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

Mystics @ Storm - 5/21/17
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who will win this game?
Mystics
36%
 36%  [ 8 ]
Storm
63%
 63%  [ 14 ]
Total Votes : 22

Author Message
sigur3



Joined: 18 Jun 2013
Posts: 6191
Location: Chicago-ish


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/17 4:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote
Richyyy wrote:
mavcarter wrote:
I wonder what line up of Delle Donne/Messeman/Thomas would've done against a team like Seattle. Seattle doesn't have a strong SF, so it's not like Delle Donne would have got worn out or exposed on defense.

Good point. I don't think we've seen a single minute from Thibault yet with three bigs. It definitely seems like it should be an option against certain opponents.


And they've been one of the slowest teams in the league through the opening week, too. Very small sample size but if this team can't play with pace then they're kind of handicapping the talent they have.
bullsky



Joined: 04 Jun 2005
Posts: 20310



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/17 11:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote
readyAIMfire53 wrote:
toad455 wrote:
I'd say Storm look like the 3rd best team right. Los Angeles-Minnesota-Seattle. Washington needs help. Meesseman shouldn't be playing center. She got killed tonight vs. Langhorne(also not a center). I can only imagine how ugly it'll be when she faces someone like Fowles, Griner & E. Williams. hell, Courtney Paris will have a field day vs. Meesseman.


For whatever reason, Emma's been playing like crap. I was thinking it was due to her leaving again soon and just not adjusting to new personnel. But maybe Emma and Elena are not compatible. Who has too many centers and needs an awesomely talented young power forward?


This is why I was so surprised that (a) Thibault dealt both Vaughn and Dolson and (b) the consensus fan reaction was "Wow Delle Donne and Meeseman, watch out!"

They are the same players. Yes, they can play off of one another, but I think each player would be better served matched with a legitimate 5. Not a tall 4 disguised as a 5.



_________________
"Don't do something until you get it right, do it until you can't do it wrong."
- Geno Auriemma
Michelle89



Joined: 17 Nov 2010
Posts: 16464
Location: Holland


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/17 1:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote
I agree with you that both play better with a center. But to fully judge this it needs more time. Emma is a player that needs more time to adjust to this.
In the games that ive seen so far she is hesitating everytime she gets the ball. Almost like she has grown more insecure about taking shots herself now with Toliver and EDD on the team.



_________________
"Sue Bird and Lauren Jackson were and are the dynamic duo. They're the one-two punch. They're all the clich�s possible to describe people that perfectly complement each other, who make each other better and also bring out the best in the team." �Karen Bryant
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 5376
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/17 3:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote
I am an old school basketball fan. The one thing that I do not like to see are current players that settle for the three point shot without any attempt to get a better shot closer to the basket. Confused



_________________
You can win, as long as you keep your head to the SKY! Be OPTIMISTIC!
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11142



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/17 5:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote
Rock Hard wrote:
I am an old school basketball fan. The one thing that I do not like to see are current players that settle for the three point shot without any attempt to get a better shot closer to the basket. Confused


The percentages would suggest that the old-school method is less successful -- hence the shift in strategy at all levels.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 5376
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/17 5:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote
ClayK wrote:
Rock Hard wrote:
I am an old school basketball fan. The one thing that I do not like to see are current players that settle for the three point shot without any attempt to get a better shot closer to the basket. Confused


The percentages would suggest that the old-school method is less successful -- hence the shift in strategy at all levels.

I still don't like it. I get tired of watching players shoot three point bricks when posting up in the low block gives a player a better shot. Hell just post up and fake like your going to shoot and kick the ball out to the three point shooter.



_________________
You can win, as long as you keep your head to the SKY! Be OPTIMISTIC!
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11142



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 9:19 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote
Rock Hard wrote:
ClayK wrote:
Rock Hard wrote:
I am an old school basketball fan. The one thing that I do not like to see are current players that settle for the three point shot without any attempt to get a better shot closer to the basket. Confused


The percentages would suggest that the old-school method is less successful -- hence the shift in strategy at all levels.

I still don't like it. I get tired of watching players shoot three point bricks when posting up in the low block gives a player a better shot. Hell just post up and fake like your going to shoot and kick the ball out to the three point shooter.


One aspect that sometimes gets lost in this conversation is that there are a certain percentage of entries to the post that result in turnovers, either on the pass or by the post herself (traveling, charge, losing the ball). Such turnovers are less likely on the perimeter ...

And sadly, some posts simply can't do anything with the ball once they get it but shoot it. Bringing help from the weakside wing forces a poor-passing post to turn toward the basket and make a crosscourt pass -- and sometimes that's just asking too much, especially at the lower levels.

Sylvia Fowles is a WNBA example of a post who has struggled to handle double-teams, but it's even worse if the post is shorter than her defender and thus can't make an over-the-head pass to the weakside.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 5376
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 10:31 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote
Clayk, I understand everything you stated. I just don't like watching bad shooters jacking up three point shots without any attempt to pass to any teammates. I love the song Brickhouse I just don't like bad shooters shooting brick three point shots. Those shots hit the rim hard and bounce further away from the basket where the opposing guards are hanging out grab those rebounds and then its off to the races for easy fast break points. Mad



_________________
You can win, as long as you keep your head to the SKY! Be OPTIMISTIC!
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 9:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote
ClayK wrote:
Rock Hard wrote:
I am an old school basketball fan. The one thing that I do not like to see are current players that settle for the three point shot without any attempt to get a better shot closer to the basket. Confused


The percentages would suggest that the old-school method is less successful -- hence the shift in strategy at all levels.


I either don't understand these claims or disagree with them.

To start, what percentages are you referring to?
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11142



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 9:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote
Basically, it comes down to this:

Points per shot are indeed highest close to the rim, but separating out uncontested layups, etc. and isolating post moves drops that down. Add in the turnovers inherent in attempts to get close to the rim (including charging fouls) and also the limited number of players who are effective close to the basket.

Points per shot beyond the arc are significantly higher than points per shot from three feet to the three-point line, so the percentages strongly suggest that a good three-point shooter with a good look will deliver more points per shot than an entry pass to the block.

Finally, it is much easier to create a good look from beyond the arc on a drive-and-kick than it is to create a good look from the block.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 10:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote
ClayK wrote:
Points per shot are indeed highest close to the rim, but separating out uncontested layups, etc. and isolating post moves drops that down. Add in the turnovers inherent in attempts to get close to the rim (including charging fouls) and also the limited number of players who are effective close to the basket.


Also, in women's basketball there is little dunking so the value of close-in shots is not as high as it is in men's basketball.



_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
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
Page 3 of 3

 
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