3 point shooting is what undid the two losers in the Conference Finals. The Rockets and the Celtics combined to go 14 of 83 from 3pt land in their game 7s. That's 16.9% - and yet they both continued to shoot them, that's what did them both in.
Jayson Williams Comment...
- Thread starter ChapelHeeled
- Start date
3 point shooting is what undid the two losers in the Conference Finals. The Rockets and the Celtics combined to go 14 of 83 from 3pt land in their game 7s. That's 16.9% - and yet they both continued to shoot them, that's what did them both in.
True. But the league also wanted the Cavs to get there, and it showed - so no tears shed for them now.
I completely agree with that. Durant looked scared and hesitant last night. The Warriors made poor decisions repeatedly. I like Klay Thompson a lot. He's probably my favorite player on that Warriors team and I think he could be a number 1 option on a different team. He's a great shooter, very good defender and usually a smart guy. But damn if he didn't come down on two separate occasions late in the 4th and gun up a 3 without a teammate anywhere close to rebounding position. It was basically 1 on 4 both times and he hoisted up a 3. WTF is that? Is that what "advanced metrics" or "analytics" say he should do? I just don't get the idea that you rush down the floor and take a contested 3 with no one in position just so you can get an extra possession. Foolish.
Houston's 3's were really circumstantial because of CP3's injury.
When they won games 4 and 5. They shot a ton of 3's but they also shot 27 and 32 free throws. So they were playing a pretty different style as opposed to just jacking up 3's. CP3 gets hurt, they shot 17 and 22 free throws and both games were aided artificially because the Warriors went to "hack a Cappella."
There was no other way for the Rockets to approach games 6 and 7 without CP3. They needed a high risk, high reward game plan because Harden can't do everything. You're not beating the Warriors shooting 2's and without CP3, you're never going to get easy 2's. Rockets did what they needed to do to give themselves a chance to win as a severe underdog.
I thought Boston just showed their youth particularly in game 7. Game 6, they played really well, just ran into LeBron's epic-mode.
What undid the Rockets was CP3's injury. What undid Boston was LeBron's been in those massive games before and none of the Celtics have been in a game of that consequence. And when you're young and you panic, you shoot 3's trying to hit home runs when stringing together singles and walks puts crooked numbers on the board.
You and I haven't seen eye to eye on the Jordan / Lebron debate, but I do agree with on this point. Lebron is clearly the best player right now. I've never been a big fan of Durant to be honest. He's a great player, but I just don't see the same "refuse to lose" mindset that I saw in MJ, Kobe and now Lebron. And putting aside the defense last night, allowing JR Smith to grab that offensive rebound without a fight was inexcusable. Fortunately for him, JR Smith had a typical JR Smith moment and KD got bailed out. But the Cavs could have easily won that game because of KD, even with the foul call reversal.
For my money, Klay is the 2nd most important Warrior behind Steph. I love his game. I think he's the only player in the NBA that fits perfectly with every team. He can score 40 points and dribble 40 times in a game. Elite defender.
Hell, the Warriors proved they can win 73 games without Durant. It's just weird, because Durant's probably their best player, but isn't close to as valuable as Steph and I don't think is as valuable as Klay.
Also, Durant's soooooooooooo lucky J.R. did what he did. Because he missed that block-out. But he's along for the ride and getting his second ring, so more power to him I suppose.
It was really disappointing. If you swapped LeBron with Durant, the Warriors win this series in 3 and the NBA would call off the fight.
But again, Durant can easily make me eat my words and go for 40/game the rest of the way. I'm just not sure he personally isn't a little intimidated by the way LeBron's playing right now.
Agreed. It's so lame. What kind of competitor joins up with other great players simply because he can't beat them. That was so pitiful. And the worst part is that KD changed after winning a championship. He's now more arrogant and aloof with reporters. It's not the same humble "you're the real MVP" Durant anymore. It's a more smartalecy and curt persona he's wearing these days and I'm like, dude, you're a chump.
I guess that's accurate when taking into account the way the game is played now. But a good defensive team from the 90s would run those guys off the 3 point line and force Steph to have to finish at the rim (which he's not great at). They'd also force Durant into taking mid-range shots (which he is good at) and they'd force Klay to create something instead of catching and shooting. But defenses now don't commit and they basically hope that the opponent just misses a 3 and then they can hurry up and get the ball back and run down and shoot a quick 3. C'mon Jung, you can't possibly like this style of basketball.
Jordan and the Bulls would slow the game down, be physical and not allow the Warriors to do what they like doing. I don't know why people always talk about Draymond's defense. I think it's pretty poor at times. Kevin Love abused him in the post when he wanted to. Yet the Cavs stopped going to him and decided that gunning a 3 was a better option than allowing Love to manhandle Green in the post.
I don't think he needs to score 40 to be the difference maker in the series. It's more about effort on the defensive end. They either need to do a better job of guarding Lebron, or let Lebron get his 40-50 and completely take everyone else out.
I would like the NBA to call fouls in the post. Right now, you can get away with too much in the paint in comparison to what you can get away with on the perimeter.
I like basketball the most when it's layered so I don't really enjoy it when every team plays the exact same style of basketball. But there needs to be rule changes to get the game more balanced on the inside.
I prefer today's game over the 80-75 games you always saw 10-25 years ago. IMO, fluid basketball is a more attractive style of basketball. But ideally, I want the NBA to be a game where the traditional big man can be extremely valuable again. The more layered the game, the better.
But it's like an exhibition. Taking half court shots - whether you can make them 25% or not - is not smart basketball. The best shot is a shot that has the best chance of going in. You can argue that guys are better at shooting 3s now but you still can't argue that a 3 has a higher probability of going in than a lay up or dunk. It's just not smart basketball.
I know, I know,...analytics show that if you get enough possessions, yada, yada, yada. But why would I want to leave that to chance. If I'm coaching a team, I don't want to score on 60% of my possessions. I want to score on 100% of my possessions and I would gameplan to accommodate that belief. No, my team wouldn't end up scoring on every possession but I would certainly treat every possession like it's an important one and I would not subscribe to the theory of "oh well, that wasn't a good possession but I know I'll get X number of possessions the rest of the game and we'll just have to make up for dead possessions with possessions that end in 3s." That seems so weird to me - to not value a possession. And because of the analytics, it's made guys care less about defense. Because they have already built in X number of possessions where the other team is going to score. That's insane to me.
I like basketball where possessions are valued, where defense is every bit as important as offense and where the team looks to take the best shot possible. Sure, the high flying act and get-up-and-down the floor game is entertaining from an exhibition standpoint. But it lacks commitment and the competitive spirit that I look for in sports.
I would like the game to be more layered. While there's obviously a place for a game plan like Golden State's... I would like a place in the NBA where you can play more like UNC does with 2 traditional big guys and feeding inside first. But the NBA needs to change rules to do that. Also, big guys just don't last as long as guards and wings so who knows if teams will go for big guys if they have maybe an 8 year prime window as opposed to a 13 year window that guards/wings have.
NBA players look at any “open” shot as a good shot, with or without a rebounder in position.
Great point here by Jung that is overlooked. The way the game is officiated, not just in the NBA, but in college to a certain degree, as well as overseas is the reason that true big men in the post are a dying breed. Inside the paint is damn near football at times which is why you are seeing more “bigs” that play like 3’s and spend more time in mid range and on the perimeter putting up shots during games. You are hard pressed to name any true elite bigs that play a traditional post role. All the bigs that you think of have taken their game moreso to the perimeter in recent years. All that’s left of true bigs are the buffoons that hack and tackle their way to rebounds and fouls.
I also think analytics has a something to do it as well. Similar to the home run surge in baseball, 3pt shots are deemed more valuable, so that's where the league is going. I'm hoping this trend is cyclical in both sports.
Sports were played inefficiently 20+ years ago. Unfortunately analytics has taken away some of the mystery of the game. But you can't stop progress.
I'm not following this argument. If Joey Gallo hits more HR's this season than Mike Trout, is he the more "efficient" player?
Not to make this about baseball... but obviously not. Mike Trout has alike a 1.100 OPS this year.
A better comparison is Kris Braynt over a Tony Gwynn. Gwynn's going to have better hitting numbers because of his contact and his ability of putting the ball in play. He'll hit 40 points higher than Bryant, but Bryant's going to go down as a far superior baseball player because he hit for a ton of power. Back when Gwynn played, someone who slashed .340/.390/.460 like Gwynn did was probably viewed as one of the most valuable players in baseball. When in today's analytical era, if Kyle Schwarber slashes .270/.380/.500.... Schwarber is the more valuable offensive player.
Joey Gallo probably doesn't play in the 80's or 90's. But the fact is, if he hits 40 home runs and draws 80 walks, his batting average becomes somewhat irrelevant.
It's really crazy how much you can get away with in the paint. But it's a really fine line. Pace of play is a huge directive in all the sports right now. Younger people want the games to flow. This is why soccer is a sport that's popular among the 18-34 demo. That sport ends in 2 hours, no questions asked. So if the NBA institutes rules to protect big guys, you're going to slow down the game and the game and there will be more free throws, which is boring.
But if the NBA wants to balance out the game, it needs to protect big guys more... Or make 3's worth 4, and 2's worth 3 so eliminate some of the heavy mathematical advantage to the current 3. But that latter will never happen because that kills off a big chunk of the game's history.
One of my favorite series was in 2015 when the Warriors got tested by the Grizzlies. Memphis had Zach Randolph and Marc Gasol and were beating up the Warriors through 3 games. It was a really interesting series because the teams played so differently.
...go back in time and give bigs who are fouled in the paint three foul shots, to make two points(note: three when needed). That would help to call bigs inside game more on post options...
Once you realize the Sj is a troll, and a very thinly disguised one, he becomes easier to stomach. It is even possible that he has simply strayed so far down the "I have to be objective" road that he doesn't even realize the he has lapsed into trollhood! He did have a brief period where he attempted balance in his comments, but it was short-lived. I have seen some say he is knowledgeable about bball, and this might be true, but his insistence on slanting everything toward the most negative description possible seems to obscure this alleged bball IQ to the point of non-existence!
Case in point: an intelligent bball aficionado would NEVER use simple numbers like height and weight to try to indicate potential effectiveness in a 1 on 1 scenario. Watching bball for about 6 seconds will show how ludicrous this argument is! (EG: Oakley had more mean in his little finger than LBJ has in his entire household!)
The only thing worth even discussing is whether LeBron is the best of his own generation, I think this is a serious discussion. I love LeBron as a player and I switch my Pro allegiance each time he changes teams, but I watched them BOTH play live as an ADULT. I played against Jordan on the court and I followed him through his Pro days just like I do LBJ. There is no question who is the better player, leader, and teammate! MJ is the GOAT and until I see someone who can match his combination of IQ, skill, physical gifts, heart, athleticism, and WILL, there will be no challengers!
Case in point: an intelligent bball aficionado would NEVER use simple numbers like height and weight to try to indicate potential effectiveness in a 1 on 1 scenario. Watching bball for about 6 seconds will show how ludicrous this argument is! (EG: Oakley had more mean in his little finger than LBJ has in his entire household!)
The only thing worth even discussing is whether LeBron is the best of his own generation, I think this is a serious discussion. I love LeBron as a player and I switch my Pro allegiance each time he changes teams, but I watched them BOTH play live as an ADULT. I played against Jordan on the court and I followed him through his Pro days just like I do LBJ. There is no question who is the better player, leader, and teammate! MJ is the GOAT and until I see someone who can match his combination of IQ, skill, physical gifts, heart, athleticism, and WILL, there will be no challengers!
It's far from "trolling" to argue that LeBron might be the best player of all time. If I were a troll, I would say "here's why Elton Brand is the greatest player of all time." There's a compelling argument to be made in LeBron's favor. If you disagree with it, that's fine, but just because you disagree with it, doesn't make it trolling.
So, I guess you are clueless where MJ and All-Time Greatest Player are concerned. You probably never knew that Michael once ran a 4.3 forty either. An athlete deluxe. Regardless, MJ has no rival today. Neither will he next month. Take care for now and enjoy the rest of the series...
Since sj is tirelessly still promoting LeBron on another thread, I will say that I expect lbj and the Cavs to win tonight. At home, they will be on their best behavior tonight. Regardless, the series still goes to Golden State. They are the better team...
Eh, I dunno. I don't see the NBA letting LeBron get swept out, and they know that if he goes down 0-3, no amount of referee assistance could entice him to put in even an ounce of effort in game 4.
Therefore, I think Cavs moneyline is a good pick for tonight. The stripes should certainly at least be able to keep it within the 4.5 spread.
I would like to apologize to @SJung851 for this poast. He was correct. LeBron’s 46% from the field, 16% from 3, and -8 +/- rating wasn’t good enough to make a game or a series of it. He saw it, and I didn’t... props, dude.
Kinda prophetic, don't ya think, in reference to Durant making you snack on some words?
This entire debater is frankly useless (who is the GOAT) because we can never really know and the discussion should not just be limited to MJ and lebron. The ONLY thing that can be to any degree rationally discussed is who is the greatest player of his era as well as how long is that era for a particular guy. I think it also interesting to consider the players that may be challengers for that title in a given era.
Lebron, as I and most have as well shared, is considered to be the best player of his generation. Jordan was the best of his era but my gosh look at the challengers to that honor that Jordan played against. People want to site NBA title records to make their case for GOAT for both MJ and Lebron, alternating from claiming the Cavs are a super team because of Lebron, that he elevates the entire team AND the Cav's are awful other than LeBron (kinda wanting things both ways ya know).
The greatest player ever would be a guy that made his teams better not just in his ability to go one on one and score big time but a guy that other players want to play with because his play is inclusive of his mates not just having them out there as spectators. Players did want to play with Jordan, they did all they could to stay on his Bulls teams, you didn't see players leaving the Bulls because they did not want to play with Jordan. IMO, Pippen was Pippen because of Mike, had he spent his career on a team without Jordan he would not have had near the career he had with him. He was a great compliment co-star, played the Robin to MJs Batman well where Lebron seems to need to be Super Man without a co-star.
To be effective Lebron has to dominate the ball, has to have it in his hands every trip down, he has to initiate everything in some part due to not trusting his mates to do so, that is not a trait of leadership, it is kinda the opposite. Jordan was a Bull, outside of the last couple years when his career was clearly done and he just wanted 1 last hurrah but lebron does not seem to understand or see any value in loyalty to his team, yet again he is looking to jump ship and hold his team hostage. Sorry but that isn't the kind of thing I consider leadership on display, "if we don't win it all I am going to quit and go to a brand new bunch of players in another city"? To me that is more what I would see as a spoiled brat attitude, certainly not the actions of great leadership.
To even as much as consider leaving your team and joining your hated rival, joining the team you could not beat, just not a thing you would have ever seen MJ do. I don't recall Jordan looking to join the Celtics, Lakers, Pistons. Yet I see today Lebron is meeting this summer for talks about joining the Warriors, Rockets, 76ers? Now maybe "if ya can't be em then join em" is a mindset that can get you a title ring but it does not make your case for greatest player of all time, it is more admission that you ain't it seems to me. .
This isn't true. Last 3 years, a big benefit of Kyrie being on the team was LeBron could essentially rest on offense for 3 or 4 possessions while Kyrie initiated the offense. Same in Miami with Wade... Have you seen what happens to the Cavs once someone else tries to initiate the offense? They look like a 15 win team, because that's what they'd be without LeBron. On this team, if LeBron isn't initiating every possession, the Cavs lose by 30. Do you really want him to trust George Hill?
Also, LeBron may leave... Any credit for him returning to Cleveland and leading that dog sh** organization to a championship and the NBA Finals 4 straights years? Easy way out to Cleveland? Once again, LeBron helped get CLEVELAND a ring. There's no additional value for LeBron returning home and winning a championship in a city that never wins anything? This one Cleveland title is probably worth more than his two in Miami.
BUT HE HAD KYRIE!!! Who never had a season above 33 wins before he came to Cleveland.
BUT THEY GOT LOVE!!! Who never finished .500 in Minnesota
I don't even know if the LeBron to Golden State stuff that Stephen A circulated has any merit, or is simply a ratings discussion ploy. But even if it isn't true, I sure as hell know it will be kept against him.
P.S.
LeBron tried to get Bosh to go to Cleveland with him in 2010. LeBron tried to get players to go to Cleveland that summer. No one wanted to. So LeBron had 2 choices. Continue to play with no one good in Cleveland, potentially go ringless in his career (which I'm sure all MJ-stans would've taken with reasonable opinions), or start completely over elsewhere.
.....promo LeBron...promo LeBron...promo LeBron...rinse repeat... promo lebron...promo lebron...promo lebron...
It's not shocking. LeBron is a whiny b-word. He's supremely talented and easily one of the three or four best basketball players of all time, but he whines like a little girl, in person and social media and it's tiring.
He gets caught up in so much dumb turmoil and pissing contests, and he doesn't need to. He's a legitimately smart businessman as well as elite athlete. He loves him some drama though.
Yes, it is very telling, clearly those that have played for him are not lining up to do so again. Off the top of my head and in addition to Bosh and Kyri you also have Issiah Thomas who couldn't wait to get away from him. Love has tried to parlay team success to a better contract and situation with no takers because he is now a second fiddle role player. The Cavs as a team are basically structured to give the ball to lebron and get out of the way and feed on what ever table scraps he may leave, not a role a top shelf player wants to take on.
I find it funny, Lebron holds management of the teams he has played for hostage, get me this player that I want or I will leave. And yet many of those same players discover that they have to be marginalized, that Lebron is the only guy that gets to dominate the ball. So he ends up with a bunch of B list players who feel they could be A listers away from him.
There is no way that will work at Golden State, Boston, or Houston, maybe the Nicks would be a better fit of course the Nicks are the Cavs before Lebron got there.
As such an amazing player, why is it that he does not have any other big time players that he can trust to initiate offense? THINK for a second, you have a team in the Cavs that are a player or 2 away from not just dominating the NBA playoffs but maybe laping the field in doing so and yet that supporting cast that gets to the title game can not get those 1 or 2 more players to want to play in the title game with Lebron?
GSW had no trouble getting Durant to play for them, he sure was not all about playing with Lebron...
Maybe you don't know but the Warriors had cap space to get Durant when he was a free agent. There were like 3 teams in the NBA with a shot at him: OKC (because they had his bird rights and could pay him more), Warriors and Wizards.
Golden State ran into some unbelievable fortune along with terrific front office draft picks to be in such a position. The obvious is drafting: Curry, Thompson and Draymond.
1. Curry's career was in doubt due to ankle issues early in his career. There was a legitimate debate within the organization which guard is their longterm guard: Monta Ellis or Steph Curry. They were able to get Curry at a "value" 4 year/40 million contract due to his ankle issues. In his second year of that contract, Curry wins the MVP and very clearly becomes not just the greatest contract value in basketball, but maybe in the history of sports. At that time, Curry is playing at about 40% of his market value. So during Durant's free agency year, the TV money kicks in (my next point). If Curry were a free agent then, he would've been eligible for around $30 mil/year. Instead, he had one year where he was playing for $12 million... Which became the going rate for backup centers and point guards. The Warriors were tremendously fortunate that Steph got hurt and became a damaged asset early in his career. This set up EVERYTHING.
2. The Warriors are able to max Draymond and Klay with the old salary cap structure before the new CBA and TV money kicks in. The NBA salary cap in 2015-16 (the year before KD signs) is $70 million. The offseason KD signs, it balloons to $94 million and has increased steadily. So that's like a 30% increase in available money. So the Warriors are able to max Klay and Draymond at roughly 4 years/$70 million as opposed to having to push around $90 million due to timing. So each of those players annually are getting about $5 million under market value. So you combine that with Steph getting about $20 million under market value... You get $30 million. To Durant's credit, he signs for a little less at about $25 mil/year. But that's how the finances worked out in Golden State's favor.
3. The Cavs are capped out at that point. It looks really bad right now because of recency bias. But at that point, the Cavs win the championship and it is expected within the basketball community that KD will re-sign with OKC because OKC can offer him like $40 million more over the lifetime of a super-max. So it isn't completely unreasonable for the Cavs to want to bring their NBA title winning roster back for another shot at it. In 2015, LeBron by himself pushes the Warriors to 6. In 2016, the Cavs (with help from Draymond) win in 7. Again, it looks terrible right now, but at that time, I don't think it was completely idiotic to keep that roster together. They were very clearly competitive with the Warriors and you can argue they win 2 if everyone is healthy in 2015. So as a result: Tristan, JR become overpaid.
If your argument is that Durant wouldn't want to play with LeBron if Cleveland had the required cap space to sign him, then that's purely a subjective opinion. I would still argue that, but that's just opinion banter that will go nowhere. But there were financial patterns that dictated Durant's free agency. LeBron really had nothing to do with it whatsoever. Everything fell into place perfectly for Durant to go to Golden State if he wanted to.
I know what's going "LEBRON BROUGHT HIS GUYS IN".... I won't be able to convince those people either way... But these are facts, if that's important to you.
I didn't know the NBA allowed 5 on 1 play. Maybe they've changed the rules since I stopped watching. By my count, his teammates scored 346 points in those six games. Or maybe facts aren't important to you.
Last edited:
Similar threads
