On April 29 2009 11:38 Xeris wrote: GOD DAMN that was such a great fucking display of coaching ability (minus the running out of time outs once again)... that was a BRILLIANT play, nobody would have expected the play for Brad Miller to have a wide open midrange jumper designed for him.
Honestly though, I think Brad Miller succumbed to nerves, he should have taken the wide open jumper, his shot is more reliable than his ability to drive to the basket IMO, and plus a jumper is probably more reliable than being forced to hit 2 clutch free throws.
Otherwise, it was a great play, just botched the execution a bit.
GREATEST FIRST ROUND SERIES.... EVER
yeah it would probably have been better if he took the jumpshot instead.
On April 29 2009 11:46 sixghost wrote:
On April 29 2009 11:25 iLoveKTF wrote: Wait let me explain it clearly because people seems to have low understanding skills. Did you see the last play? It was beautiful, designed so that the middle will be wide open for MILLER. The only reason why the celtic defenders and Rondo (who just got him in the face) came back defensively was because MILLER WAS TOO SLOW DRIVING TO THE LANE. And you are talking about tyrus' jumpshot??? Who needs a jumpshot when you have a wide open lane. With tyrus' speed and athleticism i think he wouldve done a better job than miller.
It wasn't a designed play. You seriously think they would design a play for Brad Miller with the game on the line? Who are you kidding. They were looking for Gordon first, then Rose/Salmons as a 2nd chance. The only reason Miller was open was because of a miscommunication, I don't give a shit how bad a guy is, or how well a play was designed(which is a joke by the way because Del Negro is a shit coach) no one is going to be that wide open. Miller had a layup and got fucking mugged.
What are talking about dude
you think that the coaches only give out 1 play and say run that play no matter what. gordon was probably the first option but that play led to the middle opening up and miller being open. It was probably "if gordon is open pass to him but if everyone collapses to the right side of the floor (which is what happened) miller will be open in the middle". Though vinny sucks, he has 2 great assistant coaches, you have to remember that.
What do you mean he doesn't only give out 1 play? Of course he does. They have 5 seconds to get the ball in, you don't have time for more than 1 play. The play they ran fucking sucked. Gordon/Rose/Salmons were so unopen they couldnt even inbound the ball to them. They should be thanking their stars that Miller was even open. The guy was just standing there hoping to draw 1 guy away from the other 3, and they left him completely open.
And furthermore, no way he settles for that jumpshot. That lane was so god damn open, if he didn't get mugged he either makes that layup or gets 2 and 1.
In one of the other games, C webb was talking about how when he played, coaches would often have 5 or 6 different set plays that would all be in motion on the floor. Like basically, the coach would say option 1, see clutch shooter, if he isn't open, look for option 2, if that doesn't work, move to this place and look for option 3. Miller was clearly an option 3 or 4, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a set play.
Just because there's only a few seconds doesn't mean coaches don't have multiple sets in play.
There are 2 reasons Brad Miller is even in the NBA 1) he's really tall 2) he can shoot. So if you pretty much have him 15 ft from the basket WIDEEEEEEEEEEE open... especially considering he's one slow motherfucker, do you want him to a) drive or b) shoot?
It doesn't make any sense for people thinking he should have tried the layup. First off, he was WIDE open. If he drives, defenders collapse on him, and he gets fouled, misses the layup, gets block, or somehow makes it... Chances of him scoring 2 points on that play are slim.
On the other hand, if he shoots, he's wide open. By the time defenders realized how wide open he was, the ball is already out of his hands and it will go in or not. Since he's such a good shooter, the chances of him knocking down a WIDE OPEN midrange jumper are MUCH higher than him taking a contested driving layup.
The only reason was Brad Miller choking and rashly deciding to barrel into the lane rather than shoot it. I mean, he fucking airballed the shot, and it's not because he got fouled (the foul happened after the release of the shot).
i know miller's a good shooter and all but if i was in the same position i definitely would've gone to the basket as well...the guy had a clear path to the rim and any player knows (unless you have supreme confidence in your shot which he obviously was lacking from about 18) that when there's an opening you gotta take it...besides he was rewarded for taking it strong to the rack...unfortunately he picked up a knock on the head, he missed the first ft and the rest is history. shit happens
With that said. The CHI-BOS series has not been one of the best first round series in some time, but one of the best series in general. Whoever said the SUNS-SPURS 07-08 series was better is sorely mistaken. This one is above and beyond anything in recent memory. If this series was a finals series it would be an instant classic.
On April 30 2009 05:12 unknown.sam wrote: i know miller's a good shooter and all but if i was in the same position i definitely would've gone to the basket as well...the guy had a clear path to the rim and any player knows (unless you have supreme confidence in your shot which he obviously was lacking from about 18) that when there's an opening you gotta take it...besides he was rewarded for taking it strong to the rack...unfortunately he picked up a knock on the head, he missed the first ft and the rest is history. shit happens
That's why you aren't an NBA player. I really don't see how anybody would think Brad Miller should have driven the ball in. It doesn't make sense from any point of view. Just because a guy is wide open when he catches the ball doesn't mean he is going to stay wide open. Perkins and Rondo were near the sidelines on the sides, seeing Miller driving in, they could easily clog the paint and fuck up his shot (which they did). Why? Because he is SLOW AS FUCK and has limited ball handling skills.
If you are wide open, you take 1 second, set up, and shoot it before the defense converges on you. His shot is more reliable than his driving ability. If Tyrus Thomas had the ball, that would have been an acceptable move. The fact that you are saying you would have done the same implies your lack of basketball knowledge. And plus you ignored a lot of my post.
a) he airballed the shot b) he shot the ball before he was fouled c) if Rondo didn't hit him in the head they wouldn't have called a foul on Perkins
So if Rondo didn't hit him in the head, the shot would have been an airball and Chicago would have blown an opportunity. LUCKILY, he got hit in the head so had a chance to redeem himself (but fucked up). Taking the shot would have been an infinitely smarter decision.
On April 30 2009 03:04 Xeris wrote: he should have taken the jump shot...
There are 2 reasons Brad Miller is even in the NBA 1) he's really tall 2) he can shoot. So if you pretty much have him 15 ft from the basket WIDEEEEEEEEEEE open... especially considering he's one slow motherfucker, do you want him to a) drive or b) shoot?
It doesn't make any sense for people thinking he should have tried the layup. First off, he was WIDE open. If he drives, defenders collapse on him, and he gets fouled, misses the layup, gets block, or somehow makes it... Chances of him scoring 2 points on that play are slim.
On the other hand, if he shoots, he's wide open. By the time defenders realized how wide open he was, the ball is already out of his hands and it will go in or not. Since he's such a good shooter, the chances of him knocking down a WIDE OPEN midrange jumper are MUCH higher than him taking a contested driving layup.
The only reason was Brad Miller choking and rashly deciding to barrel into the lane rather than shoot it. I mean, he fucking airballed the shot, and it's not because he got fouled (the foul happened after the release of the shot).
Have you watched this Bulls at all this year? It's common as hell to see Miller drive to the lane when he's wide open like that. You honestly think that foul didn't alter the shot? He got smacked in the face. He's an NBA player, he's not going to airball a layup without some mitigating factor.
He made the right choice, he just missed a free throw. When he was shooting the ball he was clear to the basket, he just got fouled hard.
On April 29 2009 11:38 Xeris wrote: GOD DAMN that was such a great fucking display of coaching ability (minus the running out of time outs once again)... that was a BRILLIANT play, nobody would have expected the play for Brad Miller to have a wide open midrange jumper designed for him.
Honestly though, I think Brad Miller succumbed to nerves, he should have taken the wide open jumper, his shot is more reliable than his ability to drive to the basket IMO, and plus a jumper is probably more reliable than being forced to hit 2 clutch free throws.
Otherwise, it was a great play, just botched the execution a bit.
GREATEST FIRST ROUND SERIES.... EVER
yeah it would probably have been better if he took the jumpshot instead.
On April 29 2009 11:46 sixghost wrote:
On April 29 2009 11:25 iLoveKTF wrote: Wait let me explain it clearly because people seems to have low understanding skills. Did you see the last play? It was beautiful, designed so that the middle will be wide open for MILLER. The only reason why the celtic defenders and Rondo (who just got him in the face) came back defensively was because MILLER WAS TOO SLOW DRIVING TO THE LANE. And you are talking about tyrus' jumpshot??? Who needs a jumpshot when you have a wide open lane. With tyrus' speed and athleticism i think he wouldve done a better job than miller.
It wasn't a designed play. You seriously think they would design a play for Brad Miller with the game on the line? Who are you kidding. They were looking for Gordon first, then Rose/Salmons as a 2nd chance. The only reason Miller was open was because of a miscommunication, I don't give a shit how bad a guy is, or how well a play was designed(which is a joke by the way because Del Negro is a shit coach) no one is going to be that wide open. Miller had a layup and got fucking mugged.
What are talking about dude
you think that the coaches only give out 1 play and say run that play no matter what. gordon was probably the first option but that play led to the middle opening up and miller being open. It was probably "if gordon is open pass to him but if everyone collapses to the right side of the floor (which is what happened) miller will be open in the middle". Though vinny sucks, he has 2 great assistant coaches, you have to remember that.
What do you mean he doesn't only give out 1 play? Of course he does. They have 5 seconds to get the ball in, you don't have time for more than 1 play. The play they ran fucking sucked. Gordon/Rose/Salmons were so unopen they couldnt even inbound the ball to them. They should be thanking their stars that Miller was even open. The guy was just standing there hoping to draw 1 guy away from the other 3, and they left him completely open.
And furthermore, no way he settles for that jumpshot. That lane was so god damn open, if he didn't get mugged he either makes that layup or gets 2 and 1.
In one of the other games, C webb was talking about how when he played, coaches would often have 5 or 6 different set plays that would all be in motion on the floor. Like basically, the coach would say option 1, see clutch shooter, if he isn't open, look for option 2, if that doesn't work, move to this place and look for option 3. Miller was clearly an option 3 or 4, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a set play.
Just because there's only a few seconds doesn't mean coaches don't have multiple sets in play.
You realize all those things are part of one play right? He may have said that they had 4-5 different options on any 1 play, but you aren't going to give guys more than 1 play out of the timeout, that's just stupid.
Miller was the 3rd or 4th option ON THE SAME PLAY.
On April 30 2009 05:12 unknown.sam wrote: i know miller's a good shooter and all but if i was in the same position i definitely would've gone to the basket as well...the guy had a clear path to the rim and any player knows (unless you have supreme confidence in your shot which he obviously was lacking from about 18) that when there's an opening you gotta take it...besides he was rewarded for taking it strong to the rack...unfortunately he picked up a knock on the head, he missed the first ft and the rest is history. shit happens
That's why you aren't an NBA player. I really don't see how anybody would think Brad Miller should have driven the ball in. It doesn't make sense from any point of view. Just because a guy is wide open when he catches the ball doesn't mean he is going to stay wide open. Perkins and Rondo were near the sidelines on the sides, seeing Miller driving in, they could easily clog the paint and fuck up his shot (which they did). Why? Because he is SLOW AS FUCK and has limited ball handling skills.
If you are wide open, you take 1 second, set up, and shoot it before the defense converges on you. His shot is more reliable than his driving ability. If Tyrus Thomas had the ball, that would have been an acceptable move. The fact that you are saying you would have done the same implies your lack of basketball knowledge. And plus you ignored a lot of my post.
a) he airballed the shot b) he shot the ball before he was fouled c) if Rondo didn't hit him in the head they wouldn't have called a foul on Perkins
So if Rondo didn't hit him in the head, the shot would have been an airball and Chicago would have blown an opportunity. LUCKILY, he got hit in the head so had a chance to redeem himself (but fucked up). Taking the shot would have been an infinitely smarter decision.
Come on Xeris, stop telling others about their lack of basketball knowledge when you aren't even describing the play correctly. 1) He got to the basket pretty open, and got his layup off in time before anyone could have made a legitmate play on the ball 2) He got mugged before he released the shot 3) An open drive is always better than a jumpshot
Just watch the play dude. If you still believe what you said then I don't know what to say to you, other than you are looking back at the play through hindsight.
Yep, Rondo hits him just as he's about to release the ball. And it did look like it would be an uncontested lay up, apart from the slap in the face. It's not clear to me which was the best option for Brad Miller.
0.85*0.85=.7225 Are you telling me brad miller shoots 70% 18 footers?
If Brad Miller has a 40% chance of making that layup even while fouled .4*.85=.34 chance of 3 points, up 1 .6*.7225+0.4*0.15=.49 chance of tying .6*(1-.15^2)=.17 chance of being being down
In which case brad miller needs to shoot 83%. The bulls coach probably didn't plan on Brad Miller ending up bleeding.
1. DHow deserved his suspension. No excuse for him throwing his elbow at Dalembert like that.
2. Rondo should've gotten a flagrant for that foul. He had absolutely no chance at making a play on the ball, and he knew it, but still swiped at Miller to make enough contact to make him miss. Anyone who tries to argue that he tried to make a play on the ball is detached from reality.
3. Miller did the right thing by driving to the basket. The reason why you do that in that situation is because you either get a layup or you get fouled and shoot two FTs. Both are preferable to taking a mid-range jumpshot. Also, as others have said, Miller was WIDE open for his drive to the basket. But for Rondo's flagrant foul (yes, I will always refer to it as such) he would have had an easy layup.
4. The disparity in the reactions to Ariza's foul earlier this season and Rondo's last night just confirm how full of shit most people are. Ariza's foul was 100x more a play on the ball than Rondo's was, but Rondo is left alone because it was done in a close playoff game against a bigger player. Want to talk about reckless? Swiping at a player's head when you know you have no chance at a block is infinitely more reckless than what Ariza did when he fouled Rudy.
On April 29 2009 11:38 Xeris wrote: GOD DAMN that was such a great fucking display of coaching ability (minus the running out of time outs once again)... that was a BRILLIANT play, nobody would have expected the play for Brad Miller to have a wide open midrange jumper designed for him.
Honestly though, I think Brad Miller succumbed to nerves, he should have taken the wide open jumper, his shot is more reliable than his ability to drive to the basket IMO, and plus a jumper is probably more reliable than being forced to hit 2 clutch free throws.
Otherwise, it was a great play, just botched the execution a bit.
GREATEST FIRST ROUND SERIES.... EVER
yeah it would probably have been better if he took the jumpshot instead.
On April 29 2009 11:46 sixghost wrote:
On April 29 2009 11:25 iLoveKTF wrote: Wait let me explain it clearly because people seems to have low understanding skills. Did you see the last play? It was beautiful, designed so that the middle will be wide open for MILLER. The only reason why the celtic defenders and Rondo (who just got him in the face) came back defensively was because MILLER WAS TOO SLOW DRIVING TO THE LANE. And you are talking about tyrus' jumpshot??? Who needs a jumpshot when you have a wide open lane. With tyrus' speed and athleticism i think he wouldve done a better job than miller.
It wasn't a designed play. You seriously think they would design a play for Brad Miller with the game on the line? Who are you kidding. They were looking for Gordon first, then Rose/Salmons as a 2nd chance. The only reason Miller was open was because of a miscommunication, I don't give a shit how bad a guy is, or how well a play was designed(which is a joke by the way because Del Negro is a shit coach) no one is going to be that wide open. Miller had a layup and got fucking mugged.
What are talking about dude
you think that the coaches only give out 1 play and say run that play no matter what. gordon was probably the first option but that play led to the middle opening up and miller being open. It was probably "if gordon is open pass to him but if everyone collapses to the right side of the floor (which is what happened) miller will be open in the middle". Though vinny sucks, he has 2 great assistant coaches, you have to remember that.
What do you mean he doesn't only give out 1 play? Of course he does. They have 5 seconds to get the ball in, you don't have time for more than 1 play. The play they ran fucking sucked. Gordon/Rose/Salmons were so unopen they couldnt even inbound the ball to them. They should be thanking their stars that Miller was even open. The guy was just standing there hoping to draw 1 guy away from the other 3, and they left him completely open.
And furthermore, no way he settles for that jumpshot. That lane was so god damn open, if he didn't get mugged he either makes that layup or gets 2 and 1.
In one of the other games, C webb was talking about how when he played, coaches would often have 5 or 6 different set plays that would all be in motion on the floor. Like basically, the coach would say option 1, see clutch shooter, if he isn't open, look for option 2, if that doesn't work, move to this place and look for option 3. Miller was clearly an option 3 or 4, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a set play.
Just because there's only a few seconds doesn't mean coaches don't have multiple sets in play.
You realize all those things are part of one play right? He may have said that they had 4-5 different options on any 1 play, but you aren't going to give guys more than 1 play out of the timeout, that's just stupid.
Miller was the 3rd or 4th option ON THE SAME PLAY.
I think what bp said is the same thing you said.
On April 30 2009 07:18 KOFgokuon wrote: especially due to rondo's comments after the game, he SHOULD be suspended for the next game
dwight howard deserves every bit of his 1 game suspension here's hoping the sixers can rally and win this series
man, the nba are trying so hard to get their dream matchups later in the playoffs. i just watched the replays and the foul was much harder than i thought at first. he was clearly aiming for the face and all the nba has to say is "thats ok since that was a result of a blown defensive play". WTF MAN?
EPT
