NBA (whenever)...

[kskate2]

Just heard on ESPN, NY is booting Thibs

 

[Federberg]

1. Halli was the better player throughout the series. Siakem showed up like 2 games and made a dent. I know people don't want to think about it, but it's possible the establishment didn't take too kindly to Halli's choking gesture in game 1. I know why he did it, but felt it was completely inappropriate. Man, just ball. That's what you get paid for. He's too good. Doesn't need any extra-curricular histrionics.

2. Yes, KAT missed some defensive assignments, FTs and had a few turnovers. But NY need not point the finger to anyone but the mirror. That was a collective effort of slop. It was always an uphill battle to beat Indy, but after they imploded in game 1, it was extremely difficult seeing them winning the series anyway. Poor Brunson was on fumes. Dude been carrying the whole team on his back all season. Why do you think Thibs gave him those extended rest periods? He was so exhausted I saw him turn the ball over late in games, allow himself to get trapped in a double team and then throw up a prayer that had no chance of going in.

and now Thibs paid for it. Management makes personnel changes that don't suit the coach, and when it goes wrong, the coach pays for it. Even though the Knicks actually exceeded expectations. Reminds me of the Mark Brown sacking.

Re: Halli.. I assume that gesture was in homage to Reggie Miller?

 

[kskate2]

and now Thibs paid for it. Management makes personnel changes that don't suit the coach, and when it goes wrong, the coach pays for it. Even though the Knicks actually exceeded expectations. Reminds me of the Mark Brown sacking.

Re: Halli.. I assume that gesture was in homage to Reggie Miller?

correct on both accounts

 

[Federberg]

Yes I will stick to it. I think OKC will be able to handle them but confidence is a big thing and Indy would be brimming with it if they make it and I think they still will. I’m interested to see if either of these do go back 2-2. OKC getting absolutely smashed in game 3 was a surprise. Of course it is just 1 game but that probably gives Ant and co a lot more confidence than a narrow win would have after the first two beatdowns.

I do think Indy will drop the hammer in game 4 similar to the Cavs series, and then could finish it in 5 or will take care of business in game 6.

Told ya. Pacers are not like anything they’ve faced. Not saying they win the series BUT..

 

[Federberg]

Halliburton is an absolute killer

 

[DarthFed]

Told ya. Pacers are not like anything they’ve faced. Not saying they win the series BUT..

Yeah it’s insane. When you come back this many times against all odds there clearly is just an incredible amount of confidence that they are bringing. That said, looking at the stats OKC shot < 40%, got massacred on the boards and Indy went 18-39 on 3’s and they still led until literally the last second. Indy did have 18 more turnovers than OKC though so that is unlikely to repeat as well.

I say winner of game 2 wins the series, but even if it comes back to OKC at 2-2 that is scary for them given what the Pacers have shown they can do. They are now 7-2 on the road in these playoffs

 

[kskate2]

If these teams weren't bent on jacking up a plethora of 3's, they wouldn't lose the lead w/ 2 minutes left. If you can't hold a double digit lead w/ 2 mins left, you deserve whatever happens. Put some points on the board (be it a runner, jump shot or a FT) and stop relying on the long ball because a miss is a like turnover and becomes a fast break on the other end.

 

[DarthFed]

If these teams weren't bent on jacking up a plethora of 3's, they wouldn't lose the lead w/ 2 minutes left. If you can't hold a double digit lead w/ 2 mins left, you deserve whatever happens. Put some points on the board (be it a runner, jump shot or a FT) and stop relying on the long ball because a miss is a like turnover and becomes a fast break on the other end.

Absolutely hit the nail on the head here. Players are so used to jacking 3’s the first chance they get even if they have a big lead late. You have to fault coaches too. If my team is up 10 points with 2 minutes left I’d be going nuts if my players were shooting with 15 seconds on the clock.

The other thing of note is all the turnovers in the final minutes of the game when teams are applying ball pressure as much as possible. If you saw the last Olympics it was pretty astonishing how much just a bit of on-ball pressure was bothering American players. Even LeBron and Steph were having issues with it and then the rest of the team was way worse.

 

[Federberg]

If these teams weren't bent on jacking up a plethora of 3's, they wouldn't lose the lead w/ 2 minutes left. If you can't hold a double digit lead w/ 2 mins left, you deserve whatever happens. Put some points on the board (be it a runner, jump shot or a FT) and stop relying on the long ball because a miss is a like turnover and becomes a fast break on the other end.

this is what a lot of folks got wrong about Golden State at their peak (not you! ). They got so many quick twos because the opposition was so intent on stopping the 3. And Steph would often to drive to the paint because defences preferred that. He did that to sustain or extend leads. Yes they were terrifying they were down double digits. Then.. they would splash

 

[Federberg]

Absolutely hit the nail on the head here. Players are so used to jacking 3’s the first chance they get even if they have a big lead late. You have to fault coaches too. If my team is up 10 points with 2 minutes left I’d be going nuts if my players were shooting with 15 seconds on the clock.

The other thing of note is all the turnovers in the final minutes of the game when teams are applying ball pressure as much as possible. If you saw the last Olympics it was pretty astonishing how much just a bit of on-ball pressure was bothering American players. Even LeBron and Steph were having issues with it and then the rest of the team was way worse.

it's hard to get away from the NBA programming. It's interesting that Team USA tended to sharpen up in the latter quarters as reality clashed with what they were used to in the first half

 

[Federberg]

you know it's a problem when even Isaih won't back you up!

 

[DarthFed]

you know it's a problem when even Isaih won't back you up!

I don’t mind people propping themselves up when it’s warranted. Pretty much all great athletes have big egos, it just comes with the territory. But what made that so cringe is that it wasn’t close to being true then, and while LeBron has added quite a bit onto his legacy since then, it still is not close to being true.

Curry also declared himself the best PG ever somewhat recently over Magic. That was just as laughable and it was great to see Magic tear that down.

 

[DarthFed]

It’s getting very interesting now. Almost certainly a must win game 4 for OKC. And I do just say “almost” because they are a dominant team and 2 of the last 3 games are at home.

If Indy pulls off this championship, where would you all rank it terms of surprises in NBA history? I honestly can’t think of a bigger one since I started watching aside from maybe 2004 Pistons winning it all, which included destroying the Lakers in the finals. 2011 Mavs was a big surprise but they had Dirk and quite a solid veteran squad. The real surprise there was the gauntlet they ran.

 

[Federberg]

I don’t mind people propping themselves up when it’s warranted. Pretty much all great athletes have big egos, it just comes with the territory. But what made that so cringe is that it wasn’t close to being true then, and while LeBron has added quite a bit onto his legacy since then, it still is not close to being true.

Curry also declared himself the best PG ever somewhat recently over Matlgic. That was just as laughable and it was great to see Magic tear that down.

in Steph's defence, he was asked, "are you the best point guard ever?". To which he replied, "yes".

I have less of a problem with that than Lebron, unilaterally declaring himself the GOAT, when no one even asked him. He OFFERED it.

Regarding Steph's place in the pantheon of point guards, that's tough. I think he's a hybrid. He's not really a point guard, but he's not really a two either in the conventional sense. There was a time, under Mark Jackson where he was definitely more of a point guard. But the motion offence under Kerr has created something entirely new, and pretty much unique to him. I would actually argue that the impact of what he does and his generational gravity opens up opportunities for his team mates.. Not with assists but with drawing away attention for them. The stats that would illustrate this haven't been designed yet, even if we can see it with our own eyes. There's no question in my mind that the oportunities his gravity creates for his team mates is every bit as impactful as Magic's assists. In fact I would bet that his win shares, and +/- would stand up favourably against any point guard of all time. But was it best for Steph to say yes? Not really, but he's a victim of his era. I just don't think his case is as absurd as some would think. And as great as Magic is, having the team mates that he had certainly helped. Just look at how trash a lot of the players who've left Golden State are when they don't have 30's gravity helping them