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!
*NBA THREAD* Abe will be missed (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Cliff Clavin
- Start date
JbizzleMan
Footballguy
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
JbizzleMan
Footballguy
This place is 
when the Lakers are winning.
when the Lakers are winning.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
Subtitle suggestion:
"Kobe rapes his way to yet another playoff win."
"Kobe rapes his way to yet another playoff win."
JbizzleMan
Footballguy
Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub
Footballguy
Rotoworld
Have a good season Danny.Stick to throwing up terrible perimeter jumpers if you can't hang with the big boys play down low.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread Killer
Footballguy
[QUOTE='Emeka Okafor]It all happened so fast. One second I was stepping up to block his dunk, the next second my butt hurted real bad.
[/QUOTE]
the moops
Footballguy
Pretty sure they were expected to get swept by the Lakers. Not sure anything that happened during this series would hurt Paul's rep.
Kev4029
Footballguy
I'm not sure you've seen Kaman play in the last couple years, but he went from good starter, to pretty mediocre backup to a raw 22 year old on a ####ty team. Kaman is nowhere near the top half of the league centers. And Tim Duncan is a ####### center, the only evidence otherwise is what SA lists him as, he has played 100% of his minutes at C over the last three years, and since Robinson has retired (9 years ago?) he has played all but one season at center. Even when Robinson was around he was still played a significant portion of his time at center. Tim Duncan couldn't follow around a center if he had to, how do you think he would perform defensively on (here is a list of the top 10 PFs by PER) Love, Dirk, Gasol (to be fair here, Gasol plays half his time at C), Amare, Randolph, Griffin, Aldridge, Garnett, West, Millsap. I really wonder if people even watch the Spurs.'Possum said:
pollardsvision
Footballguy
That list needs to have Perkins, Marc Gasol, and Hibbert on it somewhere. Not that I think they are better than Noah, but they are quality, true centers.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Also, Granger and Deng got into a heated conversation after the game. Not sure what that was all about.Overall, the series went almost as well as could be for the Bulls. They will get about a week off to rest their minds and bodies and should be ready for round 2. With the exception of a lackluster game 5, the Pacers played with great intensity and forced the Bulls to deal with some adversity. This will help this young, inexperienced team as the tests get tougher.The only negative was, of course, Boozer's play. Although inconsistent throughout the season, he never had a stretch of games this bad. I'm hoping the Bulls play Atlanta. Boozer will have a hard time getting out of his slump if Dwight Howard is patrolling the paint...not to mention Howard stopping/hard fouling Rose on his layup attempts, Joakim's past inability to guard Howard, etc.
Last edited by a moderator:
Abraham
Footballguy
The Pacers and the Rockets are basically the same team, only in different conferences. Their respective "top" payers (Granger and Martin) are better suited as #2 guys and not alpha dogs. They've both got a handful of scrappy guys that play hard and put up 12/8 type games, contributing to the overall good. No big FA is signing with Indiana, but otherwise the two teams are virtually identical to me.
Scruff Mcgruff
Footballguy
http://basketbawful.blogspot.com/2011/04/if-things-ended-well-they-wouldnt-end.html
Funny basketball blog I enjoy makes a really heartfelt post about the San Antonio Spurs. Good read.
"This may be hard to believe considering how many years the Spurs spent tormenting Steve Nash and the Phoenix Suns, but San Antonio's Game 4 loss to the Grizzlies really bummed me out. It's not like I ever hated the Spurs. Well, okay, in 2006-07, when Robert Horry hip-checked Steve Nash into the scorer's table and precipitated the Game 5 suspensions of Amare "I hadn't added the apostrophe yet" Stoudemire and Boris Diaw...that year I hated the Spurs. Between
, the Spurs (for a time) began to embody a quality I hate in certain NBA teams: The willingness to do anything, be it bending rules (such as flopping or whining to the officials) or taking cheap shots (see the collected works of Bowen and Horry), to win.Still, for the most part, the Duncan era teams actually represented much of what I love about basketball. The Spurs (usually) were a model of character and consistency. San Antonio played basketball the right way: Emotionally, intellectually and physically. Based in no small part on the demands of coach Gregg Popovich, the Spurs stressed the fundamentals of sports and life, focusing on loyalty and teamwork above all else. Management sought out smart players and built nothing but success on a strong foundation. That foundation being Tim Duncan.
The Spurs won their fourth NBA title in 2007...and haven't been back to the Finals since. There were mitigating circumstances, of course, specifically injuries to Ginobili in 2008 and 2009. But last season, when a reasonably healthy and restocked San Antonio team stumbled (by their standards) through the regular season and then got swept by (of all teams) the Suns in the Western Conference Semis, the Duncan era seemed essentially (if not officially) over.
Then something unexpected happened.
With the professional basketball world focused on the Celtics, Bulls, Heat and Lakers, the Spurs came tearing out of the gates. They got off to the best start in franchise history and had a stranglehold on the league's best record for most of the season. Popovich finally relented and let his players go all out to earn the top seed in the Western Conference. They got it. The Spurs finished the 2010-11 campaign with 61 wins and homecourt advantage in every series barring a matchup with Chicago in the NBA Finals.
But we can all admit something was wrong, can't we? The Duncan era champions (and championship contenders) were characterized by relentless defense, near-flawless execution and a grind-it-out style of play that wore down their opponents. This is why San Antonio served as the perfect foil for the Seven Seconds or Less Suns. And they proved to many people, beyond any shadow of doubt, that offense wins MVPs and regular season win-loss titles, but defense wins championships.
That's why it came as such as shock when this year's Spurs team became a sort of zero-calorie version of the SSoL Suns. Instead of slowing the game down, they sped it up, finishing 8th in fast break points per game (15.2). They became one of the league's best offensive teams, ranking 6th in PPG (103.7) and 2nd in Offensive Rating (111.8). On defense, they were adequate but no longer elite, finishing 11th in Defensive Rating (105.6).
Now, remember that 2006-07 Suns team I mentioned? You know, the one that may have been one bush-league move by Big Shot Rob from overcoming the Spurs and possibly going all the way to the NBA Finals? That Phoenix squad won 61 games. They finished 1st in PPG (110.2), 1st in Offensive Rating (113.9) and 13th in Defensive Rating (106.4). But the Spurs slowed them down, beat them up, and sent them home early.
History is repeating itself. Somehow, in some way, the Grizzlies have metamorphosed into the Spurs and the Spurs have transformed into the Suns. Last night, Memphis slowed the pace down to a near halt (87.4) and gradually pounded San Antonio into meek submission. The run-and-gun sprint-and-score Spurs finished with an Offensive Rating of 98.4. The Grizzlies had an O-Rating of 119.1.
You know what else is wrong with the Spurs? Tim Duncan. Oh, I saw his decline coming and watched it happening, noting it (some would say harping on it) repeatedly on this blog. Some people called me (and people who agreed with me) a naysayer. They pointed to advanced metrics. After all, they reasoned, Duncan's PER, eFG%, TS%, rebounding percentages and Wins Shares weren't all that far off his career numbers. He was still just as (or almost as) efficient...just playing fewer minutes. Staying fresh. Saving himself for the playoffs.
Still, he had quite a few un-Duncan-like performances this season. Out of the 76 games he played, Duncan scored in single figures 21 times. By comparison, that happened only seven times in 78 games the previous season and only four times in 75 games the season before that. Timmy had not one but two games against the Lakers in which he finished with a mere 2 points on 1-for-7 shooting. He had another game against L.A. in which he managed only 8 points on 3-for-12 from the field. He had a 5-point game (on 2-for-9 shooting) against the hapless Wizards. He had a 3-for-7 outing against the Clippers and a 2-for-10 night versus the Hornets. There was a 5-for-14 night against the defenseless Knicks and...I could go on, but you must see my point.
Duncan's bad nights were becoming more frequent and more, well, bawful.
Here's where we have to talk about hard realities. During his career, Duncan has logged 37,733 minutes in 1,053 regular season games. On top of that, he has put in an additional 6,877 minutes in 174 playoff games. He has carried a franchise on his back for 13 long seasons. That takes a serious toll.
You know what else takes a toll? Being an old school big man in a little (or smaller) man's game. David Stern has successfully legislated into existence an NBA in which perimeter players like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Dwyane Wade, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, et al. really can't be touched, relatively speaking. But big men are still allowed to push and shove. And let me be clear: The pounding that perimeter players absorb during their forays to the hoop is nothing -- I repeat nothing -- compared to the constant beating big men take on a nightly basis. Duncan rarely gets a play off from being grabbed, held and knocked around, and (in all fairness) dishing out the same punishment to his defender (or defenders).
As Kevin McHale once put it, being a big man means always having "an elbow in your back and a knee up your ###."
To be a big man is to be under constant assault. It wears people down. Take Karl Malone. During his prime, there wasn't a more physical or more physically imposing player than the Mailman. But as his career moved painfully toward its ragged close, Malone became increasingly weary of being Utah's only true big man. It changed his game. For most of his 19 seasons, Malone loved to mix it up. Then, almost overnight, he didn't anymore. Karl started taking fadeaway jumpers instead of muscling his way to the hoop. He openly pined for help, rejoicing when "big man" Donyell Marshall was traded to the Jazz in August of 2000. (Sadly, Marshall turned out to be a small man dressed in big boy clothes.)
I can't find the quote, but during his final years in Utah, Malone said something to the effect of: "I dream about being able to throw the ball to somebody down low and say, 'Go ahead, big fella, you take it this time.'" Malone never got the help he wanted. He got Greg Ostertag. Which makes his final, desperate (and ultimately failed) run for a title with the Lakers kind of understandable, even if it still makes me throw up in my mouth a little.
Still, it was hard (at the time) to clearly mark Malone's decline because, as with Duncan now, his numbers remained fairly stable and the Jazz continued cranking out 50-win seasons with the regularity of an atomic clock. But if you looked closer, you would have seen (as I did) Malone being outclassed and overwhelmed by younger power forwards like Duncan.
The first sign of trouble came during the 1998-99 season, when the Jazz were one year removed from a Finals appearance and favored (by some) to finally win that elusive championship, thanks to the second retirement of Michael Jordan. Only Malone -- who was named MVP of the league that season by the way -- struggled mightily in the first round against an up-and-coming Kings team. In the second round, he finally succumbed to the persistent defense of Briant Grant, scoring only 8 points on 3-for-16 shooting as the Blazers eliminated the Jazz in Game 6.
The following years brought more of the same. In 2000, the Blazers again bumped the Jazz in round two as Malone went 11-for-25 in a Game 5 elimination. In 2001, the Jazz got upset in the first round by the Dallas Mavericks, and Malone went 9-for-28 in the fifth and final game in Utah. (In all fairness to Karl, Dirk Nowitzki went 3-for-11 and grabbed only 4 rebounds in that game.) By the time the favored Kings took out the underdog Jazz in the first round of the 2002 playoffs -- Malone went 7-for-20 and made only one trip to the foul line in the finale -- it was painfully (even awkwardly) clear that Utah's time had passed. It was even more clear that making the 1998 Finals had been the team's zenith and everything after that was a (somewhat sad) sunset.
And here we are again. Watching Duncan relive the closing act of Malone's career. Younger players like Marc Gasol and Zach Randolph are now outclassing and overpowering Duncan. Did you ever, in a bajillion years, think you'd read a line like that in any human language? Or that it would be true?
The Grizzlies' big men didn't have a statistically dominant game last night -- they combined for 20 points and 18 rebounds -- but poor Timmy looked spent. He would finish with only 6 points (3-for-7) and 7 rebounds in 29 minutes. This was supposed to be Duncan's time. He averaged a career-low 28.4 minutes per game specifically for this moment...so he could be fresh and ready for the rigors of the postseason.
Yet, last night at least, he looked like a man with nothing (or very little) left. And, just like when Malone was getting worked over by the Grants and Duncans and Webbers of the world, something hit me with absolute clarity...
...2007 was Duncan's, and San Antonio's, zenith.
It's over. It's really and truly over. We never felt totally safe counting the Spurs out because Duncan and the team had been too good for too long. Look! They keep winning 50 games a season! Look! Duncan's numbers are still on par with his prime! They still look and act like the Spurs. They must still be the Spurs.
No. No, they aren't.
I'm sad. Really and truly sad. It feels like something is passing away. I am a fan of NBA basketball. Over the last decade-plus, I have followed the Association as closely as almost anybody. Duncan and the Spurs -- sometimes heroes, sometimes villains -- have defined (or helped define) a full third of my life on this planet. Now they're fading away. Not only that, I realize now they have been fading right before my eyes. For years.
If you read through the archives, I've actually been saying this for the past two or three years. But now I feel it. I feel it in my bones.
Almost 10 years ago, I had this experience with Malone and the Jazz. It hurt and, in many ways, I was never quite the same. My heroes were exposed as mere mortals and my own mortality was revealed in that truth. Last night, Zach Randolph and the Grizzlies dealt another blow to how I perceive the world and my own mortality.
It doesn't feel good.
But it feels like the truth. And we all have to face it some day. Even basketball legends like Tim Duncan.
Thanks for the memories, San Antonio Spurs. Thanks for everything."
Funny basketball blog I enjoy makes a really heartfelt post about the San Antonio Spurs. Good read.
"This may be hard to believe considering how many years the Spurs spent tormenting Steve Nash and the Phoenix Suns, but San Antonio's Game 4 loss to the Grizzlies really bummed me out. It's not like I ever hated the Spurs. Well, okay, in 2006-07, when Robert Horry hip-checked Steve Nash into the scorer's table and precipitated the Game 5 suspensions of Amare "I hadn't added the apostrophe yet" Stoudemire and Boris Diaw...that year I hated the Spurs. Between
, the Spurs (for a time) began to embody a quality I hate in certain NBA teams: The willingness to do anything, be it bending rules (such as flopping or whining to the officials) or taking cheap shots (see the collected works of Bowen and Horry), to win.Still, for the most part, the Duncan era teams actually represented much of what I love about basketball. The Spurs (usually) were a model of character and consistency. San Antonio played basketball the right way: Emotionally, intellectually and physically. Based in no small part on the demands of coach Gregg Popovich, the Spurs stressed the fundamentals of sports and life, focusing on loyalty and teamwork above all else. Management sought out smart players and built nothing but success on a strong foundation. That foundation being Tim Duncan.
The Spurs won their fourth NBA title in 2007...and haven't been back to the Finals since. There were mitigating circumstances, of course, specifically injuries to Ginobili in 2008 and 2009. But last season, when a reasonably healthy and restocked San Antonio team stumbled (by their standards) through the regular season and then got swept by (of all teams) the Suns in the Western Conference Semis, the Duncan era seemed essentially (if not officially) over.
Then something unexpected happened.
With the professional basketball world focused on the Celtics, Bulls, Heat and Lakers, the Spurs came tearing out of the gates. They got off to the best start in franchise history and had a stranglehold on the league's best record for most of the season. Popovich finally relented and let his players go all out to earn the top seed in the Western Conference. They got it. The Spurs finished the 2010-11 campaign with 61 wins and homecourt advantage in every series barring a matchup with Chicago in the NBA Finals.
But we can all admit something was wrong, can't we? The Duncan era champions (and championship contenders) were characterized by relentless defense, near-flawless execution and a grind-it-out style of play that wore down their opponents. This is why San Antonio served as the perfect foil for the Seven Seconds or Less Suns. And they proved to many people, beyond any shadow of doubt, that offense wins MVPs and regular season win-loss titles, but defense wins championships.
That's why it came as such as shock when this year's Spurs team became a sort of zero-calorie version of the SSoL Suns. Instead of slowing the game down, they sped it up, finishing 8th in fast break points per game (15.2). They became one of the league's best offensive teams, ranking 6th in PPG (103.7) and 2nd in Offensive Rating (111.8). On defense, they were adequate but no longer elite, finishing 11th in Defensive Rating (105.6).
Now, remember that 2006-07 Suns team I mentioned? You know, the one that may have been one bush-league move by Big Shot Rob from overcoming the Spurs and possibly going all the way to the NBA Finals? That Phoenix squad won 61 games. They finished 1st in PPG (110.2), 1st in Offensive Rating (113.9) and 13th in Defensive Rating (106.4). But the Spurs slowed them down, beat them up, and sent them home early.
History is repeating itself. Somehow, in some way, the Grizzlies have metamorphosed into the Spurs and the Spurs have transformed into the Suns. Last night, Memphis slowed the pace down to a near halt (87.4) and gradually pounded San Antonio into meek submission. The run-and-gun sprint-and-score Spurs finished with an Offensive Rating of 98.4. The Grizzlies had an O-Rating of 119.1.
You know what else is wrong with the Spurs? Tim Duncan. Oh, I saw his decline coming and watched it happening, noting it (some would say harping on it) repeatedly on this blog. Some people called me (and people who agreed with me) a naysayer. They pointed to advanced metrics. After all, they reasoned, Duncan's PER, eFG%, TS%, rebounding percentages and Wins Shares weren't all that far off his career numbers. He was still just as (or almost as) efficient...just playing fewer minutes. Staying fresh. Saving himself for the playoffs.
Still, he had quite a few un-Duncan-like performances this season. Out of the 76 games he played, Duncan scored in single figures 21 times. By comparison, that happened only seven times in 78 games the previous season and only four times in 75 games the season before that. Timmy had not one but two games against the Lakers in which he finished with a mere 2 points on 1-for-7 shooting. He had another game against L.A. in which he managed only 8 points on 3-for-12 from the field. He had a 5-point game (on 2-for-9 shooting) against the hapless Wizards. He had a 3-for-7 outing against the Clippers and a 2-for-10 night versus the Hornets. There was a 5-for-14 night against the defenseless Knicks and...I could go on, but you must see my point.
Duncan's bad nights were becoming more frequent and more, well, bawful.
Here's where we have to talk about hard realities. During his career, Duncan has logged 37,733 minutes in 1,053 regular season games. On top of that, he has put in an additional 6,877 minutes in 174 playoff games. He has carried a franchise on his back for 13 long seasons. That takes a serious toll.
You know what else takes a toll? Being an old school big man in a little (or smaller) man's game. David Stern has successfully legislated into existence an NBA in which perimeter players like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Dwyane Wade, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, et al. really can't be touched, relatively speaking. But big men are still allowed to push and shove. And let me be clear: The pounding that perimeter players absorb during their forays to the hoop is nothing -- I repeat nothing -- compared to the constant beating big men take on a nightly basis. Duncan rarely gets a play off from being grabbed, held and knocked around, and (in all fairness) dishing out the same punishment to his defender (or defenders).
As Kevin McHale once put it, being a big man means always having "an elbow in your back and a knee up your ###."
To be a big man is to be under constant assault. It wears people down. Take Karl Malone. During his prime, there wasn't a more physical or more physically imposing player than the Mailman. But as his career moved painfully toward its ragged close, Malone became increasingly weary of being Utah's only true big man. It changed his game. For most of his 19 seasons, Malone loved to mix it up. Then, almost overnight, he didn't anymore. Karl started taking fadeaway jumpers instead of muscling his way to the hoop. He openly pined for help, rejoicing when "big man" Donyell Marshall was traded to the Jazz in August of 2000. (Sadly, Marshall turned out to be a small man dressed in big boy clothes.)
I can't find the quote, but during his final years in Utah, Malone said something to the effect of: "I dream about being able to throw the ball to somebody down low and say, 'Go ahead, big fella, you take it this time.'" Malone never got the help he wanted. He got Greg Ostertag. Which makes his final, desperate (and ultimately failed) run for a title with the Lakers kind of understandable, even if it still makes me throw up in my mouth a little.
Still, it was hard (at the time) to clearly mark Malone's decline because, as with Duncan now, his numbers remained fairly stable and the Jazz continued cranking out 50-win seasons with the regularity of an atomic clock. But if you looked closer, you would have seen (as I did) Malone being outclassed and overwhelmed by younger power forwards like Duncan.
The first sign of trouble came during the 1998-99 season, when the Jazz were one year removed from a Finals appearance and favored (by some) to finally win that elusive championship, thanks to the second retirement of Michael Jordan. Only Malone -- who was named MVP of the league that season by the way -- struggled mightily in the first round against an up-and-coming Kings team. In the second round, he finally succumbed to the persistent defense of Briant Grant, scoring only 8 points on 3-for-16 shooting as the Blazers eliminated the Jazz in Game 6.
The following years brought more of the same. In 2000, the Blazers again bumped the Jazz in round two as Malone went 11-for-25 in a Game 5 elimination. In 2001, the Jazz got upset in the first round by the Dallas Mavericks, and Malone went 9-for-28 in the fifth and final game in Utah. (In all fairness to Karl, Dirk Nowitzki went 3-for-11 and grabbed only 4 rebounds in that game.) By the time the favored Kings took out the underdog Jazz in the first round of the 2002 playoffs -- Malone went 7-for-20 and made only one trip to the foul line in the finale -- it was painfully (even awkwardly) clear that Utah's time had passed. It was even more clear that making the 1998 Finals had been the team's zenith and everything after that was a (somewhat sad) sunset.
And here we are again. Watching Duncan relive the closing act of Malone's career. Younger players like Marc Gasol and Zach Randolph are now outclassing and overpowering Duncan. Did you ever, in a bajillion years, think you'd read a line like that in any human language? Or that it would be true?
The Grizzlies' big men didn't have a statistically dominant game last night -- they combined for 20 points and 18 rebounds -- but poor Timmy looked spent. He would finish with only 6 points (3-for-7) and 7 rebounds in 29 minutes. This was supposed to be Duncan's time. He averaged a career-low 28.4 minutes per game specifically for this moment...so he could be fresh and ready for the rigors of the postseason.
Yet, last night at least, he looked like a man with nothing (or very little) left. And, just like when Malone was getting worked over by the Grants and Duncans and Webbers of the world, something hit me with absolute clarity...
...2007 was Duncan's, and San Antonio's, zenith.
It's over. It's really and truly over. We never felt totally safe counting the Spurs out because Duncan and the team had been too good for too long. Look! They keep winning 50 games a season! Look! Duncan's numbers are still on par with his prime! They still look and act like the Spurs. They must still be the Spurs.
No. No, they aren't.
I'm sad. Really and truly sad. It feels like something is passing away. I am a fan of NBA basketball. Over the last decade-plus, I have followed the Association as closely as almost anybody. Duncan and the Spurs -- sometimes heroes, sometimes villains -- have defined (or helped define) a full third of my life on this planet. Now they're fading away. Not only that, I realize now they have been fading right before my eyes. For years.
If you read through the archives, I've actually been saying this for the past two or three years. But now I feel it. I feel it in my bones.
Almost 10 years ago, I had this experience with Malone and the Jazz. It hurt and, in many ways, I was never quite the same. My heroes were exposed as mere mortals and my own mortality was revealed in that truth. Last night, Zach Randolph and the Grizzlies dealt another blow to how I perceive the world and my own mortality.
It doesn't feel good.
But it feels like the truth. And we all have to face it some day. Even basketball legends like Tim Duncan.
Thanks for the memories, San Antonio Spurs. Thanks for everything."
Card Trader
Footballguy
Huh!? You mean the shot Jack hit when the Hornets were already up by 2...with only 9 seconds left?
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
Was it that shot or the one where Paul drove into the lane and drew the attention of the entire Lakers team and then made a great pass to a wide open Jack?Huh!? You mean the shot Jack hit when the Hornets were already up by 2...with only 9 seconds left?
Card Trader
Footballguy
Clearly you aren't watching the games...Paul sucks, got bailed out, no way they'd have won that game if it weren't for Jack making that shot.Was it that shot or the one where Paul drove into the lane and drew the attention of the entire Lakers team and then made a great pass to a wide open Jack?Huh!? You mean the shot Jack hit when the Hornets were already up by 2...with only 9 seconds left?
saintfool
Dead sexy
i would say that the grizz have been superb defensively. their big men have packed in the paint while they have been incredibly active on their perimeter defense. they have dared the Spurs to make the 3 pters while they deny them much of anything in the paint. timmy only had 7 shots because they haven't been able to get him the ball, as much as anything. the easy "and-ones" that manu and tony get are being taken away. the bench - neal, bonner, and hill - have struggled all series. i'm not entirely surprised either. bonner chokes in the post-season and neal, while not a kid, is new to the postseason. i think hill is better as the two-guard while manu comes off the bench.regardless, it's sad to see this. splitter finally was trotted out in game 4 to give SA some size and played a great, if sloppy, game. he never got paired with timmy on the floor. they could have tried some high-low post play with timmy at the top of the key given his ability to pass and shoot a jumpshot. i'm a huge duncan fanboy, obviously, and i lay these troubles at the feet of Pop. he's getting out-coached by hollins and too stubborn to adapt. it's not too late, of course, but the margin of error for these spurs is pretty tiny. they need their best game to shake the confidence of this very eager grizz team and put some spring in their own step.
Dexter Manley
Footballguy
No. And neither of these guys is a top 5 player of all time so what's your point?Is there a certain law that I'm not aware of that says the best 5 players of all time must be a PG, SG, SF, PF and a C.Many people think Tim Duncan is the greatest PF of all time.I've yet to hear a single person claim Kobe is the greatest SG of all time. Heck, there's still lots of people who don't think Kobe is even the best SG in Laker's franchise history.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
I find it sad that the best time of the year for the NBA evokes such bitterness in people (those whose teams aren't winning excluded of course).
Some great individual and team performances happening here to be appreciated.
I'd also like to change my MVP vote from Rose to Paul. He might actually be the best player in the league over LeBron even. Nice to see him all the way back after his injuries - even if he is treating the Lakers like Morris Day used to treat Jerome.
Some great individual and team performances happening here to be appreciated.
I'd also like to change my MVP vote from Rose to Paul. He might actually be the best player in the league over LeBron even. Nice to see him all the way back after his injuries - even if he is treating the Lakers like Morris Day used to treat Jerome.
saintfool
Dead sexy
well played, sir.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Knicks pick up option on Billups
Not a well constructed team right now. Will be interesting to see if they can land a big fish in the 2012 FA class.
Not a well constructed team right now. Will be interesting to see if they can land a big fish in the 2012 FA class.
Mr. PadresLakers
Footballguy
That logic isn't a strong suit of yours. Michael Jordan has nothing to do with a Kobe Bryant vs Tim Duncan debate.No. And neither of these guys is a top 5 player of all time so what's your point?Is there a certain law that I'm not aware of that says the best 5 players of all time must be a PG, SG, SF, PF and a C.
Last edited by a moderator:
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
Um... why??? $14.2M for Billups is waaaay too much unless the plan is to use his contract at the deadline to facilitate a trade. This is an option only Isiah could love.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Hi OKC, I'd like to give you Chauncey and a bag of magic beans for Westbrook. We'll just sign him away from you in the offseason anyway, you may as well get something for him.
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
That is probably exactly what is going through Isiah's head... and he probably doesn't realize that Westbrook is still locked up for 2 more years.Hi OKC, I'd like to give you Chauncey and a bag of magic beans for Westbrook. We'll just sign him away from you in the offseason anyway, you may as well get something for him.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Does qualifying offer == locked up?ETA: I guess it does, I can't imagine letting Westbrook go for that amount.
I guess they'll have to go with Paul as plan B. Will that cost more or less magic beans?
Last edited by a moderator:
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
Yup. Guaranteed for the next two years. If he only accepts the qualifying offer and does not sign an extension he could be a free agent after that. So at the absolute earliest, he'd be a UFA in 13/14.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Yes, now answer the question about the magic beans.
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
As awesome as Paul is, I'd rather pay more magic beans for Westbrook just because of Paul's knee issues. But... this is Isiah we're talking about here. Billups+Melo+Magic Beans for Blake and Fisher is his most logical move.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Now you're talking. Although I'd like to think Isiah would also enjoy swallowing Walton's miserable contract as part of the deal too.
Kev4029
Footballguy
Because there are no good free agents this year and Billups is still a fairly good player. If they wouldn't have picked up his option they still would have had Amare ($18.2M), Melo ($18.5), Turiaf ($4.4), Balkman ($1.7), Douglas ($1.1), Walker (0.9) PLUS Billups buyout of $3.5M. So their choices were (assuming no changes in the CBA, HA!) were get the best PG $5-6M could buy this offseason (Dragic, Brooks, Chalmers, Telfair) or to overpay Billups for one more year and wait until 2012 to make a run at Paul or Williams (which I don't think is even financially possible).I thought it was an obvious choice to pick up the option.
Kev4029
Footballguy
Qualifying offer doesn't necessarily mean locked up. A team could come in after next offseason and sign Westbrook to an offer sheet and if OKC decided not to match (note: no way in hell they wouldn't match ANY offer) it, Westbrook would have a new home for the 2012-2013 season.
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
Isiah? Just kidding. I guess it isn't that bad. I really don't think they'd see a big drop off from Billups to those guys though. It would just pain me to write that cheque to him.
boubucarow
Footballguy
He could provide a valuable trading piece next winter if the Knicks could pry away Paul or Williams.
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
K, Williams is not being traded to NYK. We need to stop any of this talk now. Now way in hell the Russian trades him to his crosstown division rivals*. Not happening. 0 chance.I said earlier that the only way I thought it made sense was to have a large expiring contract to trade.
*can't really be rivals when you both suck
Dexter Manley
Footballguy
What your missing is that we're talking about perception, not reality. At least that's what you stated in your original post. If you want to talk about the positions which the greatest 5 players of all time played, then we would be talking about 3 C's, a PG, and a SG. But that's a different debate.That logic isn't a strong suit of yours. Michael Jordan has nothing to do with a Kobe Bryant vs Tim Duncan debate.No. And neither of these guys is a top 5 player of all time so what's your point?Is there a certain law that I'm not aware of that says the best 5 players of all time must be a PG, SG, SF, PF and a C.
Mr. PadresLakers
Footballguy
I started with this...Kobe Bryant > Tim DuncanYou countered with this..Tim Duncan > all other PFMichael Jordan> Kobe BryantJerry West> Kobe Bryanttherefore...Tim Duncan > Kobe BryantDo you think that is a sensible argument?What your missing is that we're talking about perception, not reality. At least that's what you stated in your original post. If you want to talk about the positions which the greatest 5 players of all time played, then we would be talking about 3 C's, a PG, and a SG. But that's a different debate.That logic isn't a strong suit of yours. Michael Jordan has nothing to do with a Kobe Bryant vs Tim Duncan debate.No. And neither of these guys is a top 5 player of all time so what's your point?Is there a certain law that I'm not aware of that says the best 5 players of all time must be a PG, SG, SF, PF and a C.
Dexter Manley
Footballguy
No, it's completely illogical. And FTR, that wasn't my personal argument as you just tried to imply (reread my first post).Unfortunately, it's typical of the type of thought processes that most fans use.I started with this...Kobe Bryant > Tim DuncanYou countered with this..Tim Duncan > all other PFMichael Jordan> Kobe BryantJerry West> Kobe Bryanttherefore...Tim Duncan > Kobe BryantDo you think that is a sensible argument?What your missing is that we're talking about perception, not reality. At least that's what you stated in your original post. If you want to talk about the positions which the greatest 5 players of all time played, then we would be talking about 3 C's, a PG, and a SG. But that's a different debate.That logic isn't a strong suit of yours. Michael Jordan has nothing to do with a Kobe Bryant vs Tim Duncan debate.No. And neither of these guys is a top 5 player of all time so what's your point?Is there a certain law that I'm not aware of that says the best 5 players of all time must be a PG, SG, SF, PF and a C.
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
Mr. PL is the birther of the NBA thread.
Last edited by a moderator:
boubucarow
Footballguy
There has been a ton of evidence posted in different threads on why Duncan>Kobe. However, it is better to dispute the illogical argument. Just like some Kobe haters will dispute the 5>4 title argument with Robert Horry. It is a boring re-cycling of tired arguments with little meaning.
PizzaDeliveryGuy
extra sausage
If you don't stop linking to CC I will jump through the internets and punch you in the throat.'8ebok24 said:
JMon348
Footballguy
I actually agree with him this time.
Kev4029
Footballguy
I can't imagine the bidding wars Orlando and New Orleans are going to have over Billups. Maybe NY can trade Turiaf and Billups for Okafor, West AND Paul (I'd continue this lame joke with Orlando, but really there is nothing else they have to offer other than Howard).
Gr00vus
Footballguy
You forgot the bag of magic beans.
Similar threads
