Posts

Showing posts with the label basketball

Does every basketball fan who does not watch the NBA...

Repeat the same two reasons why? It certainly seems so, since everyone who explains to me why they don't watch the NBA says: "I watch college basketball, but I don't watch the pros because: "1) They don't play defense; and "2) Only the last couple of minutes of a game are exciting." As for number one, it is true that with an 82-game schedule, the players have to pick the spots in which to go all out. When you are a 19-year-old college player, you can impress your coach by futilely racing down the court after a player going in for a breakaway layup. But in the pros, you know the guy is going to make it, and you need to save your legs. But do the pros not play defense? Absurd. Or, in most games the charge is absurd. When is it accurate? During the All-Star game. And then you get scores such as 152 to 149 , or 154 to 149 . Meanwhile, the scores of NBA games last night were 98-96, 116-94, 104-92, 102-88, 101-95, 107-88, and 118-103. Not a single t...

Is This Move Rational?

In college basketball, when a star player gets his fourth foul, coaches usually sit him for a long time, to save him for the end of the game. I've often wondered if this makes any sense. Here is my case for doubting that it does: 1) You don't know how long it will be before foul five, so you run a high risk of benching a player for too long. For instance, perhaps he would have gone ten minutes before getting foul five, but the coach holds him out until only five minutes are left in the game: five minutes were "wasted" playing without the fellow. 2) The usual response to this would be, I think, "But we need to make sure he is on the floor at the end of the game" Why? Baskets in the first minute of a game count for exactly the same number of points as those in the last minute. Let's say the star who was held out brings his team from ten down to win by one in the last five minutes. The coach will claim vindication: "See, he saved the game for us...

Aren't These Twenties Lying on 34th Street?

The Knicks have two highly efficient shooters on the team: Steve Novak hits 48% of his threes, while Tyson Chandler hits 69% of his shots. The gives them adjusted field goal percentages of 67% and 69% respectively. Meanwhile, Carmelo Anthony has an AFG% of 43%. Yet Anthony shoots nearly twice as many shots per game as... Chandler? Novak? No, he shoots nearly twice as many shots per game as the two of them combined . So the Knicks offense is continually passing up a 7 in 10 shot at a bucket for a 4 in 10 shot. Am I the only one who sees something wrong here?