Pompous words from Kblaze volume 422: If you can prove it you are probably wrong.

[GOBB]

The point I'm making is you still come across as being ego-centric, self serving in the vast majority of your posts.

You are too concerned about how a poster makes you feel reading thier material. Especially someone who rarely ever posts here. You're not holding a grudge from a past discussion btween you 2 are you.

[Samurai Swoosh]

You are too concerned about how a poster makes you feel reading thier material. Especially someone who rarely ever posts here.

Who said I was concerned about how posters make me feel?

I'm talking about the clear cut fact that dude thinks he's important. Much like some other poster who just showed up in this thread.



Keep instigating

[joe]

Boston and San Antonio had virtually the same three point shooting numbers during their championship years. I didn't look at LA, though. Boston was slightly better at defending the three as well.

In the spirit of Kblaze's post, I didn't look at the numbers and relied on my own opinion. In 2008, Boston matched 2007 San Antonio with 38% 3's. That was better than any other championship Spurs team.

From memory, I see Bruce Bowen, Manu Ginobli, and Brent Barry as better than Ray Allen, Pierce, and Eddie House. It's cool if you disagree. Just how I felt when I watched the teams play.

[GOBB]

Who said I was concerned about how posters make me feel?

Your replies say it all.

I'm talking about the clear cut fact that dude thinks he's important.

Insecure much?

Much like some other poster who just showed up in this thread.

Like I said you are concerned too much about how a poster makes you feel.

Keep instigating

Nothing to instigate. Just find your complaining in here annoying and pointless.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Nothing to instigate. Just find your complaining in here annoying and pointless.

I'm not the only one that notices it ... yet you feel the need to jump on my sack.

Insecure, much?

[Leviathon1121]

Fair post. There are some problems with part of it though.

As much as you try to direct your rant towards the fans and the media it also highly becomes directed towards some very prominent coaches.

Coaches jobs are to win basketball games, you do that by playing the most efficient basketball at both ends of the floor, so you design your offense towards playing the most efficient basketball that's possible for your team and your defense towards getting the other team to play the least efficient basketball possible for the other team.
And how coaches coach affect the mentality of players and how they think of and play basketball, thus ultimately the fans.



That's a rubbish statement!

True shooting% and PPS indicates how well you have done at getting points on the fewest amount of shots. The natural question to ask yourself as a coach is: how do we do that as a team?

What's the best shot in basketball? A wide open layup, but those are hard to get and often become contested so the number of times layups are made go down. So if you're a good FT shooter you actually score more efficient points off of that than layups.

But as layups is the most efficient points you can score without the clock being stopped that's what you go for, what happens when you go for layups more so then when you go for a mid range shot? You create fouls leading to FT's and get the other teams players in foul trouble thus having to sub for lesser talent. "In the NBA, the team that takes the most foul shots wins 9 out of 10 times " - Hubie Brown

The 2nd best shot without the clock being stopped is the corner 3, it's shorter than some 2 point spots and gets you 1.5x more points whenever you make the shot.
The reason Greg Popovich was ahead of the curve for so long was that he realized the importance of the corner 3pt shot offensively and defensively before the other coaches, so he game planned for it. To this day a lot of other coaches still haven't closed that gap.

Layups and open 3s are also indicators of the defense having been broken down, and as much as 3s leads to fastbreak opportunities for the other team it's also easier to get offensive rebounds off 3's and layups, again it's because of the defense having been broken down, but also because you have more time to get in the right position for the offensive rebound. Mid range shots on the other hand doesn't often mean that the defense has been truly broken down, so it's harder to get offensive rebounds off of them as defenders are in better position to box out.

Overall when you talk about this stuff I think your'e looking at it way to individualistic, you talk about single players abilities and the relation to the stats you don't like and that's not right. It's a team game, 5vs5 and not 1vs1 X 5.

Saying a statistic that take shooting 3 pointers at a good rate isn't valid is crap, as long as there's a 3pt line in basketball it's a valid ability to be a good shooter from that distance. Your argument should be made towards the rules of the game, that there shouldn't be a 3pt line as you don't think it's a valid ability to be able to make tougher/longer shots than other guys. It's a very valid argument, Bob Knight for example believes in this.

But the rules of basketball being what they are, coaches has to relate to that, and like I said to begin with, the way coaches coach the game affects how players play it, and therefore how fans view it.

I know a lot of old school fans like to talk about the beauty of the mid range game, but mostly it's just that, beauty, it's not really what wins you basketball games, coaches and players have adjusted to this, you should too.

The mid range game doesn't win you basketball games? I am not sure how it is possible to be this far off with an opinion.

Kobe Bryant : Excellent mid range game
Michael Jordan : Excellent mid range game
Hakeem : Excellent mid range game
Tim Duncan : Excellent mid range game (Gotten a lot worse with age)

What do these have in common? 16 of the last 20 NBA championships featured players who's mid range game is one of the best in the league. I wonder why that is? Could it be because is wreaks havoc on defenses? Probably not since you claimed it is basically a useless skill.

These guys commanded double teams before they were near the paint, killing defenses and setting up wide open shots for their team. Not what wins you basketball games? You have got to be kidding me.

Like KBlaze pointed out, any formula that puts Steve Kerr ahead of Kareem simply because he shoots a lot of threes is very flawed somewhere.

[pete's montreux]

In the spirit of Kblaze's post, I didn't look at the numbers and relied on my own opinion. In 2008, Boston matched 2007 San Antonio with 38% 3's. That was better than any other championship Spurs team.

From memory, I see Bruce Bowen, Manu Ginobli, and Brent Barry as better than Ray Allen, Pierce, and Eddie House. It's cool if you disagree. Just how I felt when I watched the teams play.

I didn't even realize what I was doing. Just like you, I'd take my guys over your guys 10 out of 10 times, but that's just how we are, I guess. For me, you only have one go-to-shooter and that's Manu. We have three. Don't underestimate Eddie. I've never in my life seen someone get as hot as Eddie, and I've also never seen someone go cold so fast, either.

Both great championships teams, though.

[GOBB]

I'm not the only one that notices it ... yet you feel the need to jump on my sack.

Insecure, much?

And that poster is in the same boat as you are.

There you go crying errr complaining again "Hey he did it too. Why slap me?".

[Samurai Swoosh]

There you go crying errr complaining again "Hey he did it too. Why slap me?".

And I have every right to complain.



Kblaze's post are boring, self absored, lengthy and redundant.

[Dasher]

Kid is probably still sore about Ben>Hinrich

[hayden695]

Your replies say it all.



Insecure much?



Like I said you are concerned too much about how a poster makes you feel.



Nothing to instigate. Just find your complaining in here annoying and pointless.

You aren't instigating, yet on the last page you claimed "I am the type of person who just looks for something to argue." Come on GOBB.

[Kblaze8855]

Im so unimportant you feel the need to come and discuss it? You know what I do with unimportant things that are of no interest to me? Disregard them. why would I discuss something that isnt interesting? Just seems to be in conflict. Oh well.

I suggest a 360 2k10 game for the right to be a picky douche on ISH. Loser has to show common sense enough to ignore the things he doesnt like instead of argue with them which will generate more of what he supposedly doesnt like.

Care to go one on one with the great one for the rights to be ISHs most abrasive jackass?

[Samurai Swoosh]

You aren't instigating, yet on the last page you claimed "I am the type of person who just looks for something to argue." Come on GOBB.

That's all he provides the boards, and it's been like that for sometime. I hate to speculate on his life outside of the interwebs but jesus ... lots of hate in that one's heart. LOL

[EroticVanilla]

Back to the thread topic. Something that bothers me even more then people using in-game stats as the end-all be-all to determine the effectiveness of a player is when people use Combine results to try and predict how good a player will be. Like the John Wall thread (though that poster obviously has an agenda).

At least in game statistics are measuring performance on the court. Combine results are just arbitrary tests in a clinical setting thats completely separated from actually game play.

[hayden695]

That's all he provides the boards, and it's been like that for sometime. I hate to speculate on his life outside of the interwebs but jesus ... lots of hate in that one's heart. LOL

Actually I think GOBB posts quite a bit of good to great knowledgable posts. Just that made me laugh.