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 0.7227 seconds
50 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.
You're right, I misread division as conference. Because it honestly didn't occur to me that anybody gave a rat's ass about winning the division.
Having thought more about this, I think this is a lot better but I'm not sure it can get done on Iggy for Gasol, Thad for Martin straight up.
My question to you is, is this with Doug Collins as coach? Cuz I'm not sure it works then, and also I think that either Turner or Collins has to go. I'm not sure Turner should play 2 or 3.
I'd amnesty Brand, let Hawes walk, trade Iggy or Turner for a big guy. (Fire DC/Hire SVG) Sign Allen to a 3-year deal.
Try to sign Roy Hibbert. When that doesn't work, try to sign Kris Humphries? Try to sign Lou to a reasonable deal or let him walk.
I can understand this perspective, but I think the gap between Gasol and Iggy as players (particularly w/r/t to their trade value, bigs generally fetching more than wings and offensive players often fetching more than defensive players) is such that even at the end of their contracts, I think Gasol is likely to have more value than Iguodala. So getting him actually might make it easier to get another stud later should one become available.
Depending, of course, on who else LA asked for.
As for Utah: Could Philly make the salaries work for Jefferson? Would there be any reason to do that? I'm not a big fan of Jefferson's game, but I'm assuming he wouldn't cost much in terms of talent.
I counted at least four fast break opportunities where the Sixers had numbers and somehow came up with nothing. Between those and the free throws, that's the game.
And I would absolutely be against any Gasol-for-Iggy trade. Iggy's a nice player, but he's no Pau Gasol. Given the new Laker regime, however, I wouldn't be surprised to see a Gasol-for-Brand trade, just to same some money in 2014.
The people I'm picking on either don't realize or won't acknowledge that aesthetics is part of their logic.
As for the theory, I'd say I'm not sure it squares with the research I did here: http://82games.com/pelton13.htm and here: http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1412 showing increased efficiency by role players when playing with Kobe Bryant and Carmelo Anthony.
now, that is something i would be all over.
I haven't been paying attention to the college scene, so I have no idea which draft would be better. But I agree that I'd rather have the pick sooner (i.e. this year, rather than next).
Count me in with Tom and Quaker that Favors for Turner makes no sense for the Jazz and there's not a chance in hell I would even consider it if I were management. Jefferson for Iggy would at least be worth thinking about since bigs are the one area the Jazz are well stocked in, though I personally think they should just keep all 3 and see how that big lineup works for an entire season. It didn't work against the Spurs, obviously, but neither would anything else the Jazz (or Clips) could have done instead.
Say what you want about his defense, but Jefferson is a good player. He had a better PER (12th in the league) than Aldridge, Dirk & Monroe.
The idea that the Jazz are going to give him away for Caron Butler (as was said a few pages ago) or Turner is, umm, unrealistic.
Understood.
Pau:
As I have said, although Pau has said several times that he wants to stay in LA, I think he is a better basketball fit elsewhere at this point, and I think he has perhaps lost less to age than it might appear. As noted, his role is less than optimal on this team, as he missed both Odom and the Triangle. The LA Times recently ran long piece in which he was quoted extensively about his role and his issus with it. Some of the fanbase at this point would actually rather that they move Bynum than Gasol for a variety of reasons (knee, tude, up for a big extension, could probably get a better return). Kobe and Pau's deals both expire in 2014, so some fans want the team to see what they can get for Bynum, do whatever can be done the next two years, and then start over, as opposed to giving Bynum a 5-6 year deal.
As an aside, Kyle Lowry stated earlier this week that he would rather be moved than continue playing for Kevin McHale, so that will be an issue that Morey and Co will have to address, one way or another. ISTM that teams that might want Gasol would be:
Houston
Minnesota
Indiana
Philadelphia
Atlanta
Whether a deal could be worked out in those cases that would work for both sides is of course a trickier question.
I see no way that Derrick Favors is going anywhere.
It isn't that simple. When you lack shooting and dribble-drive skills and speed, it becomes a problem. Also, Pau and Bynum are, again, both very slow-footed--not guys who are good at flashing to the rim or running the floor, and not great roll men. And, on a more basic level, Gasol and Bynum aren't Tim Duncan and David Robinson. A lot of people inside the fanbase give them too much crap; a lot of people outside it give them too much credit.
If they keep the same team, the key to improvement on O will be utilizing Sessions better on O, who ostensibly was supposed to address the speed/penetration issues. They also will need a 3/D type role player. Kobe's D has really declined, and Sessions' D was even worse than I had thought it would be. Mike Brown has been quoted many times as saying he is a defensive coach, D is about wanting it, etc. If Sessions stays, Brown needs to back those words up and help to improve Sessions' work on that side of the ball.
But I doubt that they will keep the same team. I think either Gasol or Bynum will be gone, and there is a good chance Sessions will be as well.
Buss and Kupchak did try to address the shooting, but they did it by adding a guy who is not an NBA player (Kapono) and a guy who is barely playable (Murphy). So of course it didn't work.
and as i've pointed out, the sixers have 6 picks in the next 2 years, so that gives them some ammunition to throw in.
i really hope that collins is gone, regardless of whatever other moves are made. i thought he did a terrible job of keeping everyone on the team hungry and focused, and i think their late season collapses were a direct result of his shortening the rotation (which hit the team hard in 2 ways--1, it tired the legs of the team's core, and 2, it took multiple players out of the rotation (lavoy, nik, jodie, sam), which limited their ability to help the team down the stretch, since they weren't game-ready). and as i've said before, i think he psyched out his own players by screwing with their minutes like a lunatic. maybe there were off-court issues (or maybe there were injury issues) that necessitated that kind of shuffling, but lavoy allen, who was the team's best forward in the postseason, was a DNP-CD 25 times this year. nik vucevic went for 18 and 8 one night, and then a week later, he was the 9th man in the rotation, barely getting off the bench. evan turner was in the starting lineup for the rest of the season, and then he wasn't.
i'd just prefer to see a new coach brought in who's got a stronger focus on player development.
if all of this #### that collins did worked, and if the team surged in the second half of the season, i'd have no issue with bringing him back.
but when the team started its downturn, he just did not have any answers for it, and much of what he did actually hurt the team in the short term, and really clouded its future in the long term.
please tell me that's lavoy allen and not ray allen.
and i'm not a huge fan of humphries. i'd much rather see what thaddeus young could do as a full-time starter.
Kanter for Turner? I'd say possible. I wouldn't do it because I don't like Turner, though.
I would definitely do Jefferson for Iggy. I'm not as sure about it from the Sixers end...as Steagles points out adding Jefferson and losing Iggy could turn their defense into a weakness. Is Jefferson's contract a plus to the Sixers in comparison to Gasol's? He only has one year left, so it would not prevent the Sixers from acquiring a star like Gasol might. FWIW, Jefferson has at least really improved his passing and from my viewpoint seems to be great with the young Jazz players, especially Favors and Kanter.
Ok, I'll take out his first two years.
count<10 73.42%
count >10 64.48% -8.94%
count>15 62.01% -2.47%
count>20 57.67% -4.35%
count>25 53.56% -4.11%
count >30 44.57% -8.99%
I think you meant the first three years b/e the trend is still there, so I'll show that too
count<10 67.35%
count >10 64.55% -2.80%
count>15 62.53% -2.03%
count>20 57.67% -4.86%
count>25 53.56% -4.11%
count >30 44.57% -8.99%
But you are correct that the effect is minimized during the Smush era.
count<10 60.00%
count >10 51.13% -8.87%
count>15 51.49% 0.35%
count>20 50.35% -1.14%
count>25 49.40% -0.95%
count >30 50.00% 0.60%
In the post smush world, where there is no youngness or smushness
count<10 63.33%
count >10 67.23% 3.89%
count>15 64.45% -2.77%
count>20 59.60% -4.86%
count>25 53.85% -5.75%
count >30 36.36% -17.49%
Again, I urge anyone to take a look and correct; however, it seems the trend remains. Changing the narrative and the parameters will affect the magnitude of the trend, but I presume that is always going to be the case when you narrow the space. The only slight break in the trend is looking at just a two year slice.
I mostly agree. I am not sure I would have even identified the post/entry pass as a particular deficiency. I am one of those "outside the fanbase" guys that see a better Lakers team when they run the offense through the high post rather than a punch of isos and PNRs. You guys see them more, disagree with this assertion, so I am happy to defer to you.
But I don't think its 3 Point shooters. Artest will be better at that next year. Blake (for as sh1tty as he played) can still do that. If that was just a piece issue, you could probably deal with those Utah guys at get Blake Ahern for pennies.
I don't think its just a strong D/3 either. Artest isn't what he use to be, but he is still a plus defender. Barnes may be past the point of getting you something. But again, if that is all that is missing, then you can usually find that in the draft and the D league. I haven't seen as much of Ebanks as you, but isn't that what he is suppose to be?
Nevertheless, I do entirely agree that you need speed on the wings. Now if you are searching for a wing that is very fast, a lock down defender, a plus 3 point shooter, and an efficient scorer-- that may be an issue. Every team wants that player, and that player is usually near the all-NBA team.
I am skeptical that just picking up the passer is the answer, b/c if you keep Kobe's utilization at that rate, and it is from the ball being in his hands in isos and PNRs, that other players skill isn't going to be on display. In fact, IMHO, that is what is happening with Pau.
you know, i'd have significant reservations about that kind of deal, but i think i could get behind it.
holiday-XXX-turner-jefferson-allen. with lou williams (likely UFA), jodie meeks (RFA), sam young (RFA), thad young, and nik vucevic still on the bench, and picks 15, 45, and 54 in the draft.
holiday will be 22. vucevic will be 22. allen will be 23. turner will be 24. thaddeus young will be 24. lou williams will be 26. al jefferson will be 28.
they'd be in definite need of some spot-up shooters, but that's not a terrible starting point for a roster.
his top 4 comparables are greg monroe, earl clark, andre iguodala, and evan turner. turner and iguodala are listed around 215 lbs, while white is listed at a slim, trim, buff, cut, ripped, chiseled, and jacked 270 lbs.
there's similar charts on a lot of the other 2012 draftees, so if that kind of stuff interests you, have fun.
Not exactly. I have said several times that they need to stop running so many ISOs with Kobe due to his age and hands. That is in the numbers and is visible with the eyes.
As far as high P/R, that is partly true and that is largely a Mike Brown problem. Brown at times basically seemed to run a Chris Paul offense without having either Chris Paul or a decent roll man that he would play after McRoberts lost his rotation spot. Early in the year, Brown talked about all the changes he had to make in his plan due to not having "a guy like Chris Paul or Tony Parker." Then, when he got a homeless man's version of those guys, he didn't use him all that well. The Lakers started off very well with Sessions and Bryant playing together, but Sessions for a variety of reasons could not sustain it. My position has been that Kobe should have a high USG, but should be getting more looks based on off-the-ball actions and on the blocks.
Also, AFAIK, 3/D guy means guy who shoots 3s and plays D (I may be wrong). The Lakers FO never got an actual back-up 2 after they let Shannnon Brown walk. They need one who can spot up at a near league average rate and play decent defense.
As to MWP and Blake, they are both going to be 33 next year, both are overpaid, and both have extreme limitations. Blake is pretty decent on the 3, but he is not Steve Kerr, and he does not bring much else to the table. MWP's 3s will likely bounce back up towards his career rate, but his D, while still pretty good, is slipping, and his O is very limited.
As to Bryant, Hombre and I once had an exchange with kevin on the now-defunct BaskRef blog, and Hombre said that the basic argument that kevin was making all those years is that the Lakers lose games because Bryant is a selfish, overrated punk who shoots too much. And that IMO is more or less what Henry Abbott, and you, are saying as well. We started this conversation in 2007, and I think it is time (for the sake of the others on the thread) to end it, since I don't think either of our positions is going to change. Mine was, and is, that there is certainly at times truth in that idea, but that Bryant should be evaluated more in the larger context of the team than he often is, particularly given how much the team has won with him being a key part of it.
___
Who are you picking in the SA/OKC series? I am going to hold out and stick with preseason OKC in the Finals prediction, although all the signs are pointing the other way.
I think Iggy/Jefferson is a bad deal for the 76ers and Turner/Favors is a bad deal for Utah. As such, I don't expect either to get done.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. Evan Turner sucks, guys.
It will be interesting to see how he does next season. More than anyone on the Jazz (and maybe just about anyone in the NBA) he suffered from the lockout since there was no summer league and he didn't even get to play in college. He was never in NBA shape, but hopefully this season with his plans to work out with Jefferson (and I think Favors) plus summer league he'll be in better shape and consequently have better stamina and defense. He was just so slow on defense, and though I don't expect him to ever be a good defender, with his size if he's in shape he could at least be decent. I have less concerns about his offense. He's said to already have a sweet mid-range jumper and he showed some great potential in the low post, just needs practice to avoid traveling.
91% for the Spurs?! Where can I get a piece of that action?
Andris Biedrins is worse, I think.
I wasn't commenting on his actual success/failure rate.
with atlanta, shot 82, 77, 80, 81 from the line - two tough years in europe where he shot 71, 70) then 49% with the suns last year.
So you have a guy who would be the best rebounding 2/3 with some potential as a scorer. If you can't get a good player for him it doesn't make any sense to trade him at the nadir of his market value.
I'm actually higher on him now than I was when he came out of college.
In the abstract, I'm not sure that Gasol is better than Iggy (he probably is). That said, I like Iguodala more than almost anyone. Both are very good ballplayers and (imo) underrated by the public at large. In his down year, Gasol was a 16.7/10.0/3.5, with 1.4 blk shooting 50% from the field and 78% from the line. (And those #s probably suffer a bit due to system and crowding out issues) The only time he's ever had a PER below 20 was his rookie year (19.5) a decade ago, which is both kind of a selective way of looking at things and really impressive. OTOH, 2/38.3m ... whew ... that's a lot of money.
Favors isn't going anywhere.
Kevin Martin: Anyone else have the feeling he might be on the verge of collapse? Don't see too much in terms of statistical indicators suggesting that that will happen, but something makes me nervous that he could lose a step soon and - if he does - that that could cause him problems. This is my gut, not my head talking.
baudib - are you considering Derek Fisher a rotation player (tonight notwithstanding)?
I don't see much Paul Pierce in there, but I do think he'll be a solid player in time. The issue with Turner as a scorer is (for me) that he's not a good jump shooter and not good getting to the line (you can also question his decision making). That doesn't leave much for a wing. That said, I don't buy the argument that Philly should go small and play him inside as a four initiating from the high post.
Agree to disagree. He's not that young and other than rebounding, I'm not really seeing a plus skill. Put another way...I don't know that Evan Turner is better than Landry Fields.
EDIT: I think Turner will have a meaningful career in the NBA. Sort of a poor man's Paul Pierce.
Not seeing it at all.
but I do think he'll be a solid player in time.
My memory may be off, but isn't Turner already past the age where we can expect significant gains? Time is not on his side IMO.
I picked Miami over OKC before the season and before the playoffs, so I should stick with that. But the Spurs have looked damn near unbeatable so far, and if I'm allowed to change my pick, I'd say the Spurs in 6. To add to the fearless prediction, I'm saying the home team wins the first 5 games before SA closes it out in OKC in an all time classic. I'll also guess that 5 of the 6 games are decided by single digits and one of them goes to OT.
Heat/Celtics will be short and ugly.
that's a hell of a player. that's what evan turner could be. that's why i'm not exceedingly eager to toss him aside for 15 cents on the dollar.
He's not better than Landry Fields. He doesn't have another plus skill; if he did, he wouldn't suck. But if he keeps getting to the rim and getting more FTs like he did in the playoffs, he'll presumably do better than have a TS% of 41.
and
he just seems like a good basketball player who will put it together in one way or another.
Agree to disagree. It may really just be the case that I am, in fact, taking crazy pills.
Well he's gotten to the rim and to the FT line at a below average rate thus far in his career so I'm skeptical this is true.
He may have struggled in the playoffs but he's actually been an above average finisher at the rim during the regular season so I wouldn't expect much improvement over his regular season numbers from finishing.
I don't see any reason to think he'll ever be close to league average from beyond the arc. He rarely shoots from three and is at 27% in his career. And he doesn't get to the FT line a lot.
I can see this even if I think Turner is never going to be more than a passable rotation player, but most of the proposed trades I've heard have been steals for the Sixers (like for Favors and I'd even say Kanter).
The whole point is that in the playoffs, against the top 2 defensive teams in the conference, he got to the rim whenever he wanted. It was a total departure from his regular season play, and he drew a lot more fouls. Jrue Holiday did this as well, which is why he was the team's leading scorer in the playoffs after a pretty disappointing regular season. Jrue had success doing it, but Turner had ridiculously bad/probably unsustainably bad results. If he continues to attack more and maintain the numbers he had from outside and from inside during the regular season, he'll be a decent scorer. If he does that and improves his shooting at all, he'll be a pretty good scorer.
I'm not really quibbling with the idea that his FG% in the playoffs was fluky low; I just don't see any reason to think he'll get to the rim or line that often over an entire season. And considering how horrendous he's been at scoring he'd probably have to maintain both to even be mediocre.
i like turner quite a bit more than the guy i'm about to mention, but your description, steagles, and their ensuing shooting numbers remind me a bit of chris douglas-roberts - another guy who numbers didn't meet peak hype (though cdr was significantly less well regarded as a pro prospect).
A debt's being paid.
He's either there already or he isn't. It's very unlikely he do something in the rest of his career to change his ranking.
Yes, they have. I have not been impressed with this crew. Can't they just get rid of Danny and Joey Crawford?
He's still playing at a very high level, so I disagree. Plus, spivey's point.
I finally sprung for Synergy and am having some issues with the interface (which I've never liked, having poked at the free stuff before) and with using and interpreting the numbers (which I want to get a handle on before I do too much video stuff). Using the T-Wolves as an example - and noting that the main metric is PPP (points per play):
their offense (PPP = 0.91, 11th in the league) "outperformed" their defense (0.88, 16th in the league) - which is odd for a team that was outscored on the season by 2.2 points per game. The answer, of course, is that Minnesota had many less possessions than their opponents (7061 v. 7421). Given that they're counting plays which end in a FGA, turnover, or FTs - my first thought was - 'oh, Minnesota must have been much worse at rebounding than I'd believed' - as an offensive rebound would generate an extra play under that framework ... but Minnesota was near dead average on that end.
What am I missing?
Also, it looks like they lump playoff work in with the regular season. That seems like a curious choice.
Why don't that make league averages easily available? Or when they tell you that 'X' is 235th in the league at 'Y' how many other players qualified in that category? And so on and on times a bunch.
Yup. He's a non-entity on the court, unable to make the Heat pay for mostly ignoring him, and without Bradley and with Pierce working hard on LeBron defensively they need him badly.
No, he's not. He's contributing nothing. He can't pass, he can't defend, he can't rebound. You can love the guy, love what he's done, but he's just killing them.
Ah!
Here's a telling quote from BPRO - http://basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2230
There's obviously room for argument, but I'd say Duncan's help defense anchors the Spurs and provides as much for wins as does Parker and Ginobili's breaking down the defense of the dribble. Tough to tease it all apart this season.
NBA.com
I'm not sure if this or Aaron Boone's HR is my favorite single sports moment, but pretty sure I'll never forget either. Also, I can't help but marvel at the fact that I liked the Jazz' uniforms as a kid.
If you switch Pop and Brooks, I think the Thunder win in 5 or 6.
Can't see him ever getting above Kareem, Russell, Magic, or Jordan. He's in the conversation with Oscar, Bird (and others deemed to belong) for 5.
he had a pretty outstanding season, he just wasn't healthy for most of it.
he's 9th all-time in PER, behind jordan, lebron, shaq, david robinson, wilt, dwayne wade, chris paul, and bob petit.
he doesn't have a very flashy peak, but in terms of per minute production, he was a great player on day 1 when he entered the league, and he's been a great player for each of the 15 years since. per 36 minutes, he averaged 19 and 11 as a rookie, 19 and 11 as a 29 year old, and 19 and 11 now, at 35 years old. he won championships at 22, 26, 28, and 30, and has a good chance of winning another at 35.
that's a hell of a run to put up in a perennially loaded conference.
Assume that Russell is the greatest defensive player of all time. How much better is he than Duncan on defense? Because Duncan is a quantum leap better on offense.
Great intangibles, too -- arguably the best of all-time. Hyper-intelligent, very coachable (which means everybody else on the team has to be coachable), dependable, entirely driven by winning, and literally nothing he does or has ever done on the floor is driven by personal whim, neurosis, or need. When you combine that with his versatility, he's among the very best teammates to ever play the game.
Because he played 40(?) years ago and not today? Guys that played that long ago always get a boost.
Better shot blocker, better defender, more athletic, more rings.
Guys that played that long ago always get a boost.
A bunch of his prime games have been available on You Tube, NBA TV, and ESPN Classic. I'd never have the opinion I have unless I'd seen him in actual broadcast action.
Better shot blocker and better defender is covered by "assume he's the greatest defensive player of all time."
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main