|
woulda been funny if Embiid had gotten ejected from Mandela//Giants of Africa night...
On December 06 2018 22:40 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2018 06:59 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i cheer for team builders rather than players. Ujiri is pretty good and I really liked Lewieke. Had Toronto kept Lewieke I'd be a much bigger fan. I always wondered JJR, you're usually quite active on TL about all sports and seems quite knowledgeable about them. But you have this kind of cold rational approach to them: obviously you're famous here for always being the one to bring up advanced analytics, that's fine, but now you're also saying you're cheering for front office decision makers and not for players. That strikes me as quite detached for a fan to say the least :D. Are you a sports better maybe? Any other motivation that I could understand or is it just your own personal approach to fandom and that's it? i like watching David Slay Goliath.
My favourite team builders are Vince Lombardi, Lou Lamoriello, Andrew Friedman, and Pat Gillick. The New Jersey Devils always had a fraction of the resources of teh New York Rangers. The Toronto BLue Jays and Tampa Bay Devil Rays had a fraction of the resources of the New York Yankees.
Watching the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, with 13,000 people in the stands ... playing in the crappiest MLB park there is ... take down the New York Yankees is pretty fun.
My favourite Raptor team builder is Glen Grunwald.
|
On December 06 2018 22:40 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2018 06:59 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i cheer for team builders rather than players. Ujiri is pretty good and I really liked Lewieke. Had Toronto kept Lewieke I'd be a much bigger fan. I always wondered JJR, you're usually quite active on TL about all sports and seems quite knowledgeable about them. But you have this kind of cold rational approach to them: obviously you're famous here for always being the one to bring up advanced analytics, that's fine, but now you're also saying you're cheering for front office decision makers and not for players. That strikes me as quite detached for a fan to say the least :D. Are you a sports better maybe? Any other motivation that I could understand or is it just your own personal approach to fandom and that's it?
While I think some would take issue with your characterization of JJR, I don't think there's anything incongruous with these attitudes. Studying the game should detach you from emotional and arbitrary fanboyism. Jordan and Lebron are not uber leet haxxorz.
|
Sure but (and I will sound like Iverson here) focusing on the grand view of team building and outcomes, more than the game itself? Like usually your involvement in a sports starts with playing first-hand or watching others play (and stays at that level). You're a fan of a playstyle, a player, a team, a move, something that goes on on the court. Not this top-down "Oh I see Ujiri converted restricted second round picks 5 years ago for this very high xDRPM guy, such a brillant approach to the game..." stuff. I get that it's interesting, I just wonder how one might end up finding GMs more interesting than players themselves. And there are so many crappy and unsuccessful front offices that you wonder if the good ones were just a bit lucky that their team clicked well or such and such player signed with them. Basketball is still about the players, maybe more than any other team sports.
Jordan and Lebron are not uber leet haxxorz. This I didn't quite get.
And to be clear I'm not saying JJR ONLY enjoys the game as played on spreadsheets, but he certainly seems to enjoy it more than most.
|
On December 06 2018 14:24 cLutZ wrote: I know its not feasible for lower leagues, but shouldn't Techs for mouthing off at refs not be decided by refs? Generic Spurs white guy just got one for being right.
I would settle for refs who blow a call letting players have more leeway in mouthing off. Or not have a ref on the opposite end of the court call a tech on a player talking to a ref on the other end.
|
On December 07 2018 01:18 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2018 14:24 cLutZ wrote: I know its not feasible for lower leagues, but shouldn't Techs for mouthing off at refs not be decided by refs? Generic Spurs white guy just got one for being right. I would settle for refs who blow a call letting players have more leeway in mouthing off. Or not have a ref on the opposite end of the court call a tech on a player talking to a ref on the other end. yep, the players are not robots... let them blow off some steam. often when we're emotional we over exaggerate things.. let it happen .. its organic.
|
On December 07 2018 00:59 ZenithM wrote:Sure but (and I will sound like Iverson here) focusing on the grand view of team building and outcomes, more than the game itself? Like usually your involvement in a sports starts with playing first-hand or watching others play (and stays at that level). You're a fan of a playstyle, a player, a team, a move, something that goes on on the court. Not this top-down "Oh I see Ujiri converted restricted second round picks 5 years ago for this very high xDRPM guy, such a brillant approach to the game..." stuff. I get that it's interesting, I just wonder how one might end up finding GMs more interesting than players themselves. And there are so many crappy and unsuccessful front offices that you wonder if the good ones were just a bit lucky that their team clicked well or such and such player signed with them. Basketball is still about the players, maybe more than any other team sports. This I didn't quite get. And to be clear I'm not saying JJR ONLY enjoys the game as played on spreadsheets, but he certainly seems to enjoy it more than most.
The effect of learning about the game should be that you start to understand that it's about reducible components and principles. The ignorant analysis of fans is that stars are "special" in some arbitrary and undefinable way. That's why I put in the mock analysis of Jordan and Lebron. Once you understand that the game is about certain very definable skills and actions, the personality of each player seems less interesting than how can we combine the skills and schemes.
|
It's debatable, especially when you get to such a high vantage point as GMs and presidents. Why not be fans of the fucking owners while we're at it? Roster building in basketball (which is what we were talking about) is not exactly as intricate as you make it sound. It's the players and the coaching staff who make shit happen once you have the building blocks.
|
On December 07 2018 09:50 ZenithM wrote: It's debatable, especially when you get to such a high vantage point as GMs and presidents. Why not be fans of the fucking owners while we're at it? Roster building in basketball (which is what we were talking about) is not exactly as intricate as you make it sound. It's the players and the coaching staff who make shit happen once you have the building blocks. good GMs have their ear to the ground. Owners are usually completely out of touch.
Andrew Friedman rebuilt the Rays minor league system from the ground up. Every new pitcher they drafted only threw 4 pitches as mandated by Friedman's approach to developing young pitchers. 2-Seam Fastball, 4-Steam Fastball, Overhand Curve, Straight change. His belief is that other pitches cause injuries. His approach was met with a collective yawn until 3 years later the Rays system was pumping out starters like they had an assembly-line.
imo, Andrew Friedman is the #1 baseball mind on planet earth. Watching the Devil Rays beat up the unlimited money Yankees was hella fun. Going to Yankees stadium and seeing the stunned, stupified looks on the faces of fans who had already declared the Yankees as world series champs was a treat.
regarding the NBA... i'd love to hear the speech Ujiri gave the knicks when he traded away Andrea. with free agency and player movement a constant it is Masai Ujiri who IS the Raptors. its not Demar Derozan.
|
The Raptors failed miserably in the playoffs before, swept as the first seed mostly by one guy. Was it Masai Ujiri too then? Maybe I should be a fan of whomever had the genius of drafting Lebron James? (Because I'm no casual who would be a fan of one guy actually dribbling a basketball lol) Ujiri had an opportunity to turn his no-defense midrange aficionado into one year of a far better player. He took it, good on him, but first, that team hasn't won anything. Second, if by any chance Kawhi leaves, they will not win anything for a long time anyway.
What GMs do is interesting for sure, but ultimately they have little control about what happens in the game. It's just pretentious to think otherwise. And even when they make outlandish moves, it's good bartering, but there is plenty of that happening elsewhere in the world without involving basketball.
Edit: Also I am absolutely clueless about MLB which I suspect you guessed and uses to drown me in baseball arguments I can't say anything to. Actually I watched Moneyball, Brad Pitt was a cool GM in that movie, point taken.
|
On December 07 2018 09:50 ZenithM wrote: It's debatable, especially when you get to such a high vantage point as GMs and presidents. Why not be fans of the fucking owners while we're at it? Roster building in basketball (which is what we were talking about) is not exactly as intricate as you make it sound. It's the players and the coaching staff who make shit happen once you have the building blocks.
Do they though? <thorface>
The independent variable would be does player performance vary across teams and coaches? Overall, I'd say the answer is largely no. There are only a few coaches that can have a significantly positive advantage, and most of them have heavy front office influence. Looking at a player like Jimmy Butler, you can see how he has been used to better or worse effect on the last 3 teams he's been on, but it's not like he's a different player on each team.
|
On December 07 2018 10:19 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2018 09:50 ZenithM wrote: It's debatable, especially when you get to such a high vantage point as GMs and presidents. Why not be fans of the fucking owners while we're at it? Roster building in basketball (which is what we were talking about) is not exactly as intricate as you make it sound. It's the players and the coaching staff who make shit happen once you have the building blocks. imo, Andrew Friedman is the #1 baseball mind on planet earth...
Definitely. And according to Darly Morey, one of the top GM's in the NBA, Friedman is the #1 exec in any sport. I have heard him say it on more than one occasion now.
Oh ya: + Show Spoiler +
|
George hill to the bucks for delladova and hensen
Edit: i wonder if this is a precursor to a thompson move. Hes been playing well and when he hensen geta healthy he can fill that roll for a tanking team. And no hill means a lot more sexton. And bucks get a upgrade at the backup pg spot and can cut him next year to free up space if they want.
|
On December 08 2018 00:56 Jerubaal wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2018 09:50 ZenithM wrote: It's debatable, especially when you get to such a high vantage point as GMs and presidents. Why not be fans of the fucking owners while we're at it? Roster building in basketball (which is what we were talking about) is not exactly as intricate as you make it sound. It's the players and the coaching staff who make shit happen once you have the building blocks. Do they though? <thorface> The independent variable would be does player performance vary across teams and coaches? Overall, I'd say the answer is largely no. There are only a few coaches that can have a significantly positive advantage, and most of them have heavy front office influence. Looking at a player like Jimmy Butler, you can see how he has been used to better or worse effect on the last 3 teams he's been on, but it's not like he's a different player on each team. I can easily agree that players don't change too much across teams and coaches, but I don't see the point. Is that what basketball connoisseurs do? You watch a GM assemble a list of players, you look in the boxscore if his team has more points than the other?
Two posts ago I found that extremely confusing, but now that I remember that we've all been RTS players at some point it makes some sense. You probably have this very high-order view of the game. Like the build order or gameplan is more interesting than the actual execution.
Again, coming back to basketball, I don't see how the appeal of "team building" can trump that of the act of playing the game. GMs are usually dealt a well defined set of cards and have a very limited amount of moves they can make. The outcome of these moves has high variance and it's kind of hard to tell if they're not just getting lucky or unlucky.
At least I think I understand where you guys are coming from now. I'm just not there yet in my fandom :D.
Edit: Shoutout to the "My very informed opinion is that Andrew Friedman is the best baseball mind". I google "Andrew Friedman" and the first thing that pops up is an article about how he "has one of the best minds in baseball". Doesn't seem like a very challenged opinion to have :D.
|
On December 08 2018 08:27 JimmiC wrote: George hill to the bucks for delladova and hensen
Edit: i wonder if this is a precursor to a thompson move. Hes been playing well and when he hensen geta healthy he can fill that roll for a tanking team. And no hill means a lot more sexton. And bucks get a upgrade at the backup pg spot and can cut him next year to free up space if they want. Now they are reporting wiz involved as well and cav getting a protected 1st and a couple of seconds.
|
|
Philly franchise always has beef internally. Can’t remember a year from Barkley to Iverson to Igoudala to MCW to Embiid to Simmons to fultz to now where this hasn’t been the case and team is accused of underachieving lol.
|
On December 08 2018 20:28 Yanokabo wrote: Philly franchise always has beef internally. Can’t remember a year from Barkley to Iverson to Igoudala to MCW to Embiid to Simmons to fultz to now where this hasn’t been the case and team is accused of underachieving lol. RIP im not going to miss the troll bait posts, but I will miss the is he really this dumb thoughts. The good news is im sude you will be back, again, with another name soon. Infact you might still he around now ready to pop back up. I would enjoy a blog with a family tree of all your screennames. But until then, sweet dreams.
Milsap with a broken toe is a huge blow to den. He does so much for them especially on the d side.
|
On December 08 2018 22:54 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2018 20:28 Yanokabo wrote: Philly franchise always has beef internally. Can’t remember a year from Barkley to Iverson to Igoudala to MCW to Embiid to Simmons to fultz to now where this hasn’t been the case and team is accused of underachieving lol. RIP im not going to miss the troll bait posts, but I will miss the is he really this dumb thoughts. The good news is im sude you will be back, again, with another name soon. Infact you might still he around now ready to pop back up. I would enjoy a blog with a family tree of all your screennames. But until then, sweet dreams. Milsap with a broken toe is a huge blow to den. He does so much for them especially on the d side.
Considering how insane the west is, losing even one key guy can mean several losses and a big drop in standings.
Sucks.
|
On December 08 2018 09:45 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2018 00:56 Jerubaal wrote:On December 07 2018 09:50 ZenithM wrote: It's debatable, especially when you get to such a high vantage point as GMs and presidents. Why not be fans of the fucking owners while we're at it? Roster building in basketball (which is what we were talking about) is not exactly as intricate as you make it sound. It's the players and the coaching staff who make shit happen once you have the building blocks. Do they though? <thorface> The independent variable would be does player performance vary across teams and coaches? Overall, I'd say the answer is largely no. There are only a few coaches that can have a significantly positive advantage, and most of them have heavy front office influence. Looking at a player like Jimmy Butler, you can see how he has been used to better or worse effect on the last 3 teams he's been on, but it's not like he's a different player on each team. I can easily agree that players don't change too much across teams and coaches, but I don't see the point. Is that what basketball connoisseurs do? You watch a GM assemble a list of players, you look in the boxscore if his team has more points than the other? Two posts ago I found that extremely confusing, but now that I remember that we've all been RTS players at some point it makes some sense. You probably have this very high-order view of the game. Like the build order or gameplan is more interesting than the actual execution. Again, coming back to basketball, I don't see how the appeal of "team building" can trump that of the act of playing the game. GMs are usually dealt a well defined set of cards and have a very limited amount of moves they can make. The outcome of these moves has high variance and it's kind of hard to tell if they're not just getting lucky or unlucky. At least I think I understand where you guys are coming from now. I'm just not there yet in my fandom :D. Edit: Shoutout to the "My very informed opinion is that Andrew Friedman is the best baseball mind". I google "Andrew Friedman" and the first thing that pops up is an article about how he "has one of the best minds in baseball". Doesn't seem like a very challenged opinion to have :D.
Counter-point: What else are you doing? I think trying to understand the game makes it interesting. Otherwise, you are just siting there going, "that sure was a thing he just did."
|
its nice to see Jakob Poetl progressing in San Antonio. i hope his Fortnite game is improving as well. )
the Toronto Raptors are the only team in the NBA without a post game show. Curling gets pre-game and post game though. People are whining at MLSE for this. However, Curling gets better ratings than the NBA. If the Raptors ratings reach the same levels as Curling there will be a basketball post game show.
On December 07 2018 13:00 ZenithM wrote: Edit: Also I am absolutely clueless about MLB which I suspect you guessed and uses to drown me in baseball arguments I can't say anything to. Actually I watched Moneyball, Brad Pitt was a cool GM in that movie, point taken. I also named NFL and NHL leaders. so i'd say that is incorrect. check out the baseball threads from previous years. my enjoyment of the game is not related to your lack of knowledge of the game. You are free to research Friedman or Gillick if you want. Two geniuses with almost no resources taking down the 2 goliaths, namely, the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees.
Both Gillick and Friedman are much better than Beane.
|
|
|
|