The 2nd Season - 2019 Playoff Thread

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
For a conference finals elimination game it's being played with very little intensity. Good shooting though.
Both teams know it’s over in G5 anyway so why kill yourself in G4. That’s kinda what most of these 3-0 G4’s seem to feel like.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Both teams know it’s over in G5 anyway so why kill yourself in G4. That’s kinda what most of these 3-0 G4’s seem to feel like.
I don't buy that Portland is going to submit. They got this far on a grit and grind mentality. I am not saying they will even win this game but I have watched a ton of Blazers basketball this season and their success is a function of their playing great team basketball and Stotts making good adjustments.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,894
Los Angeles, CA
Guys, is that a clear path foul by the book? If so, the book needs to change. That's ridiculous. The only reason he was behind Curry at the point of the foul (really, even with him) is because he decided to foul. Would we rather having people stay in front and create a collision with their foul?
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,934
Cultural hub of the universe
I don't buy that Portland is going to submit. They got this far on a grit and grind mentality. I am not saying they will even win this game but I have watched a ton of Blazers basketball this season and their success is a function of their playing great team basketball and Stotts making good adjustments.
Not seeing much grit and grind in this game. Leonard has 25, they're shooting 9-16 from 3 and they're only up 4. Gonna have to play some D in the 2nd half if they want to win.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I love how Meyers Leonard developed a 3 point shot but Ben Simmons can’t even make a mid range jumper.
Meyers always had excellent mechanics though and was a good midrange shooter out to 15-18 feet in college. Simmons is starting out like I did when I was 5.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I don't buy that Portland is going to submit. They got this far on a grit and grind mentality. I am not saying they will even win this game but I have watched a ton of Blazers basketball this season and their success is a function of their playing great team basketball and Stotts making good adjustments.
They pretty much gave up in G3. The thing these 0-3 teams usually struggle with is the 3rd or 4th quarter runs where they aren’t mentally able to withstand it.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,304
Thanks Mark Jackson, who knew what makes Golden State so special is that they have heart, not the 2 top 5 players and 2 other all stars
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,667
The Warriors are an all-time great collection of talent, no doubt about it. Great team.

I'm bored with these playoffs though; at least we don't have to watch them beat LeBron again in the Finals.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,054
Hingham, MA
Interesting stat, at least to me: the Blazers led for more minutes in the series (101) than the Warriors (83). That wouldn't be too crazy if the Blazers had won a game or two... but seems pretty rare for a sweep.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Fans and writers often use the word “embarrassing” to describe athletes or teams. “That Sox effort was embarrassing.” It almost always strikes me as odd and misplaced. Losing is a function of so many things, including the talent on the other side. As a fan, I’ve of course felt disappointment and sadness but never really embarrassment. This year’s Celtics squad, however, with all the unrealized talent and Kyrie’s various antics, made me understand how that term might just be appropriate at times.

But there was one very big reason why the Bucks series was still not that bothersome: The Warriors. With or without Durant, the Eastern Conference playoffs seemed and still seems to me to be an inevitable death march to a 4 or 5, and in the best scenario, 6 game dumping.

What a team they are. That Bobby Weir supports them in person is nice, too.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,094
Fans and writers often use the word “embarrassing” to describe athletes or teams. “That Sox effort was embarrassing.” It almost always strikes me as odd and misplaced. Losing is a function of so many things, including the talent on the other side. As a fan, I’ve of course felt disappointment and sadness but never really embarrassment. This year’s Celtics squad, however, with all the unrealized talent and Kyrie’s various antics, made me understand how that term might just be appropriate at times.

But there was one very big reason why the Bucks series was still not that bothersome: The Warriors. With or without Durant, the Eastern Conference playoffs seemed and still seems to me to be an inevitable death march to a 4 or 5, and in the best scenario, 6 game dumping.

What a team they are. That Bobby Weir supports them in person is nice, too.
I feel like there's a Veneta reference waiting to be woven in here.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Interesting stat, at least to me: the Blazers led for more minutes in the series (101) than the Warriors (83). That wouldn't be too crazy if the Blazers had won a game or two... but seems pretty rare for a sweep.
I was listening to some national radio schmuck ranting about “Portland’s blown leads” etc etc......lol. The Blazers didn’t “blow” any leads. The Warriors flipped the switch and went on runs that the Blazers had no answer for because they aren’t remotely close to the Warriors level. Even without Iguodala on top of Durant being out they needed a 25-pt first half from Meyers Leonard to not be down double digits at the half.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,428
The Warriors are an all-time great collection of talent, no doubt about it. Great team.

I'm bored with these playoffs though; at least we don't have to watch them beat LeBron again in the Finals.
Yup, without Durant, Green and Curry get to shine more. Nice double triple-doubles. Opponents shoot 40% from 3 and you still win on the road.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Meyers always had excellent mechanics though and was a good midrange shooter out to 15-18 feet in college. Simmons is starting out like I did when I was 5.
I am doing some coaching with the new Canadian pro league the CeBL. Early on we played teams with no scouting and all I could do was look at past stats, et online. Of the 30-40 guys I looked at probably 6 guys were not 3 point shooters in college, but are now 3 point shooters. One guy went from a nonshooter, and now is a on rosters as a 3point specialist. That is rare, but he was good ft shooter and dunk contest type athlete as a young guy. He has stuck around pro, by changing his game. Usually you see lighting quick 3 point liabilities become passable, "will make it if ou give it to them" type guys. Very rare a guy is a bad shooter and becomes a 3 shooter. A few guys, especially bigs, may never shoot the 3 in college but to survive overseas have to add the 3. These guys were usually decent touch guys that were at a program where they didn't need to make 3s.

Anyway i am struck by how the game has evolved. This is summer league with 70% Canadian players, and most of the forwards (6-10 and up) can make 3s. There are 2 7 footers that are very good 3 point shooters.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,667
I am doing some coaching with the new Canadian pro league the CeBL. Early on we played teams with no scouting and all I could do was look at past stats, et online. Of the 30-40 guys I looked at probably 6 guys were not 3 point shooters in college, but are now 3 point shooters. One guy went from a nonshooter, and now is a on rosters as a 3point specialist. That is rare, but he was good ft shooter and dunk contest type athlete as a young guy. He has stuck around pro, by changing his game. Usually you see lighting quick 3 point liabilities become passable, "will make it if ou give it to them" type guys. Very rare a guy is a bad shooter and becomes a 3 shooter. A few guys, especially bigs, may never shoot the 3 in college but to survive overseas have to add the 3. These guys were usually decent touch guys that were at a program where they didn't need to make 3s.

Anyway i am struck by how the game has evolved. This is summer league with 70% Canadian players, and most of the forwards (6-10 and up) can make 3s. There are 2 7 footers that are very good 3 point shooters.
This is interesting to me, as we are now seeing a lot of guys, particularly big men, specifically focus on three point shooting, well into their careers. Until the 17-18 season, Dewayne Dedmon had attempted exactly one three pointer in his career. Over the last two seasons, he has made 133 out of 359 (37 percent) attempts. The reason is obvious, guys who fringe-rotation players can get more minutes if they can also space the floor in addition to the typical big man stuff (rebound, set screens, protect the rim, etc.) that more limited players need to be able to do to make it.

What is also interesting is that Dedmon has expanded his shooting range, but only from the three point line. While 41 percent of his FGA are now three point attempts, only 10 percent of his attempts are between 10 feet and the three point line. He's specifically worked on extending his three point shot, but is still a non-shooter from mid-range, even if he's open. He's not a natural shooter by any means, but he's practiced shooting from a very specific distance enough that he can make that shot if he's open, which increases his opportunity to play in the modern game.

We've seen plenty of other guys (Aron Baynes, Marc Gasol, Nikola Vucevic, Alex Len, etc.) make similar leaps. In hindsight, it's crazy that Garnett shot so well and so often from 15-20 feet and basically never shot three pointers. As good as he was in his prime, he'd be so much more effective today as a 5 that could shoot from outside and switch on defense.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
It is weird for me a bit. We have a 6-10 guy that has no jumphook, We get switches with guards and ofen he gets a dunk, but other than that he struggles if the guard gets behind and pushes him out a bit. But he can make threes. He is really valuable. At one time abig that didn't crucify guards in a post up would be chased out of the game, but the fact he makes other shot blockers get out on him is so valuable.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,667
It is weird for me a bit. We have a 6-10 guy that has no jumphook, We get switches with guards and ofen he gets a dunk, but other than that he struggles if the guard gets behind and pushes him out a bit. But he can make threes. He is really valuable. At one time abig that didn't crucify guards in a post up would be chased out of the game, but the fact he makes other shot blockers get out on him is so valuable.
That kind of makes sense though. With guys like Deadmon and Baynes, were are not talking about incredibly skilled offensive players. Baynes is never going to be a 20 ppg scorer, he doesn't and will never have that offensive skill level. The catch-and-shoot three point shooting is a skill that is probably easier for these more limited players to learn, as compared to trying to teach them a variety of post moves. So it isn't that surprising that a player that doesn't have great offensive fundamentals can hit an open shot.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
That kind of makes sense though. With guys like Deadmon and Baynes, were are not talking about incredibly skilled offensive players. Baynes is never going to be a 20 ppg scorer, he doesn't and will never have that offensive skill level. The catch-and-shoot three point shooting is a skill that is probably easier for these more limited players to learn, as compared to trying to teach them a variety of post moves. So it isn't that surprising that a player that doesn't have great offensive fundamentals can hit an open shot.
I think it is more guys recognising where their bread is buttered. A big guy with athleticism to play pro will dunk a big number of his 2s, and maybe shoot 5 foot banks for another chunk. But if he can make 3s he can move up a level. So he spends his time shooting threes. Usually all the work on his shot transfers to the FT line too, which is something else he does more than post moves. Don't get me wrong ten minutes a day on his jumphook the last few years and these guys are better players and starter material. But the 3 is the thing. Also think it is easier on a big man's body. One fairly heavy footer was joking he saved himself a lot of miles by stopping at the 3 point line saying if he was post up guy he would be retired.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
I think it is more guys recognising where their bread is buttered. A big guy with athleticism to play pro will dunk a big number of his 2s, and maybe shoot 5 foot banks for another chunk. But if he can make 3s he can move up a level. So he spends his time shooting threes. Usually all the work on his shot transfers to the FT line too, which is something else he does more than post moves. Don't get me wrong ten minutes a day on his jumphook the last few years and these guys are better players and starter material. But the 3 is the thing. Also think it is easier on a big man's body. One fairly heavy footer was joking he saved himself a lot of miles by stopping at the 3 point line saying if he was post up guy he would be retired.
These 3pt shooting BIGs are cheap/good value in the NBA.

The Bucks signed Ilyasova and Brooks Lopez last summer for ~$10MM combined for this season. Plus those two soak up the wear n tear from the opposing teams BIGs down low. Thus saving Giannis from being worn down to a nub during the regular season;)
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
That kind of makes sense though. With guys like Deadmon and Baynes, were are not talking about incredibly skilled offensive players. Baynes is never going to be a 20 ppg scorer, he doesn't and will never have that offensive skill level. The catch-and-shoot three point shooting is a skill that is probably easier for these more limited players to learn, as compared to trying to teach them a variety of post moves. So it isn't that surprising that a player that doesn't have great offensive fundamentals can hit an open shot.
Another thing to consider is that all bigs aren’t created the same. I’ve seen instances where bigs had the ability to shoot from the perimeter based on their warmups, practices, shootarounds, etc.....but the coaches (old school) system simply would not allow for it. I’m guessing that Dedmon would fall into that category as his FT% took a nice leap from his Fr to So year in college which is a great sign for a kid who didn’t begin playing the game until he was finishing up high school.

Two examples immediately come to mind but then with though a ton others do to. When KAT was at Kentucky some questioned his range as a face-up shooter based on his usage at UK without knowing that in HS he was a high volume and excellent 3-pt shooter. Reggie Cleveland’s example reminded me of a kid I played pro-am summer league with who went to Seton Hall named Jim Dickinson. He was a super soft 7-1 kid with NBA 3-pt range which is how he played in the summers where he was effective......yet Carlesimo was that old school coach who had him try to win minutes as a traditional low post 5. This is where I learned about coaches reputations often not representing their true abilities......PJ had no idea how to get a lethal 3-point shooter on the floor but some dude who played D-3 ball and worked at the YMCA was able to utilize him on his summer league team by playing to his strengths.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Yeah lots of guys are recruiters, motivators. When Cliff Ellis was at Auburn at a coaching clinic he was asked about how he defends the post. "I get the biggest sumbitch I can find and tell him is he wants to play that other big sumbith better not score." After much guffaws the questioner said "No coach do you front, half front," After a few more jokes and reference to Eldon Campbell and other bigs he had recruited it became clear that was his answer. Talent. When asked about scoring motion vs set, 'I get me some guards from Baltimore or New York..."

Among the best advice this guys (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Klucas) gave me was that coaches need to look a what guys can do, and change their perception of guys, rather than always try to change the player. He said to never think of a guy' height. He used the example of many skilled 7 footers or 6'10 guys that get run out of the nba because they (at that time) don't dominate the paint. He used Brad Sellers as an example saying if Chicago, and Jordan would have just thought of him as 6'7 they had a 20 minute a game guy scoring almost 10 points getting 4 rebounds or more. For 6-7 backing up Pippen that is pretty good, only the fact he was 7 feet made people think he sucked. Maybe Sellers was or wasn't a good example, but it stuck with me. Coaches love the guys that play bigger, but hate guys that play smaller even when they are good. Analytics is getting rid of a lot of bias.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Another thing to consider is that all bigs aren’t created the same. I’ve seen instances where bigs had the ability to shoot from the perimeter based on their warmups, practices, shootarounds, etc.....but the coaches (old school) system simply would not allow for it. I’m guessing that Dedmon would fall into that category as his FT% took a nice leap from his Fr to So year in college which is a great sign for a kid who didn’t begin playing the game until he was finishing up high school.

Two examples immediately come to mind but then with though a ton others do to. When KAT was at Kentucky some questioned his range as a face-up shooter based on his usage at UK without knowing that in HS he was a high volume and excellent 3-pt shooter. Reggie Cleveland’s example reminded me of a kid I played pro-am summer league with who went to Seton Hall named Jim Dickinson. He was a super soft 7-1 kid with NBA 3-pt range which is how he played in the summers where he was effective......yet Carlesimo was that old school coach who had him try to win minutes as a traditional low post 5. This is where I learned about coaches reputations often not representing their true abilities......PJ had no idea how to get a lethal 3-point shooter on the floor but some dude who played D-3 ball and worked at the YMCA was able to utilize him on his summer league team by playing to his strengths.
This post is wonderful for multiple reasons. Thanks for that.

Edit: reggie's post is gold too. Kudos to both of you.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Toronto is not going to submit to the Bucks. If Milwaukee wants to go back home up 3-1, they are going to have to earn it.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,428
It's awesome that Storm Mercury regular season game is being advertised by TNT with the same intensity as NBA Finals Game 1.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Normal Powell's resurrection is another nice story to go along with the rebirth of Rodney Hood.

Can Toronto hang on for another quarter?
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
6,055
I gotta look up the odds on a warriors finals sweep. The bucks are getting ran by a bunch of bums.