EPT2007: Very good Spurs Crush Rubbish Cleveland team with 1 player
and
2012: Lockout, Heat never play Eastern Conference rival Bulls due to injuries to 2 best players, face teenagers in finals
had me ROLLING.
5/5 would read again
NBA Playoffs 2013 - Page 161
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
koreakool
United States334 Posts
and had me ROLLING. 5/5 would read again | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On May 21 2013 16:43 XaI)CyRiC wrote: I know it worked out in the end, but I still don't see how Lebron, Wade and Bosh were intuitive matches. Bosh was a great match for the other two because he's a stretch PF/C who can open up the middle for Wade and Lebron, but Wade and Lebron played virtually identical roles as ball-dominating perimeter players with unreliable range. I think the BOS big 3 of KG, Ray and Pierce was much more intuitive and fit each other better. As for the Lakers big 3, I honestly never saw the Nash acquisition as the huge deal that others made it out to be when it was announced. My first thoughts were that Nash was old and had been steadily declining for the past few years in both production and ability to stay on the floor, and that the Lakers didn't really need a PG like Nash as much as they needed some youth, athleticism, and defense at the position. I did think that they could make Kobe, Pau and D12 work though as long as all three bought in, but didn't anticipate all of the injuries, Pau forgetting how to shoot, or D'Antoni taking over as coach (poor fit then and now). They were to me and a lot of it had to do with Bosh + Lebron and Wade playing on slow paced teams for most of their careers. NBA "experts" still rely on conventional wisdom of "big men dominate" even in the face of a changing era. 4 years ago there were signs that the positional designations meant little, and I think now it's safe to say they are largely irrelevant. As I said years ago though, Lebron and Wade are identical but they are so good the talent overlap doesn't matter. Would we say Jordan and Pippen don't mesh even though neither of them are great 3 point shooters? Of course not, and a Wade/Lebron combination is even more powerful than that (also remember Wade's off the ball game was very underrated because the national media barely watched him play after 07 so they knew nothing). Their stats were off the charts good, but it just wasn't what people expected due to the early struggle and eventual loss to an underrated Dallas team. The biggest reason they didn't seem to mesh - especially when compared with the dominant 08 Celtics - their role players sucked. The stars weren't the problem, the other guys were. Looking back at that season I give the Big 3 a ton of credit getting that far with such a weak cast. It's no surprise within a year they looked like a killer team once the Mike Bibby's and Big Z's were gone. Pairing 2 high usage,high efficiency perimeter stars is always going to work when they do almost everything well. Barring injury it is impossible to fail. Having superstar talent overlap at that level is a GREAT thing - as long as you have good role players. As for LA, the Nash deal was good because they got him cheap and he wouldn't need to play as many minutes with Kobe and Pau running the show. They would get killed defensively, but offensively they might have been able to score enough when surrounded by defensive swingmen that it would give them just enough to exploit most matchups. Not contender status - but close enough with the right signings. Of course LA got Dwight and put in a bunch of nonos like Jamison and Meeks and the train wreck that was obvious hit. Playing 2 7 footers in the modern NBA is damn difficult if the wings are poor unless 1 of those guys is KG. Memphis is actually a good example of what happens when you do it correct: Z-Bo is a poor overall defender but with Gasol and Tony Allen surrounding him, and Mike Conley as the first line of defense good luck exploiting them. The Lakers did the opposite and went for the "let Dwight take care of everything defensively" and it went south partly because of injury and mostly because the team was a mess defensively. Lastly LA was going to suffer for 2 major reasons that I wish people would have noticed in the media but I know I'm hoping for a lot here: lineups combinations. Miami worked because even with a weak bench they had 2 dominant 2 way players and an All-Star level big man 2 way player. No matter what lineups Miami ran, at least 1 was always on the court so you'd have trouble building big leads. LA doesn't have that luxury since none of their stars can do that. Paired with a weak bench and 2 7 footers, one of which regressed for 2 years, and no Lamar Odom (big reason they were so good from 08-10) and the signs were there. The stars would need to play big minutes just to make the playoffs without the lineup flexibility (remember Wade and Lebron with overlapping skillsets? this is why its a great thing) and they would suffer dearly late in the season. Lo and behold LA before even hitting March was almost a lock to get swept in the first round. Not to toot my own horn (  ) but I called it. Just too much had to go right.I rambled to hit a lot of points but this was the reason I wasn't TOO high on the Lakers. It had potential but major questions needed to be answered before we all jumped the gun and assumed they would go to the Finals. | ||
|
x2fst
1272 Posts
On May 21 2013 16:46 Ace wrote: kobe was never as good as dwight was in 2010-11. the big knock on kobe as a legittop 10 all-time great is that it's a fact that he was never actually the best player in the league, just elite for like 15years. the mvp he won was an obvious 'lifetime achievement' award, just before lebron completely shut the doorWell looking back Dwight's status as #2 doesn't look as solid when you take playoffs into consideration. I think his "#2" ranking was due to his defensive dominance plus people constantly misjudging how good that team was and Van Gundy's impact. There are a number of guys I'd choose over those years of Dwight, some of it due to flexibility and some of it due to overall growth. Dude is still a hell of a player when healthy - just not as great as the Kobe's, Wade's, KG's (especially 08-10) and Dirk's. kobe was always a way overrated defender and just not as good offensively as people think, which is why kg/duncan have been better than him pretty much every year of their respective careers. other than those two, shaq, wade, lebron, mcgrady, nash, paul, howard, dirk, nash were all better than him at various points to name only a few | ||
|
RowdierBob
Australia13294 Posts
On May 21 2013 16:46 Ace wrote: Well looking back Dwight's status as #2 doesn't look as solid when you take playoffs into consideration. I think his "#2" ranking was due to his defensive dominance plus people constantly misjudging how good that team was and Van Gundy's impact. There are a number of guys I'd choose over those years of Dwight, some of it due to flexibility and some of it due to overall growth. Dude is still a hell of a player when healthy - just not as great as the Kobe's, Wade's, KG's (especially 08-10) and Dirk's. Couldn't we apply the same logic to Chris Paul then? Howard's gone a lot further than CP3 has in the post season. | ||
|
AntiGrav1ty
Germany2310 Posts
 | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On May 21 2013 14:02 RowdierBob wrote: What does everyone think of Noel's potential as a likely #1 pick? Any favourable player comparisons of present/past NBA players (is he likely more Joe Smith or KG)? Guy's going to need to bulk up a lot to make it in the NBA (he's listed at 6'11, 206). His lack of size, injuries and offence look like the biggest red flags. His measurements and shot blocking look crazy good though. Don't like taking big men early unless they're considered an absolute lock based on an already dominant game, not just potential. Too much risk involved, too much developing they need to do to go from college to the NBA, especially just one year of college. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On May 21 2013 20:19 x2fst wrote: kobe was never as good as dwight was in 2010-11. the big knock on kobe as a legittop 10 all-time great is that it's a fact that he was never actually the best player in the league, just elite for like 15years. the mvp he won was an obvious 'lifetime achievement' award, just before lebron completely shut the door kobe was always a way overrated defender and just not as good offensively as people think, which is why kg/duncan have been better than him pretty much every year of their respective careers. other than those two, shaq, wade, lebron, mcgrady, nash, paul, howard, dirk, nash were all better than him at various points to name only a few What? I don't follow this logic. 1. You think Dwight's 10-11 was indisputably better than Kobe's years with those shitty Lakers teams or when they made the championship run? 2. Was Dwight ever the best player in the league either? I mean, that seems like a pretty weird metric to go by. I'm not sure how many people consider Duncan or David Robinson to ever have had a year as the best player in the league, and it's possible that Kevin Durant will never have one of those years but it doesn't take away from how awesome he is. As a Laker hater, I think you're a Kobe hater. Especially putting Nash, Paul and Dirk ahead of him in each of their respective best years. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
| ||
|
MassHysteria
United States3678 Posts
I actually think wade and Lebron make a better pairing than Bosh did with any of them for that very reason. Looking back, it is easier to say of course. But Ace is/was right, Wade and Lebron go good together for the same reason pippen and jordan did. As for Chris Paul being overrated, it might just be because when the hell was the last time a PG-dominated team won the championship? We would have to go back to Magic Johnson, and the guy was 6'8 who subbed in as center on a finals game. Not your typical PG. We can make a case for Billups, but Detroit was a true team built on D. But the one constant for the championship teams is that they all have a good perimeter player. THen you have to pair him with another good perimeter player (Pippen almost won MVP w/o Jordan) or a dominating big-man. Role players are necessary of course, and might be gaining more importance now with how things are changing. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
| ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
Phil Jackson won 11 championships, many of them without a real point guard. He just had somebody else bring the ball to half court sometimes to conserve Jordan/Pippen/Kobe's stamina. Once the ball is in the half court, those three would get the ball and initiate the offense. Or they would throw the ball to Shaq/Pau during the Lakers era. The current Heat do the same thing with their "point guards" as well. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On May 21 2013 21:14 RowdierBob wrote: Couldn't we apply the same logic to Chris Paul then? Howard's gone a lot further than CP3 has in the post season. Not at all, because Chris Paul's playoff performances are better than his regular season. Even with subpar teammates he's never had a year, except maybe last year where he was injured, that you could say his team was the favorite and lost because of him or they won and he underperformed. Dwight has had some series where he flat out dominated, and others where he just didn't look good enough. Giving him credit for going further in a weaker division the year the title contenders were banged up isn't enough to put him over CP3 who went against juggernauts and still performed at a superstar level. | ||
|
klaxen
United States361 Posts
| ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On May 22 2013 01:42 MassHysteria wrote: Well looking back at history, you need a great perimeter player paired with another great perimeter player (jordan and pippen) or a great perimeter player paired with a dominating big-man. Other than a few teams that can win without that every so often with good teamwork like Detroit, that has been the winning formula really. I actually think wade and Lebron make a better pairing than Bosh did with any of them for that very reason. Looking back, it is easier to say of course. But Ace is/was right, Wade and Lebron go good together for the same reason pippen and jordan did. As for Chris Paul being overrated, it might just be because when the hell was the last time a PG-dominated team won the championship? We would have to go back to Magic Johnson, and the guy was 6'8 who subbed in as center on a finals game. Not your typical PG. We can make a case for Billups, but Detroit was a true team built on D. But the one constant for the championship teams is that they all have a good perimeter player. THen you have to pair him with another good perimeter player (Pippen almost won MVP w/o Jordan) or a dominating big-man. Role players are necessary of course, and might be gaining more importance now with how things are changing. There is a problem with that line of thinking thogh - why single out point guards? Even Magic wasn't the most dominating guy since he had years with Kareem who was still crushing, and years with Worthy and a loaded bench. Technically we should be doing a team by team analysis. San Antonio also won with Parker dominating but people just go "oh Duncan is the best player it doesn't count". Miami won in 2006 with Wade who is actually a combo guard. Pat RIley said they drafted Wade as a point guard. So he fits too doesn't he? To make the point extremely short we could also say before Lebron when is the last time a dominant small forward won a chip? why? There are many reasons that teams don't win and having a point guard led team usually has more to do with how the team is constructed rather than faults of the team itself. For the people saying "it can't work" you need to go look at those Phoenix Suns teams with Nash and realize how much of a title favorite they really were. Those teams didn't lose because of some weakness in Nash - they lost because of circumstances outside their control (refs, suspensions and injuries) and going up against the San Antonio Spurs. Do research and just don't make blanket statements clutz. On May 22 2013 03:35 cLutZ wrote: The problem with a PG-dominated team is that if your elite player is a wing, he can bring the ball up the court and should be able to distribute. From a salary cap POV its fairly inefficient to have a max-deal at the 1, because there are a lot of serviceable point guards available from lots of different places (like Norris Cole). There really is no such thing as an elite defender at PG either anymore. Except we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this isn't true. Norris Cole's role isn't the same as a Chris Paul. He plays limited minutes and does not create offense the same way because his responsibilities are far less. There is a giant chasm between "serviceable PG" and "offensive nightmare". We can look at a team's ORTG, SRS, and it's related Margin of Victory and compare Point Guards and none of the non-superstar guys can even approach a Nash or Chris Paul level. In addition you can compare wing players to the elite PGs and very few, pretty much Lebron and Durant at this point with Wade in the shadows and Harden, can lift their team's offense to such a high level. In short - there aren't a lot of talents that can push a team offense to the top of the charts that happen to be playing a position other than point guard. And of them only a few (notable exception being Durant), can distribute and score at a superstar level. You make it sound so simple when it isn't. There are plenty of elite PG defenders. I'd like to here you prove why this isn't the case because people make this statement all the time. Hopefully you aren't basing this off of RAPM without understanding what it actually means since this is a common mistake. | ||
|
DystopiaX
United States16236 Posts
On May 22 2013 06:36 klaxen wrote: Del Negro isn't coming back next season. I'd really like to see Jerry Sloan sign with the Clippers. I think Paul and Sloan have very similar styles that would mesh well together. As much as people have been throwing around names of established coaches I think that there are also tons of assistant coaches who could land the job. | ||
|
MassHysteria
United States3678 Posts
On May 22 2013 06:42 Ace wrote: There is a problem with that line of thinking thogh - why single out point guards? Even Magic wasn't the most dominating guy since he had years with Kareem who was still crushing, and years with Worthy and a loaded bench. Technically we should be doing a team by team analysis. San Antonio also won with Parker dominating but people just go "oh Duncan is the best player it doesn't count". Miami won in 2006 with Wade who is actually a combo guard. Pat RIley said they drafted Wade as a point guard. So he fits too doesn't he? To make the point extremely short we could also say before Lebron when is the last time a dominant small forward won a chip? why? There are many reasons that teams don't win and having a point guard led team usually has more to do with how the team is constructed rather than faults of the team itself. For the people saying "it can't work" you need to go look at those Phoenix Suns teams with Nash and realize how much of a title favorite they really were. Those teams didn't lose because of some weakness in Nash - they lost because of circumstances outside their control (refs, suspensions and injuries) and going up against the San Antonio Spurs. Do research and just don't make blanket statements clutz. If the Suns won a chip, they would have been one of the worst defenses in the modern era to win a title. I would have taken any other modern-era championship winner over them in a series. They were not a better team than a healthy Spurs team imo but my point is they didn't win a title not that it wasn't a great team or it can't work under the right circumstances As for when I said "PG-dominated", maybe I should have said "with a PG as the best player on their team". I think it would actually fit better for what I meant to say. I say Magic but only in the last years of Kareem, when Kareem was clearly not the best player anymore but Magic was. (side-note: I think Kareem is the #2 Parker won the Finals MVP but was he really the best player on their team? Even if it isn't Duncan (which it was imo), don't forget Ginobli being the other great perimeter player. In 2006, Wade was a beast but Shaq was still in his prime (last year arguably) and they would not have gotten past Detroit without him. But we all know wade isn't a PG, that's a big stretch to fit the argument =P edit: replaced "best" with "greatest" | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On May 22 2013 06:42 Ace wrote: There is a problem with that line of thinking thogh - why single out point guards? Even Magic wasn't the most dominating guy since he had years with Kareem who was still crushing, and years with Worthy and a loaded bench. Technically we should be doing a team by team analysis. San Antonio also won with Parker dominating but people just go "oh Duncan is the best player it doesn't count". Miami won in 2006 with Wade who is actually a combo guard. Pat RIley said they drafted Wade as a point guard. So he fits too doesn't he? To make the point extremely short we could also say before Lebron when is the last time a dominant small forward won a chip? why? There are many reasons that teams don't win and having a point guard led team usually has more to do with how the team is constructed rather than faults of the team itself. For the people saying "it can't work" you need to go look at those Phoenix Suns teams with Nash and realize how much of a title favorite they really were. Those teams didn't lose because of some weakness in Nash - they lost because of circumstances outside their control (refs, suspensions and injuries) and going up against the San Antonio Spurs. Do research and just don't make blanket statements clutz. Except we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this isn't true. Norris Cole's role isn't the same as a Chris Paul. He plays limited minutes and does not create offense the same way because his responsibilities are far less. There is a giant chasm between "serviceable PG" and "offensive nightmare". We can look at a team's ORTG, SRS, and it's related Margin of Victory and compare Point Guards and none of the non-superstar guys can even approach a Nash or Chris Paul level. In addition you can compare wing players to the elite PGs and very few, pretty much Lebron and Durant at this point with Wade in the shadows and Harden, can lift their team's offense to such a high level. In short - there aren't a lot of talents that can push a team offense to the top of the charts that happen to be playing a position other than point guard. And of them only a few (notable exception being Durant), can distribute and score at a superstar level. You make it sound so simple when it isn't. There are plenty of elite PG defenders. I'd like to here you prove why this isn't the case because people make this statement all the time. Hopefully you aren't basing this off of RAPM without understanding what it actually means since this is a common mistake. I know Norris Cole is nothing like Chris Paul. Cole is like the 30th best PG in the league (if even that). The point is you would rather have Cole + the #1 Wing or + #1 Big than have CP3 + #30 of those. In a salary cap league, that is how you have to think. Also, who are the elite PG defenders? There are some decent on-ball PG defenders, but none really are the kind of player that affects all aspects of the game on the defensive end like a Lebron, Howard, Gasol, KG, etc. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
I say Magic but only in the last years of Kareem, when Kareem was clearly not the best player anymore but Magic was. (side-note: I think Kareem is the #2 best player ever after Jordan in modern-era) I also said this because he actually subbed in for Kareem and his sprained ankle in the Finals example I used. Which championship? Kareem was definitely the guy when Magic first showed up. Remember Magic made a big stink about not coming to the NBA if he didn't get to play with KAJ. Parker won the Finals MVP but was he really the best player on their team? Even if it isn't Duncan (which it was imo), don't forget Ginobli being the other great perimeter player. In 2006, Wade was a beast but Shaq was still in his prime (last year arguably) and they would not have gotten past Detroit without him. But we all know wade isn't a PG, that's a big stretch to fit the argument =P Parker was. His finals were pretty amazing too. Shaq in 2006 was no longer in his prime and was a shell. Miami wouldn't have beaten Detroit without Shaq but they wouldn't have even been there without Wade. There are many arguments for Wade deserving the MVP that year but to make it short Miami's offense collapsed to something like 22 points worse/per 100 possessions without him. That is an obscene dropoff. Around this time we also realized that while Shaq helped Wade, it wasn't as much of a boost we thought because Wade ran the offense at superstar levels just fine with Shaq off the court. And yes, Wade was playing Point Guard in the playoffs | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
| ||
| ||
