The Magic teams were not all that great for a few years, and the Cavs Shaq was so injured I wouldn't say it was squandered on his part.. Him playing 24 mins a game was fairly amazing.. LBJ and Mike Brown squandered Shaq...
By blackace Go To PostI think almost everyone in here at least knows he had a great career and a crazy last game… Where you rank him in history differs but I see very few people deny that his career was insane..
i was more so referencing that whitlock diatribe and the wider discussion surrounding Kobe's last game. slaent itself has been cordial.
someone mentioned this, but it looks like G-Tyme purposely stepped over the line just in case kobe missed his 2nd FT to get to 60.
pretty cool of him to do that.
https://youtu.be/EzpsyFvz7W0?t=4m54s
pretty cool of him to do that.
https://youtu.be/EzpsyFvz7W0?t=4m54s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3Lr2Yx4pyE
Coach Nick breaking down the Kobe finale by explaining the fundamentals behind every score. Footwork, fakes, positioning, dribbles, angles. So awesome.
Coach Nick breaking down the Kobe finale by explaining the fundamentals behind every score. Footwork, fakes, positioning, dribbles, angles. So awesome.
By P S Y C H Go To Postto this day, how a player like shaq existed makes no sense to me. that combination of size, athleticism and skill shouldn't be possible.Wilt existed, so make that two guys.
Oh, hey, some analysis on why the best way (available to us plebes) to determine 3pt defense is to look at 3pt attempts and not 3pt%: http://nyloncalculus.com/2016/04/13/deep-dives-the-myth-of-leaving-the-right-guy/
By Kibner Go To PostOh, hey, some analysis on why the best way (available to us plebes) to determine 3pt defense is to look at 3pt attempts and not 3pt%: http://nyloncalculus.com/2016/04/13/deep-dives-the-myth-of-leaving-the-right-guy/Yeah, I read an article(might have been a tweet or a radio interview idk) by Haberstroh about the same thing earlier in the year when San Antonio was holding teams to like under 20 attempts.
By Kibner Go To PostOh, hey, some analysis on why the best way (available to us plebes) to determine 3pt defense is to look at 3pt attempts and not 3pt%: http://nyloncalculus.com/2016/04/13/deep-dives-the-myth-of-leaving-the-right-guy/i assumed this was how everyone thought. It's so easy to get off 3 point shots that field goal percentage doesn't really mean anything.
at least that's how I always looked at it. you can have games where someone like kobe goes 1 for 17 and tanks the percentage. doesn't mean Jazz perimeter defense is good, just means that kobe shouldn't think hes steph curry
By Kibner Go To PostOh, hey, some analysis on why the best way (available to us plebes) to determine 3pt defense is to look at 3pt attempts and not 3pt%: http://nyloncalculus.com/2016/04/13/deep-dives-the-myth-of-leaving-the-right-guy/
That wasn't a convincing argument at all. "Oh look 35% is still a high number" doesn't change the fact that it's better than 40%. And seeing a team that holds opponents to 45% in fg's vs 50% all season and saying one isn't better defense than the other is just nonsense.
Just because someone at nylon calculus reaches a conclusion after presenting data doesn't make it true. In fact, this particular conclusion is patently absurd.
There comes a point where the data available just doesn't paint the whole picture and you should just fucking watch games to determine defense.
By 33MillionDollarMen Go To PostThere comes a point where the data available just doesn't paint the whole picture and you should just fucking watch games to determine defense.I like using data to both confirm and challenge the conclusions I draw from watching games.
Like, I used to think 3pt% was the best way to determine who is the best at defending against 3 point shots. Someone suggested 3pta instead and gave some backing reasons for it rooted in stats.
I took that information and looked at closeout situations more. This made me realize that a "hidden" value of forcing fewer 3pt attempts also results in more mid-range jumpshots if your paint defense is worth a damn. This results in a lower expected point value for the possession than having a better 3pt% against.
I took that information and looked at closeout situations more. This made me realize that a "hidden" value of forcing fewer 3pt attempts also results in more mid-range jumpshots if your paint defense is worth a damn. This results in a lower expected point value for the possession than having a better 3pt% against.
By Kibner Go To PostI like using data to both confirm and challenge the conclusions I draw from watching games..
By Kibner Go To PostI like using data to both confirm and challenge the conclusions I draw from watching games..
By Kibner Go To PostI like using data to both confirm and challenge the conclusions I draw from watching games..
To be clear, I'm rejecting the conclusion that "leave the right guy open is bad defense".
That suggests that running everyone off the 3 point line, as soon as they catch it, regardless of context, is a good idea. That's a patently absurd conclusion that really fails to understand how compromised your defense gets in that kind of scheme.
It's essentially an argument that tells you to ignore scouting reports, player strengths and weaknesses, and focus entirely on the line itself. It's kind of the absurd conclusion that the fever pitch of obsession with 3's leads to devoid of context.
I've said all along, my problem with analytics isn't data. It's non-knowledgable people reaching wrong and incorrect conclusions based on data. Shit like this right here:
Bolded are bullshit. As is the idea that running someone off the 3 point line will result in an off the dribble 3 instead of a drive to the basket and a compromised defense.
That suggests that running everyone off the 3 point line, as soon as they catch it, regardless of context, is a good idea. That's a patently absurd conclusion that really fails to understand how compromised your defense gets in that kind of scheme.
It's essentially an argument that tells you to ignore scouting reports, player strengths and weaknesses, and focus entirely on the line itself. It's kind of the absurd conclusion that the fever pitch of obsession with 3's leads to devoid of context.
By Kibner Go To PostI like using data to both confirm and challenge the conclusions I draw from watching games.
I've said all along, my problem with analytics isn't data. It's non-knowledgable people reaching wrong and incorrect conclusions based on data. Shit like this right here:
Being closer to the players who do end up shooting is better than leaving them more open, but better still is running players off the line completely, as there is a strong relationship between the proportion of threes a team forces to be taken off the dribble as opposed to catch-and-shoots and their overall 3FG% allowed. But for the most part teams simply aren’t able to pick and choose which players get open, in large part because allowing anyone to get open for rhythm threes is a defensive breakdown.
Bolded are bullshit. As is the idea that running someone off the 3 point line will result in an off the dribble 3 instead of a drive to the basket and a compromised defense.
Those are some silly assumptions and conclusions you're drawing from this 3PTA argument.
Spurs were #1 in limiting 3PTA and #1 in 3PT% defense. It can be both.
Spurs were #1 in limiting 3PTA and #1 in 3PT% defense. It can be both.
By reilo Go To PostThose are some silly assumptions and conclusions you're drawing from this 3PTA argument.
Spurs were #1 in limiting 3PTA and #1 in 3PT% defense. It can be both.
I'm not debating kibner's argument, I'm debating the conclusion drawn by the guy at nylon calculus. His conclusion is patently false and absurd.
So you'd rather have a team defense give up a three than a mid-range jumpshot or a layup? That's the argument.
By reilo Go To PostSo you'd rather have a team defense give up a three than a mid-range jumpshot? That's the argument.
No, it really really really isn't.
- I'd rather not chase Lebron off the 3 point line every time he catches it because Lebron driving passed that close out and finishing at the rim or finding an open guy isn't better for you.
- I'd rather shade my defense to stop John Wall penetration and leave Kris Humphries open to shoot than be so scared of piss poor 3 point shooters that I fail to bring an extra man to defend the pick and roll.
- I'd rather be able to double a guy who's on fire and then when the ball is kicked out run my guy to the superior player in the corner than the inferior player in the wing just because the wing guy caught it first.
in large part because allowing anyone to get open for rhythm threes is a defensive breakdown.You just called that part bullshit, so wtf are you arguing? An open rhythm three is most definitely worse defense than a drive-to-the-basket, especially if you got good interior defense.
By reilo Go To PostYou just called that part bullshit, so wtf are you arguing? An open rhythm three is most definitely worse defense than a drive-to-the-basket, especially if you got good interior defense.
You're assuming your guy driving can't pass? That article, just so we're clear, is advocating chasing EVERYONE off the 3 point line every time they catch it rather than risk giving up a 3 point shot of any kind, even contested. That is such an absurd defensive philosophy that it's laughable.
It's basically telling you to treat every player as if they have the gravity of Steph at the 3 point line. Where you no longer need great 3 point shooters to surround the PnR to be effective because any pass results in a strong close out no matter who's catching it, as long as they catch it behind the line.
Again, you're drawing those conclusions and applying exceptions to the rule. It's an overall good defensive strategy that the best coaches in the business employ. The argument isn't "this is the only way forward" but "limiting open rhythm three-pointers is preferable". And hey, guess what? If you drive the player off the three-point line and he drives and dishes to an open rhythm three pointer, then your defense literally failed to do what the argument is to begin with: prevent the open three pointer!
By reilo Go To PostAgain, you're drawing those conclusions and applying exceptions to the rule. It's an overall good defensive strategy that the best coaches in the business employ. The argument isn't "this is the only way forward" but "limiting open rhythm three-pointers is preferable". And hey, guess what? If you drive the player off the three-point line and he drives and dishes to an open rhythm three pointer, then your defense literally failed to do what the argument is to begin with: prevent the open three pointer!
Coaches don't employ that at all. Coaches don't treat everyone with the same gravity and they help and shade off the right guys as much as possible. What SA did to Steph in their best game this season isn't what they did to Barnes or iggy or, duck, Azeli. It's a nonsensical argument that guy is making.
You're attempting to qualify his statement when what he said is very clear. There's no such thing as leaving the right guy open. So chasing Lebron off the line and it leading to an open Delly 3 point shot is the same as if you didn't chase Lebron off the line at the catch. Which.is.absurd.
Okay dude, just infer what you want to infer and get angry over an argument that others didn't make. Do you, boo, this is useless.
If Lebron shot 100 contested 3's, U would win that game easily. IF Lebron was chased off the 3 point line 100 times and allowed to pick your team apart with the drive or the pass, you would probably lose that game, easily.
"Contesting is good but better still is chasing them off the line" is a patently absurd statement in all cases.
It's literally what the guy said. Maybe instead of hating me so much you argue everything I say - don't fall on the wrong sword with shit that, if we're being honest, you don't even agree with.
"Contesting is good but better still is chasing them off the line" is a patently absurd statement in all cases.
By reilo Go To PostOkay dude, just infer what you want to infer and get angry over an argument that others didn't make. Do you, boo, this is useless.
It's literally what the guy said. Maybe instead of hating me so much you argue everything I say - don't fall on the wrong sword with shit that, if we're being honest, you don't even agree with.
Again, READ the thing you bolded:
allowing anyone to get open for rhythm threes is a defensive breakdown.That's the damn core of the argument. The conclusion agrees with you! Don't allow the open three, stay home on the three-point shooter, and let Lebron drive and prevent him from getting that pass off.
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostMan. Reilo loves arguing with no one in particular.I see what you did there.
The woman who filed a police report against Zach Randolph accusing him of beating her up is now admitting she MADE UP THE WHOLE THING in a shameful attempt to shake him down for cash.
As we previously reported, a woman filed a police report with the LAPD claiming the Memphis Grizzlies star beat her up and choked her on March 23rd. Officers said they observed several visible injuries on the woman’s neck and back when she filed the report on March 24th.
But one week later, officials say the woman changed her story … and during a police interview on March 31st, and said there WAS an argument but Randolph NEVER touched her.
According to official documents … cops say the woman told officers, “she was upset and decided to file a fabricated police report and ‘just wanted to get his money.'”
When asked about the injuries, the woman said before she filed the initial report on 3/24 she and a friend drove around the corner from the police station and inflicted the injuries to her neck and back themselves … and then pinned it on Randolph.
I think we all knew a fine upstanding citizen and champion of the people like Zach Randolph would have never done this but it is good to know that it is now official.
By diehard Go To Postid rather have Curry take a wide open anything than a contested 3.
So would I, but that's not the argument this hack at NL presented.
Except layups of course.
By jjasper Go To PostI think we all knew a fine upstanding citizen and champion of the people like Zach Randolph would have never done this but it is good to know that it is now official.
Glad that a player I like as a human is actually not a monster.
By reilo Go To PostAgain, READ the thing you bolded:
That's the damn core of the argument. The conclusion agrees with you! Don't allow the open three, stay home on the three-point shooter, and let Lebron drive and prevent him from getting that pass off.
Staying attached to three 3 point shooters while you let Draymond/curry or Lebron/love or Westbrook/Durant run 100 high PnR's without a third defender in the area would probably result in an ORTG of like 150 dude. Between free throws, layups, and open shots it would be a nightmare to stop.
There's 450 players in the league, you can't throw out a generally good defensive scheme out because there's exceptions to the rule. Those players are amazing at what they do because they defy the average. How do you not understand that?
By reilo Go To PostThere's 450 players in the league, you can't throw out a generally good defensive scheme out because there's exceptions to the rule. Those players are amazing at what they do because they defy the average. How do you not understand that?
Dude - every team has two Guys you can do that with. There's a reason you need a third defender to stop the high PnR so often, it's dangerous.
A generally good defensive scheme is to close out good to great 3 point shooters and to contest or allow bad ones.
Run everyone off the line isn't a good defensive scheme at all, it's a disaster.
By jjasper Go To PostI think we all knew a fine upstanding citizen and champion of the people like Zach Randolph would have never done this but it is good to know that it is now official.So what happens to her now? Does she get off free even though she tried to ruin a mans life?
By diehard Go To Postid rather have Curry take a wide open anything than a contested 3.unless it's from the hashmarks
Pretty sure they can levy some charges against her in the realms of perjury and obstruction of justice.
By Rob Go To PostSo what happens to her now? Does she get off free even though she tried to ruin a mans life?
Prosecutors can file charges but they won't, understandable because it would scare future victims from coming forward.
Zbo can bring a civil suit and ruin her life tho. If he so wished. Which I doubt.
victims are scared enough to come forward, i dont think it helps when you have people like this that make up situations. next time it happens people might think "shes probably faking like with what happened to Zbo"
I'm probably overthinking it due to hearing the shitty opinions of people regarding stuff like the Erin Andrews situation
I'm probably overthinking it due to hearing the shitty opinions of people regarding stuff like the Erin Andrews situation
46th pick norman powell wins ROTM for east in april. on top of that got clippers 1st rounder from bucks for next year. And all it took was vasquez for all of this
masai da gawd
masai da gawd
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostMan. Reilo loves arguing with no one in particular.lmao
o_O
On that note...
Curry '15-16: 402 made (886 attempts)
Bucks '15-16: 440 made (1277 attempts)
Wolves '15-16: 455 made (13477 attempts)
