Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 125
  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Tg11 View Post
    Warriors won last night and off of something rare...a Steph triple double and Steph doesn't even have triple double type games. Last night was like his 8th triple double ever as a player since coming into the league. But at the same time the way the Warriors spread the floor last night with spacing but also seeing Steph not even at his best but still dominating on other ends just goes to show us that he's the biggest reason more or less why they won last night. But either way a win is a win and this win was a statement win.
    The thing about curry not having a tripple double for 5 yrs. Thats not right. I think he had 2 tripple doubles in 1 finals series when durant was on the team.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Tg11 View Post
    Warriors won last night and off of something rare...a Steph triple double and Steph doesn't even have triple double type games. Last night was like his 8th triple double ever as a player since coming into the league. But at the same time the way the Warriors spread the floor last night with spacing but also seeing Steph not even at his best but still dominating on other ends just goes to show us that he's the biggest reason more or less why they won last night. But either way a win is a win and this win was a statement win.
    I think it was more about the Lakers not being as good as the media hyped them to be.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Bay
    Posts
    16,641
    Quote Originally Posted by likemystylez View Post
    The thing about curry not having a tripple double for 5 yrs. Thats not right. I think he had 2 tripple doubles in 1 finals series when durant was on the team.
    Even with that itís not really a knock on Curry. Our offense isnít built for him to be ball dominant. He could pull a Russ if he wanted but he wouldnít have had the success heís had. Trip dub is a novelty.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Bay
    Posts
    16,641
    Hot start sloppy finishÖ wash at half. Letís see if this team responds. Canít be dropping the opener on the home court.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,565
    Found it interesting that, according to Poole, Kerr set a target number of turnovers at 12 a game. I wonder where that number came from ... you know, why not 10 or 15?

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Found it interesting that, according to Poole, Kerr set a target number of turnovers at 12 a game. I wonder where that number came from ... you know, why not 10 or 15?
    Most reasonable number divisible by 4 maybe? So they can keep track per quarter? 16 seems a little bit high and 8 seems very low

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,565
    Quote Originally Posted by likemystylez View Post
    Most reasonable number divisible by 4 maybe? So they can keep track per quarter? 16 seems a little bit high and 8 seems very low
    Fair. If they could stay under 12 it feels like they would win most games.

    I devalue "rebounding" in players because defensive rebounding (which makes up the vast majority of "rebounding" numbers) is just such a easy thing when the scheme is built for it and defensive rebounding has very little effect on wins and losses.

    Steals, turnovers, blocks, and offensive rebounds have a direct effect on the number of possessions and THAT has a major effect on good teams winning and losing games. If the Warriors are really good at steals and turnovers their deficiency at offensive rebounding and blocking shots can be completely negated because, in general, there are more turnovers and steals in any given game than blocks and offensive boards.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Fair. If they could stay under 12 it feels like they would win most games.

    I devalue "rebounding" in players because defensive rebounding (which makes up the vast majority of "rebounding" numbers) is just such a easy thing when the scheme is built for it and defensive rebounding has very little effect on wins and losses.

    Steals, turnovers, blocks, and offensive rebounds have a direct effect on the number of possessions and THAT has a major effect on good teams winning and losing games. If the Warriors are really good at steals and turnovers their deficiency at offensive rebounding and blocking shots can be completely negated because, in general, there are more turnovers and steals in any given game than blocks and offensive boards.
    I agree that blocks dont mean that the number of blocks dont mean a whole lot... other than something that shows shots are being challenged.

    Rebounding is a pretty big deal though. I dont know if they can give a team a target number of rebounds though. Allowing the other team to get offensive rebounds all night is just as bad as turning it over..... so yeah- your team securing over 90% of possible defensive rebounds is pretty important.

    It gives the other team more shots at scoring......and usually defense is in a vulnerable position when they are defending a team that just got an offensive rebound

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,565
    Quote Originally Posted by likemystylez View Post
    I agree that blocks dont mean that the number of blocks dont mean a whole lot... other than something that shows shots are being challenged.

    Rebounding is a pretty big deal though. I dont know if they can give a team a target number of rebounds though. Allowing the other team to get offensive rebounds all night is just as bad as turning it over..... so yeah- your team securing over 90% of possible defensive rebounds is pretty important.

    It gives the other team more shots at scoring......and usually defense is in a vulnerable position when they are defending a team that just got an offensive rebound
    Look at the stats on games, and look at defensive rebounding numbers and wins ... they don't really corrolate nearly as closely as the sum of steals and offensive rebounds minus - turnovers. Defensive rebounding as a skill for a player is wildly over-rated. The number of offensive rebounds per game is the smallest of those numbers and is generally a relatively rare skill which further devalues rebounding when compared to steals and turnovers. A defensive rebound is BY FAR the expected result of a missed shot, and a player who is "elite" at that is, generally speaking, not important to winning in the modern game.

    Big guys tend to get more defensive rebounds by scheme than talent. Offensive rebounding is much more about effort. The thing that made Rodman so valuable was that he averaged nearly 6 offensive rebounds a game for several years of his career. For comparison, in the last 20 years there have been only 6 player seasons with even 5 orb per game, 4 of them were Drummond and he can't even get playing time in the modern NBA. Erick Dampier led the NBA in ORB when he was a Warrior and he wasn't good.

    Russ Westbrook finished top 5 in rebounding a few years ... and his teams are not winning or playing good defense.

    The reality of the modern NBA is that the majority of the rebounds are barely contested if at all, and a single player racking up a bunch of one empty stat or another doesn't really make that big a difference to the outcome of a game, and often tell you more about scheme than that player.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,565

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    8,724
    Warriors face off against the Raptors tomorrow and honestly I can see the Warriors winning Streak continuing even if Steph and Draymond don't play in this game too. But I think they play tomorrow against the Raptors.

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Tg11 View Post
    Warriors face off against the Raptors tomorrow and honestly I can see the Warriors winning Streak continuing even if Steph and Draymond don't play in this game too. But I think they play tomorrow against the Raptors.
    They probably will play. I think it was really important that Kerr made the bench play without those guys yesterday. Teach them that they can win without Steph, Green, Iguodala, and Porter. It took them a while to figure it out but now they have that piece of information that they CAN win without them.

    Keep developing the young guys, keep working on cleaning up rotations, get Klay and Wiseman integrated. I could see them make it to mid-season on a better than 60 win pace, and it's more about the depth than Curry.

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    They probably will play. I think it was really important that Kerr made the bench play without those guys yesterday. Teach them that they can win without Steph, Green, Iguodala, and Porter. It took them a while to figure it out but now they have that piece of information that they CAN win without them.

    Keep developing the young guys, keep working on cleaning up rotations, get Klay and Wiseman integrated. I could see them make it to mid-season on a better than 60 win pace, and it's more about the depth than Curry.
    Pistons radio show were apparently really mad at golden state for sitting both Curry and Green. Apparently the pistons packaged this game with some duds at a pretty high price. But assuming curry and draymond are both hurt to the point that they cant play is kind of insulting. LOL watch them both be cleared to play at the exact same time too. as long as the warriors win, im ok with it.... but if it costs the team wins (after kerr said he was chasing wins this year- that rubs me the wrong way)

    But the thing with iggy. I heard that he was going to sit out the front end or the back end of back to backs. Does this mean they are just going to sit him both the front and back end?

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,565
    Quote Originally Posted by likemystylez View Post
    Pistons radio show were apparently really mad at golden state for sitting both Curry and Green. Apparently the pistons packaged this game with some duds at a pretty high price. But assuming curry and draymond are both hurt to the point that they cant play is kind of insulting. LOL watch them both be cleared to play at the exact same time too. as long as the warriors win, im ok with it.... but if it costs the team wins (after kerr said he was chasing wins this year- that rubs me the wrong way)

    But the thing with iggy. I heard that he was going to sit out the front end or the back end of back to backs. Does this mean they are just going to sit him both the front and back end?
    1. Kerr was JOKING when he said he was chasing wins this year.
    2. They were resting them. Players are always dinged up in some way. The rule for not resting players is total BS.
    3. The back-to-back rest thing means they will rest him one or the other as a plan. The doesn't mean he'll absolutely sit the first or the second or both or either, but generally it means he will rest 1 of the 2 games.
    4. If they lose a game when a player is rested it means the team available lost the game. It's going to happen. You'll have to get past your need for every game to be a win to be happy personally, it's not healthy.

  15. #105
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    1. Kerr was JOKING when he said he was chasing wins this year.
    2. They were resting them. Players are always dinged up in some way. The rule for not resting players is total BS.
    3. The back-to-back rest thing means they will rest him one or the other as a plan. The doesn't mean he'll absolutely sit the first or the second or both or either, but generally it means he will rest 1 of the 2 games.
    4. If they lose a game when a player is rested it means the team available lost the game. It's going to happen. You'll have to get past your need for every game to be a win to be happy personally, it's not healthy.
    i dont think the rest rule is BS.... it clearly gets abused when coaches rest their players just to make a statement to national tv. (Then the same team complains about operating in the red during the cba negotiations ..... im talking about the spurs.


    If they really believe that 82 games is too many games to expect players to play- drop the season to 65 or 70 games. Over time the teams can probably charge more per game as the games become a little bit more important. Also make a rule that if you sit a player- he is out for a minimum of 10 days... so make sure its worth it. (LOL i suppose teams will keep players available and then not play them).


    Also-sort of related- but coach of the year should have stats taken into account. Like what was his teams percentage when he rested players. what percentage of challenges does the coach win. how many players improved their player efficiency rating from 1 yr to the next.

    and scoots, sometimes clinching a playoff spot and having to fight to get in comes down to a few rest games that went sideways. The schedule is going to get tougher- and there might even be some real injuries through out the year. Gotta take advantage of easy wins

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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