Locker room talk: rolling basketball thread

IdleRich

IdleRich
It's just that sometimes, to my untrained eye, it looks like they run with the ball. That goal above being a case in point.
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
You get whats called a gather step in which the step you stop dribbling the ball and bring it to your hands does not count towards the allotted two steps and if you are very good at the timing of this you can essentially get 3 steps.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
I think this series is over.
don't lose hope, dude. I grant you, that was a tough loss. gotta capitalize on the extremely rare night where Steph goes 0-for from 3.

otoh, all the games have been relatively close. Game 4 yall just got beat by an all-time game from an all-time player, which happens.

Game 3 especially tho when yall just ground the Ws down, and virtually rendered Draymond useless, is encouraging

I mean don't get me wrong, you're in a bad spot and the most likely outcome is probably Ws close it out tomorrow night

but Cs aren't getting run off the court or anything. they just had a bad quarter.

which sure you can't do, but which also isn't necessarily a death knell.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Wiggins was excellent btw

that's exactly what you need from a 3rd/4th option, to step up and put it on your back when your superstar is having an off night

good to see Klay come through clutch in another Finals as well, after the extremely long road back from injury

if they do close it out, 4 titles and 6 Finals would put this Ws core on tier right below the greatest NBA teams of all time (60s Celtics, MJ Bulls, etc)

which is a pretty towering achievement, it should be noted
 
Last edited:

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
and if they were to close this out and then repeat next year you probably have to start talking about Mt Rushmore

currently 60 Celtics, Showtime Lakers, MJ Bulls for sure, and then an iffier 4th spot

between Bird Celtics, Kobe/Shaq threepeat, and Duncan/Pop Spurs

probably has to be Spurs, bc 5 title > 3 titles (and winning them 15 years apart is incredible)

but I can hear counterarguments for peak dominance > longevity

arguably Ws already on that tier but this title would solidify that

next tier down is considerably murkier but contains Hakeem Rockets, Bad Boy Pistons, Heatles, etc

and you can make arguments for special cases like the Walton Trailblazers, a one-season would be dynasty cut short by injury
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
and if they were to close this out and then repeat next year you probably have to start talking about Mt Rushmore

currently 60 Celtics, Showtime Lakers, MJ Bulls for sure, and then an iffier 4th spot

between Bird Celtics, Kobe/Shaq threepeat, and Duncan/Pop Spurs

probably has to be Spurs, bc 5 title > 3 titles (and winning them 15 years apart is incredible)

but I can hear counterarguments for peak dominance > longevity

arguably Ws already on that tier but this title would solidify that

next tier down is considerably murkier but contains Hakeem Rockets, Bad Boy Pistons, Heatles, etc

and you can make arguments for special cases like the Walton Trailblazers, a one-season would be dynasty cut short by injury
strength of the league needs to be considered as well. If warrior get this one I think theres a strong argument to have them on that mt rushmore already via combination of that and peak dominance.
 
Last edited:

linebaugh

Well-known member
and not necessarily any individual opponent per se but that the skill floor of the average nba player now being so much higher makes outcomes much more volatile. none of the other teams on that list needed to worry about lineups where every single player on the court has some sort of perimeter game and the ability to get hot at the same time.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
strength of the league needs to be considered as well
tbh I don't think comparisons across eras as very useful, both bc of the general difficulty of comparing eras, and bc with a truly dominant team it's hard to say where their dominance ends and the league's strength or lack thereof begins. statistical analysis doesn't really help - extremely powerful when comparing teams of a given era (the more recent i.e. the more available data, the more powerful) or describing a given era's style of play, but it faces the same problems when trying to compare teams across eras, let alone entire eras to each other. anything like is essentially a "bar debate".

and I don't buy that greater average skill level necessarily leads to greater average volatility - is there any evidence for that? I know I just disparaged comparing across eras, but here it would work, since we're talking only quantitative and not qualitative. if anything increased scoring should - which granted is related to pace a well as average skill - lead to lower average volatility, i.e. more scoring opportunities should == decreased influence of random chance. and every team in a given era has to worry about the same things, so it's not like that is unique obstacle for the Ws.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
having said that, I agree this title would give the Ws with a strong an argument as anyone for that 4th Rushmore spot

peak dominance is iffy, 73-9 aside

granted you can only beat who's in front of you but this is a team that was gifted 4 straight Finals against LeBron and the other Cavaliers

and had to be bailed out of a conference finals by the greatest 2H choke job in NBA history

not that that invalidates any of the titles, but when you're trying to separate all-time greatness it matters
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
tbh I don't think comparisons across eras as very useful, both bc of the general difficulty of comparing eras, and bc with a truly dominant team it's hard to say where their dominance ends and the league's strength or lack thereof begins. statistical analysis doesn't really help - extremely powerful when comparing teams of a given era (the more recent i.e. the more available data, the more powerful) or describing a given era's style of play, but it faces the same problems when trying to compare teams across eras, let alone entire eras to each other. anything like is essentially a "bar debate".

and I don't buy that greater average skill level necessarily leads to greater average volatility - is there any evidence for that? I know I just disparaged comparing across eras, but here it would work, since we're talking only quantitative and not qualitative. if anything increased scoring should - which granted is related to pace a well as average skill - lead to lower average volatility, i.e. more scoring opportunities should == decreased influence of random chance.
Id say we are already admitting its of some use by not framing the conversation as a race for second place with the 60's Celtics on an unreachable pedestal.

And I dont have any stats at hand to back me up nor do I think this is even the type of thing that could even show up on any decent aggregate metric but the 3pt shot (the bulk of what I meant by perimeter skill) making the game more volatile, particularly on a series to series basis, makes intuitive sense to me.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Id say we are already admitting its of some use by not framing the conversation as a race for second place with the 60's Celtics on an unreachable pedestal
that's true - to clarify, I don't think era comparisons are of no use, I think they're of limited use

i.e. even leaving play aside the 60s NBA was so structurally different - no free agency, probable unofficial racial quotas (which the Celtics were the first to break, contra the ingrained racism of Red Sox mgmt post-Jackie Robinson, btw), wildly uneven distribution of management quality - that you can make an argument that they had comparative advantages over any modern great time

much harder to simply compare strength of play across eras

not totally impossible, but the further back you go the more difficult and less useful it becomes

specifically I don't agree that the league is much stronger (or weaker) now than it was in the 90s or 00s. the 00s-early teens West was always a dogfight.

having said all this tho, I think an argument for a 4-title Ws as co-equals with the Duncan Spurs for the last Rushmore spot is totally reasonable
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
increased 3s due lead to greater volatility, that is true (tho the better everyone is at shooting 3s, the the less that is true)

something the Warriors very much don't have to face, otoh, is the gnarly physical defense of the 90s

that's what it's so difficult to compare play across eras

how would the Ws do in the 90s? well, what rules are we talking about? is there handchecking etc? are we assuming everyone knows about analytics?
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
I think at its simplest my point is that every team in the league can shoot now, and shooting is inherently volatile. So volatile that bad shooters will have entire seasons where they look like above average shooters. Consistent dominance in a league where any team has the ability to get hot, or your own shooters go cold (see warriors 2016), and shoot you out of a series with little you can do about it is a bonus point for the warriors as no other dynasty has ever truly faced that threat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sus
Top