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 0.6386 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.
Rose, Paul, Williams, Westbrook and ???
I bet Tony Parker
you know the really annoying thing is that collins is so forceful about preventing turnovers**, but they give possessions away on the glass, and they give points away at the FT line. if they could sure up those two things, these late game issues they seem to have would just melt into insignificance.
These things are all related, IMO. If your playing style/culture/coaching staff is such that everyone is fine with long 2s, then you won't go to the FT line because you are not driving and you won't take lots of 3s because guys will feel comfortable taking a 22 ft 2 (compare this to a situation with teams whose guys literally look down when they catch the ball to make sure what they're taking is a 3 and not a 2). And going cold from long 2 isn't so much about underestimating the effect of tired legs as it is that it is the lowest value shot in basketball and it's foolish to make a living off of it (with all apologies to Durant, Dirk, etc.).
That's just bitterness talking.
and another one just for shits and giggles: for the sixers to get to the 47 wins i had them pegged at prior to the season, they'll need to finish the year 25-3. that does not seem likely.
Just for the sake of comparison, that 3 game roadie put the Bulls back at the top of the NBA in number of road games (tied with Sac at 23). The Bulls have more road wins than the Sixers have had road games. Last night was game 5 in 7 nights for the Bulls (tonight is 6 in 8). The Bulls game tonight is also their 40th of the season; they're the first team to hit that mark. Tired legs do happen and are a factor - and there's a good chance that does happen to the Bulls tonight; if nothing else all this extra "rivalry" stuff might actually help them since it's a reason to be up for the game.
and because the sixers get their offense primarily through mid range jump shots, i think they are hurt more by fatigue than most any other team. they don't really get easy points in the post or off the glass or at the FT line, so when their shot is off, the offense completely bogs down. now, maybe that's a fatal flaw that would be present regardless of the compact schedule, so maybe you'd argue that the fatigue is not the main factor in the offense's regression, but watching the team every day, i'm fairly confident in saying that it is.
Considering the Blazers record in games under 5 points, I think Portland gets this claim first.
VERY DIFFERENT PLAYERS,
U R RONG
[ps--apologies if you are engaging in some form of inside NBA thread irony]
How is this different than any other team though? Wasn't one of the advantages the Sixers had over almost every other team minimal roster turnover, meaning the lack of practice was supposed to not affect them as much?
and because the sixers get their offense primarily through mid range jump shots, i think they are hurt more by fatigue than most any other team. they don't really get easy points in the post or off the glass or at the FT line, so when their shot is off, the offense completely bogs down. now, maybe that's a fatal flaw that would be present regardless of the compact schedule, so maybe you'd argue that the fatigue is not the main factor in the offense's regression, but watching the team every day, i'm fairly confident in saying that it is.
Also, another advantage was supposed to be their youth and depth. We've gotten plenty of stories about guys not in game shape this year (like the Mavs with Dirk and Odom, for instance), has this been a problem with Philly? Again, relatively speaking, the Sixers have had an easier work load than most teams. Unless you're watching every team every day, you just don't know that the fatigue is any worse than any other team - all of which are facing similar factors.
I bet fans of about 25 teams would say that their team has been uniquely hurt by the lack of practice in late-game situations. Execution has not been good for almost anyone.
I have thought about this topic a great deal. It reminds me of the chapter in Brushbacks and Knockdowns about the rise in homeruns through the 1990s. Were steroids a factor? Possibly, maybe even probably. But there were also factors like smaller parks, different bat construction, new training regimens, different strategic goals by teams, different ball specifications, and other factors that influence it, and that doesn't even account for the "unknown unknowns."
You could debate for weeks about how to portion out the responsibility of different factors on this era, but the zones, handchecking and threes (as Der K said), coaching trends (re: smallball defenses and other things), ref tendencies, and even possibly less quantifiable changes in how the game is learned/taught (I tend to think that guys getting pegged into a position earlier through AAU probably helps the designated PGs develop PG skills but trades off with some versatile skills such as midrange shooting). Suffice to say, I don't think there's an "answer."
Edit: my god is that post hard to read. Rather than editing it, I'm going to let it stand as a monument to my general sense of confusion today.
It makes sense, but goes against what I intuitively thought, which is selectively remembering guys who feel a sense of entitlement .
I will never live this down.
I took that to mean that there are always issues with guys wanting to get minutes, but at least with the vets, they know how to fit into a system once they're on the floor.
It's how guys like Brian Scalabrine and John Lucas III have jobs - good practice players, they know the systems/have familiarity with the coaching staff, and are the chemistry types. They don't need much attention, like some rookies might. I think it's probably a bad idea to only have veterans there - guys like Lin are worthwhile gambles and more teams should fill those last spots with guys that have upside (and if there was a real, valuable developmental league - and not one that gave playing time to guys like Antoine Walker and Greg Ostertag* - teams could just assign those guys there).
*I could have said Ricky Davis here, but I never liked Ostertag.
other teams have simpler late game sets. dump it in the post to howard. iso derrick rose. pick and roll with paul and griffin.
it doesn't take a whole lot of practice time to hone those kinds of sets, but for better or worse (and so far, it's only been worse), the sixers have decided to run something else.
you, know for everything that truehoop runs about kobe's late game proclivities, i'd really like to see their take on the sixers late game comedy of horrors. i think it'd actually be an interesting lens to view this argument. when kobe iso's, it usually guarantees 3 things: 1, he won't turn the ball over. 2, he'll get the shot off. and 3, he'll take enough time off the clock that the opposition won't get a good look to come back.
right now, in any given late game set they run, the sixers are guaranteed to do exactly none of those things, and it's an issue.
and yeah, i know they're not a 10 win team, but they have 22 wins right now and they could have 28.
Yep, iso, Rose. That's all the Bulls do.
That means he doesn't play again until after the trade deadline. If the Magic want the Nets deal (and it doesn't sound like they do), it's going to be even harder to sell it to the fans.
If the Sixers don't have anyone they can go to in ISO situations, then it sounds like you're describing a 22-win team, not a 28-win team; in other words a good, but not great, team.
And that matters to your point how? The problem for Philly is what El Hombre mentions in 135 not that they haven't practiced enough. Because the linked video is an actual play, run by a team that had less practice time than Philly when it happened. It's about talent* - Rose is both an actual option and a decoy because he's an option.
*Either that or Thibs is just that much better of an offensive coach than Collins, and I don't believe that to be true.
At first glance, I like it.
Why, yes, I'm not just getting around to reading about the Sloan conference on Truehoop.
In my simulated baseball league draft position is determined by number of years since the team last made the playoffs, with a coinflip tiebreaker. While this isn't totally flawless (sometimes teams in good positions have an incentive to not make the playoffs), it funnels the top picks to moribund franchises instead of tanking ones, and removes any seasonal reward for being as bad as possible. You could add another lottery element, if you wanted -- having the same team get the #1 pick year after year might not be good from an optics/PR perspective, especially in basketball where the top picks are hugely more valuable. But I think it's a great system that's better than the current algorithm used in all pro sports of just looking at record in the previous year (+random for basketball).
I definitely didn't make this up but I forget who I stole it from.
I think there might be something to this, but until data confirms it it's just a hunch.
As der K mentioned, it's the hand check rule than made life so much easier for speedy point guards. Yes, Isiah would be even better playing today.
You would have liked him less if he played for the Bulls.
I think we should have a better system than the current lottery system, but I'm not that fired up about that SSAC idea. I had the same reaction as AS, although early in the season, players probably have a harder time swallowing their pride. I would probably prefer the random drawing, too, as long as the envelopes aren't frozen.
The only issue I have with this lottery system are all the stupid rules they have. You can't move down so many, you can't have the #1 two years in a row, etc. I actually don't think the current system is too bad. Even if you have the worst record, you still have 3 times more likely of a chance to not get the top pick. I guess if you totally go in the tank so you fall from 10th worst to 2nd or 3rd is an advantage, but to go from 3rd to 1st is a very small increase.
The bigger issue is just making sure you get the #1 pick in the right year. Getting it when Derrick Rose is there? Great. Getting it when Andreas Bargnani is there? Meh.
Well, my question was more about offensive rebounds resulting from a double team on an ISO shooter like Kobe or Melo. That is interesting stuff, though.
They are now 22-15 and in 5th. 1 game behind the LA teams for the 3 and 4. Won 10 of 12. Randolph is participating in practice again and is supposedly traveling with the team, so if his return is not quite imminent, it's at least getting a lot closer. Overall, the season post-Z-Bo injury has gone about as well as it possibly could have. The west is pretty wide open, at least after OKC, so they've definitely put themselves in a good position for the stretch run.
That 3-seed sure would be nice, but there are going be several teams fighting for position from about the 2 seed on down, so it won't be easy to move up or even maintain the 5. Still, if Randolph can come back and work his way back into the mix, they will be a dangerous team come playoff time.
coincidentally enough, jodie meeks came off the bench and nailed 2 3s in 3 minutes.
meeks netted 11 points in 9 minutes. 3/3 from beyond the arc, 4/4 from the field.
eurogoon also got the start and was 3/3 in a 9 minute run. he got into foul trouble early, but he was pretty solid.
all in all, that was one of the better halves of offense the sixers have had since they started dropping games. young got his. holiday got his. meeks, williams, turner, brand, iguodala, eurogoon all contributed.
it'd be nice if turner hit a shot, though.
Don't distract him, he's busy coming up with excuses about how "not to make excuses, but..." the Sixers would have beat the Bucks if x, y, and z would have happened, how playing yesterday negatively affected their performance, Hawes is still out, tired legs, not enough practice time, long bus ride to Milwaukee, etc., etc., etc, meanwhile finding stats like the Bulls haven't beat a team on the road with a winning percentage over .603% in eight days so they must not be very good!...
anyway, the sixers are 5-2 when facing a non-division leading eastern conference playoff team with a day of rest after a loss to a central division playoff contender, so i've got a good feeling about this next game against boston.
I literally laughed aloud and I can't tell if this is serious or not. Either way, this post wins the thread.
Is this because a big has usually come over as a help defender on the drive, likely leaving an un-boxed out offensive player?
Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook on the same team is good for the league.
And yes, I realize the Clippers basically nullify a lot of this argument.
Not really. Part of the reason they were able to trade for Paul was that they had Gordon, another recent lotto pick with lots of potential, and Aminu as trade chips.
I'm not sure what projection systems think of Paul George, but it's easy to see why scouts fell in love with him. I don't know how many games he actually puts everything together, but he was clearly the Pacers' best player last night*. He seems like he can do everything well; he's probably playing out of position at the 2, but that's relatively minor. He's got a pretty shot, he's smooth, he's athletic, and he's a good and willing defender.
*I'm shocked to see the box score now, as he had 1 rebound, 0 assists but 2 steals, 1 block and only 1 TO. It sure felt like he did a lot more than just score.
I've fallen in love with Paul George. A 6'10'' guy capably playing the 2 is just amazing to me.
It was a nice pick. The Pacers drafted 10th, so they had to make the choice between safe pick, or swing for the fences. George has made that pay off.
Looking back on that draft, Cole Aldrich was the next pick. Has he even been heard from again?
I distinctly recall a debate at the time about how the Pacers had gone TOO safe in recent drafts and wanted to make up for it with some higher-ceiling guys, so they took George and Lance Stephenson to balance out psycho T and Brandon Rush. If they can hit on 50% of the risks they take, that's a pretty damn good rate.
I read something just the other day about how the coaching staff thinks he deserves more minutes and is pushing to be the primary backup 5. That might just be posturing. Then again, some guys take time to get acclimated. We assume that guys who stayed in college are ready for the NBA, but that's not always the case. Roy Hibbert is a good example of someone who grew into the NBA even after a 4-year college career.
Put me in the "swing for the fences" camp with a 10th pick.
When I saw Aldrich on the bench for OKC, he looked more athletic, and less "oafish" than I remember him at Kansas. Or maybe I'm misrembering him at Kansas. Or maybe I'm being fooled by the fact that he didn't shave that day.
I made it, using this.
Only a handful of teams having winning records against .500 teams. Miami, Chicago, OKC, SA, LAC and LAL. OKC is 18-6 against .500 teams,impressive.
Philly will be pressed to finish with 35 wins. They are 6-13 against .500 and better -- and of their remaining 27 games, 16 are on the road.
____________________________
That is cool. I guess the bank shot is dead, as the areas between the baseline and elbow are a dead zone for the current NBA player.
Rondo's chart is hilarious.
Outside of Rose, the Bulls just don't have many other options for iso plays (Boozer occasionally, Deng rarely, Noah when he feels frisky, and that one game for JLIII). The Bulls are also 3rd in the NBA is FG Ast%. So 2 more counters to the 'iso Rose' post yesterday.
Aldrich played through a stress fracture in one of his feet down the stretch of his junior year at Kansas and it really limited his movement.
If I were an NBA team, I'd closely monitor what my players were eating, to the point of offering to cook them every single meal.
My sister-in-law used to work for USA Swimming. She said watching some of the athletes eat was amazing. It was just something else to keep track of because they had to take in ~5000-6000 calories. You really have to try to eat that much and not have it be nothing but pizzas and burgers.
The Diaw article is good, but not as good as the Icelandic Phallological Museum wikipedia link in the Dillinger thread.
snoop gets points for authenticity, but to me, stringer, carver, and bodie really were the three most dynamic characters in the series. the growth of bodie was particularly notable, and when he got killed in season 4, that was, to me, the most powerful scene in the entire series.
and i don't know about anyone else, but the wire hasn't really aged well with me. it's good television, but i don't really see it as being great television.
And Carver is NOT IN THE BRACKET AT ALL. He gets beaten out by Serge(i?).
So yeah, I too am not a fan of this.
season 1 was absolutely fantastic television.
Will be interested to see if this leads to movement by Lakers or Orlando (not necessarily a trade between them, but other moves).
I agree. Bubbles and Prez are way more interesting to me as characters. Omar is fun, but not deep.
7 seed and 8 seed, respectively.
And yeah, I'm done on the bracket, really.
Omar as a character is completely over-rated. He's completely static and is actually more of a mythical, almost cartoonish version of himself. Same applies for Templeton, Mcnulty, Rawls, Freeman, Carcetti, Herk, Clay Davis, Avon, Burell, Pearlman and Levy. These characters are still vivid, but they exist to push the narrative and as such are often in extremes.
As far as actual characters, I think you have to put Chris, Snoop, Cutty, Prez, Kima, Daniels, all the dockworkers, Bunk, Freamon, all the kids, Stringer, Marlo, The Greeks, Augustus, Bubbles and some other I"m probablyh forgetting in a big pile.
Personally I think the most compelling characters are Bodie, Chris, Snoop, Cutty, Prez, Marlo and Bubbles and the Sobotkas.
[rant]On a critical note, I find it ironic that most white critics note the persuasive argument against the war on drugs and inner city Blacks, but forget the equally poignant realism of the fading white blue collar class.
Charles Murray recently published a book about how white middle class "values" have declined as their wages have -- and arguing that "values" lead to prosperity.
What Simon shows us is that it's the other way: crime and a decay in "values" follows a decline in economic opportunity for the whites and blacks and eastern euros of 'balmer alike.
This is *by far* the most wrong thing you've said on these threads, and that's saying something.
That's why Omar is great. Everyone else is in a gritty, realistic crime drama. Omar is Clint Eastwood.
I don't understand what's wrong with the static characters. They can also be realistic, and a show where everyone goes through the type of personal upheaval and reinvention that Bodie, Bubbles and Prez do would be unrealistic and way too intense.
oh, and just to add one more thing, what was up with chris's family? they were only really mentioned in passing, but it seemed like the show could have done more to tease out his background by making them a little more prominent.
maybe i need to watch it again, but nothing really blew me away. there were some really cool moments--omar on the witness stand, bodie running into mcnulty at the movies, mcnulty confessing to the reporter that he was the serial killer--and some of the deaths were really gutwrenching--d'angelo, wallace, bodie, prop joe--but there are just a lot of shows that i enjoy more right now. justified is great. archer is probably the first series that's truly resonated with me as an adult. as i've said in the other thread, i'm just absolutely blown away by the finales of doctor who.
i'm not knocking the wire down to the level of dexter--although, just to say a word about that, the way they teased incest during this past season was truly inspired. usually with a show like this, you get to a point where you're numb to the imagery, but adding that wrinkle to the plot last year just completely ramped up the skeeviness of a show that had kind of plateaued. i know the actors are married to each other in real life, but i think that adds to the possibilities of where the show will go next season--i'm just saying that it's not in my personal inner circle anymore.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main