2016 NBA Playoffs Thread [ARCHIVED] Basketball • Page 147

Like honestly, I don't like the Celtics but like... No. You don't want to do that, I get that buddy was fun in that tournament but that would be really bad... Like reallllly bad. You try to get a top player and if not you take Simmons, he's far and away the best prospect.

 

Haha I know it's not a good idea, but Ben Simmons seems like a douche and Buddy seems fun. In reality, I want Ingram. Getting the #2 would be sweet.

 

Skiles has this really weird track record of being able to materially improve teams that are early in their progression (especially defensively), but not being a guy that can take them over the top. My guess is there is a bad owner/management fit with Skiles because he is by all accounts a pretty hard nosed dude. Based on some of what Skiles has implemented and preached, plus the roster, Vogel feels like a good fit. I don't know that that is ideal for Mario at all, but the rest of the roster has the makeup and skill set of something Vogel could work with.

 

Marc Stein reporting there's potential for a rule change regarding intentional fouls. I'm assuming this is an effort to eliminate the hack-a-Dwight type bullshit.

 

That's cool for the 5 players it effects who suck

 

i chuckled.

 

It's cool for the fans who don't have to sit through that nonsense anymore.

 

CJ...

 

I don't understand the hack a whoever rule. In any other level of play that would be an intentional foul. Two free throws and the ball. I didn't realize until this blew up last year that it's only a common foul in the NBA. From that standpoint, I don't like the interpretation by the NBA. That said, I don't think they should change the rule for a handful of shitty free throw shooters.

 

i killed my friend for taking mccollum in our fantasy draft 5th round this year. i am such a moron.

 

It should be shots and the ball for the team getting fouled.

 

I wish that was the way the NBA already had it, but they don't. And I am hard headed enough that I don't want to change it for the few people who can't hit their shots. Maybe that's because my team benefited from it in the first round, but it also went against them in the second round. I don't know. It's hard to separate basketball and the NBA for me. I think the rule (again, while I disagree with it) increases entertainment and that's ultimately how they are looking to interpret their rules rather than what makes the most basketball sense.

 

I took wiggins in our AP dynasty league instead and I still feel bad about it... A little Bias though lol

 

You're not hard headed at all, the opposite imo. Its easy to see way the league is headed with small ball and the small percentage of guys who absolutely suck will dip even more in time. If they do this they're letting the ADD generation get the best of them, when you're playing against someone you know is better you want as many advantages as possible. Theres nothing wrong with competition and taking advantage of the rules. If your team wins you forget about it instantly, if you have the rare horrible guy on your team you probably hate it times infinity.
It definitely kills when you're watching west coast games late but its really not all about the person getting bothered by it, its about the game.

In 10 years everyone will be shooting perimeter shots and those players will probably be extinct anyway so I could be moot point sooner than later.

 

I vote for the rule change for selfish reasons and I have no shame in admitting that. It's boring.

 

Let's just go full disclosure with this rule in my case. My Cavs absolutely benefited from this rule in the Pistons series. Whether it was used to come back on a lead, maintain a close lead, stop a run, or just keep Drummond off the floor in late game situations, the Cavs used that rule to their advantage. I didn't love it, but I had an end justifies the means sort of reaction. Second round against the Hawks, Atlanta used it in spots during game 3 mostly. Game 1 they went straight up. Game 2 was a historic beating, and Game 4 TT was in foul trouble for a good portion of the game. In that game 3, I would say it was mostly successful for ATL. All told, my team definitely has a net benefit with this rule in the playoffs. I don't love it, but part of me is looking at it with that lens of "just hit the fucking free throw and be done with it" for sure.

 

This is absolutely the case and his resignation validated everything I said about him when they made the hire. Would've been the perfect guy two or three years ago.

 

Skiles and Doug Collins have similar problems

 

Lol

 

Well if they actually made a timely free throw without doing a 10 minute commercial break before they start maybe people would feel less annoyed. Probably not though, people just have the most important to-do-list yet they're up at 12am watching a game they love. I mean the few teams that benefit will be happy, very few. The noise of people whining and complaining really won't change ratings but will make people happy for a minute until they find something else they hate.

"Why are the baskets so far apart dammit?!?" - someone's team who's old and slow and suck at transition

 

I get this side of the argument but it's still weird that a team can benefit from intentionally fouling a player without the ball.

 

Globetrotters have cracked Curry

 

Weird to think this could be Duncan's last game.

 

Production be damned, I want a couple more seasons. I am not ready for him to be done yet.