Can we all agree on the whole "Kerr was vengeful towards Boston" as an absolutely dog shit narrative from idiots who don't watch? Jrue and White got plenty of minutes.
BTW - the big winner from this whole thing was Booker. He was really impressive.
Printable View
Can we all agree on the whole "Kerr was vengeful towards Boston" as an absolutely dog shit narrative from idiots who don't watch? Jrue and White got plenty of minutes.
BTW - the big winner from this whole thing was Booker. He was really impressive.
yeah, I never thought there was any animus towards Boston, that's silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by TahoeJ
Or that Kerr doesn’t know what he’s doing balancing nba egos vs the good of the team. Ffs
Oh, yes, Kerr is infallible, and can't possibly be subject to any criticism from the unwashed masses of basketball fans. FFS indeed.
I like Kerr a lot but that's a clown take.
That’s a clown take - you’re having a straw man argument. No one said Kerr was infallible but you. Warriors fans frequently question some of his rotation choices.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
Getting on his case for benching a player who was playing like shit is dumb.
Uh, did you see the post I responded to? You're taking mine out of context if you think I am saying anything but the same as you, that it's perfectly reasonable to analyze and criticize his choices; insulating him from any criticism because "he knows better" is what I was calling a clown take. FFS.Quote:
Originally Posted by TahoeJ
And this is not the NBA, this is the Olympics and the national team filled with NBA all stars sacrificing their time to be there. It is nowhere near the same as "getting on his case for benching a player" as if this was the Warriors and he was benching Kuminga. And I guaran-damn-fucking-tee you that had he benched, for ex, Curry because he shot 1-9 against South Sudan you would have been screaming about how terrible that move is.
All I am saying is that this is a different situation than his normal team, and constructing rosters and lineups within these rosters should have more considerations than "what is the very best first team and second team I can put together and damn everything else." Everyone has to take a different approach to what they normally do, players have to facilitate for others more, focus on different things, etc, and I think the coach should similarly be focused on different things. And to a certain extent he was, for sure; I just think he didn't do it enough.
I hope it snows soon.
Tatum called it a "humbling experience" after listing all of his recent accomplishments after the South Sudan game and a player's camp is often the way players get out their complaints to create the illusion of distance from said complaints. The fact is he played bad and wasn't deserving of more minutes. He wasn't asserting himself into the offense like he has with the Celtics in recent years. Like I said, he passed up open looks, looked hesitant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
I prefer how Haliburton took the high road with his DNPs, even joking about it after winning the gold. Whereas, I've seen many headlines about tatum and his limited role, even post-Olympics. His actions are lame IMO and a player's actions off the court influence who I like on the court.
Overall, I think Tatum and Brown are incredible talents. But for me, the off court stuff around the olympics diminished what i think of both players.
Not benching Curry speaks to the genius of Kerr because they certainly needed him in the semi and final games. Curry also was playing how he always played, and even when he's having a shooting slump, Curry works as a great decoy to help keep spacing. Tatum looked shook out there, which allows defenses to ignore you and better help out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
I do hope Tatum plays in 2028 because the USA will certainly need him more in those games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TahoeJ
I didnt say he was infallible. I implied hes very fallible. Kerr’s rotations suck when he can’t roll out 4 all stars or have Curry go for 50. Shocker. He stinks. Nice job in 2023 Steve with a rotation of NBA players and all stars. 4th place.
I disagree with benching Tatum but I disagree more with using Bill Simmons in any argument. The Tatum thing I go in on to see what lengths you’ll defend your binky.
Edit: Kerr def not vengeful I do agree with that. Common ground!
To be clear before someone jumps down my throat, I was not suggesting that Kerr should have benched Curry.Quote:
Originally Posted by brutah
I'm not even suggesting that Tatum should have played big minutes. Merely suggesting that the only guy on your team who was 1st team all-NBA should not receive a DNP-CD let alone 2, against Serbia, if for no other reason than respect.
For ex, every player on the 1992 team -- including Laettner -- played in every game (except for injured players). Chuck Daly got it.
The 1992 team's closest game was a 28 point victory. They won their semi-final (where the US had to come back to nip Serbia) by 51 points! There wasn't any real worry about putting the best team out there as they were simply too good for any other team across the board. With that said, I don't know why Kerr couldn't have found Tatum some minutes in the first Serbia game. It was comfortable for the whole fourth quarter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
I get that. But we're talking about Tatum as if he is an end of teh bench scrub playing against the best in the world, and finding him minutes was so tough. The team we are talking about -- Serbia -- had 2 NBA players on it. They are a good team, but if the US is struggling against them, then maybe those players that ARE getting playing time aren't doing a great job. Serbia may have the best player, but the US had the next best dozen. So the notion that we have to play very specific lineups and Tatum doesn't play because he is a bad matchup -- when truly, how many guys on Serbia are better than Tatum -- is misplaced. It's not like he had to play the 5 and cover Jokic.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusBrody
Not all missed shots are the same. Say a rim rattler vs hitting the side of the backboard from the corner. Tatum looked off the whole time.
I'm sure that Kerr could have found a way to play Tatum and still win - especially in the first Serbia game. But his goal wasn't to play Tatum, it was to win. Tatum had a negative +/- in the two games leading up to the Olympics, DNP'd the first game, then started and had a negative +/- in a blowout win vs. South Sudan. He had a negative +/- in the final, despite it being another double digit US win. In the two games he was on the positive side of +/-, every single person on the team was positive in both games (save maybe Halliburton in one of them). He didn't have a game where he was over 50% from the field and shot 38% for the tournament. The game before his second DNP, he was 1/5 for 5 points in 20 minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
I think that Tatum is a really good player, but besides giving him "respect" or playing him because of NBA awards, it doesn't seem egregious that he wasn't getting tons of minutes over other guys on the team. Now, you can argue that him not playing well was due to Kerr misusing him somehow, but given that the team was successful, you would have to believe that the changes needed to get the best out of Tatum would have made the team better overall. Unless you just are saying "Kerr could have put him in for 3 min to avoid the indignity of a NDP-CD".
My point is definitely not that he should have been getting tons of minutes over other guys, it is definitely much more your last sentence. I would also argue that the team wasn't all that successful. Yes, they won the gold medal and ultimately that is all that matters. But they were playing inferior teams and struggling to beat them, so playing him or not playing him doesn't seem like the linchpin to winning or losing. Now, I am not saying that playing Tatum more would have changed the team performance, not at all. I am saying that clinging to this notion that they won so obviously everything Kerr did was right seems misguided. And given that, given that they were not actually playing that well and Kerr was going with a big rotation to begin with, then yeah, as a matter of respect you don't give him 2 DNP-CDs.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusBrody
I mean, they only struggled in one game (Serbia), while playing against the best player in the world and a set of hot shooting teammates. Even in the France game, they never really looked likely to lose (though France did make it a bit spicy getting it down to 3). The friendlies in the run up weren't great, but they pretty much cruised in the actual Olympics save the second Serbia game. And in that game, once they went down, I think Kerr had to play the team that he felt provided the best chance to comeback, so no real qualms there about doing what he felt he needed to do. As I think I mentioned earlier, I don't know why he couldn't find a few minutes in the first Serbia game, though, as the US was up big in the fourth and I'd imagine that you'd want everyone to get their feet under them. It was kind of odd to see Tatum get a DNP then follow it with a start.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
International basketball competition is a lot better now vs then. Players on teams like France and Serbia also have more playing time together as a team, often years, compared with Team USA who only have weeks to prepare for the Olympics.
UHHHH Dude , you’re a next level clown complaining you were taken out of context in responding to my claim which you took out of context. Congrats and take a lap in your clown car if there’s room for your ego. FfsQuote:
Originally Posted by Danno
Tattum’s 3 point shot was off for all of the playoffs and a while before they started. I had read he needs wrist surgery. If it is the case he put it off to play in the Olympics. Because he has such a calm demeanor I don’t think fans of other teams realize how tough he is. He rarely misses games and plays through injury not talking about it
This, especially. Then, FIBA is different. Tatum played behind 1st team All-Stars. Kerr actually does know what he’s doing, as does Lu, Spoelstra, Few, Grant, and all the staff.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
Et-fucking-cetera. On-and-fucking-on. (I like Tatum, BTW, but if I’m being nice, the US team just had no time to just try somebody out and see how they work, and believe me they did it in the few practices they had).
Attachment 498150
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Interesting pod: https://open.spotify.com/episode/0UC...SGO6zeKyAghP3g
Would be curious to see what people say after listening to the podcast.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Attachment 498379
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Kinda wild that my feed was full of people who didn’t know who Kerr was.
It’s still crazy to think about Kerr getting taunted in college with “PLO” and “Where’s Your Father” chants after his dad was assassinated. Possibly the most fucked up taunt in sports history. I’d want to bomb the whole damn arena in his shoes.
Bump.
My first instinct was that the trade made sense for both teams, but after thinking about it... this is great for the Knicks and not so great for Minnesota. I understand why Minnesota felt like they needed to do something, but a front court of Gobert and Randle is gonna be brick city.
It basically means no teams wanted Gobert and his contract, so they had to move KAT instead.
Did the Knicks get better by adding Towns? Given health, they’re probably a better playoff matchup, but they lose depth and that may hurt them in the regular season.
And, did the T-Wolves get rid of Towns a year too early? They went far last year and Edwards can keep improving. I know they wanted to get off almost $50M a year salary, but I don’t think Randle makes them better in 24-25. DDV is a nice add, but putting Randle next to Gobert doesn’t work well. They’re gonna need to play Naz Reid with Randle more often.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
For Minnesota this trade was 100% brought to you by our sponsors: the 2nd Apron.
yeah, it was news to me... it's going to take a few years for teams to adjust to the new rules. there are going to be some weird trades coming up
It’s ironic that the 2nd apron hurts teams with lots of top end talent now that the Dubs are down.Quote:
Originally Posted by TahoeJ
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
It’s honestly really dumb. What happened with the Warriors was just luck and not really exploiting anything in the CBA at the time. Curry on a super cheap contract when he became MVP level, combined with a huge spike in the salary cap at the perfect time. It was an outlier and not really something that could be repeated.Quote:
Originally Posted by 54-46
Hopefully next time they will reward teams for keeping players they drafted by lessening their cap hit or including bonus exceptions. All of this player movement was kind of fun when it started but now it mostly sucks and there’s no franchise continuity.
Boston is going to have some salary issues, you think? Expensive championship team.
In the short term I don’t think Boston will care about losing the MLE or having their picks go to the end of the line (not a big deal if you’d be picking like 28 or 29 and it goes back to 31). It will just come down to a crazy luxury tax bill. Whomever ends up buying that team (they’re still for sale last I heard) better have the stomach for it.
If they go back to back then the pressure will really be on to run it back again.
Btw - one huge advantage in having an owner who isn’t just wealthy but also makes a shit ton of money every year is if they can show an operating loss for the franchise it offsets their taxable income elsewhere. So that $200M luxury tax may only cost them around $140M, for example. Nevermind depreciation and other loopholes.
Better find a new owner with deep pockets. Stat.Quote:
Originally Posted by TahoeJ
I'm curious what people think about Randle's impact on the Wolves chemistry: is it going to hurt their vibe? It seems like they had fun, collaborative team environment and I don't know what Randle will do to that. (I don't know much about him but he doesn't seem like a great teammate? Maybe Ant can get him to buy-in?)Quote:
Originally Posted by 54-46
Randle can be a little grumpy from what I hear from my die hard Knicks friends, and he needs the ball in his hands. Know who else needs the ball in his hands and is much better? Ant. Should be interesting.
RIP to Dikembe Mutombo.
A giant on and off the court.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
As someone that smokes weed now and then, Scoot oughta lay off that shit a bit.
https://x.com/casualtakeking/status/...Q80BvcvhhV778w
Edit: WTF with Jimmy Buckets, no funny shit? The Heat were the first team I checked on media day to see what Jimmy had in store for us, disappointed.