PeterMP

Members
  • Content count

    2,286
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About PeterMP

  • Rank
    The Dirtbags
  • Birthday 07/11/1972

Profile Information

  • Location
    Something catchy like headexplode or EA's
  1. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    Great game, but that was some ugly basketball. All the fancy movement and cuts off picks seems to be gone from the GS offense, and Houston is what they are.
  2. Anybody claiming that enforced monogamy in sciences can not mean just that in some cases is lying. There are plenty of cases where scientists enforce monogamy on their subjects and study what happens. Just as an example: http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/268/1467/557.long Even when it is not experimentally enforced, enforced monogamy is about males manipulating females for the male's (evolutionary) advantage. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1420-9101.2003.00654.x Either way, Peterson is looking at the fact that we have a problem and lying the solution to the problem at the feet of females. The solution to males walking into places and killing a bunch of people is for females to change their behavior. It is the same thing he did with sexual assault. It is the same thing he did with the sexual assault comments that started this thread. The solution for sexual assault and work place harassment is for women to stop wearing make up. For somebody that supposedly preaches growing up and self-responsibility, he's doing a lot of blame shifting here. I have an idea, maybe the solution to men being violent lays at the feet of men, and the solution is for men to change their behavior/expectations.
  3. There are several fundamental differences between guns and those things. One of the biggest is addiction. (You can also see what other countries have done in terms of guns vs. drugs and see the differences.)
  4. I bet you'd change your mind if in that couple included the one where your kid was dead.
  5. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    Houston can't try to play up tempo with GS. Unless GS got sloppy, they'd get killed. GS's transition defense is better than their half court defense, and GS certainly has more people that can make more plays in the open court. Maybe they want to play a little faster to avoid some of the issues with the shot clock, but by and large, that's what they have to do on offense. (Somehow) they have to be better on defense. On the iso, people have to be tasked with getting back and slow the ball down, and then too many times if it is Harden that misses the layup, he doesn't even really try to get back. The Rockets would have a good primary defensive response, but then they end up playing 4 on 5, and the Warriors are going to find the open shooter. Everybody has to buy into getting back as fast as they can every possession against GS. They also can't give up the back door cuts. I know people are scared of them going on a run with a string of 3s, but you can't give up easy layups on back door cuts. (The other is the Rockets have essentially played the same way all year. It just isn't realistic than in the conference finals to make big changes.)
  6. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    I will make the point this still seems to suggest an equivalent to Capela and Howard (not saying that you've said that, but that inference could be made), which isn't accurate. Capela is assisted at the rim 83.2% of the time and 3-10 feet 71.7% of the time. Those are are huge numbers that Howard in Orlando never approached. As part of that, Howard in those years has more assist than Capela (in terms of absolute numbers and assist percentage). Capela essentially only has offense made for him and doesn't make offense for other people. Howard made much more of his offense and made more offense for other people.
  7. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    I don't plan on the NBA listening to me or take my opinion into account, but this is a discussion board and so a place to have discussions. If you don't like the discussion, then you can ignore it. The biggest thing that I'd like to see changed is the contact allowed around the basket. This should be foul on Draymond Green. Given the current rules, if he put his forearm (on the back or hip) like that on a player with the ball at the 3 point line, the majority of time that player gets the foul call. If it is foul 28 feet from the basket, it should be foul 8 feet from the basket.
  8. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    (Not, directed at LKB, but anybody that thinks the years when Orlando was doing well with Howard were space and pace teams, either doesn't understand what the phrase means or doesn't remember that era of basketball. The year they made the NBA championship they were 12th in pace in the league. This year that 12th would put them dead last in the NBA in pace. The next year, which is the year I took the stats from, they were 18th in the NBA in pace. Even for that era, they were essentially an average pace team, but an average pace team then is last in pace now.) You seem to be suggesting that Howard was an equivalent to DeAndre Jordan. That isn't the case. DeAndre Jordan in his best years was assisted over 65% of the time at the rim and from 3-10 feet (and really over 70% at the rim). In 2009, for Howard those numbers were 58% and 36%. The year before (the championship year), those numbers are 53 and 49%. Clearly, he was making his own offense much more than Jordan (and a larger percentage than 2000 Shaq). Now for Shaq, Shaq's best move was easily the put the shoulder into the guy to dislodge him and then spin and dunk while the defender is recovering. The hook wasn't that good of a move for Shaq and people would have given him the hook all day vs. the drop step/spin move. Now, we only have data with shoots broken down starting in 2000, but Howard's 2009 hook numbers are better than Shaq's 2000 (more hooks, with a higher percentage, and fewer assists). And Howard is assisted a lower percentage of times than Shaq both at the rim and from 3-10 feet. I'm not saying Howard is an all time great post player. My point was to take a guy that wasn't a DeAndre Jordan, but shot a very high % (over all higher than Hakeem ever did) and use his at the rim and 3-10 feet number to get what would be reasonable for a post center. I'd happily use Hakeem's data, but the data doesn't go back that far. But I'll even do the same math with Shaq's 2000 data. In 2000, Shaq shoots 78.5% at the rim. He shoots 41.9% from 3-10 feet. Now, I pulled 1/4 of Hakeem's post ups being shots at the rim (based on 1/2 of a game). That gives 18.85 points on 20 shots. Not very good. Shooting 32% from the 3 point line is going to give you more points. (Now, let me say, I don't think that calculation is fair to Shaq. Because I don't know anybody that dunked as many post ups as Shaq so I'm going to try and break the numbers down another way to show where I think a Shaq in his prime might actually still be a useful NBA player today. Shaq has 251 shots unassisted that year at the rim and another 291 from 3-10 feet. Now, let's say all of those start with a Shaq post up. This means that Shaq is getting to the rim on 46% of his post ups (much more than the 1/4 from Hakeem from that 1/2 of that one game). Now, I don't think that 46% is really right because some of those shots are coming from offensive rebounds and the like, and I strongly suspect that's an over estimate of how many post ups ended up as dunks. But we are giving the advantage to the post-up offense. Now, I'm going to assume that Shaq is finishing shots at the rim and 3-10 feet the same assisted as unassisted (which I doubt, but I think I'm giving the benefit to Shaq's post ups as I suspect he in reality finished at a higher rate assisted). If we give Shaq 20 post ups, 9.26 times he finishes at the rim where he has a shooting percentage of 78.5%. He also has another 10.74 shots from 3-10 feet where he has a shooting percentage of 41.9%, which gives him 24 points (I rounded up). And Shaq then offensively is really equivalent to about a 40% 3 point shooter. And if I do the same calculation, with Howard, the number turns into 23 points on 20 post ups, but Howard was a guy whose best move was like Shaq and to over power the guy and then dunk. Now, again, I think the calculations benefit the post-up game because they assume the post up shoots as high a percentage as the assisted play in the same range, which I doubt and assuming that post ups were scored at the same rate as non-assisted non-post up shots (e.g. shots off offensive rebounds, which I also doubt. But even given that, you can still see the limitation of the post game.)
  9. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    There are 2 issue: 1. Do you like the way the game is played today? And I'll readily admit, IMO, the game today is better than the Kobe/Jordan era. Pace and space is better than the era that preceded it. However, I think it would be better if they made some alterations to bring back post play. If you like the way the game is played today, then that's a case where we'll just have to agree to disagree. 2. How much value does a quality low post player have today? That's not really a matter of opinion and that's where looking at how the rules have changed and stats matter. Hakeem was a great player in the era he played in and a guy that you could build a championship team around. Today, I doubt that is possible. If I take Hakeem and Horry and drop them into the NBA today, the gap between them as players is smaller than when they played (Hakeem might still be the more valuable player today because of his defense where Hakeem was an elite defender and protecting the rim still has a lot of value, but on the offensive end, Hakeem's value takes a large hit in today's game). And it is no different if I take other shooters vs. post players. The gap between Kareem and Byron Scott is smaller today than it was when they played because of the changes in the rules. If you have a player like Embiid, where should his priority be in terms of getting better. There's no doubt that Embiid as a 36% 3 point shooter has more value than Embiid with an Hakeem like low post game so practicing his 3 point shot makes more sense than practicing his post offense. Another thing the NBA could do is to adjust the value of a foul based on how close the player was to the basket. Currently, we have a situation where when fouled the value for a shot 3 feet away goes way up compared to a shot from 2 feet away as compared to the actual value of those shots. Yes, the shot from 30 feet away is a 3 point shot, but the player is much less likely to make it than the shot from 2 feet away. Then you have players like Harden going out of their way to be fouled from behind the 3 point line and given the lack of contact allowed on the perimeter, you've made it easier for perimeter players to get to the foul line and get 3 shots when they do even though the shot they took was a pretty low percentage shot.
  10. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    When he was with the Magic, Howard had a low post game and while he was never a finese player with the moves of an Hakeem (and really, in my time watching the NBA, there has been one Hakeem so that's an awfully high bar to climb). He had the ability to use his strength, size, and quickness (in a manner similar to Shaq (not the same as Shaq because again, in my time watching basketball, there has been one Shaq)) to get to the rim and get quality shots out of the low post. I know this might be hard for you to believe, but it is possible to not only watch basketball, but to have actually played (and still play at 45 years old) and understand stats and the box scores. I mean, I can understand if you can only do one of those things, but some of us don't have those limitations. (Again, I'm only using Howard's FG% at the rim and from 3-10 feet as an indication of what is historically a good out come where Hakeem's FG% in those areas isn't available and Howards FG% that year was better than Hakeem's ever was.)
  11. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    1. There is a difference between easy 2's on drives (dunks) and 1-1 for a big man in a paint. I'm not claiming any team would ever leave a big man unguarded in the post. My fundamental point is that the post up is not an easy 2 (today) and even historically (when the illegal defense rule was in place). Even given Howard's FG% shooting (at the rim and from 3-10 feet), your better off taking a 3 point shot with 36% shooting 2. Irregardless of why Howard was successful (an era with weak centers), he clearly was successful in his prime. His team was successful, he had higher FG% than people like Hakeem and even Shaq. 3. He'd double Shaq, but Shaq in his prime was maybe the best center in the league. He's also send help to any guard that had a clear path to the basket. And that's a very specific case. Would he double Shaq the whole game? 4. It doesn't create much gravity though because you are sending people to the basket vs. pulling them away from the basket (and your ignoring part of the issue with Shaq and the fouls was that Shaq was a bad FT shooter, to pretend like Shaq's post offense alone created the fouls is dishonest). 5. You are also acting like a post player can't create. Certainly, historically, some post players have created. They've beaten their man, drawn double teams, and made beautiful passes to their open teammates. Is there a reason creating can only happen 28 feet from the basket and not 10 feet from the basket? 6. It is a problem if you enjoy quality post play. Embiid has some limited time to practice. Given the current rules, it makes much more sense for him to practice his perimeter game than his post play. If you like seeing everybody stationed around the 3 point line looking for the 3 point shot or the drive to the basket, then you enjoy it is good. If you don't, it isn't. Even if Embiid shot at the rim and within 10 feet of the basket with Howard's FG% in his prime, he'd be better off becoming a 36% 3 point shooter. I enjoy watching quality low post moves, and given the current NBA rules, it doesn't make much sense to spend time learning a low post offense.
  12. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    Right, the key to scoring more than people that score more than you is never to shoot the ball more, especially when you are shooting at a much higher percent than them anyway and leading the NBA in FG% (which suggest it is going to be very hard for you to be more efficient with your shots).
  13. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    And let me be clear, there is a line somewhere. Is a 31% point shooter that can create their own shot worth more valuable than a 36% 3 point shooter that can't. Maybe. But with traditional centers, we are talking about people that essentially didn't shoot the 3 at all. Embiid in today's game as 30% 3 point shooter, but not really a very good post game has more value than except for maybe the best few centers in their prime in the history of the league. And the gap gets even larger if Embiid doesn't improve his post game at all and becomes an even better 3 point shooter. And if he improves his 3 point shooting, he improves his gravity even more in the most positive way (away from the rim) as compared to if he becomes a better 3 point shooter.
  14. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    It is hard to argue that's true after the Celtic series. The Celtics choose to single Embiid in the post and guard the shooters. Are you saying Stevens made the wrong choice? Now, is it better to have a 36% 3 point shooter that can also create their own? Yes What we are seeing in the NBA is that it is essentially impossible to be an efficient enough 2 point scorer to warrant double teaming a player. Even take a historically good shooting percentages from bigs and warping them over a large number of post ups (which is what I did with Howard), it doesn't make sense to leave the 36% 3 point shooter open. Maybe a guy like Shaq where I suspect in his prime he would have been even more effecient than Howard, but for even for people that shot excellent FG%, it doesn't make sense. The net effect is that a center can't warp a defense. Otto actually has more gravity than a center that shoots at a very high percentage because he pulls a defender away from the basket, while the center pulls the defender to the basket, which limits everybody else's ability to drive. I didn't see the game this afternoon, but I actually think that was a big game for the Cavs. Not a must win, but I think their chances to win this series just feel below 50/50.
  15. ***2017-18 NBA Playoffs Thread***

    Driving has open the 3 in two manners: 1. Certainly, many players do take 3s off the dribble. Many players in the league shoot step back 3s. 2. Drive and kick. 3. Just in terms of space. What is the primary defense against the drive? Back off and build the wall. The ability of players to drive is directly related to people leaving them space to shoot 3s.