[quote]aznt0rk wrote:
[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
And props to POR beating PHX on the road without B-Roy. Andre Miller had a revival at the right time.
Postseason off to a good start!
[/quote]
Yup, very surprised by the blazers taking game one. NBA Playoff stats says Game 1 winners have gone to win best of 7 series 79% of the time. If this holds true for the blazers it will be interesting to see them in the 2nd round.[/quote]
Suns’ll still take 'em in 5
Oy vey, Nuggets…i knew the Jazz would win at least one game, but IN Denver? don’t fall apart guys. Coach is waiting for the Second round, and you WILL need George Karl if you’re going up against LA. 3-1 during the regular season is good, and you put up a good fight in last year’s playoffs, BUT this ain’t the regular season and this ain’t last year.
Nuggets got the talent, but can they stop the bullshit sloppy play and dumbass fouls and move PAST the first two rounds? Yes, oh yes…but WILL they? i hope so, because then i’ll be saying BRING ON CLEVELAND! or Orlando…whatever.
GO THUNDER!!!
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Whats going on with the game today?
I think its significantly different to what it used to be. I totally agree with some sentiments expressed by posters in this thread about the NBA becoming more guard oriented. The age of the big man and the low post are swirling behind us. The league is becoming a metaphor for Magic’s Showtime; the versatile player whos speed is more important than his strength. You don’t just feel the changed atmosphere from viewing the games, you feel it by looking at the players themselves. They’re smaller, less muscular and less physically opposing. We can use Kevin Durant as the major generalization here for the new-age NBA player. Skinny, quick and offensive dynamite. Back in the day I remember J.R Rider, Harold Miner, and “Mama” Johnson. These dudes looked big and tough.
Ultimately, does it matter? I don’t think it does because the product is strong. I think its becoming more entertaining and the pace of the game is evolving to become quicker. Maybe its because I love lifting and this is a forum about muscle that I generally like basketball with the centers and power fowards playing more prominent roles. Its kind of fun because you get the strategy of the game, you know that if a big man is on fire the opposition is in trouble. They gotta foul him now, double team and maybe even hack a shack. You also get those moments of intensity in more pronounced packages. Today, because the game is so quick players really arne’t bumping and shoving like they used to and the emotions that I know exist arne’t as readily spewed onto the court.
{Don’t use KG as an example though, what he did was outside the realm of play, he was being an idiot.}[/quote]
You mean Larry “Grand ma-ma” Johnson, and he wasn’t a guard. He played the 4.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Whats going on with the game today?
I think its significantly different to what it used to be. I totally agree with some sentiments expressed by posters in this thread about the NBA becoming more guard oriented. The age of the big man and the low post are swirling behind us. The league is becoming a metaphor for Magic’s Showtime; the versatile player whos speed is more important than his strength. You don’t just feel the changed atmosphere from viewing the games, you feel it by looking at the players themselves. They’re smaller, less muscular and less physically opposing. We can use Kevin Durant as the major generalization here for the new-age NBA player. Skinny, quick and offensive dynamite. Back in the day I remember J.R Rider, Harold Miner, and “Mama” Johnson. These dudes looked big and tough.
Ultimately, does it matter? I don’t think it does because the product is strong. I think its becoming more entertaining and the pace of the game is evolving to become quicker. Maybe its because I love lifting and this is a forum about muscle that I generally like basketball with the centers and power fowards playing more prominent roles. Its kind of fun because you get the strategy of the game, you know that if a big man is on fire the opposition is in trouble. They gotta foul him now, double team and maybe even hack a shack. You also get those moments of intensity in more pronounced packages. Today, because the game is so quick players really arne’t bumping and shoving like they used to and the emotions that I know exist arne’t as readily spewed onto the court.
{Don’t use KG as an example though, what he did was outside the realm of play, he was being an idiot.}[/quote]
It all started with the no hand-checking rule.
By the way check out Bill Simmons Book of Basketball, good read.
the Lake Show finally played a little defense… flippin the switch! (not gonna lie I was nervous for that first game cause of the way the Lakers had been playing lately!)
I’m pumped for tonights game. Go LA
.greg.
[quote]DeterminedNate wrote:
Looks like MY LAKERS flipped the so-called “switch” today boys. Bynum lookin absolutely NASTY-WIT-IT.
CLE - COME SEE US.[/quote]
Die hard Lakers fan here as well but be careful what you wish for. The Lake-show only had one good quarter during that game, the first quarter. They actually lost the last 3 quarters to OKC.
The Lakers still have a lot of issues to work through. Personally I don’t even want Fat Shaq and LeGay to get that far in the playoffs where either of them could even sniff a possible championship. Not a fan of either.
I honestly think the Cavs match up with us well and I wouldn’t be feeling good about facing them considering how we’ve been playing as of late. I honestly would rather see Orlando and think we match up better with them and have a better shot at beating them (IF we get that far). And I think Orlando matches up better with the Cavs and have a real shot at beating them in the Eastern Conference Finals again.
The biggest problem with the Cavs is the coach (can’t coach his way out of a box) and the proclivity of LeBron to go 1-on-5 and not get his teammates involved when the game starts getting close. Look at what happened in game 2 with Chicago. When Chicago was threatening to win towards the end of the 4th quarter, LeGay went with the 1-on-5 strategy. It worked for Chicago but if he continues with this plan against Orlando I think it’s going to backfire. He’s got too much talent on the team now to rely on the 1-on-5 strategy. Trust me, I hope he does and the Cavs fail again.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Whats going on with the game today?
I think its significantly different to what it used to be. I totally agree with some sentiments expressed by posters in this thread about the NBA becoming more guard oriented. The age of the big man and the low post are swirling behind us. The league is becoming a metaphor for Magic’s Showtime; the versatile player whos speed is more important than his strength. You don’t just feel the changed atmosphere from viewing the games, you feel it by looking at the players themselves. They’re smaller, less muscular and less physically opposing. We can use Kevin Durant as the major generalization here for the new-age NBA player. Skinny, quick and offensive dynamite. Back in the day I remember J.R Rider, Harold Miner, and “Mama” Johnson. These dudes looked big and tough.
Ultimately, does it matter? I don’t think it does because the product is strong. I think its becoming more entertaining and the pace of the game is evolving to become quicker. Maybe its because I love lifting and this is a forum about muscle that I generally like basketball with the centers and power fowards playing more prominent roles. Its kind of fun because you get the strategy of the game, you know that if a big man is on fire the opposition is in trouble. They gotta foul him now, double team and maybe even hack a shack. You also get those moments of intensity in more pronounced packages. Today, because the game is so quick players really arne’t bumping and shoving like they used to and the emotions that I know exist arne’t as readily spewed onto the court.
{Don’t use KG as an example though, what he did was outside the realm of play, he was being an idiot.}[/quote]
I don’t agree with this sentiment at all. The big man will never go out of style (i.e. large power forward, imposing center, etc). One of the most dominant big men (from 1996-2003) was Shaq. Any team would take another Shaq-type player over a skinny-versatile small forward/guard any day of the week. There just don’t happen to be many lately coming out in the league. There are more Durant-type players and quick guards but the low post big man will always be the most sought after position. I guess what I’m saying is the demand will always be there, it’s the supply that’s a little thin right now. The two that come to mind that are still evolving and growing are Andrew Bynum and Dwight Howard.
You can never replace size and length in the NBA. Think about the three top teams in the league right now: the Cavs, the Magic, and the Lakers. The all have size and length. This will never go away.
[quote]randman wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Whats going on with the game today?
I think its significantly different to what it used to be. I totally agree with some sentiments expressed by posters in this thread about the NBA becoming more guard oriented. The age of the big man and the low post are swirling behind us. The league is becoming a metaphor for Magic’s Showtime; the versatile player whos speed is more important than his strength. You don’t just feel the changed atmosphere from viewing the games, you feel it by looking at the players themselves. They’re smaller, less muscular and less physically opposing. We can use Kevin Durant as the major generalization here for the new-age NBA player. Skinny, quick and offensive dynamite. Back in the day I remember J.R Rider, Harold Miner, and “Mama” Johnson. These dudes looked big and tough.
Ultimately, does it matter? I don’t think it does because the product is strong. I think its becoming more entertaining and the pace of the game is evolving to become quicker. Maybe its because I love lifting and this is a forum about muscle that I generally like basketball with the centers and power fowards playing more prominent roles. Its kind of fun because you get the strategy of the game, you know that if a big man is on fire the opposition is in trouble. They gotta foul him now, double team and maybe even hack a shack. You also get those moments of intensity in more pronounced packages. Today, because the game is so quick players really arne’t bumping and shoving like they used to and the emotions that I know exist arne’t as readily spewed onto the court.
{Don’t use KG as an example though, what he did was outside the realm of play, he was being an idiot.}[/quote]
I don’t agree with this sentiment at all. The big man will never go out of style (i.e. large power forward, imposing center, etc). One of the most dominant big men (from 1996-2003) was Shaq. Any team would take another Shaq-type player over a skinny-versatile small forward/guard any day of the week. There just don’t happen to be many lately coming out in the league. There are more Durant-type players and quick guards but the low post big man will always be the most sought after position. I guess what I’m saying is the demand will always be there, it’s the supply that’s a little thin right now. The two that come to mind that are still evolving and growing are Andrew Bynum and Dwight Howard.
You can never replace size and length in the NBA. Think about the three top teams in the league right now: the Cavs, the Magic, and the Lakers. The all have size and length. This will never go away.[/quote]
You said what I was going to. The Lakers just won a championship because nobody could contend with their size. Even the “guard oriented” style you’re talking about, revolves around the ‘point-forward’ big guy that has handles. LeBron, Melo, and Durant aren’t guards by any sense of the word, they are bigs that can handle and shoot and create mismatches against anyone on the court. There aren’t a plethora of true centers in the league right now(as Whiteflash pointed out) but the PF position is absolutely stacked.
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]randman wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Whats going on with the game today?
I think its significantly different to what it used to be. I totally agree with some sentiments expressed by posters in this thread about the NBA becoming more guard oriented. The age of the big man and the low post are swirling behind us. The league is becoming a metaphor for Magic’s Showtime; the versatile player whos speed is more important than his strength. You don’t just feel the changed atmosphere from viewing the games, you feel it by looking at the players themselves. They’re smaller, less muscular and less physically opposing. We can use Kevin Durant as the major generalization here for the new-age NBA player. Skinny, quick and offensive dynamite. Back in the day I remember J.R Rider, Harold Miner, and “Mama” Johnson. These dudes looked big and tough.
Ultimately, does it matter? I don’t think it does because the product is strong. I think its becoming more entertaining and the pace of the game is evolving to become quicker. Maybe its because I love lifting and this is a forum about muscle that I generally like basketball with the centers and power fowards playing more prominent roles. Its kind of fun because you get the strategy of the game, you know that if a big man is on fire the opposition is in trouble. They gotta foul him now, double team and maybe even hack a shack. You also get those moments of intensity in more pronounced packages. Today, because the game is so quick players really arne’t bumping and shoving like they used to and the emotions that I know exist arne’t as readily spewed onto the court.
{Don’t use KG as an example though, what he did was outside the realm of play, he was being an idiot.}[/quote]
I don’t agree with this sentiment at all. The big man will never go out of style (i.e. large power forward, imposing center, etc). One of the most dominant big men (from 1996-2003) was Shaq. Any team would take another Shaq-type player over a skinny-versatile small forward/guard any day of the week. There just don’t happen to be many lately coming out in the league. There are more Durant-type players and quick guards but the low post big man will always be the most sought after position. I guess what I’m saying is the demand will always be there, it’s the supply that’s a little thin right now. The two that come to mind that are still evolving and growing are Andrew Bynum and Dwight Howard.
You can never replace size and length in the NBA. Think about the three top teams in the league right now: the Cavs, the Magic, and the Lakers. The all have size and length. This will never go away.[/quote]
You said what I was going to. The Lakers just won a championship because nobody could contend with their size. Even the “guard oriented” style you’re talking about, revolves around the ‘point-forward’ big guy that has handles. LeBron, Melo, and Durant aren’t guards by any sense of the word, they are bigs that can handle and shoot and create mismatches against anyone on the court. There aren’t a plethora of true centers in the league right now(as Whiteflash pointed out) but the PF position is absolutely stacked.
[/quote]
And to further expound on what Randman and Red wrote teams will ALWAYS go by the “you can’t teach size” rule and draft big over little every day of the week, outside of a once in a generation talent like Iverson, James, etc… That’s why Kwame Brown and Eddy Curry can go top 3. The game is like anything else in that it goes in phases. Right now “combo” guards are en vogue, as are versatile wing/big hybrids. The kids that would’ve been 4’s and 5’s 20 years ago now work on their jumpers and handles instead of parking their asses down low and making the game easier for themselves. That’s cool, but the game will gradually shift back and the dominant big man will come back into prominence. I think the lack of dominat big man today speaks volumes about Dwight Howards game [or lack thereof] by the way.
Im not a nuggets fan but they will win it all this year. I’ll quote myself when it happens. 4-20-10
[quote]red04 wrote:
You said what I was going to. The Lakers just won a championship because nobody could contend with their size. Even the “guard oriented” style you’re talking about, revolves around the ‘point-forward’ big guy that has handles. LeBron, Melo, and Durant aren’t guards by any sense of the word, they are bigs that can handle and shoot and create mismatches against anyone on the court. There aren’t a plethora of true centers in the league right now(as Whiteflash pointed out) but the PF position is absolutely stacked.
[/quote]
Well I was talking about the perception of players nowadays compared to before, more than the actual utilization of “big men.” Theres no doubt that big men will always be viewed by NBA GMs as potential tickets to the playoffs and beyond. The college commentators are always going to make comments like he has “professional size/ an NBA level body.” Its just that the players look smaller and arn’t as physical in every position, at least in my opinion. Maybe its the HD. Nevertheless theres a lack of big men centers in the NBA game. Theres no doubting that. By big men I mean 265lbs+ not 6’11+ I just don’t see that dump in down low mentality that much.
The closest ting there is to a true center right now is Tim Duncan. The NBA shouldn’t have to even wait for the next Oden or anything (look how that turned out) coaches et al should just work with what they have. Reemphasize the fundamentals, make players go to the WEIGHT ROOM.
[quote]nomorewar wrote:
Im not a nuggets fan but they will win it all this year. I’ll quote myself when it happens. 4-20-10[/quote]
I AM a nuggets fan, and as much as i would like that to be true, i’m not yet convinced they will do it (CAN do it, yes. Will do it? hrm…)
if you’re right i’ll be the first to say, “Hey buddy, you were right! and thank GOODNESS!” but i must say i’m curious; what led you to that conclusion?
AAAHHHHHHHHHH my Thunder ALMOST had it. It was a block party tonight, but horrendous rebounding on our part. The team did play much better in game 2 than game 1. Green had a good look at the end, but he’s been cold all series, so I would have had someone else take the shot. Kobe is filthy.
I know a lot of people (analysts, people on here, etc) haven’t been showing the Thunder any love, but that’s fine. I understand the team is young and inexperienced (especially lack of playoff experience) but the first two games were close, and the team had chances to win, but couldn’t capitalize. This will come with time and experience, and although we’re down 0-2, game 3 is a fresh start, and should make for a great game. Need to learn from the mistakes and adjust for game 3.
I guess BOS didn’t need Garnett after all for game 2, because Miami decided not to show up. PHX owned POR, and ATL business as usual.
Looking forward to tomorrow’s games!
[quote]nomorewar wrote:
Im not a nuggets fan but they will win it all this year. I’ll quote myself when it happens. 4-20-10[/quote]
I hope so! I just don’t see it happening. They are so inconsistent its frustrating. We should have swept an injury plagued Jazz.
[quote]marqcoig wrote:
[quote]nomorewar wrote:
Im not a nuggets fan but they will win it all this year. I’ll quote myself when it happens. 4-20-10[/quote]
I AM a nuggets fan, and as much as i would like that to be true, i’m not yet convinced they will do it (CAN do it, yes. Will do it? hrm…)
if you’re right i’ll be the first to say, “Hey buddy, you were right! and thank GOODNESS!” but i must say i’m curious; what led you to that conclusion?[/quote]
The nuggets would lose to PHX, L.A. and Dallas I don’t think they are close to being good enough to win. Last year was last year.
Tmoney,
Props to your Thunder, they played a hell of a game last night. The look on Durants face after the game was a bit sad even for a hard core laker fan like myself. To get 30+ points on the board which is quite the accomplishments given the defense Artest was hammering him with and to still lose is a bit of a tough break. These games are good for the lakers too, they need tough hard fought wins like this to get ready for Cleveland, if they’re going to stand a chance against them. All around great game though, kept me at the edge of my seat.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
The closest ting there is to a true center right now is Tim Duncan. The NBA shouldn’t have to even wait for the next Oden or anything (look how that turned out) coaches et al should just work with what they have. Reemphasize the fundamentals, make players go to the WEIGHT ROOM.[/quote]
Tim Duncan? He plays center on occasion but he’s a power forward more than a true center. Do you watch the NBA? Try Dwight Howard and Andrew Bynum…much better definition of a true center.
[quote]drewh wrote:
[quote]marqcoig wrote:
[quote]nomorewar wrote:
Im not a nuggets fan but they will win it all this year. I’ll quote myself when it happens. 4-20-10[/quote]
I AM a nuggets fan, and as much as i would like that to be true, i’m not yet convinced they will do it (CAN do it, yes. Will do it? hrm…)
if you’re right i’ll be the first to say, “Hey buddy, you were right! and thank GOODNESS!” but i must say i’m curious; what led you to that conclusion?[/quote]
The nuggets would lose to PHX, L.A. and Dallas I don’t think they are close to being good enough to win. Last year was last year.[/quote]
Dallas Mavericks are a greater danger to the Lakers going back to the finals than the Nuggets. Ignore the regular season matchup, it means nothing. There is no way Denver is winning a championship this year. They have the physical gifts but have not mastered the mental aspect to become a champion.
[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
AAAHHHHHHHHHH my Thunder ALMOST had it. It was a block party tonight, but horrendous rebounding on our part. The team did play much better in game 2 than game 1. Green had a good look at the end, but he’s been cold all series, so I would have had someone else take the shot. Kobe is filthy.
I know a lot of people (analysts, people on here, etc) haven’t been showing the Thunder any love, but that’s fine. I understand the team is young and inexperienced (especially lack of playoff experience) but the first two games were close, and the team had chances to win, but couldn’t capitalize. This will come with time and experience, and although we’re down 0-2, game 3 is a fresh start, and should make for a great game. Need to learn from the mistakes and adjust for game 3.
I guess BOS didn’t need Garnett after all for game 2, because Miami decided not to show up. PHX owned POR, and ATL business as usual.
Looking forward to tomorrow’s games![/quote]
In the next few years the Thunder should be a team to be seriously reckoned with as long as management doesn’t screw it up.
i think the Thunder are gonna be the next ATL Hawks. you remember two years ago when they took Boston to the 7th game, and they had a losing record coming INTO the playoffs? Shit, the Thunder are already better than that…
and to think, all they had to do was move to an Indian’s graveyard.