| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9620
Back to top |
 Posted: 09/16/19 4:19 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
| Silky Johnson wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Strength was an even bigger part of the game before the three-point line. That's one reason they widened the key way back when.
It's a physical game, regardless, and if you can add strength while maintaining quickness and explosion, you'll be a better player. |
There was no pushing when I played boys high school basketball in the early 1970s. If someone was standing at the low post, the defender stood behind him, with their bodies not making contact. There was the notion that you could touch the offensive player on the back, which was supposed to let you better react to their movement, but it was a light touch that did not involve strength. |
That's one of the most #TwoAmericas things I've ever heard. |
Where in America were you playing basketball in the early 1970's (I was in suburban New Jersey) and how did it go in the low post?
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9620
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/16/19 5:21 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
I don't doubt your statement, but it sure didn't seem to work that way when I was younger (granted, that was a long time ago). The high school defensive tackle was a force on the block and it wasn't because he was quick. |
How did his vertical reach compare to the opposing post players?
|
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3318
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/16/19 10:28 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| I made a statement that Coates was able to hold her own in low-post pushing with McCowan. You asserted that wasn't the case based on your looking at the box score. If "McCowan is not driving to the basket on Coates" is not one of your limited absolute premises, how did you determine - from the box score - that McCowan could push Coates around? Did you use some kind of special decoder ring? |
No because, unlike you, I actually explained my reasoning: if McCowan had been driving on Coates, Coates would have been called for committing reach-in fouls, not shooting fouls: reach-in fouls are classified as "personal" fouls, not "shooting" fouls. Coates was getting called for shooting fouls against McCowan: not personal fouls, not blocking fouls. That means that she was fouling McCowan when McCowan was into her shooting motion. Which, in turn, means that Coates did not have good defensive position; even if all McCowan was doing when she received the ball was turning and facing, Coates committing shooting fouls means that she was not in good defensive position...
Which, in turn, means that Coates was not holding her own inside. This isn't rocket science.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| But, since you brought it back up, I'm sure that Margo Dydek took an opponent off the dribble, once, too, doesn't mean it was (or should have been) part of her repertoire. Unless you're trying to make the argument that McCowan took Coates off the dribble on every foul that Coates committed against her, I don't know why you thought you'd made a point. |
Estimating that Margo Dydek did it once would not mean that it would be correct to estimate McCowan could only do it once. |
There you go, reading stuff I didn't write, again. I didn't estimate any such thing. Do you trust Teaira McCowan to make a play with the ball, at the top of the key, with the game on the line? Because, if you don't, then it shouldn't be part of her repertoire, whether she can do it "more than once," or not. It's like, how many women in the WNBA are physically capable of dunking, versus how many would ever risk actually attempting to dunk in a game?
And, again, that's neither here nor there, because my post still wasn't a critique of McCowan, in the first place. It was a critique of Coates. I still don't know why you think pointing out how talented McCowan is serves, in any way, as a defense of Coates.
| Quote: |
| And as mentioned, McCowan has other ways to score that don't involve brute force. She also shoots on putbacks and dishes from driving teammates. |
That's all great, but Coates didn't foul McCowan when McCowan was doing any of that, so her being capable of those things isn't relevant to Coates' defense.
| Quote: |
| And then there is fouls that occur when someone shoots from the low-post starting position (without pushing into the paint). |
This claim is incongruous: barring a fast break, a screen and/or backdoor cut situation, where you end up underneath the basket undefended, there is no such thing as low-post position that is attained with zero pushing. The only way this claim makes any sense is if you take the position that all of the pushing that happens before the player receives the ball "doesn't count," which is absurd, because you can still get whistled for that. If McCowan is in the low post, and it wasn't the result of a screen that was set to get her an easy layup, then she's already pushed her way down there, which is entirely relevant to the "hold your own" argument. And, if she is down there as a result of a screen, then any fouls would have been committed by whomever's job it is to rotate, not Coates.
* Apropos of nothing, doing an internet search to make sure I had spelled Teaira McCowan's name correctly was a very unpleasant reminder of how fucking shitty some people are.
_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11148
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/16/19 11:09 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
I don't doubt your statement, but it sure didn't seem to work that way when I was younger (granted, that was a long time ago). The high school defensive tackle was a force on the block and it wasn't because he was quick. |
How did his vertical reach compare to the opposing post players? |
Generally shorter. So you'd have your 6-4 to 6-6 skinny kid who was reasonably athletic, and then you'd have the 6-2 offensive tackle who couldn't jump. He couldn't make a perimeter shot, but he got a ton of rebounds because once he pushed his way into position no one could move him. And if he had a rudimentary post move, he would just overpower a skinny defender.
Did every team have a kid like this? No, but even today you'll see the big bulky guy on the court because he can create and control space in the paint with his strength. (And if you play pickup against a guy like that you know just what I mean ...)
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9620
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/20 5:07 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Silky Johnson wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
| I made a statement that Coates was able to hold her own in low-post pushing with McCowan. You asserted that wasn't the case based on your looking at the box score. If "McCowan is not driving to the basket on Coates" is not one of your limited absolute premises, how did you determine - from the box score - that McCowan could push Coates around? Did you use some kind of special decoder ring? |
No because, unlike you, I actually explained my reasoning: |
I don't have to come up with "reasoning". I looked at the game and commented on what I saw. Only you need "reasoning" in order to claim that Coates isn't as strong as McCowan based on what you saw in the box score.
| Quote: |
| if McCowan had been driving on Coates, Coates would have been called for committing reach-in fouls, not shooting fouls: reach-in fouls are classified as "personal" fouls, not "shooting" fouls. |
You are coming up with another false absolute in order to try and hang onto a false absolute. There are plenty of shooting fouls committed by post players when the person they are covering drives. And McCowan could only drive a step or two - just enough to try and get some clearance. She wasn't holding the ball out behind the three point line.
| Quote: |
Coates was getting called for shooting fouls against McCowan: not personal fouls, not blocking fouls. That means that she was fouling McCowan when McCowan was into her shooting motion. Which, in turn, means that Coates did not have good defensive position; even if all McCowan was doing when she received the ball was turning and facing, Coates committing shooting fouls means that she was not in good defensive position...
Which, in turn, means that Coates was not holding her own inside. This isn't rocket science. |
If Coates was standing behind McCowan and McCowan (who is taller) turns and shoots and Coates fouls her how was Coates not in good defensive position?
Again, Coates could turn away from McCowan for a board and it could end up with McCowan and Coates could foul her as she shot. Coates could turn away to stop a driver who dishes to McCowan who gets fouled by Coates as she tries to recover. McCowan could take a step or two and shoot off one leg (she can do that) and Coates could try and block the shot and foul her.
None of that would involve Coates getting pushed by McCowan.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| But, since you brought it back up, I'm sure that Margo Dydek took an opponent off the dribble, once, too, doesn't mean it was (or should have been) part of her repertoire. Unless you're trying to make the argument that McCowan took Coates off the dribble on every foul that Coates committed against her, I don't know why you thought you'd made a point. |
Estimating that Margo Dydek did it once would not mean that it would be correct to estimate McCowan could only do it once. |
There you go, reading stuff I didn't write, again. I didn't estimate any such thing. Do you trust Teaira McCowan to make a play with the ball, at the top of the key, with the game on the line? Because, if you don't, then it shouldn't be part of her repertoire, whether she can do it "more than once," or not. It's like, how many women in the WNBA are physically capable of dunking, versus how many would ever risk actually attempting to dunk in a game? |
Coates was not guarding McCowan with the game on the line.
| Quote: |
| And, again, that's neither here nor there, because my post still wasn't a critique of McCowan, in the first place. It was a critique of Coates. I still don't know why you think pointing out how talented McCowan is serves, in any way, as a defense of Coates. |
Your post was claiming you could tell that Coates wasn't as strong as McCowan - what I said I observed while watching part of the game - by looking at the box score.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| And as mentioned, McCowan has other ways to score that don't involve brute force. She also shoots on putbacks and dishes from driving teammates. |
That's all great, but Coates didn't foul McCowan when McCowan was doing any of that, so her being capable of those things isn't relevant to Coates' defense. |
How can you tell if McCowan was fouled on a putback or a layup off an assist from looking at the box score?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| And then there is fouls that occur when someone shoots from the low-post starting position (without pushing into the paint). |
This claim is incongruous: barring a fast break, a screen and/or backdoor cut situation, where you end up underneath the basket undefended, there is no such thing as low-post position that is attained with zero pushing. The only way this claim makes any sense is if you take the position that all of the pushing that happens before the player receives the ball "doesn't count," which is absurd, because you can still get whistled for that. If McCowan is in the low post, and it wasn't the result of a screen that was set to get her an easy layup, then she's already pushed her way down there, which is entirely relevant to the "hold your own" argument. And, if she is down there as a result of a screen, then any fouls would have been committed by whomever's job it is to rotate, not Coates. |
I am talking about low-post position outside the 3 point area. Even if someone has to push to maintain that position prior to getting a pass, once they catch they can turn and shoot right where they caught it. They don't have to push their way into the paint.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9620
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/20 5:08 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Silky Johnson wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
| I made a statement that Coates was able to hold her own in low-post pushing with McCowan. You asserted that wasn't the case based on your looking at the box score. If "McCowan is not driving to the basket on Coates" is not one of your limited absolute premises, how did you determine - from the box score - that McCowan could push Coates around? Did you use some kind of special decoder ring? |
No because, unlike you, I actually explained my reasoning: |
I made an observation. I looked at the game and commented on what I saw. Only you need reasoning in order to determine player strength from a box score.
| Quote: |
| if McCowan had been driving on Coates, Coates would have been called for committing reach-in fouls, not shooting fouls: reach-in fouls are classified as "personal" fouls, not "shooting" fouls. |
You are coming up with another false absolute in order to try and hang onto a false absolute. There are plenty of shooting fouls committed by post players when the person they are covering drives. And McCowan as a post could only drive a step or two - just enough to try and get a shot off. She is normally starting 2 or 3 steps from the basket. That isn't enough distance to blow by someone to where they have to "reach in" to try and stop you from getting a layup.
| Quote: |
Coates was getting called for shooting fouls against McCowan: not personal fouls, not blocking fouls. That means that she was fouling McCowan when McCowan was into her shooting motion. Which, in turn, means that Coates did not have good defensive position; even if all McCowan was doing when she received the ball was turning and facing, Coates committing shooting fouls means that she was not in good defensive position...
Which, in turn, means that Coates was not holding her own inside. This isn't rocket science. |
If Coates was standing behind McCowan and McCowan (who is taller) turns and shoots and Coates fouls her how was Coates not in good defensive position?
Again, Coates could turn away from McCowan for a board and it could end up with McCowan and Coates could foul her as she shot. Coates could turn away to stop a driver who dishes to McCowan who gets fouled by Coates as she tries to recover. McCowan could take a step or two and shoot off one leg (she can do that) and Coates could try and block the shot and foul her.
None of that would involve Coates getting pushed by McCowan.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| But, since you brought it back up, I'm sure that Margo Dydek took an opponent off the dribble, once, too, doesn't mean it was (or should have been) part of her repertoire. Unless you're trying to make the argument that McCowan took Coates off the dribble on every foul that Coates committed against her, I don't know why you thought you'd made a point. |
Estimating that Margo Dydek did it once would not mean that it would be correct to estimate McCowan could only do it once. |
There you go, reading stuff I didn't write, again. I didn't estimate any such thing. Do you trust Teaira McCowan to make a play with the ball, at the top of the key, with the game on the line? Because, if you don't, then it shouldn't be part of her repertoire, whether she can do it "more than once," or not. It's like, how many women in the WNBA are physically capable of dunking, versus how many would ever risk actually attempting to dunk in a game? |
Coates was not guarding McCowan with the game on the line.
| Quote: |
| And, again, that's neither here nor there, because my post still wasn't a critique of McCowan, in the first place. It was a critique of Coates. I still don't know why you think pointing out how talented McCowan is serves, in any way, as a defense of Coates. |
Your post was claiming you could tell that Coates wasn't as strong as McCowan - what I said I observed while watching part of the game - by looking at the box score.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| And as mentioned, McCowan has other ways to score that don't involve brute force. She also shoots on putbacks and dishes from driving teammates. |
That's all great, but Coates didn't foul McCowan when McCowan was doing any of that, so her being capable of those things isn't relevant to Coates' defense. |
How can you tell if McCowan was fouled on a putback or a layup off an assist from looking at the box score?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| And then there is fouls that occur when someone shoots from the low-post starting position (without pushing into the paint). |
This claim is incongruous: barring a fast break, a screen and/or backdoor cut situation, where you end up underneath the basket undefended, there is no such thing as low-post position that is attained with zero pushing. The only way this claim makes any sense is if you take the position that all of the pushing that happens before the player receives the ball "doesn't count," which is absurd, because you can still get whistled for that. If McCowan is in the low post, and it wasn't the result of a screen that was set to get her an easy layup, then she's already pushed her way down there, which is entirely relevant to the "hold your own" argument. And, if she is down there as a result of a screen, then any fouls would have been committed by whomever's job it is to rotate, not Coates. |
I am talking about low-post position outside the 3 point area. Even if someone has to push to maintain that position prior to getting a pass, once they catch they can turn and shoot right where they caught it. They don't have to push their way into the paint.
|
|
|
|
