General NBA Playoff Discussion

Originally posted by SanFranMan:

Originally posted by teeohh:
I'd probably root for the Bulls but I can't stand Boozer, he has a face you just to want to punch, just like Otter's. I'll root for the Heat in the championship if they get there just because everyone is going to hate
#dealwithit

I know right lol

yeah Boozer does have that face, and it definitely doesn't help that he pretty much yells all game. I can't stand Bosh's face, dude looks like he should be a Raptor for life.

Wilt is the greatest player (toss-up between Jordan and Wilt) to play the game in my opinion, and I consider being the biggest and the most athletic of an era as a positive, not a negative. A lot of people discredit Jim Brown because he was going up against 250lb DTs - but it only proves how great he was - since he was close to 230 and must be a freak of nature to be able to run that fast at that weight during that era - when no one else could.

As far as rebounding goes, Wilt is the best but Rodman is very close second. So, I can see why many may feel Rodman is better in that aspect.

^ that.

-9fA

Originally posted by samoan49er:

Originally posted by SanFranMan:

Originally posted by teeohh:
I'd probably root for the Bulls but I can't stand Boozer, he has a face you just to want to punch, just like Otter's. I'll root for the Heat in the championship if they get there just because everyone is going to hate
#dealwithit

I know right lol

yeah Boozer does have that face, and it definitely doesn't help that he pretty much yells all game. I can't stand Bosh's face, dude looks like he should be a Raptor for life.

You need 3 things to be able to play for Duke:

1) Good grades

2) A strong work ethic

3) Having "a face everyone wants to punch"


Look it up, if you don't believe me. Better yet, post a picture of a Duke player that that doesn't apply to. *begins waiting an eternity*

Im on the Memphis bandwagon I hope they some how win the championship. That would be a great story for the league.

I am not saying I know more because I am older than most of you. I am just saying I watched players that many of you have only heard about. I saw Jerry West play shooting guard as much as Kobe Bryant. You learn things watching games that you can't learn from stats and film clips. I don't prefer any era when picking who I thought were the best all time players. As far as the argument old school players weren't as athletic as their counterparts from the long past, I am pretty sure if you applied modern training methods to players from 40 years ago, they would be just as big, strong and fast as their 21st century counter parts. The average NBA big man is taller than when the league started over 60 years ago, that I believe is due to the larger pool of players the league draws on, not so much the species of man evolving.
The biggest difference I see in the last 10-15 years is how quick some of these point guards are, and the league seems to have a lot of 7 footers that can hit outside shots with regularity.

Originally posted by susweel:
Im on the Memphis bandwagon I hope they some how win the championship. That would be a great story for the league.

They already have done more (winning 7 games) than any other 8th seed in the Western Conference ever did. It looked like they were going to take the series until OKC finally figured out how to slow down Randolph. Whatever team wins should make for an interesting series against the Mavericks. I doubt Dallas will keep hitting 3's at the insane rate they were, and the up tempo high energy style of the Memphis-OKC winner might wear them out.

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by susweel:
Im on the Memphis bandwagon I hope they some how win the championship. That would be a great story for the league.

They already have done more (winning 7 games) than any other 8th seed in the Western Conference ever did. It looked like they were going to take the series until OKC finally figured out how to slow down Randolph. Whatever team wins should make for an interesting series against the Mavericks. I doubt Dallas will keep hitting 3's at the insane rate they were, and the up tempo high energy style of the Memphis-OKC winner might wear them out.

The thing about the bold is that DAL has so many guys who can hit the three that if one or two go into a slump won't hurt them too much. They won't hit em at a 126 points a game rate, but they will still hit them better than most teams. Spurs only had 2 guys at a time on the court who could hit threes and most of the time, only one of them was a true 3-point sharp shooter which was why when that guy went into a drought, it hurt the team more than it would a team like DAL.

I think DAL is the real deal because they have a guy no one can stop if those 3's don't go in and this was the benefit other championship teams had such as the Lakers with Kobe, Spurs with Duncan, Boston with Pierce (to an extent), and MIA with Wade. It's that player that can get you points when all else is failing that gets teams championships.

There's only two teams with a seasoned player like that and that's DAL and MIA (they have 2).

You can argue Durant and Rose but they are still young and haven't displayed that bite and rip your skin off toughness yet. Dirk finally showed this.

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
I just saw somewhere that this is the first time in 13 years that there's no Shaq, Kobe, or Duncan in the Finals. That's pretty friggin amazing, IMO.

If Dallas beats OKC or Miami beats Chicago, you can just sub out Shaq's name for Nowitzki's/Terry's or Wade's/Haslem's/Dampier's and the streak continues (you could also sub out Kobe for Fish).

Originally posted by TX9R:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by TX9R:
Maybe mid level was too strong. Occasional all-star? You can't blame him for the Orlando debacle though, he ran in to the unstoppable buzzsaw of the Dream. LOL, hoinestly even I think that series would have been a whole lot different if even one of those free throws goes in.

I don't think that series would have gone too differently even if Anderson makes his free throws. Dream & Co. were vets that knew how to get it done.

FWIW...Eddie Jones was a 3 time all-star. Penny was a 4 time all star, and Van Exel made an ASG as well. He had chances with less, but Shaq never got it done with anyone but HOF-level wings. And Penny was well on his way to that status before injuries derailed his career.

Wow Van Excel made an ASG? Must have been a down year. Jones did make a few, after he left LA and also in a down era, his numbers weren't that great and only once did he average even 20 points. Even you have to admit the timing was good, the post Jordan-era was the post-a-lot-of-really-good players era, look at the Spurs team that won it all in 99. That was arguably the s**ttiest era the NBA ever had. I stand by my opinion that he would have got it done then with a lesser player than Kobe.

Nothing is more annoying than using the "he has made an all-star game" as a concrete barometer regarding how good supporting players are. Wally Szczerbiak, Brad Miller, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Jamaal Magloire, Dale Davis, Theo Ratliff, Nick Van Exel, Chris Gatling, B.J. Armstrong, Anthony Mason, etc. have all been all-stars (at least once). Would anyone here take any of them over Kevin Martin, Andre Iguodala, Marcus Camby, Jason Terry, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, young Mike Bibby, Tayshaun Prince, Hedo Turkoglu, Kurt Thomas, etc., none of whom have ever, nor likely will ever, make an all-star game?

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by TX9R:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by TX9R:
Maybe mid level was too strong. Occasional all-star? You can't blame him for the Orlando debacle though, he ran in to the unstoppable buzzsaw of the Dream. LOL, hoinestly even I think that series would have been a whole lot different if even one of those free throws goes in.

I don't think that series would have gone too differently even if Anderson makes his free throws. Dream & Co. were vets that knew how to get it done.

FWIW...Eddie Jones was a 3 time all-star. Penny was a 4 time all star, and Van Exel made an ASG as well. He had chances with less, but Shaq never got it done with anyone but HOF-level wings. And Penny was well on his way to that status before injuries derailed his career.

Wow Van Excel made an ASG? Must have been a down year. Jones did make a few, after he left LA and also in a down era, his numbers weren't that great and only once did he average even 20 points. Even you have to admit the timing was good, the post Jordan-era was the post-a-lot-of-really-good players era, look at the Spurs team that won it all in 99. That was arguably the s**ttiest era the NBA ever had. I stand by my opinion that he would have got it done then with a lesser player than Kobe.

Nothing is more annoying than using the "he has made an all-star game" as a concrete barometer regarding how good supporting players are. Wally Szczerbiak, Brad Miller, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Jamaal Magloire, Dale Davis, Theo Ratliff, Nick Van Exel, Chris Gatling, B.J. Armstrong, Anthony Mason, etc. have all been all-stars (at least once). Would anyone here take any of them over Kevin Martin, Andre Iguodala, Marcus Camby, Jason Terry, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, young Mike Bibby, Tayshaun Prince, Hedo Turkoglu, Kurt Thomas, etc., none of whom have ever, nor likely will ever, make an all-star game?

I'd take several of those guys over Jason Terry, Mike Bibby, Hedo, Kurt Thomas, or Kevin Martin.

ASG's aren't a concrete barometer, but you have to at least be a pretty good player to get there, which is all I was trying to exhibit.

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
I just saw somewhere that this is the first time in 13 years that there's no Shaq, Kobe, or Duncan in the Finals. That's pretty friggin amazing, IMO.

If Dallas beats OKC or Miami beats Chicago, you can just sub out Shaq's name for Nowitzki's/Terry's or Wade's/Haslem's/Dampier's and the streak continues (you could also sub out Kobe for Fish).

Wait.........what?

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by TX9R:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by TX9R:
Maybe mid level was too strong. Occasional all-star? You can't blame him for the Orlando debacle though, he ran in to the unstoppable buzzsaw of the Dream. LOL, hoinestly even I think that series would have been a whole lot different if even one of those free throws goes in.

I don't think that series would have gone too differently even if Anderson makes his free throws. Dream & Co. were vets that knew how to get it done.

FWIW...Eddie Jones was a 3 time all-star. Penny was a 4 time all star, and Van Exel made an ASG as well. He had chances with less, but Shaq never got it done with anyone but HOF-level wings. And Penny was well on his way to that status before injuries derailed his career.

Wow Van Excel made an ASG? Must have been a down year. Jones did make a few, after he left LA and also in a down era, his numbers weren't that great and only once did he average even 20 points. Even you have to admit the timing was good, the post Jordan-era was the post-a-lot-of-really-good players era, look at the Spurs team that won it all in 99. That was arguably the s**ttiest era the NBA ever had. I stand by my opinion that he would have got it done then with a lesser player than Kobe.

Nothing is more annoying than using the "he has made an all-star game" as a concrete barometer regarding how good supporting players are. Wally Szczerbiak, Brad Miller, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Jamaal Magloire, Dale Davis, Theo Ratliff, Nick Van Exel, Chris Gatling, B.J. Armstrong, Anthony Mason, etc. have all been all-stars (at least once). Would anyone here take any of them over Kevin Martin, Andre Iguodala, Marcus Camby, Jason Terry, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, young Mike Bibby, Tayshaun Prince, Hedo Turkoglu, Kurt Thomas, etc., none of whom have ever, nor likely will ever, make an all-star game?

I'd take several of those guys over Jason Terry, Mike Bibby, Hedo, Kurt Thomas, or Kevin Martin.

ASG's aren't a concrete barometer, but you have to at least be a pretty good player to get there, which is all I was trying to exhibit.

Fair enough, but there are definitely a ton of players that have never made an all-star game that are better than a ton of guys who have made one (sometimes even more). I know when I discuss Kobe vs. LBJ with friends of mine, a lot of times people defend LBJ's Cleveland supporting cast by saying he played with 3 all-stars (Jamison, Z, Mo Williams). Hell, you could even throw in another all-star and another hall of famer if you want to go by technicality and include Wally and Shaq. Ben Wallace too. The bottom line is a guy like Mo Williams was only an all-star because he played on a very relevant team, which was only relevant because of LBJ. You could probably name at least 20-25 PG's in the NBA today that teams would rather have than Mo. Long story short, I just think it's skewed that a Wally Sczerbiak has made an all-star game and guys like Andre Iguodala and Kevin Martin, arguably top-30 players in the game today, have not.

Originally posted by StOnEy333:

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
I just saw somewhere that this is the first time in 13 years that there's no Shaq, Kobe, or Duncan in the Finals. That's pretty friggin amazing, IMO.

If Dallas beats OKC or Miami beats Chicago, you can just sub out Shaq's name for Nowitzki's/Terry's or Wade's/Haslem's/Dampier's and the streak continues (you could also sub out Kobe for Fish).

Wait.........what?

Haha, think about it. If Dallas beats OKC, Nowitzki and Terry would have made it in '06 and '11. If Miami beats Chicago, Wade, Haslem, and Dampier would have made it in '06 and '11. Duncan and Kobe/Fisher were in it each other year since Jordan.

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by Joecool:
Numbers can help a lot of debates but they don't tell the entire impact of the player. Numbers can also claim that Jason Kidd was one of the best 3-point shooters in the game and his percentages are not too far behind Ray Allens'.

But, we have all seen them play and know this isn't even a close argument but 30 years from now, someone can debate this using numbers alone.

Exactly. Most of you are not 50 years old as I am and I have been watching sports since I was 5. So there is next to no one in here that has witnessed the evolution of football and basketball due to rule changes like I have. It is also rare that commentators and sports shows ever mention the evolution of the rules in these games. How many guys under 40 in here know that they used to shoot all fouls in NBA games? That offensive lineman in the NFL basically could not extend their arms when blocking? That defensive lineman could hit an offensive lineman in the head? Rule changes over the years have made it to where you just can't blindly compare stats.

Wilt was not a better rebounder than Rodman. He was loads taller than all the other bigs and Rodman was way shorter than all the other bigs and he STILL gobbled up a higher % of boards. C'mon now..