Sixers vs. Celtics: The Return of Thad

[RickyPryor]

Why do I even bother trying to make any kind of reasonable point to Ricky?  Now I remember why I left Philaphans' Sixers board when he was there.

Wow.  That was out of nowhere.

How is my disagreeing with you "unreasonable"?  I don't find you or Rick "unreasonable", just not agreeable to points I believe to be true.

[DuckyNinja]

When you say silly things like "No such thing as scoring without the ball.", I simply get frustrated.  I was trying to point out that you can score without offensive rebounds by, ya know, making your first shot.  Speights is good enough on the d-boards along with the rest of the second unit that being able to score without needing O-boards is more useful.

[RickyPryor]

When you say silly things like "No such thing as scoring without the ball.", I simply get frustrated.  I was trying to point out that you can score without offensive rebounds by, ya know, making your first shot.  Speights is good enough on the d-boards along with the rest of the second unit that being able to score without needing O-boards is more useful.

That's not what you said.  You asked the question:

The question is do we need scoring or rebounding, and when the backup unit is in, the answer is almost always scoring.

And I disagreed.  And then explained why.  Basketball teams need to score...yes, obviously.  But in order to score you need the ball.  Not in the wiseass sense...in the every-good-opportunity-comes-from-high-percentage-which-often-comes-in-transition sense.

Hence, the need for the ball (ie. rebounding.)

It all starts with rebounding.  And Speights is marginal at that hugely important skill.

[Derek Bodner]

Not in the wiseass sense

Not to be a wiseass, but everything you post is in a wiseass sense. 

Hence, the need for the ball (ie. rebounding.)

If there's a need for the ball, then isn't turnovers also a consideration?  I mean, the odds of making a basket when turning over the ball is 0%, right?  Evans is twice as likely to turn the ball over than Speights. 

Your overly simplistic way of looking at things is, well, overly simplistic.  But when you're making your point, that's your MO.

[RickyPryor]

Not to be a wiseass, but everything you post is in a wiseass sense. 

Pot, kettle.

If there's a need for the ball, then isn't turnovers also a consideration?

Sure.  But that wasn't among the choices I was provided.  It was "scoring or rebounding".  Plus, in the fundamental sense of 'normal' teaching...I put a great deal of weight on rebounding.  More so than turning the ball over, yes. 

For the record, creating turnovers falls into the defensive category; turning them - offensive.  But still outside the traditional structure of a linear basketball dialog.

An argument should have been made that DEFENSE leads to rebounds in the first place (after all, percentages are decreased when a shooter is made uncomfortable).

But I'd have argued that defense merely comes later in the cycle of the normal progression:  It's rebound, outlet, high percentage opportunity, finish...transition to defense (preferably simultaneous to the opponents' transition to offense, sooner if possible).  Repeat.