RonArtest15

***2018-19 NBA Season Thread***

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

I mean, I can understand if you can only do one of those things, but some of us don't have those limitations.

 

I see where this is going, so I'm going to interject.  You're attempting to use stats to help explain why what we're seeing should bother us.  If it doesn't it doesn't, let it go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bottom line is that the game is great currently as it has been for a long time and is not broken by not being dominated by post play. Players that have or develop those skills can use them to great efficiency and benefit to their team. If they don’t, that’s fine too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I see where this is going, so I'm going to interject.  You're attempting to use stats to help explain why what we're seeing should bother us.  If it doesn't it doesn't, let it go.

 

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.

Edited by PeterMP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Destino said:

We still sure Tatum has no chance of being better than either Simmons or Embiid?  

 

Tatum is so good and so smooth that I actually wonder if this is it for him. He looks like someone that's been in the NBA for six years. I know that's a weird thing to say about someone who can't legally drink, but it seems like all his improvements from this point forward will be of the marginal variety.

 

I mean, if this is a rookie figuring things out, good heavens, he's a future top ten player.

 

He also seems like the absolute perfect guy to pair with someone like Kyrie for the next 8 years, because he can do absolutely everything and seems to have no ego.

 

The Celtics should draft a Croatian and pay him 5 times more than Tatum just to see what happens next. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, PeterMP said:

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). 

Embiid isnt a finesse player.

 

Shaq wasnt a finesse player

 

David Robinson, and many others.

 

The problem with Dwight isn't that his post moves weren't pretty. Its that his post game was nonexistant, except for the season before his back was cooked (2010-11 season).

 

Orlando played pace and space and that allowed Dwight to do his thing which was power and jump over people. But he had no post moves as he had bad footwork, and zero counter moves. He didn't even really have a hook shot until that season I am talking about. He offensive repertoire was the same as it was in high school.

 

Quote

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.

Shaq was actually the player Dwight should have watched and studied more as he could have played a similar way. Instead all he could muster was a spin move. Watch how Shaq works in the post and his footwork and compare it to Dwight. Its night and day.

 

10 hours ago, PeterMP said:

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.

I am not that guy. You don't have to prove to me that you played the game, or whatever. I don't care. My only point was find a better example than Dwight Howard because I overall agreed with your point but asking him to post up more would cause his teams to lose as that wasnt his strong suit. Its not a good hill to die on because everyone saw Dwight was a limited offensive player.

 

Edited by BenningRoadSkin
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

My bottom line is that the game is great currently as it has been for a long time and is not broken by not being dominated by post play. Players that have or develop those skills can use them to great efficiency and benefit to their team. If they don’t, that’s fine too. 

 

We have rose colored glasses when we think of the past. When people discuss post play, they are thinking of Hakeem or Kareem on the block or Walton in the high post and all the beauty of watching giants move like ballerinas.

 

You know what most post play is?

 

Mark Jackson jamming his enormous ass into John Stockon's chest and banging out 36 dribbles in a row.

 

It was also Patrcik Ewing giving 52 shoulder fakes, taking 7 dribbles, giving another 8 shoulder fakes and then shooting a fadeaway that never went in except in those moments were you absolutely wanted it to miss. In that instance, it went in and sent some 76-76 abortion of a game into overtime.

 

God, I hated the 90s Knicks. Just a dozen guys with fat assess who took 15 dribbles on the block in order to throw up a half-assed hook shot.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dwight Howard was one of the greatest pick and roll players of all time. And he ran the floor better than nearly any center in history. But that was pretty much it for his offensive game. He had two things and when he lost athleticism, he didn't have much more to offer.

 

Shaq only had two offensive elements in his game, but I'm fairly certain he could pull his 400 pound ass out of his chair next to Ernie and dominate an NBA game for 10 minutes with those two moves before he started vomiting bacon grease on everyone.

 

Shaq's drop step might be the most devastating move in NBA history that was not the skyhook. The only way to stop it was to basically hold onto his waist and their was a chance that if you did that you were going to get dunked with the basketball.

 

The reason the drop step was so devastating was that he also had a very good spin move into a jump hook. If you cheated to the drop step you were basically giving him an uncontested 8 footer. If you cheated to the hook, you were going to end up in the front row as you tried to recover the drop and got bodyblocked into a rapper's lap.

 

The best athlete comparison to Shaq is George Foreman. Foreman looked like a lumbering animal in the ring who just threw haymakers. But if you watched him he had an insane hook to the body and a devastating jab and the reason they both worked is because his feet were always perfect.

 

Hakeem was like Ali in that you could see the beauty of the footwork from a distance. Shaq didn't do much but the few things he did were exceptional.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, PeterMP said:

 

There are 2 issue:

 

1.  Do you like the way the game is played today?  

 

2.  How much value does a quality low post player have today? 

 

1) It doesn't bother me as much as it bothers you and Steve because I'm not a basketball purist and am behind you both in understanding the game and its history.  I'm not stupid, I watch the Wizards play everyone else enough and the playoffs over the years that I can keep up with ya'll for the most part, I don't consider what I see perfect, but I still enjoy it and that is a factor in whether I agree with any change that would fundamentally change the sport as we know it and I understand it. 

 

2) Why does that really matter the way you are presenting it does if it only really bothers a minority of basketball fans the way it bothers you and Steve?  Again, I'm not saying this isn't a problem, but this is one of those where you have to consider the collective before making a decision that effects all of us.  

 

Edit:  If the collective does not matter to you, neither of you should be making decisions that effect us.

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

Tatum is so good and so smooth that I actually wonder if this is it for him. He looks like someone that's been in the NBA for six years. I know that's a weird thing to say about someone who can't legally drink, but it seems like all his improvements from this point forward will be of the marginal variety.

That's a very strange opinion to have about a 20 year old rookie and I'm glad you shared it because I've thought the same thing.  He looks like a vet with a polished offensive game, not a player that going to massively improve in his third year.  I don't know what it is about him but he just doesn't look like a superstar to me.  Maybe it's because we're starting to expect superstars to be freakish athletes?  Then again maybe it's because he played at Duke. 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only need like two moves when you're built like Shaq or Dwight.  Dwight had no shooting range, but he had post moves that got him to the rim.  He could back anyone down and his best move was to dribble into the middle of the lane with the outside hand and then he spun back outside with his shoulder in your solar plexus and then he's at the rim.  It was a well crafted move that beat the double coming from the weak side and it took skill and athleticism to pull off.  And he could often finish that thing with a dunk.  Make a dunk worth three and you've increased the value of bigs with special post ups like that.

 

If you don't like Ewing-style post fades aesthetically, well you're not making a space for them by making them more valuable if you only increase the value of the dunk. The dunk is the special play, like hitting from beyond the arc, and we should reward the special players who can pull them off by making what they do as valuable as what the special perimeter players do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Destino said:

That's a very strange opinion to have about a 20 year old rookie and I'm glad you shared it because I've thought the same thing.  He looks like a vet with a polished offensive game, not a player that going to massively improve in his third year.  I don't know what it is about him but he just doesn't look like a superstar to me.  Maybe it's because we're starting to expect superstars to be freakish athletes?  Then again maybe it's because he played at Duke. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I guess it depends on what your definition of "superstar" is.

 

Right now, he looks like what everyone hope Jabari Parker was going to be at his peak. And Jabari Parker was this good right now, Milwaukee would probably be up 1-0 on Cleveland.

 

Boston's in a position where they only need him to be their third or possibly 4th best player over the next few years. If THAT is your fourth best player, mercy......

 

Here is the real danger for the rest of the league with Tatum. A guy like that on his rookie deal can absolutely be the centerpiece of a trade for the next time a bitter superstar wants to make a move. In the NBA that happens all the time and it happens fast and it happens out of nowhere (see Kawhi Leonard). What if come January, Milwaukee is a .400 club and Giannis is suddenly ****ing about management publicly. Tatum+future Sacramenton pick+Filler is a deal that a desperate team can half-assed sell to its fans when it's letting a Giannis or Anthony Davis or Kawhi or whatever go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

Dwight Howard was one of the greatest pick and roll players of all time. And he ran the floor better than nearly any center in history. But that was pretty much it for his offensive game. He had two things and when he lost athleticism, he didn't have much more to offer.

 

Shaq only had two offensive elements in his game, but I'm fairly certain he could pull his 400 pound ass out of his chair next to Ernie and dominate an NBA game for 10 minutes with those two moves before he started vomiting bacon grease on everyone.

 

Shaq's drop step might be the most devastating move in NBA history that was not the skyhook. The only way to stop it was to basically hold onto his waist and their was a chance that if you did that you were going to get dunked with the basketball.

 

The reason the drop step was so devastating was that he also had a very good spin move into a jump hook. If you cheated to the drop step you were basically giving him an uncontested 8 footer. If you cheated to the hook, you were going to end up in the front row as you tried to recover the drop and got bodyblocked into a rapper's lap.

 

The best athlete comparison to Shaq is George Foreman. Foreman looked like a lumbering animal in the ring who just threw haymakers. But if you watched him he had an insane hook to the body and a devastating jab and the reason they both worked is because his feet were always perfect.

 

Hakeem was like Ali in that you could see the beauty of the footwork from a distance. Shaq didn't do much but the few things he did were exceptional.

 

(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.)

Edited by PeterMP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

1) It doesn't bother me as much as it bothers you and Steve because I'm not a basketball purist and am behind you both in understanding the game and its history.  I'm not stupid, I watch the Wizards play everyone else enough and the playoffs over the years that I can keep up with ya'll for the most part, I don't consider what I see perfect, but I still enjoy it and that is a factor in whether I agree with any change that would fundamentally change the sport as we know it and I understand it. 

 

2) Why does that really matter the way you are presenting it does if it only really bothers a minority of basketball fans the way it bothers you and Steve?  Again, I'm not saying this isn't a problem, but this is one of those where you have to consider the collective before making a decision that effects all of us.  

 

Edit:  If the collective does not matter to you, neither of you should be making decisions that effect us.

 

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.

Edited by PeterMP
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Yeah dawg, the magic surrounded Dwight with 4 shooters. Thats how they made the finals.

Orlando shot over 2000 threes in 2007-08, 2009, 2010, and 2011.  By today's standards 2000 is a meaningless number as only four NBA teams shot fewer threes than that.  At the time Orlando was doing this however, only 2-3 teams a season were attempting that many threes.  So they were early adopters of attempting a lot of threes. 

 

But that isn't pace and space, it was more like an early version of whatever it is that the Rockets are running.  Orlando wasn't pushing the pace and they were shooting so many threes to create space for Howard to run pick n rolls. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Destino said:

Orlando shot over 2000 threes in 2007-08, 2009, 2010, and 2011.  By today's standards 2000 is a meaningless number as only four NBA teams shot fewer threes than that.  At the time Orlando was doing this however, only 2-3 teams a season were attempting that many threes.  So they were early adopters of attempting a lot of threes. 

 

But that isn't pace and space, it was more like an early version of whatever it is that the Rockets are running.  Orlando wasn't pushing the pace and they were shooting so many threes to create space for Howard to run pick n rolls. 

take out the pace, but there was a lot of space for Dwight to get his PnR points.

 

My only point in this convo is that Dwight Howard is the last guy we need to use to talk about post scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always wondered how them Utah Jazz teams of the 90's could've done today if you surrounded them with shooters and a decent 5. Don't think there's ever been a more lethal PnR combo.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Destino said:

Orlando shot over 2000 threes in 2007-08, 2009, 2010, and 2011.  By today's standards 2000 is a meaningless number as only four NBA teams shot fewer threes than that.  At the time Orlando was doing this however, only 2-3 teams a season were attempting that many threes.  So they were early adopters of attempting a lot of threes. 

 

But that isn't pace and space, it was more like an early version of whatever it is that the Rockets are running.  Orlando wasn't pushing the pace and they were shooting so many threes to create space for Howard to run pick n rolls. 

 

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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

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.

I agree.  In Orlando the focus of their offense was Howard and Jameer Nelson was probably made to look better than he was.  Howard was the engine that made that offense go.  In Houston it's Harden, certainly not Capela.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PeterMP said:

 

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.

 

 

You really think I'm trying to control what ya'll are talking about? *sigh, I've said repeatedly that my stance on this is open-minded and very understanding, but that I would not support a 3pt Dunk nor shoving it down everyone's throats.

 

If that's the discussion (which it looks like its shifting away from, thankfully), so be it, but like you said, this is a discussion board, so I'm saying it.  There's too much intelligence in this thread to settle for that solution, aim higher. Saying I expect better should be considered a compliment, not a slight, but if that's the way anyone wants to take that, I can't control that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

We have rose colored glasses when we think of the past. When people discuss post play, they are thinking of Hakeem or Kareem on the block or Walton in the high post and all the beauty of watching giants move like ballerinas.

 

You know what most post play is?

 

Mark Jackson jamming his enormous ass into John Stockon's chest and banging out 36 dribbles in a row.

 

It was also Patrcik Ewing giving 52 shoulder fakes, taking 7 dribbles, giving another 8 shoulder fakes and then shooting a fadeaway that never went in except in those moments were you absolutely wanted it to miss. In that instance, it went in and sent some 76-76 abortion of a game into overtime.

 

God, I hated the 90s Knicks. Just a dozen guys with fat assess who took 15 dribbles on the block in order to throw up a half-assed hook shot.

 

Cmon, post play wasn't that bad lol. The bruisers like Shaq, Barkley and Mark Jackson were balanced out by the "ballerinas" on the block like Hakeem, Jordan, Pippen, and Penny to name a few. Those were my favorite players to watch in the post. They made it look effortless. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TryTheBeal! said:

Draymond is a little edgy tonight.

 

I don't want to see him get tossed... I don't want to hear the excuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.