I have been writing NBA Draft diaries for years. Typically they were just records of my thoughts and actions as I watched the draft with a group of my friends. This year, I decided to do things a little bit differently.
Rather than recording my thoughts and posting them the next day, I decided to cover the draft live and give all of my readers a chance to interact with me as the draft occurs. I asked my good friend and former radio show co-host Cody Steger to join me.
Just click on the event below and join us for the fun!
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Van Gogh Spray Paint
There are just some things in the game of basketball that words cannot do justice. Simply describing some plays is just not enough. As you see it, you know it's special. You can tell the player that executed the play is a keen observer of the game. They've been watching the tendencies of his opponent. He knows the game inside out. And then it happens. That's right. I'm talking about the perfect flop.
Wait...You thought I was going to talk about the perfect pass? Sorry. This is an art form all its own and just as impressive in my opinion.
Let's take a look at some beauties.
Would you look at it?
Would you look at that?
Just look at it?
Right now, I would assume most of you are about ready to skip over the rest of this post. You likely don't want to read an entire post about why grown men falling over is an art form and that's your right. In fact, you're probably not alone because it seems as though the general public is against flopping and I just don't understand it.
The idea of punishing floppers and attempting to outlaw the flop in the NBA started to develop early on this season and I had assumed it would subside, but unfortunately it has not disappeared. In fact, it has strengthened. Now you can't watch a single game without some announcer taking about how acting is not a part of basketball and players should not be rewarded for acting. It's gotten so bad that Jeff Van Gundy can no longer go five minutes without screaming about outlawing the flop. If you go to Youtube right now and type in "jeff van gundy flop", you will find over a page of results!
And why do people want to outlaw it? I'm honestly not sure. The only argument I've heard pertains to the manlihood of each player in the league.
The best way to play basketball is as physical as possible. If you're a post player, it is absolutely necessary to throw elbows and bang around as hard as possible to get position. That's how you play basketball in the NBA. It's a MAN'S GAME.
I'm pretty sure that is how the argument goes. It doesn't make a ton of sense to me, but I guess that's how people see the game. I'm not sure why though because any one who has ever played the game knows that basketball is so much more. Basketball is all about the game inside the game. On offense, if someone takes away Option A, you go to Option B. On defense, after you have taken away Option A on the first possession, you give up Option A to take away Option B. The game is unbelievably intricate and any one who argues that the strongest man should prevail just doesn't grasp the beauty of the game.
The flop is a tool utilized by the smartest players to manipulate the game to their advantage. The flop is not a single play. The flop is a psychological weapon. The flop is not about the play, but rather the plays leading up to and after the flop has occurred. A single flop can affect an entire game.
The greatest flop artists plan out their flops. The entire first quarter will likely consist of overly aggressive physical play. Lots of pushing. Lots of elbows. The pushing will get to such an extreme point that the opponent will be on the verge of throwing a punch. Then it happens.
The flop. A real beauty. Typically within five feet of an official. And completely exaggerated.
This will be infuriating to the opponent. He just spent the last quarter in the most physical battle of his life and now this guy falls over when he gets touched. What will he do the rest of the game? Will he throw some elbows again? Will he fall over?
This kind of psychological battle is something that a majority of people want to remove from the game. Outlawing the flop will remove one of the intricacies that makes the game so special. Instead of painting with a brush, the game would turn into a bunch of artists attempting to replicate a Van Gogh with spray paint.
And now enjoy The Art of Flopping as taught by Professor Vlade Divac.
Wait...You thought I was going to talk about the perfect pass? Sorry. This is an art form all its own and just as impressive in my opinion.
Let's take a look at some beauties.
Would you look at it?
Would you look at that?
Just look at it?
Right now, I would assume most of you are about ready to skip over the rest of this post. You likely don't want to read an entire post about why grown men falling over is an art form and that's your right. In fact, you're probably not alone because it seems as though the general public is against flopping and I just don't understand it.
The idea of punishing floppers and attempting to outlaw the flop in the NBA started to develop early on this season and I had assumed it would subside, but unfortunately it has not disappeared. In fact, it has strengthened. Now you can't watch a single game without some announcer taking about how acting is not a part of basketball and players should not be rewarded for acting. It's gotten so bad that Jeff Van Gundy can no longer go five minutes without screaming about outlawing the flop. If you go to Youtube right now and type in "jeff van gundy flop", you will find over a page of results!
And why do people want to outlaw it? I'm honestly not sure. The only argument I've heard pertains to the manlihood of each player in the league.
The best way to play basketball is as physical as possible. If you're a post player, it is absolutely necessary to throw elbows and bang around as hard as possible to get position. That's how you play basketball in the NBA. It's a MAN'S GAME.
I'm pretty sure that is how the argument goes. It doesn't make a ton of sense to me, but I guess that's how people see the game. I'm not sure why though because any one who has ever played the game knows that basketball is so much more. Basketball is all about the game inside the game. On offense, if someone takes away Option A, you go to Option B. On defense, after you have taken away Option A on the first possession, you give up Option A to take away Option B. The game is unbelievably intricate and any one who argues that the strongest man should prevail just doesn't grasp the beauty of the game.
The flop is a tool utilized by the smartest players to manipulate the game to their advantage. The flop is not a single play. The flop is a psychological weapon. The flop is not about the play, but rather the plays leading up to and after the flop has occurred. A single flop can affect an entire game.
The greatest flop artists plan out their flops. The entire first quarter will likely consist of overly aggressive physical play. Lots of pushing. Lots of elbows. The pushing will get to such an extreme point that the opponent will be on the verge of throwing a punch. Then it happens.
The flop. A real beauty. Typically within five feet of an official. And completely exaggerated.
This will be infuriating to the opponent. He just spent the last quarter in the most physical battle of his life and now this guy falls over when he gets touched. What will he do the rest of the game? Will he throw some elbows again? Will he fall over?
This kind of psychological battle is something that a majority of people want to remove from the game. Outlawing the flop will remove one of the intricacies that makes the game so special. Instead of painting with a brush, the game would turn into a bunch of artists attempting to replicate a Van Gogh with spray paint.
And now enjoy The Art of Flopping as taught by Professor Vlade Divac.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Why Does Russell Westbrook Shoot So Much?
For most of this postseason, this has been the question when talking about the Oklahoma City Thunder. Any time the Thunder have lost a game this postseason, this has been the question. Even in games the Thunder have won, this has been the question asked during post-game press conferences.
This has held true during the NBA Finals. After each game, countless experts tell us that there is no reason Russell Westbrook should be taking more shots than Kevin Durant. Kevin Durant should be the one getting the most shots. And this seems like a logical argument. Durant is the most potent scorer the NBA has ever seen. I know that statement probably seems foolish coming from a 21 year old and probably seems to be a bit hyperbolic in nature, but I honestly don't care. You're looking at a 6'10" wing that shoots it like Reggie Miller and attacks the rim with his incredible length that reminds many of George Gervin. He's just an absolutely deadly package on the offensive end and has led the league in scoring the last three seasons. At times, he is absolutely unstoppable. With all of this being said, Durant shouldn't be the one taking the most shots for the Thunder.
I know this statement seems to defy logic, but let's take a closer look at this argument.
When this idea is brought up to Durant after games, he will say things that either support Westbrook's decision making or suggest that taking a ton of shots just isn't in his personality. These comments are typically seen by media types to represent Durant being a great leader and teammate rather than his actual preference. This is where I believe the problem with this theory begins.
Durant has now played in 420 career games. In those 420 career games, Durant has taken 25 or more shots in only 36 games. I wasn't a math major at Maryville, but I do know that 36 of 420 games equates to less than 10 percent. (Much of the same holds up in the playoffs. Durant has shot 25 or more times in only four of his forty playoff games.) This would tend to make me believe Durant doesn't necessarily prefer to take a ton of shots. Some might argue that Durant hasn't had the chance to take a ton of shots because of the people he plays with, but I just don't see this argument holding up. If Durant wanted to take significantly more shots, he could. These shots may be of lower quality, but Durant could take more shots if he chose to.
For example, when we take a look at the league's best scorer before Durant we will find a much different story. The last player to lead the league in scoring three years in a row was none other than Kobe Bryant. In 1,323 career games, Kobe Bryant has taken 25 or more shots in 356 of the games. That is over 25% of his games. I'm not trying to say that this is a good or bad thing. I'm simply saying that some players prefer to take a lot of shots and some players don't. As a volume shooter and scorer, Bryant has been the league's best player and one of the ten greatest NBA players of all-time. So, obviously this approach works out very well for some players. I just don't see Durant being one of those players.
Another major logical flaw that occurs when discussing Durant getting more shots is the assumption that Durant will continue to shoot at the unbelievably high percentage he has in this postseason. During this postseason, Durant is shooting 51.4%. When taking a look at the games in which Durant has taken 25 or more shots in his career, Durant has only shot 51% or more in 11 of those 36 games. I know obviously this is a small sample size, but, at the same time, the fact that this sample size is so small shows that Durant's preference is not to take a lot of shots and it may be because he simply knows that he isn't all that effective when he does.
On top of all of that, Durant isn't wrong when he says that the Thunder are better when Westbrook takes more shots than him. This season the Thunder have a 29-8 record when Westbrook has more field goal attempts than Durant. When Durant has more attempts than Westbrook, the Thunder are 27-14. Both of those records are good, but clearly the Thunder are a better team when Westbrook takes more shots than Durant. Will there be games when pundits think that the Thunder would have been better with Durant getting more shots? Absolutely. Are the Thunder ultimately more dangerous when Westbrook is taking more shots than Durant? Yes.
So let's all just lay off Russell Westbrook for a little bit and figure out more ways to pick apart Lebron Jame's game. Wait, what?
This has held true during the NBA Finals. After each game, countless experts tell us that there is no reason Russell Westbrook should be taking more shots than Kevin Durant. Kevin Durant should be the one getting the most shots. And this seems like a logical argument. Durant is the most potent scorer the NBA has ever seen. I know that statement probably seems foolish coming from a 21 year old and probably seems to be a bit hyperbolic in nature, but I honestly don't care. You're looking at a 6'10" wing that shoots it like Reggie Miller and attacks the rim with his incredible length that reminds many of George Gervin. He's just an absolutely deadly package on the offensive end and has led the league in scoring the last three seasons. At times, he is absolutely unstoppable. With all of this being said, Durant shouldn't be the one taking the most shots for the Thunder.
I know this statement seems to defy logic, but let's take a closer look at this argument.
When this idea is brought up to Durant after games, he will say things that either support Westbrook's decision making or suggest that taking a ton of shots just isn't in his personality. These comments are typically seen by media types to represent Durant being a great leader and teammate rather than his actual preference. This is where I believe the problem with this theory begins.
Durant has now played in 420 career games. In those 420 career games, Durant has taken 25 or more shots in only 36 games. I wasn't a math major at Maryville, but I do know that 36 of 420 games equates to less than 10 percent. (Much of the same holds up in the playoffs. Durant has shot 25 or more times in only four of his forty playoff games.) This would tend to make me believe Durant doesn't necessarily prefer to take a ton of shots. Some might argue that Durant hasn't had the chance to take a ton of shots because of the people he plays with, but I just don't see this argument holding up. If Durant wanted to take significantly more shots, he could. These shots may be of lower quality, but Durant could take more shots if he chose to.
For example, when we take a look at the league's best scorer before Durant we will find a much different story. The last player to lead the league in scoring three years in a row was none other than Kobe Bryant. In 1,323 career games, Kobe Bryant has taken 25 or more shots in 356 of the games. That is over 25% of his games. I'm not trying to say that this is a good or bad thing. I'm simply saying that some players prefer to take a lot of shots and some players don't. As a volume shooter and scorer, Bryant has been the league's best player and one of the ten greatest NBA players of all-time. So, obviously this approach works out very well for some players. I just don't see Durant being one of those players.
Another major logical flaw that occurs when discussing Durant getting more shots is the assumption that Durant will continue to shoot at the unbelievably high percentage he has in this postseason. During this postseason, Durant is shooting 51.4%. When taking a look at the games in which Durant has taken 25 or more shots in his career, Durant has only shot 51% or more in 11 of those 36 games. I know obviously this is a small sample size, but, at the same time, the fact that this sample size is so small shows that Durant's preference is not to take a lot of shots and it may be because he simply knows that he isn't all that effective when he does.
On top of all of that, Durant isn't wrong when he says that the Thunder are better when Westbrook takes more shots than him. This season the Thunder have a 29-8 record when Westbrook has more field goal attempts than Durant. When Durant has more attempts than Westbrook, the Thunder are 27-14. Both of those records are good, but clearly the Thunder are a better team when Westbrook takes more shots than Durant. Will there be games when pundits think that the Thunder would have been better with Durant getting more shots? Absolutely. Are the Thunder ultimately more dangerous when Westbrook is taking more shots than Durant? Yes.
So let's all just lay off Russell Westbrook for a little bit and figure out more ways to pick apart Lebron Jame's game. Wait, what?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)