What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2021-22 NBA Thread: Bill Simmons furiously recording 2.5 hour long pod about how Boston is still better than Golden State (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
My hot take. I don't think Chauncey or Ben Wallace should be in the HoF and I am a Pistons fan. 

I think Green is a lock for the HoF. I believe college counts as well and he had a very good college career. I think Klay gets in, but isn't there yet. 

 
msudaisy26 said:
My hot take. I don't think Chauncey or Ben Wallace should be in the HoF and I am a Pistons fan. 

I think Green is a lock for the HoF. I believe college counts as well and he had a very good college career. I think Klay gets in, but isn't there yet. 
Click to expand...
Olympics count as well and IIRC he has a gold medal. 

 
If Ben Wallace is a HOFer than Rudy Gobert is a definite one. Rudy has some semblance of offensive game and is every bit if not better defender than Wallace ever was. 

 
For the record I believe Wallace, Mutumbo, and Rodman belong in the Hot along with Draymond.

I still can't get there with Gobert, but analytics and the DPOY say otherwise.

 
Instinctive said:
Isn't Mutombo a HOFer?
Click to expand...
He is and is a pretty good comparison for Gobert. He was before my time, so never got to see him during his prime. Can’t really give an opinion on how he looked when he played, maybe I would’ve felt the same way about him, I can’t say.

But when I see what Gobert has done in the playoffs, sometimes even being targeted on defense, along with what he provides on offense, I just don’t see it. JMO.

 
And to be clear I think he’ll get in due to the awards, I just have never watched him and thought man, now there’s a HOF player.

 
scoobus said:
And to be clear I think he’ll get in due to the awards, I just have never watched him and thought man, now there’s a HOF player.
Click to expand...
And that's the problem I have with the pro basketball HOF. There are a lot of players in the HOF who belong in the Hall of Very Good.

 
Just Win Baby said:
And that's the problem I have with the pro basketball HOF. There are a lot of players in the HOF who belong in the Hall of Very Good.
Click to expand...
One thing. It is not the "pro" basketball hall of fame. It is for international and American amateurs as well. It also takes into account professional NBA players collegiate and international play. 

 
msudaisy26 said:
In regards to Ben Wallace it was the fact he a bottom 5 players in the league on offense maybe ever. 
Click to expand...
That's not even close to being true. He wasn't much of a scorer himself (and didn't need to be on that team), but his offensive rebounding made the team offense much better as a whole.

From 538 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ben-wallace-anchored-a-damn-good-pistons-squad/): 

At the same time, Wallace accounted for 107.2 points per 100 individual possessions on the offensive end during those seasons, well above the league average of 104.7 points per 100 possessions. Granted, he had a usage rate of only 12.5 percent, so he was far from a major offensive factor for the Pistons. But Wallace wasn’t a detriment to the offense when he was asked to finish the occasional play.

Most importantly, Wallace elevated Detroit to another level when he got in the game. Oftentimes we’ll see big individual rebounders not actually improve their team’s rebounding rates when on the court — but not so with Wallace. He boosted the Pistons’ rebounding numbers on both offense and defense, to the point that Detroit outrebounded opponents with Wallace in the game and got outrebounded without him.
Click to expand...

 
nysfl2 said:
That's not even close to being true. He wasn't much of a scorer himself (and didn't need to be on that team), but his offensive rebounding made the team offense much better as a whole.

From 538 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ben-wallace-anchored-a-damn-good-pistons-squad/😞

At the same time, Wallace accounted for 107.2 points per 100 individual possessions on the offensive end during those seasons, well above the league average of 104.7 points per 100 possessions. Granted, he had a usage rate of only 12.5 percent, so he was far from a major offensive factor for the Pistons. But Wallace wasn’t a detriment to the offense when he was asked to finish the occasional play.

Most importantly, Wallace elevated Detroit to another level when he got in the game. Oftentimes we’ll see big individual rebounders not actually improve their team’s rebounding rates when on the court — but not so with Wallace. He boosted the Pistons’ rebounding numbers on both offense and defense, to the point that Detroit outrebounded opponents with Wallace in the game and got outrebounded without him.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Good points on his rebounding, the 3rd and often overlooked phase of the game. I tell my son it is like special teams in football...you can lose or steal a game from time to time primarily because of rebounding.

Wallace was so great as a defender and rebounder that his offensive limitations were not enough to offset that.

 
Jayrod said:
Good points on his rebounding, the 3rd and often overlooked phase of the game. I tell my son it is like special teams in football...you can lose or steal a game from time to time primarily because of rebounding.

Wallace was so great as a defender and rebounder that his offensive limitations were not enough to offset that.
Click to expand...
Rebounds equal possessions

 
nysfl2 said:
That's not even close to being true. He wasn't much of a scorer himself (and didn't need to be on that team), but his offensive rebounding made the team offense much better as a whole.

From 538 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ben-wallace-anchored-a-damn-good-pistons-squad/😞

At the same time, Wallace accounted for 107.2 points per 100 individual possessions on the offensive end during those seasons, well above the league average of 104.7 points per 100 possessions. Granted, he had a usage rate of only 12.5 percent, so he was far from a major offensive factor for the Pistons. But Wallace wasn’t a detriment to the offense when he was asked to finish the occasional play.

Most importantly, Wallace elevated Detroit to another level when he got in the game. Oftentimes we’ll see big individual rebounders not actually improve their team’s rebounding rates when on the court — but not so with Wallace. He boosted the Pistons’ rebounding numbers on both offense and defense, to the point that Detroit outrebounded opponents with Wallace in the game and got outrebounded without him.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

Making a list of those putting down the great Ben Wallace.

 
Here's a breakdown of how the Celtics players have performed in the last 12 games against the Warriors. It's probably not that valuable or predictive, as the Celtics roster has changed many times over in that time. Because of that, there are lots of minutes and production that were attributed to players no longer on the roster. White only played in one game.

Per game averages for Points-Rebounds-Assists-Steals-Blocks-Minutes
 

PTS TRB AST STL BLK MIN
Tatum 22.1 7.2 2.3 1.3 0.4 33
Brown 17.1 5.5 1.5 0.6 0.5 23
Smart 12.8 4.0 4.5 1.4 0.3 30
Horford 12.7 8.7 3.2 0.8 0.7 32
Pritchard 7.0 1.7 2.0 0.0 0.3 18
GWilliams 6.0 3.8 1.0 0.8 0.4 21
RWilliams 3.8 6.8 1.3 0.0 1.3 20
Theis 3.5 4.9 1.4 0.6 0.5 15
White 0.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 22




3P%: GWilliams 50%, Theis 50%, Brown 44%, Horford 41%, Smart 38%, Tatum 37%, Pritchard 36%

Over the last 5 games (with 4 Boston wins), Tatum has averaged 28.8 ppg, Brown 20.8, and Smart 18.2.

I will try to compile a similar profile for the Warriors players in games vs. Boston.
 

 
nysfl2 said:
That's not even close to being true. He wasn't much of a scorer himself (and didn't need to be on that team), but his offensive rebounding made the team offense much better as a whole.

From 538 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ben-wallace-anchored-a-damn-good-pistons-squad/): 

At the same time, Wallace accounted for 107.2 points per 100 individual possessions on the offensive end during those seasons, well above the league average of 104.7 points per 100 possessions. Granted, he had a usage rate of only 12.5 percent, so he was far from a major offensive factor for the Pistons. But Wallace wasn’t a detriment to the offense when he was asked to finish the occasional play.

Most importantly, Wallace elevated Detroit to another level when he got in the game. Oftentimes we’ll see big individual rebounders not actually improve their team’s rebounding rates when on the court — but not so with Wallace. He boosted the Pistons’ rebounding numbers on both offense and defense, to the point that Detroit outrebounded opponents with Wallace in the game and got outrebounded without him.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


We are talking about 2 different things. Wallace is a great rebounder. I am talking about him as an offensive player. He was a horrible ball handler, an average at best passer, he didn't have a single post move and he makes Ben Simmons look like a good shooter and free throw shooter. 

Ben might not have been a liability on offensive during the regular season, but look at the Pistons numbers during the playoffs and go back and watch the games. Teams put a guy close enough to Wallace so he couldn't get a dunk, but basically played 4 on 5 and struggled to score 80 consistently.

This is the hall of fame, not of trying hard or being very good. Wallace had a roughly a 6ish year run of being a very good player and before and after it he was an end of the bench type player. If you are going to the hof for a 6 year run you better be the best of the best in the league and not on just one aspect of the game. 

 
Jayrod said:
Good points on his rebounding, the 3rd and often overlooked phase of the game. I tell my son it is like special teams in football...you can lose or steal a game from time to time primarily because of rebounding.

Wallace was so great as a defender and rebounder that his offensive limitations were not enough to offset that.
Click to expand...


The bolded is very true, but he was still a horrible offensive player. Off the top of my head probably the worst offensive player in NBA history that is in the hof. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
Here's a breakdown of how the Celtics players have performed in the last 12 games against the Warriors. It's probably not that valuable or predictive, as the Celtics roster has changed many times over in that time. Because of that, there are lots of minutes and production that were attributed to players no longer on the roster. White only played in one game.

Per game averages for Points-Rebounds-Assists-Steals-Blocks-Minutes
 

PTS TRB AST STL BLK MIN
Tatum 22.1 7.2 2.3 1.3 0.4 33
Brown 17.1 5.5 1.5 0.6 0.5 23
Smart 12.8 4.0 4.5 1.4 0.3 30
Horford 12.7 8.7 3.2 0.8 0.7 32
Pritchard 7.0 1.7 2.0 0.0 0.3 18
GWilliams 6.0 3.8 1.0 0.8 0.4 21
RWilliams 3.8 6.8 1.3 0.0 1.3 20
Theis 3.5 4.9 1.4 0.6 0.5 15
White 0.0 4.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 22




3P%: GWilliams 50%, Theis 50%, Brown 44%, Horford 41%, Smart 38%, Tatum 37%, Pritchard 36%

Over the last 5 games (with 4 Boston wins), Tatum has averaged 28.8 ppg, Brown 20.8, and Smart 18.2.

I will try to compile a similar profile for the Warriors players in games vs. Boston.
 
Click to expand...


These are fun stats to look at, but without a real deep dive into the games it is pretty meaningless. 

How many games was each team healthy? Klay, Draymond, Steph have missed a lot time in the last few years. Poole, Wiggins and Looney are very different players than they were even 6 months ago. Plus how many times were the games at the end of a long road trip? If I am remembering correctly the last regular season matchup between these teams is when Curry got hurt early in the 2nd quarter and Wiggins was out for rest. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
All the stats say that the Celtics have done well in the regular season against the Warriors. No need to really break those down even more. 

The regular season and the postseason are two different animals. I'm not saying the Warriors don't care about the regular season, but Kerr uses it to experiment and the vets definitely pace themselves. So I don't put much stock into that.

All I hear about from Celtics fans is the Warriors won't be able to score. The biggest mismatch is actually the Celtics offense vs three Warriors defense. Seems as if Celtics fans assume they'll be able to score on the Warriors despite the Dubs having the #2 defense with Draymond missing 30+ games.

The Celtics offense isn't anything special. It relies on Tatum to create everything off PnR  and kick out to mostly career 35% 3 point shooters. How has that worked out for Denver and Dallas? 

Wiggins will be good enough to make life difficult on Tatum and if GP2 and Porter can play then the Dubs have more than enough size to switch everything. 

Only 4 more hours! LFG!

 
the moops said:
One thing. It is not the "pro" basketball hall of fame. It is for international and American amateurs as well. It also takes into account professional NBA players collegiate and international play. 
Click to expand...
Sure, but it is the basketball HOF for pro basketball players, which is what we're talking about. ;)  

 
msudaisy26 said:
These are fun stats to look at, but without a real deep dive into the games it is pretty meaningless. 

How many games was each team healthy? Klay, Draymond, Steph have missed a lot time in the last few years. Poole, Wiggins and Looney are very different players than they were even 6 months ago. Plus how many times were the games at the end of a long road trip? If I am remembering correctly the last regular season matchup between these teams is when Curry got hurt early in the 2nd quarter and Wiggins was out for rest. 
Click to expand...
I mentioned when I posted initially that there probably wouldn't be much learned in the base statistics compiled from the game summaries from the past 6 years. Golden State has a lot more of their current roster intact compared to the high churn rate of the Celtics.

PTS TRB AST STL BLK MIN
Curry 28.1 4.7 4.8 1.2 0.2 33
Wiggins 21.3 3.3 1.7 0.7 1.0 38
Thompson 19.8 4.0 2.0 0.4 0.8 34
Poole 12.5 3.3 1.8 0.8 0.5 24
Green 7.6 8.0 6.1 1.5 1.4 31
Bjelica 7.0 4.0 3.0 0.0 1.0 16
Tuscano-Anderson 6.8 2.3 1.8 1.0 0.5 18
Iguadala 6.0 4.2 3.0 1.0 0.7 24
Porter 5.5 5.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 21
Lee 4.8 4.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 20
Looney 4.7 5.9 1.6 0.3 0.6 17
Payton 3.5 1.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 8
Kuminga 3.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 13
Moody 2.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 9



3P%: Tuscano-Anderson 67%, Bjelica 50%, Curry 44%, Wiggins 40%, Payton 33%, Moody 33%, Green 25%, Poole 25%, Thompson 24%, Iguadala 23%, Lee 16%, Porter 13%, Kuminga 0%, Looney 0%

Curry has shot well from distance and had games of 49 and 47 points (1-1 in those games). Klay didn't shoot particularly well. I'm guessing the guys coming back won't make a huge impact. There's only one basketball and so many minutes to go around. Not sure going 14 players deep in the Finals amounts to all that much. Maybe they can get the starters a couple extra minutes of rest, but in general I don't think teams want their main guys on the bench for very long. They probably will go with an 8 or 9 guy rotation like Boston. IMO, trying to blend in 3 guys that have been out has as much chance of being disruptive than helping.

Looking at the numbers (while leaving out the numbers for a bunch of Celtics guys not on the team any longer), it's hard to grasp that the Celtics went 8-4 in these games. I agree there's a lot of the picture missing . . . no Kyrie, Hayward, Kemba, Isaiah, Olynyk, Rozier, Marcus Morris, Tristan Thompson, etc. for the C's. And no KD, D'Angelo, Barnes, Robinson, or Cousins for the Dubs. Clearly this is an incomplete picture.

Overall, Boston certainly did well enough (but admittedly there were games when GS had pieces missing). I was more interested in how both teams shot. Other than Steph (who hit a high volume of threes), the rest of the Warriors didn't really excel on 3-pointers.

I know I didn't post the numbers for all players involved, but Boston shot better from three:

Boston: 13.1 of 35.3 (37.0%)
Golden State: 10.1 of 32.6 (30.9%)

It remains to be seen if any of that means anything (or if Boston can play as well in the Finals compared to regular season games against GS when guys were out of the lineup).

 
Charlie Harper said:
All the stats say that the Celtics have done well in the regular season against the Warriors. No need to really break those down even more. 

The regular season and the postseason are two different animals. I'm not saying the Warriors don't care about the regular season, but Kerr uses it to experiment and the vets definitely pace themselves. So I don't put much stock into that.

All I hear about from Celtics fans is the Warriors won't be able to score. The biggest mismatch is actually the Celtics offense vs three Warriors defense. Seems as if Celtics fans assume they'll be able to score on the Warriors despite the Dubs having the #2 defense with Draymond missing 30+ games.

The Celtics offense isn't anything special. It relies on Tatum to create everything off PnR  and kick out to mostly career 35% 3 point shooters. How has that worked out for Denver and Dallas? 

Wiggins will be good enough to make life difficult on Tatum and if GP2 and Porter can play then the Dubs have more than enough size to switch everything. 

Only 4 more hours! LFG!
Click to expand...
We'll see.  I'm cautiously optimistic about this series.

:popcorn:

 
Charlie Harper said:
All the stats say that the Celtics have done well in the regular season against the Warriors. No need to really break those down even more. 

The regular season and the postseason are two different animals. I'm not saying the Warriors don't care about the regular season, but Kerr uses it to experiment and the vets definitely pace themselves. So I don't put much stock into that.

All I hear about from Celtics fans is the Warriors won't be able to score. The biggest mismatch is actually the Celtics offense vs three Warriors defense. Seems as if Celtics fans assume they'll be able to score on the Warriors despite the Dubs having the #2 defense with Draymond missing 30+ games.

The Celtics offense isn't anything special. It relies on Tatum to create everything off PnR  and kick out to mostly career 35% 3 point shooters. How has that worked out for Denver and Dallas? 

Wiggins will be good enough to make life difficult on Tatum and if GP2 and Porter can play then the Dubs have more than enough size to switch everything. 

Only 4 more hours! LFG!
Click to expand...
Agreed that regular season numbers (and even post-season numbers) won't matter once the opening tip goes up. But the Celtics are really had two completely different half seasons. The splits from the first half to the second half of season are night and day different. They were 20-21 with a +1.6 margin at the halfway point but 31-10 with a +12.0 margin in the second half of the season. As I just posted above, the Celtics shot their threes better than the Warriors (37.0% vs. 30.9%) when they've faced each other the past 6 years. With the exception of a game when they sat their starters, they haven't lost back-to-back games in 53 games. The Tatum-Brown-Horford-Smart-RWilliams starting lineup is 31-7 with a +13.8 point scoring margin in their last 38 starts together. But as you said . . . none of that matters, so let's get this party started.

 
The only thing any of us know for certain is one of these disgusting franchises is about to lose 4 times in the finals. That is something to celebrate. 

 
Chaos Commish said:
The only thing any of us know for certain is one of these disgusting franchises is about to lose 4 times in the finals. That is something to celebrate. 
Click to expand...


I don't get the hate for either team. They have built their teams mostly through the draft and developed their players. They have also took players on big contracts that no one else wanted and made them valuable assets to their teams. Both have a player that almost everyone hates, but if he was on your team you would love him. They both play well on both ends of the floor. 

Is it because both teams win a lot? The Celtics have the most titles in history and the Warriors are the best team of the last 8 to 10 years? 

 
msudaisy26 said:
I don't get the hate for either team. They have built their teams mostly through the draft and developed their players. They have also took players on big contracts that no one else wanted and made them valuable assets to their teams. Both have a player that almost everyone hates, but if he was on your team you would love him. They both play well on both ends of the floor. 

Is it because both teams win a lot? The Celtics have the most titles in history and the Warriors are the best team of the last 8 to 10 years? 
Click to expand...
I am a Celtics fan and even I am sick of their constant whining at the refs and their flopping. The only two players I am really in favor of are Timelord and Horford. The other guys need to just zip it and hoop up. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
I am a Celtics fan and even I am sick of their constant whining at the refs and their flopping. The only two players I am really in favor of are Timelord and Horford. The other guys need to just zip it and hoop up. 
Click to expand...
This worries me about this series too. GS will obliterate you in transition. Whiners like Tatum really gotta shut up and get back on D this series.

 
Am I the only one that thinks this game 1 probably doesn't give us an idea how this series plays out? 

I think the Warriors come out rusty and lose handily or I think the Celtics come out gassed from back to back physical 7 game series and lose handily. 

Just by prediction, so this is probably the game that goes to double OT with multiple buzzer beaters. 

 
msudaisy26 said:
Am I the only one that thinks this game 1 probably doesn't give us an idea how this series plays out? 

I think the Warriors come out rusty and lose handily or I think the Celtics come out gassed from back to back physical 7 game series and lose handily. 

Just by prediction, so this is probably the game that goes to double OT with multiple buzzer beaters. 
Click to expand...
Other than the insane record for GS winning  series when they wn Game 1, I tend to agree. I think they are 20-2 when up 1-0. Boston lost their last two Game 1’s and have won 7 road games so far. I don’t think much will be revealed after this game. 

 
msudaisy26 said:
I don't get the hate for either team. They have built their teams mostly through the draft and developed their players. They have also took players on big contracts that no one else wanted and made them valuable assets to their teams. Both have a player that almost everyone hates, but if he was on your team you would love him. They both play well on both ends of the floor. 

Is it because both teams win a lot? The Celtics have the most titles in history and the Warriors are the best team of the last 8 to 10 years? 
Click to expand...
I don't see any reason to "hate" (a word I dislike) the Celtics at this point unless one is a rival. I can see fans rooting against Golden State due to Warriors fatigue. I'm in that category.

I'm tired of Steph, Klay, and Draymond, though I respect them (well, maybe not Draymond) and like Kerr. I also value the older dynasties, and don't want the Warriors to elevate their run higher in the dynasty pantheon.

 
msudaisy26 said:
Am I the only one that thinks this game 1 probably doesn't give us an idea how this series plays out? 

I think the Warriors come out rusty and lose handily or I think the Celtics come out gassed from back to back physical 7 game series and lose handily. 

Just by prediction, so this is probably the game that goes to double OT with multiple buzzer beaters. 
Click to expand...
Or a massive earthquake on the san andreas cancels everything so neither team can win

 
Just Win Baby said:
I don't see any reason to "hate" (a word I dislike) the Celtics at this point unless one is a rival. I can see fans rooting against Golden State due to Warriors fatigue. I'm in that category.

I'm tired of Steph, Klay, and Draymond, though I respect them (well, maybe not Draymond) and like Kerr. I also value the older dynasties, and don't want the Warriors to elevate their run higher in the dynasty pantheon.
Click to expand...


Your second paragraph is the one I just can't get behind. These are professionals with a level playing field, salary cap, etc. I want to see greatness, I want to witness something that no one has ever done or will be extremely difficult to repeat and I don't care if it is the same team doing it. 

 
wikkidpissah said:
Celtics will win this series on balance. How can the Warriors hope to get past Russ, Tommy, Hondo and the Jones boys with two Cs in Wilt/Nate and two PGs in Rodgers/Attles?! Furthermore........eh?.........nursie says my soup is ready. GO GREEN!!!!
Click to expand...


When I read this I thought 2 things. First is I am posting in this thread way to much right now because this feels like the pregame to the super bowl and it is taking forever!!!

Second I thought you might be on an acid trip taking you back to your prime and the Celtics of yesteryears. 

 
msudaisy26 said:
Your second paragraph is the one I just can't get behind. These are professionals with a level playing field, salary cap, etc. I want to see greatness, I want to witness something that no one has ever done or will be extremely difficult to repeat and I don't care if it is the same team doing it. 
Click to expand...


I will go out on a limb here and say that you are not going to see anything in these Finals that is "something that no one has ever done or will be extremely difficult to repeat". So, respectfully, I'm really not sure what that has to do with what I posted.

Also, it's fine if you "don't care if it is the same team doing it". I do in this case. I didn't with the 80s Lakers or Celtics or 90s Bulls, but that is my own taste. I never expected everyone would agree with my opinion.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99 said:
Strato-O-Matic simulated the finals with said analytics. The results came back W-W-L-W-W for Boston (4-1). Three road wins. No point in even playing the actual games. Just give the Celtics the trophy. 
Click to expand...
That would mean I wouldn't have to stay up till midnight watching the games. I'm on board. 

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

facook
2021-22 NBA Thread: Bill Simmons furiously recording 2.5 hour long pod about how Boston is still better than Golden State -- ***3 dy Aaron Rudnicki lo
Replies
6
Views
633
The Gator
The Gator
GordonGekko
Energy Crisis: Has Your Electricity/Gas Bill Gone Completely Out Of Control Recently? (16/30)
Replies
6
Views
882
STEADYMOBBIN 22
STEADYMOBBIN 22
woodstock
This Article Is Righteous And Prescient About So Many Things, Oh, and Nü-Metal And Twilight Are The True Outsider Art, The Only Rebel Poets
Replies
16
Views
2K
Dan Lambskin
Dan Lambskin

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top