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

Friday, June 01, 2012

OT: NBA Monthly Thread, June 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: overwrought, acrimonious discussions about having where to put the site’s overwrought, acrimonious discussions.

Famous Original Joe C Posted: June 01, 2012 at 09:58 AM | 2704 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: general

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 23 of 28 pages ‹ First  < 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 > 
   2201. rr Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:53 AM (#4163366)
instead I feel like I did when A-Rod won his in '09.


I assumed you would. My guess is most Knicks fans don't share that sentiment, however (insert winking emoticon here).

KnickerBlogger's current post header: Eddy Curry earns first championship ring
Cavs: The Blog is talking about the draft and has nothing up about it at all, which is probably a good idea. Didn't look for any comments.
   2202. NJ in DC (Now with temporary employment!) Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:54 AM (#4163367)
RT @johnschuhmann: Finals +/- Serge Ibaka: -42. Kendrick Perkins: -25. Nick Collison: +13.
   2203. cmd600 Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:56 AM (#4163368)
No, the Heat are definitely A LOT better. Most of the things that made Cleveland a really good team would be negated in the playoffs against a team like Boston or OKC. Mike Brown is a good, maybe even great defensive coach, but if he can't match up athletically he has huge problems adjusting, which has basically been evident in every single series he has ever coached. I think the Laker fans here might have interesting comments on his coaching as well.

Also, he had no offensive game plan whatsoever other than let LeBron have the ball and make plays. Whatever you want to say about Spoelstra, the Heat made adjustments any time they lost a game or were faced with a mismatch problem.

The 2007-08 Cavs went 45-37 and were outscored in the regular season. The 2008-09 Cavs won 66 games with basically the same cast plus Mo Williams. Mo Williams isn't worth 20+ wins.

Also, the Cavs had pretty good depth, going about 8-9 deep with decent rotation regulars. That depth advantage is largely negated in the playoffs. And Ben Wallace was a big contributor who got hurt and was pretty worthless in 2009.



Things the made the Cavaliers a great team in 2008-09 (besides Lebron obviously) - fantastic defense, rebounding, 3 point shooting around Lebron, and protecting the ball. I'll give you that the 3pt shooting could take a dive against better defenses in the playoffs, but most of those things should continue to show up. The only time that Mike Brown really got hammered in a mismatch athletically was against Dwight Howard, and he threw everything, including the kitchen sink, at Howard. Every Cavs big man tried to guard him (including Lebron) to no avail. That wasn't an issue adjusting. And Lewis, Turkoglu, and the rest of the Magic roster were successful because they shot lights out, not because of athleticism.

And I'm not sure why the 07-08 Cavs are included here, but the 08-09 Cavs were not just the 07-08 Cavs + Mo Williams. Delonte West was a key addition, Varejao took a huge leap, and even Lebron improved (mostly on defense). The 08-09 Cavs would have mopped the floor with the Drew Gooden-Sasha Pavlovic-Larry Hughes version that was ran out the year before.
   2204. baudib Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:58 AM (#4163370)
For those who don't follow or watch Bayless, yes, he is an amazing troll. As recently as a week ago he was saying that the Heat would only go as far as Dwyane Wade could carry them. If I have a good read on the situation, I expect he'll get on the air this morning and be faux gracious, "First, let me say that LeBron played very well, and he deserves credit for FINALLY becoming the dominant player he thought he was...BUT..." and then go into a long diatribe about how Russell Westbrook and Scott Brooks gave the series away and that he'd still take Durant and Wade over LeBron.

   2205. NJ in DC (Now with temporary employment!) Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:58 AM (#4163371)
One True Hoop feature I always enjoy is their NBA player twitter reactions.

My guess is most Knicks fans don't sahre that sentiment, however (insert winking emoticon here).

Yeah, I'm getting a lot of #### for it from fellow Knicks fans still angry about The Decision. Whatever.
   2206. baudib Posted: June 22, 2012 at 02:08 AM (#4163373)
And I'm not sure why the 07-08 Cavs are included here, but the 08-09 Cavs were not just the 07-08 Cavs + Mo Williams. Delonte West was a key addition, Varejao took a huge leap, and even Lebron improved (mostly on defense). The 08-09 Cavs would have mopped the floor with the Drew Gooden-Sasha Pavlovic-Larry Hughes version that was ran out the year before.


Delonte West was on the 07-08 Cavs. He played 35 mins a game in the playoffs for the 07-08 Cavs. Gooden and Hughes were traded at the deadline for West. Pavlovic played on the 2008-09 Cavs. Mo Williams of the the LeBron-era Cavs was totally a creation of LeBron James. To a lesser extent, this is also true of Andy V and West and most of the roster.

The things that made the Cavaliers a great team in 2008-09 was LeBron James. You can end the thought there. The Cavs of 09/10 were the worst 60+ win teams of all time. If you go back and read the epic playoff thread started by robinred, you can see it was well discussed at the time.
   2207. thok Posted: June 22, 2012 at 05:51 AM (#4163394)
Is it just me, or does it feel like Boston did a better job of defending Miami's 4-12 then OK City did? (Yes, Bosh was injured for much of the Boston series, but even limiting to the later games of the Boston series there still seems to be a difference.)
   2208. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: June 22, 2012 at 08:37 AM (#4163443)
Congrats, Heat fans (if there is such a thing).
   2209. jmurph Posted: June 22, 2012 at 08:49 AM (#4163450)
Is it just me, or does it feel like Boston did a better job of defending Miami's 4-12 then OK City did?


I think Wade was worse in that series, Bosh didn't play much (as you mentioned), and the Miami shooters weren't drilling every single open look. Boston also has a few guys who can at least pretend to deal with Lebron one on one, where as OKC was limited to just Thabo.

Also, my sense (not sure how to confirm this by the numbers) is that Lebron avoided settling for the long 2 more in this series than he did against Boston, likely because KG was able to roam in the first few games without Bosh, so the paint was a much less welcoming place than it was against OKC.
   2210. jmurph Posted: June 22, 2012 at 08:51 AM (#4163455)
I don't even have a frame of reference for the absurd high post quarterbacking that Lebron did in this series. It was incredible to watch. My memories of Magic's prime aren't sharp enough to know if that would be a good comparison- I remember more Showtime Magic than I do halfcourt Magic.
   2211. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: June 22, 2012 at 09:27 AM (#4163484)
Lebron just had one of the most remarkable seasons ever. If you are a person who is paid to write about and analyze the NBA, you have failed if you do not realize this.
   2212. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: June 22, 2012 at 09:43 AM (#4163497)
Paige, LBJ blew past Bill Simmons' "42-club" (combined ppg, rpg, apg) this postseason: 30.3/9.7/5.6. Also 43 mpg, 50% shooting, 1.8 steals, amazing defense, and his lowest scoring game was 22 points. Just a spectacular run.
   2213. AROM Posted: June 22, 2012 at 09:47 AM (#4163504)
Is it just me, or does it feel like Boston did a better job of defending Miami's 4-12 then OK City did?


They did, which should be expected since they were the top defensive team in the regular season. But Mike Miller and the rest of the Heat long range shooters did get some open looks against Boston, and just missed them. When you'd got Lebron and Wade drawing double teams/ help defenders you'll always have some decent looks for 3, at it's impossible to predict when your guys will catch fire.

If OKC had pulled one of games 2-4 out, and sent the series back home, I'm pretty confidant that Miller doesn't have anything close to that kind of game again.

Looking back at Lebron in 2009:

Game 1: Lebron scores 49 on 20-30 shooting. Magic shoot 9-20 from 3, win by 1.
Game 2: Magic 10-23 from 3, Lebron scores 35, including 3 at buzzer to win by 1.
Game 3: Lebron's shooting not good, 11-28, but he gets to the line 24 times, makes 18, scores 41. Magic win.
Game 4: Lebron scores 44 on 29 FGA, 18 FTA. Magic 17-38 from 3, win in OT. James, down by 2 in regulation, gets a foul call on Pietrus with half a second remaining, hits both free throws. Down 4 with 4 seconds in OT, James hits a 3. After a foul and 1 of 2 free throws, Lebron choked on a 38 foot 3 point attempt.
Game 5: Lebron scores 37, triple double, Cavs win by 10.
Game 6: Lebron has his worst game, 8-20, 25 points, in a 13 point loss. Magic hit another 12 3 pointers, though taking 29 attempts.

Lebron played about as well as humanly possible that series. Without his buzzer beater in G2 it would have been a sweep. As for his defense, I don't remember the details but the circumstances don't seem to have presented a good matchup. Lebron can shut down pretty much any scorer one on one. But the Magic had Lewis, Turk, Alston, and Pietrus all going off on three pointers pretty much any game. He can stop one of them, but not all of them.

2010 was a different story. I can't offer any defense for the way he played in the last 3 games of that series. But it's in the past, and he's moved on to become a champion. Congrats, Lebron.


   2214. AROM Posted: June 22, 2012 at 09:53 AM (#4163515)
I checked on BB-ref, and Lebron's postseason win share total comes out just behind Duncan's 2003, 5.9 to 5.8. It's hard to say who had the best postseason, because Duncan's 25-15-5 with 79 blocks was amazing. He beat Shaq and Kobe, then the 60 win Mavericks.

He played 24 games that postseason, 1 more than Lebron. Ironically, had Miami lost 1 more game and finished in 6, as the Spurs did with the Nets, Lebron probably passes Duncan. Talk about disincentives, he'd have to lose more to get more win shares. In light of that I'll say it's close enough to give them a tie for best postseason run in the modern era.
   2215. Spivey Posted: June 22, 2012 at 10:06 AM (#4163530)
The things that made the Cavaliers a great team in 2008-09 was LeBron James. You can end the thought there. The Cavs of 09/10 were the worst 60+ win teams of all time. If you go back and read the epic playoff thread started by robinred, you can see it was well discussed at the time.

I remember this, and I remember people were mainly saying, going into the playoffs that yar, they've got all the right pieces around LeBron and Cleveland looks like a clear favorite.
   2216. Spivey Posted: June 22, 2012 at 10:07 AM (#4163535)
Paige, LBJ blew past Bill Simmons' "42-club" (combined ppg, rpg, apg) this postseason: 30.3/9.7/5.6. Also 43 mpg, 50% shooting, 1.8 steals, amazing defense, and his lowest scoring game was 22 points. Just a spectacular run.

Small nitpick, but he only scored 19 in Game 2 against the Knicks.
   2217. Moses Taylor World Re-Tour 2.0: Warszawa Posted: June 22, 2012 at 10:18 AM (#4163551)
No, the Heat are definitely A LOT better. Most of the things that made Cleveland a really good team would be negated in the playoffs against a team like Boston or OKC. Mike Brown is a good, maybe even great defensive coach, but if he can't match up athletically he has huge problems adjusting, which has basically been evident in every single series he has ever coached. I think the Laker fans here might have interesting comments on his coaching as well.

Watching this series, I was trying to mentally match up the Heat with the Bulls. We didn't see much of the Bulls healthy and peaking this year, but I was trying to compare the Bulls at their best to Miami at their best. And dammit if the Bulls still didn't come up short. So I see this quote, and I can't help but think of the similarities between the LeBron Cleveland teams and the current Bulls.
   2218. Spivey Posted: June 22, 2012 at 10:27 AM (#4163561)
Watching this series, I was trying to mentally match up the Heat with the Bulls. We didn't see much of the Bulls healthy and peaking this year, but I was trying to compare the Bulls at their best to Miami at their best. And dammit if the Bulls still didn't come up short. So I see this quote, and I can't help but think of the similarities between the LeBron Cleveland teams and the current Bulls

The big questions would be could Deng or Noah have been able to slow down LeBron. Because Miami is very beatable when he plays any level below great. Hell, there were teams in the playoffs that played the Heat tough and even won games when he was playing great. Really a testament to the consistent greatness he showed the last few weeks.
   2219. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 22, 2012 at 10:29 AM (#4163565)
Miami is a worthy champion, but I am curious as to how a series v. the Spurs would have looked. A big part of Miami's success stemmed (imo) from OKC's unwillingness to adapt to Miami playing a smaller lineup / Spo's willingness to do so. The Heat looked more like the club I thought they could be in the finals (and not just because they were successful) then they had in some time.
   2220. cmd600 Posted: June 22, 2012 at 10:48 AM (#4163577)
Delonte West was on the 07-08 Cavs. He played 35 mins a game in the playoffs for the 07-08 Cavs. Gooden and Hughes were traded at the deadline for West. Pavlovic played on the 2008-09 Cavs. Mo Williams of the the LeBron-era Cavs was totally a creation of LeBron James. To a lesser extent, this is also true of Andy V and West and most of the roster.

The things that made the Cavaliers a great team in 2008-09 was LeBron James. You can end the thought there. The Cavs of 09/10 were the worst 60+ win teams of all time. If you go back and read the epic playoff thread started by robinred, you can see it was well discussed at the time.


The Cavs played noticeably better after the trade. They wouldn't have hung with Boston at all without it. And I'm sure you can understand there's a difference between how a guy works with your team when he first gets traded there and after an offseason working with the team/coach.

Yes, Lebron was by far the biggest part of that team, but he doesn't produce a team that was top 20 all-time in wins and margin of victory without a lot of help, these last two Miami teams that would supposedly mop the floor with them couldn't come close. When you say stuff like "worst 60+ win team of all time", I know you've let the hyperbole train run well off the tracks.
   2221. Moses Taylor World Re-Tour 2.0: Warszawa Posted: June 22, 2012 at 10:58 AM (#4163587)
The big questions would be could Deng or Noah have been able to slow down LeBron. Because Miami is very beatable when he plays any level below great. Hell, there were teams in the playoffs that played the Heat tough and even won games when he was playing great. Really a testament to the consistent greatness he showed the last few weeks.

And Gibson and Asik. LeBron wouldn't have gotten in the lane as easily as he did against OKC. But that's the Bulls' strength, and we did see Miami struggle with that type of defense against Boston; of course, the Bulls have a lot more size than Boston, so it would have been that defense *plus* a rebounding advantage for Chicago. The question really is the Bulls offense against the Heat defense. Last year's ECF was a lot like the Finals this year in that the loser won game 1 in a somewhat convincing manner (Bulls moreso than Thunder), and then the rest of the series was relatively close (and that will be or already has been forgotten by many who only look at the 4-1 margin); Bulls choked the clincher away in the last couple of minutes instead of getting run off the court but the point remains.

I think the Bulls were a better offensive team this year than last; Rose was more efficient and smarter, Rip was a huge upgrade on Bogans, etc. I think the Heat looked like a better defense in the playoffs than last year; a lot of that is Battier and Battier's weaknesses would be less exposed against a less athletic team like the Bulls. I still think the Bulls would have been in trouble when LeBron switched to Rose since they still don't have a 2nd ball handler/creator. So perhaps the Bulls, with HCA, could have extended a series against Miami out longer than last year, but they still probably come up short.
   2222. JuanGone..except1game Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:01 AM (#4163589)
Miami is a worthy champion, but I am curious as to how a series v. the Spurs would have looked. A big part of Miami's success stemmed (imo) from OKC's unwillingness to adapt to Miami playing a smaller lineup / Spo's willingness to do so. The Heat looked more like the club I thought they could be in the finals (and not just because they were successful) then they had in some time.


I know that we are suppossed to bask in their glow, but I've been wondering that since game 2. I feel like Spurs would have provided more matchup problems by being able to counter the small lineup with those Bonner at PF lineups and possibly even SJax. And Duncan would have caused problems for MIA, which Ibaka/Perk/Collins just weren't. Though, as said, the Heat played their peak basketball at the right time which you can't say about the Spurs/OKC.
   2223. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:05 AM (#4163594)
If you're Miami, what do you do with Battier?
It's difficult to understate how poorly he looked from a box score perspective (relative to expectations) this year. Per 36 minutes, he was a 7.5/3.7/2.0, shooting 39/34/62 (each of those is down quite a bit from his career norms: post-rookie season, he was a 45/39/76), while splitting his time between the three (35% of team minutes) and two (25%). Interestingly, 82games has him essentially not playing the four during the regular season, where he seemed to have success in spot work in the playoffs. (How we capture position in a lineup with a bunch of wings is up for debate.)
   2224. Jimmy P Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:24 AM (#4163615)
If you're Miami, what do you do with Battier?


What can they do? Trade him or buy him out. They can't amnesty him, they signed him after that. The bigger things are what do they do with Miller and Anthony.

And, at what point do OKC fans realize that this is what Perk is?
   2225. JuanGone..except1game Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:26 AM (#4163618)
Also, this series proves again that young/inexperienced teams just aren't a good bet to win a NBA Championship. We've seen to many examples (OKC, early Jordan Bulls, Shaq Magic, Supersonics) of this playing out. I just don't count the brief period in the early/mid 70's with the Bucks and Trailblazers because of the league talent issues and the transcendence of early KAJ/Walton. I know that I'm in Bill Simmons territory, as I believe OKC will get their's but the experience of a heartbreak like this just seems to be crucial to eventually winning one yourself.
   2226. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4163621)
Oh, I meant how do you use him - I don't think he's going anywhere.
   2227. JJ1986 Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4163622)
I think Miami needs to add a real backup for Wade (Playing PG, Battier, James, 2 bigs is not a good lineup) and then let Shane just backup LeBron and play the 4 in the small lineup. Maybe Ray Allen wants to come play there.
   2228. Jimmy P Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:33 AM (#4163630)
Maybe Ray Allen wants to come play there.

Jason Terry would be good, too
   2229. cmd600 Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:40 AM (#4163638)
Also, this series proves again that young/inexperienced teams just aren't a good bet to win a NBA Championship.


But what is it about being young that transcends talent? Can they not adjust to the bigger media circus? Is there something you learn about making adjustments? Also, we have to consider that many of these younger teams were not actually considered the most talented. Apparently, despite what was said when Miami played Boston and Indiana, we now were all aware of just how much more talented this Miami team was than the rest of the league.
   2230. andrewberg Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:46 AM (#4163647)
Lots of good discussion here today. I am proud of the high level of stuff everybody here tends to post. I logged on briefly after the game last night and rolled my eyes and the temper tantrum posts ("Why can't everything be the greatest thing ever?! That makes me mad!") but there are so many interesting angles being brought up today.

I do not have a lot of analytic points to make. I was just happy to have a sports team pay off. Cheering for Minnesota teams, Georgetown hoops, and UW football has yielded more failures and moral victories than triumphs for the last 20 years. My proudest moment was my favorite player from my childhood (KG) leaving the city and winning for a team I don't especially like. Lebron and I are exactly the same age and I started following him when he was a HS sophomore prodigy. I have defended him- often against logic- for his whole career and it made me really happy to see someone in whom I became truly invested climb the mountain.

I am also happy for Mike Miller. The story about him ignoring doctors because they couldn't do anything for him is funny. I am happy for Juwan Howard and the rest of the fab 5 for finally winning a ring. I am happy for Bosh, whose reputation probably took the biggest relative hit going to Miami, and he finished the series very well. I was even impressed by how humble Wade was, which is against type, but humanizes him, particularly given the really tough family stuff he has had to handle.
   2231. JJ1986 Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:53 AM (#4163657)
Apparently, despite what was said when Miami played Boston and Indiana, we now were all aware of just how much more talented this Miami team was than the rest of the league.


Bosh was out pretty much the entire time that people were down on the Heat.
   2232. AROM Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:58 AM (#4163662)
I just don't count the brief period in the early/mid 70's with the Bucks and Trailblazers because of the league talent issues and the transcendence of early KAJ/Walton.


With the Bucks, you've also got Oscar Robertson to temper the inexperience of Kareem. For young champions, there's the 1979 Sonics. Their 3 best players (Williams, Sikma, DJ) were 23-25. 77 Blazers as you mention had top players all in their early to mid 20's. But league quality issues make it a different case. Between the decline of the Cowens Celtics and the Clyde Knicks, and the rise of Magic and Bird, there was no dynasty to contend with.

Sixers could have been that team. Dr. J was a better player in the late 70's than he was in the early 80's. And they did go to the finals in 77. Too bad they couldn't put quality players around him until a few years later when there was more competition. I could easily see a slightly changed history where they won 3-4 titles and filled that gap.

Considering that Moses Malone was trade twice after the ABA dispersal draft, Sixers could have probably gotten him if they wanted to. Replace Dawkins with Moses from 77-82, and you've got a dynasty.
   2233. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 22, 2012 at 12:07 PM (#4163670)
Newsbreak: James Jones is also considering retirement + Kendrick was apparently battling a torn groin that may require surgery.

I'm happy for a number of the Heat as well. For Miller (who's had an interesting career), for Bosh, for Turiaf. For Juwan. Kind of for LeBron.

Interesting that you (Andrew) said that you were impressed with Wade's humility - I thought he was struggling to seem humble during the postgame stuff. (Note: I don't dislike him, though I didn't like some of his antics during the playoffs).

Also, this series proves again that young/inexperienced teams just aren't a good bet to win a NBA Championship.

I think that's overstated as well. Having said that, LeBron claims that his failure last year changed him (and I think that's true) - so there's something to be said for people changing for the better because of past postseason failures (Chris Bosh committing himself more fully to spending time at the five is another example) -- an opportunity that inexperienced teams haven't necessarily had. Still - that's only one way to learn, one of many.
   2234. Jimmy P Posted: June 22, 2012 at 12:35 PM (#4163711)
Also, this series proves again that young/inexperienced teams just aren't a good bet to win a NBA Championship.


I think that has to do more with roster movement, length of players' careers, and the enormous effect that one or two great players can have on a series.
   2235. Fourth True Outcome Posted: June 22, 2012 at 12:52 PM (#4163724)
If you're in the mood for a little schadenfreude today, here's Mark Cuban taking Skip Bayless apart on First Take. I'm not a huge Cuban fan, but the way he keeps circling the conversation back to tactics to eviscerate Bayless is pretty great.

As for the youth thing, I think it has little to do with absolute age, and more to do with skill. Young teams don't win championships because young players are rarely good enough to win championships as a team's focal point. I think the Thunder lost less because they're 22/23 than because their defense didn't hold up, in large part because they didn't have anyone who could check LeBron, and their offense didn't have answers for the Heat defense. Some of that is execution, some of that is bad luck on shots, some of that is Scott Brooks not making the right adjustments, etc. I don't know that I believe you can really point to age specifically.
   2236. Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot Posted: June 22, 2012 at 12:59 PM (#4163728)
[2205 / NBA player reactions] Agree. I literally laughed out at the Thabeet tweet but then I went to his twitter account and it's all that awesome. The funniest part is probably his handle.
   2237. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:01 PM (#4163729)
Also, this series proves again that young/inexperienced teams just aren't a good bet to win a NBA Championship.

I think that's overstated as well.


I don't think it's overstated. I think it's complete ###### nonsense. The thing is that EVERY team is a bad bet to win a championship. Even the best team in the league is maybe 25%. The way OKC handled the oh so experienced Spurs, should really have killed off any finger-pointing at age.

They lost to a very good Heat team, with the best player in the league playing at a superlative level. There's really nothing more to say than that. The better team won, not because they were more experienced, but because they were just better.
   2238. JuanGone..except1game Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:24 PM (#4163744)
I don't think it's overstated. I think it's complete ###### nonsense. The thing is that EVERY team is a bad bet to win a championship. Even the best team in the league is maybe 25%. The way OKC handled the oh so experienced Spurs, should really have killed off any finger-pointing at age.


Why would that be nonsense? What are you pointing to? Of course, its hard to win an NBA championship, but we have a clear 25 year trend and enough teams for a decent sample. Yes, OKC handled the Spurs, but as Moses said "fo-fo-fo". A week ago, people were expecting an all-time great series and what we got was an OKC team that was every bit as good as the Heat all year, with more depth, as much if not more top-shelf talent, homecourt, no injuries yet they got dismantled. They shot under their averages in 3pt% and Ft%, one of their best but most inexperienced players was AWOL for most of the series and even their second best player was highly inconsistent. You can disagree, but I think your off on calling it nonsense.
   2239. NJ in DC (Now with temporary employment!) Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:37 PM (#4163752)
A week ago, people were expecting an all-time great series and what we got was an OKC team that was every bit as good as the Heat all year, with more depth, as much if not more top-shelf talent, homecourt, no injuries yet they got dismantled.

Not sure we accounted for LeBron going Super Saiyan.

EDIT: But seriously, the series was incredibly tight other than Game 5.

EDIT 2: Coke.
   2240. AROM Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:41 PM (#4163758)
Yes, OKC handled the Spurs, but as Moses said "fo-fo-fo".


OKC actually did the fo-fo-fo thing. But since Moses won that ring we've added another playoff round. We need fo fo's to get to the promised land.

Heat didn't do any dismantling until the final game. The first 4 were close enough that either team could have won.

I don't know if being a young team gives you any special disadvantage in the NBA finals. There may have been any young championship teams in a long time, but that might just be because young teams being good enough to challenge for a championship are so rare themselves.
   2241. baudib Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:43 PM (#4163761)
I still feel that if these teams play 100 games, OKC probably wins close to 50 if not more.
   2242. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:49 PM (#4163767)
Each of the first four games went down to the last minute. It was a close series in the way that the 2005 World Series was close.
   2243. andrewberg Posted: June 22, 2012 at 01:53 PM (#4163772)
Interesting that you (Andrew) said that you were impressed with Wade's humility - I thought he was struggling to seem humble during the postgame stuff. (Note: I don't dislike him, though I didn't like some of his antics during the playoffs).


Maybe I'm falling for the sappy stuff with his kids, but that seemed genuine to me.
   2244. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 22, 2012 at 02:03 PM (#4163788)
I'm referring specifically to his response to a question about taking a second banana role this year - Wade looked to be choosing his words carefully and biting his tongue a bit. Which is fine, he didn't get to where he is by not being an alpha dog.

baudib on OKC: You're presuming that Brooks changes his rotations sooner than later, I guess. Or that Bosh gets hurt again at some point?

It was a close series - I think people will forget that remarkably quickly, but it was. Were I a betting man, I'd've considered putting money on the Thunder after game 4.

As for experience/youth - I don't want to be too dismissive. Not because of the pressure of it all, mind you, but because it's a fundamentally different situation with the playoffs, where matchups mean a lot more, where you play the same team over and over, and where long run strategies go out the window. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some small, real effect - but that it might be hard to measure.
   2245. NJ in DC (Now with temporary employment!) Posted: June 22, 2012 at 02:05 PM (#4163791)
[2243] That reminds me, I seem to remember NBA Playoff halftime shows (Especially late in the playoffs) being filled with nothing but human interest stories/angles. I saw none of that this year, which greatly pleased me, but was curious if anyone knows whether ABC/TNT/ESPN purposefully went away from that. If so, was this something they did last year as well? When did it start?
   2246. AROM Posted: June 22, 2012 at 02:09 PM (#4163795)
Young teams with 55 or more wins:

64 Royals - 25 year old Oscar, 23 Jerry Lucas. Like everyone else at this time, they couldn't beat Russell.
69 Bullets - Unseld as a rookie, Monroe was 24. Nothing in playoffs.
78 Blazers - didn't win, but same crew won the title in 77.
79 Sonics - won
89 Cavaliers - Price, Harper, Daugherty were 25 and under. Ran into Jordan in playoffs. This seemed like a great team that would grow together, but too many injuries to all 3 prevented this. 2 years later they had their best showing, going to the ECF, but ran into Jordan again.
95 Orlando Magic. Swept in Finals, next year lost to a Jordan bent for revenge, Shaq took his talents to Venice Beach.

Too small a sample to draw any conclusions about this. Except that assuming the team will have many more chances for a title is not a safe bet. Injuries and free agency can screw that plan up quickly.
   2247. kpelton Posted: June 22, 2012 at 02:31 PM (#4163810)
I suppose Scott Brooks is young for a coach.
   2248. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: June 22, 2012 at 02:40 PM (#4163815)
Why would that be nonsense? What are you pointing to? Of course, its hard to win an NBA championship, but we have a clear 25 year trend and enough teams for a decent sample.

As AROM points out in 2246, we really don't.

A week ago, people were expecting an all-time great series and what we got was an OKC team that was every bit as good as the Heat all year, with more depth

Which should tilt the series in the Heat's favor since depth is less important in the playoffs.

as much if not more top-shelf talent, homecourt, no injuries yet they got dismantled.

Did not get dismantled, played the Heat close and lost.

They shot under their averages in 3pt%

Which should be expected playing against a team that is far above average defensively.

one of their best but most inexperienced players was AWOL for most of the series and even their second best player was highly inconsistent.

Yeah, Westbrook is a model of consistency in the regular season.

The point I am making is that every time a young team challenges and falls short, the narrative becomes about their how their youth cost them. But the Thunder were maybe 5/1 to win the title before the playoffs, and we would have gotten the same bs if they had lost to the Spurs or any other team. You need a lot of teams to come up short at those odds before it becomes even remotely significant. Why aren't we getting the age doesn't win championships narrative when the Spurs go out, or the Celtics?
   2249. The District Attorney Posted: June 22, 2012 at 02:42 PM (#4163822)
The thunder is defeating the heat right now in New York City, but I assume this doesn't count.
   2250. Moses Taylor World Re-Tour 2.0: Warszawa Posted: June 22, 2012 at 02:47 PM (#4163830)
The point I am making is that every time a young team challenges and falls short, the narrative becomes about their how their youth cost them. But the Thunder were maybe 5/1 to win the title before the playoffs, and we would have gotten the same bs if they had lost to the Spurs or any other team. You need a lot of teams to come up short at those odds before it becomes even remotely significant. Why aren't we getting the age doesn't win championships narrative when the Spurs go out, or the Celtics?

This gets a well said. It's projecting the narrative into the causation. There's actual on court basketball reasons the Heat won that have nothing to do with age (or experience).

It was a close series - I think people will forget that remarkably quickly, but it was.

Yep. I said that above, and it's already happening.
   2251. andrewberg Posted: June 22, 2012 at 03:32 PM (#4163884)
Which should tilt the series in the Heat's favor since depth is less important in the playoffs.


Yes. I and others said before the series that the fact that Miami and OKC were of equal quality in the regular season and Miami got to add the advantages of better star health and a shorter bench would make them a favorite. I had them in 6 and they played even better. OKC was a very popular pick, so much that Miami was 3/2 or worse to win the series, probably because the Spurs were viewed as vastly superior to Boston (maybe an overrating of regular season success).
   2252. Spivey Posted: June 22, 2012 at 03:34 PM (#4163885)
I agree with those saying youth wasn't really a big factor. I don't think the Spurs would have fared any better either - they don't really have any rim protectors or the length that OKC did, which was the one thing that seemed to bother Miami on offense. Jackson and Leonard are solid defenders but I see no reason to think they'd have been able to stop LeBron the way he was playing. I also think Miami's defense would have limited a lot of their open looks. And I don't think the Spurs have anyone that can guard Bosh.
   2253. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 22, 2012 at 03:45 PM (#4163900)
Lin (and Billups and Hickson) got early bird rights?
I'm stunned.

League will appeal.

***

If nothing else, I suspect Miami would've played their bigs more v. the Spurs (Anthony, et al.) - that's a minus.
   2254. andrewberg Posted: June 22, 2012 at 03:47 PM (#4163904)
Jackson and Leonard are solid defenders but I see no reason to think they'd have been able to stop LeBron the way he was playing


Not sure it would have been enough to disrupt the offense entirely, but SA is much more adept at having bigs double on the baseline side. It is a staple of their post defense. OKC tried to mimic that last night, but they were so slow to arrive that Lebron often found the open guy before the help arrived. The counterpoint would be that they swing the ball so well that they could get it to the open man with one additional pass, or that Bosh could pull the post help defender away from the low block enough to slow him down from getting to the low side. I'm not sure how that would play out over a series, but they really don't use the same tactics.
   2255. smileyy Posted: June 22, 2012 at 04:05 PM (#4163935)
Is there a difference between "youth" and "finals inexperience"?
   2256. NJ in DC (Now with temporary employment!) Posted: June 22, 2012 at 04:16 PM (#4163956)
[2253] That is awesome news! We get to keep Lin AND Novak and have a little left over for another piece.
   2257. JC in DC Posted: June 22, 2012 at 04:20 PM (#4163964)
Has anyone pointed out that with Bosh Miami lost like 2 games in the playoffs?

And, I WIN!!!
   2258. AROM Posted: June 22, 2012 at 04:43 PM (#4163985)
I agree with those saying youth wasn't really a big factor. I don't think the Spurs would have fared any better either - they don't really have any rim protectors or the length that OKC did, which was the one thing that seemed to bother Miami on offense. Jackson and Leonard are solid defenders but I see no reason to think they'd have been able to stop LeBron the way he was playing. I also think Miami's defense would have limited a lot of their open looks. And I don't think the Spurs have anyone that can guard Bosh.


They have this guy from the Virgin Islands who can probably handle Bosh and/or protecting the rim. I hear he's supposed to be pretty good.

Has anyone pointed out that with Bosh Miami lost like 2 games in the playoffs?


3 games. 4-1 vs. Knicks, 2-1 vs. Celtics, 4-1 vs, OKC.


   2259. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: June 22, 2012 at 04:52 PM (#4163995)
I don't think the Spurs would have fared any better either - they don't really have any rim protectors or the length that OKC did, which was the one thing that seemed to bother Miami on offense.

They have this guy from the Virgin Islands who can probably handle Bosh and/or protecting the rim. I hear he's supposed to be pretty good.
Not only that, but the Spurs do have some post offense, something the Thunder had virtually ZERO of this series.

I really was amazed at how little OKC got from their bench. Harden, in particular, was basically invisible for the series.
   2260. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 22, 2012 at 04:54 PM (#4163997)
Rumor: Hawks are looking at Danny Ferry for their GM job.
   2261. Jimmy P Posted: June 22, 2012 at 05:00 PM (#4163999)
I really was amazed at how little OKC got from their bench. Harden, in particular, was basically invisible for the series.


This is one of the stories that gets lost in the OKC narrative - how limited their supporting cast is. They have a group of players that are either good on one side of the ball only, or just bad. Losing Maynor really cost them.
   2262. JuanGone..except1game Posted: June 22, 2012 at 05:23 PM (#4164008)
Not only that, but the Spurs do have some post offense, something the Thunder had virtually ZERO of this series.


I think that the post offense would have been the key to Pop's strategy. You have to keep the Heat from running and gunning, and the ability of the Spurs to slow the game down would have been helpful for those times when the Heat started clicking. The Thunder didn't want to slow the game down and didn't have the tools to do it even if they did.

I do have to say thinking about the post offense, it makes me giddy to think of Lebron guarding Duncan in the post during the Heat's many switches. I doubt it would be successful, but it would be cool to see in a NBA finals.
   2263. steagles Posted: June 22, 2012 at 05:57 PM (#4164025)
i know that noone's in draft mode yet, but i want to throw out a comp and see what people think:

perry jones
darko milicic


from a comp standpoint, both players had great size, both players had great athleticism, and both players had a diverse offensive skillset. darko could do a lot of things on offense, but he couldn't do any of them at an NBA level, and i see the same thing with perry jones. jones isn't a great shooter, or a great slasher, or a great playmaker, or a great rebounder, or a great defender, or a great shotblocker. he dabbles in a lot of those things, but for an NBA player, he's not even average in any of them.

and since the NBA tends to be a league where one- and two-dimensional players excel at a greater rate than more well-rounded talents, i think jones is gonna have a lot of the same issues**.


thoughts?


**well, jones won't likely have to deal with larry brown, so that may help. and the team that drafts him probably won't be passing on carmelo anthony and chris bosh and dwyane wade to pick him.

but other than that...
   2264. andrewberg Posted: June 22, 2012 at 06:32 PM (#4164047)
perry jones
darko milicic


Very interesting comp. I think you did a good job articulating the type of similarities that may exist. I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. First, they are not all that physically similar. Darko was over an inch taller with much longer arms (7'5 to 7'1.75), which basically had him profiling as a center immediately. He was also 16 lbs heavier. My eyes tell me that Jones is more explosive than Darko ever was, and the extra 6" on the vertical seem to affirm that belief. Darko was viewed as a very skilled player- good passer, soft hands, excellent coordination- and none of that is really false, he just doesn't finish well and appears really lazy. I think that's where the comp comes from: both guys seem like they just don't care for stretches. Of course, people said the same about Rudy Gay in college, and he developed pretty nicely. Bottom line, I think Jones is a slightly smaller, considerably more athletic version of Darko at very least, which probably puts him more in the Anthony Randolph camp of crappy Minnestoa backup bigs who can't get playing time. Either way, as you kind of said, getting a guy like that in the middle of the first round really isn't a bad thing.

Another issue is the jack of all trades/master of none characterization. I think I agree with you that picking 15+, you are probably better off going for someone who has at least one playable skill. On the other hand, you are probably more likely to find an impact player or a star player if you go after the well rounded guys with lots of risks. I guess it is a question of how you want to allocate your team's risk.
   2265. Jimmy P Posted: June 22, 2012 at 07:06 PM (#4164055)
perry jones
darko milicic


I think someone like Yi Jianlin is probably a better comp.

It's not like Jones is a total stiff. The guy's put up some really good stats, he just has games where it looks like he's not even playing sometimes. It'll be interesting to see who takes him, because he wants to be a 3, he's probably better at it, but since he's 6'11" no lets him.
   2266. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 22, 2012 at 10:07 PM (#4164108)
In terms of what people did in college (performance) and projectability - that's what Hollinger's draft rater gets at right? (Not that it is *the* response to that question, but it's a response.)
Rudy Gay was the #5 performer in Hollinger's metric his draft year* - by comparison, Jones doesn't rate as a first rounder this year (though Hollinger subjectively bumped him up to 28 on his board). He doesn't rebound, or get steals, or blocks. He doesn't go to the line. He has range, but doesn't hit his jumpers. He's a good ballhandler, but doesn't create for others or shoot a particularly high percentage. He's not a scorer. Honestly, I've seen profiles in the D-League that I like more.

Yes, I can see how Jones' athleticism could translate well to the NBA game, but there's zero chance that I'd draft him.


* Not his tool's best performance - he had Ty Thomas and Shelden Williams as his top two, though I made some of the some mistakes that year, probably for similar reasons.
That said, in my mock draft that year, I got Brandon Roy and Paul Millsap, so I didn't do that badly.
   2267. Spivey Posted: June 22, 2012 at 11:20 PM (#4164158)
They have this guy from the Virgin Islands who can probably handle Bosh and/or protecting the rim. I hear he's supposed to be pretty good.


Duncan doesn't protect the rim that well anymore, and he certainly isn't quick enough for Bosh.

I agree that Perry Jones will not translate well, and I wouldn't draft him high at all. He doesn't seem like more than an athletic tall guy that has a bit of handle and a bit of an outside shot. No skill is great, and if any were to get great it's likely by the time he's a FA.

   2268. AROM Posted: June 23, 2012 at 02:15 AM (#4164200)
I'm curious if anyone has ever seen these kinds of stats before: From 1957-58 to the end of his career, Bill Russell missed 28 games. Celtics were 10-18 in those games. In all but one of those games, they gave up more than 100 points. With him they won 72% of the time. They were 8 net points better with Russell.

The only reason I was able to do this is because BB-ref has newspaper box score scans of every NBA game ever. The boxes were pretty light back then, just telling you how many field goals and free throws players hit (without giving FG attempts). But it's good for with/without, just noting which players were in the lineup.
   2269. AROM Posted: June 23, 2012 at 02:25 AM (#4164201)
Duncan doesn't protect the rim that well anymore, and he certainly isn't quick enough for Bosh.


You try driving the lane on him then. Duncan still blocked 88 shots this year, that's 27 more than Kevin Garnett. During the season, their defense rating was 5.4 points better with Duncan on court, in the playoffs it was 17.3 points better. You might be right about Bosh though, they only met once in the regular season. It was a Miami blowout, and Bosh went 14-22, scoring 30.
   2270. smileyy Posted: June 23, 2012 at 02:45 AM (#4164202)
[2267] What do you do with guys like that in the draft? I guess you pass OB them?
   2271. baudib Posted: June 23, 2012 at 03:22 AM (#4164205)
baudib on OKC: You're presuming that Brooks changes his rotations sooner than later, I guess. Or that Bosh gets hurt again at some point?

It was a close series - I think people will forget that remarkably quickly, but it was. Were I a betting man, I'd've considered putting money on the Thunder after game 4.


I don't want to rip on Brooks too much because his track record and continued improvement are pretty impressive. The Thunder are not built like any other championship team. If I had to compare them to someone, I'd say it's the '76 76ers who lost to Portland with Erving, McGinnis, Free, Collins, etc.

I don't expect James Harden to play as badly as he did over any 5-game stretch. Maybe this can be attributed to youthful inexperience, but I think a lot of it has to do with simple variance. I also don't expect Shane Battier to shoot like he did in Games 1 and 2 very often. The Heat generally got one great performance by a role player each game, which is a great recipe for winning, but they've certainly gone long stretches before without getting anything outside the Big 3.
   2272. kpelton Posted: June 23, 2012 at 03:50 AM (#4164207)
Not his tool's best performance - he had Ty Thomas and Shelden Williams as his top two, though I made some of the some mistakes that year, probably for similar reasons.

Mostly out of my own curiosity, my own top 10 that year was Thomas, Millsap, Balkman, Patrick O'Bryant (?), Rondo, Shelden, Roy, Brewer, Aldridge, Gay. That was a weird draft.
   2273. rr Posted: June 23, 2012 at 04:13 AM (#4164210)
I have said this before, but in Basketball on Paper, Dean Oliver used old box scores and other stuff as a way to "trace" Russell and Chamberlain as best he could. Oliver tentatively concluded that Russell was worth about 6 PPG on D, above an average center, which with Oliver's metrics meant Russell was having a defensive impact on defense similar to that of Michael Jordan on offense.
   2274. baudib Posted: June 23, 2012 at 04:35 AM (#4164214)
I have said this before, but in Basketball on Paper, Dean Oliver used old box scores and other stuff as a way to "trace" Russell and Chamberlain as best he could. Oliver tentatively concluded that Russell was worth about 6 PPG on D, above an average center, which with Oliver's metrics meant Russell was having a defensive impact on defense similar to that of Michael Jordan on offense.


How does he rate other people? How does he rate Chamberlain? And what about Russell's offense?
   2275. baudib Posted: June 23, 2012 at 07:19 AM (#4164222)
steagles:
I know you read Liberty Ballers and you must know that they are pretty high on taking Jones at No. 15 if he falls there. College ball and scouting aren't my thing but I know Jones was an uber underachiever.

In football, I can think of some guys who were incredible athletes who didn't produce at the college level but were projectable. Jason Pierre-Paul comes to mind immediately, as well as Antonio Gates. Are there any examples of guys who were talented underachievers in college who went on to become stars in the NBA?
   2276. Spivey Posted: June 23, 2012 at 10:10 AM (#4164251)
How does he rate other people? How does he rate Chamberlain? And what about Russell's offense?


This would be my thought too (edit: about how Chamberlain rates). I would expect early basketball to be much like early baseball - the median is so much lower, that the gap between the superstars and the average player is larger.
   2277. Spivey Posted: June 23, 2012 at 10:11 AM (#4164252)
Was Antonio Gates an underachiever? I thought he just didn't play football much in college.
   2278. AROM Posted: June 23, 2012 at 10:59 AM (#4164274)
Oliver looked at how the Celtics defense performed during Russell's time vs league average, and how the team performed the year after and year before he played. He did not look at box scores for those years. He did that for players who played about 20 years ago, like Derrick Coleman.

I guess you could have gone to a library and gathered old microfilm, but until the last year or so boxscores from Russell's time were generally not available. Now they are and we can thank Sean Forman and Justin Kubatko for making them available.
   2279. ej2557 Posted: June 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM (#4164280)
Are there any examples of guys who were talented underachievers in college who went on to become stars in the NBA?

Neither of them are stars, but I think Thaddeus Young and Demar DeRozan had similar profiles (good athletes, very highly ranked recruits, mediocre college stats) to Perry Jones and became NBA rotation players. Perry Jones is about 5 inches taller and stayed in college an extra year, so the low number of blocks and the lack of improvement are more worrisome, but I don't think he is hopeless.
   2280. stubbyc Posted: June 23, 2012 at 11:52 AM (#4164290)
I'm down in big 12 country and saw at least 50 of Jones' college games. He has a fairly diverse set of skills, but he does not really excel in any one of them and it's going to be pretty hard for him to find a position in the NBA. A lot of talk out of the combine was that he should be a 3 at the NBA level. He handles the ball well for a 6'11 guy, but not for a wing player in the NBA. He shoots the ball well for a 6'11 guy, but again not as well as most NBA 3's. I think he needs to play the 4, but then again he cannot defend or rebound the way you would want your power forward to. The best comps I can think of are Lamar Odom and maybe Chris Bosh. A 4 who handles just well enough to play a little on the perimeter. He would rather face up than post up.

The more I watched him the more I thought he was overrated rather than just an underachiever. This is a guy who did score more in during big 12 play his freshman year than he did in high school. A lot of his reputation came off of highlight videos and some big games on the AAU scene.

The other Baylor kid (Quincy Miller) is a better prospect assuming his knee is healthy. He's not quite as big, but he's a better shooter, more confident, and just has a much better feel for the game. Medical red flags seem to be the primary reason he's dropping on a lot of the mock drafts I have seen.
   2281. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 23, 2012 at 12:03 PM (#4164295)
Gates, iirc, went to mich st on a football scholarship, but transferred to kent st to play basketball before he ever took the gridiron. Pretty good hoopster too, something like a 18/8/4.
Young's college #s translated well to the pros. Demar's not so much but he (again, off memory) showed great improvement over the year - jones has not improved much.
   2282. baudib Posted: June 23, 2012 at 01:29 PM (#4164317)
Re Gates: Sorry, underachiever was the wrong word since he didn't play college football. He was a guy with obvious athleticism and projected to be a possible NFL player with no real college resume.

AROM: I have some numbers for Allen Iverson that I did a couple years ago, but I stupidly did not include points allowed. From 1998-99 (Iverson's second season) to 2005-06 (his last full season with the Sixers), he missed 96 games. The Sixers went 39-57 (.406) without him and 223-173 (.563) with him. They scored 86.9 points per game without him and 96.3 with him.
   2283. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 23, 2012 at 01:35 PM (#4164321)
The aforementioned draft rater ranked Young 4th overall (at the time - a later re-run with new logic pushed him down to 7th, but the point stands), DeRozan 54th. And DeRozan did, indeed, improve significantly over the course of his one college season. That said, DeRozan isn't very good - his box score numbers last year were: 16.7/3.3/2.0 in 35.0 min, shooting 42/26/81. PER= 12.87, WS/48: .054

And wrt Gates: I'd forgotten about his stop at EMU, where he was a basketball walk-on, if memory serves. Anyway, his last year at Kent State, he was 20.6/7.7/4.1 in 33.2 mpg, shooting 48/35/71. Age aside (almost 23 on draft day), you could've considered him a lesser (and shorter) version of your Royce Young / Draymond Green types. Not an NBA talent, but a useful guy in Europe.
   2284. Spivey Posted: June 23, 2012 at 02:07 PM (#4164337)
It makes me glad that a lot of college all-stars that don't have NBA ability get to go to Europe and make a good living.
   2285. baudib Posted: June 23, 2012 at 02:38 PM (#4164352)
Ah. I went back and figured out the points allowed numbers for Iverson. Also, I made a couple of serious errors, most notably omitting the 2002-2003 season, in which Iverson played all 82 games.


Here are the numbers:

WITH Iverson
W-L 299-227
W% .568
PF 95.8
PA 94.5

WITHOUT Iverson
W-L 39-59
W% .398
PF 86.8
PA 89.4

Point differential of +1.3 with Iverson vs -2.6 without him.
   2286. rr Posted: June 23, 2012 at 03:05 PM (#4164372)
He did not look at box scores for those years


Yes, I was mistaken. I was thinking of another Chamberlain/Russell thing I read. I was right, though, about the conclusion, since I got the book out and looked:

If the rest of the guys, were gym rats with lousy jumpers, Wilt probably is the better choice because of his combiation of offensive and defensive skills. But if the rest of the guys were NBA stars, it is hard to ignore Russell's five-to-six point effect on team defense.



How does he rate other people? How does he rate Chamberlain? And what about Russell's offense?


Uhh, ok. But don't blame me if someone says, "MORE Chamberlain/Russell crap? NO!!!"

Oliver uses a bunch of methods which he explains in detail, and comes up with an individual won-loss record, sort of similar to Bill James' old individual won-loss record, which combines % of team defensive stops made, percentage of team offensive possesions comtributed to, percentage of team minutes played, and percentage of games started. He weighs the first two by a factor of three each, and the last two by a factor of one each. He uses ORTG and DRTG and creates an estimate of W/L and how many games players were responsible for. Here is what some look like, rounded to integers:

1996 Bulls

Jordan 16-0 (his "losses" were .4)
Pippen 12-1
Kerr 5-0 (his "losses" were 0.0)
Rodman 7-1
Dickey Simpkins 1-2

2002 Spurs

Duncan 16-1
Robinson 10-1
Malik Rose 4-3
Bowen 2-5

So, looking at Kerr for example, that tells you he had a pretty small role on the team, but more or less filled it to perfection, which makes sense.

When Oliver talks about Chamberlain, although he comes at it from a totally different POV, he says stuff that would have helped Simmons' TBOB case in some ways had Simmons read BOP. Short version:

1. Adjusted for context, the 50 PPG would be about 35 PPG in the early 2000s (Simmons talked about this some IIRC).
2. Chamberlain's owner and coach (Eddie Gottlieb and Frank McGuire) wanted Chamberlain to score as much as possible and planned the early 1960s team that way. IMO Simmons should have mentioned this in TBOB and IIRC he didn't. I became aware of it reading The Rivalry by John Taylor, a book Simmons read and didn't like.
3. Oliver says that as Chamberlain's career continued and he played with better teammates, he shot less, became more efficient and his effect on team D appeared to improve, leading to:

In his best seasons, Wilt probably posted about twenty wins and one loss.


Chamberlain often played crazy numbers of minutes by modern standards; supposedly as a young man, he played 48 minutes pretty often, which would partially create the larger number of wins.

Oliver doesn't have the data to generate W-L for Russell and Chamberlain, but he does do it for a lot of other guys in the chapter, called The Great Ones. These numbers are through 2002:

Stockton 176-26
Malone 215-54
Barkley 166-29
Jordan 180-28
Rodman 92-22
Kareem (1974-1989) 118-26
Bird 143-30
Magic 139-19
Olajuwon 183-56
Ewing 142-69
Shaq 120-24



Individual seasons:

Jordan 88 18-1
Magic 87 13-1
Bird 86 15-1
Rodman 90 9-0 (losses .3)
Barkley 90 15-1
Iverson 01 11.4-4.6
Bryant 02 12-4

He also runs numbers for some other guys, like Parish and McAdoo.

In explaining it, he looks at Jordan's 1996 numbers and says:

The numbers here suggest that Jordan contributed 16 wins to the team, which was net 62 (72-10). That means if you surrounded him with average teammates, the team would have won 50 games or so--


The book is ten years old, but it holds up very well and includes chapters on teamwork and usage/efficiency.
   2287. baudib Posted: June 23, 2012 at 03:22 PM (#4164384)
cool stuff rr
   2288. nick swisher hygiene Posted: June 23, 2012 at 04:31 PM (#4164432)
2280--Henson, I think, has the same problems; difference is that he's more of a rebounder and shotblocker, but it's hard to see what he'll do offensively at an NBA level.

it won't be free throws, that's for sure.
   2289. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 23, 2012 at 05:32 PM (#4164471)
I like Henson, probably more than I should, but couldn't help but be struck by this Brewhoop comparison of his game, with those of Larry Sanders and Hassan Whiteside.
   2290. steagles Posted: June 23, 2012 at 06:51 PM (#4164487)
steagles:
I know you read Liberty Ballers and you must know that they are pretty high on taking Jones at No. 15 if he falls there. College ball and scouting aren't my thing but I know Jones was an uber underachiever.
generally (actually, come to think of it, i think this applies to every sixers fan on the internet), i think those guys are clowns. they're way too pessimistic about the players on this team already, and way too easily distracted by shiny things, perry jones among them. ~"this team sucks now, but if they add josh smith and nick young this offseason, they'll be top tier contenders"~

it's really very annoying.
He has a fairly diverse set of skills, but he does not really excel in any one of them and it's going to be pretty hard for him to find a position in the NBA. A lot of talk out of the combine was that he should be a 3 at the NBA level. He handles the ball well for a 6'11 guy, but not for a wing player in the NBA. He shoots the ball well for a 6'11 guy, but again not as well as most NBA 3's. I think he needs to play the 4, but then again he cannot defend or rebound the way you would want your power forward to.
that's exactly what i see, and exactly why i don't want to draft him.

   2291. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: June 23, 2012 at 07:53 PM (#4164509)
generally (actually, come to think of it, i think this applies to every sixers fan on the internet), i think those guys are clowns. they're way too pessimistic about the players on this team already

Well it's tough for fans of teams that aren't the sixers, since they don't have the 8 greatest players in basketball history on their team.
   2292. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 23, 2012 at 08:00 PM (#4164511)
Oh, this is just rumor, but lots of articles have said or suggested that OKC will sign stretch four Andrey Vorontsevich from CSKA. Not really a fan.
   2293. NJ in DC (Now with temporary employment!) Posted: June 23, 2012 at 08:22 PM (#4164516)
   2294. rr Posted: June 23, 2012 at 09:42 PM (#4164546)
I would be very leery of moving either of those guys for a pick.
   2295. tshipman Posted: June 23, 2012 at 09:52 PM (#4164549)
Can anyone besides the Bobcats even absorb either of those salaries? I would move Deng for a pick. He didn't give them a whole lot last year. I think someone like MKG (whom you could snag with the Cats' pick) would be better.

I have no idea why Charlotte would make that deal, though.
   2296. Spivey Posted: June 23, 2012 at 10:24 PM (#4164567)
Deng is going to be better than next 4 years than MKG. Deng was/is really good when he's healthy. I guess you can say he's injury prone, but he was a big time player until he got hurt and had to play hurt the rest of the season.

I'd be willing to move Asik for a late lottery pick, which is roughly what I think he's worth.
   2297. baudib Posted: June 23, 2012 at 10:35 PM (#4164577)
I think it's way less than 50-50 that you get a player as good as Noah with picks 2-10. I'm a really big fan of Noah though. I can't see doing that trade unless it frees you up to sign an impact player or trade for someone like Bynum or Howard, which I don't see as likely.
   2298. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: June 23, 2012 at 11:24 PM (#4164594)
Deng didn't give them a whole lot last year?* He was named an All Star, led the league in minutes per game, and was named 2nd team All-D.
Asik is an RFA, fwiw.

The reason you consider a deal like what's discussed here if you're Chicago is to enjoy the value over salary the lottery pick gives you, they're one of the best deals in the league. I don't think that needs to be what Chicago focuses on right now (iow, they don't need that kind of retool) and I'm far from sure that the #2 pick this year will turn out to be a sure thing stud.



* okay, that seriously overstates things - it was a down year - his fg% was down as were things like his +/- #s. still, he was an above average starter - at minimum.
   2299. PJ Martinez Posted: June 23, 2012 at 11:24 PM (#4164595)
Have the Bulls decided that next year will be a lost season, thanks to Rose's injury? That's the only way I can see a Deng or Noah trade for a high pick makes any sense. Even then it doesn't make much sense to me. But maybe they're very high on someone they figure will be available somewhere from 3-7 or so?

Edit: Or is this just Reinsdorf being cheap?
   2300. tshipman Posted: June 23, 2012 at 11:50 PM (#4164613)
Deng didn't give them a whole lot last year?* He was named an All Star, led the league in minutes per game, and was named 2nd team All-D.


Sure. And with all of that, he still didn't give them a ton. He was .412 from the field, and .367 from 3, taking 4 per game. Per 36 min, his slash line was 14/5.9/2.7 (all lower than his career averages). He also chipped in just under a steal and a block per 36.

Moving to advance metrics, his PER was 14.1 and his WS/48 were .132. His simple rating was +2.1, 4th best among Bulls starters, beating out Boozer. He's a good defender.

All that said, if you can trade a guy who was probably your fourth best player (while making 10 million+ per year) for the #2 pick in the draft, you make that trade 99 times out of 100. This gets even easier when you can pick a guy who can slot right in at spot immediately vacated by the guy you just traded. You get younger, cheaper and potentially more talented. Yeah, it can blow up on you, but that's a good basketball move, imo.
Page 23 of 28 pages ‹ First  < 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Piehole of David Wells
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogDayton Moore's vision for Kansas Royals validated - ESPN
(15 - 10:24am, Oct 01)
Last: Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-1-2014
(5 - 10:24am, Oct 01)
Last: Batman

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(15 - 10:23am, Oct 01)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogNed Yost on the sixth inning and his bullpen usage: “its just one of those things” | HardballTalk
(23 - 10:21am, Oct 01)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogNL WILD CARD 2014 OMNICHATTER
(15 - 10:17am, Oct 01)
Last: Random Transaction Generator

NewsblogSpector: Stats incredible! Numbers from the 2014 MLB season will amaze you
(42 - 10:16am, Oct 01)
Last: Der-K and the statistical werewolves.

NewsblogWhy the Nats will win the World Series - ESPN
(1 - 10:14am, Oct 01)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogLinkedIn: 10 Sales Lessons From “The Captain”
(5 - 10:07am, Oct 01)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogThe Economist: The new market inefficiencies
(21 - 9:57am, Oct 01)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogWSJ: Playoff Hateability Index
(20 - 9:42am, Oct 01)
Last: Yeaarrgghhhh

NewsblogAL WILD CARD GAME 2014 OMNICHATTER
(1134 - 9:41am, Oct 01)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(4084 - 8:46am, Oct 01)
Last: Bitter Mouse

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8174 - 8:01am, Oct 01)
Last: Norcan

NewsblogThe Calm-Before-The-Storm and Postseason Prediction OMNICHATTER, 2014
(111 - 7:14am, Oct 01)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 2014 Discussion
(14 - 2:17am, Oct 01)
Last: bjhanke

Page rendered in 1.1505 seconds
53 querie(s) executed