New Album & The Beginning of Basketball Season

The latest today is that the Lakers are seriously eyeing Melo and LeBron this summer

I pity the coach who would have those oversize egos on one team ... BTW the Lakers are still without a coach.. Aren't they?
 
I pity the coach who would have to coach those eoversize egos on a eam ... The Lakers are still without a coach.. Aren't they?

I read that they are delaying a coaching decision as they are wanting someone who can coach their Big 3 if it ever comes to fruition
 
I pity the coach who would have those oversize egos on one team ... BTW the Lakers are still without a coach.. Aren't they?


Good one. Though I think Lebron could play with anyone. He is truly an ambassador for the game. They would though need at least two basketballs to play with. :)
 
Yes but the players association will protest if a big name signs for less money.

I read the Big 3 of Miami all took less money to make the Heat fit the cap or to minimize their luxury tax, back in 2010. Ray Allen took less money too, and Chris Bosh reportedly said he'll take less money to stay with the Heat once again. The magic of Pat Riley.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=5368003

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports....h-says-hed-take-less-money-to-stay-with-heat/
 
Good one. Though I think Lebron could play with anyone. He is truly an ambassador for the game. They would though need at least two basketballs to play with. :)

Looking at how James is playing now, he is playing like Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant within a game. Though he never reminds me of Larry Bird. Good thing. :D
 
The case FOR Melo:

Some guys people just love to hate.

In NBA circles, there are a few things that set off this sports hatred:

1. Being "a punk" -- this one is subjective, guy has too many tattoos, smirks when you don't want him to smirk, yells at the refs too much. You can't fully define why the guy is a punk, but damn it you know a punk when you see one, and this guy is totally a punk!

2. Not winning it all -- Before winning the 2012 Finals, LeBron was consistently mocked for not being a winner. In the NFL, Peyton Manning was the guy who couldn't win the big one before finally winning the big one. In baseball, A-Rod was a choke artist until he hit six homers in the 2009 playoffs and the Yankees won it all. You're a bum who will never win it all..until..you know..you win it all. (Usually when your teammates are finally good enough to have this happen).

3. You shoot "too much" -- never mind if these shots go in at a good clip, you're a ball-hog and teams can't win with a ball-hog! Guys like Kobe Bryant (career: 20 FGA per game, 5 rings), or Michael Jordan (career: 23 FGA per game, 6 rings). Now if you pass the ball in crunch time to an open man (like LeBron has many times), you're not a real winner/alpha dog (unless that shot goes in, ala John Paxson in the 1993 Finals off the assist from MJ), then you obviously made the right decision.

Now if you couldn't already tell, the whole basis of this article is Carmelo Anthony. And his reputation of being a loser ball-hog who will never win. Again, if you can't tell, I think this is BS.

Sports are built on narratives, narratives like "this guy can't win because he's a loser and not clutch and I just know he's a bum!". Dozens of great players have had this stigma, several of which were mentioned above. Fans (and media) see a player fail in the playoffs three, five, ten times -- and they come to the conclusion that: this guy has not won, therefore he cannot win. It is foolish.

In Jordan's case, he didn't win until Scottie Pippen became one of the best players in basketball. For Kobe, he needed Shaq (the best player in the game), or Gasol (a Hall of Famer and top-10/15 player in 2009/2010). For LeBron, it was D-Wade and Bosh. In the NBA, you can't win with one star, no matter how brightly that star shines.

In the case of Carmelo, he's never had that star. He played with Allen Iverson for one and a half seasons, but AI was 32 and their games were far too similar. Besides that he played with Chauncey Billups for a few seasons (and made the Western Conference Finals), and a broken down version of Amar'e Stoudemire. He's been surrounded by good players, but never great. And the result is a 3-10 record in playoff series that has created this "You can't win with Melo" narrative.

But what if we look back to a few other players who struggled in the post-season before joining forces with other stars. Guys named Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce.

Garnett's playoff record before 2008: 2-8 in series, 17-30 in games, made playoffs 8 of 12 seasons

Allen's playoff record before 2008: 3-4 in series, 18-18 in games, made playoffs 4 of 11 seasons

Pierce's playoff record before 2008: 3-4 in series, 16-21 in games, made playoffs 4 of 9 seasons

Carmelo's playoff record: 3-10 in series, 23-44 in games, made playoffs 10 of 11 seasons

Anthony and Garnett have nearly identical winning percentages in both series (KG .200, Melo .231) and games (KG .362, Melo .343), and while both Pierce and Allen fared a little better, both of those guys made the playoffs in less than half of their seasons. Is it really fair to give Anthony less credit for making the playoffs nearly every season before getting bounced, as opposed to just not making it at all? That seems a little backwards.

Obviously every situation is different, but don't sit here and say that a guy can't get over the playoff hump once paired with another star (or two). KG used to carry the 'regular season stud, post-season dud' moniker with him just as Melo does now. Once paired with Pierce and Allen though, he won it all on his first try..funny how better teammates can help you beat the best of the best in the playoffs, isn't it?

It's also worth noting that Jordan was only 14-22 in his first five trips to the playoffs before Pippen took the leap to All-Star caliber guy in 1990.

(Note: I am in no way saying Melo is Jordan. Not even in the same stratosphere. Just making the point that yes, even the best of all-time was once considered a guy who couldn't get over the hump, and he needed a second stud alongside him to make it happen.)

And then there's the "he shoots too much" stuff. Yes, Carmelo shoots a lot. And yes, he's not the distributor that many great players are. But the thought that he's some offensive black hole that you can't win with is insane..and incorrect.

For his career, Anthony has a 31.8% usage rate, meaning 31.8% of his team's plays are used by him when he's on the floor (important note: this does not include assists, only field goal attempts/free throw attempts and turnovers). That number is pretty damn high, but consider that Carmelo averaged 27.4 PPG last season and has averaged 25.3 PPG for his career, and that his shooting splits for his career stand at 46/34/81. The reason Anthony shoots so much? Because he's one of the best offensive players in basketball! He gets to the line eight times a game and over the last few seasons has become a borderline elite three-point shooter (39% on six attempts per game over the last two years). He shoots because the ball goes in.

And how does that 31.8% usage rate compare with some other big-time scorers who have won it all?

Jordan: 33.3%

Kobe: 31.8% (29.2% with Shaq, 33.6% since Shaq left)

LeBron: 31.6%

Again, this does not include assists -- only possessions that end with a shot or turnover.

Point being? You can absolutely, positively win with a phenomenal scorer taking a bunch of shots. And while Melo is not the same caliber of player these guys are (Melo = one of the best players of his generation, the others are all-time greats), he's also never had another superstar to play alongside besides that 1.5 season run with an older AI. So if you pair him with another star, it's likely that you see his usage rate dip, much like Kobe's did when he played with Shaq/Gasol compared to when he played with Smush Parker and Kwame Brown from 2004-2007.

The bottom line is we have no idea how Melo would react to playing with stars like Rajon Rondo and Kevin Love (a lot of this chatter surrounds the "Big 3" pipe dream of these three coming together in Boston), but to sit here and say that Melo is a loser who could never win it all/change his game is preposterous. He won it all in college, and he played out of his mind in the Olympics to help the team win gold. Obviously neither of those things guarantees he could win an NBA championship, but this whole "losing is in his DNA" crap is just so incredibly wrong. He dragged some pretty average teams to the Western Conference playoffs in Denver, and then as soon as he got to NYC Amar'e's knees fell off. If you suddenly gave him a top-five point guard and a 25/12 power forward I think his efficiency would spike. Plus he's one of the ten or so players in the NBA who can get his shot whenever the hell he wants it, no matter who is guarding him. We saw how Pierce's ability to do that helped the 2008-13 Celtics, and Melo is an even better scorer.

Are there warts? Yup. He's not a terrible defender, but you only see the great defender in him come out from time to time (he reminds me of pre-KG Pierce with this). He's certainly not LeBron on that end of the floor, but he's not a sieve like James Harden, and under Brad Stevens he has the potential to be better. And he certainly isn't a great passer, although again, he can pass. But he's pretty consistently around 3 APG, a paltry number for someone who has the ball as much as he does. However, if he's with Rondo, the ball won't run through him on offense as much, and his role will be more set. As opposed to the point forward who gets the ball at the top of the key with 18 seconds on the shot clock, he'll hopefully be getting the ball in a better position to actually do something with it.

So should the Celtics go after Anthony if the opportunity arrises? I think you know my answer. And if your answer is no, hopefully it's for a better reason than "he's a loser". Maybe you think the Celtics are better off keeping their draft picks and going the total rebuild route. Or maybe you just don't think the Rondo/Love/Melo threesome is good enough to win it all. There are fair reasons to want to go in other directions, but this ridiculous thought that Melo can't win it all is not one of them.

http://www.celticslife.com/2014/06/yes-celtics-should-go-after-carmelo.html
 
Somebody had to shine and that was KAHWI!!!!

Great game plan. Attack, be offensive minded, score the points, and do the D. A bit scary when the lead was cut to 7 but good thing Spurs held on. The heart is now there.
 
one of the best games I've seen in a very long time. Clearly these are the 2 best teams in the NBA

Spurs hold on for the much needed win 111-92 and go up 2-1

As long as the Spurs win, it will be a 'best' game, Steve. :D A chess game worthy of the best finals in a long time. And hope our team wins. :)
 
From NBA.com

Report: Lakers, Scott talk again — Former Lakers standout Byron Scott was nothing if not confident after having an interview with L.A. for its coaching opening. Scott told the media after his first interview that he’d be the ‘perfect’ coach for Kobe Bryant and could get the Lakers back to their winning ways. The Lakers continue to mull their options for their next coach and Scott might be high on the list. ESPNLosAngeles.com’s Dave McMenamin reports that he and the team had another discussion about L.A.’s opening:
Byron Scott met with the Los Angeles Lakers on Tuesday to discuss the team’s vacant coaching position for the second time, according to sources with knowledge of the situation.
Scott met with vice president of player personnel Jim Buss and general manager Mitch Kupchak. Thus far, he is the only candidate to be interviewed twice by the Lakers.
While Scott is a clear front-runner, sources said talks have not escalated to the point where the sides are discussing contractual terms.
Scott, a former longtime Laker who played with Kobe Bryant during Bryant’s rookie season, has spoken with Bryant several times throughout the Lakers’ coaching search.
 
Isn't it time to give Eric Spoelstra some recognition? The man is one of the best coach in the NBA, IMO. Yes! He has the best player on the planet but those we consider great coaches did have great players too ... From Red Auerbach to Phil Jackson they had stars of the highest caliber too...
 
It could well be that the Spurs are the only team capable of defeating the Heat. This organization has a knack of finding players that no one notices... The likes of kawhi Leonard or Green (I think the Spurs themselves did cut him or was it Patty Mills ? :) ). When everybody was geared toward stopping Parker (seems tired) , Duncan (no longer the terror he used to be in the low post) or Ginobli (less consistent than in his prime) .. You had to contain with the unheralded Leonard or Green or Mills or Belinelii or some other guy from another planet :) with the thinnest scouting report you can think of ... It wasn't so much outcoaching than some players playing to their potential .. You still can see the shyness in Leonard demeanor and I don't think we have seen the last of him, he has potential both on the offensive and the defensive sides ofthe game ... A star in the making ... On the other side ... Wade is fading , no doubt and Bosh while effective does't play enough in the paint nor his dfense anything to write home about... I still wouldn;t discount the Heat, they tend to rebound and well ... We'll see .. Good series so far ...
 
Isn't it time to give Eric Spoelstra some recognition? The man is one of the best coach in the NBA, IMO. Yes! He has the best player on the planet but those we consider great coaches did have great players too ... From Red Auerbach to Phil Jackson they had stars of the highest caliber too...

That question crossed my mind too. And my guess is bec he has a great Pat Riley upstairs to watch him. Remember the hotel room visit after a loss in a game in last year's finals? With Riley bringing in a bottle of wine to 'help'? Which coach has that luxury? Coach Erick has proven he can coach but past coaches of the years turned teams around with lesser named or salaried players. Phil Jackson won only once, in his first year with Jordan and won none with Shaq and kobe. Maybe it's like the Oscars, you may be great, but you will be snubbed.:)
 
It could well be that the Spurs are the only team capable of defeating the Heat. This organization has a knack of finding players that no one notices... The likes of kawhi Leonard or Green (I think the Spurs themselves did cut him or was it Patty Mills ? :) ). When everybody was geared toward stopping Parker (seems tired) , Duncan (no longer the terror he used to be in the low post) or Ginobli (less consistent than in his prime) .. You had to contain with the unheralded Leonard or Green or Mills or Belinelii or some other guy from another planet :) with the thinnest scouting report you can think of ... It wasn't so much outcoaching than some players playing to their potential .. You still can see the shyness in Leonard demeanor and I don't think we have seen the last of him, he has potential both on the offensive and the defensive sides ofthe game ... A star in the making ... On the other side ... Wade is fading , no doubt and Bosh while effective does't play enough in the paint nor his dfense anything to write home about... I still wouldn;t discount the Heat, they tend to rebound and well ... We'll see .. Good series so far ...


IMO the difference so far has been Leonard (who BTW has the largest hands of any player in the NBA-he grasps the ball like it's an orange). You never see him talk and he clearly looked like a fish out of water when they interviewed him at the end of the first half
 
IMO the difference so far has been Leonard (who BTW has the largest hands of any player in the NBA-he grasps the ball like it's an orange). You never see him talk and he clearly looked like a fish out of water when they interviewed him at the end of the first half

And such foresight by the Spurs management to tell the Pacers to Draft him and then swap him with George Hill.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu