NBA Thread

[greyhammer90]

This Boston Philly game is sloppy as hell.

 

[Irish YJ]

This Boston Philly game is sloppy as hell.

yup. but it's close and good. my mom is a huge brad stevens fan and is texting me from Indy. not good for her blood pressure..... my wish is that Boston moves on and kicks James in the sack.

 

[greyhammer90]

yup. but it's close and good. my mom is a huge brad stevens fan and is texting me from Indy. not good for her blood pressure..... my wish is that Boston moves on and kicks James in the sack.

Considering Boston is up 3-1 I don't think anyone's blood pressure should be up.

I have no love for Celtics fans so I wouldn't mind see them be the first team to lose a 3-0 lead though.

 

[greyhammer90]

I understand it's part of the game but I hate when an entire half is called ticky tacky as hell and then the last two minutes the refs call the game completely differently and swallow their whistles.

 

[greyhammer90]

2.4 seconds left on the clock and Simmons tried to throw a full court alley oop...

76ers may have the future talent but dang they are young and dumb right now.

 

[stlnd01]

Celtics may not have the (healthy) talent to get much farther, but damn are they a fun team to root for.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Celtics may not have the (healthy) talent to get much farther, but damn are they a fun team to root for.

Agreed. I just hope Kyrie and Gordon can both get back to 100% because this is a team built to compete right now. They have an incredibly deep roster with premier talent.

 

[Irish YJ]

Agreed. I just hope Kyrie and Gordon can both get back to 100% because this is a team built to compete right now. They have an incredibly deep roster with premier talent.

very unlucky and talented. i think they (Boston), the Pacers, the 76ers, and Cleveland (assuming James stays) are the future East. I think the West will diminish as a whole. I do think Portland and Utah will get better and challenge.

Toronto.... I just can't get behind them regardless of just about anything....

 

[Irish#1]

Agreed. I just hope Kyrie and Gordon can both get back to 100% because this is a team built to compete right now. They have an incredibly deep roster with premier talent.

In case you missed it, during the game, they mentioned that GH is back in Indy rehabbing and working out. Very similar to PG13's injury.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

very unlucky and talented. i think they (Boston), the Pacers, the 76ers, and Cleveland (assuming James stays) are the future East. I think the West will diminish as a whole. I do think Portland and Utah will get better and challenge.

Toronto.... I just can't get behind them regardless of just about anything....

Why do you believe the West will diminish? The Rockets and Warriors are built to win now. The Warriors look like they'll retain most of their roster.

I'll be shocked if James stays in Cleveland. The Pacers won't challenge for a title but they'll be competitive in the East. The 76ers are a step away but drafting M Fultz hurt them, they needed that pick to be worth something. So far, it's not looking so good.

Obviously I'm high on the Celtic's future.

I don't know the Rocket's contract situation but they are a potent team as well.

 

[greyhammer90]

Why do you believe the West will diminish? The Rockets and Warriors are built to win now. The Warriors look like they'll retain most of their roster.

I'll be shocked if James stays in Cleveland. The Pacers won't challenge for a title but they'll be competitive in the East. The 76ers are a step away but drafting M Fultz hurt them, they needed that pick to be worth something. So far, it's not looking so good.

Obviously I'm high on the Celtic's future.

I don't know the Rocket's contract situation but they are a potent team as well.

The Warriors will still be an amazing team but they will probably return to "mortal" status in the next few years when their stars stop taking paycuts to win. Championships seem like the most important thing in the world when you don't have them. Once you get them, you wake up and realize how leaving $10 million on the table per year isn't worth it.

I think the Celtics are going to be the cream of East along with wherever Lebron is. I don't think they'll be as amazing as everyone thinks though. Everyone seems to have the "think how good they'll be when Kyrie and Hayward come back" mindset. I think its naive to think that the return of those two won't also have a negative effect on the rotation of bench players.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

The Warriors will still be an amazing team but they will probably return to "mortal" status in the next few years when their stars stop taking paycuts to win. 1. Championships seem like the most important thing in the world when you don't have them. Once you get them, you wake up and realize how leaving $10 million on the table per year isn't worth it.

I think the Celtics are going to be the cream of East along with wherever Lebron is. I don't think they'll be as amazing as everyone thinks though. Everyone seems to have the "think how good they'll be when Kyrie and Hayward come back" mindset. 2. I think its naive to think that the return of those two won't also have a negative effect on the rotation of bench players.

1. I think the Warriors have unlocked something with these current players and I expect the majority of them to work to stay together. I guess time will tell if greed will trump their legacy.

2. If you mean some players will have reduced numbers because of reduced playing time, you are likely correct. But they are proving they can play winning basketball with their 8 man roster. When Stevens has two more star caliber players, they will be able to do wholesale substitutions to keep their players fresh and not miss a beat.

Of course Stevens is playing chess with his lineups so I don't think he'll necessarily do that but I don't believe many teams have as much talent as the Celtics. Their collective FG percentage will go up next year with the athleticism they reacquire.

 

[greyhammer90]

1. I think the Warriors have unlocked something with these current players and I expect the majority of them to work to stay together. I guess time will tell if greed will trump their legacy.

As to the money, Durant has already hinted he expects to get paid: https://nba.nbcsports.com/2018/04/2...rriors-going-to-start-taking-advantage-of-me/

I also think the idea that staying together would help their legacy is not necessarily true. I think Durant is (correctly) going to be seen as a bitch by most NBA fans no matter how well he does with the Warriors. If he wins on a roster that isn't a 73 win team without him he might reverse that narrative. Curry will probably retire a warrior, but I think the rest of them are going to want to get paid or prove their individual success eventually.

 

[greyhammer90]

2. If you mean some players will have reduced numbers because of reduced playing time, you are likely correct. But they are proving they can play winning basketball with their 8 man roster. When Stevens has two more star caliber players, they will be able to do wholesale substitutions to keep their players fresh and not miss a beat.

Of course Stevens is playing chess with his lineups so I don't think he'll necessarily do that but I don't believe many teams have as much talent as the Celtics. Their collective FG percentage will go up next year with the athleticism they reacquire.

If any coach can pull it off its Stevens, but there are plenty of examples of benches rising to the occasion when their star player is down who regress heavily to the mean when the star player is back. I'm also not the biggest Hayward fan and think the Celtics have several athletic wings who he is very comparable to (and is much more expensive than). So I expect for Boston to get better, but not "add twenty points to Boston's score because Kyrie and Hayward" better.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

As to the money, Durant has already hinted he expects to get paid: https://nba.nbcsports.com/2018/04/2...rriors-going-to-start-taking-advantage-of-me/

I also think the idea that staying together would help their legacy is not necessarily true. I think Durant is (correctly) going to be seen as a bitch by most NBA fans no matter how well he does with the Warriors. If he wins on a roster that isn't a 73 win team without him he might reverse that narrative. Curry will probably retire a warrior, but I think the rest of them are going to want to get paid or prove their individual success eventually.

I think Durant has proven he's one of the best basketball players in the world. He might've been the best player on the best team last year. He's smart, he proved how good he was in Oklahoma, now he can cement his legacy with a team built to win now.

He doesn't earn anything besides more money if he leaves. Maybe haters want to cry about him joining a good team. I hope they cried when the Heat were formed.

Durant made the smart move, he wasn't trying to bang his chest and scream "all me". He found a good team and put them over the top.

If any coach can pull it off its Stevens, but there are plenty of examples of benches rising to the occasion when their star player is down who regress heavily to the mean when the star player is back. I'm also not the biggest Hayward fan and think the Celtics have several athletic wings who he is very comparable to (and is much more expensive than). So I expect for Boston to get better, but not "add twenty points to Boston's score because Kyrie and Hayward" better.

I think Hayward was the most efficient scorer in the NBA the year before he was traded? Or at least top 3. That's what makes me believe Boston will be better. Hayward is a good passer and he doesn't require 50 touches/30 shots to score his pts. Kyrie can score on anyone, anytime when he's healthy. Tatum has been everything the Celtic's had hoped. Horford has played great ball in the playoffs.

Smart, Baynes, Morris, Brown and Rozier can hold their own against any line-up. Hayward will be given enough recovery time, even if he isn't ready for season opener.

Hayward averaged 20 pts from 16 shots over the past 3 years. he's also averaging ~5 rebs and 3.7 assists the last 3 years. I don't think he is a juggernaut, I believe he's an efficient player and that is what Brad Stevens craves: Efficiency and care with the basketball.

This is all a projection and I don't follow the stats that close but Hayward is one of those guys who plays extremely efficient. Tatum already looks like he'll be the same type of player so I think the Celtics get better by virtue of not having two isolation all stars, I just think their various lineups will include very efficient players and that make them terribly hard to defend for 4 quarters.

I guess we'll know around this time next year which of us was right.

 

[greyhammer90]

I think Durant has proven he's one of the best basketball players in the world. He might've been the best player on the best team last year. He's smart, he proved how good he was in Oklahoma, now he can cement his legacy with a team built to win now.

He doesn't earn anything besides more money if he leaves. Maybe haters want to cry about him joining a good team. I hope they cried when the Heat were formed.

Durant made the smart move, he wasn't trying to bang his chest and scream "all me". He found a good team and put them over the top.

Agree to disagree. The Warriors didn't need Durant to go "over the top". They were a 73 win team with a unanimous MVP, a Finals MVP, and a DPOY.

The second best player on the planet going up on a historic 73-win team 3-1 in the playoffs, playing terribly and allowing his team to lose, and then joining that 73-win team while taking a big pay cut is one of the biggest b*** moves in the history of NBA free-agency. The fact that he called it "the hardest road" and has alternate-twitter accounts where he pretends to be a fan and trashes his OKC team and defends his decision makes him certified Charmin Two-Ply Soft.

I guess we'll know around this time next year which of us was right.

To be clear, I think they'll be 1st seed in the East, and Lebron will age eventually so they might be the undisputed Eastern representative for awhile, I just don't see them being comparable to whatever the West rolls out unless there's a major shakeup going forward.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

1 . Agree to disagree. The Warriors didn't need Durant to go "over the top". They were a 73 win team with a unanimous MVP, a Finals MVP, and a DPOY.

The second best player on the planet going up on a historic 73-win team 3-1 in the playoffs, playing terribly and allowing his team to lose, and then joining that 73-win team while taking a big pay cut is one of the biggest b*** moves in the history of NBA free-agency. The fact that he called it "the hardest road" and has alternate-twitter accounts where he pretends to be a fan and trashes his OKC team and defends his decision makes him certified Charmin Two-Ply Soft.



2. To be clear, I think they'll be 1st seed in the East, and Lebron will age eventually so they might be the undisputed Eastern representative for awhile, I just don't see them being comparable to whatever the West rolls out unless there's a major shakeup going forward.

1. Fine. You think he's garbage and I think he might be the best scorer in the game.

2. I didn't realize you were so high on them earlier or this wouldnt' have been a discussion. I think the Celtics are engineered to compete with anyone, when healthy. You're just one step removed from that, believing they are best in the East but incapable of beating the best in the west.

I really enjoy watching the Warriors and Celtics play but I'm not a historical fan of either program, to be clear.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Celtics had a good game plan and everyone was hitting shots, g1 was a blowout.

It'll be much closer in g2, right? Lebron should at least go off for 40, is that enough?

Who do you think wins g1 in the West?

 

[greyhammer90]

Celtics had a good game plan and everyone was hitting shots, g1 was a blowout.

It'll be much closer in g2, right? Lebron should at least go off for 40, is that enough?

Who do you think wins g1 in the West?

Lebron will go off, but if Korver and Smith are missing wide open threes like they were in the first quarter it won't matter.

I think Warriors roll.

 

[koonja]

Celtics had a good game plan and everyone was hitting shots, g1 was a blowout.

It'll be much closer in g2, right? Lebron should at least go off for 40, is that enough?

Who do you think wins g1 in the West?

I'll take a large Vbuck bet hard on the under on 40 for Lebron in game 2.

I don't think he's going to get easy looks unless he can cry his way to the line fro 15 FTs.

 

[Irish#1]

Lebron will go off, but if Korver and Smith are missing wide open threes like they were in the first quarter it won't matter.

I think Warriors roll.

Smith isn't a consistent 3pt threat like Korver. If Korver and Love are hitting, then the Cavs have a decent chance. This series is going to be all about Boston's all around D.

 

[stlnd01]

Celtics had a good game plan and everyone was hitting shots, g1 was a blowout.

It'll be much closer in g2, right? Lebron should at least go off for 40, is that enough?

Who do you think wins g1 in the West?

Game 2 should be closer, of course, but the Cavs will need more than just LeBron to beat these Celtics in Boston. They haven’t lost a home game yet this postseason, and he’s won’t get all the calls.

 

[koonja]

I'm about to become less popular on here, and I didn't think that was possible. Don't @ me.

I have no problem with people saying MJ is the goat, but I have a serious problem with the media storm that has swarmed to only talk "Is it MJ or Lebron", and totally bypassing Kobe.

MJ is the greatest, no bones about it. But Kobe is so close to a clone that if you hold MJ in that high of a regard, Kobe should naturally be next on your list. It's almost like Kobe gets dinged for being so similar and coming after Jordan's time. The media wants the "new style", and Lebron is an all time great, don't get me wrong, but everything you get in MJ you get in Kobe.

Rings? 6 vs. 5
Defense? Yep
Killer mentality? Yep
Grit (extremely underrated BTW. Probably most underrated point in this list)? 10/10 for each
Work ethic? Yep
Complete mastery of his craft? Yep
Passing? MJ was better.
Shooting? Kobe was better.

Kobe won 3 with Shaq, but he also won 2 with Pau Gasol, who's not close to an all timer. Let's also not forget Lebron left to win one With Wade and Bosh in their prime (Wade was an all time great in his prime), and Kyrie Irving, who's far better than Pau Gasol ever was.

It's an argument I will not win, but it's the right argument.

 

[zelezo vlk]

Koon, is Kobe even better than Duncan?

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Kevin Durant is getting really good at taking sh!ts on the haters, must be because he's "Charmin soft"

Curry looked pedestrian in that game and the Rockets couldn't take it. With Curry, Durant and Thompson all capable of 30+, I don't think the Rockets have what it takes.

How do you think the series will end?

And who do you think wins the Cavs/Celts game tonight?

 

[Ndaccountant]

I'm about to become less popular on here, and I didn't think that was possible. Don't @ me.

I have no problem with people saying MJ is the goat, but I have a serious problem with the media storm that has swarmed to only talk "Is it MJ or Lebron", and totally bypassing Kobe.

MJ is the greatest, no bones about it. But Kobe is so close to a clone that if you hold MJ in that high of a regard, Kobe should naturally be next on your list. It's almost like Kobe gets dinged for being so similar and coming after Jordan's time. The media wants the "new style", and Lebron is an all time great, don't get me wrong, but everything you get in MJ you get in Kobe.

Rings? 6 vs. 5
Defense? Yep
Killer mentality? Yep
Grit (extremely underrated BTW. Probably most underrated point in this list)? 10/10 for each
Work ethic? Yep
Complete mastery of his craft? Yep
Passing? MJ was better.
Shooting? Kobe was better.

Kobe won 3 with Shaq, but he also won 2 with Pau Gasol, who's not close to an all timer. Let's also not forget Lebron left to win one With Wade and Bosh in their prime (Wade was an all time great in his prime), and Kyrie Irving, who's far better than Pau Gasol ever was.

It's an argument I will not win, but it's the right argument.

Offensively, Bryant can’t hold a candle to Jordan, mainly because of a disparity in efficiency. After translating both Jordan’s and Bryant’s stats to a league-wide offensive efficiency level of 106 points per 100 possessions to account for the changes in the game (the NBA’s overall average since it merged with the ABA in 1976), Jordan posted an offensive rating of 118.4 between the ages of 21 and 34, while Bryant put up a rating of 112.4. For a top scorer like Bryant or Jordan, an offensive rating boost of six points per 100 possessions can mean an extra four wins for his team in an 82-game season.

Because of an effect known as “skill curves,” it can be misleading to directly compare efficiency numbers between players with different offensive responsibilities. (This is why Steve Kerr and Fred Holberg aren’t better offensive players than Allen Iverson and Carmelo Anthony, for instance.) But Jordan’s and Bryant’s roles were of roughly the same, so it’s a fair comparison; between the ages of 21 and 34, Jordan used 31.9 percent of the Chicago Bulls’ possessions while on the floor, while Bryant used 31.6 percent of the Lakers’ possessions when he was in the game. In other words, with essentially the same volume of the offense being directed through each player, Jordan was just a lot more efficient than Bryant at turning possessions into points.

Why? Jordan shot the ball more accurately than Bryant, with a true shooting percentage of .580 to Bryant’s .556 — and that number even includes Bryant’s superior three-point shooting (particularly by volume) and a slight edge to Bryant at the free throw line as well. This means Jordan’s shooting advantage was almost totally driven by a better success rate on 2-pointers, where he crushed Bryant 52.0 percent to 48.5 percent despite the high likelihood that Bryant has taken more shots closer to the rim than Jordan did. (Even though a much larger proportion of Bryant’s shots came from three-point territory, Bryant’s rate of drawing fouls per shot attempt — a good proxy for how close to the basket a player is taking his shots — was higher than Jordan’s.)

Jordan also protected the ball much better than Bryant. Between the ages of 21 and 34, Jordan turned the ball over on just 9.3 percent of his possessions, the best rate ever among players with such a high volume of shooting. Bryant isn’t exactly careless with the ball, but Jordan’s combination of a high usage rate, great shooting efficiency, a good assist rate and a microscopic rate of turnovers is what makes him arguably the best offensive player of the NBA’s post-merger era.

Even when coupled with usage rate, it’s possible for individual efficiency numbers to belie a player’s true offensive contribution. A more sophisticated approach to measuring a player’s effect on his team’s offense can be found in statistical plus/minus metrics like Daniel Myers’s Box Plus/Minus (BPM). By that measure, Jordan helped his teams’ offenses by about 2.3 more points per 100 possessions than Bryant did between ages 21 and 34. We can’t be sure what a player’s actual on-court impact was before 2001 because we don’t have play-by-play data, but this reconstruction of regularized adjusted plus/minus for the 1990s (using box score and quarter-by-quarter score data) estimates that Jordan was, by far, the best offensive player of that decade. (By contrast, Bryant’s offensive impact ranks fourth relative to his peers.)

Meanwhile, on defense Bryant looks like the Derek Jeter of the NBA — soaking up defensive accolades on reputation rather than performance. Over his career (which includes 12 All-Defensive team nods) the Lakers have only been 0.6 points per 100 possessions better than average defensively, and Bryant’s long-term regularized defensive plus/minus of -0.9 is below average. Synergy Sports, the video-tracking service that classifies every play a player is involved in, has the most favorable view of Bryant defensively but still considers him to be just a 55th percentile defender on aggregate since it began tracking full-season data in 2006-07 (a span over which Bryant was named to six All-Defensive squads).

There is much more, but you get the point.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/michael-jordan-kobe-bryant/

 

[koonja]

There is much more, but you get the point.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/michael-jordan-kobe-bryant/

You put all of your stock into stats? There are a lot of NBA player examples of why that doesn't work.

And besides, I didn't say Kobe is better than Jordan. I said if you consider MJ the greatest, Kobe should be next in line.

 

[greyhammer90]

Kevin Durant is getting really good at taking sh!ts on the haters, must be because he's "Charmin soft"

You keep misconstruing my points in this thread. What can you not understand about my thinking that he's as mentally soft as a down pillow has nothing to do with his basketball ability? He made the greatest b*tch move in the history of NBA free agency. That has nothing to do with his scoring ability.

Fact: Kevin Durant left his 3-seed team with a future MVP and a All-Defense stalwart for what was already statistically the greatest team in the history of the NBA immediately after squandering a 3-1 lead against that same team.

Fact: Kevin Durant is probably the 2nd greatest pure scorer of his generation (behind Curry)

These two are not exclusive.

 

[Irish#1]

I'm about to become less popular on here, and I didn't think that was possible. Don't @ me.

I have no problem with people saying MJ is the goat, but I have a serious problem with the media storm that has swarmed to only talk "Is it MJ or Lebron", and totally bypassing Kobe.

MJ is the greatest, no bones about it. But Kobe is so close to a clone that if you hold MJ in that high of a regard, Kobe should naturally be next on your list. It's almost like Kobe gets dinged for being so similar and coming after Jordan's time. The media wants the "new style", and Lebron is an all time great, don't get me wrong, but everything you get in MJ you get in Kobe.

Rings? 6 vs. 5
Defense? Yep
Killer mentality? Yep
Grit (extremely underrated BTW. Probably most underrated point in this list)? 10/10 for each
Work ethic? Yep
Complete mastery of his craft? Yep
Passing? MJ was better.
Shooting? Kobe was better.

Kobe won 3 with Shaq, but he also won 2 with Pau Gasol, who's not close to an all timer. Let's also not forget Lebron left to win one With Wade and Bosh in their prime (Wade was an all time great in his prime), and Kyrie Irving, who's far better than Pau Gasol ever was.

It's an argument I will not win, but it's the right argument.

You left off the most important trait that makes this a "no discussion". MJ made the players around him better and demanded they be better. Not only couldn't Kobe do that, Kobe whined to much.

Kevin Durant is getting really good at taking sh!ts on the haters, must be because he's "Charmin soft"

Curry looked pedestrian in that game and the Rockets couldn't take it. With Curry, Durant and Thompson all capable of 30+, I don't think the Rockets have what it takes.

How do you think the series will end?

And who do you think wins the Cavs/Celts game tonight?

You can tell Chris Paul isn't used to the playoffs. He's too caught up in the war of words and trying to get into everyone's heads.

 

[Ndaccountant]

You put all of your stock into stats? There are a lot of NBA player examples of why that doesn't work.

And besides, I didn't say Kobe is better than Jordan. I said if you consider MJ the greatest, Kobe should be next in line.

enlighten us all as to why the 538 analysis is bogus. I'll hang up and listen.

EDIT: Also, how many rings do you think LBJ would have if he had Phil Jackson coaching him for 11 years?