Poe

Whatever you say about how the Thunder played at home, whether they executed a possession here or failed a possession there, their loss boils down to one single category; three point shooting. Despite inconsistent energy and focus, the Thunder played better overall. They simply missed threes. Wide open ones. Had they made at least 24% of their 17 attempts (4 makes instead of 1, meaning 9 more points scored), they would have won.

But we ARE born as an animal.

When the Mavericks won against the Thunder, it took Dirk to score 48 points on 94% TS in order to win by only 9 points. The next game, Dirk scored 29 points on 68% TS. Though not as phenomenal as the last game, it was still incredibly efficient, yet the Mavericks still lost by 6. Just putting it out there. Let's see how this plays out.

1. Evan Turner A rookie, and he's already the best rebounder and distributor of the three. Plus, he takes better care of the ball than the other two in their respective rookie years. He's also a good defender. Really, he's shown to be good at everything except scoring, and it's unlikely that any of the abilities he has proven will get lost over time. If he works hard, he'll be a good scorer too. 2. James Harden Like Turner, a good rebounder for an SG (though not AS good). Scores very efficiently. He doesn't bring the same impact defensively as much as on offense, though. 3. O.J. Mayo He's had an off-year, though statistically he is likely to bounce back. For his career, he is the best scorer of the three. However, he is a poor rebounder, and his lack of size makes it difficult to be a good match-up piece defensively. A reason why he came off the bench this year.

-1. It would take you 5 minutes. Anything else that you would be planning to do in that time frame? Build a rocket ship? If not, then what does a "life" mean to you? If you are too busy to click "bold" or "underline", then you are clearly too busy to even submit a thread. GTFO of here then, those rocket scientists need you. Or maybe this is just an attempt to look super-cool, when you could simply admit that something you have actually taken time and effort into - like making all these threads about projecting team offseasons - needs improvement. Every time you attempt to say you are too high and mighty to become better, you take a step backward in LIFE. Instead, take note of my suggestions, and approach them with an OPEN MIND.

First woman player on the roster. Source: http://twitter.com/#!/darrenrovell/status/70829361334464513 An interview: http://blogs.courant.com/uconn_womens_basketball/2011/05/maya-moore-talks-about-joining.html http://thatsenuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Maya-Moore-Lynx.jpg

Like here's an example: Looks better and easier to follow.

It's good to put effort into a post, but it becomes much easier to read when you 1) Put space between each paragraph 2) Make use of bold, underlines, and italics. 3) And maybe even add different color and sizes to it. Not at random, though. Just make sure it looks organized.

I like it. Put LBJ on Rose. He's not used to being guarded by defenders stronger than him. And give the guy single coverage please Spo. Let him take 30 (contested) shots. His scoring efficiency isn't great. His team actually has a higher chance of losing the more shots he takes. Fixed Edit: Well, not "dumb", but I think it would be better.

It doesn't need to be. The draft is likely to be a weak one. They already have a lot of young talent. Instead of adding talent and more youth to wait on, they should look to fill specific needs. Let's take a look at some team stats: Strengths 2nd in Offensive Reb% -- 29.6 6th in 3PT% -- 37.6 10th in Blocks -- 5.1 Weaknesses 21st in FT/FGA -- .217 24th in effective FG% -- 48.3 27th in Defensive FT/FGA -- .251 27th in Defensive effective FG% -- 51.4 27th in Defensive 3PT% -- 37.4 30th in Turnover Percentage -- 15.1 uhh.. Middle Ground 16th in Defensive Reb% -- 73.7 16th in Defensive Turnover Percentage -- 13.1 First let's address the strengths. Rebounding. This is an element the T-Wolves have successfully built this season through Beasley (9.6 Total Reb% at the SF position), Randolph (14.4), and especially Kevin Love (23.6 - #1 in the league). It is essential they keep these players so that they can keep virtually their only strength as a team, and build from there. Three Point Shooting. Wesley Johnson led the team in threes made with 1.3 per game (35.6%), and Martell Webster and Love each with 1.2 per game (both 41.7% each), then Luke Ridnour with 1.0 (44.0%). With Johnson and Love being definite core pieces, three point shooting should continue to be a strong part of this team, plus Beasley making 0.8 per game (36.6%). Shot Blocking. Darko led the way with 2.0 per game. However, he is also foul prone, leading his team with 3.3 fouls per game (in only 24.4 minutes). Considering the team is already among the worst in keeping their opponents off the free throw line (27th in Defensive FT/FGA), AND the fact that Darko is not a strong rebounder for a center (11.8 Total Reb%), NOR is he a good scorer (10th in his team in Points Per 36 minutes with only 12.9, plus among the worst True Shooting Percentages on his team with just 48.2), it may be best to move the center to the bench and replace his starting role with Anthony Randolph. They lose shot blocking, but they gain rebounding, scoring, and less fouls, plus some added ball handling. Second, weaknesses. Scoring Efficiency. They don't make many shots inside the arc and they rarely get to the free throw line. Looking at free throws, Kevin Love is best on the team with 5.8 free throws made per game. Then comes Beasley with 3.0, however, he attempts 17.1 shots to get his 4.0 attempts, a very poor free throw rate. Scoring efficiency. Of the players to play at least 20 MPG, Kevin Love leads the team once again with a TS% of 59.3. Second is Anthony Tolliver with 58.5, third is Martell Webster with 57.5, fourth is Luke Ridnour with a 56.7, and fifth is Anthony Randolph with 53.7. Those are the only players on the team to shoot above the league average of about 53.5. Michael Beasley only shot 51.0. Defensive Scoring Efficiency. The team has had the best success defensively when Darko Milicic, Kevin Love, Anthony Randolph, Kosta Koufos, and Corey Brewer were on the floor individually, using Defensive Rating (an estimate of points allowed per 100 possessions). This shows that the better part of their defense lies in the interior, meaning they need perimeter defenders, particularly when taking note of their extremely poor defense on shooters (27th in Defensive 3PT%). The team has size, but needs foot-speed to increase the pressure on the perimeter, without fouling (27th in Defensive FT/FGA). Turnovers. Dead last in the league, which is extremely disappointing considering the team supposedly ran the Triangle Offense. Nearly all Phil Jackson led teams were at least top 10 in the league in turnover percentage, both with the Bulls and the Lakers. Something went very, very wrong between the teaching and the learning of this offense. The team's worst players at taking care of the ball are Jonny Flynn with a turnover percentage of 26.4, Pekovic with 22.5, Darko Milicic with 19.4, Sebastian Telfair with 19.3, and Sundiata Gaines with 18.5 Last, Needs. Reviewing the above, this team needs: 1) Ball handling / Guard-Play / Discipline when running the Triangle 2) Perimeter Defenders 3) Players that score around the basket and draw fouls The above can be acquired through their trade pieces. Players that have value but don't fill any needs, along with their #2 draft pick. Jonny Flynn, Nikola Pekovic, Darko Milicic, and Wayne Ellington can all be traded without damaging the team's strengths or overall talent level. Luke Ridnour could also be trade-able depending on who they get in return.

Kahn has taken enough gambles, and he's given them all time to play out. Now is time for sure-things, and that's trading a pick for a player of proven value.

And you seriously believe that? Do you read my posts? I even watch the WNBA for crying out loud. I think people here put more value into rep points than you think, and post count as well. Or else there is nothing to strive for. There would be no motivation.

1. Dorell Wright hasn't primed. (Also, measuring his rate of improvement, he is likely to be an all-star-caliber player two years from now). 2. However it's given out, I still don't feel he deserved it, and I believe the way the MVP award is selected should NOT be based on votes, but by measurement. Also meaning that more statistics need to be calculated in order to accurately measure the true MVP (like screen-for-scores, deflections, etc.). 3. LeBron is more deserving than Rose, but I'm not sure if he is the most deserving either. Perhaps Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, or Kobe Bryant. All of which are more deserving than Rose (IMO).

Depends on the situation. And whether you are smart or not isn't measured by what people think of you.

You aren't proving much with that post. Nobody is correct 100% of the time. If I am, it's by luck. By chance. First quote: I underestimated the Hawks and the Grizzlies. I made a couple mistakes. The Knicks had injuries to key players from game 1. I still believe they would have won the series had they remained healthy. It's difficult to predict injuries. But that's still 9/12 correct so far in the playoffs. Second quote: It was an undeserved MVP. He team won because they among the top in the league in defense and rebounding, but are inefficient offensively, and Rose isn't that efficient offensively either. Third quote: Terrible choice. "unless Rose and Deng can become true perimeter threats." - Which they did, averaging a combined 42 PPG. "Whether Rose truly improves his 3 point shooting is going to have a bigger impact than even Rose might realize." - He made 1.6 threes per game this year, shooting 33%. Fourth quote: "July 2010" Nevertheless • Portland was injured again • the Thunder improved at PF and C like predicted • Houston didn't get higher than 8th like predicted "if Yao does not successfully return". • The Kings still have high potential, and may very well make the playoffs next year But admittedly, the Grizzlies and Hornets predictions were outright mistakes Fifth quote: Arenas still has much to prove. If things aren't different by next season, THEN you can start calling me out. It's way too early now. Sixth quote: "High hopes" = Prediction? I mean, common lol. You have to do better than that if you want to make me look bad.

To be honest, I don't care all that much about how much rep I receive. It's virtually valueless. It's not like I get a prize for it, there's no money involved, nor is it anywhere close to an accurate measurement of basketball intellect. What bothers me though is the pattern I notice with rep and the way it's given and received, and how that actually compares to real life in many ways. Like intangible rep points given to someone who says a snappy "comeback" (in a public situation), even if what's said doesn't logically make much sense, and in the grand scheme of things nothing positive was accomplished.... for a small example. You're right, it's too soon to make such a statement. I haven't proven anything. Well not yet, hopefully. I do feel that a lot of the things I say aren't taken seriously now, but perhaps after months or years, people might look back and say "you know, he had a point...". Sometimes it's predictions I make, and the shitty thing about predictions is that they don't come true until they happen, which may take months or years, forcing me to bump topics if I want to gain a small amount of respect or recognition, since people don't remember that stuff. A lot of predictions I've made have still yet to unravel, and a lot were made outside the forums like predicting O.J. Mayo would be a bench player at the beginning of the season, or predicting the Rockets would trade for a ball handling wing player (who turned out to be Terrence Williams). The scoring system isn't perfect. Not many stats, or even advanced stats, are. Hollinger is famous for stats like PER (Player Efficiency Rating) and PPR (Pure Point Rating), when their flaws are more than obvious. I actively challenged people to find the flaws in the results of my own stat, which I suppose can be difficult when I had yet to reveal it's process. I think I've drawn a conclusion that there aren't enough flaws where the stat can't at least be considered useful. However, I do have one concern, and that the result of my scoring rating oddly ranks the players similar to points per 36 minutes. But comparing to the fact that PPR is very similar to assist to turnover ratio (actually, it's formula is basically assist to turnover ratio but factors team pace), I guess it isn't too much to worry about. And I'm not sure what you mean about by "so obnoxious with your obsession with being right". If you are talking about during debates, that's just an attempt to get people to strengthen their side of the argument. I want to be challenged in that way. When I feel that they aren't making a strong case, I try to push buttons. Perhaps I push the wrong ones, leading to "hurr durr you're just an idiot". If you're talking about bumping topics saying "I told you so". Well, I don't do that very often. There's no real reason to do it other than gloat. Maybe I'm just tired of people not taking me seriously (or, at least, it feels that way. Maybe it's my anxiety). And the shittiest part, is when my posts get this long, people don't usually read it. At least not the whole thing, and they'll quote just a sentence acting as if that's the basis of my argument, forcing me to repeat and waste my energy. It's probably a reason I'm getting disinterested in this forum. And I'm guessing most of the people who click on this thread, seeing that a new post has been made, will immediately skip and go back to the previous page seeing a post longer than two sentences. Another reason not to stick around.

To be honest, I didn't expect them to lose in the first round either, especially to the same team they destroyed the previous year in the playoffs (the Hawks). But the circumstances changed.

You seem mad. But that's life. Hated before respected. Kind of like Van Gogh. It takes a while for the rest to catch up. That's why I don't get repped. At least not repped by the more active posters when my opinion differs too far from the norm. I'm not popular at this stage. I'm outcasted for being different, when the difference is simply a measure of capacity. This is more directed towards my views, my opinions, my creations. I could have been wrong in my predictions by chance, like say, an injury. Anyway, I have no reason for my ego to inflate. This stuff happens all the time. I just don't bother to point it out as much as I should. When my ego will really inflate is once I talk to NBA team executives about some stats I have invented and will invent, after I get them patented of course. Edit: And of course your post gets repped lol.

Kind of off-timing to bump this but.... first round not an option?

6 posts got rep points. All posts in this thread already incorrect except mine. I deserve at least 6 rep points.

Number one in the league in 3 pointers made.

Looks like I got the conference finals matchups correct.

In some places in Africa, an abnormally long neck is considered attractive. In others, small breasts are attractive. In some places larger, even fatter, women are considered attractive. For me, it's the women that don't buy into the cultural standards. Because none of it's real. Parenting and other influences on children like this girl is what sets the standards in her mind. She doesn't just feel like all the stuff she is doing is an option, but a must. She is taught that being attractive is at utmost value. In her mind, if she doesn't rid herself of "wrinkles", she will be considered unattractive, and therefore unaccepted by others. When in reality, none of it's real. It's all in her imagination, thanks to her mother.

Lol. This happens so much I should get paid. I'm told that I'm crazy and out of my mind, then turn out completely right in the end.

Using this thingy (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi), I found: Jason Kidd and Darrell Walker are the only players to, in a single season, average 8+ assists and 8+ rebounds, but average less than 15 points (min 50 games). -------------Source: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=&year_max=&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=g&c1comp=gt&c1val=50&c2stat=pts_per_g&c2comp=lt&c2val=15&c3stat=ast_per_g&c3comp=gt&c3val=8&c4stat=trb_per_g&c4comp=gt&c4val=8&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws Only Richie Frahm (who?) has had above a .60 TS% and below a .05 TOV% in a single season (min 50 games). -------------Source: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=&year_max=&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=ts_pct&c1comp=gt&c1val=.60&c2stat=tov_pct&c2comp=lt&c2val=5&c3stat=g&c3comp=gt&c3val=50&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws Michael Jordan, Tracy McGrady, and Gus Williams are the only players to have above a .30 AST% and below a .10 TOV% in a single season (min 50 games). -------------Source: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=&year_max=&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=ast_pct&c1comp=gt&c1val=30&c2stat=tov_pct&c2comp=lt&c2val=10&c3stat=g&c3comp=gt&c3val=50&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws