Anfernee Simons is unbelievable

[BBert]

That's, like, one of the greatest things I've ever seen, man.

 

[illmatic99]

I will never understand how that "gather" step by Ant isn't a travel.



Dame's sidestep, pound dribble looks a lot cleaner.

 

[DDolla]

Friday tweet of the Day

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I will never understand how that "gather" step by Ant isn't a travel.



Dame's sidestep, pound dribble looks a lot cleaner.

I had the same thought. I was looking at that clip frame-by-frame to see if it was.

Looks like hand is off the ball while the left foot is off the ground, then the foot comes down and the hand hits the ball simultaneously. Then two steps on the sidestep. Looks sketchy in real-time, but I have to call it legit.

 

[illmatic99]

I had the same thought. I was looking at that clip frame-by-frame to see if it was.

Looks like hand is off the ball while the left foot is off the ground, then the foot comes down and the hand hits the ball simultaneously. Then two steps on the sidestep. Looks sketchy in real-time, but I have to call it legit.

View attachment 45461

it's legal, he's put in a lot of work to get that footwork clearly, but still looks odd to me. Steph/Kyrie/Harden have that move down to a science. (tatum does it a lot too, but his looks a bit more clunky cuz of his height).

 

[PtldPlatypus]

it's legal, he's put in a lot of work to get that footwork clearly, but still looks odd to me. Steph/Kyrie/Harden have that move down to a science. (tatum does it a lot too, but his is a bit more clunky).

Yeah--it's close enough that it wouldn't surprise me to see him get a few travel calls on that move.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

obviously, mj and kobe were on whole other levels, but watching this reminds me of watching Kobe’s emulations of MJ.

 

[Strenuus]

I will never understand how that "gather" step by Ant isn't a travel.



Dame's sidestep, pound dribble looks a lot cleaner.

Same. I had to rewatch it a few times. I think it's because it's just one step with his right foot, plants then lands with his left and shoots. I think that's why. My eyes have decieved me before but that's what I... Gathered. Ha!

 

[Natebishop3]

obviously, mj and kobe were on whole other levels, but watching this reminds me of watching Kobe’s emulations of MJ.

The funny thing though was that Kobe even tried to emulate Jordan's persona.

Ant and Dame are very very different in terms of personality. Ant might replicate Dame's offense, but I'm not sure if I see him becoming the leader that Dame is.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The funny thing though was that Kobe even tried to emulate Jordan's persona.

Ant and Dame are very very different in terms of personality. Ant might replicate Dame's offense, but I'm not sure if I see him becoming the leader that Dame is.

I don't think he wants to be the leader Dame is. I imagine he still views Dame as the leader, and has no interest in usurping his role.

 

[Natebishop3]

I don't think he wants to be the leader Dame is. I imagine he still views Dame as the leader, and has no interest in usurping his role.

Sure but there are natural leaders. Dame didn't want to step on LMA's toes when he joined the team either. He was just naturally the kind of guy that people follow. He's a true type A kind of guy. He doesn't need to demand that people follow him. They just do it naturally and that's what drove LMA crazy. He could never understand true leadership. Ant is more of a wall flower. Super quiet.

 

[blazerkor]

sure...that's a good point too because that was the playoffs Portland got swept by the Pels. But let's be clear: the reason for that sweep was a failure of the offense, not the defense (although I guess you could say that Nurkic could not defend AD).

but the Pels exploited Portland's Achilles Heel that other teams, notably the Warriors have exploited: that being that when the ball was taken out of Dame's hands, the Blazer offense collapsed. CJ could not make the other team pay for the Dame-centric defense, and he couldn't run the offense well enough, nor did it have other weapons effective enough.

that's where large servings of hope come in:

1) Will Simons be better at being the outlet option than CJ was? Will he be better at initiating the offense? Is he talented enough, unlike CJ, to consistently punish an imbalanced defense twisted toward Dame? I think the early returns are positive. Simons seems to have better court vision than CJ (at least he does when driving right), he seems to dribble less and make quicker decisions. And his perimeter game is much more like Dame than CJ's (although his dribble-drive game is too much like CJ's...get to the damn foul line Ant!)

2) is Billups, as a coach, better equipped to design a defense that covers for the Dame/Ant pairing than Stotts was at designing a defense that covered the Dame/CJ pairing? Will the Billups motion offense be harder to defend than the 'iso-heavy-Dame-save-us!' offense of Stotts?

3) finally, and perhaps most important: Does Cronin really have a plan? Will he be able to add the players between now and the trade deadline next season, that complements the Dame/Ant pairing enough to make that pairing viable? I think with Nurkic-Hart-Winslow-lottery pick(s)-TPE's he has a pretty nice start

when I look at that extremely objective and logical list of extremely intelligent and insightful questions I generated out of my extremely gifted colon, I'm more hopeful now than I was at any time over the last 7 seasons. Bow down to my colon man

I won't bow down to your colon butt I do think those are great questions that lead any logical thinking person to the conclusion that this has a better chance of working than I've been giving it.

 

[wizenheimer]

I had the same thought. I was looking at that clip frame-by-frame to see if it was.

Looks like hand is off the ball while the left foot is off the ground, then the foot comes down and the hand hits the ball simultaneously. Then two steps on the sidestep. Looks sketchy in real-time, but I have to call it legit.

View attachment 45461

technically...I think it is a travel because he takes 3 steps after picking the dribble. I think it's also a violation of the 'spirit' of the rule because those steps create an advantage. The reality is the NBA often awards successful and pretty plays because they are pretty

but it is a close call and I've seen when players have taken 7 or 8 steps and not be called

 

[STOMP]

*heroes

Is spelling too hard for you?

SCALMA

Spelling Police LOL!!! Hard to imagine how a more feeble response. Did you roll on your back, wimper and take a leak after that post? Good grief man...

STOMP

 

[STOMP]

This is a hot debate that I don't like to get into, because people get mad. However, while some focus on "small backcourt", I wonder where the 2nd all star is. Since LMA left, Dame has never been paired with an all star - at any position.

So, in s2 crazy talk, my opinion is "Get Dame a fucking all star to play with, and then we'll see if the small backcourt is actually a problem."

An All-Star would be nice, but I'll take a star scoring guard (like Dame or Ant) surrounded by solid team players with size/length who D up.

"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group — that's teamwork. The star of the team is the team." John Wooden

STOMP

 

[Wizard Mentor]

An All-Star would be nice, but I'll take a star scoring guard (like Dame or Ant) surrounded by solid team players with size/length who D up.

"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group — that's teamwork. The star of the team is the team." John Wooden

STOMP

If you Ok with that, I have no problem. But....
How many teams have won NBA championships in the last 15 years with only 1 all star? That's my concern.

 

[STOMP]

Reminds me of the logic when fans here questioned why we would want to draft CP3 after watching Stoudamire get exploited for 7 years. Like somehow they were the same player just because they were both under 6 ft.

Having had some formative years in Winston-Salem, I was a huge Chris Paul fan and was crushed to see Portland pass on the opportunity to draft him. The board was in love with John Nash's incredible wisdom (he'd answer your email!) and his pick from the year prior, Sebastian Telfair. I kept pointing out during Telfair's rookie year that he couldn't shoot, but the board was sure would turn into a huge star and they didn't want two sub 6 footers paired in the backcourt.

STOMP

 

[blazerfan11]

If you Ok with that, I have no problem. But....
How many teams have won NBA championships in the last 15 years with only 1 all star? That's my concern.

You need 2 All Stars and at least one player who is an All Star and All Defensive Team member.
If you have two All Stars and neither is a notable defender, you're not winning a championship.
The second all star may arise after the team starts winning a lot of games. What Lillard or Ant needs is an NBA All defensive team member, or someone who could be that in the future.

 

[BonesJones]

Lol, whatever. I take no pleasure in reading fanboy pretend time takes of how big you want your heros to be. Is reality too hard for you?

I'm rooting for the team to make decisions that help them to compete for championships in reality. In reality, teams continually exploit Portland's small backcourt. To best accomplish that winning stuff, a SG needs to be big enough to be able to be switched off onto a SF.

STOMP

Yeah man, Austin Rivers posting up CJ was why we lost last year...

 

[BonesJones]

You need 2 All Stars and at least one player who is an All Star and All Defensive Team member.
If you have two All Stars and neither is a notable defender, you're not winning a championship.
The second all star may arise after the team starts winning a lot of games. What Lillard or Ant needs is an NBA All defensive team member, or someone who could be that in the future.

Basketball doesn't really work like that. Nobody on Phoenix was an all-defensive team AND all-star guy last year and they got to Game 6 of the Finals in a very competitive series. The all-star selection process for individual players is a terrible way to guage whats possible for a TEAM.

If you have two stars and a role player, why is having the star be the elite defender better than the role player? Does that really make the team better simply because the guy who's good on offense is the good defender over the guy that's just a role guy offensively?

There's so many arbitrary evaluation systems thrown around that doesn't really get to the point. The teams combination of offense and defense has to be good enough to compete and then the breaks have to go your way. There's no arbitrary cutoff line that determines whether you absolutely can compete or absolutely can't.

Ant and Dame do need good defenders around them so I don't disagree with that. But 3 really good defenders that are non-defensive team guys is better than one all-defense elite defender and two average guys.

Also, average defenders can put together an above average defense by playing hard, playing on a string, communicating, and executing whatever the gameplan is. A teams defense is never exactly the sum of its individual parts.

 

[bobf]

How is length of time relevant? They have the proof of concept. It worked for them, it works for us now.

When was the last time when neither was a good defender though.

 

[blazerfan11]

Having had some formative years in Winston-Salem, I was a huge Chris Paul fan and was crushed to see Portland pass on the opportunity to draft him. The board was in love with John Nash's incredible wisdom (he'd answer your email!) and his pick from the year prior, Sebastian Telfair. I kept pointing out during Telfair's rookie year that he couldn't shoot, but the board was sure would turn into a huge star and they didn't want two sub 6 footers paired in the backcourt.

STOMP

Basketball doesn't really work like that. Nobody on Phoenix was an all-defensive team AND all-star guy last year and they got to Game 6 of the Finals in a very competitive series. The all-star selection process for individual players is a terrible way to guage whats possible for a TEAM.

If you have two stars and a role player, why is having the star be the elite defender better than the role player? Does that really make the team better simply because the guy who's good on offense is the good defender over the guy that's just a role guy offensively?

There's so many arbitrary evaluation systems thrown around that doesn't really get to the point. The teams combination of offense and defense has to be good enough to compete and then the breaks have to go your way. There's no arbitrary cutoff line that determines whether you absolutely can compete or absolutely can't.

Ant and Dame do need good defenders around them so I don't disagree with that. But 3 really good defenders that are non-defensive team guys is better than one all-defense elite defender and two average guys.

Also, average defenders can put together an above average defense by playing hard, playing on a string, communicating, and executing whatever the gameplan is. A teams defense is never exactly the sum of its individual parts.

We are talking about winning the finals ( I believe). Phoenix didn't win. They lost 4 games in a row. That is not a competitive series. I'm looking at the history of the champions, not the teams who lost in the finals. Because of the way the NBA is set up (like most leagues) the two best teams don't necessarily make it to the finals.
I do agree that All Star and All Defense selections are arbitrary. It may come later or earlier. Chris Paul is a 12 time All Star and a 7 time All Defensive first team member.
Edit: Only by looking at history, it looks very very unlikely to win a championship with a team that has no All Defense Team members (whose selection may not be the year they win the championship).
Edit 2: To win a championship. really what you want is your best player to be one of the best players in the league. The only team I can think of where the best player wasn't an All Defensive Team member is Golden State, if you consider Steph Curry to be their best player. Golden State may be the template for such a team. But they have Draymond Green, who is a 4 time All Defensive first team member, and the defensive player of the year in 2017. And Klay Thompson, he's made the All Defensive 2nd team once.

 

[OneSport3]

 

[Pinwheel1]

45% catch and shoot percentage from beyond the arch. That bodes well while playing with Dame.

 

[bobf]

Spelling Police LOL!!! Hard to imagine how a more feeble response. Did you roll on your back, wimper and take a leak after that post? Good grief man...

STOMP

*not a sentence

 

[bobf]

45% catch and shoot percentage from beyond the arch. That bodes well while playing with Dame.

He is also above 50% this year on from 3-16 ft out. That’s compared to Dame’s 38% and CJ 45% career.

If he can just figure out how to play D and how to get to the line... super star...

 

[KSF-ERIC]

Just remember- Simons had 37 and 9 in his first start of his career, last night of the season. Maybe he was always this good? But had to wait his turn behind Dame?

 

[KSF-ERIC]

Honestly, like I just said in the game thread the game against the Nets on March 18th will be nine weeks and one day after Dame's surgery, a surgery that takes four to six weeks to recover from. Dame should be back by then because we will be competitive.

Wait what? Last I heard from you, we were going to lose 13 in a row! Like literally like a week ago.

 

[Idog1976]

Just remember- Simons had 37 and 9 in his first start of his career, last night of the season. Maybe he was always this good? But had to wait his turn behind Dame?

Behind CJ it seems. I remember that game well its when I first caught a glimpse of what we are seeing now. I thought for sure he’d take ofd the next season but Stotts was gonna Stotts. So grateful he finally got his chance. He’s gonna be special.

 

[blazerkor]

Wait what? Last I heard from you, we were going to lose 13 in a row! Like literally like a week ago.

Stop trolling me man. The team is better than I thought it would be. I'm not alone in that. You go extremely positive every time. You are wrong a helluva lot. Most people have just decided to tune out your nonsense. So when you go positive every time it's just like when Aldo goes negative every time, sometimes you will be right and most people that take an approach that is more nuanced than worshiping everything this team does will be wrong but if I took the time to find all of your Stotts loving bullshit, your Olshey is always right nonsense, your takes about what success for our team is, your terrible predictions about series that we would win... I would be spending all of my time showing you all of the times you're wrong. I have no interest in doing that.

Again, I was wrong. I get things wrong a lot but seriously your perspective on this team is fundamentally wrong, we can fuck up, we do fuck up, we're never as good as you say we are... if we were we would have won a shit ton more playoff series than we have over the past decade. I don't usually mind your reckless optimism but get the the fuck off of my back.