alcstarheel

She'd just make the thread that much better.

Looks like we're going to have to start removing the non-hot girls <_<

Z played 27 MPG this past year. You think he's going to be as effective with his minutes being down a third? I don't see it. He had to work in that flow to be effective from the perimeter. Yes adjustments can be made, but I see the Cavs having to adjust more to Shaq than the other four teams will be adjusting to their acquisitions.

Shaq in Miami was three years ago. You can't say that nothing has changed as far as his effectiveness these past few years. His output and mobility will steadily decline this year as it has recently. Not to mention he is due for another 50 game season. He hasn't put together a string of two straight seasons of 70 games since the first year of this decade. We're now in the last year of this decade. What many aren't realizing is that Z really spread the floor for LeBron because he was an outside threat. He readily hit those corner threes or those 20' jumpers. He was 15-39 last year, which was huge for them at key points. I still believe they are a top 5 team, but I think they are just the 5th best. Lakers - got Artest, will have Bynum for the whole year (hopefully), and we should be able to retain Odom Celtics - will be healthy, and 'Sheed's perimeter offensive game and his rebounding effectiveness will be big...he gives them even more of an edgy team Spurs - huge pickups in McDyess and Jefferson, PLUS a healthy Manu Magic - Vince is an all-around threat and Bass is a BIG pickup, and they'll have Jameer all year and won't have Rafer sucking Cavaliers - picked up Shaq, will still win over 60, but it'll be tough for them once again See the theme of this list? All of the first four teams had a major player sit injured for at least 25 games, with almost all of them in the latter half of the season and into the 'offs. Cavs were pretty injury-free down the wire. They are due for the injury bug to hit when it counts.

Doesn't really look like he's going to go anywhere, but I understand what he's saying. He took his lumps last year coming off the bench and losing out on his value. We should compensate him somewhat. We need him.

Beast!

Looks good. He's always worn those short shorts for some reason, or for no reason I guess

Vecsey is a punk. Congrats to him, I guess. But a big congrats to Collins. He's been through the whole spectrum with this sport and has always been classy about it.

It's from Tupac's Hit 'Em Up

http://www.rollingout.com/v2/ro_today/060809/chris%20brown%20%26%20shannon%20brown.jpg

Nice work on the updates

I'm waiting for the 5 Rings shirt

I just saw it and liked it, despite the reviews. Some funny parts, good action, and Fox was...man...even though she's not showing a lot of skin she's still nice. A little long, a pretty quick ending, but if you liked the first one you should like this one.

This is what you're missing. Just because the box score shows you with 30 shots doesn't mean you only took up 30 possessions of your team's offense. If you are shooting frees, most of those are going to be on your drawing shooting fouls. So if you drew 7 shooting fouls resulting in 14 frees, that's a total of 37 possessions that you have from other players on the team. So if you get to the lines 10 times and make 10 of them, great. You maximized your possessions. If you get to the line 10 times and make 5, that's not good because you didn't maximize your possessions. If you don't shoot any frees in a 30 shot game, but still make 50% of those field goals, you maximized all the possessions that you took up. That's why I'm saying if you are over 50% it shouldn't matter how many frees you take as long as you make the most of them. Now, if you're shooting considerably lower than 50% from the field on 30 shots, then yes, you better get to the line to make up for it. You have to make up for the possessions when you weren't converting.

Why not? If one player takes all their team's shots, and shoots 50%, why would that be bad? That would actually be great for the team as on average teams are shooting under 50%. Teams are taking about 80 field goals a game. Shooting 30 times won't be half of your team's shots, but shooting that many times at a 50% clip would not be bad for your team. So we'll just apply it further. You are saying that if you shoot 7 for 10 it's okay, 70%, good percentage. But if you shoot 21 for 30, that's not okay because you're taking too many shots? It's the same percentage in both situations. Both percentages are above average for a team as a whole. 1.21.09, Cavs vs. Portland, LeBron goes 14-30 with only 4 free throws. Would you call that game not as effective because he was 3-4 from the line?

He'd be great for any of those teams. Dee I don't think he's punking out. I just hear Donnie Nelson on the radio and he was talking about everything that was going on with the Mavs recently. He said that they are trying to keep Bass, but with Marion coming to Dallas and Gortat looking like a strong possibility, it really puts a damper on their willingness to keep Brandon. He didn't sound to sure of it. He even went on to say that if they can't get anything resolved, the front office would not be averse to doing a sign-and-trade so Brandon can "pursue his American Dream elsewhere."

That's pretty sad. It shouldn't have even come to this. So what you guys are agreeing that Nike confiscated the tapes because it was in violation of their rules of taping the event? This is what's being said, right? Then why wasn't this confiscated: Same camp, right? So why wasn't this confiscated? Probably because he wasn't getting dunked on.

This first reply to this thread basically said that 30 points on 30 shots is bad because you should also be getting to the line. Read Kingfish's question: And read how Riot replied: Kingfish was asking why it's bad to score 30 points on 30 shots if you still shoot 50%. Riot's response was because you should also get to the line. That's what I was debating.

I would slightly take Kim over Megan. Kim is hot man, plain and simple, and I like her body just a little more than Megan's.

Moist

I could not find it or I would have fixed it...where is the setting?

I was talking about the old site.

What I saw in here was someone say that if you only shoot and make a few frees while shooting 30 shots that you are less efficient than when you shoot and make more frees. I don't see it that way. If you shoot 30 shots and make 15 of them, I don't think it matters how many times you go to the free throw line because you can't always control it. I see the number of frees only detracting from your overall efficiency if you are shooting a multitude of them at a bad percentage. If you were to take 30 shots, make 15, and only shoot 2-2 from the line, I don't see that any worse than shooting 30 shots, making 15, and shooting 10-10 from the line. From a purely statistical perspective, you've scored more points on the same amount of shots in the latter situation compared to the former, but when you look at it in a basketball sense, you made the most of your free throw opportunities in either case, and I don't think either should be downplayed.

FG FGA FG% PTS Date Shots/Point FT FTA FT% 12 30 0.4 29 11/14/2008 1.034482759 3 4 0.75 14 31 0.452 41 12/20/2008 0.756097561 11 11 1 13 32 0.406 33 1/13/2009 0.96969697 6 9 0.667 19 31 0.613 61 2/2/2009 0.508196721 20 20 1 14 33 0.424 37 2/11/2009 0.891891892 8 8 1 13 30 0.433 39 2/20/2009 0.769230769 12 12 1 10 31 0.323 29 2/27/2009 1.068965517 9 12 0.75 18 38 0.474 49 3/1/2009 0.775510204 10 10 1 In Kobe's case this past year, his 30 shot games only yielded one game over 50% shooting. But from the perspective of some of you, 3 of those 7 times he was less than 50% from the field were still efficient only because he shot many frees and made almost all of them. December 20, 2008 - Shot 45% but scored 1.3 points per shot. February 20, 2009 - Shot 43% but scored 1.3 points per shot. March 1, 2009 - Shot 47% but scored 1.3 points per shot. Now if we look at the game on February 2nd. If he shot no frees that game (for example), he would have only scored 41 points, which would have been 1.3 points per shot. that would look the same as his 45%, 43%, and 47% game, even though he shot 61% from the field in that game. So you can see how it can be skewed depending on the free throws taken and missed.

But you can get to the stripe 20 times, make only 11 of those frees, and still look like you're efficient. So if you go 12/20 from the field (all inside the arc) and 12/20 from the line, you have 36 points on 20 shots. Sure it's "efficient" from a purely shots/points ratio, but when you bring in 60% from the line it is never good, especially when 20 frees would be all or most of your team's frees on a given night. I think you look at is as so...if you are making about 50% of your shots, it doesn't matter how many times you shoot from the field, and it should only matter how many times you shoot from the free throw line if it was a detriment to your team. If you only go 3-4 from the line, that's not a downturn for your team. FG FGA FG% PTS Date Shots/Point FT FTA FT% 12 39 0.308 29 11/3/1997 1.344827586 4 6 0.667 18 38 0.474 49 11/21/1997 0.775510204 13 19 0.684 17 33 0.515 44 1/9/1998 0.75 9 10 0.9 13 31 0.419 32 1/10/1998 0.96875 6 10 0.6 17 37 0.459 40 2/4/1998 0.925 5 6 0.833 17 33 0.515 42 3/8/1998 0.785714286 7 9 0.778 17 30 0.567 37 3/10/1998 0.810810811 2 2 1 18 31 0.581 40 4/5/1998 0.775 4 4 1 Jordan's last year with the Bulls, shooting over 30 shots. He did it four times. Four times he was over 50%. Four times he was under 50%. Of the four times over, he was even more efficient because of his frees, shooting 100% twice. Even though it was under five frees attempted each time, he didn't hurt his efficiency by shooting a bad free throw percentage. He actually shot more frees overall on his four games of less than 50% shooting compared to the four games over. Not to mention his free throw percentage in those games was also not very good.