CB Draft '10 Playoffs Eastern Conference Semi-Finals

[Roy H.]

Okay, Nick is going to dodge that one, which is not surprising.

Here is something to think about:

If Chicago overwhelmingly won the first overall seed, meaning it had the most regular season wins, wouldn't it follow that a lot of these issues worked themselves out over the season?

For instance:

2. The Bulls have possibly the worst bench in the league and given that they have three of the top 51 highest ranked players in fouls per minute(Noah 51st, Ilyasova 17th, Amundson 11th) they are going to get into foul problems and their bench can't pick up the slack.

3. The Boxers have championship(six NBA championships) experience and veterans that have accomplished great things internationally(Olympic and FIBA gold medals, Euroleague Final Fours MVPs). The Bulls have one championship ring winner, a guy that got benched for the playoffs when his team won the championship(Allen) and are relying heavily on second year players, rookies, and players playing in roles they just are not used to playing in (Ilyasova starting, Amundson as a first big off the bench)

If my squad managed the first overall seed by a VERY healthy margin, wouldn't it follow that these issues (overcoming early foul problems, adjusting to new roles, etc) worked themselves out over the previous 86+ games or so? Remember these playoffs aren't happening in September. Its happening in May, after Ersan Ilyasova and Louis Amundson have spent the entire year in new roles. They must have figured out how to be okay in them, or else the Bulls would not have won so many games.

Basically what I'm saying is that these issues of Nick's (new roles, Ersan's foul-prone tendencies) are issues that would've had to work themselves out, and in a positive manner.

Otherwise why were the Bulls the best team in the conference? They're not going to just suddenly fall apart and forget what they'd been doing during the season, and Nick isn't presenting anything revolutionary. In fact, he's kind of dodging nearly every argument that is challenging him while I'm running around like a chicken wiht my head cut off trying to address issues from GM's who haven't made up their minds.

Fact: LeBron has not ever been beaten in the playoffs by anything other than an utterly elite NBA team, if not the best defensive team in the league.

Fact: You all looked at the other teams in the conference and voted Chicago first. You can say "I didn't believe they were a 1 seed, I had them at 3" or whatever, but the fact is, we finished first, which means we won the most games.

Fact: If this were the real NBA, a lot of the reservations people have about Ersan Ilyasova or Louis Amundson or Mike MIller would have been sorted out, and for the better if this team was a legitimate #1 seed. And, since this team won the #1 seed easily, I don't see a real choice there.

Question:  Which team had the #1 seed in the East last year?  What about the year before?

Were all of their flaws worked out in the regular season?

[Rondo2287]

Honestly Roy, I havent had time to read the stuff on the west, i gotta look at that tonight when i get home.  How many votes we got so far... like 2?

[Roy H.]

Honestly Roy, I havent had time to read the stuff on the west, i gotta look at that tonight when i get home.  How many votes we got so far... like 2?

Last time I checked with Faf, not many.  (And I don't know what the vote totals are looking like, because I can't see the ballots.)

Before you vote, just please read some of the bullet points (and more, if you have time).  This isn't a case of voting for the higher seed just because people liked them better in the regular season.  Sacramento is really better than Utah, and would fairly handily win a series, I think.

[indeedproceed]

Okay, Nick is going to dodge that one, which is not surprising.

Here is something to think about:

If Chicago overwhelmingly won the first overall seed, meaning it had the most regular season wins, wouldn't it follow that a lot of these issues worked themselves out over the season?

For instance:

2. The Bulls have possibly the worst bench in the league and given that they have three of the top 51 highest ranked players in fouls per minute(Noah 51st, Ilyasova 17th, Amundson 11th) they are going to get into foul problems and their bench can't pick up the slack.

3. The Boxers have championship(six NBA championships) experience and veterans that have accomplished great things internationally(Olympic and FIBA gold medals, Euroleague Final Fours MVPs). The Bulls have one championship ring winner, a guy that got benched for the playoffs when his team won the championship(Allen) and are relying heavily on second year players, rookies, and players playing in roles they just are not used to playing in (Ilyasova starting, Amundson as a first big off the bench)

If my squad managed the first overall seed by a VERY healthy margin, wouldn't it follow that these issues (overcoming early foul problems, adjusting to new roles, etc) worked themselves out over the previous 86+ games or so? Remember these playoffs aren't happening in September. Its happening in May, after Ersan Ilyasova and Louis Amundson have spent the entire year in new roles. They must have figured out how to be okay in them, or else the Bulls would not have won so many games.

Basically what I'm saying is that these issues of Nick's (new roles, Ersan's foul-prone tendencies) are issues that would've had to work themselves out, and in a positive manner.

Otherwise why were the Bulls the best team in the conference? They're not going to just suddenly fall apart and forget what they'd been doing during the season, and Nick isn't presenting anything revolutionary. In fact, he's kind of dodging nearly every argument that is challenging him while I'm running around like a chicken wiht my head cut off trying to address issues from GM's who haven't made up their minds.

Fact: LeBron has not ever been beaten in the playoffs by anything other than an utterly elite NBA team, if not the best defensive team in the league.

Fact: You all looked at the other teams in the conference and voted Chicago first. You can say "I didn't believe they were a 1 seed, I had them at 3" or whatever, but the fact is, we finished first, which means we won the most games.

Fact: If this were the real NBA, a lot of the reservations people have about Ersan Ilyasova or Louis Amundson or Mike MIller would have been sorted out, and for the better if this team was a legitimate #1 seed. And, since this team won the #1 seed easily, I don't see a real choice there.

Question:  Which team had the #1 seed in the East last year?  What about the year before?

Were all of their flaws worked out in the regular season?

No, not all of them, but flaws like Ersan Ilyasova and Louis Amundson not being accustomed to playing more significant roles, or MIke Miller not contributing on offense would have been resolved, correct?

It is much the same thing you're dealing with Roy. If Zach Randolph didn't already figure out how to be a bench player/role player when need be for the Kings, would they have any chance at beating Utah? Any chance of getting the 3 seed overall? I don't think so.

[Rondo2287]

Honestly Roy, I havent had time to read the stuff on the west, i gotta look at that tonight when i get home.  How many votes we got so far... like 2?

Last time I checked with Faf, not many.  (And I don't know what the vote totals are looking like, because I can't see the ballots.)

Before you vote, just please read some of the bullet points (and more, if you have time).  This isn't a case of voting for the higher seed just because people liked them better in the regular season.  Sacramento is really better than Utah, and would fairly handily win a series, I think.

I shall read dont you worry.  IP you wanna send out another PM asking people to vote?

[indeedproceed]

Honestly Roy, I havent had time to read the stuff on the west, i gotta look at that tonight when i get home.  How many votes we got so far... like 2?

Last time I checked with Faf, not many.  (And I don't know what the vote totals are looking like, because I can't see the ballots.)

Before you vote, just please read some of the bullet points (and more, if you have time).  This isn't a case of voting for the higher seed just because people liked them better in the regular season.  Sacramento is really better than Utah, and would fairly handily win a series, I think.

I shall read dont you worry.  IP you wanna send out another PM asking people to vote?

I'll do it around 6 or 7

[StartOrien]

I've got a 7:15 softball game tonight, so I won't be anywhere near my computer from 5:30-9:30. Also It's Always Sunny starts tonight, so if you have questions for me, please do so now

[Fafnir]

Honestly Roy, I havent had time to read the stuff on the west, i gotta look at that tonight when i get home.  How many votes we got so far... like 2?

Last time I checked with Faf, not many.  (And I don't know what the vote totals are looking like, because I can't see the ballots.)

Before you vote, just please read some of the bullet points (and more, if you have time).  This isn't a case of voting for the higher seed just because people liked them better in the regular season.  Sacramento is really better than Utah, and would fairly handily win a series, I think.

We have a total of 6 votes in.

I haven't been sharing results early with anyone either, so you're struck with straw polls!

[Who]

I was pretty firmly in the Milwaukee camp earlier today but I liked the change Champkind made putting Ty Lawson in the starting lineup. I think Lawson's quickness can cause Jason Kidd a lot of difficulty. Maybe even play Kidd to a standstill.

Especially in that 1-4 pick and roll against Dirk with LaMarcus Aldridge. Where both Kidd and Dirk are defensive liabilities. That could cause Milwaukee a lot of problems.

I think Jason Terry has Jarrett Jack's number too. The switch to move Lawson into the starting lineup has improved the club's chances a great deal.

Not so sure about starting Vince Carter though. Rip Hamilton is going to torch him running off of screens. Carter will be fighting just to play even here. Rip can play him tough off the dribble and has enough size to fight in the post. Not an easy matchup for Vince offensively (not anymore).

With Corey Maggette, I think Maggette can score easily on Vince. I don't think Vince has the defensive chops to limit Maggette's explosive slashing ability. Maggette is a far more explosive and efficient scorer than Rip Hamilton so even though Vince's offense should improve in this matchup ... his lack of defense will wiping that out.

I think Vince is better off as a sixth man and getting some of his minutes against Matt Barnes and CJ Miles where I think he'd do a lot of damage. Then bringing him on late in the half to play alongside Lawson and JJ on the perimeter.

[Who]

Rondo,

How does Milwaukee choose to match up against this lineup?

PG - Lawson
SG - Joe
SF - Vince
PF - Kirilenko
C - Aldridge

[Who]

I don't think I'd play Amir Johnson in this series. He is a good team defender but his man-to-man defense is vulnerable especially against a scorer as talented as Dirk Nowitzki ... Dirk will just tear him apart.

Amir is a fine matchup against Turiaf. He can play him well on both ends of the court (solid defense matchup + punish Turiaf on his over-zealous help defense) all while out-rebounding Ronny.

Brandon Wright would likely gain confidence against Amir though. Amir isn't physical enough or skilled enough to punish Wright. To take advantage of him ... I think Wright finds a nice comfort zone against Amir. Too similar to one another. A fairly neutral matchup.

[indeedproceed]

Who, wahts your take on the CHI-WAS series?


EDIT: Also, Tony Allen's primary cover when he's in is Manu Ginobli. LeBron will cover Manu in games late (if Tony isn't in), but to start games and as long as Manu isn't killing us we're going to run with Mike Miller on Manu to start. This is to keep LeBron free to help (on Manu) and to keep him fresh for later in the game.

[Who]

Who, whats the take on the CHI-WAS series?

I am leaning towards Washington. I am assuming LeBron James is defending Manu Ginobili. If he's not, the series is over, Chicago lost.

Starters

PG - Jennings vs Felton - advantage Chicago
SG - LeBron vs Ginobili - advantage Chicago
SF - M.Miller vs Chandler - advantage Chicago
PF - Ilyasova vs Scola - advantage Washington
C - Noah vs Bynum - advantage Washington

I don't think Raymond Felton can contain Jennings' quickness. Mike Miller is a better all-round player than Wilson Chandler. Chandler will defend LeBron and do a respectable job but LeBron is LeBron. 

Ilyasova is a solid defender who plays good team defense and below average serviceable man-to-man defense ... but he simply cannot contain a physical scrappy + offensively talented power forward like Luis Scola. Ilyasova will cause Scola some issues too (being on the perimeter and all) but overall the matchup is firmly in Scola's favour.

The Noah vs Bynum matchup was one I've been thinking about the last two days. I thought Noah out-played Bynum last season and will both out-rebound Bynum and play better defense than Bynum in this series.

However, I think Bynum's increased offensive output (on this Washington team) adds more than Noah's advantages. My expectation in this series is for Bynum to be a solid 20/10 big man who plays very good defense while Noah will be a 14/13 big man who plays excellent defense.

Bench

I think Washington has a matchup advantage with their backup guard (Leandro Barbosa over Eric Maynor) + with their backup big man (Haslem vs Amundson).

The backups at the other positions are hard to list because Chicago plays such a short bench. Tony Allen and Budinger should be fairly neutral.

Greene gives Washington some more depth on the wings. A solid defender and stand-still shooter. I would avoid playing him at the four in a small ball lineup though. I think Washington is best off trying to play their three main big men for the full 96 minutes. That's where their best asset lies (in this series).

[Who]

Greene gives Washington some more depth on the wings. A solid defender and stand-still shooter. I would avoid playing him at the four in a small ball lineup though. I think Washington is best off trying to play their three main big men for the full 96 minutes. That's where their best asset lies (in this series).

Actually ... hmm ...

PG - Ginobili
SG - Budinger
SF - Chandler
PF - Greene
C - Bynum

That would be a tricky lineup for Chicago to match up with. If Greene was to play at the four, I'd only put him out there with Bynum at the five + I think I'd go big on the perimeter with Ginobili to make him a tougher matchup issue for Chicago.

Force Jennings to defend someone much bigger than he is (likely Budinger) or force him off the floor in favour of TA and let Manu be a disruptive influence with his help D (make TA a very large offensive liability, force him to be a shooter).

That might work, I don't know ... it's interesting though.

------------------------------

I am thinking this might be useful against the Bulls when LeBron goes to the power forward spot.

Keeping Wilson Chandler on LeBron.

[nickagneta]

3. The Boxers have championship(six NBA championships) experience and veterans that have accomplished great things internationally(Olympic and FIBA gold medals, Euroleague Final Fours MVPs). The Bulls have one championship ring winner, a guy that got benched for the playoffs when his team won the championship(Allen) and are relying heavily on second year players, rookies, and players playing in roles they just are not used to playing in (Ilyasova starting, Amundson as a first big off the bench)

Question: Do you think that your mere existence in the playoffs, at this stage, proves that Bynum stayed healthy all year?

Does the fact that Lebron was the best player on multiple teams that never won a championship make him a great leader? Does being the best at something mean you can lead others?

Answer my question. Its a fair one.

Do you believe, that since you have in fact made it to the second round of the playoffs with Bynum as your second best player, that Bynum must have been healthy all season, or else you would not have made it here?

Of course.