| Forum Index > General Games |
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On January 30 2012 20:53 VENDIZ wrote: Bitter? Not at all, I didn't expect the Bulls to beat the Heat without Luol Deng - I was only reacting to a silly claim due to a total of 5-6 missed free throws over a period of 4 years.. Everyone loves Drose, but the fact is he might try too hard sometimes and miss. | ||
|
JiYan
United States3668 Posts
Ive seen stretches where kobe would get the ball and solo it 5 plays straight without passing it once. If you watch the lakers play you can see that kobe sometimes doesnt even try to look for the open man, but assumes he himself is the only option. Pau himself said that sometimes he can tell when kobe will just take it in himself and doesnt even run down the court anymore knowing that. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
On January 31 2012 02:41 JiYan wrote: some basketball experts are attributing the Lakers' terrible offense mostly to Kobe's usage %, not the other way around. Seems like a lot of people are thinking that kobe is being forced to take over since his team is sucking on offense. I believe that kobe feels that way, but that his ball hogging is making his offense worse and worse. People who play basketball know that you play better when you are involved in the plays and are in the flow of the game. You need ball touches and you need to see some action. Ive seen stretches where kobe would get the ball and solo it 5 plays straight without passing it once. If you watch the lakers play you can see that kobe sometimes doesnt even try to look for the open man, but assumes he himself is the only option. Pau himself said that sometimes he can tell when kobe will just take it in himself and doesnt even run down the court anymore knowing that. Have you been watching the lakers play lately? Seriously? Gasol shot 6 for 18 in Milwakee which was a loss. Here's a quote from the LA times reporting on Milwakee. Even with the Lakers shooting only 39% of from the field in the first quarter, they ran their offense with efficiency. Kobe Bryant immediately set up Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol in the low post. Bynum remained balanced in the lane. When Gasol received touches in the high post, he immediately drove to the basket. And all that movement allowed Bryant to move off the ball and score with ease. Both Gasol and Bynum missed bunnies, but the purposeful execution proved beneficial. That is, until the Bucks made adjustments. They forced 14 turnovers. Gasol and Bynum combined for only 27 points on 12-for-28 shooting. And the Lakers hardly had enough players dribbling effectively in penetration to offset Milwaukee's aggressiveness. Yet somehow according to you, that's Kobe's fault. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
No one else in the history of the game gets more passes and excuses than Kobe, for once at least admit that him being the focus of the offense is not working instead of using the same canned response about "just watch the games". I'm not even sure if you watch the games and know what to look for to tell if Gasol is playing badly because of where his offense is coming from. Which seems to be case especially when Gasol said it himself. But meh, what do I know? | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
On January 31 2012 03:36 Ace wrote: 1 game against Milwaukee doesn't ignore the fact that Kobe is playing like it's 2006 again. Back then there was a somewhat legit excuse that he didn't have enough help. This time he has 2 guys that helped him win 2 championships while posting a once again absurd usage rate without the hopeful climb in efficiency or wins. No one else in the history of the game gets more passes and excuses than Kobe, for once at least admit that him being the focus of the offense is not working instead of using the same canned response about "just watch the games". I'm not even sure if you watch the games and know what to look for to tell if Gasol is playing badly because of where his offense is coming from. Which seems to be case especially when Gasol said it himself. But meh, what do I know? Are you serious? You're not even considering the fact that the Lakers won two championships running the TRIANGLE OFFENSE which operated COMPLETELY differently from Mike Brown's conventional offense. The team we have right now is built to run the triangle, that's why the Lakers were able to win two championships with Derek Fisher at starting Point Guard, no other offense would ever be able to accomplish that. Look at the recent champions besides the Lakers in recent years, Boston - Rondo, Dallas - Kid, San Antonio - Parker, Detroit - Billups. Every other team has a top tier point guard running their offense because it's REQUIRED if you want to win at the top level with a conventional offense. The Triangle is an exception and without it this team's offense is completely different it isn't even comparable. A lot of the focus of the offense is on Kobe by DESIGN. As in Mike Brown is the one putting the ball in his hands. So even if you want to criticize Kobe for his usage rate you have to consider that the offense is supposed to go through him by coach's design, just like it was in Cleveland with Lebron James. Second, you have to consider how unbelievably inconsistent the other Lakers are on offense especially on the road. Bynum's FG% away from Staples goes from 55% to 50% and Barnes goes from 50% to 35%. Same offense, same team, completely different results. There's a lot going on with the Lakers right now, and Kobe's usage percentage is a problem but it's WAY down the list of problems right now. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Bynum and Gasol are not those players. "The team we have right now is built to run the triangle". What? Really? Your top 3 players are good enough to play in any system with Bynum possibly being the only one who makes me skeptical. Even your line about the reason the Lakers won the championship being the triangle offense makes me question you as it's now sounding like a bunch of excuses. Phil Jackson, the only coach to successfully use the triangle offense also had Kobe Bryant and Shaq on the teams. If you're familiar with how the offense works: primarily 2 options, 1 on the weak side with a cutter and perimeter shooting threat then why wasn't it successful when other coaches tried to run it? Now back to the rest of your post. Look at the recent champions besides the Lakers in recent years, Boston - Rondo, Dallas - Kid, San Antonio - Parker, Detroit - Billups. Every other team has a top tier point guard running their offense because it's REQUIRED if you want to win at the top level with a conventional offense. The Triangle is an exception and without it this team's offense is completely different it isn't even comparable. This is somewhat wrong and once again I'll explain this since it is a concept that gets lost so many times amongst people that really don't know much. The recent champions won not because they had a Point Guard that was dynamic: It's because they had great facilitators that just happened to be the PGs. Jason Kidd wasn't a top tier PG last year (he was actually horrible outside of anything but passing), and neither was TP unless you want to count his FMVP performance. That said the point still sticks: Teams win by having multiple players facilitate the offense. The Lakers could have abandoned the triangle, let Kobe and Lamar be the primary set up guys and still win a chip. They could have done that in 2008, 2009, and 2010. Taking the responsibility off of Kobe and Derek Fisher and giving it to Pau is just acknowledging the fact that you've got a lot of good playmaking options in spite of the T.O. An even better argument would be looking at how many teams made it to the finals or conference finals and why they won or lost. Even Miami with Mike Bibby playing made it far due to having all 3 of their superstars being top tier, and in the case of Bosh solid play makers. Trying to place the blame on your terrible point guard in a conventional offense just shows your missing the point entirely. It doesn't matter that Derek Fisher can only shoot 3s: Kobe can run the offense and so can Pau. If you're losing because the offense sucks then start looking at how it's setup and the guys making the decisions before you start crying about lack of the T.O., Derek Fisher, Mike Brown or whatever inane reason comes to mind. Yes the Lakers have many problems right now, and it starts and ends with Kobe Bryant. He's having a great season and I'd even put him into MVP consideration if he wasn't posting such an insane usage rate on low efficiency. Hell, if his name WASN'T Kobe Bryant many fans would call him a "good player putting up empty stats on a bad team" kind of guy like they tried to do to him in 2006. At THAT high of a usage rate Gasol and Bynum aren't getting the chance to dominate and play their games, and as bad as the team is with those 3 they should look much better. Blame the bigs all you want but if they aren't getting easy shots and Gasol is complaining about playing too far away from the basket then the guard play should be a big question. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
you sound like a rehash almost entirely of ESPN analysts. It almost sounds like you're saying that as long as the Lakers have Kobe Bynum and Gasol they should be fine, when the case in point for why exactly you're wrong is in the Miami Heat in their loss to Dallas. (It should also be mentioned that around here, a first round exit in the playoffs is not considered fine.) Big 3's are SO overrated in the NBA without the correct coaching staff and support players. San Antonio only continues to shine despite their age because of Popovich and their supporting cast made efficient by Popovich. Boston's Big 3 took an immediate nosedive following the departure of Perkins despite Rondo playing what I considered to be top 5 level player Basketball. Miami will only win the title this year thanks to the contributions of off season acquisitions like Battier and up and comers like Cole if they win it at all. Right now the Lakers are stuck winning only because their big 3 is dominant. We won in Minnesota last night only because Gasol and Kobe played the entire second half. That won't cut it. God forbid a single one of them has an off night and we're in trouble. Coming from a guy that's accustomed to seeing the Triangle shore up anyone's performance including Kobe Bryant's in game 7 of the finals of '10 the current overdependence of our big 3 to carry the offense just demonstrates a lack of depth and a lack of an offensive system that works for our team. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Now I'm not saying because Kobe and Gasol are that good the TEAM should be good: No. I understand that it takes a team to win games and a bad team will sink any superstar. The case is that 2006 Kobe was a monster of a player that did everything he could with that shit cast inefficiencies be damned. However, has 2 guys capable of taking a load off of his shoulders this year but he's playing like it's 2006 all over again. That is where my issue with Kobe is. Big 3's are SO overrated in the NBA without the correct coaching staff and support players. San Antonio only continues to shine despite their age because of Popovich and their supporting cast made efficient by Popovich. Boston's Big 3 took an immediate nosedive following the departure of Perkins despite Rondo playing what I considered to be top 5 level player Basketball. Miami will only win the title this year thanks to the contributions of off season acquisitions like Battier and up and comers like Cole if they win it at all. I actually agree with most of this except the Boston part. Perkins leaving was a big issue but the team had other issues that bit them in the ass: the bench + Marquis Daniels getting hurt. Also not all Big 3s are created equal: The Boston and Miami Big 3s are a different level altogether than their NY and LA counterparts. Some deserve the hype, some don't. Also yes, a major reason for Miami losing last year was that the team as a whole was just ugly. Miami making it to the Finals was downright amazing and a testament to how good their Big 3 was carrying the worst bench in the league, and probably one of the worst in NBA history for a playoff team. Doesn't matter how good Wade, Lebron and Bosh are though: No one can win 16 playoff games playing monster minutes on both ends of the floor without lots of help. Right now the Lakers are stuck winning only because their big 3 is dominant. We won in Minnesota last night only because Gasol and Kobe played the entire second half. That won't cut it. God forbid a single one of them has an off night and we're in trouble. Coming from a guy that's accustomed to seeing the Triangle shore up anyone's performance including Kobe Bryant's in game 7 of the finals of '10 the current overdependence of our big 3 to carry the offense just demonstrates a lack of depth and a lack of an offensive system that works for our team. Ok then here's a question: Barring a trade how would you fix it? If it's the offensive system then put that on Mike Brown, if it's the lack of depth then I guess you're stuck having to develop players which means this could just be bad luck for the Lakers having no camp. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
On January 31 2012 05:38 Ace wrote: ugh come on, ESPN analysts are terribly uninformed. I'm not arguing solely on stats here - I'm just pointing out that when using up that many possessions the blame has to start with Kobe is he isn't being highly efficient. Now I'm not saying because Kobe and Gasol are that good the TEAM should be good: No. I understand that it takes a team to win games and a bad team will sink any superstar. The case is that 2006 Kobe was a monster of a player that did everything he could with that shit cast inefficiencies be damned. However, has 2 guys capable of taking a load off of his shoulders this year but he's playing like it's 2006 all over again. That is where my issue with Kobe is. I actually agree with most of this except the Boston part. Perkins leaving was a big issue but the team had other issues that bit them in the ass: the bench + Marquis Daniels getting hurt. Also not all Big 3s are created equal: The Boston and Miami Big 3s are a different level altogether than their NY and LA counterparts. Some deserve the hype, some don't. Also yes, a major reason for Miami losing last year was that the team as a whole was just ugly. Miami making it to the Finals was downright amazing and a testament to how good their Big 3 was carrying the worst bench in the league, and probably one of the worst in NBA history for a playoff team. Doesn't matter how good Wade, Lebron and Bosh are though: No one can win 16 playoff games playing monster minutes on both ends of the floor without lots of help. Ok then here's a question: Barring a trade how would you fix it? If it's the offensive system then put that on Mike Brown, if it's the lack of depth then I guess you're stuck having to develop players which means this could just be bad luck for the Lakers having no camp. First: In theory Gasol and Bynum should be able to take a big load off of Kobe's shoulders and in fact they are doing it, but the problem is that Gasol and Bynum are only dominanat when they are on the floor at the same time. Our championship team had an amazing rotation of Gasol/Bynum Bynum/Odom Gasol/Odom in the front court. Now, when Bynum goes to the bench with early fouls or even just when they are getting their rests in we have rotations like Bynum/Murphy, Gasol/McRoberts... neither of which have either the scoring potential or facilitating prowess of Lamar Odom (it should be mentioned that I am a huge fan of McRoberts as a role player but he can only do so much.) So... when we have a situation where Bynum is on the Bench and Gasol and Kobe are on the floor where does the offense come from? Well... it comes from Gasol and Kobe lol. Every team knows that and just doubles and triples on them or works hard to deny them access to the ball in any of their patented money spots. This leads to situations where if the team is behind the lead for the other team increases the moment our bench comes out, or our lead disappears which is what happened in both Milwakee and Minnesota. In Miami and Orlando, we never had a lead to begin with but we were able to stick relatively close behind their starters until it was time for the bench to play in which case we dropped down by over 10 points and had to claw back in every time. So how do we fix it? We can't without a trade. Kapono is a complete dud, he was signed on for his shooting abilities and he isn't performing well at all. World Peace is a complete mystery each game, he shows signs that he can still be a dominant player like against the Clippers but also disappears in others. Murphy is a solid rebounder, but a poor defender otherwise who draws more fouls than any bench player should, his shooting is nowhere near what it has been in the past especially his 3 point shot, Ebanks still needs a lot of development, Barnes is inconsistent but otherwise a decent perimiter defender and slasher (the only one we really have), and Darius Morris has terrible decision making with the ball. Blake is mediocre all around but doesn't excel anywhere even when he's healthy, if he can ever get his three point shooting to a decent level then he's worth keeping. The only guys on our bench that I don't want to flat drop right now are Walton who can possibly help facilitate the offense but is a complete mess on both offense and defense, Goudelock who is showing potential for a rookie and McRoberts who provides the physicality and hustle that I expect from a bench role player. We need help in the back court, specifically someone who's capable of creating dribble penetration and can keep up with speedy guards on defense, a decent small forward who has offensive capability would be more than welcome also. Also, don't think I'm not putting a huge portion of blame on Mike Brown because I am. I was highly skeptical of his hiring in the first place after watching the Cavaliers ousting in the '09 and '10 playoffs and the offense on the Lakers now so highly resembles the ineffective overly dependent on Lebron James offense of the Cavaliers era that it makes me sick frankly. In the meantime, Brown should play Walton more, should keep Murphy and Kapono isolated to the bench except in case of foul problems, and the team should slap around World Peace and Gasol before every game so they come with the right attitude. That should get us to a top 4 seed in the west, but there's no way the Lakers are making it past the second round (and second round is if you're incredibly optimistic) without a trade to help out our backcourt. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On to Mike Brown though. Those Cleveland teams had decent offense because as dominant as Lebron was he did have some help, as terrible as it was at times. How can Mike Brown be the one to blame when it looks like the surrounding players suck so much? I'm just hesitant to blame coaches for problems when to me it seems the players are screwing up, especially when the main one playing like shit (Gasol) is usually super efficient. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
On January 31 2012 06:56 Ace wrote: Wow, I must say that is a well written and thought out post. Hell I actually think most of it is solid except I haven't looked at the lineup information for Bynum/Gasol with bench players. On to Mike Brown though. Those Cleveland teams had decent offense because as dominant as Lebron was he did have some help, as terrible as it was at times. How can Mike Brown be the one to blame when it looks like the surrounding players suck so much? I'm just hesitant to blame coaches for problems when to me it seems the players are screwing up, especially when the main one playing like shit (Gasol) is usually super efficient. Trust me, I've watched every Laker game this season I can almost recite verbatim Brown's rotations (they aren't exactly difficult to figure out.) Admittedly he doesn't have a lot to work with. Our front court rotations are: Bynum/Gasol, Murphy/Gasol, Murphy/Bynum, Bynum/McRoberts, McRoberts/Gasol. Brown hasn't figured out yet which he likes better Backcourt rotations are: Fisher/Bryant, Bryant/Goudelock, Morris/Goudelock (Two rookies on the floor at the same time ugh.) and Fisher/Goudelock. It should be noted that Bryant is playing a very high number of minutes because the alternative is putting Fisher in with a rookie shooting guard or having two rookies on the floor at the same time. SF rotations vary depending on match ups, but typically Barnes starts with McRoberts, World Peace or Kapono coming in off the bench. Ebanks RARELY gets playing time, and Walton like I said already should play more. The one thing each of these guys has in common is that none of them are a consistent offensive threat. The one thing that I'm super critical of Brown for offensively (defensively I have different gripes like WTF are you letting Barnes guard Lebron James.) is his insistence to use his system and not just go back to the triangle at times of offensive stagnation. Fisher can run the triangle by himself with no guidance from the coach, hell that's typically how it went even with Phil at the helm and our starters are far more accustomed and comfortable in that offense (with the notable exceptions of Barnes and World Peace) than they are in Brown's offense. Doing that even intermittedly will keep the opposition guessing which is much better than just focusing all the defense on Kobe like they are now. I don't get it. Phil's offense worked with this team with amazing success and yet he just flat out refuses to use it even at times when we can't buy a basket from anyone except Kobe, and before anyone brings up an argument that you can't just flip offensive systems like that, well yes you can. The Lakers did it to the Clippers in the pre-season and it worked tremendously well until they flipped back to Brown's offense and watched their lead disappear. It's frustrating to watch. | ||
|
MassHysteria
United States3678 Posts
Even so, the Lakers in the last few years were not all that great at running the triangle(Tex Winter said so himself) and even abandoned it altogether at crucial times (to make it easier on some players). Could the starters still run it using their previous years' experiences? Probably (well not Barnes or MWP or -to a lesser degree- Bynum). Would they run it well consistently and make the right plays? We don't know. Who would be there to critique, refine, and improve upon that if they don't? There lies the problem imo. I def agree with the Lakers needing a guard and that they have horrible bench play. The loss of Odom and Shannon Brown have proven to be huge(and a little understated), specially because both those guys came off the bench, were some of the team's best cutters/dribble penetrators, and both can create shots for themselves. Brown was also improving on his shot, and boy could they use him right now. As for Kobe, I am going to have to say that I agree with Ace more on this one. I mean it is kind of like what came first? The chicken or the egg? Did kobe start hogging the ball first? or did the offense go so stagnant and bad that Kobe had to try to do it all by himself to win? I honestly think it started with Kobe. If you look at the first few games of the season(even the first 2 games when bynum comes back), I see the ball movement for the Lakers being much better and playing much more like a team. There was a quote around that time Kobe said someting along the lines of "well its good Drew gets points, but we have to understand the offense runs through me". Kobe started taking more shots and holding the ball more after this, around the time Mike Brown said something publicly. Of course Brown had to take a backseat as it looked like he was standing up to Kobe (a no no in LA), and all has gone unnoticed since then. disclaimer: I had more to type on the Kobe and offense but had to run it short to get out of work | ||
|
VENDIZ
1575 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
On January 31 2012 10:40 MassHysteria wrote: My opinion is it might be because the triangle offense is as complex as a basketball offense can get, and it would be hard to coach the players when Brown probably understands it less than some of them like Kobe or Fish. It is an offense that requires everyone to be able to run it(be at right spot, make the right cut, make the right pass, etc), so saying Fish could run it by himself is kind of a mute point. It is an offense that relies on reading the defense and then making the correct plays according to what they are showing you, so it requires a little more than normal offenses (which is why the smart players get it more). Now, if Brown is as bad offensively as you make him sound, I doubt he would be able to grasp all of this without prior experience in the triangle and then be able to coach it at a professional level. Even so, the Lakers in the last few years were not all that great at running the triangle(Tex Winter said so himself) and even abandoned it altogether at crucial times (to make it easier on some players). Could the starters still run it using their previous years' experiences? Probably (well not Barnes or MWP or -to a lesser degree- Bynum). Would they run it well consistently and make the right plays? We don't know. Who would be there to critique, refine, and improve upon that if they don't? There lies the problem imo. I def agree with the Lakers needing a guard and that they have horrible bench play. The loss of Odom and Shannon Brown have proven to be huge(and a little understated), specially because both those guys came off the bench, were some of the team's best cutters, and both can create shots for themselves. Brown was also improving on his shot, and boy could they use him right now. As for Kobe, I am going to have to say that I agree with Ace more on this one. I mean it is kind of like what came first? The chicken or the egg? Did kobe start hogging the ball first? or did the offense go so stagnant and bad that Kobe had to try to do it all by himself to win? I honestly think it started with Kobe. If you look at the first few games of the season(even the first 2 games when bynum comes back), I see the ball movement for the Lakers being much better and playing much more like a team. There was a quote around that time Kobe said someting along the lines of "well its good Drew gets points, but we have to understand the offense runs through me". Kobe started taking more shots and holding the ball more after this, around the time Mike Brown said something publicly. Of course Brown had to take a backseat as it looked like he was standing up to Kobe (a no no in LA), and all has gone unnoticed since then. disclaimer: I had more to type on the Kobe and offense but had to run it short to get out of work Without really going to your Kobe point because I think you're at least making a fair assessment, (jt isn't a question that can be answered with any sort of absolute clarity) I guess I have to reiterate a point I made about using the Triangle. I don't think it's a good idea to go back to running the Triangle as the Laker's primary offense, but I do think it's a good idea to run at least a few plays with it coming out of a time out or so in order to keep the defense honest. If the Lakers have it as part of their arsenal and teams know that it keeps them guessing about where the ball is going to go and how they should arrange their defense. As it is right now, the offensive system Mike Brown employs is incredibly predictable among other things. The ball almost always ends up in the hands of one of the big 3 and does so with rather predictable ball movement. This is why the Lakers are turning it over at such a high rate, it isn't only because of mishandling and stripping but also because the movement of the ball is predictable and passes are being intercepted. The Lakers can run the triangle well enough with the starters to make it a worthwhile strategy to mix in especially when the offense is otherwise stagnant. If the Lakers are scoring in bunches and we have them on the ropes, then don't bother with it, but if the offense is frozen like has been occuring often in the 3rd quarter of games on the road I see no reason the triangle shouldn't be used. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On January 31 2012 11:40 Vindicare605 wrote: Without really going to your Kobe point because I think you're at least making a fair assessment, (jt isn't a question that can be answered with any sort of absolute clarity) I guess I have to reiterate a point I made about using the Triangle. I don't think it's a good idea to go back to running the Triangle as the Laker's primary offense, but I do think it's a good idea to run at least a few plays with it coming out of a time out or so in order to keep the defense honest. If the Lakers have it as part of their arsenal and teams know that it keeps them guessing about where the ball is going to go and how they should arrange their defense. As it is right now, the offensive system Mike Brown employs is incredibly predictable among other things. The ball almost always ends up in the hands of one of the big 3 and does so with rather predictable ball movement. This is why the Lakers are turning it over at such a high rate, it isn't only because of mishandling and stripping but also because the movement of the ball is predictable and passes are being intercepted. The Lakers can run the triangle well enough with the starters to make it a worthwhile strategy to mix in especially when the offense is otherwise stagnant. If the Lakers are scoring in bunches and we have them on the ropes, then don't bother with it, but if the offense is frozen like has been occuring often in the 3rd quarter of games on the road I see no reason the triangle shouldn't be used. The problem with the "triangle offense will fix it" mentality is that is simply untrue without Odom. Right now Kobe is the only guy who should have the ball in his hands coming up the floor, which is simply not enough. | ||
|
MassHysteria
United States3678 Posts
I have to say it is not a bad idea though, and something that I had never thought of before. I don't really see any reasons to not try it, as it would only bring potential upside. The only thing I can think of is that it takes away time from running, practicing, and figuring out Mike Brown's offense, since it IS still a work-in-progress. The offense might seem simple and questionable but with only a month into the season, I guess I am giving Brown the benefit of the doubt that he can improve it. @clutz: although true that Odom was a great asset in the triangle offense, the beauty of the triangle is you don't need that special someone to bring the ball up the floor, which is why Phil loved having big PGs. In any case, Vindic's point is to have the starters run it on occasion, in which they would have enough to bring it up the floor with Fish and Kobe. | ||
|
Ack1027
United States7873 Posts
Wow what a dunk. | ||
|
jtbem
Canada1404 Posts
| ||
|
slyboogie
United States3423 Posts
| ||
|
AntiGrav1ty
Germany2310 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games summit1g9010 ceh9522 Happy336 C9.Mang0265 Mew2King148 NeuroSwarm72 QueenE22 Dewaltoss17 NotJumperer12 |
|
Wardi Open
PiGosaur Cup
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
OSC
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
Replay Cast
OSC
LAN Event
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
