Friday, April 24, 2009

20 comments My Name is the Boston Sports Guy and Everything I Experience Is Exciting and The Greatest of All-Time

I really struggled with what to write about today, because despite the fact my favorite NFL team doesn't draft until somewhere near midnight and just signed the best average quarterback in the NFL to a 5 year extension worth $42 million, I am very excited for the NFL Draft. I generally try to avoid doing mock drafts because they are all speculative but I am going to try and get one up so everyone can make fun of me.

First, Bill Simmons, or as I call him the Boston Sports Guy, has put out a column about how great the Bulls-Celtics series is going to be and how it is going to be an all-time classic. I say over and over that Bill believes anything he experiences or does is the absolute best or is an all-time classic. I read this column and can't ignore it, so I have to cover it. Bill put out an article on Wednesday that was very bizarre, it was about sideline reporters and conversations that should happen. I found it neither offensive nor entertaining, it actually felt really, really long and seemed to lose steam very early. It reminded me of a blog posting I would put up on a day where I had writer's block.

Today, the Boston Sports Guy is back, inventing rules that just happen to prove what he is trying to say is correct and just overall pissing a lot of people off.

There are four scenarios for a memorable first-round series and only four. All are in play for the 2009 NBA playoffs.

This is the first sentence and already Bill is being an ass. There are more than four scenarios for a memorable first round series, we just don't have them this year, but there are more.

For those that did not read Bill's article, he forgot a scenario where two superstars carry on a personal duel to get two generally non-competitive teams into the second round. I can name others but I have like 100,000 more words to dissect of Bill's writing.

Scenario No. 4: An aging, injured, exhausted, depleted heavyweight (Boston) fights off a hungry young challenger that's clearly coming into its own (Chicago).

(Acting shocked) You mean the Celtics meet one of the criteria for a memorable playoff series this year? I would not have expected this. Usually Bill doesn't pay attention to the Celtics.

The best part about all of this is that Bill had put his playoff picks up on his blog and here are how many games he has the Celtics "memorable series" going.

5 games. Hmmm...that doesn't seem so memorable. It's like he watched the first two games of the series and then decided he wanted to talk about what a memorable series and all-time classic it was going to be, so he made up a bunch of rules and pigeon holed them into a column talking about the Celtics. Basically, what he seems to do on a regular basis.

Two disclaimers: The Boston Sports Guy knows more about the NBA than I do, but he also embarrasses Celtics fans everywhere by writing shit like this. He is the reason there are people I know who are Celtics fans who refuse to admit it, like they are fucking alcoholics or something.

I also would like to know, since there are 4 other series that meet Bill's "memorable series" criteria, where the breakdowns of the other series by Bill are? That's right, they don't involve Boston teams so we will never see those get written.

And, yeah, I feel that way about the Bulls. They are slightly more talented than a depleted Boston team. They can control the boards without Kevin Garnett around. They have just as many options at the end of games. They will be positively frightening at home with their crowd behind them. (I see them winning Game 3 by 20-plus on Thursday night.)

Actually, try the other way around. Remember everyone, this is the guy who teaches his readers (ages 18-25, white males) how to gamble.

Games 1 and 2 could have been simulcast on ESPN Classic. This has a chance to be remembered as one of the most exciting first-round series ever played.

After two games Bill knows he is witnessing history. After two freaking games he knows this. He knows, even though there were five games to go (four now) that those were going to be exciting games because the first two were exciting...oh, and the Celtics were involved so that helps his knowledge...well not to mention he writes the rules and is the one that decides this is going to be an exciting playoff series, so that also helps.

I think Seattle-Denver from 1994 was the most exciting first round series ever, but that also did not involve the Celtics, so that may not count...and yes, I realize he said "one of the best" but we all know he really meant "the best."

They have two of the most identifiable uniforms and logos.

Even though neither logo makes sense because the word "Celtics" should have a hard "k" sound if it is really from the Irish origin of the word and the Chicago seems to have very few Bulls running around. I am being nitpicky and don't care about it.

They have veteran crowds that know how to affect games and make them a little more fun to watch.

Here Bill goes again with the idea that crowds can magically affect basketball games outside of just cheering very loudly. This very idea is bullshit of course. Crowds can cheer loudly and that seems to be about it, there is not some magical mystique that crowds can transfer over to players from the opposing team that makes them play poorly. This is all in Bill's head.

I don't know what Bill means by veteran crowds but I would guess half the crowd at the Celtics game would think Reggie Lewis is actually supposed to be Reggie Cleveland and Xavier McDaniel is a pro wrestler.

One thing separates him from other world-class rookies who preceded him on a big stage: As far as pure point guards go, he might be the best athlete we've ever seen. If you built the ideal point guard, like how you can create a player from scratch on "NBA Live," wouldn't you basically create Derrick Rose?

No, I would choose someone who could shoot 3 point shots well and was a little bit better on the ball defender.

Lord help us if he ever learns how to shoot 3-pointers.

So, Bill would not basically create Derrick Rose either?

Regardless, after Games 1 and 2, the ceiling has been removed for Rose. I am prepared for anything over the next 12 years. Anything.

I love it when Bill gets dramatic. I just wonder where Rose is located in Bill's new MVP standings? Has he moved up? If so, why didn't Bill have him up higher originally since he knows everything about the NBA? Come on, he is a self proclaimed expert, he had to know how good Rose was.

As a Celtics fan, I'm terrified. As a basketball fan, I'm titillated. But it was always meant to be. Even if comparisons to Vinnie "Microwave" Johnson make more sense on paper, I'd liken him more to a shorter Andrew Toney. Vinnie was called "The Microwave" for a reason -- either he got hot right away, or they unplugged him.

Yeah, I don't remember that second part about them unplugging him if he wasn't hot. He played an awful lot of minutes and scored very few points for a guy who only got to play when he was hot. I think Danny Ainge nicknamed him that because he got hot quickly, and there was nothing that dealt with him being unplugged. At least that I can recall.

I guess a little revisionist history never hurt anyone.

Again, he had two defenders flanking him and they KNEW he had to shoot. Has there ever been a shorter player who got better shots in traffic?

Yes, Bill there has been. Maybe Allen Iverson, Isiah Thomas...I can go on and on.

Bill is full of hyperbole in this article. Everything is the greatest ever, the best ever, or one of the most memorable events. It's all a little bit much for me.

My father has been attending Boston playoff games since 1974 and ranked Gordon's Game 2 performance up there with the best of Toney, Microwave and Nick Weatherspoon -- probably the Mount Rushmore of "Streaky Scorers Who Annihilated the Celtics In a Playoff Series" -- saying simply, "We just couldn't stop him." And we couldn't.

Well, that completely changes my opinion then. Your father, clearly a genius because he raised Bill, is like the Boston Sports Grandfather. He knows it all and has been through it all and if he thinks Ben Gordon's performance is up there, I am not shocked.

But.....................he does lose a little credibility since he left Michael Jordan's 63 point game out of the conversation. That was probably just a fluke peformance though.

Lost in all of this: Rajon Rondo trumping a special regular season with two phenomenal games to start the playoffs. (Note: Don't downgrade him for being unable to stay in front of Rose. Under the current rules, NOBODY is staying in front of Derrick Rose.

I find it quite a bit odd that Bill frequently downgrades Jason Kidd for not being able to stay in front of Derrick Rose, Tony Parker, Deron Williams, Chris Paul and Rajon Rondo...but we are not supposed to downgrade Rondo for that.

As I have said before, Bill makes up the rules and then fits what he wants to say into those rules. That way everything is super duper special and makes what he experiences very important and special as well.

Rondo doesn't get enough credit from an entertainment standpoint; he does three things every game that you will not see from another human being who plays basketball for a living.

Hyperbole, hyperbole, hyperbole. I can't even write angrily about this. Everyone who is not a SimmonsClone knows this is all bullshit that Bill is making up. Every game Rajon Rondo does 3 things no other basketball player can do? If you believe that, you are a SimmonsClone. That's the new test, I just made up.

We always hear about "The Big Three," but Rondo might be the most compelling story on the 2008-09 Celtics: a very good point guard with a chance to be superb. Can he get there? Stay tuned.

Don't worry about staying tuned, I am 100% sure Bill is going to keep us updated. Earlier in the column Bill was talking about how great Rose is and how he can do things other players can't, now he thinks Rondo is able to do things other players can't, and he hasn't even talked about Chris Paul yet. So if you believe Bill Simmons, we are pretty much watching three of the greatest point guards in NBA history right now.

I don't want to jinx it, but Vinny Del Negro is putting on an anti-coaching clinic for the ages.

The Boston Sports Guy is like the Gregg Easterbrook of the NBA. He has the advantage of hindsight and then criticizes coaches for all the stupid moves they make...but it's like neither Bill nor Gregg knows it is hindsight and actually believe they would have made a different decision in the same situation, even though they would not have.

called two timeouts in the final three minutes of Game 2 to design plays for Ben Gordon, who, again, had an actual fireball shooting out of his butt. You can't just scream "go to Gordon again" from the sidelines, Vinny?

Let's see which situation is an example of better coaching:

A. Calling a timeout to make sure you get the ball to your red hot scorer by setting up a play that ensures he gets the ball.

B. Screaming who the ball is going to go to from the sidelines and having your point guard, who is so quiet as the TNT announcers said last night sometimes his own players don't know the play, call out a play and hope everything goes well?

I personally believe calling a timeout is the best thing to do rather than have the team just fucking wing it and hope something goes right. To criticize Del Negro for doing this any differently is wrong. This was good coaching.

(That reminds me, the Celtics haven't received enough credit for persevering without Garnett these past two months.

Oh yeah, the Celtics never receive enough fucking credit. They definitely need more. I am glad Bill is here to point out all the wonderful things the Celtics have done without Kevin Garnett. Bill's own MVP rankings the Celtics have the #5 and #17 most valuable players in the league, not to mention a point guard that can do three things in a game you have never seen another person do in a basketball game. I don't know how many teams can brag about that, but based on that, I would have to say they are getting too much credit for doing so well down the stretch of the year without Garnett.

Of course we don't credit John Paxson for this! He's the luckiest guy on the planet! Chicago had something like 0.00000000000000043 odds to get Derrick Rose last spring and got him. Without him, NONE OF THIS HAPPENS. You can't credit any GM for succeeding with a team that has drafted first, ninth, second, third, seventh, second, fourth, fourth, eighth and first in the past 10 drafts and recently stumbled into one of the best No. 1 overall picks of the past 25 years.

I actually kind of agree with this. The Bulls should actually be a lot better than they currently are. John Paxson, much like his time with Michael Jordan, is getting fairly lucky.

I hate Joakim Noah. I hate looking at him. I hate his hair. I hate how he dunks. I hate the way he high-fives. I hate every reaction he has. I hate his game. I hate the way announcers pronounce his name. I hate the story that I've heard a million times about his tennis-playing father.

There are certain things every single person in the world can get behind no matter color of skin, religion, creed or sexual orientation and I think hating Joakim Noah is one of those things. Everyone hates him.

The dirty little secret of this series: Paul Pierce is wiped out.

Other than the fact he currently looks like he has AIDS (he has bizarre circles around his eyes), I think this is a pre-emptive bullshit excuse by Bill for when/if the Celtics end up tanking at some point in the playoffs. "They did not get beat, they were tired because they won the NBA Finals last year." That will be his excuse.

Pierce certainly looked pretty good last night. I am sure a lot of players who are in the playoffs right now are tired, Pierce is probably not the only one.

The dude played 108 games last season, then another 82 this season -- all while waving a "come and get us, we're the champs" bull's-eye for every comer -- and spent the past two months carrying a KG-less team on both ends.

Well first, only played 106 games last year because he missed two regular season games and he only played in 81 this year. I know there is some fictional "we are the champs, so we are going to get played harder by every other team" issue that Bill wants to push forward but I don't know if they get played any stronger than how teams play when wanting to beat Kobe and LeBron's teams.

Also, Kobe had to do everything Pierce had to do without Garnett, because he was without Bynum this year AND he played in the Olympics. I am just saying...

Pierce is the only guy on the Celtics who can remotely consider handling LeBron. By that point, after playing 200-plus games in 20 months, he will potentially have to slow down the Bo Jackson of basketball seven times over 14 days. And that's if Pierce doesn't break down before then.

Remember the Celtics never actually get beaten by another team, they are just too tired because of how hard it is to be the champs. They don't lose, they just give in...but if they were healthy, if they were not so tired, if..........................

A number of readers disagreed, which I expected for the simple reason that Allen is underrated and Miller is overrated.

Here he goes with his underrated bullshit again. It's weird how he believes another Boston athlete is underrated.

If he were a baseball player, he would have been Wade Boggs -- not a franchise guy, but someone with a few elite skills (milking pitch counts, getting on base, stroking singles and, in Boggs' case, rarely missing a game)

The Boston Sports Guy compares him to another Boston athlete. Shocking.

Boggs rarely missed a game? Let me double check that.

I think what Bill meant when he said Boggs rarely missed a game was, "Wade Boggs never played a full season of baseball and even in his prime (26-33), he averaged only 153 games." I don't consider that "rare," when it comes to missing games and I really wish Bill would look up what he is writing before he actually writes it.

that made him a genuine asset as long as you surrounded him with other quality players.

There are probably thousands of players that could be genuine assets as long as you surround them with other quality players. I can't believe how dumb this statement sounds when read aloud.

His 2000-01 Bucks were so alarmingly screwed by the officiating against Philly -- please, Google "Bucks Sixers 2001 playoffs officials" and you will see what I mean

Well, if you are going to google things and use that as proof, google "Bill Simmons sucks" and you will get some proof of that as well.

Miller had more big moments but played in more big games;

I want to make fun of this statement but it is just way too easy.

I do have to say I think Ray Allen is a better player than Reggie Miller was but Bill's reasoning, as usual, is suspect.

And now, Allen holds a wonderful Bulls-Celtics series in his hands. The champs will fall in Round 1 unless Ray Allen comes through. It's as simple as that.

Yeah, whatever happened to that #5 MVP guy? I guess because he is too tired from carrying the team he doesn't count anymore. I like how Bill puts the Bull-Celtics series all in Ray Allen's hands after waxing poetic about how Rajon Rondo is so special and putting Paul Pierce as the #5 MVP in his rankings...when all of a sudden Pierce not so valuable anymore because he is tired and Rondo apparently will not be a factor for some unknown reason. This is Bill hedging his bets and putting an excuse out there so he is not wrong when/if the Celtics lose.

As a Celtics fan, I can only tell you this: When one of the great clutch shooters in recent NBA history holds your immediate playoff destiny in his hands, it's a good place to be.

You have ruined so many things for other Celtics fans over the past year, I rue the day you were born to that genius of a father.

I am going to spit out a mock draft tomorrow, it could suck, but I am interested to see what it will look like.


AJ said...

I can't wait for Boston to finish this series in 5 games and Bill to acknowledge the fact he was wrong about this being an epic battle...oh wait, he will fail to mention this article ever again when that happens. The Bulls are not a young upcoming team, they suck, which is why they finished 7th in the East (a very very very weak conferance). Why would he say the Bulls are a better team then Boston?

Boston 62-20
Chicago 41-41

Yep, the Bulls are a better team, as indicated by their overall record this season.

And I think he just likes to make things up, like the Vinnie Johnson thing, cuz he knows his readers know nothing about him or the Pistons from that era. He was not a hot and cold shooter, he was instant offense that played 25 mins a game behind two of the best guards in the league. There is a reason his number is retired at the Palace, and it's not for being a hot and cold shooter.

And wow, his dad has been to every playoff game! Wow!!! Amazing! I've watched just about every playoff game too for the Pistons the past 20 years, I may not have been to every home game, but I've watched them. I believe I am now considered an expert! I wonder what Bills dad did when Boston completely sucked all those years?

Matt said...

are there any other series going on right now? how about baseball? there was an entire world series played last year w/out so much as a column about it. were the Sawx in it, we'd have had 3 running diaries and 2 5000 word columns breaking down the World Series. espn should just create ESPN/city for each city and move his column to ESPN/Boston. honestly, i could care less about the bulls/celtics series. while the first 2 games were good the series has no national appeal. ugh!!!!

Bengoodfella said...

I think the Boston Sports Guy is just managing expectations at this point. Really there is no reason the Celtics should not beat the Bulls, like you just showed, no matter whether Garnett plays or not. He doesn't make a 21 game difference.

I just thought it was funny he predicted the series would be over in 5 games but thought it was going to be an epic battle. That seems like a big contradiction to me.

He completely made that up about Vinnie Johnson. That is not why he got the nickname, and the worst part is that Danny Ainge, a Celtic at the time, made up the nickname after Johnson dropped 34 on the Celts. The Pistons just don't put a person's number up because he got hot a few times a season coming off the bench. He played too many minutes for this to be the case.

As far as his dad being at every playoff game and that making him an expert. I find personally that when I watch a game on television after attending the game, I see some stuff that I did not see at the game. Not that this is always the case but I don't know if there is a big difference in attending a game and watching a game on television and also being able to notice things that happen.

I think the worst part of the column is when he talked so wonderfully about Rondo and then said Allen was the only player who would make a difference in whether the Celtics win or lose. What???

He is just thinking of excuses to use when the Celtics lose to the Cavs or another team, like he did not expect them to win or to make it seem like they had a higher hill to climb to repeat or it was more difficult for them. Kobe and LeBron have been playing basketball for nearly a year and a half straight now, Pierce should not have any excuses.

Bengoodfella said...

Matt, that is why I have started calling him the Boston Sports Guy. I realize he follows that city's teams, and that is kind of his niche, but it still frustrates me. When the BoSox are in the series we get tons of running diaries and things like that, but then nothing when they don't make the series.

I just don't think it looks very good for ESPN, because I believe it does make it look like they favor certain teams in regards to coverage. It does have national coverage because Bill Simmons talks about it constantly on and ESPN puts his columns front and center on the page. So while I agree the series is not more important than another series, by having his columns on the front page of their site and allowing Bill to write about them whenever they do well, ESPN is giving the series national precedent over the other series' in my mind.

AJ said...

I agree, he is just making excuses now, and you know what, he always does this for every team he likes.

Matt has a good idea, and you know what, from what I hear ESPN is actually doing this. I thought Chicago already had thier own ESPN site dedicated to just Chi.

Actually Boston played better without Garnett, so really he has no reason to even say that the Bulls are better.

I think he picked Rondo as the key cuz he doesn't know anyone else on the team besides Pierce and Allen.

Bengoodfella said...

I have seen the Chicago site for ESPN and I would be absolutely shocked if there was not a Boston site set up in the very near future, then they can put Simmons on that site and they don't have to worry about people like me complaining it is too Boston-centric because that is what it is intended to be.

Again, I would be shocked if this did not happen. They can link it on the main page but his columns in the Boston section and that way they avoid any complaints of some type of bias.

Edward said...

Love your line about Noah, Ben.

I'm a Bulls fan and I actually think Noah is criminally underrated by most Bulls fans. I still hate him. A lot.

Bengoodfella said...

Oh, he is a useful player, don't get me wrong...but between his hair, his teeth, pretty much everything else about him, I just hate him a whole lot. I don't know what Bulls fans think of him but he has played very well against the Celts in this series.

I think my dislike for him started when he went to Florida. I am not a Florida fan and just thought he looked like an incredibly annoying player...which he is, which also makes him valuable.

Jeremy Conlin said...

You make some good points, but you're wrong about all of the Rondo stuff. He's legitimately one of the top 5 or 6 point guards in the NBA (behind Paul, Deron Williams, Tony Parker, and Chauncey Billups). You're point about Simmons saying that Kidd can't stay in front of whoever lacks any punch because Jason Kidd can't stay in front of anyone. Rondo can shut down most points guards, for instance, just off the top of my head, he was phenomenal against Devin Harris in a game against New Jersey a few weeks ago. In the case of Kidd, he consistently gets beaten off the dribble by guards that are pretty mediocre (like Sebastian Telfair and Mike Conley, just to name a two that I saw play well against him recently).

Secondly, my counter to your Vinny Del Negro argument would be that when he calls a timeout, not only does it let Boston set up its defense better, it also lets Boston's older, more tired players (like Pierce and Allen) get a rest, while his guys don't especially need it. Furthermore, Del Negro was left with no timeouts with 3 seconds to play. If they have a timeout, they can advance the ball to half-court, and they're much more likely to get a good shot, as opposed to a 60-foot heave.

And finally, I strongly, strongly disagree with your argument that a crowd can't affect a game. Players can feed off crowds. Go watch game 6 of the Dallas/Golden State playoff series in 2007. Also, go watch any Knick blowout from the Isiah era and watch how the crowd collectively quits on the team, and as a result, the team plays worse. And furthermore, watch teams that have more rowdy crowds (like Boston, Utah, Portland, or Dallas), and you'll see how those crowds affect the way that officials (especially bad ones) call the game. A crappy official will start to favor the home team more (case in point, game 2 of the finals last year, when Boston had a 38-10 advantage in free throw attempts). These things happen. As someone who writes about the NBA, and watches probably 25 hours of basketball a week, I notice these things. Now, I'm not criticizing you, because I assume you don't watch as much basketball as I do (and I apologize if this sounds condescending, it's really not my intent), but watching games as opposed to looking at box scores is significantly different (to return to Rondo, many of these things that Simmons writes about that Rondo can do won't show up in the box score. A no-look pass that leads to a dunk and a swing pass that leads to a 16-foot jumper both show up as an assist, but they're drastically different plays).

Simmons in his writing is very hyperbolic and over the top, but that's what a lot of people like about him. He writes from a perspective that not too many other writers do (looking at sports from the fan's perspective, making a point to stay out of locker rooms, etc.). He writes about sports the way people in an office talk about sports. I happen to greatly enjoy his columns, even though I agree he is too much of a Boston homer.

AJ said...

PG's that I'd want over Rondo (i.e. better then Rondo):

Billups, Rose, Harris, Wade, Parker, Miller, Nash, Roy, and Williams at least...

Anyone who says Rondo is top 5 clearly doesn't watch 25 hours of basketball a week or they could easily name 9 or 10 better PG's and a few more that are equal to him (Arenas, Mo Williams, Nelson, Crawford).

And saying some of what he does doesnt show up in the box score can be made to just about every player in the league. So he makes a no look pass, so what (Kidd does that every single game, is he top 5....nope)? So does every player in the league. Thats like saying Ben Wallace is a great center cuz he changes shots in the lane, a "stat" that doesnt show up in the box score.

I just love that arguement, that what they do doesn't show up in the box score...I guess with that line of thinking Varejao is one of the top 5 PF's in the game.

And Kidd can't keep anyone in front of him because he is 100 years old. And he looks even worse when he doesn't have any good defenders to back him up, unlike Boston.

Bengoodfella said...

I really never said I did not like Rondo or thought he wasn't potentially one of the top 5 point guards in the league. Bill said Rondo made three plays a game that no other human being playing basketball could make. I have watched a few Celtic basketball games that involve Rajon Rondo and I haven't yet seen him make three plays in a game that no other basketball player can make. That's what I was trying to focus on. I think Rondo is a great PG and I think it is complete crap that Bill speaks so highly of him and then puts the series completely on Allen's shoulders. That's what he said about Rondo and a no look pass or a great swing pass doesn't count as something no one else can do.

As far as Del Negro goes, regardless of whether the Celtics get a rest with a timeout, as a head coach you have to call a timeout and set up a play to make sure you get a good shot and don't just let your young team wing it. As a coach, he can't be thinking about "well, we may need to get down the court with 3 seconds left later, so I will save the timeout," he has to trust he calls a good play and his team executes on offense and defense. Just yelling out who the ball is supposed to go to is pretty irresponsible as a coach.

I will relent on this, maybe crowd noise can affect a game, but I don't think there is an overwhelming crowd energy that makes the other team play worse.

I realize Rondo does things that don't show up in the box score, but none of those things are plays no other human being playing basketball can make. I have watched plenty of Celtic games to know this is not a fact. That was my problem with Bill's impossibly hyperbolic statement, not that I think Rondo is no good.

He does talk about sports the way people in an office talk about sports, and I am not sure that is normally a compliment in my mind. He is not really too much of a homer, that is ALL he really is. Everything is Boston-centric, it just gets old. Fortunately ESPN will set up ESPN Boston soon and his columns will go there.

AJ said...

Well I know of a few players that make plays that no one else can make, and not one of them is on Boston. James, Koby, Wade...thats about it actually.

I don't know if he writes like people at the office talk, I mean I don't talk to people at my office about how NBA teams are losing money, trade value rankings, and I don't answer random stupid emails. I also don't talk about Boston all the time either, so no, he does not write like people in an office talk.

And of course he writes different then most sports people, cuz those sports people get paid to not act like a fan of any team. They also get paid to do research, and not just make stuff up with no way to figure it out (like Rondo making plays no other human can).

If I gave you this stat line, would you think this guy had a great regular season:

33 mins/game, 11 ppg, 8 apg, 30% 3's, 64% FT

And on the timeout thing, that is completly normal for any coach to do. 2 timeouts in the last 3 mins of a game? Seriously? Thats the norm, in fact, I'm surprised they didn't take 5 time outs in the last 1 min of the game.

And you always take a TO in that spot, 20 seconds left, to set up a play, always. Giving the other team a "rest" and/or letting them set up a defense is completely stupid logic. You must remember, they would have set up a defense anyway, Rondo had just commited a foul! In case we forget, time stops when you commit a foul anyway.

In the end, it wasn't the coaches fault his player decided to jack up a shot with 12 seconds left, leaving the other team plenty of time to make another one. If Gordon leaves Boston with 5 seconds left, the game is completely different.

Oh and by the way, the Lakers took 3 timeouts in the last 30 seconds in game 3...including a TO with 16 seconds left to set up a play for Koby. Now in Bills mind, this is stupid to do, since Koby is the best player on the court, how hard is it to just yell out from the bench, "Koby, shoot the ball"? That Phil Jackson, what a horrible horrible coach! And in that same game, can you believe that Sloan called a TO with 11 seconds left to set up a play for his best player?? I know, Sloan sucks as a coach too. I can't believe these coaches get paid so much, they suck.

As always, these are Bills readers!

Bengoodfella said...

AJ, I can see the after effects of the Lions draft is still affecting your mood. I of course agree with you on the timeout issue, I think it is smart to take a timeout and get a play set up for whoever the coach thinks should get the ball.

My problem is not with Rondo overall, my problem is just in the terms that Bill talked about Rondo, as if he was doing things no other player could do. It is true he has played fairly well this year, I don't see him making plays no other player can make.

I always thought it was pretty standard to call a timeout to set up a play and I would especially not yell one from the bench with a rookie PG (even Derrick Rose).

AJ said...

No, really I just hate people defending Boston players and taking shots at anyone Boston plays. That timeout is a typical NBA call, and there is no way to defend the other side...unless of course you are a Boston fan.

Just like Boston fan likes to point out the Yankees are chockers cuz they blew that 3-0 lead...when they fail to remember that the Red Sox were chockers long before NY was.

I should note, I do not like Rondo, I do not think he is very good, and if he played for any other team that didn't have 3 All Stars he would suck.

Jeremy Conlin said...

First of all, Dwyane Wade, Brandon Roy, Gilbert Arenas, and Jamal Crawford aren't point guards. They are 2 guards that occasionally play the point. Second of all, if you would honestly want Devin Harris or Andre Miller over Rondo, then you don't know anything about the NBA. Through four games, Rondo is averaging a triple-double going up against one of the point guards you claim is better than him. At this point in time, Rondo is better than guys like Nash and Kidd because he's much, much, much (repeat "much" 700 times) better defensively than either one of them.

As for the "three plays that no other human being can make" line, obviously it is overly hyperbolic. But Rondo does make more than a few plays that will make you say "wow!" The one that immediately comes to mind is the layup in traffic he had in the 4th quarter yesterday where he had to bring the ball back underneath Rose's arm in order to get the ball up. That's the type of play Simmons is talking about. I'm not sure if he makes 3 of those-type plays every game, but he makes them pretty often.

As for the timeout issue, again, my counter would be that Del Negro taking all of those timeouts led to his team being without a timeout in each of the first two games, and in both of those games the Bulls had an opportunity to tie or win the game, but because they had no timeouts left, they had to resort to 80-foot heaves. If they had a timeout, they could have advanced he ball and had close to 3 seconds to get a good shot up. Another example, in game 4, Del Negro called a timeout with 0.8 seconds left IN THE 2ND QUARTER to try to set up a play. Do you think that's a good timeout? I don't. It's a timeout that they could have put to better use down the stretch. It's not so much that he called one timeout, it's that he used up all of his timeouts. That would be the argument that I would make.

Bengoodfella said...

I guess that is what I don't like about Simmons is that his comment was hyperbolic...maybe. I really didn't get that from reading the column. I think he really thinks Rondo does 3 things no other player can do. I think many people take his hyperbole for fact. I really do think that. I still think someone else could have made that play yesterday against Rose. Andre Miller made a pretty nice one in the 4th quarter of the Philly-Orlando game.

I think we are just going to disagree on the timeout issue because I think it is more important to get a good play in a timeout early in the game or else the Bulls may not have been in the position to win the game at the end of the game. Basically what I am saying is that I feel is that if the Bulls screw up that play and don't call a timeout, they may not be in a position to win at the end of the game.

I do have to agree with AJ on the point that I am going to be interested to see how Rondo plays without the Big 3 in Boston, though he has played well in the playoffs so far...

I really like Devin Harris, I am not sure I would take Rondo over him, but it would be close in my little mind.

AJ said...

Well I think Wade, Crawford, and Arenas are all PG's, they handle the majority of the ball...Roy maybe not so much.

No use arguing over who is what and whom is better them whom, everyone has their own thoughts. Some of our thoughts are based more on unbiased opinions, some more biased then others.

You may think he is a top 5-6 PG, and I'm not going to say you are wrong, thats your thoughts. I don't like him, thats all.

Jeremy Conlin said...

You could say the same thing about Kobe and LeBron. Does that make them point guards?

I think Rondo is only going to get better as he gets older, because (a) his shot selection is going to improve, (b) he's going to improve his jump shot, and (c) he's going to be getting more shots once those two things happen. He could pretty realistically average 18/11/7 for a season with over 50% shooting. Throw in the fact that he's only owed $8 Million total over the next three years, and I'd say comparatively speaking, he's much more desirable than an Andre Miller ($10 Million, expires this summer) or Devin Harris (owed $42.5 M over the next 5 seasons).

Bengoodfella said...

Rondo may be better as he gets older, I guess we are also assuming the players around him don't get worse. If that is the case then his shot selection may not improve because he will be called upon to handle a greater amount of the scoring load and his assists are currently going to three guys who may make the HoF and he is not always going to have those guys around him. That is pure speculation of course.

In regards to money, then yes, he is more desirable right now, but I wasn't really taking that into account when I was ranking the best PG's in the league. I was going purely on performance...I don't know what AJ was thinking. He is right in that we all have our own bias and I guess he doesn't like Rondo.

Anonymous said...