ZoomSlowik

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jun 14, 2013 -> 02:39 PM) Balta, I think Atlanta could do it. I think the Clippers could dump some pieces and pull it off as well though. Dallas has enough room for 1 player. The only way the Clippers could do it is a sign-and-trade with the Lakers. Even without Paul, they have $45 million commited next year, which doesn't leave them enough for one "mini-max" much less the "mega-max" these two can get. They can use the amnesty to "dump" one guy (Jordan), but Griffin and Butler would still be major obstacles. A sign-and-trade with Blake and Bledsoe would be pretty great for the Lakers, but I still seriously doubt they'd facilitate Dwight going to their in-building rival.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 14, 2013 -> 02:10 PM) Atlanta and Houston Houston has WAY too much commited for both, though they can get one. You have to remember that through a quirk in the CBA, the AVERAGE of Lin and Asik's contract is used for Houston, whereas if their teams had matched it would have been the actual yearly salaries (I don't get it either). That means that they have close to $30 million commited just between Harden, Lin and Asik.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 14, 2013 -> 01:39 PM) Does any team have enough cap space that they could make a legit run at both? Hard to say without the exact cap numbers. Atlanta can get as low as $22 million in existing salaries though and Utah and Detroit can get to the high-20's.

Well, it's officially the off-season. Chris Broussard with his first "sources say" post that lists 17 different possible outcomes that likely won't happen. ZOMG, PAUL AND HOWARD TOTALLY SIGNING WITH SAME TEAM UNLESS THEY'RE NOT

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2013 -> 10:23 PM) So much pressure on the Spurs in game 5 now. I hate 2-3-2. I think everyone hates the 2-3-2 except the people that can change it.

It's hard to beat them if the Big 3 all show up (yes, Bosh too).

That last shot pretty much sums up Chris Bosh of late.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 13, 2013 -> 08:56 PM) WHAT A FLOP JESUS CHRIST Both of these teams do it a lot. It's one step below soccer.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 12, 2013 -> 11:50 AM) The Nets have the paramaters of a three-year offer in place for Jason Kidd to become their next head coach, a source told the New York Post. And he's already talking about Gerald Wallace "bringing the ball up the court" in a "fast-break, uptempo offense". Isn't that what Deron Williams is for?

It kind of reminds me of David Robinson at his peak, though with him it was the entire post-season. He was a monster in the regular season, arguably the best center in the league. For the most part, he just wasn't the same in the playoffs though. For three straight years during his peak, he shot 46.5%, 41.1% and 44.6% from the floor (about 30 games total). Hakeem was the exact opposite, which is probably why he's remembered more favorably.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 11:36 PM) Tony Parker to have MRI tomorrow might miss game 4 That would definitely blow. Despite two blowouts, I've found this series entertaining so far.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 11:22 PM) No. But you have to remember. I'm the outcast here. I'm the one going up against like 20 people. So maybe I didn't notice you were the only arguing up until '94 or '95. More like 89-ish (towards the end of Celtics/Lakers) to 97 or so (before all your superstars drafted in the mid-80's like Hakeem, Barkley, Ewing, Robinson, ect started to retire/see a drastic drop in production). The late 80's/early 90's drafts kinda sucked and KG started the high schooler wave in 95. I would make a similar distinction around 2007 when you had the first two super teams and the guys from the stronger 2003 and on drafts started hitting their peaks. That "dividing line" is a lot messier though because a bunch of people drafted in the 90's (KG, Kobe, Duncan, Dirk, Pierce to name a few) are still going strong. League quality is definitely higher than early 2000's though, so there's a distinction somewhere.

QUOTE (Boogua @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 11:11 PM) I just don't know what happens with him. He shows the ability to absolutely dominate, but this is his second finals where he is severely underperforming. It seems like he has lost a decent amount of confidence in his jumper. I don't get it either. It's like he worked so hard to prune the bad shots from his repertoire that he doesn't know what to do when he can't get to the rim anymore. Normally I'd say that's a really good thing, but with his teammates not playing like stars he should probably try a little harder to score. Yes, I know I sound like your typical meathead typing that.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 11:10 PM) lol. hold up. So the argument for all these months has been half the 90's vs today? I always thought the argument was the entire decade. whatever. Are you counting 2000-2005 when you're talking about the league "right now?" I kinda doubt it. If you are, then awesome, I can start making fun of Stephon Marbury, Baron Davis and Steve Francis.

How about we get back to making fun of Lebron for doing his best Hedo Turkoglu impersonation?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 11:02 PM) Nothing. I'm just saying PPG would be higher. I don't recall you (not saying you're lying) saying the late 90's sucked. I know for damn sure booqua has never said that. Or at least I've never seen it. Okay, now I'm absolutely convinced you don't actually read anything. I've consistently used "late 90's/early 2000's" and words like "garbage" in the same sentence.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 10:57 PM) I'll say this much. Let the league move the line in as they did from '95 through '97 today and my goodness. Those three years in particular deserve an asterisk. How does the 3-point distance have anything to do with the pace?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 10:43 PM) So as each year went by the pace went down every year to the pathetic '99 season. So the game got slower and slower and the expansion thinned out the talent. Edit. I'll concede '90 to '93. But '94 on, s*** was ugly. For about the 40th time, no one ever argued that the league was great in the late 90's. Notice I said "Bulls era", which ended in 97-98. And if 94-96 was a "snail-like pace", so is the current NBA.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 10:12 PM) Proof? Take your lazy ass to bball reference. I'm not typing out all these numbers when there right there for you. The 90's was a slow-it-down to a snails pace style with teams totally diluted by a 6-team expansion. Offenses are so much more advanced now. Look at what the Spurs are doing right now. This is pure basketball. Thugball Pacers/Knicks is out. You should take your own advice. The league pace this year was 92. The year before it was 91.3. In 2010/11, it was 92.1. Here are the yearly league pace totals for the 90's... 90-91: 97.8 91-92: 96.6 92-93: 96.8 93-94: 95.1 94-95: 92.9 95-96: 91.8 96-97: 90.1 97-98: 90.3 98-99: 88.9 So for the majority of the Bulls' era, the NBA was comparable or faster than the current league. LOL at the "diluted" comment too. It's not like the Bobcats, Raptors, Pistons, ect. are brimming with talent. The Bucks made the playoffs for christ's sake.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 10, 2013 -> 08:26 PM) Did Denver give him that contract? I thought he came with it from DC From basketball reference: Acquired March 15, 2012: As part of a 3-team trade, traded by the Washington Wizards with Ronny Turiaf to the Denver Nuggets; the Denver Nuggets traded Nene to the Washington Wizards; the Los Angeles Clippers traded Brian Cook and a 2015 2nd round draft pick to the Washington Wizards; and the Washington Wizards traded Nick Young to the Los Angeles Clippers. Signed July 18, 2012 for an assumed $44,000,000 for 4 years. So it's actually $11 million!

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 10, 2013 -> 08:17 PM) I really didn't get the Karl firing at all. I don't think you want Javale playing more than 20 minutes a night. 20 might be a perfect amount of minutes for him. He's like a platoon player in baseball. Too many minutes and you see that he's basketball stupid, but with just the right amount, he's a very good player. The numbers show this. He's put up very efficient shooting numbers since he's had a more limited role in Denver. But they gave him $10 million a year! That must mean he's good!

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 10, 2013 -> 07:50 PM) They only surprisingly made it to the Western Conference Finals after trading their highest paid player. NBD. That coaching move and the George Karl one are a little weird to me. I realize Denver lost, but Gallinari was out and Faried missed a game too. Reading rotoworld, it sounds like both might hire from within. I guess that kind of makes sense for Denver since they supposedly weren't happy with his lineups (they wanted more McGee and Fornier, less Miller), other than the fact they fired one of the best coaches in the league.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 10, 2013 -> 05:59 PM) I guess so. But he sure can do it. Not as much now. But in his prime? Hell yeah. Not that I pay attention to anything Michael Jordan says when it comes to evaluating talent (he's awful at it). But he said the only players today that could dominate in his era are LeBron, Kobe, Duncan and Dirk. Dirk has one of the most unique skill-sets for his size ever. Bosh? It's easy to pick on him now. But in his Raptor days, definitely. At the very least certainly more of a threat in that regard than the Horace Grant's, Charles Oakley's, and Dale Davis's of the world. Now you're moving the goalpost. I never said anything about Dirk's ability to hit shots or score. It's also easy to compare him to middle tier bigs that weren't know for offense and make him look good, I could say the same thing about Malone and Barkley vs guys like Chandler or Larry Sanders. Whatever, basically arguing semantics.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 10, 2013 -> 05:43 PM) Durant, Dirk, Bosh, Gasol, KG, Odom (yes, he sucks now. but he was the 6th man of the year just two years ago), Aldridge, Cousins. Of course, Durant is the only player here that's in his prime. The others are either past their prime, too young or just fallen off a cliff. Fact is we've seen all these guys in a relatively short amount of time. I'll give you KG and Odom, but both of those guys aren't doing much of that anymore. I'm obviously getting a completely different definition from that phrase than you are. Aldridge does basically zero ball-handling, I have no idea where you're going with that. It's similar for Dirk and Cousins. Gasol is a nice passer, but he's not exactly going to kill you on the drive if he catches it in the high post. Hell, someone like Toni Kukoc fits that description better than most of those guys, and he was pretty marginal. Outside shooting has definitely changed things, but it's not like your average point guard is 6'7" now.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 10, 2013 -> 05:28 PM) You named one, I'll add Dirk. Does Bosh count also? How exactly is Dirk a guy that "puts it on the floor and creates"? I must have missed all these plays where he catches the ball on the wing and drives to the rim. A huge percentage of his shots are post-ups and catch-and-shoot jumpers. 2.6 assists per game doesn't exactly scream "creator" either. Bosh at least drives a little more (or more accurately, used to), but nowhere near of the frequency of your average "ball-handler". Hakeem was a better ball-handler than either of them, I still wouldn't call him a guy that "puts it on the floor and creates space."