General NBA Playoff Discussion

Originally posted by GameOver:
Heat-Celtics match-up...motherf**king yes...

Thoughts? Comments? This is going to be a great series, there is bound to be some strong opinions for one side over the other

For what it's worth, I'm probably cheerin for the Cs just because Ive actually got friends who are huge Cs fans...I dunno any Heat fans before BronBron sooo...yeahhh...lol

It would have been better in the conference finals. But they will have to face eachother now.

Hollins is a moron. Up by three with 1.7 seconds left and you don't foul? Not to mention Spurs had used all their timeouts.

They just gave the Spurs a ton of momentum for game 6.

[ Edited by Hopper on Apr 28, 2011 at 04:59:37 ]

Originally posted by Hopper:
Hollins is a moron. Up by three with 1.7 seconds left and you don't foul? Not to mention Spurs had used all their timeouts.

They just gave the Spurs a ton of momentum for game 6.

Fouling with 1.6 seconds left is a terrible idea. No coach in the league would do that. If you foul before the ball's in, it's two shots and the ball, and if you foul once the ball's in, there's a pretty good chance that the shooter gets in the act of shooting while you do.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Hopper:
Hollins is a moron. Up by three with 1.7 seconds left and you don't foul? Not to mention Spurs had used all their timeouts.

They just gave the Spurs a ton of momentum for game 6.

Fouling with 1.6 seconds left is a terrible idea. No coach in the league would do that. If you foul before the ball's in, it's two shots and the ball, and if you foul once the ball's in, there's a pretty good chance that the shooter gets in the act of shooting while you do.

lol Plenty of coaches have done it, especially when they know the opposing team is out of timeouts.

As soon as Neal touches the ball, Mayo should have grabbed him. The Spurs get two free throws and the Grizz are still up by one point with about 1.5 left. Then the Spurs have to foul giving the Grizz two Free throws. As I said the Spurs would've had no timeouts to advance the ball down by two or three with a second left, game over.

Neal had a second to take a dribble. That's the second you grab him and avoid fouling him in the act of shooting.

Originally posted by Hopper:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Hopper:
Hollins is a moron. Up by three with 1.7 seconds left and you don't foul? Not to mention Spurs had used all their timeouts.

They just gave the Spurs a ton of momentum for game 6.

Fouling with 1.6 seconds left is a terrible idea. No coach in the league would do that. If you foul before the ball's in, it's two shots and the ball, and if you foul once the ball's in, there's a pretty good chance that the shooter gets in the act of shooting while you do.

lol Plenty of coaches have done it, especially when they know the opposing team is out of timeouts.

As soon as Neal touches the ball, Mayo should have grabbed him. The Spurs get two free throws and the Grizz are still up by one point with about 1.5 left. Then the Spurs have to foul giving the Grizz two Free throws. As I said the Spurs would've had no timeouts to advance the ball down by two or three with a second left, game over.

Neal had a second to take a dribble. That's the second you grab him and avoid fouling him in the act of shooting.

What they should have done is subbed in everyone over six-nine and placed them all at or outside the three point line.

The game could have ended earlier when the grizzlies unbounded didn't throw it to Mayo streaking to the backslide.

Man, the Hornets need to stop shooting themselves in the foot. Their losses are primarily due to dumb turnovers. They need to wake up.

Originally posted by Hopper:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Hopper:
Hollins is a moron. Up by three with 1.7 seconds left and you don't foul? Not to mention Spurs had used all their timeouts.

They just gave the Spurs a ton of momentum for game 6.

Fouling with 1.6 seconds left is a terrible idea. No coach in the league would do that. If you foul before the ball's in, it's two shots and the ball, and if you foul once the ball's in, there's a pretty good chance that the shooter gets in the act of shooting while you do.

lol Plenty of coaches have done it, especially when they know the opposing team is out of timeouts.

As soon as Neal touches the ball, Mayo should have grabbed him. The Spurs get two free throws and the Grizz are still up by one point with about 1.5 left. Then the Spurs have to foul giving the Grizz two Free throws. As I said the Spurs would've had no timeouts to advance the ball down by two or three with a second left, game over.

Neal had a second to take a dribble. That's the second you grab him and avoid fouling him in the act of shooting.

Not with 1.7 seconds on the clock. You have to be close enough to the guy to grab him immediately before he gathers, which is extremely difficult to do with all of the back screens that are set on these plays. Once Neal catches the ball, he can go into the shooting motion as soon as a guy goes to grab him, and it's 3 shots.

Mayo didn't even get the opportunity to grab him.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Hopper:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Hopper:
Hollins is a moron. Up by three with 1.7 seconds left and you don't foul? Not to mention Spurs had used all their timeouts.

They just gave the Spurs a ton of momentum for game 6.

Fouling with 1.6 seconds left is a terrible idea. No coach in the league would do that. If you foul before the ball's in, it's two shots and the ball, and if you foul once the ball's in, there's a pretty good chance that the shooter gets in the act of shooting while you do.

lol Plenty of coaches have done it, especially when they know the opposing team is out of timeouts.

As soon as Neal touches the ball, Mayo should have grabbed him. The Spurs get two free throws and the Grizz are still up by one point with about 1.5 left. Then the Spurs have to foul giving the Grizz two Free throws. As I said the Spurs would've had no timeouts to advance the ball down by two or three with a second left, game over.

Neal had a second to take a dribble. That's the second you grab him and avoid fouling him in the act of shooting.

Not with 1.7 seconds on the clock. You have to be close enough to the guy to grab him immediately before he gathers, which is extremely difficult to do with all of the back screens that are set on these plays. Once Neal catches the ball, he can go into the shooting motion as soon as a guy goes to grab him, and it's 3 shots.

Mayo didn't even get the opportunity to grab him.

After looking at the video. Mayo could have grabbed Neal as soon as he touched the ball. Mayo gave Neal a little too much space. That doesn't happen if Hollins puts on the intentional foul.

As soon as the ball is inbounded you grab the player. This is not hard at all to execute without fouling in the act of shooting.

Originally posted by Hopper:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Hopper:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Hopper:
Hollins is a moron. Up by three with 1.7 seconds left and you don't foul? Not to mention Spurs had used all their timeouts.

They just gave the Spurs a ton of momentum for game 6.

Fouling with 1.6 seconds left is a terrible idea. No coach in the league would do that. If you foul before the ball's in, it's two shots and the ball, and if you foul once the ball's in, there's a pretty good chance that the shooter gets in the act of shooting while you do.

lol Plenty of coaches have done it, especially when they know the opposing team is out of timeouts.

As soon as Neal touches the ball, Mayo should have grabbed him. The Spurs get two free throws and the Grizz are still up by one point with about 1.5 left. Then the Spurs have to foul giving the Grizz two Free throws. As I said the Spurs would've had no timeouts to advance the ball down by two or three with a second left, game over.

Neal had a second to take a dribble. That's the second you grab him and avoid fouling him in the act of shooting.

Not with 1.7 seconds on the clock. You have to be close enough to the guy to grab him immediately before he gathers, which is extremely difficult to do with all of the back screens that are set on these plays. Once Neal catches the ball, he can go into the shooting motion as soon as a guy goes to grab him, and it's 3 shots.

Mayo didn't even get the opportunity to grab him.

After looking at the video. Mayo could have grabbed Neal as soon as he touched the ball. Mayo gave Neal a little too much space. That doesn't happen if Hollins puts on the intentional foul.

As soon as the ball is inbounded you grab the player. This is not hard at all to execute without fouling in the act of shooting.

No, what's dumb is why even set under the 3-point line prior to the ball being inbounded? I think 4 defenders were under the 3-point line. They should just run a max 3-4 cover 2 zone with their arms spread behind the 3-point line.

CP3 is a great player, but tonight was a good example of why I'd take Derrick Rose ahead of him. His team was having a ton of trouble getting open shots, and he never tried to impose his will on the game at any point. Just went quietly into the night. He played a similar game in the critical Game 3.

Rose is the kinda guy that's going to try to take over a game if his team is struggling like that. Durant too. (last night was ridiculous) Those are the kinda guys that win a lot in this league.

I think the Hawks match up well against the Bulls. They'll get passed Chicago

Originally posted by LA9erFan:
CP3 is a great player, but tonight was a good example of why I'd take Derrick Rose ahead of him. His team was having a ton of trouble getting open shots, and he never tried to impose his will on the game at any point. Just went quietly into the night. He played a similar game in the critical Game 3.

Rose is the kinda guy that's going to try to take over a game if his team is struggling like that. Durant too. (last night was ridiculous) Those are the kinda guys that win a lot in this league.

Thats why I always picked D-Will over him too Williams just takes over games when he needs too and Paul doesnt have the same swagger. Deron was awesome against Denver last year in the 1st round.

Good Bye Portland

Hello Lakers

Originally posted by LA9erFan:
CP3 is a great player, but tonight was a good example of why I'd take Derrick Rose ahead of him. His team was having a ton of trouble getting open shots, and he never tried to impose his will on the game at any point. Just went quietly into the night. He played a similar game in the critical Game 3.

Rose is the kinda guy that's going to try to take over a game if his team is struggling like that. Durant too. (last night was ridiculous) Those are the kinda guys that win a lot in this league.

Problem with Paul is he disappears at times. I'm waiting for next summer when the Knicks can get another big time player. I love rose but doubt a scoring PG would work with Melo and Amare.

I think it is between Deron and Cp3 and deron is more consistent.

Originally posted by YungAce:
I think the Hawks match up well against the Bulls. They'll get passed Chicago

The problem with the Hawks is that they're pretty schizophrenic. You play lock-down defense on them early (and the Bulls only have the best defense in the league), they get frustrated and start jackin up ill-advised shots. I think the mental-toughness of the Bulls will get the better of the Hawks...and oh yeah, we got that guy Derrick Rose!