or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread - Page 1337

post #20041 of 27204
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

last 15 champions fit one of the above definitions except the 2011 Mavs, who i'm still not quite sure how they won. because Carlisle?

I probably sound like a broken record at this point, but don't forget the '04 Pistons.  The best player on that team was...Chauncey Billups?

And the Mavs won that year because Dirk played out of his mind, but also because that team had all the right pieces for Carlisle's pace-and-space offense.  They were loaded with guys who could spread the floor (Caron Butler, JJ Barea, Jason Terry, Dirk, Peja Stojakovic, Jason Kidd, and that punk DeShawn Stephenson) and also had a disruptive wing defender in Shawn Marion and a great P&R big in Tyson Chandler.
Edited by diadem - 1/28/15 at 6:59pm
post #20042 of 27204
Quote:
Originally Posted by diadem View Post

Guys who take money below the market rate are guys who are desperate for rings like indesertum said, guys taking the "homer discount" (Dirk Nowitzki signing that 3 year/$25 mil deal was just a travesty...he deserved much much more), and guys who are willing to take less so that they can accommodate other high-profile players (LeBron, Wade, and Bosh all took less than max money to play together).  All of these scenarios require a well-established owner/GM with cachet
i.e. who can line up an infinite supply of supermodels outside your hotel room door and suck you dry until you either die or sign (hi Dr. Buss!)
post #20043 of 27204
Quote:
Originally Posted by diadem View Post

I probably sound like a broken record at this point, but don't forget the '04 Pistons.  The best player on that team was...Chauncey Billups?
ok, them too
post #20044 of 27204
Bulls and Rockets in 90s both met that criteria too no?
post #20045 of 27204
i think the big problem/misconception is that the top 3, 4 players that get max deals are worth so much more than their deal that everybody sees the other players that get max but arent as good and think they're therefore not worth max when in reality the top 3, 4 skews everything.

also a lot of good players get great contracts that seemed bad at the time, but turned out to be amazing deals eg curry, millsap, korver because they bet on the players future whereas other deals eg deron, joe johnson didnt. hindsight 20/20
post #20046 of 27204
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

i dont think what haralabob said is true. his point was old school triangle leads to mostly long range 2s. its fairly easy to modify the triangle a bit to make it more about 3s than long range 2s. definitely the way the bulls and lakers played the triangle would not be great today as the current knicks coaching shows. but both the hawks and warriors run a lot of triangle sets (mixed with other things like a motion offense) that are more about 3s than long 2s

also kobe/shaq were so dominant they didnt need a system to get them easier shots. pretty much unless you're kobe and shaq that strategy will not yield a championship
was it? i thought his point was that you needed the pnr to be the backbone of an offense in today's nba. i'm not a triangle or offensive system expert so i can't say much about the hawks and warriors this year, but i might question what a "lot" is. as for your 2nd part, don't the offenses that have recently won championships have a lot more in common w/ a pnr-based offense than the triangle?
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodguy View Post

I'm not following this argument at all, because when the triangle is run correctly, it's all about fluid movement. and it's all about read-and-react that gets to the ball to the right player at the right time. it IS definitely harder to master than simple pnr sets, but it is a thing of beauty when you've got guys like fisher, gasol, bryant and odom working it.
i think haralabob's point was that it's a necessity nowadays to have penetration to contort the defense and force rotations and doubleteams. the triangle de-emphasizes dribble penetration, unlike recent offenses that have made a killing off of quick dribble handoffs, tons of picks that come out of nowhere, etc.
post #20047 of 27204
this is gonna be my last post about the triangle cuz i'm out of my element ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

these tweets are from december it turns out
post #20048 of 27204
hey this Haralabos guy's so smart, maybe he should be coaching. uh huh.
post #20049 of 27204
iirc he worked for a team for a year or so but he says the money wasn't good enough compared to what he made gambling. i think he'd rather be a gm but nobody would just straight up hire him as one.


hey what's more surprising, that kyrie had 55 today w/ 11 3s? or that josh smith hit 4 3s?
post #20050 of 27204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brothersport View Post

was it? i thought his point was that you needed the pnr to be the backbone of an offense in today's nba. i'm not a triangle or offensive system expert so i can't say much about the hawks and warriors this year, but i might question what a "lot" is. as for your 2nd part, don't the offenses that have recently won championships have a lot more in common w/ a pnr-based offense than the triangle?
i think haralabob's point was that it's a necessity nowadays to have penetration to contort the defense and force rotations and doubleteams. the triangle de-emphasizes dribble penetration, unlike recent offenses that have made a killing off of quick dribble handoffs, tons of picks that come out of nowhere, etc.

i dont really care to find the tweets, but he was arguing with the bballbreakdown guy for awhile about how triangle sucks cuz it only gives long twos. pick and rolls are a big part of a triangle offense. generally a triangle will happen on the strong side and depending on which option you use it naturally flows into a pick and roll on the weakside. its not really an either or thing

hawks and warriors do a lot of nifty things like where a set looks like a pick and roll 2 man game on one side, but it's actually a pinch post and there's a triangle set happening on the other. or they do a triangle and once the defense is distorted it flows into a horns set.


also uh knicks beat okc

what?

post #20051 of 27204
Thread Starter 
Oh you SFbot you!


I swear I had a gut feeling which number 2 was yesterday. lol8[1].gif


Quote:
Originally Posted by StyleforumRobot View Post

Alright boys and girls, let's have a fun game.

I'm going to describe three threads without linking to them.

Can you guess which ones they are? Tomorrow morning I'll clue you in! 


They can come from any forum.

1. This thread tells a surly story, about those angry posters who can't be grateful for what they have. In fire, ice, heat and humidity there is ought but suffering. Perhaps - mayhaps - as foretold a holy fire of annihilation and destruction will arise and destroy.

2. This thread combines mathematics, statistics, arguing, money, sweat, tears and fervent fandom. What do you think about them? As a bonus hint: this thread also contains a particular, special angry poster whose views inspire nothing but contempt.

3. It involves lots of posturing and posting, it involves socks in pockets, it involves unravelling stitching, baggy tweed pants and sharp creases.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StyleforumRobot View Post

Drumroll...

And the answers are:

1. I Hate New York thread
2. NBA Thread
3. Classic Menswear WAYT thread
post #20052 of 27204
So wait is SF bot one of us? Or just lurks?
post #20053 of 27204
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post

Um, pay under market, heh. I know I'll get shredded, but fuck it.

The 5 under contract are a solid group, it's good fodder.

To start, I'd seek Pop's commitment to join the transition process. That's a big factor in re-balancing the team. 5 year contract? Worth the money. Name a successor.

I'd ask Duncan to take a gradual large cut in exchange for winding down into a limited role and a transition into coaching or management. He's proven to be adept and will do well in either.

Leonard, I'd offer 12m. Maybe 13. Ask him to understand what the system needs and point to players that took less for rings. Also let him know this is a franchise that rewards career guys. Use the rest of the team to pressure him. If he says no, he says no.

Manu? Similar to Duncan. Want to teach Anderson?

Danny Green. 6 - 7m. Take it or leave it.

The rest of the guys are dispensable, though I'd offer Joseph a decent deal. Maybe 4m? Negotiable.

Marco can go, lots of 3 point talent out there.

Now, to the business of rebuilding. You need a decent draft pick in this draft, who knows who. Draft for need. A SG? A SF is Leonard wants to go? Lottery.

Bring in 2 - 5 free agents. Guys I'd target at reasonable prices:

Demarre Carrol
Milsap
David West
Luol Deng
Thad Young
Aaron Brooks
Kevin Love (well below max)
Aaron Afflalo
Omer Asik
Brandan Wright
Amir Johnson
Reggie Evans
Reggie Jackson
Andre Miller
Tobias Harris
Layoy Allen

Good thing you're not the Spurs GM.
post #20054 of 27204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post

Good thing you're not the Spurs GM.

What would you do?
post #20055 of 27204
Thread Starter 
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread