NBA Playoffs 2013 - Page 148

On May 16 2013 19:50 Vindicare605 wrote:



For those that didn't see it.

To quote Chuck.

"That's Detroit Tayshaun Prince right there."

On May 17 2013 00:25 andrewlt wrote:


You have it backwards in the first two sentences. The Seattle deal is good for taxpayers. The Sacramento deal is taxpayer robbery. This is pretty much the owners not wanting to set a precedent of owners paying for their own stadiums. They want to preserve the ability to fuck taxpayers, even though every single reputable economist and business analyst that has studied taxpayer stadium financing has concluded that these deals are terrible for taxpayers.

On May 17 2013 03:56 VayneAuthority wrote:
the second round is just showing the difference between miami and thunder/knicks. Miami actually has an offensive system put in place to make use of their role players, while the players on the knicks and thunder are so scared to step into their role because its been beat into their heads by their coaches that carmelo/durant/westbrook own their teams and they are going to them no matter what. Can't ever build up any confidence for playoff games if you never get the chance

On May 17 2013 03:31 Jerubaal wrote:


TP: I was running down dudes for over the top blocks when Lebron was deciding who to ask to the middle school dance.

On May 17 2013 04:58 Jerubaal wrote:


You may be right about the bolded part, but not for the reasons you stated. It's difficult to argue that OKC and NYK role players didn't get their shots, especially in the last games. It's certainly hard to argue that Durant did not try to get his teammates involved the entire series. What is true is that the OKC roleplayers are not equipped to carry a large offensive load or create their own offense. Most just go to their spots and wait for the ball to come to them after Westbrook or Durant have drawn attention, and would a driving trait really be that valuable with KD/WB commanding such high usage? That essentially is the Martin vs Harden debate in a nutshell. NY, on the other hand, has the opposite problem. I'd say they take turns playing iso ball, but the truth is that Anthony/Smith/Felton are practically the only offensive players on the floor the whole game. Even lil' ol' Shumpert got 6 shots off though. Copeland/Novak going 3-4 from 3 last game in 13 minutes and not seeing more use is mind boggling.

Miami at first glance looks similar to OKC, but they have better 3 point shooters (at least when Martin is like he is this year) and other players who can roll to the basket as well. There's more use for other drivers because Wade is not going to play 82x48 like Westbrook.

On May 17 2013 05:59 Jerubaal wrote:
I feel like there's a narrative here that isn't necessarily coming from results (at least not a broad view of them). Miami won so their roleplayers succeeded. OKC lost so their roleplayers failed. 1. I don't think it's been shown that the Miami roleplayers have been better than OKC's. They were actually neck and neck, with OKC having the slight edge, in bench points during the regular season. In the playoffs, it's been ~38 for Miami and ~30 for OKC, but that includes some 20 point games by Ray Allen against the hellacious Bucks and against a depleted Bulls squad with a 7 man rotation. Miami increased their bench production by 10 in the playoffs. 2. As I said, OKC is built around KD and WB and they have no WB.

The initial argument, though, was whether the system discouraged players from taking shots and, considering OKC's bench scoring has risen by a bit in the playoffs, that seems erroneous.

On May 17 2013 06:20 Jerubaal wrote:
That's the thing, though. We don't need a psychological explanation. They lost by a handful of points WITHOUT A TOP 5 POINT GUARD. Give me Jrue Fucking Holliday and they might win. I agree that they looked bamboozled and didn't seem to have much of an offensive plan other than give it to Kevin.

Too often we try to ascribe psychological meanings to things that are more cerebral. Like when we call people selfish/unselfish, we should probably call them smart- not-so-smart. OKC didn't look like they knew what to do, but that's different from being gunshy. Even if they had a whole year to prepare, though, this is not a team filled with people to get their own shot. Ibaka is not going to turn into Kevin Love and K-Mart isn't going to turn into A.I..

On May 17 2013 06:26 VayneAuthority wrote:
I guess it just boils down to me saying that scotty brooks is overrated and a garbage coach. they shouldnt have lost 4-1

On May 17 2013 06:26 VayneAuthority wrote:
I guess it just boils down to me saying that scotty brooks is overrated and a garbage coach. they shouldnt have lost 4-1

On May 17 2013 05:59 Jerubaal wrote:
I feel like there's a narrative here that isn't necessarily coming from results (at least not a broad view of them). Miami won so their roleplayers succeeded. OKC lost so their roleplayers failed. 1. I don't think it's been shown that the Miami roleplayers have been better than OKC's. They were actually neck and neck, with OKC having the slight edge, in bench points during the regular season. In the playoffs, it's been ~38 for Miami and ~30 for OKC, but that includes some 20 point games by Ray Allen against the hellacious Bucks and against a depleted Bulls squad with a 7 man rotation. Miami increased their bench production by 10 in the playoffs. 2. As I said, OKC is built around KD and WB and they have no WB.

The initial argument, though, was whether the system discouraged players from taking shots and, considering OKC's bench scoring has risen by a bit in the playoffs, that seems erroneous.