TA vs Perk in the semis... who will you be rooting for?

[ACF]

Thunderup!

[Fafnir]

OKC. They have a better shot at beating the Lakers.

Agreed, and I think its because OKC has the better PG.  Time and again, LA has shown they have a hard time containing good PGs.

But, do you guys trust Durant against Kobe and Artest? I don't.

As long as he doesn't settle for 3s, Durant can get right by Artest especially if he gets a screen.

The only way Durant has a good game against the Lakers is if he's playing a lot off the ball and the team makes a good effort to get him open and then give him the ball for a catch and shoot. Else, he's going to suffer the same kind of problems he's had with the Lakers for the past 2 years, particularly against a strong defender with good hands.

He's played well versus the Lakers this year. They're a very good defensive team but his TS% only declines a few points from .58 to .55. They do keep him off the three point line very well.

That's getting skewed a bit because he had one great game against them in which he shot 11 of 15.

The other 2 games he went 8-24 and 8-20. Then you go back to last year, particularly in the playoffs, and it really doesn't look good for him.

Glossing over the last 13 games he's played against the Lakers over the past 2 years, he seems to have had about 3 or 4 games in which he actually played great, and a lot of awful shooting performances among them.

I'm glad that the third game doesn't count since you don't agree with what it says!

Ron Artests decline as a defender makes me weight past years by a lot less. He also is shooting a lot of three and making almost none of them, if he can be discplined with attacking Artest instead of settling for threes he can dominate that match up. (he's shooting very well from everyone but 3 against them)

[BudweiserCeltic]

OKC. They have a better shot at beating the Lakers.

Agreed, and I think its because OKC has the better PG.  Time and again, LA has shown they have a hard time containing good PGs.

But, do you guys trust Durant against Kobe and Artest? I don't.

As long as he doesn't settle for 3s, Durant can get right by Artest especially if he gets a screen.

The only way Durant has a good game against the Lakers is if he's playing a lot off the ball and the team makes a good effort to get him open and then give him the ball for a catch and shoot. Else, he's going to suffer the same kind of problems he's had with the Lakers for the past 2 years, particularly against a strong defender with good hands.

He's played well versus the Lakers this year. They're a very good defensive team but his TS% only declines a few points from .58 to .55. They do keep him off the three point line very well.

That's getting skewed a bit because he had one great game against them in which he shot 11 of 15.

The other 2 games he went 8-24 and 8-20. Then you go back to last year, particularly in the playoffs, and it really doesn't look good for him.

Glossing over the last 13 games he's played against the Lakers over the past 2 years, he seems to have had about 3 or 4 games in which he actually played great, and a lot of awful shooting performances among them.

I'm glad that the third game doesn't count since you don't agree with what it says!

Ron Artests decline as a defender makes me weight past years by a lot less. He also is shooting a lot of three and making almost none of them, if he can be discplined with attacking Artest instead of settling for threes he can dominate that match up. (he's shooting very well from everyone but 3 against them)

Who said anything about it not counting? I'm just saying that it skews a small sample. I'm more of a fan of counting the number of games in which a player was effective rather than averaging out 3 games, 2 of which he was either bad or not good, and one extremely good shooting night.

1 great shooting night is just that, 1 game it doesn't carry over. They're going to need more repetitive play from him to win a series.

[Fafnir]

OKC. They have a better shot at beating the Lakers.

Agreed, and I think its because OKC has the better PG.  Time and again, LA has shown they have a hard time containing good PGs.

But, do you guys trust Durant against Kobe and Artest? I don't.

As long as he doesn't settle for 3s, Durant can get right by Artest especially if he gets a screen.

The only way Durant has a good game against the Lakers is if he's playing a lot off the ball and the team makes a good effort to get him open and then give him the ball for a catch and shoot. Else, he's going to suffer the same kind of problems he's had with the Lakers for the past 2 years, particularly against a strong defender with good hands.

He's played well versus the Lakers this year. They're a very good defensive team but his TS% only declines a few points from .58 to .55. They do keep him off the three point line very well.

That's getting skewed a bit because he had one great game against them in which he shot 11 of 15.

The other 2 games he went 8-24 and 8-20. Then you go back to last year, particularly in the playoffs, and it really doesn't look good for him.

Glossing over the last 13 games he's played against the Lakers over the past 2 years, he seems to have had about 3 or 4 games in which he actually played great, and a lot of awful shooting performances among them.

I'm glad that the third game doesn't count since you don't agree with what it says!

Ron Artests decline as a defender makes me weight past years by a lot less. He also is shooting a lot of three and making almost none of them, if he can be discplined with attacking Artest instead of settling for threes he can dominate that match up. (he's shooting very well from everyone but 3 against them)

Who said anything about it not counting? I'm just saying that it skews a small sample. I'm more of a fan of counting the number of games in which a player was effective rather than averaging out 3 games, 2 of which he was either bad or not good, and one extremely good shooting night.

1 great shooting night is just that, 1 game it doesn't carry over. They're going to need more repetitive play from him to win a series.

Even on his bad games he got enough free throws to be an effective offensive player. Both of his bad games were also very close games.

I don't like binary judgements like that, you have data aggregate it! The Lakers won two close games (without Perkins playing) and then got blown out in the third.

[BudweiserCeltic]

OKC. They have a better shot at beating the Lakers.

Agreed, and I think its because OKC has the better PG.  Time and again, LA has shown they have a hard time containing good PGs.

But, do you guys trust Durant against Kobe and Artest? I don't.

As long as he doesn't settle for 3s, Durant can get right by Artest especially if he gets a screen.

The only way Durant has a good game against the Lakers is if he's playing a lot off the ball and the team makes a good effort to get him open and then give him the ball for a catch and shoot. Else, he's going to suffer the same kind of problems he's had with the Lakers for the past 2 years, particularly against a strong defender with good hands.

He's played well versus the Lakers this year. They're a very good defensive team but his TS% only declines a few points from .58 to .55. They do keep him off the three point line very well.

That's getting skewed a bit because he had one great game against them in which he shot 11 of 15.

The other 2 games he went 8-24 and 8-20. Then you go back to last year, particularly in the playoffs, and it really doesn't look good for him.

Glossing over the last 13 games he's played against the Lakers over the past 2 years, he seems to have had about 3 or 4 games in which he actually played great, and a lot of awful shooting performances among them.

I'm glad that the third game doesn't count since you don't agree with what it says!

Ron Artests decline as a defender makes me weight past years by a lot less. He also is shooting a lot of three and making almost none of them, if he can be discplined with attacking Artest instead of settling for threes he can dominate that match up. (he's shooting very well from everyone but 3 against them)

Who said anything about it not counting? I'm just saying that it skews a small sample. I'm more of a fan of counting the number of games in which a player was effective rather than averaging out 3 games, 2 of which he was either bad or not good, and one extremely good shooting night.

1 great shooting night is just that, 1 game it doesn't carry over. They're going to need more repetitive play from him to win a series.

Even on his bad games he got enough free throws to be an effective offensive player. Both of his bad games were also very close games.

I don't like binary judgements like that, you have data aggregate it! The Lakers won two close games (without Perkins playing) and then got blown out in the third.

He also turned the ball over 5 times in 2 of them. You might not like those types of judgement, but it's a better measure of consistency and consistency is what usually wins playoff series.

Perkins really had little to do with that blowout though. They brought him to contain Gasol and Bynum, and it didn't happen. The Thunder were simply overwhelming offensively in that game. Something to build on and give the team confidence entering the playoffs, but by no means representative of what we should expect.

[GreenFaith1819]

Both of them.

As for whether OKC or MEM would have a better shot at beating LA? Right now, to me at least - the difference between these two is small, at best.

MEM will punish LA inside I believe...Marc can play Bynum well and ZBo would make Gasol work. ZBo may have some problems with Gasol or Bynum's length, but I thought that would be the case vs the Spurs, too - and I was wrong there.

Of course OKC has Durant, but I just don't know if he could do well vs Artest in a 7 game series. Sure he lit Ron Ron up during that last game of the reg season a few weeks ago, but can KD do that in a seven game series vs Ron Ron AND Matty B?

Westbrooke would be my sure bet to excel in such a series with OKC vs LA - and while talented he's no CP3.

As much as I can't stand LA, and just recently I've stated on here that I didn't think LA would make it out of the west, I just can't bury them until it's actually done. And right now? while OKC has Perk and Serge, it is just wishful thinking for me to say that OKC would in fact take them in a seven game series.

After all - Perk is in fact helping OKC, IMO - but Nene has given him problems. Imagine what Bynum will do to Perk.

Now for MEM? ZBo, Marc and D Arthur those three are HUNGRY.....throw in TA as your perimeter defender, and Conley who lit LA up for 30 during the reg season...throw in Battier as yet ANOTHER perimeter defender who can shoot?

To me, whether LA faces MEM or OKC they will have a tough battle. And that is to say even IF La can get past CP3 and NOH.

[Moranis]

The team that has the best chance of beating the Lakers...there are things i like about both teams but at this time i feel OKC is the team in the west best suited to dethrone the Lakers.Memphis is playing at a high level but its more about the Spurs not playing there best basketball.RJ hasn't given them anything,T.Parker is missing shots he normally make,etc.It wouldn't surprise me if they turn this series around.

I'm sure that has nothing to do with Memphis' defense.  Memphis wanted to play the Spurs for a reason.  They match-up well with them.  They also match-up well with the Thunder.  I think they beat the Thunder in 6 (if they hang on against San An, which they should).  I think the Lakers will come out of the west, but the team outside of New Orleans that can give them the most fits is amazingly Memphis.

[Fafnir]

He also turned the ball over 5 times in 2 of them. You might not like those types of judgement, but it's a better measure of consistency and consistency is what usually wins playoff series.

Perkins really had little to do with that blowout though. They brought him to contain Gasol and Bynum, and it didn't happen. The Thunder were simply overwhelming offensively in that game. Something to build on and give the team confidence entering the playoffs, but by no means representative of what we should expect.

And he turned it over 2 times during the third game, which means he's 1 over his overall average for the year at 4 per game.

There are valid reasons to talk about Durant struggling, but your responses to me are a bit maddening. Dismissing some stats, talking up others. Bringing up TOs when they don't match up with your "good/bad" game argument previously.

Why not just look at his overall numbers?

[Fafnir]

The team that has the best chance of beating the Lakers...there are things i like about both teams but at this time i feel OKC is the team in the west best suited to dethrone the Lakers.Memphis is playing at a high level but its more about the Spurs not playing there best basketball.RJ hasn't given them anything,T.Parker is missing shots he normally make,etc.It wouldn't surprise me if they turn this series around.

I'm sure that has nothing to do with Memphis' defense.  Memphis wanted to play the Spurs for a reason.  They match-up well with them.  They also match-up well with the Thunder.  I think they beat the Thunder in 6 (if they hang on against San An, which they should).  I think the Lakers will come out of the west, but the team outside of New Orleans that can give them the most fits is amazingly Memphis.

The New Orleans series still amazes me, the Lakers handled them in their regular season match ups. CP3 is feeling well at the right time I guess.

[BudweiserCeltic]

He also turned the ball over 5 times in 2 of them. You might not like those types of judgement, but it's a better measure of consistency and consistency is what usually wins playoff series.

Perkins really had little to do with that blowout though. They brought him to contain Gasol and Bynum, and it didn't happen. The Thunder were simply overwhelming offensively in that game. Something to build on and give the team confidence entering the playoffs, but by no means representative of what we should expect.

And he turned it over 2 times during the third game, which means he's 1 over his overall average for the year at 4 per game.

There are valid reasons to talk about Durant struggling, but your responses to me are a bit maddening. Dismissing some stats, talking up others. Bringing up TOs when they don't match up with your "good/bad" game argument previously.

Why not just look at his overall numbers?

I'm not dismissing anything, I'm putting context. When using stats sample size is the most important aspect, and 3 games is not a good sample size to extrapolate any meaningful data to project future performance.

That's why I went back and look to what he has done over the past two years, which is 13 games, and a better sample size to see what he has done, and it hasn't been promising and I don't know if 2 subpar games this year and one extremely good game this year is enough to change what history has been telling us so far. Also remember, it's common to remove outliers in statistics, and as far as I'm concerned that very good game is a bit of an outlier.

The only thing that game tells me is that Durant is capable of having success against the Lakers, but he has to consistently prove it before I'm confident of him doing so. He has yet to do that. It's something to build on though. But certainly not the first time he has had a great game against them, he's just missing in the consistency department, and that's what worries me in a playoff series. Are we confident we can count on him against the Lakers? I just don't know how I can say yes, when history is simply telling me no, other than having a gut feeling.

[Jon Niednagel]

Both of them.

As for whether OKC or MEM would have a better shot at beating LA? Right now, to me at least - the difference between these two is small, at best.

MEM will punish LA inside I believe...Marc can play Bynum well and ZBo would make Gasol work. ZBo may have some problems with Gasol or Bynum's length, but I thought that would be the case vs the Spurs, too - and I was wrong there.

Of course OKC has Durant, but I just don't know if he could do well vs Artest in a 7 game series. Sure he lit Ron Ron up during that last game of the reg season a few weeks ago, but can KD do that in a seven game series vs Ron Ron AND Matty B?

Westbrooke would be my sure bet to excel in such a series with OKC vs LA - and while talented he's no CP3.

As much as I can't stand LA, and just recently I've stated on here that I didn't think LA would make it out of the west, I just can't bury them until it's actually done. And right now? while OKC has Perk and Serge, it is just wishful thinking for me to say that OKC would in fact take them in a seven game series.

After all - Perk is in fact helping OKC, IMO - but Nene has given him problems. Imagine what Bynum will do to Perk.

Now for MEM? ZBo, Marc and D Arthur those three are HUNGRY.....throw in TA as your perimeter defender, and Conley who lit LA up for 30 during the reg season...throw in Battier as yet ANOTHER perimeter defender who can shoot?

To me, whether LA faces MEM or OKC they will have a tough battle. And that is to say even IF La can get past CP3 and NOH.

TP to you. We seem to have similar thoughts on the matter.

Personally, I really like the Grizzlies, and that is why I want them to win the series. It has nothing to do with TA or Perk. I love them both (Perk more so) and wish them well. I have lived in Memphis since 2006, so the Grizz have become my number #2  team. They have my support until they play the Celtics. Nothing comes close to my love for the Cs.

I don't think either team (OKC or Memphis) has a decided advantage over LA. Both can and will give LA fits, and are capable of beating them.

[GreenFaith1819]

Both of them.

As for whether OKC or MEM would have a better shot at beating LA? Right now, to me at least - the difference between these two is small, at best.

MEM will punish LA inside I believe...Marc can play Bynum well and ZBo would make Gasol work. ZBo may have some problems with Gasol or Bynum's length, but I thought that would be the case vs the Spurs, too - and I was wrong there.

Of course OKC has Durant, but I just don't know if he could do well vs Artest in a 7 game series. Sure he lit Ron Ron up during that last game of the reg season a few weeks ago, but can KD do that in a seven game series vs Ron Ron AND Matty B?

Westbrooke would be my sure bet to excel in such a series with OKC vs LA - and while talented he's no CP3.

As much as I can't stand LA, and just recently I've stated on here that I didn't think LA would make it out of the west, I just can't bury them until it's actually done. And right now? while OKC has Perk and Serge, it is just wishful thinking for me to say that OKC would in fact take them in a seven game series.

After all - Perk is in fact helping OKC, IMO - but Nene has given him problems. Imagine what Bynum will do to Perk.

Now for MEM? ZBo, Marc and D Arthur those three are HUNGRY.....throw in TA as your perimeter defender, and Conley who lit LA up for 30 during the reg season...throw in Battier as yet ANOTHER perimeter defender who can shoot?

To me, whether LA faces MEM or OKC they will have a tough battle. And that is to say even IF La can get past CP3 and NOH.

TP to you. We seem to have similar thoughts on the matter.

Personally, I really like the Grizzlies, and that is why I want them to win the series. It has nothing to do with TA or Perk. I love them both (Perk more so) and wish them well. I have lived in Memphis since 2006, so the Grizz have become my number #2  team. They have my support until they play the Celtics. Nothing comes close to my love for the Cs.

I don't think either team (OKC or Memphis) has a decided advantage over LA. Both can and will give LA fits, and are capable of beating them.

MEM is a nice place - I traveled through there back in 09 on the way to VA. Must be crazy there right now with what the Grizz are doing.

Whether or not OKC or MEM (or Boston) beats LA, I hope (and expect) it to happen one way or the other.

LA cannot win this June - that would be wrong...just not right.

[RJ87]

I've been a fan of OKC for awhile now, and I think they have a legit chance to dethrone the Lakers this year. I really like what Sam Presti did to deepen the frontcourt at the deadline. Perk, Ibaka starting then Nazr Mohammed & Collison coming off the bench is a pretty good big man rotation, and they'll have the fouls to use against the unholy trio of Gasol/Bynum/Odom.

I think the perimeter players will be the key - and I'm going to take Durant/Westbrook over Bryant/Fisher at this point, especially if Kobe is limited by his ankle. Then throw-in the perimeter defense of Thabo Sefolosha - whose had success defending Bryant in the past - plus the inconsistency of Ron Artest and I like the the Thunder's chances.

Also, I like the boost Harden and Maynor provide off the bench for OKC. Now, LA has some good bench guys in Brown, Blake, and Barnes but they've lacked punch in this series against NOH and they don't seem to be playing very well together right now.

[bbd24]

I think I'll be rooting for the physician on call that series.  Because God forbid TA or Perk coming down and rupturing another knee on a standard rebounding play.

You'll have to be the 'Larry Bird' of the physician team to reconstruct one of those bad boys.

[Jon Niednagel]

Both of them.

As for whether OKC or MEM would have a better shot at beating LA? Right now, to me at least - the difference between these two is small, at best.

MEM will punish LA inside I believe...Marc can play Bynum well and ZBo would make Gasol work. ZBo may have some problems with Gasol or Bynum's length, but I thought that would be the case vs the Spurs, too - and I was wrong there.

Of course OKC has Durant, but I just don't know if he could do well vs Artest in a 7 game series. Sure he lit Ron Ron up during that last game of the reg season a few weeks ago, but can KD do that in a seven game series vs Ron Ron AND Matty B?

Westbrooke would be my sure bet to excel in such a series with OKC vs LA - and while talented he's no CP3.

As much as I can't stand LA, and just recently I've stated on here that I didn't think LA would make it out of the west, I just can't bury them until it's actually done. And right now? while OKC has Perk and Serge, it is just wishful thinking for me to say that OKC would in fact take them in a seven game series.

After all - Perk is in fact helping OKC, IMO - but Nene has given him problems. Imagine what Bynum will do to Perk.

Now for MEM? ZBo, Marc and D Arthur those three are HUNGRY.....throw in TA as your perimeter defender, and Conley who lit LA up for 30 during the reg season...throw in Battier as yet ANOTHER perimeter defender who can shoot?

To me, whether LA faces MEM or OKC they will have a tough battle. And that is to say even IF La can get past CP3 and NOH.

TP to you. We seem to have similar thoughts on the matter.

Personally, I really like the Grizzlies, and that is why I want them to win the series. It has nothing to do with TA or Perk. I love them both (Perk more so) and wish them well. I have lived in Memphis since 2006, so the Grizz have become my number #2  team. They have my support until they play the Celtics. Nothing comes close to my love for the Cs.

I don't think either team (OKC or Memphis) has a decided advantage over LA. Both can and will give LA fits, and are capable of beating them.

MEM is a nice place - I traveled through there back in 09 on the way to VA. Must be crazy there right now with what the Grizz are doing.

Whether or not OKC or MEM (or Boston) beats LA, I hope (and expect) it to happen one way or the other.

LA cannot win this June - that would be wrong...just not right.

Memphis has been a fine city to live in, but I'm really excited to move home (Maine) in two weeks. I agree that LA must not win this June. I barely survived last June, and I certainly have not gotten over it.