Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: MrMichaelLee and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Ted Leonsis says Gilbert Arenas looks "fit, trim and explosive"

Gilbert Arenas has maintained an extremely low profile this offseason while training mostly in Chicago with Tim Grover, but there still remains a high level of interest in how the former face of the franchise has been coming along.

Owner Ted Leonsis fills in that void with a short post on his personal blog, Ted's Take, in which he writes about stumbling into the practice court at Verizon Center and finding Arenas playing a pickup game with several NBA players, including some all-stars.

Leonsis doesn't mention the other players in the gym but tweets from Chris Paul and Trevor Booker mentioning the run probably offered a clue. He writes, "It was quite a show and quite a display of talent...[S]uffice to say Gilbert looked trim, fit and explosive. His shot was sweet and he did one left handed dunk that was something to see. It had everyone talking. I was impressed and am happy."

Leonsis's comments reminded me of my trip to Barry Farm last summer to catch Arenas in a surprise pickup game with the Goodman League. Arenas had considerable bounce on that humid night as well. He looked like he was close to being back to his old self, then came the lost campaign of 2009-10.

But now, Arenas has already met with Leonsis, who is encouraging fans to "re-embrace" him, and spoken with John Wall about his expectations for the upcoming season. You guys ready for comeback No. 4?

By Michael Lee  |  August 25, 2010; 1:59 PM ET
Categories:  Gilbert Arenas  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Kwame Brown back with Michael Jordan, both in different places
Next: John Wall connects with Brandon Jennings for sick alley-oop dunk

Comments

saw this from a fan on another Wiz site also:

I was downtown and happened to run into Sam Young who told me they had been playing at Verizon yesterday with a bunch of other nba players and that Gil was torching the place. He said gil had a few exposive dunks and was burning it up from all over the floor. He said Gil looked in better shape than he has ever seen him.... Just thought I would pass the word....

Posted by: dlts2041 | August 25, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Junior Burrough pretty much said the same thing on CSN about 6 weeks ago.

My prediction is Gil will come back and prove that he still is the best Wizard, and the Wall/Gil combo will be deadly.

Also, those haters who want him to play well and then be traded after he proves himself need to get over it. Gil ain't going nowhere.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 25, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

How about this quote from Leonsis:

"Gil - our All-Star"

Take that DCMan and any other hater!

Take Ted at his word, not what you want to happen.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 25, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Gil's new number should number 4 as in "Comeback No. 4"!

Posted by: JohnWWW | August 25, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

I see Wall and Arenas being an explosive backcourt. Man its going to open up the floor. Would love to see this team run. Question is will they play D?

Posted by: One9 | August 25, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

The backcourt of Arenas and Wall could possibly be better than Arenas and Hughes. My only issue is whether or not Gil really buys into playing the 2. Gilbert is an awesome talent and could definitely return to All-Star status. The addition of John Wall does not cancel out Gilbert at all. Look forward to Gilbert "Lights Out" Arenas!

Posted by: Doobie_Sparks | August 25, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Heard the same stuff last summer and then Gil looked like he couldnt get off the floor when the season started.

HOWEVER, now the knee is as healed as it's gonna get so I am cautiously optimistic

Posted by: divi3 | August 25, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Heard the same stuff last summer and then Gil looked like he couldnt get off the floor when the season started.

True, but remember Gil was still averaging 22 a game and was mostly adjusting to being a point guard. I look for big things from Gil this season. The man is talented.

Posted by: thecomedian1 | August 25, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Wow i didn't know CP3 was coming to town. They looked friendly back then

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S7rvC1fIgg

Posted by: jefferu | August 25, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Yeah I was just gonna say that. CP3 is on of the guys playing in the pickup games. Not sure if that's who Gil was going at...but it sure ain't halfway house residents.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | August 25, 2010 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Man, am I loving that. You can tell Ted is excited as well.

And the question of will this Team play D? All I have to say about that is, in order to run the ball effectively, you have to play D.

It is the way I was taught. Becoming adept at taking the ball away from your opponent so that you can run is a lost art.

It is why Arenas and Hughes were so good together. They led the League at taking the ball away.

You can't run effectively if the ball is going through the hoop.

A lot of people like to break the game down to an individuals defensive play, which isn't the key at all.

The key is how good are you together at taking the ball away and not letting the other team score.

If they do score, then you make sure they are out of rhythum when they do. Coaches today are mostly too controlling and they don't allow the players to dictate on the court.

They lack confidence to let the players control things, for they feel it would show a lack no how on their part as a coach.

Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, John Wooden, and some others are/were masters at giving their players direction and a philosophy and letting them actually achieve it on the court in gametime situations.

Too many coaches like to stand on the sideline and coach the entire flow of the game up and down the court. They think that is what good coaching is.

Good players playing together will always figure out how to win and will do what is necessary to win, only if you let them.

To run the ball and score it, you have to get it first. First means defense and it always has and always will.

To many equate running with no defense, but those who believe that like coaches really don't understand the game.

John Wall will be no good without the ball because his forte is run to score. When you run to score, that is opportunity on the fly and you must take the ball away(defense) at a high rate to have good success at it.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | August 25, 2010 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Your on the right track Doobie_Sparks but

keep in mind; Arenas and Hughes shared the

well as well as taking it away often.

They led the league in steals took turns bringing the ball down the court.

And I now you are on to something, we all foresee John Wall becoming a phenom.

And with Gil playing at a high-level, the floor will be wide open.

Peace, John

Posted by: upscalechef | August 25, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

"To many equate running with no defense, but those who believe that like coaches really don't understand the game."

Putting aside the (by now familiar) fact that that sentence makes no grammatical sense . . .

The reason why people equate running with no defense is because most running teams don't play any defense.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 25, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Glad to hear that Arenas is out there quietly tearing it up.

Who knows, with this backcourt, and if Blatche can pick up where he left off last season, this club could really surprise a lot of people.

Posted by: Independent11 | August 25, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Actually, the best running teams always play good defense and rebound. That's how you get to run. Not too easy to get the break started when you're constantly taking it out of the twine...

Posted by: truke | August 25, 2010 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Maybe I am just super hyped today, but it just occurred to me that I have never seen Gilbert do a left handed dunk before.

Is this the same Gilbert that so many said last year that couldn't elevate and finish anymore?

Wow!

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | August 25, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Same ol' hype, let the future record speak for itself....

Posted by: mofares | August 25, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

The reason why people equate running with no defense is because most running teams don't play any defense.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 25, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse


I think that's really about most running teams wanting to gamble and get the steal, the deflection, the loose ball etc to cause disruption to the offense. When it works, it results in easy points. When it doesn't, it means the offense has a man advantage. It equates to poor defense because the teams end up gambling so much, defenders are often out of position. Playing defense like that is why Gilbert and Hughes could rack up the steals but the team's defensive metrics were pretty bad during those years.

The trick is to play patient, solid defense playing for missed shots and rebounds rather than steals and blocks and then still push the tempo when you get the ball. The only team that does this really well is Boston. They still pick up a lot of steals because Rondo is a freak at getting helpside steals, but they play great positional team defense and the big dudes cover well (though they sacrifice some rebounding for that). Plus they foul a lot, I mean, play physically.

We've got a similar PG in Wall. But we don't have the defenders or rebounders to go along with it.

Posted by: manifested | August 25, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

If he still looks good in January then the team might have a shot at moving him. Maybe throw in Blatche as a sweetener. AB will be looking for an extension next year,anyway. If a team is going to risk big money on him, I'd rather it not be the Wizards.

Posted by: djnnnou | August 25, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Showtime Lakers, Great defensive team that would run you into the floor.

The Wilt, Jerry West, and Gail Goodrich, Lakers in the early 70's ran their way to an NBA title and played shut down D.

Celtics, All you got to say is the Celtics, from Bill Russell, to Dave Cowens, to Larry Bird and company, always played D and would run your ass ragged.

The great Bullets era from 69' to 79' great defensive teams that could always run.

I could go on and on, the salary cap and the star system have slowed many NBA teams to a crawl since they can't afford to carry the 8 to 10 high level players it takes to run. That's the financial side of the game that has krept onto the court, a true fastbreaking team can win in this league if they have the salary cap under control.

But not many do, but the Wiz do now, and have the opportunity to build a running team. Wall is the perfect guy to build a fastbreaking team around and Gil could be a workable backcourt partner. Gail Goodrich wasn't a protypical shooting guard, but he played it on a title winning team when paired with Jerry West.

I've got to agree with Larry, true fastbreaking teams always start with D first. There was a version of play that some confuse with fast breaking basketball that was taught by Doug Moe and some others(Paul Westhead in college). They beleived that they could trade 2's for 3's in a wide open, shoot the first 3 style of offense.

But they weren't really teaching fastbreaking, they were trying to take the ball out of the hoop, and then push up the floor and get quickly into a spread the floor offense that was designed to take the first available 3.

That's not a fastbreak, comparing the two are like comparing apples and oranges.

Kal, have you ever actually seen NBA basketball? Or is this just another discussion in the abstract and the innane to you, like the great labor law debate?
You really kept me glued to my computor screen on that one...
GM

Posted by: flohrtv | August 25, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse

If he still looks good in January then the team might have a shot at moving him. Maybe throw in Blatche as a sweetener. AB will be looking for an extension next year,anyway. If a team is going to risk big money on him, I'd rather it not be the Wizards.

Posted by: djnnnou | August 25, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Why would you move these two relatively young players if the team is successful.

Posted by: NewManagement | August 25, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Why would you move these two relatively young players if the team is successful.

Posted by: NewManagement | August 25, 2010 6:17 PM

Yeah, if Andre Blatche plays like he did the second half of last season, why in God's name would anyone want to trade him, and not resign him?

It's hard to lure young, talented, big men, so if you end up finding one in your own ranks, you better nail him to the floor.

The grass isn't always gonna be greener with someone else just because they're different...

Posted by: Independent11 | August 25, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, if Andre Blatche plays like he did the second half of last season, why in God's name would anyone want to trade him, and not resign him?

Because the last risky signing blew up in their faces. Andray has shown enough warning signs for a quality organization to pass on.

Posted by: djnnnou | August 25, 2010 7:12 PM | Report abuse

You Gilbert lovers never learn, do you? Just keep trying to kick that football Lucy's holding.

Gilbert always tears it up in the gym every summer. Then we get these media leaks about great he looks every summer. Then he finds a pooch to scr*w every winter.

Maybe he'll change, maybe he won't. But anyone who goes into this season believing he definitely has changed has the memory of a goldfish.

Posted by: KTV1 | August 25, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

You Gilbert lovers never learn, do you? Just keep trying to kick that football Lucy's holding.

Gilbert always tears it up in the gym every summer. Then we get these media leaks about great he looks every summer. Then he finds a pooch to scr*w every winter.

Posted by: KTV1 | August 25, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Really? I heard he looked good last summer, he came back after two years...played better every month of the season and was playing really well when he was stupid enough to get suspended.

Two years before he was recovering from sugery ini the summer. Just for the record. Don't think he was healthy for the start of either season. If he was...he was out for another surgery within a month.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | August 25, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Because the last risky signing blew up in their faces. Andray has shown enough warning signs for a quality organization to pass on.

Posted by: djnnnou | August 25, 2010 7:12 PM

I don't know what basketball criteria you are using, but I don't think any team and certainly not quality NBA teams would pass on Andray Blatche.

I can't think of any team that would pass on Mr. Blatche now. And pray tell, what warning signs are you referring to???

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | August 25, 2010 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Because the last risky signing blew up in their faces. Andray has shown enough warning signs for a quality organization to pass on.

Posted by: djnnnou | August 25, 2010 7:12 PM

Like I said if Blatche plays next year like he did the last half of last season he'll have 1.5 years of fabulous play for a young power forward.

And you'd want to trade him, because when he was still developing years prior he showed some inconsistency?

Man, every team in the NBA would be after Blatche if he performs like he did during the last half of last year. And we might actually have a chance at him, well ... because he's already here.

Posted by: Independent11 | August 25, 2010 8:03 PM | Report abuse

If AB plays this season as well as he played the 2nd half of last, his detractors will be sick 'cause EG will be working on re-upping him a year early not trading him.

Posted by: divi3 | August 25, 2010 8:11 PM | Report abuse

This must be a slow news day. Ted has become a kid in a candy store and Mike Lee is reminiscing about Barry Farms and their 9 ft. rims.

Please, let's not mention Barry Farms anymore because Barry Farms success does not mean anything, and a former star playing well in a pickup game doesn't imply that he'll do well in a team/nba game setting.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 25, 2010 9:32 PM | Report abuse

"Take that DCMan and any other hater!

Take Ted at his word, not what you want to happen.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 25, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse "

Yeah sure, Teddy has no vested interest in hyping up Gilby. Teddy's word is everything.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 25, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

"I think that's really about most running teams wanting to gamble and get the steal, the deflection, the loose ball etc to cause disruption to the offense. When it works, it results in easy points. When it doesn't, it means the offense has a man advantage. It equates to poor defense because the teams end up gambling so much, defenders are often out of position."

Posted by: manifested | August 25, 2010 5:51 PM

Which is just a long-winded way of saying what I already said: Most running teams don't play defense. Is it possible to do both? Sure. But the fact remains, most teams that do one rarely do the other.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 25, 2010 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Bird's Celtics were a fast-breaking team? That's news to me...

Posted by: MeviousMan | August 25, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Showtime Lakers, Great defensive team that would run you into the floor.

The Wilt, Jerry West, and Gail Goodrich, Lakers in the early 70's ran their way to an NBA title and played shut down D.

Celtics, All you got to say is the Celtics, from Bill Russell, to Dave Cowens, to Larry Bird and company, always played D and would run your ass ragged.

The great Bullets era from 69' to 79' great defensive teams that could always run.

The Showtime Lakers were, at best, a good defensive team. They were never a great one. As for the rest . . . I realize that you're getting on in years and that your memory isn't what it once was . . . but you do realize the 1970's ended a while ago, right? The fact that the most recent example you've got is about 25 years old and that the best ones are older than that pretty much cements my point. I'm talking about the NBA today. You're sitting on your porch in a rocker with a knitted shawl on you lap, shooing the youngins out of the yard. Try naming some teams from the last decade and a half or so that've been successful playing an uptempo/running offense (and by successful, I mean winning a majority of their games, not just scoring a lot of points on their way to the lottery) who also played consistently better than average D. You might wanna double up on the gingko biloba before you start thinkin' about it.

Now that we've gotten the customary "proving GM doesn't know what the hell he's talking about" portion of the program out of the way, let's now move on to the "taking GM's limp attempt at a zinger and punk-slapping him with it" part of the show.

"Kal, have you ever actually seen NBA basketball?"

Yep and, apparently unlike you, I've actually watched it during a a year that begins with a "2" and a "0."

Tell me, when you talk out of your crack like that, do you cut a slit in the seat of your pants first, or do you like it when the sound comes out all muffled so you can reminisce about your days robbing banks with the James Gang with a dirty kerchief covering your mouth?

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 25, 2010 10:55 PM | Report abuse

by time december come around we will all learn that this is still Gilbert's team and I can see Gilbert and Hinrich closing out games.

Posted by: lemekdivine | August 25, 2010 11:00 PM | Report abuse

"Bird's Celtics were a fast-breaking team? That's news to me..."

It's news to anyone with enough brain cells still firing to actually remember having watched them play. They ran the break when it was available to them. But then again, so do most halfway decent teams in the NBA. Was their offense predicted primary on creating running opportunities as often as possible? Of course not. That would be pretty stupid of them given that they had two of the best half-court players of the era--Bird and McHale--in their lineup.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 25, 2010 11:03 PM | Report abuse

"Actually, the best running teams always play good defense and rebound. "

Wrong.

D'Antoni's Suns and Nellie's Mavs routinely won 50+ games and advanced in the playoffs. They were also mediocre to flat out awful when it came to defense and rebounding. The Suns have improved a bit defensively under Gentry but, correspondingly, they also run less. The Mavs got better defensively under Aj and Carlise but, like the Suns, that defensive uptick also came with a decrease in pace and tempo.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 25, 2010 11:12 PM | Report abuse

"by time december come around we will all learn that this is still Gilbert's team and I can see Gilbert and Hinrich closing out games.

Posted by: lemekdivine | August 25, 2010 11:00 PM | Report abuse "

Don't forget that by then, it'll be clear that it's gonna be another trip to the lottery.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 25, 2010 11:18 PM | Report abuse

@larryinclinton "Too many coaches like to stand on the sideline and coach the entire flow of the game up and down the court. They think that is what good coaching is.
Good players playing together will always figure out how to win and will do what is necessary to win, only if you let them."

Good post. Do you think OUR coach is willing to figure out a winning style, then step back and let the players pretty much take care of their own business?

Posted by: dcjazzman | August 26, 2010 12:00 AM | Report abuse

"Take that DCMan and any other hater!

Take Ted at his word, not what you want to happen.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 25, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse "

Yeah sure, Teddy has no vested interest in hyping up Gilby. Teddy's word is everything.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 25, 2010 9:48 PM

If your word is no good, then your name is no good...Teddy is very successful,and has a very good rep, so he's not going to be throwing out words just to sound good...That's not how he built his rep.

Posted by: Newington32 | August 26, 2010 12:10 AM | Report abuse

"most running teams don't play defense..." hmmm. how many titles did red auerbach's celtic teams win using a fast break backed by exellent team defense? didn't the laker teams with kareem, magic and worthy run everybody off the court and still play good defense? today, the celtics and the magic play run & shoot, but are still good defensively. but i DO agree that defense is not an exalted skill these days.

Posted by: dcjazzman | August 26, 2010 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Way I remember it is, Gilbert played very, very well during those 32 games last season, much better than we could expect from a guy coming off a two year absence from the NBA. And it was also pretty clear that 1) he wasn't the player he had been before the injury, which meant that 2) he was no longer the sort you could build your contending team around; and 3) he seemed to be aware of it.

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 12:56 AM | Report abuse

"i DO agree that defense is not an exalted skill these days.Posted by: dcjazzman"

At least not in the NBA, and not the sort of defense we saw years ago. I think the rules changes have a great deal to do with that.

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 12:58 AM | Report abuse

""most running teams don't play defense..." hmmm. how many titles did red auerbach's celtic teams win using a fast break backed by exellent team defense? didn't the laker teams with kareem, magic and worthy run everybody off the court and still play good defense? today, the celtics and the magic play run & shoot, but are still good defensively. but i DO agree that defense is not an exalted skill these days."

Posted by: dcjazzman

hmmm . . . (A) Red Auerbach coached his last game more than 40 years ago. (B) The Showtime Lakers won their last title more than 20 years ago. (C) The showtime Lakers were not a great defensive team. Good, solid overall? Sure. But they were probably middle of the pack overall in the NBA in those days. (D) There's a difference between a running team and a team that runs selectively if the opportunity presents itself. Teams like D'Antoni's Suns and any team coached by Nellie fall under the former heading. Most other good teams fall under the latter. (E) The Celtics, be it under Auerbach or Rivers were/are not a running team.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 26, 2010 1:44 AM | Report abuse

"Teddy is very successful,and has a very good rep, so he's not going to be throwing out words just to sound good...That's not how he built his rep.Posted by: Newington32"

Not to compare him to Leonsis, but not so long ago you could have said the same about Bernie Madoff...

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 7:55 AM | Report abuse

And to those who claim defense will be a problem, how many tough defensive teams are there in the East, outside of Boston, and Orlando has Dwight to protect the rim, but surely VC is not a defender at the 2. Who is Miami's defenders? Chicago? They decent defensively in certain areas, but they lost Hinrich, their best defending guard. They got Noah, and talent in depth, but Boozer isn't a defender. Atlanta has Josh Smith defensively, but not much else DEFENSIVELY. I am not saying the wizards are better than those teams, but Milwaukee, Philly, Detroit, and teams of that ilk are comparable to the Wiz.

Oh, I guess Cleveland has a great defensive team.

What Washington really needs is Nick to value defense and grab that role off the bench backing up Gil.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 26, 2010 8:11 AM | Report abuse

Why is Leonsis guilty until proven innocent in regards to his word? Y'all need to go root for a team other than the Wizards if you don't want Arenas on your team. Cause Ted is dropping words like "REDEMPTION" and "OUR ALL-STAR" on y'all and you need to accept it. Gil ain't going nowhere.

Gil ain't playing in Miami, root for them.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 26, 2010 8:18 AM | Report abuse

The no-hand rules have negated defense moreso than player apathy. Team USA is vastly superior defensively to their competition and I dont think they learned how to D it up just this summer. If we win the Worlds, it'll be due to the ability of the team to completely shut down the opponents offense for critical stretches.

Posted by: divi3 | August 26, 2010 8:20 AM | Report abuse

As well as Gil played last year....41%FG has to go up this season imo. The last thing this team needs is Gil taking 15-20 shots a night shooting at 40% clip.

Posted by: divi3 | August 26, 2010 8:24 AM | Report abuse

If Gil fits into the right role this season and excels, why would we trade him? If AB puts up all-star numbers at age 24, we'd move him to build around a young core?

no way. the team IS young, if they play well together the significant pieces will stay in place.

Posted by: divi3 | August 26, 2010 8:29 AM | Report abuse

I want to see how Gil plays with multiple playmakers on the floor. What I mean, it appears that Wall will be great at making plays for others, Gil was ok at it at point, but nothing special. At 2guard, he could be better than average at making plays for others. But Gil has never played with 2 other playmakers cause Blatche is an above average playmaker for a 4/5. Antawn was well below average, Haywood zilch, DShawn below average, Caron was average at best. You have to go back to Antonio Daniels and maybe Hughes.

Yeah Gil f--ked up last season but there are 2 bright sides to that story. The first is winning the lottery and selecting John Wall. The second is they got rid of Antawn and gave that spot to Blatche. Blatche is a confident player now. Confidence goes a long way.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 26, 2010 8:35 AM | Report abuse

IMO, Gil is most likely still our best player. AB still has the most tools. Wall probably the biggest upside.

Our team, assuming AB and everyone else is healthy, wont be as bad as many predict. I'd take Gil, Wall and AB over most 1, 2 and 4's in the league. Throw in Josh Howard, McGee and a few more glue guys and we could get to 40 wins with some luck.

The key this year is NOT gil or Wall. The key is JM. If he doesnt rebound and defend down low, it wont matter what anyone else does. We'd be a donut. BIIIIGGGG hole in the middle.

Posted by: original_mark | August 26, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

If JM surprises many people and looks like a legit starting C by season's end, the core group of the rebuild will already be in place which is what I've been semi-preaching and hoping for.

And I'd love to see this team run opponents out of the gym on many nights

Posted by: divi3 | August 26, 2010 9:04 AM | Report abuse

This "running team" vs. "non-running team" has turned nonsensically into a semantics argument based on somebody's individual definition of "running team."

It reminds of football arguments trying to designate whether an offense is a running offense or a passing offense, as if it's impossible to be both.

My take: the Wizards would do themselves well to get out and run whenever the opportunity presents itself. If it doesn't present itself, obviously, they would do well not to force it and set-up their half-court offense.

However, with John Wall and Gilbert Arenas on the court together, the opportunity to run should present itself a lot more than other NBA teams could reasonably expect with their own lineup. It's not every day you have two athletic ball-handlers capable of running with a point guard's efficiency at an (hopefully) all-star level.

That does not preclude the Wizards from placing an emphasis on the defensive end of the court, either. It merely means that in certain situations in which your average NBA team finds it advantageous to slow the tempo, the Wizards will have the opportunity to run because of who they have on the court.

Whether that makes them a running team or not, that's up to your own personal definition.

Anyway, it's great to hear that Arenas is looking so good. He's always thrived off of the motivation of doubters. Let's hope that characteristic holds true into this season.

Posted by: psps23 | August 26, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

I think Gil's knee is PK. However, he needs to regain his shooting touch. Untreatably, his outside shooting fell off last season due to long layoff. By regaining his once-feared long range shooting ability not only will help him drive to the basket, but also will help John Wall too.

Posted by: sagaliba | August 26, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Sorry to be off topic, but I think this is the right forum to ask the question.

I am thinking about switching from Comcast to Verizon FIOS for my TV service. Wonder if they carry Comcast Sports Net in HD (their website is vague)? Since most Wizards games are carried by CSN, this will be the deciding factor for me. 

BTW, I live in Montgomery County, if this makes any difference. Thanks in advance!

Posted by: sagaliba | August 26, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Gil played 32 games on top of missing over 100. I don't think you can definitively answer anything. His play wasn't the same month to month...it didn't get worse...it got BETTER.

At first he couldn't beat anyone of the dribble, couldn't elevate and wasn't getting to the line. Then he could beat them but lost control, then he would beat them, control the ball and couldn't finish. The last weeks bfore the suspension it was starting to come together. Let alone the mental portion of the game...scoring/running the team.

Now he just needs to score. Should be a lot easier for him.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | August 26, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

@larryinclinton "Too many coaches like to stand on the sideline and coach the entire flow of the game up and down the court. They think that is what good coaching is.
Good players playing together will always figure out how to win and will do what is necessary to win, only if you let them."

Good post. Do you think OUR coach is willing to figure out a winning style, then step back and let the players pretty much take care of their own business?

Posted by: dcjazzman | August 26, 2010 12:00 AM

Flip might be less inclined to leave the gameplan and the overall flow to the players on the floor.

However, I have seen that due to the greatness and desire and will to win of the star on the court (Wall/Gilbert), Jordan, Majic, Bird, that they will have great impact on how much the coach lets the players control the game.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | August 26, 2010 10:18 AM | Report abuse

And to the "Ted is lying" group...didn't Ted say Gil was out of shape and put on some weight not too long ago?

I guess he should've started the spin machine earlier.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | August 26, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

"It reminds of football arguments trying to designate whether an offense is a running offense or a passing offense, as if it's impossible to be both."

No one said it's impossible to do both. Of course it's possible. Anything is possible. But the fact remains (and it is a fact) that in the modern NBA, good running teams tend to be very poor on defense and good defensive teams predicate their offense mostly on half-court sets rather than pushing the ball with tempo. Still waiting for someone to offer a shred of contrary evidence that isn't 25 or more years old.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 26, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

"My take: the Wizards would do themselves well to get out and run whenever the opportunity presents itself. If it doesn't present itself, obviously, they would do well not to force it and set-up their half-court offense."

Which would (A) distinguish them not at all from most NBA teams and (B) not really make them a running team.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 26, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

"And to those who claim defense will be a problem, how many tough defensive teams are there in the East . . . "

Not really the point, is it? The defensive deficiencies of other teams don't alter the benefit that would accrued by the Wizards being able to stop people. Hell, if anything, it increases that benefit. If they go into the season thinking "well, no one else is playing defense so why should we?" then they're screwed from day one.

Posted by: kalo_rama | August 26, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Not to compare him to Leonsis, but not so long ago you could have said the same about Bernie Madoff...

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 7:55 AM
Sounds like a comparison to me...You can go to the extreme with anything in life, but I'll take my chances with Leonsis not creating a scandal or anything close to that.

Posted by: Newington32 | August 26, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

PSPS23,

Great post.

And let me just add. It is amusing how some always want to keep equating a running team with those that haven't won a champioship of late or that play poor defense.

Your analogy psps23 is spot on. And yes, the Bird Boston Celtics could really run your ass in the ground. And at the same time, they could play half court as well.

Good running teams today that play defense. Lets see, the Lakers, the Spurs, the Celtics, the Majic, the Hawks, and that team that a lot of you that say the Wizards should mimic in rebuilding, the Oklahoma City Thunder.

I'm sure that we could squeeze in a few more current teams that run the ball and play good D. However, the fact of the matter is that defense purist for some reason always like to cite the teams that run and don't have good defense and not the ones that run and do.

And let me say it loud and clear one more time. The Larry Bird Boston Celtics Team had one of the best fast breaks in the game.

If you did not get back on them it was a layup everytime. Just cause they were good at halfcourt did not mean they could not run your ass of the court.

The Oklahoma City Thunder plays good defense and you better stop the ball, or they will run you out of the gym.

The Atlanta Hawks are the same way, but since they fired their coach, they might find our all to soon what real BBall is and they won't being doing it anymore.

Got to Go.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | August 26, 2010 10:40 AM | Report abuse

"IMO, Gil is most likely still our best player."

I think you'd get some argument if you said he was Washington's best player during his stint last season. Here are Gil's numbers alongside Antawn Jamison's:

Avg Minutes: GA 36.5, AJ 38.9
Scoring Avg: GA 22.6, AJ 19.8
FG%: GA 41.1, AJ 45.6
3pt%: GA 35.7, AJ 35.5
FT%: GA 73.9, AJ 70.0
RB: GA 4.2, AJ 8.8
Assts: GA 7.2, AJ 1.3
Stls: GA 1.3, AJ 1.0
TOs: GA 3.7, AJ 1.49
Fouls: GA 3.0, AJ 2.73

Adjusting for their respective positions, these are very comparable performances. Two players who are productive in terms of the stat sheet, but not as productive in terms of wins and losses.

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

"Sounds like a comparison to me...You can go to the extreme with anything in life, but I'll take my chances with Leonsis not creating a scandal or anything close to that.
Posted by: Newington32"

Well, here's your original statement: ""Teddy is very successful,and has a very good rep, so he's not going to be throwing out words just to sound good...That's not how he built his rep.Posted by: Newington32"

I was just pointing out how little sense your opinion made. In fact, it's an 'argument from authority', a logical fallacy where you argue that a statement is correct because of the reputation of the person who made it. Don't you remember that from Logic 101?

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

kalo

That is true, and I do want them to improve defensively, and I never said it was unimportant, but #1, the rules are stacked against defense on the perimeter.

The Wizards do need more well rounded players in certain positions, and I think Blatche could be an offense/defense player(certainly Antawn was not), but they lost Haywood. McGee is not Haywood defensively. He needs to improve.

Gil could defend 2's better than 1's, at least he should be better keeping them from penetrating. Running around and thru screens could be a problem, but there aren't too many 2-way players at the 2 spot. The scorers don't defend and the defenders don't score. You got the rare Kobe's. But again, he is rare. What the Wizards of the past really needed was better depth. The role players stunk, and some of the starters stunk too.

The reason the Wizards were an average team was because of the role players and depth.

That is why I liked Singleton last year, he was a good role player, who played defense, rebounded, and could make an open shot. They should re-sign him. That is why I like Booker, a person that knows his limits, is physical, athletic, and could match up DEFENSIVELY with a LeBron, though nobody stops LeBron. Picking up a Hinrich, who is a role player, but a good role player. He can handle, defend, and shoot.

The Big 3 carried those teams as far as they could. If they had better support, things would have been different.

But, guess where the bargain depth will be headed, MIAMI. Washington never had that luxury. Bargains went to Boston, San Antonio, Detroit, etc.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 26, 2010 10:53 AM | Report abuse

As the Wizzies stand right now we won't win many games.
Playoffs? I doubt it.
But this season shouldn't be a total loss like when Eddy T. refused to play AB,JM & NY. Hopefully Flip will find out who can play by playing them in real games.
Will Nick get it? Can Seriphin play at this level? Is Booker ready to bang with the best? Can Javale learn to defend?
This is the future of this team. Playing is the only way we'll find out what we got.
Even if by some strange occurrence we make the PO's it would be a short series.

Posted by: VBFan | August 26, 2010 11:11 AM | Report abuse

(C) The showtime Lakers were not a great defensive team. Good, solid overall? Sure. But they were probably middle of the pack overall in the NBA in those days.
Posted by: kalo_rama

Not that this adds much to the discussion, but more just because I was curious, I went back to look at the 80s era Lakers defensive stats. Based on just a very superficial analysis (Opp FG%, RB differential, STLs, BLKs), I would say they were a good, some times very good defensive team. Opposing FG% is definitely not a complete measure of a team's defensive ability, but it's a decent indicator.

Over the seasons from 80/81 - 89/90 the Lakers averaged finishing between 8th and 9th in OppFG%. They finished as high as 4th and as low as 14th (in a 22 team league). Generally speaking their defense was good. They were also usually in the upper half in generating turnovers, frequently finishing in the top 10 in both steals and blocks. IMO, they were better than middle-of-the-pack, some times borderline great, but never a top defensive team.

Where they were decidedly more average is in rebounding. They usually only averaged 2 to 3 more rebounds a game than their opponents, where the top rebounding teams were usually averaging 4 to 5 more or better.

Where they shone of course, was in their own offensive efficiency, usually finishing in the top two or three (and often #1) in stats like offensive efficiency and their own FG%.

Posted by: ts35 | August 26, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

I am thinking about switching from Comcast to Verizon FIOS for my TV service. Wonder if they carry Comcast Sports Net in HD (their website is vague)? Since most Wizards games are carried by CSN, this will be the deciding factor for me.

BTW, I live in Montgomery County, if this makes any difference. Thanks in advance!

Posted by: sagaliba

I believe FiOS does carry CSN in HD. I think the biggest problem with FiOS for a Washington sports fan is that they don't (I don't think) carry MASN2 in HD or the spill over for CSN in HD. Meaning on nights where the Caps and Wiz both play, only one will get shown in HD.

Posted by: ts35 | August 26, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

I was just pointing out how little sense your opinion made. In fact, it's an 'argument from authority', a logical fallacy where you argue that a statement is correct because of the reputation of the person who made it. Don't you remember that from Logic 101? Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 10:50 AM

Cool..That's your Logic and you can stick with Your logic...They did a documentary on Leonsis a few months back on a PBS station FROM 14 years ago and they had a guy on the panel that sounded similar to you, especially when Leosis was talking about the future...Ted was using terms such as Social Media and the impact it was going to have on the world today. The guy debating Ted had a logical answer for everything..All I'm saying Bro is that Leonsis is not slinging words..Plain and simple...

Posted by: Newington32 | August 26, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

How exactly does one determine if a team is a running team? Sure there are obvious outliers like GSW, but past that, how do you determine which teams from last season were runners without having watched a bunch of their games?

For instance, last season Utah was amongst the league leaders in most Field Goals made per game (4th behind GSW,Phx,Den) and they were 4th in opponents FGs made, right behind Boston.

Wouldnt that indicate they run and play great defense?

Posted by: divi3 | August 26, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

"Cool..That's your Logic and you can stick with Your logic..."

LOL well, there's no law that says you have to be logical, so you're legally protected at least...

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

"For instance, last season Utah was amongst the league leaders in most Field Goals made per game (4th behind GSW,Phx,Den) and they were 4th in opponents FGs made, right behind Boston. Wouldnt that indicate they run and play great defense?Posted by: divi3"

A good question. The indicator for a running offensive club is FGs attempted, not made. Here's the comparison of the Jazz vs a few known running teams:

Golden State:7,094
NY Knicks:6,876
New Orleans:6,842
Phoenix:6,788
Denver:6,678
Utah:6,575

Utah ran more than teams such as Miami (6,518), Orlando (6,394), or Cleveland (6,391), but their scoring prowess came largely from a glossy 49.1% team FG percentage. The Jazz were actually a pretty well-balanced club. Don't know how they'll be this season, with all the defections.

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

How exactly does one determine if a team is a running team?

Posted by: divi3

It's a good question. FGs Made may work, or it may just indicate an efficient team. Utah is usually one of the higher FG% teams.

There's a composite stat called Pace or Pace factor that might be a better indicator

For what it's worth, basketball-reference.com defines it this way

Pace Factor (available since the 1973-74 season in the NBA); the formula is 48 * ((Tm Poss + Opp Poss) / (2 * (Tm MP / 5))). Pace factor is an estimate of the number of possessions per 48 minutes by a team.

Most good defensive teams these days like to turn good defense into easy offensive opportunities. But, like the Celtics, if they are willing to dig in on D, and make their opponents use a lot of the shot clock, their overall pace or possessions might not be as high.

Plus there's probably a small difference between a 'running' team and a 'fast-paced' team. D'Antoni's and Nellie's teams like to run, but even on half-court possessions they're going to try to get shots early in the shot clock.

Ultimately, these days it's probably more of an eyeball test than anything else.


Posted by: ts35 | August 26, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

How about the Bucs last year? 2nd in FGAs behind GSW and 2nd in OppFGM behind Miami. That would seem to be a team that runs and plays D

cant find the pace stats at bballref

Posted by: divi3 | August 26, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Ted Leonsis is a bigger man than most for embracing Arenas and asking others to do likewise. Secondly, I hope Wall remains humble with all the hoopla surrounding him. Hopefully he will recognize as a man who had not proved anything on the NBA level "yet" that Arenas is still the "go to guy" in crucial game situations, although John is the quality playmaker. I envision Washington with Arenas, Blatche and Wall leading the way, the team winning between 38-42 games. Lastly, if Ted decided to re-name the team, lets make it the "Washington Monuments." Let's win a few first. Until next time...

Posted by: esmith4 | August 26, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

cant find the pace stats at bballref

Posted by: divi3

One of the disappointing parts about bbal-ref is that I can't find team comparison stats. At bball-ref, the pace stats are on the team's season stat pages near the other stats like pythagorean W-L, etc.

But you can find sortable team comparison stats here:

http://www.databasebasketball.com/leagues/leagueyear.htm?lg=N&yr=2009

How about the Bucs last year? 2nd in FGAs behind GSW

Actually the Bucs only attempted 26 FGs last year, which is why they brought in Hunter Lawrence to compete for the Kicker's job with Connor Barth............sorry, prepping for too many fantasy football drafts....

Posted by: ts35 | August 26, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

"How exactly does one determine if a team is a running team?

Posted by: divi3 | August 26, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse"

This was exactly my point. It's all based on your personal definition of the term. Just because you don't have a seven-seconds-or-less philosophy doesn't mean that you cannot be a running team (IMO).

Teams are going to base their gameplan off of their opponent's ability. Generally speaking if you're more athletic and fit than your opponent, it benefits you to push the tempo. If you're less athletic and fit, it benefits you to slow the tempo (other factors being equal).

The Wizards with Wall, Arenas, McGee, and Blatche on the court will be one of the most athletic teams in the league. It will almost always benefit the Wizards to push the tempo. That doesn't mean there won't be stretches within a game or entire games themselves where the Wizards will want to tactically slow the game, but in general, the Wizards should end up being a running team. And as long as discipline is maintained, this should not preclude the Wizards from placing an emphasis on the defensive end of the court.

Posted by: psps23 | August 26, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

And as long as discipline is maintained, this should not preclude the Wizards from placing an emphasis on the defensive end of the court.

Posted by: psps23

As in, JaVale deciding he's better off securing the rebound than leading the break :)

Posted by: ts35 | August 26, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

I mostly don't bother with Kal's posts because he so much time being consistantly wrong, and since I'm so old I don't have enough time left to refute all of his bullhockey.

Lets see, in the past 50 years they didn't change the shape of the ball.

Court's the same size, same number of players. The game is pretty much the same as it always was, except for the business side of it.

There's not one player of the 50 greatest from the first 50 years that couldn't play the game today. So there's no merit to the old guys couldn't play today line of thinking.

Hand checking on the perimeter has been outlawed, except it always manages to come back for the playoffs. So there's not one relevent point been made as to why a defensive minded, fastbreaking, team can't play in the NBA today.

More recent teams that won with a fastbreaking offensive style?

Pop in an old VCR tape of the Bulls/first three titles/ pre MJ retirement. Classic defensive minded team, that would use defensive stops and turnovers to runout on the break at every opportunity.

I'll grant you the second 3 titles MJ & co. walked it up a lot.

Both the Sacramento Kings and the Suns have come with in a hair's breath of a title playing in a fastbreaking offense. Both were highly adept at running their offensive as a 4 or 5 man break. They were masters at run the floor, get in your lanes and look for the mismatch because they had an extra offensive man.

The Suns might well have won a title had they not had some guys leave the bench against the Spurs. The Kings couldn't finish the Lakers when they had them down. They didn't lose to the Lakers because of style, they lost because Phil Jackson had the best two players on the planet at the time in Shaq and Kobe.

And when the Lakers played the Kings they were forced to run the ball when they could too. Still got those old VCR tapes of those games, some real classics.

The league's latest up and coming team in OK City is playing that classic defend and run the floor style of the old Celtics. They are definitely a team to watch, they're going to have other team's copying their style too. Last year they were my favorite team to watch on the ticket.

Team's plod the ball when they think that their stars are better then the other team's stars. Plod the game down to a glorified version of 3 on 3, with the other two guys trying to stay out of the way.

The Cavaliers may have been maybe the league's all time ploddingest team. What did they win? How many times did the Pistons fall short in their grind it out style? How many titles did "The Czar" win with his grind it out style?

How many years has Larry Brown coached? How many titles does he have?

Yeah, that grind it out thing really works a high percentage of the time.
GM

The game hasn't changed, superstar players that eat up the salary cap have changed coaches' approach.

But a running team will win again in this league, probably real soon...
GM

Posted by: flohrtv | August 26, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

"They didn't lose to the Lakers because of style, they lost because Phil Jackson had the best two players on the planet at the time in Shaq and Kobe."

Don't forget when Mike Bibby's nose fouled Kobe's elbow.

Posted by: divi3 | August 26, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

"Lets see, in the past 50 years they didn't change the shape of the ball. Court's the same size, same number of players. The game is pretty much the same as it always was, except for the business side of it."posted by flohrtv

Well, that's not strictly true. The NBA was formed in 1946. The 24 second shot clock was adopted in 1954, a few years outside your time frame, but that certainly was a major change in the pace of the game. The debut of the ABA in 1961 featured the introduction of the 3 pointer and a wider lane, and led to a new emphasis on offense. The NBA adopted the 3 point shot in '79, the colleges in '86. In 1988, in response to complaints about bad calls, a third ref was added. That led to more foul calls, particularly at crunch time.

As for the ball itself, here's the Wiki entry: "Starting in the 2006 season, the NBA switched to a new ball from Spalding that had a synthetic surface and a modified rib pattern...Until 2005 the ball had a leather surface. On December 11, 2006 the NBA decided to revert to the old leather ball due to numerous player complaints, lawsuits and injuries, mostly scratched hands, from the synthetic ball[3]."

Damn -- they even changed the ball. Have those people no respect?

Those facts sure get in the way of a good argument sometimes...

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Both the Sacramento Kings and the Suns have come with in a hair's breath of a title playing in a fastbreaking offense. Both were highly adept at running their offensive as a 4 or 5 man break. They were masters at run the floor, get in your lanes and look for the mismatch because they had an extra offensive man.

Neither was a particularly good defensive team, though.

The Cavaliers may have been maybe the league's all time ploddingest team. What did they win? How many times did the Pistons fall short in their grind it out style? How many titles did "The Czar" win with his grind it out style?

Which Pistons team are we talking about? The Bad Boys that won two titles? Or the Rip/Chauncey/Big Ben/Sheed Pistons who won one and were in the Finals a few other times? Which Cavs? The LeBron Cavs or the Brad Daugherty / Mark Price era Cavs? Either one have enviable regular season records and as much playoff success as the Suns or Kings.

The idea that Bird's Celtics were a running team is a bit off. They would run, as all teams do, but they also ran a lot of half court. So I don't think they qualify anywhere close to the typical "running" team. Same with MJ's Bulls. They definitely tried to turn TO's into fast break opportunities, but they spent as much time in the half-court (hence the whole noteworthiness of the Triangle offense). I think you're confusing teams who run with "running", uptempo teams.

Plus, I didn't think the argument was plodding teams vs running teams, just whether running teams invariably play good defense.

Posted by: ts35 | August 26, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Actually my original time frame included the Boston Celtics as a team the won with a defensive driven fastbreaking offense. So that's where 50 years got into the discussion. I didn't really start to follow NBA ball a lot until the late 60's.

I'm not old enough to have ever seen a preshot clock NBA game.

The lane has actually changed twice over the years, I do remember HS teams still playing with the old key up into the 60's.
I think the NBA widened it the first time when Makin was dominating, and I thought the second when time was in response to Wilt.

Lot of people don't remember that the ABA ball was actually smaller and easier to grip then the NBA ball. The "new" NBA ball was trying to bring some of that old ABA showmenship back to the game. Didn't work out, players hated it.

I saw an article one time about a guy that was going back and studying old Lakers' film. He used a computor to super impose a 3 point line onto their film and then was counting up all the 3 point shots Jerry West made. His point was that West should be regarded as one of the great 3 point shooters even though he never played a game with a 3 point line.

If anything the 3 point shot opens the floor up for the break, now teams have cover up the 3 point shooters following the break instead of getting back and just cutting off the drivers.

So, adding the 3 point shot didn't lead to teams running less, Economics did...

OK City is in a position to change that trend and the Wizards could easily follow.

How will you beat Miami's 3 star studded roster? Well, you could mual them on the boards with waves of bigs like Boston intends, or, run them into the floor.

Lebron & Wade will play plod ball and try and shorten the game by eating the clock. If a team can beat the Heat on the boards, they could be in position to force tempo, once they force tempo they can make Lebron and Wade run back on D. Force them to run, and you get them off the floor sooner.

Getting into their bench is going to be like getting to the Nationals' bullpen in the 5th inning...
GM

Posted by: flohrtv | August 26, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Lebron & Wade will play plod ball and try and shorten the game by eating the clock. If a team can beat the Heat on the boards, they could be in position to force tempo, once they force tempo they can make Lebron and Wade run back on D. Force them to run, and you get them off the floor sooner.
Posted by: flohrtv

I guess that same theory should have worked against Jordan and Pippen. FYI, it didn't.

The problem with trying to maul them on the boards is that Bosh is a good rebounder, Haslem (assuming he plays C, though undersized) is a good rebounder, LeBron is a great rebounder for a 3, and Wade is a good rebounder. If you put Miller out there with him, he's a solid rebounder.

The problem with trying to run them into the ground (aside from the problems rebounding), is that either Bron or Wade can run the team and carry the team in stretches long enough for the other to get their rest.

I don't think the SuperFriends are going to try to plod the ball. Why would they? To save energy? More likely they'll take a page from the Bulls best teams....if you're up by 20 to start the 4th, you'll get as much rest as you need.

Posted by: ts35 | August 26, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

"I saw an article one time about a guy that was going back and studying old Lakers' film. He used a computor to super impose a 3 point line onto their film and then was counting up all the 3 point shots Jerry West made. His point was that West should be regarded as one of the great 3 point shooters even though he never played a game with a 3 point line."

Well, you can the flaw there: West was a terrific outside shooter but would no doubt have taken a great many more 24 foot shots if a 3 point rule had been there to encourage it. And it's likely his FG percentage would have dropped some as a result of shooting a greater percent from that distance.

Same for Pete Maravich, who shot from farther out than West.

Posted by: Samson151 | August 26, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Well, you can the flaw there: West was a terrific outside shooter but would no doubt have taken a great many more 24 foot shots if a 3 point rule had been there to encourage it. And it's likely his FG percentage would have dropped some as a result of shooting a greater percent from that distance.
Posted by: Samson151

Plus, the NBA logo would look a lot different.

Posted by: ts35 | August 26, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

"If your word is no good, then your name is no good...Teddy is very successful,and has a very good rep, so he's not going to be throwing out words just to sound good...That's not how he built his rep.

Posted by: Newington32 | August 26, 2010 12:10 AM | Report abuse "

And Abe was successful and used to say wonderful things too and how did all that work out? Don't forget that Teddy started out in marketing before he became a franchise owner. Marketing = lies

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 26, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Besides the fact that Arenas and Wall will be suited up, here is why I'm so excited to see the season start:

The Wizards will have the same record as Miami and Boston; we'll have the same record as all the teams that will eventually vie for the 8 eastern playoff spots; the imagination can run wild on the attitude of, "the sky's the limit".

One game at a time, young Wizards, one game at a time. Winning attitude.

Posted by: ragtop4spd | August 26, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

And Abe was successful and used to say wonderful things too and how did all that work out? Don't forget that Teddy started out in marketing before he became a franchise owner. Marketing = lies

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 26, 2010 5:10 PM

Abe was a man with intgerity..the game passed him by, but he at least won a championship...You look hard enough, you can find fault with anyone. I just like the direction Ted is taking the team and hoping for a great finish. We'll just have to wait and see...

Posted by: Newington32 | August 26, 2010 9:16 PM | Report abuse

And Abe was successful and used to say wonderful things too and how did all that work out? Don't forget that Teddy started out in marketing before he became a franchise owner. Marketing = lies

Posted by: DC_MAN88

You want Ted to be lieing so because you are a Gilbert-hater. I said earlier, if you don't want Gilbert on your team, choose another team to root for. Stop stepping on Ted's integrity just to keep your Gilbert-less team alive. It ain't happening.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 27, 2010 7:48 AM | Report abuse

"You want Ted to be lieing so because you are a Gilbert-hater. I said earlier, if you don't want Gilbert on your team, choose another team to root for. Stop stepping on Ted's integrity just to keep your Gilbert-less team alive. It ain't happening.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 27, 2010 7:48 AM | Report abuse "

C'mon man...we're talking about practice....practice?

Save your excitement for at least a preseason game.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 27, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

"You want Ted to be lieing so because you are a Gilbert-hater. I said earlier, if you don't want Gilbert on your team, choose another team to root for. Stop stepping on Ted's integrity just to keep your Gilbert-less team alive. It ain't happening.

Posted by: G-Man11 | August 27, 2010 7:48 AM | Report abuse "

C'mon man...we're talking about practice....practice?

Save your excitement for at least a preseason game.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 27, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

If Teddy is so excited about Gilby, he should give Gilby an extension and put his mug back up on the side of VC.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | August 27, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company