RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

New York Liberty 2017
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 77, 78, 79, 80  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/28/17 10:02 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Yeah, as I've said many times, I don't like that teams that finished as high as 3rd could be finished in the postseason after one game. I also think it defeats the purpose of the new system, because it allows a strong possibility that the top two teams end up playing weaker opponents in the semis, leading to one-sided semi-final series. They want the best teams playing in the Finals, but they also want the best teams in the best-of-five semis when they're drawing (relatively speaking) lots of eyes.

It's why I keep advocating a version of the AFL playoffs system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFL_final_eight_system . In troduce an element of double-elimination to somewhat protect the teams that have earned the higher spot. More than just home court in a one-off playoff.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12493
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/28/17 10:04 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote:
Any team that has big perimeter scoring (or one perimeter scorer who carries you) can beat you in an elimination game. Phoenix adds the brutal element of defending Griner. While I'm wary of Seattle and D.C., Phoenix worries me a little more.

I'd love to somehow play Dallas. I think they have the least chance of beating us. Their fourth quarter offense regularly breaks down and they're a terrible defensive team. Oh and they have almost no playoff experience. I'd give them little to no chance of beating us at home.


Be careful what you wish for . Remember it took overtime to beat us last time out and we also have 1 more matchup to end the season Sept 3rd! ill be in attendance so i know we will win & If not guess what ? #PP's !!!! Twisted Evil



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
root_thing



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 7365
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/28/17 10:38 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Bob Lamm wrote:

Sorry, just not with you on this. You are very focused on the stats from that one game that ended our 2016 season. I'm not. I'm not disrespecting anyone and certainly not outstanding players like Taylor, Bonner, and Dupree. All I'm saying is that Taurasi and Griner are terrific and I don't like the thought of a do-or-die game against them. And I don't seem to be alone in that concern.

As for how champions shouldn't be afraid of anyone, I'm not on the Liberty roster. If I'm afraid of Taurasi and Griner, that doesn't hurt New York one bit. Bill Laimbeer and the Liberty players don't care who I'm afraid of. I'm not going to be a champion when the 2017 playoffs are over, but I hope the coaches and players of my team will be.

Similarly, as for "be careful what you wish for," it doesn't affect anything what I wish for. That doesn't decide who plays whom in the playoffs. If we play Washington in the second round and lose, is it my fault for hoping we can bypass Phoenix? I don't think so.


Look at your original post:

Bob Lamm wrote:

Assuming there aren't upsets in the first round, avoiding Washington in the 2nd round would mean a do-or-die game vs. Phoenix. That wasn't fun last season. I'd rather play Washington in that situation.


I think I responded directly to your statement. You were referring specifically to last year's loss and suggesting that this year's experience could be similar. That's why I referenced that particular game and noted that 10 players are missing. That's 83% of the team, including Taylor, Dupree, and Bonner. For the experience to be similar, that could only mean that the missing players were insignificant or readily replaceable.

You also blurred the lines between yourself and the team when you said: "I'd rather play Washington." Obviously, you were never going to "play" anybody. So, when I said a champion shouldn't be afraid of anybody, I was doing the same thing. It's pretty clear that nothing in this discussion was ever about the attitude of players or coaches. This was always about what we as fans feel.



_________________
You can always do something else.
Bob Lamm



Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/28/17 10:50 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

root_thing wrote:
Bob Lamm wrote:

Sorry, just not with you on this. You are very focused on the stats from that one game that ended our 2016 season. I'm not. I'm not disrespecting anyone and certainly not outstanding players like Taylor, Bonner, and Dupree. All I'm saying is that Taurasi and Griner are terrific and I don't like the thought of a do-or-die game against them. And I don't seem to be alone in that concern.

As for how champions shouldn't be afraid of anyone, I'm not on the Liberty roster. If I'm afraid of Taurasi and Griner, that doesn't hurt New York one bit. Bill Laimbeer and the Liberty players don't care who I'm afraid of. I'm not going to be a champion when the 2017 playoffs are over, but I hope the coaches and players of my team will be.

Similarly, as for "be careful what you wish for," it doesn't affect anything what I wish for. That doesn't decide who plays whom in the playoffs. If we play Washington in the second round and lose, is it my fault for hoping we can bypass Phoenix? I don't think so.


Look at your original post:

Bob Lamm wrote:

Assuming there aren't upsets in the first round, avoiding Washington in the 2nd round would mean a do-or-die game vs. Phoenix. That wasn't fun last season. I'd rather play Washington in that situation.


I think I responded directly to your statement. You were referring specifically to last year's loss and suggesting that this year's experience could be similar. That's why I referenced that particular game and noted that 10 players are missing. That's 83% of the team, including Taylor, Dupree, and Bonner. For the experience to be similar, that could only mean that the missing players were insignificant or readily replaceable.

You also blurred the lines between yourself and the team when you said: "I'd rather play Washington." Obviously, you were never going to "play" anybody. So, when I said a champion shouldn't be afraid of anybody, I was doing the same thing. It's pretty clear that nothing in this discussion was ever about the attitude of players or coaches. This was always about what we as fans feel.


This is like a high school debate. I concede. Hardly worth it.



_________________
Remember Roe v. Wade. Work for and support legal abortion all over the world and full reproductive rights for everyone.
NYL_WNBA_FAN



Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/28/17 10:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon wrote:
I'm pretty psyched for the playoffs.

I think we've reversed our pattern from our previous two seasons. We had our injury in the beginning of the season, our confused and mediocre play in the middle of the season, and we seem to be having the putting it all together winning part of the season now. A little rest, combined with maintaining our momentum and I think we could actually make some noise in the post season.


Me too. Anything can happen in a one and done of course. But the Libs are a better offensive team this year than they were last year. Better balance, more depth.



_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
NYL_WNBA_FAN



Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/28/17 10:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Regarding the discussion about the playoff format, I'm still at a loss why you can't have a six-team playoff with two byes and best of three first rounds. 7 and 8 have almost no chance to make the finals, and they get no home games until semis game 3 if they get there. It's absurd.



_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
Bob Lamm



Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/28/17 11:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote:
Regarding the discussion about the playoff format, I'm still at a loss why you can't have a six-team playoff with two byes and best of three first rounds. 7 and 8 have almost no chance to make the finals, and they get no home games until semis game 3 if they get there. It's absurd.


What you've proposed here would be far better than the current system.

I believe the answer to your "why" question is simply money. The more teams that qualify for the playoffs, the more franchises where fans may come to late-season games. It's not just that the #7 and #8 teams make the playoffs. (I'd argue that they shouldn't.) The #9 and #10 teams are often still in the hunt until the end of August so those fans have reason not to stay home.



_________________
Remember Roe v. Wade. Work for and support legal abortion all over the world and full reproductive rights for everyone.
toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 22470
Location: NJ


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 5:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm hoping in a few years the play-offs will get changed to where to the first round is a best-of-3(#1 vs. #8, etc.) & the semis & Finals remain a best-of-5.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 7:40 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote:
Regarding the discussion about the playoff format, I'm still at a loss why you can't have a six-team playoff with two byes and best of three first rounds. 7 and 8 have almost no chance to make the finals, and they get no home games until semis game 3 if they get there. It's absurd.


I agree letting only the top 6 in. I'd go for the top 4.

As for why - I think owners want to be able to claim their team was a playoff team for marketing purposes and to hype the playoff races as Bob says. However, marginal teams fail to draw any kind of decent crowd for playoffs and teams frequently have to find an alternate arena. The result is embarrassing crowds often in alternate arenas. Even the Lynx have to go to different arena this year. As a result, the marginal teams want in, but don't want to have series go very long.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 7:42 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Randy wrote:
As a result, the marginal teams want in, but don't want to have series go very long.


The league has perhaps found the perfect compromise in allowing eight teams in but having the first two rounds be one-and-done



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
LibFan25



Joined: 01 Sep 2012
Posts: 893
Location: NY


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 8:46 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Read this article, Great analysis of the eight game winning streak.

https://summitthoops.com/2017/08/29/new-york-liberty-8-game-winning-streak-wnba-playoffs/

The guards are noticing the extra attention that shades toward Charles even before she has touched the ball and catch defenses leaning with their crisp ball movement. I mentioned their spacing, which is vital to allow Charles to hit the open player out of a double team. LaChina Robinson may have beat me to it in really singing her praises, but Bria Hartley’s excellence in some of the game’s subtleties has really allowed her to shine in her starting role.


Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 8:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Randy wrote:
As a result, the marginal teams want in, but don't want to have series go very long.


The league has perhaps found the perfect compromise in allowing eight teams in but having the first two rounds be one-and-done

I'm fine with that for teams that finish 5-8, but it feels a bit harsh on the ones finishing 3rd/4th. The Liberty could end up winning 43 games over two years and only playing two total playoff games. Obviously it'd be their own fault for crapping the bed in two home playoff games, but anything can happen in one-off games, which is why they play series.

Maybe they should make the second round semi-double elimination. If the 3rd/4th seed wins Game 1, it's over; if they lose it goes to a deciding game back at the lower seed's arena. I just feel like the 3rd/4th needs a little more protection, more reward for the regular season performance.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Bob Lamm



Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 9:17 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

One of the things I believe is that in no professional sport should a team be in the playoffs if its regular season record is below .500. Any team that would qualify simply based on a seeding system would forfeit its first round do-or-die game or its first round series.

This doesn't address the issue of second round do-or-die games in the current WNBA playoff setup. It just bothers me when mediocrity is rewarded in the name of money. Even a .500 record is no great achievement. But if your team finishes a WNBA season at 16-18, why should they be in the playoffs?

Obviously what I'm proposing here is never going to happen in any professional league in the U.S. I doubt that the WNBA would even cut the number of playoff teams from eight out of 12 to six, but I wish it would.



_________________
Remember Roe v. Wade. Work for and support legal abortion all over the world and full reproductive rights for everyone.
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63711



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 9:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
Maybe they should make the second round semi-double elimination. If the 3rd/4th seed wins Game 1, it's over; if they lose it goes to a deciding game back at the lower seed's arena. I just feel like the 3rd/4th needs a little more protection, more reward for the regular season performance.


Imagine the scenario where the #4 & #5 seeds are determined by the 2nd tiebreaker, and now you're the #5 seed and you're expected to win two successive games over the #4 seed to their one game. That would be total bs. Leave it the way it is now. If you can't step up and win a home playoff game over a tired opponent, you deserve your fate.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 10:15 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

No one will come up with a perfect playoff system, and this one is as good as any. It has improved the games in the last week of the season. At present it seems like just about every spot from 1-8 is up for grabs in the last 2 or 3 games. So that is a benefit. I agree with Bob that any team that can't win half their games probably shouldn't be in the playoffs.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11104



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 10:40 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think a big issue was the really bad attendance at first-round playoff games in the past. Without time to market, and with game ones usually on a weeknight after school had started, it was pretty ugly. From an owner's perspective, why play an extra game that costs you money? The playoffs are supposed to be a chance to make up for regular season deficits, not add to them.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 11:32 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
I think a big issue was the really bad attendance at first-round playoff games in the past. Without time to market, and with game ones usually on a weeknight after school had started, it was pretty ugly. From an owner's perspective, why play an extra game that costs you money? The playoffs are supposed to be a chance to make up for regular season deficits, not add to them.

But the owners clearly want to make the playoffs - or at least have the possibility of making them - or we'd have dropped below two-thirds of the league making the postseason. That's higher than any of the major US men's sports leagues. So either they're still making money from these early playoff games with crappy attendance, or the increased interest in late-season games from still having a chance to make the playoffs is enough to off-set any potential losses from the added game(s).



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Bob Lamm



Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 12:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
ClayK wrote:
I think a big issue was the really bad attendance at first-round playoff games in the past. Without time to market, and with game ones usually on a weeknight after school had started, it was pretty ugly. From an owner's perspective, why play an extra game that costs you money? The playoffs are supposed to be a chance to make up for regular season deficits, not add to them.

But the owners clearly want to make the playoffs - or at least have the possibility of making them - or we'd have dropped below two-thirds of the league making the postseason. That's higher than any of the major US men's sports leagues. So either they're still making money from these early playoff games with crappy attendance, or the increased interest in late-season games from still having a chance to make the playoffs is enough to off-set any potential losses from the added game(s).


I agree with Richyyy. The issue raised by ClayK about lousy attendance for first-round games can't be viewed in isolation. It has to be seen in a larger context which includes (a) presumably increasing attendance for late-season games for every team in contention for the 7th or 8th playoff slot;
(b) TV money for the first-round games; and (c) the impact of making the playoffs on season-ticket sales for the following season. Only if we have reliable data on all of that can we begin to assess whether various franchises and the league as a whole benefit financially from having eight teams in the playoffs instead of six.



_________________
Remember Roe v. Wade. Work for and support legal abortion all over the world and full reproductive rights for everyone.
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11104



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 2:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I agree with Bob and Richyyy ... I didn't make it clear that my point was more about why the first-round series are just one game. The best-of-three series tended to lose money because of bad attendance, so it made sense to drop to one game.

If the first-round single-game playoff games start to draw 8,000 actual bodies, then a move to best-of-three makes sense.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Bob Lamm



Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 2:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
I agree with Bob and Richyyy ... I didn't make it clear that my point was more about why the first-round series are just one game. The best-of-three series tended to lose money because of bad attendance, so it made sense to drop to one game.

If the first-round single-game playoff games start to draw 8,000 actual bodies, then a move to best-of-three makes sense.


Thanks, Clay. Now I understand better what you were addressing. Sorry if I misunderstood.

I'd still prefer just six teams in the playoffs. Two-out-of-three in the first round, three-out-of-five in the semis, three-out-of-five in the finals.



_________________
Remember Roe v. Wade. Work for and support legal abortion all over the world and full reproductive rights for everyone.
Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 4:37 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The no less than 500 teams rule would also be easy to work out. Just give a bye to the team that would have otherwise faced them.


Nerd2



Joined: 06 Jun 2010
Posts: 7659



Back to top
PostPosted: 08/29/17 5:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Bob Lamm wrote:
ClayK wrote:
I agree with Bob and Richyyy ... I didn't make it clear that my point was more about why the first-round series are just one game. The best-of-three series tended to lose money because of bad attendance, so it made sense to drop to one game.

If the first-round single-game playoff games start to draw 8,000 actual bodies, then a move to best-of-three makes sense.


Thanks, Clay. Now I understand better what you were addressing. Sorry if I misunderstood.

I'd still prefer just six teams in the playoffs. Two-out-of-three in the first round, three-out-of-five in the semis, three-out-of-five in the finals.


But then that would eliminate some teams pretty early and make too many games meaningless late in the season. The Storm got 13,000 people in part because this last game mattered. Had it been 6 teams, Phoenix would have clinched early in the day and the Storm would have been out. Single elimination games are very common overseas and at the college level and I find them an acceptable compromise over people losing interest in the regular season.


LibFan25



Joined: 01 Sep 2012
Posts: 893
Location: NY


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/30/17 1:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

2017 Team Photo Today



root_thing



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 7365
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 08/30/17 3:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Did Boyd lose her contact lens or is she about to run a race?



_________________
You can always do something else.
root_thing



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 7365
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/01/17 11:13 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Recent story about a man saved by Charles' foundation. Not sure if Tina has actually given her entire salary every year. I heard it was 100% in 2016, but 50% in 2015 and 2017. Regardless, she's still very generous.

https://sports.yahoo.com/wnba-star-saved-life-man-never-met-212426292.html



_________________
You can always do something else.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 77, 78, 79, 80  Next
Page 78 of 80

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin