• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Official 2018 NBA Offseason Thread: the preseason cometh

Even His Highness Ken Pom says early season probabilities are not accurate. :)
 
you can't take 32 year old LBJ. 29 year old KD is a tough sell. Kawhi at 26 is probably the best pick but Giannis at 22 is the most fun. KAT has been showing some serious defensive deficiencies.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
If you get one player for the next five seasons, who do you take?
Click to expand...

Three seasons Lebron (not sure about the last two with him) -After the next three season he will have played the third most regular season minutes in NBA history. Even he has to start wearing down a little.

Five seasons Kawhi - the "in" pick would be Giannis, but he hasn't shown a good shot yet.
 
RJKarl said:
If a game is 52-48, there's a theoretical 4% better chance for the favorite win. In a 60/40 game, it's theoretically a 20% difference. That's five times as big a spread.
Click to expand...

I've read this several times and don't understand what the underlying point is.
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
fair enough, you said if they had a downfall it would be their bench. they probably have the best bench in the league.

arguing about how good the warriors really are just feels like a 10x stupider version of the klay thompson argument from last season.
Click to expand...

I'd have to look at the data but I highly doubt the Warriors have anything close to the best bench in the league.

And to be fair, the Klay Thompson argument got stupid when it quickly veered from "how good is Klay Thompson" into trying to explain the concept of a range.

No one is arguing about how good the Warriors are. We all agree that they are really fucking good. What's the point of the internet if not to argue about which team or which player is the GOAT?
 
deac29 said:
RJ, in the NBA, a team with 40% odds of winning a given game is likely a 3.5 point underdog. A 3.5 point underdog winning a game would not be a longshot, though it's obvious to everyone but you that a 40% likelihood of anything happening is not a longshot.
Click to expand...

It has been 76 years since a MLB player has qualified for a batting title and hit .400. Seems like a longshot to me.
 
RChildress107 said:
I'd have to look at the data but I highly doubt the Warriors have anything close to the best bench in the league.

And to be fair, the Klay Thompson argument got stupid when it quickly veered from "how good is Klay Thompson" into trying to explain the concept of a range.

No one is arguing about how good the Warriors are. We all agree that they are really fucking good. What's the point of the internet if not to argue about which team or which player is the GOAT?
Click to expand...

they were 2nd in net rating last season and they didn't lose anyone.

and no the klay thompson thing was just dumb as hell. as is this "the warriors might be vulnerable because of their bench which has been awesome their entire run but did you see who they played in the 15 playoffs?"
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
they were 2nd in net rating last season and they didn't lose anyone.

and no the klay thompson thing was just dumb as hell. as is this "the warriors might be vulnerable because of their bench which has been awesome their entire run but did you see who they played in the 15 playoffs?"
Click to expand...

The bench potentially getting worse and the Warriors easy playoff runs have nothing to do with each other. Two separate arguments.
 
so what are you arguing? the warriors bench went from an elite unit to a vulnerability in one offseason and the warriors aren't historically great because of their 15 opponents?

this is like when you vehemently argued klay wasn't top 30 and at then very end after pages of self-masturbatory posts were like he's probably like 32nd.
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
so what are you arguing? the warriors bench went from an elite unit to a vulnerability in one offseason and the warriors aren't historically great because of their 15 opponents?

this is like when you vehemently argued klay wasn't top 30 and at then very end after pages of self-masturbatory posts were like he's probably like 32nd.
Click to expand...

Warriors never should've let go of Harrison Barnes. He was on track to be their best player because he knew something Steph could never know about: POSTING UP AND SCORING. And Harrison Barnes SUCKS. Tells you something.
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
they were 2nd in net rating last season and they didn't lose anyone.

and no the klay thompson thing was just dumb as hell. as is this "the warriors might be vulnerable because of their bench which has been awesome their entire run but did you see who they played in the 15 playoffs?"
Click to expand...

Surprised it was that high, would have guessed they were in the 6-10 range. How do they compare minutes-wise. And I would imagine a decent amount of their success is attributable to having the best bench player in the league (who turns 34 this year).

I know you understand the difference between calling the Warriors bench weak and suggesting they may not be as strong as last year so let's stop switching back to the former. I don't expect the starters to decline and any lack of motivation will probably be compensated for (and then some) by increased cohesion of KD in the offense.

If your point is that it doesn't matter if their bench gets worse then duly noted. But you seem overly upset by the argument that IF the Warriors have any non-injury related vulnerability it is probably the risk that the bench play falls off. If you think it's impossible that the Warriors get worse this year, or think any potential regression will be for some other reason, then say so. If not then stop whining about how "dumb as hell" you think a pointless internet argument is.
 
if steph curry turns into seth curry and kevin durant turns into rudy gay i feel like the warriors are vulnerable

my take is that the warriors are invincible healthy, and would still be the best team in the NBA by a decent margin without KD which is insane. not sure what losing steph or draymond would do but i think they'd still be favorites. and if this jinxes them and they lose even better. don't think there's anything left to say on the topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top