NBA 2011-12 Season Thread

[jesse_custer]

And to think, the Clippers won in SPITE of Chris Paul not knowing what "Team" means.....

That statement was meant to draw attention to the fact that Paul's passing numbers have been going down, even with a Clippers team that, as it proved in Game 7, is better than the Hornets ever were. I stand firm in my belief that Paul is a very good player whose passing and defense should and can be better, but I know many seem to think Paul is already the perfect player, as he hardly ever gets criticized.

[kalorama]

Granted however when you have multiple key players in your starting 5 with 5 fouls at the start of the 4th, some of which are offensive fouls at half court, its unacceptable for any team.

Which can partly be laid at the feet of their bench and partly from Bosh getting hurt, but it sure didn't help that their top scorers were spending key time on the bench in the third quarter when they were needed on the floor and fouling out with 4 minutes left to go.

Loss of any kind is unacceptable in sports. my point is that there's nothing about the way they lost that puts them in any kind of particularly bad or embarrassing light. They lost a close, hard-fought game on the road to a higher-seeded team that most people are picking to won the title.

[Hiromi]

That statement was meant to draw attention to the fact that Paul's passing numbers have been going down, even with a Clippers team that, as it proved in Game 7, is better than the Hornets ever were. I stand firm in my belief that Paul is a very good player whose passing and defense should and can be better, but I know many seem to think Paul is already the perfect player, as he hardly ever gets criticized.

Chris Paul has lead the league in assists twice, led in steals per game 4 times(and currently holds the NBA record of most consecutive games with a steal, and is the only player to ever lead the league in steals and assists twice while being third all time in career assists per game), been a member of an all defensive team 3 times, so is it any wonder that most people don't consider his passing or defense a problem?

[kalorama]

It's not like Paul's passing numbers have taken a nose dive. His career high for a season is 11 apg. The last 3 seasons he's been between 9 and 10. Not exactly a precipitous decline. As the Hornets shed talent to save money, Paul needed to score more to give them a chance to win. Similar deal with Clippers, they don't have enough reliable scorers at other positions that Paul can afford to pass up his shots. And aside from Griffin (who mostly needs to be set up to score, which Paul does a fine job of) their best scoring talent are all guys who are best with the ball in their own hands (Billups--who's injured, putting more responsibility on Paul-- Williams, Butler).

[streator]

missed the heat/pacers game yesterday (my father-in-law had to watch golf) but i did see some of the clippers/grizzlies game, yuck. that first half was some of the worst basketball i've seen in a while.

i think with the teams that are left i'd like to see the spurs or okc win the title.

[jesse_custer]

Chris Paul has lead the league in assists twice, led in steals per game 4 times(and currently holds the NBA record of most consecutive games with a steal, and is the only player to ever lead the league in steals and assists twice while being third all time in career assists per game), been a member of an all defensive team 3 times, so is it any wonder that most people don't consider his passing or defense a problem?

Since he used to average double-digit assists with inferior teammates, I do wonder why we wouldn't expect him to average as many assists or more assists now.

And I also wonder when steals are the only thing we need to count on defense. Here's something for you to consider: even though he doesn't have as many steals as Paul, Avery Bradley is a far superior defender. And the reason is that he's capable of shutting down Dwayne Wade and other elite scorers. Paul has only shown us that he has quick hands, but I think he could show us more because he's incredibly talented.

[Hiromi]

Loss of any kind is unacceptable in sports.

Oh please, I guess we can just cut out all after game analysis after team X wins Team Y loses

my point is that there's nothing about the way they lost that puts them in any kind of particularly bad or embarrassing light. They lost a close, hard-fought game on the road to a higher-seeded team that most people are picking to won the title.

Losing a game in which you outfoul the other team 31 to 22, many of which the fouls are pure frustration fouls, is a sign that you let the other team get into your head and dominate you mentally, which was my point. Notice the score of the game has the Heat win by 9? Care to guess by how many points the Heat outscored the Pacers at the charity stripe? And that's without factoring in that only two players on the Pacers squad was able to put in more than 30 minutes on the floor.

Edit: Dennis Rodman used to talk about trying to get a reaction from you early in the game, because once he did he knew he owned you the rest of that game, its similar here, and simply not how you want to start a series off, which is what I was getting at.

[Dreadstar]

i think with the teams that are left i'd like to see the spurs or okc win the title.

I'm OK with either one of those, because that would mean that the Lakers lost before making it out of the West.

Period.

[jesse_custer]

It's not like Paul's passing numbers have taken a nose dive. His career high for a season is 11 apg. The last 3 seasons he's been between 9 and 10. Not exactly a precipitous decline. As the Hornets shed talent to save money, Paul needed to score more to give them a chance to win. Similar deal with Clippers, they don't have enough reliable scorers at other positions that Paul can afford to pass up his shots. And aside from Griffin (who mostly needs to be set up to score, which Paul does a fine job of) their best scoring talent are all guys who are best with the ball in their own hands (Billups--who's injured, putting more responsibility on Paul-- Williams, Butler).

But did you watch Game 7 against the Grizzlies? His team stepped up and won the game because he and Griffin couldn't.

[kalorama]

Oh please, I guess we can just cut out all after game analysis after team X wins Team Y loses

You can if you like, but nothing in my statement suggests that, in any way shape or form, so I fail to see why you bothered saying it.

Losing a game in which you outfoul the other team 31 to 22, many of which the fouls are pure frustration fouls, is a sign that you let the other team get into your head and dominate you mentally, which was my point.

But your point doesn't really jibe with what happened. I saw the whole game and didn't see any signs of "mental domination." What I saw was the game being taken over by two future HoF players who the Pacers had no good physical matchups against because those two players were either bigger, stronger, quicker, more explosive (or, in the case of James, all of the above) than anyone the Pacers had to guard them.

Care to guess by how many points the Heat outscored the Pacers at the charity stripe? And that's without factoring in that only two players on the Pacers squad was able to put in more than 30 minutes on the floor.

Don't need to guess because it doesn't matter. Getting outscored at the FT line is not, by any measure, an inherent sign of "mental domination."

[kalorama]

But did you watch Game 7 against the Grizzlies? His team stepped up and won the game because he and Griffin couldn't.

The Clippers bench played a great game, but they won the game mostly with defense and physicality down the stretch, so it's not like they did anything to prove that they can go out and outscore opponents in a shootout and that Paul's scoring is unnecessary.

[kalorama]

I'm OK with either one of those, because that would mean that the Lakers lost before making it out of the West.

Period.

I's love to see the SPurs win, but I find myself starting to dislike the Thunder, mostly due to Westbrook.

[Hiromi]

You can if you like, but nothing in my statement suggests that, in any way shape or form, so I fail to see why you bothered saying it.




But your point doesn't really jibe with what happened. I saw the whole game and didn't see any signs of "mental domination." What I saw was the game being taken over by two future HoF players who the Pacers had no good physical matchups against because those two players were either bigger, stronger, quicker, more explosive (or, in the case of James, all of the above) than anyone the Pacers had to guard them.

And yet, as you say, the game was still close until the final four minutes. So this wasn't a case of a team being physically dominated on the court(which the Pacers should be commended for).

Edit: And one of the reasons they were able to gtake control of the game is that neither picked up a foul until the second half, no one on your squad can take charge when the rotation's being blown to Hell due to key players having to warm the bench because of foul trouble.

Don't need to guess because it doesn't matter. Getting outscored at the FT line is not, by any measure, an inherent sign of "mental domination."

Multiple charges at half court, one of which resulted in a top scorer picking up a 5th foul in the third, and contributed to getting Miami into the bonus with nearly half the quarter left however are.

[Hiromi]

The Clippers bench played a great game, but they won the game mostly with defense and physicality down the stretch, so it's not like they did anything to prove that they can go out and outscore opponents in a shootout and that Paul's scoring is unnecessary.

And its not like Paul didn't have a good game either, he was still the lead scorer, had a rebounding explosion, his usual steals, the only thing that suffered was his assists, and that wasn't for lack of trying, but from his starting 4 not being able to hit the broad side of a barn.

[BYC]

There's no use in debating a topic about Chris Paul not being a team player when the opposing side the one stating it, against all evidence, clinging to that ludicrous idea somehow.