Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 171 of 199 FirstFirst ... 71121161169170171172173181 ... LastLast
Results 2,551 to 2,565 of 2981
  1. #2551
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    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.
    i think Lonzo issue is hes to traditional and try to pass everything and dont offer efficient scoring. So he helps moving the ball and his defense but he also hurts. to play with him the other 4 guys will need to be good. He cannot be your best payer with his style.

    Okafor would have been good 10 years ago. avg 25/9. but again you will fall behind if you dont defend the 3.

    Gsw took advantage of the grizzles not the other way around. So you are right thats the way to combat it but you got to get athletic bigs that can defend and have lateral quickness.

    Lakers size dominated GSW this preseason thing is they lost some guns.

  2. #2552
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    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.
    finals 5 straight. Its not that they shoot 3s its how efficient they were at it. sure like all jump shooting team would go cold but they got stupid hot at times. Curry was also good at getting to the rim and you had to respect his shot . Add Durant and you got three guys that shoot well two that can get to the basket at any time.
    Last edited by ldawg; 12-10-2019 at 01:32 PM.

  3. #2553
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,842
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    i think Lonzo issue is hes to traditional and try to pass everything and dont offer efficient scoring. So he helps moving the ball and his defense but he also hurts. to play with him the other 4 guys will need to be good. He cannot be your best payer with his style.

    Okafor would have been good 10 years ago. avg 25/9. but again you will fall behind if you dont defend the 3.

    Gsw took advantage of the grizzles not the other way around. So you are right thats the way to combat it but you got to get athletic bigs that can defend and have lateral quickness.

    Lakers size dominated GSW this preseason thing is they lost some guns.
    I doubt Okafor would've ever put up those kinds of numbers. If you look back to guys who put up big numbers like that, it's always big men who are relatively athletic and are also pretty crafty and can recognize defenses. Sabonis is the only center that I can remember who was slow and still very good, but he also had a very big body and was pretty fleet of foot for someone his size (he was slow, but he also weighed almost 300 lbs so not that slow given his size). Sabonis was also very crafty and excellent at reading defenses. Marc Gasol is actually another example of a guy who had slow feet but was still an all-star caliber player for most of his career. okafor doesn't have the recognition to be effective at that level and isn't skilled or athletic enough to make up for it.

    As for Lonzo, he just can't shoot very well. It's rare for a pg to be the best player on a team where he can't shoot. Magic wasn't a very good shooter initially, but he was also 6'9 and was very strong and quick and athletic early on (although he could never jump very high). Most other pgs who led their teams in the past were relatively good shooters or at least weren't horrible shooters.

  4. #2554
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,842
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    finals 5 straight. Its not that they shoot 3s its how efficient they were at it. sure like all jump shooting team would go cold but they got stupid hot at times. Curry was also good at getting to the rim and you had to respect his shot . Add Durant and you got three guys that shoot well two that can get to the basket at any time.
    Well yes, but I was referring to the gs team that LBJ and the cavs beat. Once they got KD they went to another level.

  5. #2555
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Well yes, but I was referring to the gs team that LBJ and the cavs beat. Once they got KD they went to another level.
    well the only true star there was Curry.

  6. #2556
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,842
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    well the only true star there was Curry.
    Yeah I would agree that he was the only superstar, but they also had Klay who was an all-star, and then Draymond, Iggy, and Barnes were borderline all-star caliber players depending on the game. But I was saying they weren't yet a super team until KD got there.

  7. #2557
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I doubt Okafor would've ever put up those kinds of numbers. If you look back to guys who put up big numbers like that, it's always big men who are relatively athletic and are also pretty crafty and can recognize defenses. Sabonis is the only center that I can remember who was slow and still very good, but he also had a very big body and was pretty fleet of foot for someone his size (he was slow, but he also weighed almost 300 lbs so not that slow given his size). Sabonis was also very crafty and excellent at reading defenses. Marc Gasol is actually another example of a guy who had slow feet but was still an all-star caliber player for most of his career. okafor doesn't have the recognition to be effective at that level and isn't skilled or athletic enough to make up for it.

    As for Lonzo, he just can't shoot very well. It's rare for a pg to be the best player on a team where he can't shoot. Magic wasn't a very good shooter initially, but he was also 6'9 and was very strong and quick and athletic early on (although he could never jump very high). Most other pgs who led their teams in the past were relatively good shooters or at least weren't horrible shooters.
    More minutes with Okafor with run post plays he would be at 25/9 easy. Today at 18mpg, 5rpg 9ppg 60% As a rookie he avg 17ppg on 51%

    The question is which style would win you more games. Posting to Okafor or gunning with Russell
    Last edited by ldawg; 12-10-2019 at 01:44 PM.

  8. #2558
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    31,113
    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.
    Yes, it's a sound idea in theory, but the problem is, if it's so effective to simply go back to playing early 00's ball to beat the top offenses of today, why aren't teams doing it? Even the slowest teams today play at a far faster pace than they did in 2000.

    As for the Grizzlies, if that is what you're hanging your hat on, you need better examples. They lost the series 4-2, with all 4 wins being by double digits. For perspective, the first Cavs/Warriors series the Cavs went up 2-1 and lost 4-2 with only 2 of the Warrior's wins coming by double digits, and you claimed LeBron and company got beat handedly and weren't close.

    So the Dubs winning 4-2 after being down 1-2 is close but the Cavs losing 2-4 after being up 2-1 isn't close?

    It seems like you're changing your definition of whats close to help your argument.

  9. #2559
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    31,113
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Yeah I would agree that he was the only superstar, but they also had Klay who was an all-star, and then Draymond, Iggy, and Barnes were borderline all-star caliber players depending on the game. But I was saying they weren't yet a super team until KD got there.
    While I disagree that Iggy or Barnes were borderline all-star players at that point, I agree that they were extremely talented and featured plenty of star power outside just Curry with both Dray and Klay.

  10. #2560
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    While I disagree that Iggy or Barnes were borderline all-star players at that point, I agree that they were extremely talented and featured plenty of star power outside just Curry with both Dray and Klay.
    I barns and Iggy not stars but really good players. Klay and Green border line stars Like Pascal and Van.
    Last edited by ldawg; 12-10-2019 at 03:43 PM.

  11. #2561
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    187
    Are Bryantfans still trying to make a case for their guy who is ranked 14th? What a joke.

    Just enjoy LeBron, the greatest player of all time, currently ranked #2 all time.
    Kobe Bryant: ranked #14 by Bleacher Report
    Bryant is ranked #12 by ESPN and FOX
    King James: ranked #1-2 along with MJ

  12. #2562
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,842
    Quote Originally Posted by LakerClipperFan View Post
    Are Bryantfans still trying to make a case for their guy who is ranked 14th? What a joke.

    Just enjoy LeBron, the greatest player of all time, currently ranked #2 all time.
    Only a troll would believe that nonsense

  13. #2563
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,842
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    While I disagree that Iggy or Barnes were borderline all-star players at that point, I agree that they were extremely talented and featured plenty of star power outside just Curry with both Dray and Klay.
    I think it was close, at least the first year they had Iggy, but either way yeah they were really good players.

  14. #2564
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,842
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    I barns and Iggy not stars but really good players. Klay and Green border line stars Like Pascal and Van.
    I think Klay was an all-star, Draymond I would agree was borderline

  15. #2565
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    187
    Hey Troll: I suggest you look at Bleacher Report rankings. Bryant is 14, LAbron is 2. Need me to give you a link, or is the Troll already aware of the rankings?

    Facts are facts. Bryant is ranked 14.

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Only a troll would believe that nonsense
    Kobe Bryant: ranked #14 by Bleacher Report
    Bryant is ranked #12 by ESPN and FOX
    King James: ranked #1-2 along with MJ

Posting Permissions

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