|
Why do games never start at a designated time? In a lot of other sports, you'll have an actual time when the first whistle will blow. In the NBA, you'll have a time and the tip off will be a random amount of minutes after that. It's incredibly annoying.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 03:08 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 04:54 |
|
|
What does it mean when a player can "create his own shot"? I take it to mean he can elude defenders and get himself open for a shot, or attack the rim for opportunities, but what is the opposite? Is it that a player who can't create his own shot relies on good passing from teammates or having them take care of the defenders?
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 03:12 |
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:What does it mean when a player can "create his own shot"? I take it to mean he can elude defenders and get himself open for a shot, or attack the rim for opportunities, but what is the opposite? Is it that a player who can't create his own shot relies on good passing from teammates or having them take care of the defenders? You've got it pretty much spot on.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 03:24 |
|
|
spamman posted:Why do games never start at a designated time? Tipoff is generally 15 minutes after the game is scheduled. I know baseball games start at like 7:07 instead of the scheduled 7:00pm Also, being able to create your shot is among the most valuable skills. If you are not a gigantic idiot on the court and are able to create your own shot, you're probably a superstar in the making
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 03:26 |
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:What does it mean when a player can "create his own shot"? I take it to mean he can elude defenders and get himself open for a shot, or attack the rim for opportunities, but what is the opposite? Is it that a player who can't create his own shot relies on good passing from teammates or having them take care of the defenders? Or someone who can cut/run screens well enough to lose his man when he's off the ball.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 03:26 |
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:What does it mean when a player can "create his own shot"? I take it to mean he can elude defenders and get himself open for a shot, or attack the rim for opportunities, but what is the opposite? Is it that a player who can't create his own shot relies on good passing from teammates or having them take care of the defenders? Usually, players who can "create their own shots" are bigger guards or wings -- think about Wade, Kobe, Lebron, etc. They are quick, big, and skilled enough to get a shot that has a 40-50% chance of going in from about anywhere on the floor. There are exceptions, like Allen Iverson in his prime, who is tiny but could get a high percentage shot just as well as Dark, who is a foot taller than him. But yeah, more or less it means that you can get (and hopefully make!) a high percentage shot without the help of teammates. It's a bit of an trope from announcers, but it is a thing to think about when you watch players. A lot of players who can "create their own shot" should never do it, but are still eternally praised by Magic Johnson and Michael Wilbon for their abilities to do it.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 03:26 |
|
|
Wandle Cax posted:What does it mean when a player can "create his own shot"? I take it to mean he can elude defenders and get himself open for a shot, or attack the rim for opportunities, but what is the opposite? Is it that a player who can't create his own shot relies on good passing from teammates or having them take care of the defenders? Generally it means a player who can dribble well enough to be a threat to get around his defender and into the paint, or to back his defender down deep into the paint. Such a player generally gets the attention of more than one defender. One opposite is a player who thinks he can dribble well enough to be a threat, but can actually be covered well enough by a single defender. Jerry Stackhouse was this player for ten years. The other opposite are players who can dribble well enough to occupy extra attention from defenders, but know it. These players are limited to standing around the perimeter or setting screens.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 03:38 |
|
man
|
BIZORT posted:Also, being able to create your shot is among the most valuable skills. If you are not a gigantic idiot on the court and are able to create your own shot, you're probably a superstar in the making A player that can create his own shot can go a long way to make up for offensive shortcomings in your scheme or personnel. And if you watch enough games, you will see that a lot of games that are close at the end will come down to isolation plays where the player that can create his own shot will get the ball while the rest of his team clears out for him to make a play. To me this is interesting because you always want to say "why not run a real play?" but I believe the thinking of the coach is that with this single player, even if his isolation play only has a 40% chance of scoring and it will probably be contested, has less room for error than running a regular play where less skilled players may end up involved in the play, or the defense has opportunities to affect the outcome and you still have a decent chance of ending up with a contested shot by a player that shoots worse than your star.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 03:50 |
|
|
It's much easier to defend a single player than five players and the FG% in the closing minutes on an isolation play is so low that I have no idea why coaches still rely on it other than that's what they're expected to do. The worst thing about having a guy who gets a reputation for being a 'clutch' player is that he begins to believe it so much that he won't pass the loving ball and you end up having Kobe scenarios like in the first game of the season against Chicago. You can either rely on Kobe taking an incredibly difficult layup over three guys, one of which will definitely block the shot, or kick it out to a guy who has an open look. The iso play becoming the go-to option for NBA players is nothing but some giant ego boost and coaches are pushovers that let them do it because they know if his guy misses it, "It was a difficult shot!" but if you run a play and it doesn't work then it's the coach's fault
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 04:33 |
|
|
morestuff posted:Here's an article that mentions it. It looks like they used the ISTP personality test. That's funny if they were using that as a determining factor in signing him.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 04:43 |
|
|
BIZORT posted:It's much easier to defend a single player than five players and the FG% in the closing minutes on an isolation play is so low that I have no idea why coaches still rely on it other than that's what they're expected to do. It also ends in players getting crucified for not having Killer Instinct when they kick it out to a wide open guy.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 04:52 |
|
|
BIZORT posted:It's much easier to defend a single player than five players and the FG% in the closing minutes on an isolation play is so low that I have no idea why coaches still rely on it other than that's what they're expected to do. I remember that one time that Lebron passed to a completely open Donyell Marshall(who missed), which was followed by several weeks of talk about how he wasn't clutch. Edit: Lots of Jordan's highlights are him passing to an open Kerr/ Ainge/ whatever, I wonder when that started to be ignored.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 04:58 |
|
|
Also those couple of times late last season that D'Antoni drew up plays for Bill Walker in end game situations. I think he got awesome looks on them and ruined them all.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 05:01 |
|
|
cisneros posted:I remember that one time that Lebron passed to a completely open Donyell Marshall(who missed), which was followed by several weeks of talk about how he wasn't clutch. If it works then "He finally gets it! You need your teammates to win! You can't do it all on your own! He's matured" If it does not work then he is a pussy But if you miss the shot on your own then the media might mention how terrible the shot was immediately after the game but all criticism will disappear soon thereafter because, "Hey man, Jordan missed over half of the shots he took in those situations." I really cannot believe people are so loving stupid with end-game situations and "closers." I know coaches aren't that stupid but get sucked into having to go along with it, either by the modern way of thinking or possibly wondering if he doesn't adhere to this then he'll lose his job
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 05:23 |
|
|
What's a Eurostep?
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 06:47 |
|
|
Mornacale posted:What's a Eurostep? I like to think of it as essentially a "step-side" - instead of doing something like a stepback, you take a large step to one side and then a long lateral step the other direction with your last step. But don't take my word for it, here's Manu Ginobili: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gqx7OqmJpL8
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 06:50 |
|
|
Cool, thanks.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 07:06 |
|
|
spamman posted:Why do games never start at a designated time? if you're talking about the same time every week, well, most games not on national TV are at one of a few times - the Blazers are always at 7 pm when they're at home on weeknights, and I don't think there are many afternoon tip-offs. National TV games are at weirder times.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 11:56 |
|
|
BIZORT posted:It's much easier to defend a single player than five players and the FG% in the closing minutes on an isolation play is so low that I have no idea why coaches still rely on it other than that's what they're expected to do. I think the justification is that basically there's less of a chance of a turnover, and any shot is better than no shot. Yeah, if you don't trust your offense not to turn it over, you have no business coaching basketball.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 12:13 |
|
|
harperdc posted:if you're talking about the same time every week, well, most games not on national TV are at one of a few times - the Blazers are always at 7 pm when they're at home on weeknights, and I don't think there are many afternoon tip-offs. National TV games are at weirder times. Nah, more of a rigid and accurate tip-off time. In pretty much all sports in Australia, the time of the beginning of the match will be given and that's what will be used. So in Aussie Rules football, the opening bounce time will be given as 2.10pm or 7.10pm for example, and that is precisely when the game starts. In the NBA (And other US sports to be honest) you'll get a time of 7pm for example, and the tip-off will happen at some point after that (Not always 15min in my experience). I'd just like a tip-off time, and for the tip-off to happen at that time.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 12:48 |
|
|
cisneros posted:I remember that one time that Lebron passed to a completely open Donyell Marshall(who missed), which was followed by several weeks of talk about how he wasn't clutch. Funny, it would appear that we were just identifying a pattern.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 20:09 |
|
|
Panzeh posted:I think the justification is that basically there's less of a chance of a turnover, and any shot is better than no shot. No, I'm pretty sure the justification is BIG PLAYERS GOTTA TAKE THE BIG SHOTS crm posted:Funny, it would appear that we were just identifying a pattern. No because that is the world's dumbest example of being "unclutch"
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 21:00 |
|
|
A lot of those game-ending plays happen with less than a full 24 on the clock. I am ok giving it to Lebron/Melo/Kobe when there's like 6 seconds left because you really don't have enough time to let a real play develop. Give it to a guy who do something with the ball or make the single pass for a catch-and-shoot. When Kobe dribbles the ball for 22 seconds to make a contested 14 foot shot, that's pretty dumb, and I often wonder if its drawn up that way by the coach or if the players "improvise" because "they saw something on the floor" or something.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 21:07 |
|
|
Lockback posted:A lot of those game-ending plays happen with less than a full 24 on the clock. I am ok giving it to Lebron/Melo/Kobe when there's like 6 seconds left because you really don't have enough time to let a real play develop. Give it to a guy who do something with the ball or make the single pass for a catch-and-shoot. There's no improvisation of a play; just about all basketball players (and coaches, believe it or not) keep the last possession as sacred in a close game. Anything under 25 seconds and you're team is going to try and hold the ball for the whole time so the opponent has no opportunity to retaliate. I personally think that this is a logical fallacy if you are down in a game, but hey, I don't know a thing.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 21:24 |
|
|
I forgot about Pippen literally crying because he didn't get the last shot that one time, I guess it's been an issue for a long time.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 21:35 |
|
|
Spite posted:I like to think of it as essentially a "step-side" - instead of doing something like a stepback, you take a large step to one side and then a long lateral step the other direction with your last step. Speaking of which: is there a new move in the last thirty years that's had as much impact as the euro step? People have been doing crossover dribbles/behind the back/etc for ages. And why did it take so long for people to figure it out? Is it because it looks like a travel?
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 22:32 |
|
|
It's been around for awhile. I've seen Pip use it in the 80s, off the top of my head.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 22:35 |
|
|
kingcobweb posted:Speaking of which: is there a new move in the last thirty years that's had as much impact as the euro step? People have been doing crossover dribbles/behind the back/etc for ages. Lebron one day decided he could take 4 steps to the basket and called it the crab dribble, I don't think NBA players are worried about traveling.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 22:37 |
|
|
Crab Dribble's been around, you can do it legally by doing a hesitation dribble away from your man to make it look like you picked up your dribble, then spin around them when they step up. Lebron's version was basically just traveling.
|
| # ? Jan 11, 2012 22:46 |
|
|
cisneros posted:I forgot about Pippen literally crying because he didn't get the last shot that one time, I guess it's been an issue for a long time. What makes that incident weirder in my mind is that if memory serves, they needed a three-pointer to win, and Toni Kukoc actually hit a fadeaway 3 from 25 feet away, which under the best of conditions is a really loving difficult shot, and that's not even taking into account that Kukoc was a pretty good distance shooter (for his time) and Pippen was decent (again, for his time). You want your best players taking the most important shots, but at the same time, you want your most important shots to be quality.
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 01:45 |
|
|
The Lakers have had several last second situations without Kobe and after seeing how inept they have been, yeah, giving Kobe the ball to run ISO is the best option. Yes getting the ball to Pau is theoretically the better option but the Lakers have failed at that over and over with Kobe off the floor, and the only last second situations where they've got it to him have happened when Kobe felt like sharing the ball with Pau in that situation. If you want to argue that's because the Laker don't practice the situations without Kobe then yeah, I totally agree, but the Lakers last second offense is ugly in other people's hands.
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 02:25 |
|
|
Declan MacManus posted:What makes that incident weirder in my mind is that if memory serves, they needed a three-pointer to win, and Toni Kukoc actually hit a fadeaway 3 from 25 feet away, which under the best of conditions is a really loving difficult shot, and that's not even taking into account that Kukoc was a pretty good distance shooter (for his time) and Pippen was decent (again, for his time). You want your best players taking the most important shots, but at the same time, you want your most important shots to be quality. Ewing had tied the game on a running hook and then Kukoc hit a fadeaway off the catch from the top of the key, a two-point shot. Like always, when Ewing does hit a 'clutch' shot, someone one-ups him and the Knicks end up losing. It's the story of his career
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 03:33 |
|
|
Rick posted:The Lakers have had several last second situations without Kobe and after seeing how inept they have been, yeah, giving Kobe the ball to run ISO is the best option. Yes getting the ball to Pau is theoretically the better option but the Lakers have failed at that over and over with Kobe off the floor, and the only last second situations where they've got it to him have happened when Kobe felt like sharing the ball with Pau in that situation. If you want to argue that's because the Laker don't practice the situations without Kobe then yeah, I totally agree, but the Lakers last second offense is ugly in other people's hands.
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 03:41 |
|
|
Rick posted:The Lakers have had several last second situations without Kobe and after seeing how inept they have been, yeah, giving Kobe the ball to run ISO is the best option. Yes getting the ball to Pau is theoretically the better option but the Lakers have failed at that over and over with Kobe off the floor, and the only last second situations where they've got it to him have happened when Kobe felt like sharing the ball with Pau in that situation. If you want to argue that's because the Laker don't practice the situations without Kobe then yeah, I totally agree, but the Lakers last second offense is ugly in other people's hands. Or you could have Kobe on the floor but make sure he knows that he's not bigger than the teahahahaha I just can't.
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 04:10 |
|
|
Mornacale posted:Or you could have Kobe on the floor but make sure he knows that he's not bigger than the teahahahaha I just can't. Man if i'm a guy of Kobe's skill why would I give it up to Pau Gasol? I know i'm amazing. Why do I need to give the ball up? I'm the best low quality shot maker in the NBA.
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 04:14 |
|
|
BIZORT posted:Ewing had tied the game on a running hook and then Kukoc hit a fadeaway off the catch from the top of the key, a two-point shot. Like always, when Ewing does hit a 'clutch' shot, someone one-ups him and the Knicks end up losing. It's the story of his career That whole series was pretty crazy, I'm pretty sure there was a brawl in one of those games. Didn't Pippen claim he had a migrane or something and refuse to come off the bench in one of those games?
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 04:17 |
|
|
Some Chicago 12th man, JoJo something, suckered Derek Harper into a fistfight that spilled into the stands, right in front of Stern.
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 04:21 |
|
|
Panzeh posted:Man if i'm a guy of Kobe's skill why would I give it up to Pau Gasol? I know i'm amazing. Why do I need to give the ball up? I'm the best low quality shot maker in the NBA. Because he (hypothetically) realizes that the amount of time left on the clock doesn't suddenly change the fact that a whole offense has a higher chance of scoring than Kobe alone.
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 04:23 |
|
|
Mornacale posted:Because he (hypothetically) realizes that the amount of time left on the clock doesn't suddenly change the fact that a whole offense has a higher chance of scoring than Kobe alone. I'm sure he realizes that but think about how cool it is when he makes the game winner and does the jaw thing
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 04:25 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 04:54 |
|
|
Mornacale posted:Because he (hypothetically) realizes that the amount of time left on the clock doesn't suddenly change the fact that a whole offense has a higher chance of scoring than Kobe alone. Look at the coach. This is Mike Brown. Is a Mike Brown offense actually more efficient than the Mamba?
|
| # ? Jan 12, 2012 04:30 |
|
