*NBA THREAD* Abe will be missed (4 Viewers)

[sporthenry]

C'mon Sterling , make it so

Clippers would be stupid to send 2. Boston is stuck in a corner. Maybe Ainge knows that Doc won't leave but if he leaves then they are looking at getting nothing for him.

His contract apparently says he can't coach any other team for the length of the contract even if he resigns. He has to have Boston's permission to leave and coach somewhere else.

Yeah, but seems to be a lot of speculation that he'll go back to TV and after all this, you'd imagine it'd be more likely since its obvious he doesn't want to be there.

He's giving up 21 million and the next three years to go to TV? I mean, sure, I guess. But it's not like he's at the tail end of a 20 year deal. He just signed the contract two years ago and had to know Garnett and pierce would be done/gone long before it was over.

Then maybe its a misdirect from him to push his way out more. But sources have said he would do it. And what do these analysts make? He wouldn't be giving up $21 million in total.

 

[Abraham]

It's also being done wrong. The celtics have the leverAge. Worst case they are looking for a coach during an offseason where both van gundys, Karl, Hollins, shaw and Scott are available and they have Garnett and pierce for one more pretty good year. Doc should have gone to ainge and said, "I'm not the guy to rebuild with. Lets find a way out of this where we both win." As it is, doc can't return to Boston the way things are. No way. So ainge can wait out the clippers, and each day this drags on is more evidence that they'll add Bledsoe to the deal.

If that happens, I'm sending rondo to New Orleans for Gordon and the 6. I'm sending pierce to Cleveland for 19 and 33. I'm sending Jordan to Atlanya for 18. Which gives them Bledsoe, Jeff green, Eric Gordon, and four top 20 picks.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Does Garnett plan to retire if he isn't dealt and doc resigns?

 

[HellToupee]

Does Garnett plan to retire if he isn't dealt and doc resigns?

KG will retire if Pierce goes

 

[Abraham]

I think he'd stick around. Garnett seems to be a guy that takes the league and the game seriously. I think he would embrace the chance to teach Jordan and green and still play at a high level. I also think he would welcome a trade to a contender. What could Brooklyn or chicago offer? The celtics are in a spot where they realize the window is basically closed. The rest of the east is better and even at full strength they aren't likely to get to the finals, much less win it. But their assets are old or Hurt. Do you milk it for one more season as a celebration lap or start the rebuild a year sooner?

 

[sporthenry]

It's also being done wrong. The celtics have the leverAge. Worst case they are looking for a coach during an offseason where both van gundys, Karl, Hollins, shaw and Scott are available and they have Garnett and pierce for one more pretty good year. Doc should have gone to ainge and said, "I'm not the guy to rebuild with. Lets find a way out of this where we both win." As it is, doc can't return to Boston the way things are. No way. So ainge can wait out the clippers, and each day this drags on is more evidence that they'll add Bledsoe to the deal.

If that happens, I'm sending rondo to New Orleans for Gordon and the 6. I'm sending pierce to Cleveland for 19 and 33. I'm sending Jordan to Atlanya for 18. Which gives them Bledsoe, Jeff green, Eric Gordon, and four top 20 picks.

No way its Bledsoe. The asking price right now is just the 2nd first. Bledsoe is > 1st round pick. The first round picks probably don't mean much for the Clips since they are going all in and they should be late 1st rounders anyways. But if some way they don't get CP3 or Howard and they stink, those draft picks could be valuable.

 

[Abraham]

I think it they want Bledsoe they will get him.

 

[This_Guy]

It's also being done wrong. The celtics have the leverAge. Worst case they are looking for a coach during an offseason where both van gundys, Karl, Hollins, shaw and Scott are available and they have Garnett and pierce for one more pretty good year. Doc should have gone to ainge and said, "I'm not the guy to rebuild with. Lets find a way out of this where we both win." As it is, doc can't return to Boston the way things are. No way. So ainge can wait out the clippers, and each day this drags on is more evidence that they'll add Bledsoe to the deal.

If that happens, I'm sending rondo to New Orleans for Gordon and the 6. I'm sending pierce to Cleveland for 19 and 33. I'm sending Jordan to Atlanya for 18. Which gives them Bledsoe, Jeff green, Eric Gordon, and four top 20 picks.

How does that give the Celts any leverage dealing with the Clippers? The Clips have all those coaches available too. They can pass and still get a good coach and keep all their assets to trade elsewhere. The Celts are in a position where they are either having Doc coach when the whole world knows he doesn't really want to be there and they are stuck with a bunch of aging players. Now that the cat is out of the bag they are almost forced to move Doc and every other team knows that.

 

[Raider Nation]

As much as I'd like to make an insightful post about how Game 7 will go... I'm pretty sure flipping a coin to pick the winner and rolling a 20-sided die for the margin of victory would just as predictive, if not more.

Unacceptable! The least you can do is try. I'll go first.

103-84, Heat.

 

[Daywalker]

As much as I'd like to make an insightful post about how Game 7 will go... I'm pretty sure flipping a coin to pick the winner and rolling a 20-sided die for the margin of victory would just as predictive, if not more.

Yeah any analysis is silly at this point. Been hearing the Spurs need to hit threes except they should have won game 6 while Ginobli played the worst game of his career and they were only 5-18 from beyond the arc. Hearing the talking heads spouting how difficult it will be for the Spurs to rebound from such a difficult loss is just asinine based off of what has happened this series. Guess they have to fill airtime.

 

[sporthenry]

Give me the Heat by 10. Perhaps I'm overrating the last part of the game but the Heat certainly seemed to finally figure some things out. I'm sure Pop will counter but I just don't see what he can do when Allen, Miller and Chalmers are all out there. I'd expect Wade to get some early minutes but if he isn't having a game 4 type performance, I'd imagine his leash will be short. Spurs looked lost with LeBron bottling up TP and fatigue might be setting in on Parker and Duncan. Now if Manu sobers up in time for game 7, who knows.

 

[Abraham]

New Nbadraft.net mock is interesting. Len going first, Noel falling to the suns at 5, which seems low until you start reading about how teams can't get in touch with him and he's canceling meetings and blew off Wes and Lebrons guy.

Oladipo at 7 seems low.

 

[JMon348]

Heat win another close one.

97-93

 

[Dentist]

Wish i could say the spurs had a shot tonight, or that it was even going to be a close game.

But i've seen this scenario play out so many times over the years in a variety of sports.

Home teams don't lose game 7's very often. Road teams that should've won game 6 and lose in somewhat heartbreaking fashion almost NEVER win game 7.

More often the road team comes out extremely flat having used up all their energy and emotion trying to win game 6.

Heat by 10, but it will be one of those games where the score doesn't indicate how much of a lock it was because the spurs never threatened in the second half..

 

[TobiasFunke]

Wish i could say the spurs had a shot tonight, or that it was even going to be a close game.

But i've seen this scenario play out so many times over the years in a variety of sports.

Home teams don't lose game 7's very often. Road teams that should've won game 6 and lose in somewhat heartbreaking fashion almost NEVER win game 7.

More often the road team comes out extremely flat having used up all their energy and emotion trying to win game 6.

Heat by 10, but it will be one of those games where the score doesn't indicate how much of a lock it was because the spurs never threatened in the second half..

I don't understand why people are acting like this happens all the time. Not just Dentist, but the media are also acting like we have some sort of historical reference here.

This is only the 5th Game 7 since they switched the format of the Finals to go 2-3-2:

In 2010 the Lakers won game 6 by 22 at home.

In 2005 the road team (Pistons) won Game 6 before losing in San Antonio in Game 7.

In 1994 the road team (Knicks) did lose a heartbreaking Game 6 to the Rockets, but they didn't get come out flat at all. It was a two point game at the half and a three point game in the third quarter.

In 1988 we had another road team (Pistons) losing in heartbreaking fashion, but they also didn't come out flat in Game 7. Led after the first quarter, one point deficit at halftime, got blown out in the third but fought back to lose by only 3.

That's it- the whole history of seven game series in this format.* Only two teams in a situation remotely comparable to the Spurs', and both fought like hell in Game 7.

Sure the home team wins most of the time. That's because the home team: (1) is usually the better team, since they have home court by virtue of having the better record; and (2) is at home, which is an advantage in mid-December weekday games just like it's an advantage in Game 7 of the Finals. The team with the better record, playing at home, is gonna win most of the time regardless of the stakes.

*Only five Game 7s in almost 30 years- so much the the Stern conspiracy theorists.

 

[Instinctive]

Sure the home team wins most of the time. That's because the home team: (1) is usually the better team, since they have home court by virtue of having the better record; and (2) is at home, which is an advantage in mid-December weekday games just like it's an advantage in Game 7 of the Finals. The team with the better record, playing at home, is gonna win most of the time regardless of the stakes.

I feel like not enough people seem to understand this, though it seems fairly obvious.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Does Spoelstra have the balls tonight to cut Wade's minutes?

 

[Dentist]

Wish i could say the spurs had a shot tonight, or that it was even going to be a close game.

But i've seen this scenario play out so many times over the years in a variety of sports.

Home teams don't lose game 7's very often. Road teams that should've won game 6 and lose in somewhat heartbreaking fashion almost NEVER win game 7.

More often the road team comes out extremely flat having used up all their energy and emotion trying to win game 6.

Heat by 10, but it will be one of those games where the score doesn't indicate how much of a lock it was because the spurs never threatened in the second half..

I don't understand why people are acting like this happens all the time. Not just Dentist, but the media are also acting like we have some sort of historical reference here.

This is only the 5th Game 7 since they switched the format of the Finals to go 2-3-2:

In 2010 the Lakers won game 6 by 22 at home.

In 2005 the road team (Pistons) won Game 6 before losing in San Antonio in Game 7.

In 1994 the road team (Knicks) did lose a heartbreaking Game 6 to the Rockets, but they didn't get come out flat at all. It was a two point game at the half and a three point game in the third quarter.

In 1988 we had another road team (Pistons) losing in heartbreaking fashion, but they also didn't come out flat in Game 7. Led after the first quarter, one point deficit at halftime, got blown out in the third but fought back to lose by only 3.

That's it- the whole history of seven game series in this format.* Only two teams in a situation remotely comparable to the Spurs', and both fought like hell in Game 7.

Sure the home team wins most of the time. That's because the home team: (1) is usually the better team, since they have home court by virtue of having the better record; and (2) is at home, which is an advantage in mid-December weekday games just like it's an advantage in Game 7 of the Finals. The team with the better record, playing at home, is gonna win most of the time regardless of the stakes.

*Only five Game 7s in almost 30 years- so much the the Stern conspiracy theorists.

I was crossing this over multiple sports.

I was aware it had only happened in the nba a few times... although your evidence is still 5-0 home team.

But i've seen it in MLB, NHL.. the other team sports with best of 7 formats.

I realize those aren't the same sports, but the team concepts of emotion, heartache, all apply.

I'll never forget the 1985 world series.. Cardinals were the better team, had the Royals on the ropes.. lost an extremely tight game 6 due to a bad call + a series of unbelievable circumstances that led to a 9th inning come from behind win.

the next day for game 7.. a series that had featured very little offense saw a Cardinals team that had absolutely felt slighted and emotionally spent lost 11-0.

 

[PatsFanCT]

Ok, here's my

The Heat were lucky to win a "must-win" elimination game Tuesday night. At home. The Spurs have played much better overall in this series than the Heat. This series should have been over with a 4-2 Spurs win. The Heat know that, and the Spurs know that. Pop is the much better coach and he will have his guys fired up for this game.

I can see the Spurs blowing out the Heat tonight, and +6 is a gift as far as I'm concerned.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Wish i could say the spurs had a shot tonight, or that it was even going to be a close game.

But i've seen this scenario play out so many times over the years in a variety of sports.

Home teams don't lose game 7's very often. Road teams that should've won game 6 and lose in somewhat heartbreaking fashion almost NEVER win game 7.

More often the road team comes out extremely flat having used up all their energy and emotion trying to win game 6.

Heat by 10, but it will be one of those games where the score doesn't indicate how much of a lock it was because the spurs never threatened in the second half..

I don't understand why people are acting like this happens all the time. Not just Dentist, but the media are also acting like we have some sort of historical reference here.

This is only the 5th Game 7 since they switched the format of the Finals to go 2-3-2:

In 2010 the Lakers won game 6 by 22 at home.

In 2005 the road team (Pistons) won Game 6 before losing in San Antonio in Game 7.

In 1994 the road team (Knicks) did lose a heartbreaking Game 6 to the Rockets, but they didn't get come out flat at all. It was a two point game at the half and a three point game in the third quarter.

In 1988 we had another road team (Pistons) losing in heartbreaking fashion, but they also didn't come out flat in Game 7. Led after the first quarter, one point deficit at halftime, got blown out in the third but fought back to lose by only 3.

That's it- the whole history of seven game series in this format.* Only two teams in a situation remotely comparable to the Spurs', and both fought like hell in Game 7.

Sure the home team wins most of the time. That's because the home team: (1) is usually the better team, since they have home court by virtue of having the better record; and (2) is at home, which is an advantage in mid-December weekday games just like it's an advantage in Game 7 of the Finals. The team with the better record, playing at home, is gonna win most of the time regardless of the stakes.

*Only five Game 7s in almost 30 years- so much the the Stern conspiracy theorists.

I was crossing this over multiple sports.

I was aware it had only happened in the nba a few times... although your evidence is still 5-0 home team.

But i've seen it in MLB, NHL.. the other team sports with best of 7 formats.

I realize those aren't the same sports, but the team concepts of emotion, heartache, all apply.

I'll never forget the 1985 world series.. Cardinals were the better team, had the Royals on the ropes.. lost an extremely tight game 6 due to a bad call + a series of unbelievable circumstances that led to a 9th inning come from behind win.

the next day for game 7.. a series that had featured very little offense saw a Cardinals team that had absolutely felt slighted and emotionally spent lost 11-0.

4-0 home team, but like I said that's not really unusual.

If you're crossing over sports, I watched a road team bounce back from a brutal loss to win the subsequent winner-take-all game just eight months ago, when the Cardinals lost Game 4 of the NLDS on a Jayson Werth walk-off in the bottom of the 9th, then came back from 6-0 down to win Game 5 in Washington. So there's my counterexample. My horrifying, nightmarish, agonizing counterexample.

 

[hxperson]

Ok, here's my

The Heat were lucky to win a "must-win" elimination game Tuesday night. At home. The Spurs have played much better overall in this series than the Heat. This series should have been over with a 4-2 Spurs win. The Heat know that, and the Spurs know that. Pop is the much better coach and he will have his guys fired up for this game.

I can see the Spurs blowing out the Heat tonight, and +6 is a gift as far as I'm concerned.

I tend to agree. I understand the conventional wisdom around the emotions of a crushing defeat on the brink of victory, and the home team advantage, but the Spurs are not a conventional team. These guys have won 3 championships together and have one of the best coaches in the game. From what I've seen the Spurs have a better handle of how to beat their opponent than the Heat do right now. They made some bad mistakes last game that are fixable and could make them even better tonight.

I can easily see this game going either way but put a gun to my head and I'd pick the Spurs.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Ok, here's my

The Heat were lucky to win a "must-win" elimination game Tuesday night. At home. The Spurs have played much better overall in this series than the Heat. This series should have been over with a 4-2 Spurs win. The Heat know that, and the Spurs know that. Pop is the much better coach and he will have his guys fired up for this game.

I can see the Spurs blowing out the Heat tonight, and +6 is a gift as far as I'm concerned.

Why were they lucky?

 

[Abraham]

Ok, here's my

The Heat were lucky to win a "must-win" elimination game Tuesday night. At home. The Spurs have played much better overall in this series than the Heat. This series should have been over with a 4-2 Spurs win. The Heat know that, and the Spurs know that. Pop is the much better coach and he will have his guys fired up for this game.

I can see the Spurs blowing out the Heat tonight, and +6 is a gift as far as I'm concerned.

Why were they lucky?

It's part of the game so calling it "luck" is a bit silly. But they needed about 5 different things to happen in the last thirty seconds and all five did. I don't think it's out of line to ascribe "luck" to a fortuitous development like that. (Manu missed free throw, Leonard missed free throw, bosh rebound, Allen 3...)

 

[Ghost Rider]

Ok, here's my

The Heat were lucky to win a "must-win" elimination game Tuesday night. At home. The Spurs have played much better overall in this series than the Heat. This series should have been over with a 4-2 Spurs win. The Heat know that, and the Spurs know that. Pop is the much better coach and he will have his guys fired up for this game.

I can see the Spurs blowing out the Heat tonight, and +6 is a gift as far as I'm concerned.

Why were they lucky?

It's part of the game so calling it "luck" is a bit silly. But they needed about 5 different things to happen in the last thirty seconds and all five did. I don't think it's out of line to ascribe "luck" to a fortuitous development like that. (Manu missed free throw, Leonard missed free throw, bosh rebound, Allen 3...)

Maybe so, but there are many NBA champions who won games in a "lucky" manner that had they not won them, they likely do not become champions. It happens. Some might call it luck.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Ok, here's my

The Heat were lucky to win a "must-win" elimination game Tuesday night. At home. The Spurs have played much better overall in this series than the Heat. This series should have been over with a 4-2 Spurs win. The Heat know that, and the Spurs know that. Pop is the much better coach and he will have his guys fired up for this game.

I can see the Spurs blowing out the Heat tonight, and +6 is a gift as far as I'm concerned.

Why were they lucky?

It's part of the game so calling it "luck" is a bit silly. But they needed about 5 different things to happen in the last thirty seconds and all five did. I don't think it's out of line to ascribe "luck" to a fortuitous development like that. (Manu missed free throw, Leonard missed free throw, bosh rebound, Allen 3...)

Bosh is a talented rebounder who was in even better position to grab that rebound because San Antonio needed to have good perimeter defenders on the floor up three. Allen is the greatest 3 point shooter in history. And Manu and Kawhi missed only 2 of their 6 combined free throws in the final minute, which is right in line with what you'd "expect" based on their normal numbers.

Sure, a lot of things broke the Heat's way in the final 28 seconds. But a lot of other things broke against them in the previous minute to put them in that position. Most notably, with the Heat up 3 and about to put the game away, a guy who shot 35% from three on the year hitting a ridiculous 25 footer from the top of the key in the midst of a 6 for 23 shooting performance. That was probably more unlikely than any other single event down the stretch.

 

[Instinctive]

Sure the home team wins most of the time. That's because the home team: (1) is usually the better team, since they have home court by virtue of having the better record; and (2) is at home, which is an advantage in mid-December weekday games just like it's an advantage in Game 7 of the Finals. The team with the better record, playing at home, is gonna win most of the time regardless of the stakes.

I feel like not enough people seem to understand this, though it seems fairly obvious.

That 1% thing is such a burden, isn't it?

Look man, from a basketball knowledge perspective you're easily my favorite poster to read in the thread. Do you need to be a #### about things, or can you let it go?

 

[PatsFanCT]

Ok, here's my

The Heat were lucky to win a "must-win" elimination game Tuesday night. At home. The Spurs have played much better overall in this series than the Heat. This series should have been over with a 4-2 Spurs win. The Heat know that, and the Spurs know that. Pop is the much better coach and he will have his guys fired up for this game.

I can see the Spurs blowing out the Heat tonight, and +6 is a gift as far as I'm concerned.

Why were they lucky?

It's part of the game so calling it "luck" is a bit silly. But they needed about 5 different things to happen in the last thirty seconds and all five did. I don't think it's out of line to ascribe "luck" to a fortuitous development like that. (Manu missed free throw, Leonard missed free throw, bosh rebound, Allen 3...)

Maybe so, but there are many NBA champions who won games in a "lucky" manner that had they not won them, they likely do not become champions. It happens. Some might call it luck.

Yes, luck was probably a poor choice, but fortunate indeed.

 

[JMon348]

 

[R Dizzle]

My official game prediction, with an assist from random.org....

For the game-winner, in honor of our thread-starter, I shall flip a virtual "toonie", with the queen side representing those drama queen Miami Heat, and the bear side representing the surly disposition of Spurs head coach Greg Popovich.

Timestamp: 2013-06-20 16:09:27 UTC

For the winning margin, I shall use the "True Random Number Generator" on the homepage with Min set to "1" and Max set to "20".

Result:14

 

[TobiasFunke]

Sure the home team wins most of the time. That's because the home team: (1) is usually the better team, since they have home court by virtue of having the better record; and (2) is at home, which is an advantage in mid-December weekday games just like it's an advantage in Game 7 of the Finals. The team with the better record, playing at home, is gonna win most of the time regardless of the stakes.

I feel like not enough people seem to understand this, though it seems fairly obvious.

That 1% thing is such a burden, isn't it?

Look man, from a basketball knowledge perspective you're easily my favorite poster to read in the thread. Do you need to be a #### about things, or can you let it go?

It's all part of the Ferris charm. Once many months ago I inaccurately recalled Jacque Vaughn's role when he was at Kansas- I said I thought he was a combo when he was a pure PG. I was like 18-22 when Vaughn was at KU; 99% of the time I was either studying or on drugs, so I'm amazed I even remembered seeing him in the KU uniform. But Ferris has never ever let me forget it. At this point I'm disappointed when he doesn't bring it up any time we disagree.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Sure the home team wins most of the time. That's because the home team: (1) is usually the better team, since they have home court by virtue of having the better record; and (2) is at home, which is an advantage in mid-December weekday games just like it's an advantage in Game 7 of the Finals. The team with the better record, playing at home, is gonna win most of the time regardless of the stakes.

I feel like not enough people seem to understand this, though it seems fairly obvious.

That 1% thing is such a burden, isn't it?

Look man, from a basketball knowledge perspective you're easily my favorite poster to read in the thread. Do you need to be a #### about things, or can you let it go?

It's all part of the Ferris charm. Once many months ago I inaccurately recalled Jacque Vaughn's role when he was at Kansas- I said I thought he was a combo when he was a pure PG. I was like 18-22 when Vaughn was at KU; 99% of the time I was either studying or on drugs, so I'm amazed I even remembered seeing him in the KU uniform. But Ferris has never ever let me forget it. At this point I'm disappointed when he doesn't bring it up any time we disagree.

I'll donate $250 to your favorite charity if by tipoff tonight if you can show more than one instance of me bringing this up outside the context of Roy Williams point guards.

Although the topic was RW and point guards (way to skirt a charitable donation on a technicality), here's you bringing it up for absolutely no reason well after we first had the conversation. Here's one from a couple weeks ago. I thought I recalled a few others, but perhaps not. I'm not great with the search function around here. Not that it bothers me. I like that we have a thing.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

My official game prediction, with an assist from random.org....

For the game-winner, in honor of our thread-starter, I shall flip a virtual "toonie", with the queen side representing those drama queen Miami Heat, and the bear side representing the surly disposition of Spurs head coach Greg Popovich.

Timestamp: 2013-06-20 16:09:27 UTC

For the winning margin, I shall use the "True Random Number Generator" on the homepage with Min set to "1" and Max set to "20".

Result:14

I went with "YES" on the slightly-more-important "Does LeBron wear a headband?" question, though I admit I went my gut on that one, and not with a system as sophisticate as flipping a virtual "toonie".

Question for our Canadians and/or folks who spend a lot of time there: What is the proper spelling of the nickname for the two dollar Canadian coin? Is it "toonie" in reference to the loon on the "loonie", or is it "twonie" to mashup the two-dollar value with the loonie reference?

Toonie and loonie.

 

[saintfool]

Give me the Heat by 10. Perhaps I'm overrating the last part of the game but the Heat certainly seemed to finally figure some things out. I'm sure Pop will counter but I just don't see what he can do when Allen, Miller and Chalmers are all out there. I'd expect Wade to get some early minutes but if he isn't having a game 4 type performance, I'd imagine his leash will be short. Spurs looked lost with LeBron bottling up TP and fatigue might be setting in on Parker and Duncan. Now if Manu sobers up in time for game 7, who knows.

Wasn't this only done in 4Q? Doing it for an entire game is a tall order. I have to think the Spurs and TP will figure out a counter for that, especially if attempted most of a game.

 

[Abraham]

Absolutely. I expect screens at half court the entire game if James is guarding Parker as well as the spurs guards snow birding in an attempt to wear him out running back and forth. Anyone that thinks fatigue isn't affecting everyone, including James, isn't watching. This is going to be a rough 48 minutes for everyone. Whoever manages it best is likely to end the game on a 14-2 run and win the title IMO. Cheering for the spurs but give me Miami by 8

 

[thecatch]

Sure the home team wins most of the time. That's because the home team: (1) is usually the better team, since they have home court by virtue of having the better record; and (2) is at home, which is an advantage in mid-December weekday games just like it's an advantage in Game 7 of the Finals. The team with the better record, playing at home, is gonna win most of the time regardless of the stakes.

I feel like not enough people seem to understand this, though it seems fairly obvious.

That 1% thing is such a burden, isn't it?

Look man, from a basketball knowledge perspective you're easily my favorite poster to read in the thread. Do you need to be a #### about things, or can you let it go?

It's all part of the Ferris charm. Once many months ago I inaccurately recalled Jacque Vaughn's role when he was at Kansas- I said I thought he was a combo when he was a pure PG. I was like 18-22 when Vaughn was at KU; 99% of the time I was either studying or on drugs, so I'm amazed I even remembered seeing him in the KU uniform. But Ferris has never ever let me forget it. At this point I'm disappointed when he doesn't bring it up any time we disagree.

C'mon, if the kid wants to let his hair down on this board and relieve himself of the social pressure of pretending not to be smarter than everyone else all the time, the least he can do is put up with some ribbing now and then.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I'll donate $250 to your favorite charity if by tipoff tonight if you can show more than one instance of me bringing this up outside the context of Roy Williams point guards.

Although the topic was RW and point guards (way to skirt a charitable donation on a technicality), here's you bringing it up for absolutely no reason well after we first had the conversation. Here's one from a couple weeks ago. I thought I recalled a few others, but perhaps not. I'm not great with the search function around here. Not that it bothers me. I like that we have a thing.

Those are the only two. Recency bias is a #####, isn't it? There have been many times since then when we've disagreed on stuff, yet it didn't come up.

ETA: given the source of the Jacque Vaughn thing was when you were trying to counter the conventional wisdom that Roy Williams struggles when he doesn't have a dominant PG, I disagree with the classifying the context of Roy Williams PGs as a technicality. And my beef wasn't over Jacque Vaughn specifically; it was the certainty and snark with which you presented a statement that wasn't true. It was not unlike here where you accused me of an arbitrary cutoff to include one data point an exclude another, except the cutoff was not arbitrary and included the data point you accused me of excluding. And somehow I got through all that without having to play the Jacque Vaughn card.

It's the day of Game 7 of what has been an incredible NBA Finals. I'm not gonna do this again in the NBA thread.

 

[sporthenry]

Give me the Heat by 10. Perhaps I'm overrating the last part of the game but the Heat certainly seemed to finally figure some things out. I'm sure Pop will counter but I just don't see what he can do when Allen, Miller and Chalmers are all out there. I'd expect Wade to get some early minutes but if he isn't having a game 4 type performance, I'd imagine his leash will be short. Spurs looked lost with LeBron bottling up TP and fatigue might be setting in on Parker and Duncan. Now if Manu sobers up in time for game 7, who knows.

Wasn't this only done in 4Q? Doing it for an entire game is a tall order. I have to think the Spurs and TP will figure out a counter for that, especially if attempted most of a game.

I think it was sprinkled throughout although he seemingly took over all guarding of TP in the 4th. I just think you might see the adjustments like LBJ covering TP or taking out Wade much quicker since you can't really afford to leave anything out there. Last game of the year Brent, can't hold anything back now.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I'm thinking Heat by 10 at the end of the 1st quarter, Tied at half. Heat up by 1 at the end of the third. Heat win by 12.

I, of course, have no idea what I am talking about when it comes to the NBA however, so the grain of salt here is epic.

 

[R Dizzle]

I'll donate $250 to your favorite charity if by tipoff tonight if you can show more than one instance of me bringing this up outside the context of Roy Williams point guards.

Although the topic was RW and point guards (way to skirt a charitable donation on a technicality), here's you bringing it up for absolutely no reason well after we first had the conversation. Here's one from a couple weeks ago. I thought I recalled a few others, but perhaps not. I'm not great with the search function around here. Not that it bothers me. I like that we have a thing.

Those are the only two. Recency bias is a #####, isn't it? There have been many times since then when we've disagreed on stuff, yet it didn't come up.

ETA: given the source of the Jacque Vaughn thing was when you were trying to counter the conventional wisdom that Roy Williams struggles when he doesn't have a dominant PG, I disagree with the classifying the context of Roy Williams PGs as a technicality. And my beef wasn't over Jacque Vaughn specifically; it was the certainty and snark with which you presented a statement that wasn't true. It was not unlike here where you accused me of an arbitrary cutoff to include one data point an exclude another, except the cutoff was not arbitrary and included the data point you accused me of excluding. And somehow I got through all that without having to play the Jacque Vaughn card.

It's the day of Game 7 of what has been an incredible NBA Finals. I'm not gonna do this again in the NBA thread.

I agree with you that this NBA Finals is incredible.

But I got to thinking about this earlier, one of the best Finals I've seen. But what makes this Finals more incredible than any other? There have only been 2 close games of 6.

Does Game 6 make this Finals incredible?

Is it because we have a polarizing figure in LeBron, either you love him(and the Heat) or hate him(and the Heat)?

Is it because you have a Spurs team with 3 veterans and possibly the greatest PF ever, a team that displays a prime example of team basketball. Built vs Bought?

Or is it simply because it has lasted 7 games?

I know it's a combination of all of those things, but how often is a series that has 4 double digit margin final scores referred to as incredible.

 

[saintfool]

Give me the Heat by 10. Perhaps I'm overrating the last part of the game but the Heat certainly seemed to finally figure some things out. I'm sure Pop will counter but I just don't see what he can do when Allen, Miller and Chalmers are all out there. I'd expect Wade to get some early minutes but if he isn't having a game 4 type performance, I'd imagine his leash will be short. Spurs looked lost with LeBron bottling up TP and fatigue might be setting in on Parker and Duncan. Now if Manu sobers up in time for game 7, who knows.

Wasn't this only done in 4Q? Doing it for an entire game is a tall order. I have to think the Spurs and TP will figure out a counter for that, especially if attempted most of a game.

Agreed. If MIA switches LeBron to Parker early, my guess is SAS will counter with putting Gary Neal in the game and having him start the play while Parker runs LeBron through obstacle courses of screens. SAS has a couple sets for that; they installed them to wear down two-way PGs like Westbrook and Rondo.

i could also see TP going into attack mode, especially early, with James on him. If he could get some cheap, quick fouls early then it *really* hurts Miami.

I think the Spurs win this. If any team can pull the upset by beating 35 years of history and the Heat then it is this team of Spurs. No telling who steps up and has the game of his life but it happens tonight. Spurs by 6 with Lebron pulling a full Kobe-hero-mode late in the game.

 

[Kev4029]

I'll donate $250 to your favorite charity if by tipoff tonight if you can show more than one instance of me bringing this up outside the context of Roy Williams point guards.

Although the topic was RW and point guards (way to skirt a charitable donation on a technicality), here's you bringing it up for absolutely no reason well after we first had the conversation. Here's one from a couple weeks ago. I thought I recalled a few others, but perhaps not. I'm not great with the search function around here. Not that it bothers me. I like that we have a thing.

Those are the only two. Recency bias is a #####, isn't it? There have been many times since then when we've disagreed on stuff, yet it didn't come up.

ETA: given the source of the Jacque Vaughn thing was when you were trying to counter the conventional wisdom that Roy Williams struggles when he doesn't have a dominant PG, I disagree with the classifying the context of Roy Williams PGs as a technicality. And my beef wasn't over Jacque Vaughn specifically; it was the certainty and snark with which you presented a statement that wasn't true. It was not unlike here where you accused me of an arbitrary cutoff to include one data point an exclude another, except the cutoff was not arbitrary and included the data point you accused me of excluding. And somehow I got through all that without having to play the Jacque Vaughn card.

It's the day of Game 7 of what has been an incredible NBA Finals. I'm not gonna do this again in the NBA thread.

I hate when mom and dad fight.

 

[Abraham]

I'll donate $250 to your favorite charity if by tipoff tonight if you can show more than one instance of me bringing this up outside the context of Roy Williams point guards.

Although the topic was RW and point guards (way to skirt a charitable donation on a technicality), here's you bringing it up for absolutely no reason well after we first had the conversation. Here's one from a couple weeks ago. I thought I recalled a few others, but perhaps not. I'm not great with the search function around here. Not that it bothers me. I like that we have a thing.

Those are the only two. Recency bias is a #####, isn't it? There have been many times since then when we've disagreed on stuff, yet it didn't come up.

ETA: given the source of the Jacque Vaughn thing was when you were trying to counter the conventional wisdom that Roy Williams struggles when he doesn't have a dominant PG, I disagree with the classifying the context of Roy Williams PGs as a technicality. And my beef wasn't over Jacque Vaughn specifically; it was the certainty and snark with which you presented a statement that wasn't true. It was not unlike here where you accused me of an arbitrary cutoff to include one data point an exclude another, except the cutoff was not arbitrary and included the data point you accused me of excluding. And somehow I got through all that without having to play the Jacque Vaughn card.

It's the day of Game 7 of what has been an incredible NBA Finals. I'm not gonna do this again in the NBA thread.

I agree with you that this NBA Finals is incredible.But I got to thinking about this earlier, one of the best Finals I've seen. But what makes this Finals more incredible than any other? There have only been 2 close games of 6.

Does Game 6 make this Finals incredible?

Is it because we have a polarizing figure in LeBron, either you love him(and the Heat) or hate him(and the Heat)?

Is it because you have a Spurs team with 3 veterans and possibly the greatest PF ever, a team that displays a prime example of team basketball. Built vs Bought?

Or is it simply because it has lasted 7 games?

I know it's a combination of all of those things, but how often is a series that has 4 double digit margin final scores referred to as incredible.

It's been a great finals for the following reason:

- both teams have given their fans something to cheer about in the case of dominant games.

- Both teams have given their fans something I grouse about.

- the stars are playing like stars.

Been a long time since those three things happened in the finals.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I agree with you that this NBA Finals is incredible.

But I got to thinking about this earlier, one of the best Finals I've seen. But what makes this Finals more incredible than any other? There have only been 2 close games of 6.

Does Game 6 make this Finals incredible?

Is it because we have a polarizing figure in LeBron, either you love him(and the Heat) or hate him(and the Heat)?

Is it because you have a Spurs team with 3 veterans and possibly the greatest PF ever, a team that displays a prime example of team basketball. Built vs Bought?

Or is it simply because it has lasted 7 games?

I know it's a combination of all of those things, but how often is a series that has 4 double digit margin final scores referred to as incredible.

You know, to me it's a weird impossible to quantify thing. Just feels like the quality of play is on another level from anything we've seen in years. The first three quarters of Game 4 in particular was incredible. It felt like I'd been watching the college game all season and just turned on my first pro game or something, that's how much better it was than normal NBA action IMO.

There's also the coaching chess match. Maybe it's the better access to info and advanced analysis, but I feel like we're aware of all these fascinating strategy subplots we didn't really know about about before. The Wade spacing problem in particular makes for a fascinating dynamic. And the offenses are kind of mirror images of each other, with the textbook unselfishness and ball movement on offense and excellence in transition. It's like watching each team try to stop themselves.

This is also the first time since at least 2008 that the Finals have matched up two teams that are clearly the best in the league (since the Westbrook injury).

And there's also the plot lines you mentioned; two all-time greats and at least two others you can tell your kids about seeing some day, all on the floor. The contrast between how the teams came together. The contrast between the cities. All that good stuff. Plus some good breaks- no technical fouls, no real officiating controversies, nothing getting in the way of the players deciding the games.

 

[badmojo1006]

Is Aaron Hernandez going to pull an OJ in the middle of the game tonight?

It is kinda eerie

 

[HellToupee]

So Stern is blocking the Bos/Lac deal

 

[Kev4029]

This is the worst news of heard in months.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Does Spoelstra have the balls tonight to cut Wade's minutes?

I think his play a d flow of the game will dictate his minutes, not game 6.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Game 7 refs: Danny Crawford, Scott Foster, Monty McCutchen

 

[R Dizzle]

I agree with you that this NBA Finals is incredible.

But I got to thinking about this earlier, one of the best Finals I've seen. But what makes this Finals more incredible than any other? There have only been 2 close games of 6.

Does Game 6 make this Finals incredible?

Is it because we have a polarizing figure in LeBron, either you love him(and the Heat) or hate him(and the Heat)?

Is it because you have a Spurs team with 3 veterans and possibly the greatest PF ever, a team that displays a prime example of team basketball. Built vs Bought?

Or is it simply because it has lasted 7 games?

I know it's a combination of all of those things, but how often is a series that has 4 double digit margin final scores referred to as incredible.

You know, to me it's a weird impossible to quantify thing. Just feels like the quality of play is on another level from anything we've seen in years. The first three quarters of Game 4 in particular was incredible. It felt like I'd been watching the college game all season and just turned on my first pro game or something, that's how much better it was than normal NBA action IMO.

There's also the coaching chess match. Maybe it's the better access to info and advanced analysis, but I feel like we're aware of all these fascinating strategy subplots we didn't really know about about before. The Wade spacing problem in particular makes for a fascinating dynamic. And the offenses are kind of mirror images of each other, with the textbook unselfishness and ball movement on offense and excellence in transition. It's like watching each team try to stop themselves.

This is also the first time since at least 2008 that the Finals have matched up two teams that are clearly the best in the league (since the Westbrook injury).

And there's also the plot lines you mentioned; two all-time greats and at least two others you can tell your kids about seeing some day, all on the floor. The contrast between how the teams came together. The contrast between the cities. All that good stuff. Plus some good breaks- no technical fouls, no real officiating controversies, nothing getting in the way of the players deciding the games.

 

[tommyGunZ]

I agree with you that this NBA Finals is incredible.

But I got to thinking about this earlier, one of the best Finals I've seen. But what makes this Finals more incredible than any other? There have only been 2 close games of 6.

Does Game 6 make this Finals incredible?

Is it because we have a polarizing figure in LeBron, either you love him(and the Heat) or hate him(and the Heat)?

Is it because you have a Spurs team with 3 veterans and possibly the greatest PF ever, a team that displays a prime example of team basketball. Built vs Bought?

Or is it simply because it has lasted 7 games?

I know it's a combination of all of those things, but how often is a series that has 4 double digit margin final scores referred to as incredible.

You know, to me it's a weird impossible to quantify thing. Just feels like the quality of play is on another level from anything we've seen in years. The first three quarters of Game 4 in particular was incredible. It felt like I'd been watching the college game all season and just turned on my first pro game or something, that's how much better it was than normal NBA action IMO.

There's also the coaching chess match. Maybe it's the better access to info and advanced analysis, but I feel like we're aware of all these fascinating strategy subplots we didn't really know about about before. The Wade spacing problem in particular makes for a fascinating dynamic. And the offenses are kind of mirror images of each other, with the textbook unselfishness and ball movement on offense and excellence in transition. It's like watching each team try to stop themselves.

This is also the first time since at least 2008 that the Finals have matched up two teams that are clearly the best in the league (since the Westbrook injury).

And there's also the plot lines you mentioned; two all-time greats and at least two others you can tell your kids about seeing some day, all on the floor. The contrast between how the teams came together. The contrast between the cities. All that good stuff. Plus some good breaks- no technical fouls, no real officiating controversies, nothing getting in the way of the players deciding the games.

I agree with most of this. In particular, I think that the bold is just more evidence of how advanced the sport really is compared to 20 years ago.

If you think the NBA before this series looked like college, go watch a game on NBA Classic from the 80s or early 90s. The jump in the level of play is absolutely unreal. Games from the 80s look like HS jayvee games.