ZoomSlowik

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Feb 8, 2012 -> 08:11 PM) Does anyone know what the exact protections are on the Bulls ownership of the Bobcats 1st round pick? From RealGM 2012 first round draft pick from Charlotte Charlotte's own 2012 1st round draft pick to Chicago (top-14 protected in the 2012 Draft, top-12 protected in 2013, top-10 protected in 2014, top-8 protected in 2015 and unprotected in the 2016 Draft.) [Charlotte - Chicago, 2/18/2010] In other words, it'll be a while.

That was an odd game. Illinois made more 3's at a higher percentage than NU and Leonard was unstoppable, and yet they somehow lost?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 08:02 AM) I've heard people calling the 2012 NBA draft class "loaded"? Then again, the NBA drafts on potential, which is why Leonard could be a lottery pick despite a mediocre season. It looks to be deep more than anything. There isn't a definite Lebron/Wade/Durant type guy, but quite a few guys with good upside (especially Davis, Drummond and Jones).

QUOTE (Boogua @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 08:39 PM) I think it's because basketball, in general, has deteriorated. The fundamentals of the game are lost and the NBA game (iso's) has younger players molding their game to be like a Derrick Rose, LeBron James, or Dwayne Wade. In college they seem to allow more contact than in the NBA, which makes it harder for those types of players to succeed. Shooting is more important, which is why guys like Morrison and Redick were able to pretty much dominate college basketball. The NBA changed their rules (no handcheck, crazy superstar calls, continuation) to add more offense to the game as current players just weren't skilled enough to score at a high level anymore.. I wonder if the NCAA will eventually go that way. The NBA definitely has more space. Part of it is the lack of zone defenses, part of it is the deeper 3-point arc for more spacing, part of it is the handchecking calls. You can just pack the paint and hack the hell out of better teams in college, and it's easier to get away with since a lot those guys can't hit jumpers (see Kentucky and Kansas in 2010 where they looked like the two best teams and lost because they shot like 3-480 from the arc).

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 30, 2012 -> 08:13 PM) Wizards are so poorly constructed. You look at some of these teams and you wonder how the GMs have jobs. I wouldn't say "poorly constructed" as much as "basketball challenged". They have some insanely athletic players but few skills and no basketball IQ. Wall and McGee are nice pieces (though Wall isn't there yet obviously), but Blatche is clueless and they don't have anyone that can shoot.

Please stop putting "NU" or "Northwestern" and "tournament" in the same sentence unless you are saying "Northwestern is not going to the tournament." This is just like every other season: they go something like 10-2 in the non-conference season, start the conference slate in 1-4/2-5 territory when they start playing real teams, then finish with 6 or 7 conference wins and another NIT berth. They're just so annoying to follow. They always seem to have 1 or 2 really solid players and then a bunch of limited role players that shouldn't see significant playing time on a decent team. What's worse is they always seem to give you just enough hope before someone gets hurt and they drop a few close games that would be huge resume builders. So annoying, these last few years were by far their best chances in quite some time. Before Coble got hurt/quit they looked like a reasonably safe bet to make it, then last year they had to deal with Shurna limping around all year. The near future doesn't look that great either with Shurna graduating and a lot of young players that haven't produced yet on the roster. Barring a surprising underclassman stud, it'll be at least two more years before they look remotely tournament-worthy again. Sorry about the rant, I know no one cares about NU except me and Danman.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 12:08 PM) I have watched a ton of NBA basketball for decades now. The team game is gone for the most part in the NBA. The Bulls are one of the few watchable teams out there. When offense consists of placing four guys outside of the three point stripe and then having one guy go one on one, it isn't basketball. Its playground ball. I'd much rather watch HS or college ball where all 10 people are involved in the game. And college basketball has plenty of games that end 60-55 because of some combination of a slower pace, tightly packed zone defenses, sloppy play and mediocre shooting when teams can't get inside. Both styles have their pluses and minuses.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 20, 2012 -> 10:28 PM) Either way, suggesting him for MVP last year was kind of a joke. Dwight is the least consequential "super star" I've seen in a long time. Sure, the stats are great, but he never dominates the way Shaq did, and he's inconsequential in crunch time. Meh. The Magic are a 55-win type team the last several years despite filling the roster with chuckers that are bad on defense. That's all because of Dwight. Realistically, the only other guy that's had as big an impact on his team's record the last several years has been Cavs-era Lebron. MVP might be a bit of a stretch, but he's still a monster.

NU just always seems to be one guy short of being legitimately good. Crawford and Shurna are pretty damn good, but their centers blow and their guards can't really create their own shots. They might be a threat if Cobb or Marcotullio were healthy and productive, but something always goes wrong for the Cats.

NU might as well play 2 on 5 some of these possessions, so many of their guys have no offensive ability whatsoever.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 18, 2012 -> 08:21 PM) Dont worry Wisconsin will go 10 minutes without scoring to make sure this game is in the 50s. NU is usually good for one of those too. Both of these teams shoot a lot of jumpers.

QUOTE (Felix @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 11:07 AM) I'm sure this is a big part of it, but it also certainly doesn't help that he's been put at the 3 for most of his NBA career when he's probably much more suited to play the 4. As a 3, he settles for a jumper way too much and rarely gets to the free throw line, which is why he's averaged 16 points on 14 shots throughout his career. Basically, Michael Beasley is the definition of an inefficient NBA player. That's a large part of the problem right there, he's become a jump-shooter instead of attacking the basket like he did in college. It doesn't appear to be a "he can't finish against NBA players" issue either because he's at nearly 80% in the basket area so far this year after being around 65% the previous two years. He needs to be playing PF, preferrably for a team that pushes the pace so he doesn't have to defend a lot in the half court. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen in Minnesota.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 18, 2011 -> 03:44 AM) Ah see, you are stuck thinking about the OSU of previous years. This years team is athletic and long as hell with really no outside shooting or organization. They are ridiculously young and have beaten teams based on length and running the ball. OSU should obliterate NU, but they're still not on the same level as Baylor in that department. Baylor seems to have a never-ending supply of 6'9" guys with long arms that can jump out of the gym. The Cats couldn't find any space at all offensively because of their length and it was basically a dunk contest on the other end. I have no idea why they don't play Pierre Jackson 35 MPG either, he's really fast and can shoot. OSU is more skilled, but I was really impressed with Baylor's athleticism. On a semi-related topic, they're only up 5 at the half against Eastern Illinois despite a pretty solid offensive performance. Their defense has been abysmal, WAY too many easy shots.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Dec 17, 2011 -> 08:43 PM) Watch them play before you decide that, they're really f'n good. Besides OSU there isn't a team in the B10 that they wouldn't be able to compete with over the course of a full season. Doug McDermott is a flat out baller. I saw them last year in Evanston where they had several of these guys and really only McDermott was particularly impressive. Obviously they have Echinique and Gibbs now and some of them have gotten better so I realize it's not the exact game. I'm not counting this as a win in the bag by any stretch. There's a difference between saying they can "compete" with them and saying they'd finish second in a deep, strong conference. They smoked Iowa and beat Nebraska by 10, but neither of those teams is exactly the cream of the Big Ten crop. They're 55th in Pomeroy right now because they're giving up a ton of points per possession. Even Northwestern has a higher defensive efficiency so far, which isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. I'd take my chances with Wisconsin and Indiana since they're about as efficient offensively so far and are giving up a lot fewer points. After that everyone has been a little more hit or miss, which is why I said if NU can win this game I'd feel a lot better about them against teams like Purdue, Illinois and Michigan State.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 17, 2011 -> 08:05 PM) Creighton could possibly be the 2nd best team in the Big 10 if they played in the conference this year. They're fantastic. I wouldn't go THAT far. Offensively they can hang, but they're 182nd in defensive efficiency so far (through Friday) and lost to a fairly middling St. Joe's team. However, they are a near lock tournament team and will probably win the MVC. If NU could win there, I'd feel a lot better about their chances against the middle tier of the Big Ten.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 17, 2011 -> 04:17 PM) NW had a close game with Central Conn. St. I'd love for them to finally make the tourney, but I'm thinking that 9-1 record is a mirage. What's their best win, G-Tech? Seton Hall? They played one good team and got run out of their own gym. When they're hitting shots, they're a decent team. When they're not, things get dicey. They have to shoot well because their inside game is highly suspect. Baylor was just WAY too big and athletic for them. That's a terrible matchup for NU and they're not going to play another team like that until the post-season (Yes, even OSU. The Buckeyes are better, but don't have the same kind of length and explosiveness). I'd say the game at Creighton should be a better barometer for success. They seem closer to the caliber of the middle tier of the Big Ten, which is the kind of games they're going to have to win.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 17, 2011 -> 11:49 AM) Pretty sure SC hasn't set a legal screen all game. And it looks like Sully broke his foot. Awesome. Supposedly a bone bruise, though I wouldn't complain if he was out for the NU game the 28th.

More importantly, I'm pretty sure part of the deal was that Paul agrees to pick up his option so they'd have him for at least two years.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 07:36 PM) Chris Paul, IMO, is the pre-season favorite for MVP. He's got GUNS now. It's gonna be raining oops, oops and more oops. Not a bad point because the voters seems to like guys that spearhead a major improvement in the standings. Pretty much every other player that you can say is better than him is already on a contender. My only concern with the Clips would be how their backcourt works out. Gordon was a really solid SG, without him they have a bunch of point guards to try to fill the role. I guess Mo has some experience off the ball playing with Lebron and Chauncey can shoot, so it'll probably work out fine.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 06:27 PM) Wait... so eric bledsoe, mo williams, chauncey billups and CP3 ... they are like the good Timberwolves. Yeah, I don't get that. 1) They claim Billups while they're discussing getting Paul, 2) They keep Bledsoe for some reason even though New Orleans needs him more than they do. No way I'd have traded Gordon personally. That 2012 pick could end up being a monster asset already. Oh well, good for my fantasy team, Gordon should score 25 PPG.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 03:27 PM) So the people touting him, are the ones who actually saw him play. Well, the old farts yes. Celtic homers, not so much. To be fair, it is pretty hard when all you have to go on are stats and grainy videos.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 02:49 PM) I have to agree that Russell is definitely overrated. Maybe not to the level you think, but overrated, specifically due to the championships. He consistenly had multiple HOFers on his teams. Just because he won with those guys doesn't automatically make him a top-5 player as some seem to think. This is mostly where I fall. I think he's overrated mostly because he seems to get ALL of the credit for those 11 rings from a historical perspective. Havlicek is one of the most underrated players from a historical perspective, the only people you hear really touting him are Celtics homers (cough Simmons cough) or really old farts. Keep in mind that he got two rings post-Russell along with Dave Cowens and Jo Jo White. He's also only one of the great players the Celtics had in that era. Does the casual fan even know who Sam Jones is, much less what he accomplished? Or Tom Heinsohn? However, he was still a damn good player. He wasn't a total gimp offensively, he still scored 15 a game at an average to slightly above average FG% and could handle the ball/pass. I've always compared him to something like Josh Smith with an exponentially higher basketball IQ. While that's not a top-5 player ever, that's still pretty damn good.

I'm weird, I've been playing a ton of multiplayer on the 3rd one and have been catching up on the story from Drake's Fortune and Among Thieves. I thought Drake's Fortune was alright, the firefights were pretty lame with only a few exceptions (mostly ones with snipers or turrets). There was also a chapter or two where I felt like they just had you take a longer route just to add game time (Drake even said "I'm just going around in circles"). I also didn't like that they show you the two main villians early on and then you don't see them again for like 10 chapters. I'm only on like Chapter 5 of Among Thieves, but so far it's WAY better. The story seems a lot more developed so far and the few firefights I've had have been way more interesting. I actually LIKE when they try to flank you so you have to pay attention and/or move your cover. Too often in the first one it seemed like I'd just sit there behind cover and pick guys off one by one with little threat of death.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 08:16 AM) I don't really see how this would be possible. They still haven't resigned Afflalo (but I imagine they will), however, Chandler and JR Smith being stuck in China doesn't help anything. Yeah, a lineup of Lawson/maybe Afflalo/Gallinari/Harrington I guess/Nene isn't exactly imposing on paper. Their biggest strength post-Melo last year is that they went 2-deep with starting-caliber players at nearly every position. Felton, Chandler, K-Mart and Smith appear to be gone at the moment and their replacements are far less interesting (Miller, Brewer, Fernandez and Faried at the moment).

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 04:54 AM) Although I read somewhere today, if the Mavs amnesty Haywood at the end of this season and with Odom's expiring deal (I assume Kidd's deal also finishes at the end of this season), apparently they could have the cap room to sign both Deron Williams and Howard (how that would work I'm not sure). Not true. Dirk alone is nearly $21 million, Marion is another $8.6 mil. That already takes them below double-max space and they'd still have a few other lesser/cheaper players on the books. They could easily have room for one or the other though with a number of expiring deals and that amnesty in their pocket. Supposedly that's the main reason they didn't want to spring for Chandler.