If defense is so easy to teach you think we may be able to teach Cat, Franchise, Cato, Walt & Mo to play this offseason?
Aelliott, Are those just ppg stats or are they based on possesions? I don't consider a slow tempo game, a sign of a team that can score in the half court, the same as a good defense. The Bulls were a highly efficient offense that I'd rather take the last shot against than have MJ take the last shot. Detroit was great defensively as well as SA. The Lakers got back on the transition and were also tough in the half court, but Shaq are dominant in the half court offense. I consider the hack a shaq to be cheating. Am I the only one that thinks a violation should hurt a team and not benefit it? ------------------
OK, verse you make an interesting argument. There maybe a bit too much emphasis placed on defense, and defense alone does not a good team make. Basketball is no different than other sports in that BALANCE and TALENT ultimately separate the elite teams from the pack, especially talent. That's why I cringe a bit when I read posts about how the Rocks need to trade ALL of their first rounders this year for whatever. I can see moving two of the picks or trying to move up in the draft, but a 1st rounder is still a 1st rounder, in talent and potential, especially in a draft as deep as this one's. Worse case-scenario if the Rocks don't move any of the picks (and my gut says they won't unless there is a no-brainer deal out there) is the addition of 3 talented players to the overall talent pool and increased depth. But, I'll use an analogy that a relative, who happens to be a lifelong baseball fan shared with me: 'The perfect team can hit, pitch, field, and run. But if you had to choose between hitting and pitching, assuming that your team can field and run, pitching wins 9 times out of 10. You can't hit it if you can't see it, so to speak.' ------------------
sorry for being gone so long....had a project to do.... moving on.... Achebe: how many times in the charlotte miami series have you seen charlotte run that same damn play for mashburn or wesley or robinson (the one where they either rub off or run by the high post pick going to the post.)? almost every time it has resulted in an EASY baseline turnaround OR layup. and for charlotte's defense disecting miami's offense....while i'll agree that their defense has been effective, more importantly IMO is miami's STUPIDITY. how many damn games are you going to win with alonzo mourning, brian grant and anthony mason chucking up 17 footers? absolutely ridiculous. if miami would go inside, they could negate charlotte's fast breaks. also, why the HELL is im hardaway attempting to guard a QUICKER, STRONGER baron davis? you think i would not have picked davis? then you don't know me at all. as a matter of fact, my best friend and i were watching game 1 when the announcer made this revelation: "the big question is whether or not tim hardaway can hold baron davis...." ROTFLMAO!!! i said it then: HELL NAW! and i still say it now. the best matchup for miami would be, believe it or not...eddie house. see, you can't stop baron @ this point. however, you can counteract his performance with YOUR offense. tim is just a washed up pull up 3 pointer shooting guard trying to play point guard. as for who i'd choose offensively, seriously, i'd have chosen charlotte. see, i don't make my observations based on paper. i base them on what i SEE. and i can't stand miami's style of ball. charlotte has a much more fluent offense which allows this combo: PG: Davis SG: Wesley SF: Mashburn to be better than PG: Hardaway SG: Jones SF: Bowen and i'd have told you the same thing at game one. how many of those 3 on miami can even create their own shot??? and when your post players are chucking up 15-17 footers...you have no chance. ------------------ Lt. Roastabotch reporting for duty!
aelliot: :sigh: yes, they do. but what kind of teams were they? 88-89 & 89-00 Detroit: let's not lose track of the fact that they had an extremely OFFENSIVELY talented backcourt, capable of dictating the tempo of the game and scoring in bunches (zeke, joe, and vinnie). they had an extremely talented frontcourt as well, with dantley (later aguirre), laimbeer, "buddha" edwards, and the spider (at THAT point a legitimate threat to score, as was d-rodman). could they play "d"? obviously. but they had an indominatable will over the pace of a game. they, IMO, had a near perfect balance of defense and offense. numbers don't show how potent their offense was when they needed for it to be. it just showed what they did on the average. 90-91, 91-92, 92-93 Bulls: extremely high on both ends. however, it was the focus the defense put on jordan that was the catalyst for everything else. in other words, teams were so concerned with stopping mj that they threw their OWN game plans out the window. it's the very reason, IMO, that houston was successful against chicago: because we knew that we could, yes, contain jordan, but also knew that they COULD NOT stop us on offense. we just had more weapons than they did. jordan would get his 30 (which was good defense ), scottie would get his 15 and that was it. meanwhile, hakeem would get his 30-35, maxwell would make jordan play d and get his 15-20, horry would get his 12-15, same for kenny, etc. we fed off of hakeem as a team. chicago fed off jordan as a team. we just had more hungry people. 93-94 Rockets: i'm going to take the 2 rocket teams separately, since they were 2 distinctly different teams. this team was a classic example of having not only the best player in the league, but the best big man in the league, best one-man-defender in the league, and a dirth of 3 point shooters. were the rockets a good defensive team? IMO, no. that's right, no. hakeem was a good defensive team. max & horry were good defenders in their own right, but IMO were FAR more important on the offensive end. they stretched the offense enough to allow hakeem to go to work, which, IMO is what controls the tempo of a game - OFFENSE. if you asked me what do i remember this team more for (offense or defense), i'd probably say "offense" - mainly because what hakeem was doing was incredible and rare. why? because dikembe mutombo can do what hakeem was doing back then on defense. what made it incredible was what he did on OFFENSE, in addition to the defense. 94-95 Rockets: offensive juggernaut. nuff said. 95-96 Chicago: see above 96-97 Chicago: see above 97-98 Chicago: see 92-93 Bulls 98-99 Spurs: already argued in this thread 99-00 Lakers: the immovable object - Shaq the undeniable force - Kobe what are you going to do on defense to stop them? nothing. what you CAN do, however, is outscore them and make THEM play d. that will tire them out more than the 6 fouls you use ever will. ------------------ Lt. Roastabotch reporting for duty!
verse, so now you're stressing a balance between defense and offense? That is easier to buy. Your initial post states that we don't need to start a defensive role player at the 3, 4, or 5. But every team that you have mentioned started a defensive role player (guy known primarily for his defensive skills). Rodman for the Pistons and (2nd gen) Bulls, Horry for the Rockets, Cartwright for the 1st gen Bulls, Elie for the Spurs and the 95 Rockets, Harper for the 2nd gen Bulls and the Lakers. Max and Thorp were both defense-first guys for the 93-94 Rockets, too. Going back a little further, Michael Cooper and Kurt Rambis for the showtime Lakers of the 80s. ------------------ I'm about to boldly go where many men have gone before.
SamCassell: well, the 1st sentence of the opening post did say that d was not unimportant, just overrated. you DO need a balance. and i'm not entirely opposed to starting capable defenders. what i'm saying is especially for this team, we need to still be thinking of getting player(s) whose strong suit is offense. does that mean they CAN'T play defense? no. it means they are a stronger offensive than defensive player. i kept hearing all year long about shandn being SO valuable and needing more players like him. i tell ya what. i'd take 2 more walt williams over 2 more shandns. and that's sayin a lot. ------------------ Lt. Roastabotch reporting for duty!
Joe Joe: bingo. that's poor offense and poor decision making on offense. has nothing to do with defense. however, if you were a wannabe statistic-hound, you'd look at the box score and say "Hey. The stats prove that the Lakers gave up two points. That's bad defense." good point.
Live: being a Libra , i understand and appreciate "balance". at this point, i don't think our offensive side of the scale is heavy enough. we need to fill the cup a little bit more. once we've done that, you teach a TEAM to play TEAM defense. you don't become a great defensive team by adding individual defensive players. you become a great defensive team by teaching and playing TEAM defense.
You're funny verse. You've chosen your argument and apparently won't admit when you're wrong. Look back at aelliott's chart. You can reach and stretch as much as possible, but no bull**** that you can type will make up for it's efficacy. Defense wins championships. In the past 12 years, every team except for the 95 Rockets were in the top 5 defensively. Nine of those teams were better defensively than they were offensively. 75%! You're wrong 75% of the time! As far as the Miami series goes, Miami isn't dumb. They know they need to shoot from the inside, and that they won't win from the outside. But they can't get the ball inside! Ask Riley if he's really excited about his outside shooting. Then you give up even more. Eddie House is tiny. He can't pass over Baron Davis or Wesley any better than Carter or Hardaway. He's a little turbo and I make motorcycle noises when he's dribbling through a crowd but he's not more salient... and Davis would just drop into the post where he's probably 30 lbs. heavier. Look back over the fastbreak opportunities. Look back at the box scores. The Heat shot a good percentage, they just shot alot less than the Hornets b/c the Hornets had alot more steals, etc. Mash, etc. might be effective on the inside... but an uncontested layup or alley oop is hell of alot easier, and is totally possible b/c of their prowess on the boards, and their defensive clamp on Miami's interior. It's by far the funnest series to watch, IMO. ------------------ women love me, fish fear me.
achebe, if numbers make a person right, then i'll readily admit to being wrong. i just see things differently, that's all. it's like, if you miss five shots in a row, does that mean i played good d on you? in my book, it's not a guaranteed "yes". apparently, in yours, it is. as for charlotte/miami... at this point, i'd take baron in the post, cause he's carving tim hardaway up anyway. so i'd sacrifice the post points for the NRG house brings to the floor. entry passes? well, i'm going to guess that house could do no worse a job than anyone else on the floor has. but i'm also gonna guess that no other miami guard has brought the NRG he has. i'm not saying play the guy 35 minutes. i'm just saying give him some important minutes. i'll admit to not being a hardaway fan, and that might make me slightly biased towards eddie house. however, it cannot be denied that the entire tempo of the game changes when he enters. better yet, Achebe, what do YOU think Miami can do??? ------------------ Lt. Roastabotch reporting for duty!
There's nothing Miami can do. Silas is smarter than Riley (he always has been ), but more importantly, he has the better squad. It's poetry watching Davis hit the ball out of the air and then fastbreak or that vise shut down Mason or Mourning and then outlet pass. When Mash gets the ball on the inside, I have to hope that the ball goes in. When Davis and Mash or E. Robinson are storming the court, I can smile before the lob is even thrown. Fastbreak opportunities are caused by an effective defense more often than they are an opponent's ineffective offense. They're also the easiest shot a team will ever get... that's why we all want a frontcourt player than can board and heyp yells about Francis not knowing how to run the break. Other people yell about Francis passing to Cuttino instead of an open Shandon on the break. It's the easiest shot they'll ever get in the game! ------------------ women love me, fish fear me.
aw cmon, achebe. don't do this to me.... so why doesn't miami just call david stern and forfeit game #3? i mean, hell, there's nothing they can do anyway.... seriously, there are some things miami can do. 1st of all they need to put pressure on baron davis, mash, eddie robinson, and david wesley to play some damn defense. charlotte, IMO, isn't playing the exceptional defense you think they are playing. IMO, miami is executing a TERRIBLE offense. 1) why not screen high, since they can't get an entry pass into the post? house and/or jones or even hardaway can all penetrate and dish. miami's big guys are capable of rolling &/or hitting the 12 footer (prefer the roll, of course). 2) smack dan majerle in the back of his peasy-ass head! stop hitting the foam of the backboard with open 3s!!! 3) run a quick lineup: house, carter/hardaway, jones, mason, grant. matchups: house v davis carter/hardaway v wesley jones v mash mason v pj brown grant v campbell charlotte would have the size advantage, but they had that anyways. what this would do is give miami more quickness and playmaking ability. charlotte perimeter defenders are matadors, and you can get pj and elden in foul trouble quickly. it's how the rockets beat the hornets, as well. you can't necessarily counter defense with more defense. you have to counter defense with OFFENSE.
