Sports is our Business
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=340&t=1126969
)
Code: Select all
Frazier - 23.2 PPG on .571 TS% (.512 FG%)
Brown - 23.0 PPG on .572 TS% (.498 FG%)
Wise - 23.2 PPG on .558 TS% (.505 FG%)
Johnson - 18.2 PPG on .494 TS% (.454 FG%)
Walton - 18.6 PPG on .563 TS% (.522 FG%)
Cunningham - 26.1 PPG on .524 TS% (.469 FG%)
Westphal - 25.2 PPG on .565 TS% (.519 FG%) - IN ONLY 31 MINS
Beaty - 22.9 PPG on .612 TS% (.555 FG%)
Roster:
C Wilt Chamberlain (71-72)
- 14.8 points, 19.2 rebounds, 4.0 assists, 65% FG
- 1972 NBA Champion
- Finals MVP
- 1972 All Defensive 1st Team
- 1972 All NBA 2nd Team
PF Bob McAdoo (74-75)
- 34.5 points, 14.1 rebounds, 2.2 assists, 2.1 blocks, 1.1 steals, 51% FG, 81% FT
- 1975 NBA MVP
- 1975 All NBA 1st Team
SF Bob Dandridge (70-71)
- 18.4 points, 8.0 rebounds, 3.5 assists, 51% FG
- 1971 NBA Champion
SG Walter Davis (77-78)
- 24.2 points, 6.0 rebounds, 3.4 assists, 1.4 steals, 53% FG, 83% FT
- 1978 Rookie of the Year
- 1978 All NBA 2nd Team
PG Lenny Wilkens (71-72)
- 18.0 points, 9.6 assists, 4.2 rebounds, 47% FG, 77% FT
PG/SG Jo Jo White (75-76)
- 18.9 points, 5.4 assists, 3.8 rebounds, 45% FG, 84% FT
- 1976 NBA Champion
- 1976 NBA Finals MVP
SF/PF Tom Sanders (69-70)
- 11.5 points, 5.5 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 44% FG
C Elmore Smith (73-74)
- 12.5 points, 11.2 rebounds, 4.8 blocks, 1.8 assists, 46% FG
SF/SG Chet Walker (71-72)
- 22 points, 6.1 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 51% FG, 85% FT
Rotation:
Chamberlain (38) - Smith (10)
McAdoo (38) - Sanders (10)
Dandridge (36) - Walker (6) - Sanders (6)
Davis (32) - Walker (8) - White (8)
Wilkens (32) - White (16)
You could call Bobby D. a cross between Caron Butler and Big Shot Brob, someone who did all the little things, drifted between three positions, defended every type of forwards (famously outdueling Julius Erving in the '78 Playoffs) and routinely drained monster shots (like the game-winner against a triple-team in Game 7 of the '79 Spurs series, which happened after he had been switched to a scalding-hot George Gervin and shut down Ice for the final few minutes).
When he did finally find himself playing with talent, he found success- here, he's playing with talent in his athletic prime.
If that's not good enough evidence that Reed was a dominant playoff performer at both ends of the court against elite size (just look at the differential when he didn't play!) I don't know what else I can say. Wilt was a 4-time MVP and 10 x All Star at this point, whose 22/22 statline that year was still far better than Walton, whom Reed faces in this matchup. He also overcame a Bullets front court of Johnson (in this matchup) and Wes Unseld (no slouch) supported by Earl Monroe, and Kareem!
Bill Walton was kind of a "you had to see it" sort of thing.
Comparing his quickness and mobility to the young KG is interesting. I think Walton was both faster and quicker. One primary point...Walton played in a faster paced period, so his speed and quickness shouldn't have stood out as much. They did. He ran like a SF.
He ran the floor like a SF and rebounded like Dwight Howard or Bill Russell or Wilt. All of those guys have rebound rates well over 20--more like 21. Dwight Howard, in the last four years, has rebound rates of about 21. Wilt has a career rate in the mid-20s. Same with Russell. Walton? Career rate of 19.8...about 21 in his peak seasons. So you have a big man that ran the court better than anyone else who rebounded better than anyone else.
The passing. My God, the passing. Walton assist numbers do not reflect what an amazing passer he was. If I had to bet on which part of his body would fail when he was in college and in his first couple of years, I would have gone with his back. He would get the rebound, twist his body in mid air, and throw the outlet pass before his feet hit the ground. This was not a highlight reel play; this was something he did naturally all the time. His passes were not slow or inside-out passes; they were quick, fast thinking passes from a player that saw the court like a PG. I was too young to see Wilt's big assist years. The best passing big man I have ever seen--and it's by a lot--is Bill Walton.
Walton had range--not Jack Sikma range--but good, 15-20 foot range. He could easily play at the top of the key, and your offense would not slow down. He shot 52% from the field. He scored better than a point every two minutes he was on the court as a starter. He was not a primary scorer type...but he could score well and, if called on (*cough*NCAAfinals1973*cough*) would murder you on offense.
Bill Walton's desire to win was second to none. He played with total abandon and passion. We make fun of Walton's commentary because he brings that abandon and passion to his TV statements. But Bill Walton is not a natural speaker (in fact, he had a speech impediment). At basketball, he was a natural...John Wooden--who knows from big men--said Walton was the most fundamentally skilled big man of all time. Combine that with his passion and abandon. That's terrifying.
Case in point...Walton's comments about his college career. Bill Walton has said repeatedly that he regards his college career as a "failure" and that he feels "shame and embarrassment" to this day as a result of it. Walton won the Naismith Award three times, was the AP player of the year twice, and won two titles. He is on the short list (of three) for best college basketball player of all time. His game in the 1973 finals is probably the most dominant college basketball game of all time. He won titles twice. And yet, he feels shame and embarrassment and thinks of himself as a failure. Why? Because his team didn't win every game. That's how competitive Bill Walton was. He honestly thought he should have won every time he stepped on the court, and has never gotten over his inability to do just that.
The player I most liken Walton too--it'll sound weird, but hear me out--is Magic Johnson. Walton's rebounding is like Magic passing...absolutely elite. Walton's passing was like Magic's rebounding...if not the best ever for his position, close. Both thrived in upbeat play, but were terrific halfcourt players because of their astonishing fundamentals. Both were good scorers--not huge--but strong, and could score very well if called on to do so. Both played with joy and fury. Both helped their teams in ways that simply didn't show up on the stat sheet. That's the type of impact Walton had. When Walton won his second title with the Celtics, Kevin McHale said: "You watch an old, old guy like that, with the most hammered body in sports, acting like a high school kid -- it's both funny and inspiring at the same time. Every game was a challenge, and he didn't let any of us forget that."
Tim Duncan has been so amazing for so long--Duncan is my personal top ten--that we kind of lose track of how wonderful he is. I think we will miss it more when he is gone. Walton was like a comet--short period of dominance, and echoes of it afterwards. But, for me, I'll say it like this. If I had a choice between Walton's best years and Duncan's best, I'd consider going with Walton--even knowing that he'd miss 15-20 games a year. Walton was that good.
If we look at the transition across era's, particularly as 2 of my starters were playing in 1970, we will see that Reed, DeBusschere and Buse were all actually very efficient for their era; particularly Reed who was getting 10 FTA per game in that Finals run. And, when all these guys line up in a team, it's hard to say whether these FG%'s will be anywhere close to their statlines in selected years - playing with good players often (though, not always) results in improved efficiency.
Your defenders may be elite, but my front court held the league leading Opp PTS/G -105.9 - in 1970. That's elite, and the chemistry is there already.
That's all very nice, but really, TRB% isn't especially useful. You can make a case that DeBusschere and Reed's TRB% is pretty low, but they played together, and RPG / TRB% are heavily influenced by team-mates rebounding ability, and doesn't factor in overall team-rebounding. It's worth noting that Reed overcame the Bullets front court of Johnson/Unseld (whose TRB% was higher), and the Lakers of Chamberlain (whose TBR% was higher), and the Bucks of Kareem (whose TRB% was higher), in their selected year.
Gremz wrote:VS MILLER4EVER
There's really not a whole lot that needs to be addressed here in reality. I think this is a pretty straight forward case of defense being too much. Sure there's reason to be concerned with the volume offense, but Barry's success wasn't tested against a prime Thurmond, let alone with a monster of a defensive partner in Gilmore. Even against just Sloan and Van Lier they only scraped through to the finals, and up against a more formidable defense with a one dimensional offense a similar result is a big stretch of the imagination.
The biggest concern is with Barry's ability to take over games. In wake we have Sloan to take him on as a man defender, the main reason being to restrict any freedom he has. We don't want him to be able to have his way on the court so locking him down via solid man defense is what we have in mind. Caldwell isn't what we consider a major threat, and Baylor should adequately provide a solid size coverage to restrict those open looks.
Van Lier will be a huge factor on defense here. Lucas, a guy who wasn't immune from turnovers, will find the pressing nature of Van Lier exceptionally difficult to manage. Specifically, the underrated court vision of Lucas that M4E suggests will struggle to be in effect with such a dominant defensive threat looming over him constantly. Van Lier's ability to manufacture steals is legendary, pair that with an equal threat in Sloan and it's hard to see any way that a smooth passing game will exist from the backcourt. This is another big advantage to us, considering they will rely upon heavy amounts of ball movement to create enough open looks to threaten the scoreboard. Let's face it, it's not like they'll be getting any easy looks inside.
I'll keep going back to it, but there's not enough range threats to worry about for us here. It's theoretically the only way an offense will succeed against us, and you'd need ammunition in bucket loads, which is simply not present here.
Gilmore and Thurmond have little immediate threat offensively from an aging Bellamy and a less than dominant scorer in Unseld. The best part about this is how it will reflect upon the dominance on the boards, and the pressure they can apply to the guards who attempt to get into the paint (which I give them credit for IF they even try it, big if). With such a prominent big court we will be more than capable of stopping any easy hoops, effectively forcing M4E's team to a jumpshooting team, which will certainly not end well.
Offensively our two main guys will get theirs. With Unseld "holding" off Gilmore he can simply use his length to shoot over him. I'm not worried about his ability to get easy baskets this way. Gilmore is phenomenal at getting to "his spot". Not only that, but his playoff offensive numbers are on par with the greatest of all time, and were up there before he was injured and needed to be closer to the basket. Unseld can try all he like, but Gilmore in this season is unstoppable.
The other main point is of course Baylor, and if he's being looked after by Barry, it's essentially big trouble here. I won't go as far as saying Barry would act as a swinging gate against Baylor, but he's not far from it. Baylor's strength will be a major factor here, and ultimately I think the pressure here and from Gilmore are where we take down this series.
When you add in the effectiveness of a dominant scoring 6th man like Connie Hawkins and the useful scoring from Van Arsdale, we provide more than enough capable scoring options to get the job done here. It's not like we need to score 100 points with a defense like ours.
M4E might rebut that he has a great passing system, but I assure you looking at our number that we are as good if not better as a team at ball movement. Everyone of our guys are nothing short of quality in terms of distributing the ball.
In terms of rebounding, normally you'd look at Bellamy and Unseld in awe, unless they're up against the dominance of Thurmond and Gilmore. In fact, across the board we have the rebounding edge, which will be huge to prevent all those second looks for a solid offensive unit.
Pretty straightforward series win for us here.
Miller4ever wrote:Gremz wrote:VS MILLER4EVER
There's really not a whole lot that needs to be addressed here in reality. I think this is a pretty straight forward case of defense being too much. Sure there's reason to be concerned with the volume offense, but Barry's success wasn't tested against a prime Thurmond, let alone with a monster of a defensive partner in Gilmore. Even against just Sloan and Van Lier they only scraped through to the finals, and up against a more formidable defense with a one dimensional offense a similar result is a big stretch of the imagination.
The biggest concern is with Barry's ability to take over games. In wake we have Sloan to take him on as a man defender, the main reason being to restrict any freedom he has. We don't want him to be able to have his way on the court so locking him down via solid man defense is what we have in mind. Caldwell isn't what we consider a major threat, and Baylor should adequately provide a solid size coverage to restrict those open looks.
Van Lier will be a huge factor on defense here. Lucas, a guy who wasn't immune from turnovers, will find the pressing nature of Van Lier exceptionally difficult to manage. Specifically, the underrated court vision of Lucas that M4E suggests will struggle to be in effect with such a dominant defensive threat looming over him constantly. Van Lier's ability to manufacture steals is legendary, pair that with an equal threat in Sloan and it's hard to see any way that a smooth passing game will exist from the backcourt. This is another big advantage to us, considering they will rely upon heavy amounts of ball movement to create enough open looks to threaten the scoreboard. Let's face it, it's not like they'll be getting any easy looks inside.
I'll keep going back to it, but there's not enough range threats to worry about for us here. It's theoretically the only way an offense will succeed against us, and you'd need ammunition in bucket loads, which is simply not present here.
Gilmore and Thurmond have little immediate threat offensively from an aging Bellamy and a less than dominant scorer in Unseld. The best part about this is how it will reflect upon the dominance on the boards, and the pressure they can apply to the guards who attempt to get into the paint (which I give them credit for IF they even try it, big if). With such a prominent big court we will be more than capable of stopping any easy hoops, effectively forcing M4E's team to a jumpshooting team, which will certainly not end well.
Offensively our two main guys will get theirs. With Unseld "holding" off Gilmore he can simply use his length to shoot over him. I'm not worried about his ability to get easy baskets this way. Gilmore is phenomenal at getting to "his spot". Not only that, but his playoff offensive numbers are on par with the greatest of all time, and were up there before he was injured and needed to be closer to the basket. Unseld can try all he like, but Gilmore in this season is unstoppable.
The other main point is of course Baylor, and if he's being looked after by Barry, it's essentially big trouble here. I won't go as far as saying Barry would act as a swinging gate against Baylor, but he's not far from it. Baylor's strength will be a major factor here, and ultimately I think the pressure here and from Gilmore are where we take down this series.
When you add in the effectiveness of a dominant scoring 6th man like Connie Hawkins and the useful scoring from Van Arsdale, we provide more than enough capable scoring options to get the job done here. It's not like we need to score 100 points with a defense like ours.
M4E might rebut that he has a great passing system, but I assure you looking at our number that we are as good if not better as a team at ball movement. Everyone of our guys are nothing short of quality in terms of distributing the ball.
In terms of rebounding, normally you'd look at Bellamy and Unseld in awe, unless they're up against the dominance of Thurmond and Gilmore. In fact, across the board we have the rebounding edge, which will be huge to prevent all those second looks for a solid offensive unit.
Pretty straightforward series win for us here.
No, cause no.
