in these, the waning days of stern: 2013-2014 NBA regular season thread (part 1)

Lmao

ahhh yes roommate otm, i was rooting so hard for the blazers too and not just cause i h8 the lakers that team was sweet

http://m.sporcle.com/games/jfey5/0009NBAMVP

got 138 but having the team names felt like cheating

― k3vin k., Saturday, December 21, 2013 10:38 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the two i missed in 2005 are completely bizarre

Missed Brandon Roy

How quickly we forget

the two i missed in 2005 are completely bizarre

― call all destroyer, Sunday, December 22, 2013 10:48 AM (12 minutes ago) Bookmark

Camby and PJ? Me too

yeah--camby only started 66 games that year (on top of them both having completely unremarkable stats)

i got 134

the lesson of that quiz for me was that i totally forgot carlos boozer played for utah

booz was so good for a while

Yeah he was good in Utah. So was dwill.

Feel like every PF did well in Sloane's pick and roll setup tho

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BcG8rakCQAA0r6M.jpg

reggie jackson is looking p dece

Is Mr. OKCtober too good?
Reggie Jackson has exploded, but will the Thunder be able to keep him?
Updated: December 19, 2013, 10:28 PM ET
By Tom Haberstroh | ESPN Insider

In case you haven't noticed, the Thunder are juggernauts again. They're 20-4, which is the best record in the NBA. And they've achieved that lofty record despite the sixth-toughest strength of schedule in the league thus far. With 10 victories over winning teams -- no other team has more than eight -- they've earned the top spot on the Hollinger Power Rankings with a comfortable cushion over the rest of the league.

Kevin Durant is playing like an MVP once again, pushing his ceiling to seemingly impossible heights. Russell Westbrook is back, registering a Westbrook-like 23.2 PER in December. Only one other player can match Serge Ibaka's 14.6 points, 9.5 rebounds and 2.3 blocks per game this season, and he was drafted No. 1 overall a year ago -- Anthony Davis.

We knew the OKC trio was good. We just didn't know teammate Reggie Jackson would be this good, this quickly. This season, he is averaging 12.0 points, 3.5 assists and 3.8 rebounds per game. Not impressed? Well, those numbers are deflated because he's playing as a reserve. He is averaging 17.6 points, 5.1 assists and 5.6 rebounds per 36 minutes while shooting 47.5 percent from the floor. As I pointed out in last week's episode of The Big Number, the list of players who can match those totals is a short one: LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Manu Ginobili.

Yeah, Jackson's good. But OKC fans might be dreading that he's too good. Here's why: One of the ironclad rules during general manager Sam Presti's tenure in OKC is he does not let his young studs get to free agency. Sign them to an extension before their rookie deal expires or flip them to another team for more assets. Jackson is eligible for an extension in July.

The small-market organization can't afford to let the open market set the prices. Faced with the possibility that his young player could walk away for nothing, Presti has made his policy clear: extend early or trade before it's too late.

Presti is serious about this rule. Just ask James Harden, who was traded four days before the final season of his rookie contract began. Look at Jeff Green, who was starting for the division-leading Thunder before he was dealt midseason in 2010-11.

Is Jackson next?

This is where OKC fans hope the alternate ending hits. Jackson has one more season left on his contract after this one, so the Thunder have some time to figure out his future. But he is boosting his price tag seemingly every game. At 23, Jackson is earning just $1.3 million this season and is due $2.2 million next season before his contract is up. The Thunder already have about $50 million dedicated to their star trio -- Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka -- in 2015-16, which is when Jackson's possible extension would kick in.

Here's the good news: The Kendrick Perkins albatross will expire that summer. Assuming Presti does not have a fetish for turnovers and pouting, Perkins won't be re-signed at big money, which would lift nearly $10 million off the books. The Thunder could fit Jackson into that space, assuming that he doesn't attract max offers from other teams in the same way that Harden did.

But Jackson is not as productive as Harden was at this age and likely wouldn't garner an eight-figure salary in 2015-16. That math changes if Jackson develops a 3-point shot. He already is an elite penetrator and finisher at the level of Harden, but the Boston College product has lacked a complementary jumper.

However, that might be a thing of the past. In 24 games this season, Jackson already has made more midrange jumpers than he did in 70 games last season. Jackson converted 35.4 of his shots in that area last season and is now up to 47.2 percent. His 3-point shot efficiency also has risen from an awful 23.1 percent last season to 29.3 percent. If Jackson continues to develop his perimeter game, the Sixth Man of the Year Award will be his. And then some.

Jackson is getting better and already views himself as a starter in the league. When recently asked by The Oklahoman about whether he saw himself as a starter in the NBA, Jackson gave an ominous (to OKC fans) response.

"Why not?" Jackson said. "To be the best, I think you eventually have to get to a starting role and you have to do it consistently. Thirty-plus minutes night in and night out and get championships. So that's the thing that motivates me each and every day and what I strive for."

Jackson doesn't have a starting gig. And he's not averaging 30 minutes night in and night out. The Thunder hope that Jackson doesn't follow in Harden's footsteps, looking for a starting opportunity and a star's salary, because he probably won't find it in OKC.

The Thunder have been notoriously stubborn about their starting lineup even though it's getting clobbered by a margin of 10.1 points every 100 possessions this season, according to NBA.com. Jackson has played with the starting personnel in place of Thabo Sefolosha for just 20 of his 590 minutes this season. The Thunder have outscored opponents by seven in those 20 minutes, if you were wondering. Even better: Jackson in place of Perkins, where the score is 91-59 OKC in 40 minutes of action.

Jackson deserves more playing time, but he is playing behind a top-10 player in Westbrook. Perhaps Jackson could supplant Westbrook one day and allow the Thunder to find similar production at a discount price. But breaking up one of the top duos in the game doesn't seem prudent for a small-market team that has them locked up through 2016-17.

Ultimately, this is a good problem to have. OKC has produced yet another Sixth Man of the Year candidate out of nowhere to complement its stud trio.

Rest assured, the majority of NBA front offices would gladly trade their problems for OKC's "dilemma" of having too much young talent. Two summers ago, OKC fans wondered if Jackson could step in and be the next Harden. They'd better hope the impression goes only so far.

if scotty brooks doesnt stop playing perk and fisher i might murder him

Looking forward to the 60 Minutes exposé on Perk blackmailing Brooks to stay in the league.

Also, is this old interview between Minny-era Garnett and John Thompson common knowledge for people? Somehow had never seen it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ef-f7EeDpYI

(ftr, the clip is just Garnett breaking into tears of frustration because he's playing for a losing team)

huge win for the raptors on the road in OKC. Guess they're making the playoffs.

i don't really hate these wolves jerseys. clips' are an eyesore tho

man both of these benches are horrendous

I love that KG interview and I knew he would finally accept a trade one day watching it

Occasionally when I have a tough day I just look into space and say

I'm LOSING man...LOSING -wistful stare-

You might as well cgi Kevin love into that same footage right now and play it before his introductory press conference for the celtics in summer 2015

i don't really hate these wolves jerseys. clips' are an eyesore tho

― k3vin k., Sunday, December 22, 2013 9:54 PM (41 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

not totally in love w the baby blue clips ones but aren't they partially a buffalo braves throwback

The minny ones otoh look like a Turkish junior league uniform or something

griffin is shooting close to 80 percent from the line this month, including this game

76%

pek is just feasting

would the wolves trade us pek for javale and miller? their GM is pretty dumb right?

i'll throw in tim or hickson too and a second rounder

71 and 29 for love/pek tonight

clippers maybe should've addressed the frontcourt...............................

I love that KG interview and I knew he would finally accept a trade one day watching it

Occasionally when I have a tough day I just look into space and say

I'm LOSING man...LOSING -wistful stare-

― z-time champion (agent hibachi), Sunday, December 22, 2013 10:33 PM (45 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

LOSING, BIG JOHN.

Especially struck me because he looks so cinematic. Looking down, shaking his head, and his eyes pop back up to look at Thompson. "Losing." Swear that could be A footage for his reel and he'd legit have no problem finding work.

Even though he's obviously an outlier when it comes to competitive play, that whole clip is such an obvious anecdata point for how important unquantifiables like effort, intensity, etc., are. Like, people can say that "chemistry" and "hard work" are way overblown / doesn't exist, but I think you'd be bonkers if you thought that Lance could exist in his current form without the crazy internal support structure / methods for handling him and his play that the Pacers have. I don't think he rides the bench for two years if there isn't someone like Larry Bird to say, "Hey, you really have insane potential but guess what, you're nowhere near sniffing a rotation spot because your game is completely deficient, have fun working hard in practice and relearning basketball from the bench." And last year, when he became an actual player, I think there are a ton of coaches -- some great coaches -- who couldn't have accepted his style of play and would've benched him continually, to the point where he would've just regressed / acted out. Vogel has had infinite patience with Good Lance and Bad Lance.

Swear that, in these first 25+ games, he's probably been the most exciting game-to-game player the Pacers have ever had. He's one of the only players in the league right now where there is literally never a dull moment when he has the ball. I don't think, in a different situation, his teammates would be as good at knowing when to reign him in / letting him ball out of control as West/Hibbert/PG/Hill have been; and, I don't know if Lance (someone with a long history of not giving a fuck) decides to play along. It's just that this year he's become a totally joyous passer, just totally in love with passing, and on-court it's so obvious that he's putting in a level of effort that other NBA players just don't bring, he wouldn't play at that level if that chemistry weren't there, and it's all making him a special player.

Basically Lance this whole season = http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zXzVOVhIlBI/UreSxpMwjRI/AAAAAAAAAkU/neoAMHX0FiY/s400/l22.gif

WOW

paul gets cheated out of a FT yet again because the refs won't give him a shooting foul on that. unbelievable

Even though he's obviously an outlier when it comes to competitive play, that whole clip is such an obvious anecdata point for how important unquantifiables like effort, intensity, etc., are. Like, people can say that "chemistry" and "hard work" are way overblown / doesn't exist,

― Call me Shitmael (CompuPost), Monday, December 23, 2013 12:08 AM (24 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

looool dude u realize anecdata is a satirical term for the tendency to draw overarching conclusions from anecdotal evidence not one thats used as part of that process, and who exactly is saying hard work doesnt exist? what are you talking about

i think a lot of the problem people have with intangibles talk like chemistry etc isnt that its unquantifiable its that its proponents dont have anything resembling a coherent definition of what it is or how it works

it involves leadership, and character, and ability to deal with lance stevenson or something

only good teams ever have it, bad teams to not, is it a resutl of winning, is it a cause, is it just general winningness, no one really knows

teams often attribute it to liking each other, except when they dont, see kobe/shaq, bird/mchale

or they say its cause theyve got a lot of quality guys, except when there best players are psychopathic egomaniacs kobe/jordan

looool dude u realize anecdata is a satirical term for the tendency to draw overarching conclusions from anecdotal evidence not one thats used as part of that process, and who exactly is saying hard work doesnt exist? what are you talking about

― lag∞n, Monday, December 23, 2013 12:44 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Figured "anecdata point" was kinda driving the point home that I'm talking about something that can't be quantified / verified w/ hard statistical data. It's almost as if I were lightly using it ... satirically.

I'm basically talking about these intangible things things being waaaaay undervalued.

Ha, kinda case in point.

you are talking about something that you have absolutely no working definition for

... or the problem is that working definitions of stuff like this happens to be way more complicated to work out than someone's TS%.

you cannot begin to define what you mean because u dont mean anything

chemistry is something that all good teams have and that no bad teams have is it something different that just being good at basketball

lagoon do u honestly want to read a 20¶ post trying to work toward a definition of good team chemistry? Seems like a losing prop for all involved.

and idk I think the Celtics look like a shitty team with good chemistry, which is why I'd bet on them to overperform, same goes for Bulls this season and last.

so chemistry is what we call the amount a team over performs its projection

in which case the pacers have no chemistry?

Also kinda weird that you're strawmanning intangibles as The Only Important Things when really they couple along w/ all the other fun stuff like mid-range FG% and TO/assist ratios.

oh my fucking lol god at straw man accusations from buy who claims people thing hard work doesnt exist