Me too. And I think we are finally getting to the point where we have the roster to do it, especially if we can plug the dreaded piss poor perimeter defense against point-guards problem.
Here it is. http://www.basketball-reference.com/ It shows each teams pace for each year. It shows pace factor if you click on the team and the specific year of the coach, as well as full NBA team stats if you click on the year.
I liked Lawson a lot last year when he came to camp. I think that would be a good pick for us. But we would have to move Blake. Something about Lawson says gold to me.
If a team is top 5 in efficiency without running...why run? I mean, isn't efficiency more important than running? I get the idea that it's better to run a little bit to get some easy hoops...but evidently we are getting a lot of easy hoops, or else we wouldn't be so efficient.
Thanks for the link, but I didn't find the fast break differential I was looking for. I wish someone like 82games.com would put together a formula based of the roster of a team, past and prior PACE with those teams compared to when the coach was there, and a few other stats to come up with a better picture. I thought you had a specific link that was a one-stop shop, but in all seriousness, thank you.
Some fans want entertainment more than they want wins. I think they'd rather us turn into the Suns than the Spurs.
You get no argument from me. I think there were some lost opportunities against good defensive teams last year because we let them get set up too often. Those are the teams we need to really try and hit before they set up. Aside from that, efficiency and defense win titles, and I can live with that.
It's been my opinion all along that we're after a PG, perferably Lawson as he's the easiest to attain and we will add a veteran PG (Kidd) to tutor him for a year or two. We will not start the year with one of the 3 current SF's nor with at least 1 and maybe 2 of our current PG's.
Great post Cake! When you put it that way, wow, I would be stoked to roll into next season with Hinrich/Lawson as our PGs.
Efficiency is helped by offense rebounding. We have amazing offensive rebounders that help mask our issues on offense.
True. But the same can not always be said about Nate's teams. His Seattle teams never had great rebounders.
This is true outside of the 2004-2005 year where he had a couple rebounders comparable to Joel (in particular Reggie Evans). They had no standout rebounders in the rest of the years but just about five to six guys each averaging around 5-6 rebounds. It is painful to see some of those offensive ratings next to porous defensive ratings though. For efficiency that is.
The question is not just whether the team SHOULD run, but whether Nate WANTS to. I don't care if we run, as long as we win... although I think that certain rosters are definitely built to run, I'm not sure this one is. Nate, though, DOES have a long and storied history of taking the air out of the ball, in spite of talking every year about "loosening the reins". I'm pretty convinced that he's just hot air on that front, and pointing the finger at Roy or other players after his teams consistently being slow seems disingenuous. Ed O.
