Do you consider this getting Bopped or he Slipped?

[VDusen04]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

Just a pet peeve of mine in general. Dunks are worth the same as lay ups, huge blocks result in the offensive team getting the ball back and getting crossed over on the dribble doesn't mean anything unless the team scored. Not mad at getting excited over a big play in the moment but when is too much, too much (I don't know but this guy is on the other side of "too much" for me)?

I agree with you in some respects, but not all. To me, the excitement associated with certain plays is a large part of what makes basketball so awesome to me in the first place. In fact, every sport has those moments where redundant actions may occur, but one will inevitably be more exhilarating than the other. For instance, bases loaded, Austin Jackson hits a bases-clearing single. 3 runs score. Great. However, let's say two men on, Prince Fielder hits a 454 foot blast onto the freeway. 3 runs score. Same result, one is arguably 17 times awesomer to watch and perform and likely provides an additional boost to fan response and team morale. I think the same goes for dunking. A layup in the midst of an 8-0 run will be met with pumped up teammates and excited crowd. But a monster facial will blow the roof off the place and provide a potential death blow.



Would a tip-lay in have sufficed? Surely, would it have had the same effect on the game? I do not believe so.

Regarding blocked shots, I've never been one to buy into the theory that swatting the ball somehow puts the defense at a disadvantage (versus merely getting a piece of the ball). Surely, I've heard the stories of Bill Russell guiding blocked shots to teammates as a means of starting fast breaks. That's admirable and that's a heck of a luxury to be able to already be looking beyond the impending blocked shot and looking for potential teammates to block the ball toward. I don't think even the elite shot blockers in today's game have the luxury to attempt such a play in 99% of their potential shot blocking situations. Even when I play against the middle schoolers I coach, if I'm trying to be a defensive monster, I still can't afford to looking beyond trying to get the block itself.

It is my feeling, on a block that remains inbounds, a big time rejection may have nearly just as good a chance of ending up in a teammate's hand as it does the opposition. Similarly, merely getting a piece of a blocked shot would still seem to be able to end up in the hands of a teammate or right back in the opposition's hands for a put-back. Surely, there's situations where a major block will have a higher chance of ending up back with the offensive team (sending a shot back to the half court line when your defensive teammates were crashing the glass) but there's a ton of instances where the rejection serves much better than the mere deflection:



Basically, if a player's lucky, they're able to get their hands on 3-4 blocks every game. They likely try to block many times that. As such, they're reaching and exploding any way possible in hopes of getting their fingers on a shot. I feel going out of one's way to extend in the air with an arm locked and rigid could in many instances affect one's ability to block a shot in the first place. They're bang-bang plays and it honestly doesn't take much to send a shot flying, even on accident. It's similar to how some folks see Dwight Howard catch someone's shot and wonder aloud, "Why doesn't he always do that?!" Well, because it's not that simple, and blocks are more about reactions than planning.

With allllll of that said, I'm pretty much in agreement with you in regards to ankle breakers that don't lead to a basket or scoring opportunity. I have a baseball friend of mine who moonlights at open gyms from time to time. One time a guard half his size stepped on his foot and made him fall in the process. The guard bricked the shot, but many people went absolutely nuts. He didn't even make any sort of maneuver, it was a casual cross, just he happened to step on someone's foot.

Legitimate ankle breakers with subsequent finishes are neat (Iverson's got a couple that are neat) and in those cases, it's cool and exciting but again, I see where you're coming from.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by VDusen04

I agree with you in some respects, but not all. To me, the excitement associated with certain plays is a large part of what makes basketball so awesome to me in the first place. In fact, every sport has those moments where redundant actions may occur, but one will inevitably be more exhilarating than the other. For instance, bases loaded, Austin Jackson hits a bases-clearing single. 3 runs score. Great. However, let's say two men on, Prince Fielder hits a 454 foot blast onto the freeway. 3 runs score. Same result, one is arguably 17 times awesomer to watch and perform and likely provides an additional boost to fan response and team morale. I think the same goes for dunking. A layup in the midst of an 8-0 run will be met with pumped up teammates and excited crowd. But a monster facial will blow the roof off the place and provide a potential death blow. ...

On the things you say you disagree with I think you just misunderstand my beef. I only have a problem with exaggerated celebration on otherwise meaningless plays like this one. When you add situational aspects any play can be bigger. I'm not criticizing the play itself. But dude's analyzing a 5 sec clip of a play that doesn't appear to have any impact on the result of the game... and only focusing on a guy looking silly. I'd rather look silly and win than guard against looking silly and lose. And that's what often happens when kids worry about getting dunked on, crossed over or blocked.