Fear the Sword - SB Nation's Cavaliers Blog
With the NBA season starting, now's a good time to check out our Cavaliers counterparts at Fear the Sword.
3 months ago
Ryan
67 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
And take the Browns with you!
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Oct 27, 2009 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
LeChoke never fails to disappoint.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Oct 28, 2009 12:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Really? I mean, even for you…
Chugga-chugga chugga-chugga, Choo Choo!
by USSChoo on Oct 28, 2009 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The sooner LeStunod leaves for New York, the better I’ll like it.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Oct 28, 2009 2:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’re not even being rational. Impressive.
Chugga-chugga chugga-chugga, Choo Choo!
by USSChoo on Oct 28, 2009 3:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, he managed to trash the Browns and LeBron in the same fanshot.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 28, 2009 8:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s not going to New York. I don’t think he’s leaving, but if he does it definitely won’t be for the Knicks.
But I know you don’t really want a discussion about this, you just want to get everybody upset.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 28, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well LeStunod blew up for a triple-double and the Cavs still lost to – wait for it – the Raptors! With Rupaul playing no less.
That douche noozle’ll be packing his bags com May. I can’t wait.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Oct 29, 2009 12:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chuck, this is the one thing I will always disagree with you on.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 28, 2009 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
38 points, 4 rebounds, 8 assists, 4 blocks. If that’s disappointing then I hope he’s disappointing ever game.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 28, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately, like in every other year, it’s not gonna matter if he’s the only one doing it.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 28, 2009 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wake me up in February when they decide to start playing real defense.
I mean, it was a good game, but you could tell they weren’t ready to be too physical.
Wait 'til next millennium!
by emd2k3 on Oct 28, 2009 9:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How about May when the playoffs start?
by Roger Dorn on Oct 28, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even better.
Wait 'til next millennium!
by emd2k3 on Oct 28, 2009 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I swear, a basketball season is going to lap itself at some point.
by Voltaire on Oct 28, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Agreed. As much as I hate Garnett and all things Boston, it’s hard to get worked up about NBA when even college basketball won’t be exciting for three months.
The strike-shortened NBA season was the best ever; they should have kept it.
Il faut d'abord durer.
by CU Adam on Oct 28, 2009 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I recced both of these comments. The NBA is just tragically long. They only play, what, 82 games…?
by MooneysRebellion on Oct 28, 2009 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is what I love about NBA season. Combines the some degree of the intensity of football with the grueling schedule and large sample size of baseball. I feel like NBA champs are more often the most “worthy” champions of the three major sports.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 28, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the ridiculous 7-game early round series certainly adds to this. There is a certain attrition due to luck factor that becomes important though and that I don’t think reflects true quality.
by APV on Oct 28, 2009 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know, it’s not like the luck factor is anywhere near as great in those seven-game series as it is in baseball.
by Jay on Oct 28, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m thinking of attrition not in the context of a 7-game series, but in the context of the 82-game regular season.
by APV on Oct 28, 2009 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess finance dictates that all sports seasons are somewhat longer than they ideally should be.
by Jay on Oct 28, 2009 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just look at it this way. The best team in the NBA is likely to beat the worst team in the NBA 8 out of 10 times or more (not actual numbers, just for the sake of my argument). In baseball, that number is probably closer to 6 out of 10. That’s why I appreciate the NBA’s 7-game format, because it’s basically doing as much as they can to remove doubt and flukes. Baseball’s 5-game first round, on the other hand, is kind of a joke. Way too much left to luck in a 5-game series.
In general, I like the NBA’s playoff structure much more than MLB’s.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 28, 2009 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You remember my nutty MLB restructuring plan?
- Three leagues, ten teams each.
- Three pennant winners, plus one Wild Card.
- Playoffs: 16-game round robin among all four teams. 17th game tiebreaker if needed.
- World Series: best-of-9 between the best two playoff teams.
by Jay on Oct 28, 2009 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes. I absolutely love this plan. Mostly because it restores meaning to actually being the best team in your league over 162 games. I wish I was alive during an era when pennants meant more than have a good 1-2 starter combo and closer.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 28, 2009 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would actually shorten the season to 154 games, but yeah, restoring the lustre of winning a pennant is one of the big goals of the plan.
To be honest, finishing in second has lost lustre, too. A team that went, say, 94-60 and finished second was well respected and regarded as having had a very fine season.
by Jay on Oct 28, 2009 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. I just hate the fact that a team with 83 wins even has a chance to be in the playoffs, let alone win a World Series.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 28, 2009 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That obviously would never happen under my system.
by Jay on Oct 28, 2009 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unless one league was so terrible…
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 28, 2009 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How could one league be so terrible that not one out of 10 teams finish more than two games over .500? I guess it depends on whether there’s interleague play, and how much.
by Jay on Oct 28, 2009 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But how do the Indians make the playoffs in your system?
by supermarioelia on Oct 28, 2009 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As currently constructed, the only shot the Tribe has for a play-off berth is if the go to a lottery system.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Oct 29, 2009 1:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Indians would have been in the playoffs in 2007 under the Plan.
by FredOx on Oct 29, 2009 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Spiro Agnew would certainly love you, Chuck.
How’s that for cultural significance?
Wait 'til next millennium!
by emd2k3 on Oct 29, 2009 9:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We win the pennant, maybe a couple times each decade.
There are fewer playoff slots by half, but they’re worth more.
by Jay on Oct 29, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like the plan, but why even bother with playoffs at all? If we are going nutty, let’s make this a one league setup, play however many games and then crown our champ.
by fwembt on Oct 30, 2009 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because there would be no real rivalries in a 30-team league. Just a giant 30-way free-for-all.
by Jay on Oct 30, 2009 1:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree wholeheartedly. If anything, the fewer meetings between the teams would make the games more significant. Take the example of soccer (which I know you are loathe to do), the European associations are a tiered system with the top 20 or 24 teams competing in a single league. The one league setup certainly doesn’t keep those rivalries from being extremely heated.
by fwembt on Oct 30, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But we could never have a tiered farm system.
by Jay on Oct 30, 2009 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would we need to? Redoing the upper level should be sufficient to enact the change. Promotion/Relegation in the system be practically impossible and not idea in any way.
by fwembt on Oct 30, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok. What I am saying is that we wouldn’t need to copy the entire system, just the model of the very top league. This hasn’t caused the deterioration of any rivalries over there.
by fwembt on Oct 30, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tell me more about that model. I know nothing about it, because that league is beneath my notice.
by Jay on Oct 30, 2009 9:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure if you are legitimately curious or just mocking my poor, sincere soul.
by fwembt on Oct 30, 2009 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough.
Take the Football Association in England as an example. The very top tier (Premier League) is comprised of the top 17 teams from the previous year and three teams who are promoted from the tier below (The Championship). These 20 teams then play 38 games each with points awarded for draws and wins. At the end of the season the team with the most points is the champion, with ties decided by goal differential.
Obviously, baseball would require more games per team but the end goal, to determine the best team over the course of the season, would remain the same. The factor of luck over a seven game series is completely eliminated. It will never happen, but I don’t mind the idea.
by fwembt on Oct 31, 2009 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Both the business and the tradition demand a playoff structure. My system would have 37 to 41 posteason games. The current system has 24 to 41 posteason games.
I also think that in baseball, it is a real achievement to be the best team out of 10 in a series of 150+ games. That is both the true nature of the sport and, again, in keeping with the tradition. I fail to see what purpose it serves to eliminate the concept of winning a pennant.
by Jay on Oct 31, 2009 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I never said that the plan was a good one for baseball. I merely threw it out there as, perhaps, the best way for determining a true champion.
by fwembt on Oct 31, 2009 1:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps, but that’s not the only purpose I’m trying to serve.
by Jay on Oct 31, 2009 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
European soccer is not the model I would emulate to improve competition.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Oct 30, 2009 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It delivers a deserving champion more frequently. That’s all my point here is.
by fwembt on Oct 30, 2009 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s fair. But I’m a college basketball fan. Awarding the most deserving team isn’t my primary interest in a playoff system. There, I said it.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Oct 31, 2009 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is why I don’t like college basketball
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously, I respect that. But for me, it’s entertainment. I’m willing to sacrifice a pure meritocracy to get it.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Oct 31, 2009 11:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually love the 7-game first round series. I actually wish baseball would switch to a 7-7-9 format. I don’t think it’s necessarily attrition due to luck so much as endurance.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Oct 28, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, the 7-game series is much better. Luck plays a much larger role in a 5-game series than a 7-game series, so the longer series more truly determines the better team.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 28, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The 5-game Div Series have gotsta go.
Remember when the stupid things started at the road team’s place? Unbelievable!
by JulioBernazard on Oct 28, 2009 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I find those 7-game first round series painfully long. I could get between a 5-7-9 format.
by APV on Oct 28, 2009 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s only because of all the off days they add in. There should never be two off days between games in a series.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 28, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They don’t really need any off-days. With the Phillies’ starting depth, they’d be mopping up in a normally scheduled series.
by Jay on Oct 28, 2009 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Adam was talking about the 7-game first round series in basketball. That goes on way too long because of all the off days — I can see one off day between playoff games but you don’t need two.
In baseball, they should never have an off day except for travel days. Those off days between games 4 and 5 are stupid.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 28, 2009 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They don’t even really need the travel days.
by Jay on Oct 28, 2009 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With the goofy CBA rules, it’s probably just better to schedule the travel days in advance than to wait to see whether or not the West teams make it past the first round.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Oct 29, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There should NEVER be five-game series, in any sport.
by JulioBernazard on Oct 28, 2009 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Sweet Baboo
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
