PDA

View Full Version : All-Time Redraft Semifinals: (1) Rochester vs (4) London



Shammyguy3
05-18-2015, 08:35 PM
Each year PSD users on the forum partake in a fantasy snake-draft consisting of all-time players. Players are designated for certain eras based on their peak, and we've used a general 5 year prime to try and rank players overall value (so try and vote based on that 5-year peak as best you can). After the draft, opposing conferences voted for playoff ranking. So, given the two rosters below, if they were to face in real life (with every player in their 5-year prime), which team would win in the 7-game series?

1. Rochester (Home-Court Advantage)
PG: Penny Hardaway - Mike Bibby
SG: Tracy McGrady - Jason Richardson
SF: Bruce Bowen - Dale Ellis
PF: Chris Webber - Dan Issel
C: Shaquille O'Neal - Zydrunas Ilgauskas

4. London
PG: Stephen Curry - Derrick Rose
SG: Manu Ginobili - Latrell Sprewell
SF: Bobby Jones - Dave Debusschere
PF: Kevin McHale - Rashard Lewis
C: Moses Malone - Kevin Willis


Neither team sent in a write-up

MFFL==FML
05-18-2015, 09:14 PM
This is a great matchup. I'm leaning towards London as the only perimeter defender I see in Rochester roster is Bruce Bowen. I want to know how they plan on stopping London's wings.

KnicksorBust
05-18-2015, 09:29 PM
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO et tu MBT?

dhopisthename
05-19-2015, 12:54 AM
This is a great matchup. I'm leaning towards London as the only perimeter defender I see in Rochester roster is Bruce Bowen. I want to know how they plan on stopping London's wings.

they have manu ginobili and bobby jones. what wings do they need great defenders for?

Raidaz4Life
05-19-2015, 07:37 AM
London pretty easily for me here as, imo, the most underrated team takes down the most overrated team.

mightybosstone
05-19-2015, 09:21 AM
I don't have a ton of time this morning, but I do want to provide some quick points as to why London would and should win this series:

1. London's defensive wings provides some excellent versatility for us on that end of the floor. Bobby Jones (11x All-Defense and one of the greatest all-time perimeter defenders) will primarily be assigned to their most dangerous wing threat in Tracy McGrady. But he can defend essentially any position from 1-4 and can switch over to Penny if needed. Meanwhile Manu's primary goal will be bothering Hardaway and Curry will be "hidden,' (although he's hardly a below average defender) on Bowen, who is essentially a non threat on that end outside of his 3-point shooting. Having Sprewell (1x All-defense) and Debusschere (6x All-defense) off the bench capable of also defending multiple positions is also helpful.

2. McHale and Malone are uniquely qualified to defender Webber and Shaq, but I'm not sure Webber and Shaq can stay with McHale and Malone. Both McHale and Malone were athletic, physical, versatile offensive players who could pound you down in the low post or spread you out to 18 feet (career 60.5% TS%, 61.8% in the postseason). Webber was just not a very good defender and will be perplexed by McHale's repertoire of low post moves and hyper efficiency. Meanwhile, Shaq cannot be expected to guard Malone out to the perimeter. Not only will it allow Moses to take Shaq off the dribble, but it was provide plenty of space for McHale to work the low post and for the penetration of Curry and Ginobili. On the flip side, McHale can absolutely handle the historically inefficient Webber (career 51.3% TS%), who will likely spend most of his time jacking up mid-range shots as nearly 75% of his FGA came from outside of 3 feet from 2000-08 and more than 36% came from 16 feet out to the 3-point line. And before someone calls the center matchup a mismatch in Shaq's favor, let's not forget that Malone is a 3x MVP and 2x All-defensive player who manhandled Kareem's Showtime Lakers twice in the postseason (6-1 career postseason record against them) and essentially dominated all the great centers of his era. This is no mismatch, and if Shaq gets lazy on the glass, the greatest all-time offensive rebounder (16.3% career ORB%) will make him pay.

3. Floor spacing is certainly on London's side. In addition to having a center who has no range whatsoever outside of five feet, Rochester's guards are hardly reliable 3-point shooters. Hardaway shot an abysmal 31.6% from beyond the arc despite taking nearly 1,600 3-point attempts in his career while McGrady shot 33.8% on 3-pointers. Bowen could certainly shoot the 3-pointer, but he never took more than four 3-pointers a game in his entire career, so it was hardly high volume. Rochester will have to bring in Richardson and Ellis to play more minutes just so the offense doesn't condense to 18 feet. On the flip side, London has arguably the greatest 3-point shooter in NBA history (Curry) and a guy who is third all-time in postseason 3-pointers made (Manu). Considering both men are excellent passers and ball handlers and can create for themselves or shoot off of screens or on assists, that makes London's perimeter far more deadly to guard. And of course all three of London's big men had range out to 18 feet.

4. Bowen may have been a good 3-point shooter, but what else does he offer on that end of the floor. He was a terrible FT% at 57.5% in his career, doesn't distribute well (1.2 career APG) and isn't going to crash the glass (career 2.8 RPG). You simply cannot play 4 on 5 offensively in an all-time game like this against a team with five legitimate offensive threats.

5. London has a SIGNIFICANT edge in terms efficiency in this game. Yeah, Shaq was an efficient monster, but every other player in their starting five was below average, including Bowen (50.8% TS%), Webber (51.3%), McGrady (51.9%) and Hardaway (53.5%). In an all-time re-draft, that's inexcusable. On the flip side, London has five extremely efficient offensive players with Moses (56.9%), Manu (58.6%), Curry (60.2%) McHale (60.5%) and Jones (60.7%). If both teams get the same number of possessions and same number of turnovers, there's just no chance in hell Rochester is outscoring us. Not only do we have better 3-point shooters, but our offense is head and shoulders more efficient offensively. It's just no contest.

6. In addition to being inefficient on offense, Rochester has really only two plus defenders in their starting five. Webber is a clear weakness on that end of the floor while Hardaway and McGrady were nothing to write home about. They'll be forced to put Bowen on the much quicker Curry, and we'll utilize screens to switch defensive assignments and get him on mismatches all game long against the poorer defensive guards. Hardaway and McGrady simply won't be able to hang with him. Meanwhile, Manu and Jones are hardly useless on that end. In addition to both players being excellent passers (4.0 APG for Manu, 3-4 APG for Jones in prime), both guys are more than capable of putting up 15+ on a given night. Jones can easily take Rochester's wings to school on the low block while Manu's Euro step will be a challenge for either McGrady or Hardaway to handle.

7. Championship success has to account for something. London has it in spades and Rochester leaves a bit to be desired in that area. Moses, Manu and McHale have all won titles as the best or second best player on championship teams, while Manu has won multiple as the No. 3 or 4 guy and Jones even won a title in 82-83 as an excellent 6th man. The only guy not on that list is Curry, who may very well win his first title in less than a month. On the flip side, Shaq obviously dominates that category, but who else is going to step up in the postseason for Rochester? Bowen has plenty of rings, but you can't rely on him to give you anything offensively. Webber never played in the NBA Finals and his postseason numbers are abysmal (49.6% TS%, 0.90 WS/48), while McGrady never made it past the second round and Hardaway played in one Finals, but was essentially carried by Shaq.

8. So I've pointed out a lot of weakness with Rochester's team, but I'm missing one, right? Shaq. Well, there's one very obvious flaw in his game, which we can exploit quite a bit in key moments: Hack-a-Shaq. The guy was a 52.7% free throw shooter and was even worse in the playoffs (50.4%). If Rochester's offense finds rhythm and goes on a run, we can and will use this strategy to our advantage. Bowen also would not be a terrible candidate to hack late in games as he shot only 55% from the line in the postseason, while Webber shot only 64.9% from the charity stripe in his career and 61.1% in the playoffs. Meanwhile London has no candidate worthy of being hacked if you're Rochester. Every single player in our starting five shot at least 76% from the line in their careers. If they foul us, they will get slaughtered from the free throw line.

Bottom line, London is far more efficient offensively, has far better shooters from the 3-point line and free throw line, has a more balanced and versatile team defense, is playing 5 on 4 offensively and has far more guys with championship success. I'd call that a win in London's favor. London in 6.

mightybosstone
05-19-2015, 09:22 AM
they have manu ginobili and bobby jones. what wings do they need great defenders for?

See my write-up above. Leaving Jones and Ginobili unguarded is a recipe for disaster. Rochester will get torched.

valade16
05-19-2015, 09:44 AM
I was leaning Rochester but the write-up for London was very convincing. I want to see if Rochester can address some of the points made by London.

KnicksorBust
05-19-2015, 10:06 AM
Questions for London:

#1.) If Rochester plays Dale Ellis heavy minutes at the 3 to improve their spacing, how would that effect your defensive matchups?

#2.) What type of numbers do you see Shaq putting up in this series?

#3.) Who is London's go-to player or go to set at the end of a close game?

Lucky.
05-19-2015, 01:22 PM
To MBT:

1) Bobby Jones is capable of playing SF in spurts but you're essentially playing a PF at the three, both offensively and defensively. He does not have the speed required to guard Tracy McGrady or especially Penny Hardaway. We don't question Bobby Jones defensive talent but playing him on a mismatch such as McGrady or Hardaway is a disaster waiting to happen for you.

Curry is below average for an ATRD. Just as every GM has stated throughout this game. You and PSK seem to be the only two that can't seem to grasp that. He did improve his defensive this year, but that doesn't make him a plus defender or even an average one in an ATRD, not yet. The same goes for James Harden. Is he improved? Of course, but you're not fooling anyone for this game. I'll wait for PSK's stats that claim otherwise that I have seen time after time throughout the draft process.

2) We have two of the best big man duos in the entire RD, so neither team will be having a big advantage, if any, when it comes to our big men. Still, that doesn't change the fact that we have the best big man of the bunch, and certainly the best prime, or peak. Which is really what this game is all about, no? Reading through your arguments, when you talk about offense the only stats you bring up are TS% and 3PT%. That's flawed for a couple reasons. For one, both stats you're using career numbers which is not what this game is about. Second, I never once noticed you talking about Webber's passing ability which is a big part of what made him as good as he was. Chris Webber, in his prime years, had a TS% as high as .559 - .521 - .581 - .554 - .523 - .530 - .516 and .540, which is a lot better, wouldn't you say? Either there's a flaw in your argument, or there's a flaw in the game.

3) Again, you're basing these stats off career rather than prime. We have better floor spacing than you, rather easily actually. Two of your wings, both of which that are playing at SF therefore you'll almost always have one on the floor, were completely nonexistent from 3. They didn't shoot 32%, 30% or even 28%. They didn't shoot 3's in general. Derrick Rose, another perimeter shooter that shot no better than Penny Hardaway.

Tracy McGrady in his prime, or the era that I picked him for, shot 35%, 36%, 38% (6 attempts per game), 34% and 32% in seasons where he attempted 2+ 3's per game. That doesn't include how lethal he was from 16+ feet.

Penny Hardaway, although my weakest 3PT shooter among my 6 perimeter players, still shot a respectable number from 3.

We also surrounded our starting 5 with borderline elite 3PT shooters of the bench. Mike Bibby, Jason Richardson and especially Dale Ellis were all very good to even elite shooters throughout their prime.

4) We believe his defense makes up for his lacking offense. But even then, we feel he compliments our offense well. He's a player that knows his role and will knock down shots when given the chance, which will inevitably happen playing with playmakers as good as Hardway, McGrady and Webber. Playing just about his entire career in San Antonio, I'd argue he knows how to make the extra pass, too.


5) Again, use peak numbers rather than career numbers.

6) McGrady in his prime proved to elevate his defense when is mattered most. I'm surprised that many people seem to have forgotten that. He was known for his defense during his time in Toronto. His length, height, athleticism and superb footwork allows him to guard positions 1-3 very well, and would use all those tools to his advantage to stopping Curry.

7) I'm sure everyone by now knows how I feel about the championship argument when talking about individuals. KJ, Jets and myself have proven to win with less championship experience so I struggle to see how it would make a difference now. I also don't view champion experience as similar to others. I don't view it as winning, but getting there, or at least deep into the playoffs and learning what it takes to win. I feel our team certainly proves that. Whether it's Penny Hardway (I think it's kind of funny that you discredit him for being a 2nd option to Shaq), Chris Webber or even Tracy McGrady late into his career with the San Antonio Spurs.

8) Quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever read in a PSD game argument. We're really going to bring Hack-A-Shaq into these? Question, when the rules is changed how would that play out in future ATRD's? But hey, I'll play along. We welcome you to Hack-A-Shaq. No really, please do. You're playing with a 10 man roster, not a 12-15 man roster with a few bench warmers to take the hit. Not to mention all my FT shooters shoot above 50% which would actually benefit my offense when you look at the average points per 100 possessions.

KnicksorBust
05-19-2015, 01:39 PM
1. Rochester (Home-Court Advantage)
PG: Penny Hardaway - Mike Bibby
SG: Tracy McGrady - Jason Richardson
SF: Bruce Bowen - Dale Ellis
PF: Chris Webber - Dan Issel
C: Shaquille O'Neal - Zydrunas Ilgauskas

Questions for Rochester:

#1) Who will be the primary ball handler for your team and why?

#2) In terms of minutes, how do you plan on splitting PG-SG-SF?

#3) What type of numbers do you think McHale would average in this series?

KnicksorBust
05-19-2015, 01:40 PM
To MBT:

1) Bobby Jones is capable of playing SF in spurts but you're essentially playing a PF at the three, both offensively and defensively. He does not have the speed required to guard Tracy McGrady or especially Penny Hardaway. We don't question Bobby Jones defensive talent but playing him on a mismatch such as McGrady or Hardaway is a disaster waiting to happen for you.

Curry is below average for an ATRD. Just as every GM has stated throughout this game. You and PSK seem to be the only two that can't seem to grasp that. He did improve his defensive this year, but that doesn't make him a plus defender or even an average one in an ATRD, not yet. The same goes for James Harden. Is he improved? Of course, but you're not fooling anyone for this game. I'll wait for PSK's stats that claim otherwise that I have seen time after time throughout the draft process.

2) We have two of the best big man duos in the entire RD, so neither team will be having a big advantage, if any, when it comes to our big men. Still, that doesn't change the fact that we have the best big man of the bunch, and certainly the best prime, or peak. Which is really what this game is all about, no? Reading through your arguments, when you talk about offense the only stats you bring up are TS% and 3PT%. That's flawed for a couple reasons. For one, both stats you're using career numbers which is not what this game is about. Second, I never once noticed you talking about Webber's passing ability which is a big part of what made him as good as he was. Chris Webber, in his prime years, had a TS% as high as .559 - .521 - .581 - .554 - .523 - .530 - .516 and .540, which is a lot better, wouldn't you say? Either there's a flaw in your argument, or there's a flaw in the game.

3) Again, you're basing these stats off career rather than prime. We have better floor spacing than you, rather easily actually. Two of your wings, both of which that are playing at SF therefore you'll almost always have one on the floor, were completely nonexistent from 3. They didn't shoot 32%, 30% or even 28%. They didn't shoot 3's in general. Derrick Rose, another perimeter shooter that shot no better than Penny Hardaway.

Tracy McGrady in his prime, or the era that I picked him for, shot 35%, 36%, 38% (6 attempts per game), 34% and 32% in seasons where he attempted 2+ 3's per game. That doesn't include how lethal he was from 16+ feet.

Penny Hardaway, although my weakest 3PT shooter among my 6 perimeter players, still shot a respectable number from 3.

We also surrounded our starting 5 with borderline elite 3PT shooters of the bench. Mike Bibby, Jason Richardson and especially Dale Ellis were all very good to even elite shooters throughout their prime.

4) We believe his defense makes up for his lacking offense. But even then, we feel he compliments our offense well. He's a player that knows his role and will knock down shots when given the chance, which will inevitably happen playing with playmakers as good as Hardway, McGrady and Webber. Playing just about his entire career in San Antonio, I'd argue he knows how to make the extra pass, too.


5) Again, use peak numbers rather than career numbers.

6) McGrady in his prime proved to elevate his defense when is mattered most. I'm surprised that many people seem to have forgotten that. He was known for his defense during his time in Toronto. His length, height, athleticism and superb footwork allows him to guard positions 1-3 very well, and would use all those tools to his advantage to stopping Curry.

7) I'm sure everyone by now knows how I feel about the championship argument when talking about individuals. KJ, Jets and myself have proven to win with less championship experience so I struggle to see how it would make a difference now. I also don't view champion experience as similar to others. I don't view it as winning, but getting there, or at least deep into the playoffs and learning what it takes to win. I feel our team certainly proves that. Whether it's Penny Hardway (I think it's kind of funny that you discredit him for being a 2nd option to Shaq), Chris Webber or even Tracy McGrady late into his career with the San Antonio Spurs.

8) Quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever read in a PSD game argument. We're really going to bring Hack-A-Shaq into these? Question, when the rules is changed how would that play out in future ATRD's? But hey, I'll play along. We welcome you to Hack-A-Shaq. No really, please do. You're playing with a 10 man roster, not a 12-15 man roster with a few bench warmers to take the hit. Not to mention all my FT shooters shoot above 50% which would actually benefit my offense when you look at the average points per 100 possessions.

Hold on, who is Bowen guarding?

Killerjug
05-19-2015, 01:54 PM
I don't have a ton of time this morning, but I do want to provide some quick points as to why London would and should win this series:

1. London's defensive wings provides some excellent versatility for us on that end of the floor. Bobby Jones (11x All-Defense and one of the greatest all-time perimeter defenders) will primarily be assigned to their most dangerous wing threat in Tracy McGrady. But he can defend essentially any position from 1-4 and can switch over to Penny if needed. Meanwhile Manu's primary goal will be bothering Hardaway and Curry will be "hidden,' (although he's hardly a below average defender) on Bowen, who is essentially a non threat on that end outside of his 3-point shooting. Having Sprewell (1x All-defense) and Debusschere (6x All-defense) off the bench capable of also defending multiple positions is also helpful.

2. McHale and Malone are uniquely qualified to defender Webber and Shaq, but I'm not sure Webber and Shaq can stay with McHale and Malone. Both McHale and Malone were athletic, physical, versatile offensive players who could pound you down in the low post or spread you out to 18 feet (career 60.5% TS%, 61.8% in the postseason). Webber was just not a very good defender and will be perplexed by McHale's repertoire of low post moves and hyper efficiency. Meanwhile, Shaq cannot be expected to guard Malone out to the perimeter. Not only will it allow Moses to take Shaq off the dribble, but it was provide plenty of space for McHale to work the low post and for the penetration of Curry and Ginobili. On the flip side, McHale can absolutely handle the historically inefficient Webber (career 51.3% TS%), who will likely spend most of his time jacking up mid-range shots as nearly 75% of his FGA came from outside of 3 feet from 2000-08 and more than 36% came from 16 feet out to the 3-point line. And before someone calls the center matchup a mismatch in Shaq's favor, let's not forget that Malone is a 3x MVP and 2x All-defensive player who manhandled Kareem's Showtime Lakers twice in the postseason (6-1 career postseason record against them) and essentially dominated all the great centers of his era. This is no mismatch, and if Shaq gets lazy on the glass, the greatest all-time offensive rebounder (16.3% career ORB%) will make him pay.

3. Floor spacing is certainly on London's side. In addition to having a center who has no range whatsoever outside of five feet, Rochester's guards are hardly reliable 3-point shooters. Hardaway shot an abysmal 31.6% from beyond the arc despite taking nearly 1,600 3-point attempts in his career while McGrady shot 33.8% on 3-pointers. Bowen could certainly shoot the 3-pointer, but he never took more than four 3-pointers a game in his entire career, so it was hardly high volume. Rochester will have to bring in Richardson and Ellis to play more minutes just so the offense doesn't condense to 18 feet. On the flip side, London has arguably the greatest 3-point shooter in NBA history (Curry) and a guy who is third all-time in postseason 3-pointers made (Manu). Considering both men are excellent passers and ball handlers and can create for themselves or shoot off of screens or on assists, that makes London's perimeter far more deadly to guard. And of course all three of London's big men had range out to 18 feet.

4. Bowen may have been a good 3-point shooter, but what else does he offer on that end of the floor. He was a terrible FT% at 57.5% in his career, doesn't distribute well (1.2 career APG) and isn't going to crash the glass (career 2.8 RPG). You simply cannot play 4 on 5 offensively in an all-time game like this against a team with five legitimate offensive threats.

5. London has a SIGNIFICANT edge in terms efficiency in this game. Yeah, Shaq was an efficient monster, but every other player in their starting five was below average, including Bowen (50.8% TS%), Webber (51.3%), McGrady (51.9%) and Hardaway (53.5%). In an all-time re-draft, that's inexcusable. On the flip side, London has five extremely efficient offensive players with Moses (56.9%), Manu (58.6%), Curry (60.2%) McHale (60.5%) and Jones (60.7%). If both teams get the same number of possessions and same number of turnovers, there's just no chance in hell Rochester is outscoring us. Not only do we have better 3-point shooters, but our offense is head and shoulders more efficient offensively. It's just no contest.

6. In addition to being inefficient on offense, Rochester has really only two plus defenders in their starting five. Webber is a clear weakness on that end of the floor while Hardaway and McGrady were nothing to write home about. They'll be forced to put Bowen on the much quicker Curry, and we'll utilize screens to switch defensive assignments and get him on mismatches all game long against the poorer defensive guards. Hardaway and McGrady simply won't be able to hang with him. Meanwhile, Manu and Jones are hardly useless on that end. In addition to both players being excellent passers (4.0 APG for Manu, 3-4 APG for Jones in prime), both guys are more than capable of putting up 15+ on a given night. Jones can easily take Rochester's wings to school on the low block while Manu's Euro step will be a challenge for either McGrady or Hardaway to handle.

7. Championship success has to account for something. London has it in spades and Rochester leaves a bit to be desired in that area. Moses, Manu and McHale have all won titles as the best or second best player on championship teams, while Manu has won multiple as the No. 3 or 4 guy and Jones even won a title in 82-83 as an excellent 6th man. The only guy not on that list is Curry, who may very well win his first title in less than a month. On the flip side, Shaq obviously dominates that category, but who else is going to step up in the postseason for Rochester? Bowen has plenty of rings, but you can't rely on him to give you anything offensively. Webber never played in the NBA Finals and his postseason numbers are abysmal (49.6% TS%, 0.90 WS/48), while McGrady never made it past the second round and Hardaway played in one Finals, but was essentially carried by Shaq.

8. So I've pointed out a lot of weakness with Rochester's team, but I'm missing one, right? Shaq. Well, there's one very obvious flaw in his game, which we can exploit quite a bit in key moments: Hack-a-Shaq. The guy was a 52.7% free throw shooter and was even worse in the playoffs (50.4%). If Rochester's offense finds rhythm and goes on a run, we can and will use this strategy to our advantage. Bowen also would not be a terrible candidate to hack late in games as he shot only 55% from the line in the postseason, while Webber shot only 64.9% from the charity stripe in his career and 61.1% in the playoffs. Meanwhile London has no candidate worthy of being hacked if you're Rochester. Every single player in our starting five shot at least 76% from the line in their careers. If they foul us, they will get slaughtered from the free throw line.
Bottom line, London is far more efficient offensively, has far better shooters from the 3-point line and free throw line, has a more balanced and versatile team defense, is playing 5 on 4 offensively and has far more guys with championship success. I'd call that a win in London's favor. London in 6.

Your own co has said that the hack a shaq is not a recipe for success

mightybosstone
05-19-2015, 02:00 PM
Lucky, I don't have time to address all of those points right now, but suffice it to say some of that was pretty weak. Complaining about the use of Hack-a-Shaq and the use of career numbers despite the fact that I used career number for my own players as well? You guys are better than that. Also, trying to emphasize how bad you claim Curry to be on defense is completely irrelevant because he's guarding Bruce freaking Bowen.

I have you yet to see you guys come up with any semblance of a defensive strategy, and most of your counters to my arguments revolve more around semantics than actual points. If I have time this evening, I'll counter some of this, but I honestly don't know that I'll have time to.

mightybosstone
05-19-2015, 02:03 PM
Your own co has said that the hack a shaq is not a recipe for success

It depends on the circumstance. I've seen it work and I've seen it fail, but if used in the right way at the right time and if the free throw shooter doesn't make the shots, it can absolutely be a useful means to deter a run or break a team's offensive rhythm. And if the free throw shooter REALLY can't hit anything, it can often force a coach to pull the player entirely.

To say it has no merit whatsoever is just inaccurate. And I guarantee you that PSK would agree with me on that.

Lucky.
05-19-2015, 02:49 PM
1. Rochester (Home-Court Advantage)
PG: Penny Hardaway - Mike Bibby
SG: Tracy McGrady - Jason Richardson
SF: Bruce Bowen - Dale Ellis
PF: Chris Webber - Dan Issel
C: Shaquille O'Neal - Zydrunas Ilgauskas

Questions for Rochester:

#1) Who will be the primary ball handler for your team and why?

#2) In terms of minutes, how do you plan on splitting PG-SG-SF?

#3) What type of numbers do you think McHale would average in this series?

1) Both Penny and McGrady will handle the ball a good amount, but to answer the question, the better player. McGrady.

2) Jason Richardson wont be seeing too much time in this series, maybe a couple spot minutes here and there. Dale Ellis will see majority of the minutes off the bench with his versatility to play both SG and SF. You'll see lineup combinations such as:

Mike Bibby-Tracy McGrady-Bruce Bowen
Penny Hardaway-Dale Ellis-Bruce Bowen
Penny Hardaway-Tracy McGrady-Dale Ellis

3) It's hard to say not knowing the exact amount of minutes London plans on playing McHale and what stats you're referring to. If we're going with basic stats and the traditional amount of playoffs minutes, I'll say 24-8-2 knowing that McHale was never the greatest rebounder.


Hold on, who is Bowen guarding?

He'll see most of his time on former teammate, Manu Ginobili.


Lucky, I don't have time to address all of those points right now, but suffice it to say some of that was pretty weak. Complaining about the use of Hack-a-Shaq and the use of career numbers despite the fact that I used career number for my own players as well? You guys are better than that. Also, trying to emphasize how bad you claim Curry to be on defense is completely irrelevant because he's guarding Bruce freaking Bowen.

I have you yet to see you guys come up with any semblance of a defensive strategy, and most of your counters to my arguments revolve more around semantics than actual points. If I have time this evening, I'll counter some of this, but I honestly don't know that I'll have time to.


I'm not complaining about Hack-a-Shaq, I just think it's funny. And to be honest, I think it's a pretty weak argument for some of the reasons I already mentioned.

This game is based on the peak of players, not overall careers. So yes, it does matter even if you use your career averages. My players peaks are better than yours. It's how we built our team. Like I said, either there is a flaw in your argument, or there is a flaw in the rules.

Pointing out how bad Curry is defensively is not irrelevant. Who is Curry going to guard when Bowen is not in the game? It doesn't really matter who, he's going to be a liability regardless of who you put him on. My defense gets worse when Bowen is not in the game (my offense also gets better), I'm not going to deny that, there's no way I could. But it lessens the blow knowing that you're going to have Curry in the game to equal the lacking defense.

PatsSoxKnicks
05-19-2015, 03:04 PM
It depends on the circumstance. I've seen it work and I've seen it fail, but if used in the right way at the right time and if the free throw shooter doesn't make the shots, it can absolutely be a useful means to deter a run or break a team's offensive rhythm. And if the free throw shooter REALLY can't hit anything, it can often force a coach to pull the player entirely.

To say it has no merit whatsoever is just inaccurate. And I guarantee you that PSK would agree with me on that.

I'll have more to comment on the matchup later but I think the way the Rockets used it in game 4 for example was definitely appropriate.

KnicksorBust
05-19-2015, 07:08 PM
1. Rochester (Home-Court Advantage)
PG: Penny Hardaway - Mike Bibby
SG: Tracy McGrady - Jason Richardson
SF: Bruce Bowen - Dale Ellis
PF: Chris Webber - Dan Issel
C: Shaquille O'Neal - Zydrunas Ilgauskas

Questions for Rochester:

#1) Who will be the primary ball handler for your team and why?

#2) In terms of minutes, how do you plan on splitting PG-SG-SF?

#3) What type of numbers do you think McHale would average in this series?

1) Both Penny and McGrady will handle the ball a good amount, but to answer the question, the better player. McGrady.

2) Jason Richardson wont be seeing too much time in this series, maybe a couple spot minutes here and there. Dale Ellis will see majority of the minutes off the bench with his versatility to play both SG and SF. You'll see lineup combinations such as:

Mike Bibby-Tracy McGrady-Bruce Bowen
Penny Hardaway-Dale Ellis-Bruce Bowen
Penny Hardaway-Tracy McGrady-Dale Ellis

3) It's hard to say not knowing the exact amount of minutes London plans on playing McHale and what stats you're referring to. If we're going with basic stats and the traditional amount of playoffs minutes, I'll say 24-8-2 knowing that McHale was never the greatest rebounder.


Hold on, who is Bowen guarding?

He'll see most of his time on former teammate, Manu Ginobili.


Lucky, I don't have time to address all of those points right now, but suffice it to say some of that was pretty weak. Complaining about the use of Hack-a-Shaq and the use of career numbers despite the fact that I used career number for my own players as well? You guys are better than that. Also, trying to emphasize how bad you claim Curry to be on defense is completely irrelevant because he's guarding Bruce freaking Bowen.

I have you yet to see you guys come up with any semblance of a defensive strategy, and most of your counters to my arguments revolve more around semantics than actual points. If I have time this evening, I'll counter some of this, but I honestly don't know that I'll have time to.


I'm not complaining about Hack-a-Shaq, I just think it's funny. And to be honest, I think it's a pretty weak argument for some of the reasons I already mentioned.

This game is based on the peak of players, not overall careers. So yes, it does matter even if you use your career averages. My players peaks are better than yours. It's how we built our team. Like I said, either there is a flaw in your argument, or there is a flaw in the rules.

Pointing out how bad Curry is defensively is not irrelevant. Who is Curry going to guard when Bowen is not in the game? It doesn't really matter who, he's going to be a liability regardless of who you put him on. My defense gets worse when Bowen is not in the game (my offense also gets better), I'm not going to deny that, there's no way I could. But it lessens the blow knowing that you're going to have Curry in the game to equal the lacking defense.

Nice response. I love the idea of Ellis getting more minutes in this series and I respect that you gave McHale his due.

Shammyguy3
05-19-2015, 07:11 PM
Wow, after reading everything i have no idea :laugh2:

MFFL==FML
05-19-2015, 07:48 PM
Questions for Rochester:

1.) Who will be guarding Curry? What kind of box score do you think he'll get against your defenders?

2.) What is your offensive pecking order? 1.) Shaq 2.) ? 3.) ?

3.) London exposed how inefficient your starting line-up, minus Shaq, was offensively, how do you plan to counter that disadvantage?

MFFL==FML
05-19-2015, 07:52 PM
Questions for London:

1.) How do you think your bench matches up with Rochester's bench?

2.) In what ways do you think having the playoff and championship will ensure your team wins in 6 games?

3.) How long will Manu be playing? What do you expect his points per game to be being guarded by Bowen?

Lucky.
05-19-2015, 08:17 PM
Questions for Rochester:

1.) Who will be guarding Curry? What kind of box score do you think he'll get against your defenders?

2.) What is your offensive pecking order? 1.) Shaq 2.) ? 3.) ?

3.) London exposed how inefficient your starting line-up, minus Shaq, was offensively, how do you plan to counter that disadvantage?

Tracy McGrady will be guarding Curry. As I stated earlier in the thread, McGrady has kind of flown under the radar in this game as far defense goes. He proved time after time that he was capable of elevating his defense when it mattered most against fierce competition, even matching up with Kobe Bryant both offensively and defensively during his prime. Tracy McGrady was actually known for his defense throughout his early Toronto days. We believe his height, length, athleticism and footwork that he possess would make him one of the best at disrupting Stephen Curry's shot. As for his stat line, I'm thinking somewhere around 23-4-8. We look to make him become more of a playmaker rather than a scorer.

Shaquille O'Neal, then Tracy McGrady. I'm not going to say who our 3rd option is because I believe with the amount of playmakers we have that anyone is capable of going off any given night or even beating the opposition in other ways than just scoring. Logic would have it be Chris Webber, but Penny Hardway is just as capable. Even Dale Ellis could take over any particular game if he gets hot from three. Pick your poison.

I don't believe they exposed anything if you look back at my rebuttal towards MBT. MBT used averages over the course of the career, which is not within the rules of this game. We're basing this off of primes, not longevity. If you take a look at the efficiency of my players during their peak, you'll find that they're much more efficient than what you probably originally thought. Even though MBT later said he used career averages for his players as well, it doesn't matter. I drafted these players based on prime because that's what the rules are, and he used stats beyond the rules so they would benefit London.

KnicksorBust
05-19-2015, 09:09 PM
Questions for Rochester:

1.) Who will be guarding Curry? What kind of box score do you think he'll get against your defenders?

2.) What is your offensive pecking order? 1.) Shaq 2.) ? 3.) ?

3.) London exposed how inefficient your starting line-up, minus Shaq, was offensively, how do you plan to counter that disadvantage?

Lol bro you stealin ma ****?

xnick5757
05-19-2015, 09:10 PM
Feel like London wins this in 6


Mose & McHale down low while Curry drops bombs? Dirty

Shammyguy3
05-20-2015, 12:33 AM
i'm actually leaning London right now, but like in another matchup i'll need to read everything one more time and then sleep on it

mightybosstone
05-20-2015, 12:53 AM
Questions for London:

#1.) If Rochester plays Dale Ellis heavy minutes at the 3 to improve their spacing, how would that effect your defensive matchups?
I think that depends on who they sit in the process. If you're Rochester, you cannot afford to sit Bowen while Curry is on the floor. He's their only elite perimeter defender and the only guy on the floor with a legitimate chance to stop Curry. It's kind of one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situations if you're Rochester.

Their safest bet is probably to swap out Penny for Ellis and go with three wing lineup with McGrady playing point guard. If they do that, I have two options. First, I do nothing. While Ellis is a tough guard, he's also not a good defensive player and will be stuck on Manu. I like Manu's chances to bother Ellis more than Ellis' chances to bother Manu. If that doesn't work, I think we swap out Manu for Sprewell and test that to see its effectiveness. Sprewell was certainly a very physical player who should bother Ellis on the perimeter.

But the biggest question for Rochester is, how in the hell do you plan to make minutes for Ellis? Who is sitting down? Because if you pull Bowen, you're sacrificing defense. If you pull Hardaway, you sacrifice playmaking. And if you pull McGrady, you sacrifice your No. 2 scorer. I'd love to see an actual minutes distribution of their 1-3 because I don't think they can find a way to give Ellis 30 minutes without making a serious sacrifice elsewhere in the process.


#2.) What type of numbers do you see Shaq putting up in this series?
Shaq is going to get his. There's really no way around it. Against the Sixers and Mutombo in 2001, he put up 33/16/5/3 on a 57.5% TS%. And that was against an all-time great defensive center in Mutombo. However, Shaq won't dominate Moses on the glass, and he's not going to get a ton of second chance opportunities against London. Also, he's not likely to get as many touches as he did in that series. Remember, he's playing on a team with McGrady, Hardaway and Webber, who are all essentially volume scorers. Also, he put up those numbers in 45 minutes a game. His numbers in that series were more like 27/14 per 36 minutes.

While seeing a significant drop in touches and minutes, I think Shaq is capable of something closer to 24/11/2/2 on roughly 16-18 FGA per game. If Shaq gets any more touches than that, it will seriously limit the effectiveness of McGrady, Hardaway and Webber, who all need touches to be effective. Looking at their peak numbers, Shaq required 18-20 FGA per game in his peak years, while McGrady took 21-24 FGA, Webber took 19-21 and Hardaway took 14-16 FGA. Even if we look at the low end of those numbers, you're talking about 72 FGA for only four players per game. The entire Miami Heat squad averaged 78 FGA per game this season. You can do the math, but clearly something is going to have to give with touches in that starting five, and I think you almost have to take away at least two to three FGA per player for that offense to even make sense.


#3.) Who is London's go-to player or go to set at the end of a close game?
It depends on the circumstance. Not every situation is the same. If we need a 3-pointer, we may pull McHale out and bring in Rashard Lewis. I'd probably inbound the ball with Jones and look to get it in Ginobili's hands, then try to run Curry off of screens from Jones and Moses to try and get an open look while Lewis camps in the corner. If Curry gets any space on the perimeter, he's getting the ball. If not, and Lewis' man makes a move to pick up Curry, than Lewis gets the ball. And if nothing else works, you just do what you can to get the ball in Curry's hands and give him a chance to take it one way or the other.

Now if it's a 2-pointer, then the circumstances are obviously different. I'd keep McHale in the lineup. I still think having Curry try to create space without the ball is the way to go, but there are so many different weapons outside to 18 feet to consider. And with Curry running around and drawing defenders, someone is going to be open in the mid-range or in the paint. Another nice advantage in that situation is Moses on the offensive glass. So you can probably take the shot with 4-5 seconds to spare rather than right at the last possible second and there's a damn good chance Moses could save you with a tip in.

If you're just talking go-to offense in general, I think our offense is versatile enough that we don't have to rely too much on a single offensive set. I like the idea of having Curry and Ginobili running the offense at the top of the key while the other guard looks to create space without the ball. But you can always go low post with McHale or maybe high post with Moses so that Shaq has to come out to 15 feet and Moses has the option to pull up or take Shaq off the dribble. I think you have to go with the hot man, but there's enough hyper efficient threats and willing passers that not a single player will be required to have to score every point late in games.

mightybosstone
05-20-2015, 01:06 AM
Wait a second.... So Bowen is going to defend Ginobili? WTF? Then who on Rochester is going to defend Curry? That question has got to be answered. You have no plus perimeter defender to slow down arguably the deadliest offensive guard in this matchup, and we're just supposed to accept that? Completely nonsensical. It's like you guys opted not to gameplan for Curry at all and just hope he doesn't go off...

mightybosstone
05-20-2015, 01:32 AM
Questions for London:

1.) How do you think your bench matches up with Rochester's bench?
Pretty damn well. I don't think you'll ever see a five-on-five bench matchup in this series, though, so it's really more about versatility. With Rose, I can start him at PG or bring him in and play him next to Curry off the ball in a small ball lineup that would be impossible for Rochester to defend. Bibby would get slaughtered head-to-head against Rose, though. Sprewell and Debusschere each bring defensive toughness to the table and offer a ton of defensive versatility as they combine to allow me to defend 1-4 at an elite level if I need them to while still being competent offensive players. Rochester went for solely offense with their bench wings with Richardson and Ellis, so having Spre and Debuschere are going to be really key for that second unit with Rose running things offensively.

Willis is a versatile center, but I don't see him getting much playing time. The reason why is that I have two very good combo forwards in Jones and Debusschere who can slide over to PF in small ball lineups when Shaq sits down and they're forced to give Z or Issel minutes at the 5. I can then play McHale at C for a pretty beastly small ball lineup with Lewis getting minutes at the other forward spot to even further stretch the floor. As they have no great low post threat at the 5 outside of Shaq, I can play a lot of small ball in this series, and that gives us a big advantage whenever Shaq sits down.


2.) In what ways do you think having the playoff and championship will ensure your team wins in 6 games?
I don't think it ensures anything. But I don't think it's something you can ignore. Plus, our guys have put up some pretty beastly numbers in the postseason. Moses' numbers in the fo, fo, fo postseason were pretty awesome, and McHale is one of those rare players whose postseason numbers are actually better than his regular season numbers. Ginobili's numbers hardly dipped at all.

Meanwhile, Webber's numbers in the postseason were just atrocious. And McGrady never even made it past the second round and has had some pretty well known no-shows in the playoff, particularly during his time in Houston (which I'm far too familiar with, unfortunately). When two of your three best players are postseason failures, I don't think that bodes well for your chances, especially against a team stacked with elite championship performers.


3.) How long will Manu be playing? What do you expect his points per game to be being guarded by Bowen?
It will probably vary from game to game, but I would probably guess somewhere around 33-35 minutes, which is roughly what he averaged in the postseason in his peak. He won't get as many looks as he did in San Antonio, but I see no reason why he couldn't put up 15/5/4/2 on relatively efficient shooting percentages. But remember, even if Manu is being slowed by Bowen, he's only our fourth best offensive player. And that also means Curry and Jones are being defended by sub-par perimeter defenders while McHale is going to have a field day against Webber.

Also Manu is the kind of player who can still be very useful when his shot isn't falling. That's what makes Rochester's decision to place Bowen on him especially confusing. He's rarely going to be the go-to guy on that end of the floor and will get most of his points within the rhythm of the offense as he so often does in San Antonio. But if his shot isn't falling, he's still an exceptional passer and playmaker, can terrorize the passing lanes with his high rate of steals (27th highest STL% in NBA history) and draw fouls on both ends of the floor as well as any player in this series.

My opponent seems to think he can have Bowen stay on Ginobili the whole series and not have to switch to Curry, but I think that's disingenuous.

Another thing to consider is that we always have the option of playing small. If I bring in Rose to play the two, push Manu over to the 3 with Jones, Debusschere or Lewis at the 4, then Rochester's perimeter defense is REALLY going to be in trouble. There isn't a chance in hell Bowen will be guarding Manu in those circumstances while Rose and Curry wreak havok on their other sub-par perimeter defenders.

PatsSoxKnicks
05-20-2015, 03:07 AM
Rochester wants to keep mentioning Curry's bad defense and yet the evidence is clearly against them:

http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/defense/?Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular%20Season

In the regular season this past year, when defended by Steph Curry, opponents shot almost 3% points worse than they normally shoot. The only area where Curry's defense is "worse" than average is in the <6 feet area and well, no ****, he's a freaking PG. Of course he's going to be worse than league avg on shots near the basket. And that's also why we have 2 of the best defensive big men to help out there.

But of course, I'm sure Rochester wants to point to this being an outlier right? Well they're wrong. Curry was pretty decent last year too:
http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/defense/?Season=2013-14&SeasonType=Regular%20Season

So shooters' shot about 1.5% worse with Curry as the primary defender vs. what they normally shoot. And it's negative on both 2 pointers and 3 pointers.

Curry's also 4th in the NBA in Steal%, which for those who actually pay attention to analytics, is an undervalued stat (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-hidden-value-of-the-nba-steal/). And to optimize the defensive lineup, you typically want 1 guy who creates a lot of turnovers (and Curry isn't just great at steals, he's also great at forcing turnovers ranking 8th in the entire league in Forced TOV% (http://www.vantagesports.com/story/VSdK_ScAACkADhd-/assessing-the-mvp-contenders-defense)- better than CP3)

Finally, he's been one of the best wing players in the league this year on closeouts: http://www.vantagesports.com/story/VQWj-h4AACQAodLK/all-about-closeouts

He ranks 3rd among PGs in closeout points allowed per chance, which is actually PERFECT for this matchup since all Bruce Bowen does is shoot 3s....And if they have Ellis in the game, if all he's doing is shooting 3s, well Curry is great on closeouts so Rochester actually plays to our strengths.

Oh and another stat for you guys: Curry was actually pretty strong in P&R defense BEFORE this year:

Steph actually finished the 2013-14 season as a well above-average Pick-and-Roll defender on finished sets, per Synergy Sports. Opposing guards attacked him there relentlessly, accounting for over 40 percent of his finished plays on the year, but were surprisingly ineffective. Curry allowed just 36.5 percent shooting on nearly 300 field-goal attempts in such sets, all while committing a shooting foul under 5 percent of the time, a very low figure especially considering the weight disadvantage he nearly always gives up.

Also for those who want to say he's being "hidden", first off, Golden State has a ton of excellent defenders so he's not being hidden so much as he's their worst defensive guard/wing, which isn't a knock on him considering Iggy, Klay and Green are all "all-defense" caliber players. Second off, if you look at all of Curry's shots he's been the closest defender on over the last 2 years (i.e. shots he's defending), 53 of those belong to Lillard and 31 to CP3, which are both in the top 5 overall for Curry. So the Warriors are clearly ok with letting him guard a Lillard or a CP3 (and he's done a good job on CP3 this year with his TS% being 7% worse when Curry is on the floor (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/defense/?Season=2013-14&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)), which should tell you all you need to know about their so called hiding him on defense (http://www.slamonline.com/nba/steve-kerr-wants-turn-stephen-curry-defensive-player/#sZxw2I0mhDirzK4J.97). It's simply not true.

And if you want to look at the entirety of his defense, he ranked as above average in DRPM this past year and last year (http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/2014.html), was also above average in pure RAPM, which is an estimate of your impact defensively on your team, adjusted for teammates and opponent. It's also the most predictive stat out there (beating Vegas).

Finally, Rochester says it wants to stick T-Mac on Curry. Cool, enjoy watching T-Mac struggle to stop a great off ball player. T-Mac might be a good on-ball defender but what makes Curry lethal is his ability to play off the ball, coming off screens where he'll dagger you do death with his 3 point shot:

From last year (http://bluemanhoop.com/2013/11/19/golden-state-warriors-the-hidden-value-of-stephen-curry/):

Per Vantage Sports, Curry shoots 55 percent on three point attempts after using an off ball screen. To put that in perspective, a Curry three point attempt off a screen is worth 165 points per 100 possessions. The Miami Heat, the league’s best offense, score 111.5 points per 100 possessions.

Oh and for what it's worth, Curry was tied for 1st this year in points per possession coming off screens (http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/off-screen/?dir=1&Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&sort=PPP&CF=Poss*GE*50).

So please, attempt to have T-Mac run around screens, tire himself out trying to guard a player whose insanely efficient of off ball screens that requires barely any space due to his quick release and also runs around quite a bit (http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/player/speed/?sort=DIST&dir=1&Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&CF=GP*GE*50) to get himself good open looks within the flow of that Warriors offense. Considering T-Mac is their #2 option, London will gladly take a gassed T-Mac by the end of the game. Not to mention, T-Mac probably won't be guarding those off ball movements very well.

Oh and if Rochester points out Curry off ball is bad for our offense? That's simply not true as we can play through the post where we have 2 excellent post threats in McHale and Moses and even let Manu bring the ball up the court as he's a playmaker himself. This frees up Curry to run around like a mad men to get himself great looks at 3 while T-Mac struggles to keep up, tires himself out and can't function as a good #2 because he's too busy getting gassed chasing Curry around.

valade16
05-20-2015, 10:43 AM
Is this the first year Steph Curry played quality defense or has this been going on for awhile? As I learned in my matchup, doing something really well for a year or 2 is not enough to establish that skill as inherent to their ability.

PatsSoxKnicks
05-20-2015, 02:05 PM
Is this the first year Steph Curry played quality defense or has this been going on for awhile? As I learned in my matchup, doing something really well for a year or 2 is not enough to establish that skill as inherent to their ability.

Well as I pointed out above, it's been more than 1 year. I gave numerous stats that were from 2013-14. So it's at least been 2 years. But if you want to dig further, in 2012-13, he had a positive Defensive RAPM as well: https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2013-rapm-non-prior-informed-updated-march-30

And in fact if you look at his career on-off #'s, the Warriors defense is actually better with him on the court vs. when he's off the court:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryst01/on-off/

That ought to count for something. Keep in mind, a lot of people think Curry is bad defensively because of his slight build and because he's not athletic but just because people have perceptions about someone's build and what that makes them defensively, it doesn't mean it's true. (for example, JJ Redick, because he's white and unathletic, there would be a perception he's bad defensively when in fact he's not). So don't fall prey to the masses and just assume "oh this guy looks bad defensively" so he is.

PatsSoxKnicks
05-20-2015, 02:25 PM
Furthermore, he's still guarding Bruce Bowen. So as I pointed out earlier, one of his strengths is his ability to closeout on shooters. And well all Bowen does is shoot so that pretty much "cancels out" Bowen's 1 decent offensive skill.

And if Rochester chooses to take Bowen out because of his limited offense, well, London will then have a big advantage on offense because they would've removed their best defensive player. And Rochester can SAY Penny and/or T-Mac can guard Curry but the truth of the matter is that because of Curry's off ball ability, they really can't. Both those guys were better on ball defenders. You wouldn't want either of them running around screens chasing Curry, especially if T-Mac is their #2 scorer. He'll be gassed by the end of the game. And since Rochester doesn't really have any defenders on the bench, it's safe to say they don't really have anyone who can guard Curry.

Also, keep in mind Manu is also great off ball (hey he's been playing in that excellent Spurs system the last few years where there's a ton of movement, screens, etc. and now imagine a prime Manu playing that way) and so London can switch playmaking duties back and forth between Curry and Manu while the other murders Rochester on 3s coming off screens and just generally running around tiring out T-Mac and/or Penny.

And speaking of off ball movement, it seems Rochester thinks the Spurs way of playing basketball (and now the Warriors) doesn't work or something? Because none of Rochester's starters are really any great off ball. You can't run T-Mac off screens and have him bomb away from deep. Not only that, Rochester's starters don't really have any great 3 point shooters. Even using T-Mac's 5-year prime, he shot about 35% which is league average and certainly not enough to provide you with adequate spacing (watch the NBA today and look at how important spacing is....seriously all 4 conference finalists use the 3 as a primary weapon.) In Penny's 5-year prime, he shot 31% from 3- that's not good enough at all. And while Bowen was a great 3 point shooter, the Spurs never used him the same way that you see a guy like Korver being used. Bowen would just stand in the corner and wait for a pass. He was never asked to move around the way a Korver is. Plus, he never had plays designed for him either. So their best 3 point shooting player isn't even someone who can be used as a weapon in that way.

To my eyes, Rochester looks like a team that was just thrown together but doesn't fit at all. Are they planning on playing the Triangle? That might work with T-Mac and Shaq or Penny and Shaq but what Rochester seems to be forgetting is that the Lakers/Bulls teams had excellent role playing 3 point shooters around them so that you couldn't clog the paint- which London will be doing btw. Essentially in this matchup, London gets to avoid guarding one of the primary weapons in the modern NBA- the 3 point line.

Redrum187
05-20-2015, 03:04 PM
It's not Curry's defense I'm concerned about, it's who the hell guards Curry if not Bowen? I don't think Bowen will be going off for 20-30 points a night with Curry guarding him...

PatsSoxKnicks
05-20-2015, 03:28 PM
It's not Curry's defense I'm concerned about, it's who the hell guards Curry if not Bowen? I don't think Bowen will be going off for 20-30 points a night with Curry guarding him...

Exactly, they only have 1 player who can guard Curry and they've indicated he won't be guarding Curry so why wouldn't Curry go off every game? And as we mentioned earlier, if Bowen does guard Curry, we'll just use Manu off ball more and tire out T-Mac/Penny with his constant running around off screens. Plus as we already mentioned, we have 2 great post threats in Moses and McHale so we can play inside out. And it's not like Shaq was the greatest defensively. Moses can definitely get his. And Webber guarding McHale? Yeah McHale will definitely get his points.

Also, if Bowen is playing, that also means that Rochester is essentially playing 4 on 5 with essentially no spacing in their offense. No off ball movement. It'll just be iso city all day. And haven't we learned that iso offense doesn't work as well as an offense that emphasizes ball movement, spacing and player movement? That's what the London offense will emphasize and you can still do this with post up threats- when Moses/McHale post up, we'll have Curry and Manu moving around trying to get good open looks from 3, which also means that Rochester can't really afford to double, unlike London, which can afford to double because Rochester has poor spacing....Oh and if Rochester brings in Dale Ellis to replace Bowen for more offense, well that just means Curry is free to absolutely crush Rochester.

Saddletramp
05-20-2015, 08:47 PM
Exactly, they only have 1 player who can guard Curry and they've indicated he won't be guarding Curry so why wouldn't Curry go off every game? And as we mentioned earlier, if Bowen does guard Curry, we'll just use Manu off ball more and tire out T-Mac/Penny with his constant running around off screens. Plus as we already mentioned, we have 2 great post threats in Moses and McHale so we can play inside out. And it's not like Shaq was the greatest defensively. Moses can definitely get his. And Webber guarding McHale? Yeah McHale will definitely get his points.

Also, if Bowen is playing, that also means that Rochester is essentially playing 4 on 5 with essentially no spacing in their offense. No off ball movement. It'll just be iso city all day. And haven't we learned that iso offense doesn't work as well as an offense that emphasizes ball movement, spacing and player movement? That's what the London offense will emphasize and you can still do this with post up threats- when Moses/McHale post up, we'll have Curry and Manu moving around trying to get good open looks from 3, which also means that Rochester can't really afford to double, unlike London, which can afford to double because Rochester has poor spacing....Oh and if Rochester brings in Dale Ellis to replace Bowen for more offense, well that just means Curry is free to absolutely crush Rochester.

I think the guy said McGrady will be guarding Curry.

Also, you guys have waaaay too much time on your hands.

Also, give me London (I don't really care enough to go back to the desktop version).

Shammyguy3
05-20-2015, 08:52 PM
about 24 hours left, vote please

Saddletramp
05-20-2015, 09:20 PM
Boom

KnicksorBust
05-20-2015, 09:28 PM
I'm voting London. Their team is more complete, balanced, and a better fit. The "talent" advantage of Rochester is not enough to match that. Moses is one of the few centers in NBA History that could reasonably compare to Shaq on both ends and London fits his talent better than Rochester. At the end of the day, I worry T-mac and Penny is redundant while Curry and Manu would thrive off playng with each other.

Shammyguy3
05-20-2015, 09:35 PM
similar reasons for why i voted for them

mightybosstone
05-21-2015, 12:46 AM
I'm a little disappointed at the lack of debate from our opponents. Where you at KJ and Lucky? I expected a little more fight out of you guys than this.

Sadds The Gr8
05-21-2015, 01:39 AM
at some point it's just going in circles...

Shammyguy3
05-21-2015, 10:08 AM
at some point it's just going in circles...

yeah, every team makes their points and there's nothing else to argue since it'll be the same things over and over :laugh2:

about 10 hours left of voting

Mr. Baller
05-21-2015, 10:11 AM
I'm a little disappointed at the lack of debate from our opponents. Where you at KJ and Lucky? I expected a little more fight out of you guys than this.

they're winning... They don't need to debate more.

mightybosstone
05-21-2015, 10:23 AM
at some point it's just going in circles...

Maybe for us. But they haven't even come 90 degrees yet, much less a full circle.

Lucky.
05-21-2015, 10:47 AM
Maybe for us. But they haven't even come 90 degrees yet, much less a full circle.

I said a couple things I wanted to say and answered some questions thrown our way, which is really all I care to do. I don't have the time nor the desire to argue until it inevitably gets repetitive, which we both know it will.

At this point in the voting stage, I don't think it matters regardless. If someone feels you would win, they're going to vote for you. I wouldn't worry.

valade16
05-21-2015, 11:30 AM
I thought Rochester was the class of the entire game, but after reading the back and forth, I have to vote London which is honestly something I did not think I would do at the beginning of this matchup.

Ebbs
05-21-2015, 01:51 PM
Rochester is arguably better at every starting position save point guard.

KnicksorBust
05-21-2015, 02:49 PM
Rochester is arguably better at every starting position save point guard.

Bowen better than Bobby Jones?
Webber better than McHale?

Yuck.

Ebbs
05-21-2015, 02:51 PM
Bowen better than Bobby Jones?
Webber better than McHale?

Yuck.

Yea you can argue both.

I also think Bruce Bowen is disgustingly underrated.

Redrum187
05-21-2015, 02:55 PM
I suppose you could "argue" that, but London has a much better fit. Assuming a scenario where all the players are close in terms of peak-prime, the team with the better fit should win.

KnicksorBust
05-21-2015, 03:02 PM
Yea you can argue both.

I also think Bruce Bowen is disgustingly underrated.

I'd love to hear the argument. Bobby Jones was better than Bowen offensively and defensively. Kevin McHale was better than Webber offensively and defensively.

IKnowHoops
05-21-2015, 03:48 PM
Rochester will kill London. Shaq will annihilate down low, and Penny and Tracy will dominate every where else. Put Bruce Bowen on Steph and its a Rap. This isn't a close game at all IMO. Rochester is not only more talented, but they are bigger, faster, stronger and more athletic. There is absolutely no answer for Shaq at all. This is a destruction. Rochester wins the chip also. Give it to them now.

IKnowHoops
05-21-2015, 03:54 PM
I dont think London is better than some of the Spurs teams that actually won the chip, while Rochester is worlds better than the LA lakers teams that won the chip. This game is not close. Again, Shaq is worth 3 people on London. He just is. He's going to kill this team. Webber is like 27/12 in his prime, he doesn't have th career of Mchale, but common, Prime Webber against Prime Mchale...there is an argument both ways, but Webber has more game. Michale has better post moves and thats it. He can't jump, he's not strong, and has never gone up against anyone like Webber.

valade16
05-21-2015, 04:03 PM
I dont think London is better than some of the Spurs teams that actually won the chip, while Rochester is worlds better than the LA lakers teams that won the chip. This game is not close. Again, Shaq is worth 3 people on London. He just is. He's going to kill this team. Webber is like 27/12 in his prime, he doesn't have th career of Mchale, but common, Prime Webber against Prime Mchale...there is an argument both ways, but Webber has more game. Michale has better post moves and thats it. He can't jump, he's not strong, and has never gone up against anyone like Webber.

Which Spurs team could possibly match this? Tony Parker or Steph Curry? Tiago Splitter or Kevin McHale.

This team would annhilate the Spurs championship teams lol.

Ebbs
05-21-2015, 04:20 PM
I dont think London is better than some of the Spurs teams that actually won the chip, while Rochester is worlds better than the LA lakers teams that won the chip. This game is not close. Again, Shaq is worth 3 people on London. He just is. He's going to kill this team. Webber is like 27/12 in his prime, he doesn't have th career of Mchale, but common, Prime Webber against Prime Mchale...there is an argument both ways, but Webber has more game. Michale has better post moves and thats it. He can't jump, he's not strong, and has never gone up against anyone like Webber.


Some of what you said 100% bang on.

Some of what you said bat **** crazy.

London is 110% better than every spurs team ever.

IKnowHoops
05-21-2015, 04:57 PM
99

IKnowHoops
05-21-2015, 04:59 PM
Which Spurs team could possibly match this? Tony Parker or Steph Curry? Tiago Splitter or Kevin McHale.

This team would annhilate the Spurs championship teams lol.

99 Spurs, I like Tim and David over Moses and Mchale, That year Tim outplayed Shaq in the Western finals and David posted a higher PER than either Mchale or Moses ever did. Then the Spurs 3pt shooting was terrifying.

IKnowHoops
05-21-2015, 05:00 PM
Some of what you said 100% bang on.

Some of what you said bat **** crazy.

London is 110% better than every spurs team ever.

99 Spurs David and Tim over Mchale and Moses. Spurs 3pt shooting was crazy. They annihilated everyone in the playoffs.

mightybosstone
05-21-2015, 06:23 PM
Yea you can argue both.

I also think Bruce Bowen is disgustingly underrated.
No. You can't remotely argue that. And it's ridiculous to even suggest you could.

mightybosstone
05-21-2015, 06:30 PM
99 Spurs David and Tim over Mchale and Moses. Spurs 3pt shooting was crazy. They annihilated everyone in the playoffs.
Your basketball takes are almost as bad as your ability to follow rules in PSD games. Actually they might be worse. This take is just totally ****ing ridiculous....

Shammyguy3
05-21-2015, 07:11 PM
looks like Rochester advances; i wasn't that high on London before the playoffs started, but looking back on it i underrated them big time

PatsSoxKnicks
05-21-2015, 07:51 PM
looks like Rochester advances; i wasn't that high on London before the playoffs started, but looking back on it i underrated them big time

Nobody values spacing unfortunately. I don't think most posters understand the modern NBA.

And Bruce Bowen better than Bobby Jones? looolz. Bobby Jones was MUCH better offensively and defensively they were at least similar. But check out their BPMs:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jonesbo01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bowenbr01.html

Not even close. Bowen had some years where he was hovering around 0. Bobby Jones was always well above 0. Or look at the 14-year RAPM dataset: http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/14y.html

Bowen gives almost everything good he does on defense back on the offensive end. Yeah he was a good 3-point shooter but he'd just stand in the corner. No off ball movement which is why the -2.4 ORAPM. And RAPM SHOULD theoretically help Bowen out because it'll take into account the contributions that don't show up in the box score i.e. defense mainly. And he's good there. Just not good on offense. If anything, he might be overrated.

Laughable to compare them.

MFFL==FML
05-21-2015, 08:19 PM
The more I look at Rochester player's playoff stats, the more I lean towards London. Tracy and Anfernee are too similar and don't bring much diversity or defense. Webber also had a really high usage and I don't see him being very effective with this line up.

I also don't buy that Tracy is a good defender. "He was a good defender when he wanted to be" is not acceptable. Using peak prime years, Tracy was not the defender Rochester wants us to think. As they stated, Tracy will be guarding Curry, and I see Curry going off for 25 to 30 ppg while making Tracy exert more energy trying to keep up with him, thereby making him even less efficient than his playoff numbers.

I can't vote on this app, count my vote for London please.

Shammyguy3
05-21-2015, 09:14 PM
Nobody values spacing unfortunately. I don't think most posters understand the modern NBA.

And Bruce Bowen better than Bobby Jones? looolz. Bobby Jones was MUCH better offensively and defensively they were at least similar. But check out their BPMs:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jonesbo01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bowenbr01.html

Not even close. Bowen had some years where he was hovering around 0. Bobby Jones was always well above 0. Or look at the 14-year RAPM dataset: http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/14y.html

Bowen gives almost everything good he does on defense back on the offensive end. Yeah he was a good 3-point shooter but he'd just stand in the corner. No off ball movement which is why the -2.4 ORAPM. And RAPM SHOULD theoretically help Bowen out because it'll take into account the contributions that don't show up in the box score i.e. defense mainly. And he's good there. Just not good on offense. If anything, he might be overrated.

Laughable to compare them.

damnnnnn, those numbers are pretty telling :laugh2:

Stinks that you lost, but Rochester is a really good team nonetheless. They advance

PatsSoxKnicks
05-22-2015, 01:44 AM
damnnnnn, those numbers are pretty telling :laugh2:

Stinks that you lost, but Rochester is a really good team nonetheless. They advance

Oh they are a great team, didn't mean any disrespect to them. Lot of talent on that team. But I still think we were better. Anyways, congrats to KJ and Lucky.

IKnowHoops
05-22-2015, 02:14 AM
Your basketball takes are almost as bad as your ability to follow rules in PSD games. Actually they might be worse. This take is just totally ****ing ridiculous....

Dude, you really need to quit crying when things don't go your way. Let me be straight with you since you seem to be lost here. Your not going to win these games if you cry, and piss people off every time someone disagrees with you.

NYKalltheway
05-22-2015, 09:58 AM
I think Rochester is the best team so far. Weaknesses are just not that evident*. London has a solid team too of course and would take this series at least to 6 games. Not sure who the #2 and #3 teams are but I think London should have had a higher rank. Really like their team.

* perimeter D might sound as a problem, but their starting guards' length can cover it up imo