Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 170 of 192 FirstFirst ... 70120160168169170171172180 ... LastLast
Results 2,536 to 2,550 of 2875
  1. #2536
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    43,071
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Look at james Worthy efficiency to that of Huges. Injury prone and played 70 games once with caves shooting a whopping 40% wow. You insulted James Worthy.
    How many games did you see James play?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  2. #2537
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    14,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    That's true, but back then there were other super teams because the league had fewer teams (so the talent was more concentrated). Now the talent is more diluted because there are more teams. I don't think LBJ's teams would've been super teams in the 80s because there would've been other teams that had similar type of talent so they would've all just been contenders. I agree that how a team fits together is really important, but when you put enough talent on a team, it stops to matter how the pieces fit together at some point (just so long as the mismatching isn't absurd). With LBJ, there weren't any other super teams at the time (the warriors counts once they got KD, but LBJ never got past that warriors team). With the lakers and Celtics, they had each other to balance it out and there were other teams that were fairly stacked as well (e.g., Sixers, Pistons).

    For me, what all of this comes down to is that LBJ just hasn't won enough to be in that discussion. I know it's a big bar he has to reach, but these guys you all want to put him ahead of are legendary players. You don't get to pass them simply by putting up great numbers. That's ultimately what my position on LBJ comes down to. Once the winning is on par with those guys, then there is a strong case to be made.
    Statistical data matters, and GS was better than any Heat team Bron was on before Durant came. They were much deeper before Durant, and they are the greatest team in regular season history. They are worlds better than Sacramento or Portland that the Lakers best. As someone who watched 95% of Brons games, Bron has outperformed all these guys in the finals win or lose. And when heís not on the court, none of his super teams can maintain leads. Lebron had a ridiculous finals against GS and Iíd bet that Brons top 5 finals appearances are better than Kobeís best, and thatís against better competition. IF you outperform someone and are more efficient while doing so and you lose and the guy you outperformed wins, that that means the guy who won had more help or faced worse competition. You canít measure championships as the main barometer to judge a player. There are way to many other variables. The best version of Jordan didnít win a ring because he didnít have enough help period.
    Last edited by IKnowHoops; 12-10-2019 at 02:37 AM.

  3. #2538
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,770
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    Statistical data matters, and GS was better than any Heat team Bron was on before Durant came. They were much deeper before Durant, and they are the greatest team in regular season history. They are worlds better than Sacramento or Portland that the Lakers best. As someone who watched 95% of Brons games, Bron has outperformed all these guys in the finals win or lose. And when heís not on the court, none of his super teams can maintain leads. Lebron had a ridiculous finals against GS and Iíd bet that Brons top 5 finals appearances are better than Kobeís best, and thatís against better competition. IF you outperform someone and are more efficient while doing so and you lose and the guy you outperformed wins, that that means the guy who won had more help or faced worse competition. You canít measure championships as the main barometer to judge a player. There are way to many other variables. The best version of Jordan didnít win a ring because he didnít have enough help period.
    GS is actually a good example of why that data you're talking about isn't all that useful. Their numbers were great, just so long as they were allowed to play their style. As soon as they went up against a few of the teams that could slow it down and make them play in the half court they were just a good team. That's why a mediocre Memphis team that had key players injured and playing hurt almost beat them their first run (and would've won were it not for injuries) and that's why a talented, but not particularly special OKC team had them on the ropes (and should've won if KD and Westbrook don't choke). In the half court, when the game slows down, Curry goes from a HOF-caliber player to a good all-star and Klay shows a similar decline. Those kings and Blazers teams, along with the Duncan spurs and kg Celtics would've likely given it to those warrior teams (doubt those series would be all that competitive). Those LBJ heat teams would also likely beat the warriors, along with just about any championship caliber team that could slow it down and execute in the half court. GS style worked because everyone was trying to mimic them and they were the best at that style of play, but they were absolutely vulnerable and showed it multiple times against teams that weren't particularly strong contenders. A truly great team doesn't go down 3-1 to a weak contender like OKC and doesn't struggle against a non-contender like Memphis, particularly given the injuries.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 12-10-2019 at 03:38 AM.

  4. #2539
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    12
    Man Kobe wasn't even better than Tim Duncan

    Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

  5. #2540
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    31,031
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    James Worthy would have been Larry Hughes and Kareem would be totally useless standing in the corner
    Much like AD is useless now standing in a corner?

    I get it, you hate LeBron, but saying the 09 Cavs are as good as the Showtime Lakers had they simply had Magic instead of LeBron is a bad hot take, even for your bad anti-LeBron hot takes.

  6. #2541
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,850
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    GS is actually a good example of why that data you're talking about isn't all that useful. Their numbers were great, just so long as they were allowed to play their style. As soon as they went up against a few of the teams that could slow it down and make them play in the half court they were just a good team. That's why a mediocre Memphis team that had key players injured and playing hurt almost beat them their first run (and would've won were it not for injuries) and that's why a talented, but not particularly special OKC team had them on the ropes (and should've won if KD and Westbrook don't choke). In the half court, when the game slows down, Curry goes from a HOF-caliber player to a good all-star and Klay shows a similar decline. Those kings and Blazers teams, along with the Duncan spurs and kg Celtics would've likely given it to those warrior teams (doubt those series would be all that competitive). Those LBJ heat teams would also likely beat the warriors, along with just about any championship caliber team that could slow it down and execute in the half court. GS style worked because everyone was trying to mimic them and they were the best at that style of play, but they were absolutely vulnerable and showed it multiple times against teams that weren't particularly strong contenders. A truly great team doesn't go down 3-1 to a weak contender like OKC and doesn't struggle against a non-contender like Memphis, particularly given the injuries.
    So why were they called a super team when Curry was the only Star and formed a duo with Durant?

    Well you got to look on how the game is called today with the Shaq rules vs back then. Harden is taking advantage of it.

    Yes they could have slowed the game but its not like teams did not try. OKC had them and a healthy Cavs could beat them. Thing is GSW had big men too but that was not their best version. So yes try to slow the game down but hope you get back on Defense because they will not slow down to let you set your defense. Let gsw put your big guy in the pick and role if you do get back. Try to post up let gsw make him pick up the dribble rushing at him with his slow post moves or why not zone. When you just struggle for 2 points in 15 seconds gsw just got 3 in 7 seconds. They can erase a 10 point lead in a very short time with just 3 shots. So yes slow it down bring the big men that cant shoot or not very good. If you fail to impose your style on them good luck trying to keep up.
    Last edited by ldawg; 12-10-2019 at 10:06 AM.

  7. #2542
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    31,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    GS is actually a good example of why that data you're talking about isn't all that useful. Their numbers were great, just so long as they were allowed to play their style. As soon as they went up against a few of the teams that could slow it down and make them play in the half court they were just a good team. That's why a mediocre Memphis team that had key players injured and playing hurt almost beat them their first run (and would've won were it not for injuries) and that's why a talented, but not particularly special OKC team had them on the ropes (and should've won if KD and Westbrook don't choke). In the half court, when the game slows down, Curry goes from a HOF-caliber player to a good all-star and Klay shows a similar decline. Those kings and Blazers teams, along with the Duncan spurs and kg Celtics would've likely given it to those warrior teams (doubt those series would be all that competitive). Those LBJ heat teams would also likely beat the warriors, along with just about any championship caliber team that could slow it down and execute in the half court. GS style worked because everyone was trying to mimic them and they were the best at that style of play, but they were absolutely vulnerable and showed it multiple times against teams that weren't particularly strong contenders. A truly great team doesn't go down 3-1 to a weak contender like OKC and doesn't struggle against a non-contender like Memphis, particularly given the injuries.
    They would all have a good chance, but you are discounting the explosion in 3's since that period. Unless those teams had a chance to adjust their offensive and defensive schemes, they would be so totally unprepared for the modern game. Consider the 02 Kings and the 00 Blazers took 14 3's a game. The 07 Spurs and the 08 Celtics were a little better at 19 a game. During those seasons the most 3's by a team in the league were 20, 24, 24 and 26.

    Compare that to the 2016 Warriors who won 73 games. They took 31 3's in the regular season and 32 per game in the playoffs.

    The Mid-00's were designed to stop the paint, the Blazers, Kings, Spurs, etc. would consider it a positive play to deny the Warriors the paint and let them shoot a 3. That would be a disastrous outcome. Those teams would absolutely need a chance to adjust. They would be leaving Curry wide open 2 ft from the 3pt line because who the heck would actually shoot from that distance? Him, and he'd make it like 40% of the time.

  8. #2543
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,850
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    They would all have a good chance, but you are discounting the explosion in 3's since that period. Unless those teams had a chance to adjust their offensive and defensive schemes, they would be so totally unprepared for the modern game. Consider the 02 Kings and the 00 Blazers took 14 3's a game. The 07 Spurs and the 08 Celtics were a little better at 19 a game. During those seasons the most 3's by a team in the league were 20, 24, 24 and 26.

    Compare that to the 2016 Warriors who won 73 games. They took 31 3's in the regular season and 32 per game in the playoffs.

    The Mid-00's were designed to stop the paint, the Blazers, Kings, Spurs, etc. would consider it a positive play to deny the Warriors the paint and let them shoot a 3. That would be a disastrous outcome. Those teams would absolutely need a chance to adjust. They would be leaving Curry wide open 2 ft from the 3pt line because who the heck would actually shoot from that distance? Him, and he'd make it like 40% of the time.
    Yep even Spurs were forced to change.

  9. #2544
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    14,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    GS is actually a good example of why that data you're talking about isn't all that useful. Their numbers were great, just so long as they were allowed to play their style. As soon as they went up against a few of the teams that could slow it down and make them play in the half court they were just a good team. That's why a mediocre Memphis team that had key players injured and playing hurt almost beat them their first run (and would've won were it not for injuries) and that's why a talented, but not particularly special OKC team had them on the ropes (and should've won if KD and Westbrook don't choke). In the half court, when the game slows down, Curry goes from a HOF-caliber player to a good all-star and Klay shows a similar decline. Those kings and Blazers teams, along with the Duncan spurs and kg Celtics would've likely given it to those warrior teams (doubt those series would be all that competitive). Those LBJ heat teams would also likely beat the warriors, along with just about any championship caliber team that could slow it down and execute in the half court. GS style worked because everyone was trying to mimic them and they were the best at that style of play, but they were absolutely vulnerable and showed it multiple times against teams that weren't particularly strong contenders. A truly great team doesn't go down 3-1 to a weak contender like OKC and doesn't struggle against a non-contender like Memphis, particularly given the injuries.
    All we know is that GS was the most dominant regular season team in any era. And Bron played super human basketball to beat them, far better than any finals Kobe ever had.

  10. #2545
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,850
    GSW mostly started with a traditional big but it was the small ball line up that usually did the damage. So its not like they had no bigs. They even had MCgee the Lakers currant starting center.

  11. #2546
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,770
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    They would all have a good chance, but you are discounting the explosion in 3's since that period. Unless those teams had a chance to adjust their offensive and defensive schemes, they would be so totally unprepared for the modern game. Consider the 02 Kings and the 00 Blazers took 14 3's a game. The 07 Spurs and the 08 Celtics were a little better at 19 a game. During those seasons the most 3's by a team in the league were 20, 24, 24 and 26.

    Compare that to the 2016 Warriors who won 73 games. They took 31 3's in the regular season and 32 per game in the playoffs.

    The Mid-00's were designed to stop the paint, the Blazers, Kings, Spurs, etc. would consider it a positive play to deny the Warriors the paint and let them shoot a 3. That would be a disastrous outcome. Those teams would absolutely need a chance to adjust. They would be leaving Curry wide open 2 ft from the 3pt line because who the heck would actually shoot from that distance? Him, and he'd make it like 40% of the time.
    I don't think it would be an issue, because one thing that never really gets discussed is why the 3 is so prominent now. It's mostly because of transition and semi transition basketball, where teams play at a fast tempo to get good looks from 3 that are high percentage shots. That's a lot tougher to do when the game slows down and is played in the half court. The thing is that it takes 2 to run and so if the other team plays a slow tempo the other team can't run. The grizzlies for example didn't have very many good shooters (the teams I mentioned had far better shooters the grizzlies team did) and they gave gs all kinds of trouble despite being injured and having key guys playing hurt. I don't think the warriors would be able to get away with playing small ball against those types of teams who all had dominant guys who could score down low. I do agree that they would have to adjust their defense, but it's not too hard to do that once a team keeps making 3s. Eventually they would make the adjustment and not give up the 3. Although I'm not convinced it would be an issue because it's never been a good strategy to allow great shooters to take open shots from anywhere on the court. The key to beating those GS teams (and really any small ball team that relies on 3s) is simply to slow it down and make them play in the half court, because that will take away most of their good looks from 3 that are generated from transition and semi transition basketball, which I think all of those teams would be able to do pretty effectively.

  12. #2547
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,770
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    All we know is that GS was the most dominant regular season team in any era. And Bron played super human basketball to beat them, far better than any finals Kobe ever had.
    We don't always agree, but I will agree on this. LBJ did have an incredible finals and was able to knock off the warriors, who although I don't think were as good as their record indicated, they were still a pretty excellent team.

  13. #2548
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,770
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    So why were they called a super team when Curry was the only Star and formed a duo with Durant?

    Well you got to look on how the game is called today with the Shaq rules vs back then. Harden is taking advantage of it.

    Yes they could have slowed the game but its not like teams did not try. OKC had them and a healthy Cavs could beat them. Thing is GSW had big men too but that was not their best version. So yes try to slow the game down but hope you get back on Defense because they will not slow down to let you set your defense. Let gsw put your big guy in the pick and role if you do get back. Try to post up let gsw make him pick up the dribble rushing at him with his slow post moves or why not zone. When you just struggle for 2 points in 15 seconds gsw just got 3 in 7 seconds. They can erase a 10 point lead in a very short time with just 3 shots. So yes slow it down bring the big men that cant shoot or not very good. If you fail to impose your style on them good luck trying to keep up.
    Well I don't think GS was a super team before KD got there. I think once he got there they became a super team with KD, Curry, and Klay. As for stopping GS, I agree that no team could keep up with them if they didn't impose their own style. I think the reason it was so hard though is because there aren't that many teams with a good half court offense and a big man who can score consistently down low. I actually think the current laker team would give that GS team trouble because even though we're not a great half court team in terms of executing offensively (at least not yet) we could slow it down with LBJ creating off the dribble and AD playing out of the post. The clippers, Sixers, and Bucks would also give them trouble because of their ability to play slow and in the half court. We won't ever know for sure though because the team disbanded before we could have those matchups, unfortunately.

  14. #2549
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,850
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I don't think it would be an issue, because one thing that never really gets discussed is why the 3 is so prominent now. It's mostly because of transition and semi transition basketball, where teams play at a fast tempo to get good looks from 3 that are high percentage shots. That's a lot tougher to do when the game slows down and is played in the half court. The thing is that it takes 2 to run and so if the other team plays a slow tempo the other team can't run. The grizzlies for example didn't have very many good shooters (the teams I mentioned had far better shooters the grizzlies team did) and they gave gs all kinds of trouble despite being injured and having key guys playing hurt. I don't think the warriors would be able to get away with playing small ball against those types of teams who all had dominant guys who could score down low. I do agree that they would have to adjust their defense, but it's not too hard to do that once a team keeps making 3s. Eventually they would make the adjustment and not give up the 3. Although I'm not convinced it would be an issue because it's never been a good strategy to allow great shooters to take open shots from anywhere on the court. The key to beating those GS teams (and really any small ball team that relies on 3s) is simply to slow it down and make them play in the half court, because that will take away most of their good looks from 3 that are generated from transition and semi transition basketball, which I think all of those teams would be able to do pretty effectively.
    But dont that forces the team that falls behind to adjust? Bigs cant defend a guy going side to side at the 3 point line. what if you miss a shot wont you be able to bolt up court in transition. Can you picture Celtics Robert Parish trying to defend a guard and running the court up and down. Would that not end up with Bird moving to pf or Center like say Pau or Duncan. the game evolved.
    Last edited by ldawg; 12-10-2019 at 01:05 PM.

  15. #2550
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,770
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    But dont that forces the team that falls behind to adjust? Bigs cant defend a guy going side to side at the 3 point line. what if you miss a shot wont you be able to bolt up court in transition. Can you picture Celtics Robert Parish trying to defend a guard and running the court up and down. Would that not end up with Bird moving to pf or Center like say Pau or Duncan. the game evolved.
    parish would do no better defending a guard up the court than any other center would do lol. The game changed, but not all of that led to better play. There are very few big men who can still post up and play effectively down low, although those who can are basically all-star caliber players or superstars (e.g., KAT, AD, Jokic, Embiid, Aldridge). Okafor is actually relatively effective, he's just not a star, but I doubt he would've ever been a star at any point. I doubt Lonzo would play any different now than in any other era. His biggest issue is actually that he can't stay on the floor because of injury and then he also seems to have some mental blocks out there sometimes.

Posting Permissions

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