His Greatness

I'm also imagining a lot of "my turn" with the basketball.

How do you figure? Regardless, I would still like to give him a chance. We're not in any kind of urgency (or position) to win anyways; I'd prefer using these down years with a constructive coach that will cultivate the youth and groom them into players.

Horrible. Because you're right, but at the same time there is still an unexplainable inkling of hope even though we won't win.

Didn't even smile. Funniest thing that came out of it was JVG's line about him being Lois Lane.

Mhm. That, and Rondo's postseason performance has really secured the decision for me.

I get that Lewis can get his shot off easier, but he was cold all game — why give him two shots (especially after missing the first one) in the clutch?

And 1?

I can't help but feel that Orlando is just ill-equipped for Boston. I don't think the rest of the series will be this one-sided, but I still have Boston in the Finals.

Sharp defense from Boston. Couldn't have defended any better.

I am not a Cavs fan, and I have never seen CF douche it up that excessively.

Wow, real classy.

And we have a heartbeat.

What the hell Garnett? Wasn't this guy done like two weeks ago?

Yeah, but the difference is that Wade was still aggressive, assertive, and he never tuned out. I don't know whether LeBron is injured or not, but whatever it is, it's f'ing with his head and he's not in a good place right now.

Agreed on everything but the first sentence. Momentum and runs are very real and a part of basketball. And coaches will always value clutch/important baskets in tight games over worthless points against no defense in a blowout. Absolutely not the same in importance. I refuse to hand out handicaps. I'll judge the performances by what they were. I understand your point, but you realize how it's flawed logic to project a 21 minute game over a larger volume and assume that value? It's an incredible rate of scoring, but you just cannot expect him to score at the same rate and pace for 26 more minutes. I suppose it isn't literally impossible, but you do understand how illogical that argument looks though, right? Things like PER 48 are maybe worthy of projecting over a full season because there is a bigger sample size, but single games? Nah, just take them for what they were and don't overthink it. Yet, 21 minutes of streaky scoring is enough to assume Dragic would've scored 55 points? And fair enough — explain the other two. Explain Eric Maynor, Darren Collison, Sergio Rodriguez, and Sebastian Telfair averaging 9+ APG. Explain McGee's 5.01 BPG, Thabeet's 4.84, and Andersen's 4.05... all better than Howard's metrics. They matter to an extent, but not so much that it begins to warp logic. Both games were outstanding, but you have to understand this: Dragic didn't score 55 points, he scored 23.

It is, but impact varies depending on the situation. However, you can only assume the production is the same because no background information is given. Minutes only manner in the most extreme cases. Generally, I want efficiency (shots taken) and timely production (situational). Three points at the end of a blowout is not nearly as important as three to end a drought in a close game. You're overthinking this. No player can control what happens in the game when they're benched, meaning there is no guarantee that the subs will even score. I'm not sure why you even argued this. You realize that points are cumulative right? And that two players cannot score at the same time? Yes it looks worse because you changed the production to an extreme scenario to suit your argument, but generally, and especially with the topic at hand, it's quite insignificant. I understand what you're saying and it makes sense, but the logic is not invariably correct, and becomes flawed as you progress with it, such as with this case. You're debating using rates and projection rather than what actually happened. Dragic did not score 55 points (and he still would never have been close if he played the same minutes as Rondo). He scored 21 points. Rondo scored more, contributed in every area, and completely outproduced and outperformed Dragic from top to bottom. According to the PER 48 metrics (essentially your logic), Paul Davis 'really' averaged 30.1 PPG, 18 APG, and was the year's top shot-blocker with a historic 6.01 BPG (new record), Kevin Love was a better rebounder than Dwight Howard with 18.4 RPG, and Corey Maggette was the 9th best scorer this season. After all, production per minute is what matters most.

Yeah, Mark Jackson, who's wanted a head coaching job for years, turned down the interview. Wonderful decision on his part too. An average career as a point guard, a below average career as a basketball analyst, and no prior career at all as a coach is definitely enough to snag a head coaching job where the situation is convenient. What else can you tell me about Laimbeer?

I would absolutely love Larry Brown here if he wasn't so adamant about taking over GM duties. Someone similar—an accomplished, personable guy that would ideally unearth this team's defensive potential—like JVG or even Thibodeau might suffice, and they don't have the baggage. Van Gundy is a long shot, but he would be my first pick.

First, none of those trades ever happened. I drafted Williams, and I gutted my entire team for Durant. Second, blow me. As a GM, you are supposed to take advantage, shop around, and make the right deals. And Jeffrey, you will never get straight.

Do you know how situational that scenario sounds? You could map out an imaginary scenario like that with anything to make it favorable to one side. For instance, let's say it was a closely contested, down to the wire game — assuming the player that played 48 minutes scored in all quarters, which player has more impact? The player that gave consistent production through four quarters and kept his team in a game, or a player that comes in for one quarter and scores the same amount? And keep in mind that the players have absolutely no control over what happens in the game while they're on the bench, so the production (20 points) is the same, barring a significant difference in efficiency and importance. Besides, it absolutely does not apply here because neither players lost, and Rondo outproduced Dragic and had a better game. So your vague hypothetical is still irrelevant. He scored 23 points in the fourth quarter. Exceptional performance, but Rondo not only scored more, but he had the advantage everywhere else too.

I will not be participating this time. So everyone has a chance to win now.

Way different, because it's the same production in both scenarios, whereas Rondo outproduced Dragic, dominated the entire game, controlled the flow, played defense, and was just as instrumental to his team in the fourth.

It's not exactly honest, but every smart defender will take advantage of whatever they can get away with. I'm sure Kobe has some tricks of his own, but he would never publicly divulge it.

We are judging the performance and the total production, so therefore the minutes are irrelevant, also meaning the minutes they played are irrelevant. Did Dragic score 55 points?

Everyone did! But it seemed like he was surprised or something because I said OTR would be still be my main site. I never wanted OTR to close down.