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 0.6434 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.
West: OKC, SAS, DAL, MEM, LAL, LAC, DEN, POR
East: MIA, CHI, BOS, NYK, ATL, ORL, PHI, IND
Playoffs:
Winner: MIA (9), CHI (3), OKC (1)
Runner-up: OKC (9), MEM (2), DAL (1), CHI (1)
ECF Loser: CHI (7), MIA (3), BOS (2), NYK (1)
WCF Loser: MEM (4,) DAL (3), LAC (2), LAL (2), SAS (1), OKC (1)
T-Wolves fans, I'm sorry injuries have ruined what was a very entertaining season.
I always like reading Simmons cuz he's funny and he's clearly a fan, first and foremost. He truly seems to care about the NBA and doesn't seem to write columns just cuz it's his job and he's getting paid to.
But I read him mainly to be amused. I do think he's too much of a homer and too open about his biases against teams and players he doesn't like to be taken very seriously as an actual analyst of the game.
Memphis has a chance. But Oklahoma City is the only team for whom a first-round loss would be a surprise (to me). The Lakers could be in the WCF or lose in the 1st Rd. I also think that is true of the Grizzlies, Clippers, Nuggets, and Mavericks. The Spurs are unlikely to lose in RD 1 but it would not surprise me. I think the Rockets are capable of winning a series in the right matchup, as are the Jazz. If Phoenix gets in I think they will lose in RD 1.
The Grizzlies' ability to match up pretty well with the Spurs and the Thunder gives them a shot at the Finals.
This is true. But I do think that Simmons sees himself as having some real analytical chops; IMO he would not have written a 700-page history of the NBA otherwise.
The Jazz have played well this season against the Lakers, Grizz, and Nuggets. Unfortunately (for me), if they make the playoffs, it'll be as a 7th or 8th seed and they won't be facing any of those 3. I don't see us taking more than one game if we're lucky against OKC or SA (and I'm not entirely sure I even want us to make the playoffs, since we'll lose our draft pick to Minnesota if we do as part of the Jefferson deal).
This is true. But I do think that Simmons sees himself as having some real analytical chops; IMO he would not have written a 700-page history of the NBA otherwise.
I actually thoroughly enjoyed his book, minus a few of his trademark biased fan-rather-than analyst or "I'm trying to be funny rather than smart" comments that made me roll my eyes. The homerism was sometimes a bit thick, though.
The last game was a lousy barometer, but Utah should be a tough match-up for SA in that SA is a bit thin in the middle. Jefferson, Milsap, and Favors should be able to do a lot of damage in that series and getting at least one home win should be expected. Though SA beat Utah at home this year, Utah is very tough there. If they only get one win in that series, that would be a disappointing effort.
SA seems to be in a tough spot against LA, Memphis and Utah. Utah still needs a bit more on the perimeter to beat them in a series I think, but Memphis and the Lakers are going to be tough for the Spurs to beat IMO.
Pretty much my thoughts as well. I guess they could upset the Thunder. It would just take Hayward shutting down Durant all series like he did the last time they played...so that's not happening, but I think they have a slightly greater chance against the Thunder than they do the Spurs. Speaking of Hayward, it seems like every time I'm ready to write him off he starts playing great. His offense has really picked up again, and he seriously has played shut down defense on some greats like Durant and Kobe. His drtg is awful, but 82 games has him with the best opponents' PER on the team: Utah Jazz. His length really causes problems for his opponent.
Is this draft still supposed to be deep? Most years I don't think the 13th pick or so is a huge deal, and some playoff experience for Favors and Hayward would be nice. If Golden State wasn't the tankiest tankjob ever I really wouldn't worry about giving Minnesota this pick.
He needs to learn how to play consistently, of course, but he's had enough good games that I'm still optimistic he can be a very solid player (maybe 15 ppg in his peak years) for his career. I'm actually just as eager to watch his development over the years as I am with Favors.
Is this draft still supposed to be deep? Most years I don't think the 13th pick or so is a huge deal, and some playoff experience for Favors and Hayward would be nice. If Golden State wasn't the tankiest tankjob ever I really wouldn't worry about giving Minnesota this pick.
Yeah, that's why I'm conflicted. It would be cool to make the playoffs just cuz no one expected it to happen, and to get the youngens some experience. But you're right that the Warriors are in full out tank mode, so we're already likely to lose out on that pick. And I do believe this draft is supposed to be deeper than the last few. While I'm holding out hope for the Jazz kids, we've had two number 3 picks (plus a 9 and a 12) from the last 2 drafts and its entirely possible we won't end up with a single star from it due to the lack of available depth. Why couldn't the 2010 and 2011 drafts be like 2003, 2005, or 2008, where a 3rd pick could've netted us the likes of Carmelo, Bosh, Wade, DWill, Paul, Westbrook, or Love? Dammit.
He seems to be at way less than 100%. He was killing the Bulls tonight.
Rose makes that face 95% of the time. He's fine with it. He hasn't practiced or played in about 30 days. He has no lift and no explosion. Does a healthy Rose walk the ball up the court on every play? Hell no.
Thing is, time to start getting conditioned for the playoffs is here now. He can't keep sitting out and have any sort of wind in teh playoffs. So he's pushing it, as he should.
Thibs is a helluva coach and for this season at least, everyone is behind him 100% from Rose down to Scal.
Great win. I'm not a huge Asik fan but he was big tonight down the stretch. Gibson obviously along with Watson and Korver as well.
He sees how popular dumbass Stacey King has become, and is trying to emulate him. Too bad, since he used to be ok.
If he's not hurt, he certainly seems to be sulking.
Ridiculous.
So Taj Gibson is a better player than Carlos Boozer at this point, right?
He's always been better defensively, and has a knack for timely statement plays. He's actually not that good offensively (and terrible in the post), but had 2 really nice moves (plus the big dunk). Boozer did have 19/11 tonight, so he's still got something. His offense kept them in the game in the 1st and 3rd. They need him to score like that if they want to win a series against Miami.
I even think matchup is overrated, because match up is often used as an after the fact explanation of what happened.
Just because some people only realize it after the fact doesn't make it less true. Hell, it's pretty much the entire story of the WCF playoffs last season and could play a huge role there again this year.
Thibs is a helluva coach and for this season at least, everyone is behind him 100% from Rose down to Scal.
He made some odds substitutions at odd times tonight, enough to make me wonder what he was trying to do. At a certain point, it made sense why he was holding Rose out. But them to put him back in with 3 or so mins left, cold and terrible, was a weird choice. But at least he pulled him before it went on too long. Deng sat a big stretch late in the 4th, with Brewer guarding LBJ; I think Deng came back in at about the 1 min mark or so. Noah barely played in the 2nd half (deservedly so), only coming in after Gibson fouled out.
---
I don't think there's a whole lot to take from tonight, beyond maybe some worry that Rose needs a lot of time to get up to speed. Miami may have talked this matchup up, but losing really doesn't change their long term outlook or how the playoffs will turn out.
Some crazy +/- numbers tonight: Wade +11, Battier -34, Noah -20, Rose -27, Korver +24, Asik +25, Gibson +27 and Watson +38!.
I suppose it depends how you frame the question. Overall performance is the much bigger factor, certainly, but there is demonstrable predictive value to head-to-head performance. I don't believe I included the Finals when I looked at this because two games are less meaningful than the four teams in the same conference usually play against each other.
Was Rose making his sad face on the bench?
I would imagine that the less noisy components of a box score would produce a higher correlation.
Maybe something like an analysis based on how many shots were "good"? So, like, let's say it's the Grizzlies against Sacramento, and I dunno, 40% of their shots are within 9 feet. Compared to the Grizzlies against Boston, where 30% of their shots are within 9 feet.
That's how I would go about it. Things like 3p% and turnovers would have a lot of noise to them.
Yeah, good rebounder and looks like he'll be a decent low post presence. Definitely a project, though. When he catches a pass inside or gets an offensive board under the hoop he needs to learn to just go back up strong rather than trying a bunch of pump fakes that gives the defense time to collapse on him. I think he'll be a useful player, but I've actually been more impressed with Burks.
Either you're joking, or you're confusing him with Ralph Simpson.
Thanks. I'm glad they at least had the nice run in the first half. Playoffs were unlikely after the Rubio injury, so more injuries don't make much of a difference. Gotta root for the Jazz now to try to get that first rounder.
We'll see how it actually works out. I will say that looking at some of the picks in the teens, I see some guys I would like to have on the Wolves- Austin Rivers, Terrence Ross, Doron Lamb.
*-I also thought Kyrie Irving and Derrick Rose were overrated. And that Oden should get drafted ahead of Durant. So, you know...whatever.
From what I can recall at the time of the draft I still think that was reasonable, though maybe I just don't recall serious injury concerns pre-draft.
Also, the Maloofs are protesting the new Sacramento Arena deal to the NBA. Yes, everyone except the Maloofs remembers that the Maloofs signed the deal in February.
There are about 616,000 people in Western Washington who have a similar selective amnesia about that contract.
I believe the "He doesn't move like a NBA player" concerns came out before the draft -- that he walked like an old man, and that that would kill him going up an down an NBA court.
My main concern with Oden was simply that he looked 40 in college. That couldn't be a good sign...
No Millsap tonight for the Jazz.
20 and 10 for Favors! :)
Due to Aldridge's upcoming surgery, all the Oden and Roy stuff is being dredged up here. Every time a Blazer gets hurt, the sky is falling.
He looked like an old man. He could have passed himself off as Robert Parish's older brother. While strange, that doesn't really mean anything.
Bill Simmons reports in his Book of Basketball that he walked like an old man and that set up big red flags and is a much bigger deal - if he's walking in pain before he even plays a game, how is he going to look after playing 82 of them? I don't know how much of that was reported before the draft and how much is post injury rationalization.
Course, to a lesser degree you could say the same things about LeBron...
Simmons' position on Oden is completely in hindsight and after the fact. He didn't say anything about it before he got injured or even drafted iirc.
I remember Simmons as always being a huge Durant guy.
I'm specifically referring to his "Oden walked like an old man he was always a huge injury risk" hypothesis. I dunno, I could be wrong. Will try and dig through his archive maybe.
Simmons was on the Durant train hard before that draft. A lot of the "Oden was doomed" stuff is Simmons revisionism (though his pre-draft snap judgements have proven accurate), but he argued that Durant was a can't-miss guy and Oden wasn't before anything had panned out.
I dunno about this. I think there were two stories to the WCF playoffs last year. Memphis/San Antonio. That was less matchups and more two other things: Ginobili being hurt, and Memphis being a pretty f'n good team that was playing like a 50 win team for the second half of the year and playoffs. Also, Z-Bo was playing out of his mind that series. And then there was Dallas - well they were a good team that was on fire from three. I don't know that was matchups as much as it was unsustainable shooting.
Edit: I do think matchups matter a bit, but I think people often say matchups when really it is something more unsustainable like a hot streak, or a team not playing well, or health issues (including getting healthy), or a team that got a seed that doesn't reflect their talent and how they had been playing.
Other than that circumstantial quote, I'm not seeing anything that DX said about him from high school through college that talks about Oden being an injury risk or not being able to play effectively in the NBA for any durability reason.
Going into the playoffs, it was noted that SA's weakness was big offensive players - like the Lakers. Well, Z-Bo and Gasol did exactly to them what people thought LA would do to them. LA's big weakness was 3pt defense, and shockingly enough Dallas took advantage. That's what I meant.
---
As for the Oden injury stuff, it's not like Durant was without question marks. Remember he couldn't bench 185 once, so there was a lot of concern about whether or not he'd be strong enough for the league. Also, as good as he was, Texas flamed out in the tourney; to a number of people that was also a red flag. Some weren't sure what position he should play - he played the 2 most of his first season in the NBA. So even if there were injury fears with Oden, taking a 7ft center was still seen as a lot safer by the majority of people.
In fact, he said this:
That's about as far from the walk like an old man that you can get.
Here's the draft diary.
I think a good example of matchups mattering was the 2007 first round upset between Golden State (42-40) and Dallas (67-15). GS was one of the few teams that won the regular season series with Dallas (I think it was 3-1, but I'm not sure), but people seemed to shrug it off as a small sample size fluke and assumed the clearly better team would win in a 7 game series. Well, it wasn't a fluke. GS really did match up well with Dallas and played a type of offense they had trouble defending. The Mavs were still clearly the better team overall; if they had won that series they would've been a serious threat to win the title, whereas the Warriors proved they weren't a true contender by fading away meekly in the 2nd round against a 5th seed Jazz team. So yeah, I think matchups really can matter.
(OTOH, the following season with basically the same teams, Dallas won 51 games and GS won 48, so maybe there wasn't a huge difference between them after all. I always did get the feeling the Mavs weren't quite as good as their record and the Warriors may have been slightly better than theirs, so I guess its debatable whether the match up example above really applies).
New Jersey won in Philadelphia.
Toronto beat Boston 84-79.
Well, if Dwight wasn't trying to get Stan fired before, he certainly is now.
27 points for Millsap total. Jazz still lose to New Orleans for the second time this year. They've really got to work on their consistency. Beat SA at home (okay, okay, it was without the Spurs big 3) and the Rockets in Houston in their last two, and now lose to the Hornets. And a few weeks back they beat the Lakers in LA and then the Thunder at home in two straight games, and then lost at home to the Kings a week later. Sigh...
Inconsistency comes with youth and inexperience, I guess.
They did that already.
Also the shortened season. Lots of good teams are highly inconsistent this year also. Probably not directly applicable here.
Or: they're fringe contenders, but dismissing the "contenders" part of that out of hand is silly, just like dismissing the "fringe" part would be.
[/homer]
Tangentially, I was just watching this-- Magic was before my time, but seeing the way he varied the release point on his one-hand bounce passes to optimize the passing angle through traffic really reminded me of Rondo. More a stylistic point than anything, but interesting.
Edit: New York let it slip away.
Awesome. I will never in my life get tired of functionally flashy passing. It's just the best.
I'm wondering if there is another sports question that's absolutely non-controversial (Jordan the greatest) by 80%+, but there is a small minority who feel so adamently about it. I absolutely believe that Magic was the greatest, but when this comes up I find 1 or 2 supporters, but the rest of the crowd acts like I compared Jordan to Vince Carter. I'm not even sure Ted Williams supporters are as adamant as Magic Truthers.
As much as I loathe them, BOS could definitely make a Dallas-type run this year. Their defense with Bradley starting in the backcourt, along with Rondo and Garnett is formidable. It's really all about health with them. The playoffs do look to be brutal this year with the scheduling for an old team like the C's.
I've always felt like the Jordan thing was a branding success. It's really difficult to compare across eras, but I'm really not sure that Jordan was better than Wilt, for instance.
But Jordan is the GOAT, so whatever.
The only thing to take from the game is that Rose looks 100x better than he did on Thursday. Still not 100%, but his shot wasn't as flat, he attacked more, and just looked less winded throughout the game. I'm sure part of that is facing the Pistons D instead of the Heat, but he just has to get back to speed the next couple of weeks. Of course, he couldn't escape the game unscathed. Villeneuva split his nose open with a hard foul (it was called a flagrant 1, but I think it was just a hard foul that happened to draw a lot of blood).
That's sort of where I land with it. Jordan absolutely nailed the narrative arc of being a winner, never losing a game 7 and snapping off two threepeats bookending his baseball dalliance. (And that was caused by his father's death, so you can't ding him for that.) And he did all that on-court while trailblazing how to be a global branding icon. His brand narrative obliterated history, and he combined ability and rings. I agree that he's not obviously better than Wilt, and Pippen often gets overlooked as his wingman. I'm not saying he isn't GOAT, but the ironclad imperviousness of it has as much to do with narrative and Jordan lucking into the perfect career timing as it does his dominance.
I'll remember him as the guy the draft announcers predicted that the Golden State Warriors would draft, when they drafted Tyrone Hill instead. The Warriors made the right choice.
Sad to hear about his passing, as good of an NBA player as he wasn't.
11.9
9.8
8.7
8.8
Here are LeBron James' TOVs the last four years, counting this year:
11.0
12.3
13.8
13.1
Latter-day Jordan had TOVs around 7 or 8 with USGs still in the 30s.
Now, of course, James and Johnson have/had much higher AST rates, but peak Jordan consistently had USGs in the 30s, TOV's in single digits, and TS%s around 60.
You add that to his defense (better than Bird or Magic) and the diversity of his offensive game (was not a bad FT shooter, like Wilt or Shaq, could get to the rack, shoot the J, and work the mid-range area) and I think that puts him at the top. There was really nothing you could do with the guy at his peak. He was not a particularly good 3p shooter and was just a good-not-great passer, but when you can get that many quality shots on your own, hit your FTs, pass the ball well enough to burn the other team if they trap, collapse, hedge, or double, take care of the ball that well, AND play top-notch defense, well, that is pretty much it.
Some of his stat lines from games in that period tell the story. Game 2 of the 1991 Finals (that was the mid-air handswitch game):
15/18 FG
3/4 FT
13 AST
4 TO
7 RB
A much less famous game--Game 4, 1990 Conference semis, in Philly. Pippen didn't play:
16/31 FG
12/13 FT
11 AST
2 TO
6 RB 2 STL 2 BLK
Guys an #######, but he could ball.
Great job anticipating my reply! I have no interest challenging the contemporary given that Jordan is the GOAT, but I do think it's partly a consequence of where we are in history. KAJ has all the qualities you mention, including FT shooting and defense. He didn't have Jordan's offensive versatility, given his position and size. Obviously, however, he didn't really need it! But Jordan was awesome, and I think there's a bias against making a 5 the GOAT; it seems to have to be a guard/forward.
Is there? I don't know that a bias for MJ really means a bias against a center. I think it might be that there isn't a consensus in the Wilt/Russell argument, and as you would note KAJ belongs in there as well. It's a lot harder to poke a hole in MJ's case than the other guys - whether or not the hole is deserved or overstated.
ISTM this would likely be the case because a lot of the value in a great big man is the effect he has on the defense and defense, especially team defense, tends to be underrated. In addition, I suspect there's a tendency to belittle the accomplishments of 5s by saying that they aren't "good" basketball players, they're just big, whereas with the other positions we're able to say wow, what a great passer/dribbler/shooter/etc. It's kind of like how Dwight Howard has pretty clearly been, at worst, the second best player in basketball for a few years now and he doesn't really seem (IMO) to have that public acknowledgement.
Okay, I really, really really don't want to devolve into this long argument about MJ and the GOAT, because to my mind there isn't much difference in being the greatest or the third greatest. So I'm just going to stipulate up front that I am fine with describing MJ as the GOAT.
That said, holes in MJ's case:
1. Low defensive responsibility compared to centers. Shooting guard and SF are probably the positions with the least inherent defensive responsibility. If your man never touches the ball, your impact is limited. Centers are much more involved in the defense in every play. It's like SS vs. outfield.
2. Harder to build a team around. Most of the other GOAT guys were really easy--find someone to get them the ball. The Bulls were harder to build because of the idiosyncratic players required: a PG who was a spot up shooter/defender, bigs who didn't want the ball, Scottie Pippen.
3. Probably benefited from the refereeing more than any player in history. Most of the other contenders for GOAT were centers and routinely beaten up with no whistles. After around 1991, that didn't happen to Jordan. This is sort of unproveable.
I'm not interested in that conversation either, but your post kinda proves my point. It's a lot easier to say about Russell "look at the FG% and lack of offense"; it's easy to point at Wilt and say "2 rings, couldn't beat Russell"; you can look at KAJ and say "Magic, and game 7". Whether or not those are right or not is beside the point.
EDIT: I should say I'm commenting on the narrative of MJ as GOAT, not whether or not he actually is or isn't.
Fair point, and this gets into unproveable territory pretty fast. The Bulls didn't make the Finals until '91. Before that time, in '86-'90, they went first round loss, 2nd round loss, 3rd round loss, 3rd round loss.
It's sort of chicken and the egg scenario, because the Bulls never had any good players who didn't fit that kind of mold. Part of that, of course, towards the end of his career was MJ, though.
I do think Jordan was more difficult to build around than Wilt or Kareem from a structural POV.
You mean his suspension from the NBA for gambling.
/Simmons.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main