 |
| |
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
I know the NBA isn't exactly big here with 'Poly sports fans, but we really ought to have some thread about it.
Especially since it is shaping up, thus far, to be perhaps the best Finals since the first Detroit-L.A. matchup way back in '88.
The Lakers, the prohibitive favorite, get pushed around in Game One, and then again appear to be defeated in Game Two before coming up with one of the greatest :40 comebacks in NBA history, capped off by one of the greatest clutch shots of all-time. Even as a diehard Pistons fan for my whole life, I can not help but admire what an incredible game that was last night, and what an amazing performance that was by Kobe Bryant.
Still, I was nigh-despondant after that game; we had a 2-0 lead in our grasp, in a series that many said would be a L.A. sweep. That hurt.
BUT, there is another way to look at this. The Pistons could be, perhaps should be, very encouraged. It took nothing short of a miracle for the Lakers to salvage even one game on their home floor, going back to the Palace for the next three. After Detroit controlled most of the first two games in L.A., they have to feel confident that they can win at least one more game at the Staples Center if the series goes to a game six and/or seven. If the Pistons can win two of the next three at home, you have to think that they have an excellent chance of winning the championship in L.A.
The flip of that is that a loss like that can be psychologically crushing to the Pistons, and uplifting to the Lakers. The Lakers got a huge boost out of their last (four-tenths of a) second win over San Antonio a couple rounds ago. However, this wasn't the first crushingly disappointing loss for the Pistons. The dropped a triple-OT classic to the Nets in a Game Five a couple rounds ago, and they managed to come back and win the next two deciding games, both blowouts, Game Six being at Jersey. Game One against the Pacers was another game that just got away in the closing seconds, thanks to a Reggie Miller three, and they came back to win Game Two thanks to Tayshaun Prince's highlight-of-the-year blocked shot. So, at best, the psychologically consequences of last night's game have to considered a push.
Whatever happens, it has been an incredible series thus far. If you haven't been watching, I highly recommend it--you'll become a basketball fan all over again.
At the very least, the way things have gone thus far should finally silence all the talk about the "Leastern" Conference and that the East is simply the JV to the West. The Pistons are probably the best team the Lakers have faced in the playoffs over the past five years, with the possible exception of last year's Spurs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I wish there was a way for Malone and Payton to win a title without Shaq and Kobe getting one more... |
Excellent point. I'd be rooting for them if they weren't the Lakers, and they weren't playing the Pistons.
But those two have been playing like crapity crap crap. Well, Payton has. Almost no offense; his defense was a little better last night, but still fouling too much. Malone played quite a bit better last night, even though he was in a lot of pain. Passed and shot well, but his defense definitely suffered. The Pistons should have taken more advantage of that; I'd expect them to attack Malone with Rasheed Wallace again and again in Game Three, assuming Malone plays.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
I think the biggest story of the series so far has been Shaq's foul shooting.
65%
With any other player, you'd be tearing your hair out. But he had been shooting 41% (41%!) in the first three rounds. If he had kept to that pace, Game One would have been a total blowout, and Game Two would have been a fairly comfortable Pistons victory. You've gotta figure his shooting is going to cool down soon.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
Is there a bigger (literally and figuratively) one-trick pony in the NBA than Shaq? I don't think there's a player in the league I respect less than him.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
Meh. I've seen Malone pull some decent moves out of his ass when the Jazz used to run up against Jordan and Co., and he can actually shoot the ball. Can't say I know too much about Cassell, but I've seen him play decently on a few occasions.
Shaq, on the other hand, can dunk with impunity simply because he's three times the weight of anyone else. I looked better shooting a basketball at age six. He can't dribble, pass or defend and is the last person up the court on just about every play. He's also the least humble person this side of Asher and loves to shoot his mouth off even though he can't actually speak.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BustaMike
|
 |
You think you're better than me? You've been handling my ass pennies!!!
Nov 1999
time: 21:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SpencerH
Bill Russell would have owned Shaq just like he owned Wilt. |
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
As for the NBA this season, I'm a die hard fan, but I gotta say it's been pretty crappy. The Lakers are the laziest freakin' team I have ever seen. They only bother to even show up 50% of the time. Look at what they did with San Antonio. Lose the first two and then say, oh yeah, we gotta play now, lets win the next 4. I'd love to see Detroit win, but really LA in 6 games is how this is gonna go unless all that slacking finally catches up with them. Basically, I don't see an Eastern conference team being capable of winning it all for a while. Detroit is good and all, especially with Rasheed, but they would still be the 5th or 6th seed in the west.
As for gettin Malone and GP rings, I say they both had their chances and they both couldn't beat Jordan and Pippen to get one. This crap of joining LA just to get a title wouldn't be so bad I guess if either one of them was doing a damn thing, but they're not. Also, I think Karl Malone is a douche bag. I wish someone would just knock him on his ass one of these days.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cubbyphan1138
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
shaq cant shoot much of anything. when was the last time he made a shot outside of the key other than a layup? |
Why would Shaq ever shoot outside the key? That's not his job. If you read the article it mentions all the different kind of shots Shaq can hit. He has the bank of the glass, the lob hook, the turn around. Shaq leads the league in FG% almost every year, often by a significant margin, and it's not just because of dunks. To say he can't shoot just because he isn't launching needless shots from 15-20 feet out is stupid.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Why would Shaq ever shoot outside the key? That's not his job. If you read the article it mentions all the different kind of shots Shaq can hit. He has the bank of the glass, the lob hook, the turn around. Shaq leads the league in FG% almost every year, often by a significant margin, and it's not just because of dunks. To say he can't shoot just because he isn't launching needless shots from 15-20 feet out is stupid. |
hey if i was 7 ft tall and 350 lbs, i took could lay it up too. shaq's got one move. post up, back down, and dunk/layup. i mean, he can hardly dribble, and cant play d. i too would lead the league in FG% if every shot was a layup or a dunk. and if you cant shoot from outside the key, you cant shoot. its simple.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Aeson
|
 |
orangesoda
Nov 2001
time: 22:36
|
|
I love basketball, and this finals has been entertaining... but highly frustrating too.
In Game 1, the Lakers should have won with anyone competent handling the ball. Shaq was 13 for 16... and shot 8 for 12 from the FT line. That's just an unreal stat. He shot the ball just about every time he got it on the low block. He shot 81%. He didn't get as many shots as Kobe! That's just stupid on the part of everyone playing on the Lakers. Shaq should have had 30 shots at least, and even if Detroit had started double teaming, that would have freed up so much more of the Laker's offense. Yah, Kobe (and Shaq) saved them at the end of game 2 (Walton saving them in the first half), but Kobe lost them game 1 by taking 27 shots and shooting half the percentage (37%) Shaq was.
Game 2... Detroit should have won. Shaq wasn't having the success down low, didn't have the (8 foot) shot going. Detroit went 4 straight times to Rasheed on the low block in the 3rd quarter. 3 point blank uncontested shots, and a wide open 3 pointer. 11 point Laker lead pretty much down the drain. Then they stopped. Part of the reason was Shaq guarded Rasheed for a lot of the 4th, but he wasn't always guarding him. Detroit's ball handlers needed to find Rasheed when he was being guarded by Malone. They only did once in the 4th, and the result? A layup for Hamilton.
Then Shaq caught the ball with ~11 seconds left, and the Lakers had no timeouts... he wasn't fouled! So what that he's shooting 66% from the line, even if he makes both you're in better shape then letting them get a set play for a 3 pointer. They'll foul you, your odds of making the free throws are better than Shaq's, and then they have to bring the ball up the whole length of the court, no timeout to set up the play, and try to hit a 3 (if they are lucky and Shaq hits as many free throws as Rip or Chauncey... obviously don't let Ben touch the ball) in much more durress than Kobe's shot (which wasn't that great a shot, it was situational pressure, but not contested... basically he hit a wide open 3). Odds are that it will be a 4 point lead at that point though, and game over.
NBA teams just seem to always try to make it harder on themselves than it needs to be.
-----------
Bill Russell was a great player who consistantly had better teammates than Wilt. One on one it was a great matchup, but the Celtics always won because outside that matchup they always had the advantage. Which one is 'better' would depend on the rest of your team. I'd take Russell if I already had a couple scorers, Wilt if I didn't.
Shaq is a great center (who I detest watching play because it's so predictable), but I think in general the style of the game has changed so much that you can't compare. Player's now get away with so much physical contact, and so much shuffling of the feet, that Shaq's "great" footwork is nothing more than bulling over whoever's guarding him to create space and usually travelling in the process. I don't hold it against him, as that is how the NBA officials seem to want to allow the game to be played. Shaq is just playing by the rules they set (or enforce), as are the players guarding him (they get away with a ton of stuff too). He is very agile for his size, and if the rules were enforced differently I wouldn't doubt his footwork would actually keep up. Anyone who puts Shaq's footwork up around Hakeem's or Kevin McHale's is dreaming.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
SpencerH
|
 |
Co-Ruler of my patch of land south of Birmingham Alabama
Feb 2002
time: 23:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aeson
-----------
Bill Russell was a great player who consistantly had better teammates than Wilt. One on one it was a great matchup, but the Celtics always won because outside that matchup they always had the advantage. Which one is 'better' would depend on the rest of your team. I'd take Russell if I already had a couple scorers, Wilt if I didn't.
Shaq is a great center (who I detest watching play because it's so predictable), but I think in general the style of the game has changed so much that you can't compare. Player's now get away with so much physical contact, and so much shuffling of the feet, that Shaq's "great" footwork is nothing more than bulling over whoever's guarding him to create space and usually travelling in the process. I don't hold it against him, as that is how the NBA officials seem to want to allow the game to be played. Shaq is just playing by the rules they set (or enforce), as are the players guarding him (they get away with a ton of stuff too). He is very agile for his size, and if the rules were enforced differently I wouldn't doubt his footwork would actually keep up. Anyone who puts Shaq's footwork up around Hakeem's or Kevin McHale's is dreaming. |
I'd agree with that. I think the point though is that the reason Wilt had a weaker supporting cast was because he didnt need them .................... except against Russell. Would Russell have owned Shaq, maybe not, the game has changed. But for my money, he would have. He was a much better 'big-man' athlete.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-06-2004 21:52
. 
|