| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24349
Location: London
Back to top |
 Posted: 08/26/14 3:03 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| Unless LA gave themselves an out in the contract - and Toler never has before - Harding's no kind of FA. |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/14 3:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Nobody's gonna believe Harding signed a three year contract, and even if she did, since when do contracts apply to Harding (in particular) or anybody that doesn't want to be where they're at?
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/14 3:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| well, if it was a three year contract, this was her year of rest. Next year she'll play like an allstar so that someone else will give her another big contract...[geez, I'm sounding jaded!]
|
|
scullyfu
Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 8859
Location: Niagara Falls
Back to top |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/14 6:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Rock Hard wrote: |
Wow, Jammerbirdi. The eloquence of your analysis of the current state of the Sparks is magnificent! The network that broadcasts the Sparks games should hire you instead of the bimbo eye candy they have now.  |
Thank you so much. I am definitely not eye candy. Bimbo? I have been called similar things if not actually that. Maybe radio or to be more realistic part of the prep team for the on-air talent.
You know I think to be perfectly frank and not necessarily nice, the WNBA is a sport that suffers broadcast teams, especially locally, which either the play-by-play or the color commentators are just dull people who you really wouldn't want to listen to speak for anything more than 5 seconds. Dull dull sports-jock heads. That may be mean but at least they're not 81 so I think they should be fair game for some honest and even scathing criticism if warranted. And it's warranted.
So place that fact into the context of a basketball game which is just a sport and one that is repeated 34 times by each team
do the math.  Point is that if it's just talked about in basketball terms it would be endlessly repetitive. So you have dull people potentially and often in reality saying the same things over and over again all season long. Sparks getting killed in the paint, Bob. Fast break points are about even. Dull people coupled with dull content.
And back in the day, before we even thought about points in the paint or shit like that you can imagine what it was like or just go watch classic sports broadcasts of NBA ball. A SHOT from the outside by Goodrich is GOOD! I was doing a better job earlier in my head channelling this stuff but you know what I'm talking about. The analsys, if you could call it that, was pretty much non-existent when I was growing up.
But even today I think there's got to be a balance and in the case of the WNBA an INSERTION of more of the jammer style of discussion. What's going on on the team, in the player's heads, etc. Yeah okay, it is being done. I mean, there is already that, but it's being done by people who are kind of dull and not interesting to listen to so the quality of the whole package often sucks.
You know I watch Clippers games and now a shit load of even other NBA games all winter. I think since the Clippers acquired Chris Paul I haven't missed a possession.  So I listened to the legendary Ralph Lawler and his broadcast partner, former Clipper, Mike Smith. Lawler is Lawler. He's old timey without being corny or 'off' key or out dated in any freaking way. He is deserving of the accolades and of this great Clippers team at long last after decades of covering the joke the franchise has always been.
But Mike Smith is very very VERY good. He does his homework. He mixes mostly hardcore basketball stuff with the more inside the player's heads stuff. He must absolutely be in a constant state of preparation for the next game as I think he's said he is.
When you go from that to Jim Watson and Mary Murphy it's tough. And Watson knows basketball and is not a dummy but as in any situation like his a certain percentage of the stuff that comes out of his mouth is written down and placed in front of his face either before or during the game. He could use some better help there. And Murphy has to go. And everyone around the league like her has to go.
Anyway. Thanks again, Rock. Full employment is a nice thought.  _________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, βMe, too.β - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/27/14 2:37 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
As I mentioned in another thread, the Sparks have two elite power forwards in Parker and Ogwumike, and that causes them to run the system they do.
They also have only three-point shooter (Toliver), which makes it easy for defenses to both pack the paint and control the perimeter.
Leadership is nice, but talent comes first, and the Sparks have too much concentrated in one spot. Granted, they pretty much had to take Nneka, and they tried to see if having two power forwards would work, but it doesn't.
If I were running that team, I'd be shopping Nneka for a quality perimeter player and looking for a shooter in the draft. |
There is no reason to believe this Sparks team couldn't be successful just the way they are. Now I'm not saying this team is perfect, they are far from it, but it's not as if this team is the worst talent wise in the league and leadership isn't going to do anything for the team. Of course there are different areas where the roster can be improved, but as I mentioned in my earlier post, if they don't have a leader it's not going to matter who they bring it, the Sparks are still going to be in the same situation, get wins on talent alone, but when push comes to shove and things get rough they will struggle and become disjointed like they are now.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14109
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/27/14 2:40 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ucdt3 wrote: |
| Richyyy wrote: |
While I appreciate that everyone's always improving, and if you stand still you're going backwards, and every other cliche you might want to throw out... this LA team won 24 games in both 2012 and 2013. Both times with Parker/Ogwumike as their primary post pairing. And the records weren't a fluke. Both years they had a pythagorean record projection that was actually better than 24-10, and in 2013 they had the second-best offense and second-best defense in the league. When they had very nearly as little three-point shooting as they did this season.
This team has worked, essentially as currently constituted. Arguably, with the additions of Herrington and Wiggins (and Gruda, if she was ever motivated and used properly), and the development of Lavender, they're actually more talented now.
I understand the disappointments of this season leading to inevitable reactions about wanting to blow it up. But this works! It's been shown to work. They need the right coach who can motivate them and build a coherent system, and put players in properly defined roles like Brondello did in Phoenix. They maybe need to fill a spot or two in around the margins, and add more perimeter shooting (something else that happened in Phoenix this year). But I'm not remotely convinced that the drastic options people are suggesting would be steps forward.
Also, just as an addendum, some of the players that people just want to dump are, y'know, under contract. They've got some awkward front office decisions to make this offseason even before the big blow-it-up moves people are suggesting. |
Having the likes of the Phoenix "TANKERS" and Tulsa "INABILITY-TO-CLOSE-RS" in your conference may over-exaggerate your record...so maybe Parker wasn't all that wrong, at least in reference to their 2012 record.  |
The Sparks lost to Tulsa twice in 2012 so it didn't over exaggerate their record that much
|
|
zune69
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8183
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 10:13 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Maybe the sparks can solve their on court chemistry issues without trading Parker or Ogwumike.
1)Sign C.Paris
2)Trade Lavender,Price or Harding +2015 1st rd pick for Strickland & Johnson.
3)Bring Ogwumike off the bench(Nneka will still play 26-30 minutes per game)
LINEUP:
G-Johnson
G-Toliver
C-Paris
F-Parker
F-Stricklen
6-Ogwumike
7-Beard
8-Price or Harding
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 11:14 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| zune69 wrote: |
Maybe the sparks can solve their on court chemistry issues without trading Parker or Ogwumike.
1)Sign C.Paris
2)Trade Lavender,Price or Harding +2015 1st rd pick for Strickland & Johnson.
3)Bring Ogwumike off the bench(Nneka will still play 26-30 minutes per game)
LINEUP:
G-Johnson
G-Toliver
C-Paris
F-Parker
F-Stricklen
6-Ogwumike
7-Beard
8-Price or Harding |
This team looks like it could vie for that 2016 lottery pick for sure. It's worse than what they have currently.
|
|
zune69
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8183
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 11:33 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
| zune69 wrote: |
Maybe the sparks can solve their on court chemistry issues without trading Parker or Ogwumike.
1)Sign C.Paris
2)Trade Lavender,Price or Harding +2015 1st rd pick for Strickland & Johnson.
3)Bring Ogwumike off the bench(Nneka will still play 26-30 minutes per game)
LINEUP:
G-Johnson
G-Toliver
C-Paris
F-Parker
F-Stricklen
6-Ogwumike
7-Beard
8-Price or Harding |
This team looks like it could vie for that 2016 lottery pick for sure. It's worse than what they have currently. |
1 thru 8,this team is better constructed.You add a SF who can spread the court and knock down the 3 point shot,a center that will rebound the basketball,a veteran PG that will run the offense and play defense,and finally,the quality bench depth.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
|
zune69
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8183
Back to top |
|
RP
Joined: 17 Jul 2010
Posts: 1299
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 12:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| You are treating the positions like they have the same value. This is not true. To aquire Sims, Diggins, or DRob you would have to overpay due to the scarcity of the position. |
I understand the concept of positional value, but we're not comparing quarterbacks and running backs here.
What evidence is there to suggest a team would need to overpay to the extent you have suggested to acquire a quality point guard? As mentioned before, the Whalen deal was not an overpay. And neither were the deals involving a number of quality point guards who have changed teams in recent years.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
|
zune69
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8183
Back to top |
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 1:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ok, if I need to explain:
Having TJ and Toliver on the floor together would be disasterous defensively.
Yes, Stricklen on her good days can make big shots. On her bad days, she is worse than Coleman who they already dumped/didn't resign. On your team she would be the defensive star though.
Yes Paris does rebound the ball well. She also struggles defensively against big centers and against mobile centers. I think she's become a very decent 6th woman type of player. Having her and Parker on the floor together means a pretty bad defensive frontline to go along with a disasterous backcourt. Phoenix destroys this team and scores 120 points. Minny destroys this team and scores 110. Tulsa destroys this team, Seattle too... Phoenix got away with playing no defense for a long time by having a high powered offense but nobody else has come close to being successful with a team that would be this horrible defensively.
|
|
zune69
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8183
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 2:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
ok, if I need to explain:
Having TJ and Toliver on the floor together would be disasterous defensively.
Yes, Stricklen on her good days can make big shots. On her bad days, she is worse than Coleman who they already dumped/didn't resign. On your team she would be the defensive star though.
Yes Paris does rebound the ball well. She also struggles defensively against big centers and against mobile centers. I think she's become a very decent 6th woman type of player. Having her and Parker on the floor together means a pretty bad defensive frontline to go along with a disasterous backcourt. Phoenix destroys this team and scores 120 points. Minny destroys this team and scores 110. Tulsa destroys this team, Seattle too... Phoenix got away with playing no defense for a long time by having a high powered offense but nobody else has come close to being successful with a team that would be this horrible defensively. |
I agree,this is way I ended my comment with "And has lots of room to improve" The rebounding prowess Paris brings to the table could really help the sparks.I thought J.Appel outrebounding the sparks starting frontline 20-19 was embarrassing.When Courtney steps on the court,lack of effort is the last thing you need to worry about.
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 2:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Good discussion here of why so hard to improve a team in a big way. Basically, LA is a one superstar team, competing with a two superstar team (PHx) and a 3 superstar team (MN). And its supporting cast is not quite as good in either case. Absent getting someone to give up a superstar type player (e.g. Angel, Maya, Tina, EDD, Skylar, etc) for little in return they can only improve incrementally. That may not be enough since every other team will try to do the same. Attrition of the opposition through aging is more likely to occur before LA can make that mega trade or find a role player or two that is going to put them over the top.
Probably the qucikest route to improvement is to get a good coach. Worked for DC and the Mercury for example. Of course, Ross was a good coach as long as they were winning more than 20 games a year.
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 3:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GEF34 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
As I mentioned in another thread, the Sparks have two elite power forwards in Parker and Ogwumike, and that causes them to run the system they do.
They also have only three-point shooter (Toliver), which makes it easy for defenses to both pack the paint and control the perimeter.
Leadership is nice, but talent comes first, and the Sparks have too much concentrated in one spot. Granted, they pretty much had to take Nneka, and they tried to see if having two power forwards would work, but it doesn't.
If I were running that team, I'd be shopping Nneka for a quality perimeter player and looking for a shooter in the draft. |
There is no reason to believe this Sparks team couldn't be successful just the way they are. Now I'm not saying this team is perfect, they are far from it, but it's not as if this team is the worst talent wise in the league and leadership isn't going to do anything for the team. Of course there are different areas where the roster can be improved, but as I mentioned in my earlier post, if they don't have a leader it's not going to matter who they bring it, the Sparks are still going to be in the same situation, get wins on talent alone, but when push comes to shove and things get rough they will struggle and become disjointed like they are now. |
According to the article quoted about Magic, Parker told him changing the coach wasn't enough, and he went on and on about how important it is to listen to the players. I would say there will be some major shakin and bakin with this team. The three players that would surprise me if they were traded are Nneka, Parker, and Beard.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 3:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Randy wrote: |
Good discussion here of why so hard to improve a team in a big way. Basically, LA is a one superstar team, competing with a two superstar team (PHx) and a 3 superstar team (MN). And its supporting cast is not quite as good in either case. Absent getting someone to give up a superstar type player (e.g. Angel, Maya, Tina, EDD, Skylar, etc) for little in return they can only improve incrementally. That may not be enough since every other team will try to do the same. Attrition of the opposition through aging is more likely to occur before LA can make that mega trade or find a role player or two that is going to put them over the top.
Probably the qucikest route to improvement is to get a good coach. Worked for DC and the Mercury for example. Of course, Ross was a good coach as long as they were winning more than 20 games a year. |
Parker says they were winning because of the talent level of the club, but they didn't have a style or identity (they were just winging it every night sorta like TUL now), so they didn't have what it takes to win in the playoffs. To me that's pointing to coaching.
Whether Parker came up with that alone or people have been telling her that's the problem, I'm not sure.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 3:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I keep thinking if its a scapegoat they are looking for, Tolliverova looks perfect for the part.
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 3:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Randy wrote: |
| I keep thinking if its a scapegoat they are looking for, Tolliverova looks perfect for the part. |
or Harding. They should be able to get value for Toliver if that is wanted, but they still need shooters so dumping the only one they have is difficult.
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/14 4:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| True, but how much will Kritsti be there next year, and in 2016 due to her National Team requirements (which would also diminish her trade value.) But I agree - Harding is probably looking for a change of address kit. It really comes down to whomever Candace is blaming from the way it sounds.
|
|
|
|
