Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 176

Thread: NBA Finals

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Greater Tacoma
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    This guy really likes Delly's game.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...orts&ir=Sports
    .
    .
    .
    "thnk god for few" jazzdelmar(12/12/11 12:50pm)
    .
    "When most of us couldn't buy a basket. Where do we get off anyway?!" siliconzag (11/17/06 5:45:41 pm)
    .
    I am monitoring the price of a donut
    .

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bkzag View Post
    ...the only franchise that concentrates on TEAM work is San Antonio.
    Then you haven't been paying attention. Golden State is a team in the truest sense and has had a marvelous season because of it. The Atlanta Hawks don't have a superstar, won 60 games, was the #1 seed in the East and went to the conference finals. The Celtics got rid of their superstar malcontent, became a team, turned their season around and made the playoffs. The Bull lost their star for most of the year and won with teamwork and defense.

    Shall I continue?

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    7,914

    Default

    I don't watch games during the season, but the playoffs are different...IMHO of course.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    World Traveler
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robzagnut View Post
    Then you haven't been paying attention. Golden State is a team in the truest sense and has had a marvelous season because of it. The Atlanta Hawks don't have a superstar, won 60 games, was the #1 seed in the East and went to the conference finals. The Celtics got rid of their superstar malcontent, became a team, turned their season around and made the playoffs. The Bull lost their star for most of the year and won with teamwork and defense.

    Shall I continue?

    No need to continue...as you say several teams play "TEAM Basketball;" however, it is still entertainment and not basketball, because it's all about making money. The "stars" are protected and get the calls or don't get called. What kind of a game would it be if James had two/three fouls in the first quarter...he would have to sit on the bench for a long period of time and this would make for poor TV ratings. I have seen both GS and Cleveland play this year and w/out Love and Irving, there is no way Cleveland should start close to GS. This is all about hype and James being the best there has ever been and how he can carry his team to the Championship. I don't buy it. I think the game would be much more interesting if they used FIBA rules as NBA rules are a facade IMO.

    I was brought up watching the Celtics and Lakers play in the NBA Championships back in the 60's. Watching perhaps three of the greatest players of all time Wilt Chamberlin, Oscar Robertson and Jerry West play basketball, when it was a game of finesse and not force. Where Oscar Robertson averaged a Triple Double for an entire season, where Wilt Chamberlin averaged 50pts per game for two seasons and because of him the foul lines were extended and the ball on a free throw MUST touch the rim, where TEAM Basketball was played by each team in the league. Where there were almost no excessively physical fouls made on players trying to score. Where fouls and traveling were called.

    The NBA has surely changed its philosophy on how the game should be played and called. Today there are bigger and stronger players but that doesn't mean the game is better...it is what the audience wants not how the game was intended to be played, because that is what fills the arenas.

    Shall I continue?
    The virtue I desire most is Humility and just when I think it's achieved, I have lost it.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Columbia, MO
    Posts
    592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bkzag View Post
    No need to continue...as you say several teams play "TEAM Basketball;" however, it is still entertainment and not basketball, because it's all about making money. The "stars" are protected and get the calls or don't get called. What kind of a game would it be if James had two/three fouls in the first quarter...he would have to sit on the bench for a long period of time and this would make for poor TV ratings. I have seen both GS and Cleveland play this year and w/out Love and Irving, there is no way Cleveland should start close to GS. This is all about hype and James being the best there has ever been and how he can carry his team to the Championship. I don't buy it. I think the game would be much more interesting if they used FIBA rules as NBA rules are a facade IMO.

    I was brought up watching the Celtics and Lakers play in the NBA Championships back in the 60's. Watching perhaps three of the greatest players of all time Wilt Chamberlin, Oscar Robertson and Jerry West play basketball, when it was a game of finesse and not force. Where Oscar Robertson averaged a Triple Double for an entire season, where Wilt Chamberlin averaged 50pts per game for two seasons and because of him the foul lines were extended and the ball on a free throw MUST touch the rim, where TEAM Basketball was played by each team in the league. Where there were almost no excessively physical fouls made on players trying to score. Where fouls and traveling were called.

    The NBA has surely changed its philosophy on how the game should be played and called. Today there are bigger and stronger players but that doesn't mean the game is better...it is what the audience wants not how the game was intended to be played, because that is what fills the arenas.

    Shall I continue?
    A few observations.

    1. Revisionist/hindsight bias in full effect here

    2. The NCAA is NOT "all about making money?"

    3. Agreed 100% the NBA is more entertainment than sport...at least compared to CBB, NHL, MLB

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    On an island that is long
    Posts
    13,950

    Default

    Here are a couple examples of why I have trouble watching the NBA... selective rule enforcement...





    If you want to call it entertainment... fine... but when you can't call the most basic of rules when it is blatantly obvious then it takes away from the integrity of the game.
    "And Morrison? He did what All-Americans do. He shot daggers in the daylight and stole a win." - Steve Kelley (Seattle Times)

    "Gonzaga is a special place, with special people!" - Dan Dickau #21

    Foo me once shame on you, Foo me twice shame on me.

    2012 Foostrodamus - Foothsayer of Death

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    20,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bkzag View Post
    No need to continue...as you say several teams play "TEAM Basketball;" however, it is still entertainment and not basketball, because it's all about making money. The "stars" are protected and get the calls or don't get called. What kind of a game would it be if James had two/three fouls in the first quarter...he would have to sit on the bench for a long period of time and this would make for poor TV ratings. I have seen both GS and Cleveland play this year and w/out Love and Irving, there is no way Cleveland should start close to GS. This is all about hype and James being the best there has ever been and how he can carry his team to the Championship. I don't buy it. I think the game would be much more interesting if they used FIBA rules as NBA rules are a facade IMO.

    I was brought up watching the Celtics and Lakers play in the NBA Championships back in the 60's. Watching perhaps three of the greatest players of all time Wilt Chamberlin, Oscar Robertson and Jerry West play basketball, when it was a game of finesse and not force. Where Oscar Robertson averaged a Triple Double for an entire season, where Wilt Chamberlin averaged 50pts per game for two seasons and because of him the foul lines were extended and the ball on a free throw MUST touch the rim, where TEAM Basketball was played by each team in the league. Where there were almost no excessively physical fouls made on players trying to score. Where fouls and traveling were called.

    The NBA has surely changed its philosophy on how the game should be played and called. Today there are bigger and stronger players but that doesn't mean the game is better...it is what the audience wants not how the game was intended to be played, because that is what fills the arenas.

    Shall I continue?

    Agree....and you might agree that the quintessential player of that area was Hondo. All finesse and effort. Nonpareil.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    World Traveler
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thegloriousgoateeofKP View Post
    A few observations.

    1. Revisionist/hindsight bias in full effect here

    2. The NCAA is NOT "all about making money?"

    3. Agreed 100% the NBA is more entertainment than sport...at least compared to CBB, NHL, MLB

    Revisionist/hindsight bias? What the heck is that? Bias? I am sorry, but I was one of many on this board that were fortunate to be able to watch the "50 Greatest NBA" players of all time play in their prime! Which is why I am able to make my statements...bias?

    Ok, let's visit the NCAA about making money and how it effects one game: Have you ever seen a "star" being called for two fouls in the first few minutes in the first half? The answer to that is YES! In fact, they could be poor calls but still the call is made. In the NBA you can count on your fingers the number of times a "star" player gets two fouls in the first quarter. Why? Because he then has to sit the bench for fear of picking up a third! As stated earlier, fathers who bring their kids to watch Rose, James, and other NBA "stars" play are not happy when they are on the bench! We all complain about the physical tendencies of the NCAA brand of basketball and the NBA is even worse. Fundamentals are all be extinct, because they are not the prime focus of play in high school or AAU basketball.

    Please, don't try to make me believe "this NBA" is the same or better than "my NBA," as there is no comparison. Heck I'm willing to bet a bundle the fans/followers of the NBA don't even know "basic basketball" skills. They don't care and neither does the NBA as we agree, it is nothing more than entertainment and because I am a purist, I am not entertained.

    One last tidbit, 'dova didn't play this way in college. If he had, his time on the court would of been limited due to fouls and possibly fragrant fouls at that. That is the NBA and it is acceptable "behavior." Need I say more?
    The virtue I desire most is Humility and just when I think it's achieved, I have lost it.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    World Traveler
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Absolutely! He and Cunningham were the best "sixth-men" in the NBA - past and present!
    The virtue I desire most is Humility and just when I think it's achieved, I have lost it.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,405

    Default

    I guess I never saw the biased calls that Kobe Bryant gets as any more obnoxious than the biased calls that Duke gets.

    I don't see corruption, bias, and inconsistency as the least bit exclusive to the NBA. And while my sample is skewed by the WCC and Pac 12 (probably 90% of my NCAA watching during regular season), the NBA refs seem a hell of a lot more competent.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    20,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bkzag View Post
    Absolutely! He and Cunningham were the best "sixth-men" in the NBA - past and present!
    Saw him in high school. The Kangaroo Kid from Erasmus Hall, love the way UNC would always announce him as six four and seven eights from Brooklyn ny.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Medical Lake
    Posts
    611

    Default

    When the Big O averages a triple double, something only a very ball dominant player could do, he's praised as a team player that plays the right way.

    When LeBron leads his team to the finals without Love and a gimpy (now absent) Kyrie Irving, he's blasted for not playing team ball and being a product of today's NBA.


  13. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ProjectMKUltra5 View Post
    When the Big O averages a triple double, something only a very ball dominant player could do, he's praised as a team player that plays the right way.
    When LeBron leads his team to the finals without Love and a gimpy (now absent) Kyrie Irving, he's blasted for not playing team ball and being a product of today's NBA.
    It's very odd to me too.

    Obviously the marketing and everything is all about LeBron, but how they sell the game to get people watching isn't necessarily indicative of how the guy plays. He's a wonderful player that sees the floor, sets up teammates, plays solid defense, etc. To say its all about him, but to praise Wilt Chamberlin as a bright beacon of team basketball seems weird to me. I'm sure there have been plenty of examples of selfish and of accommodating players since the game was played with peach baskets.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Some find the NBA entertaining, and some do not. To each their own.

    If you don't believe the outcome of some those games is pre-determined, or at the very least weighted for a particular outcome, you're out of your mind.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    19,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coolhandzag View Post
    Some find the NBA entertaining, and some do not. To each their own.

    If you don't believe the outcome of some those games is pre-determined, or at the very least weighted for a particular outcome, you're out of your mind.
    I absolutely do believe there is "bias" in terms of how games "play-out." (Putting it nicely).

    Which is why it was all the more inexplicable to me that, with the game on the line, and the ball in Lebron's hands, with under a minute in regular time remaining, a guy could grab both his arms and hold them down, right in front of the ref, and not have that called. And, on the next trip down the floor, Lebron gets held during the jump ball and THAT doesn't get called.

    To me, the fact it is "Lebron," coupled with the fact that a "tied" series is way better (TV Money-wise) than a 2-0 series, made me not believe my eyes and wonder all the more....

    In those moments, I became a Cav fan, whereas previously I had no rooting interest.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
    Mark Twain.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Columbia, MO
    Posts
    592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bkzag View Post
    Revisionist/hindsight bias? What the heck is that? Bias? I am sorry, but I was one of many on this board that were fortunate to be able to watch the "50 Greatest NBA" players of all time play in their prime! Which is why I am able to make my statements...bias?

    Ok, let's visit the NCAA about making money and how it effects one game: Have you ever seen a "star" being called for two fouls in the first few minutes in the first half? The answer to that is YES! In fact, they could be poor calls but still the call is made. In the NBA you can count on your fingers the number of times a "star" player gets two fouls in the first quarter. Why? Because he then has to sit the bench for fear of picking up a third! As stated earlier, fathers who bring their kids to watch Rose, James, and other NBA "stars" play are not happy when they are on the bench! We all complain about the physical tendencies of the NCAA brand of basketball and the NBA is even worse. Fundamentals are all be extinct, because they are not the prime focus of play in high school or AAU basketball.

    Please, don't try to make me believe "this NBA" is the same or better than "my NBA," as there is no comparison. Heck I'm willing to bet a bundle the fans/followers of the NBA don't even know "basic basketball" skills. They don't care and neither does the NBA as we agree, it is nothing more than entertainment and because I am a purist, I am not entertained.

    One last tidbit, 'dova didn't play this way in college. If he had, his time on the court would of been limited due to fouls and possibly fragrant fouls at that. That is the NBA and it is acceptable "behavior." Need I say more?
    We (all humans) have a tendency to glorify the past...to remember only its positives and not its negatives...in hindsight.

    The NBA of yesteryear you so fondly remember had its own set of problems, just as it does today.

    The Golden Age Fallacy

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,988

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thegloriousgoateeofKP View Post
    We (all humans) have a tendency to glorify the past...to remember only its positives and not its negatives...in hindsight.

    The NBA of yesteryear you so fondly remember had its own set of problems, just as it does today.

    The Golden Age Fallacy
    Gotta weigh in here. Completely agree with BK (though I think the same is largely true in the NCAA, to a slightly lesser extent). I think you are young and don't understand the difference between the old days and the game today. I am 61 and play pickup ball with guys mostly in their 20s-40s, a few in their 50's. Around the mid 90's on a grass roots level the game went from passing, lots of screens and off-ball movement to everyone standing and watching the guy with the ball go one on one, at least among the kids.



    Around that time, or maybe late 90's or so, I heard a radio interview with Lionel Hollins (all star guard with the Walton Blazer teams) when he was an asst coach w/ the then- Vancouver Grizzlies. He said, when asked about the game at that time v when he played (paraphrasing) "We have to coach differently because players today don't have the skills we had".

    Look at some film of the championship Blazer team. (Or the early 70's Knicks, just to name a couple) It was poetry in motion. Nine guys between 9 and 18 ppg on that Blazers team. Virtually nobody plays like that today. There simply aren't enough players that grew up understanding how to do it. AAU just reinforces the ratball they grow up with on the playground.

    As to the "problems" of that era, the only one I can think of is that the game appealed only to those who understand it and appreciate its subtleties and teamwork. David Stern was an evil genius who understood marketing and created a product he could sell.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    1,500

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LongIslandZagFan View Post
    Why do I feel a tinge of guilt being happy for Delly and actually find myself rooting for the Cavs because of him?

    How can you root for that guy? He dishes out one cheap shot after another and has made multiple attempts at seriously injuring players. About as low as it gets in my book.
    "After holding open practices during his first three seasons, Romar closed them to reporters last season, citing the "Gonzaga factor." He felt his team was compromised before the 2004-05 game against the Zags, that the opponent awaiting him and beating him 99-87 in Spokane seemed a little too well prepared."

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Columbia, MO
    Posts
    592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maynard g krebs View Post
    Gotta weigh in here. Completely agree with BK (though I think the same is largely true in the NCAA, to a slightly lesser extent). I think you are young and don't understand the difference between the old days and the game today. I am 61 and play pickup ball with guys mostly in their 20s-40s, a few in their 50's. Around the mid 90's on a grass roots level the game went from passing, lots of screens and off-ball movement to everyone standing and watching the guy with the ball go one on one, at least among the kids.



    Around that time, or maybe late 90's or so, I heard a radio interview with Lionel Hollins (all star guard with the Walton Blazer teams) when he was an asst coach w/ the then- Vancouver Grizzlies. He said, when asked about the game at that time v when he played (paraphrasing) "We have to coach differently because players today don't have the skills we had".

    Look at some film of the championship Blazer team. (Or the early 70's Knicks, just to name a couple) It was poetry in motion. Nine guys between 9 and 18 ppg on that Blazers team. Virtually nobody plays like that today. There simply aren't enough players that grew up understanding how to do it. AAU just reinforces the ratball they grow up with on the playground.

    As to the "problems" of that era, the only one I can think of is that the game appealed only to those who understand it and appreciate its subtleties and teamwork. David Stern was an evil genius who understood marketing and created a product he could sell.
    You make a very, very compelling and well reasoned argument. I'm sure the game has changed drastically since those days, and you're right: I wasn't around for them.

    However, I still quibble with assessing one style as objectively better than the other. Different does not = worse.

    Again, we all tend to glorify the past and conveniently forget its faults; marketing was almost certainly not the only problem with the NBA of yesteryear. It was slower, less athletic, lower scoring.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    13,520

    Default

    On a semi-related note, here is a fantastic article from late April on Stephen Curry. Lots of great quotes from Davidson coach Bob McKillop:

    http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...s-nba-playoffs

    It cannot be overstated how hard this kid has worked to be where he is at, and also what a fine role model he is for kids.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    20,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maynard g krebs View Post
    Gotta weigh in here. Completely agree with BK (though I think the same is largely true in the NCAA, to a slightly lesser extent). I think you are young and don't understand the difference between the old days and the game today. I am 61 and play pickup ball with guys mostly in their 20s-40s, a few in their 50's. Around the mid 90's on a grass roots level the game went from passing, lots of screens and off-ball movement to everyone standing and watching the guy with the ball go one on one, at least among the kids.



    Around that time, or maybe late 90's or so, I heard a radio interview with Lionel Hollins (all star guard with the Walton Blazer teams) when he was an asst coach w/ the then- Vancouver Grizzlies. He said, when asked about the game at that time v when he played (paraphrasing) "We have to coach differently because players today don't have the skills we had".

    Look at some film of the championship Blazer team. (Or the early 70's Knicks, just to name a couple) It was poetry in motion. Nine guys between 9 and 18 ppg on that Blazers team. Virtually nobody plays like that today. There simply aren't enough players that grew up understanding how to do it. AAU just reinforces the ratball they grow up with on the playground.

    As to the "problems" of that era, the only one I can think of is that the game appealed only to those who understand it and appreciate its subtleties and teamwork. David Stern was an evil genius who understood marketing and created a product he could sell.


    May, very very impressed you still run with young ones, heck, that you even run at all. My osteo knees quit on me around 55. Greatest game, the one you describe. Growing up in Brooklyn we intentionally patterned our schoolyard games after the Holzman Knicks. Can't imagine what those games are like now.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    6,762

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thegloriousgoateeofKP View Post
    You make a very, very compelling and well reasoned argument. I'm sure the game has changed drastically since those days, and you're right: I wasn't around for them.

    However, I still quibble with assessing one style as objectively better than the other. Different does not = worse.

    Again, we all tend to glorify the past and conveniently forget its faults; marketing was almost certainly not the only problem with the NBA of yesteryear. It was slower, less athletic, lower scoring.
    gosh, seems like scoring is way down compared to the late 80s, early-90s...at least the game tempo is way down.
    Go Zags!!!

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    On an island that is long
    Posts
    13,950

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGonzagaFactor View Post
    How can you root for that guy? He dishes out one cheap shot after another and has made multiple attempts at seriously injuring players. About as low as it gets in my book.
    Show exactly where he has tried to seriously injure anyone.

    http://www.rantsports.com/nba/2015/0...-dirty-player/

    That is a good read. If he had been a Zag and had done the same thing, you'd be using words like playing scrappy and working to get the ball... instead he is somehow dirty and out to injure people.
    "And Morrison? He did what All-Americans do. He shot daggers in the daylight and stole a win." - Steve Kelley (Seattle Times)

    "Gonzaga is a special place, with special people!" - Dan Dickau #21

    Foo me once shame on you, Foo me twice shame on me.

    2012 Foostrodamus - Foothsayer of Death

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    3,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maynard g krebs View Post



    ......
    Look at some film of the championship Blazer team. (Or the early 70's Knicks, just to name a couple) It was poetry in motion. Nine guys between 9 and 18 ppg on that Blazers team. Virtually nobody plays like that today. There simply aren't enough players that grew up understanding how to do it. AAU just reinforces the ratball they grow up with on the playground.....
    I think the style of play you describe is what players in Europe, South America; Australia are learning. What is a "Euro big?," but a skilled player who can shot the ball, pass the ball and share the bell. NBA ball, like US culture in general, suffers from too much 'Me' and not enough 'We.'
    He can move 15 ft to the left or right about as fast as my eyes can see it, his name could just as well be Hunter Hustle -ZagsGoZags 11/17/21

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    19,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maynard g krebs View Post
    Gotta weigh in here. Completely agree with BK (though I think the same is largely true in the NCAA, to a slightly lesser extent). I think you are young and don't understand the difference between the old days and the game today. I am 61 and play pickup ball with guys mostly in their 20s-40s, a few in their 50's. Around the mid 90's on a grass roots level the game went from passing, lots of screens and off-ball movement to everyone standing and watching the guy with the ball go one on one, at least among the kids.



    Around that time, or maybe late 90's or so, I heard a radio interview with Lionel Hollins (all star guard with the Walton Blazer teams) when he was an asst coach w/ the then- Vancouver Grizzlies. He said, when asked about the game at that time v when he played (paraphrasing) "We have to coach differently because players today don't have the skills we had".

    Look at some film of the championship Blazer team. (Or the early 70's Knicks, just to name a couple) It was poetry in motion. Nine guys between 9 and 18 ppg on that Blazers team. Virtually nobody plays like that today. There simply aren't enough players that grew up understanding how to do it. AAU just reinforces the ratball they grow up with on the playground.

    As to the "problems" of that era, the only one I can think of is that the game appealed only to those who understand it and appreciate its subtleties and teamwork. David Stern was an evil genius who understood marketing and created a product he could sell.
    My age limits my look-back window to Bird and Magic.

    I question whether Bird and Magic could be the level of superstar they were, if they played the game today.

    I am NOT saying they would not be a success. What I'm saying is could they be the heads/tails above other players today than they were in yesteryear, just given how they played the game. Neither was super athletic, both near slow. Both relied on court vision and either making the pass or making just the right cut. Of course, both could backdown players and shoot turnaround jump shots, but would they physically be able to move given the physicality nowadays.

    I don't know the answer b/c I don't have the BB knowledge some do here. My inclination is that they would be very good players, but could not excel like they did b/c their games didn't quite translate to todays hyper-athletic, break-your-man-down, type of game.

    Of course, the Pistons didn't allow anyone to get all fancy, either so. . . .
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
    Mark Twain.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •