Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

NBA Playoffs 2016

2456731

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 53,028 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,456 ✭✭✭astonaidan


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 53,028 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,456 ✭✭✭astonaidan


    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


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 53,028 ✭✭✭✭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!


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭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 :-)


  • Registered Users Posts: 53,028 ✭✭✭✭ButtersSuki


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


  • Registered Users Posts: 252 ✭✭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


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭Bonniedog


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


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,456 ✭✭✭astonaidan


    Going good for the Pistons so far


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭Bonniedog


    6 assists from my man Jackson :-)


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭Bonniedog


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


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,391 ✭✭✭D2D


    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).


  • Registered Users Posts: 106 ✭✭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!


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,520 ✭✭✭nerd69


    hornets just getting demolished this could be a sweep


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,343 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 53,028 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,832 ✭✭✭NufcNavan


    Grizz are going to struggle to score this whole series.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,832 ✭✭✭NufcNavan


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭Bonniedog


    What happened to coverage of Memphis and Clippers? Almost certain it was on. Channels have women pulling one another's hair and kicking one another one another in the head. Time was that was left to porn channels .......


  • Registered Users Posts: 53,028 ✭✭✭✭ButtersSuki


    Bradley out for rest of 1st round at least. Very bad news for the Celtics and really changes the dynamic of the series. I had Boston winning it, now I can't see ATL losing.

    Also on the above, NBA say the refs missed 4 calls in the final 2mins - 3 for Boston. Pretty bad!

    Curry "doubtful" for Game 2. Given how awful Houston are, they should just rest him.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,520 ✭✭✭nerd69


    Bradley out for rest of 1st round at least. Very bad news for the Celtics and really changes the dynamic of the series. I had Boston winning it, now I can't see ATL losing.

    Also on the above, NBA say the refs missed 4 calls in the final 2mins - 3 for Boston. Pretty bad!

    Curry "doubtful" for Game 2. Given how awful Houston are, they should just rest him.

    ref was pretty bad all game to be honest (boston /hawks game) they did go both ways but i feel that the hawks definitely got the benefit but the celtics can't really have complaints they missed a lot of open 3s so hard to look at any other reason for the loss.


    the bradly news is a disaster likely means rozier/hunter will take his minutes and they are not ready yet


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,391 ✭✭✭D2D


    Kawhi Leonard named Defensive Player of the Year for the second straight year


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,456 ✭✭✭astonaidan


    D2D wrote: »
    Kawhi Leonard named Defensive Player of the Year for the second straight year

    And gasps of shock are heard everywhere :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,343 ✭✭✭buyer95


    astonaidan wrote: »
    And gasps of shock are heard everywhere :pac:

    A solid argument could have been made for Draymond Green also. That being said, I would have voted for Kawhi.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,343 ✭✭✭buyer95


    Bradley out for rest of 1st round at least. Very bad news for the Celtics and really changes the dynamic of the series. I had Boston winning it, now I can't see ATL losing.

    Also on the above, NBA say the refs missed 4 calls in the final 2mins - 3 for Boston. Pretty bad!

    Curry "doubtful" for Game 2. Given how awful Houston are, they should just rest him.


    Boston seem to have been screwed out of the 3 seed by an administrative error also. http://clutchpoints.com/were-the-celtics-robbed-of-home-court-advantage-in-the-first-round/


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭Bonniedog


    What an incredible game!

    Unfortunately BT/ESPN are now showing Pithead Rovers playing Lathe Warriors in some borefest instead of what could be an intriguing second game in Oakland if Steph sits out through injury and Harden redeems himself.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,940 ✭✭✭Carcharodon


    Good game between okc and dallas this evening, Dallas showed tremendous fight to win that game, they are banged up but deserved the win. They set the tone early by interrupting the Westbrook pre game dance thing or whatever it is.....I ve always like the Mavs, good organization from the top down.

    Warriors pretty much strolled to victory against Houston without Curry.
    Houstons biggest assists in harden and Howard are their biggest weaknesses. Howard is just a joke at this stage, he has zero competitiveness in him. Harden couldn't defend worse if he tried.
    I've never seen Barkley, shall and Kenny give a team such a slagging after a game, they scratched off the potential game 5, 6 and 7.
    While I agree pretty much, they could take one, they have some streaky players.
    I would sit Curry again until he is needed


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 106 ✭✭mjavi


    Good game between okc and dallas this evening, Dallas showed tremendous fight to win that game, they are banged up but deserved the win. They set the tone early by interrupting the Westbrook pre game dance thing or whatever it is.....I ve always like the Mavs, good organization from the top down.

    Warriors pretty much strolled to victory against Houston without Curry.
    Houstons biggest assists in harden and Howard are their biggest weaknesses. Howard is just a joke at this stage, he has zero competitiveness in him. Harden couldn't defend worse if he tried.
    I've never seen Barkley, shall and Kenny give a team such a slagging after a game, they scratched off the potential game 5, 6 and 7.
    While I agree pretty much, they could take one, they have some streaky players.
    I would sit Curry again until he is needed

    Saw the stats and KD was 7-33 and Westbrook was 8-22. I never imagined a world where RW will be held down on defense by Deron Williams and Raymond Felton.

    Was able to watch the 4th Q of the GSW - HOU game and D12 looks like he doesn't want to be there, getting blocked by Bogut and all. Harden got into the line a lot and Jason Terry almost made things a little bit interesting til GSW decided to end the toying around. Thompson still looks bored while beating you with pull ups and threes.


Advertisement