That sounds nice in statistical terms, but I think for us, it's not the sample size that gets us, but the inherent meaning of the games to other teams and their relative fatigue. The current version of the Rox starts off the season slow and only begins winning games and overachieving when other teams get mentally and physically fatigued around Jan-March and take us lightly, then we run them out of the building. When the playoff chase starts and teams are giving full effort, the Rox tail off again. Fewer games means that each game is more important, and teams are not more tired than usual, thus we're less likely to catch teams off guard, and there's no mid-season run of W's. But with squeezing in a full, hectic 82, not only are teams less able to scout and prepare for our young guns and pace, but we'd be adding a few more of those "fatigue games" to the sched. More wins! Exactly!
Considering that they did not talk about the BRI at all yesterday I doubt they can close this in 2 days. I remain optimistic though. They have been making steady progresses all along, I don't think the rich men are so stupid they can't realize the financial losses of missing a season. They're just playing the procrastination game in terms of seeing who gets more inpatient first. Like the ancient Chinese story of 3 lazy monks dying of thirst because they all think someone else will go fetch the water.
(The NBA thrives when the Knicks, Lakers and Celtics are title contenders. No one cares about small market teams, no one ever has)
STEIN_LINE_HQ Marc Stein RT @Chris_Broussard: Owners/players broke for dinner after 6 hours of system talk. Next will center on BRI. Players intent on staying at 52%
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski Chris_Broussard Chris Broussard WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
Except teams like Houston and others were willing to give Toronto a package for Bosh in a S&T, which would've given Bosh his 6th year in the US.
KBergCBS Ken Berger Mark Cuban leaving hotel, an indication this may not be a long night. "How're you?" He asked. Close enough. 16 seconds ago HOW U
NOt a bad intuition, but in 1999, mediocrity appears to have been far more determinative of result than pace: Fast and bad: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DEN/1999.html 6th in Pace, 26th overall http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NJN/1999.html 4th in pace, 25th overall http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/WAS/1999.html 8th in pace, 24th overall http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/1999.html 3rd in pace, 22nd overall good: http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1999_standings.html 19th in pace, 1st overall http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/UTA/1999.html 23 in pace, 2nd overall http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/1999.html 12th in pace, 3d overall http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/IND/1999.html 26th in pace, 4th overall http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIA/1999.html 29th in pace, 5th overall Actually you have to go all the way down to 7th place to find a fast paced team that was actually good (Lakers, 2nd fastest) - not sure if thats a favorable comparison with Shaq, Kobe etc....
