NBA 2014/15 Season Thread

[Meacon Keaton]

Records can also be flawed, because every year the competition is different. The Spurs have never had as many wins in a season as Golden State did this year, but I'd argue that more than one of those championship Spurs teams could beat this years Warriors.

Like DMN said, they'd have no answer for a big man and guys like Duncan, Robinson, and Shaq would have a field day in the middle.

[DMN in the House]

The NBA has changed a lot because of the dearth of good big men in the league, especially as compared to the 90s when there were four or so around (Shaq, Hakeen, Ewing, Mourning). It skews things and makes guard-centric teams more viable than they've been at any other time in the history of the NBA. In fact, the only 'All-Time' type team built around a guard is the 90s Bulls, and even Wennington (sp?) or Grant would be top big men today.

The game has changed, but the next time a truly great big man enters the league, it'll change back. Playing inside-out will always be the best way to play.

[Maxx]

Records can also be flawed, because every year the competition is different. The Spurs have never had as many wins in a season as Golden State did this year, but I'd argue that more than one of those championship Spurs teams could beat this years Warriors.

Like DMN said, they'd have no answer for a big man and guys like Duncan, Robinson, and Shaq would have a field day in the middle.

How'd the Rockets fare?

[Mofoticon]

The NBA has changed a lot because of the dearth of good big men in the league, especially as compared to the 90s when there were four or so around (Shaq, Hakeen, Ewing, Mourning). It skews things and makes guard-centric teams more viable than they've been at any other time in the history of the NBA. In fact, the only 'All-Time' type team built around a guard is the 90s Bulls, and even Wennington (sp?) or Grant would be top big men today.

The game has changed, but the next time a truly great big man enters the league, it'll change back. Playing inside-out will always be the best way to play.

That's the problem with the way the game is today though. Big men are coming into the league wanting to shoot 3s because that's the way the NBA seems to be going. Everyone wants to be the next Steph Curry, James Harden, or even Dirk Nowitzski, and you see guys like Blake Griffin start to play on the outside of the paint rather than the inside where he should be a dominant player every night. I don't know if a truly dominant inside big man is going to be in the cards going forward because it's not the way kids are seeing the NBA played nowadays. Everything is about shooting jumpers and the Warriors winning a title that way is only going to enhance it, for better or worse.

[Quom]

Or it could be because of zone defence and changes in how wings are allowed to be guarded (such as no hand checking any more) which has made it so it's much easier to generate points driving to the basket rather than playing off the blocks.

Then on defence having a proper big can be lovely eating up room in the paint, but it doesn't work so well if you're playing a game against a team that runs, spaces the floor and can generate a lot of points from outside and via movement. Either your big man needs to bust his arse getting back up the court on defence or you're playing 4-5. If he is busting his arse then chances are he's not playing 35 minutes a game.

[livid]

Yeah the rule changes have more to do with it than anything else. There are still some talented big men (though admittedly probably less than there used to be), they're just being asked to do more than just post up.

[gunnar hendershow]

Analytics have a ton to do with teams changing the way they play as well. Rule changes have really changed the ability of big men to dominate, it's just like any other sport the dominant strategy perpetually and always changes to counter the previous dominant strategy. Right now we have the same kind of people who could be working at Goldman Sachs running numbers and showing what the best way to play is. Having the dominant big man in the league is important, but right now it is a league built around guards since the league adapted to the era of Shaq and Duncan. Big men had their dominance negated by being forced to play small and fast, something they naturally couldn't do. No sport remains with a constant strategy, each strategy comes into prominence to counter the previous one.

[Benjamin]

The NBA has changed a lot because of the dearth of good big men in the league, especially as compared to the 90s when there were four or so around (Shaq, Hakeen, Ewing, Mourning). It skews things and makes guard-centric teams more viable than they've been at any other time in the history of the NBA. In fact, the only 'All-Time' type team built around a guard is the 90s Bulls, and even Wennington (sp?) or Grant would be top big men today.

The game has changed, but the next time a truly great big man enters the league, it'll change back. Playing inside-out will always be the best way to play.

I'm curious, why do you think it's the best way to play? Is it just a personal preference?

[VerbalPuke]

I don't know if this will satisfy what DMN feels, but I can agree with him. Statistics may disagree, but it seems to me that shots around the basket are always going to be higher percentage. It's maybe an old school mentality, but I still think a team can win or have a fighting chance using that mentality (so long as the skill level suits). I'm very much a defensive, grind it out kind of guy given the best teams Detroit has seen in basketball, but I do love a good three point shooter. I feel like I had something else interesting to add and I forgot.

It's sort of my thoughts on football, the passing attack is fun, and it's obvious the NFL has moved toward a high octane passing league. Still, fuck all that, I'd build my team around stout defense and power running. I find it funny that an annalist suggested that teams were mimicking the Cowboys with the jumbo offensive line and power running game. I've been saying the Lions should do that shit for years, wasn't that a fucking no brainer years ago? Wonder if some teams in the NBA start doing the same and going old school to counteract the small ball and three point shooting teams. Then we hear "Yeah, a lot of teams want to mimic this team using a big man in the paint". Hah.

[Benjamin]

I would a balanced team, because I love a post-up game as much as I love guards who are awesome from the wings. It's why I don't love GSW's game, as effective as it is, because it's all 3-pointers and it gets especially irritating when they've missed so many of them in a row, but they keep hitting them because they know they're going to get hot hands eventually and take over. I like a well-balanced team because it's more interesting to see what they go with and how they adjust.

[DMN in the House]

Playing inside out IS a balanced strategy. You throw it inside until they stop it, then the center kicks it out for the three. Obviously you need talent that can execute, but any strategy does. You the add stuff off of it to mix it up.

It's pretty much how I feel about football, actually. You run to set up the pass, and you always, always, emphasis defense. It might be 'boring', but it works.

[Maxx]

Nah, Westhead System, run run run go go go


Also, I can't believe Kristaps Porzingis is being talked about as a top 3 pick. How many times do you have to have an international guy completely flame out to realize they aren't worth picking that high? And in the last decade, how many of them besides like Jonas Valančiūnas and Gallinari have even contributed to their team? Its just shocking teams can continue to be so dumb.

[Meacon Keaton]

Minnesota intends to trade Anthony Bennett, and have apparently told Karl-Anthony Towns that he'll be the first pick of the draft.

[gunnar hendershow]

So Okafor can start shopping for a house in LA then.

[Quom]

KAT has since come out and said no such guarantee was made, which makes me sad.

I like Bennett as a project but Cleveland really fucked him over by taking him #1, his contract is ridiculous since it's $5million a year. In comparison Payne who is already slightly ahead of him costs less than $2million.

Lakers chasing Boogie hard, either working by themselves and giving Randle and the #2 pick or with Orlando who would get the #2, Lakers get Boogie and #6 and Sac gets Vuc and #5 with future draft picks/possibly extras thrown in. I really hate the Lakers because somehow you know they're going to pull this off.

[Quom]

Porzingis is 7'1.25" barefoot with a 7'6" wingspan and is 230 pounds. For comparison Gobert was close to an inch shorter but was 8 pounds heavier and still looked rail thin.

It could be insane if he can legit play SF whilst being close to 7'3 in shoes.

[gunnar hendershow]

The trade probably doesn't happen until after the draft since the Lakers can't trade the 2nd pick until after they take a player. That said I'm skeptical they get it done, Kings want to build around Boogie too.

[Maxx]

George Karl is going to get himself fired again.

[Mofoticon]

I don't think the Lakers have enough assets to get Cousins unless he specifically demands a trade there. Basically all they have to trade is the #2 pick and Julius Randle. It's not enough to get a player of Cousins caliber unless they can get very creative with a 3 team trade.

[Maxx]

Unfortunately its the Lakers and things always seem to work out just so for them.