NBA Regular Season & Playoffs 2018-19 Thread

Hitch2222

I don't know if it's just me but there seems to a growing acceptance that talking back to and talking about officials is ok now.

Perhaps the officiating has been exceptionally poor this year but quite a number of post game interviews appear to be focusing on this.

Obviously not a trajectory anyone wants to see the game going in as it's largely pretty respectable, not quite rugby but not nearly as bad as soccer.

Kevin O'Conner had a nice piece on his dad's influence on his love of the game:
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2019/5/3/18527632/boston-celtics-playoffs-family

Nice sentiment

Gregk961

ButtersSuki wrote: »

That's grand, I assume you emailed ESPN, TNT, SF1, all the talking head shows, The Ringer, and all the other media outlets etc. who called Ujiri the GM then last week and historically - I mean, we wouldn't want to allow this gross error to go unchecked. I mean imagine the confusion it could cause? People could assume it was Bobby Webster expressing interest in the Wizards role and not Ujiri. :rolleyes:

The GM monicker refers to who is in charge, regardless of actual title. I'm sure you're very much aware of this and this usage; as equally I'm sure that anyone who has more than a passing interest in NBA Basketball would know who's in charge in Toronto.

I know you're a good contributor but you do act like a child sometimes Butters.

ButtersSuki

Hitch2222 wrote: »

I don't know if it's just me but there seems to a growing acceptance that talking back to and talking about officials is ok now.

Perhaps the officiating has been exceptionally poor this year but quite a number of post game interviews appear to be focusing on this.

Obviously not a trajectory anyone wants to see the game going in as it's largely pretty respectable, not quite rugby but not nearly as bad as soccer.

Listen to the Windhorst podcast from earlier this week after Game 1, the one where he loses it on officiating. All year he's been criticising the Warriors for their behaviour towards officials but he really went to town on the Rockets.

The Michael Lewis pod I also previously referenced is interesting as he talks about officiating from a number of perspectives, but points to the fact that by any objective measure NBA officiating now is better than it has ever been. He also discusses this separately with Bill Simmons in one of the Simmons podcasts. His theory is it's not the average player complaining more, but the entitled superstars - and that's what makes it so obvious at the moment.

ButtersSuki

Gregk961 wrote: »

I know you're a good contributor but you do act like a child sometimes Butters.

Thanks for that contribution.

ButtersSuki

Lakers and Lue expected to agree a deal imminently as per multiple sources. Yet another huge mistake by the LA front office. LeBron can kiss any chance of a ring goodbye for next year unless KD/AD/Kyrie/Leonard join him + usual mid season reshuffling of the deck from him the front office of the team that has LeBron.

Hitch2222

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Lakers and Lue expected to agree a deal imminently as per multiple sources. Yet another huge mistake by the LA front office. LeBron can kiss any chance of a ring goodbye for next year unless KD/AD/Kyrie/Leonard join him + usual mid season reshuffling of the deck from him the front office of the team that has LeBron.

It's only bad if they passed on someone noticeably better-no1 springs to mind- but he knows LBJ, they won a ring together, he'll let LBJ dictate the show for the most part.
It seems like a decision that that is more likely to attract players than less likely imo. Players know going there that LBJ is happy, they know what to expect, that seems more attractive than a contentious situation involving LBJ and whatever other coach they passed on.

ButtersSuki

Hitch2222 wrote: »

It's only bad if they passed on someone noticeably better-no1 springs to mind- but he knows LBJ, they won a ring together, he'll let LBJ dictate the show for the most part.
It seems like a decision that that is more likely to attract players than less likely imo. Players know going there that LBJ is happy, they know what to expect, that seems more attractive than a contentious situation involving LBJ and whatever other coach they passed on.

It's bad because he's not an elite-level coach, it's as simple as that. Would anyone say Ty Lue is even a Top 10 coach in the NBA? I seriously doubt it. I doubt tI'm have him in the top half of active head coaches TBH The Lakers, esp. given the clock is ticking with LeBron should have gone all out for a Top 3/Top 5 coach. It seems they had a very, very short shortlist of Williams, Lue, Kidd, and Howard. None of the latter 3 there inspire any confidence that they know what they're doing.

Re. the part of your message I highlighted in bold.....don't you see that's a huge part of the problem in LA?

As has been said may times, LeBron is the worst GM in the league*. Again, if you don't believe me just google that line to see how many times it has been written about.



*awaiting someone to tell me he's not actually a GM.

Hitch2222

ButtersSuki wrote: »

It's bad because he's not an elite-level coach, it's as simple as that. Would anyone say Ty Lue is even a Top 10 coach in the NBA? I seriously doubt it. I doubt tI'm have him in the top half of active head coaches TBH The Lakers, esp. given the clock is ticking with LeBron should have gone all out for a Top 3/Top 5 coach. It seems they had a very, very short shortlist of Williams, Lue, Kidd, and Howard. None of the latter 3 there inspire any confidence that they know what they're doing.

Re. the part of your message I highlighted in bold.....don't you see that's a huge part of the problem in LA?

As has been said may times, LeBron is the worst GM in the league*. Again, if you don't believe me just google that line to see how many times it has been written about.



*awaiting someone to tell me he's not actually a GM.

Yeah that makes little sense to me tbh. Perhaps he's not an elite level coach, top 10 etc but if that level of coach doesn't exist for hiring which I don't think it does how would the Lakers acquire one?
They can't conjure one up.

How many coaches are available that have won a championship let alone a championship with the best player on your team?
No top 10 coach is out of a job.

LBJ has a timeline that is getting shorter and shorter, it seems logical to hire a coach that he knows so the acclamation is quick.

Perhaps he hasn't been a successful GM or whatever you want to call him but if he is in fact the puppet master of Ty Lue does that make it less likely that superstar players are likely to join him?

That's really the point, what gives the highest probability of attracting good players

A. A puppet mediocre coach who you know will appease LBJ, reduce friction and bend to his will increasing the chances he plays well

B. A more contentious coach who isn't elite either but maybe slightly better who perhaps doesn't appease LBJ to a degree therefore reducing probability of LBJ playing his best?

I'm not saying any of those players go to the Lakers anyway, I don't think they do but Option A seems more likely to attract them than B by a long margin.

Morrison J

Really don't get why teams don't foul when down 5+ with under 30 seconds left anymore. Especially when you have shooters like the Warriors do.

irishguitarlad

The league needs to really begin to look at everything Draymond Green does under a microscope. He gets away with murder, last night he went for Harden's eye again and no repercussions, apparently he did something similar with Lebron in the finals last year as well. Anyways well done rockets hopefully they can draw out this series as it's good fun to watch.

Legion.

Morrison J wrote: »

Really don't get why teams don't foul when down 5+ with under 30 seconds left anymore. Especially when you have shooters like the Warriors do.

This was bizarre. Was weird enough in the Spurs v Nuggets G7 as the Spurs just watched their season tick away. But really have no idea why the Warriors just gave up. Think if Austin Rivers had been around in G1 this series is 2-1 Rockets.

irishguitarlad wrote: »

The league needs to really begin to look at everything Draymond Green does under a microscope. He gets away with murder, last night he went for Harden's eye again and no repercussions, apparently he did something similar with Lebron in the finals last year as well. Anyways well done rockets hopefully they can draw out this series as it's good fun to watch.

Getting ridiculous at this stage. I love the intensity he plays with but he pretty blatantly went after Harden's eye last night, not to mention he should be T'd up 8 times a game the way he interacts with referees.

ButtersSuki

Legion. wrote: »

This was bizarre. Was weird enough in the Spurs v Nuggets G7 as the Spurs just watched their season tick away. But really have no idea why the Warriors just gave up. Think if Austin Rivers had been around in G1 this series is 2-1 Rockets.



Getting ridiculous at this stage. I love the intensity he plays with but he pretty blatantly went after Harden's eye last night, not to mention he should be T'd up 8 times a game the way he interacts with referees.

I'm not defending Draymond but if you apply that logic, so should Chris Paul and Harden (to a lesser degree). Bill Simmons during the week said Paul would captain a team of complainers and Harden would be a starter.

Legion.

ButtersSuki wrote: »

I'm not defending Draymond but if you apply that logic, so should Chris Paul and Harden (to a lesser degree). Bill Simmons during the week said Paul would captain a team of complainers and Harden would be a starter.

I don't like they way CP3 or Harden carry on either but I don't think anyone is in the same league as Draymond.

Think Bill's opinions may have been slightly coloured by the furore surrounding Game 1, and the Rockets' conduct in leaking the referee reports from their series last season too.

ButtersSuki

Legion. wrote: »

I don't like they way CP3 or Harden carry on either but I don't think anyone is in the same league as Draymond.

Think Bill's opinions may have been slightly coloured by the furore surrounding Game 1, and the Rockets' conduct in leaking the referee reports from their series last season too.

Paul has been doing this for years, back to his Clippers days. The Clippers were the bitchiest team in the league in the height of the CP3/Doc/Blake era. This is not new behaviour.

Elmer Jones

irishguitarlad wrote: »

The league needs to really begin to look at everything Draymond Green does under a microscope. He gets away with murder, last night he went for Harden's eye again and no repercussions, apparently he did something similar with Lebron in the finals last year as well. Anyways well done rockets hopefully they can draw out this series as it's good fun to watch.

The league won't do anything because it wants to create drama and have people talk about it for only partly basketball related stuff than it is about having as good a sport as possible.

All this bitching at the referees , dirty play from players and the controversy it creates is precisely what the league wants.

Hitch2222

Legion. wrote: »

I don't like they way CP3 or Harden carry on either but I don't think anyone is in the same league as Draymond.

Think Bill's opinions may have been slightly coloured by the furore surrounding Game 1, and the Rockets' conduct in leaking the referee reports from their series last season too.

Simmons is good and all that but he has some incredibly myopic viewpoints at times.
He rarely holds his hands up when an opinion/prediction has proven to be wrong.

I find him witty, very intelligent and good viewing but he vehemently defends opinions sometimes which he should simply concede.

Not quite a talking head but he's the Joe Rogan of basketball commentary.
Not a bad spot to be in by any means but he has some pretty glaring gaps at times.

CP3 & Harden moan, blur the lines of rules in different ways sometimes but they're no Draymond, he's pretty systematic in his use of force to gain an upper hand.
He's simply an underhanded player in the worst way, teammates love him, opponents hate him etc.

Legion.

Hitch2222 wrote: »

Simmons is good and all that but he has some incredibly myopic viewpoints at times.
He rarely holds his hands up when an opinion/prediction has proven to be wrong.

I find him witty, very intelligent and good viewing but he vehemently defends opinions sometimes which he should simply concede.

Not quite a talking head but he's the Joe Rogan of basketball commentary.
Not a bad spot to be in by any means but he has some pretty glaring gaps at times.

CP3 & Harden moan, blur the lines of rules in different ways sometimes but they're no Draymond, he's pretty systematic in his use of force to gain an upper hand.
He's simply an underhanded player in the worst way, teammates love him, opponents hate him etc.

I agree with you here. I love listening to Bill but I view it as listening to one of the lads discussing basketball - the time of him having any real insight has passed. Still a great interviewer obviously and has an encyclopaedic knowledge of the games history but he isn't exactly cutting edge. See: his bullish predictions for the Nets, OKC and disregard for the Spurs in round 1.

Even if you look at G1 of this Houston series where Paul got ejected for two Ts, I feel Draymond is much more aggressive with the refs and more often but doesn't suffer the same fate.

Whats more disappointing is that where we should be talking about an interesting series, we're talking about attitudes and referees rather than basketball skill and ability.

Hitch2222

Legion. wrote: »

Well said.

Whats more disappointing is that where we should be talking about an interesting series, we're talking about attitudes and referees rather than basketball skill and ability.

Unfortunately the nature of all media, classic and social. Sentiment analysis since the 60s or 70s(would have to double check) suggests that media narratives across the board focus more and more on stories with negative connotations than they do of the positive.

Fans would prefer to conjecture about the souring relationships of players, coaches, organisations, bad officiating etc than focus on the play itself.

Angliru

Kawhi is so f*cking pure.

ButtersSuki

Legion. wrote: »

I agree with you here. I love listening to Bill but I view it as listening to one of the lads discussing basketball - the time of him having any real insight has passed. Still a great interviewer obviously and has an encyclopaedic knowledge of the games history but he isn't exactly cutting edge. See: his bullish predictions for the Nets, OKC and disregard for the Spurs in round 1.

Even if you look at G1 of this Houston series where Paul got ejected for two Ts, I feel Draymond is much more aggressive with the refs and more often but doesn't suffer the same fate.

Whats more disappointing is that where we should be talking about an interesting series, we're talking about attitudes and referees rather than basketball skill and ability.

Ah come on now, Paul bumped a ref. Whatever about being verbally aggressive, you bump a ref and you're gone. He's lucky he wasn't suspended for a game.

ButtersSuki

Legion. wrote: »

I agree with you here. I love listening to Bill but I view it as listening to one of the lads discussing basketball - the time of him having any real insight has passed. Still a great interviewer obviously and has an encyclopaedic knowledge of the games history but he isn't exactly cutting edge. See: his bullish predictions for the Nets, OKC and disregard for the Spurs in round 1.

Even if you look at G1 of this Houston series where Paul got ejected for two Ts, I feel Draymond is much more aggressive with the refs and more often but doesn't suffer the same fate.

Whats more disappointing is that where we should be talking about an interesting series, we're talking about attitudes and referees rather than basketball skill and ability.

Simmons called Houston for this series btw, but felt that them going down 2-0 it's over. This was based on mental fatigue of GS after 5 years as much as anything.

ButtersSuki

First full Sixers game I've watched this year and wow they're very limited offensively from a systems perspective. Seems very off the cuff at times.

Kawhi could have had mid-40s if he made his FTs, and 50 easily if he was even bordering on gunning. He looked phenomenal from the highlights I've seen in this series, but he looked even better in the full game tonight.

ButtersSuki

Hitch2222 wrote: »

Simmons is good and all that but he has some incredibly myopic viewpoints at times.
He rarely holds his hands up when an opinion/prediction has proven to be wrong.

I find him witty, very intelligent and good viewing but he vehemently defends opinions sometimes which he should simply concede.

Not quite a talking head but he's the Joe Rogan of basketball commentary.
Not a bad spot to be in by any means but he has some pretty glaring gaps at times.

CP3 & Harden moan, blur the lines of rules in different ways sometimes but they're no Draymond, he's pretty systematic in his use of force to gain an upper hand.
He's simply an underhanded player in the worst way, teammates love him, opponents hate him etc.

That's really harsh.

Morrison J

Kawhi is a top three player in the league isn't he? Actually mental how underrated he is given the lack of push he gets compared to a Curry/Giannis/Harden etc.

Hitch2222

ButtersSuki wrote: »

That's really harsh.

On who?

I'm not an avid follower by any means but Joe Rogan has one of if not the most popular podcast in the world.

He gets everyone on his podcast from public intellects to political figures to experts in a given field.

Similar to Bill, Voulgaris for gambling as an example, he has a level of knowledge but like Joe he's no polymath.
General public and many who listen to both would think I'm being harsh on Joe Rogan.

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Simmons called Houston for this series btw, but felt that them going down 2-0 it's over. This was based on mental fatigue of GS after 5 years as much as anything.

That's a pure Simmons comment right there, "mental fatigue" such a loose all encompassing phrase. Precisely the type of analysis that has less and less credence as time has passed.

K.O.Kiki

Morrison J wrote: »

Kawhi is a top three player in the league isn't he? Actually mental how underrated he is given the lack of push he gets compared to a Curry/Giannis/Harden etc.

3rd in MVP voting in 2017, followed by sitting out a year / falling out with the Spurs, and only played 60 games this year.

So while everyone KNOWS he's possibly the best 2-way player in the league, he just hasn't had a chance to really show it for ages.

ButtersSuki

Hitch2222 wrote: »

On who?

I'm not an avid follower by any means but Joe Rogan has one of if not the most popular podcast in the world.

He gets everyone on his podcast from public intellects to political figures to experts in a given field.

Similar to Bill, Voulgaris for gambling as an example, he has a level of knowledge but like Joe he's no polymath.
General public and many who listen to both would think I'm being harsh on Joe Rogan.



That's a pure Simmons comment right there, "mental fatigue" such a loose all encompassing phrase. Precisely the type of analysis that has less and less credence as time has passed.

I think it's harsh because I see Rogan as somewhat of a troll whereas I don't doubt Simmons' love of the game, that's why.

As for the mental fatigue comment, he's not the only commentator to have said GS were displaying the signs of this all year - and to a degree last year, incl. Kerr btw. And to be fair, he didn't say just that. Given the talent they have, to have posted a win total as low as they did the last 2 regular seasons points to something being off with the team - be that laziness, apathy, mental fatigue, taking things for granted, in-fighting, the KD questions, or some combination of all of the above. They have looked off - whether they were still good enough to win it all without being at 100% was the real question. From memory they've lost more games at home this year than any other year (in this run), and they certainly had more blowout losses (20+ pts) than any other year. Throw in the single biggest blown lead game in Play Off history and dropping 2 games to the Clippers who basically just out-hustled them, and you can see where these questions come from. Houston came in cooking since Christmas basically and made light work of Utah. I can understand how people would have thought they could beat GS this year.

simongurnick

Morrison J wrote: »

Kawhi is a top three player in the league isn't he? Actually mental how underrated he is given the lack of push he gets compared to a Curry/Giannis/Harden etc.

He's putting up stats in the last few games that not even MJ managed! Guy is a phenom and doesn't even break a sweat, grimace, grin, scowl....cool as a breeze at all times!

Hitch2222

ButtersSuki wrote: »

I think it's harsh because I see Rogan as somewhat of a troll whereas I don't doubt Simmons' love of the game, that's why.

No interest in debating the credibility of Joe Rogan tbh but I suspect almost nobody sees him as a troll. Given the viewership and a guest list like this https://m.ranker.com/list/joe-rogan-podcast-guests/ranker-podcast?page=2 it's probably fair to suspect you haven't watched any of him.

I'd completely stand by my comment which is largely a compliment to Simmons in an age of specialisation.

ButtersSuki

Hitch2222 wrote: »

No interest in debating the credibility of Joe Rogan tbh but I suspect almost nobody sees him as a troll. Given the viewership and a guest list like this https://m.ranker.com/list/joe-rogan-podcast-guests/ranker-podcast?page=2 it's probably fair to suspect you haven't watched any of him.

I'd completely stand by my comment which is largely a compliment to Simmons in an age of specialisation.

You assume an awful lot. I have actually listened to and watched some of Rogan's pods. I happen to like his stance on political correctness (as in he's anti-PC) for instance, and he's quite liberal. What I don't like is that it just seems a little amateurish to me at times from a journalistic perspective, and is more than a little tabloid. The Alex Jones interview car-crash and subsequent fall out are an example of this - he failed to prepare and you got a show like that. And there are others like that. Simmons is a journalist first and a podcaster etc. second (though you could argue he's a podcaster first now but the fact remains he trained and learned his craft as a newspaper journalist), Rogan is a bit of a jack of all trades (stand up comic, MMA announcer, lots of things in between).

Rogan seems more entertainment than anything else, which is fair enough if that's your thing. I've said this frequently on the Radio forum though, popularity doesn't necessarily equal quality. Just because Rogan's pod is popular, doesn't make it good.

You're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to mine. If we disagree, so be it.