Rose Sought Isiah's Advice
Isiah the attention whore. Hey everybody! He asked me for advice! Me!
4 months ago
bullhockey
76 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
So this is sort of off-topic, but this article is what made me think of it, so I'll post it here
Reading this article made me think about how hard it is to win championships in the NBA. In the NBA, it’s extremely hard to build a championship-caliber team, and as a result, many of the greatest players of all time have failed to win it all. Guys like John Stockton, Karl Malone, Charles Barkley and Patrick Ewing never won it all despite being really good. I then thought about the Super Bowl and how a flawed team like the Giants led by a very good , but not great QB in Eli Manning was able to win it all. Don’t get me wrong, the Giants were a great team, but were they really the hand-down most talented team in the league? And Eli Manning’s a great QB, but is he really one of the greatest QBs of all time? Anyways, it’s just so much harder to build a championship team in the NBA that there’s really no “lucking into a ring”, and I think that’s awesome.
Pat Riley is the devil.
yeah, thats one thing i always disliked about football is that the SB champs are almost never the best team in the NFL
bball though has the potential and usually lives up to its potential determining who are the true NBA champs and requires as you say not as much “luck.”
by Geo4MVP on Feb 9, 2012 12:14 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Two major problems with the NFL
One is the injuries. With only 16 games in a season and as few as 3 to win a super bowl, every injury is huge. Problem with that is that the league is plagued by injuries. Ask any player after week 10 or so and they will tell you “nobody is 100% right now”. Shorten the seasons to 12 (no more than 14) cut at least four teams and the NFL can become watchable again. As it is they are too eager to profit off of killing their players. It is pathetic and by the end of the season you don’t get the best ball possible with the best teams.
Two is the almost coin-flip nature of their playoffs. They want excitement and parody? So they make it so literally any team that is just good enough to sneak in the playoffs can win the whole thing. The health issue and the one-and-done playoffs almost guarantee that you do not get the best vs. the best in the title game. Same fix as above. 12 game season, no more than 26 teams and you can set up divisions so you get the best teams to win each conference and have a three game title series between conference winners. And cut down on games out of conference. Make it special again.
Fuck the NFL. It is now more of a marketing machine than a great sport.
I’ll stick to the NBA and MLB. Nothing is perfect, but usually they get their champions right and the best teams play for it and win.
no way
for one thing, thats AT LEAST a month long series which is insane, but it also means guys who were injured would eventually return, namely the patriots number one reciever.
Waiting for the Prodigal Son to Return KH12 BITCHES!!!!
In the Chemi-meter we trust!
Hey, the Giants had their fair share of injuries when the teams played in November, too.
And they didn’t really get going till their major injuries more or less subsided. The Giants are indeed a very talented team — WHEN HEALTHY. But that’s the case for pretty much everyone else, too. Look at the Packers. They started to break down when the injuries started to pile up.
And the Patriots really aren’t as good as they used to be, at least on the defensive end.
But anyway, this is apples and oranges. The main reason there’s that “any given Sunday” factor is that they only play one game a week due to the violent nature of the game.
"Smith stripped. Smith stopped! Smith stopped again by Pippen!"
by ColonelFatheart on Feb 9, 2012 10:35 AM CST up reply actions
They would
Because the Pats can’t stop a nose-bleed
"Violence is not always the answer."
"Violence is the question, and the answers always YES!"
by T.Moore on Feb 9, 2012 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
"Guys like John Stockton, Karl Malone, Charles Barkley and Patrick Ewing never won it all ..."
That’s called the Jordan Effect.
made me think
that they should redo the format for nba games. Part of what i think is real cool about the superbowl might be the idea that its just one game, And that its THE most important game of the season. Basketball doesnt really have that. Game 7s are really rare, and they are by design part of a series thats already good. I think the post season would be better off if they did best of 5 instead of best of 7 up until the Finals, and then in the finals they just made it best of 3. The ratings would get a boost, the games would be played much harder. You wouldnt get teams in the playoffs who were just resting or waiting to turn it on. You would have to play your best basketball right off the bat.
Waiting for the Prodigal Son to Return KH12 BITCHES!!!!
In the Chemi-meter we trust!
i actually had this convo with my buddy and he said the SAME EXACT thing as you did
best of 5 and then the final being best out of 3. I totally agree and this would def bring in more $$$ for the NBA.
Well it could also bring less $$$
As potentially cutting a series out 4 games can really cost them, especially in a marquee say Miami or CHicago vs LA battle (I can’t say New York ever).
I know in theory that oculd work—the 3 game series thing and I get it may draw more folks per game, but I just think that the NBA is so far down the US totem poll from the NFL, that all the teams/league would do is cut revenues to do a dramatic drop frm 7 to 3 games in the finals…..long term (say 7-10 yrs) maybe it would work out, but it’s a bit too risky.
It is frustrating that it seems the 7 game NBA finals tend to be ones like the “stellar” Spurs vs Pistons machups….(in all honesty that was a great series there, but not really marquee and the ratings were awful if I remember).
The kid's out of this world. He's got Allen Iverson speed, Jason Kidd's vision, Chauncey Billups' shooting ability and Michael Jordan's athleticism. How do you guard that? - Pacers coach Frank Vogel.
more games less money???
math much?
After being crowned the best in the league, he’s ready to be the best at his position
-Adande
by BigforkBullsFan on Feb 9, 2012 11:15 AM CST up reply actions
Its absolutely insane to think you'd make more money with less games.
"Sportsmanship is just loser talk for losing."
by boyonthedock on Feb 9, 2012 1:05 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
that was my point...
or are you agreeing with me in a strange way?
by BigforkBullsFan on Feb 9, 2012 3:13 PM CST up reply actions
Increase the price of playoff tickets to around 2.5X...
or basically make the prices comparable to NFL playoff games (and those prices are nuts). Less games makes it more exciting even if an elite were playing a marginally best playoff team. For instance, lets say the heat were facing the magic and the magic bring their A game and the heat are dicking around and it costs them the first two games of the series (best out of 5). Because its best out of 5, increase the price of tickets and i can guarantee even the less exciting playoff matches would sell out (e.g. hawks vs sixers). TV ratings could potentially go up in the earlier rounds of the playoffs.
As a fan who tries to pay for games...
Nah
by BigforkBullsFan on Feb 9, 2012 8:46 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
ok fine, then inc the tix prices earlier i nthe rounds to 1.5 times the price (all the way to the semifinals)...
heading out from the ECF 2.5 and the NBA finals 3 times the price. That would result in a major profit gain for the NBA.
lol, obviously i wouldn't have said more $$$ with lesser games without an increase in tix prices
I wish the NBA can regain the number of fans it had in the 90s.
But it would increase the "luck factor" so much
Like I said, I like the fact that, in the NBA, the best team almost always wins. I don’t like it when one lucky bounce of the ball can have a greater impact on who wins a championship than how good my team’s left tackle is.
Pat Riley is the devil.
by Poloplaya14 on Feb 9, 2012 1:09 AM CST up reply actions 3 recs
i dont think it would be teh same as single elimination
i mean, you can have one lucky fluke game, but its hard to have 2 lucky fluke games. Actually in that system, you would have 3 rounds when you have to win 3 games. Surely once can be luck, 2x can be a fluke, but 3×......thats gonna take skill. So it would be a truer battle to make it out of the conference, and so even if there is a bit more luck in the finals, its not like you would have some unworthy team in the finals. In order to win a best of 5 series a team still has to be very very good, you may fluke a best of 5 series in one round, but not 3 times.
Waiting for the Prodigal Son to Return KH12 BITCHES!!!!
In the Chemi-meter we trust!
I think it makes the NFL more exciting,
and it’s what makes the NCAA tournament so popular. Now, it’s a shitty way of crowning a champion, but it’s very entertaining because every single play counts so much more in a do-or-die game. It’s like Game 7 every day.
"it’s a shitty way of crowning a champion"
I guess the less shitty ways of crowning champions are more exciting to me — and it’s also probably why I don’t really care for the NCAA Tournament, unless “my team” is still playing (UF), but will watch the NBA playoffs even if the Bulls are no longer competing.
but thats cuz you are a real basketball fan
not a casual one. For the casual audience, single eliminations are more exciting. You dont need to know the players the system the talent, all you need to do is pick a team, root real hard, and when they win throw it in people face. How many times do you meet people who know nothing about football but are able to without so much as hesitation give you their pick for the game? Theres a ton of people like that out there, hell…im one of them. Poets will write it off as destiny, old school fans will write it off as prepared vs unprepared, skip bayless’ kin will write it off as clutch genes, stat heads will find some inconcievable pattern where none should exist to explain how it was a logical outcome…everyone finds something, hearts are crushed and some rewarded.
Hardcore fans would love to have the most important series last forever, but casual fans just want that quick jolt of ecstasy, that one moment where htey gave a damn, and then wonder if it was love.
Then there are the small market teams, who feel they can never ever actually field the best team, and are happy to accept a lucky championship as opposed to watching big markets dominate every championship while they exist without a single one in their legacy…..
Waiting for the Prodigal Son to Return KH12 BITCHES!!!!
In the Chemi-meter we trust!
But it’s not good for anyone for small market teams to do too much winning. Once in a great while is ok, but every sport is driven by NY, California and Chicago. It is not even in question. And you don’t want to throw those fans away just to satisfy a market of 100k. It is bad for any sport when teams in the major markets have down years. Just look at the ratings and the advertising dollars.
Shortened series will never happen for the same reason a full season reduced schedule will not happen
The owners that are competing for titles, not just trying to make it to the playoffs are likely paying the tax anyway, and they’re counting on that income from as many games as possible per series.
And for every other owner, they’re counting on the full slate of games to make money for their team over the course of a season.
We will never see less games that are more meaningful in the NBA.
No way would it make sense to have the most important series be the shortest
The NBA isn’t the NFL, and the Finals aren’t a spectacle like the Superbowl is, and I think that’s fine.
by tuluse on Feb 9, 2012 10:24 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Ugh, that's the worst
Are you trying to produce less reliably “top tier” champions. More games equals larger same size means greater likelihood that random variance won’t prevent the team that is actually superior from winning a given series.
For instance: in MLB, the five-game Divisional Series is the reason why so many great teams get bounced so early en route to the World Series, teams that are often much likelier to win if allowed two additional opportunities. As it is, teams that win Game-1 of the NLDS or ALDS almost always advance, and being up 2-0 is a virtual lock in a five-game series, while it isn’t actually that big of a deal in a seven-game series, relatively speaking. It’s the shorter series that are the more boring.
Damn, my utter disgust with your proposal really fucked my typing ability:
Edits:
Are you trying to produce less reliably "top tier" champions?
More games equals larger sample-size means greater likelihood that random variance won’t prevent the team that is actually superior from winning a given series.
I loved that article
and the best part is the question Rose asked him. “How did you win back to back titles at this size”. I love that because it means that Rose at the age of 23 is not only aware of his strengths but also who and what he is. He’s also more focused on a NBA championship than any other great player this side of Kobe.
Hey Rose. I don't see the appeal!
by Dils on Feb 8, 2012 11:36 PM CST reply actions 3 recs
def, D Rose has always been a self-aware superstar and hes not stubborn as people make him out to be
he knows he has weaknesses and there are mutliple obstacles in the future to overcome.
I'm glad D. Rose seeked out advise. He knows his size can be a disadvantage at times
so he went out looking for someone close to his size that won a championship. And Isiah did it at a time when the defense was a lot more physical. This shows how he matures every year and gets better at a certain aspect of his game.
I’m wondering if the push shot/tear drop that he’s incorporating in his arsenal more is something to combat when he’s being guarded by someone taller? It’s quicker than a jump shot so the defender has less time to react and jump to block the shot. They always have to be aware of D. Rose’s speed so they sag off a foot or two which lets him get the shot off.
On the J.R. Smith bandwagon until otherwise advised.
thats one of the crappiest answers ive heard in a while
Damn am I good or what? I told you guys New York would win a title this year!!
i absolutely love this
I know as a bulls fan you’re supposed to hate Isiah Thomas but I always loved his game. He’s in that top 10-15 player range in my book. Maybe Rose will get a little meaner on the court which I approve of 100%.
Now go get healthy Derrick…
by MartyMondays on Feb 9, 2012 2:15 AM CST via mobile reply actions 1 recs
Ummm
He’s in that top 10-15 player range in my book.
Is this book of yours only about point guards?
by DRoseO1 on Feb 9, 2012 8:58 AM CST up reply actions 5 recs
name 15 players better than him
Not saying you’re wrong either. Just in my opinion I think he was that good.
by MartyMondays on Feb 10, 2012 2:42 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Easy
Jordan, Russell, Kareem, Magic, The Big O, Bird, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Hakeem, Robinson, Kobe, Duncan, Lebron, Wade, Garnett, Shaq (though I hate him), Moses Malone, Dr. J, Scottie, Jerry West, Wilt, Baylor, and Dirk…
Some other guys I’d put above him…Ewing, Nash, Barry, and Kidd.
And I think Paul, Rose and Durant will be better when its said and done.
by Dunker Von Smashalot on Feb 10, 2012 3:38 AM CST up reply actions
agree to disagree then
i guess a lot of it has to do with what defines a great player.
by MartyMondays on Feb 10, 2012 3:52 AM CST up reply actions
you could argue
that he’s better than Stockton (Stockton had Malone and was a system player), Wade, Scottie Pippen (Scottie wouldn’t have won a ring as the best player on a team), Dirk (more rings/dominance), Nash (Nash is one of the worst defenders I’ve ever seen), Ewing, Kidd.
by MartyMondays on Feb 10, 2012 4:02 AM CST up reply actions
scottie was a bad call away from getting the chance to win a ring as the best player on a team.
Look
I didn’t want to offend anyone by saying the "f" word or generalizing my statement to any particular sex by saying "gays" or lesbians" or "bi’s" so "homos" is the most "politically correct" term. I’m just trying to be more tact in a tactless blog.
by Hindut Patrol on Feb 15, 2011 2:51 PM EST
well Isiah did it twice
He was a better player than Pippen Aa good as Pippen was
by MartyMondays on Feb 10, 2012 2:44 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
wasn't talking about the argument
of scottie vs isiah, just the point that scottie wouldn’t have won as the best player on a team.
Look
I didn’t want to offend anyone by saying the "f" word or generalizing my statement to any particular sex by saying "gays" or lesbians" or "bi’s" so "homos" is the most "politically correct" term. I’m just trying to be more tact in a tactless blog.
by Hindut Patrol on Feb 15, 2011 2:51 PM EST
John Stockton was not a system player and he was a far superior player than Isiah Thomas
Pat Riley is the devil.
by Poloplaya14 on Feb 10, 2012 11:41 PM CST up reply actions
John Stockton was never the best player on his own team
and even if he was would not have been good enough to win a title. Isiah was. Isiah pound for pound was probably the best player for his size ever.
Hey Rose. I don't see the appeal!
Those Pistons teams, more than any other championship teams in the history of the league, won with defense and depth
If Isiah Thomas was the best player on those teams, it wasn’t by much. Anyways, even if you want to argue that Isiah Thomas at the peak of his career was better than John Stockton at the peak of his career, Stockton crushes Isiah in terms of longevity. Stockton put up all-star seasons up through his late 30’s while Thomas retired at age 32. That matters.
Pat Riley is the devil.
and when it comes to mentioning guys like
Wilt, West, and Baylor there’s always the idea that the competition just wasn’t as good. I don’t know where i sit on that debate but it’s hard to imagine a player getting 100 points against fair competition.
who knows though, i can’t argue with a lot of your choices.
by MartyMondays on Feb 10, 2012 4:03 AM CST up reply actions
Ewing? Really? Stockton? As much of a dbag that he is, Isaiah was the best player on a two time championship team. That alone puts him ahead of Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Stockton….
Are you kidding?
You think the 2nd leading scorer in NBA history and the NBA’s all time assist leader are not better than Thomas? You are on crack. So what if he won two championships? Stockton and Malone were up against a Bulls dynasty! You can’t just eliminate players from that era b/c they didn’t win a championship. Dumb.
He’s still better than both. It’s great to have great stats like Malone and Stockton did but I don’t see how they are better because they compiled bigger numbers. To me, being a top player on a two time championship team means something more than nice looking padded stats
How the fuck were they padded?
You are making the same argument I am making, but the exact opposite. You are putting all your stock into championships. My point is, it takes a ton to win a championship and not all the best players will.
Rk G MP PER TS% eFG% AST% STL% TOV% USG% ORtg DRtg
1 1504 47764 21.8 .608 .546 50.2 3.5 20.8 18.9 121 104
2 979 35516 18.1 .516 .465 37.4 2.5 16.8 25.3 106 107
Stockton had a better PER, better TS%, better AST%, and did it for a longer period of time. But fine, let’s just give Thomas the edge here. After all, Stockton did have Malone to pass too (Isiah had some amazing players to pass to as well FYI, but fine).
Rk MP PER TS% ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% TOV% USG% ORtg DRtg
1 54852 23.9 .577 7.9 23.5 16.0 17.6 12.4 29.4 113 101
2 35516 18.1 .516 2.9 7.8 5.3 37.4 16.8 25.3 106 107
Malone and Thomas are not even close. Malone averaged 25ppg for his career. He did so with .577 TS%. Only 11 players EVER, have averaged more points for their career. Not one of those 11 players matched Malone’s TS% for their career. You could easily make the argument that he was the best scorer of all time. Championship or not, Karl Malone is a better player than Isiah Thomas.
Yeah but you didn't disprove his point
With all of that going for them, why couldn’t they win a ring? What because of MJ? Hell Isaiah was the reason MJ didn’t win a ring until his late 20s
Hey Rose. I don't see the appeal!
That's because MJ's supporting cast wasn't good enough until '91, when Pippen took a huge leap and started playing at an all-star level
Put John Stockton on the ’89 or ’90 Pistons instead of Isiah, and they still win titles and have an even easier time of it.
Pat Riley is the devil.
stats don't tell the whole story man
It’s whatever though I personally just think Malone and Stockton are overrated.
by MartyMondays on Feb 10, 2012 11:23 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
LOL
Stockton, Ewing,Nash,Kidd, Robinson, and possibly Wade were not better than Isiah Thomas.
Hey Rose. I don't see the appeal!
Seriously, it’s not like the Pistons didn’t have to beat great teams to win their rings. I don’t care about PER or TS. When the Jazz needed to Malone to step up in the Finals, he came up way short. He made stupid mistakes. He folded under pressure. Isiah took over a Finals game with a totally fucked ankle. Malone could never do anything like that.
To me, championships and how you contributed to getting them count more than pure stats or some dumb formula Hollinger made up.
by C Smoove on Feb 11, 2012 6:15 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Just 15?
Wilt, Jordan, Robinson, Shaq, Kareem, Barkley, Mikan, Baylor, Pettit, Karl Malone, Moses Malone, Bird, Oscar, McAdoo, Magic, Dr. J, Jerry West, Gervin, Havlicek, That wasn’t even challenging. I think those are the guys that are 100% not even arguable. There are more that you might have an argument on I suppose, although I think I could name about 10 more that are retired that are better. Start including guys like LeBron, Kobe, Duncan and others that are still playing, it’s not even close.
Why would we hate Isaiah Thomas?
He’s like the candy pinata that kept on giving!
Isaiah for Knicks GM again!
If anyone should hate Thomas it’s recent-ish Knicks fans [though it’s, like everything, more Dolan’s fault]
Rose decides not to go 1-on-2 and I was thinking, "what are you doing?! You've got the numbers!" -Zach Harper, Daily Dime Live
by Prevenge on Feb 9, 2012 7:24 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Just as long as Gar is not seeking Isiah's advice...
Schindler's List is, at the most basic level, a remake of Jurassic Park... ~Zizek
by THEKILLERWHALE on Feb 9, 2012 8:34 AM CST reply actions 8 recs
don't talk to Isiah, talk to Dwight Howard
/unnecessarycynicism
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 9, 2012 10:11 AM CST reply actions 5 recs
this was great...thx for the link...imo Zeke is the perfect guy to ask for advice (as long as it not GM advice)
these quotes were gems btw:
And I emphasize win championships, because you can pile up statistics and great numbers playing a non-aggressive style and have a great career. But if you want to win championships, you have to pay the price and Derrick is definitely paying the price
(My toe) was painful. Anything below the hips for a point guard definitely changes your game, and then for small guys, you have to be so fine-tuned that anything of that kind throws off your rhythm in terms of your knees, ankles or feet. … What Derrick has got to transfer from is that now his greatest strength has to become his mind and not necessarily just his physical gifts.
watching derrick's decline will be sad if he doesn't learn an old man's game
After being crowned the best in the league, he’s ready to be the best at his position
-Adande
by BigforkBullsFan on Feb 9, 2012 11:17 AM CST up reply actions
he already is!
his improvement on shooting is something j. kidd didn’t work on till late in his career and its holding him up..if he gets better, it should keep him in longer
by Belize on Feb 9, 2012 11:19 AM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Yeah, I actually saw him post a guy up yesterday!
I do not think that he dribbles into the post well but Boozer fed him and it looked good.
Schindler's List is, at the most basic level, a remake of Jurassic Park... ~Zizek
by THEKILLERWHALE on Feb 9, 2012 11:31 AM CST up reply actions
Oh i totally agree.
just don’t want to see the comparisons to AI play out that far
by BigforkBullsFan on Feb 9, 2012 3:09 PM CST up reply actions
and the awesome thing about his flaws as a jumpshooter...
they are def fixable. When hes making him jumpers, its kidna obvious the shot will go in before he even releases his shot. The only issue he has right now is creating a CONSISTENT rhythm on his jumpshots and that all involves his footing and setting him self for the right release of hsi shot and balance.
by Geo4MVP on Feb 9, 2012 8:46 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
As long as the advice is about winning as a point guard in the NBA and not about being a general manager, can't possibly be nothing but good advice.
by berzerkulous on Feb 9, 2012 4:28 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
lol agree
Isiah is just like Jordan in the way that, playing basketball = yes. anything else that has to do with basketball = no.
by MartyMondays on Feb 10, 2012 3:57 AM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
