Boogua

QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 28, 2013 -> 10:33 PM) Zeller on a milk carton so far. I remember everyone thinking I was crazy when I said that zeller wouldn't have been a top 5 pick most years early in the season. Now he might not be a top 5 pick in one of the weakest drafts in a while. Again, he's a good player, but his game really doesn't translate all that well to the nba. I even think people were saying he would make multiple all star games. Ridiculous.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 25, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) He won the title last year. If he wins it again, this "overall playoff success" BS is just that. The roster he played with in Cleveland wasn't as good as the roster MJ played with when he couldn't beat Detroit. Of course the first 5 or 6 years of MJ's career, the critics were saying he would never win. LeBron dominated in the finals and is dominating this year. MJ starting winning championships at about the same age LeBron is now. Haters are gonna hate, but LeBron is the best in the game, and one of the best of all-time. BS? He laid eggs in important games against Orlando and Boston. How about the Mavs series? Is that BS too? Yes, he's the best in the game. Yes, he's one of the best ever. You just can't compare what Jordan did in the playoffs to what Lebron has done. Jordan never lost with home court advantage. If his team was better, he just wasn't losing. And like Zoom said, the teams that Jordan had to play against early in his career were better than the teams Lebron had to face. I'm not hating. The guy is ridiculously good and the best in the NBA, but to say that he would have won a championship with Cleveland when he barely got out of the ECF last year playing alongside Wade seems far-fetched. Possible? Yes. Likely? I doubt it.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 25, 2013 -> 10:26 AM) Wade and Bosh are great, but I still think Lebron would have won a championship last year if he stayed in cleveland. Andy has turned into a damn good player, and who knows who may have found their way there as well. Lebron is just the king of the league right now. He made his choice, his team is great, they are going to win for a long time. There's always a super team in the nba, this is their time. Eh, Lebron barely got past the Celtics last year and that was with Wade by his side. His lack of overall playoff success is kind of being downplayed because of last year and the current streak.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 25, 2013 -> 10:32 AM) I don't think the Heat would be less dominant if you substituted a 1996-1998 Pippen and Rodman for the current Wade/Bosh. In fact, those guys might have even fit better with LeBron. I still think Jordan is the king, but every year LeBron wins, he gets a little closer. I think you're way, way off on that one. Pippen played similar in that he played point forward, so his skills would be somewhat redundant. He also wasn't the same slasher at that point in his career. Bosh really helps space the floor with his shooting. Rodman would obviously really hurt the spacing.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 25, 2013 -> 10:15 AM) Apparently Jordan didn't have Pippen and Rodman. Also, Wade was arguably a top 5 player and Bosh a top 10 player in the league when they all decided to team up. Rodman came in and wasn't anywhere near that. He was a fantastic role player, but was well past his prime at that point.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Mar 14, 2013 -> 01:32 PM) I'd also like to see how Bertrand improves his game and how he'll do with a much bigger role on the team next year. He's an interesting case. Earlier this season I thought he was getting better and would be a force next year, but his play in conference (especially the Iowa game- my god...) makes me hesitant on whether or not he'll even be a starter next year.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Mar 14, 2013 -> 12:35 PM) Illinois is going to suck next year unless the freshmen play well above their rankings. That is a really good class but none of those guys appear to be instant impact players. But the talent that will be left on the roster from Weber for next year is awful. Just absolutely dreadful. It's way too early to say that. Rice is going to be pretty big addition and I think Egwu is going to be a force next year. We also don't know about transfers (5th year seniors), how the freshmen will be, and other player progressions (Henry, Abrams, etc).

QUOTE (Jake @ Mar 12, 2013 -> 08:55 PM) Yet people say we need WR help and the LT we signed is no good -- still lots of reasons we could not do well Also, this will be Forte's last season in Chicago. Book it. Well, we both use PFF so we know that Bushrod was still an overall positive player (higher rating than long and Webb, but a bad year in pass pro). The potential is there though. He also gave up a combined 4 hurries and 2 sacks in the games against SF and GB. I would have rather gotten loadholt, Winston, or smith, but I'm really not as unhappy with the signing as you. It really clearly upgrades the offensive line.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Mar 12, 2013 -> 03:19 PM) Oh hey, a TE that doesn't completely suck. Going from the 5th worst rated TE (out of 62) to the 5th highest rated in Bennett. He isn't spectacular at anything, but he scored above average in everything (receiving, run block, pass block, etc)

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Mar 12, 2013 -> 03:02 PM) @nfldraftscout Can confirm: Chicago #Bears will be signing TE Martellus Bennett tonight. Very good signing.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 12, 2013 -> 01:03 PM) So if you could have only one: Loadholt or Bushrod. I think it's Loadholt. He'd likely be cheaper than Bushrod (RT vs LT), we wouldn't have to move Webb to RT where we don't know how he'd do, and Bushrod graded out poorly against the pass last year (-3.5 whereas Webb was -.8)

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 12, 2013 -> 09:27 AM) Are these rankings really gospel though? I've heard oline rating is the hardest to grade out. I just use pro football focus. I wouldn't call the rankings gospel, but the people that do the rankings probably know more than either of us, so it's a decent tool to use. Oh, and Andre Smith wants 9 mil a year at RT and is regarded as one of the best (if not the best) RT in the league, so we don't have to use the grading thing with him too much.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 12, 2013 -> 09:03 AM) You may get your wish. Brad Biggs says the Bears want Loadholt. I would be pretty happy with that. He actually grades out better than Winston (although not quite as good as Smith). It would also hurt the Vikings.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 12, 2013 -> 06:51 AM) The Bears pretty much have to make a move like this. If the Bears still envision themselves as a playoff team, they need line help desperately. They really don't have to sign Long. Especially at 11 mil per year. If they can swing it financially I obviously won't object, but he graded out slightly above Webb last year and is an injury concern. Webb wasn't nearly as bad as people think he was last year and there are really good RTs out there (Winston and Andre Smith come to mind) that could still let the Bears fill other needs.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 11, 2013 -> 02:30 PM) The greatest player who ever lived had numbers that didn't drastically improve percentage-wise between his freshman and junior seasons. I wouldn't say Dean Smith was a horrible developer of talent. Indiana is hated. I get it. I don't like them either. But they won. They get the credit. People just sound like Cubs fans pointing out White Sox attendance when they want to discredit Crean. If I were an Indiana fan on here I would just tell all the haters, "you're right, he can't develop players and he's a horrible in game coach. Your guy is far better. Enjoy 5th place." He won the Big Ten. Just give him his due and move on. A college coach is the Coach, GM and Chairman of his team. For this season, up until now, Crean has been better than all the other Big Ten coaches if you base it on results. Jordan's percentages did go up from his Freshman to Junior year. From 53.5% to 55.1% and he went from 13.5 PPG to 20.0 and 19.6 (on less minutes and better %s than the 20 PPG season). There was a pretty drastic improvement there. I don't think that's the best example. The whole thing about Crean being a better coach than other Big Ten coaches because he won the conference is silly. His roster is clearly more talented (which I know is part of being a coach) than every other roster in the B1G. Because Valpo won the horizon league in 2011-2012 does that mean Bryce Drew is a better coach than Brad Stevens? You'll probably say he was for that season, but come on, that's silly.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 11, 2013 -> 10:16 AM) Rumors probably started on an IU board. If you win the outright conference title you don't do what he did. He's lucky they pulled that out yesterday otherwise it would have been a pretty large fail of a season. All that talent returning and that "unreal" recruiting class got him exactly one more win. That "unreal" recruiting class was overrated for a while. Yogi is really good and Hollowell is decent. The people that thought Perea would be a difference maker right away and that Jurkin could contribute right away were just way off. I remember how people were saying how much they were going to gain when Perea and Jurkin would come back from suspension. It was stupid. Perea has always been really raw and his rating had dropped from 5 star status (I believe) to barely sneaking into the top 50. Jurkin was a 3 star project at Center. They're probably going to be good down the line though.

QUOTE (lord chas @ Mar 2, 2013 -> 11:36 AM) VCU is a fun team to watch I think they would easily beat a team like Gonzaga if they played them. The ball pressure on Gonzaga's guards would be an absolute nightmare.

Not sure if this is the right thread, but the Miami Heat did the Harlem Shake. Pretty good too.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 12:10 PM) You throw a silly Bills Simmons quote at me stating that Kevin Johnson would average 30/15 in today's game and you want to talk about substance? Rightttttt. And these one or two game outliers you reference mean nothing. I've seen Dana Barros score 50 in a game. I've seen Tony Delk score 50 in a game. I've seen Muhammad Abdul Rauf, or whatever his name was, go on insane scoring binges. These guys weren't even borderline all-stars. it's quite simple: Bulls fans won't admit this, and I sure didn't at the time, but the 90's was watered down as s***. You don't add 6 new teams in 8 years, as the league did from '87 through '94, and not see the league take a big hit overall. That's basically a new team a year. The drafts from '94 through '2002 were ugly. I'm talking Kirstie Alley ugly. Just f***ing Awful. The 2000/2001 particularly were the worst ever. It's taken a while, but the league has finally caught up to all that expansion from the late 80's, early 90's. Look at the drafts from '03 through last year and compare them to '94 through '02. it's like comparing Joyce Dewitt to Snookie. The talent is simply better now. Nothing to do with a few rule changes 8 years ago. The KJ thing was just something I read the other day that I found funny. I was using it as an example that a guy who probably knows more about basketball than both of us combined thinks that this era is soft on perimeter players. Most logical people agree. You didn't really explain the explosion in wing scoring. At all. But I enjoyed the Kristie Alley reference. That's what I look for in basketball debates. And those isolated incidents happened to those players once. Crawford, Redd, and Arenas (3x) all did it multiple times. I mean, just look at Arenas' jump. Look at Michael Redds, Iversons, Vince Carter, etc.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 12:26 PM) I am getting a huge disconnect between people calling college bball watered down and talentless today and there apparently being head and shoulders more talent in the NBA. What is happening between the college season and the draft? Exactly. Jim Boeheim was on PTI last week and he said that both college and the NBA are suffering because players aren't developing like they were in the past. He sees first hand that the game is worse. It starts at even the high school level now with AAU basically playing like all star games where fundamentals aren't emphasized and it's just a showcase of talent. Could this era be better than the early 90s? For sure. If fundamentals were emphasized and players stayed longer in college it probably would be. As a whole, the league is probably more athletic than the early 90s (although the 90s had good athletes too). I've thought about it and you have scrubs like Gerald Green and other freak athletes that are on the bench, but just suck. The difference is overall skills. That's what separates the early 90s from today. I'd say the majority of the league had some sort of post game. Hell, the guards used to have their back to the basket on the top of the key sometimes because of all the ball pressure (hand checking). eFG% jumped from .471 in 03-04 to .482, .490, .496, .497, .500, .501.... PPG jumped from 93.4 to 97.2, 97.0, 98.7, 99.9, 100.... All the high school players going to the NBA started to kill the NBA. They had no fundamentals and the league had to change the handcheck rule because it was getting brutal. It's not like they changed the rule for no reason. The results are clear as day. I just don't understand how someone argues otherwise. Kobe Bryant at the age of 34 is having a better statistical season than he did at 25 (the year before the handcheck rule was instated). Just another example. There are tons.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 10:05 AM) Why comment? You say the same thing over and over. "It's because of the rules, it's because of the rules, it's because of the rules." Yes, but you never provide anything of substance. I can go through all the wing players blowing up after 2004. I can show Allen Iverson having his best scoring season ever after 2004. There are just so many examples of how the rule changes helped perimeter players, so yes, it's because of the rules, it's because of the rules, it's because of the rules. Can you help me understand the explosion in wing scoring that doesn't point towards the rule changes? Please? Can you explain to me how Damon Stoudamire scored 54 in a game at 31, or how guys like Parker, Redd x2, Crawford x3 scored 50+? Hell, a past prime Iverson and Gilbert freaking Arenas had 60 point games after the rule changes.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 09:54 AM) Are you sure you're only 25? Because you simply wreak of the typical old, creaky, fart that refuses to let go of the past and pigeon hole anything good about the present. Positive I'm only 25. I'm not really sure why you quoted me there if you weren't going to comment about anything in my post, besides questioning my age. I didn't even talk about the past there. I talked about current players and how they're able to succeed. I think both of those guys would be good in any era, by the way. E: I also said earlier in the thread that I thought today's basketball was really entertaining, especially with all the storylines. I can appreciate today's NBA. I just get upset when people try to take a shot at the 90s when there are tons of stats that show how much easier the game was post-2004 on wings. Michael Redd has 2 50 point games, Jamal Crawford 3 I think, Tony Parker has done it, Deron Williams, Damon Stoudamire, etc.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 09:26 AM) Average...? Paul and Parker are both insanely fast players. Insanely fast? Paul has had knee problems for a while (including surgery) and Parker is about to be 31 and has been in the league 11 years. You seriously think they're insanely fast? They were at points in their careers, but they're pretty average for PGs right now. They can both get to where they want on the floor because they're both smart (which is huge, think Nash in his heyday), have good quickness, can hit an open jumper, and the rules help with penetration.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 03:58 AM) If anyone doesn't think this is the Golden Era of the Point Guard, they're wrong. It's like the 90's with Centers. In terms of overall number of PGs that can take over a game and is a difference maker in today's NBA? Sure. The rules have made it a golden era for PGs. Especially the score first combo guard listed at PG like Rose (who I love), Westbrook, Jennings, Curry, etc. I just think it's funny that today's PGs are so much more athletic and so great and blah, blah, blah, but the two best PGs in the NBA are both small and have average athleticism (Paul and Parker).

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 27, 2013 -> 11:42 PM) Give it up, dude. the PG position is the most stacked it's ever been in the history of the game. And it's not all attributed to rule changes. They're bigger, stronger, more athletic and more diverse than 20 years ago, easy. Kevin Johnson average 30 a game? Not without a jumper, let alone a 3-point shot. lol@15 assists. the pace those suns teams played on dwarfs any in today's game. he wouldn't sniff 15 assists. Not without a jumper? Jesus Christ. Okay. We really don't need to have this argument. Agree to disagree.