I'd probably take Jason Williams or Pistol Pete but it's arguable and recency bias will play a role in that debate.
NBA 2023-2024
- Thread starter charlton66
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
I'd probably take Jason Williams or Pistol Pete but it's arguable and recency bias will play a role in that debate.
i thought they were saying they were the most talented back court? that's different from saying they're the best?
if your talking best back court then of course Steph and Klay are above them due to what they've won, but Klay is not more talented overall than Kyrie or Luka.
Jason Williams was flashier but in terms of overall skill i think Kyrie takes it. Williams blows him away passing wise.
Jamal Crawford is up there as well.
rip to bill walton. an all time great player. 3 time NCAA player of the year and 2 time NCAA champion (in 3 years). injuries destroyed his nba career but still 2 titles and 1 mvp. a hilarious broadcaster and a person of rare moral clarity and courage
On vacation, so missed hearing about the passing of Bill Walton. Great guy, both on and off the court.
RIP Bill, you will be missed.
RIP Bill, you will be missed.
While I generally prefer the Celtics over the Pacers, I would like this series to be extended.
If the two series end today and tomorrow, there will be more than a week without games. I can’t recall the last time that something like that happened.
If the two series end today and tomorrow, there will be more than a week without games. I can’t recall the last time that something like that happened.
Rip bill Walton
Bill Walton 
RIP
RIP
This is poor. Sorry, but how can the Pacers lose each time the same way? They had the lead until pretty much the end, and they lost it.
In any case, good to see the Celtics in the Finals again. They lost only two games in this postseason, none on the road. Amazing.
In any case, good to see the Celtics in the Finals again. They lost only two games in this postseason, none on the road. Amazing.
Well they are the 6th seed and missing their star player...
Yeah but they also beat the #3 seed without their own superstar player and the Knicks without OG Anunoby, Robinson, Bogdanovic, and Brunson hobbled... And it's not like Haliburton was playing well this playoffs, he was very hot and cold in the semifinals. I said this before the series started:
And it clearly showed in these four games against the Celtics.
Let's hope the Mavs sweep the Wolves as well now and they both get a similar amount of rest before the Finals.
Pacers only got there thanks to Giannis and Dame injuries - plus Doc, honestly - then the Knicks finished the series with like 3 guys who could stand on their own. And likewise, C's got Butler-less Heat, Cavs without Mitchell and now Pacers without Haliburton
Ridiculous amounts of luck, even with the Porzingis injury
Ridiculous amounts of luck, even with the Porzingis injury
In a league/sport with as many injuries as the NBA, staying healthy is (almost) as much a skill as it is luck.
Just as it is not just a coincidence why our first team (Man United) have 5-10 (more?) players injured almost constantly.
It's not all luck - the Celtics finished with a historically great scoring margin and locked up the 1st overall seed in the league very early on so they didn't have to grind their guys down with a ton of high pressure or leverage minutes.
In a historically poor conference compared to an ultra-competitive West.
They were 23-7 against the West this year. Calling the East "historically poor" also seems like a bit of a stretch - especially when it was basically just 2 teams who dragged everyone else down:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/friv/east_vs_west.html
They still lost their 3rd best player and it hasn't matteted one bit because their opponents kept losing their best player outright
This in an already weak conference. These Pacers are honestly an historically poor conference finalists. East was back to the LeBron-Cavs years
3 East teams that made the playoffs had a winning record against the West. EVERY West team that made the play-in had a winning record against the East
It wasn't 2 teams dragging everyone else down. The East was historically weak
It is hard to understand how good the Celtics are based on these playoffs. Yes they've made it relatively easily but then all their opponents have lost their best player. In this series against the Pacers, they've been outplayed for most of it but have just recovered enough to win in the last 3 minutes. With the strength of their squad, and how weak the Pacers are without Haliburton, you would expect the Celtics to handle them easier than they did.
Yawn, these Lakers fans making up excuses for the inevitable.
Well… the most paid player in the league + the highest-rated American prospect + the best defensive backcourt duo (also very capable on offense, both) + one of the smartest old heads at five + a former young unicorn now in his prime + a solid bench … I mean, anything different from a 4-1 against Mavs would be a pound-for-pound failure but I am pretty sure they would take a 4-3 last shot as well to get the banner.
Luka and Kyrie will see to it. Tatum always chokes sooner or laterYawn, these Lakers fans making up excuses for the inevitable.
Sure it's an easy path. But it's absolutely bizarre that people are trying to nitpick a team that put up a historic season because they've come close in the playoffs the last few years.
Obviously circumstance favoured them in terms of establishing the best record in the league as you point out - but this isn't grounds to think they'd be overmatched against the West when they had more or less the same win percentage (78.8% vs the East, 76.7% vs the West).
In what sense was their season historic? Genuine question - their win total wasn't even as much as a franchise record, their most recent two championship teams in '08 and '86 both put up more wins than they did this season.
They tied the 16/17 Warriors for 3rd all time in net rating and had literally the best offense in NBA history?
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/best-net-rating-in-nba-history-by-season
it's the Boston Celtics. Feck them
Move the franchise to a respectable city with a respectable fanbase and we'll stop nitpicking and putting them down. Honestly if they win there should be an asterisk next to the title. Frankly they should just void the season actually. NBA season tournament should be declared champions in their stead
First one seems impressive. Second one they're followed by the Pacers and Thunder this year and the Kings last season if I'm looking at the right stats on Statmuse, so doesn't really say much and can't be compared to other years especially since it's basically a no-contact league these days.
They aren't anything special to me. Good team, sure. Nothing special.
it's the Boston Celtics. Feck them
Move the franchise to a respectable city with a respectable fanbase and we'll stop nitpicking and putting them down. Honestly if they win there should be an asterisk next to the title. Frankly they should just void the season actually. NBA season tournament should be declared champions in their stead
Banner 18 incoming!
Don't necessarily disagree with you given the upward creep of offense in the NBA over the last few years. That said, that they were also an elite defense at the same time speaks volumes.
Recommend looking up the 2002-03 season to see how shit the East was - only one team made it to 50 wins, the West had six teams on 50+. Only three East teams managed a winning record against the West - Detroit, New Jersey, and New Orleans each at 15-13. Contrast to the West against the East - Dallas 26-4, Spurs 24-6, Kings 23-7, Portland 21-9, Warriors 19-11, Suns and Wolves 18-12.
Timberwolves make it 3-1, gonna make it 3-2 as well. People forget they are the higher seed and therefore can't be written off already.
There's a reason why teams going down 3-0 in a series are 0-154 to win the series in the end. You just don't bet against that trend unless it's happened imo.
But in a way I agree with the sentiment yeah, "just" win at home now, and then you only need to win one game to force Game 7. Looks simple on paper. Higher seed doesn't really mean much to me when it's #3 vs #5, not like it's a 1-seed against a complete underdog.
It's bound to happen once and also there should be more connect behind those 154-0 stats, how many of those are where the lower seeded team is up 3-0? I'm sure it wouldn't be a lot of those. The fact is Timberwolves need to win just game away and rely on winning twice at home (though I think the advantage of home court is reduced now).
Celtics nearly pulled it off vs Heat last year (might have had Tatum not gotten injured early in game 7). I just think with Wolves ability to defend, and Mavs being sketchy in terms of shooting, anything can happen.
Now that the series is 3-1, does the probability of a 3-0 comeback still apply? Genuine question for people who know about probability stuff.
No math wizard but I'd say yes, the 0-154 still counts because it was 3-0 at one point, but also they do have a higher probability now that's it 3-1. Not even sure if they are compatible with each other though
There are instances of teams coming back from a 3-1 deficit but they never were in a 3-0 hole to begin with, so that makes a difference. I think the Nuggets overcame two 3-1 deficits in a row in the bubble during Covid, but they never were in a 3-0 position. And obviously the Cavs against the Warriors in the 2016 Finals.
0-3 never overturned is a game of chances, innit? Winning 4 games in a row vs a similar (or even better) team in the face of any sudden event like your stars twisting their wrist or ankle, the pressure from the organization and the fans, the scrutiny from the media, the in-game adjustement to stop your comeback, the referees often acting unpredictable or just trolling, the mental fatigue in the dressing room…
Ooh, we are doing this again
Nice that we get more basketball. Amazing how many stupid fouls KAT takes, but redeemed himself this time
Nice that we get more basketball. Amazing how many stupid fouls KAT takes, but redeemed himself this time
Yep we're doing this again
And the answer is the same: at this level it can only happen due to injuries. Otherwise no, the Mavs are too good to lose 4 in a row(which seen the other way is also why they didn't sweep the wolves). If they go to game 7, they'll win that one, just like the Heat last year
And the answer is the same: at this level it can only happen due to injuries. Otherwise no, the Mavs are too good to lose 4 in a row(which seen the other way is also why they didn't sweep the wolves). If they go to game 7, they'll win that one, just like the Heat last year
The one he fouled out on wasn't a foul for me, I thought it was established refereeing that it doesn't get called anymore when the player on offense initiated contact? Luka clearly leans into KAT and is looking for the contact. KAT might jump forward a little bit but he's nowhere near Luka's space if Luka doesn't jump forward in an unnatural shooting position. Not a foul to me.Ooh, we are doing this again
Nice that we get more basketball. Amazing how many stupid fouls KAT takes, but redeemed himself this time
So at the tip-off of game 7 Celtics had 0%, got it.
Yeah, I wasn't referring to the last one, but to the 3 of the first 5. And it happens couple of times in almost every game.