The NBA Thread.

Seriously, it's one [uck fay]ing game. In LA. The Bucks also didn't have George Hill, who will be an important part of their playoff run. They won't even play each other, if both make it that far, for nearly three damn months, either.

And, I did not "continue to prop up anything". But, you did decide to prop up that Clippers game and ignore the 30 point loss the Clippers incurred in Milwaukee with George and Kawhi, if we're doing the one game counts thing.

Toronto got hot at the right time last year. They also were a double OT game away from going down 3-0 to the Bucks last year in the Eastern Conference Finals. To think there's some great chasm the Bucks can't ever overcome or things will stay as they always have is silly.

 

The East falls off a cliff after Philly (#6). The West stays competitive for a playoff spot through #11 or #12. There's a reason Phoenix (#13 in the West) has a higher winning percentage than the #9 team in the East. The West is just a better conference, both at the top and top to bottom.

Could you make an argument that the teams in the 3-6 slots are similarly dangerous in the playoffs? Maybe. I know I'd rather play Philly (#6), Indiana (#5), Miami (#4), and probably even Toronto (#2) before I'd want to play Houston. I also feel like Utah and Denver have a higher ceiling (if they can get it together in the playoffs) than their counterparts in the East.

This whole back and forth started when Uni pointed out 3-1 against LA teams. I pointed out that that number doesn't necessarily reflect much of anything, as the Clippers weren't full strength against them either game and were missing their 2 stars in 1 of the 2. Would you agree with Uni, that 3-1 is 3-1, or would you put more stock in a Lakers win over the Bucks at full strength in March?

 

I haven't ignored anything. I haven't discounted any of the Bucks' wins over LA teams aside from the one in which Kawhi and PG didn't play.

We're trying to compare the 3 best teams in the league. There's not a huge sample size to choose from, and the teams don't play again this season. But I put a little more stock in the game that takes place in March over the games that took place in November and December. I get that it's one game, but it was much more reflective of what we will likely see in a playoff series, from a match up perspective. And it presented the same problem that ended the Bucks last season. If you hold Giannis somewhat in check, they don't have a good answer.

 

Boston is a huge question mark at this point. Tatum has only been the best of the 3 since February, and he's cooled down the last couple of games. If he can maintain that level of play moving forward, then yeah, he's the best of the 3, but he hasn't proven he can do that.

They've also lost 4 of their last 5, with the only win coming against Cleveland. 3 of those 4 losses came against Western teams in that #3-#6 slot I mentioned in my other post.

And I get that it's just one stretch of the season. They definitely have time to get back on track, but at the moment, they're not instilling a ton of confidence in anyone watching them.

 

Middleton is an All-Star who hit a shooting slump against Toronto. He just had 40 the other day and is averaging 21 a game. You don't get to the best record without having more than one dude.

But, yes, if you can limit someone's superstar, you can, generally, do well against a team.

 

Are you referencing his 39 on Sunday? That was against Phoenix. Or the 40 he had a couple weeks ago? That was against the Wizards. I'm not overly impressed by big scoring numbers against bottom feeders. Middleton isn't close to as good of a 2 as Anthony Davis, and I'd say Paul George is also a fair amount better, when healthy.

Downplay it all you want, but the Bucks imploded last year. They won their two home games like they were supposed to and then lost 4 in a row. The team is built around Giannis, so when he gets slowed down, so does everyone else. Did Middleton hit a shooting slump, or was he just exposed as not as good as his stats suggest? What about his 12 against the Lakers Friday? Another shooting slump?

 

Or, his 22 against Toronto, 25 and 31 against Philly, 24 against Denver.....But, no, he's not Anthony Davis. The idea there's no one other than Giannis is silly. They don't win this many games just with him and a collection of scrubs, unless he's just this good.

I didn't downplay anything. I know what happened. I also know most teams face a growing period before they win or compete for titles.

 

And? The only one which concerned me was the Phoenix game, even without Giannis. Very poor defense. Last night was their G-League team against the Nuggets. It was, basically, a forfeit.

Hell, the Lakers had a 4 game losing streak, lost to a bad Orlando team and you think they are head and shoulders above everyone else due to one game this past week. Every team has a slump. My confidence arises from the fact they have earned the best record with about 17 games left, have the MVP and will end up with a record which is on par with most dominant championship teams.

 

I've never said there is no one other than Giannis. I've said that the Bucks have not proven that they can win big time games when a top notch opponent shuts/slows down Giannis. They couldn't do it in the playoffs last season, and they couldn't do it this past Friday against the Lakers. That problem sticks out a lot more to me than their ability to dominate the bottom feeders of the Eastern Conference.

 

A 4 game losing streak.... in December....

Lost to a bad Orlando team.... without Anthony Davis....

And no, I do not think they are head and shoulders above everyone else. I'm pretty sure I just said the LA vs LA series will go 7, and whoever wins will beat the Bucks in 6. I think it's a virtual toss up between the Clippers and Lakers and may very well come down to who is healthier.

Also, Giannis doesn't have the MVP wrapped up just yet. Bron made up a ton of ground over the past few games, and now Giannis is out with an injury. The record is what it is. They had the best record in the NBA last year too.

 

Giannis already has the MVP from last year. And, why are teams which lose games without their full accompaniment of players an explanation for losses, yet for Milwaukee you say losing the last 4 of 5 is "not instilling confidence", despite their numerous missing pieces?

Also, yes, it was in December. Do the playoffs start tomorrow? December is also about as close to now as the NBA Finals are, so the time argument is meaningless, too. Teams get hot, get cold. Your arguments could easily be applied to either side.

 

What? My comment about losing 4 of the last 5 was in reference to Boston, if I'm not mistaken. Not Milwaukee.

 

Ok, my mistake.

 

Holy shit.

 

Jeebus

 

So, first, this:

"Gobert reportedly made it a point to touch the microphones and recorders of every reporter around him in the media room on Monday."

And now he's tested positive. [uck fay]ing monumental level of stupid.

 

Hold up, what? Like, he knew he was not feeling well and did that to be a [penis]?

 

More of a mocking the Coronavirus questions/concerns. Apparently, no major symptoms and he feels fine.

 

But he likely had it when he acted like a child and directly exposed anyone that had to handle that equipment after the interviews.