NBA 2015-16

The Berean

Well-known member

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Maybe it is just a hangup with me, but when it's a freewheeling tempo, I feel like it's streetball...and nonchalant.

Is that what you think of Magic Johnson and his Lakers? They were never freewheeling with Pat Riley, just up tempo.

This video explains why modern NBA defenses are far more sophisticated than in the past. The game has moved away from strict man-on-man defensive schemes. It's a lot harder to score today.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/po...best-defenses-are-playing-a-whole-nother-game

This is valid, and so is the point in a down turn in talent with the retirement/aging of 80s superstars.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Is that what you think of Magic Johnson and his Lakers? They were never freewheeling with Pat Riley, just up tempo.

I don't believe the showtime Lakers played at a frenetic pace. They walked it up the floor at times, dropped it into the post, kicked it out. Ran set plays.

These playoffs, every possession is a semi fast break.

There is an ebb and flow to hoops, a time to run, a time to slow down.
Constant pushing leads to sloppy play.

:noid:
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
I believe the Lakers ran the fast break every chance possible.
And that's one reason I was a Celtics fan...I could imagine being a smart ball handler who played tough defense and banged the boards for offensive rebounds. I couldn't imagine being a greyhound. I think we tend to identify more with what we can associate ourselves with most closely.

So I'm like STP. I loved the older, slower game. Not as flashy, but there was more team and less "Hey, lookit!" in it, to my mind. Give me the Spurs now.
 

The Berean

Well-known member
And that's one reason I was a Celtics fan...I could imagine being a smart ball handler who played tough defense and banged the boards for offensive rebounds. I couldn't imagine being a greyhound. I think we tend to identify more with what we can associate ourselves with most closely.

So I'm like STP. I loved the older, slower game. Not as flashy, but there was more team and less "Hey, lookit!" in it, to my mind. Give me the Spurs now.

You and STP would have absolutely HATED the 1960's NBA. That era was the true run and shoot era. In 1962 the average team took 1,800 more shots that the average team today. In 1962 the top team took 2,000 more shots than the top team this season.

There's a metric called Pace Factor which is the number of possessions per 48 minutes. This season the Warriors led in Pace Factor at 99.3. The league average was 95.8. In 1962 the top team (TH's Celtics) led the NBA with a 134.4 Pace Factor! The league average was 127.7. The lowest team in 1962 had a 122.9 Pace Factor. And in 1962 there was no 3-point line so it wasn't the case of players taking long jumpers.

The 1960's NBA makes the Showtime Lakers and today's Warriors look like Princeston University playing its four corners offense. :p
 
Last edited:

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
You and STP would have absolutely HATED the 1960's NBA. That era was the true run and shoot era. In 1962 the average team took 1,800 more shots that the average team today. In 1962 the top team took 2,000 more shots than the the top team this season.
Bums. Bums all. :eek: What were the shooting percentages like?

There's a metric called Pace Factor which is the number of possesions per 48 minutes.
Saw that somewhere but I didn't know what it was about. Thanks.

This season the Warriors led in Pace Factor at 99.3. The league average was 95.8. In 1962 the top team (TH's Celtics) led the NBA with a 134.4 Pace Factor! The league average was 127.7. The lowest team in 1962 had a 122.9 Pace Factor. And in 1962 there was no 3-point line so it's was the case of players taking long jumpers.
:think:

The 1960's NBA makes the Showtime Lakers and today's Warriors look like Princeston Univerity playing its four corners offense. :p
But in fairness I hear the shot clock ran faster and the referees carried black jacks...and not for show.
 

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
And that's one reason I was a Celtics fan...I could imagine being a smart ball handler who played tough defense and banged the boards for offensive rebounds. I couldn't imagine being a greyhound. I think we tend to identify more with what we can associate ourselves with most closely.

So I'm like STP. I loved the older, slower game. Not as flashy, but there was more team and less "Hey, lookit!" in it, to my mind. Give me the Spurs now.

 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Well, the Warriors are still alive.

If the Warriors can somehow win at OKC, I don't see them losing Game 7 at home, but It's hard to imagine them winning Game 6 at OKC.

Of the four major sports, I would rank the NBA as #2 for "home field advantage" in the postseason.

My rankings:

1) NFL
2) NBA
3) MLB
4) NHL

So, it's going to be tough for the Warriors to win Game 6 on the road.
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
Well, the Warriors are still alive.

If the Warriors can somehow win at OKC, I don't see them losing Game 7 at home, but It's hard to imagine them winning Game 6 at OKC.

Of the four major sports, I would rank the NBA as #2 for "home field advantage" in the postseason.

My rankings:

1) NFL
2) NBA
3) MLB
4) NHL

So, it's going to be tough for the Warriors to win Game 6 on the road.
Read an interesting article that noted a book, "Scorecasting: The Hidden Influences Behind How Sports are Played and Games Are Won" by L. Jon Wertheim. According to the statistical analysis presented by the author American soccer enjoyed the biggest HF advantage, winning 69% of the time. The NBA came in second, with a 60.5%. It was 57.3% with the NFL and 53.9% in baseball.

I thought they'd be close. Soccer floored me. I guess having those extra thirteen or fourteen people in the stands makes a real psychological difference. :plain:
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Well, the Warriors are still alive.

If the Warriors can somehow win at OKC, I don't see them losing Game 7 at home, but It's hard to imagine them winning Game 6 at OKC.

Of the four major sports, I would rank the NBA as #2 for "home field advantage" in the postseason.

My rankings:

1) NFL
2) NBA
3) MLB
4) NHL

So, it's going to be tough for the Warriors to win Game 6 on the road.

Are the Warriors down in the Playoffs ?
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
I don't follow the NBA :plain: I get all my sports news and statistics from TOL
:think: In that case, the Patriots are tied with the Rangers in the bottom of the ninth with Brady driving for the end zone or hoping to get to the foul line for a penalty kick. :plain:
 

The Berean

Well-known member
Well, the Warriors are still alive.

If the Warriors can somehow win at OKC, I don't see them losing Game 7 at home, but It's hard to imagine them winning Game 6 at OKC.

Of the four major sports, I would rank the NBA as #2 for "home field advantage" in the postseason.

My rankings:

1) NFL
2) NBA
3) MLB
4) NHL

So, it's going to be tough for the Warriors to win Game 6 on the road.
The Warriors are truly road Warriros. They set the NBA record for most road wins this season. The did beat the Thunder in OKC during the regular season as well. Given all that, it will be very tough for the Warriors to win in OKC on Saturday. The Thunder are playing with a lot of confidence and poise right now. And their arena is really, really loud. For the The Warriors to win they need to get out to a great start and absolutley not fall behind 10-12 points early in the game. Andrew Bogut needs to stay out of foul trouble. He did that last night and he scored 15 points with 14 rebounds.
 

The Berean

Well-known member
Read an interesting article that noted a book, "Scorecasting: The Hidden Influences Behind How Sports are Played and Games Are Won" by L. Jon Wertheim. According to the statistical analysis presented by the author American soccer enjoyed the biggest HF advantage, winning 69% of the time. The NBA came in second, with a 60.5%. It was 57.3% with the NFL and 53.9% in baseball.

I thought they'd be close. Soccer floored me. I guess having those extra thirteen or fourteen people in the stands makes a real psychological difference. :plain:

I think in baseball the pitcher is a huge wildcard. No other major sport has such crucial position that greatly affects a game's outcome. If a last place team has a guy like Klayton Kershaw, then in the games he pitchers the odds of his team winning go way, way up.
 
Top