Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 102
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,337
    vCash
    1500
    they didn't gain anything by trading him now instead of during the summer, and they probably just flushed their chances at an (unlikely) NBA championship

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    LI-NY
    Posts
    22,802
    vCash
    1500
    How can you say the Spurs don't need this ability? Parker and Ginobili have hit so many huge buckets out of nothing throughout their playoff runs. Timmy has also hit his fair share of late clock pick and pops off Parker.

    Again, a coach can only call one play in a 24 second shot clock (that takes 6-8 seconds to get up the court and initiate). A XO genious like Pop isn't pulling out a second miracle play mid-shot clock with everyone in random spots on the floor because the original set came up empty. If the first set comes up empty, someones creating their own shot. Thats how it works in the NBA.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    31,717
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by D-Leethal View Post
    lol, so you think a creative coach is going to draw up a set mid-shot clock after the original set comes up empty?
    I think hes saying its on both the coach and the player, and that he would rather have a set with multiple options so that when one breaks down, you dont just rely on toilet clogged possessions as Phil Jackson would say (Im pretty sure thats what he called them).


    All late clock possessions end in iso's, even for the most creative coaches.
    Yea but depending on the player and his system, they happen less frequently if you have players who dont have to rely on those shots.

    Thats what good defenses who study your offensive sets and play you 7 games straight in a playoff series do. They force you to beat them with tough shots. Being 'creative', whatever you mean by that, isn't getting you layups in a gut wrenching game 7 against a great defense.
    I disagree entirely, I dont think games are won and lost that way.

    The Grizz were a much better offensive unit when they didn't have Gay around to stagnate offenses back when they made their run. That was with Battier being a strong/efficient shooter off of set plays.

    Lets put it simply
    For the Grizz,
    With Gay you had a more stagnant sets and thus relied more on those low% final second shots. With a guy like Battier, you can have more movement and sets that end with high% shots.

    True, when a possession breaks down you wont have that 33% chance of making the shot. But you have a greater odds at not needing that shot in the first place.

    I mean its one thing if Gay is elite at what he does, but he clearly hasn't been for the Grizz.


  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    31,717
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by D-Leethal View Post
    The first what?
    Statistician to get a ring.

    All I said was even low level employees get championship rings. Cuban giving him a ring doesn't mean he praises his work any more than his former NBA player employees, or his video production guys, or his marketing guys. Its standard procedure.
    Yea I dont believe you know standard operating procedures around the league.


  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    LI-NY
    Posts
    22,802
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    I think hes saying its on both the coach and the player, and that he would rather have a set with multiple options so that when one breaks down, you dont just rely on toilet clogged possessions as Phil Jackson would say (Im pretty sure thats what he called them).



    Yea but depending on the player and his system, they happen less frequently if you have players who dont have to rely on those shots.


    I disagree entirely, I dont think games are won and lost that way.

    The Grizz were a much better offensive unit when they didn't have Gay around to stagnate offenses back when they made their run. That was with Battier being a strong/efficient shooter off of set plays.

    Lets put it simply
    For the Grizz,
    With Gay you had a more stagnant sets and thus relied more on those low% final second shots. With a guy like Battier, you can have more movement and sets that end with high% shots.

    True, when a possession breaks down you wont have that 33% chance of making the shot. But you have a greater odds at not needing that shot in the first place.

    I mean its one thing if Gay is elite at what he does, but he clearly hasn't been for the Grizz.
    My thing is, regardless, they are going to need those shots. Adding a more efficient player isn't going to assure you of never playing in tight games or have to create in empty possessions. Every single team has to do that.

    You can't even guarantee that being a more efficient team will put you in better positions to finish games. The game isn't played in a vaccuum like that. Battier and his limited skillset makes you a much easier team to defend than a guy like Gay. Battier puts no pressure on the interior D, you can shut him out with your worst defender as long as they don't fall asleep on him. I don't even think you can say adding a more efficient individual player like Battier will make your team more efficient team overall. They were a different team back than, Battier/Gay wasn't the only difference, and I have said for years Mayo was extremely underrated for that team.

    My main point is that, every team needs that 33.3% late clock shooter, because a playoff defense is going to force you into those shots, regardless of the quality of your offense.

    I also don't think it matters that Gay wasn't elite at what he does. Its the fact that he does what he does, and nobody else on the team does it. Same comparison with Felton and the Knicks, hes not that good at what he does, yet makes our team so much more dynamic and difficult to defend.
    Last edited by D-Leethal; 02-01-2013 at 06:38 PM.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    LI-NY
    Posts
    22,802
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    Statistician to get a ring.


    Yea I dont believe you know standard operating procedures around the league.
    Likewise my friend, considering you thought it was a big deal the stat geek in the Mavs FO got one.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    8,752
    vCash
    34875
    Quote Originally Posted by D-Leethal View Post
    My thing is, regardless, they are going to need those shots. Adding a more efficient player isn't going to assure you of never playing in tight games or have to create in empty possessions. Every single team has to do that.

    You can't even guarantee that being a more efficient team will put you in better positions to finish games. The game isn't played in a vaccuum like that. Battier and his limited skillset makes you a much easier team to defend than a guy like Gay. Battier puts no pressure on the interior D, you can shut him out with your worst defender as long as they don't fall asleep on him. I don't even think you can say adding a more efficient individual player like Battier will make your team more efficient team overall. They were a different team back than, Battier/Gay wasn't the only difference, and I have said for years Mayo was extremely underrated for that team.

    I think my main point is that, every team needs that 33.3% late clock shooter, because a playoff defense is going to force you into those shots, regardless of the quality of your offense.

    I also don't think it matters that Gay wasn't elite at what he does. Its the fact that he does what he does, and nobody else on the team does it. Same comparison with Felton and the Knicks, hes not that good at what he does, yet makes our team so much more dynamic and difficult to defend.

    Grizzlies without Gay beat the Spurs and took the Thunder to seven. They used set plays near the end and were very efficient.

    Grizzlies with Gay were put away by the Clippers in seven because despite Gay creating for himself, he could not do it efficiently enough near the end of the game.

    The offense is geared towards finding highly efficient shots, and the defense is geared for the opposite. That is not different in the regular season.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    8,752
    vCash
    34875
    Quote Originally Posted by D-Leethal View Post
    Likewise my friend, considering you thought it was a big deal the stat geek in the Mavs FO got one.
    If you call people who use the best information geeks I can call you an idiot for ignoring it.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    LI-NY
    Posts
    22,802
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Guppyfighter View Post
    Grizzlies without Gay beat the Spurs and took the Thunder to seven. They used set plays near the end and were very efficient.

    Grizzlies with Gay were put away by the Clippers in seven because despite Gay creating for himself, he could not do it efficiently enough near the end of the game.

    The offense is geared towards finding highly efficient shots, and the defense is geared for the opposite. That is not different in the regular season.
    Grizzlies also had a guy named OJ Mayo who could create shots in those situations. I don't even think you get my points. I'm talking about late clock, not late game. Every team is going to run set plays late in the game, my point is that very often those plays will come up empty and you will need to drill some tough contested shots and need a guy who can create space and get clean shots off in those situations.

    I understand what offense and defense is about. Except it doesn't always work like a charm. Thats why people get played to play defense. You need guys who can get you buckets despite a lights out defensive possession.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    LI-NY
    Posts
    22,802
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Guppyfighter View Post
    If you call people who use the best information geeks I can call you an idiot for ignoring it.
    I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm saying more efficient =/ better. I'm saying well rounded team dynamic > stat sheets.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    8,752
    vCash
    34875
    Quote Originally Posted by D-Leethal View Post
    Grizzlies also had a guy named OJ Mayo who could create shots in those situations. I don't even think you get my points. I'm talking about late clock, not late game. Every team is going to run set plays late in the game, my point is that very often those plays will come up empty and you will need to drill some tough contested shots and need a guy who can create space and get clean shots off in those situations.

    I understand what offense and defense is about. Except it doesn't always work like a charm. Thats why people get played to play defense. You need guys who can get you buckets despite a lights out defensive possession.
    The line of thought you need a shot creator to win close games is very odd to me. Because we know, with the amount of data throughout basketball that games with in 3-5 points generally break 47-53 percent. There is very high variation in close games. Teams do not win close games at high rates. It never happens. That's why the idea of a "shot creator" who can take long contested twos and make around 25 percent is not a good notion to have.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    8,387
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    btw, the last 5 NBA champions all employ statistical analytics crews. Sorry guys, its part of the current and future NBA. The old days of going with your gut have been molded.
    really... who is that guy on the Lakers... and if your answer is Jim Buss you might want to rethink your position on what defines an analytical crew...

    The last two laker chips had ZERO to do with employing advanced stat techniques

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    8,752
    vCash
    34875
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinylman View Post
    really... who is that guy on the Lakers... and if your answer is Jim Buss you might want to rethink your position on what defines an analytical crew...

    The last two laker chips had ZERO to do with employing advanced stat techniques
    There is more than one guy in charge. They have a whole team, and there is a crew of statisticians for each team.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    The Empire State
    Posts
    997
    vCash
    1500
    This is why i didn't like this move in the middle of the season, Hollins already showed his dislike with the Gay trade talks. This is just a lot of un-needed drama for a team that was playing so good before the trade and rumors.

    “If you quit ONCE it becomes a habit. Never quit!!!”
    - Michael Jordan

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    30,152
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Starks View Post
    Hollins should be upset. The trade was made for all the wrong reasons and just threw away the best shot they ever have had, and perhaps ever will have at winning a title. They had already dumped salary it wasn't necessary. Worse case scenario they could've gave it a shot this season and unloaded him in the summer, it's not like they got a blockbuster deal.......
    That's what everyone is missing. I like Ed Davis, but he ain't no Rudy Gay. He's never had that being the man pressure. Rudy Gay has won a championship in his young pre NBA career, he's tasted the NBA conference finals, Ed Davis when the pressure of the playoffs and high expectations come, and this is the year the Grizzs could have knocked off OKC w/ the Westbrook issues and losing Harden, it's just not a good move.
    shots fired?

    I follow rules and appreciate the ignore button

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •