NBA - Rochambeau Playoffs

[DMC]

Yeah actually if I was to compare Embiid to anyone it'd be Ewing.  Ewing never scored at Embiid's rates, but their games are pretty similar.  Been listening to a lot of podcasts lately because of the long drive to campus, and Simmons made the same comparison.  Or Russillo.  At least one of them.

[Maithanet]

8 hours ago, Proudfeet said:

The way the Bucks lost has to be especially painful, having a big lead after the third the past two games.

In crunch time of both games 4 and 5, the Bucks offense absolutely fell apart.  Giannis charging toward the basket, and usually gets fouled, but in the final minutes the refs don't call it.  And so it's either a wild shot, or he passes it out to somebody who looks confused about what to do.  Nothing like team offense at all. This isn't a new problem for the Bucks, but it seemed like getting Middleton mostly solved it (at least it did in 2021), but it was definitely back in this series. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

27 minutes ago, grozeng said:

That's why I think Ewing would do well.  With being allowed to travel now, he would just start running in with the ball from the 3 point line and no one would stop him.  Or he could hit the jumper from just inside the 3 point line.  And he was a good passer out of double teams (just he was passing to John Starks, not Steph Curry).

Maybe. He might also just benefit from being able to draw more fouls. But like I said I'm not sure his ceiling would be much higher today than it was when he was in his prime. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

13 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yeah actually if I was to compare Embiid to anyone it'd be Ewing.  Ewing never scored at Embiid's rates, but their games are pretty similar.  Been listening to a lot of podcasts lately because of the long drive to campus, and Simmons made the same comparison.  Or Russillo.  At least one of them.

Idk, Embiid has got like 30 pounds on him while also being able to move better, and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall Ewing being the same kind of elite elite defender that Embiid is. 

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Idk, Embiid has got like 30 pounds on him while also being able to move better, and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall Ewing being the same kind of elite elite defender that Embiid is. 

Embiid's bigger sure, but Ewing was just as athletic.  And I don't really consider Embiid an "elite elite" defender.

[Maithanet]

5 hours ago, baxus said:

Even if we do count that as an advantage for Jordan, then we have to count Miami as a massive advantage for LeBron, too. I mean, if 3 out of top 5 picks in the same draft, all three played for Team USA and at least two of them will be in the Hall of Fame, are not a sign of good team building then I don't know what is.

A lot of people ding Lebron for joining Miami because he should have "beaten them instead of joining them" (although Lebron never lost a playoff series to either Wade or Bosh).  Yes, Lebron had a great team around him in Miami for the first 3 years, and went 2/3 winning the title those years.  The final year Bosh was starting to fade and Wade was a complete shell of himself, and in the 2014 Finals it felt only marginally more talented than the Cavs teams he'd led previously.  I'm not surprised Lebron was not interested in continuing there.  The year after Lebron left, Wade and Bosh led the team to 37 wins and the #10 seed.  Pretty stark contrast to how well the Jordan-less Bulls performed in the 1994 playoffs. 

Quote

If centers of yesteryear played today they would've grown up in the same system as centers of today and would play a similar style.

Sure, and there's every reason to think they would be better at 3 pointers than they were in the 90s.  But "better" and "decent" are not the same thing.  If Ewing were shooting 30% from deep, teams would be happy to back off and let him do that all day.  There are a great many guys in the NBA today (including some all-stars) who aren't good enough from 3 to be given the green light even if they're open.  Because shooting a 3 consistently is really hard, especially when you are nearly 7 feet tall with huge hands. 

[Maithanet]

21 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Maybe. He might also just benefit from being able to draw more fouls. But like I said I'm not sure his ceiling would be much higher today than it was when he was in his prime. 

I'm not an expert on Ewing's career, but I agree.  The eras are different, but it seems a little strange to just assume guys who were great in the 90s would be "even better" today.  And I've heard that claim about most of the great players from the 90s.  There are a few guys that I can see the argument - namely the guys who were great shooters, but struggled with the physicality of the game like Pistol Pete. 

But if you're talking about guys who were already great like Ewing or Jordan, it just feels unlikely that they would be even better.  Would they still be good?  Absolutely, that's not the question.  Is it likely that Jordan could work on his 3 pointer and improve from his career 27% from deep?  Yes, that is virtually certain.  But it's not like he wasn't trying to be a good 3 point shooter back then, it's absolutely reasonable to question whether he would improve to 33% (terrible by today's standards) rather than 38% or something. 

[grozeng]

2 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

But if you're talking about guys who were already great like Ewing or Jordan, it just feels unlikely that they would be even better.  Would they still be good?  Absolutely, that's not the question.  Is it likely that Jordan could work on his 3 pointer and improve from his career 27% from deep?  Yes, that is virtually certain.  But it's not like he wasn't trying to be a good 3 point shooter back then, it's absolutely reasonable to question whether he would improve to 33% (terrible by today's standards) rather than 38% or something. 

Yeah, I am not saying he would be LeBron now.  He just would be successful.  His creaky knees would have problems with the pace of today's game.  But once he got in the post his game would translate very well.  And if they doubled him, he could pass out.  If they left him open, he could hit the jump shot.  And all the times he got called for traveling when he was posting up are legal now (you can tell I hate that part of the modern NBA).  So that's like 10 points more a game for him.

[Maithanet]

I will also say that the way the chips have fallen make for a really great second round on tap (assuming the favorites close things out). 

Lakers vs Warriors is the headliner - two all time greats going at it for (probably) the final time in the playoffs. A real mismatch of styles too.  Should be great fun.

Sixers vs Celtics - The East looked like the better conference this year, and these are the two best teams left after the Bucks no-show, so the winner of this series will probably be the favorite for the title. 

Suns vs Nuggets - Jokic vs Durant.  Both guys desperately need to add more playoff successes to their resumes.  The Suns have more star talent, but Denver has better depth and home court.

Heat vs Knicks - The series no one expected, but it's a good matchup nonetheless.  Jimmy Butler looked like the best player in the league in the first round, can he keep that up? 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

A pity Chris Welp's knee went out during his rookie season, otherwise we might have a reference for how centers capable of hitting trhees could've worked.

[DMC]

3 hours ago, Maithanet said:

but it seems a little strange to just assume guys who were great in the 90s would be "even better" today.

To be clear, I'm not saying anyone would be "even better."  Rather, just saying I see no reason to think they wouldn't be just as good/great/whatever. 

[DireWolfSpirit]

On 4/25/2023 at 8:22 PM, Tywin et al. said:

I think the version of the Spurs that LeBron faced in the Finals was better than the twin towers one that battled Shaq and Kobe. And if Timmy doesn't miss a bunny they probably go 2-0 against the Heat.

My argument isn't just that Jordan couldn't beat the two best teams at their best, it's that when he took over the league the other teams were inferior to the one's LeBron had to beat. If possibly the best team ever was never put together LeBron may have two more titles and maybe a third if his team didn't get destroyed by injuries during the Warriors first championship. I personally don't think Jordan ever beat a team as good as the Spurs or Warriors were so I don't fault LeBron for failing to be perfect against them. I'm pretty sure if you swapped Jordan out and put LeBron on his teams they go 6-0 too. I doubt Jordan on the Cavs instead of LeBron beats the Durant Warriors. 

The best argument I've heard for Jordan over LeBron is that he's like Durant in that you can drop him on any team and they'll get better without much adjustment. LeBron teams have to be built around him otherwise you're not maxing out what he can do. 

I'm relying on old heads with this one, but what I've always heard is that after their last title the Pistons were not the same and pretty quickly fell apart even before the IT injury a few years later.

Your hearing it correctly, Jordans a Chicago p.o.s. that could never beat his competion till thier prime had passed.

[DireWolfSpirit]

Yeah this is the "April Madness" playoffs, playing out more like an NCAA tourney thus far giving us slightly unexpected 2nd round matchups.

Celtic v Sixers gonna be very entertaining.

Im favoring a Suns vs Celtics finals at this point but the Bucks rolling over, Miami, the Knicks and Lebron rising have been pretty entertaining surprises.

Like I alluded, a playoffs more akin to to a NCAA tournament in results.

Im loving it.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 hours ago, DMC said:

Embiid's bigger sure, but Ewing was just as athletic.  And I don't really consider Embiid an "elite elite" defender.

I was surprised to see he's never been a first team all-NBA defender. But that said when people list their top five defenders in the league his name comes up often and he's probably the best pure rim protector (though I like Giannis and Time Lord more because of versatility). 

4 hours ago, Maithanet said:

I'm not an expert on Ewing's career, but I agree.  The eras are different, but it seems a little strange to just assume guys who were great in the 90s would be "even better" today.  And I've heard that claim about most of the great players from the 90s.  There are a few guys that I can see the argument - namely the guys who were great shooters, but struggled with the physicality of the game like Pistol Pete. 

But if you're talking about guys who were already great like Ewing or Jordan, it just feels unlikely that they would be even better.  Would they still be good?  Absolutely, that's not the question.  Is it likely that Jordan could work on his 3 pointer and improve from his career 27% from deep?  Yes, that is virtually certain.  But it's not like he wasn't trying to be a good 3 point shooter back then, it's absolutely reasonable to question whether he would improve to 33% (terrible by today's standards) rather than 38% or something. 

Certainly an expert on Ewing either. The second paragraph is the key though. If an all-time great was subpar at something it's reasonable to think they could be at least average at it now with the proper coaching. I just find it hard to believe that a player can go from being terrible at something to being good at it. It could happen, but it would likely be a huge outlier. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

A pity Chris Welp's knee went out during his rookie season, otherwise we might have a reference for how centers capable of hitting trhees could've worked.

Just look at KAT right now. He has flaws, but his ability to shoot from outside at high level makes it much easier for him to bait the defender to come out then blow by them to attack the rim. The problem there is he's awful at avoiding charges. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Yeah, but Welp could've been a good NBA player in the 1990s. So his game was way ahead of his time.

[Slurktan]

51 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

The second paragraph is the key though. If an all-time great was subpar at something it's reasonable to think they could be at least average at it now with the proper coaching. I just find it hard to believe that a player can go from being terrible at something to being good at it. It could happen, but it would likely be a huge outlier. 

In general i agree but I think you and Maith are underestimating what the effect of zero hand checking would do to Jordan's offense. (And defense conversely)

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

25 minutes ago, Slurktan said:

In general i agree but I think you and Maith are underestimating what the effect of zero hand checking would do to Jordan's offense. (And defense conversely)

I don't believe I said anything about Jordan except that I think he could maybe be an average 3 point shooter early in his career. He would be completely unguardable attacking the rim with modern defenses. 

[Slurktan]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

I don't believe I said anything about Jordan except that I think he could maybe be an average 3 point shooter early in his career. He would be completely unguardable attacking the rim with modern defenses. 

Maith did and you agreed. But yeah to the later point.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

26 minutes ago, Slurktan said:

Maith did and you agreed. But yeah to the later point.

I was just talking about Ewing and in general we can't assume players would get significantly better at certain skillsets. Improve, sure, but if you can't shoot then you probably can't shoot now. A better example for me is someone like KG. He was really good at hitting long twos and I always wondered why he didn't just take one step back for a three. These days I'm sure that would be a larger part of his game.