70sFan wrote:trex_8063 wrote:That's assuming the FT tally on the official boxscore is accurate---which I've said repeatedly that should be the one thing they get right on the box at the time........however, it's clear that even that gets botched sometimes:
You'll note Dick Garmaker is listed as going 3/3 from the FT line in the boxscore; however, he's clearly seen missing the front-end of a pair of FT's late in the 3rd Q (line 327 in the log, and there's a video time-stamp near that play if you wish to view for yourself). The commentator even comments about how it's relatively rare for Garmaker to miss a FT. So.....
It's strange to be honest, I wonder if that's a one game fluke or we should start to doubt in pre-broadcast stats at this point.
I think I've seen enough to doubt pretty much anything mid-60's or earlier.
Although [as I stated earlier], whatever errors there are hopefully effect everyone more or less equally in the long-run (such that general comparative relationships [statistically] more or less hold true).
70sFan wrote:Jack Twyman - Limited highlight footage I'd seen of him previously left me with the impression he was mostly a set-shooter......not at all the case. Very much a jump-shooter, and he actually has a pretty lightning-quick release. He's also got a very quick first step, and pretty good open-court speed.
His range extends out to pretty close to 3pt range, although he only sporadically actually does shoot from near there (I didn't record any of his 34 attempts as actually being from 24+ [or 23.75+] feet); he almost exclusively stays within about 21', with the majority of his attempts the 14-21' range.
The guy could shoot, no question. Could see him having a Klay Thompson-like career in the modern league (same size, tendency toward outside shooting, quick release, etc).
Yeah, I was highly impressed with Twyman's shooting ability in this game. He missed quite a few shots, but a lot of his attempts weren't easy wide open shots, he had the ability to knock down contested jumpshots. He seemed to be fine athlete as well, despite what I've heard about him. Just really good offensive player and it's not a surpirse that he thrived next to Oscar.
Have you looked at his defense? I think he wasn't anything special in this game, but he didn't make a lot of mistakes either. Just average type of defender.
Yeah, he appeared more or less average to me too. Nothing glaringly wrong with his defense, but he certainly wasn't a stand-out either.
There were a couple of instances where he moved his feet really well (he drew one charge, iirc, by moving his feet). He's somewhat absent on the defensive glass in this game, but his career numbers indicate he probably must have been "OK" on the defensive glass generally.
70sFan wrote:Elgin Baylor - Terrific athlete. Really nice touch from outside, and a super-strong finisher if he can get in close. Where he's REALLY struggled in the two games I've logged is the in-between, specifically the 10-16' range. At the rim, he's fantastic. From the outside he's been really good. Even from 3-10' he's been excellent [on very limited sample], as many of these are sort of runners, fluid running jump hooks or push-shots, etc.
From 10-16', though, it's usually a pull-up, and he's shown a habit of not going up fluidly off the dribble, but too often after picking up his dribble and pausing--->allowing the defender to really chest up on him. He'll try to shake him a little with maybe a head/shoulder fake, or nudge a little to get an inch or two of space, and then try to pull-up from a dead-stop. Kobe Bryant-like shots (just really really hard, and probably not the best shot selection).
And so far it's showing in the numbers: he's 0/10 in the 10-16' range.
He's hitting frankly AMAZING [even by modern standards] everywhere else on the court. And the other thing of note in his shot chart data is that this is almost all in isolation: so far only 20% of his FG's were assisted.
And I'll once more give a shout out to his passing. Really an underrated playmaker, imo. Leads his team in assists [by more than double anyone else] in this Royals game, fwiw; and a couple of pretty nice dimes included in that, too.
His lack of efficiency from close midrange can be explained in a way you did - he had bad habits of doing short stops before shooting which gave defenders more time to recover. On top of that, he had tendency of shooting turnaround one handed shots which he could make, but they definitely lower his efficiency.
I'm quite high on Baylor's offense the more I watch it. He was excellent all-around scorer but it's his passing and handles that are underrated historically. He was really a well rounded offensive player, even though many people view him in a way of typical high scoring SF. I really view him as Kobe-esque figure, only with less experienced coaches that allowed him for even more ridiculous shots.
Baylor also looks quite good defensively here, probably the best I've seen from him. He blocked and contested some shots and his athleticism helped Lakers inside. Very good rebounder as well, but we already knew it from other games.
Yes! He actually looks very good defensively in this game. At one point while on the FT line, the commentator is going on about his defensive presence (and improvements from his rookie year--->though I once noted the big improvement the Lakers made defensively when he arrived as a rookie).
I'd previously mentioned Twyman's surprisingly quick first step.....well, there's one instance where he uses it in attempt to beat Baylor off the dribble; but Baylor moves so well laterally he stays right in front and takes Twyman's shoulder squarely in the center of his chest, gets the offensive foul call.
He also blocks two shots in this game (I recall one of them being pretty impressive, too), contests 1 or 2 others pretty well. And of course the defensive rebounding presence as well.
Probably another underrated aspect of his game, as people tend to fixate on his offense.
70sFan wrote:Larry Foust - ......
For me he looks like someone who wouldn't be out of place even 30 years later and that's past prime Foust.
Totally agree. And you may be right; I too wouldn't be surprised if I learned he actually weighed closer to 240 in that video.
[/quote]70sFan wrote:Anyway, I'll leave it there (no need for me to comment on EVERY player). Thanks again for providing the footage.
Can I ask for one more - rookie Embry? He had quite good rebounding game and he showed flashes of decent offensive potential here. He was also MASSIVE as a rookie, at very least 240 lbs of muscles.
Oh yeah, good call; he's definitely worth a little discussion.
What can I say about him?......
Well, for starters I agree: he's a big strong dude. Vertical game a bit limited, but he uses that big body pretty well (he had the game-high 15 rebounds, for example, despite sitting out a long stretch because he picked up 3 fouls early). And nobody's really moving him if he didn't want to be moved (even Foust, who [as you mentioned] wasn't a small guy either).
When they show the close-up as he set for a FTA, his form looks strange to me; and incidentally that season was his career-worst at the line (weirdly, by a LONG shot at only 51.4%; was a career 64.0%). He otherwise showed a pinch more range than I was expecting, even going 1/2 from 16-23' (actual jump-shots, too). Looked like a "not bad" passer out of the post, too; could do those little misdirection one-handed passes/hand-offs because he could easily palm the ball (Foust did too, fwiw; interestingly the commentator stated at one point while Embry was on the line that Embry had a 12" hand-span!).
EDIT: I need a second opinion on a play in the Rockets/Knicks video......at 1:35....what was the call there? Do you think that was a shooting foul on Hank Finkel [and they're just not showing any of the FT's]?