2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

[Jack Parkman]

4 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

Generational talents overcome analytics.

Ewing would be the best pure center right now, his per is similar to Embiid but thered be less big men to guard him. 

Ok, this makes more sense. It seems like teams are asking if someone can play rather than how tall they are now. Talent dropoff makes sense....which begs the question....Where did all of the pure centers from Jabbar to Duncan come from, and why don't they exist anymore? 

Next question: Is Tim Duncan the last great big man? How long before we get another transcendent center? 

Edited April 30, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Soxbadger said:

You dont seem to get other team would have to make changes to play against Shaq. 

Shaq in his prime would eat Giannis alive. If you put guys like Draymond Green on him Shaq would average 30/20. Plus with hed allow the rest of his team to be more aggressive on the outside on defense because no one could challenge him inside.

This.  Again, you also have to factor that Shaq on offense would be a disrupter.  He would command so much attention on the block, that it would leave shooters open all over the place.  Pick your poision.

[SoxAce]

Mike really did put up some insane numbers under Doug Collins. 

[Jack Parkman]

12 hours ago, Tony said:

 

Jack, you have to understand this is why people come after you, and you are ALWAYS having to defend yourself. It’s OK that you don’t keep up with current NBA. You don’t have to be an expert on everything, no one is. 
 

If you aren’t up to date on a subject, don’t make such a big statement like “Let's put it this way: It's questionable if Shaq or Ewing would have a place in today's NBA. Kukoc there isn't even a question about.“ You’re going to be rightfully called out for it and then spend two hours trying to defend yourself. Not worth it dude. 

That was my understanding on how the game has changed, The classic 7 ft center has all but disappeared from the NBA. (I know this much) I'm wondering if they're just not wanted or if there's just no talent there. I should have phrased it as a question rather than a statement. 

My understanding of it was that NBA teams don't want one dimensional slow inside scorers anymore, but it could be a talent issue as well. 

I don't know which is the truth...But if it's a talent issue, then where did all of the big men go? There were a lot of greats coming into the NBA from Jabbar in the late 60s through Duncan in 97. Then, somehow after Shaq and Duncan retired they're gone. My question is....why? 

In the 80s and 90s you had guys like:

Jabbar in his prime, and 

guys like: 

Sampson

Olajuwon

Ewing

David Robinson

Shaq

Duncan

coming into the league, and I'm sure I'm forgetting a few more. 

 

Edited April 30, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[illinilaw08]

15 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

That was my understanding on how the game has changed, The classic 7 ft center has all but disappeared from the NBA. (I know this much) I'm wondering if they're just not wanted or if there's just no talent there. I should have phrased it as a question rather than a statement. 

Plenty of 7 foot centers.  They are just different.  Offense has evolved away from prioritizing post ups - so you don't see as many possessions where you dump the ball to the big on the block and let them figure it out - but they still happen.  Embiid, for example, averages over 8 post touches a game.  Jokic is a hair under 7 feet, but Jokic averages 15 shots a game, and only about 3.5 are threes.  Gobert doesn't shoot any threes.  Zion was awesome in his 19 games last year while taking less than a 3 a game.  You want bigs to protect the rim and to be efficient around the rim offensively.  If your offense is built around an elite creator - like Harden or Giannis - yeah, you want your bigs to make 3s because it gives your best guys the most space possible to operate.  But if your team's best offensive player is a big, you build your offense around their strengths (watch how the Nuggets use Jokic or the Sixers use Embiid). 

What has changed is what you need your role playing 7 footer to be able to do.  Mason Plumlee on the Nuggets (I'm a Nuggets season ticket holder so these are easy examples for me) is a 6'11" role playing big who blocks shots, rebounds, and is athletic enough to switch onto to smaller guys defensively.  He is also a pretty effective secondary playmaker (good ball handler and passer).  He doesn't get post up opportunities.  His points come on putbacks and rolls off the pick and roll.  Role playing centers are more athletic and versatile than they used to be.  But they are still frequently 7 feet tall.

[Quin]

 

Now look at how many the Sixers have:

https://www.nba.com/sixers/team/staff-directory

Imagine if Dunn, WCJ, and Lauri had been given a proper staff.

[SoxAce]

Sir Charles was just an animal. Glad alot of the youngsters are watching this documentary. 

Draymond needs to go to a mental institution if he thinks he can even hold the same jock strap as Sir Charles.

[bmags]

5 hours ago, SoxAce said:

Sir Charles was just an animal. Glad alot of the youngsters are watching this documentary. 

Draymond needs to go to a mental institution if he thinks he can even hold the same jock strap as Sir Charles.

I’m apparently wrong and I was too young to know anyway but that Phoenix team was the only one I was scared was going to beat the bulls.

[southsider2k5]

9 hours ago, SoxAce said:

Sir Charles was just an animal. Glad alot of the youngsters are watching this documentary. 

Draymond needs to go to a mental institution if he thinks he can even hold the same jock strap as Sir Charles.

Green has benefited from being the 5th best player on a World Championship team.  When he was the best player on a mediocre team, he wasn't very good.  Barkley carried some pretty good squads, including the one with Dr J.  The differences couldn't be more obvious.

[bmags]

25 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Green has benefited from being the 5th best player on a World Championship team.  When he was the best player on a mediocre team, he wasn't very good.  Barkley carried some pretty good squads, including the one with Dr J.  The differences couldn't be more obvious.

steph, kd, klay...who is your fourth? His first championship maybe igoudala was better but draymond does a lot by guarding the 5s.

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, bmags said:

steph, kd, klay...who is your fourth? His first championship maybe igoudala was better but draymond does a lot by guarding the 5s.

Sure.  Call it 4th then.  Much different than what Barclay did.

[illinilaw08]

3 hours ago, bmags said:

steph, kd, klay...who is your fourth? His first championship maybe igoudala was better but draymond does a lot by guarding the 5s.

Draymond, clearly not Barkley.  But he is an all-time great role player.  Great defender (DPOY in 2016-17) who can guard pretty much every position.  Really good passer which has been critical to making that Golden State offense go.  His biggest downfall offensively is - 73 win season excluded - he hasn't been a great 3 point shooter, so he isn't much of a scorer.

He's absolutely not Barkley - more of a Rodman, but more useful offensively.  Great role player.

[bmags]

I  have to say Wilbon on these docs annoy the crap out of me. I know since ESPN produced it they had to shoehorn him in, but like, Wilbon was not a part of that era for anyone. He wasn't in Chicago, he wasn't a prominent national guy at the time. He's become the new Jim Belushi, and of course the one part where he could provide some value he gets completely wrong (him stating nine guys were against isaiah coming to the USA team).

And frankly the chicago sportswriters would be more interesting there since the relationship with Isaiah was complicated where they were overwhelmingly on Jordan's/bulls side but also still gave him reverence for his chicago high school days.

Anyway, I'm enjoying the doc a lot but am a bit disappointed that there really isn't much on the 98 season itself. That said the All star game footage was incredible.

[Brian]

19 minutes ago, bmags said:

I  have to say Wilbon on these docs annoy the crap out of me. I know since ESPN produced it they had to shoehorn him in, but like, Wilbon was not a part of that era for anyone. He wasn't in Chicago, he wasn't a prominent national guy at the time. He's become the new Jim Belushi, and of course the one part where he could provide some value he gets completely wrong (him stating nine guys were against isaiah coming to the USA team).

And frankly the chicago sportswriters would be more interesting there since the relationship with Isaiah was complicated where they were overwhelmingly on Jordan's/bulls side but also still gave him reverence for his chicago high school days.

Anyway, I'm enjoying the doc a lot but am a bit disappointed that there really isn't much on the 98 season itself. That said the All star game footage was incredible.

I agree. Outside of Sam Smith, is anyone local on there? Jackie MacMullan has been on the east coast her whole life.

I'm loving it and not complaining but the definitely could have used a more local people.

[bmags]

Just now, Brian said:

I agree. Outside of Sam Smith, is anyone local on there? Jackie MacMullan has been on the east coast her whole life.

I'm loving it and not complaining but the definitely could have used a more local people.

They've had melissa isaacson (espn employee too, right?), but yeah you are seeing Merk, Mulligan, a whole bunch of these people in the footage and then interviewing people that weren't there for the day to day.

Some of the national guys are good, David Aldridge has been good. I feel like Wilbon tries to act like Chicago's bill simmons but he is just no believable at all.

[Jack Parkman]

I still want to know...where did all of the elite centers go? 

[Chi Town Sox]

12 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

I still want to know...where did all of the elite centers go? 

Game has been flipped on it's head.  I don't think they've disappeared, I just think they focus on shooting 3's now and being more all-around than Centers of the past posted on the block. 

[Balta1701]

2 hours ago, Chi Town Sox said:

Game has been flipped on it's head.  I don't think they've disappeared, I just think they focus on shooting 3's now and being more all-around than Centers of the past posted on the block. 

I think some of the big inside fighting guys have disappeared, because they can't defend well away from the basket. If you're a center now, you have to be able to adapt to the guy you're guarding moving away from the basket for an open shot, and then having a faster guy drive past you. That's removed the slow, tall guys because they're a major weakness defensively.

I think a great example of this was Kendrick Perkins. With the Celtics team, he was a useful player, but even though he was only in his late 20s, when he got to OKC his defensive value started going down because he couldn't guard the type of lineups people were putting against him.

[Jack Parkman]

51 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I think some of the big inside fighting guys have disappeared, because they can't defend well away from the basket. If you're a center now, you have to be able to adapt to the guy you're guarding moving away from the basket for an open shot, and then having a faster guy drive past you. That's removed the slow, tall guys because they're a major weakness defensively.

I think a great example of this was Kendrick Perkins. With the Celtics team, he was a useful player, but even though he was only in his late 20s, when he got to OKC his defensive value started going down because he couldn't guard the type of lineups people were putting against him.

This goes again toward my line of thinking. So it's more about being a defensive liability vs an offensive one. 

Those who watch the NBA regularly, would Lakers Shaq be in trouble here? 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[Balta1701]

29 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

This goes again toward my line of thinking. So it's more about being a defensive liability vs an offensive one. 

Those who watch the NBA regularly, would Lakers Shaq be in trouble here? 

Shaq was such a different beast that I think he'd still be dominant. He wasn't just big, he was fast, at least in his prime. If you only saw 2006 Shaq, yeah he was mostly using size and strength, and that would still be a problem for teams to defend today, but back in the 1990s he wasn't just flat footed and in the lane, he was moving around a lot and could get himself up a lot. 

I think a lot of the strategy today would be to find ways to move him out to the 3 point line to defend, but that would leave your team weak  on the glass as well.

[Kyyle23]

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

This goes again toward my line of thinking. So it's more about being a defensive liability vs an offensive one. 

Those who watch the NBA regularly, would Lakers Shaq be in trouble here? 

Why do you keep pointing to Lakers Shaq as the bad one?  He was in his prime with the lakers, towards the end he got heavy and then on the back end of his career(Miami Boston Phoenix Cleveland) it hurt him, but Lakers Shaq was fucking awesome

[bmags]

I think here's the reality:

- If the 2000 lakers played like the 2000 lakers they would get...destroyed by the, say, 2018 golden state warriors.

The 2000 lakers averaged 4 made three pointers a game. The 2018 GS warriors averaged 12. The lakers would haven't known what the hell was going on.

Now if shaq was in todays game at age 27/28 playing the last decade would he be a dominant player? Hell yeah. I mean Rudy Gobert is a dominant player and he doesn't have near the offensive game of shaq.

But, yeah, trying to clog up the lane, slow the pace and go for drives and post-ups all game playing a modern NBA team? The math will just beat you.

But if the 2000 lakers knew that stuff they would have just...played differently and still been damn good. I still think that was a particularly weak time in the league and the last 5 years would beat them, but you are still talking about a conference finals type team.

[Jack Parkman]

4 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

Why do you keep pointing to Lakers Shaq as the bad one?  He was in his prime with the lakers, towards the end he got heavy and then on the back end of his career(Miami Boston Phoenix Cleveland) it hurt him, but Lakers Shaq was fucking awesome

Because Orlando Shaq>>>>> he got fat in LA. He wasn't the same guy defensively. The NBA is different now and he was pushing 350 even by the time they started winning championships. 

Orlando Shaq was an athletic freak. 

LA Shaq was just bigger than everyone else so he was kind of a physical bully. 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[Boogua]

26 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Because Orlando Shaq>>>>> he got fat in LA. He wasn't the same guy defensively. The NBA is different now and he was pushing 350 even by the time they started winning championships. 

Orlando Shaq was an athletic freak. 

LA Shaq was just bigger than everyone else so he was kind of a physical bully. 

The game would have to adapt to LA Shaq, not vice versa. The Warriors lineup of death wouldn't be able to see the court much against LA Shaq. That's the difference. He would make a team like the Warriors have to play a guy like Bogut and a big backup 30+ minutes per game.

[Kyyle23]

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

Because Orlando Shaq>>>>> he got fat in LA. He wasn't the same guy defensively. The NBA is different now and he was pushing 350 even by the time they started winning championships. 

Orlando Shaq was an athletic freak. 

LA Shaq was just bigger than everyone else so he was kind of a physical bully. 

Can you show me in the numbers where Orlando Shaq was definitely better than LA Shaq, because I just looked at his reference page and it really looks to me like he had pretty much all of his best seasons averages in LA