User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
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. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.6422 seconds
51 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 still can't believe Durant has a 65% true shooting. At his level of usage I can't even fathom it.
Michael Jordan
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Wilt Chamberlain
Lebron James
Chris Paul
All have 4 seasons of this (if you are including Paul and James' current seasons), with the exception of Jordan who has 6.
Edit: not saying he needs that to make him great, but he needs it to get appreciated more.
I hope that this is all overblown, as I really like this Grizz team as currently constructed, but it'll be interesting to see if this fizzles out or explodes.
SuperTeams are a little more viable when you can pay LeBron James $17,545,000, and less well when you're paying Rudy Gay $16,460,538.
Is the issue that it's a dumb test or that he might never be able to pass such a test? This is Chris Kaman...
Usually it's a pretty simple test that you take in the preseason. It's then compared against your current state, and you have to meet that level to pass.
It's just another macho athlete that's too stupid to protect the thing inside their own skull.
I think Peyton Manning once admitted to tanking the pre-season test so he'd have a lower baseline during the regular season if his bell was rung, which strikes me as a perfect example of cleverness in the service of incredible stupidity.
I'm skeptical, because Sheridan's "sources" seem to be basing their idea that the Spurs are frontrunners because the two FOs are close, rather than any specific trade talk. Maybe that's not the case, but that's how Sheridan presents it here. Even if they are frontrunners, that trade seems a bit much, at least if Lorbek really is a good asset. Personally, I'd rather have Splitter on the Jazz than Jefferson, if only because he won't demand as much PT, so Favors and Kanter can actually get more minutes. Finally, I just don't see Jefferson as a Spurs target. He's horrible defensively, and despite his improvement with the Jazz, still a poor passer, so I don't see him fitting in well with Pops.
The likely conclusion from those two pieces: Rondo has his limitations as a player (obviously), but they are magnified by the offense Boston has been running the last few years, even as Pierce and Garnett have declined and Allen has been replaced by a very different player. If Boston is not better with Rondo offensively on the floor at this point (and that appears debatable), the responsibility seems to lie partly with Rondo, partly (or maybe even mostly, depending on your analysis) with Rivers, and partly with Ainge.
Basically what Kelly Dwyer said: Ball Don't Lie on Hollins
And the reason Speights was traded is that you preferred to give his playing time to Arthur. Now you don't like Arthur.
I actually think the Spurs might be the perfect team for Jefferson. His defensive shortcomings won't be quite as damaging with Duncan in the middle to pick up the slack. Al could concentrate on what he does best - scoring and rebounding.
When your guard line is Kobe and Nash, you still have a chance.
Right. If this were 2006, maybe. Now? No. The best play for the Lakers is to shut Pau down, shut Howard down, pick up a big off the scrap heap, and ride it out as best they can. If I worked for Dwight Howard, I would probably rec to him that he get the surgery. He is going to get max offers from the Lakers, Dallas, and Atlanta, and probably some other teams, even if he doesn't play another game this year and is in rehab when he hits FA.
From the Lakers' POV, if Howard walks, they put Pau back at the 5, sign Clark to play the 4, play out next year, and go into summer 2014 with a mostly clean cap and their pick. If Howard stays and they keep D'Antoni, then they explore trading Pau.
Also, while I don't think he was in serious danger, Pau's injury is probably a security blanket for D'Antoni. I think that even with all the problems, Kupchak and Buss still expected the Lakers to get the 8 seed and to play a competitive, if not winning, series against either OKC or SA. Had the Lakers stayed reasonably healthy and still finished 9th or 10th, that, added to the fact that Howard obviously doesn't like D'Antoni, and Pau gave a long interview with Simers talking about, among other things, his issues with D'Antoni, I think MDA might have been in some trouble. He still may be at some point, but I think they will almost certainly keep him now.
Nah. The Lakers haven't been scary good for 3 years. But only their fans seem to think that you can't win with "only" two superstars. It has been kind of interesting though to see the reverse homerism that's been happening this season; the non Laker fans on this site have been a lot more optomistic about LA's chances of making a low seed playoff push.
I'm not saying they're going to be good or even average, but I suspect you're overstating things by thinking they have a serious shot at losing out the rest of the month. I expect them to win in Charlotte, at home vs the Suns and T-Wolves, and split the homies vs the Celtics and Blazers. C'mon, now. Those first three teams are bad and the last two are only .500.
So 4-6 the rest of the month. That's my prediction. And that's if Dwight isn't full strength.
Are Sheridan's sources the voices in his head? This rumor seems like Chris Sheridan sitting around in his underwear and playing with the trade machine since he has nothing else to do since getting canned by ESPN.
As you said, "Nah." That is more fatalism from guys who really want the team to lose, but assume since it's the Lakers, they will figure something out. It is sort of like people outside the fanbase who assume that Howard is staying, when it is very clear that he might not. I really admire Nash and like having him on the team, but based on his performance this year, he is nowhere near being a superstar anymore, although his rate stats are still good. His D has been very bad, although he does try. Kobe, according to Zach Lowe, who is mostly even-handed about the Mamba, is still about "6-10" on a ranking list but his D has been , at times, terrible. Gasol and Howard have both dropped off a lot, particularly on D. What has happened to the Lakers has many causes but is pretty simple. The team was based on the premise that Howard, Nash, Gasol and Bryant would
a) Play 65-80 games apiece
b) Play at their recent historical levels
c) Play well together
For a variety of reasons--age, injury, fit, chemistry, coaching--this has not come close to happening, which has exposed the roster construction issues as related to the defense and the bench.
For me it's just that they simply have too much talent to be this bad. It doesn't really have anything to do with the logo on their jerseys or the franchises past history of success.
True, but that's part of why I'm not sure that Pau's injury will be as catastrophic to the Lakers record as some are predicting. This isn't Gasol 2010. He was already unhappy coming off the bench, wasn't really being used right in the offense (from my limited observations), and wasn't putting up the numbers he used to anyway. It's a big blow to a team with little depth already, obviously, but Howard's status is much more important, IMO.
Agreed, but all these things are reasons why the Lakers aren't the title contenders we all thought they'd be (in our preseason predictions I had them winning 59 games and making the Finals), but I still don't see these issues as being SO great that they can't even be a .500 team.
These are extremely sensible suggestions and I agree with them. The only way I would deviate from that plan is if Howard shows enough health before the deadline, in which case I would shop Gasol to see if there is a prime return out there for him at this point. That has less to do with the possibility that the Lakers could contend for a title this year with Nash, Kobe, Howard + return for Gasol than it does with my concern that Gasol is doing irreparable damage to his value (through poor health and ineffectiveness) as time passes.
Of all the surprising things with the Lakers this year, the MOST surprising to me has been the inability for Gasol and D'Antoni to find good chemistry. I would have bet large sums that D'Antoni would help guide Nash and Gasol to great success with one another regardless of what was happening around them.
Add me to the list of people who think this would do more harm than good for the Spurs. Mills and De Colo are probably mostly a wash at the bottom of the roster, Jackson only matters if Leonard gets hurt again, and their roster composition obviously makes them more concerned with winning this year than whenever Lorbek would eventually help them. Still, Jefferson is a pure anchor who does one thing very well (score in low-block isos) and has a reasonable midrange game. They would definitely lose defense without Splitter, and they have enough bigs to mix and match based on need that could cover for what Jefferson would provide. Bonner spaces the court better, Blair rebounds better, Splitter defends better (and does a competent job replicating his offense), and Diaw passes better. I suppose the motivation would be that Jefferson in the lineup would force Ibaka into more dangerous one-on-one defensive assignments (not his strength) and prevent him from roaming for blocks, but I think they can get a lot of the same value by playing Bonner or Diaw because those guys could punish OKC for leaving them.
I interpreted it as the front office saying that the marginal gain in championship probability that Gay provided over Prince + Davis was far less than the marginal loss in future payroll flexibility from being over the luxury tax. I can see how one would interpret it as you said, but I do not think it is the clear and only interpretation.
Gasol was not playing very well, but the deeper you get into the Lakers' big rotation, the uglier it gets. Gasol playing at 75% is still miles ahead of what they'll get out of Sacre.
Not to mention that every minute Sacre plays is a minute he isn't celebrating on the bench.
I thought Gasol was doing much better with Howard out of the lineup, they did just win three straight road games with him as the starting center and he's had much better numbers at center all year. I they are better without Howard than they are without Gasol.
No kidding. The dual damage to team morale caused by having him on the court rather than the bench is immeasurable.
Now, if Howard had just tweaked an ankle and would be back at 100% tonight, you might be right. But Howard by his own admission can't even sit comfortably on the bench or in a chair without having numbness and tingling in his legs, and in addition to that has a torn labrum for which surgery has been recommended. His decline in defensive activity and mobility has been well-documented, and is very visible through the eye test as well as in the numbers. And, partly because they are paying Kobe, Pau, Howard, and Nash a combined 62M, the primary big behind Pau and Howard is, as Hombre notes, Robert Sacre. And, as I said, and berg just mentioned again, the Lakers have very poor perimeter D--which will be magnified with no rim protector.
As to the fact that just about everybody (statheads,MSM guys,neutrals,fanboys,haters) picked the Lakers to win a bunch of games and contend for the title, I think the takeaway there is that while predictions are fun and sometimes carry some weight, they are in many ways still just educated guesses. I picked the Lakers to go 55-27, but I had a long post about them in preseason in which I detailed the many obvious ways the season could go wrong: Age, injuries, Howard's back not being ready, D, bench, coaching. I also said that the best way to deal with fit issues would be a two-star platoon system, with a Kobe/Pau team and a Nash/Howard team, which I still think would have been the best call. Neither Brown nor D'Antoni agrees.
So, while few thought this would happen to the Lakers, it was clear that it could happen. The "talent" is concentrated in four guys, and only one of them has really given the Lakers what they needed in terms of durability and overall production.
I agree. Pau has been in decline for some time, and even at his peak was never really a superstar. He's not the guy from 2010-2011.
***
In separate news, the league has solicited a proposal from my place of employment. I am outrageously excited about this. (Is this vague enough to not get fired?)
On a related note, I saw mention of HOU pursuing Bynum if Howard doesn't work out this summer, do any of the CHI guys (or anyone else) think Asik could play the 4?
I think you mean Kobe, unless Nash said something that I don't know about. Kobe's comments are understandable given his age, career arc, personality, and how many injuries he has played through. But Howard is almost eight years younger than Bryant is, about to hit FA, and not everybody has the same pain/compartmentalization thresholds, so there is no real reason for Howard to listen to Bryant or to come back if he doesn't think he can go.
I thought that when Howard came here, Nash and Howard would get along and connect on-court but according to people arwound the team, that hasn't happened. Instead, Nash and Bryant supposedly get along well, break down video together, etc.
EDIT:
Hmmm. Howard fired back in Boston at shootaround, supposedly. If Nash said something, that makes Howard look a little worse.
There's a delicate balance that one has to keep between "We're all in this together/Us-against-the-world/Ubuntu" stuff, and the fact that basketball is a business and a job.
Weren't there arguments that he was the best player on at least one of the Lakers championship teams? From a production point of view, it seems like its hard to not be a "superstar" when you're the best player on a championship team.
Like you said, Dwight Howard has come off as a guy who makes everyone hate their time around him.
This doesn't surprise me at all.
Its also the kind of thing that makes me think that Duncan and Garnett would get along on the same team.
Yeah, I was going to comment on this but left it alone.
LeBron: 27.5 PTS, 7.0 REB, 6.7 AST, 26.2 PER, .213 WS/48
Durant: 26.6 PTS, 6.7 REB, 3.0 AST, 23.3 PER, .183 WS/48
Through Age (28-ongoing for LJ)
LeBron: 27.6 PTS, 7.2 REB, 6.9 AST, 27.4 PER, .236 WS/48
Jordan: 32.3 PTS, 6.3 REB, 6.0 AST, 29.8 PER, .275 WS/48
21+LBJ: 28.6 PTS, 7.5 REB, 7.0 AST, 29.0 PER, .263 WS/48
I really wish League Pass was around in the Jordan Era.*
*-And that I was able to see through my seething hatred of His Airness and appreciate what he was doing.
EDIT: Added a 3rd line removing LBJ's first two years. And obviously Jordan kills everyone in narrative, rings, etc.
Not through age 28 he doesn't...
Right you are.
Interesting that Hollins is lamenting the lack of big men. Not the lack of Rudy Gay. All the moves made were because Rudy Gay was the big-money guy who was not essential to the team. Based on their amazing playoff run without him, it was thought that WITH him the team could be a contender for #1 or #2 seed. It turned out that somehow the presence or absence of Rudy Gay did not have a big impact on the team's success.
So to get rid of Rudy Gay they had to make these other moves, swapping Speights for Ed Davis and in effect swapping Gay for Tayshaun Prince. I thought Prince would be viewed as a valuable veteran presence. Maybe he will be. Is the absence of Marreese Speights really going to destroy the team spirit? I guess Davis will have to prove himself.
I think it's because Hollins and the players hadn't experienced a failure. Contrast their perception of their situation with the Hawks players after the Joe Johnson trade. Repeated playoff losses (granted, extra shots becoming available to pending free agents can't be entirely discounted either) seemed to produce a "Hey, we lost a good player but we have to try something different."
Plus, if you're Hollins or the players, who are you better off venting about: the rookie executive or the new owner who collaborated on the deals? The owner has to be more likely to have the longer tenure/greater influence in the league.
I agree, but they're not objective observers. I think their default mindset has to be "We haven't yet" rather than "Despite somewhat favorable circumstances, we haven't yet and we probably can't."
No. But if they're going to sign Bynum, he won't have to.
*-And that I was able to see through my seething hatred of His Airness and appreciate what he was doing.
To be fair, Knicks fans had it particularly hard. They were probably the biggest victim of his dominance. Had Starks made a couple more shots, perhaps it wouldn't have been as bad.
Jordan: 32.3 PTS, 6.3 REB, 6.0 AST, 29.8 PER, .275 WS/48
21+LBJ: 28.6 PTS, 7.5 REB, 7.0 AST, 29.0 PER, .263 WS/48
I think/feel/believe that LeBron right now is better defensively than MJ ever was, and that he's been consistently better than MJ throughout his career on that end. Once Pippen was in his prime, he took the tougher defensive assignments from MJ. What LeBron is doing on the defensive end plus the offensive brilliance puts his individual peak higher than MJ's. Whether that peak lasts as long and translates into team success will determine whether I ever consider LBJ the GOAT (I think he can and will get there). I stayed out of the LBJ/KD discussion, because it's really hard to comprehend how good KD already is now that I'm comfortable with how good LBJ is.
The Hollins reaction/MEM tailspin since Hollinger arrived is reminding me, in ways, of Depo and the Dodgers. At least on a superficial level.
Ditto.
Huh?
I mean, I guess I can see this, but I'm not sure about it. I have to think about it some more.
From the mouthpiece...
It's a few million cheaper per year. Which you and I both know Jerry would love. It would add another spacer in for when Rose gets back, especially if their going to be playing Butler at Hamilton's expense.
Not sure how I feel about it either, though.
It would have to mean they either don't think Mirotic is coming over before 2015 or they are going to flip Bargs, right? Dunno, maybe it's for...wait for it...flexibility!
Am I wrong in thinking that a team can only amnesty a player that was on the roster when the CBA was signed?
WTF does Toronto want with Boozer then, I have no idea.
Probably more about not wanting Bargnani than wanting Boozer.
On another note, can't wait to see what James White has in store for the dunk contest.
One big difference in the situation is that I'm pretty sure if somebody gets fired over this rift in the offseason, it ain't going to be Hollinger.
3rd quarter
1:50 Denver Nuggets DEN Wilson Chandler makes a 25-foot three-pointer from the right wing. Assist: Corey Brewer 70-95
1:24 Chicago Bulls CHI Daequan Cook misses a 14-foot running jumper from the right wing
1:23 Denver Nuggets DEN Ty Lawson defensive rebound
1:17 Denver Nuggets DEN Ty Lawson drives to the hoop for a layup 70 - 97
:51.4 Chicago Bulls CHI Turnover: Shot clock violation
:40.5 Denver Nuggets DEN Layup by Wilson Chandler 70 - 99
Downside for the Suns: Weak draft.
Yeah I am sure they would be fine together (and back in the day would have been great to watch together).
Usually, outstanding. I didn't get to see a minute of the game thanks to the "storm" (I also didn't see any of the Illini upset, but that was because I don't care), but the twitters talked about how Noah was clearly not 100%.
The more I think about a potential Bargs/Boozer swap, the more I come around to it. Bargs has a lot of defensive weaknesses, similar to Boozer, but at least Boozer knows and plays in Thibs system. That'll take some time for Bargs. Boozer really doesn't play inside much these days, so they're not losing a lot there. Boozer is still a good rebounder, so Deng and Noah will have to pick up some slack there. But that would make for an interesting big rotation.
Of course, like Jimmy says, the real reason the Bulls are considering it are purely financial. It would likely also have to include a NateRob for JL3 swap just to irritate me, but it would get the Bulls under the luxury tax. I think it minimizes whatever small chance the Bulls would have to compete this year, but might help them next. It does sound like Jerry really doesn't want to amnesty Boozer because he'd have to pay him to play somewhere else. So I think this deal happens if Toronto agrees to it (and I'm not sure totally why they would).
My favorite is easily The Basketball Jones. They are stats friendly, knowledgable, entertaining, and all clearly seem to love watching and talking about the NBA.
I do not see why the Raptors would want Boozer, either. Boozer is a name, but he is a terrible return on investment, and unilke Gay, there is no chance that he magically becomes more producitve outside of that system (nor is he young).
On the other hand, a 7-footer who shoots 40%, averages less than 5 rebounds per 36 and has no defensive game at all, is great to have around. Boozer is paid about $5 million more a year than Bargnani, their contracts run the same length. So instead of looking at whether he's worth $15 million, is he worth $5 million?
OTOH, I have a theory (can't prove it) that teams often do well for a short period of time after a star goes down. I think other guys get excited by getting more opportunities, coaches make adjustments, opposing teams don't have time to gameplan.
But eventually, I think that turns around, and the limitations of the guys stepping in become apparent, and the opponent makes adjustments of his own.
Just keep boozer and amnesty him as planned.
I kind of forgotten about them and had just started listening to it when I asked the question. I like them a lot.
Me too, rr.
This theory needs a name! :)
Edit: Unless, of course, Fab Melo is the unicorn I want him to be. (He isn't.)
Also, I third the Basketball Jones as a good NBA podcast. It's really the only one I listen to consistently. Are there other solid ones out there that I don't know about?
No, but I think it is fair to talk about how high-leverage a guy is to a team, given the rest of the team's skillsets.
Oh, absolutely. That was meant to address the larger discourse around it, not anyone's comments in this thread. I think Rondo is overrated in some ways, underrated in others, and that parts of this Celtics team may do better without him, while others will miss him. (I think Terry, for one, will really do well without Rondo.) I just also think that the current win streak has led to some overblown talk of him perhaps being more expendable/low-leverage to the team than I think is true.
Yea there might be something to the theory, remember when Ewing went down and the Knicks picked it up?
Ainge with some thoughtful quotes on Rondo and the Celtics without him: "Rondo is a terrific talent. So the question is, 'Is Rondo doing this, or are we allowing Rondo to do this?' Are we as players, as coaches, as management, relying on him too much?" That's tactfully vague and diplomatic, but I think he's getting at the right questions.
And Andre Drummond out at least for the rest of February it looks like. :(
20 down halfway through the 3rd, now within single digits entering the 4th. Never underestimate the ineptitude of the Bobcats...
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main