NBA All Star Draft Play-In 3 : Stoke vs EHB

[Nosferatu]

Wouldn't call it a shot. Just a difference of opinion on the players but your vehement hatred of them could swing votes so best to avoid them lol

I think you are overestimating my influence... lolzzz

 

[tlance]

Again, some great matchups. Just not sure how Stoke puts the ball in the hoop. Got to go EHB

 

[blstoker]

I think you are overestimating my influence... lolzzz

I've stopped arguing for my teams. It just irritates me more when I lose (and this is just supposed to be fun) and I rarely sway anyone's opinion. I've seen at least 5 points made that I would've refuted 2 years ago, but right now I'm just like - "Hey, it was something to occupy me for a week before I get back to what I am really supposed to be doing."

 

[Nosferatu]

Remember 7 votes are needed to win.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

ehb

 

[ehb5]

I've stopped arguing for my teams. It just irritates me more when I lose (and this is just supposed to be fun) and I rarely sway anyone's opinion. I've seen at least 5 points made that I would've refuted 2 years ago, but right now I'm just like - "Hey, it was something to occupy me for a week before I get back to what I am really supposed to be doing."

Any chance you'll tell me what you disagree with since I assume you disagree with something I wrote. We can keep it friendly lol. Btw I do know how you feel. Ive seen people say some things I couldn't wrap my head around in the past but I really love the bball drafts so I'll usually try and stick up for my team in these ones.

 

[Shanemansj13]

I do love Larry Bird and think that he with his cast would be tough to beat but EHB has IMO the best PF & C of all-time and I have a slight lean for EHB winning this matchup. Wow this would be a amazing game to watch.

Kareem > Wilt IMO

 

[Ritzarmy]

Kareem > Wilt IMO

I have Shaq #1 who ever has him should automatically win their matchup

 

[wlk3]

Stoke

 

[UK Cowboy]

Stoke

 

[tlance]

I have Shaq #1 who ever has him should automatically win their matchup

I thought Reggie Miller was the GOAT?

 

[Ritzarmy]

I thought Reggie Miller was the GOAT?

Damn I guess Miller & Shaq will have to share that honor. Not fair if someone has both those 2 players. Why not give him The Glove while you are at it.

 

[blstoker]

Any chance you'll tell me what you disagree with since I assume you disagree with something I wrote. We can keep it friendly lol. Btw I do know how you feel. Ive seen people say some things I couldn't wrap my head around in the past but I really love the bball drafts so I'll usually try and stick up for my team in these ones.

Nothing big.

1) "I think this over states the shooting you have." - EHB

The insinuation that my team can't shoot and I was trying to overestimate them. Van Lier did have a good shot for his time, and if he played under different rules/had better training that could translate to him being a decent shooter today. I'm not saying he's Steph Curry - but he shot higher than the league average of his time. Johnson and Hayes did have decent mid range jumpers for their time, nothing earth shattering about that - but it does provide spacing - maybe more akin to 1980s spacing as opposed to 2015 spacing - but my team wouldn't have to just crowd the hoop and Duncan and Wilt could swap balls all game long.

2) "Wilt shouldn't have a problem putting up 30 and 20 on him."

I don't think Wilt gets 30/20 easily against Russell - since he didn't even average that against him - not to mention Bol would play anywhere from 10-20 minute focused solely on keeping Chamberlain in check (and though Bol isn't as thick - his 6 inch advantage would be something that Chamberlain had never seen and Bol fouling to put Chamberlain on the line wouldn't hurt in the slightest). Even if you just concider his 1961-62 season as his peak - he was a stud, but he didn't develop the desire to pass out of double teams until years later when he was averaging only 24 (instead of 50). Russell held him to 35 ppg that year - and it would require Chamberlain to shoot basically 40-50% of your teams shots to get that - which would mean that the rest of you team would have to be even more effective against their matchups for your team to be a consistent threat to get more than 80 points, IMO. So, let Wilt get 30 - no one else will.

3) "I also think while you have a great defensive team, it won't match up well defensively with me. Because of my shooting your perimeter defenders will be forced to stay home on shooters and Duncan and Wilt just aren't gonna be stopped down low."

Each of my defenders are excellent by themselves and weren't known to have much help throughout their careers, so spreading them out may make the team defense a little less intimidating (I have my doubts) but wouldn't affect that they are just stifling individually - not to mention the ability to bring in 3 more great defenders to ensure legs are fresh and able to keep the defense running for 48 minutes+. I can give Wilt and Tim 50 points, cause the amount of shots that it's gonna take for them to get there will not leave enough for the rest of the team to beat me.

4) "Just not sure how Stoke puts the ball in the hoop." - tlance

I actually have some guys who can score. I mean everyone knows Bird can score (and that Pierce isn't stopping him). Hayes also scored 21 ppg for his career and topped out near 30. Johnson, Robertson, Davis, Russell and Jones were in the mid teens for much of their careers, and Van Lier (who wasn't brought in to shoot) was near 12 and topped at 16. While true, I made my team where there were too many scorers and ball dominant players, I don't have a bunch on single digit scorers either. Not to mention that in an offense where 3 people average over 5 assists a game (and that's career - not peak), then your looking at a team that is much more difficult to guard than a team that depends on one guy to facilitate a couple other guys.

It really isn't anything big, just a different opinion of how the matchups work. This game would be low scoring, but my team isn't bereft of people who can put the ball in their hoop - but is overloaded with players who specialize in keeping it out of their opponents hoop.

 

[ehb5]

Nothing big.

1) "I think this over states the shooting you have." - EHB

The insinuation that my team can't shoot and I was trying to overestimate them. Van Lier did have a good shot for his time, and if he played under different rules/had better training that could translate to him being a decent shooter today. I'm not saying he's Steph Curry - but he shot higher than the league average of his time. Johnson and Hayes did have decent mid range jumpers for their time, nothing earth shattering about that - but it does provide spacing - maybe more akin to 1980s spacing as opposed to 2015 spacing - but my team wouldn't have to just crowd the hoop and Duncan and Wilt could swap balls all game long.

2) "Wilt shouldn't have a problem putting up 30 and 20 on him."

I don't think Wilt gets 30/20 easily against Russell - since he didn't even average that against him - not to mention Bol would play anywhere from 10-20 minute focused solely on keeping Chamberlain in check (and though Bol isn't as thick - his 6 inch advantage would be something that Chamberlain had never seen and Bol fouling to put Chamberlain on the line wouldn't hurt in the slightest). Even if you just concider his 1961-62 season as his peak - he was a stud, but he didn't develop the desire to pass out of double teams until years later when he was averaging only 24 (instead of 50). Russell held him to 35 ppg that year - and it would require Chamberlain to shoot basically 40-50% of your teams shots to get that - which would mean that the rest of you team would have to be even more effective against their matchups for your team to be a consistent threat to get more than 80 points, IMO. So, let Wilt get 30 - no one else will.

3) "I also think while you have a great defensive team, it won't match up well defensively with me. Because of my shooting your perimeter defenders will be forced to stay home on shooters and Duncan and Wilt just aren't gonna be stopped down low."

Each of my defenders are excellent by themselves and weren't known to have much help throughout their careers, so spreading them out may make the team defense a little less intimidating (I have my doubts) but wouldn't affect that they are just stifling individually - not to mention the ability to bring in 3 more great defenders to ensure legs are fresh and able to keep the defense running for 48 minutes+. I can give Wilt and Tim 50 points, cause the amount of shots that it's gonna take for them to get there will not leave enough for the rest of the team to beat me.

4) "Just not sure how Stoke puts the ball in the hoop." - tlance

I actually have some guys who can score. I mean everyone knows Bird can score (and that Pierce isn't stopping him). Hayes also scored 21 ppg for his career and topped out near 30. Johnson, Robertson, Davis, Russell and Jones were in the mid teens for much of their careers, and Van Lier (who wasn't brought in to shoot) was near 12 and topped at 16. While true, I made my team where there were too many scorers and ball dominant players, I don't have a bunch on single digit scorers either. Not to mention that in an offense where 3 people average over 5 assists a game (and that's career - not peak), then your looking at a team that is much more difficult to guard than a team that depends on one guy to facilitate a couple other guys.

It really isn't anything big, just a different opinion of how the matchups work. This game would be low scoring, but my team isn't bereft of people who can put the ball in their hoop - but is overloaded with players who specialize in keeping it out of their opponents hoop.

All fair points.

I certainly didn't mean to insinuate you were trying to overrate you're team I just think dennis johnson was a pretty bad shooter. Even being only a mid range shooter can be damaging I think but maybe I'm being too harsh.

As for Wilt averaging a 30 and 20 i said that off the top of my head but upon looking it up he did average 29 and 29 against Russell and certainly had his fair share of monster games against him. So maybe wilt doesn't go for 30 and 20 in this exact scenario but the point is more that while russell is as good as anybody to match up with him, wilt was still better and would still get his.

Your 3rd point - I don't disagree you have all around great defenders 1 on 1 or otherwise but realistically Duncan was better than Hayes and Wilt better than Russell and I have the offense to give them the space to work. Realistically I'm happy with letting them go down there despite them facing great defenders.

Anyways a good matchup for sure.