timschochet's thread - Ranking hemorrhoids (1 Viewer)

[Cliff Clavin]

I don't see any reason to make a change, but MLB parks are obviously different dimensions in the outfield, so I don't know why this would be so different.

Should they be able to change key size? Court width? Restricted area? Foul line?

It is a ridiculous idea.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

fixed

 

[Apple Jack]

I don't see any reason to make a change, but MLB parks are obviously different dimensions in the outfield, so I don't know why this would be so different.

Should they be able to change key size? Court width? Restricted area? Foul line?

It is a ridiculous idea.

If it's voted so, then yes. But the three point line is the only thing being discussed here and there's really no reason to change those other things.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I don't see any reason to make a change, but MLB parks are obviously different dimensions in the outfield, so I don't know why this would be so different.

Should they be able to change key size? Court width? Restricted area? Foul line?

It is a ridiculous idea.

If it's voted so, then yes. But the three point line is the only thing being discussed here and there's really no reason to change those other things.

And there is no reason to allow teams to decide if they want a 3 point line or not.

 

[Apple Jack]

I don't see any reason to make a change, but MLB parks are obviously different dimensions in the outfield, so I don't know why this would be so different.

Should they be able to change key size? Court width? Restricted area? Foul line?

It is a ridiculous idea.

If it's voted so, then yes. But the three point line is the only thing being discussed here and there's really no reason to change those other things.

And there is no reason to allow teams to decide if they want a 3 point line or not.

Sure there is. There are a lot of people who are over the current state of the 3-point shot oriented game. There are a number of ways to address that. It would shake up the game. Draw attention where it wouldn't otherwise get it with this huge tv contract kicking in. Shake up the coaching game and get people having to buckle down and put more thought into offensive sets. There is plenty of upside to that.

 

[Insein]

I don't see any reason to make a change, but MLB parks are obviously different dimensions in the outfield, so I don't know why this would be so different.

Should they be able to change key size? Court width? Restricted area? Foul line?

It is a ridiculous idea.

If it's voted so, then yes. But the three point line is the only thing being discussed here and there's really no reason to change those other things.

And there is no reason to allow teams to decide if they want a 3 point line or not.

Yea because if they still count threes, how will he refs know if it is one?

 

[mcintyre1]

Love's playing the same loner game that he played in Minnesota, except this time he can't justify it by being the best player on the team. Dude's always seemed like a bit of knob that doesn't mesh with his teammates. That combined with the way in which he left (going on ESPN to say 'oh, my agent's handling all that' about wanting to leave Minnesota, referring to the team as "them", the Boston trip) sealed him as I guy I never want on my favorite team again. Some people joke around that Love should re-sign with the Wolves this offseason and laugh about how badly we screwed the Cavs, but honestly I wouldn't want him back on the team even if he wanted to be here. He's burned that bridge for me, as a fan.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I don't see any reason to make a change, but MLB parks are obviously different dimensions in the outfield, so I don't know why this would be so different.

Should they be able to change key size? Court width? Restricted area? Foul line?

It is a ridiculous idea.

If it's voted so, then yes. But the three point line is the only thing being discussed here and there's really no reason to change those other things.

And there is no reason to allow teams to decide if they want a 3 point line or not.

Sure there is. There are a lot of people who are over the current state of the 3-point shot oriented game. There are a number of ways to address that. It would shake up the game. Draw attention where it wouldn't otherwise get it with this huge tv contract kicking in. Shake up the coaching game and get people having to buckle down and put more thought into offensive sets. There is plenty of upside to that.

Based on that huge TV contract, the league is doing just fine. No need to put a gimmick into the game to appease a few whiners. There is zero upside.

 

[Apple Jack]

Whatever you say, Clavin.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Whatever you say, Clavin.

 

[Bobcat10]

All baseball parks have home run walls.

There is no stadium that has gone rogue (maybe they can't by rule), removed their fences and all seats, bullpens, etc in the OF, and have the foul lines extending into infinity.

At least argue that a NBA team can decide on where to put the 3pt line, not to eliminate it if they want.

 

[GOB]

If they start changing the dimensions of the court, that scene in Hoosiers is not going to make any sense.

That would be a damn travesty.

 

[No. 16]

I don't get why everyone wants to change the 3 point line. There's only a few players like Curry, Klay, and Korver. Changing the rule for the outliers is never a good idea. The league as a whole is actually shooting worse from the 3 point line (obviously because teams are emphasizing 3s over long 2s). So the "it's easier narrative" doesn't hold for me.

If you're talking about offensive sets and aesthetics. I'll strongly disagree. In order to get those 3 point shots it requires lots of teamwork. The most aesthetically pleasing offenses (Spurs, Warriors, Hawks, Mavericks) are those that value the 3 and move the ball well.

Keep the game as is.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't get why everyone wants to change the 3 point line. There's only a few players like Curry, Klay, and Korver. Changing the rule for the outliers is never a good idea. The league as a whole is actually shooting worse from the 3 point line (obviously because teams are emphasizing 3s over long 2s). So the "it's easier narrative" doesn't hold for me.

If you're talking about offensive sets and aesthetics. I'll strongly disagree. In order to get those 3 point shots it requires lots of teamwork. The most aesthetically pleasing offenses (Spurs, Warriors, Hawks, Mavericks) are those that value the 3 and move the ball well.

Keep the game as is.

I think any suggestion of moving the line back would be based on the assumption that the trend towards three point shooting will continue until it verges on the absurd (I'd describe > 50% of attempts from beyond the arc as absurd), not on the game in its current state. I notice for example that you didn't list the team that takes the most 3s in the league on your list of aesthetically pleasing offenses. People don't generally seem to like watching the Rockets in my experience- part of it is probably the flopping, but part of it is also the fact that every possession either ends up with a 3 (which they don't shoot all that well, they just understand math enough to know it's still a good shot at 34%) or at the foul line. Gets kind of boring.

That said, I'd rather they give defenses a chance to adjust and improve their ability/prioritize guarding the arc before doing something extreme like changing the rules. Especially since a rules change would probably mean widening the court or taking away corner 3s entirely, which would kill spacing.

 

[Insein]

How much space is there now between the 3 pt line and the sideline? If they extend the 3, courts would have to get wider wouldn't they?

 

[Apple Jack]

I don't get why everyone wants to change the 3 point line. There's only a few players like Curry, Klay, and Korver. Changing the rule for the outliers is never a good idea. The league as a whole is actually shooting worse from the 3 point line (obviously because teams are emphasizing 3s over long 2s). So the "it's easier narrative" doesn't hold for me.

If you're talking about offensive sets and aesthetics. I'll strongly disagree. In order to get those 3 point shots it requires lots of teamwork. The most aesthetically pleasing offenses (Spurs, Warriors, Hawks, Mavericks) are those that value the 3 and move the ball well.

Keep the game as is.

I think any suggestion of moving the line back would be based on the assumption that the trend towards three point shooting will continue until it verges on the absurd (I'd describe > 50% of attempts from beyond the arc as absurd), not on the game in its current state. I notice for example that you didn't list the team that takes the most 3s in the league on your list of aesthetically pleasing offenses. People don't generally seem to like watching the Rockets in my experience- part of it is probably the flopping, but part of it is also the fact that every possession either ends up with a 3 (which they don't shoot all that well, they just understand math enough to know it's still a good shot at 34%) or at the foul line. Gets kind of boring.

That said, I'd rather they give defenses a chance to adjust and improve their ability/prioritize guarding the arc before doing something extreme like changing the rules. Especially since a rules change would probably mean widening the court or taking away corner 3s entirely, which would kill spacing.

Fair enough. How about my halftime nathans weenies suggestion?

 

[Sammy3469]

I don't get why everyone wants to change the 3 point line. There's only a few players like Curry, Klay, and Korver. Changing the rule for the outliers is never a good idea. The league as a whole is actually shooting worse from the 3 point line (obviously because teams are emphasizing 3s over long 2s). So the "it's easier narrative" doesn't hold for me.

If you're talking about offensive sets and aesthetics. I'll strongly disagree. In order to get those 3 point shots it requires lots of teamwork. The most aesthetically pleasing offenses (Spurs, Warriors, Hawks, Mavericks) are those that value the 3 and move the ball well.

Keep the game as is.

I think any suggestion of moving the line back would be based on the assumption that the trend towards three point shooting will continue until it verges on the absurd (I'd describe > 50% of attempts from beyond the arc as absurd), not on the game in its current state. I notice for example that you didn't list the team that takes the most 3s in the league on your list of aesthetically pleasing offenses. People don't generally seem to like watching the Rockets in my experience- part of it is probably the flopping, but part of it is also the fact that every possession either ends up with a 3 (which they don't shoot all that well, they just understand math enough to know it's still a good shot at 34%) or at the foul line. Gets kind of boring.

That said, I'd rather they give defenses a chance to adjust and improve their ability/prioritize guarding the arc before doing something extreme like changing the rules. Especially since a rules change would probably mean widening the court or taking away corner 3s entirely, which would kill spacing.

In all seriousness, the "easiest" answer is just reduce value of the 3 point shot to the 2.6 point shot. WA LA it's no longer the most efffecient shot for most teams

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't get why everyone wants to change the 3 point line. There's only a few players like Curry, Klay, and Korver. Changing the rule for the outliers is never a good idea. The league as a whole is actually shooting worse from the 3 point line (obviously because teams are emphasizing 3s over long 2s). So the "it's easier narrative" doesn't hold for me.

If you're talking about offensive sets and aesthetics. I'll strongly disagree. In order to get those 3 point shots it requires lots of teamwork. The most aesthetically pleasing offenses (Spurs, Warriors, Hawks, Mavericks) are those that value the 3 and move the ball well.

Keep the game as is.

I think any suggestion of moving the line back would be based on the assumption that the trend towards three point shooting will continue until it verges on the absurd (I'd describe > 50% of attempts from beyond the arc as absurd), not on the game in its current state. I notice for example that you didn't list the team that takes the most 3s in the league on your list of aesthetically pleasing offenses. People don't generally seem to like watching the Rockets in my experience- part of it is probably the flopping, but part of it is also the fact that every possession either ends up with a 3 (which they don't shoot all that well, they just understand math enough to know it's still a good shot at 34%) or at the foul line. Gets kind of boring.

That said, I'd rather they give defenses a chance to adjust and improve their ability/prioritize guarding the arc before doing something extreme like changing the rules. Especially since a rules change would probably mean widening the court or taking away corner 3s entirely, which would kill spacing.

Fair enough. How about my halftime nathans weenies suggestion?

Can this also vary from stadium to stadium? Like can the Wizards make them eat half smokes? Would Rod Strickland come out of retirement?

 

[Weeber]

Whatever you say, Clavin.

Why do I get the feeling apple jack is a racist black guy trying to rid the NBA of Caucasians by removing the three ball?

 

[thecatch]

You've got more free flowing offense and passing in the league now then there has ever been since teams actually started playing defense in the 90s. I have no idea why anyone would want to mess with the rules right now.

 

[Gr00vus]

Horrific win for the Lakers.

And they should move the 3 point line back. I see more shuttling the ball around the perimeter than free flowing offense for most teams and it's painful to watch. They're not all the Spurs.

#### the corner three.

 

[Frostillicus]

Allowing variable three point lines would be kind of neato.

 

[Insein]

Moving basket last 2 mins of a half. Keep to the arcade basketball tradition.

 

[Gr00vus]

Moving basket last 2 mins of a half. Keep to the arcade basketball tradition.

I vote for adopting Arch Rivals rules. Tyrone was with the sucker punches.

 

[sports_fan]

I'd like to see a moving basket in addition to the variable 3pt line. As well as a penalty box. Power plays would be an interesting dynamic.

 

[Weeber]

I think we should also install a "buzzer beater wins" rule. My friends and I use to use this while playing nba2k. It doesn't matter what the score is, if you hit a buzzer beater 3 ball in the fourth you win.

 

[SeveredHorseHeads]

Maybe we can have different sized rims and backboards too? If like to see a rim as big as a hula hoop and no backboard. Then make half court the three point line for each team.

 

[sjslacker]

How about on the same court having 1 side with a 3 pt line and 1 side without the 3 pt line. That'd be entertaining. Then we can add a coin flip to NBA games as a bonus so teams can choose ball or side to open!

 

[Joe Summer]

Grantland has a great piece about the late Bobby Phills. It's worth your time.

link

 

[Captain Quinoa]

How about on the same court having 1 side with a 3 pt line and 1 side without the 3 pt line. That'd be entertaining. Then we can add a coin flip to NBA games as a bonus so teams can choose ball or side to open!

Take the wind in the 4th.

 

[SeveredHorseHeads]

It would be cool if you could shoot through either side of the hoop. Throw it up through the bottom of the hoop, two points.

If you throw it up through the bottom and it goes back through the hoop on the way down, 5 points.

 

[Insein]

It would be cool if you could shoot through either side of the hoop. Throw it up through the bottom of the hoop, two points.

I'd you throw it up through the bottom and it goes back through the hoop on the way down, 5 points.

That's just ridiculous. Make it 1 point up and 2 down.

 

[SWC]

All baseball parks have home run walls.

There is no stadium that has gone rogue (maybe they can't by rule), removed their fences and all seats, bullpens, etc in the OF, and have the foul lines extending into infinity.

At least argue that a NBA team can decide on where to put the 3pt line, not to eliminate it if they want.

brohan just imagine how messed up it would be if they ran the picket fence and little strap bam hit his head right on four foot rim that would be messed up right there bromigo take that to the bank

 

[sjslacker]

Doc's got entertainment value at least...

@jadande: Doc Rivers says he understands Warriors resting Green because "they didn't want to take the risk of going 2-2 with their regular guys."

@jadande: Kerr's reply to Doc's theory: "Either that or we have a 9-game lead with a couple guys banged up."

 

[Insein]

Ha Sixers visited the White House today.

http://mobile.philly.com/blogs/?wss=/philly/blogs/pattisonave/&id=298227541

Getting ready for 2019 when they win it all.

 

[sjslacker]

Someone call the cops...Curry took Paul's lunch money....

http://deadsp.in/WUC7TQg

 

[sports_fan]

Harden scored 51. New career high

 

[JMon348]

Stephen Jackson was great last night on the Grantland Basketball Hour:

Vid

 

[Village Idiot]

How locked in do you think the Bucks are at the 6 seed?

At this point, it seems the Wizards are pretty much locked into the 5. Bulls and Raptors will fight it out for the 3 with the Bulls having a slight advantage with the better current record and the tiebreaker. I'd love for the Bulls to get the Bucks in the first round since they seem to match up well with them. Also, the strong crowd support for the Bulls in nearby Milwaukee makes it seem like a home away from home. The Heat kind of scare me mainly due to Hassan Whiteside. I hoping they don't move up to 6. Besides, we'd all rather see LeBron play the Heat.

I think the 3vs6 and 4vs5 are locked. Raptors aren't catching the Bulls, especially because of the tie breaker. Lowry won't be back for a while either.

Bucks have a pretty soft schedule so as long as they go close to .500, the Heat won't catch them.

The 1st tie breaker is division winner gets the higher seed.

 

[Juxtatarot]

How locked in do you think the Bucks are at the 6 seed?

At this point, it seems the Wizards are pretty much locked into the 5. Bulls and Raptors will fight it out for the 3 with the Bulls having a slight advantage with the better current record and the tiebreaker. I'd love for the Bulls to get the Bucks in the first round since they seem to match up well with them. Also, the strong crowd support for the Bulls in nearby Milwaukee makes it seem like a home away from home. The Heat kind of scare me mainly due to Hassan Whiteside. I hoping they don't move up to 6. Besides, we'd all rather see LeBron play the Heat.

I think the 3vs6 and 4vs5 are locked. Raptors aren't catching the Bulls, especially because of the tie breaker. Lowry won't be back for a while either.

Bucks have a pretty soft schedule so as long as they go close to .500, the Heat won't catch them.

The 1st tie breaker is division winner gets the higher seed.

That's stupid.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

How locked in do you think the Bucks are at the 6 seed?

At this point, it seems the Wizards are pretty much locked into the 5. Bulls and Raptors will fight it out for the 3 with the Bulls having a slight advantage with the better current record and the tiebreaker. I'd love for the Bulls to get the Bucks in the first round since they seem to match up well with them. Also, the strong crowd support for the Bulls in nearby Milwaukee makes it seem like a home away from home. The Heat kind of scare me mainly due to Hassan Whiteside. I hoping they don't move up to 6. Besides, we'd all rather see LeBron play the Heat.

I think the 3vs6 and 4vs5 are locked. Raptors aren't catching the Bulls, especially because of the tie breaker. Lowry won't be back for a while either.

Bucks have a pretty soft schedule so as long as they go close to .500, the Heat won't catch them.

The 1st tie breaker is division winner gets the higher seed.

Noticed that last night

 

[Long Ball Larry]

But the better record gets home court, right? didn't they make that change a couple years ago?

 

[Cliff Clavin]

But the better record gets home court, right? didn't they make that change a couple years ago?

Yes. Toronto is guaranteed the 4 but not home court if the Wiz catch them.

 

[Jack White]

Horrific win for the Lakers.

And they should move the 3 point line back. I see more shuttling the ball around the perimeter than free flowing offense for most teams and it's painful to watch. They're not all the Spurs.

#### the corner three.

It's already almost 24-feet away, except for the corners.

 

[Jack White]

Question about seeding:

I read that the NBA changed the seeding rule this year so that the three division winners plus the top non-division winning record get the top four seeds, but the actual seeds are based on records.

Yet I see that in the East, the Raptors and Bulls are tied, but the Raptors are listed as the three seed despite the Bulls winning the season series.

Also, do you think it's time to get rid of divisions completely? What purpose do they serve? The NBA schedule is effectively balanced.

 

[Bobcat10]

Question about seeding:

I read that the NBA changed the seeding rule this year so that the three division winners plus the top non-division winning record get the top four seeds, but the actual seeds are based on records.

Yet I see that in the East, the Raptors and Bulls are tied, but the Raptors are listed as the three seed despite the Bulls winning the season series.

Also, do you think it's time to get rid of divisions completely? What purpose do they serve? The NBA schedule is effectively balanced.

I think it was mentioned above that first tie breaker is simply division winner.

Are you getting rid of conferences with your divisions, or just the divisions? I think the latter is certainly doable, not sure how much I like the idea of the former.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Are you getting rid of conferences with your divisions, or just the divisions? I think the latter is certainly doable, not sure how much I like the idea of the former.

Conferences and divisions were put in place to ease travel back in the day. With the private jets and all the other luxuries players have now, I don't see a reason for keeping them. Without changing the number of games I don't think you'll get a perfectly balanced schedule. it would be close enough so that a team like Toronto doesn't get a massive edge over the rest of the league while the southwest teams get screwed.

 

[Capella]

Magic are going after Billy Donovan again.

 

[GOB]

Magic are going after Billy Donovan again.

Please no. I really cannot stand that man. Orlando Magic bow down to no one.*

*except 29 other NBA teams

 

[Jack White]

Question about seeding:

I read that the NBA changed the seeding rule this year so that the three division winners plus the top non-division winning record get the top four seeds, but the actual seeds are based on records.

Yet I see that in the East, the Raptors and Bulls are tied, but the Raptors are listed as the three seed despite the Bulls winning the season series.

Also, do you think it's time to get rid of divisions completely? What purpose do they serve? The NBA schedule is effectively balanced.

I think it was mentioned above that first tie breaker is simply division winner.

Are you getting rid of conferences with your divisions, or just the divisions? I think the latter is certainly doable, not sure how much I like the idea of the former.

No, still two conferences but no divisions. Do people even pay attention to them any more? I know I don't.

**EDIT** OK, I didn't see that about division winner trumping season series in the event of a tie. Which I think is dumb.