HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Thoughts....Random, yet interesting
Date: 19 Aug 92 15:54:11 GMT
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino CA, USA

In article <18AUG199221261698@mitme5.mit.edu> kettler@mitme5.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.) writes:
>I may be flamed for this but personally, I don't think that the Shaq will win 
>ROY. Although he can block shots, he is not a great defender. Consider how well 
>Calbert Cheaney shot against the Shaq in the Indiana-LSU with his hook shot 
>over the Shaq's attempted block. He lets people too often into the lane and is 


Of course the fact that Shaq wasn't guarding Cheaney doesn't matter does
it? You can't blame the center for every basket the other team scores in
the paint. If he handles his man(which he did against IU) and is able
to alter/block several other people's shots(which he did against IU),
its pretty hard to blame him for poor defense. IU is very good at 
spreading out a defense and exposing their weaknesses, this is how they
beat LSU. If you remember the game, the first several minutes of the game
were completely dominated by Shaq at both ends of the court,  he had IU's
front line scared to death. But being a good coach, Knight figured out how
to neutralize Shaq, and being a bad coach Dale Brown never made a counter
move.
>he will have problems guarding "centers" like Bill Laimbeer who make a living 
>on the offensive end by shooting from outside 15 ft since under Dale Brown's 
>system, the Shaq never had to get out of the paint.

Whereas most NBA centers excel at guarding guys like Bill? Why do you think
a slow guy who can't jump a lick has had such a long NBA career? Because
he was a great rebounder, played good defense, and drove centers crazy
by stepping out and hitting the J. 

Shaq will do just fine as a rookie, but no matter how well he plays, he'll
be labelled a disappointment because he can't possibly live up to this
much hype.




Russ Smith
*******************************************************************************
George-"When I was 13 I used to run barefoot under the sprinkler wearing
an inner tube".

Jerry- "Well girls mature faster than boys".

Jerry Seinfeld and George on a 13 year old Olympic diver.
******************************************************************************
From: rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Roberts can't be traded!
Date: 18 Aug 92 20:46:06 GMT
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino CA, USA

In article <18AUG199215565266@pierre.mit.edu> kettler@pierre.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.) writes:
>No, this isn't right. The rules are whenever a restricted free agent gets an 
>offer from a team which is then matched by his original team, then the original 
>team may not trade the player to the team making an offer from a year. However, 
>nothing prevents the original team from trading the player to a third team. In 

I think the other guy was right. Dallas signed Roberts to an offer sheet
that gave him a no-trade clause in the contract. When Orlando matched the
offer sheet, that means they have to give him the same contract which 
also includes the no trade clause. However a notrade clause only means
you can't trade Stanley without his approval, not that you can't trade
him at all.

You are correct  that they can't trade him to Dallas for one year, since
they were the team who gave him the offer sheet.




Russ Smith
*******************************************************************************
George-"When I was 13 I used to run barefoot under the sprinkler wearing
an inner tube".

Jerry- "Well girls mature faster than boys".

Jerry Seinfeld and George on a 13 year old Olympic diver.
******************************************************************************
From: swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Danny Ferry - Did he err?
Date: 21 Aug 92 13:51:57 GMT
Reply-To: swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams)
Organization: Carderock Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center

Did Danny Ferry err when he opted to play for an Italian team instead
of signing with the Los Angeles Clippers?

By signing and playing with the Clippers, Ferry surely would have gotten
a lot of playing time in NBA and establish his reputation as a NBA star.

Am I wrong?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Steve Williams                           swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: sgl@aeg.dsto.gov.au (Simon Langsford)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Australias would heve beaten dream team
Keywords: Australia, dream team, olympics
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:34:29 GMT
Reply-To: sgl@aeg.dsto.gov.au
Followup-To: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Organization: Aeronautical Research Laboratory

In article 27584@nosc.mil, hatch@gandalf.nosc.mil (Mark D. Hatch) writes:
>In article <1992Aug18.183329.1@wombat.newcastle.edu.au> c9111381@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (ROBERT BUCK) writes:
>
>>I think the aust would have beaten the U.S. all over the court had they 
>>played.
>
>I think that you're fellow Australians would tell you that you're dreaming.
>Australia didn't even make it to the medal round.  Correct me if I am wrong,
>but the Aussies lost to Lithuania and the Unified Team, as well as at least
>one other team.  The Dream Team dominated Lithuania, and beat up on Croatia
>twice, who beat the Unified Team in the semifinals.  Australia would have
>had their head handed to them.
>

Yep, he's dreaming. Most of us who follow basketball in Aust had little 
doubt that the DT would have no opposition, even from Croatia and so 
on who boast at best average-NBA-standard players in their starting 5s - 
with maybe only Kukoc standing out from these (but enough on him). 
I thought Aust might be a chance for a bronze though, especially after
their first game against Puerto Rico. But they didn't have too many 
good games through the Olympics.

>>They even look better on paper
>
>OK, let's look at them on paper.
>
>>Luc Longely is aparently one of the biggest stars in the N.B.A
>
>Is this what the local papers tell you?  I had the pleasure of watching
>Luc play several times in college, as well as the pros.  Even in the WAC,
>a college conference frequently devoid of quality centers, Luc hardly
>dominated.  He often played rather poorly, though he would have an
>occasional great game.  He has decent skills, but he does not play hard.

This is reasonably well known here. His reputation is for being a lazy
big man who makes little impact in a pretty ordinary team.

>>Andrew Gaze scores 44ppg as opposed to MJ 29ppg

I think one of the main differences here is how much farther out the 
NBA 3 point line is. Gaze gets a lot of 3-pointers, which would only 
be simple 2s in the NBA. However, I think few people in America would
have seen Gaze at his best - which is better than the form he
displayed at Seton Hall (or the Olympics for that matter). Still, 
comparing the average ppg across the competitions is ridiculous.

>>They have more power, the elephant Andrew Vlahov would have too much strength
>>for Barkley or Malone.

:-)

>>You will probably read tyhis and think that it is B.S but I what both leagues
>>you probably haven't seen the ausralians play.  
>
>This is the only reason I responded to this article.  

Me too. There can be no real comparison between NBA and Aust NBL 
competitions. Mind you, considering that the total population we
have to choose from over here is comparative to one of your bigger
cities, and that basketball is still very much a young sport here,
we do ok. 


Simon
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: paul@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul R Krueger)
Subject: Re: Angola
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 19:58:19 GMT

In article <Bt70y2.89E@ecf.toronto.edu> yewhin@ecf.toronto.edu (YEW HIN Jimmy) writes:
>I am a visa student from Angola and I am going to tell you something that will 
>upset many of you, specially in the US, but I swear to you over my grandfather 
>Kunta Abooba's grave, it is true. The reason our national team lost to the 
>Dream Team was because our team did not have enough time to prepare for the 
>games due to a tribal warfare in our countryside and some of our key players 
>were badly injured and could not make it to Barcelona.  The game was very close
>until the Charles Barkley elbow.  His intimidating style of play affected our   team morale; such hooliganism should not be allowed in international play.      Without all those problems, our team would have defeated the Dream Team since 
>we are superior technically specially in defense as you would know if you 
>watched our national league. 
>
   First Australia and now this. How hysterical, jokesters from all over
   the world. Who will it be tomorrow???? Sister Josephine from the Little
   Sisters of the Poor??? "We could have beaten the dream team and qualified
   for the olympics if only Sister Brenda hadn't twisted her pinky finger in
   a pick up game in latejune."    

   --salty



Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: ortcm@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (thomas.mcguigan)
Subject: Re: Roberts can't be traded!
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 20:42:38 GMT

In article <18AUG199215565266@pierre.mit.edu> kettler@pierre.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.) writes:
>>From what I understand, it isn't a "no-trade" clause, in that he can't be 
>>traded, but more that he has the right of refusal of any trade, and that he
>>can't be traded unless he agrees to it.
>
>No, this isn't right.
The true situation, as discussed in excruciating detail in the Orlando press,
is as follows:

1.  The No-Trade clause is just what it says. If it is in the contract, then
Roberts cannot be traded.  Because the clause has no monetary value, the
Magic and Roberts can mutually agree to delete the clause when the offer
sheet is drawn up as a contract and signed.  Roberts is expected to waive the
clause (or he may have already waived it, I haven't heard that he has 
actually signed his contract yet).  If the clause is waived, then:

2.  Under the free-agency rules, Roberts may not be traded without his
approval.  THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NO-TRADE CLAUSE.  All restricted
free-agents who have offer sheets met by their current teams have this
same right-of-refusal.  This right-of-refusal applies for the first year of
the new contract only, or until the player is traded, whichever comes first.

Tom@Orlando
From: davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Meeks == Lor
Keywords: I'd have to think hard to come up with a more offensive insult!
Date: 23 Aug 92 01:11:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: uvmark.1992Aug23.011156.30226
Distribution: usa
Organization: Vmark Software, Inc.

In article <1992Aug21.223403.23997@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes:
>Meeks's 24th lie: article #24 post-stop.
>
>In article <1992Aug21.143341.22342@uvmark.uucp> davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks) writes:
>
>>See, the main difference is right here.  I said, in the example, 
>>"positive integers have real sqrts".  I believe in the type just like the
>>statement of "types of things you consider bogus are nothing more than home 
>>jobs that happen everywhere".  However, I have no power to stop you from 
>>including -1 into your set of positive integers.  
>But I have power to stop me from including -1 into my set of positive 
>integers, because -1 isn't a positive integer.  
>
>You have no evidence that -1 is in my set of positive integers, because
>I never considered so.  So your -1 example is irrelevant.

It is not irrelevant, because the point is that you can include it if you
like.  Regardless of whether I think it is wrong or not.  The fact that
you choose not to is irrelevant.
>
>>Just like above, -1 would not belong in my set of positive integers 
>>have real sqrts but may exist in yours. Understand??? 
>No, -1 doesn't belong to my set of positive integers or the type mentioned
>in the characterization either. So this analogy is irrelevant.

No, your inclusion/non-inclusion is irrelevant.  It is your ability to 
include it that is relevant.  And, if you at some point decided to include
it, it would not mean that I then agree with the instance.
>>But according to the poll, all teams received some degree of favoratism at
>>home...  Hence, favoratism was perceived to happen everywhere..
>What poll? do you care to publish the result of the poll? I haven't seen
>any. At least I know favoritism wasn't perceived to happen at the Delta
>Center.

Oh yeah???  It seemed to think so.
>>They are the current back-to-back NBA champions, and one of
>>the fore-runners to three-peat.
>This is irrelevant.  What does this have to do with the 13 year period?

Well, if they 3pt, that will be as many championships as the Celtics have
won in the same period. 
>
>>The comment you think is an admission!!!
>Yep, it is. The sarcasm has nothing to do with calls being bad. You only
>tried to say that the 7 vs 3 was not conclusive.

Oh, so now you think you have the fucking ability to speak for me?? What, are
you still trying to prove that Meeks == Lor??  Won't work Ed, you still 
have a long way to go to reach my level.  


-- 
David T. Meeks                    ||" We are jigsaw pieces, aligned on the 
VMark Software, Inc.              ||  perimeter edge, 
uvmark!davem@merk.com             ||  interlocked through a missing piece"
davem%uvmark@merk.com             ||" ...This world is totally Fugazi"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: st1ge@Rosie.UH.EDU (Edward Hui)
Subject: Re: Self Restaint
Reply-To: st1ge@Rosie.UH.EDU
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:24:46 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.204729.2011@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, csquared@coos.dartmouth.edu (C Squared) writes:
>
>OK, Larry Bird retired, and I'm really bummed.
>
>I wore my Bird shirt today, even though it is about 2 sizes too small, in
>honor of him.
>
>So I meet this guy in the laundry room.  We get to talking about Bird.
>How good he was, etc.  And then the guy says:
>
>I think the only guy who could shoot better than him is PAXSON(!?!?!?)

       Jim or John?

Edward Hui
>just walked away.  Then I
From: davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Australias would heve beaten dream team
Date: 18 Aug 92 15:43:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: uvmark.1992Aug18.154337.9900
Organization: Vmark Software, Inc.

In article <1992Aug18.183329.1@wombat.newcastle.edu.au> c9111381@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (ROBERT BUCK) writes:
>
>I think the aust would have beaten the U.S. all over the court had they 
>played.

Here's a dollar, go buy a clue..

>You will probably read tyhis and think that it is B.S but I what both leagues
>you probably haven't seen the ausralians play.  


Well, I have and there is a reason why they didn't play the Americans and 
didn't even win a medal at the games.  THEY WEREN"T GOOD ENOUGH.  As Charles
Barkley said, the US should have played the US Womens team, as they would 
have been more competition.  Or, as Chuck Daly said, it is sad to say, but
we really didn't see the abilities of the Dream Team displayed because they
were never challenged.  They easily beat teams by >30ppg, even the vaunted
Croatians.  And they did this with injuries to Stockton and Magic and Bird.
They never really went full out for an entire game, and only in brief moments
did they display the full might in which they could have demolished teams.
If they were facing any competition, or had a reason to do so, they would have
demolished the Croatians by 50+ points, and they were the cream of the crop
after the US.  They would have beaten the Australians by, oh... maybe
100 points..Pippen and Jordan would have shut Gaze down...

Why am I even responding to this...
-- 
David T. Meeks                    ||" We are jigsaw pieces, aligned on the 
VMark Software, Inc.              ||  perimeter edge, 
uvmark!davem@merk.com             ||  interlocked through a missing piece"
davem%uvmark@merk.com             ||" ...This world is totally Fugazi"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: djd7889@tm0006.lerc.nasa.gov (Douglas J. Deutsch)
Subject: Re: American athletes and the Olympics
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center / Cleveland, Ohio
Date: 14 Aug 1992 10:04 EST  

In article <1992Aug13.124629.29105@NeoSoft.com>, claird@NeoSoft.com (Cameron Laird) writes...
>In article <5698@osc.COM> ashwin@osc.osc.com (Ashwin Honkan) writes:
>			.

[lots o' Mary Decker and American Boxer babble deleted]

Q:  What exactly does this have to do with professional basketball?

DJD
===================================================================
| Douglas James Deutsch     | EMAIL: djd7889@tm0006.lerc.nasa.gov |
| 516 East Merry Street #13 |        cb208cs@opie.bgsu.edu        |
| Bowling Green, OH 43402   |=====================================|
|===========================|=========== 296 more days ===========|
|=================================================================|
| 'Don't knock my smock or I'll clean your clock'  - Hobbes       |
| 'Smock smock smock smock smock smock smock smock' - Hobbes      |
===================================================================
> 
>Cameron Laird
>claird@Neosoft.com (claird%Neosoft.com@uunet.uu.net)	+1 713 267 7966
>claird@litwin.com (claird%litwin.com@uunet.uu.net)  	+1 713 996 8546
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: martyp@engin.umich.edu (Martin Pochmara)
Subject: Re: Angola
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 16:42:33 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor


>
>From: yewhin@ecf.toronto.edu (YEW HIN Jimmy)
>
>I am a visa student from Angola and I am going to tell you something that will 
>upset many of you, specially in the US, but I swear to you over my grandfather 
>Kunta Abooba's grave, it is true. The reason our national team lost to the 
>Dream Team was because our team did not have enough time to prepare for the 
>games due to a tribal warfare in our countryside and some of our key players 
>were badly injured and could not make it to Barcelona.  The game was very close
>until the Charles Barkley elbow.  His intimidating style of play affected our   team morale; such hoo
>liganism should not be allowed in international play.      Without all those problems, our team would
>have defeated the Dream Team since 
>we are superior technically specially in defense as you would know if you 
>watched our national league. 

PINCH.....wake up.....WAKE UP......WAAAAAAAKE UUUUUUUUP!!!!!
You must have partied too much this past weekend! Can I buy some of that
reefer you were smokin'? It must have been good to make you trip out
like that!


				-Marty ;)
From: chrisda@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (David Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Debunking the standard myth was Re: Couple of thoughts..
Date: 17 Aug 92 02:22:59 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University

Really, this thread is ridiculous.  The quality of discussion has even topped
alt.abortion.shrill.hysteria!  On the one hand, we have folks obsessed with
finding a genetic explanation for numbers of different races participating in
sports THEY HAVE WATCHED ON TELEVISION!  On the other hand, we have folks so
tightly wound about race issues that to pose the possiblity that various people
in your neighborhood have different genes, is to automatically infer less 
intelligence for dark-skinned people and therefore to BE A RACIST!  We've heard
claims as to how many dark-skinned people in Washington DC under 6-5 can dunk,
and claims that outdoor wind makes poorer inner-city people jump higher. (!)

Is it the harsh fluorescent-lighting, corporate ENVIRONMENT of r.s.b.p. readers
that causes this tendency to flights of absurdity, or is there an undiscovered
r.s.b.p. GENE that gives these folks more "quick-frothing" mouth tissues?

:-))
David
From: ronnie@uts.amdahl.com (Ronnie Townsend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Debunking the standard myth was Re: Couple of thoughts..
Date: 15 Aug 92 01:26:08 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <XJAM.92Aug14093528@cork.CS.Berkeley.EDU> xjam@cork.CS.Berkeley.EDU (The Crossjammer) writes:
>>>>>> "Bennet" == Bennet Ih <bih@bagheera.East.Sun.COM> writes:
>	[lots of stuff deleted]
>  Bennet> This observations by the way are from my experience in pick-up games.
>
>Need I say more? Well I will.
>
>Organized basketball is too different a game from pickup to provide much
>insight into basketball skills. Especially defensively, where in a pickup
>game the concept is a dirty word. There's also very little concept of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not in *my* neighborhood. "D'ing up" was a big part of the pickup game I 
learned on the playgrounds of central florida. Probably because if you didn't
play good D you tended to get "clowned on."  

>offensive plays, picks, offensivie positioning. On an organized team, you'd
>better be good at these things or the other team will eat you alive.

I agree here... although people usually chose up sides with players who could
pass/create/rebound and yes... play D'.... One-dimensional offensive jerks 
usually did a lot of watching. 

>
>The basic physical skills are the same, but there's a whole lot of other
>things at the organized level that are just as important.

No question... Now we're getting somewhere... a reasonable intelligent 
discussion at last!!! 


-- 
Ronnie
-------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not cynical... I just don't believe in anything....
From: jjonsson@alexandria.lib.utah.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Retraction, regarding Karl Malone
Date: 21 Aug 92 00:58:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: alexandr.jjonsson.95
Organization: Marriott Library, University of Utah

In article <1992Aug19.181857.1624@cci632.cci.com> dxj@cci632.cci.com (Dennis Joyce) writes:

>Malone is a good player but the best big forward? Hmmmm.... I think not...

>I used to think that he was one of the NBA made superstars. You know the
>ones that the NBA made when it was apparant that Magic and Bird wouldn't be
>around forever. It just seems that he pushes and shoves his way into 
>position, then grabs the ball and gets fouled or scores. He does this very well.
>But you give Karl the ball 8 feet and beyond the hoop and he is lost. 

Wrong! see below.

>Throw in the occasional 12-15' brick that Malone throws up. OK go ahead
>and quote some stat that says that he is the best shooter from 12 feet out
>who ever was his weight and size, or some other useless stat saying that he
>can actually shoot the ball. I have only seen the man dent the rim with his 
>outside shot. 

Then you're not watching him play much.

Malone makes more of these shots than he misses, and has won many games with 
his outside shot. Granted it's not in the same league as the classic 
shooters, but Malone has a very VERY good touch, for someone his size, from 
about 12'-17'. Did you ever take a look at his overall shooting percentage? 
It's up over 50% for his career. I'd say a good 15% of his points come 
from mid-range jumpers.
	But of course if everyone has an attitude like yours, then defenders 
will continue to disregard his jumper and he'll continue to make them.


Jeff Jonsson
Marriott Library System Support, University of Utah.
==============================================================================
--"It's the sound of the secret--  jjonsson@alexandria.lib.utah.edu
-- machinery at the center of  --  jjonsson@utahlib.bitnet
-- the world." -Cliff Steele   --  "You talkin' to me?"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro