OT- NBA playoffs Lillard | Page 2 | The Boneyard

OT- NBA playoffs Lillard

I would keep a short leash on Malone if I was the Nuggets. I think they are a year away from being the best team in the West. They have a very good core, and if everyone stays healthy, Denver has about a 3-4 year window to get to the NBA Finals and potentially win a title. These windows do not happen very often for teams like Denver, and they have to make this window count.

I am not a fan of Malone. I don't hate him, but I think he is mediocre and I don't think he is capable of winning a title. The problem is that the talent will carry Denver to four straight 50+ win seasons and it will hide Malone's shortcomings.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I would keep a short leash on Malone if I was the Nuggets. I think they are a year away from being the best team in the West. They have a very good core, and if everyone stays healthy, Denver has about a 3-4 year window to get to the NBA Finals and potentially win a title. These windows do not happen very often for teams like Denver, and they have to make this window count.

I am not a fan of Malone. I don't hate him, but I think he is mediocre and I don't think he is capable of winning a title. The problem is that the talent will carry Denver to four straight 50+ win seasons and it will hide Malone's shortcomings.
Expand ...
Why are you not a fan and what are his shortcomings?

The guy has one of the best reps around the league.
 
Denver should either slightly overpay for Middleton in the offseason (cutting Millsap's PO) or get in on the Davis sweepstakes with their surplus guard inventory. That would put them over the top.

Jokic
Davis
Barton or MPJ (whoever NOP does not want)
Harris
Morris

I really want to see what Sacramento does this offseason. They have some cap space and are considered a front runner for Vucevic. However, how cool would it be for Durant to sign there??? It would be a legacy saver after the GSW move and Sacramento has a damn good young core. Everyone has him signing with the Knicks but I bet he gives the Kings a look. They would have to move Barnes, though...
 
uconnbaseball said:
I really want to see what Sacramento does this offseason. They have some cap space and are considered a front runner for Vucevic. However, how cool would it be for Durant to sign there??? It would be a legacy saver after the GSW move and Sacramento has a damn good young core. Everyone has him signing with the Knicks but I bet he gives the Kings a look. They would have to move Barnes, though...
Expand ...

The Kings have turned into a pretty fun group but I would be dumbfounded if they're on Durant's radar. General consensus - I thought - seemed to be that moving his company to NY was a dead giveaway as to what he's doing.
 
uconnbaseball said:
Denver should either slightly overpay for Middleton in the offseason (cutting Millsap's PO) or get in on the Davis sweepstakes with their surplus guard inventory. That would put them over the top.

Jokic
Davis
Barton or MPJ (whoever NOP does not want)
Harris
Morris

I really want to see what Sacramento does this offseason. They have some cap space and are considered a front runner for Vucevic. However, how cool would it be for Durant to sign there??? It would be a legacy saver after the GSW move and Sacramento has a damn good young core. Everyone has him signing with the Knicks but I bet he gives the Kings a look. They would have to move Barnes, though...
Expand ...

I thought the Millsap contract had a team option for this offseason, not a player option. It will be interesting to see what Denver does with Millsap. He has become the Al Horford of the Nuggets, the veteran forward/glue guy.

Not sure why Middleton would leave Milwaukee as long as Giannis is there. The Bucks will be bringing everyone back but Lopez, who is probably getting a significant raise and a 3-4 year deal in the offseason.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I thought the Millsap contract had a team option for this offseason, not a player option. It will be interesting to see what Denver does with Millsap. He has become the Al Horford of the Nuggets, the veteran forward/glue guy.

Not sure why Middleton would leave Milwaukee as long as Giannis is there. The Bucks will be bringing everyone back but Lopez, who is probably getting a significant raise and a 3-4 year deal in the offseason.
Expand ...

My bad, you are correct on Millsap.

IIRC the Bucks need to pay Brogdon, too. It'll be fascinating to see how they approach this offseason.
 
.-.
Dogdeacon said:
First of all he didn't step back , he stepped into it or side-stepped. In a vacuum I agree with you about 37 footers (you literally keep moving the goal to make your point). In Dame's hand that isn't a bad shot & me and others have proven it was a high percentage shot. And of course he'd face extra defenders if he drove the lane AND they aren't calling a foul in a tie game for anything short of maiming.
Also Dame shot 48.1% from 3 and 46.1% overall in the series and you are saying driving to the hoop is a better shot?
Your exact quote was " it's amazing if it goes in, but absolutely terrible if it misses."
What is terrible about a miss in that situation? Lillard leads everyone in shots taken at 115 for the playoffs, has 26 3-pointers if 5 games (tied with George & Russ combined!) and averaged 1.43 points per shot. Any shot he took had a favorable chance to win the game. If you are OKC you cannot LET him get any shot off in that situation, but sure blame Lillard continuing to convert 'terrible' shots into points and Ws.
Nope, Damian Lillard's series winner wasn't a bad shot
Expand ...

It was a contested pull up jumper against a taller defender from 38 feet. It was a bad shot, and the worst kind of hero ball because he dribbled the clock out before doing it. I get that NBA players can do things mere mortals can't do, but that doesn't make it a good shot.
 
uconnbaseball said:
Jokic has played very good defense on Aldridge and Poetl all series, so that is totally wrong.
Expand ...
42618

;)
 
nelsonmuntz said:
It was a contested pull up jumper against a taller defender from 38 feet. It was a bad shot, and the worst kind of hero ball because he dribbled the clock out before doing it. I get that NBA players can do things mere mortals can't do, but that doesn't make it a good shot.
Expand ...

If he makes them routinely - and he had made them at a nearly 70% rate during the series - why, other than increasingly outmoded conventional wisdom - is it a bad shot?
 
Samoo said:
View attachment 42618
;)
Expand ...
Denver's defense has given up only 102 points per 100 possessions with Jokic on the floor over five games, a tick below Milwaukee's league-best season-long figure, per NBA.com. He susses out what San Antonio wants to do early, and lumbers his way into position. He has 15 deflections, sixth most overall.

www.espn.com

NBA playoff winners and losers: Russ, Dame and the Warriors

Zach Lowe runs through the players and teams that have mattered most in Round 1.
www.espn.com www.espn.com
 
BigErnMcCracken said:
If he makes them routinely - and he had made them at a nearly 70% rate during the series - why, other than increasingly outmoded conventional wisdom - is it a bad shot?
Expand ...
Added context, Lillard and Terry Stotts both voiced concerns that the refs would swallow their whistles if he went inside, given it was a tie game and would go into overtime if Lillard was fouled and they did. There was also the fact that both George and Westbrook had five fouls, and the Blazers felt they had the momentum and would have a good chance in overtime. All told nobody in the Portland organization sees it as a bad shot.

That, and hindsight is 20/20.
 
Matrim55 said:
Denver's defense has given up only 102 points per 100 possessions with Jokic on the floor over five games, a tick below Milwaukee's league-best season-long figure, per NBA.com. He susses out what San Antonio wants to do early, and lumbers his way into position. He has 15 deflections, sixth most overall.

www.espn.com

NBA playoff winners and losers: Russ, Dame and the Warriors

Zach Lowe runs through the players and teams that have mattered most in Round 1.
www.espn.com www.espn.com
Expand ...
To a certain extent, I'm trolling the OP a bit based on the comment that Lillard was having a "nice" playoff run. Jokic is probably the second best player in the playoffs this year and his gaudy stats are probably historic in some fashion.

That said, Lillard is actually leading the playoffs in deflections, third in steals at 2.4/game, second in drawn charges (as good as a steal), and is averaging more blocks than Jokic. If Jokic is playing great defensive ball, Lillard is having an amazing defensive playoffs thus far.
 
.-.
BigErnMcCracken said:
If he makes them routinely - and he had made them at a nearly 70% rate during the series - why, other than increasingly outmoded conventional wisdom - is it a bad shot?
Expand ...

If 38 foot shots are such good ideas, why doesn't he take 10 a game? Why doesn't everyone do them? 12 shots is not statistically significant, and those were all shots from 30+, not 38 feet. And we aren't even getting into the fact that an NBA all-star with a 6 inch height advantage (probably 8-9 inch when you factor in wingspan) was defending Lillard.

Conventional wisdom was to give the ball to the team's best player and let him do whatever he wanted. That is as archaic an approach to basketball as there is. Hero ball is not cutting edge, it has been around forever, and if it worked, Carmelo Anthony would still be playing in the NBA. With advanced statistics, we have learned that hero ball fails much more often than it succeeds.

It was a bad shot. Don't go looking for justifications for hero ball.
 
superjohn said:
Why are you not a fan and what are his shortcomings?

The guy has one of the best reps around the league.
Expand ...

www.espn.com

Spurs 120-103 Nuggets (Apr 25, 2019) Box Score - ESPN

Box score for the San Antonio Spurs vs. Denver Nuggets NBA game from April 25, 2019 on ESPN. Includes all points, rebounds and steals stats.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

Malone has to be able to put away an inferior Spurs team with the talent he has. He was a 19 point comeback in game 3 from being knocked out tonight.

Malone never made the playoffs before this season, and has never had a team overachieve. I don't think he is terrible, but I don't think he is the caliber of coach that can win a Championship. We will find out.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
If 38 foot shots are such good ideas, why doesn't he take 10 a game? Why doesn't everyone do them? 12 shots is not statistically significant, and those were all shots from 30+, not 38 feet. And we aren't even getting into the fact that an NBA all-star with a 6 inch height advantage (probably 8-9 inch when you factor in wingspan) was defending Lillard.

Conventional wisdom was to give the ball to the team's best player and let him do whatever he wanted. That is as archaic an approach to basketball as there is. Hero ball is not cutting edge, it has been around forever, and if it worked, Carmelo Anthony would still be playing in the NBA. With advanced statistics, we have learned that hero ball fails much more often than it succeeds.

It was a bad shot. Don't go looking for justifications for hero ball.
Expand ...

This is a wild hill to die on but suit yourself. One would think that if you've kept up on the NBA over the past few years you'd recognize that these shots are becoming more and more commonplace. And if he hits them at +40% over the course of the season that would seem to be a reasonably sufficient sample size. But the world needs contrarians.
 
BigErnMcCracken said:
This is a wild hill to die on but suit yourself. One would think that if you've kept up on the NBA over the past few years you'd recognize that these shots are becoming more and more commonplace. And if he hits them at +40% over the course of the season that would seem to be a reasonably sufficient sample size. But the world needs contrarians.
Expand ...

How many shots over the course of a season?

Cause people using the series....that’s a laughably small sample size.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
If 38 foot shots are such good ideas, why doesn't he take 10 a game? Why doesn't everyone do them? 12 shots is not statistically significant, and those were all shots from 30+, not 38 feet. And we aren't even getting into the fact that an NBA all-star with a 6 inch height advantage (probably 8-9 inch when you factor in wingspan) was defending Lillard.

Conventional wisdom was to give the ball to the team's best player and let him do whatever he wanted. That is as archaic an approach to basketball as there is. Hero ball is not cutting edge, it has been around forever, and if it worked, Carmelo Anthony would still be playing in the NBA. With advanced statistics, we have learned that hero ball fails much more often than it succeeds.

It was a bad shot. Don't go looking for justifications for hero ball.
Expand ...
Plenty of teams don't get off shots at end of games due to good D or other. So calling any shot with any chance to go in at end of a tie game a bad shot by definition is nonsensical. And we are only arguing with you because it was a good Shot making your rigidness seem insane to anyone that coaches, plays or watches basketball. Yet uttering the mystical phrase 'sample size'* and labeling with cliche of 'hero ball'** plus invoking the evil name of Carmelo*** is a valiant effort.

*Are you a statistician? What sample size have you used so that you KNOW the best end of game play is ____? Please give us your ideal play instead?

** Did you know that a turnover might be bad in a tie game so an iso play is often used minimize downside risk****?

*** Did you know Carmelo won an NCAA title, 2 Olympic golds and will be in the HOF? His mortal sin wasn't hero ball but choosing and thus prioritizing $ over team makeup. Ultimately that doomed him to hero ball purgatory.

**** Fancy statistical terminology, pretty impressive eh?
 
Dogdeacon said:
Plenty of teams don't get off shots at end of games due to good D or other. So calling any shot with any chance to go in at end of a tie game a bad shot by definition is nonsensical. And we are only arguing with you because it was a good Shot making your rigidness seem insane to anyone that coaches, plays or watches basketball. Yet uttering the mystical phrase 'sample size'* and labeling with cliche of 'hero ball'** plus invoking the evil name of Carmelo*** is a valiant effort.

*Are you a statistician? What sample size have you used so that you KNOW the best end of game play is ____? Please give us your ideal play instead?

** Did you know that a turnover might be bad in a tie game so an iso play is often used minimize downside risk****?

*** Did you know Carmelo won an NCAA title, 2 Olympic golds and will be in the HOF? His mortal sin wasn't hero ball but choosing and thus prioritizing $ over team makeup. Ultimately that doomed him to hero ball purgatory.

**** Fancy statistical terminology, pretty impressive eh?
Expand ...


Why do players take any shots other than 38 foot shots if they are such good ideas? It isn't like there will be a lot of defense out there in most cases.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Why do players take any shots other than 38 foot shots if they are such good ideas? It isn't like there will be a lot of defense out there in most cases.
Expand ...

38 feet is generally a bad shot. But..

www.bostonherald.com

Brad Stevens on the 3-pointer’s future: Think deeper

As one of the most progressive coaches in the most forward-thinking league in professional sports, Brad Stevens has his eyes on the outer reaches, literally.
www.bostonherald.com www.bostonherald.com

“Twenty-eight, 30 feet I would say is the answer I would give,” the Celtics coach said when asked about the future of the 3-pointer.

“When you think about how freely people shoot it now off the dribble, how bigs can be going away from the basket, set their feet and make a 23-footer – I just think it will continue,” he said. “Range will continue to be expanded. It will be an even bigger emphasis to defend it. That’s one of the things that makes it so hard. Layups are I’m sure up as well, and I don’t know that for a fact, but I’m guessing they’re up from 10, 15 years ago. Much more space, and it’s really hard to do it. I’d be shocked if it gets stopped anytime soon.”

“For sure. No question, that’s the Steph Curry effect, right?” said Stevens. “When you pick up Kyrie Irving, Steph Curry, Kemba Walker, at 22 feet you’re dead. You’d better pick them up higher than that, because they’re so good scoring off the dribble into their shot from 25, 26 feet and in, I just think that’s the game right now.

“And that’s something that is stretching defenses out, and the best offenses get to the rim because of that,” he said. “That’s what we’re trying to get better at.”
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Why do players take any shots other than 38 foot shots if they are such good ideas? It isn't like there will be a lot of defense out there in most cases.
Expand ...
No, give me the analysis of 'hero ball' iso plays at the end of tie games versus your prescription. What is the comparative effectiveness? We've got 1 W on the ledger. You brought up sample size - so let's see it.

This is likely rhetorical because just as I know (and can prove) that increasingly longer shots are going in at increasingly higher rates, I also know you don't have much more than 'a 38 [sic 37] footer is a bad shot b/c I said so'.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
If 38 foot shots are such good ideas, why doesn't he take 10 a game? Why doesn't everyone do them? 12 shots is not statistically significant, and those were all shots from 30+, not 38 feet. And we aren't even getting into the fact that an NBA all-star with a 6 inch height advantage (probably 8-9 inch when you factor in wingspan) was defending Lillard.

Conventional wisdom was to give the ball to the team's best player and let him do whatever he wanted. That is as archaic an approach to basketball as there is. Hero ball is not cutting edge, it has been around forever, and if it worked, Carmelo Anthony would still be playing in the NBA. With advanced statistics, we have learned that hero ball fails much more often than it succeeds.

It was a bad shot. Don't go looking for justifications for hero ball.
Expand ...

The idea that hero basketball is archaic is an archaic take in itself, as shown by advanced statistics. Why is the most forward thinking team in the Rockets the most heavy iso team? Why do the Raptors and Warriors play so much iso? These are 3 of the most efficient offense in the League.

I will concede that the math only checks out for the elite of the elite. That said, Harden scores 1.1 point per possession on ISO possessions. 1.06 and 1.05 for KD and Kawhi respectively. League average total point per possession is something like .86. For the top 20 scorers in the NBA, only 3 players even average 1.1 ppp cumulatively throughout all possessions - Kawhi, Curry, AD.

As for the Dame shot - I think it was a mediocre shot. Not because of the depth, but because of the contest and the step aside. Smarter teams are having players shoot from deeper and deeper because it opens the floor more and a shot 4-5 ft. deeper but uncontested is better than a contested normal 3. Again, look to the Rockets and Ryan Anderson for the advent of this trend. Check out the best regular season offense this year and notice where Brook Lopez's sets up from.
 
.-.
On the topic of Iso basketball - this is not ideal.



.63 ppp. Not good
 
Walker11 said:
On the topic of Iso basketball - this is not ideal.



.63 ppp. Not good
Expand ...


Yeah, celts are gonna be ok dealing him for brow.

It’s not ideal. But they’ll survive.
 
Walker11 said:
The idea that hero basketball is archaic is an archaic take in itself, as shown by advanced statistics. Why is the most forward thinking team in the Rockets the most heavy iso team? Why do the Raptors and Warriors play so much iso? These are 3 of the most efficient offense in the League.

I will concede that the math only checks out for the elite of the elite. That said, Harden scores 1.1 point per possession on ISO possessions. 1.06 and 1.05 for KD and Kawhi respectively. League average total point per possession is something like .86. For the top 20 scorers in the NBA, only 3 players even average 1.1 ppp cumulatively throughout all possessions - Kawhi, Curry, AD.

As for the Dame shot - I think it was a mediocre shot. Not because of the depth, but because of the contest and the step aside. Smarter teams are having players shoot from deeper and deeper because it opens the floor more and a shot 4-5 ft. deeper but uncontested is better than a contested normal 3. Again, look to the Rockets and Ryan Anderson for the advent of this trend. Check out the best regular season offense this year and notice where Brook Lopez's sets up from.
Expand ...

You are conflating a few items. Let's breakdown my problem with Lilliard's shot.

1) it was from 38 feet
2) It was an ISO pull up
3) He had a top notch defender on him who was also much taller
4) He didn't really run an ISO, he just dribbled the clock out and jacked up a shot.

The NBA website has a lot of sortable data, and it all says the same thing. Catch and Shoot % is about 2-3% higher than shooting off the dribble, and a catch and shoot 3 is about 4 percentage points better. A touch in the paint is close to 60% shooting percentage. Contested shots are lower percentage than uncontested shots.

I don't have good data on shots from 30+ feet. I can't find them on the NBA site in any event. Generally closer is better. I have no problem with setting up a few feet behind the 3 point line to space the floor, but that is not what Lillard did. He did a 38 foot pull up over a much taller defender.

Portland didn't need a 3 pointer. The better play was probably to break George down or run a pick and roll, not pull up from 38 feet. It was a bad shot.
 
Dogdeacon said:
No, give me the analysis of 'hero ball' iso plays at the end of tie games versus your prescription. What is the comparative effectiveness? We've got 1 W on the ledger. You brought up sample size - so let's see it.

This is likely rhetorical because just as I know (and can prove) that increasingly longer shots are going in at increasingly higher rates, I also know you don't have much more than 'a 38 [sic 37] footer is a bad shot b/c I said so'.
Expand ...

I am guessing that I am one of the few people on this board that still plays basketball on a regular basis, but if you are also one of those, I suggest that next time you play, start launching shots from 38 feet and see how your teammates react.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I am guessing that I am one of the few people on this board that still plays basketball on a regular basis, but if you are also one of those, I suggest that next time you play, start launching shots from 38 feet and see how your teammates react.
Expand ...
You've really jumped the shark. You've been twisting yourself in a pretzel the whole thread but comparing yourself and some message board posters taking a shot to Damian Lillard taking a shot takes the cake.
 
superjohn said:
You've really jumped the shark. You've been twisting yourself in a pretzel the whole thread but comparing yourself and some message board posters taking a shot to Damian Lillard taking a shot takes the cake.
Expand ...
The entire point is that for guys like Steph and Dame those formerly bad shots are becoming better and better shots. But let's go backwards and compare them to a bunch of over-the-hill yahoos at the YMCA. He refused to answer my question about effectiveness of iso's vs set plays in tie games. Why? Because as I predicted and dictated to him he has no data & just uses rebuttals like sample size because that's what the kids are saying these days. And the shot was 37' not 38 :)
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,333
Messages
4,564,911
Members
10,464
Latest member
Rollskies27


Top Bottom