EPTOKC isn't really close. Their Big 3 is arguably better but too many of their role players are one-dimensional. They have to make a tradeoff between going offense or going defense.
NBA Playoffs 2012 - Page 96
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
OKC isn't really close. Their Big 3 is arguably better but too many of their role players are one-dimensional. They have to make a tradeoff between going offense or going defense. | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
I think the option that Griffin has is to try to match up with Duncan and wrap all around the basket. I'm surprised that Blair didn't get a lot of time because I think he could use his girth to push Griffin completely out of the paint, although Diaw has superb passing. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On May 16 2012 13:24 jmbthirteen wrote: what year do you think it is? No way are Jackson and Diaw above average starters. Diaw has had 2 above average seasons in his entire career, the last one in 2008-2009. And Jackson hasn't been the same since he left GS. Mario Chalmers, Joel Anthony, Greg Stiemsma, Avery Bradley, Spencer Hawes, Jodie Meeks, Darren Collison: All of those guys were or are starters for current teams in the Eastern Conference playoffs. There is no way on this planet you're telling me that Diaw and Jackson couldn't start. Notice I'm not saying they need to drop 20 and 10 every night - but they are definitely starters. @igotmyown: Oops, last month. *shrug* On May 16 2012 13:56 Whatson wrote: i'd just like to point out that you lose all credibility with this statement. Who'd they face last year? Oh yeah, a blistering hot Memphis team that had all the right matchups and made every western conference playoff team shit their pants for a good three weeks. Injuries and age played a giant part in every playoff exit they've had. It's really as simple as that. After 1999 when they got their first chip with Duncan and had a squad every year why didn't they win it? They weren't injured every year now were they? Sometimes they just didn't have a loaded roster to win it all - it really is that simple. When Boston won it in 2008 they had PJ Brown coming off the bench and he could STILL start for teams in the league at that point. When LA won it in 2009 they had Odom coming off the bench and he could start for teams in the league. Same in 2010. Dallas? Terry and Barea. Saying it's some magic secret as if Pop's system is unbeatable is just flat out wrong: He's a great coach and he has the roster he needs. Otherwise they would have beat Memphis last year who didn't have Rudy Gay with his system. Manu was actually on the court where as Rudy was in street clothes. Come on, just stop talking nonsense. On May 16 2012 14:25 andrewlt wrote: A lot of the Spurs' success comes from the front office. They are very good at finding players that can work in Pop's system and complement their star players. They look for guys like Bowen who can defend and hit the corner three. Or guys that can hit any three for that matter, the corner three is just the best one. OKC isn't really close. Their Big 3 is arguably better but too many of their role players are one-dimensional. They have to make a tradeoff between going offense or going defense. Bingo, but for some reason guys think it's literally just finding *anyone*, putting them on the team with Pop's system and it's instant success. I think OKC is close when they've got Fisher coming off the bench as their serviceable vet along with Collison and Cook. Not exactly the same as Stephen Jackson and Boris Diaw but its somewhat in the same direction. | ||
|
MilesTeg
France1271 Posts
This discussion is just a result of the Spurs being so underrated for the whole year. Suddenly in the playoffs people realise they're damn good and they wonder what's their secret. There's no secret, they're just very good everywhere, 12 deep, and in every aspect of the game. Why aren't we wondering why the Heat or Thunder are good? It's been the same every year except the last couple, which is why it was hilarious to read the Spurs are a "regular season team". A team that won 4 titles and has outperformed expectations every playoffs for a decade isn't a "regular season team". | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
As far as attention, I think it's just the market/marketability. Sports news is ridiculously biased. Just look at how much attention the Knicks got just for getting into the playoffs. Even the Lakers are somewhat overrated. OKC is the exception because they are extremely marketable and have the second best player in the league and two other 'sensational' guys. When you point it out to people, they have to invent reasons as to why they overlooked them. | ||
|
MassHysteria
United States3678 Posts
@igotmyown: and Ace has been giving credit to the Spurs by the way just as an fyi. I have read every post in the NBA threads in a while and I can back him up. You searched spurs but even just looking up like San antonio would lead you to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=289239¤tpage=157#3127 and http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=289239¤tpage=157#3140. There might be more but you can look it up if you want. | ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
Rose is out for approx. 8~12 months.  They should try and get Nash. | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On May 17 2012 02:59 Telcontar wrote: http://www.suntimes.com/sports/12555676-419/derrick-rose-might-not-be-able-to-return-next-season.html Rose is out for approx. 8~12 months. They should try and get Nash. TIme for Chicago to pull a David Robinson. I don't see Nash being a great fit for the Bulls. He makes people better, but Chicago doesn't have a lot of offensive weapons. You can only catch defenders asleep on Noah/Gibson/Asik so many times. Now if Boozer starts playing out of his mind in the pick and roll or they move Rose to the 2 guard and he improves his jumpshooting, then that might work. | ||
|
Bonzinator
Slovenia862 Posts
There was no replay about that shot on tv so i couldn't see it. I saw Wade complaining after the buzzer but i thought he is just whining as he does sometimes. I know Heat won't dwell on it. Game 3 is going to be sick. I can't wait  | ||
|
AntiGrav1ty
Germany2310 Posts
On May 17 2012 03:05 Jerubaal wrote: TIme for Chicago to pull a David Robinson. I don't see Nash being a great fit for the Bulls. He makes people better, but Chicago doesn't have a lot of offensive weapons. You can only catch defenders asleep on Noah/Gibson/Asik so many times. Now if Boozer starts playing out of his mind in the pick and roll or they move Rose to the 2 guard and he improves his jumpshooting, then that might work. Boozer, Noah and Gibson would thank the gods for someone like Nash. On the other hand thibs would go crazy. I don't think he would let Nash run the offense the way he likes it. | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
| ||
|
Bonzinator
Slovenia862 Posts
On May 17 2012 04:58 Holcan wrote: why wasn't wade given a game off for his body check on collison? it makes no sense.....dc should've wailed on the ground for ten minutes like everyone else, then maybe the refs would give a flagrant 2 to a superstar. It wasn't a flagrant 2 by any means, it was a flagrant 1. Simple as that. If he was in the air or pushed him with hands, i bet he would have gotten #2. I didn't see any unnecessary and excessive contact there. He just bumped him and moved him out of the way to the basket. Collison did step in the path of Wade which made it look it was really bad. Steve Kerr. #1 Hater by a mile. I won't even go into that. People can check it out by themselfs. | ||
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
On May 17 2012 05:12 Bonzinator wrote: It wasn't a flagrant 2 by any means, it was a flagrant 1. Simple as that. If he was in the air or pushed him with hands, i bet he would have gotten #2. I didn't see any unnecessary and excessive contact there. He just bumped him and moved him out of the way to the basket. Bodycheck isn't the right word to discribe that foul. Going to disagree with you on that one. I see it as a clear bodycheck from behind, which can be very dangerous when the player you hit is going fast in the same direction. Wade was obviously trying to hit him too out of frustration for not getting a call on the play before, which adds in the intent factor. Other players have gotten 1-game suspensions for that kind of stuff and less this season. The only reason Wade didn't is because he's Wade. | ||
|
Bonzinator
Slovenia862 Posts
On May 17 2012 05:16 XaI)CyRiC wrote: Going to disagree with you on that one. I see it as a clear bodycheck from behind, which can be very dangerous when the player you hit is going fast in the same direction. Wade was obviously trying to hit him too out of frustration for not getting a call on the play before, which adds in the intent factor. Other players have gotten 1-game suspensions for that kind of stuff and less this season. The only reason Wade didn't is because he's Wade. Collison did step in he path Wade was running. So there was more power to it then if he wouldn't cut him off. He's intent was to stop him for an easy 2. Not hurting him. I belive that. Wade isn't Artest. As for others i can't really say thats true, but i guess star factor will always raise those claims. Well at the end, it won't matter. Touching a shooter on a elbow before the realese is a clear foul. | ||
|
VENDIZ
1575 Posts
| ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On May 17 2012 06:01 VENDIZ wrote: For those of you talking about Nash + the Bulls; it's never going to happen, Nash is too expensive and is looking for a 3-year deal, something the Bulls won't give him. He'll take a pay cut if he really wants a ring. @AntiGrav1ty- I agree that he would make those guys a lot better, but the Bulls need to get a lot of offense from only a few places. Rose did a pretty good job at getting Noah and Gibson the ball when they had looks. Nash would do a little bit better but with a lot less scoring of his own. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On May 16 2012 20:54 MilesTeg wrote: Pop is the front office though. He deserves a lot of credit. This discussion is just a result of the Spurs being so underrated for the whole year. Suddenly in the playoffs people realise they're damn good and they wonder what's their secret. There's no secret, they're just very good everywhere, 12 deep, and in every aspect of the game. Why aren't we wondering why the Heat or Thunder are good? It's been the same every year except the last couple, which is why it was hilarious to read the Spurs are a "regular season team". A team that won 4 titles and has outperformed expectations every playoffs for a decade isn't a "regular season team". Every 1-seed that gets eliminated by an 8-seed is going to be underrated the next year. If you've done any prediction markets, people have tried to come up with many very complex systems but seldom do they beat next = last on a statistically significant level. Fans always love to cherry pick stats and then crow the few times they are proven right. However, short of doing an actual regression analysis, there's really no better predictor than next = last. And the Spurs sucked last playoffs. | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
On May 17 2012 05:12 Bonzinator wrote: It wasn't a flagrant 2 by any means, it was a flagrant 1. Simple as that. If he was in the air or pushed him with hands, i bet he would have gotten #2. I didn't see any unnecessary and excessive contact there. He just bumped him and moved him out of the way to the basket. Collison did step in the path of Wade which made it look it was really bad. Steve Kerr. #1 Hater by a mile. I won't even go into that. People can check it out by themselfs. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4mupw5Nnzk&feature=g-all-u hitting a player off the ball, with excessive force, is a flagrant 2 last I checked. there was nothing basketball about the play, at all. flagrant two. you also though kobes wasn't a flagrant, so I'm not buying your interpretation of the rule. | ||
|
Bonzinator
Slovenia862 Posts
On May 17 2012 06:53 Holcan wrote: hitting a player off the ball, with excessive force, is a flagrant 2 last I checked. there was nothing basketball about the play, at all. flagrant two. you also though kobes wasn't a flagrant, so I'm not buying your interpretation of the rule. Well atleast the league is saying it will stay 1. Woot, i don't remember saying anything about Kobe and flagrant foul. You probably mixed me up with someone esle. | ||
|
justinpal
United States3810 Posts
| ||
| ||
