Around the NBA 18/19 Season #2

[dice]

Klay Thompson with 44 points without any FT attempts. Wonder if that's a record or if it isn't, what's the most anyone has scored without making or even attempting a free throw.

kareem and the dream each scored 48 i think w/o FT attempts. per sportscenter

Wow, that's even more impressive considering most of their points came from banging in the paint.

i dunno if it's more impressive on a player basis, but it's certainly fluky that they never went to the line. typically when a guy is dominating in the paint he'll at least get intentionally fouled a couple of times if nothing else

[dice]

klay w/ 44 pts on 110%ts last night, warriors w/ 41 assists vs 10 TOs. both might be some sort of record

[HomoSapien]

mirotic won the bulls games last year. kilpatrick didn't. the bulls were 3-6 w/ him on the team, and in only 1 of those 3 wins did he play reasonably well in a close game

kilpatrick was a replacement level player signed to fill a roster spot at the tail end of the season and who played limited minutes. you WANT replacement level players on the court when you're tanking. if anything, they should have started him. on the other hand, mirotic was a very good player who was signed to...ruin the tank by playing well so that we could get a late 1st rounder in a trade? THAT makes no sense

the bulls FO was engaging in the same "don't let a guy walk for nothing" nonsense mindset that most fans do. letting niko walk for nothing was exactly what they should have done if the idea was rebuilding. they would have then gotten criticism from the "you let him walk for nothing?!" crowd, but it would have been the right move

First of all he averaged 16 points per game in those three wins. He had one really bad shooting game (he shot 2-11), but got to the free-throw line 8 times. We won that game by 8 and he was tied as our leading scorer. This was in a must lose game against the Magic. Had we lost this game, we would have had a tied regular season record with them (we wouldn't hold the tie breaker, but it was still a pivotal draft position game). I think it's real hard for you to argue he didn't make an impact on that win.

there is a big difference between having an impact in a win and losing w/o a player's contribution. lots of people have impact in a 30 point victory, whereas none of the players are essential to the win. the reality is that in a maximum of ONE win would the bulls have lost due to removing the presence of crappy kilpatrick

That said even if you disagree, you inadvertently proved my point. One more loss and we would have no longer had a tie breaker with the Kings (which we lost), thus giving us the 2nd pick. Three more losses, and we would have tied records with the Mavs and Hawks, and would have had a coin toss with the Magic. When you're tanking, every single loss matters. We picked up three stupid wins and it cost us big.

and you missed both of my points. number one is that there is no evidence that with some OTHER replacement player in the lineup the bulls wouldn't have won the exact same number of games. number two is that HE WAS A REPLACEMENT PLAYER. what were the bulls supposed to do? once he has a good game, cut him and replace him w/ a different replacement player? and then when THAT replacement player has a good game, cut him and replace HIM with a different replacement player?

the bum was a REPLACEMENT PLAYER. he is no longer in the league. there was absolutely nothing reasonable the team could have done with his roster spot to lose more games beyond engaging in historic tank measures (have a center play at point guard, sign a bench player from the D-league). the sample size was so small of his minutes played that there was at no point reason to believe that his mediocre level of play would continue for the rest of his tenure with the team

the bulls could have done some things differently to lose more games. the sean kilpatrick signing is WAY down that list, and the only reason it could possibly be argued that it even belongs on that list is in retrospect

So, what are you arguing exactly dice? That it was smart for a tanking team to sign a 28-year-old player who had had a proven track record of being able to score on an NBA-level?

His sample size was not small. He has 93 games with the Nets that proved he could score. It is such a laughably avoidable problem that I cannot even fathom that you'd take this position.

there was absolutely nothing reasonable the team could have done with his roster spot to lose more games beyond engaging in historic tank measures (have a center play at point guard, sign a bench player from the D-league).

Furthermore, it appears as if you've forgotten the context of this signing. We had Jarrell Eddie (a few weeks earlier), Jaylen Johnson, and C.J. Fair (we waived to Eddie the day before and Johnson the day we signed Kilpatrick). Kilpatrick was a clear upgrade over these guys. Again, this was a stupid self-inflicted wound.

[MrSparkle]

L. Ball ruled a grade 3 sprain. Uh, isn’t that basically a tear?

Lakers treading murky water. If they get burned in free agency, they have a big problem. Their core can’t support a 35+yo Lebron.

[dice]

First of all he averaged 16 points per game in those three wins. He had one really bad shooting game (he shot 2-11), but got to the free-throw line 8 times. We won that game by 8 and he was tied as our leading scorer. This was in a must lose game against the Magic. Had we lost this game, we would have had a tied regular season record with them (we wouldn't hold the tie breaker, but it was still a pivotal draft position game). I think it's real hard for you to argue he didn't make an impact on that win.

there is a big difference between having an impact in a win and losing w/o a player's contribution. lots of people have impact in a 30 point victory, whereas none of the players are essential to the win. the reality is that in a maximum of ONE win would the bulls have lost due to removing the presence of crappy kilpatrick

That said even if you disagree, you inadvertently proved my point. One more loss and we would have no longer had a tie breaker with the Kings (which we lost), thus giving us the 2nd pick. Three more losses, and we would have tied records with the Mavs and Hawks, and would have had a coin toss with the Magic. When you're tanking, every single loss matters. We picked up three stupid wins and it cost us big.

and you missed both of my points. number one is that there is no evidence that with some OTHER replacement player in the lineup the bulls wouldn't have won the exact same number of games. number two is that HE WAS A REPLACEMENT PLAYER. what were the bulls supposed to do? once he has a good game, cut him and replace him w/ a different replacement player? and then when THAT replacement player has a good game, cut him and replace HIM with a different replacement player?

the bum was a REPLACEMENT PLAYER. he is no longer in the league. there was absolutely nothing reasonable the team could have done with his roster spot to lose more games beyond engaging in historic tank measures (have a center play at point guard, sign a bench player from the D-league). the sample size was so small of his minutes played that there was at no point reason to believe that his mediocre level of play would continue for the rest of his tenure with the team

the bulls could have done some things differently to lose more games. the sean kilpatrick signing is WAY down that list, and the only reason it could possibly be argued that it even belongs on that list is in retrospect

So, what are you arguing exactly dice? That it was smart for a tanking team to sign a 28-year-old player who had had a proven track record of being able to score on an NBA-level?

His sample size was not small. He has 93 games with the Nets that proved he could score. It is such a laughably avoidable problem that I cannot even fathom that you'd take this position.

i'm arguing that "ability to score" does not necessarily translate to winning. which is why the nets dumped him and why he is no longer in the league. the bulls this year have their fair share of players with "ability to score" (lavine, lauri, jabari, portis) and yet are a garbage team. countless players with "ability to score" have never worn an nba uniform. kilpatrick himself was a 1st team all-american with "ability to score" coming out of college, yet was not drafted. there's a reason for that: "ability to score" is merely a fraction of what constitutes an all-around basketball player

there was absolutely nothing reasonable the team could have done with his roster spot to lose more games beyond engaging in historic tank measures (have a center play at point guard, sign a bench player from the D-league).

Furthermore, it appears as if you've forgotten the context of this signing. We had Jarrell Eddie (a few weeks earlier), Jaylen Johnson, and C.J. Fair (we waived to Eddie the day before and Johnson the day we signed Kilpatrick). Kilpatrick was a clear upgrade over these guys. Again, this was a stupid self-inflicted wound.

2 of those 3 players have never played a minute in the nba. the other was played by hoiberg for a total of 3 minutes. can't exactly be a tank commander when you don't see the floor. now, if you want to argue that the FO should have demanded that those 3 guys get playing time, go for it. but i'm not even sure that the tankathon sixers ever resorted to those tactics. even while trying to lose they were trying to develop bad players with the hopes that they would turn into something (even if only to turn around and trade them for a draft pick or two). that's how covington was found

if you're THAT committed to tanking, wouldn't playing the starters (which the bulls continued to do at the end of the season) be a much, MUCH more egregious tactic? wouldn't letting lavine CONTINUE to play (and play horribly) have been optimal? playing a replacement player limited minutes was the least of their tanking issues

[HomoSapien]

there is a big difference between having an impact in a win and losing w/o a player's contribution. lots of people have impact in a 30 point victory, whereas none of the players are essential to the win. the reality is that in a maximum of ONE win would the bulls have lost due to removing the presence of crappy kilpatrick


and you missed both of my points. number one is that there is no evidence that with some OTHER replacement player in the lineup the bulls wouldn't have won the exact same number of games. number two is that HE WAS A REPLACEMENT PLAYER. what were the bulls supposed to do? once he has a good game, cut him and replace him w/ a different replacement player? and then when THAT replacement player has a good game, cut him and replace HIM with a different replacement player?

the bum was a REPLACEMENT PLAYER. he is no longer in the league. there was absolutely nothing reasonable the team could have done with his roster spot to lose more games beyond engaging in historic tank measures (have a center play at point guard, sign a bench player from the D-league). the sample size was so small of his minutes played that there was at no point reason to believe that his mediocre level of play would continue for the rest of his tenure with the team

the bulls could have done some things differently to lose more games. the sean kilpatrick signing is WAY down that list, and the only reason it could possibly be argued that it even belongs on that list is in retrospect

So, what are you arguing exactly dice? That it was smart for a tanking team to sign a 28-year-old player who had had a proven track record of being able to score on an NBA-level?

His sample size was not small. He has 93 games with the Nets that proved he could score. It is such a laughably avoidable problem that I cannot even fathom that you'd take this position.

i'm arguing that "ability to score" does not necessarily translate to winning. which is why the nets dumped him and why he is no longer in the league. the bulls this year have their fair share of players with "ability to score" (lavine, lauri, jabari, portis) and yet are a garbage team. countless players with "ability to score" have never worn an nba uniform. kilpatrick himself was a 1st team all-american with "ability to score" coming out of college, yet was not drafted. there's a reason for that: "ability to score" is merely a fraction of what constitutes an all-around basketball player

there was absolutely nothing reasonable the team could have done with his roster spot to lose more games beyond engaging in historic tank measures (have a center play at point guard, sign a bench player from the D-league).

Furthermore, it appears as if you've forgotten the context of this signing. We had Jarrell Eddie (a few weeks earlier), Jaylen Johnson, and C.J. Fair (we waived to Eddie the day before and Johnson the day we signed Kilpatrick). Kilpatrick was a clear upgrade over these guys. Again, this was a stupid self-inflicted wound.

2 of those 3 players have never played a minute in the nba. the other was played by hoiberg for a total of 3 minutes. can't exactly be a tank commander when you don't see the floor. now, if you want to argue that the FO should have demanded that those 3 guys get playing time, go for it. but i'm not even sure that the tankathon sixers ever resorted to those tactics. even while trying to lose they were trying to develop bad players with the hopes that they would turn into something (even if only to turn around and trade them for a draft pick or two). that's how covington was found

if you're THAT committed to tanking, wouldn't playing the starters (which the bulls continued to do at the end of the season) be a much, MUCH more egregious tactic? wouldn't letting lavine CONTINUE to play (and play horribly) have been optimal? playing a replacement player limited minutes was the least of their tanking issues

Did you watch those games? Because I did, and I certainly felt like at the time Kilpatrick was pivotal in those wins. There's a reason he got the nickname "Kildraftpick".

And yes, I'm fully advocating that we should have just kept one of those three scrubs instead of electing to sign a 28-year-old journey man who had no future on this team, but had the proven ability to score points. Again, one win is all that took us out of the Luka sweepstakes.

And, no, I don't think we should have benched our starters. There's a difference in playing our core players and playing journey men who have no future here.

[Repeat 3-peat]

L. Ball ruled a grade 3 sprain. Uh, isn’t that basically a tear?

Lakers treading murky water. If they get burned in free agency, they have a big problem. Their core can’t support a 35+yo Lebron.

The Lakers should be trying to land Beal.

I don't see them landing a star free agent during the Summer.

[dice]

So, what are you arguing exactly dice? That it was smart for a tanking team to sign a 28-year-old player who had had a proven track record of being able to score on an NBA-level?

His sample size was not small. He has 93 games with the Nets that proved he could score. It is such a laughably avoidable problem that I cannot even fathom that you'd take this position.

i'm arguing that "ability to score" does not necessarily translate to winning. which is why the nets dumped him and why he is no longer in the league. the bulls this year have their fair share of players with "ability to score" (lavine, lauri, jabari, portis) and yet are a garbage team. countless players with "ability to score" have never worn an nba uniform. kilpatrick himself was a 1st team all-american with "ability to score" coming out of college, yet was not drafted. there's a reason for that: "ability to score" is merely a fraction of what constitutes an all-around basketball player

Furthermore, it appears as if you've forgotten the context of this signing. We had Jarrell Eddie (a few weeks earlier), Jaylen Johnson, and C.J. Fair (we waived to Eddie the day before and Johnson the day we signed Kilpatrick). Kilpatrick was a clear upgrade over these guys. Again, this was a stupid self-inflicted wound.

2 of those 3 players have never played a minute in the nba. the other was played by hoiberg for a total of 3 minutes. can't exactly be a tank commander when you don't see the floor. now, if you want to argue that the FO should have demanded that those 3 guys get playing time, go for it. but i'm not even sure that the tankathon sixers ever resorted to those tactics. even while trying to lose they were trying to develop bad players with the hopes that they would turn into something (even if only to turn around and trade them for a draft pick or two). that's how covington was found

if you're THAT committed to tanking, wouldn't playing the starters (which the bulls continued to do at the end of the season) be a much, MUCH more egregious tactic? wouldn't letting lavine CONTINUE to play (and play horribly) have been optimal? playing a replacement player limited minutes was the least of their tanking issues

Did you watch those games? Because I did, and I certainly felt like at the time Kilpatrick was pivotal in those wins. There's a reason he got the nickname "Kildraftpick".

he went 2/11 in one of the three wins, so he certainly wasn't pivotal in the win, though he would have been pivotal in the loss had the rest of the team played a bit worse. the 2nd of the 3 wins was not a close game, so obviously he wasn't needed to win that one. and the 3rd, where he actually DID have a good game, the team won by 6. whether he was 6 points better than whoever would have gotten those minutes (and it might have actually ended up being more minutes given to the starter given that hoiberg wasn't playing the 3 scrubs you mentioned) is debatable

Again, one win is all that took us out of the Luka sweepstakes.

you can only say that knowing which teams "won" the lottery. you wouldn't be saying that the bulls should have tried to WIN more games had they had lost one more game than the hawks and thus missed out on luka

And, no, I don't think we should have benched our starters. There's a difference in playing our core players and playing journey men who have no future here.

how about resting 2 starters per game, like other teams have done? that certainly would have done more to turn a 6 point win into a loss than not playing kilpatrick

[dumbell78]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

[sco]

L. Ball ruled a grade 3 sprain. Uh, isn’t that basically a tear?

Lakers treading murky water. If they get burned in free agency, they have a big problem. Their core can’t support a 35+yo Lebron.

The Lakers should be trying to land Beal.

I don't see them landing a star free agent during the Summer.

Lakers should be looking to land Gasol...looks like Memphis "quietly check on trades"...so quiet WT picked it up.

They should see if they can trade Ball (who helps the Memphis tank) as part of deal...try for Conley too.

[HomoSapien]

he went 2/11 in one of the three wins, so he certainly wasn't pivotal in the win, though he would have been pivotal in the loss had the rest of the team played a bit worse.

Again, he led us in scoring. His shooting was terrible, but that team had no perimeter offense, and he found a way to fill that gap. He also played the second most minutes for us in that game, so clearly Hoiberg thought he was helping us. He also scored 7 points in the 4th quarter, and we won by 8, so...

the 2nd of the 3 wins was not a close game, so obviously he wasn't needed to win that one.

You're real determined to not give this guy any credit, aren't you? How do you know if it's a blowout without him? Why isn't he getting credit for that win? Surely without him, it's a much closer game.

nd the 3rd, where he actually DID have a good game, the team won by 6. whether he was 6 points better than whoever would have gotten those minutes (and it might have actually ended up being more minutes given to the starter given that hoiberg wasn't playing the 3 scrubs you mentioned) is debatable

LaVine and Dunn were out at this point. We had little to no perimeter offense. If Kilpatrick doesn't play, then that means we see more of Nwaba and Jerian Grant. Kilpatrick clearly has shown a better ability to get points up than those guys.

Again, one win is all that took us out of the Luka sweepstakes.

you can only say that knowing which teams "won" the lottery. you wouldn't be saying that the bulls should have tried to WIN more games had they had lost one more game than the hawks and thus missed out on luka

I don't subscribe to this, because hindsight isn't the issue here. We had made the choice to tank, so philosophically we shouldn't have ever considered signing Kilpatrick in the first place. Again, what was the purpose of signing him? We brought him in, he averaged 15 a game for us, and then we let him go. Why? I really don't get it. Were we hoping he'd play even better? I'd really like to know what we were trying to accomplish there.

how about resting 2 starters per game, like other teams have done? that certainly would have done more to turn a 6 point win into a loss than not playing kilpatrick

Let's be honest here. Hoiberg wasn't trying to tank. Management was. It's on them to put us in the best position to do that, and well, again they gave themselves a self-inflicted wound.

We already got dinged by the league for "tanking" so I don't think blatantly benching two starters a game was an option, but at the same time, I'm fine if we randomly win a game on the backs of our young core players. I'm not too cool with it if it's on the back of a guy we signed for 9 games and then waived.

[RSP83]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

should we consider Conley? we talked about this team missing a glue piece. Maybe he can help out our young guys. Parker's salary and team option should be interesting to them to clear up cap next season. I'd send in Dunn/Portis to make the salary work.

Conley
Lavine
2019 Lottery Pick
Markkanen
Carter Jr.

We just need to get rid of the head coach and the FO next.

[kulaz3000]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

should we consider Conley? we talked about this team missing a glue piece. Maybe he can help out our young guys. Parker's salary and team option should be interesting to them to clear up cap next season. I'd send in Dunn/Portis to make the salary work.

Conley
Lavine
2019 Lottery Pick
Markkanen
Carter Jr.

We just need to get rid of the head coach and the FO next.

I like Conley, and would love to add him, but he is making 32 million next season, and after that 34 million. That's just too large of a pill to swallow.

[bearadonisdna]

Like the kilpatrick discussion. It was basically a strategy that backfired.
Introducing a new player was supposed to hurt chemistry. For losses.

[step]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

should we consider Conley? we talked about this team missing a glue piece. Maybe he can help out our young guys. Parker's salary and team option should be interesting to them to clear up cap next season. I'd send in Dunn/Portis to make the salary work.

Conley
Lavine
2019 Lottery Pick
Markkanen
Carter Jr.

We just need to get rid of the head coach and the FO next.

I like Conley, and would love to add him, but he is making 32 million next season, and after that 34 million. That's just too large of a pill to swallow.

That and he is just too old to fit in ideally.

[dumbell78]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

should we consider Conley? we talked about this team missing a glue piece. Maybe he can help out our young guys. Parker's salary and team option should be interesting to them to clear up cap next season. I'd send in Dunn/Portis to make the salary work.

Conley
Lavine
2019 Lottery Pick
Markkanen
Carter Jr.

We just need to get rid of the head coach and the FO next.

With me it's an age thing, not so much the salary to be honest. He's 31 and at the end of his prime. He would have been great if we had Jimmy/Niko around, not right now.

[HomoSapien]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

should we consider Conley? we talked about this team missing a glue piece. Maybe he can help out our young guys. Parker's salary and team option should be interesting to them to clear up cap next season. I'd send in Dunn/Portis to make the salary work.

Conley
Lavine
2019 Lottery Pick
Markkanen
Carter Jr.

We just need to get rid of the head coach and the FO next.

With me it's an age thing, not so much the salary to be honest. He's 31 and at the end of his prime. He would have been great if we had Jimmy/Niko around, not right now.

Plus we don't want to jeopardize the tank. I'd rather take a shot at Rose next year. He's younger, cheaper, and won't cost us any assets.

[Red8911]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

should we consider Conley? we talked about this team missing a glue piece. Maybe he can help out our young guys. Parker's salary and team option should be interesting to them to clear up cap next season. I'd send in Dunn/Portis to make the salary work.

Conley
Lavine
2019 Lottery Pick
Markkanen
Carter Jr.

We just need to get rid of the head coach and the FO next.

Bulls are tanking right now,so no way they are getting Conley even though I agree he would of been a good player to get. Also conley didn’t like the direction of his team(tanking) that’s why he talked to management along with gasol,pretty sure he wouldn’t like this bulls one either.

[kodo]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

should we consider Conley? we talked about this team missing a glue piece.

I disagree our problem are glue guys. That was Miami needing Shane Battier.

Our problem is star talent. We need the Lebron in that equation.

[kyrv]

Memphis hitting the reset button, gonna listen to trades for Gasol and MC.

should we consider Conley? we talked about this team missing a glue piece. Maybe he can help out our young guys. Parker's salary and team option should be interesting to them to clear up cap next season. I'd send in Dunn/Portis to make the salary work.

Conley
Lavine
2019 Lottery Pick
Markkanen
Carter Jr.

We just need to get rid of the head coach and the FO next.

I agree if the FO gets Conley it will time to get rid of them.