Mister Kia is fortunate that his teams have put the opposing team away early in these games, because he's been exhibiting an alarming tendency to go 0-fer and 1-fer in the fourth quarter, triple-doubles and all.
[NBA Playoffs] Conference Semifinals open thread
- Thread starter Mr. S£im Citrus
- Start date
- Status
LOL!
fansinceday1
Starter
Down goes shaq! Down goes shaq!
HAHAHAHAHA!
HAHAHAHAHA!
My TV's at an odd angle from my monitor: was Balmer just pantomiming a sex act on live television? 
Hurry up and wait... Did I get recalled to active duty?
Can't follow you there, I'm afraid: my disdain for Ugly Beardface James Harden and Grinning Hypocrite Dwight Howard supersedes my disdain for Whiny Punk Chris Paul and Stupid *****face Blake Griffin.
I understand. For me, however, the deciding factor is LA. As much as I dislike Houston, I dislike LA so, so, so much more.
HndsmCelt
Hall of Famer
These are the value judgements we all need to make for ourselves. In my case the entirety of Flop City except Doc win my ire over the defenseless Beard and the cowardly lion at center.
Last edited:
lawlman91
Starter
I agree with the above posters. The Grizzlies and the Warriors appear to be at philosophical odds, and the result of this match-up will definitely affect the culture of basketball. I will argue that the effect that a Grizzly win might have will be more than the effect of a Warrior win. Why? If the Warriors win, things will continue as normal, but everyone that follows a "run-and-gun", jump-shooting philosophy will be backed by the success of the Warriors. Thus, we will more likely see 3 point shooters in a pick-up game. If the Grizzlies win, things will not continue as normal. There will probably be buzz about how "grit and grind" triumphed over "run-and-gun", with lots of old people preaching to the kids that old-school does, in fact, work. Pick-up games might even end up having guards that can post up, just like Andre Miller. I can see a Grizzly victory changing the culture of basketball. To what degree, I can't tell. But I can guarantee change.
I'd say that's a bridge too far. I'll settle for our ownership and management realizing that GSW's style doesn't work with our personnel.
captain bill
All-Star
I really don't understand why people keep saying this. The Warriors are a great defensive team that relies heavily on 3 point shooting on offense. That is NOT run-n-gun. The SSOL Suns were run n gun. The We Believe Warriors were run n gun. This W's team emerged when they traded Monte Ellis (a chucker) for Bogut (an elite post defender).
The ONLY 'philosophical difference' is that the Ws rely heavily on 3 point shooting on offense, while the Grizz run their offense through the post and have poor shooters. Every recent NBA champ has relied on 3 point shooting in the playoffs - the only difference is the volume of the Ws shooting.
Saying the Ws are a run n gun team lacking in fundamentals is like saying that the Webber Kings were run n gun- it's lazy and wrong, and generally based around the idea that "great offense = bad playoff team" while ignoring the actual defensive prowess of the team just because they shoot a lot of 3s and score at such a high clip that they run opponents out of the gym.
If anything, they're more comparable to Dwight's finals team than a true run n gun squad.
lawlman91
Starter
I'll clarify: I keep hearing that they are not "run-and"gun", and I haven't seen them play enough to determine whether or not they are. However, whether or not they actually are does not matter; it's how they are perceived.
All you have to do is look at the first part of the season to realize this is true.....not sure why it is so difficult for some (FO) to grasp.
Henkel
Starter
"Wizards just announced they've found FIVE non-displaced fractures in John Wall's left wrist and hand. Unreal misfortune for Wiz and Wall"
https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/596383299892748288
https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/596383299892748288
The eastern conference playoffs are about to get even more insignificant. Tough break for Wall and sets up what's sure to be a lackluster eastern conference finals.
https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/596383299892748288
https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/596383299892748288
The eastern conference playoffs are about to get even more insignificant. Tough break for Wall and sets up what's sure to be a lackluster eastern conference finals.
This is a straw man. You're creating a false equivalency here: nobody but you has equated "run n gun" with "lacking in fundamentals." D'Antoni's Suns didn't lack fundamentals. That's not what most people understand "run n gun" to mean. And whether you are a "run n gun" team and whether or not you play defense are mutually exclusive, because "run n gun" is a descriptor that only applies to one end of the basketball court. The Warriors don't get called a "run n gun" team merely because they shoot a ton of threes: they get called a "run n gun" team because they they have a guard-heavy offense, that relies on a lot of transition threes. There's a lot of "Run to the three-point line" in the Warriors' offense; that's the hallmark of a "run n gun" team. The Atlanta Hawks shoot a ton of threes, too, and nobody calls them a "run n gun" team. You want to know why? Because they move the ball around to find open threes in their half court sets and, more importantly, they have two guys that they can post up to get what they like to call "easy" baskets in the paint, that's why.They do, in fact, take a ton of threes, but the three-point shot isn't Option A in the Hawks' offense; Option A is a back door cut.
To me (and, I suspect, to other people in this thread who have made the allusion), "run n gun" does not mean "no defense" or "lacking in fundamentals." To me, "run n gun" is shorthand for "lack of a reliable low post offensive threat." Shooting threes is not the baseline, lack of a low-post threat is. As long as you have a guy whom you can dump the ball into, down on the block, and say, "Go get me a basket, and/or get fouled," Then I don't think you can be reasonably described as a "run n gun" team, whether that guy is Hakeem Olajuwon, Tim Duncan, Dwight Howard or LeBron James. I also feel that any team that lacks such an option can be reasonably described as a "run n gun" team, and that defense and fundamentals have nothing to do with it.
No post-up players. Running on made baskets, regardless of circumstance. Those are the characteristics of "run n gun" teams, and that's how the Warriors play.
What do you mean, "more insignificant"? More insignificant than what, a Bulls/Wizards final?
The Hawks versus whomever in the Eastern Conference Finals are the only chance the ECF has of having any significance.
Henkel
Starter
After the Wizards switched to a smaller lineup for the playoffs they looked a lot better then the Hawks of the past couple of months. Game 1 being a nice example. I wouldn't pick either to beat the Cavs or Bulls, but I think it would be a better series then watching a fading Hawks team get bounced without much drama. More insignificant is poor wording I suppose, less entertaining maybe?
On the contrary, the Hawks' only real weakness is against teams with a low post threat. Cleveland doesn't have one of those. The Hawks match up better against the Cavs than any team they've faced in the playoffs so far. Hawks/Bulls would be problematic for Atlanta, but they could actually beat the Cavaliers.
As far as entertainment goes, you and I may not have the same sense of entertainment value, as it pertains to basketball.
As far as entertainment goes, you and I may not have the same sense of entertainment value, as it pertains to basketball.
Henkel
Starter
They've been playing around .500 ball for two months at this point. Can't agree with you that low post defense is their only real weakness. What about their stagnant offense? For most of the season this was the least of their problems, but recently, especially during the Nets series, they're not getting the ball movement and thus the open looks they were earlier. So many possessions in that Nets series ended with contested outside jumper. Counting on Korver to bail them out isn't going to get it done. The Wiz on the other hand were riding high on a short lived turnaround. Throw game one into the mix and the the idea that the Wiz might just be a better team at this point makes sense to me.
I missed most of the 90's basketball slugfest, so maybe it's a generational thing. I enjoy the Griz and those early Duncan Spurs teams, but given the choice I'll take the Nash led Suns or this Warriors team.
Last edited:
They went undefeated in the month of January; there was nowhere but them to go but down.
Stagnant offense? During the regular season, the Hawks averaged 102.5 points per game, and 25.7 assists, against 14.5 turnovers. In the playoffs, they're averaging 101.9 points and 26.4 assists, against 12 turnovers. And, in their last five playoff games, they're averaging 107.4 points and 28.6 assists per game, against 11.8 turnovers. Now, they're not hitting shots at as high a percentage as they were during the regular season, but their offense has not become stagnant; if anything, their offense is better than it was during the regular season.
They averaged 25.7 assists per game in the first round, same as the regular season. Ball movement was not their problem.
The Wizards benefited from playing a choking dog team in the first round, that's not built for the playoffs. And that's not Duane Casey on the other bench, this time. A healthy John Wall would have made this series interesting, but the Hawks winning was inevitable, in my opinion.
Ugh, As a child of the late eighties/early nineties, let me just say, gag me, with a spoon!
captain bill
All-Star
You're wrong. Run n gun is a reference to a philosophy that encompasses both offense and defense:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_and_gun_(basketball)
By your definition, the SSOL Suns were not a run n gun team because the offense moved heavily through Stat in the post. He regularly scored 30+ against Duncan in the post in the playoffs.
The term you're looking for is "jump shooting team."
You'll pardon me if I don't accept any source that can be edited by "Jonesey95" as the definitive word on the subject.
And yes, D'Antoni's Suns were a "run n gun" team. He said so himself.
captain bill
All-Star
Look I'm basing my opinion on years of following basketball, the Wiki is a quick and dirty way to show how the system has evolved. Read up on Grinnel. Read about how D'Antoni never coached defense. Saving energy on defense in order to get a shot fast is the defining feature of run n gun / SSOL.
And no crap the Suns were run n gun. That was my point. You said in your post that "run n gun = no post offense," and I countered by pointing out that Amare was the biggest part of the Suns offense - FROM THE POST.
Kerr Warriors emphasize pace, but in the sense of moving the ball rapidly around (ie, all 5 guys get touches, keep passing til you find the open shooter). This is the same philosophy that powered the Lebron Heat, Kawhi Spurs, and Webber Kings. It is NOT run n gun, and it has NOTHING to do with philosophically disfavoring post players.
lawlman91
Starter
In my opinion, the implied #1 option on every team should be the lay-up. Every other opportunity should build on the threat of a lay-up.
- Status
