NBA Playoffs 2016

D2D

After breaking the regular season record with 73-9, can the Warriors now go back-to-back as champs? With the #1 seed in the East, can LeBron deliver a ring to Cleveland? Can the Spurs grab their sixth title? How can Miami do without Bosh in the Playoffs?

So many questions so welcome to the 2016 NBA Playoffs!!



East Match-ups

1) Cleveland Cavaliers vs. 8) Detroit Pistons
2) Toronto Raptors vs. 7) Indiana Pacers
3) Miami Heat vs. 6) Charlotte Hornets
4) Atlanta Hawks vs. 5) Boston Celtics

West Match-ups

1) Golden State Warriors vs. 8) Houston Rockets
2) San Antonio Spurs vs. 7) Memphis Grizzlies
3) Oklahoma City Thunder vs. 6) Dallas Mavericks
4) Los Angeles Clippers vs. 5) Portland Trail-Blazers


Tip Off times for this weekend:

Saturday, April 16

5.30 p.m (12.30 p.m EST) - Pacers@Raptors
8.30 p.m (3.30 p.m EST) - Rockets@Warriors
Midnight (7 p.m EST) - Celtics@Hawks
2.30 a.m (9.30 EST) - Mavs@Thunder

Sunday, April 19

8 p.m (3 p.m EST) - Pistons@Cavs
10.30 p.m (5.30 p.m EST) - Hornets@Heat
1 a.m (8 p.m EST) - Grizz@Spurs
3.30 a.m (10.30 p.m EST) - Trail-Blazers@Clippers

ButtersSuki

Haven't put as much thought into this as I usually world but here goes:

East Match-ups

1) Cleveland Cavaliers vs. 8) Detroit Pistons
4-1

2) Toronto Raptors vs. 7) Indiana Pacers
4-2

3) Miami Heat vs. 6) Charlotte Hornets
4-2

4) Atlanta Hawks vs. 5) Boston Celtics
3-4

West Match-ups

1) Golden State Warriors vs. 8) Houston Rockets
4-0

2) San Antonio Spurs vs. 7) Memphis Grizzlies
4-1

3) Oklahoma City Thunder vs. 6) Dallas Mavericks
4-1

4) Los Angeles Clippers vs. 5) Portland Trail-Blazers
4-2

D2D

My predictions:
East

1) Cleveland Cavaliers vs. 8) Detroit Pistons
4-0 Cavs - Cavs sweep past Motor City into Round 2

2) Toronto Raptors vs. 7) Indiana Pacers
4-3 Raptors - Can see this going to a Game 7 with Toronto getting by, should be a fun series to watch

3) Miami Heat vs. 6) Charlotte Hornets
4-2 Heat - Tough series to call, think Miami will be just too good for Charlotte as the series goes on

4) Atlanta Hawks vs. 5) Boston Celtics
4-3 Celtics - Toughest to call in the East, a series that really could go either way. Have Celtics taking it

West Match-ups

1) Golden State Warriors vs. 8) Houston Rockets
4-0 Warriors - Warriors sweep Houston

2) San Antonio Spurs vs. 7) Memphis Grizzlies
4-0 Spurs - Spurs too good for the Grit and Grind

3) Oklahoma City Thunder vs. 6) Dallas Mavericks
4-1 Thunder - OKC should move on easily enough

4) Los Angeles Clippers vs. 5) Portland Trail-Blazers
4-2 Clippers - The toughest to call out west. Blazers have surprised this season and will take a game or 2 but the Clippers should move on

ButtersSuki

D2D wrote: »

My predictions:
East

1) Cleveland Cavaliers vs. 8) Detroit Pistons
4-0 Cavs - Cavs sweep past Motor City into Round 2

2) Toronto Raptors vs. 7) Indiana Pacers
4-3 Raptors - Can see this going to a Game 7 with Toronto getting by, should be a fun series to watch

3) Miami Heat vs. 6) Charlotte Hornets
4-2 Heat - Tough series to call, think Miami will be just too good for Charlotte as the series goes on

4) Atlanta Hawks vs. 5) Boston Celtics
4-3 Celtics - Toughest to call in the East, a series that really could go either way. Have Celtics taking it

West Match-ups

1) Golden State Warriors vs. 8) Houston Rockets
4-0 Warriors - Warriors sweep Houston

2) San Antonio Spurs vs. 7) Memphis Grizzlies
4-0 Spurs - Spurs too good for the Grit and Grind

3) Oklahoma City Thunder vs. 6) Dallas Mavericks
4-1 Thunder - OKC should move on easily enough

4) Los Angeles Clippers vs. 5) Portland Trail-Blazers
4-2 Clippers - The toughest to call out west. Blazers have surprised this season and will take a game or 2 but the Clippers should move on

Had real difficulty giving SA a sweep or giving Memphis 1 game, went with the latter. Otherwise we're pretty similar.

D2D

League Pass is having a free weekend for the start of the Playoffs

ButtersSuki

D2D wrote: »

League Pass is having a free weekend for the start of the Playoffs

I'm tempted, but if they play the Pitbull promo (there's another one) between every break I may break my tv

Alfred Borden

Not a great game so far but Pacers doing well to hang with the Raptors. Need to clean up their shooting though.

Alfred Borden

Paul George with a big third quarter there.

astonaidan

Ill never rate Lowry, hes one of the biggest play off flops in sports

Alfred Borden

Great second half performance from the Pacers and George especially. Top win on the road.

Paully D

Every pundit I can find on the main NBA sites tipping a Warriors/Cavs final. What a waste of time these playoffs are.

astonaidan

I went out and shot 100 free throws yesterday and got 67 how the **** does a professional player only get 80 out of 210

NufcNavan

Paul George is real.

astonaidan

Safe enough to say D12 will have the same amount of rings as the Lakers since he left for Rockets to win rings :pac:

ButtersSuki

astonaidan wrote: »

I went out and shot 100 free throws yesterday and got 67 how the **** does a professional player only get 80 out of 210

Not this again....

Please see my previous post on this. All I'll say in a shortened version is you're not comparing like with like. Players don't shoot 100 free throws back to back in a game.

astonaidan

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Not this again....

Please see my previous post on this. All I'll say in a shortened version is you're not comparing like with like. Players don't shoot 100 free throws back to back in a game.

No obviously not, but I dont play basketball or shoot one at all means a professional should have picked up the knack of doing it from a free throw line when they have played the game for years

Itssoeasy

The warriors best the rockets handy enough. 104-78

astonaidan

astonaidan wrote: »

No obviously not, but I dont play basketball or shoot one at all means a professional should have picked up the knack of doing it from a free throw line when they have played the game for years

1.what you did was not relivant as there was rythem involved as butterski said they don't shoot them back to back

2. Your not doing it in front of a stadium of people

3.there have been studies that have shown that height and hand size make free throws more difficult assuming your not 7 foot with shovel hands again what you did is not relivant.

4. Thinly veiled I'm a better free throw shooter than nba players

ButtersSuki

astonaidan wrote: »

No obviously not, but I dont play basketball or shoot one at all means a professional should have picked up the knack of doing it from a free throw line when they have played the game for years

Like I said, dig out my detailed previous post on this and you'll get a more comprehensive list as to what you're way off on your logic and thinking. You're completely oversimplifying. It's nowhere near as simple a task as you're making it out to be and there are many variables to every ft, it's not actually (as is commonly mistakenly believed) the same shot every time.

celtics 1 of 10 from 3 that s fairly brutal

edit:2 of 16 some serious changes will be needed for game two

first half killed us. avery bradley did his hammy that could be us done

edit:great game though

ButtersSuki

Good game but C's had their chances and blew it. The good news is they got the shots regardless of whether they went in or not. The bad is the injury. Soft tissue like a hamstring could be anything time wise. Lose Bradley and it's over.

Shows the importance of stating injury free.

astonaidan

Elisabeth Lively Pedal wrote: »

1.what you did was not relivant as there was rythem involved as butterski said they don't shoot them back to back

2. Your not doing it in front of a stadium of people

3.there have been studies that have shown that height and hand size make free throws more difficult assuming your not 7 foot with shovel hands again what you did is not relivant.

4. Thinly veiled I'm a better free throw shooter than nba players

I know all that, and I know its easier to get a rhythm, but people keep screaming change the rules just allows these guys to get away with never learning the skill. They are trained to play under the basket, coaches dont care if they cant shoot ft so they never learn. Kawhi Leonard has massive hands and he shoots over 80%, why couldnt Capela, Tim Duncan is taller than Capela yet shoots 70%, its lazy excuses for players not to train at a skill

ButtersSuki

astonaidan wrote: »

I know all that, and I know its easier to get a rhythm, but people keep screaming change the rules just allows these guys to get away with never learning the skill. They are trained to play under the basket, coaches dont care if they cant shoot ft so they never learn. Kawhi Leonard has massive hands and he shoots over 80%, why couldnt Capela, Tim Duncan is taller than Capela yet shoots 70%, its lazy excuses for players not to train at a skill

Stop! Please!

You're making a fool out of yourself. You clearly don't know enough about the biomechanics of the game or the game itself to engage in anything but sweeping generalisations on this.

Your posts are jumping between different aspects of free throw related topics. First it was about %'s, now it's about rule changes. What is your point?

Have you read my longer post on this topic yet? I bet you haven't.

You're acting like certain NBA players are complete fÛcktards. They are (unlike you - I suspect - or me) truly elite sportsman who have exceptional speed, strength, agility, flexibility, hand eye coordination, vo2 maxes etc etc (I could go on). They are superhuman compared to the vast majority of human beings in terms of their physical gifts. If anyone could master a simple repetitive task as you're implying it is, it would be these people. You're making out that if they spent a little more time shooting free throws they'd all be shooting 90%. It's not that simple. You're also assuming they don't practice fts, or have dedicated shooting coaches paid to do nothing else than (re)teach guys how to shoot. Most teams do.

If I had time I'd write a detailed response to each of your statements, but I don't.

But please stop with the sweeping generalisations.

Extra Butter: I'm not trying to have a go mate, I promise. I feel like this is the kind of question I always used to get from non-basketball people who couldn't understand this. And the answer is obvious when you think about it. I've a history with the game and sports science (primary degree, though I work in a completely different field these days) so although I don't know everything about either, I do know a lot about both.

As an aside, I'm currently reading "The Sports Gene" by David Epstein. Very interesting stuff that would help provide additional perspective for the type of question you're asking (across multiple sports).
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Sports-Gene-Practice-Success/dp/022409162X

ButtersSuki

I meant to post this ages ago, from si.com's Body Analytics feature from Feb. Interesting read for those of you who remember when Steph had glass ankles.


STEPHEN CURRY DIDN'T know if he'd wake up owning a dead man's tendons.

It was April 25, 2012, and inside the Southern California Orthopedic Institute in Van Nuys, a renowned surgeon hovered over a baby-faced, decreasingly conscious Curry. In the vast majority of the ankles operated on by Dr. Richard Ferkel, who's cut thousands of holes into hundreds of NBA players since 1983, he knew precisely what he'd find well before the anesthesia started pumping -- structural damage, scar tissue, etc. But here in this fourth-floor operating room, something wasn't adding up with his 185-pound patient. As the clock ticked and the Curry family prayed just down the hall, Steph went to sleep a mystery.


Before the drugs hit, Ferkel had explained a range of potential outcomes. Less than a year before, in Curry's hometown of Charlotte, North Carolina, a specialist had already sliced open that same right ankle and rebuilt two ligaments that had stretched apart like a rotting sweater. The worst-case scenario now? Total re-reconstruction, meaning that everything rebuilt in Curry's first surgery would be reattempted. If that proved necessary, they'd use better parts -- specifically, tendons from a cadaver -- and the projected recovery time would be at least six months. But such an operation would also be extreme enough that no one would be sure how the new hinge would hold up on the court. One near certainty: With Curry's rookie deal expiring in six months, on Nov. 1, 2012, his future with Golden State would be that much hazier. His agent would likely need to negotiate an extension before the undead ankle could appear in a game.


Understand: The four doctors and two nurses in the operating room didn't know they were endeavoring to save the future of the NBA. Nobody, anywhere, considered that a 24-year-old who was still getting carded at California Pizza Kitchen was the impending nightmare of both LeBron James and Kevin Durant. At this point, Curry's trajectory was just depressing: In his first NBA season after the original procedure, he suffered five ankle sprains while playing in a mere 26 games.

"He was turning his ankle in completely nontraditional, crazy ways," Warriors general manager Bob Myers says. One time, Curry turned it while hopping into a passing lane during a preseason game against the Lakers. Another time, he was dribbling upcourt against the Spurs, with no one around, only to have his right foot fishtail like an old tire on black ice. "It was scary," Myers says. "I'd never seen someone sprain his ankle like that prior to Steph. And I haven't seen it since."


The league had once envisioned Curry as a sharpshooter with a close-up magician's gift of misdirection. But now, as the Warriors guard rested atop Ferkel's operating table, his career resembled a crossover in reverse: a case of ankles breaking a man. "People started saying, 'Steph's got glass ankles. Steph's Grant Hill 2.0,'" recalls Bryant Barr, Curry's best friend and college teammate at Davidson. "He didn't hide his emotions, his frustration, for anyone." In college, somehow, Curry had no history of right ankle trouble. As a pro? The sight of the guy chucking his mouth guard, punching a padded chair or slapping the floor in existential agony became more memorable than any highlight.


When Curry eventually blacked out on the operating table, however, a rather remarkable thing happened. A recent battery of strength tests, nerve tests, X-rays, MRIs and CAT scans had all failed to resolve why his ankle kept buckling. But a set of stress X-rays conducted midsleep, when pain can't impact motion, formally ruled out any structural damage to the ligaments. A 1-ounce HD camera snaked into Curry's subtalar and ankle joints produced images of thick, sticky bands of scar tissue -- "like crab meat," Ferkel says -- as well as inflamed tissue, bone spurs and chips of cartilage. To anyone else, orthopedic seafood might be revolting. To Curry, "it was good news," he says. "The least intrusive outcome." A motorized device called a shaver scraped and vacuumed all of it away in less than 90 minutes. No zombie tendons necessary. Projected recovery time: three to four months.


Easier said than done, of course. Three months later, in July 2012, Curry was rehabbing with his personal trainer, Brandon Payne, when he made a startling confession: "I feel like I've been doing nothing but rehabbing for two years," Curry quietly told him. "I feel like I'm never going to be able to play again."
He looked exceptionally miserable. And everyone could see it.
"Steph was sick and tired of it," Myers recalls. "He said, 'This ankle thing is not gonna be my life.'"

When Keke Lyles started with the Warriors in 2013, he brought a new approach for Curry's training.

IT'S NEARING MIDNIGHT in downtown Atlanta, and inside the players' lounge at an eerily empty Philips Arena, Keke Lyles is rotating his hips while grabbing his butt with both hands. Lyles has 24-hour entree to this room as the Hawks' new executive director of player performance, overseeing all medical, rehab and strength and conditioning decisions. The bearded 31-year-old received such an imposing title, which came with the power to handpick his own staff, in order to lure him away from his previous employer, Golden State. Or, as LeBron James described the title-winning, scratch-resistant team in November, "The most healthy team I've ever seen in NBA history."


Before joining the Warriors as performance director in 2013, Lyles had been watching Curry from afar in Minnesota, where he was the Timberwolves' strength and conditioning coach. For all of the rehab hopelessness in July 2012, Curry would proceed to play a reassuring 78 games that season with a breakout 22.9/4.0/6.9 line. Ferkel's surgery, though, was no miracle cure. "You could see when Steph didn't trust his ankle," says forward Brandon Rush, who was on that 2012-13 team. "He didn't try to make the moves he usually makes. He didn't finish and take contact like he usually takes." Curry missed four games in January 2013 with right ankle sprains, exited one March game early for the same reason and -- worst of all -- rolled his left ankle during both Warriors playoff series, hobbling him against the Nuggets and then the Spurs.

So Lyles arrived in Oakland with a new theory. At first blush, the Northeastern grad can seem like a bro-ish ex-athlete -- which, having grown up in Southern California, Lyles technically is. But in his junior year of high school, a life spent hooping was disrupted by a condition called femoroacetabular impingement, wherein extra bone growth causes excruciating pain in the hip. That part of the body is what turned his fascination inward, Lyles says, toward a career spent obsessing over how to fix athletes. And it is the same part of the body that would spring to mind, years later, when Lyles faced his first and foremost assignment with Golden State. Hence the pedagogical clutching of his derriere.

Curry, Lyles believed, was already among the best in the world at changing direction. But the guard overwhelmingly relied on his ankles for speed and quickness. Those body parts appeared to be basketball's take on the mythical wings of Icarus: melting, as if made of wax, from overuse and ambition. But what if Curry could add another way to fly? "Shiftiness is an ankle strategy," Lyles explains, "but power comes from the hips. We wanted to teach Steph how to load his hips to help unload his ankles."


Curry, haunted by what-ifs after those 2013 playoff sprains -- "I had to do rehab in between games; it brought back memories," he recalls -- was immediately sold on the theory.


The best marksman in NBA history, perhaps unsurprisingly, turned out to be a quick study at exercise technique. "Steph's central nervous system is the best I've worked with," Lyles says. "It's why he's a great golfer, a great bowler, a great shooter." Curry swiftly perfected a yoga pose called the single-leg hip airplane, designed to build balance and core strength. He conquered the hip hinge, the fundamental movement of explosive lower-body exercises, in 10 minutes. He even mastered textbook trap-bar dead lifts, which amplify glutes and hamstrings, during his introductory session with Lyles. Other players typically need a week.


At first, a willowy Curry could deadlift a pitiable 200 to 225 pounds. But then the labor began: less a Rocky training montage, heaving with theatrical workouts, than a time-lapse video, comically dense with, well, time. "The man was always in the gym," teammate Klay Thompson says. "Steph just stuck with the routine. He works on his body just as much as he works on his jump shot." By Curry's second year in the program, his dead lifts could touch 400 pounds -- more than twice his bodyweight and second most on the Warriors behind 6-foot-11, 265-pound center Festus Ezeli. "Steph became more aware of how he needs to take care of his body," says his father, Dell Curry, a 16-year NBA vet. "It helped him understand that his body is his career."


Curry quickly picked up Lyles' methods. The objective is never bulk; Steph prefers his weight at no more than a chiseled 190 pounds. Instead, both Lyles and Payne -- to whom Curry still entrusts his ankles in the summer -- harp on stability amid a storm of jumps, hard cuts and pick-and-rolls. For that same reason, some 90 percent of Curry's lower-body strength work with Payne is one-legged: single-leg reverse lunges, rear-foot elevated single-leg squats, single-leg dead lifts. A standard offseason warm-up involves standing like a flamingo on a squishy blue Airex pad as Payne obscures Curry's vision, sometimes with flashing strobe goggles, and whips basketballs his way. "Steph's core strength," Payne declares, "is second to none."


In each of the past two seasons, Curry has careened into the paint -- a forest of lower-leg dangers -- and shot more often and at a better percentage than all but seven players, all of them bigger. No one is better than Curry at misdirection through hip gyration, as when he thrice juked Kawhi Leonard on Jan. 25 before hitting a corner 3, transfiguring the defensive player of the year into a viral chalk outline. And yet that play might not have been more impressive than one seven days earlier, when Curry found himself the meat in a Kyrie Irving-LeBron James sandwich in the lane. He judo-tossed the 250-pound James onto the floor, broke free of Irving's grip, sprinted past a screen and drained a 3 in the time it took for James to stand back up. "The way Steph moves, 98 percent of the world would hurt themselves trying to run like that," says Warriors assistant GM Kirk Lacob, son of owner Joe. "I think people would pay to watch Steph work out."


Watching the 27-year-old stay on the court has been gift enough. Over the past two and a half seasons -- a run of three All-Star selections, a 2014 FIBA World Cup gold medal, 28 NBA playoff games and one title (so far) -- Curry has missed a measly two games due to ankle-related concerns. The first came in November 2013, as a precaution for a left ankle bone bruise. The second was in February 2015, after his right foot landed on Boris Diaw's left. And that's it.


A theory appears to have paid off.


But here in Atlanta's lounge, Lyles takes care to philosophize about the boundless constellation of factors that compose any injury equation. He brings up Curry's pair of Zamst ankle braces, worn every game. And Curry's pair of Under Armour sneakers, scientifically designed for his feet. And the insight into fatigue that the Warriors have gleaned from analyzing player-worn GPS accelerometers in practice and the overhead SportVU cameras in arenas. And coach Steve Kerr's sincere commitment to improving health by reducing personal stress. (On training days, Lyles would intermittently send Curry off to unwind with his family or play golf with swingman Andre Iguodala.)


Then there's the Warriors' roster, which is so good and so deep that Curry, through 50 games, was averaging just 33.8 minutes a game (32nd in the NBA), shrinking risk exposure. Last year he averaged 32.7 (41st). "All of that matters," Lyles says. "I could argue that everything matters."
Which means, logically, that any random thing can also be a threat.

Curry has averaged at least 22.9 ppg in each of his four seasons since 2012-13, over 5 ppg more than his first three seasons. IT'S HALF AN hour before Golden State hosts Miami in January, and Bob Myers and Kirk Lacob sit around a circular table in a small back room underneath Oracle Arena, mulling over Curry's ankles. As much as any front office in sports -- owing at least partly to its proximity to Silicon Valley -- Golden State's front office actively quantifies injury risk. Yes, Myers and Lacob agree, any random threat might matter. "But the aspiration is to measure as much as we can," Myers says.

The Warriors hired their new head of physical performance and sports medicine, Australian sports science expert Lachland Penfold, with this data-driven mission in mind. "Eventually," Lacob says, "we'll have, like, a video game fatigue meter. A guy like Lachland will be able to go up to Bob and Steve [Kerr] and say, 'Guys, he's at a 77, and our threshold is 75 for Safe to Play.'" (The team declined to make Penfold available for an interview.)
Obviously, when it came to re-signing Curry before Nov. 1, 2012, there was nothing close to such technology. Asked now about the thinking behind his approach, Myers chuckles like a trader who bought Google mid-recession. "I wish we could've paid Steph more," he says with a grin. But the GM notes that at the time of the outlay -- a four-year, $44 million extension -- Curry had just sprained his right ankle in the preseason, labeling him rather emphatically Unsafe.


"So we decided to bet on a couple of things," Myers explains. "We bet on who he is as a human being. We bet on his ability. We bet on the fact that he was the type of player who'd do everything within his power to come back and be smart and be diligent."

But to be perfectly clear: "Nobody could imagine this happening," Curry says. It was unthinkable that the Warriors might one day offer the theory currently being advanced inside this back room: A Steph Curry who has never injured his ankles would be less preferable than the Steph Curry we actually have today.


"The ankle thing made him work smarter, to counteract him ever being put in that position again," Lacob says. "If he hadn't had it, maybe he wouldn't have the same core strength." Adds Myers, nodding, "It made Steph what he is now."


This is not to suggest that the people in Curry's inner circle have stopped worrying about him. Five separate interviewees knock on wood in the middle of talking about his ankles. One of them, Warriors assistant coach Bruce Fraser, who oversees Curry's famed pregame shooting routine, frets about defenders challenging Curry's jumpers by getting underneath him, turning their feet into land mines. "But I don't know if Steph's aware of that," Fraser says. "And I don't know if I want to make him think about it." Ferkel, meanwhile, still pays periodic visits to the Bay Area, just to check in. And Payne still can't shake the feeling of watching Curry limp after hitting his banged-up left shin against Lakers center Roy Hibbert in January. "It scared the hell out of me," the trainer says. "It brought back immediate memories of Steph getting hurt." Payne sighs, then continues: "Watching him isn't the enjoyable process you'd think. It's a lot of sitting on edge."


Dell sometimes declines to sit altogether. This Christmas, in the middle of the second quarter of the Cavs game at Oracle, Steph had to go back to the locker room to attend to a right calf strain. It was exactly the type of scene that leads to naysayers crowing about injury luck regressing to the mean ... and friends texting Lyles in Atlanta, half joking, How long until your phone rings ... and a terrified dad suddenly abandoning his chair to follow his son inside. "Any time I'm at the game and Steph gets dinged up," Dell says, a tad sheepishly, "I'm able to get around that building pretty good. Just to see what's going on." It is even more remarkable, then, that the player in question might be less anxious than them all.


Back in the Warriors' locker room after trouncing the Heat by 15 -- Steph dropped a ho-hum 31 -- Curry ponders his front office's theory of his evolution. After all that agony and uncertainty, does he honestly believe that the absurdity of his ankle history has saved him from a worse career?


"I think so," Curry matter-of-factly replies. "It definitely drove home my work ethic. Post-surgery, it's kept me driven about taking advantage of every day. There was a time when I was just worried about playing basketball, much less playing at a high level. Now I try to have as much fun out there as possible. You don't enjoy the surgery and the rehab process. But I enjoy how I came out of it, for sure."


His answer carries the rosy whiff of cliché, admittedly. But when you remember all that must be waved aside to embrace this unfinished timeline of events, so much positivity sounds less like optimism and more like the real secret to Steph Curry's flying, higher than ever.


He learned to forget, finally, that he still might fall.

astonaidan

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Stop! Please!

You're making a fool out of yourself. You clearly don't know enough about the biomechanics of the game or the game itself to engage in anything but sweeping generalisations on this.

Your posts are jumping between different aspects of free throw related topics. First it was about %'s, now it's about rule changes. What is your point?

Have you read my longer post on this topic yet? I bet you haven't.

You're acting like certain NBA players are complete fÛcktards. They are (unlike you - I suspect - or me) truly elite sportsman who have exceptional speed, strength, agility, flexibility, hand eye coordination, vo2 maxes etc etc (I could go on). They are superhuman compared to the vast majority of human beings in terms of their physical gifts. If anyone could master a simple repetitive task as you're implying it is, it would be these people. You're making out that if they spent a little more time shooting free throws they'd all be shooting 90%. It's not that simple. You're also assuming they don't practice fts, or have dedicated shooting coaches paid to do nothing else than (re)teach guys how to shoot. Most teams do.

If I had time I'd write a detailed response to each of your statements, but I don't.

But please stop with the sweeping generalisations.

Extra Butter: I'm not trying to have a go mate, I promise. I feel like this is the kind of question I always used to get from non-basketball people who couldn't understand this. And the answer is obvious when you think about it. I've a history with the game and sports science (primary degree, though I work in a completely different field these days) so although I don't know everything about either, I do know a lot about both.

As an aside, I'm currently reading "The Sports Gene" by David Epstein. Very interesting stuff that would help provide additional perspective for the type of question you're asking (across multiple sports).
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Sports-Gene-Practice-Success/dp/022409162X

I understand what your saying, I just dont agree with it. Yes I do think their is players that are lazy and get by on their athletic gifts, surely you see this everytime you watch a game. I have worked in sports to not Basketball but the principle applies to everything, I use free throws as a major gripe of mine as I see it as the same as kicking of a tee in rugby. Where it didnt matter who I had kicking I could get them better by repetition and change to form. A free throw will always be taken from the same spot, imo not getting 50% at least is crazy, thats not that high thats baseline.

ButtersSuki

astonaidan wrote: »

I understand what your saying, I just dont agree with it. Yes I do think their is players that are lazy and get by on their athletic gifts, surely you see this everytime you watch a game. I have worked in sports to not Basketball but the principle applies to everything, I use free throws as a major gripe of mine as I see it as the same as kicking of a tee in rugby. Where it didnt matter who I had kicking I could get them better by repetition and change to form. A free throw will always be taken from the same spot, imo not getting 50% at least is crazy, thats not that high thats baseline.

Does every player on a rugby team have to kick penalties in rugby? No. It's a specialist skill with one dedicated kicker.

Do I think some players are lazy and get by on their athletic gifts? Of course I do. But again, that wasn't and isn't the question at play here.

You're assuming they're not practising. You're assuming they're not being coached.

Btw, baseline figures are taken on gross population and not on individual basis; in this case it would be taken across the league, not per player.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html?redir

The LEAGUE AVERAGE (not individual player) is 75.7%. So in the NBA just over 3 out of every 4 free throws attempted are scored.

You can't take a couple of players with bad %'s and the extrapolate that into a mass generalisation like you have done.

MrKingsley

So how about them playoffs......

Id love for detroit to make it interesting tonight.

Houston were utter cack last night.

ButtersSuki

MrKingsley wrote: »

So how about them playoffs......

Id love for detroit to make it interesting tonight.

Houston were utter cack last night.

They could, esp. inside. I wouldn't rule them out going 6 games, maybe even 7, but they won't beat them bar an injury to LeJon.

MrKingsley

ButtersSuki wrote: »

They could, esp. inside. I wouldn't rule them out going 6 games, maybe even 7, but they won't beat them bar an injury to LeJon.

Yeah i have the cavs winning in 6.

I just hope detroit put up more of a fight than Houston or Dallas. Granted dallas are absolutely cooked after the end of the regular season.

astonaidan

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Does every player on a rugby team have to kick penalties in rugby? No. It's a specialist skill with one dedicated kicker.

Do I think some players are lazy and get by on their athletic gifts? Of course I do. But again, that wasn't and isn't the question at play here.

You're assuming they're not practising. You're assuming they're not being coached.

Btw, baseline figures are taken on gross population and not on individual basis; in this case it would be taken across the league, not per player.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html?redir

The LEAGUE AVERAGE (not individual player) is 75.7%. So in the NBA just over 3 out of every 4 free throws attempted are scored.

You can't take a couple of players with bad %'s and the extrapolate that into a mass generalisation like you have done.

I picked them as examples and my point is how can so much do it when a few cant, my point about rugby was I got forwards to a decent level of kicking but the guys who improved most were the ones who took it serious, the lads who knew theyd never had to do it were the ones who made tiny improvements. Anyways I think we will never agree on this so I take your point, I just dont agree with it

ButtersSuki

astonaidan wrote: »

I picked them as examples and my point is how can so much do it when a few cant, my point about rugby was I got forwards to a decent level of kicking but the guys who improved most were the ones who took it serious, the lads who knew theyd never had to do it were the ones who made tiny improvements. Anyways I think we will never agree on this so I take your point, I just dont agree with it

But your contradicting yourself so much and you clearly can't even see that. Why can some do it better than others? Because that's life! In every facet of life and esp. in sport you'll have people who are better than some in other ways for a variety of reasons. Regardless of how hard some people try, they will fail. In the book I'm reading that I referenced in a previous some groups subjected to intense practice actually got worse.


Take the rugby example you give. I'm not going to go into the biomechanics of it in depth but because of his natural shape and physique for example Cian Healy (a prop) could never become a world class goal kicker no matter how much he practiced. Could he become better? Yes. Could he become a lot better? Probably - but not without taking from other aspects of his game as he would have to slim down, and would have to practice exercising, training and developing other muscle groups than those required for his core skills. So the net result would be negative in an overall context - but his kicking would/might improve.

Likewise, if a sprinter trained for a marathon running he'd become better. He would, but he'd mess up his sprinting completely.

I remember talking to a national team coach (not Ireland) many years ago and asking him what he wanted from his 7 footers. His response was "to rebound and chew gum". Despite the simplicity and humour of it, it's both damning and insightful.

Going back to rugby, it's like that saying "forwards win matches, backs decide by how much". Guys are there for certain things.

You're being very selective in what you're focusing on and repeatedly missing the point.

No offence, but you're just throwing out opinion. You're not backing anything up with fact. You are of course entitled to your opinion. You're also entitled to be wrong.

astonaidan

ButtersSuki wrote: »

But your contradicting yourself so much and you clearly can't even see that. Why can some do it better than others? Because that's life! In every facet of life and esp. in sport you'll have people who are better than some in other ways for a variety of reasons. Regardless of how hard some people try, they will fail. In the book I'm reading that I referenced in a previous some groups subjected to intense practice actually got worse.


Take the rugby example you give. I'm not going to go into the biomechanics of it in depth but because of his natural shape and physique for example Cian Healy (a prop) could never become a world class goal kicker no matter how much he practiced. Could he become better? Yes. Could he become a lot better? Probably - but not without taking from other aspects of his game as he would have to slim down, and would have to practice exercising, training and developing other muscle groups than those required for his core skills. So the net result would be negative in an overall context - but his kicking would/might improve.

Likewise, if a sprinter trained for a marathon running he'd become better. He would, but he'd mess up his sprinting completely.

I remember talking to a national team coach (not Ireland) many years ago and asking him what he wanted from his 7 footers. His response was "to rebound and chew gum". Despite the simplicity and humour of it, it's both damning and insightful.

Going back to rugby, it's like that saying "forwards win matches, backs decide by how much". Guys are there for certain things.

You're being very selective in what you're focusing on and repeatedly missing the point.

No offence, but you're just throwing out opinion. You're not backing anything up with fact. You are of course entitled to your opinion. You're also entitled to be wrong.

The prop on our local team is the best kicker on our team, body type has very little to do with kicking, I dont see how Im contradicting myself, I hear what your saying I dont agree with it. You made a statement about 7 footers and big hands, I selected two players who fit those with high percentages. You pretty much said the national coach said what I did, that they want their big men to rebound hence ignoring other aspects. As for forwards win games, thats a massive cliche in rugby, which is thrown out by people who havent a clue
You are also throwing out opinion tbh, Im not going to agree with you on this we should just leave it here.

ButtersSuki

astonaidan wrote: »

The prop on our local team is the best kicker on our team, body type has very little to do with kicking, I dont see how Im contradicting myself, I hear what your saying I dont agree with it. You made a statement about 7 footers and big hands, I selected two players who fit those with high percentages. You pretty much said the national coach said what I did, that they want their big men to rebound hence ignoring other aspects. As for forwards win games, thats a massive cliche in rugby, which is thrown out by people who havent a clue
You are also throwing out opinion tbh, Im not going to agree with you on this we should just leave it here.

That wasn't actually me - it was another poster. I never mentioned hand size.

Re. the prop. I'm sure there are exceptions at whatever level you're playing at. As we were discussing elite level, I stuck with that as a comparative example. Body type has a lot to do with it actually at elite level. Show me one international class kicker who has a prop's body shape? Please! Or do you think it's a coincidence that there are none? Do you really not see that body shape has a lot to do with goal kicking at elite level? I'm talking from a biomechanical perspective for clarification.

Re. the National coach's comment - it was meant as a "minimum". Obviously they want them to be able to do other stuff. They do not however (and this is the core point) expect everyone on the team to be a 90% FT shooter. I also said he was being humourous and simplistic. But hey, go with your selective interpretation of what I said.

On the rugby cliche thrown about by people who haven't a clue. The last rugby person I heard say it (and I have heard many) was Brian O'Driscoll - not jokingly, he emphasised it as coming from a cliche but it actually being true in the majority of cases (again there are exceptions) - on Off the Ball within the last month. I suppose he hasn't a clue about rugby?

I'm not throwing out opinion. I've backed everything I've said up with an example (an elite level example or a scientific study).

You're sounding like a guy in a pub conversation not expecting to be challenged on the nonsense he's spouting.

astonaidan

ButtersSuki wrote: »

That wasn't actually me - it was another poster. I never mentioned hand size.

Re. the prop. I'm sure there are exceptions at whatever level you're playing at. As we were discussing elite level, I stuck with that as a comparative example. Body type has a lot to do with it actually at elite level. Show me one international class kicker who has a prop's body shape? Please! Or do you think it's a coincidence that there are none? Do you really not see that body shape has a lot to do with goal kicking at elite level? I'm talking from a biomechanical perspective for clarification.

Re. the National coach's comment - it was meant as a "minimum". Obviously they want them to be able to do other stuff. They do not however (and this is the core point) expect everyone on the team to be a 90% FT shooter. I also said he was being humourous and simplistic. But hey, go with your selective interpretation of what I said.

On the rugby cliche thrown about by people who haven't a clue. The last rugby person I heard say it (and I have heard many) was Brian O'Driscoll - not jokingly, he emphasised it as coming from a cliche but it actually being true in the majority of cases (again there are exceptions) - on Off the Ball within the last month. I suppose he hasn't a clue about rugby?

I'm not throwing out opinion. I've backed everything I've said up with an example (an elite level example or a scientific study).

You're sounding like a guy in a pub conversation not expecting to be challenged on the nonsense he's spouting.

I dont care if Im challenged or not tbh, you my friend are the one being aggressive and dismissive, Im merely replying to comments, my apologies about the hands size thing I thought it was you. I dont how ever have any interest in arguing with you about this. Even if BOD said it, its a easy anwser and in rugby coaching its cliche, similar I suppose in the way forwards in basketball are to rebound and chew gum and cut of line to finish the topic.
And no I dont think body type is related to kicking, you release a scientific study for years said egg cholesterol was bad for you, hence why I take not a lot of interest in it. In a way people talk about LBJ and fast twitch muscles as to why he was the best player not the fact that hes religious about his preparation to the game and winning.
Anyways this can go on and on, but I dont agree with you, you dont think Im wrong. Whats the point in talking about it on the playoff thread. PM me if you want dude

Bonniedog

Indiana were good bet to beat the jibbing Raptors. Went conservatively and took the spread rather than back them to win.

Going to be ridiculously one sided series this round. Harden looked almost disinterested other than spurt in the 3rd. Fancy the Celts to take Atlanta.

ButtersSuki

astonaidan wrote: »

I dont care if Im challenged or not tbh, you my friend are the one being aggressive and dismissive, Im merely replying to comments, my apologies about the hands size thing I thought it was you. I dont how ever have any interest in arguing with you about this. Even if BOD said it, its a easy anwser and in rugby coaching its cliche, similar I suppose in the way forwards in basketball are to rebound and chew gum and cut of line to finish the topic.
And no I dont think body type is related to kicking, you release a scientific study for years said egg cholesterol was bad for you, hence why I take not a lot of interest in it. In a way people talk about LBJ and fast twitch muscles as to why he was the best player not the fact that hes religious about his preparation to the game and winning.
Anyways this can go on and on, but I dont agree with you, you dont think Im wrong. Whats the point in talking about it on the playoff thread. PM me if you want dude

You're the one who brought it up!

Bonniedog

Newbie here, but what are people fancies for tonight?

Cavs first up and you'd imagine they be way too strong with Le Bron spending a lot of time with his towel around him.

Not much in the way of punting opportunities. All lines close to overall stats, but could be a low score with Cavs build a big lead and rest. Went for Jackson to over 5.5 assists. Just for interest :-)

ButtersSuki

Pick of the games tonight is probably Clippers and Portland but it's on at 3:30am....:(

limerickfc

Drummonds an idiot he should have just let the ball out of bounds, Lebron gettin the rub of the green as per usual aswll

Bonniedog

Jackson started well. Need him back in. This could be a surprise.

astonaidan

Going good for the Pistons so far

Bonniedog

6 assists from my man Jackson :-)

Bonniedog

Detroit could lose it on free throws if it ends tight, but great game.

D2D

ButtersSuki wrote: »

You're the one who brought it up!

And let's end it at that and focus on the Playoffs

Fun game in Cleveland there. Pistons suddenly found a groove from 3 point land but the Cavs big 3 were on fire (LBJ 22/Kyrie 30/Love 28).

mjavi

Pistons could have stolen that one but Jackson started to play hero in the last 3 mins that have costed them the game.

Big credit to the Cavs for effectively shutting down Morris in the second half, dude was on fire in the first two quarters!

hornets just getting demolished this could be a sweep

buyer95

I fancy the Spurs to sweep the the Grizzlies, 5 games at most. That being said the spread is 17 points which seems too big by about 5 points. Think I'll have a bit of that. Later on in the night I'd imagine the Blazers will give the Clippers plenty of it, but you'd imagine LA should have just about enough. There's something about this Clipper's team though, I just don't think they are a good team. They obviously have decent pieces and they are better than the Blazers but I would not give them much of a chance of getting out of the second round.

ButtersSuki

Detroit coulda/shoulda stolen that game. Upsets like that usually come in game 1, they've likely blown that chance now. Still, interesting to see all 3 Cavs Stars have big games.....hard to see all 3 doing that in every game.

NufcNavan

Grizz are going to struggle to score this whole series.

NufcNavan

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Detroit coulda/shoulda stolen that game. Upsets like that usually come in game 1, they've likely blown that chance now. Still, interesting to see all 3 Cavs Stars have big games.....hard to see all 3 doing that in every game.

Pistons played well considering their overall lack of experience. It's a bit disappointing they lost because you can't expect them to shoot the 3 that well again.

But it was a nice effort overall. Took very good games from Kyrie and Love for the Cavs to win.