Jump to content

NBA Thread


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, BGleas said:

First, Giannis is phenomenal! But with that said, it is crazy how he's allowed to basically truck defenders like a RB trying to plow over a corner and it's always called on the defense. 

Bostons defense was not able to push around the Bucks. Also they will not be facing the worst defense in the league in this series. They will adjust and come back stronger but man they just got man smacked today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also very disappointed in my Grizzlies. I think playing the Wolves in round 1 hurt them a lot. They took on some bad habits playing fast and free with the ball. While I think they are much deeper and more athletic then the Warriors for sure and I think they could run them to death by the end of the series they just have to focus and really tighten up their game to out execute GS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dgambill said:

Also very disappointed in my Grizzlies. I think playing the Wolves in round 1 hurt them a lot. They took on some bad habits playing fast and free with the ball. While I think they are much deeper and more athletic then the Warriors for sure and I think they could run them to death by the end of the series they just have to focus and really tighten up their game to out execute GS.

I think the Dubs are going to be a tough out for anyone. Three HOFers, two more guys coming into their own in Poole and Wiggins, a HOF coach.... they're a lot to handle. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I think the Dubs are going to be a tough out for anyone. Three HOFers, two more guys coming into their own in Poole and Wiggins, a HOF coach.... they're a lot to handle. 

I know…but I really felt Memphis could do a good enough job to lock down the perimeter and force contested jumpers and on the offensive end could push the ball and wear down Steph and Klay and the older players. Turn it into a track meet. They are just so deep and I didn’t think GS could defend them and keep them out lane…but we will see. GS definitely knows how to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, dgambill said:

I know…but I really felt Memphis could do a good enough job to lock down the perimeter and force contested jumpers and on the offensive end could push the ball and wear down Steph and Klay and the older players. Turn it into a track meet. They are just so deep and I didn’t think GS could defend them and keep them out lane…but we will see. GS definitely knows how to win.

I think the Grizz are a year ahead of schedule and don’t know how to win in the playoffs. They don’t have a vet that’s been there, some that like the Suns had last year.

Still a year away IMO. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I think the Grizz are a year ahead of schedule and don’t know how to win in the playoffs. They don’t have a vet that’s been there, some that like the Suns had last year.

Still a year away IMO. 

Probably right on that…but honestly they have all the right pieces. Not sure who they could have added…maybe could have done the CJ Mcollum deal as I think they could use an upgrade at the 2 or definitely at the back up point over Ty Jones.  A vet that could settle them and play off Morant but still they are pretty dang loaded. They may still figure it out yet. The longer the series goes the more dangerous they become….and come time they play Phoenix…could be very interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dgambill said:

Probably right on that…but honestly they have all the right pieces. Not sure who they could have added…maybe could have done the CJ Mcollum deal as I think they could use an upgrade at the 2 or definitely at the back up point over Ty Jones.  A vet that could settle them and play off Morant but still they are pretty dang loaded. They may still figure it out yet. The longer the series goes the more dangerous they become….and come time they play Phoenix…could be very interesting.

They lost at home in a game Dray got tossed in the first half, and the Warriors missed last field goals. If they can’t win that game they aren’t winning four.

They are very good and have a bright future, but they’re at least a year away. The Dubs are honestly just as deep as them when they’re healthy and have experience on them tenfold. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KoB2011 said:


 

The NBA has by far the greatest basketball players in the world…but this dunk or 3 offense is just not fun to watch for me. I still watch it when the elite teams play each other (if the stars actually play) but I honestly can’t stand watching pick n roll where they get an unathletic (mostly center) on a guard/forward and then take them one on one or fling it around til someone shoots a 3. It just isn’t very entertaining. Some teams don’t do that (have more movement like GS) so at least the 3s come from guys running off screens and back cuts etc but it’s just very hard to watch for me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dgambill said:

The NBA has by far the greatest basketball players in the world…but this dunk or 3 offense is just not fun to watch for me. I still watch it when the elite teams play each other (if the stars actually play) but I honestly can’t stand watching pick n roll where they get an unathletic (mostly center) on a guard/forward and then take them one on one or fling it around til someone shoots a 3. It just isn’t very entertaining. Some teams don’t do that (have more movement like GS) so at least the 3s come from guys running off screens and back cuts etc but it’s just very hard to watch for me.

I feel the same and it going down to the other levels as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, dgambill said:

The NBA has by far the greatest basketball players in the world…but this dunk or 3 offense is just not fun to watch for me. I still watch it when the elite teams play each other (if the stars actually play) but I honestly can’t stand watching pick n roll where they get an unathletic (mostly center) on a guard/forward and then take them one on one or fling it around til someone shoots a 3. It just isn’t very entertaining. Some teams don’t do that (have more movement like GS) so at least the 3s come from guys running off screens and back cuts etc but it’s just very hard to watch for me.

Then don't watch? These numbers kind of show that a lot of midrange isn't working, most of those guys are already out of the playoffs. The two guys left are at best the secondary scoring option on their team.

Edited by KoB2011
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good recipe for success in any sport - get a good matchup for your playmaker and get them in space. That's good offense and good things will happen; all the old stuff in basketball, football, etc. isn't as efficient as that.

We all have preferences in what we do and don't like, but there is no doubt about what is actually the best in terms of scoring. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

A good recipe for success in any sport - get a good matchup for your playmaker and get them in space. That's good offense and good things will happen; all the old stuff in basketball, football, etc. isn't as efficient as that.

We all have preferences in what we do and don't like, but there is no doubt about what is actually the best in terms of scoring. 

Maybe in the NBA but the offense in the college game is not as effecient.  Scoring and shooting is down compared to the past.  To me the best shot is the open ones and it shouldn't matter where it comes from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Maybe in the NBA but the offense in the college game is not as effecient.  Scoring and shooting is down compared to the past.  To me the best shot is the open ones and it shouldn't matter where it comes from.

I don't think most college teams run NBA level offenses, and I think the biggest reason scoring is down is because of the officiating and the game being over-coached. But regardless.... this is the NBA thread, no? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I don't think most college teams run NBA level offenses, and I think the biggest reason scoring is down is because of the officiating and the game being over-coached. But regardless.... this is the NBA thread, no? 

Shooting 3's are better today because they actually shoot them.  If Larry Bird would have shot 6-8 3's a game he probably would have scored a lot more points.  In the 80's there were a lot of scoring with teams like the Nuggets and Lakers showtime

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IU Scott said:

Shooting 3's are better today because they actually shoot them.  If Larry Bird would have shot 6-8 3's a game he probably would have scored a lot more points.  In the 80's there were a lot of scoring with teams like the Nuggets and Lakers showtime

Who said otherwise? You kinda just pointed out the schemes in the 80s were inferior despite you liking them better, and I agree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Who said otherwise? You kinda just pointed out the schemes in the 80s were inferior despite you liking them better, and I agree. 

Why are they inferior it is just different.  If you scored points who cares how you score them.  I know this is a NBA thread but it drives me crazy when they say today's offense is more effecient I'm college.  How is it more effecient when you score less and shoot a lower percentage.  Teams today shoots more 3's and layups yet score less points. IU teams of the 80's to the mid 90's  scored 80+ points shooting a lot of 12-15 foot jumpers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Teams today shoots more 3's and layups yet score less points

Here’s the math behind that. Just for round numbers, let’s say a team gets 100 possessions per game. If a team averaged 40% shooting from 3 and shot nothing but 3s, they’d average 120 points per game. To do the same using all 2 point shots, they’d need to average 60% shooting, and as that stat showed, only 7 players in the league averaged 50%. Shooting 50% from 2, you’d need 120 possessions per game to equal the output shooting nothing but 3s. 
 

That’s why teams either shoot the 3, or an extremely high percentage 2.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zlinedavid said:

Here’s the math behind that. Just for round numbers, let’s say a team gets 100 possessions per game. If a team averaged 40% shooting from 3 and shot nothing but 3s, they’d average 120 points per game. To do the same using all 2 point shots, they’d need to average 60% shooting, and as that stat showed, only 7 players in the league averaged 50%. Shooting 50% from 2, you’d need 120 possessions per game to equal the output shooting nothing but 3s. 
 

That’s why teams either shoot the 3, or an extremely high percentage 2.

Most teams don't come close to hitting 40 percent from 3.  I just take the 87 championship team and look at their scores in the tournament.  They scored 94, 107, 88, 77, 97 and 74 and the most 3's they hit in a game was 7. Alford hit all of the teams 3's but one of them in the tournament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Most teams don't come close to hitting 40 percent from 3.  I just take the 87 championship team and look at their scores in the tournament.  They scored 94, 107, 88, 77, 97 and 74 and the most 3's they hit in a game was 7. Alford hit all of the teams 3's but one of them in the tournament.

The theory holds for the NBA, not college. It’s probably not the best offense for college, but college mimics the NBA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zlinedavid said:

The theory holds for the NBA, not college. It’s probably not the best offense for college, but college mimics the NBA. 

I posted the scoring averages from every year in the NBA and the average score this year is not much higher if at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I posted the scoring averages from every year in the NBA and the average score this year is not much higher if at all.

Can't believe the best stretch for scoring in the NBA was from 60-72 with the highest being 118 points per game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Why are they inferior it is just different.  If you scored points who cares how you score them.  I know this is a NBA thread but it drives me crazy when they say today's offense is more effecient I'm college.  How is it more effecient when you score less and shoot a lower percentage.  Teams today shoots more 3's and layups yet score less points. IU teams of the 80's to the mid 90's  scored 80+ points shooting a lot of 12-15 foot jumpers.

I love a good mid-range jumper, but if you're looking at points scored in the past and comparing that to now, you have to account for the changed officiating. The kind of physical defense kids play today wasn't allowed back then. I would also argue overall defense is just better now, but I concede that is up for interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...