2016-2017 NBA Thread

[Quin]

I'm listening to espn 1000. Hearing A LOT of GMs are PISSED. They had no idea it would take so little to get a top 8 player in the game. The Wizards for example could've given up Otto Porter+ that would've been better than what the Pelicans gave up.

 

Damn near any team could have beat that. Did Vivek watch a Hield college reel and become enamored?

[Kyyle23]

Damn near any team could have beat that. Did Vivek watch a Hield college reel and become enamored?

 

He feels that Hield will run the 4 on 5 defense flawlessly

[Jordan4life_2007]

Damn near any team could have beat that. Did Vivek watch a Hield college reel and become enamored?

 

True. I just brought up the Wizards because it was implied they would've been willing to deal Otto Porter+++ for Cousins but didn't think it would be enough. Beal, Wall and Cousins? Cavs would've been shook. Let LeBron off the hook.

[Rowand44]

J4L I defend you all the time in this thread but you've officially killed the words GOAT and Shook.

[Brian]

J4L I defend you all the time in this thread but you've officially killed the words GOAT and Shook.

 

*Like*

[Jordan4life_2007]

J4L I defend you all the time in this thread but you've officially killed the words GOAT and Shook.

 

Name me a better frontcourt in the past better than Davis/Cousins? Don't give me Robinson/Duncan. Robinson was past his prime at that point and a full-blown role player by 2001. Davis and Cousins are 23 and 26. And I use shook only when it applies. It definitely applies here. The Warriors would much rather see a no-defense playing squad like Denver than this new monster.

[Steve9347]

I too am shook.

[Chisoxfn]

Name me a better frontcourt in the past better than Davis/Cousins? Don't give me Robinson/Duncan. Robinson was past his prime at that point and a full-blown role player by 2001. Davis and Cousins are 23 and 26. And I use shook only when it applies. It definitely applies here. The Warriors would much rather see a no-defense playing squad like Denver than this new monster.

In Duncan's rookie season (97-98), both players were pretty damn good. That said, I think Davis / Cousins is one of the best front courts in a long long time. It will be interesting how they share the ball/dynamic. Hell, Marc Gasol and Zbo is one of the best front courts of the last 15 years, haha.

[Chisoxfn]

By the way, I don't know if it is a good argument or a bad argument, but deals like this are why I have long said I'd keep Butler and figure out a way to add pieces around him. That said, this type of deal for Cousins gets made and yet again we aren't the team getting "said" player. I have no idea why...maybe we tried or maybe no one in the NBA had a clue and the Pelicans got it because Vlade is in love with one or two of the pieces...cause a mediocre draft pick we could have given them and we could have easily handed them Doug / Niko / Valentine / Portis, whomever the hell else they wanted.

[Steve9347]

Apparently the Celtics completely blew it on Cousins. They've been ignoring him as they're completely focused on Jimmy.

 

APPARENTLY this means they might be willing to meet the Bulls' demands to save face and make a legitimate run at the Finals. They smell blood in the water with Love hurt and LeBron playing so many minutes. Upgrading Crowder to Butler would be a huge haul for them.

 

GIMME DEM PICKS

[Quin]

In Duncan's rookie season (97-98), both players were pretty damn good. That said, I think Davis / Cousins is one of the best front courts in a long long time. It will be interesting how they share the ball/dynamic. Hell, Marc Gasol and Zbo is one of the best front courts of the last 15 years, haha.

 

This is essentially Gasol and Z-Bo on crack.

[Chisoxfn]

Apparently the Celtics completely blew it on Cousins. They've been ignoring him as they're completely focused on Jimmy.

 

APPARENTLY this means they might be willing to meet the Bulls' demands to save face and make a legitimate run at the Finals. They smell blood in the water with Love hurt and LeBron playing so many minutes. Upgrading Crowder to Butler would be a huge haul for them.

 

GIMME DEM PICKS

I don't know...Cousins just got drafted for mediocrity...doesn't that lower the perceived price it would take to get Butler? I mean, Bulls obviously aren't going to be the Kings when it comes to this. I am really shook...I figured if Cousins was going anywhere it was going to be Lakers for Russell (or Clarskson), Randle, and some picks.

[Chisoxfn]

By the way, with all this "tanking" going on, it is only a matter of time until the NBA legitimately changes its lottery process. I know there has been talk in recent years, but it is getting worse and the NBA is going to be forced to do something. I don't know if they will go as drastic as some of the proposals out there (with teams kind of having a calendar of picks) or if it will be something more simple, such as teams can't have a top 5 pick 3 years in a row (or something along those lines).

[Quin]

By the way, with all this "tanking" going on, it is only a matter of time until the NBA legitimately changes its lottery process. I know there has been talk in recent years, but it is getting worse and the NBA is going to be forced to do something. I don't know if they will go as drastic as some of the proposals out there (with teams kind of having a calendar of picks) or if it will be something more simple, such as teams can't have a top 5 pick 3 years in a row (or something along those lines).

 

Once a full, 30 team D-League/G-League is established, I'd like to see Bill Simmon's 14 team tournament to get the first pick.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I don't know...Cousins just got drafted for mediocrity...doesn't that lower the perceived price it would take to get Butler? I mean, Bulls obviously aren't going to be the Kings when it comes to this. I am really shook...I figured if Cousins was going anywhere it was going to be Lakers for Russell (or Clarskson), Randle, and some picks.

 

Word is the Kings really wanted Ingram in any deal for Cousins. And the Lakers said hell no. I don't blame the Lakers. Ingram is potentially KD 2.0

Edited February 20, 2017 by Jordan4life

[thxfrthmmrs]

I presume the Kings must have some ridiculous internal scouting reports on the players they got...but man it makes no sense and I agree with you. I saw it and literally was like, geeze, we could have made this deal.

 

Even if that's the case, take what J4L posted for instance

 

I'm listening to espn 1000. Hearing A LOT of GMs are PISSED. They had no idea it would take so little to get a top 8 player in the game. The Wizards for example could've given up Otto Porter+ that would've been better than what the Pelicans gave up.

 

The only player with upside they got back is Hield. If they have some sort of inside intel on Hield, the package is still very weak by industry standards. If they field a couple more offers from others teams, they could drive a bidding war and it forces NOLA to put a better package around Hield to match other teams. The fact that they failed to do that shows a lack of competency, maybe there's something else going on behind doors that we don't know, but still it's a failure.

 

We know that this is a superstars league. I'm just disgusted at the fact that a hapless franchise, who is within reaching distance of a playoff spot for a change, just traded away a superstar for half of what he's worth and sealed their fate as the bottom dweller in the West for the next 5-7 years.

Edited February 20, 2017 by 2005thxfrthmmrs

[Chisoxfn]

And in terms of quality of the league, we can debate the styles of 90's era basketball with the current era, but I don't think we can debate that the modern league has fewer teams with legitimate title chances then ever before and far more teams on the "tanking" side in the past. Bad teams have existed for forever, but the disparity that exists now (vs. the 90's when yes the Bulls were dominant, but you had the Spurs / Rockets / Knicks / Pacers / Lakers / Pistons / Jazz / Blazers / Suns as plausible contenders (during a variety of those runs).

 

When I see two great teams play today, even though I tend to enjoy "iso" basketball, I also love seeing great ball movement, etc, so like a lot of aspects of the current game, I do recognize the fact that I get to see some great basketball, but too many games today don't fit the bill and in my opinion are at a lower overall quality level.

 

I think a combination of changing the draft and forcing players to stay in college at least two years is part of the answer at improving the depth of the NBA product.

[southsider2k5]

Don't fret. We all know once the trade deadline passes, the Bulls will be standing in the exact same place with their dick in their hands, having done nothing to improve the team they have, nor to start to rebuild.

[Chisoxfn]

Word is the Kings really wanted Ingram in any deal for Cousins. And the Lakers said hell no. I don't blame the Lakers. Ingram is potentially KD 2.0

I don't blame the Lakers either, but the Kings took a lesser deal than what the Lakers could have offered without Ingram. That said, I disagree with you on Ingram's upside...anything could happen, but as of right now, he doesn't look like a budding superstar. Two years ago Ingram and Russell were both going to be superstars, right now I think the right team could get Russell for a 1st round pick (decent one, but nothing like the pick used to get Russell in the first place). And hell, look at Okafor and the supposed price to get him after going where he went in the draft.

[Chisoxfn]

Don't fret. We all know once the trade deadline passes, the Bulls will be standing in the exact same place with their dick in their hands, having done nothing to improve the team they have, nor to start to rebuild.

Well...this deal did remove one competitor from Okafor (if the Bulls want Okafor). I do think there is a lot to be said for his offensive ability, etc. Clearly he has major defensive issues though. I do like the general idea of buying low on guys, but I don't know that Okafor is a guy you can win with, because his flaws are so major.

[CrimsonWeltall]

By the way, with all this "tanking" going on, it is only a matter of time until the NBA legitimately changes its lottery process. I know there has been talk in recent years, but it is getting worse and the NBA is going to be forced to do something. I don't know if they will go as drastic as some of the proposals out there (with teams kind of having a calendar of picks) or if it will be something more simple, such as teams can't have a top 5 pick 3 years in a row (or something along those lines).

 

I like the proposal where each team chooses a DIFFERENT team's position for the following year. Basically, betting on who will suck.

 

So if you're the Nets, you might select the Kings' position. If the Kings finish in last next year, you get the #1 pick. You don't have as much incentive to tank yourself because you don't even control the pick related to where you finished in the standings.

 

I also think playoff seeds 1-3 should get to choose their opponent out of the 5-8 seeds. Golden State shouldn't get stuck with a potentially beastly Pelicans team as a reward for finishing first. Picking your opponent would also add some competitive fire because you're insulting your opponent by picking them as the "easiest win".

[Jordan4life_2007]

And in terms of quality of the league, we can debate the styles of 90's era basketball with the current era, but I don't think we can debate that the modern league has fewer teams with legitimate title chances then ever before and far more teams on the "tanking" side in the past. Bad teams have existed for forever, but the disparity that exists now (vs. the 90's when yes the Bulls were dominant, but you had the Spurs / Rockets / Knicks / Pacers / Lakers / Pistons / Jazz / Blazers / Suns as plausible contenders (during a variety of those runs).

 

When I see two great teams play today, even though I tend to enjoy "iso" basketball, I also love seeing great ball movement, etc, so like a lot of aspects of the current game, I do recognize the fact that I get to see some great basketball, but too many games today don't fit the bill and in my opinion are at a lower overall quality level.

 

I think a combination of changing the draft and forcing players to stay in college at least two years is part of the answer at improving the depth of the NBA product.

 

I completely disagree with you. the 90's was Chicago and that's it. Now if Shaq had not bolted to LA and Penny had stayed healthy then we're talking. We could've had a legit rivalry. Pat Riley tried with Mourning/Hardaway. But gmab. Utah in '98. Nobody thought they were really better. But that they had homecourt. That and only that was supposed to be the difference. If you think today's era is bad, and that's fair, the 90's were even worse.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Jordan4life

[ZoomSlowik]

I completely disagree with you. the 90's was Chicago and that's it. Now if Shaq had not bolted to LA and Penny had stayed healthy then we're talking. We could've had a legit rivalry. Pat Riley tried with Mourning/Hardaway. But gmab. Utah in '98. Nobody thought they were really better. But that they had homecourt. That and only that was supposed to be the difference. If you think today's era is bad, and that's fair, the 90's were even worse.

You could say the same thing about right now. There's 3 teams that can win, with maybe a 10% chance of someone like Toronto, Boston, LA or Houston winning. Even the Spurs are lagging a bit, but I won't count them out.

 

The east wasn't very good after Boston and the Bad Boys fell off, but you could say the same thing since Rose's knee blew up. It's not like the teams LeBron faced to get to the Finals were any better than Zo/Hardaway, the Doherty/Price Cavs, the Reggie/Schrempf Pacer teams or the Knicks.

 

There was also way more parity in the west. Houston, Phoenix, Seattle, Utah and the tail end of the Lakers were all legit. The OKC blowup really hurt that for the west.

 

This is a weird time right now. Some of the west contenders are going in the wrong direction and no one has risen up in the east yet. We need another couple of years for these young guys to grow up.

Edited February 20, 2017 by ZoomSlowik

[Chisoxfn]

You could say the same thing about right now. There's 3 teams that can win, with maybe a 10% chance of someone like Toronto, Boston, LA or Houston winning. Even the Spurs are lagging a bit, but I won't count them out.

 

The east wasn't very good after Boston and the Bad Boys fell off, but you could say the same thing since Rose's knee blew up. It's not like the teams LeBron faced to get to the Finals were any better than Zo/Hardaway, the Doherty/Price Cavs, the Reggie/Schrempf Pacer teams or the Knicks.

 

There was also way more parity in the west. Houston, Phoenix, Seattle, Utah and the tail end of the Lakers were all legit. The OKC blowup really hurt that for the west.

 

This is a weird time right now. Some of the west contenders are going in the wrong direction and no one has risen up in the east yet. We need another couple of years for these young guys to grow up.

I guess my point was that there were a lot more depth of "contenders". I'm not saying all of them had legit threats to beat the Bulls, but there were quiet a few different teams who emerged to play against the Bulls or even the Lakers after Jordan retired. There were some epic postseasons driving that. Right now, I really only see Golden State in the west and Cleveland in the East. Toronto may be better, but I just don't think that highly of Boston (well coached, but they'd be the worst champion I can ever remember...worse then the Pistons team that took out the Lakers with Ben Wall / Sheed / Billups / Rip).

 

Part of this might be largely tied to just how good I think the Warriors are right now. Yes, injuries can change things, but you basically have a small number of teams that can contend or are even close to "contending" and on the downside a much great number of teams who are "tanking" then we've ever seen before. The combination of that is bad for the game, imo.

[Rowand44]

Name me a better frontcourt in the past better than Davis/Cousins? Don't give me Robinson/Duncan. Robinson was past his prime at that point and a full-blown role player by 2001. Davis and Cousins are 23 and 26. And I use shook only when it applies. It definitely applies here. The Warriors would much rather see a no-defense playing squad like Denver than this new monster.

You use shook like in 80 percent of your posts in this thread now. I f***in love the idea of this AD/DMC front court and my post had nothing to do with that, just saying that you have absolutely killed those two words.