Heavily Directed Go Away

I've done so much writing in the last few days, and none of it for here. So while this should be considered an open thread for whatever, please follow the following links:

-Shoals, interviewed by The Big Picture. It was wonderful experience and forced me to get a lot of my meta-blog thoughts in order.

-New Longform is up, on the subject of Mike Brown's inner peace.

-Dr. LIC's Spurs preview up at Deadspin!. Cavs one coming soon!!!!

And, uh, GO CAVS!!!!!


At 6/07/2007 11:33 AM, Anonymous amphibian said...

How does Wiggle from the Lavender Grave not get an honorary mention?

I, like Darko, am befuddled.

At 6/07/2007 12:05 PM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

because it's still a work-in-progress.

At 6/07/2007 12:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can we have the Longform Shoals Moses graphic as a FD t-shirt please?

At 6/07/2007 12:49 PM, Anonymous Kaifa said...

Open thread, so here's what I'm pondering. If it was possible to trade the #1 or #2 pick straight up for any player, which ones would the Blazers and Sonics consider? (No Duncan or Shaq as a rookie but the versions we have right now)

#1: just LeBron (not much older, even better franchise player and marketing potential than Oden or Durant)

#2: Duncan (still good for 3-4 solid shots at a title)

Wade (most marketable of these 3, injury concerns)

Kobe (PR nightmare right now, a few years too old already to be traded for the #1)

On the verge (for the 2nd pick): Dwight Howard, Melo, Bosh

At 6/07/2007 2:15 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

At 6/07/2007 2:17 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...

Wow, DLIC says some more stupid, unfair shit about the Spurs. I'm shocked!

"Second, it is common knowledge that each of the Spurs' championships to this point has been tainted...in 2003 Kobe was injured for the majority of the playoffs and especially in the Western Conference finals."

Really, it's common knowledge that Kobe was injured during the 2003 Playoffs? Sweet shit, I never heard that! Funny, then, that he averaged 32.1 points during those Playoffs, HIS CAREER HIGH, and the only time he's ever averaged more than 30 per game in the Playoffs.

And the refs kept Sheed in foul trouble in '07? Please! Duncan PUT Sheed in foul trouble, and that genius had the good sense to leave ROBERT FUCKING HORRY WIDE OPEN WITH THE GAME ON THE LINE.

But hey, let's extend this premise further and invalidate every title ever. Miami's ring doesn't count because of all Wade's FT's. The Pistons ring doesn't count because Mailman was out. That Lakers 2000 title clearly doesn't count since Duncan sat out the Playoffs with injury and couldn't defend his title. Hakeem never actually won rings since Jordan was banned for gambling.

Do I need to continue?

I'll agree that the '99 season seemed somewhat tainted at the time by the lockout, but that team did steamroll through the 'Offs by going 15-2, and, given that they've since made THREE MORE TRIPS back to the Finals I think it's safe to say that wasn't some asterisked fluke.

The fact remains that this Spurs team has come a lot closer to winning 5 straight titles than they have to winning none. Were it not for .4 or Ginobili's foul on Dirk, Duncan would be looking to match Jordan's jewelry collection (he still might get there).

Are they a dynasty? I don't know. It's a pretty hazy distinction, and I agree that repeating is probably significant, but at the same time it's harder than ever to have the kind of classic dynasties we had in the past so we may need to revise our definition. Regardless, the Spurs have been competing for titles, year after year, since 1999. That is a tremendous achievement not likely to be matched any time soon, if ever.

In '05 I said the Spurs weren't a dynasty but an EMPIRE, and that seems more true now than ever. This year's Finals pits Spurs vs. Spurs East, but we're not done franchising yet. The West-Coast branch is currently being constructed with Presti now installed in Seattle and Carlisimo likely to follow. In other words, We taking over, one city at a time.
The Gospel of Pop is being spread throughout the land and there’s nothing Free D can do about it. At some point don’t you just feel like you’re shoveling shit against the tide?

At 6/07/2007 2:39 PM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

so yeah, spurs post is up, link in the post.

so is my column on the genius of mike brown. link above.

At 6/07/2007 2:50 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

An interview at The Big Picture at bigpicture.typepad.com would have been even cooler.

At 6/07/2007 2:58 PM, Blogger Mr. Six said...

Shoveling shit against the tide? No, I feel like I'm watching the Christianization of Europe.

I sing no hosannas for the 1000-year reign of enforced mediocrity and slave morality.

At 6/07/2007 3:13 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...


I just wanted to make the Wire reference. I kid DLIC & Shoals because I love DLIC and Shoals.

I know I'm in the minority on this with Simmons, John Wooden, Bill Russell, Joey Straight Banging and a few others, but I don't understand how people can say this Spurs team is boring.

I thought Simmons had some particularly good stuff on this today: "Maybe they aren't that likable, and maybe the flopping and eye-rolling and constant bitching isn't defensible ... but if you can't rally around Duncan's all-around brilliance, Parker's uncanny ability to score in the paint, Ginobili's penchant for rising to the moment, their superb role players and the obvious affection these guys have for each other (as well as their coach), then I don't know what to tell you. Their fast breaks are great. Their slash-and-kick game is great. Duncan's low-post play and footwork isn't just great, it's unparalleled right now. Their spacing is great, their rotations are great, even their flopping is great. Their outside shooting is good enough that they're averaging 39 percent for 3s in the playoffs ... as a team."

At 6/07/2007 3:20 PM, Blogger stopmikelupica said...

DLIC hates the Spurs like Brown Recluse hates the Knicks. FreeDarko may be about style, but they find still find some time to do some old fashioned hating.

At 6/07/2007 3:33 PM, Blogger Mr. Six said...

(Can't believe I missed The Wire reference!)

I hate "there are two kinds of people in the world" statements (since they're nearly 100% false dichotomies), but the Spurs seem to be about that dichotomizing.

Those who find the Spurs likable because of their technical precision are fairly incomprehensible to those who perceive that precision and nevertheless find the team inalterably dull. And vice versa.

I thought Shoals did a lot to give substance to the latter position by explaining that winning isn't everything.

At 6/07/2007 3:35 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...

I'm actually a little pissed about DLIC picking the Spurs. Unless I'm mistaken FreeDarko has incorrectly picked against the Spurs in all of the Deadspin previews. It was a funny joke, and I was hoping to keep that little bit of magic alive.

For the record, I actually think the Cavs have a legit chance in this series. I mentioned it the night of Bron's big game 5, and I've since come down off the ledge a little bit, but this is a SPORT OF MATCHUPS and the Cavs match up really well.

I wanted to mention the possibility of Lebron guarding Parker. I haven't seen anyone else really discuss this and meant to put a post-together, but I'm pretty lazy and I'm off to the beach tomorrow. He checked TP both times during the regular season and had great success--season high in turnovers for Tony and I think a season low in points. He's quick enough to stay close and too big and strong to let Parker get to the hole like he needs to. If Bron can do what he did during the regular season, that allows Hughes to check Ginobili. Larry may be a mess on offense but he's still a menace on D.

At 6/07/2007 3:38 PM, Blogger Brown Recluse, Esq. said...

@brick, funny that you quoted that portion of the simmons piece, since the rest of it is all about how the spurs are NOT a dynasty.

sml hates me.

At 6/07/2007 3:43 PM, Blogger Nate said...

Speaking of Duncan and the Spurs and dynasties, I just threw something up at the fanhouse about the Shaq-Duncan era, and how I think all this small ball non-sense is just that...non-sense...


At 6/07/2007 4:11 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...

@ Six: See, but I don't find them likeable because of their techinical precision. I think that on offense they're really fucking good and score in all sorts of ways, and this image of Popovich as stifling/conservative/dogmatic is way overrated. Pop is actually far more liberal and open-minded than people give him credit for (similarly, recall George Karl publicly assuming a few years back that Pop was a Bush supporter, only to have Pop quickly tell the media that was far from the case). Does he insist that his guys play defense? Absolutely, but he's willing to make all kinds of other exceptions that fly in the face of "right way" (whatever the hell that means anyway). Peep the freedom he gave to Stephen Jackson a few years ago and currently affords Manu. Or the way he decided to bring Manu, the second best player on the team, off the bench. That's far from status quo, bro.

Just look at what they did against Utah: Tony going between Memo's legs to Manu, Manu dunking in traffic, a 7 footer whipping one handed bounce passes from the top of the key, and the vintage Finley elegant baseline jam. This ain't Hoosiers, folks.

@ Recluse: 1. I specifically said I wasn't sure if the Spurs were a dynasty. 2. Where in that Simmons piece did he say the Spurs weren't a dynasty? There were a lot of other things I could have quoted, and the thesis of the article was that the Spurs would destroy the Cavs and be remembered as "one of the better championship teams of the past 30 years."

Also, I agreed with Simmons when it comes to the talent level surrounding Duncan on past Spurs teams. Duncan's supporting cast is always overrated. I'm convinced that you could drop the rest of the team, use the cap space to surround him with 10 different players, and he'd still be competing for titles. Wait, actually, they've already done this.

At 6/07/2007 4:25 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...

More @ Six: I also think people read far too much into the fact that Pop has military ties. Yes, he was at Air Force, but it's not like he was a grunt or drill sargeant. Dude was in training for intelligence and counter-intelligence, specilizing in Sovietology, or some such. That's pretty badass! Call him the Good Shepherd! It may not have helped his military career, but years later it helped him land Rasho when he trekked through the Balkans and spoke to the big Slovenian in his native toungue.

I guess the Sovietology didn't help his basketball career much either.

Frankly, I think his time at liberal arts Pomona was probably more formative.

At 6/07/2007 4:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Spurs are a dynasty. I hate them, and it's still true. Even as a suns fan, there's no better player than Duncan right now (unless King James surpasses him in this series and the Cavs take it down) fat chance. to read some other articles if you guys are bored, there's a guy with a new blog called The No Huddle Offensive that's actually pretty good. http://nohuddleoffensive.blogspot.com/ looks like it's brand new, only one article. not bad

At 6/07/2007 4:51 PM, Blogger Brown Recluse, Esq. said...

simmons said that were it not for shaq's laziness, the lakers would have won five in a row, thus negating a couple spurs championships, thus no dynasty or even an empire.

At 6/07/2007 5:05 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...

But that only speaks to what I'm saying about how remarkable it is that Duncan has been winning Chips since '99. The NBA season is a grueling journey. Preseason + 82 game regular season + 2 months worth of playoffs = lots of time for shit to go wrong for a team.

I mean, we could always play the hypothetical game, but what's the point? I could say the Spurs would've defended their title in 2000 if Duncan wasn't sitting out, or that the Spurs would've won 4 in a row but for .4 and Manu's dumb foul, but (unfortunately for me) that's not what happened. To win in this league everything has to go right. I understand that, and knowing how difficult it is makes winning a title that much sweeter.

At 6/07/2007 5:09 PM, Anonymous rusty said...

Mr. Six: I certainly understand where you're coming from, but that "two kinds of people" view drives me nuts. What kills me is the notion that the Spurs are somehow the polar opposite of the Suns/Warriors and that it's impossible to like both. I really detest the implication that liking the Spurs somehow reduces one to a lower, unenlightened form of fandom embodied by Paul Shirley's assertion that rooting for them "would be like cheering for cancer".

It would be just as easy to construct an insulting, fallacious claim that the Suns are the equivalent of terrible Hollywood action movies full of empty explosions and paper-thin plotlines. Not that I'm going to because 1) I like the Suns as well and 2) it would be an unfair oversimplification of what they do as well as inaccurate. I just wish liking the Spurs didn't mean automatically getting lumped in with the Charley Rosens and Jerry Sloans of the world.

I do realize that the Spurs and especially TD are somewhat complicit in the way that they're portrayed in the media and thus should share some of the blame for that viewpoint of them by virtue of their failure to counteract it's prevalence.

brickowski: I'm with you 110% about Pop. I think the way he's tailored his system to fit his players is very underrated. Also I fully believe that he's motivated entirely by the belief that what he's doing is the most efficient way to win championships, not by some desire to slavishly adhere to some mythical "right way" ideal; if the rules were changed to favor Nelly Ball he'd be runningn'gunning in an instant.

recluse: that Simmons decree means absolutely nothing. like Brickowski said, anyone can, in retrospect, come up with reasons why any championship is meaningless or invalid.

At 6/07/2007 5:37 PM, Blogger stopmikelupica said...

With regards to "dynasty" talk around the Spurs, I believe The Serious Tip once came up with a definition of dynasty that I think is pretty valid:
"I define a dynasty as any team that wins at least three championships in five years or wins championships in at least half of the years more than five. For example, winning two championships in a row does not not make a team a dynasty. Winning one more in the next three years does, however (3 in 5 years). Winning championships every other year for eight years would also make a dynasty (4 in 8 years) as would winning six in up to 12 years, 10 in up to 20 years, etc., etc."

I have to agree with that definition.

Of course, Brown Recluse will come up with some sort counterargument....

At 6/07/2007 6:10 PM, Blogger Brown Recluse, Esq. said...

3/5 = dynasty or 4/8 (provided the team is a legit contender the other 4 years) seems fair to me.


At 6/07/2007 6:29 PM, Blogger stopmikelupica said...

While I'm giving out links: What do ya'll think of this Hoops Addict interview with Dr. Greenberg:

There is some gold in there.

At 6/07/2007 6:32 PM, Anonymous RedAuerbachsForeskin said...

Shoals, you magnificent poison-swiller!

Just as I'm about to write you off as another jerkoff with a blog, you come up with this:

"Jordan was an obnoxious, over-exposed prick"


But I wonder how you reconcile that statement with the fact that Jordan is the Ur-sociopath who is the spiritual baby-daddy for all the rest, who will inevitably (aspire to) become obnoxious, over-exposed pricks.

And now, at the risk of asking for too much, will you perhaps admit that a Duncan bank shot can be considered a thing of beauty? And will you try to understand that some of us will always root for people of apparent humility (Duncan, D. Robinson, etc.), because one can only absorb so many James White highlights before a feeling of utter emptiness sets in?

Anyway, in my revisionist history of sports writers, you are no longer Robert Conrad in "Battle of the Network Stars" - you are Kirk Fucking Gibson in the bottom of the ninth.

Well, (possibly) until your next column.

At 6/07/2007 6:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey StopMikeLupica, how about a link to the times you called the Rockets the best team in Texas? Repeatedly.

At 6/07/2007 7:36 PM, Blogger Ty Keenan said...

I've been refining my opinion on the Spurs this playoffs, and I think it comes down to the fact that, when I watch them, I rarely see something I haven't seen them do hundreds of times before. Duncan in particular does nothing new. Parker and Ginobili still have these moments, but they're happening less often than they used to.

That said, I really do like watching them blow teams out just because they look like something approaching the perfect halfcourt-based team in those moments.

At 6/07/2007 8:45 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...

Good news for Cavs fans--Javie is in the building!

Not saying there's any kind of conspiracy (because I don't believe there is), just that Javie always sticks it to the home team.

At 6/07/2007 9:23 PM, Blogger Mr. Six said...

@brick and rusty: I hope it was clear from my caveat that I was actually attempting to avoid being reductionist. As far as I'm concerned there are as many reasons to find the Spurs totally uninteresting as there apparently are to love and be fascinated by them.

For me, it all comes down to aesthetics. I've written this before, so I'm not trying to convince anyone, but just to be clear: I watch their game and see the inner workings of a well-crafted clock or robot assembly line. I can appreciate that it's going to do the exact same thing with every movement and that it's going to produce exactly the desired product. There's a certain beauty to it, but not of a kind that compels me to watch. There is nothing human in it, nothing inventive, no act of creation or self-creation.

And when one points out Parker passing between Okur's legs, I just shrug. Even that seems mechanical to me.

And pointing out the allegedly interesting aspects of the personalities of the parts doesn't affect my perception at all. It's like saying about vanilla ice cream: "Look, we used the rarest and most flavorful vanilla beans in existence! And the freshest organic dairy from prize-winning cows! And a secret formula from the Old Country! It's delicious!" I'll taste it, think it's fine, and go find something else to eat ...

At 6/07/2007 9:38 PM, Blogger Ben Q. Rock said...

Sweet Jesus, Shawn Marion in jean shorts. No wonder he gets no respect.

At 6/07/2007 9:59 PM, Blogger stopmikelupica said...

Anon 6:36: How about you provide a link to that time I "called the Rockets the best team in Texas"?

I remember disparaging Dallas back when it was unhip (calling them the "third best team in Texas"), but I've never disrespected the Spurs. Definitely not. At worst, I might have said the Rockets could give the Spurs a run in the Western Conference Finals (because, as MC Welk will remind ya, I underestimated the Jazz and Sloan greatly - that I openly admit I was totally wrong about). But I've never dissed the Spurs....

At 6/07/2007 10:13 PM, Blogger T. said...

Help me to understand myself.

1. I root for perhaps the dullest team in the league (over the last 4 years). Get the ball down the court. Send it into Yao, let him work or he will pass out to a shooter or Yao and Mac will pick and roll or Mac will drive into the middle and find an open man or he will just elevate over fools. That's the entire offense. (the 2004 Rockets are excepted from the 'boring' tag)

2. I find the individual Spurs players exciting. I LOVE Ginobili. I marvel at Parker's speed and am trying to incorporate (very unsuccessfully) the teardrop into my own game. The Duncan bank shot makes me cry in a positive way.

So why do I not like the Spurs?

It's not a Texas thing - I save all my hate for Dallas.

I don't know - maybe it goes back to the Pitor Gudmansson teams. Or maybe i'm just a hatin' sumbitch.

Go Cavs!

At 6/07/2007 10:42 PM, Anonymous Sean said...

What beautiful, exquisite basketball!

At 6/07/2007 11:06 PM, Blogger Ty Keenan said...

If the O'Brien logo weren't at center court, I'm not sure I'd be able to distinguish this thing from a college game.

I will say that I am constantly amazed by the Spurs' ability to get back on defense forty times better than any other team.

At 6/07/2007 11:27 PM, Blogger Brown Recluse, Esq. said...

shawn marion always wears jean shorts. he lives in the desert.

At 6/07/2007 11:32 PM, Blogger Ben Q. Rock said...

Shorts are okay.
Jeans are okay.
Jean shorts are never okay.

At 6/07/2007 11:37 PM, Blogger stopmikelupica said...

T, I can't help you on the Rockets thing... maybe it's because you live in China, and everything revolves around Yao?

But with regards to Ginobili - despite the recent flopper tag, he is exciting... he's a proven winner, he can carry a team himself (see Olympic performances), but is okay being second banana (and a 6th man) on the best team in the NBA. And when the team needs him, he steps up (he should have been the 2005 Finals MVP).

The sad thing is that Pop is probably holding back Ginobili's "funness"; Ginobili in international play is as Free Darko as they come, throwing up crazy layups, hitting threes, and dropping alley oops, plus running the offense at time, and playing great defense. People don't watch Ginobili enough, especially his international play.

Of course keep in mind I'm completely biased.

At 6/07/2007 11:43 PM, Blogger T. said...

SML - actually my Rockets love had a lot more to with my time in Houston, and nothing to do with currently being in China. I grew up a Lakers fan in the 80s. (yes, I switched NBA teams. Yes, i'm a hypocrite because I routinely hassle sports bigamists, but I had a really good reason to switch. Like a paycheck)

I know why I support the Rockets. I don't know why I hate the Spurs - that's what I seek to understand.

At 6/07/2007 11:58 PM, Blogger Brickowski said...

"shawn marion always wears jean shorts."

So true.

Didn't Andreo once claim he saw Rasho wearing, like, JNCO jean shorts and an oversized white t while walking around Miami? I swear this happened.

At 6/08/2007 12:10 AM, Anonymous aug said...

I love watching the spurs. I think a lot of people buy into the hype too much and just hate the spurs because espn and other sports outlets/writers make them seem worse than they are. It's not just an appreciation for right way either, they're a good team with every aspect of an entertaining team except for a guy with tons of personality doing commercials and dunking from the free throw line. Duncan is actually a cool/funny guy out of interviews from what i've seen. How can people hate on tony parker's fast break and pick and roll drive skills but then sing the praises of barbosa and nash(his scoring ability at least). They're a efficient team, but they're also an entertaining team. Drive and dish, pretty post moves, daring drives in traffic, going for the fast break 1 on 3, the best team passing in the league, etc... I know i'm slightly biased because i enjoy the coaching aspect of basketball(and coach a bit myself) but i love watching their team defense. Some of those rotations, hard flashes on pick and rolls and traps are really nice to watch if you enjoy the subtleties of basketball.

That parker to horry to duncan touch pass with 1:30ish left in the game to seal the deal was truly beautiful. I'm most certainly on board with sml and brick. A lot of people who like the cavs(who are probably one of the most boring teams in the nba to watch save 3-4 lebron plays per game) but hate constantly on the spurs need to lay off drinking the kool aid.

Plus, as they've said, it's always fun to bust the balls of FD. I've been doing it for about 2 years now. Even when i agree with them, it's sometimes fun to just take the opposite side in order to get them to explain stuff better, and for me to understand the issue better myself. And it's fun to see slew of anons get riled up. Hell, one comment about durant(not even a negative one) spawned a ton of negative responses. It's all in good fun and the FD guys know i always understand and respect their position on issues.

At 6/08/2007 12:45 AM, Blogger ~CW~ said...

ESPN and other sports outlets makesthe Spurs worse? They don't ever disparage them, only by pronouncing their style The Right Way every ten seconds. Honestly, the ABC/ESPN coverage of the NBA is beyond terrible. Can Game Two please, please, please be on TNT? Or NBC with Marv and John Tesh?

I agree that people who enjoy the Spurs and people who hate the Spurs will never come an agreement. It's a gut thing, and that's all there is to it. You will never convince me to enjoy their bastardization of basketball, and I will never convince you their "fundamental team play" isn't a joy to watch.

Also, this is supposed to save the playoffs? Blech. More FreeDrafto at this rate.

At 6/08/2007 12:47 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This conversation reminds me of a great observation by either DLIC, Brown Rec or Shoals after Den won game one- that alley-hoops are not supposed to win play-off games. It makes me wonder why the Spurs have such a great disdain for alley-hoops. I cant remember a Spurs alley hoop in these playoffs? Is it simply because SA lack the explosive personnel? or are alley-hoops simply not efficient basketball plays? The Kobe-to-Shaq alley-hoop seemed pretty devastating and effective to me.Though my favorite LAL hoop was when Kobe passed to Shaq in the low post and cut hard resulting in a Shaq-to-Kobe alley hoop- now that play was a thing of beauty.

At 6/08/2007 1:02 AM, Anonymous rusty said...

mr. six: no, I understand what you were saying. I have no problem with FD's writers and the majority of commenters who dislike the Spurs, who are invested in their feelings and passionate about basketball and what they do or do not like about it. What's irritating is the perpetuation via lazy, hive mind articles and TV pieces by the mainstream media of the Spurs as either 1) a boring team that no one likes or 2) the living, breathing embodiment of some "right way" Platonic ideal, no more and no less, both of which are severely limited viewpoints whether you like watching them or not.

anon 12.47: did you miss the failed alley-oop that from Parker to Duncan? the Spurs don't utilize them more b/c Elson is the only dude (discounting James White) on the roster with the size and explosiveness to finish them and he even lacks the instincts and court sense to make the appropriate cuts.

At 6/08/2007 1:07 AM, Anonymous RhySD said...

@above: Parker to Manu alley-oop with a few minutes to go in the 4th. I've seen alley-oops to Manu a few times in the regular season.

ABC was trying to say that the Spurs run that kind of play regularly though. :E

At 6/08/2007 1:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh man, that failed alley oop to duncan was funny. Just the look on both their faces afterwards was great. You know duncan wanted to throw it down with authority, and i think he still can do it, he just mistimed it and parker didn't throw it that great. The spurs had the cavs by the throat but then Pop took duncan and tony out and let the cavs go on a little run and by the time they came back in, the cavs had to much momentum and cut it to 8. Pop put them back in at just the right time though as they were able to get back into the flow and halt the cavs run in time. I enjoyed the game personally. Not high scoring but a good show by the spurs.

At 6/08/2007 1:21 AM, Blogger Ben Q. Rock said...

Shit, Rasho Nesterovic in JNCOs? This information should surprise me, but it doesn't.

At 6/08/2007 9:22 AM, Blogger Brown Recluse, Esq. said...

the alley oop is actually about the most efficient basktball play there is, if done correctly. dean smith drew up plays for lobs all the time, including the bad-ass out of bounds lob. lest anyone think freedarko is anti-right way, that play demonstrates that right way can be stylish.


Post a Comment

<< Home