Jump to content

NBA 2017 - 18: A Shot at Parity


Relic

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, Proudfeet said:

Was that the same Pistons team that were beaten by the one-man Cleveland team who were swept by the Spurs in the finals the next year?

No it is not.  The Pistons beat the Lakers 4-1 in 2004, and then lost to the Spurs in seven in 2005.  They lost to the eventual champion Heat in the ECF in 2006, and then lost in game 7 to the "one man Cavs" in 2007.  By the 2007 season, Ben Wallace was gone, Rasheed Wallace was old, and their defense had regressed significantly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Relic said:

for the record this is the Cavs roster form the Finals of that uyear -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006–07_Cleveland_Cavaliers_season

 

Wow. 

 

I'm well aware that team was really bad, at least as much of one man squad as the 2015 Cavs team after Love and Irving both got hurt.  But I don't have any patience for the notion that the 2007 Pistons team losing in the ECF means that the 2004 Pistons team wasn't very good.  The 2004 Pistons (or for that matter, the 2005 Pistons) would have crushed the 2007 Cavs without difficulty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jaime L said:

It's clear the guy eats, sleeps and breathes basketball so I don't get why he's seemingly so incapable of learning from what's not working. Both in terms of minutes and his defensive philosophy. T'Wolves are bottom 6 in defensive rating. And the injuries issue you mention. If he ever coached Embiid, I swear he'd kill him.

I can understand why he’s struggling to adjust his defensive and offensive schemes. They’re proven methods that worked for decades. My guess he’s one of the old heads that thinks the volume three game is a fad, though he’s wrong. The minutes though is unforgivable. Doesn’t he realize everyone mocks him for it?

Quote

Kawhi's probably the ultimate success story for turning a pure athlete into a knock down shooter. Of course he worked with the best shooting coach in the NBA. A lot of lottery guys who can't shoot never learn how (i.e.: MKG, Turner, Tyreke Evans, your beloved Rubio). And Ben Simmons has made all of 1 three pointer in his college and pro career combined thus far. I don't know, would feel like a small miracle if he's able to add this to his game at some point.

Kawhi is a statistical outlier for sure, but if I was selling you on Simmons and his hopes of improving his jumper, he’s the guy I’d use as an example. And he’s not the only great player who improved his jumper. LeBron and Jordan, for example, are players who drastically improved their range throughout their careers, and if you believe that Simmons is an elite talent, there’s no reason to think he can’t do the same.

After all, it’s important to keep in mind that Curry had to totally retrain his jump shot when he was a senior in HS. And A.A.Ron and to totally change his throwing motion while backing up Farve. And they went on to be the best shooter and passer we’ve ever seen.

Quote

Maybe Markelle Fultz can work with him. 

You're savage! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, sperry said:

It's definitely time for someone to put an elbow in Durant or Curry's earhole. The Warriors have been the kings of cheapshots for quite a while.

I’m not sure the Warriors are that much more dirty than other teams. They just have a bigger spotlight on them.

And now that I’ve seen the play, I think Zaza should have gotten a 1 game ban, but it wasn’t as bad as people made it out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

I'm well aware that team was really bad, at least as much of one man squad as the 2015 Cavs team after Love and Irving both got hurt.  But I don't have any patience for the notion that the 2007 Pistons team losing in the ECF means that the 2004 Pistons team wasn't very good.  The 2004 Pistons (or for that matter, the 2005 Pistons) would have crushed the 2007 Cavs without difficulty. 

Well, so I was wrong about that, but that wasn't my argument. I honestly didn't know as I wasn't paying attention to basketball then. My point on that was that it was a cherry picked example anyway (and not a very good one upon looking it up as they had a similar win total to the Lakers who they defeated so it wasn't like they were huge underdogs who crushed the favourites).

I don't care about history that "balances out". You can always improve instead of settling for balancing out. I don't get the resistance to reseeding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Proudfeet said:

Well, so I was wrong about that, but that wasn't my argument. I honestly didn't know as I wasn't paying attention to basketball then. My point on that was that it was a cherry picked example anyway (and not a very good one upon looking it up as they had a similar win total to the Lakers who they defeated so it wasn't like they were huge underdogs who crushed the favourites).

They were huge underdogs.  I don't know how credible this website is, but that indicates that the Pistons were approximately 6 to 1 underdogs, and that a bet on the Pistons to win in 4 or 5 would be a 20 to 1 payoff.  That's a really bigupset, I don't think anything like that has happened since then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

They were huge underdogs.  I don't know how credible this website is, but that indicates that the Pistons were approximately 6 to 1 underdogs, and that a bet on the Pistons to win in 4 or 5 would be a 20 to 1 payoff.  That's a really bigupset, I don't think anything like that has happened since then. 

Eh, not for the purpose of a reseeding. The Cav's victory over the 73 win 3-1 lead Warriors (and by proxy the Spurs) seems more of an upset. As in, they have a win total difference that would have been enough to create a gap similar to the first and second seeds against the seventh and eighth seeds. Basically unthinkable.

The Thunder beat the Spurs and almost beat the Warriors that year too, so win totals isn't everything, but it is still a pretty good predictor regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Jaime L said:

And Ben Simmons has made all of 1 three pointer in his college and pro career combined thus far. I don't know, would feel like a small miracle if he's able to add this to his game at some point.

Simmons is already on the cusp of being an all-star without a reliable mid-range shot.  That's all he needs to make the defense honest.  As a Sixers fan, I don't want--nor do I expect--him to primarily focus on 3-point shooting in the summer.  He's a 6'10 PG, his job is to find shooters not to become one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sour Billy Tipton said:

Simmons is already on the cusp of being an all-star without a reliable mid-range shot.  That's all he needs to make the defense honest.  As a Sixers fan, I don't want--nor do I expect--him to primarily focus on 3-point shooting in the summer.  He's a 6'10 PG, his job is to find shooters not to become one.  

I mean 3 point shooting matters for virtually everyone these days. If Embiid didn't add it, think it could really hinder how well he and Simmons compliment each other. Lebron adding a consistent 3 pointer unlocked unstoppable mode for him. Griffin needed to add it to still be somewhat relevant as a star. Towns is more valuable because he shoots them. Freaking Dewayne Dedmon even shoots them now. 

That said, I agree. I'd argue Simmons should have been an all star. Simmons and Giannis are the two young guys big and freakish enough that they can get away without having it. You can build a devastating offense centered around their skillsets right now. But it does mean for max effectiveness, you need to surround them with 4 guys who do. 3 point shooting used to be a nice perk in a star, now you gotta be fucking amazing to get away with not having it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

 3 point shooting used to be a nice perk in a star, now you gotta be fucking amazing to get away with not having it. 

Go back and look at the 2008 all star team.  It's only ten years ago, but it just shows how incredibly different the NBA is now.  Of the 10 starters, only Kobe, Melo, and Kidd shot above 35% from 3 in 2008, and Kobe was the highest at 36%.  Hell, more than half of the forwards at that game are poor/terrible distance shooters.  And those are the all-stars. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

I mean 3 point shooting matters for virtually everyone these days. If Embiid didn't add it, think it could really hinder how well he and Simmons compliment each other. Lebron adding a consistent 3 pointer unlocked unstoppable mode for him. Griffin needed to add it to still be somewhat relevant as a star.

 Exactly, it's seen as paramount in today's game because of GS success.  It will always be relevant and a great weapon to have if you have the personnel.  I know the the thinking from 20-30 years ago may seem archaic, that it's ridiculous to shoot from a distance in which you'll likely be 30-35% from when you only gain 1 extra point.  Go with the odds and be a 40-55% midrange shooter.  That thinking has been pushed aside with the level of speed offenses run at now.  You can compensate the misses by adding more attempts if you have a fast offense that can continually set up the skilled shooters with perimeter screens.  Eventually, I believe we will see a return of the mid-range offense.  Keep it up Demar!

40 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

If Embiid didn't add it, think it could really hinder how well he and Simmons compliment each other. 

I disagree, Embiid takes far too many attempts.  It's good he's a threat and is able to consistently get defenders to bite on his up-fakes which enables him to get him sprinting in the lane.  However, his game will be taken to the next level if he perfects his footwork.  Also Simmons is too talented, he would be able to produce the same numbers if Embiid set up down-low the majority of the time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Proudfeet said:

Eh, not for the purpose of a reseeding. The Cav's victory over the 73 win 3-1 lead Warriors (and by proxy the Spurs) seems more of an upset. As in, they have a win total difference that would have been enough to create a gap similar to the first and second seeds against the seventh and eighth seeds. Basically unthinkable.

That Cavs team was also a lot more talented than its record, which I think has to be accounted for.  These Cavs teams have wildly underperformed in the regular season before switching it into gear once the playoffs start since LeBron came back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last night was another perfect example of how criminally underutilized KAT is. His final stat line was 26 points, 17 rebounds, 4 assists and 2 blocks and steals. But those 26 points came from 10 freaking shots. Why, for the love of god, do the Wolves not feed him more when he’s having these type of shooting nights????????

And just to highlight how effective KAT's been this year, he only has the 15th best true shooting percentage in NBA history. Pretty impressive for a 22 year old. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Go back and look at the 2008 all star team.  It's only ten years ago, but it just shows how incredibly different the NBA is now.  Of the 10 starters, only Kobe, Melo, and Kidd shot above 35% from 3 in 2008, and Kobe was the highest at 36%.  Hell, more than half of the forwards at that game are poor/terrible distance shooters.  And those are the all-stars. 

Yeah it was like a totally different sport back then. I mean the draft that year went D. Rose, Beasley, OJ Mayo. By 2018 standards that's insane.

9 hours ago, Sour Billy Tipton said:

 Exactly, it's seen as paramount in today's game because of GS success.  It will always be relevant and a great weapon to have if you have the personnel.  I know the the thinking from 20-30 years ago may seem archaic, that it's ridiculous to shoot from a distance in which you'll likely be 30-35% from when you only gain 1 extra point.  Go with the odds and be a 40-55% midrange shooter.  That thinking has been pushed aside with the level of speed offenses run at now.  You can compensate the misses by adding more attempts if you have a fast offense that can continually set up the skilled shooters with perimeter screens.  Eventually, I believe we will see a return of the mid-range offense.  Keep it up Demar!

I disagree, Embiid takes far too many attempts.  It's good he's a threat and is able to consistently get defenders to bite on his up-fakes which enables him to get him sprinting in the lane.  However, his game will be taken to the next level if he perfects his footwork.  Also Simmons is too talented, he would be able to produce the same numbers if Embiid set up down-low the majority of the time.  

The thing is that 1 extra point is 50% more valuable than a 2 point shot. So, if you take the possibility of foul shots out of it, a 33% 3 point shooter (which is not good BTW) will still score just as many points as a center who shoots 50% but only shoots 2's. Of course you're far more likely to get fouled on a 2 point shot, especially one where you're attacking the rim so that's why the comparison is more like 37-38% for a 3 point shooter to compare.

And that doesn't even get into the spacing benefit 3 point shooting provides and how it makes 2 point shooting easier.  Teams have figured out the math and how to exploit and it's really made the old way of playing obsolete. Yeah at some point the midrange shot will likely become undervalued but we're note there yet. Even DeMarr DeRozan, the king of the long 2, had to become a competent 3 point shooter this year to reach the next level. 

Regarding Embiid, he does take too many 3s considering how devastating he is from the post and how mediocre of a 3 point shooter he is. But just the fact he's kind of a threat out there gives Simmons at least a little more room to operate when he attacks the paint.

Those two are so freaking talented on both ends they're making it work and carrying a not very deep Philly team to the playoffs. But I do think they're in for a rude awakening once they get there. Defenses clamp down in a much harsher way and teams will pack the paint against them and force the 76ers to beat 'em with open 15+ footers which I don't think they'll be able to do. The dirty secret of Philly is it's biggest strength is on defense, not offense. Embiid, Simmons and Covington are all great defenders. Long-armed and aggressive. If they win a postseason series, it'll be because they ramp up their defense in turn. The issue is young guys rarely understand this at first. They think regular season intensity still is enough...and every superstar I can ever think of had to learn the difference the hard way. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Western Conference cumulatively has 184 wins to 168 losses vs the Eastern Conference for the 2017-18 season thus far. A slight Western advantage in strength perhaps, but nothing outside the normal range and certainly no compelling reason to change format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Maithanet said:

I'm well aware that team was really bad, at least as much of one man squad as the 2015 Cavs team after Love and Irving both got hurt.  But I don't have any patience for the notion that the 2007 Pistons team losing in the ECF means that the 2004 Pistons team wasn't very good.  The 2004 Pistons (or for that matter, the 2005 Pistons) would have crushed the 2007 Cavs without difficulty. 

I just posted it to agree with the previous poster about the "one man team" especially after looking at that roster and remembering how fucking BAD that team would have been without LeBron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

The Western Conference cumulatively has 184 wins to 168 losses vs the Eastern Conference for the 2017-18 season thus far. A slight Western advantage in strength perhaps, but nothing outside the normal range and certainly no compelling reason to change format.

You are missing the point. It doesn't matter East vs West. Its about the individual teams. You can also have a 50/50 conference split but have a conference that is top and bottom heavy in a 16 team seeding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...