NBA Regular Season 2016-17

LuckyLloyd

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Rdpn-vR9YY

LeBron taking no **** from Phil Jackson. I feel like he's going to become an extremely outspoken presence once he retires. Wouldn't be surprised if he ends up in politics in some fashion.

LuckyLloyd

ButtersSuki wrote: »

What's really interesting about that is how much the Clippers feature. Thanks for posting, interesting reading.

Yeah, the Clippers are playing good D is the obvious conclusion. The 'rim protection' stat makes for very interesting reading in terms of bigs too.

ButtersSuki

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Yeah, the Clippers are playing good D is the obvious conclusion. The 'rim protection' stat makes for very interesting reading in terms of bigs too.

What's weird about it is you don't immediately think of them as a defensive team. To feature so prominently in those stats is genuinely shocking to me, esp. as I have seen GS in particular pick them apart with ease on a regular basis....the preseason game where GS were up by 50 2 minutes in to the 2nd half was one example but there have been others. But they do appear to be playing very well right now. One caveat, it's November. Wonder are they peaking too soon?

Would love to hear Doc say it's all down to Austin........:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::);):D

brady23

I thought last nights Portland game summed them up perfectly. Arguably a top 3 backcourt in the league but everywhere else they are badly exposed. 24% or so from range on the game. Turner was grossly overpaid after playing well in the C's system. Leonard, PlumLee and arguably Harkless too aren't playoff starters.
I like Crabbe as a bench spark but they have to figure out something to get a big because they are in that no man's land territory for the foreseeable future. I think one of the more polarizing teams to watch,

ButtersSuki

ButtersSuki wrote: »

What's weird about it is you don't immediately think of them as a defensive team. To feature so prominently in those stats is genuinely shocking to me, esp. as I have seen GS in particular pick them apart with ease on a regular basis....the preseason game where GS were up by 50 2 minutes in to the 2nd half was one example but there have been others. But they do appear to be playing very well right now. One caveat, it's November. Wonder are they peaking too soon?

Would love to hear Doc say it's all down to Austin........:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::);):D

On the above, by coincidence the latest BBALL BREAKDOWN video is about the Clippers and particularly their D. Worth a look.

Kal El

brady23 wrote: »

Espn Insider just put this up


Kevin Pelton: Chad, the 2014 NBA draft discussion was dominated by one question: Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker? Two-plus years later, as both players are progressing toward making good on the potential they showed as college freshmen, the question still remains relevant.

I dont get this at all tbh. I dont believe its really a conversation anymore. Wiggins is way ahead of Parker. As you said he has had his injuries. But he to me will only ever be a rotation player.
Regarding Wiggins you compared him to PG13 and I think thats a fair comparison, I would myself think DeRozan. In the same way its took DeRozan a while to get used to the league and how to be a leader I think the same will happen with Wiggins.
Speaking of draft comparisons, remember when there was talk of Williams going ahead of Irving :pac:
The whole time I couldnt understand why, a flashbacks

GoldFour4

Yeah Wiggins is miles ahead of Parker for me too. Wiggins game needed time to develop and its starting to become very good.

LuckyLloyd

brady23 wrote: »

Lakers in an interesting situation now. Evidently Walton has mended Russell/Young relationship and both look the better for it. He's turned Clarkson into a 6th man of the year candidate and Randle looks good too.

Unfortunately with the contracts they've handed out they're tied into two players with no chance of being effective anymore on a good playoff team.

Subsequently they are now too good to tank and too bad to be a decent playoff team. They're clearly on an upward trajectory but I'm not 100% convinced yet they're a playoff team and if they're not they miss their chance to get a top 3 pick in one of the most loaded draft classes in memory, arguably the best on paper since 2003.

Clearly from the moves they made that was never the plan but I really wish they would have waited another year.
If they had kept that top 3 pick. Then perhaps traded it for say Cousins etc, picked up another good player in free agency Griffin, Curry, Durant, CP3 or the more realistic Lowry or Hayward they would be jumping a few steps ahead with Randle, Russell and Ingram all better players with more minutes.

This is the most fascinating aspect of Basketball in many respects - in the absence of a guy on your roster (or in the wake of someone who used to be the guy retiring as is the Laker's scenario) what's the best way of trying to work towards a championship. A year ago I'd have leaned your direction in terms of 'wait another year, amass more assets'. But I think Philadelphia are demonstrating that such an approach leads nowhere good. At a certain point, you run the risk of hurting the development of young players and allowing a culture of losing to take hold.

It's early days, but the Laker's have supplemented their exciting young talent with gritty role players. Mozgov and Deng are not first or second options. They play good defense and offer very solid minutes without detracting from Randle, Williams, Ingram and Clarkson from carrying the load. Lou Williams is a diamond acquisition too. Finally, cheap veterans in the locker room like Artest and Calderon who are happy to play few minutes but demonstrate work ethic and professionalism only adds to what I think is a potent mix.

You can spend forever waiting and tanking. Getting to a playoff series - even as a 7th / 8th seed - could really help develop their young core. The simplest way of looking at it imo is that if they do end up in the playoffs with ~45 wins they were right to go as they were ready. And the supportive moves they made indicated great faith in their key three lottery picks.

LuckyLloyd

Some fascinating stuff. The TO% has fallen massively and it's waaay harder to to gather offensive boards, two clear indications of a huge leap in quality and competitiveness across the league

brady23

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

brady23 wrote: »

Lakers in an interesting situation now. Evidently Walton has mended Russell/Young relationship and both look the better for it. He's turned Clarkson into a 6th man of the year candidate and Randle looks good too.

Unfortunately with the contracts they've handed out they're tied into two players with no chance of being effective anymore on a good playoff team.

Subsequently they are now too good to tank and too bad to be a decent playoff team. They're clearly on an upward trajectory but I'm not 100% convinced yet they're a playoff team and if they're not they miss their chance to get a top 3 pick in one of the most loaded draft classes in memory, arguably the best on paper since 2003.

Clearly from the moves they made that was never the plan but I really wish they would have waited another year.
If they had kept that top 3 pick. Then perhaps traded it for say Cousins etc, picked up another good player in free agency Griffin, Curry, Durant, CP3 or the more realistic Lowry or Hayward they would be jumping a few steps ahead with Randle, Russell and Ingram all better players with more minutes.

This is the most fascinating aspect of Basketball in many respects - in the absence of a guy on your roster (or in the wake of someone who used to be the guy retiring as is the Laker's scenario) what's the best way of trying to work towards a championship. A year ago I'd have leaned your direction in terms of 'wait another year, amass more assets'. But I think Philadelphia are demonstrating that such an approach leads nowhere good. At a certain point, you run the risk of hurting the development of young players and allowing a culture of losing to take hold.

It's early days, but the Laker's have supplemented their exciting young talent with gritty role players. Mozgov and Deng are not first or second options. They play good defense and offer very solid minutes without detracting from Randle, Williams, Ingram and Clarkson from carrying the load. Lou Williams is a diamond acquisition too. Finally, cheap veterans in the locker room like Artest and Calderon who are happy to play few minutes but demonstrate work ethic and professionalism only adds to what I think is a potent mix.

You can spend forever waiting and tanking. Getting to a playoff series - even as a 7th / 8th seed - could really help develop their young core. The simplest way of looking at it imo is that if they do end up in the playoffs with ~45 wins they were right to go as they were ready. And the supportive moves they made indicated great faith in their key three lottery picks.

I think you're right in terms of the Philly comparison but I do think that is the most extreme version we have or maybe could ever see given a likely change in the CBA.

I think handing Mozgov and Deng such long contracts are bad. I don't mind the idea of giving up your chances of getting a pick to create a culture and try for the if you feel players are ready but I think you could get similar production for less money and more importantly less years

brady23

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/18063065/minnesota-timberwolves-karl-anthony-towns-face-nba-big-man-revolution

LuckyLloyd

brady23 wrote: »

I think you're right in terms of the Philly comparison but I do think that is the most extreme version we have or maybe could ever see given a likely change in the CBA.

I think handing Mozgov and Deng such long contracts are bad. I don't mind the idea of giving up your chances of getting a pick to create a culture and try for the if you feel players are ready but I think you could get similar production for less money and more importantly less years

Okay, we probably agree on the contract lengths. One year less each would have been ideal. But ultimately I like the type of acquisitions they made.

Philadelphia, well they actually did the damn thing people like ourselves had been advocating for years - i.e. go full tank and asset acquisition for a few years. And they ****ing suck the other side of it.

brady23

Yeah I think they got it wrong for definite but I think they have been somewhat unfortunate given injuries, draft lottery has gone against them too.
If there is ever a professional sport to tank in its basketball but so far it's a failed experiment.

Hypothetically speaking assume they win the KAT draft or take Porzingis even with pick 3.
Suck again and get Simmons and he doesn't get injured.
Embiid plays as he's played now and Noel is coming off the bench with Saric.
Do we think it's such a failure then I wonder?

KAT/Porzingis Simmons Embiid Saric and Noel looks pretty decent.
A trade here or there and you might just have a playoff team.
Obviously total ****e talk but it's interesting what 1 or 2 small moves might have done to our perception of their strategy

ButtersSuki

I have to admit to being a a little surprised at how deep a thinker and how honest Stan Van Gundy is showing himself to be in the last 10 days. On top of the Trump comments, there's the following (from nba.com):

NEW YORK (AP) -- Detroit Pistons coach Stan Van Gundy says he has used the term ''posse'' before, and it was always in regards to minorities.
A day after LeBron James criticized Knicks President Phil Jackson for using the word in an interview to describe James' friends and business partners, Van Gundy was reflective Wednesday when thinking about his own words, calling on people to be aware of their language and attitudes.
''I'm going to be perfectly honest here, I've used that word before, OK,'' Van Gundy said, ''and when that all came out I had to ask myself, have I ever used that word before with a white player, and the answer is no. So, I think, look, you have to be aware of the language and you have to be aware a little bit of your own biases if you're going to overcome them and so I took that seriously.''
In the ESPN interview , Jackson recalled a time when James asked for the Miami Heat to stay over in Cleveland while on a road trip, a request that put coach Erik Spoelstra in a bind.
''You can't hold up the whole team because you and your mom and your posse want to spend an extra night in Cleveland,'' Jackson said.
Van Gundy, speaking before his Pistons played the Knicks, said he never used the term publicly but had when speaking with people he knows and ''it has never been in conjunction with a white player.''
''And so I think at the time where you're going to call out other people on attitudes, I think you need to be willing to look in the mirror and call yourself out,'' he added. ''I don't think I've used that term in a long, long, long time, but I think going back to my days as an assistant when I was younger I know in the past I have used that term. I'm just being honest and it's not right.''

ButtersSuki

On tanking and PHILA, the problem is that they chose REALLY badly with their picks, not specifically in terms of personnel as you could justify each pick in isolation, but because they failed to piece those assets together in a way to buld a team. They picked big after big after big. Now they're loaded with bigs and have SFA around that - at a time when the league is going smaller and quicker. And they've been terribly unlucky with injuries in fairness. I've actually no issue with them taking the players they did on an individual draft basis but when you look at the totality of it they should have traded one or more of those bigs either on draft night or afterwards for either another rookie or an established player in one of the other spots they needed help in.

Their logic was fine, their execution of the picks and failing to complement each previous pick was very poor. It doesn't however mean that the process (that word) is flawed. Done correctly with the right brain trust making the calls on players it could be hugely successful. Let's say hypothetically that San Antonio went into full tank mode next year if say Aldridge leaves (he's out of contract) and Pau, Parker and Ginobli retire. Now if you have Greg Popovich selected a Top 5 player from 4 consecutive drafts with the remainder of that panel, you'd be fairly confident he'd do a far better job than the Sixers did, right?

brady23

I would be more of the take the best player available opposed to building a team when in full tank mode. If that meant taking big after big I'd be happy to do so. The reason being you aren't in a win now situation so passing on a better prospect to draft a guy more suitable based on position or style to help you win more games in the short term is counter productive to the overall goal.

I disagreed at the time with Okafor and have always maintained a guy who shoots that low from the free throw line had no business being drafted that highly.
I was always big on Porzingis backed him for ROY.
I would have taken him 2nd after KAT (easy said now but true)

ButtersSuki

brady23 wrote: »

I would be more of the take the best player available opposed to building a team when in full tank mode. If that meant taking big after big I'd be happy to do so. The reason being you aren't in a win now situation so passing on a better prospect to draft a guy more suitable based on position or style to help you win more games in the short term is counter productive to the overall goal.

I disagreed at the time with Okafor and have always maintained a guy who shoots that low from the free throw line had no business being drafted that highly.
I was always big on Porzingis backed him for ROY.
I would have taken him 2nd after KAT (easy said now but true)

It's not a short term play though, it's the more long term one; can't you see that? There's no point in having 5 centres and no shooters or a decent point guard, especially in the modern game. There is no point in being loaded in one position and having nothing everywhere else. You ideally need average to above average players in all 5 positions.

If you keep picking bigs st some stsge some of them have to go so you trade some of them for assets. The problem now however is you're entering a buyers market as teams know you're overstocked in certain areas, so you're on the back foot from a negotiating point of view now.

brady23

I see your point but I would still be of the opinion in a sport that is potentially dominated by one player more than most team sports, I think taking the best possible player based purely on ability, upside and/or potential is the best play.

I think the negative effect of being overly stocked at one position is far less than the negative impact of passing on a better prospect when you're in rebuild mode.
I think history is littered with examples of that

LuckyLloyd

There is a temptation to be results orientated here, and if they were luckier with injuries or made a couple of different picks it may well be very different. As it is, I understand the 'best player available' logic and their commitment to that was symptomatic of them following through on the strategy the whole way.

Brady dislikes the Mozgov / Deng contracts, but I hate the Ilyasova, Bayless, Henderson, Rodriguez deals. And that's where the strategy has fallen apart imo - not the acquisition of young talent but the failure to surround that talent with competent veteran minutes. The 76ers roster should be far far better this year.

Of course, the advantage of their strategy is that it's still fixable. They're on tick to have $45m invested for next season. So Simmons returns, add another lottery pick and invest in free agency and they could become a playoff contender relatively soon. But that's where it needs to go, and quickly.

That number one slot West is really important this year with their being only three dominant teams.

Bad loss by the Clippers pulls them back to the bunch.
They had the ball with 26 seconds left and up a point but they impounded to Crawford in the corner who panicked under pressure and threw an interception. Really should have saw that out.

Ive found somewhere to get the games so watched the last four, Austin Rivers is sooo bad.
I've never been a fan and he hasn't improved at all.
He had a lay up in that game that hit the top of the backboard and bounced over definitely a contender for Shaqin.
He's playing far too much IMO.

On stock he's a good example that the hardest decision lays not in what position to draft, but to make sure ye don't get a lemon.
There was at least 15 players better than him with Draymond being the stand out 20 positions after.

brady23

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There is a temptation to be results orientated here, and if they were luckier with injuries or made a couple of different picks it may well be very different. As it is, I understand the 'best player available' logic and their commitment to that was symptomatic of them following through on the strategy the whole way.

Brady dislikes the Mozgov / Deng contracts, but I hate the Ilyasova, Bayless, Henderson, Rodriguez deals. And that's where the strategy has fallen apart imo - not the acquisition of young talent but the failure to surround that talent with competent veteran minutes. The 76ers roster should be far far better this year.

Of course, the advantage of their strategy is that it's still fixable. They're on tick to have $45m invested for next season. So Simmons returns, add another lottery pick and invest in free agency and they could become a playoff contender relatively soon. But that's where it needs to go, and quickly.

Yeah I agree with the Vets. Take the T-Wolves acquiring Prince and Garnett with the goal in mind of developing their talent in every aspect by surrounding them with some different characters but leaders.

I also agree regarding the flexibility which is huge but the problem is given how long this has been going on I think they're going to have to overpay someone to join them in free agency or trade assets to get any semi decent players because to players Philly is currently a hole

Kal El

brady23 wrote: »

I would be more of the take the best player available opposed to building a team when in full tank mode. If that meant taking big after big I'd be happy to do so. The reason being you aren't in a win now situation so passing on a better prospect to draft a guy more suitable based on position or style to help you win more games in the short term is counter productive to the overall goal.

I disagreed at the time with Okafor and have always maintained a guy who shoots that low from the free throw line had no business being drafted that highly.
I was always big on Porzingis backed him for ROY.
I would have taken him 2nd after KAT (easy said now but true)

At the time I wouldnt have took Russell myself, but Im happy with the way he has been progressing. I liked KP myself and would at the time been happy with him but saying that the guy I wanted was Okafor :pac:......:o

LuckyLloyd

By the way, drafting is ****ing hard. Cleveland took LeBron with the first pick in the draft in 2003. Ten year's later they took Anthony Bennett. Every year there are bust lottery picks, and multiple franchises across the league have been involved in same. And that, of course, is a point against the tank and amass assets model.

brady23

http://hoopshype.com/2016/11/16/josh-smith-takes-18-three-point-shots-in-a-game-in-china-because-yolo/

Ah he's great though isn't he?

NufcNavan

The next time Monta Ellis yells at someone for giving up a layup after Monta gets beat by his own man who scores the layup, I hope Boomer comes down from the ceiling, stuffs him into a t-shirt cannon, and shoots him into space.

The Monta Ellis experience. Sucks balls for 80% of the game, makes one alright play and yells at people and suddenly he's a "leader"

It was quite lucky for the Suns that every time the Pacers started to make a run, Monta was there to throw up another bull**** mid range jumper and put a stop to it.

Well I think what just happened at the end of the Kings/Raptors game is the most laughable thing I have seen in the NBA, absolutely disgraceful. Amateur officiating

brady23

If anyone picked Nick Young for comeback player of the year now is time to take a bow. Evidently Luke Walton is a genius.
He's basically become JR Smith. One of the Lakers better defenders, cut out the long 2s and shooting really well.

NufcNavan

Deleted User wrote: »

Well I think what just happened at the end of the Kings/Raptors game is the most laughable thing I have seen in the NBA, absolutely disgraceful. Amateur officiating

The whole point of review is to review the situation and make it right. The right call was made. If they replay the play, and he misses, you're going to have people upset because he hit the first time. If he hits the shot, you're going to have people upset because he clearly didn't get it off in time the first play. Someone is going home unhappy.

Kal El

brady23 wrote: »

If anyone picked Nick Young for comeback player of the year now is time to take a bow. Evidently Luke Walton is a genius.
He's basically become JR Smith. One of the Lakers better defenders, cut out the long 2s and shooting really well.

I did, I just forgot to tell everyone :pac:
I was demanding to trade him to anyone who would listen to me all summer.
Saying that I still wouldnt be surprised to see him being moved at deadline to a team looking for scoring of the bench.

NufcNavan

NufcNavan wrote: »

The whole point of review is to review the situation and make it right. The right call was made. If they replay the play, and he misses, you're going to have people upset because he hit the first time. If he hits the shot, you're going to have people upset because he clearly didn't get it off in time the first play. Someone is going home unhappy.

This is the best explanation I have read on the issue:

"Now, ordinarily there can be some dispute over when, precisely, a player takes possession of the ball. But by showing the clocks BEFORE and AFTER Ross possessed it, we are eliminating that as a factor. We can say conclusively that he held the ball for no more than 1.6 seconds. In addition, because the contact that should have started the clock was a deflection, we can be fairly precise in terms of when the clock SHOULD have started.

So in order for the final call to be correct, it would have to have taken 0.8 seconds for the ball to travel from the point at which Cousins touched it to the moment before Ross touched it.

Needless to say, it didn't take that long. At most, it took 0.3 or 0.4 seconds, leaving more than enough time for the shot attempt."

1) The call was very likely wrong and the 3 points should have stood and it goes to OT
2) At the very least the refs admit the messed up and replay the possession.

You can't have the clock that the players are using to make their decision display the wrong time and then say "tough" after the game.

I can say a lot of people here are fed up with what they see as being 'screwed' constantly either through bad calls (what was it? the 3+quarters of not getting to the line in the playoffs last years, shocking decisions in the Cleveland game last week with the refs then making equally as bad calls against cleveland in garbage time (see lebron offensive 'foul'), didn't get much against the warriors the next night either. And how about that scheduling? back-to-back away and home to the 2 best teams in the league

Anyway, I am ranting. I was a Celtics fan mainly before I moved here and watched many games over a 5 year period. Since moving here I have watched the vast majority of Raptors games and I think they get screwed quite a bit