Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canada Basketball

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MixxAOR wrote: View Post
    "OG-FVV-Pascal didn't make playoffs therefore continuity doesn't matter" LOL woat take
    I'm just repeating your words back to you: Euro teams beat high level NBA talent because "continuity trumps talent." Continuity does matter. Attacking strengths and weaknesses matter. Strategy and tactics to attack those strengths & weaknesses matter (which I mistakenly thought was the domain of coaches). Talent, of course, matters.

    But, apparently everything matters.... except coaching. lol.

    You've backed yourself into a corner on this one. I'm just holding up the mirror each time you say something, to let you know where you are. It's a moving target right now.

    Comment


    • Lol now you brought out so many woat takes that your excuse is I was putting a mirror. Right bud. In your world talent (what you think is talent) should always win and when they don't oh that must be coaching. Simpleton. And when I explain dynamics that affect winning your head is spinning
      Only one thing matters: We The Champs.

      Comment


      • Each of these studies looked at what happens to team outcomes when a coach is changed. Back in 2009, Michael Leeds, Eva Marikova Leeds, Michael Mondello and I published a study of NBA coaching in the International Journal of Sport Finance. This paper took a different approach, examining how NBA coaches impacted the productivity of individual NBA players. Although the approach was different, the results for most NBA coaches were similar. In other words, we found that most NBA coaches have no statistical impact on the productivity of individual players. What does all this mean? Henry Abbott – of ESPN’s True Hoop – suggested in 2008 that the argument that NBA coaches don’t tend to change player productivity indicated that coaches could be replaced with “deck chairs.” These studies, though, don’t indicate that teams are better off without a coach. That is because none of these studies looked at a team with and without a coach. What these studies did is look at teams or players with different coaches and failed to find much of a difference. That suggests that coaches in sports are not very different from each other. It may be true (and more than likely very true) that you are better off with a professional coach than with a random person grabbed from the stands (or no one at all). But it doesn’t appear that the choice of professional coach matters much. Such an argument echoes something that was noted by Adam Smith in 1776. In An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Smith argued that the daily operations of a firm are run by “principal clerks” and such clerks are essentially homogenous. Or as Smith put it “their labour of inspection and direction may be either altogether or very nearly the same.” Smith’s view of those charged with the “labour of inspection and direction” certainly runs counter to the view people have of coaches and managers in professional sports. But the sports data appears to be consistent with Smith’s view, even if he wasn’t explicitly talking about sports. So why do principle clerks and coaches appear to be the same? Essentially, coaches appear to receive similar training, face similar information sets, and ultimately make similar decisions. The results – perhaps not surprising when you consider these similarities – are that outcomes with different coaches are quite similar. And that means, if it costs a small fortune to fire your coach – and often it does – then a team is probably better off just keeping who they have on the sideline. Yes, this may not make the fans of the losers very happy today. But it doesn’t make sense for universities to make decisions that cost the school money and don’t systematically change the outcomes we see on the field.
        https://freakonomics.com/2012/12/is-...ly-the-answer/ Not so crazy
        Only one thing matters: We The Champs.

        Comment


        • Great win. I caught the last few minutes. Go Canada!

          Comment


          • What a game !! Too bad it wasn't in Prime time .. We beat the U.S !! Holly Crap !!

            Comment


            • Dillon Brooks with 39 pts on 12-18 shooting lmao
              Only one thing matters: We The Champs.

              Comment


              • redemption for NOAH
                Only one thing matters: We The Champs.

                Comment


                • Incredible performance from Brooks and Shai. RJ had a dagger 3 in overtime to seal it. So awesome that we medaled, but not only that we prevented the Americans from medaling as well.

                  Got of to an incredibly hot start. But we fumbled that by bringing in some bench players. Not sure why Ejim was needed. Edey was really bad. I think Scrubb made an appearance too. I wouldn't be surprised if they were like -10 during their short stint (didn't see the box score). But we hung in. Some bad bounces off the rim to give the Americans more opportunities. Brunson was tough to handle. As was Edwards obviously. Still can't believe Bridges made that 3 to tie it. US had like 3 bad turnovers in a row in overtime which cost them.

                  NAW was cold. If we had a more capable shooter we likely would have won earlier. But our defense wasn't as crisp as it's been. Maybe everyone is just tired from the long tournament.

                  Either way I'm super proud of the team. Guys showed up, played hard, and got a medal. Looking forward to Paris to see what they do on an even bigger stage.

                  Comment


                  • Damn, can't write paragraphs again for some reason. And can't edit my post either.

                    Comment


                    • Jordi > Kerr.

                      The most talented team (by far) in the tournament lost 3 of their last 4 games.

                      In FIBA tournaments..... FIBA coaches matter.

                      Comment


                      • Brooks with 39 and SGA being SGA. Next year we need Murray and hopefully Wiggins and some
                        more bigs
                        "Both teams played hard my man" - Sheed

                        Comment


                        • MACK11 wrote: View Post
                          Brooks with 39 and SGA being SGA. Next year we need Murray and hopefully Wiggins and some
                          more bigs
                          Finding more bigs will be the hard part. Tristan is washed up and never commits to Canada. Birch kind of sucks and is often injured. Boucher is undersized. Who am I missing?

                          Comment


                          • planetmars wrote: View Post

                            Finding more bigs will be the hard part. Tristan is washed up and never commits to Canada. Birch kind of sucks and is often injured. Boucher is undersized. Who am I missing?
                            People won't like this idea, but in FIBA I think each country gets to add 1 non-native player to the roster... like when Spain added Lorenzo Brown. A lot of big men would probably love to join Team Canada, as the missig piece, with a legit shot at gold in the Olympics.

                            Comment


                            • golden wrote: View Post

                              People won't like this idea, but in FIBA I think each country gets to add 1 non-native player to the roster... like when Spain added Lorenzo Brown. A lot of big men would probably love to join Team Canada, as the missig piece, with a legit shot at gold in the Olympics.
                              Yeah its called being a naturalized player. Maybe we can bring in the Austrian Hammer now that he's a Raptor again.

                              Comment


                              • Canada takes down #1 (Spain), #2 (USA), #5 (France) & #7 (Slovenia) in a span of 2 weeks. Team Canada has arrived.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X