

Oh, I'm now close to convinced that Howard will end up in Houston.
   909. robinred Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:03 AM (#4181664)
Is Jordan Hill gone?


Probably, but not officially AFAIK. There is a caveat in the CBA that dictates that the Lakers can only pay Hill (due to the status of his contract) 3.6 or maybe 3.8M, but other teams can pay him more. Seems counterintuitive, since they have Hill, but I read it via Larry Coon, so I am sure it is correct. Hill has drawn some interest; he is a pretty good rebounder. It would help the Lakers if he came back, but I doubt that they would be talking about Jermaine O'Neal if they thought he was.
   910. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:05 AM (#4181667)
That status arising because Houston (Hill's old team) declined Hill's option for this year. Other guys have similar limitations, but they didn't raise their stock the way Hill did at the end of the season.

Rumor is, and I wouldn't place too much stock in this, that Minnesota wants him (why not, they're trying to sign everybody) as part of their plan B should they not get Batum.
   911. robinred Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:08 AM (#4181670)
Oh, I'm now close to convinced that Howard will end up in Houston.


It appears so. He will likely be playing with Duhon, Richardson, Glen Davis, Patrick Patterson, Courtney Lee, Kevin Martin, Toney Douglas, and Chandler Parsons, at least to start.

I wonder if they will try to get Calderon if they get Howard; they need a PG.
   912. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:10 AM (#4181673)
Either way, I view this as good news for the Hawks. This is generating a scenario where Howard ends up on a team where he may not want to stay - and Atlanta may be more attractive to him as a rebound landing spot than as an initial target.
(the self centered justification game!)

***

Is Morey's variation of Beane's "#### not working in the playoffs" - "my #### doesn't get you a superstar", such that he figures that he can get role players at will, but not the core?
   913. robinred Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:11 AM (#4181674)
Golden State has talked to Hill as well, supposedly.
   914. JJ1986 Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:13 AM (#4181678)
I think the Magic should try to get Courtney Lee in that scenario. He's young enough that he'll still be good when the team's contending again and should be cheap enough not to eat up the whole cap. They need some younger veterans to play next year.
   915. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:15 AM (#4181682)
I like GS a bit better for him (Hill).

Would Lee want to play in ORL? Houston renounced his QO - so he's a UFA.
   916. robinred Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:17 AM (#4181683)
If the Lakers aren't going to get him, I would actually like to see Howard on the Hawks. Nice angle, and a franchise that has never won anything. Never even been in the conference finals. I have read a couple of "sources say" items to the effect that Howard doesn't want to play there at all, but at this point, who knows.

I would think that a guy like Lee would simply go where the most money/years and PT was.
   917. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:18 AM (#4181684)
Nice angle, and a franchise that has never won anything.

They won in '58!
   918. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:20 AM (#4181689)


Still pissed off that Nash is going to be playing with Bryant, huh?


I don't need a specific reason to poke fun at the Lakers.
   919. robinred Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:21 AM (#4181693)
Morey said more or less that about three years ago, as I mentioned. NBA Moneyball can help you a lot from 3-9 and down but really has little to do with getting James or Howard. Anybody from a guy on the internet to an old-school scout to the geekiest videostat breakdown addict understands the importance of getting those guys and can usually recognize them.

   920. NJ in DC (Now unemployed!) Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:22 AM (#4181694)
I'd also take the Howard of the last few years over Ewing in 92 (I think).

and

Howard > Ewing: Most def.

Such little respect for the Greatest Knick Ever.
   921. tshipman Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:30 AM (#4181703)
Is Morey's variation of Beane's "#### not working in the playoffs" - "my #### doesn't get you a superstar", such that he figures that he can get role players at will, but not the core?


Yeah, I feel like Morey is getting frustrated to some degree. How many years can they win 48 games and lose in the first round? I think that success in the NBA is so weird and specific to just a few star players.

I don't know what I would do if I were Morey. He appears to believe (as I do) that he needs to get off the treadmill, so he's setting his team up with options. If he gets Howard, he goes for it. If he fails to get Howard, he tanks.

I thought amnestying Scola was a good move, FWIW. He fell off some last year.
   922. robinred Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:30 AM (#4181704)
They won in '58!


Only because Bill Russell was hurt. Bill Simmons said so, and he knows who would have won every NBA title, if we did not live in a world of injustice, injuries, and asterisks.

The 57-58 St. Louis Hawks are very interesting in historical terms. Game 7 of the 1957 Finals is forgotten but in some ways it was like the famous 1958 NFL title game.
   923. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:36 AM (#4181711)
Amnestying Scola was certainly an expensive move - that contract had a long way to go and, even with the falloff, he's still a solid player and legit starter. Probably still worth it, though - given the context.

tshipman on Morey: Yeah. I find it most interesting from the perspective that ownership (presumably) is okay with this - they're taking a big risk.
How many years can they win 48 games and lose in the first round?

Or not make the playoffs - they're the perenially last man out.

**

I'm good w/ Howard staying in Houston or going to Atlanta (as a Hawk fan, I very much want him to go there but, even without that, I like it for the reasons robinred states).
   924. AROM Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:38 AM (#4181714)
Potentially Ewing too. But Robinson and Malone were in their prime and were ultra athletic. I think they could have found a way to match up fine.


It's not like Ewing would be asked to chase Durant around. As long as the 2012 plays Chandler at center, how can there be any doubt that Ewing can be on the floor? His job would be to not leave Chandler completely alone, don't let him get an open dunk, but other than that just protect the rim.

In 1992 Ewing was 29 years old. He was decently athletic, if not in the company of Robinson. From 1988-1992, he blocked more shots every year than Dwight Howard blocked in his career high.
   925. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM (#4181717)
You guys are still talking about the Hawks with something less than abject derision in your voices. It's weird.
   926. JL Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM (#4181718)
But they would have to pay the actual cash on both the amnestied contract and the dumped contract. If the Pistons take on Andris Biedrins or Hedo Turkoglu or some other awful contract, they're adding that much money to their payroll.

I understand. But if a team like Detroit is one of the few with an amnesty left, they may be able to use it to facilitate deals that they could not have done in the past. They have the opportunity to buy draft picks that they might not have had in the past.
   927. Jimmy P Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4181721)
So, Batum was never officially given an offer sheet yesterday. The Wolves and Blazers are still trying to work a trade. Contrary to earlier reports, it's being reported here that the Blazers want Derrick Williams and the Wolves will not include him in a trade.

It's a funny situation. I think it's becoming clear that the Wolves really want him, and the Blazers don't want to pay him $11 million a year, but neither one is giving in.
   928. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 10:48 AM (#4181727)
I think, for non-locals, you get less abject derision and more bemusement, ignorance, or mild pity.

***

Heck, Detroit in selling (not buying) picks mode (see Maggette for Gordon)
   929. jmurph Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:01 AM (#4181734)
Houston could presumably sign/trade Howard next summer if they can't convince him to stay, right? That's probably somewhat comforting for Morey and ownership in going all in on a deal.
   930. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:13 AM (#4181738)
I think it would have been amusing to see the 2000's Knicks in an era of no salary cap, especially with Isiah Thomas as the GM. I think we would have seen the first billion dollar team. And I mean per year.


And they still wouldn't have been a playoff team. You'd have just seen a dozen max contracts to league average players.
   931. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM (#4181750)
I'd also take the Howard of the last few years over Ewing in 92 (I think).

and

Howard > Ewing: Most def.

Such little respect for the Greatest Knick Ever.


I'm with ya, Melo. I still think I'd take Ewing too. I tend to think Howard just looks better compared to his peers cuz his contemporaries at center are so weak and Ewing's were so strong.

Of course, I also think I'm becoming crotchety in my old age and I tend to think the players from "the good old days" (i.e. the '90's) were better than the young punks playing today, so take that for what's it's worth. I even find myself vigorously defending the guys I didn't particularly like at the time, like Ewing, Jordan, Pippen, etc.

Damn I'm getting old.
   932. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:23 AM (#4181751)
Serious question though, to those who said they'd take Howard over Ewing:

Why? Now I'm curious...
   933. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:26 AM (#4181755)
Only gonna copy stuff from this page, since I've fallen behind again. But I don't understand exactly what the Pacers are doing here. I don't think they've gotten better - then again, maybe Mahinmi/Green/Augstin is better than Collison/Jones, but I guess that depends on how much you like Mahinmi and if you think Green has really broken out. Also, this signing makes Plumlee an even worse pick in retrospect. Dallas, on the other hand, had a nice little rebound from where we thought they had fallen down considerably. Especially if they can get either Brand or Scola via amnesty. Which bring me to my next point -

The Worldwide Leader says Lakers are after Elton Brand, Antawn Jamison, and .... Jermaine O'Neal.

I know it was ESPN LA, but this is quite misleading of ESPN. The actual article mentioned that Brand has to clear amnesty, but there's virtually no chance of that. So what's the point of this "news"?

There would be guys on the 92 team though that would have been serious defensive liabilities, especially if there was no hand checking.

The flipside, how much more would some of the 92 guys (MJ specifically) have been able to do not having to play against hand checking?

It appears so. He will likely be playing with Duhon, Richardson, Glen Davis, Patrick Patterson, Courtney Lee, Kevin Martin, Toney Douglas, and Chandler Parsons, at least to start.

Lee is an UFA, and outside of some stories last week about Rivers begging him to play for the C's for free, it was been quiet on him. The Pacers were interested at one point, but have signed Green. I'm still holding out hope the Bulls get him. But I wonder if he has, let's call it a silent verbal with the Rockets to resign. I don't know the exact salary ramifications of that since they didn't offer him the QO and what that does to Bird rights, cap hold (there's isn't one, but I'm not sure on resigning restrictions).

Such little respect for the Greatest Knick Ever.

So you disagree? Or are you pointing out the sad history of the Knicks?

---

Reports are the Bulls are going to match on Asik, whenever Houston gets around to giving him the offer sheet. At this point, can't the Bulls just deal directly with Asik?
   934. AROM Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:32 AM (#4181758)
I even find myself vigorously defending the guys I didn't particularly like at the time, like Ewing, Jordan, Pippen, etc.


I think it makes sense to do that for the benefit of the guys you like. Say Jordan/Pippen/Rodman is way better than Lebron/Wade/Bosh and you've got room to say that Malone and Stockton, had their best team season come today instead of 97-98, would be world champions.

I'd buy it. I don't think they beat this year's Heat, which got everyone healthy just as the Finals rolled around, had Lebron on a mission and using a post up game, etc. But the 97-98 Jazz could very easily have done exactly what Dallas did last year.
   935. NJ in DC (Now unemployed!) Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:37 AM (#4181768)
Why? Now I'm curious...

So...I checked out the numbers...and Howard is pretty clearly better in...well, in just about everything except passing. How much of that is a result of the dearth of quality 5s, who knows.
   936. Heinie Mantush (Krusty) Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:40 AM (#4181773)
Greatest Knick Ever.


I grew up on the 90's Knicks (I was inconsolable after the Charles Smith game) and actually got to know Patrick Ewing a little bit during that time (which was as cool as you could possibly imagine it to be.)

...I still lean towards Clyde.
   937. Jimmy P Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:41 AM (#4181774)
Reports are the Bulls are going to match on Asik, whenever Houston gets around to giving him the offer sheet. At this point, can't the Bulls just deal directly with Asik?

I believe that the Bulls can't offer him as much as the Rockets offer sheet. There's some weirdness because he was a 2nd rounder.

Either way, I view this as good news for the Hawks. This is generating a scenario where Howard ends up on a team where he may not want to stay - and Atlanta may be more attractive to him as a rebound landing spot than as an initial target.
(the self centered justification game!)


I think if there's anything the last 6 months have taught us, it should be to stop trying to figure out what Dwight Howard's thinking. Because he doesn't even know. I still think that getting him now is a huge advantage and Houston should do it. What's the worst that will happen? After next season they're in the same shape they are now. Take the chance, this is why you collect the assets.
   938. andrewberg Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:54 AM (#4181788)
Howard > Ewing: Most def.


Ok, good. I thought that was obvious, then there was so much sentiment the other way that I started to question myself.

One factor that weighs in favor of the old guys is that we have seen their whole careers now. True, it's a testament to their greatness that almost all of them remained great into their later years (I guess Drexler and Mullin slid a bit, but they were a notch below at peak too). When we compare Love to Barkley, we say that Barkley was clearly better because Love has only had one season at superstar level and Barkley had 5-8 or whatever. Maybe Love will get there, maybe he won't, but it's not really fair to say that he is undeniably worse because he hasn't done something yet that he hasn't had a chance to do.

Also, zone defense.

Whether Kupchak can add two half-decent bench players with the mini-MLE and a vet min deal (specifically, a backup big and a wing who can play a little defense and/or spot up) will actually be more important to the Lakers' chances than the "Can Nash and Kobe co-exist?" stuff. They should try to add a set of young legs, but with their roster, and in the market they are shopping in, that will be difficult. Bringing back Ebanks and letting him play some is likely the best they can do


I completely agree. As I have said a couple of times, I think that offense will be lethal, and they can keep 2 star players on the court at all times. But with their age and health concerns, finding a capable bench is a serious concern. If they can find someone who is quick enough to guard good perimeter players as a backup wing (I don't know how good Ebanks is at on-ball defense at this stage, maybe he's the guy), it could go a long way to addressing what appear to be their 2 biggest weaknesses.

Is Morey's variation of Beane's "#### not working in the playoffs" - "my #### doesn't get you a superstar", such that he figures that he can get role players at will, but not the core?


That sure seems like his strategy. Not only picking up role players at will, but doing it RIGHT NOW. He doesn't have a draft or a full offseason to restock the roster. The last rumor I saw was Howard, J-Rich, Duhon, Big Baby for Kevin Martin, Parsons, Morris, Patterson, Lamb, Jones, White. If that is really the offer, it would leave Houston with the guys they took back, plus Montiejuanas, whoever they don't waive out of the Forbes/Fortson/DWTDD/Jorts group, and the scrap heap. Pairing Howard with Lowry/Dragic and Martin seemed clever. This scenario is a humongous risk.

Lee is an UFA


All indications are that the Wolves would offer him something like 4-5/yr if the Batum thing ever gets resolved. Myself, I'm leaning toward "will never get resolved."
   939. andrewberg Posted: July 13, 2012 at 11:59 AM (#4181791)
So...I checked out the numbers...and Howard is pretty clearly better in...well, in just about everything except passing. How much of that is a result of the dearth of quality 5s, who knows.


To elaborate on what I said earlier, it is so much easier to double team in the low post now that guys who may have looked like passable offensive centers in the 90s look like hopeless buffoons now. True, David Robinson and Hakeem were all-time greats, but if not for a weird series of injuries, we'd have Yao and Howard as only slightly inferior centers now, and they'd probably look a lot better without the traps.
   940. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: July 13, 2012 at 12:06 PM (#4181798)
The last rumor I saw was Howard, J-Rich, Duhon, Big Baby for Kevin Martin, Parsons, Morris, Patterson, Lamb, Jones, White. If that is really the offer, it would leave Houston with the guys they took back, plus Montiejuanas, whoever they don't waive out of the Forbes/Fortson/DWTDD/Jorts group, and the scrap heap. Pairing Howard with Lowry/Dragic and Martin seemed clever. This scenario is a humongous risk.

And multiple picks, including the lottery pick they got from the Raptors for Lowry. I think the Magic would be insane not to accept this offer.
   941. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 12:30 PM (#4181810)
I think it makes sense to do that for the benefit of the guys you like. Say Jordan/Pippen/Rodman is way better than Lebron/Wade/Bosh and you've got room to say that Malone and Stockton, had their best team season come today instead of 97-98, would be world champions.


It's actually not just that, though. I disliked Jordan yet still considered him the GOAT years before he ever ran into Stockton and Malone in the Finals. I mainly didn't like how the entire focus of the NBA was centered around one guy, rather than on all the great players and teams of the era, some of which never got their proper recognition (IMO). I also thought some of MJ's minor accomplishments were overblown cuz he was Jordan and they wouldn't have been such a big deal if someone else had done the same thing (the sick game 5 of the 1997 Finals has already been discussed, but The Shot against Cleveland and the switch hand layup against the Lakers in the 1991 Finals are two more examples that come to mind. Also the OUTRAGE!!! when Barkley and Malone beat MJ for MVP's)

But yes, I do think Jordan was better than LeBron and Pippen was better than Wade. I think I'd give Bosh the edge over Rodman, though.
   942. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 12:45 PM (#4181825)
Howard > Ewing: Most def.

Ok, good. I thought that was obvious, then there was so much sentiment the other way that I started to question myself.


Thing is, it seems people are using peak Howard rather than current Howard. If defenders of the original Dream Team have to use creaky 1992 Bird instead of prime 1986 Bird, then to be fair Howard defenders have to use 2012 "quit on my coach" Dwight with the bad back and the pi$$-poor attitude rather than the happy-go-lucky 2009 version that smiled all the time and wore a superman shirt in the dunk contest. We should be comparing the old guys at their 1992 level of ability to the young guys at their 2012 levels, not at their peaks.

If I were building the current Dream Team, I'm not sure I'd want Howard with the injury concern and all the trade drama. And certainly not more than I'd want 1992 Ewing.
   943. Spivey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 12:54 PM (#4181835)


Thing is, it seems people are using peak Howard rather than current Howard. If defenders of the original Dream Team have to use creaky 1992 Bird instead of prime 1986 Bird, then to be fair Howard defenders have to use 2012 "quit on my coach" Dwight with the bad back and the pi$$-poor attitude rather than the happy-go-lucky 2009 version that smiled all the time and wore a superman shirt in the dunk contest. We should be comparing the old guys at their 1992 level of ability to the young guys at their 2012 levels, not at their peaks.

If I were building the current Dream Team, I'm not sure I'd want Howard with the injury concern and all the trade drama. And certainly not more than I'd want 1992 Ewing.


Not really though. Because nobody is acting like Howard is on the 2012 Dream Team. If he was, I think the arguments on this board would be different and more people would consider giving the current group the benefit of the doubt. I also don't think the quitting on the coach is relevant because I don't think that's a factor with this Olympic team for him. The issue is that he is hurt, so he can't play. We can still compare Dwight to Ewing.
   944. Spivey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 12:56 PM (#4181838)
It's not like Ewing would be asked to chase Durant around. As long as the 2012 plays Chandler at center, how can there be any doubt that Ewing can be on the floor? His job would be to not leave Chandler completely alone, don't let him get an open dunk, but other than that just protect the rim.

My thought is that Chandler and Robinson would be the starters at centers getting the heavy minutes in this theoretical game. When Chandler isn't in, Love will be at center and I don't think Ewing could guard him. I suppose you could give Ewing some playing time against Chandler and let Robinson or Malone guard Love.
   945. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 01:05 PM (#4181848)
#943 - K, I guess there's two different arguments going on. If we're comparing peak Howard to peak Ewing, then yeah, maybe I'd take Howard. If we're combining the 1992 Dream Team and the current one but letting the current one use anyone in the league rather than just the guys actually on it, then no, I'd take 1992 Ewing over 2012 Howard.
   946. AROM Posted: July 13, 2012 at 01:34 PM (#4181861)
Are there other NBA stars who had season ending back surgery and came back 100%?

With teams trying to move heaven and earth to get Dwight Howard on their teams I wonder what the chance is they'll end up regretting it just based on his contributions on the court. Larry Bird was not the same when he came back, was still pretty good, but he was also older than Howard. I can't think of any others right now.

   947. NJ in DC (Now unemployed!) Posted: July 13, 2012 at 01:34 PM (#4181862)
Thing is, it seems people are using peak Howard rather than current Howard. If defenders of the original Dream Team have to use creaky 1992 Bird instead of prime 1986 Bird, then to be fair Howard defenders have to use 2012 "quit on my coach" Dwight with the bad back and the pi$$-poor attitude rather than the happy-go-lucky 2009 version that smiled all the time and wore a superman shirt in the dunk contest. We should be comparing the old guys at their 1992 level of ability to the young guys at their 2012 levels, not at their peaks.

Taking the '92, '96, '00, '04, '08, and '12 teams...who would you choose to fill out a 12-man roster based on the style/level of play each player was at that time. You also can't choose more than 1 version of a player.
   948. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 02:00 PM (#4181870)
rumor!
Kwame to PHI for 2/6, yr 2 a p-opt.
Sorry STEAGLES...

Also, in 76ers news, Xavier Silas (on their summer team and the son of James Silas) was seriously hurt in today's game - skull may be fractured.
   949. Kurt Posted: July 13, 2012 at 02:02 PM (#4181872)
So...I checked out the numbers...and Howard is pretty clearly better in...well, in just about everything except passing.

I'm not saying it pushes Ewing ahead overall, but free throw shooting?

Also, I don't know whether Ewing's vastly better shooting range is a plus (because the international game is more perimeter based) or not (because it's a dream team - other players can handle the perimeter shooting).
   950. Joel W Posted: July 13, 2012 at 02:05 PM (#4181874)
Kwame Brown is a perfectly cromulent backup center.
   951. clowns to the left of me; STEAGLES to the right Posted: July 13, 2012 at 02:16 PM (#4181880)
rumor!
Kwame to PHI for 2/6, yr 2 a p-opt.
Sorry STEAGLES...
eh, i'm actually pretty fine with it. he's not good, but he gives the sixers a 3rd guy who's a legitimate 7 footer, and unlike the other two (hawesome and vucevic), he's got the strength to match up against the more physical big men. the sixers now have 6 guys who figure to be in competition to minutes at the 4/5 (hawes, vucevic, brown, lavoy allen, thaddeus young, and arnett moultrie), and i think the competition between them can only be positive.


   952. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 02:23 PM (#4181882)
I'd rather have a not legitimate 7 footer or a lesser 7 footer for less money. He's consistently the quality of a 10th man or so (7 year simple rating of -4.0, basically the same as he's posted the last two years and a good reflection of his true talent, imo).
AND, they gave him a p-opt!
   953. thok Posted: July 13, 2012 at 02:45 PM (#4181894)
I'm sort of curious how the Dream Team would have defended Durant, who's demonstrated himself to be a nearly unstoppable force under international rules. I'd almost consider having David Robinson guard him some of the time.
   954. Fourth True Outcome Posted: July 13, 2012 at 02:52 PM (#4181897)
I'd almost consider having David Robinson guard him some of the time.


That would be amazing to watch. Wouldn't you put Pippen on him, though?
   955. thok Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:02 PM (#4181901)
That would be amazing to watch. Wouldn't you put Pippen on him, though?


Pippen would be my primary defender for Durant, but he's not playing the entire game unless you are willing to concede some amount of offense.
   956. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:09 PM (#4181904)
Taking the '92, '96, '00, '04, '08, and '12 teams...who would you choose to fill out a 12-man roster based on the style/level of play each player was at that time. You also can't choose more than 1 version of a player.


That'd be a cool debate. I'd have to look up the names though cuz I don't remember who was on the '96-'08 teams. If Kobe was on the '08 team, I'd take him over the current version. And if Shaq was on the '96 or '00 team, I'd definitely take him over '92 Ewing as my second center (and if Robinson was on the '96 team, I might take him over the '92 version; I'd have to look it up).

That would be amazing to watch. Wouldn't you put Pippen on him, though?


Pip might be a little too short to guard Durant, wouldn't you think?
   957. Eddo Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:14 PM (#4181908)
Pip might be a little too short to guard Durant, wouldn't you think?

Cursory googling puts Pippen at 7'2" or 7'3" wingspan, Durant at 7'5". I think Pippen's probably the best bet at slowing down Durant.
   958. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4181910)
Cursory googling puts Pippen at 7'2" or 7'3" wingspan, Durant at 7'5". I think Pippen's probably the best bet at slowing down Durant.


Interesting. That's closer than I would've thought. Durant has always seemed taller to me than he actually is, I think.
   959. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:24 PM (#4181911)
KCJHoop: Pending passed physical, Bulls have traded Kyle Korver to Atlanta. Could be sign-and-trade w/Hinrich.


Ok. Now they better use their MLE on Lee.

They still need another guard (Redd?) or two (JL3 again?).
   960. JuanGone..except1game Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:30 PM (#4181914)
I completely agree. As I have said a couple of times, I think that offense will be lethal, and they can keep 2 star players on the court at all times. But with their age and health concerns, finding a capable bench is a serious concern. If they can find someone who is quick enough to guard good perimeter players as a backup wing (I don't know how good Ebanks is at on-ball defense at this stage, maybe he's the guy), it could go a long way to addressing what appear to be their 2 biggest weaknesses.


Personally, I think Jodi Meeks would be a great get for the Lakers. Watching enough Philly games, he's a better than average defender, can shoot the three and is young. The Lakers need someone other than Ebanks, who is completely miscast when playing SG, to slot behind Kobe. Love to get him with the mini-mid.
   961. NJ in DC (Now unemployed!) Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:38 PM (#4181917)
Durant has always seemed taller to me than he actually is, I think.

Not sure exactly what this means, but I'm pretty sure Durant, who is listed at 6'9'' is at least ~6'11'' and the tallest player on OKC.
   962. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:42 PM (#4181919)
Taking the '92, '96, '00, '04, '08, and '12 teams...who would you choose to fill out a 12-man roster based on the style/level of play each player was at that time. You also can't choose more than 1 version of a player.


Here's who I'm inviting to try out:

'92 Magic
'00 Payton
'92 Stockton
'08 Paul

'92 Jordan
'92 Drexler
'08 Kobe
'08 Wade

'12 James
'12 Durant
'96 Hill
'92 Pippen

'92 Malone
'00 Garnett
'92 Barkley
'04 Duncan

'96 Shaq
'96 Hakeem
'08 Howard
'92 Robinson

20 guys for 12 spots. I'll start by taking two at each position, and leave open the last two spots to fill in any gaps I have at the end.

PG: Magic put up a 25 PER in 1991, averaging 19/7/13. Pretty sure he was still great in 1992. Yeah, you have to hide him on D, but I've got the guys to do that. For a backup - well, Payton was at his best in 2000 - 24/7/9 the previous season, with all-world D. Still, I like the changeup of putting in pre-knee injury Chris Paul here, in the midst of his best two year run, one that stacks up with any PG ever (28 PER in '08, 30 in '09). I can find wing defense elsewhere. Sorry, Gary. Stockton was great too, but I'll take Magic and peak Paul for now.

SG: Jordan, obviously. The other SG position is tricky - we have Drexler at his apex, Wade around his apex (he averaged 30/5/8 the next season) and Kobe still in his prime. Now, do I have to root for this team? I'm taking Wade. But, if I'm picking a team to win, which I am, I guess I go Kobe to back up Michael.

SF: Man, this is stacked - this is when Grant Hill was putting up 20/10/7, mind you. So, Lebron, obviously. Pippen needs to be there. Durant probably, too, but I'm only picking two per position at the moment.

PF: Yikes, again. Okay, I'm taking Duncan for sure. Barkley will have to wait. Now Malone vs. Garnett - if I had, say, 2004 Garnett, I'm taking him over any Malone ever. However, I don't, so I think I have to go Malone here, begrudgingly.

C: Again, yikes. Okay, Dwight is out. Hakeem is in, along with Robinson. Shaq in a similar spot as Garnett - if I get '00 Shaq, he's probably starting. '96 Shaq wasn't quite at that level - but I wouldn't argue a bit if you took him. And they really had Shaq and Hakeem together in '96? I like Robinson over Shaq becuase with all the scoring I get elsewhere, I want his crazy, paint roaming rim protection. Hakeem also just fits in better offensively, I think. Better passer than young Shaq.

So that's 10 - two spots left. I want some flexibility. I don't need another big, because Duncan can play center. I still want some more shooting - perfect, give me Durant. One more spot - I'm giving it to Barkley. I can play him at the 3 or 4, get some help on the offensive boards, and generally let him do Barkley things.

So, my team:
'92 Magic
'92 Jordan
'12 Lebron
'04 Duncan
'96 Hakeem

'08 Paul
'08 Kobe
'92 Pippen
'12 Durant
'92 Barkley
'92 Malone
'92 Robinson

6 from '92, 1 from '96, 1 from '04, 2 from '08, 2 from '12. If I have to take at least one guy from each team, give me '00 Garnett over '92 Malone. And I still kind of can't believe I didn't take '96 Shaq, but oh well.

   963. outl13r Posted: July 13, 2012 at 03:48 PM (#4181922)
I think the matchup problems created by Kobe/Durant/LBJ are greater than many are giving credit. Also, since this is never going to actually happen, I'm getting KG on this team as my starting 5 man and getting Ray Allen or a comparable 3pt shooter for the bench. Paul, KB, Durant, LBJ, KG w/Iggy, Chandler, Melo (as much as I dislike his game, he tends to step it up in intl comp), Westbrook, Rondo, Love, Wade and Allen off the bench is a really good team. 2012 definitely has the defensive edge, especially when any 2 of Magic, Bird and Barkley are on the court.

This will be a more fun discussion to have in 10 yrs or so when we have seen more from the current team.
   964. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 04:07 PM (#4181929)
960: I **think** Meeks is the guy LAL is hoping to get for that slot, for the reasons you cite.
   965. AROM Posted: July 13, 2012 at 04:07 PM (#4181931)
My thought is that Chandler and Robinson would be the starters at centers getting the heavy minutes in this theoretical game. When Chandler isn't in, Love will be at center and I don't think Ewing could guard him. I suppose you could give Ewing some playing time against Chandler and let Robinson or Malone guard Love.


Love's not the kind of player Ewing normally guards. But let's turn that one around - Love would have a very difficult time guarding Ewing.

Durant's not the tallest player on OKC- they have signed the real Hasheem Thabeet. But among the players who actually contribute, I do know he's a bit taller than Kendrick Perkins, thanks to a shot of them standing right next to each other in the playoffs. Durant's listed height is 6'9, as an 18 year old, and in bare feet. Most players want to pump up their height so the height with shoes is what they go by. Durant is different there.
   966. Eddo Posted: July 13, 2012 at 04:21 PM (#4181938)
Interesting. That's closer than I would've thought. Durant has always seemed taller to me than he actually is, I think.

Also, Pippen was famously long for his height.
   967. NJ in DC (Now unemployed!) Posted: July 13, 2012 at 04:25 PM (#4181940)
Also, Pippen was famously long for his height.

That's what she said. I'll show myself out.
   968. HMS Moses Taylor Posted: July 13, 2012 at 04:25 PM (#4181941)
KCJHoop: The Korver trade is via Minnesota into Atlanta's traded player exception, meaning Bulls get 2nd-round pick from Minny and save $500K.


So no, Hinrich is still getting the MLE. Which means the add'l roster spots will all be veteran minimum deals (assuming the Bulls still match Asik's still unsigned offer sheet - though Lin's has now been signed).

And I'm unsure of what Minnesota is getting here to make this deal work (from Atlanta).
   969. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 05:12 PM (#4181965)
6 from '92, 1 from '96, 1 from '04, 2 from '08, 2 from '12. If I have to take at least one guy from each team, give me '00 Garnett over '92 Malone. And I still kind of can't believe I didn't take '96 Shaq, but oh well


If you want to include '00 Garnett, why over '92 Malone rather than over '92 Barkley? Malone was better than Chuck, and you didn't have to hide him on defense. Also, if you really wanted '96 Shaq, I'd probably take him over Charles too.

Edit: And this exercise just shows that even if you include every other USA Olympic team as candidates, the '92 squad still reigns supreme. :)
   970. andrewberg Posted: July 13, 2012 at 05:22 PM (#4181971)
Edit: And this exercise just shows that even if you include every other USA Olympic team as candidates, the '92 squad still reigns supreme. :)


Part of that is guys not coming back like they do now. I'd take 96 Jordan or Pippen over the 92 version, and those are pretty crucial guys.
   971. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 13, 2012 at 05:28 PM (#4181973)
If you want to include '00 Garnett, why over '92 Malone rather than over '92 Barkley? Malone was better than Chuck, and you didn't have to hide him on defense. Also, if you really wanted '96 Shaq, I'd probably take him over Charles too.

Peak Malone wasn't better than Peak Chuck, IMO, and that was Peak Chuck. If we're ranking them all-time, Malone comes out ahead because his prime was much longer - but we're not - the question here is do I want Barkley of that moment or Malone of that moment, and I would take Barkley. Barkley's advantages are passing (though Malone was also a good passer), quickness, flexibility (I could play him at the 3), offensive rebounding, and personality. Malone's advantages are size, offensive efficiency and John Stockton. Given the rest of my roster - I have enough size, IMO, and so I'd take Barkley there. Plus, I think Garnett and Malone have more overlapping skills than Garnett and Barkley (insert joke about Barkley's D here).

Barkley was also much more fun to watch and have on your team, and given either of those guys is probably something like a 9th or 10th man on this team that's unbeatable anyway, give me the entertaining guy. YMMV, especially as a Jazz fan.

'96 Shaq was simply "what do I need three centers plus Duncan for?" I prefer the balance of the roster with another forward in there.
   972. Famous Original Joe C Posted: July 13, 2012 at 05:29 PM (#4181974)
I'd take 96 Jordan or Pippen over the 92 version

Do you? I see the argument either way, but '92 Jordan still was at the peak of his physical powers as well as having figured some things out.
   973. andrewberg Posted: July 13, 2012 at 05:33 PM (#4181976)
Do you? I see the argument either way, but '92 Jordan still was at the peak of his physical powers as well as having figured some things out.


It's at least debatable, and it is with Robinson, Malone, and Stockton as well. My point isn't that the later versions were clearly better, just that the 92 invincibility is a little overstated.
   974. Booey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 05:37 PM (#4181979)
#971 - All that makes sense, though I'd take the better D personally - and the guy who'd be less likely to start international incidents by elbowing Angolans(?). :)

It just kinda seemed weird that when you were ranking PF's you picked Duncan 1st, Malone 2nd, and Chuck 3rd as one of your extra's, but when you decided you needed Garnett as a rep from the '00 team, you picked him over your 2nd choice rather than over your 3rd. But I getcha.
   975. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 13, 2012 at 05:49 PM (#4181986)
Brand to dal for 2.1
   976. Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili(Teddy F. Ballgame) Posted: July 13, 2012 at 06:35 PM (#4182000)
Anybody want to take a crack at an all-time Olympic roster for non-US players?
   977. thok Posted: July 13, 2012 at 06:55 PM (#4182014)
Anybody want to take a crack at an all-time Olympic roster for non-US players?


Just limiting to the last 20 years is ridiculously hard. I'm pretty sure Sabonis starts at center, but comparing players with vastly differing levels of talents for teammates with extremely limited data is near impossible.
   978. Yardape Posted: July 13, 2012 at 07:15 PM (#4182025)
I'm pretty sure Sabonis starts at center, but comparing players with vastly differing levels of talents for teammates with extremely limited data is near impossible.


I'd be pretty comfortable starting with Nash, Nowitzki and Sabonis. Pau Gasol and Ginobili also seem like pretty likely candidates.
   979. clowns to the left of me; STEAGLES to the right Posted: July 13, 2012 at 08:42 PM (#4182093)
I'd be pretty comfortable starting with Nash, Nowitzki and Sabonis. Pau Gasol and Ginobili also seem like pretty likely candidates.
not a whole lot of defense there.
   980. thok Posted: July 13, 2012 at 08:49 PM (#4182103)
Also, Nash and Nowitzki only played in one Olympics and their teams didn't come close to medalling. I'm not sure as an Olympic player that either is more qualified than Drazen Petrovic or Vlade Divac, or Toni Kukoc, or Saurunas Marcelonis, or Oscar Schmidt. And those are the obvious people to consider.
   981. The District Attorney Posted: July 13, 2012 at 08:54 PM (#4182109)
Do they get Hakeem? (Well, obviously they don't if the criteria is having played for a non-US Olympic team, but he is an "international player" in a sense.)
   982. Spivey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 08:57 PM (#4182116)
Ginobili is a good defender, or at least was during his prime. Nowitzki and Gasol (both Gasols) have been underrated at defense. Don't remember on Sabonis, and Nash is poor but he's not Ridnour. I do think that you'd need another wing player or two that could play some defense but I think you'd be able to do that.

The one issue is that you probably don't want Nowitzki playing SF, though in FIBA-ball maybe you can get away with it if you're playing a long team against a lot of the US teams, which have 3 point shooting as their biggest weakness.

980 - Yes, I suppose it's a different ballgame if you're only considering years they played. I think those guys would have likely played more if it was a situation where they thought they'd medal.
   983. thok Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:08 PM (#4182121)
I think those guys would have likely played more if it was a situation where they thought they'd medal.


Neither Canada nor Germany qualified for the Olympics in any year other than the one where Nash/Nowitzki played (during their basketball careers), and both Nash and Nowitzki played during the Olympic qualifying trials in years where their team didn't qualify.
   984. Spivey Posted: July 13, 2012 at 09:28 PM (#4182134)
Neither Canada nor Germany qualified for the Olympics in any year other than the one where Nash/Nowitzki played (during their basketball careers), and both Nash and Nowitzki played during the Olympic qualifying trials in years where their team didn't qualify.


Fair enough, I guess I misunderstood your post. Given that, I think you basically get to pick their prime.

I don't think a non-US team would be able to beat the US team consistently, but they'd win a game every now and then.
   985. robinred Posted: July 14, 2012 at 12:56 AM (#4182281)
Despite the Houston Rockets using the amnesty provision to waive forward Luis Scola, there was no trade of Howard from Orlando to Houston, and sources briefed on the talks between the two sides said the teams weren’t nearly as close to a trade as many have speculated. That can change in an instant, of course, but late Friday, there was no deal.

Talks between the two sides are “not active,” one source said Friday.

“There’s nothing happening,” another source said.

The Rockets, according to a league source briefed on the discussions, are willing to take one bad contract back from the Magic, not two or three, as has been speculated. And in return, Houston will give up one of the their three first-round picks in last month’s Draft– Jeremy Lamb, Royce White or Terrence Jones –but only one
   986. robinred Posted: July 14, 2012 at 12:57 AM (#4182284)
That is from NBA.com.
   987. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: July 14, 2012 at 01:51 AM (#4182291)
Update from Phoenix:

OJ Mayo was in town today.

Deadline for NO to match Suns' offer to Gordon is tomorrow, and Hornets will.

Suns made a stay-here pitch video for RFA Robin Lopez that equated him to comic-book heroes. Really.
   988. AROM Posted: July 14, 2012 at 02:40 AM (#4182297)
You want defense on the fantasy international team? Get Mutombo.
   989. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: July 14, 2012 at 05:41 AM (#4182309)
Suns made a stay-here pitch video for RFA Robin Lopez that equated him to comic-book heroes. Really.

Was it Aquaman? I bet it was Aquaman.
   990. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: July 14, 2012 at 08:47 AM (#4182331)
Chuck elbowing that Angolan was pretty much the height of Olympic basketball as far as I'm concerned.
   991. NJ in DC (Now unemployed!) Posted: July 14, 2012 at 04:34 PM (#4182483)
RT @Jonathan_Feigen Rockets so far unable to hand deliver Lin offer sheet. Knicks refused to accept at team hotel. Glen Grunwald not at practice yest, gm today.

RT @Jonathan_Feigen Rockets had a courier knocking on doors at hotel, call room. Could not get someone to accept offer sheet yesterday.

RT @Jonathan_Feigen Rockets FedExed offer sheet to Knicks offices in NY, but league said GM Glen Grunwald must receive it himself. Clock to match at standstill.

RT @Jonathan_Feigen All of this is high comedy, but does leave no doubt that Knicks will take every bit of three days to match, once offer sheet is in hand.

RT @seth_rosenthal: Glen Grunwald will match Jeremy Lin's offer sheet once you find his secret hiding spot!
   992. GregD Posted: July 14, 2012 at 04:49 PM (#4182488)
That is just awesome and I assume the outstanding offer on the Rockets' books actually serves the purpose of slowing the Rockets' other transactions. That's fair since the Rockets seem to have made the offer mostly to f* with the Knicks.
   993. Booey Posted: July 14, 2012 at 04:50 PM (#4182489)
Chuck elbowing that Angolan was pretty much the height of Olympic basketball as far as I'm concerned.


I thought that was hilarious too. But I was also 12 at the time, so that may have influenced my opinion a little bit. I thought Beavis and Butthead was awesome back then too.

Aw, who am I kidding? I still think the Chuck/Angolan incident is funny. Sensitivity has never been one of my strong suits.
   994. Tripon Posted: July 14, 2012 at 04:53 PM (#4182490)
You know Booey, there's are new seasons of Beavis and Butthead on MTV.
   995. PJ Martinez Posted: July 14, 2012 at 05:07 PM (#4182495)
Beavis and Butthead was, in fact, awesome.
   996. smileyy Posted: July 14, 2012 at 05:09 PM (#4182496)
That offer sheet stuff sounds really stupid. Shouldn't that be something emailed/faxed/couriered to the league office and acknowledged by a neutral party?


[993] And I still think Beavis and Butthead is hilarious.

   997. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: July 14, 2012 at 05:13 PM (#4182498)
992 - well, they'd like to get the player too.

Darko cleared amnesty waivers - is a UFA.
Haywood claimed by CHA. Not that he was available to PHI, but who would you rather have, salaries and contract lengths aside, Haywood or Kwame?

De Colo signs with SAS, as does Kravtsov with DET (2/3m?)
   998. robinred Posted: July 14, 2012 at 05:15 PM (#4182499)
The Lakers should be talking to Darko's agent.
   999. PJ Martinez Posted: July 14, 2012 at 05:21 PM (#4182502)
I think the Celtics should talk to Darko, too. How much is he going to get paid?
   1000. robinred Posted: July 14, 2012 at 05:27 PM (#4182506)
flip
Page 10 of 25 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Brian
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCSN: Enough is enough — time to move on from Ryan Howard
(81 - 7:29am, Jul 25)
Last: Jeltzandini

NewsblogOTP - July 2014: Republicans Lose To Democrats For Sixth Straight Year In Congressional Baseball Game
(3033 - 7:22am, Jul 25)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogNoble: Tom Seaver expects Derek Jeter to become first unanimous Hall of Fame inductee
(54 - 7:20am, Jul 25)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread- July 2014
(915 - 5:53am, Jul 25)
Last: MikeOberly

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread July, 2014
(382 - 5:25am, Jul 25)
Last: Swedish Chef

NewsblogAs shifts suppress offense, time has come to consider a rule change
(90 - 5:07am, Jul 25)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogSurprising Sports Stars – Guided by Voices’ Robert Pollard
(3 - 4:44am, Jul 25)
Last: Alex meets the threshold for granular review

NewsblogYadier Molina serves his brother crackers on a plate — home plate
(43 - 3:59am, Jul 25)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogBucs Dugout: Manel: Pirates getting creative with defensive shifts
(8 - 3:53am, Jul 25)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogTwitter / Ken_Rosenthal: Mariners announce acquisition of Kendrys Morales for RHP Stephen Pryor.
(16 - 3:37am, Jul 25)
Last: Jeff Francoeur's OPS

NewsblogA's designate Johnson for assignment
(20 - 3:28am, Jul 25)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogGoldman: Eliminating the shift a bandage for a phantom wound
(31 - 3:23am, Jul 25)
Last: Rob_Wood

NewsblogFivethirtyeight: Billion-Dollar Billy Beane
(21 - 2:42am, Jul 25)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOMNICHATTER: 7-24-14
(59 - 1:56am, Jul 25)
Last: Bunny Vincennes

NewsblogEx-MLB star Chuck Knoblauch accused of assaulting ex-wife
(21 - 12:26am, Jul 25)
Last: Ray (RDP)

Page rendered in 1.0760 seconds
53 querie(s) executed