Reply With Quote
George Hill was terrible in that Memphis series so saying Green>Hill isn't a stretch.
Hill is the better overall player, but Green is the better fit.
As of today, I would take Green over Hill, especially on the defensive minded team we have now.
George Hill was terrible in that Memphis series so saying Green>Hill isn't a stretch.
Hill is the better overall player, but Green is the better fit.
Oh not much, how about you, got?
Last edited by Legacy; 05-20-2013 at 04:38 PM. Reason: added smilies, lol ...
In game 1 last year the Thunder had a 5 point lead in the 3rd and went into the fourth up. That was when Pop said he wanted some nasty and we came back and won.
In game 2 we were rolling the Thunder in the first half and Marv Alberts was comparing us to some 70's Knicks teams that he considered all time bests. However in that game, the Thunder started to switch on pnr and left Ibaka on our guards. Ibaka played some of the best perimeter defense from a big I have ever seen. Parker and Manu could not shake him. We held on to win but it was obvious that OKC had found a solution. They used said solution along with exposing Bonner and Duncan on pnr to beat the out of us 4 games straight.
Memphis wasn't even compe ive outside of a 1:30 stretch in the third quarter where Neal played ty perimeter defense and let Pondexter score 8 points on 3 possessions and Duncan made an equally ty pass giving Mem a dunk. Memphis tried to switch on our pnr and Parker and Manu ate it up because Arthur and Gasol don't have the length or athleticism of Ibaka. I twas a big reason why we had so many wide open looks.
People keep talking nebulous bull about how Mem is resilient and tough etc but tactically they were far from finding an answer.
Great one game analysis of Memphis' entire season. So by your logic, you would be surprised if Memphis wins a game?
No I am saying that OKC was much more compe ive vs us in our two wins last year than Memphis was yesterday. Do you disagree? We can go over the game logs if you like.
I didn't even discuss Memphis' season beyond nebulous characterizations by others.
I will say that our defense against teams trying to feed post players has been good both yesterday and vs the Lakers.
So tactically what do you see the Grizzlies doing to defend our pnr, feed the ball into the post, overcome our gang rebounding or anything else the failed to do yesterday? You just going to stick with 'they are resilient?'
You have pretty consistently hinted that "Memphis vaunted defense" is perhaps not all that good. You keep saying basically that all the people talking about Memphis positively and commenting on their resiliency are just stating bull and that Memphis has shown nothing to stop the Spurs. So what is the end game to you? With all that you said (mem defense being overrated, having nothing they can essentially do to adjust, that they aren't resilient...) what are you trying to say? Do you see them winning a game? Because your comments seem to suggest you would not only be surprised, but shocked if they do.
Also, lol at you acting like I said something generic and crazy when I posted proof of me saying the things you tried to say well before you said them
And you can make up all the excuses in the world about their opponent, but for a team that is basically wildly overrated on what they are known for, they sure did show some resiliency this playoffs by coming back on LAC from 0-2 and against OKC down 1-0. If it were is easy as you say because of the excuses, Houston should have won against OKC when WB went down.
Not only this playoffs, but during the regular season, MEM was one of the league leaders in come from behind wins when trailing by double digits IIRC...
Because of the nature of the Grizzley's next three loses their team will be blown up this off season.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions