2017-18 official NBA discussion thread

[jenksycat]

Because we did not know those 3 guys were going to be good and 90% of the league didn't pick them to win ROY. Just as we do not know Markelle Fultz is the most NBA ready rookie this year.

 

 

 

What? That's not the story.

 

And how many years of Lebron's career will it take off for Lonzo/Ingram to be real difference makers on a championship team? I purposely did not mention Ingram because he looked BAD last year, and he's also a bad fit on the floor at the same time as Lebron.

 

Lonzo/Ingram aren't the primary reason to go to LA. Its the 60-80m they'd have to spend on him (who will take a team friendly deal) + whoever else he wants.

[thxfrthmmrs]

Lonzo/Ingram aren't the primary reason to go to LA. Its the 60-80m they'd have to spend on him (who will take a team friendly deal) + whoever else he wants.

 

There will be other teams with cap space who could afford two near max free agents. So Lebron to LA is possible, but definitely not 100%. And Lonzo and Ingram aren't great fits to play next to Lebron. However, if Lonzo proves he could be a good shooter and could do damage when Lebron does the ball handling, and if Ingram takes a HUGE step forward, especially as a shooter, then I like the chances better.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I think this is actually solid for both teams. Cleveland did very well getting this much for Kyrie when they basically had to move him. IT and Crowder makes it so they are still the favorite in the East. They may lose LeBron and Thomas after the season but they'll have a high pick and assets to move toward a rebuild if they wanted. From Boston's end, they get 2 years of Kyrie and it's worth it if he re-signs (not sure if that's likely) in Boston. They set themselves up for the future and they absolutely didn't want to pay IT $200 million.

 

As far as the Bulls are concerned, this has nothing to do with Butler. These deals aren't mutually exclusive even though people keep bringing them up in the same context. The Bulls likely wanted this year's pick for Butler. I would have insisted on a pick in this year's draft as well. The Celtics love Jayson Tatum and weren't willing to do that. Why would anyone want this package for Butler? The Bulls have no need for Isaiah Thomas. They are trying to lose as many games as possible. The plan involves possibly landing Michael Porter Jr or Marvin Bagley III. That's the silver lining in the Bulls deal.

[ZoomSlowik]

Because we did not know those 3 guys were going to be good and 90% of the league didn't pick them to win ROY. Just as we do not know Markelle Fultz is the most NBA ready rookie this year.

 

 

 

What? That's not the story.

 

And how many years of Lebron's career will it take off for Lonzo/Ingram to be real difference makers on a championship team? I purposely did not mention Ingram because he looked BAD last year, and he's also a bad fit on the floor at the same time as Lebron.

 

I lost a bigger post I don't feel like retyping. This is the cliffnotes.

 

You're putting so much stock in the 2018 pick while hand-waving the last two #2 picks. It's a good asset, it might be as good as Ball and Ingram! We have no idea where the pick will be right now, who it will be or how ready the player will be.

 

Ball will have a year in the NBA and Ingram will have 2. That's big on the development curve.

 

They don't fit any worse than Irving and Love. Kyrie does plenty of dribbling and Love is a bad defender that can't switch.

 

Ingram has tons of talent and another year to develop before Lebron arrives. He has the length and athleticism to switch and his shot isn't broken. He needs polish. It's close to impossible to have too many versatile wings in the current NBA environment.

 

Ball looks like as good a bet as any rookie guard right now. Minimally he shouldn't suck. Is he Kyrie? Probably not. The big deal is the other FA.

 

As for Kyrie, if it was just a LeBron issue, he could have waited a year. He got out first to get away from a bad management group that creates drama (with a big assist from Lebron).

Edited August 23, 2017 by ZoomSlowik

[thxfrthmmrs]

I lost a bigger post I don't feel like retyping. This is the cliffnotes.

 

You're putting so much stock in the 2018 pick while hand-waving the last two #2 picks. It's a good asset, it might be as good as Ball and Ingram! We have no idea where the pick will be right now, who it will be or how ready the player will be.

 

Ball will have a year in the NBA and Ingram will have 2. That's big on the development curve.

 

They don't fit any worse than Irving and Love. Kyrie does plenty of dribbling and Love is a bad defender that can't switch.

 

Ingram has tons of talent and another year to develop before Lebron arrives. He has the length and athleticism to switch and his shot isn't broken. He needs polish. It's close to impossible to have too many versatile wings in the current NBA environment.

 

Ball looks like as good a bet as any rookie guard right now. Minimally he shouldn't suck. Is he Kyrie? Probably not. The big deal is the other FA.

 

As for Kyrie, if it was just a LeBron issue, he could have waited a year. He got out first to get away from a bad management group that creates drama (with a big assist from Lebron).

 

Cavs definitely wouldn't be drafting someone like Ingram with the Nets pick next year. Ingram is a raw kid with upside, Cavs would likely be targeting someone in the Tatum or Fultz profile, guys who can come in day 1 and be a contributor.

 

So no, even though Ingram was a high pick, he's the not the type of player 2018 Cavs would be targeting if they want to convince Lebron to stay.

 

Like you said, if Lebron leaving, he's leaving to go to the best situation to win. I don't think Laker is unless they could fit 3 max contracts, and that won't happen unless they trade Deng, and Clarkson (and use Randle as a sweetener ). It could happen, but no guarantees.

[bmags]

If I was a cavs fan the last thing I'd want them to do is use a top 5 pick on a nba-ready lower ceiling player just because it fit our window better. If that's the case, trade the pick for a player that is a more sure thing.

[Y2Jimmy0]

If I was a cavs fan the last thing I'd want them to do is use a top 5 pick on a nba-ready lower ceiling player just because it fit our window better. If that's the case, trade the pick for a player that is a more sure thing.

 

 

If LeBRon leaves after season, they could likely trade Love and move IT in a S&T if they wanted to rebuild as well.

[ZoomSlowik]

Cavs definitely wouldn't be drafting someone like Ingram with the Nets pick next year. Ingram is a raw kid with upside, Cavs would likely be targeting someone in the Tatum or Fultz profile, guys who can come in day 1 and be a contributor.

 

So no, even though Ingram was a high pick, he's the not the type of player 2018 Cavs would be targeting if they want to convince Lebron to stay.

 

Like you said, if Lebron leaving, he's leaving to go to the best situation to win. I don't think Laker is unless they could fit 3 max contracts, and that won't happen unless they trade Deng, and Clarkson (and use Randle as a sweetener ). It could happen, but no guarantees.

 

Again, we have no idea what the pick will be. What if the Nets win 30 games? What if they get bad lottery luck? What if the top guys right now disappoint or get hurt? Someone like Ingram or Brown could very easily be their top option. Even then It's no lock they're good early. Look at Wiggins, he's the 3rd best player on a 6-seed type team.

 

You're assuming great things for the pick but discounting development for a guy with as much raw talent as almost any draft prospect.

 

[thxfrthmmrs]

Again, we have no idea what the pick will be. What if the Nets win 30 games? What if they get bad lottery luck? What if the top guys right now disappoint or get hurt? Someone like Ingram or Brown could very easily be their top option. Even then It's no lock they're good early. Look at Wiggins, he's the 3rd best player on a 6-seed type team.

 

You're assuming great things for the pick but discounting development for a guy with as much raw talent as almost any draft prospect.

 

Well does that sound more ridiculous than saying Lebron is 100% going to Lakers next year (Not you, but you were supporting Jenk's proclamation)? What if KD and Curry gets hurt and Cavs wins championship this year? What if Lonzo totally bombs and Ingram doesn't improve? A lot more can go wrong with that theory than Nets landing a top 3 pick next year. All I said was Cavs have a higher chance of retaining Lebron with the 4 pieces they got than they did before the trade, which I still think is true.

[Dick Allen]

I think the Irving is the best player so Boston wins, but it was a good deal for Cleveland. They weren't going to win a title as they were constructed. IT, IMO, isn't as good as Irving, but he's still good. I've never been a Crowder fan, but he's serviceable, and you don't need him scoring when IT and Lebron are on the floor, the center is OK, the pick could be gold, and on top of it, they save $30 million in luxury tax. So they did what they had to do. Just in the NBA, when you are not tanking, it almost always is whoever gets the best player winds up "winning" the trade.

 

If the Bulls really want to mess with DWade, they should play him 38 minutes a night. That will get him to want a buyout a bit sooner.

Edited August 23, 2017 by Dick Allen

[Kyyle23]

It's amazing how much I hate the Bulls. I hate seeing fans talk about them. I watched 75% of the games as recent as 2 seasons ago. My interest in them has plummeted to a new low. I won't watch the NBA until playoffs this year.

 

Same. I even watched a lot last year, but it's time to ignore them until something truly changes at the top. This s*** show has gone on long enough

[ZoomSlowik]

Well does that sound more ridiculous than saying Lebron is 100% going to Lakers next year (Not you, but you were supporting Jenk's proclamation)? What if KD and Curry gets hurt and Cavs wins championship this year? What if Lonzo totally bombs and Ingram doesn't improve? A lot more can go wrong with that theory than Nets landing a top 3 pick next year. All I said was Cavs have a higher chance of retaining Lebron with the 4 pieces they got than they did before the trade, which I still think is true.

Those scenarios are way less likely. Even if the Nets are the worst team (which isn't a lock), they only have a 64% chance at a top-3 pick. Then they have to take the right guy. Then he has to be good relatively fast. Oh, and Thomas has to resign.

 

All the Lakers need is to convince someone like George, who already said he wants to go to the Lakers. Then they're at least in the running if not the favorite.

 

 

[thxfrthmmrs]

Those scenarios are way less likely. Even if the Nets are the worst team (which isn't a lock), they only have a 64% chance at a top-3 pick. Then they have to take the right guy. Then he has to be good relatively fast. Oh, and Thomas has to resign.

 

All the Lakers need is to convince someone like George, who already said he wants to go to the Lakers. Then they're at least in the running if not the favorite.

 

George's tone has changed since the trade. He's mentioned he's willing to stay in OKC if they are competitive next year. Russ is loyal to OKC, so we will see if he could convince him to stay.

 

Even if PG goes to LA, would a core of him, Lonzo, Ingram, Clarkson, and Randle be definitively better in 2018 and 19 than Love, IT, Crowder, Porter Jr (or another top prospect), and Zizic? I think not. Not to mention now they have to play in the same conference as Warriors, Spurs, and Rockets.

[jenksycat]

George's tone has changed since the trade. He's mentioned he's willing to stay in OKC if they are competitive next year. Russ is loyal to OKC, so we will see if he could convince him to stay.

 

Even if PG goes to LA, would a core of him, Lonzo, Ingram, Clarkson, and Randle be definitively better in 2018 and 19 than Love, IT, Crowder, Porter Jr (or another top prospect), and Zizic? I think not. Not to mention now they have to play in the same conference as Warriors, Spurs, and Rockets.

 

Westbrook has a player option after this year, he can leave too if he wants. From Cali, went to UCLA. (insert hmmm emoji)

[Soxfest]

It's amazing how much I hate the Bulls. I hate seeing fans talk about them. I watched 75% of the games as recent as 2 seasons ago. My interest in them has plummeted to a new low. I won't watch the NBA until playoffs this year.

They will be unwatchaBULL this year.

[thxfrthmmrs]

Westbrook has a player option after this year, he can leave too if he wants. From Cali, went to UCLA. (insert hmmm emoji)

 

Well aware of that. As I said Russ is loyal to OKC, I don't think it's too likely he leaves, especially since LA is set at PG. I think it's more likely Cleveland S&T LBJ to OKC for Adams and 1st (PG and Russ re-signing of course) than him going to LA.

[jenksycat]

Well aware of that. As I said Russ is loyal to OKC, I don't think it's too likely he leaves, especially since LA is set at PG. I think it's more likely Cleveland S&T LBJ to OKC for Adams and 1st (PG and Russ re-signing of course) than him going to LA.

 

I don't see that happening at all. Those 3 could just as easily go to LA and not be stuck in OKC + add Lonzo/Ingram/Randle.

[thxfrthmmrs]

As if Lebron + PG + Russ need more wings or ballhanders who could not shoot.

 

That sounds nice on paper, but that trio needs rim protection and shooting to round out the team.

[Bananarchy]

Well aware of that. As I said Russ is loyal to OKC, I don't think it's too likely he leaves, especially since LA is set at PG. I think it's more likely Cleveland S&T LBJ to OKC for Adams and 1st (PG and Russ re-signing of course) than him going to LA.

No way. He's going West. Westbrook is too good to pass up if you're LA

[ZoomSlowik]

George's tone has changed since the trade. He's mentioned he's willing to stay in OKC if they are competitive next year. Russ is loyal to OKC, so we will see if he could convince him to stay.

 

Even if PG goes to LA, would a core of him, Lonzo, Ingram, Clarkson, and Randle be definitively better in 2018 and 19 than Love, IT, Crowder, Porter Jr (or another top prospect), and Zizic? I think not. Not to mention now they have to play in the same conference as Warriors, Spurs, and Rockets.

 

It could very easily be the Lakers.

 

There are no locks with Cleveland beyond this year and only the pick with potential to improve. Thomas has only been elite for one year and his hip appears to still be an issue, plus he's a FA. Love is trending in the wrong direction and hasn't been able to maximize his production with Lebron. Crowder is fine, not great. Thompson and Smith are overpaid role players and anyone else is barely worth mentioning. Not a lot of defense either.

 

If the pick isn't a stud pretty fast, they're going to be moving in the wrong direction at the end of Lebron's peak. And for about the fifth time, the pick is more likely to end up at 4 or 5 than 1. There's a big difference between Porter (or whomever emerges as #1) and someone that's more of a wild card like Bamba or Williams. Even if it's Bagley or Ayton, it's going to be hard to play them, Love and Lebron.

 

LA would have George (or Westbrook or Cousins) who are all elite players at their peak, and two strong prospects on the roster that won't be rookies.

 

I'll put it this way: the Lakers would be in better shape than Cleveland when he came back.

Edited August 24, 2017 by ZoomSlowik

[thxfrthmmrs]

It could very easily be the Lakers.

 

There are no locks with Cleveland beyond this year and only the pick with potential to improve. Thomas has only been elite for one year and his hip appears to still be an issue, plus he's a FA. Love is trending in the wrong direction and hasn't been able to maximize his production with Lebron. Crowder is fine, not great. Thompson and Smith are overpaid role players and anyone else is barely worth mentioning. Not a lot of defense either.

 

If the pick isn't a stud pretty fast, they're going to be moving in the wrong direction at the end of Lebron's peak. And for about the fifth time, the pick is more likely to end up at 4 or 5 than 1. There's a big difference between Porter (or whomever emerges as #1) and someone that's more of a wild card like Bamba or Williams. Even if it's Bagley or Ayton, it's going to be hard to play them, Love and Lebron.

 

LA would have George (or Westbrook or Cousins) who are all elite players at their peak, and two strong prospects on the roster that won't be rookies.

 

I'll put it this way: the Lakers would be in better shape than Cleveland when he came back.

 

Not enough to beat GSW or enough to draw Lebron there.

 

But I give up, think whatever you want. The matter is Kyrie demanded a trade, Cavs had to either trade him for 80 cents on the dollar or end up with a dysfunctional locker room with no financial flexibility or draft pick assets. They virtually had no chance of retaining Lebron. Yet after the trade Cavs end up with two players who look like who should fill in for Kyrie's production, a 20 year old European prospect, a high draft pick in a very top heavy draft. In fact, even if they don't use the pick, they could package the pick to a get another star to play alongside Lebron, Love, Crowder and possibly IT. So yea, I absolutely think Cavs have a BETTER chance of retaining Lebron than before the trade. And I am ok if you don't think the same way.

[ZoomSlowik]

Not enough to beat GSW or enough to draw Lebron there.

 

But I give up, think whatever you want. The matter is Kyrie demanded a trade, Cavs had to either trade him for 80 cents on the dollar or end up with a dysfunctional locker room with no financial flexibility or draft pick assets. They virtually had no chance of retaining Lebron. Yet after the trade Cavs end up with two players who look like who should fill in for Kyrie's production, a 20 year old European prospect, a high draft pick in a very top heavy draft. In fact, even if they don't use the pick, they could package the pick to a get another star to play alongside Lebron, Love, Crowder and possibly IT. So yea, I absolutely think Cavs have a BETTER chance of retaining Lebron than before the trade. And I am ok if you don't think the same way.

If the bar is beating GS, he might as well retire.

 

Kobe asked for a trade too. Their locker room is probably going to be dysfunctional anyways with Lebron b****ing about not having enough talent, or their owner being cheap, or how they let Griffin go, or subtweeting his teammates or 5 other things I forgot. The constant questions about his FA (and to a lesser extent Thomas) won't help either. Their management team won't calm things either.

 

They did very well if you assume that they had to trade Irving. They didn't get worse, which is better than most do in that situation.

 

How much it helps remains to be seen. They still don't have any financial flexibility and only one future asset (albeit potentially a very good one).

Edited August 24, 2017 by ZoomSlowik

[jenksycat]

Cavs are old and have 0 payroll flexibility for the next 2 years (because of GM Lebron's moves).

 

Lakers are young and have a mountain of money to spend...and are in LA not Cleveland.

 

Warriors have the next 2 years on lock down assuming health & Durant keeps opting in. Year 3 gets dicey with Klay wanting to get paid potentially.

 

I think the true elite guys are going to try and copy the Warriors and the Lakers are truly best built for that (money + location + young guys already on the team)

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Why would anyone want this package for Butler? The Bulls have no need for Isaiah Thomas. They are trying to lose as many games as possible. The plan involves possibly landing Michael Porter Jr or Marvin Bagley III. That's the silver lining in the Bulls deal.

 

Because they got an absolute trash return for a top 15 f***in' player, even for what they wanna do. That is why Bulls fan would have wanted this kind of package, minus thomas. The pick alone is a better return than the trash that they got, and very obviously makes so much more f***in' sense for what you CLEARLY point out they wanna do, potentially land Porter/Bagley.

[Steve9347]

I think this is actually solid for both teams. Cleveland did very well getting this much for Kyrie when they basically had to move him. IT and Crowder makes it so they are still the favorite in the East. They may lose LeBron and Thomas after the season but they'll have a high pick and assets to move toward a rebuild if they wanted. From Boston's end, they get 2 years of Kyrie and it's worth it if he re-signs (not sure if that's likely) in Boston. They set themselves up for the future and they absolutely didn't want to pay IT $200 million.

 

As far as the Bulls are concerned, this has nothing to do with Butler. These deals aren't mutually exclusive even though people keep bringing them up in the same context. The Bulls likely wanted this year's pick for Butler. I would have insisted on a pick in this year's draft as well. The Celtics love Jayson Tatum and weren't willing to do that. Why would anyone want this package for Butler? The Bulls have no need for Isaiah Thomas. They are trying to lose as many games as possible. The plan involves possibly landing Michael Porter Jr or Marvin Bagley III. That's the silver lining in the Bulls deal.

The Bulls did about the worst you can do in trading someone like Jimmy Butler. They could have saved face by not punting the 1-7, but they really like to faceplant and did a spectacular job of it.