Re: Detroit vs. LA
- --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "John Hollinger"
> I think Lakers in five. One thing that sticks out to me is that theTayshaun has to cover Kobe. There will be a rotation on him, but
> matchups for Detroit are absolutely terrible. They can't put Ben
> Wallace on Shaq or he'll foul out in 20 minutes, and they can't put
> Rip on Kobe without giving up 30 a night. Detroit's bench is far
> better, but that matters less in the playoffs than it did during the
> season. I suppose if Prince can cover Kobe and Billups blows up it
> could go six or seven, but I doubt it.
Tayshaun makes sense as a stopper. Having Rip on him isn't horrible
either. Rip, for all that people, uh, rip on him, works fine in that
defense. He knows what he is supposed to do, where to force guys.
His lateral quickness is good enough. Besides, forcing Kobe to the
interior is what you want these days. You can strip him of the ball
as Minnesota did only a fair amount. He doesn't protect the ball as
well as he should. Detroit's big men especially have quick hands. You
want to see him make one of those incredibly difficult reverse flips
because, yes, they're still difficult for him.
I honestly don't know what Larry Brown is going to do to increase his
odds, but I know that if he works the officials the right way or even
not the wrong way, if he gives up none of the easy stuff to LA off bad
turnovers, which is very doable (please Rasheed, don't lose your
focus), he can win this series in 5 before going back to LA. The
defense is that good -- a couple numbers are pretty ridiculous,
suggesting that it is practically impossible to hurt them on the
offensive glass, something I've never seen (and don't quite believe).
And the Lakers are very beatable this year with Shaq definitely down
a bit from years past (for FTs and other reasons). Looking at even
the Lakers' nice playoff performance, I see holes left and right that
can be taken advantage of. Larry (a fellow UNC guy, I like to point
out at times like this) is a good enough coach to see most of those
holes, I think, and, more importantly, to convince his guys that they
can win by playing to those weaknesses. Maybe it's just Roboscout
making me see so many things you can do to make up a few points -- it
is my first full year of using it -- but I now get so frustrated when
I see teams doing the wrong things at times of the game (Minnesota
completely choked in the 3rd quarter against the Lakers in Game 6,
even though they outscored them and took the lead then. They went
away from a dominant strategy, charging the lane, to doing what they
were comfortable with, jumpers. They could have fouled out Shaq and
maybe Karl/Kobe so that the 4th would have been a lot easier, but they
stopped attacking the basket. And it's not that the Lakers took it
away. But Flip didn't push it. That was 2-4 points right there even
if KG picks up another foul. How much $$$ did that cost them, too,
with one appearance in the Finals raking in dough for teams for 20
years into the future?)
The 8.5 pt spread is ridiculous. No way the Lakers are that much
better. I don't know any of this Vegas stuff, but that was a very
interesting opening line. (I guess it's come down to 8.)
Author, Basketball on Paper
When basketball teams start playing Moneyball, this is the book
> --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Dickey"
> <danthestatman@h...> wrote:
> > >From: "Mike G" <msg_53@h...>
> > >Reply-To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
> > >To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com
> > >Subject: [APBR_analysis] Detroit vs. LA
> > >Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 13:44:44 -0000
> > >In any case, the Pistons should not be considered patsies. They
> > >don't have injuries that I'm aware of. They don't have holes on
> > >offense or defense. And these numbers suggest they should be the
> > >favorites.
> > I am one of the few "crazy" people predicting a Detroit victory in
> > championship series. I have this feeling that Chauncey Billups
> > actually start playing well - which would help their offense
> > I also have this feeling that the Lakers feel they've already won.
> > I also could easily be wrong - which I've been told by every single
> > I've told this to.
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Check out the coupons and bargains on MSN Offers!
- --- If having the best player in the regular season is no guarantee,
I'm not sure what else you can do as a GM. That's why they play the
In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
> --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "mrintp2000" <shzys@n...>a
> >.. I don't know what
> > to conclude ...though... having the best player is anything but
> guarantee of a title. ..suggest
> Well, only 4/34 teams have lost when they had the best individual
> Finals performer. It's highly likely the top player will be from
> the Lakers this year.
> But if you have the best player coming in, but an opponent is the
> best in the Finals, there is almost no precendent that would
> you have a chance to win. It's been a 1-in-16 occurrance
> (Kemp/Jordan in '96).