Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Game 68: Bobcats@Hawks


King Taharqa

Recommended Posts

The Bobs are in ATL tonight to face division rival Atlanta Hawks. This is another huge game for us and could be a preview of a 1st round series between the two teams. The Hawks are led by all star Joe Johnson (who is a game time decision with an achilles injury), Josh Smith, Al Horford, and Sixth Man Of The Year candidate Jamal Crawford. They are a long athletic team that plays very well at home. Tonight we get G-Force back after sitting out the past week with an injury. We will need a huge game from him, as well as Jax, and our bench guys to steal this one. The Hawks on a Friday night in ATL is not an easy game, but we need to continue to put pressure on the teams chasing us in the playoff race. GO BOBCATS!!!

bed5661d33908df516a9d8aac23b22f4-getty-90043824sc008_warriors_hawks.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been able to watch any Bobcat games, but I'm going to go out and find an online stream for this one tonight. You do a good job with these threads KT and you've slowly gotten me pumped up about the Bobcats and watching the NBA in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no no no no, F U

:D

Nothing comes between me and NCAA Ball. Although I am watching the Cats game cause there ain't no good games on right now.

None of them are going to be "good".

NCAA sucks this year. In a normal year, this pathetic dook team wouldn't be anywhere near the top 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't suck this year, this has been one of the best tournys in a while.

Anyway, Cats need to go on a little run here.

"Competitive" games to me doesn't equal good.

College basketball this year is as pathetic as almost every thing else these days. It's no where near as good as it used to be, just because most of the teams are equally bad, which makes the games competitive.

I repeat. This pathetic dook team wouldn't even be sniffing the top 5 in a normal season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...