ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite

Moderators: floppymoose, Curtis Lemansky, sly

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Tue May 12, 2015 5:02 pm

General/for seeding writeup - (additional matchup writeups to follow)
1
trex_8063
David Robinson
Horace Grant
Rick Barry
George Gervin
Chauncey Billups

Kevin Willis
Dave Cowens
Bruce Bowen
Danny Green
Terry Porter

Coach: Bill Sharman
Spoiler:
Once again I'll state we owe it to each other to read the write-ups prior to voting.

The Overview (copied prior post with a couple small additions and minor changes)

Starters
PG - Chauncey Billups (‘06-’08)
SG - George Gervin (‘78-’80)
SF - *Rick Barry (‘67-’70)
PF - Horace Grant (‘92-’94)
C - David Robinson (‘94-’96)

Bench
*Bruce Bowen (‘04-’06)
Dave Cowens (‘74-’76)
Terry Porter (‘91-’93)
Danny Green (‘13-present)
Kevin Willis (‘92-’94)
Coach: Bill Sharman

My general philosophy was to create a team that is deep, that is great and balanced on both sides of the ball; a team without significant weakness in any area of the game.

To go thru, I’ll begin by outlining the qualities I see in my 1st unit (hinting at their application), then my “2nd unit”, then a word about my coach, and finally a few comments on minutes/usage of the players at my disposal.

1st Unit
Offensive
Generally, my aim is ball movement and/or quick and decisive action once the rock is in one's hand (something both Gervin and DRob were good at). What I want avoided is the chewing up of 6-10 seconds of clock while someone dribbles idly on the perimeter, shot-fakes (a la Dantley), crabs-walks down, or other general time-consuming isos which (imo) subtract from a team offensive flow.

Now....
My 1st unit has elite-level perimeter scoring and elite-level interior scoring. I have one of the GOAT-level slasher/finishing perimeter scorers, an elite post scorer, 3pt shooting/floor spacing, good ball-control, and pretty good passing from nearly all positions.

My offensive front-man is going to be The Iceman. This was a guy who even prior to changes to hand-check rules was slashing and getting into the lane effectively. Was an amazing finisher, even more amazing at finishing what appeared to be almost “circus-shots” (finger rolls from 5 feet from the basket??), good mid-range shooter, excellent at hitting little “leaners” and “floaters”, too. In the span of his career I’m going with (‘78-’80) he was averaging a big 36.2 pts/100 possessions while shooting an amazing 53.5% FG% :o. Decent at getting to the line, too, where he shot 83.6%; overall 59.1% ts (+6.6% to league avg) during this span, which is pretty amazing while scoring such volume and shouldering that level of primacy.
And did it generate effective team offense? You bet it did. If you scrutinize those Spur teams: his biggest offensive help were guys like Billy Paultz and James Silas. And yet the Spurs ORtg during the span: 2nd, 3rd, and 3rd (out of 22) respectively.
With modern rules (no hand-checking) being in place for this fantasy league, makes me think he could be even MORE effective/efficient in getting into the paint or to the line. Just an amazing scorer.

**I'll be honest, I flat excited about the potential of George Gervin in league/era with better floor spacing and hand-checking being outlawed, as we're talking modern rules/context for this league. His ability to get to the rim or the line with no hand-checking should be like James Harden......except that he's probably a better finisher, much (much much MUCH) better in the close range (3-10 ft), and probably a little better from the mid-range, too. I don't see anyone having a fun time trying to slow him down.

When David Robinson (GOAT-level rs performer, and who knows how good he could be in post-season with the focus taken off him) is your SECOND option, how good must your offense be?!? In the years specified this guy averaged 37.0 pts/100 poss @ 58.9% ts (+5.13% to league avg). He gives me a center who can run in transition and finish off oops as good as any center that has ever played. A nice face-up game with the quickness/athleticism to blow by slower centers, and the strength and explosiveness to bully weaker centers on the block. Doesn't let you off the hook at the FT-line either, where he was a career 73.6% shooter. Where his playoff short-comings are concerned, well…..that isn’t much of a concern now, as he no longer has to shoulder the burden of being my primary scorer. And Gervin, you’ll note, doesn’t appear to skip a beat in the playoffs (nor do some of my other starters; more on that later). Pretty decent passing big, and a consummate teammate, too.

Chauncey Billups provides a more than capable floor general, good play-making, very good ball-control (Ast:TO ratio of 2.81 during his prime, 3.68 in the years specified), and clutch play (1-Time FMVP, nicknamed “Mr. Big Shot” for a reason; and you’ll note he too doesn’t appear to skip a beat in the playoffs). Elite outside shooting, which also helps with the floor spacing; and it’s pretty nice to have a ~60-61% ts scoring as your third (at times perhaps 4th) option scorer.

You may be wondering why I had an * by Rick Barry and Bruce Bowen. It’s because while I may be starting Rick Barry, I actually don’t intend to play him much with the 1st unit. I am more intending to use him as the offensive engine of my 2nd unit.
We all know Barry likes a lot of shots, and that he has more than his share of ego. However, he’s also an intelligent guy with a pretty high bball IQ. I think even he would recognize that he’s a superstar among superstars on this team, and that he simply cannot warrant/demand the kind of primacy that he was otherwise used to.
My intent was to probably start him (to soothe his ego with the distinction of being a “starter” on this team full of superstars), but then likely bench him early in the first quarter in favor of Bruce Bowen. An additional perimeter scorer (Barry) is a touch redundant with the line-up I’ve already described. Really what I need is an additional guy to space the floor (Bowen: 39.9% 3pt shooter on avg 2.9 3PA/g in years specified; really elite in the corners), and do little else offensively; the rest of Bowen’s value would come on the other end (more on that below). And then Barry is free to get lots of shots while on the court with the 2nd unit, as that is my primary intention for him. So anyway, that was the purpose of the * by each of their names.

And lastly, at PF, I intend to start Horace Grant. His role on offense will be to occasionally catch an interior pass from a penetrating guard and finish at the rim (he’s proved to have great hands and nice finishing ability), hit the occasional open 11-18 footer (another thing he’s pretty well proven at), do some facilitating from the high post (not unaccustomed to that either; avg as high as 3.4 apg in the years specified, with a cumulative Ast:TO ratio of 2.06---which is almost unheard of for a PF). And otherwise, I want to crash the offensive glass (another thing he’s proven capable of: OREB% of 14.0% in years specified).
All in all, this seems like a marvelous offensive line-up, imo.

Defense
I’ve one ELITE level perimeter defender who can stymie most perimeter scorers to some degree---Bruce Bowen.
I’ve got another very good perimeter defender in Chauncey Billups.
In Horace Grant I’ve got a guy who is mobile and smart enough to defend very well against the pick-n-roll, is a very good low-post defender (against PF or C), and a decent help defender, too.
And then to pick up any slack, protect the rim, defend pnr and anything else that needs doing I’ve got a short-list all-time great defensive center to anchor it all in DRob.

This defense frankly looks every bit as amazing as the offense. On to the 2nd unit…..


2nd Unit
Rick Barry is intended to be the primary scorer with this group, with the rest more or less working off of him and the attention he’ll draw. Aside from shooting, Barry was a more than competent passing SF, too; was a totally decent defensive player from what I’ve seen, too.

I should have great floor spacing with this group: Danny Green is an absolutely lights out 3pt shooter (42.1% from downtown on 5.2 3PA/g over the last three years). And what’s more, he’s a scrappy defender (with nice DRAPM in recent years). He tends to bring his A-game in the playoffs, too.
Terry Porter, despite playing in an era before the 3pt line was in such high usage was shooting 40.8% from trey on 4.0 3PA/g in the years specified. He also gives solid leadership, play-making, and ball control.

Dave Cowens should more or less be able to fill every function (on both offense and defense) at the PF that I wanted in Horace Grant: can hit open mid-range shots, can pass/facilitate from the high post, quick enough to defend the pick-n-roll or if caught on a switch, and tough/strong enough to defend the low post. Maybe not quite as good a finisher as Grant, but has a little more in the way of post-up game should that be required (only reason I’m not starting him ahead of Grant, is that this aspect of his game will get lost among this stacked team); and he’s probably a MORE elite rebounder than Grant.

And Kevin Willis will provide some reasonable offense, again the lateral quickness to defend the pick-n-roll, and the strength to defend the post. And while he’s not much of a rim protector at all, he’s an absolute beast on the boards (he’s rebounding just a small step below peak Dwight Howard, with a Reb/100 poss rate of 18.5 during the years specified).


Coaching
At coach I’ve got a very cerebral, tough-minded warrior in Bill Sharman. A guy who understood well both sides of the game, and appeared capable of dealing with big egos (coached both Rick Barry and Wilt Chamberlain in his career, and took both of them to the NBA finals, winning it all with Wilt. He also coached one ABA champion).

Come on!…..this team is remarkable in all aspects of the game.


Minutes/Usage
I’m generally only going 9 guys deep in my roster…..

David Robinson is clearly my most dominant all-around player, and also plays the position for which I lose the most in going to his replacement (Willis, although I’ll likely use either Cowens or Grant at the C position once in awhile). So he’s going to be getting the largest minutes.

Second in minutes will likely be Gervin, as he’s my most reliable high volume/high efficiency scorer (at any position). As long as he’s on the court (with just about any other compliment of the players I have on the roster), that will put pressure on any defense. Can’t see playing him any less than about 30 mpg.

Billups will likely be third, with Porter pretty consistently being his sub. Barry will likely only be about 4th in minutes (again: mostly as the leader of my second unit, though he may spell Gervin at SG here and there; only rarely intend to have both he and Gervin on the floor at the same time).

Bowen, although just a role player, will likely be getting ~24 mpg. Barry and Gervin on the court at the same time creates a bit of redundancy, so I’ll usually have Bowen at SF when Gervin is on the court. Bowen (in combo with either Billups or Porter) ensures floor spacing on offense, and is my most elite perimeter defender who can be assigned to the best SG/SF on the other end.

Both Cowens and Grant will likely see at least a little time at the C position, otherwise each spelling the other at PF. Both will likely be >24 mpg.

Green will also get relevant playing time, mostly alongside Barry with the 2nd unit.

Kevin Willis is mostly just a bit of filler, really only getting minimal minutes to help get Robinson a the minimum reasonable amount of rest, and/or filling in when there’s foul trouble issues, etc.

Overall, the minutes per game will look something like this:
David Robinson ~36 mpg
George Gervin 30-32 mpg
Chauncey Billups 27-30 mpg
Rick Barry 24+ mpg
Horace Grant 24-27 mpg
Dave Cowens 24-27 mpg
Bruce Bowen 24+ mpg
Terry Porter 18-21 mpg
Danny Green ~16-18 mpg
Kevin Willis ~4-5 mpg (if any)



9
Warspite
Bill Walton
Kevin Love
John Havlicek
Joe Dumars
Walt Frazier

Mel Daniels
Detlef Schrempf
Bernard King
Louie Dampier
Maurice Cheeks

Coach: Tom Izzo
Spoiler:
Warspite wrote:starting lineup
PG Frasier
SG Dumars
SF King
PF Love
C Walton

Bench
Cheeks, Hondo, Schrempf, Mel Daniels, Louie Dampier

Coach Tom Izzo

Offense:
King is #1 option in the low post with Love and Dumars on the outside and Walton in the high post/elbow. Other plays will be using Dumars and Hondo much like Rip Hamilton having them come off screens for curls and having Frasier play pick and pop/roll with Walton/Schrempf/Love/Daniels.

Defense:
Frasier/Dumars is the best defensive backcourt if not the best overall. Cheeks and Hondo will back them up so there isn't much drop off. Walton/Daniels are the rim protectors while Love provides rebounding.

Hanging our hat on defense, guard play and clutchness. I can put a lineup on the court in which every player is a FMVP. Frazier/Dumars/Hondo/Daniels/Walton. No my team is not 3pt dependent and with Frasier, Dumars, Walton and Hondo I get great passing to find more quality looks. I think my fast break will also be very effective with Walton/Love outlet passing to start the break or find early offense.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#2 » by trex_8063 » Thu May 14, 2015 8:47 pm

If you haven't already done so, please read the general blurb about my team in spoiler above.

vs. Warspite
Well this 2nd round match-up certainly presents more of a challenge to my team than the first round (as it should be, I suppose).

Couple positive points for Warspite in this match-up:
*My strongest offensive weapons (Gervin, Robinson, Billups, Barry) happen to be at (or near) positions where he is strongest defensively.
*His weakest position defensively (PF) happens to be where I am perhaps the LEAST threatening offensively.

Although, the flip-side is also true: he's strongest offensively in some of the positions I'm strongest at defensively.

Further, his backcourt---while definitely a pesky bunch defensively---do lack size/length relative to my backcourt. His largest guard (by a good margin) is Frazier at 6'4" (might be listed at 6'5" these days??) and 200 lbs. Dumars is just 6'3", 190 lbs. Cheeks is 6'1" (Dampier, if he plays, is 6'0").

I also have the option of putting both Gervin and Barry on the court at the same time to have TWO true 6'7" guys who can score. I should think that may force Izzo to sit Dumars more than he'd generally like, and instead floor both King and Havlicek to better match up with me size-wise.

That may work out OK for me defensively, too: Barry's a little bigger/stronger than Bowen (might even be bigger than 205 lbs in modern era, weight-lifting and all) and can bang with King a little more in the post; and while perhaps not an elite defender, he always struck me as capable and willing on that end (more so than most offensive stars). At any rate, any time I don't have Barry on the court, Bowen is in fact an elite defensive SF to cover King.

Walton isn't the kind of center looking to go off for 20+ ppg, and Daniel's simply isn't the caliber of offensive center to warrant DRob's "full attention" (he's a strong finisher, but his range is limited and he's not a great passing center). These factors sort of allow DRob to do what he does best defensively: help D/blocking shots, and defend the pick n' roll.
And meanwhile, DRob's presence on offense should keep both Walton and Daniels on a relatively short leash, as far as playing help D.

Horace Grant definitely has the length and quickness to cover Love on the outside.


While on the topic of what Warspite is going to do offensively, I see a few problems for him:
Some of it stems from a general lack of 3pt shooting.
I know Kevin Love won a 3pt shooting contest, but over his best 3-year span ('12-'14, which I'm assuming is the span Warspite's taking, though I can't see where he's ever specified) he's 35.8% on 5.9 3PA/G; they are generally spot-ups (88% assisted), too, yet he's hitting barely over league average 3pt%.
Dumars (years??) is over 38% from trey (though on <1 3PA/G, fwiw). But for reasons I mentioned above, he may not be playing Dumars as much as he'd like.
With Detlef, it sort of depends on what span he's got for him (again: Warspite never specified). He looks good from trey in '95-'97, but those are the years they shortened the 3pt line to 22ft; he never really approached that volume or accuracy at any other point in his career. Generally he just didn't have that kind of range, not until very late in his career (which I'm sure is NOT the span Warspite is selecting). If he's taking '91-'93, for instance, which might be more his peak, Detlef was just 28.2% from 3pt range.
I don't think Hondo or Frazier can be counted on as good 3pt shooters--->too much in the way of question marks. King and Cheeks, we know weren't 3pt shooters.
Dampier's one of his best 3pt shooters, but I doubt he gets relevant playing time.

So aside from direct effects of mediocre 3pt shooting, it will also have the indirect effect of hurting his spacing, which is going to make other schemes (pick n' rolls, post isolations, etc) a little more difficult.

Besides which I've got good to elite pick n' roll defenders in Billups, Bowen, Grant, Robinson, and Cowens (presumably). And for reasons mentioned above, DRob should have a small amount of liberty to harass people at the rim, or cheat toward King from time-to-time (who's not a very good---if even willing---passing SF).
If he ends up relying heavily on guys like Hondo, Frazier, and Walton trying to beat me from the mid-range.....well, that's something I can easily live with.


In short: Warspite's defense might be as good as my offense (though I don't quite think so); but I don't think his offense is as good as my defense.

In this series I suspect I'll be spreading the minutes out something like this:
C: David Robinson 38-40 min/Horace Grant or Dave Cowens 8-10 min
PF: Horace Grant ~24 min/Dave Cowens 24 min
SF: Rick Barry 24-27 min/Bruce Bowen 21-24 min
SG: George Gervin 32-34 min/Danny Green 14-16 min
PG: Chauncey BIllups 32-34 min/Terry Porter 14-16 min
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
Warspite
RealGM
Posts: 13,327
And1: 1,099
Joined: Dec 13, 2003
Location: Surprise AZ
Contact:
       

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#3 » by Warspite » Fri May 15, 2015 6:10 am

PG Frasier 34mpg /Dumars 10mpg/Cheeks 4mpg
SG Dumars 24mpg/Hondo 24mpg
SF King 36mpg/Hondo 12mpg
PF Love 36mpg/Daniels 12mpg
C Walton 33mpg/Daniels 15mpg

1st of all Im a fan of Gervin and Barry but they don't belong on a basketball court together anymore than Luciano Pavarotti and Snoop Dog do on a stage. 2 guys who take 25 FGAs a game and avg about 3apg. A duo who takes more shots and avg fewer assists than Melo/AI did is not winning many games. Whats worse than having 2 of the biggest ball hogs in the history of the game is also having 2 of the worst defenders in the history of the game as well.


On Defense:

Trex team has 3 big weaknesses on offense.

1. Ball movement: The 2 black holes along with Billups who struggles in the half court execution and has to run a highly structured offense to be effective. Billups has a horrible 1st step who relies on his strength and the refs whistle. If he cant jump into you or get you to buy his head fakes he is done. Billups adv stats look so great because of his 3pt/FT shooting. He is a taller stronger Steve Kerr. A one trick pony who cant create for others or break down a defense. Gervin is a monster but am I to believe the guy that guarded Micheal Freakin Jordan and Magic Johnson his soiling his shorts?

2. Soft frontcourt: Grant and DRob are 2 mid range jump shooters who are allergic to paint. Mediocre to bad post up game and inefficient unless fouled. Not that it matters with DRob and Grant getting fewer than 10FGAs combined. DRobs mobility and ability to drive does pose problems but Walton is very mobile but as his playoff stats show he can be reduced to a jump shooter because he shies away from contact.

3. Spacing: I know that your thinking 3pt shooters create spacing but isnt it just as important to have players below the FT line as above? Trex team operates from the FT line to the 3pt line which is actually a smaller area than from the low post to the elbow. Loading up on outside players doesn't stretch a defense if you don't have anyone who can draw a double team in the paint. Gervin/Barry/DROb/Grant want to operate on the elbow and shoot mid range shots. Only 1 shooter (Billups) and no post game. Spacing isn't about how far you are from the basket its about how far you are apart from each other. With players who don't operate in the paint offensive rebounds will be scarce. With a much better rebounding front line my team will dominate the boards and that means fast break pts with Walton/Love outlet passes to start the break.

On Offense:

No real changes. We are working inside out with King being guarded by Barry. Barrys defense is on par with Chris Mullins but he is good with steals. King with a usage rate around 30 still avgs about 3TOs a game so he can protect the ball. King has space to operate in the low post against Barry because Walton is at the opposite elbow while Love and Dumars are on out on the wing and Frasier at the top of the key. Its essentially a 1 in 4out type of offense that Izzo employs at MSU. Walton draws DRob away from the basket and Grant is stuck out on the 3pt line. This spacing allows for offensive rebs and Frasier who rebounds on the level of Jason Kidd can operate in that space and allow us to control the boards. Not that Bernard King who shots 57% vs double and triple teams will be going to miss a bunch with Barry on him.

I like Daniels ability to post up either Willis or Grant. Willis lacks length and Grant lacks size. I believe he can have a dominating series here since he is the strongest and most physical player in this series. Ho Grant and DRob are athletic quick defenders who are good at switching and trapping however neither is physical and both are known for checking out when faced with a physical opponent. IMHO Grant needs a Cartwright and DRob needs a Cummings but we have to 2 bigs who don't compliment each other. These 2 athletic top heavy defenders both lack the lower body strength to play post defense. I do have concerns when Trex team goes into a half court trap and uses the quickness and length of DROb/Grant but having 3 great passers in Frasier, Dumars and Hondo in the game I believe can beat that trap and at this level beating a trap at midcourt is a layup or dunk. I would be remiss if I didn't highlight how bad of a defender Gervin is. He lacks the foot speed to stay in front of any of my players. Even Walton has the ability to take him off the dribble. In the 1989 and 90 Finals the Pistons game plan was to attack whoever Magic or Terry Porter was guarding. Dumars took adv of it and torched Magic for the Finals MVP and then destroyed Terry Porter in game 3. Porter switched to guarding Isiah who then went on to win the FMVP. Gervin who is a worse defender than Magic wont be able to hold Dumars down as much as the Lakers did in 89 and that's bad news since Joe was 27ppg 6apg on .659 TS%.


Conclusion:

Trex has a great regular season team that can run and gun you into the ground and has a special player on offense in Gervin and DRob on defense. However this team is soft in the post season and to reliant on the mid range jump shot and the contested 3. It doesn't have quickness and its defensive rotations are weak to non existant. You attack the slow footed weak defenders in Billups, Gervin and/or Barry and wait for the defense to collapse to find open shooters or finish at the rim. If you put DRob in foul trouble the game is over and the route is on.

I believe my team would win a 7 game series because it

Plays better team defense with better rotations.
Better rebounding
More efficient scoring
More fast break pts
More assisted baskets
More FT attempts
Better offensive balance
HomoSapien wrote:Warspite, the greatest poster in the history of realgm.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#4 » by trex_8063 » Fri May 15, 2015 8:39 pm

Warspite wrote:
Spoiler:
PG Frasier 34mpg /Dumars 10mpg/Cheeks 4mpg
SG Dumars 24mpg/Hondo 24mpg
SF King 36mpg/Hondo 12mpg
PF Love 36mpg/Daniels 12mpg
C Walton 33mpg/Daniels 15mpg

1st of all Im a fan of Gervin and Barry but they don't belong on a basketball court together anymore than Luciano Pavarotti and Snoop Dog do on a stage. 2 guys who take 25 FGAs a game and avg about 3apg. A duo who takes more shots and avg fewer assists than Melo/AI did is not winning many games. Whats worse than having 2 of the biggest ball hogs in the history of the game is also having 2 of the worst defenders in the history of the game as well.


On Defense:

Trex team has 3 big weaknesses on offense.

1. Ball movement: The 2 black holes along with Billups who struggles in the half court execution and has to run a highly structured offense to be effective. Billups has a horrible 1st step who relies on his strength and the refs whistle. If he cant jump into you or get you to buy his head fakes he is done. Billups adv stats look so great because of his 3pt/FT shooting. He is a taller stronger Steve Kerr. A one trick pony who cant create for others or break down a defense. Gervin is a monster but am I to believe the guy that guarded Micheal Freakin Jordan and Magic Johnson his soiling his shorts?

2. Soft frontcourt: Grant and DRob are 2 mid range jump shooters who are allergic to paint. Mediocre to bad post up game and inefficient unless fouled. Not that it matters with DRob and Grant getting fewer than 10FGAs combined. DRobs mobility and ability to drive does pose problems but Walton is very mobile but as his playoff stats show he can be reduced to a jump shooter because he shies away from contact.

3. Spacing: I know that your thinking 3pt shooters create spacing but isnt it just as important to have players below the FT line as above? Trex team operates from the FT line to the 3pt line which is actually a smaller area than from the low post to the elbow. Loading up on outside players doesn't stretch a defense if you don't have anyone who can draw a double team in the paint. Gervin/Barry/DROb/Grant want to operate on the elbow and shoot mid range shots. Only 1 shooter (Billups) and no post game. Spacing isn't about how far you are from the basket its about how far you are apart from each other. With players who don't operate in the paint offensive rebounds will be scarce. With a much better rebounding front line my team will dominate the boards and that means fast break pts with Walton/Love outlet passes to start the break.

On Offense:

No real changes. We are working inside out with King being guarded by Barry. Barrys defense is on par with Chris Mullins but he is good with steals. King with a usage rate around 30 still avgs about 3TOs a game so he can protect the ball. King has space to operate in the low post against Barry because Walton is at the opposite elbow while Love and Dumars are on out on the wing and Frasier at the top of the key. Its essentially a 1 in 4out type of offense that Izzo employs at MSU. Walton draws DRob away from the basket and Grant is stuck out on the 3pt line. This spacing allows for offensive rebs and Frasier who rebounds on the level of Jason Kidd can operate in that space and allow us to control the boards. Not that Bernard King who shots 57% vs double and triple teams will be going to miss a bunch with Barry on him.

I like Daniels ability to post up either Willis or Grant. Willis lacks length and Grant lacks size. I believe he can have a dominating series here since he is the strongest and most physical player in this series. Ho Grant and DRob are athletic quick defenders who are good at switching and trapping however neither is physical and both are known for checking out when faced with a physical opponent. IMHO Grant needs a Cartwright and DRob needs a Cummings but we have to 2 bigs who don't compliment each other. These 2 athletic top heavy defenders both lack the lower body strength to play post defense. I do have concerns when Trex team goes into a half court trap and uses the quickness and length of DROb/Grant but having 3 great passers in Frasier, Dumars and Hondo in the game I believe can beat that trap and at this level beating a trap at midcourt is a layup or dunk. I would be remiss if I didn't highlight how bad of a defender Gervin is. He lacks the foot speed to stay in front of any of my players. Even Walton has the ability to take him off the dribble. In the 1989 and 90 Finals the Pistons game plan was to attack whoever Magic or Terry Porter was guarding. Dumars took adv of it and torched Magic for the Finals MVP and then destroyed Terry Porter in game 3. Porter switched to guarding Isiah who then went on to win the FMVP. Gervin who is a worse defender than Magic wont be able to hold Dumars down as much as the Lakers did in 89 and that's bad news since Joe was 27ppg 6apg on .659 TS%.


Conclusion:

Trex has a great regular season team that can run and gun you into the ground and has a special player on offense in Gervin and DRob on defense. However this team is soft in the post season and to reliant on the mid range jump shot and the contested 3. It doesn't have quickness and its defensive rotations are weak to non existant. You attack the slow footed weak defenders in Billups, Gervin and/or Barry and wait for the defense to collapse to find open shooters or finish at the rim. If you put DRob in foul trouble the game is over and the route is on.

I believe my team would win a 7 game series because it

Plays better team defense with better rotations.
Better rebounding
More efficient scoring
More fast break pts
More assisted baskets
More FT attempts
Better offensive balance



While I realize we all see our own teams thru some degree of rose-colored optics, and that the aim of these match-up specific posts is to hype your own team while criticizing or otherwise downplaying the qualities of your opponent's team......I attempted to do so as objectively as possible. That is, I pointed out potential problematic points I saw in Warspite's squad, supporting that position with only objective data and non-hyperbolic conjecture.
The above post from my opponent is, imo, absolutely littered with hyperbole (if not outright inaccuracies). I'll be taking on some of the more bizarre or inaccurate statements point by point:

Gervin and Barry on the floor at the same time......
I guess I cannot accuse Warspite of not thoroughly reading posts/write-ups because I did imply I might be going this route. But I never said this was a definitive thing. To quote myself, I stated I "have the option" of putting them both on the floor at once to provide some more size mismatches (also thinking Barry might do OK on post-defense against King, being a little bigger than Bowen). However, as is clearly noted in my general write-up (provided in spoiler of post #1), my general intent is to have Bowen on as SF alongside Gervin, whereas Barry will be playing primarily with my 2nd unit (I'll want him on the court every minute that Gervin is NOT on the court). This for the very reason Warspite is citing: redundancy. I have them both on my roster because I wanted to have an offensive leader when Gervin sits. I don't expect to have them both on the court at the same time for more than 8-10 minutes, even in this series. I leave it to Sharman's discretion to make adjustments in the Gervin/Barry/Bowen rotation.


"2 of the worst defenders in the history of the game".....
Wow, that's overstating things a bit. Gervin is likely no better than a mediocre defender, and perhaps worse; so I can let pass some criticism of him on that end. But implying he might the "worst ever" is stretching things somewhat. And at any rate, I'm not overly concerned with Dumars blowing by Gervin when I have Robinson protecting the rim. Could conceivably even have him overplay the outside on Dumars, and just allow Robinson to clean up what slips thru. I like Gervin's potential for closing out on the 3pt shot or mid-range 2 (height/length advantage).

And where Barry is concerned, I simply disagree; and I don't even agree with lumping them together defensively. I've seen more game footage of Barry than I have of Gervin, and from what I've seen Barry is both an attentive and generally willing defender, and who has considerable athletic gifts at his disposal, too. He isn't blowing anyone's mind with his defense, but he's more than capable, imo.
Gervin is clearly a better pure scorer, imo. And yet he's consistently ~10 places below Barry on basically everyone's ATL. That's because Barry is a more complete player; he's at least a little better than Gervin in absolutely every other facet of the game (including defense). So I don't think it's even fair or accurate to call Barry "poor" as a defender, much less among "the worst in the history of the game."


"Billups struggles with half-court execution, and requires a highly structured offense to be effective......also is a "one-trick pony" (outside shooting) who can't run an offense"......and other generalizations about lack of play-making ability........
In the years specified, the Piston's were pretty much ONLY a half-court team: their pace in the years specified was 29th, 30th, and 30th (of 30 teams). i.e. they didn't run and gun. And in those years their ORtg was 4th, 6th, and 6th, with his help consisting of Sheed, Rip Hamilton, Tayshaun Prince, and either Ben Wallace (an empty uniform on offense) later replaced by old versions of McDyess and Chris Webber.
For a guy who "struggles with half-court execution" and "can't run an offense", those are some pretty respectable half-court only offenses for which he was the clear leader.

Regarding [accused] lack of play-making ability....
This one is really hard to swallow, particularly after Warspite then goes on to declare ALL of Frazier, Dumars, and Hondo as "great passers".
In the years specified Billups averaged collectively 7.6 apg (as high as 8.6), despite the horrendously slowed pace; pace-adjusted he was averaging 11.9 ast/100 possessions (as high as 13.2). For comparison, that 3-year per 100 avg is higher than the single-season best of Stephen Curry. Or for that matter, here are Frazier's Ast/100 poss estimates for '69-'73:
'69--->9.2
'70--->8.7
'71--->6.6
'72--->6.3
'73--->6.6
And BIllup's did that while scoring at a comparative rate (pace and era standard adjusted) to Frazier, and with just 2.1 topg; had Ast:TO ratio of 3.68 in years specified.

Oh, and was his ability to make plays for others or run an effective offense limited to the schemes in place in Detroit? No, apparently not. Despite being well north of age 30, over the next three years ('09-'11, played mostly in Denver), his assists would go down somewhat (to 6.2 apg; not surprising as Melo does a lot of isolation) and turnovers worsening (though still respectable 2.45 Ast:TO ratio), while scoring volume AND efficiency pretty much exactly what they'd been in '06-'08. And Denver's team ORtg? 7th, 3rd, and 1st (of 30 teams) in '09, '10, and '11 respectively.

Regarding the "one-trick pony" comment.....
As hopefully has been illustrated above, he isn't a one-dimensional or one-trick pony. He is a very capable play-maker and offensive general; he's also a solid perimeter defender.
Where his scoring is concerned, Billups is heavily reliant on his outside shooting and getting guys to bite and get the call. But please let's not make it out like this is some sort of fluke occurrence. He did this effectively for a solid decade here in the modern era (and this fantasy league is to play out with modern rules and officiating). Please inform me of exactly why this should suddenly not be effective, when he proved definitively that it is (again: for a solid decade).

Anyway, here's my one-trick pony who can't effectively pass (I like #4):
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ca9TVg9ARjs[/youtube]

Here's another:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cUZRECXZ2Y[/youtube]


Dumars guarded Jordan, so has nothing to fear from Gervin.....
Please don't mistake this for maligning Dumars' defensive reputation; I do think he's a fantastic perimeter defender. And while even Jordan has praised Dumars' defense, let's not forget that the Pistons made containing Jordan a TEAM focus (ahem: the Jordan Rules). That was a concerted effort, and one which in many ways would not be possible today because of tighter officiating on rough play. How much can Dumars' teammates here collapse on Gervin, with all the other weapons assembled? idk; I'll allow that Gervin wasn't always a willing passer (though to be fair, neither was King: he's just as much a "black hole" as Gervin).
Also, I think there's room to question if Dumars would be quite as effective in an era where he's not allowed to hand-check.
Otherwise, I merely cited the height difference as potentially problematic.


Barry is a non-passing ("black hole") 3 apg guy.....
Well, it's close I guess, for the years I selected (he was 3.6 apg). He showed willingness and capability to pass in his career (averaging as many as 6.2 apg, and >6 in multiple seasons, career avg of 4.9); so I feel his willingness to pass is somewhat circumstantial.


DRob is a jump-shooting big who is "allergic to the paint"......
Short answer: Wat??
Longer answer:
DRob can indeed hit reliably out to 19 feet or so, but allergic to the paint...... :crazy: . In the years specified he averaged 14.4 FTA/100 possessions. For comparison: prime Dwight Howard ('07-present) has had an avg of 14.2. Even Dwight in his peak ('09-'11) wasn't too much higher at 15.7.
So unless you're suggesting that teams were so terrified of DRob's mid-range game that they were hacking him 17 feet from the rim, this "allergic to the paint" business just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. And fwiw, even in the playoffs he was still averaging 13.6 FTA/100 during the years specified.

Further, while we only have the data for '01-'03, it shows that in the rs 47.9% of his shot attempts came WITHIN 3 feet of the rim (an additional 16.6% from 3-10 feet.....so nearly 2 of every 3 shots coming <10 feet from the hoop). This increased in the playoffs: 57.4% coming from <3 feet, and another 13.9% from 3-10 feet (for total of 71.3% coming from within 10 feet). And this is in the twilight of his career when they had another solid low-post option (Duncan). I suspect, if the data were available, it would show that an even higher proportion of his shots came close to the bucket in his prime (when he was more explosive). Which is where I remember him making his living: bulling weaker centers on the low block, finishing on oops or in transition, facing up if catching the ball nearer the elbow and often penetrating toward the rim.

This implication that he lived in the mid-range is, frankly, ridiculous. Spacing is preserved: Robinson will be down low. Grant (and Cowens) will often be operating from near the FT-line on offense, either facilitating from the high-post, working the pick n' pop, or just decongesting the area under the rim for Robinson (while being prepared to crash the boards).


"Soft frontcourt".......
Criticisms of DRob aside, I've heard many descriptions for guys like Grant and Cowens, but "soft" was never one of them.


My team has no offensive rebounding......
Horace Grant in years specified was avg around 4.5 OReb/36 minutes, OREB% of 14.0%.
Robinson's OREB numbers are respectable, too. I imagine Cowens could be a good offensive rebounder were he consistently assigned to do so (and Kevin Love hasn't---to my eye---had his fantastic rebounding rates thru the TEAM REBOUNDING principle of boxing out and preventing opponents from getting to the glass, but rather thru neglecting shot contesting so that he can cheat off his man to hit the glass).


Mel Daniels will punish Grant and Kevin Willis in the low-post......
No, he won't, because Willis won't be in the game. Here again I suspect you haven't taken the time to thoroughly read posts. In my general write-up I stated Willis would be playing 4-5 mpg if at all. In my write-up specific to this match-up I didn't list him as getting playing time at all.
And otherwise, Mel Daniels wasn't ever a particularly effective or efficient scorer even against early ABA competition. If you intend to dump the ball into him on the block with any regularity......well, that's a strategy I can easily live with.


Billups is a weak perimeter defender.....
That's news to me. 2-Time All-Defensive 2nd Team (and my eye-test) say otherwise........


Anyway.......Warspite has a solid team. He does have one monster scorer, excellent defense at most positions, solid rebounding, and great outlet passers in Walton and Love. This should be an interesting series. It's not necessary to resort to exaggeration and falsehoods to prep your team up. They can stand on their own merits.


EDIT: I have a good rs team, but not a playoff team.....
I meant to respond to this one earlier, but forgot. I suspect this one is largely aimed at---or at least stemming from an opinion of---David Robinson. But it largely just isn't true, and fwiw part of my drafting decisions were based on playoff performance.

MOST players have their advanced metrics diminish in the playoffs......let's put that out there at the get go. For those numbers to go down in the post-season is not necessarily sub-standard relative to one's peers: that's commonplace, even for stars and some superstars. And it should be noted that often raw numbers will look same or better despite slight dips in advanced metrics: because stars are typically playing bigger minutes in the playoffs. But for simplicity, I'm going to focus on advanced metrics only below (and when I refer to "numbers" below, I'm referring specifically to PER and WS/48).

History indicates that Robinson may drop off by a larger proportion than some of his peers, and cannot be consistently counted on offensively in playoffs----although fwiw I think part of this is circumstantial, in that I don't think he's quite capable of being the offense for an otherwise mediocre offensive unit; not when facing good defenses, anyway. That's part of why I wanted a principle scorer to take that pressure off of him, and particular one who doesn't diminish in the playoffs: George Gervin. Gervin's career playoff numbers essentially don't drop off any relevant amount from his rs numbers (in fact, during the three years I selected, his playoff numbers and advanced metrics actually get significantly BETTER).

Chauncey Billups: earned the moniker "Mr. Big Shot", is a FMVP, and his career playoff numbers are also marginally BETTER than his career rs numbers (though they do take a bit of a dip in the 3-year span selected).

Horace Grant: in the 3-year span selected his playoff numbers diminish minimally (less than the average player). His career playoff numbers actually don't drop off at all from his rs numbers.

Danny Green: career numbers suffer a minimal drop off (less than his peers) in the playoffs. For the 3-year span selected, his playoff numbers are actually marginally BETTER than his rs numbers.

Rick Barry: career playoff numbers do not drop off at all from his rs numbers. Also a FMVP (though not in the 3-year span I selected).

Terry Porter: minimal drop off (significantly less than his peers) in his playoff numbers relative to rs.

So in truth, the majority of my roster has a reputation of "showing up" in the playoffs.


And for comparison, I'll look at the average % by which PER and WS/48 fall off (or go up) in the playoffs for our respective rosters (went with career numbers, since still don't know what years Warspite is going with):

Warspite's starters (went with Frazier/Dumars/King/Love/Walton):
PER---> -1.0%
WS/48---> +14.8%
Warspite's bench:
PER---> -6.1%
WS/48---> -12.3%

My starters:
PER---> -1.9%
WS/48---> -4.0%
My bench:
PER---> -5.4%*
WS/48---> -12.2%*

*my bench's numbers are actually brought down by Kevin Willis: whom I've already stated I don't intend to play at all. Remove Willis from the picture, and my bench's PER only drops off by average 3.9% and WS/48 by only 10.1%.
So my starters fall of a bit more than his starters (though still less than league average), but my bench falls off a bit less than his bench. Overall, there's not a big gap here.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#5 » by trex_8063 » Sat May 16, 2015 3:13 am

Added an edit at the end on above post.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
User avatar
Quotatious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 16,999
And1: 11,142
Joined: Nov 15, 2013

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#6 » by Quotatious » Sat May 16, 2015 7:01 am

Great post Trex. :nod: Warspite's description of Billups is one of the funniest things I've read on this board in a while..."Taller stronger Steve Kerr", "struggles in half court execution" - we definitely had to watch a different player...
Warspite
RealGM
Posts: 13,327
And1: 1,099
Joined: Dec 13, 2003
Location: Surprise AZ
Contact:
       

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#7 » by Warspite » Sat May 16, 2015 11:01 am

As a Pistons fan I have always felt that Billups was the weakest link on that team. His horrible defense vs quick guards or his constant embarrassment by Kidd and inability to get open outweighed his low TOs. His awesome defense held Jason kidd to 24ppg 10rpg 6apg. When you consider that Frasier is so much better than Kidd the outcome looks frightening. As great as you think Billups is he is still grossly outclassed by Walt Frasier. Billups is clearly an overrated player and darling of the adv stat geeks who don't watch the games. He is called Mr Big Shot because its his timely shooting that gets his team back in the game after being abused or being invisible for 3 quarters.

DRobs ability to get to the FT line doesn't have anything to do with the fact that he has a very weak post up game. Not that it matters because in the playoffs he doesn't get as many calls (not that he would get to touch the ball much) and again how do you drive the lane when there are no openings because nobody is stretching the defense to the baseline? Gervin, DRob and Barry all operate on the elbow FT line extension. 3 Iso wing scorers IMHO is not a balanced team.

I believe Kevin Willis should play because that is the only way for his team to control the defensive boards and because his frontcourt will be in foul trouble trying to cover for the matador defenders on the wing. He is TRex best post scorer and rebounder. He should be playing. Im not a fan of Dave Cowens and his sub 45% FG. Good rebounder and overrated defender but his accolades are as much based on his skin color and uniform color as his talent.

I think Trex team is more of a regular season team because it is a jump shooting team and it is playing 4 on 5 on offense with Bowen or it is playing 2 on 5 on defense with Barry.

My team is a better post season team because I HAVE A FINALS MVP AT EVERY POSITION.

I have Walt Frasier who has the GOAT game 7 performance. I have Hondo who has 7 rings and many clutch plays and baskets. I have Joe Dumars who shredded a better defender than anyone Trex has in 89. I have Bill Walton who has the GOAT NCAA Final performance. I have Mel Daniels who was the MVP or the FMVP for 5 straight yrs. How do you get more clutch than that? 16 rings from my 8 man rotation.

I have spent way too much ink/time on defense. My team can play defense with the best and can bother elite scorers as well as anyone. My team also has elite scorers (King/Walton/Hondo/Dumars and Trex defenders are mediocre to horrible. What I like most about my team on offense is that it has very good passers in Walton/Love/Frasier/Dumars and Hondo while Trex has questionable rotations (If Sharman uses rotations with his 1960s defense)


My teams supposed weakness is 3pt shooting but Trex's coach Sharman doesn't even use the 3pt shot in his offense. Coach Izzo uses the 3pt shot extensively and loves the stretch-4 concept. I don't think teams want to shoot long range 3s vs my team when I have such a huge rebounding advantage and outlet passers in Kevin Love and Bill Walton. For every 3pt make my wing players get 2 dunks. Besides My shooters will have open looks while my opponent's will face better def rotations. Im perfectly content to shoot FTs and layups while others shoot 3s.


Rebound Rate of bigmen

Trex DROb 16% Grant 16% Cowens 18% Walton 20% Love 21% Daniels 21%

Its a clear huge adv that my team has the better rebounding front court.
HomoSapien wrote:Warspite, the greatest poster in the history of realgm.
User avatar
Quotatious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 16,999
And1: 11,142
Joined: Nov 15, 2013

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#8 » by Quotatious » Sat May 16, 2015 11:33 am

Warspite wrote:As a Pistons fan I have always felt that Billups was the weakest link on that team. His horrible defense vs quick guards or his constant embarrassment by Kidd and inability to get open outweighed his low TOs. His awesome defense held Jason kidd to 24ppg 10rpg 6apg.

Kidd averaged almost 24 ppg in the 2003 ECF (and Billups was absolutely embarrassing on offense in that series, too, averaging less than 10 ppg on below 30% from the field), but Trex has 2006-08 versions, not 2003. Plus, Kidd was at his absolute peak in 2003. Pistons weren't quite ready to contend for a title in 2003, either.

Also, if you want to talk about Kidd vs Billups matchups - look at the 2004 semifinals when Billups held Kidd to 10 ppg on 28% FG.

I'm really surprised that you're so low on Chauncey. There's no way in hell you guys would've won the 2004 title without Billups (Kidd and maybe Nash are the only guys who could've made the Pistons similarly successful that year, but they both played very poorly in the playoffs that year, while Billups was very good, so I'm not sure if Detroit would've even beaten Indiana in the ECF with Kidd/Nash).

Also, how about Billups' 2004 finals performance against the Lakers? He was outstanding, I think you would agree with that. Stepped up big time in the most important moment. His career winning percentage is very impressive, too - Pistons made the ECF six years in a row, and then declined by a HUGE margin when Billups was traded for Iverson. Then he was also a key player for the Nuggets for two seasons. Eight straight 50+ win seasons is awfully impressive, I think, especially considering that he was either #1 or #2 offensive option on all of those teams.

You're clearly not giving him nearly enough credit.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#9 » by trex_8063 » Sat May 16, 2015 8:13 pm

Warspite wrote:As a Pistons fan I have always felt that Billups was the weakest link on that team. His horrible defense vs quick guards or his constant embarrassment by Kidd and inability to get open outweighed his low TOs. His awesome defense held Jason kidd to 24ppg 10rpg 6apg. When you consider that Frasier is so much better than Kidd the outcome looks frightening. As great as you think Billups is he is still grossly outclassed by Walt Frasier. Billups is clearly an overrated player and darling of the adv stat geeks who don't watch the games. He is called Mr Big Shot because its his timely shooting that gets his team back in the game after being abused or being invisible for 3 quarters.


Wow, that's really harsh. I get the feeling you soured on him as a result of tunnel-vision on a mere handful of performances, and have stubbornly clung to that opinion in spite of [copious amounts of] other evidence. As for you feeling Billups was the weakest link on those teams.....all I can say is that you're in an extreme (seriously extreme) minority in that opinion. If you insist on adhering to a belief that you see something that apparently the whole rest of world does not, then I doubt there's anything I can say to change such a zealous opinion. Between my above post and what Quotatious posted above, I feel it's already been well-covered.

Warspite wrote: DRobs ability to get to the FT line doesn't have anything to do with the fact that he has a very weak post up game.


Well, I won't claim his post-up game is great; he doesn't have a vast repertoire of reliable post moves. He does have the strength to get low-post position, though, and is a great (not good, great) finisher. Even if his post-game isn't Olajuwon's, it's not as though you can just leave him alone down there: he'll kill you.
I still disagree with a notion that he lived out at the free-throw line extended in actuality, and at any rate stated that's NOT how I intend to use him (except for screens).

Warspite wrote:Not that it matters because in the playoffs he doesn't get as many calls (not that he would get to touch the ball much) and again how do you drive the lane when there are no openings because nobody is stretching the defense to the baseline? Gervin, DRob and Barry all operate on the elbow FT line extension. 3 Iso wing scorers IMHO is not a balanced team.


Have stated DRob isn't going to be played at the FT-line extended, yet you insist that's where he'll be. Have stated that Barry and Gervin will spend only a very limited amount of time on the court together.....you've ignored that. I have stated Bowen will be getting relevant minutes, and he LIVED in the corners on offense (41.3% 3pt shooter in the corners in the years I specified)---and when he's not in, Danny Green will be living in the corners or between there and the elbow---yet you claim no one is stretching the baseline.
I must admit to feeling like I'm just be spinning my wheels at this point, because it all appears to be going in one ear and out the other.

Warspite wrote:I believe Kevin Willis should play because that is the only way for his team to control the defensive boards and because his frontcourt will be in foul trouble trying to cover for the matador defenders on the wing. He is TRex best post scorer and rebounder. He should be playing. Im not a fan of Dave Cowens and his sub 45% FG. Good rebounder and overrated defender but his accolades are as much based on his skin color and uniform color as his talent.


Could be a fair point regarding Willis. I'd let Sharman decide that, if Cowens appears to be underperforming.


Warspite wrote: I think Trex team is more of a regular season team because it is a jump shooting team and it is playing 4 on 5 on offense with Bowen or it is playing 2 on 5 on defense with Barry.


See above comments regarding your insistence on ignoring the application I have in mind.
And how is Bowen an empty uniform? You JUST got done saying that I need someone to stretch along the baseline: that's Bowen's essential function on offense! It's not as though I need more from him (nor did the Spurs dynasty) given the rest of the line-up.


Warspite wrote:I have Walt Frasier who has the GOAT game 7 performance. I have Hondo who has 7 rings and many clutch plays and baskets. I have Joe Dumars who shredded a better defender than anyone Trex has in 89.


Magic? Seriously, wasn't Cooper primarily assigned to Isiah? Anyone? I'm genuinely asking.


Warspite wrote:I have spent way too much ink/time on defense. My team can play defense with the best and can bother elite scorers as well as anyone.


Very true. It's this kind of argument I'd have appreciated you sticking with. The derisive exaggeration* (*which is putting it lightly in some instances) is something I'm tiring of.

Warspite wrote:My team also has elite scorers (King/Walton/Hondo/Dumars and Trex defenders are mediocre to horrible.


David Robinson (who anchored multiple top 3 defenses---including two #1 defenses---BEFORE Duncan arrived; and the Spurs dropped to 29th of 29 defensively the year he was injured), Bruce Bowen, Horace Grant, Chauncey Billups, Dave Cowens, Danny Green: "mediocre to horrible".......??? Gervin I can see taking some flack. Beyond that.....I'm stunned. I really just don't even know how to reply. The statement is so boldly ridiculous, I don't know that I should give it the time of day to respond further.

Also, calling Hondo an "elite" scorer (and perhaps Dumars, too) is.....well, a stretch. Very good, certainly; but "elite" denotes something else, imo. And if Frazier is "elite", then so is Billups (even if you're not a fan with the manner in which he does it). Billups is also someone who is proven a very effective scorer in the context of modern rules and officiating......Frazier, Hondo, Walton (and to a smaller degree, Dumars) are not.

Warspite wrote: What I like most about my team on offense is that it has very good passers in Walton/Love/Frasier/Dumars and Hondo while Trex has questionable rotations (If Sharman uses rotations with his 1960s defense)


You're obviously assuming Frazier, Hondo, Daniels etc all adapt easily and well into the modern context......why do you assume my coach will be rigidly incapable of adapting to modern trends? You don't see the inconsistency there?

fwiw, I chose Sharman for two reasons: 1) intelligent man who respected and gave attention to BOTH sides of the ball (both as a player and as a coach); and 2) because he was a tough-minded individual who is proven capable to deal with big egos (Barry, Chamberlain, etc) and consistently earned the respect of his players and produced results. Dealing with egos would, I assume, be a necessity on the types of teams we've all assembled.


Warspite wrote: My teams supposed weakness is 3pt shooting but Trex's coach Sharman doesn't even use the 3pt shot in his offense.


Well, duh: Sharman coached in the NBA prior to the existence of a 3pt line; so of course he didn't use it there. He had 3 years ('69-'71) coaching in the early ABA, where the 3pt line was little more than a gimmick or novelty, with very few players actually being proficient at it. Although fwiw, his ABA teams rank in 3PA were as follows:
'69: 3rd of 11
'70: 6th of 11
'71: 3rd of 11

So in actuality, he appeared to utilize the 3pt shot marginally more than his peer coaches.

Warspite wrote:Coach Izzo uses the 3pt shot extensively and loves the stretch-4 concept.


But again: who will taking this extensive volume of 3pt shots? You have two capable 3pt shooters in Dumars and Dampier (but Dampier likely won't be seeing minutes). Havlicek and Frazier are not at all guarantees to have accurate 3pt shooting. I don't assume they'll be poor 3pt shooters, but I don't assume they'll be "good" either.

And who's going to be spreading the floor at the baseline for you? Will you be camping Dumars in the corners? That doesn't seem like it will take full advantage of his attributes (or allow him much opportunity to exploit Gervin's defense). But otoh if you DON'T utilize him that way, you simply don't have much of anyone else who can adequately spread the floor.
Unless you're using LATE career Detlef, he's not a threat, and I'd not assume better than average for Hondo. Everybody not guarding Dumars has some degree of liberty to sag in and congest things.

Meanwhile, I've got FOUR players who demand your attention even out to 24-25 ft from the rim.

And aside from the added effect of spacing, there's the simple direct effect of high 3pt%: being able to drill 39-42% on 3pt attempts is insanely efficient scoring, plain and simple. You don't have anyone who can hit that efficiently; I've got FOUR of them.

Warspite wrote: I don't think teams want to shoot long range 3s vs my team when I have such a huge rebounding advantage and outlet passers in Kevin Love and Bill Walton. For every 3pt make my wing players get 2 dunks.


Bolded is exaggeration.


Warspite wrote:Besides My shooters will have open looks while my opponent's will face better def rotations. Im perfectly content to shoot FTs and layups while others shoot 3s.


Again, exaggeration and/or inappropriate and unjustified dismissive attitude.

Warspite wrote:Rebound Rate of bigmen

Trex DROb 16% Grant 16% Cowens 18% Walton 20% Love 21% Daniels 21%

Its a clear huge adv that my team has the better rebounding front court.


This is a valid point, and the scariest thing about your team. Keeping up on the boards is definitely going to be difficult for my squad (and perhaps a fair reason to give Kevin Willis some minutes).
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
Warspite
RealGM
Posts: 13,327
And1: 1,099
Joined: Dec 13, 2003
Location: Surprise AZ
Contact:
       

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#10 » by Warspite » Tue May 19, 2015 5:33 am

Quotatious wrote:
Warspite wrote:As a Pistons fan I have always felt that Billups was the weakest link on that team. His horrible defense vs quick guards or his constant embarrassment by Kidd and inability to get open outweighed his low TOs. His awesome defense held Jason kidd to 24ppg 10rpg 6apg.

Kidd averaged almost 24 ppg in the 2003 ECF (and Billups was absolutely embarrassing on offense in that series, too, averaging less than 10 ppg on below 30% from the field), but Trex has 2006-08 versions, not 2003. Plus, Kidd was at his absolute peak in 2003. Pistons weren't quite ready to contend for a title in 2003, either.

Also, if you want to talk about Kidd vs Billups matchups - look at the 2004 semifinals when Billups held Kidd to 10 ppg on 28% FG.

I'm really surprised that you're so low on Chauncey. There's no way in hell you guys would've won the 2004 title without Billups (Kidd and maybe Nash are the only guys who could've made the Pistons similarly successful that year, but they both played very poorly in the playoffs that year, while Billups was very good, so I'm not sure if Detroit would've even beaten Indiana in the ECF with Kidd/Nash).

Also, how about Billups' 2004 finals performance against the Lakers? He was outstanding, I think you would agree with that. Stepped up big time in the most important moment. His career winning percentage is very impressive, too - Pistons made the ECF six years in a row, and then declined by a HUGE margin when Billups was traded for Iverson. Then he was also a key player for the Nuggets for two seasons. Eight straight 50+ win seasons is awfully impressive, I think, especially considering that he was either #1 or #2 offensive option on all of those teams.

You're clearly not giving him nearly enough credit.


Do you recall that Kidd in 04 was on one leg and pretty much ineffective unless Billups was guarding him? Hunter and James were very effective with the half court trap. Billups still couldn't get by him even though Kidd was limping on defense. I will admit that Billups would much rather face Frasier than say Isiah or AI or Tiny. Its the quick PGs that make him look like a statue.

As a Pistons fan at the time the Pistons board viewed the team as an underachiever. Pistons choked in 05, 06, 07, 08 and many times they did so because they took the foot off the gas and let the other team in the series. Billups deserves most of the blame since he was a very inconsistent player and depended on FTs for too much of his scoring. "It aint right if it aint rough" was his motto and they refused to put away teams (never swept an opponent) and for much of the time didn't play hard until they were down in a series. That just doesn't sit right with blue collar fans from Michigan who understand when Eminem says "this is your one chance don't blow it". You cant just sit around and wait for the other guy to quit. The most liked player in the league and IMHO the anti-Larry Bird/Isiah Thomas.

The Pacers were done when they lost game 2. Billups shot 30% in that ECF so I don't see how he was so dominate. Being a Suns employee in 08 and 09 I have seen a ton of Steve Nash and although I have a very low opinion of him (his inability to guard high school kids and WNBA players) he would have very much outplayed Billups. Looking at the stats nobody had a good series except Rip who was being guarded by a 79 yr old Reggie Miller. Phil Jackson in the 04 Finals double teamed off of Billups because he believed he couldn't shoot (25% from 3 in the ECF) and he made him pay making wide open shots.

From the outside Im sure many fans viewed the Pistons much like the 01 sixers (Billups playing he AI role). I more likened them to the 80s sixers or Celtics. A team of a half dozen all stars and multiple HoFers that won 1 title when they should have several. Sure most of the blame falls on the owner for refusing to pay any lux tax and let multiple players go while only using the MLE twice (Dyses/Nazr) in 6 yrs and Dumars drafting Darko over Wade or Bosh but had Billups been able to get into the lane and finish a few more times instead of throwing bricks from 25ft he would have 3 or 4 rings.
HomoSapien wrote:Warspite, the greatest poster in the history of realgm.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#11 » by trex_8063 » Tue May 19, 2015 6:39 pm

Warspite wrote: From the outside Im sure many fans viewed the Pistons much like the 01 sixers (Billups playing he AI role).


I don't know of anyone who saw them remotely like that (the one-man carry job). If fact they seemed quite the opposite.
Speaking for myself, I saw them as a true team: solid (even all-star caliber) right across the starting five (similar to this year's Atlanta Hawks, you might say). And fwiw, that's the media and public impression I recall, too, perhaps as evidenced by the year(s?) that FOUR of the five starters were on the Eastern All-Star team.


Warspite wrote: I more likened them to the 80s sixers or Celtics. A team of a half dozen all stars and multiple HoFers that won 1 title when they should have several. Sure most of the blame falls on the owner for refusing to pay any lux tax and let multiple players go while only using the MLE twice (Dyses/Nazr) in 6 yrs and Dumars drafting Darko over Wade or Bosh but had Billups been able to get into the lane and finish a few more times instead of throwing bricks from 25ft he would have 3 or 4 rings.


Would Billups have been a better player if he were more able to get into the paint and/or finish at the rim? Of course he would have been. Does the fact that he was NOT elite at those things mean he was not an excellent player? Absolutely not.

And I cannot for the life of me figure out one can lay the blame on Billups for not winning more than one title based on the following:

'04
Yeah, he wasn't all that impressive offensively in the ECSF.....but then no one really was. That was a grind it out defensive series (Pistons outscored them on average 86.7 to 83.3). Billups---15.1 ppg on 50.0% ts, 5.7 apg with 2.4 topg---actually had the highest individual ORtg in the entire series (for either team, except for Brandon Armstrong who played just 12 minutes in the whole series): 104 (team avg was 97.4).
ECF: yeah, not too impressive in that series.
Finals (win): 21.0 ppg on 69.6% ts. And for the opposing Lakers, Gary Payton avg 4.2 ppg on 36.4% ts. FMVP well-earned, imo.

'05
ECSF: 18.7 ppg on 56.6% ts, 7.2 apg against just 2.4 topg. Again the highest individual ORtg (117; team ORtg was just 102.2).
ECF: 16.9 ppg on 54.3% ts, 5.9 apg against 2.1 topg. Tied with Hamilton for highest individual ORtg (113; team ORtg was 105.2).
Finals (loss): 20.4 ppg on 57.0% ts, 6.3 apg with just 1.3 topg. And once again (excluding Darvin Ham [11 minutes played total] and Elden Campbell [1 minute played]) he had the highest individual ORtg---by a good margin---at 128 (team ORtg was 105.7).

Conclusion: Billups played a big role in the Pistons even making it to the finals at all, and can hardly be blamed for them losing once they got there.....he clearly had a fine series (in spite of whatever missed long-balls you're sourly recalling).

'06
ECSF: 14.9 ppg on 56.0% ts, 5.9 apg with 3.1 topg. Not a great series, but not awful. 108 ORtg (still better than the team's 106.4 ORtg).
ECF (loss): 18.0 ppg on 52.3% ts, 7.2 apg with just 2.2 topg. 111 ORtg (vs. 101.1 team ORtg). Not a great series, but by no means bad.

'07
ECSF: 19.3 ppg on 57.9% ts, 7.0 apg against 2.0 topg. Except for Nazr Mohammed (just 4 minutes played in whole series) Billups once again had the highest individual ORtg (by a good margin) at 124 (team ORtg was just 106.9).
ECF (loss): Yeah, this one was a stinker of a series for Billups, though not in the way you imply (missing long shots instead of getting into the paint); he was actually shooting the ball well (much better than nearly all of his teammates: he avg 15.3 ppg on 59.3% ts), but was an uncharacteristically bad ball-control series for him (3.5 apg against 3.8 topg).

'08
ECSF: Missed two games, but in the three he played: 16.3 ppg on 57.8% ts, 3.7 apg against 0.7 topg. Had the 2nd-highest individual ORtg on the team (behind only limited-minutes role player Theo Ratliff).
ECF (loss): 16.5 ppg on 55.9% ts, 5.3 apg against just 1.3 topg. 119 ORtg (vs. team ORtg of 109.4).


Seems clear he showed up in the big playoff series' more often than not.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
Warspite
RealGM
Posts: 13,327
And1: 1,099
Joined: Dec 13, 2003
Location: Surprise AZ
Contact:
       

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#12 » by Warspite » Tue May 19, 2015 8:38 pm

If you want to have a private discussion Im more than happy but your breaking the rule of 1 rebuttal since you are now on your 3rd. I don't want to see you lose by forfeit.

What is your obsession with Ortg and TS% when they don't support what your saying nor disagree with me? Billups TS% is all about his FT shooting. If the refs give him FTs he is great and if they don't he isn't. That's been my point for the last 10 yrs. Many a games Billups is awful but shoots 9-10 Fts in the 4th and his stats look great but his great play came when the clock was stopped.

This thread is not supposed to be about Billups and how he played.
HomoSapien wrote:Warspite, the greatest poster in the history of realgm.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: ATNE Tournament, ROUND 2: 1. Trex v. 9. Warspite 

Post#13 » by trex_8063 » Wed May 20, 2015 6:47 pm

Warspite wrote:If you want to have a private discussion Im more than happy but your breaking the rule of 1 rebuttal since you are now on your 3rd. I don't want to see you lose by forfeit.


Yes, I’m sure that would break your heart. :wink:
I’ll take my chances on a forfeit loss (and accept that outcome if that's what people decide); with most people having dropped out of the project entirely, I figure almost any discussion is welcome. That said, you’re right that we’re sort of derailing, so I’ll try to restrain myself and make this my last post here.

Warspite wrote:What is your obsession with Ortg and TS%


Obsession?
If I’m not mistaken, in the entirety of this thread (which includes three very large posts, and a one or two smaller ones) I have made mention of ORtg at grand total of three places (though only ONCE in reference to individual ORtg):
1) Mentioned the team ORtg for Gervin’s teams in my original team blurb.
2) In direct response to accusation that Billups was incapable of leading an offense, I cited the SEVERAL good (or even elite) team offenses he’s been at the head of.
3) And finally, in response to accusation that Billups underperforming in the playoffs is responsible for the Pistons not winning multiple titles, I went thru the specs of his performance in every post-first round playoff series of ‘04-’08…..and in that I cited ORtg, just for completeness.

That constitutes “obsession”?
I beginning to see exaggeration as a pathologic consistency in your posts (another poster in another recent thread was making similar observations too, fwiw). Apparently it ain’t worth stating if you don’t overstate it. I guess I should just learn to ignore any time I encounter what appears to be hyperbole within your posts.

And fwiw, team ORtg is very relevant stat. Individual ORtg has some bias (still useful, though), but team ORtg is a very “pure” stat: how efficiently a team converts possessions into points…..that’s what it is. I mean, the entire point of what a team is trying to do on offense is EXACTLY what is being measured (that is: how well they’re doing it).

wrt to TS% (again: “obsession”?).....

When defending against statements like this:
Warspite wrote:…..had Billups been able to get into the lane and finish a few more times instead of throwing bricks from 25ft he would have 3 or 4 rings



….where the implication clearly appears to be that his shooting efficiency is suspect and costing them games, it seemed only appropriate to include some evaluation of his shooting/scoring efficiency; and TS% is much more useful (or truthful) than raw FG% (more on that below).

Warspite wrote:...when they don't support what your saying nor disagree with me? Billups TS% is all about his FT shooting. If the refs give him FTs he is great and if they don't he isn't. That's been my point for the last 10 yrs. Many a games Billups is awful but shoots 9-10 Fts in the 4th and his stats look great but his great play came when the clock was stopped.


Sure, here’s your point that I don’t disagree with: Billups is not great at getting into the paint or to the rim, and he’s not a great finisher.
My point is: who cares? When he is clearly (and pretty consistently) finding other means to score efficiently…….I mean, why should we care that that isn’t a significant part of his game? Seriously, if in addition to his outside shooting and FTr and FT%, he was ALSO able to get to the rim and finish like Russell Westbrook…..I mean he’d likely be the greatest scorer of all-time. Criticizing his lack of ability to drive/finish (in spite of the copious other means he brings)----basically everyone is saying "he can do this and this and this (and to them all very very very well and to great effect)", and your only reply is, "yeah, but he can't do this.".......it's somewhat like criticizing him for NOT being the GOAT scorer.

He wasn’t a penetrator/finisher, and thus he “merely” was what he was…...which was still a very efficient and capable mid-volume scorer (much better than the hot dog-**** you appear to be implying he is); and that’s all anyone is saying.

He shoots a lot of threes. And as such, he misses more often than someone who shoots primarily twos. That doesn’t mean he’s not efficient.
You made mention that King was dropping 57% from the field, so let’s just run with that number to make a little example comparison:
Suppose you shoot 57% from the field but ONLY shoot 2-pointers; I shoot 40% from the field but ONLY shoot 3-pointers (and let’s for simplicity say neither of us ever gets fouled or turns the ball over)......who is the more efficient scorer?
Well, you would average 1.14 pts/possession. I would average 1.2 pts/possession.

That’s not conjecture, that’s not putting a false spin on things…..that’s mathematical truth. And it’s a relationship that TS% captures exactly (whereas raw FG% misses the mark by a mile).

And I don’t get how you can state getting to the FT-line like it’s a bad thing. You wished he’d have driven (or been able to drive) the paint more…...what do you think would have happened if he’d been able? A lot of the time he’d have drawn a foul; that’s generally the point of teams/coaching liking it when their primary scorers can attack the rim: because it often either leads to high% shot opportunities, or a trip to the line (both of which are good outcomes). And again for a comparison:
Suppose you shoot 57% from the field (again, twos only) and never get fouled; and suppose I ONLY get fouled (but we’ll say I NEVER convert the FG, and it’s always a foul on a 2-point shot) and I shoot 90% from the FT-line (like Billups):
You again avg 1.14 pts/poss, and I average 1.8 pts/poss.

Obviously a trip to the line is a very high% scoring opportunity (for most players, and certainly is for Chauncey).

TS% doesn’t capture this relationship exactly (but it comes pretty close).

So his high TS% isn’t putting some sort of false spin on things….it’s pretty closely stating the truth of the matter where shooting efficiency is concerned. And that’s why I use it.


Warspite wrote:This thread is not supposed to be about Billups and how he played.


True. To be fair, it turned in that direction when you made part of your case against my team a slanderous assault on Billups as a player. otoh, if all this is just a side-bar discussion and not overly relevant to the broader debate, then it really shouldn't be a reason for me to lose by forfeit. :)
Anyway, I’ll sincerely try to be quiet from here on.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd

Return to Fantasy Basketball Leagues