PDA

View Full Version : Your 2009-10 NBA thread



Chip R
10-27-2009, 10:39 PM
Great tipoff to the NBA season tonight with the Celtics beating the Cavs in Cleveland. :eek:

Next up, Lakers and Clippers. Unfortunately for the Clipsters, Blake Griffin is out with a broken kneecap. Talk about your star crossed franchises.

jimbo
10-27-2009, 10:41 PM
Great tipoff to the NBA season tonight with the Celtics beating the Cavs in Cleveland. :eek:

Next up, Lakers and Clippers. Unfortunately for the Clipsters, Blake Griffin is out with a broken kneecap. Talk about your star crossed franchises.

The NBA started tonight? ;)

MasonBuzz3
10-28-2009, 02:33 AM
the curse of los clippers strikes again. Tough break for the clips, but they played tough tonight against the lakers.

Boston looked like a seasoned champ tonight, and somehow Rasheed merged in without any techs or mouthing off. Could Sheed have finally matured?doubt it, but it is what it is. The Cavs look like a team that needs more work in practice, or in games against the non big five NBA teams this year. A lot of new faces in Cleveland and they looked a little unsure tonight, need to figure out minutes and match-ups.

This is going to be a great year for the NBA. Five teams that are head and shoulders above the rest, and the upcoming free agent class. Can we skip ahead to March already?

Razor Shines
10-28-2009, 03:05 AM
I'm pretty excited for this season. I watched a bit of the Blazers and Rockets game, I thought Oden's line was funny. 0pts, 5blks and 12rebs.

I want to think that they Pacers will be a playoff team this year, but I thought that last year. I think adding Dahntay Jones will help defensively.

Speaking of former Dukies, I read this about JJ Redick earlier today:


•Van Gundy recently called SG J.J. Redick one of the team's top two perimeter defenders. Redick on Monday credited Van Gundy and Joe Rogowski, the team's strength and conditioning coach, for his improvement.http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/orl-sportsmagic-notes-27102709oct27,0,5021144.story :laugh: I hope so, but I'll have to see it to beleive it.

improbus
10-28-2009, 06:08 PM
Watched the Boston vs. Cleveland game.
-Shaq has more lift than Garnett. Garnett looked beyond old last night. He is wiley and never dominated based on his athleticism, but he has to improve physically for the C's to win.
-'09 'Sheed = '02 Horry plus some post moves, passing, and an afro.
-The Cavs desperately need a 2 guard who can punish a defense off the dribble, ala Steven Jackson. Pull the trigger Danny Ferry.
-Ray Allen could do Ray Allen things until he is 45.
-Is Marquis Daniels trying to like like that blue girl from Star Wars?

Chip R
10-28-2009, 06:31 PM
Watched the Boston vs. Cleveland game.
-Shaq has more lift than Garnett. Garnett looked beyond old last night. He is wiley and never dominated based on his athleticism, but he has to improve physically for the C's to win.



It's going to be interesting to watch those two as the season goes on and the mileage in their legs piles up.

Unassisted
10-29-2009, 09:37 AM
Spurs looked deep last night in their opener, a win against the Hornets. Even if one of the Big Three (Duncan, Ginobili or Parker) have an off-night, there will be plenty of guys on the roster who can pick up the slack. Columnist in the local paper made the point that that even if their starting 5 aren't the best in the league, a strong case can be made for the second five being the best.

Razor Shines
10-29-2009, 09:43 AM
The Spurs do look really, really tough. I hope to make to 6 or 7 games this year. For sure when the Pacers come in to get slaughtered. I heard all this talk about how the Pacers were going to play D this year and then they go out and let Atlanta drop 120 on them.

I also watched the Suns and Clippers last night. Nash took over the last 7 or 8 minutes in a way I didn't think he could any more. He looks as good as he's ever been. Amare, on the other hand, looked old.

Boston Red
10-29-2009, 10:28 AM
Who will be coaching the Cavs next month?

improbus
10-29-2009, 10:54 AM
Who will be coaching the Cavs next month?

Avery Johnson...maybe...

DTCromer
10-29-2009, 12:37 PM
How can you you have an NBA thread without this link?

http://deadspin.com/5392030/the-book-the-nba-doesnt-want-you-to-read


That very first time Jack and I bet on an NBA game, Dick was on the court. The team we picked lost the game, but it covered the large point spread and that's how we won the money. Because of the matchup that night, I had some notion of who might win the game, but that's not why I was confident enough to pull the trigger and pick the other team. The real reason I picked the losing team was that I was just about certain they would cover the spread, no matter how badly they played. That is where Dick Bavetta comes into the picture.

From my earliest involvement with Bavetta, I learned that he likes to keep games close, and that when a team gets down by double-digit points, he helps the players save face. He accomplishes this act of mercy by quietly, and frequently, blowing the whistle on the team that's having the better night. Team fouls suddenly become one-sided between the contestants, and the score begins to tighten up. That's the way Dick Bavetta referees a game-and everyone in the league knew it.

Fellow referee Danny Crawford attended Michael Jordan's Flight School Camp years ago and later told me that he had long conversations with other referees and NBA players about how Bavetta propped up weak teams. Danny told me that Jordan himself said that everyone in the league knew that Bavetta cheated in games and that the players and coaches just hoped he would be cheating for them on game night. Cheating? That's a very strong word to use in any sentence that includes the name Dick Bavetta. Is the conscious act of helping a team crawl back into a contest "cheating"? The credo of referees from high school to the NBA is "call them like you see them." Of course, that's a lot different than purposely calling more fouls against one team as opposed to another. Did Bavetta have a hidden agenda? Or was he the ultimate company man, making sure the NBA and its fans got a competitive game most times he was on
the court?

Studying under Dick Bavetta for 13 years was like pursuing a graduate degree in advanced game manipulation. He knew how to marshal the tempo and tone of a game better than any referee in the league, by far. He also knew how to take subtle-and not so subtle-cues from the NBA front office and extend a playoff series or, worse yet, change the complexion of that series.

The 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Sacramento Kings presents a stunning example of game and series manipulation at its ugliest. As the teams prepared for Game 6 at the Staples Center, Sacramento had a 3–2 lead in the series. The referees assigned to work Game 6 were Dick Bavetta, Bob Delaney, and Ted Bernhardt. As soon as the referees for the game were chosen, the rest of us knew immediately that there would be a Game 7. A prolonged series was good for the league, good for the networks, and good for the game. Oh, and one more thing: it was great for the big-market, star-studded Los Angeles Lakers.



In the pregame meeting prior to Game 6, the league office sent down word that certain calls-calls that would have benefitted the Lakers — were being missed by the referees. This was the type of not-so-subtle information that I and other referees were left to interpret. After receiving the dispatch, Bavetta openly talked about the fact that the league wanted a Game 7.

"If we give the benefit of the calls to the team that's down in the series, nobody's going to complain. The series will be even at three apiece, and then the better team can win Game 7," Bavetta stated.



As history shows, Sacramento lost Game 6 in a wild come-from-behind thriller that saw the Lakers repeatedly sent to the foul line by the referees. For other NBA referees watching the game on television, it was a shameful performance by Bavetta's crew, one of the most poorly officiated games of all time.

The 2002 series certainly wasn't the first or last time Bavetta weighed in on an important game. He also worked Game 7 of the 2000 Western Conference Finals between the Lakers and the Trail Blazers. The Lakers were down by 13 at the start of the fourth quarter when Bavetta went to work. The Lakers outscored Portland 31–13 in the fourth quarter and went on to win the game and the series. It certainly didn't hurt the Lakers that they got to shoot 37 free throws compared to a paltry 16 for the Trail Blazers.



Two weeks before the 2003–04 season ended, Bavetta and I were assigned to officiate a game in Oakland. That afternoon before the tip-off, we were discussing an upcoming game on our schedule. It was the last regular-season game we were scheduled to work, pitting Denver against San Antonio. Denver had lost a game a few weeks prior because of a mistake made by the referees, a loss that could be the difference between them making or missing the playoffs. Bavetta told me Denver needed the win and that it would look bad for the staff and the league if the Nuggets missed the playoffs by one game. There were still a few games left on the schedule before the end of the season, and the standings could potentially change. But on that day in Oakland, Bavetta looked at me and casually stated, "Denver will win if they need the game. That's why I'm on it."



I was thinking, How is Denver going to win on the road in San Antonio? At the time, the Spurs were arguably the best team in the league. Bavetta answered my question before it was asked.

"Duncan will be on the bench with three fouls within the first five minutes of the game," he calmly stated.



Bavetta went on to inform me that it wasn't the first time the NBA assigned him to a game for a specific purpose. He cited examples, including the 1993 playoff series when he put New Jersey guard Drazen Petrovic on the bench with quick fouls to help Cleveland beat the Nets. He also spoke openly about the 2002 Los Angeles–Sacramento series and called himself the NBA's "go-to guy."



As it turned out, Denver didn't need the win after all; they locked up a spot in the playoffs before they got to San Antonio. In a twist of fate, it was the Spurs that ended up needing the win to have a shot at the division title, and Bavetta generously accommodated. In our pregame meeting, he talked about how important the game was to San Antonio and how meaningless it was to Denver, and that San Antonio was going to get the benefit of the calls that night. Armed with this inside information, I called Jack Concannon before the game and told him to bet the Spurs.

To no surprise, we won big. San Antonio blew Denver out of the building that evening, winning by 26 points. When Jack called me the following morning, he expressed amazement at the way an NBA game could be manipulated. Sobering, yes; amazing, no. That's how the game is played in the National Basketball Association.

Of course, Stafford had some friends in the league, too. I worked a Knicks game in Madison Square Garden with him on February 26, 2007. New York shot an astounding 39 free throws that night to Miami's paltry eight. It seemed like Stafford was working for the Knicks, calling fouls on Miami like crazy. Isiah Thomas was coaching the Knicks, and after New York's four-point victory, a guy from the Knicks came to our locker room looking for Stafford, who was in the shower. He told us that Thomas sent him to retrieve Stafford's home address; apparently, Stafford had asked the coach before the game for some autographed sneakers and jerseys for his kids. Suddenly, it all made sense.

Relationships between NBA players and referees were generally all over the board-love, hate, and everything in-between. Some players, even very good ones, were targeted by referees and the league because they were too talented for their own good. Raja Bell, formerly of the Phoenix Suns and now a member of the Charlotte Bobcats, was one of those players. A defensive specialist throughout his career, Bell had a reputation for being a "star stopper." His defensive skills were so razor sharp that he could shut down a superstar, or at least make him work for his points. Kobe Bryant was often frustrated by Bell's tenacity on defense. Let's face it, no one completely shuts down a player of Kobe's caliber, but Bell could frustrate Kobe, take him out of his game, and interrupt his rhythm.




You would think that the NBA would love a guy who plays such great defense. Think again! Star stoppers hurt the promotion of marquee players. Fans don't pay high prices to see players like Raja Bell-they pay to see superstars like Kobe Bryant score 40 points. Basketball purists like to see good defense, but the NBA wants the big names to score big points.




If a player of Kobe's stature collides with the likes of Raja Bell, the call will almost always go for Kobe and against Bell. As part of our ongoing training and game preparation, NBA referees regularly receive game-action video tape from the league office. Over the years, I have reviewed many recorded hours of video involving Raja Bell. The footage I analyzed usually illustrated fouls being called against Bell, rarely for him. The message was subtle but clear-call fouls against the star stopper because he's hurting the game.

improbus
10-29-2009, 01:50 PM
How can you you have an NBA thread without this link?

http://deadspin.com/5392030/the-book-the-nba-doesnt-want-you-to-read

Pretty scary stuff but until someone else can back up this info, I'm still somewhat skeptical. What does Donaghy have to lose by writing this book?

Anyway, why would the NBA have let the Spurs, known as the destroyers of NBA ratings, ever win four titles. They could have very easily given the Cavs the series last year if they wanted to, but they didn't. How is the Kings-Lakers game in 2002 any different than the Steelers-Seahawks Super Bowl in the level of suspicion? The Kings lost becuase they went 2-20 from 3 point range and 16-30 from the line, not because of the refs.

15fan
10-29-2009, 02:55 PM
Rogue refs in the NBA?

Get out. (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2840587)

DTCromer
10-30-2009, 08:15 AM
Pretty scary stuff but until someone else can back up this info, I'm still somewhat skeptical. What does Donaghy have to lose by writing this book?

Anyway, why would the NBA have let the Spurs, known as the destroyers of NBA ratings, ever win four titles. They could have very easily given the Cavs the series last year if they wanted to, but they didn't. How is the Kings-Lakers game in 2002 any different than the Steelers-Seahawks Super Bowl in the level of suspicion? The Kings lost becuase they went 2-20 from 3 point range and 16-30 from the line, not because of the refs.

What Donaghy is saying is what everyone has already known for years. It's just more gasoline on the fire.

The refs are just company men.

DTCromer
10-30-2009, 08:18 AM
Pretty scary stuff but until someone else can back up this info, I'm still somewhat skeptical. What does Donaghy have to lose by writing this book?

Anyway, why would the NBA have let the Spurs, known as the destroyers of NBA ratings, ever win four titles. They could have very easily given the Cavs the series last year if they wanted to, but they didn't. How is the Kings-Lakers game in 2002 any different than the Steelers-Seahawks Super Bowl in the level of suspicion? The Kings lost becuase they went 2-20 from 3 point range and 16-30 from the line, not because of the refs.

I disgaree. The Cavs were pitiful against the Magic last year and the refs did everything possible to give it to them. Lebron tripping on his own feet and getting a blocking call on Orlando and Mo Williams shoving a player pretty hard right in front of the official are 2 examples right away.


And the Kings lost the series in game 6, not game 7 because of the absolutely pathetic officiating. You can talk all you want about officials not deciding games, but their calls do very much whether people want to admit it or not.

NJReds
10-30-2009, 11:51 AM
What Donaghy is saying is what everyone has already known for years. It's just more gasoline on the fire.

The refs are just company men.

Agreed. I remember watching the two series he mentioned Lakers-Sacramento and Lakers-Portland. The calls in favor of the Lakers were blatent. This story isn't surprising.

Also, how many times did Wade go to the line for Miami when they won the championship. Absolutely sickening.

Roy Tucker
10-30-2009, 12:58 PM
I've often wondered too. That Wade/Miami finals was ridiculous. The guy throws his body into the lane like a fullback in the 2 hole and they'd give him a call every time.

The NBA said they'd investigate Donahy's allegations. But that's like Richard Nixon hiring a prosecutor to look into Watergate. There won't be any smoking gun.

improbus
10-30-2009, 05:11 PM
Look at the stats. In Game 6 of the 2006 finals, the Heat may have gotten 37 free throws, but they only made 23 of them. The Mavs made 19. The difference in the game was that the Heat shot 45% for the game and the Mavs shot 37%. Also, in that game 6 for the Kings vs. Lakers, Shaq went for 41 and 17 and shot 14-25 from the field.

Finally, both the Kings and Mavs were jump shooting teams while the Lakers and Heat attacked the rim relentlessly, so they forced the officials into making the decisions that they did. It isn't a fix, it's smart basketball. It is the exact same thing that every NFL team is doing now with deep passes fishing for interference calls. Was there poor officiating, yes. Was it fixed? Give me a break.

15fan
10-30-2009, 10:13 PM
Look at the stats. In Game 6 of the 2006 finals, the Heat may have gotten 37 free throws, but they only made 23 of them. The Mavs made 19. The difference in the game was that the Heat shot 45% for the game and the Mavs shot 37%.

Of course, with Miami shooting so many more FTs, that by definition meant that the Mavs had more guys in foul trouble & had to play their bench more/starters less.

Here are a couple of my favorite foul calls from that series:

Wade never gets touched on this one, yet he gets the foul call.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lX_qMS9bRY&feature=related

And here Wade gets the call after practically punching Nowitzki in the stomach.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5y8nI1PPYOk&feature=related

Razor Shines
10-31-2009, 12:28 AM
I watched the Heat and Pacers tonight and there were 4 offhand/pushoff offensive fouls called on the Pacers (3 in the 4th quarter when they were making somewhat of a little run) and Mr. Offhand himself had 0 called on him and he went to the line 19 times. I think the Pacers would have lost anyway but the officiating was pretty bad.

Watching Golden State and Pheonix right now. Again Steve Nash is playing incredible basketball. 18pts, 20asts and 6rebs. Channing Frye is playing really well also, hit his first 6 three point attempts.

Tom Servo
10-31-2009, 01:33 AM
Bobcats won a game!

improbus
10-31-2009, 07:02 AM
Look, the 2004 finals were embarassing. But, my guess is that the refs set the tone that if a player dives into the lane, he is going to get the call. Once they set that precedent, they couldn't just change. That is the way every basketball game at all levels works. You find out what the refs are giving you and take advantage. That is the ultimate sign of a Pat Riley team.

As far as fixing games and being one sided, you could argue that no team has ever gotten more blatant, one-sided obvious calls than the Yankees in this postseason. It happens in every sport but for some reason the NBA is the only one that people think is fixed.

Everyone loves a good conspiracy theory, but the Mavs could have won that series with or without the help of the refs. If Dirk doesn't go 2-14 in game four, maybe they have a better chance.

TeamSelig
10-31-2009, 07:01 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aySGUzzxjGE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4y8M7yDasQ

Unassisted
10-31-2009, 11:19 PM
I haven't looked up rosters to confirm it, but I read somewhere that several NBA teams are starting the season 1 or 2 players short of 15 on their roster to save money. Sounds like a page out of the book of our favorite baseball team, which has been known to drag its feet filling roster holes.

KoryMac5
11-01-2009, 04:02 PM
Looks like the NBA is also flirting with the idea of changing their playoff format for the 8th seeds.


SI’s Ian Thomsen says the NBA is considering the idea a postseason tournament in which the Nos. 8-through-15 teams in each conference would play up to play-in games in pursuit of the eighth and final spot in the playoffs.

improbus
11-02-2009, 07:01 PM
Looks like the NBA is also flirting with the idea of changing their playoff format for the 8th seeds.

Hopefully that would help to deal with the occasional tanking that happens in the NBA.

Razor Shines
11-13-2009, 12:27 AM
The Pacers look like they're getting it together without Murphey. 3rd straight win against the Warriors tonight.

I only bring up the game because Andris Biedrins had the funniest DNP ever. In the box score it reads "DNP OSTEITIS PUBIS". I guess it's pretty common in Rugby, but it sounds funny.

MasonBuzz3
11-13-2009, 03:21 AM
The Pacers look like they're getting it together without Murphey. 3rd straight win against the Warriors tonight.


speak of the perfect guy for the Cavs right now....I love Murphy as a PF, great on the boards and can strech the floor, but that contract, wow


will be interesting to see where Stephen Jackson ends up, since Golden State hates 6-7 SG that avg 20 ppg

Roy Tucker
11-13-2009, 09:23 AM
I only bring up the game because Andris Biedrins had the funniest DNP ever. In the box score it reads "DNP OSTEITIS PUBIS". I guess it's pretty common in Rugby, but it sounds funny.

Yeow. There are some things I wish I hadn't googled and this is one.

Revering4Blue
11-13-2009, 11:01 AM
The Pacers look like they're getting it together without Murphey. 3rd straight win against the Warriors tonight.

No Foster or Dunleavy, either.

As much as I wanted the Pacers to draft Dejaun Blair, I'm more than happy with Tyler Hansbrough.

BTW, what sense did it make for the Hornets to fire Byron Scott now?

SandyD
11-13-2009, 08:25 PM
Caught a bit of this story in WWL last night, and caller said he read an article on ESPN about mid-season last season which talked about the body language during a time out ... suggesting that the Scott had lost the players. Not sure if that's really true. There did seem to be a lot of frustration last year.

What is true: they've gotten off to a horrendous start, and most people felt this was Scott's last year as Hornets coach anyway.

Chip R
11-14-2009, 11:55 AM
Caught a bit of this story in WWL last night, and caller said he read an article on ESPN about mid-season last season which talked about the body language during a time out ... suggesting that the Scott had lost the players. Not sure if that's really true. There did seem to be a lot of frustration last year.

What is true: they've gotten off to a horrendous start, and most people felt this was Scott's last year as Hornets coach anyway.

They were saying this morning on ESPN that some felt Scott was more concerned with getting tee times to go golfing than coaching. It was said that he was trying to book tee times at courses when they were going to the west coast. It was also said that he changed the flight time to Phoenix so he could get some golf in.

CP3 seemed pretty upset since he wasn't consulted on the change. He was apparently close to Scott and was one of his golfing buddies.

SandyD
11-14-2009, 12:15 PM
Yeah, he said he and D West should have been consulted. Now, CP3 is injured, and could miss the next couple of weeks.

I still think it's funny the coach Scott was fired and the GM Bower is his replacement for the time being. I'm not sure the GM shouldn't be fired too.

As for golf, who was he golfing with? He may have been looking for his next job anyway. There was some surprise when the Hornets didn't offer an extension this past off season, IIRC.

Chip R
11-14-2009, 12:18 PM
As for golf, who was he golfing with?


Like I said, I heard one of them was CP3 - the Franchise. He probably thought if he was golfing with CP3, then it was cool.

15fan
11-16-2009, 03:09 PM
BTW, what sense did it make for the Hornets to fire Byron Scott now?

Trying to make sense out of anything involving George Shinn is an exercise in futility.

MasonBuzz3
11-16-2009, 03:22 PM
Trying to make sense out of anything involving George Shinn is an exercise in futility.

what he said.

add the Bobcats to the unable to figure out list. They salary dump Okafor this offseason and then trade for Diop's big $ and now trade for S. Jackson's huge contract. I guess MJ only drafting ACC kids wasnt the biggest issue.

Revering4Blue
11-16-2009, 08:53 PM
[QUOTE] I guess MJ only drafting ACC kids wasnt the biggest issue./QUOTE]


He also drafted Adam Morrison instead of Rudy Gay or Brandon Roy.

That worked out well.:confused:

texasdave
11-30-2009, 07:23 PM
The NBA season is just for show this year. If the Lakers stay healthy there isn't a team out there that can touch them. Repeat City.

Chip R
12-02-2009, 03:29 PM
Ron Artest has admitted that he used to drink Hennessey during halftime.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4706474

BRM
12-03-2009, 09:31 AM
The Nets set the record last night for most losses to start a season. 0-18 start. That's rough.

texasdave
12-03-2009, 12:29 PM
A ton of props to Rick Adelman this year. No Yao Ming, no T-Mac, no Ron Artest = no playoffs? Not so fast. The season is young but I believe they will battle for a playoff spot all season long. I have never followed a team that plays as consistently hard as this team does. The Rocket rotation is Brooks, Scola, Hayes, Battier, Ariza, Landry, Andersen, Buddinger and Lowry. Is anyone scared yet? And here they stand at 10-8 with wins over the Lakers, the Jazz and the Blazers. The Nets have as much talent as the Rockets - Brooks Lopez and Devin Harris are likely better than any players the Rockets have. And yet the Nets stand 0-18. If Rick Adelman squeezes 45 wins and a playoff spot out of that roster he is hands-down coach of the year.

Revering4Blue
12-03-2009, 07:07 PM
I agree 100%, Texasdave. It is foolish to count out the Rockets.

Meanwhile, Paul Westphal's Kings, projected Pacific cellar-dwellers by many, are 9-8 without the services of Martin and Garcia, though the Clips and dysfunctional Warriors are M*A*S*H units, themselves.

improbus
12-03-2009, 07:14 PM
A ton of props to Rick Adelman this year. No Yao Ming, no T-Mac, no Ron Artest = no playoffs? Not so fast. The season is young but I believe they will battle for a playoff spot all season long. I have never followed a team that plays as consistently hard as this team does. The Rocket rotation is Brooks, Scola, Hayes, Battier, Ariza, Landry, Andersen, Buddinger and Lowry. Is anyone scared yet? And here they stand at 10-8 with wins over the Lakers, the Jazz and the Blazers. The Nets have as much talent as the Rockets - Brooks Lopez and Devin Harris are likely better than any players the Rockets have. And yet the Nets stand 0-18. If Rick Adelman squeezes 45 wins and a playoff spot out of that roster he is hands-down coach of the year.
The Rockets are filled with eight solid rotation guys who know how to play basketball and all understand their limitations. The really impressive team is Sacramento at 9-8. Look at last nights starting lineup for the Kings.
PG - Tyreke Evans - nice rookie but not a PG
SG - Donte Greene - Never EVER heard of this guy, even in college at Syracuse
SF -Andres Nocioni - So over the hill and bad...
PF - Jason Thompson - nice young forward, but he is still Jason Thompson
C - Spencer Hawes - Stiff white guy with some skills

Off the bench
Omar Casspi - The Israeli wonder
Beno Udrih - Has every basketball skill except for "good basketball player"
Ime Udoka - Beno 2.0
Sergio Rodriguez - Who?
Jon Brockman - Who again?

RBA
12-03-2009, 08:45 PM
The NBA season is just for show this year. If the Lakers stay healthy there isn't a team out there that can touch them. Repeat City.


I hope you're right. :thumbup:

texasdave
12-04-2009, 02:01 AM
The Rockets are filled with eight solid rotation guys who know how to play basketball and all understand their limitations. The really impressive team is Sacramento at 9-8. Look at last nights starting lineup for the Kings.
PG - Tyreke Evans - nice rookie but not a PG
SG - Donte Greene - Never EVER heard of this guy, even in college at Syracuse
SF -Andres Nocioni - So over the hill and bad...
PF - Jason Thompson - nice young forward, but he is still Jason Thompson
C - Spencer Hawes - Stiff white guy with some skills

Off the bench
Omar Casspi - The Israeli wonder
Beno Udrih - Has every basketball skill except for "good basketball player"
Ime Udoka - Beno 2.0
Sergio Rodriguez - Who?
Jon Brockman - Who again?

Kudos to the Kings (9-8) who have made relative hay against probably the easiest schedule in the league so far. Through games of Wednesday they had played 17 games, 9 of which came against teams with losing records. The teams they have played to date have a winning percentage of .455. They have played 10 at home and 7 on the road. Their current four game streak has come entirely at home against teams with a combined record of miserable (actually it is 17-54). They have beaten 2 teams with a winning record.

The Rockets (10-8) have had what could be the toughest schedule in the league so far. They have played 8 at home and 10 away. They have played 18 games, only 4 of which came against teams with losing records. Rockets' opponents have played at a cumulative .587 clip. They have beaten 6 teams with a winning record.

Switch the schedules and I would guess the Kings record would be 5-12, while the Rockets would be about 13-5.

Revering4Blue
12-04-2009, 10:42 PM
The Nets set the record last night for most losses to start a season. 0-18 start. That's rough.

The losing streak finally ends at 18.

New Jersey 97, Charlotte 91

Razor Shines
12-06-2009, 08:11 AM
Tim Duncan Calls Out Geometric Angle Needed To Make Bank Shot

SAN ANTONIO—Immediately after releasing a 12-foot jump shot Tuesday night, Spurs center Tim Duncan called out the angle necessary for the ball to bank off the backboard and into the basket. "Forty-six-point-seven degrees," said the airborne Duncan, also noting the ball's initial upward velocity of 14.4 meters per second after a moment of mental calculation. "Two points." According to team sources, when teammate Tony Parker failed to call out the angle of a bank shot later in the game, Duncan glared at the point guard for the entire fourth quarter.

NJReds
12-07-2009, 02:35 PM
The losing streak finally ends at 18.

New Jersey 97, Charlotte 91

And then they lost to the Knicks. Ouch.

cincrazy
12-08-2009, 11:04 PM
Just watched the Cavs lose to the Grizzlies.

I'm going to say it now, and feel free to disagree, however: Cleveland acquiring Shaq was the height of stupidity.

I didn't think it would work before the games started, and I feel that way even moreso now.

TeamSelig
12-17-2009, 12:55 AM
NBA or WWE? LA getting "rigged" calls, or no?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89w3ciG7lMQ

RBA
12-17-2009, 01:37 AM
Looks like the defenders feet wasn't planted. His feet were still moving.

Razor Shines
12-17-2009, 02:06 AM
Looks like the defenders feet wasn't planted. His feet were still moving.

Come on, I know you're a Laker fan, but that was a pretty clear charge. You're feet can be moving and still draw a charge, I don't think his were though. I think it's ok for you to admit that Kobe gets calls in the same way Jordan use to get them, it's just that now we have youtube so it's more magnified. The great players have always gotten the calls and always will get the calls as long as there is a human element involved in officiating. I don't think I believe it's an NBA directive or anything, but it's just something that happens.

KoryMac5
12-17-2009, 08:19 AM
Stars get the calls because stars are who the fans pay to see. Jordan got calls, Bird got calls, Wade and James get calls to, this league is a star driven league and the NBA knows it.

TeamSelig
12-17-2009, 01:46 PM
Looked like a possible travel as well.

BuckeyeRed27
12-17-2009, 03:44 PM
It was probably a charge, but it wasn't super obvious. He had just been back peddling.

TeamSelig
12-17-2009, 05:10 PM
Just a little too convenient IMO

Roy Tucker
12-18-2009, 09:52 AM
I think this Donaghy thing has to be causing David Stern nightmares...

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/11340/tim-donaghys-claims-on-trial



Dec 7 8:06PM ET By Henry Abbott

At the heart of the book is a gripping and sad first-hand account of a gambling addiction tearing apart a family, a career and a reputation. To the detriment of his wife, children, job, the legacy of his father and all sense, Tim Donaghy tells of growing increasingly obsessed with the highs of winning. Table games at casinos, poker games with friends, golf games, horse races, football, basketball -- he says he bet on all of it to such an extreme that the mob, the FBI, the NBA and federal prosecutors got involved. Donaghy now joins Shoeless Joe Jackson, Ben Johnson, Pete Rose and the like in the pantheon of sports infamy.

"Personal Foul" is hardly all gambling addiction, though. Anecdotes include Charles Barkley dumping a container full of Gatorade on Donaghy in the referee's locker room; Donaghy sneaking away from the media surrounding his house in a daring nighttime golf cart raid, and the story of the prisoner who almost literally "broke his kneecaps," perhaps on behalf of the mob.

The book's primary mission, however, is to promote the theory that the NBA's independent investigation by attorney Lawrence Pedowitz, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's office have been unable to disprove Donaghy's claim that he didn't fix games, because he didn't have to.

According to Donaghy, so many referees and league officials have axes to grind with various players, coaches or owners that insider knowledge can lead to an unheard of rate of sports gambling success.

Donaghy writes that he started betting on the NBA with his friend in November 2003. They kept their bets small -- typically $2,000 per game, but won big cash: "I'm stuffing it everywhere," he says in an interview. "Suitcoat pocket, card games, golf games, luxury items for the wife and kids." Donaghy estimates he made roughly $100,000 betting on the NBA.

Seventy to eighty percent of his picks -- a rate unheard of in professional gambling -- paid off. His secret? Knowing things like which referees hated which players, coaches, or owners. (Later, according to Donaghy, federal documents, and several other accounts, Donaghy instead provided his picks to James Battista, whose involvement with the Gambino crime family led to the wiretap that ensnared Donaghy.) The U.S. Attorneys wrote in a letter to the presiding judge that Donaghy won between $10,000 and $30,000 a year betting on the NBA.

Before the mob was involved, when Donaghy was betting, he says, $2,000 or thereabouts on NBA games, the wins came easy, and so did the money. "It's euphoria. I'm making picks. I'm the go-to guy. And I'm continually winning at an unbelievable rate."

Donaghy says his picks were once correct an amazing 15 out of 16 times. That streak, he says, "scared the living daylights out of us, and almost made us think we should stop, because we were scared that we were going to be detected."

Donaghy writes:

So that’s how I did it. I listened to the directives from the NBA office, I considered the vendettas and grudges referees had against certain players or coaches, and I focused in on the special relationships that routinely influenced the action on the court. Throw in some quirks and predictable tendencies of veteran referees and the recipe was complete. All I had to do was call it in and let the law of averages take over. During the regular season, I was right on the money seven out of 10 times. There was even a streak when I simply couldn’t miss, picking 15 winners out of 16 games. No one on the planet could be that lucky. Of course, luck had little to do with it.

Basically, Donaghy is saying that whether or not a certain team beats the spread in a certain game depends on a lot more than the performance of the players on the court. He is an NBA insider, insisting that NBA games do not unfold on a level playing field. That stokes the fires of fans who say NBA refereeing is not on the up and up.

Although the NBA itself has consistently painted Donaghy as lacking all credibility, people with intimate knowledge of the game found his book to be loaded with claims that sounded believable.

"This," says one current NBA executive, after reading the book, "is not going to be good. This goes way beyond one guy with a grudge. Some of the things in this book, I can remember them! And then I look back at a lot of other things I have seen, and I have to wonder. I'm scared this book will change forever how I see the game."

The scuttlebutt on press row since the book came out has also included plenty of open-mindedness to Donaghy's version of events. NBA writers, editors, bloggers and the like have been repeating, for instance, that Steve Javie had it in for Allen Iverson, or that Dick Bavetta likes to keep games close.

The assertion that NBA referees are not honest brokers has profound resonance. Has David Stern ever had a more difficult task than restoring the league's credibility after the Donaghy news first broke? These new allegations are in many ways worse. Donaghy's book names names, with specific, far-reaching claims that go a long way to painting the sport as illegitimate.

In short, this book tells the story of every NBA fan's worst nightmare.

But are the claims in Donaghy's book true?
"Personal Foul" has dozens of interesting claims. A good portion of these claims are nearly impossible to verify. But there are some exceptions.

For instance, Donaghy declares Charles Barkley, as a player, stalked into the referees' locker room looking for Donaghy after an on-court dispute between the two in a Clippers vs. Rockets game.

Barkley, says Donaghy, then dumped a massive bucket of Gatorade and ice over the referee.

In a text message to ESPN's Mark Schwarz, Barkley insists he has no recollection of any such thing, yet Donaghy was as indignant as ever.

"The two refs in the locker room know it happened. I know it happened. For Charles Barkley to lie like that is troublesome to me. Maybe we both need to sit down and take a lie detector test, and maybe the loser needs to give $500,000 to charity. And I'd like to see what his response would be to that."

In another part of the book, Donaghy claims that as a young referee he called a travel on Michael Jordan. In the ensuing conversation, Donaghy writes, then-Bulls coach Phil Jackson pointed at Jordan and said "they don't want that called on him."

Shown that passage by ESPN's J.A. Adande, Jackson responded: "I never said that."

Donaghy, however, insists that he did, and added: "It's probably on video somewhere." Asked why Phil Jackson -- whom Donaghy quotes in his book as a league personality willing to talk frankly about issues with refereeing -- would deny saying such a thing, Donaghy suggests that the conversation took place a long time ago, and Jackson may have forgotten.

Another anecdote is about three referees each calling palming on Allen Iverson in the first quarter of a particular game. In fact, if you look at the play-by-play of that game, Iverson had just two such calls. Donaghy says that he thought he remembered three calls, but was unable to confirm all three because the NBA wouldn't let him keep the tape of the game.

But some of the book's central claims -- those about how Donaghy was so successful gambling on the NBA -- are, with a lot of work, researchable. For instance:

Dick Bavetta and big spreads
"From my earliest involvement with [referee Dick] Bavetta, I learned that he likes to keep games close."

Donaghy asserts there was easy money to be made counting on Bavetta to use his whistle to help a team that is trailing.

For a gambler, this strategy would be dicey in games expected to be close. The time to bust this one out is by betting on underdogs when there's a big point-spread. Donaghy says he felt confident that big underdogs would beat the spread if Bavetta was one of the three referees.

It's not hard to find examples when Donaghy was wrong. Bavetta has refereed plenty of blowouts. In January 2004, for instance, the Kings were seven-point favorites over the Suns, but won by 20. The next month, the Rockets were nine-point favorites over the Hawks, and won by 21. In January 2005, the Suns were favored by eight and won by 18. That same year, the Bulls won a Bavetta game by 40 when they were favored by nine, and the Pistons laid a 25-point beating on the Bobcats when they were favored to win by seven. A few months later, the Pistons, favored by seven, beat the Pacers by 25.

Of course, a few losses does not a bad betting strategy make. When you look at all Bavetta games from the period in question, is Donaghy right? Did Dick Bavetta keep games close during the period when Donaghy was betting? Kevin Arnovitz digs in deep with economist Joe Price, whose massive NBA database has no support for Donaghy's claim.

Steve Javie vs. Allen Iverson
Donaghy claims referee Steve Javie does not like NBA star Allen Iverson, and that betting against Iverson's teams in Javie-refereed games was good strategy.

"If Javie was on the court when Iverson was playing," writes Donaghy, "I would usually bet on the other team to win or at least cover the spread. No matter how many times Iverson hit the floor, he rarely saw the foul line."

One can dig into each and every game -- Javie refereed Iverson just 14 times while Donaghy was betting. And you know what? Iverson's teams did just about average, compared to the betting line. On November 26, 2003, when the Pistons were in Philadelphia, the Sixers were favored by one point, but won by four. So, Donaghy's rule would have lost you money that night. Javie was on the court when Iverson's Sixers played in Seattle on December 28, 2004. The Sonics were eight point favorites, but won by just seven. If he had followed his own advice, Donaghy would have lost money that night. Javie refereed when Iverson's Sixers killed the Nets, 116-96, on April 12, 2006.

All together, in the period in question, Iverson's teams beat the spread six times, and failed to beat it seven times when Javie was refereeing. Once, there was a "push" (in 2005, when the Spurs were nine point favorites, and beat the Sixers 100-91).

Win or lose, gamblers typically pay a 10 percent vig. Basically, to win $100, you have to bet $110. If someone had bet $110 on Iverson's opponents to beat the spread in each of the 14 Javie games, they would have won $700, lost $660, (and had no money change hands on the "push" game). Do the math there, and you'll see that this betting strategy would have left you with a measly $40 profit, on $1540 gambled.

You'd have to bet a ton of money to get rich that way. Of course, it's possible that Donaghy only bet some of these games, and happened on a winning streak. But the rule he describes in his book is no way to beat your bookie. And it's not true that following this rule would make you a long-term winner.

Most importantly for those who like to believe that the NBA is a pretty fair game, there's no evidence to support the notion that Allen Iverson had it particularly bad in Javie games. The specifics of which referee made which call are not available -- only the NBA has that -- but the idea that Iverson would shoot fewer free throws in games Javie referees is simply not true. Iverson averaged 8.5 free throws per 36 minutes played in those 14 Javie games, compared to 7.9 per 36 minutes played over his entire career. (A note about that statistic: TrueHoop reader Bobby points out that these were peak years for Iverson, and using his career stats might be unfair. He's right: A follow-up analysis reveals that during the four seasons in question, Iverson averaged 8.7 points per 36 minutes, meaning his rate in Javie games was a tiny percentage less than normal for that time. Nevertheless, there's still nothing to suggest betting against Iverson's teams in Javie games would help you achieve anything close to 7 out of 10 winners, nor that Javie was significantly influencing Iverson's free throw rate as Donaghy suggests. You can assess the boxscores for the 14 games Javie reffed while Donaghy says he was betting (11/26/2003 Pistons at Sixers , 2/3/2004 Raptors at Sixers , 12/28/2004 Sixers at SuperSonics , 1/12/2005 Sixers at Bulls , 2/4/2005 Hawks at Sixers, 3/2/2005 Nets at Sixers, 4/1/2005 Mavericks at Sixers, 12/3/2005 Sixers at Spurs, 12/14/2005 Hawks at Sixers, 1/16/2006 Sixers at Wizards, 3/31/2006 Sixers at Knicks, 4/12/2006 Sixers at Nets, 3/30/2007 Nuggets at Suns, 4/16/2007 Timberwolves at Nuggets).

Wayne Winston is a professor at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business, the author of the book "Mathletics" which explains intricate methods of using math to assess sports, including referee bias. In the nine years he worked for the Dallas Mavericks, Winston built a sophisticated database of NBA game information. Winston used his own methods to check into Donaghy's claim about Javie and Iverson. He looked into how Iverson's Sixers teams performed compared to expectations when Javie refereed, and similarly found nothing to confirm Donaghy's assertion. "I computed forecasts based on Sagarin ratings for each game Javie officiated against the 76ers from 2002-2006," he reports, "and found zero evidence that Javie unfavorably impacted 76ers performance in those games."

Joe Crawford and Allen Iverson
"Referee Joe Crawford had a grandson who idolized Iverson," writes Donaghy. "I once saw Crawford bring the boy out of the stands and onto the floor during warm-ups to meet the superstar. Iverson and Crawford’s grandson were standing there, shaking hands, smiling, talking about all kinds of things. If Joe Crawford was on the court, I was pretty sure Iverson’s team would win or at least cover the spread."

In the relevant period Iverson's teams -- the Sixers from 2003 into 2006, then the Nuggets -- were refereed by Crawford 14 times. They only beat the spread five times, and failed nine times.

The games in question are 11/5/2003 Hornets at Sixers, 2/5/2004 Lakers at Sixers, 1/22/2005 Sixers at Magic, 2/11/2005 Sixers at Raptors, 3/1/2005 Sixers at Bucks, 11/11/2005 Lakers at Sixers, 11/26/2005 Sixers at Knicks, 12/12/2005 Timberwolves at Sixers, 2/8/2006 Sixers at Bobcats, 3/9/2006 Nuggets at Sixers, 4/8/2006 Sixers at Bulls, 11/17/2006 Sixers at Suns, 2/20/2007 Nuggets at Spurs, and 4/9/2007 Lakers at Nuggets.

Betting against Iverson's team in Crawford games would have been lucrative. But Donaghy recommended betting for Iverson's team to beat the spread in these games. Let's pretend Donaghy bet $110 on Iverson's team to beat the spread in every Crawford game. Donaghy would have paid $990 for the nine losers, and won $500 on the winners, meaning he would have lost $490.

Of course, you'd be far better off just picking winners at random.

For what it's worth, there's little evidence Iverson was getting any favors in these games, as his free throw rate in Crawford games was 7.9 per 36 minutes -- the same as his career average.

Joe Forte and Mike Fratello
Donaghy writes that Fratello and Forte are close friends, and that Forte dines free at Fratello's restaurant in Atlanta, where he once even brought Donaghy as a guest.

Donaghy never says that he actually made money betting on this relationship, but Donaghy does say he once bet on a Fratello-coached Memphis team (he later switched the bet, based on a tip about injuries to the Wizards).

But what about a referee and a coach being friends? Isn't that the kind of thing that turns your stomach as a fan? Did Fratello's Grizzlies tend to do well when Forte was on the floor, as Donaghy implies?

Hardly.

Forte refereed 13 games while Fratello was coaching the Grizzlies (all fall during the period when Donaghy was betting). They beat the spread in just six of those 13 games, falling short seven times. According to BYU economist Joe Price's database, when you factor in the final scoring margin in those games -- a more refined measure of a team's performance -- Fratello's Grizzlies did not happen to do well in those 13 games.


Donaghy's retort
Confronted with all of that data at a Tampa hotel on Monday morning, Donaghy had no explanation, other than to say that his betting techniques were more subtle than simply betting on these rules, and that he did not bet on every game that met the description.

"These are some of the criteria that I used," Donaghy says. "I'm not saying I bet every game. ... You can spin the stats any way you want ... The FBI investigated thoroughly. ... To sit here and say there was a science to how I did this, with the stats you're throwing at me. ... Based on the information you're using, with your equation, it's not even in the same ballpark. There were other factors that came into play. Inside information about injuries. Home game or away game. Home crowd. Many more factors to take into consideration."

"I'm claiming that I picked 15 out of 16, and I'm also claiming that all the facts in this book are true, and it's what I used to pick games."

Again and again during the interview, Donaghy relied on the FBI to buttress his credibility.

"The FBI and the NBA did a thorough investigation," he says, "and they both concluded that I did not fix games in the NBA."

The truth is far less emphatic. U.S. Attorney Benton J. Campbell wrote, in a letter to the presiding judge, that "there is no evidence that Donaghy ever intentionally made a particular ruling during a game in order to increase the likelihood that his gambling pick would be correct." The letter adds that Donaghy has acknowledged that his gambling may have subconsciously influenced his work.

The NBA's investigation concluded, essentially, that Donaghy might not have rigged games. "It seems plausible to us that Donaghy may not have manipulated games," but admits that they have no thorough way to check. "Given the information currently in our possession, we and the League’s experts are unable to contradict the government’s conclusion that '[t]here is no evidence that Donaghy ever intentionally made a particular ruling during a game in order to increase the likelihood that his gambling pick would be correct.' ... Donaghy officiated close to 300 games in this period. Without knowing on which games or teams he wagered and without access to Donaghy’s explanation for his calls, we believe that it would be impossible to find that the government’s conclusion that he did not manipulate games is erroneous.

Meanwhile, Donaghy points to the foreword of his book, penned by former FBI agent Phil Scala. The foreword goes to some trouble to lend credence to Donaghy, but specifically does not say he did not fix games, saying the FBI's interest was the Gambino crime family, and they left employment issues and the like to others.

Did Tim Donaghy fix games? His book is emphatic that he did not, but while it has provided many claims to that effect, it has not yet delivered evidence.

Kingspoint
12-28-2009, 07:29 AM
Stars get the calls because stars are who the fans pay to see. Jordan got calls, Bird got calls, Wade and James get calls to, this league is a star driven league and the NBA knows it.

Only since David Stern took over. Stern's turned the league into a big joke. Games are fixed all the time. It just takes non-calls (just like in football) to fix a game.

texasdave
12-28-2009, 09:14 AM
I would agree that the NBA has a little wrestling in it.

Revering4Blue
01-10-2010, 10:54 AM
The New York Post's Peter Vescey writes that a Lakers' source says the team is looking to move Andrew Bynum for Chris Bosh as the Feb. 18 trade deadline approaches.

The trade would need to include other players to make the money work, but the deal does make some sense. Bynum's under contract for three more seasons and is a legitimate NBA center, while Bosh's contract is expiriring, and he'll likely be looking to leave Toronto after the season. Stay tuned.

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NBA&id=1132

MasonBuzz3
01-20-2010, 02:36 PM
the raptors would be insane to trade their best player for an injury-prone all hype Bynum. The Raptors have been one of the hotter teams in the NBA since Christmas and anything can happen in the East. But then again, this is the NBA where Pau Gasol to the Lakers for three basketballs and a pair of jordans happens

texasdave
01-22-2010, 02:19 AM
CNNSI headline states that the NBA avoided a controversy when McGrady was edged out for a starting postion in the All-Star Joke of a Game. But I suppose there is no controversy over Allen Iverson gaining a starting position. All he has done this year is quit on one team and average 14 points in 19 games. Those are some worthy credentials.

Kingspoint
01-22-2010, 04:22 AM
stars are who the fans pay to see.

That's not true, and David Stern needs to recognize this. Stern's ruining the NBA because he believes this, but more than half the NBA teams have had more than half-empty arenas for 10+ years now. (Don't go by "announced" attendance. True attendance, what walks through the turnstiles, is what I'm talking about.)

The people who buy the tickets, mostly middle-aged white people, hate seeing one-on-one boring basketball by everyone who thinks they are the next Michael Jordan or Dominique Wilkins.

Jordan never would have won a single championship if Scottie Pippen hadn't come along with his team-style, cerebral approach. He also would have never won anything if Portland had won the coin-flip and gotten Olajuwon instead of Bowie, or if Sabonis had gone to Portland sooner.

Team-play wins basketball games and team-play is what the people who have the money and are willing to spend the money to buy season tickets, middle-aged white people, want to see.

More than half of the NBA franchises are heading towards bankruptcy because of Stern's misunderstanding that the fans who pay for the season tickets want to see Stars.

Stern's been fixing (cheating) the NBA ever since he got in charge. It's not a coincidence that he's from New Jersey and so was the ex-Cop/ref who was just busted two years ago for betting on games. I've seen dozens of fixes in person, and it happens on a regular basis.

Kingspoint
01-22-2010, 04:25 AM
I hope the NBA gets fixed (in the right way) because I love watching competitive up-and-down basketball.

Tom Servo
01-30-2010, 03:31 PM
The Bobcats are a lot of fun to watch right now. I hope they keep it up. Stephen Jackson has been a tremendous addition.

Roy Tucker
02-01-2010, 08:18 AM
I watched the Celtics-Lakers game. I can't remember when I've seen worse officiating. Blatant homering, blatant star-favoring, and just plain old laziness and bad calls. I'm starting to think this whole Stern conspiracy theory has some merit. And I had no dog in this hunt. I dislike both Lakers and Celtics equally.

Chip R
02-01-2010, 09:45 AM
I watched the Celtics-Lakers game. I can't remember when I've seen worse officiating. Blatant homering, blatant star-favoring, and just plain old laziness and bad calls. I'm starting to think this whole Stern conspiracy theory has some merit. And I had no dog in this hunt. I dislike both Lakers and Celtics equally.


I don't know if I'd say that. They called offensive fouls on both Pierce and Kobe and the Kobe one was a crap call. Maybe it was bad officiating but it didn't seem to favor either side.

MasonBuzz3
02-01-2010, 02:18 PM
I watched the Celtics-Lakers game. I can't remember when I've seen worse officiating. Blatant homering, blatant star-favoring, and just plain old laziness and bad calls. I'm starting to think this whole Stern conspiracy theory has some merit. And I had no dog in this hunt. I dislike both Lakers and Celtics equally.

so this was the first NBA game you have watched in a while? just kidding....but I dont know about the Stern conspiracy, but the NBA refs leave a lot to be disired. granted, it is a difficult job to keep up with these huge, amazing athletes but I think a level of consistancy would be appreciated thoughout the league and its fans

Roy Tucker
02-01-2010, 05:32 PM
so this was the first NBA game you have watched in a while? just kidding....but I dont know about the Stern conspiracy, but the NBA refs leave a lot to be disired. granted, it is a difficult job to keep up with these huge, amazing athletes but I think a level of consistancy would be appreciated thoughout the league and its fans

It was the first NBA game of this year that I really *watched*. Most of the time I flip the channel over NBA games, watch a bit, but it gets maybe 50% of my attention. I watched quarters 1, 2, and 4 pretty closely.

Consistency is a good way to describe it. Really weird calls, hugely inconsistent, and some plain old bad calls where I was thinking "how can you call that out of all the things that are happening". I really didn't care who won, but I was like "what game are these refs watching?".

Kingspoint
02-02-2010, 03:16 AM
The Bobcats are a lot of fun to watch right now. I hope they keep it up. Stephen Jackson has been a tremendous addition.

They need more talent than 3 people.

Tonight was a perfect example.

Gerald Wallace was held to 10 shots taken, but got 17 points. Portland's strength is Nicolas Batum's and Martell Webster's abilities to play defense against opposing players of their size, and both of them guarded Wallace. Wallace spent the first quarter trying to get others involved, but the rest of the team self-destructed all night (21 turnovers) without any real pressure from the Trailblazers. Wallace tried to take over in the 2nd half, but it was too late (though they did rally to within 3 before losing by 19).

Stephen Jackson had a mismatch all night against Andre Miller and Steve Blake, the players chosen to guard him the first 3 quarters. Jackson took a million shots and ended up with 21 points before rolling his ankle halfway into the second half. His night was over as he continued to play, but he got up only 2 more shots with Batum guarding him the rest of the way and his ankle obviously hurting him. Jackson was neutralized by Jerryd Bayless (1 foul) and someone else who got him to get his 2nd foul in the first quarter. He had to sit out more 1st half minutes than what he's used to, allowing the TrailBlazers to build a 10-point lead after one quarter, which they held for most of the game.

Ronald Murray is the only other player who can score points, and he did a fine job getting to 13, above his season average, but after those 3 players, the Bobcats had absolutely nothing. The rest of the team is basically a bunch of stiffs who can't shoot and can't score. Even Stephen Jackson is a poor shooter, he just makes up for it in volume. Ronald Murray is the same way.

Gerald Wallace is a monster. They need to blow up the team and get him better players to work with. They don't even have a point guard. Felton shouldn't be starting for any team in the league. He's a bench 10-14 minute bench player, at best.

They have a lot of stupid players, Wallace not among them. All night they had mismatches against Portland, and all night long they failed to recognize them. They spent all night just jacking it up from outside when Gerald Wallace is the only player they have that can shoot from outside and he wasn't doing any of the shooting.

They also need a Coach.

They should take a point guard with their first pick of the draft this summer, or sign a good Free Agent Point Guard. It's amazing they've won as many games as they have in the league, but there's 10 really bad teams in the league a lot worse than they are. Play enough of those other teams and they'll get some wins, or if Stephen Jackson and Gerald Wallace could get 20+ shots each in a game, they'd have a chance to win a game.

Revering4Blue
02-05-2010, 05:04 PM
The Suns are looking to deal Amar'e Stoudemire and they also have serious interest in 76ers forward Andre Iguodala.

Philadelphia will listen to offers for Iguodala, but they aren't believed to be actively shopping him.

An NBA source told CSN Philly that "Phoenix desperately wants Andre. They are pushing this. That I know for a fact."

One possible deal would send Stoudemire to Philadelphia for Iguodala and center Samuel Dalember

Boston Red
02-05-2010, 05:49 PM
My Jazz are the hottest team in the NBA outside of Ohio, which is nice. AK-47 is all of a sudden playing like the max contract guy that he is again, and Paul Millsap is exploding again with Boozer out. Big game against the Nuggs tomorrow night. If they win that, they're still right in the hunt for West #2 in the playoffs.

Kingspoint
02-06-2010, 06:03 AM
My Jazz are the hottest team in the NBA outside of Ohio, which is nice. AK-47 is all of a sudden playing like the max contract guy that he is again, and Paul Millsap is exploding again with Boozer out. Big game against the Nuggs tomorrow night. If they win that, they're still right in the hunt for West #2 in the playoffs.

They are playing great right now. Their flow is fantastic and they're smart with trying to get the easiest baskets that they can. Believe it or not, very few teams play like that because everyone thinks they're Michael Jordan and are too unselfish with the basketball or they're just too lazy to make the extra pass. Utah's not been playing like that. They still need to show they can win consistently on the road, though. They've been doing that the last month, and the style of basketball they're playing should continue to show that they can win consistently on the road and into the playoffs.

The Lakers try one more time to beat Portland in Portland. They've lost 9 in a row there and 22 of their last 26 in Portland. Portland's beaten them with scrubs half the time. Brandon Roy will be out this time (along with Outlaw, Oden and Pryzbilla), so you'd think the Lakers could finally get this monkey off their back, as Portland has absolutely zero interior defense, and haven't had any since Pryzbilla went down permanently in early December, and Oden and Outlaw in November.

Oh, and say, "Hi" to John and Abigail Adams' ghosts for me, Boston Red.

Kingspoint
02-07-2010, 02:50 AM
The Lakers finally won one. First time in 5 years.

texasdave
02-07-2010, 11:11 AM
The Lakers are also going to win the last game played in the NBA this season.

Unassisted
02-07-2010, 03:14 PM
Spurs are rumored to be considering trades of Ginobili and Parker. Ginobili because his contributions have diminished since his surgery and Parker because they believe they won't be able to sign him to a new deal when his current deal expires at the end of next season.

Although their record is 29-20, very few of those wins have come against teams over .500. They've also been swept in the season series by the likes of Portland and Utah.

The addition of Richard Jefferson has been a huge disappointment. He doesn't fit into the offense and his defensive play has been uninspired. For a team that depends on defense for success, the choice to add an expensive veteran who at times doesn't appear to like to play defense is looking like a failure.

Currently they're 3 games into their 12-game rodeo road trip. This Toronto newspaper has a good update. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/basketball/spurs-rodeo-road-trip/article1453855/

Chip R
02-07-2010, 08:21 PM
The Lakers are also going to win the last game played in the NBA this season.

I hate to say it but I agree.

cincrazy
02-09-2010, 08:48 PM
The Lakers are also going to win the last game played in the NBA this season.

I wouldn't write off the Cavs quite yet.

The Lakers have more talent. But Lebron James is THAT good right now. And if Kobe is banged up at the end of the year with injuries, it wouldn't surprise me to see the Cavs raising the trophy.

Chip R
02-09-2010, 11:26 PM
I wouldn't write off the Cavs quite yet.

The Lakers have more talent. But Lebron James is THAT good right now. And if Kobe is banged up at the end of the year with injuries, it wouldn't surprise me to see the Cavs raising the trophy.

I don't think anyone is writing off the Cavs. But they were the team to beat last year and they didn't make it to the Finals. It won't be easy getting through the East again. If (and that's a big if) Vince Carter can keep playing at the level he's playing right now, with Howard and him as a 1-2 punch, the Magic are going to be very strong again. Atlanta's tough and Chicago could give teams some problems. I don't look for Boston to get to the East finals but they are going to give teams a run for their money and soften their opponent up for the next round.

MasonBuzz3
02-10-2010, 12:52 AM
I don't think anyone is writing off the Cavs. But they were the team to beat last year and they didn't make it to the Finals. It won't be easy getting through the East again. If (and that's a big if) Vince Carter can keep playing at the level he's playing right now, with Howard and him as a 1-2 punch, the Magic are going to be very strong again. Atlanta's tough and Chicago could give teams some problems. I don't look for Boston to get to the East finals but they are going to give teams a run for their money and soften their opponent up for the next round.

you mean shooting 28% in the month of January? Vince scoring 48 was the worst thing that could have ever happen to the Magic, he will be volume shooting the rest of the season. as of right now its the Cavs and nobody else close in the East, a 6-7 game lead at the break is ridiculous.


I would also challange anyone to say that the Lakers are the favorites over the Cavs this year and please nobody bring up Boston as the East favorite like some ABC analysts continually do...i.e. Mark Jackson

improbus
02-10-2010, 09:48 AM
you mean shooting 28% in the month of January? Vince scoring 48 was the worst thing that could have ever happen to the Magic, he will be volume shooting the rest of the season. as of right now its the Cavs and nobody else close in the East, a 6-7 game lead at the break is ridiculous.


I would also challange anyone to say that the Lakers are the favorites over the Cavs this year and please nobody bring up Boston as the East favorite like some ABC analysts continually do...i.e. Mark Jackson

I do like the matchup for the Cavs and Boston against LA and I don't like Orlando or Atlanta. Both the Cavs and the C's have guys who can somewhat guard Kobe (LeBron and Pierce) as well as enough size down low to deal with Bynum, Gasol, and Odom. Plus, Rondo would decimate the Lakers, who really struggle against quick PG's (see Aaron Brooks). If Boston could make it to the finals, the could very easily beat LA.

texasdave
02-10-2010, 10:18 AM
Nobody said it would be a walk in the park, but if the Lakers are healthy in the playoffs I don't see anyone taking them down.

texasdave
02-10-2010, 10:22 AM
Don't look now but history is being made. The New Jersey Nets are currently sporting a 4-47 record. Philadelphia's record of fewest wins in a season (9) is in serious jeopardy.

BuckeyeRed27
02-10-2010, 11:19 PM
Nobody said it would be a walk in the park, but if the Lakers are healthy in the playoffs I don't see anyone taking them down.

Who says they have to be healthy? I am on my couch watching the Lakers without Kobe and Bynum just dismantle the Jazz in Utah(who had won 9 in a row and 12 of 13).

Now as a Jazz fan I'm pretty used to watching the Lakers whip us, but this team is scary good. They just always seem to get open shots and everyone plays D.

Roy Tucker
02-11-2010, 08:18 AM
Phil has them playing the triangle about as well as it can be done. Even withut Kobe they get good shots. Lamar Odom has played very well the last few times I've seen the Lakers.

Lakers have to be the favorites. Denver might give them a tussle but that's all I see coming out of the West. The Cavs will probably meet them in the finals and Lebron is playing about as well as I've ever seen him play. But they still don't have the depth the Lakers have. After Kobe, they still have Odom, Gasol, Artest, Bynum, Fisher, Farmar, etc. Cavs still watch Lebron go 1 on 5 too much. Shaq hasn't been the answer.

BuckeyeRed27
02-11-2010, 11:24 AM
The Lakers just have amazing length and cause so many match up problems. Artest, Odom and Gasol are all very good on both ends of the floor and then you can throw Bynum into the mix. They can always create a mismatch and like somebody else said they are so good at running that offense that somebody almost always gets an open look.

texasdave
02-11-2010, 12:53 PM
Maybe someone with a more in-depth knowledge of the NBA can answer this question for me. Are the Lakers the only team that runs the triangle? Or do all NBA teams incorporate parts of it in their offensive scheming?

TeamSelig
02-11-2010, 01:18 PM
I think Minnesota runs alot of triangle offense

savafan
02-12-2010, 01:48 AM
Don't look now but history is being made. The New Jersey Nets are currently sporting a 4-47 record. Philadelphia's record of fewest wins in a season (9) is in serious jeopardy.

4-48 now. I think this team could be historically bad, and is the only thing that actually has me interested in the NBA right now.

NJReds
02-13-2010, 08:44 AM
4-48 now. I think this team could be historically bad, and is the only thing that actually has me interested in the NBA right now.

Looking closer, though. They're playing the "cap" system perfectly. Instead of trying to scrape by and get the 8th spot in the playoffs. They've traded off almost every long-term contract that they had.

They have a solid young center (Lopez) and point guard (Harris)

They'll probably get the #1 pick (or #3 at worst)
They'll be able to sign two max contract players ... and more

The Nets new owner is a Russion billionaire who will spend a lot of cash.

So they may set a record for the worst team ever this year, but they'll probably be in better shape than the Knicks next year.

texasdave
02-13-2010, 09:43 AM
Looking closer, though. They're playing the "cap" system perfectly. Instead of trying to scrape by and get the 8th spot in the playoffs. They've traded off almost every long-term contract that they had.

They have a solid young center (Lopez) and point guard (Harris)

They'll probably get the #1 pick (or #3 at worst)
They'll be able to sign two max contract players ... and more

The Nets new owner is a Russion billionaire who will spend a lot of cash.

So they may set a record for the worst team ever this year, but they'll probably be in better shape than the Knicks next year.

Tanking a whole season, very sporting of them. I wonder if they are still charging the same ticket prices for the fans. Sweet.

Revering4Blue
02-13-2010, 07:10 PM
The first major NBA trade deadline deal.


The Mavericks have agreed in principle to trade Josh Howard, Drew Gooden, James Singleton and Quinton Ross to the Wizards. In exchange the Mavs get Caron Butler, Brendan Haywood, and DeShawn Stevenson.

It's not clear if the Wizards plan to buy out Gooden's contract or exercise their team option for Howard next season. As it stands, Howard should get all the minutes he can handle for the out-gunned Wizards. (Source: Washington Post)


More rumored deals:

Amare Stoudemire to the Cavs or Heat.

Devin Harris to the Lakers.

Marcus Camby, Tyrus Thomas and Troy Murphy to the Blazers, Spurs and Nuggets.

NJReds
02-14-2010, 08:08 AM
Tanking a whole season, very sporting of them. I wonder if they are still charging the same ticket prices for the fans. Sweet.

San Antonio did the same thing and they were able to draft Tim Duncan. Blame the system. If they are able to assemble a championship team in a year or two, then the fans won't complain.

Also, they've announced their intention to move to Brooklyn, thus alienating their NJ fan base (what there was of one), anyway.

15fan
02-14-2010, 09:33 PM
San Antonio did the same thing and they were able to draft Tim Duncan.

No, they didn't tank the season.

David Robinson was injured and only played in 6 games in 96-97.

Take Kobe Bryant off the Lakers, LeBron off the Cavs, Dwayne Wade of the Heat, etc for an entire season due to injury, and the same thing happens to those teams.

reds44
02-14-2010, 10:09 PM
No, they didn't tank the season.

David Robinson was injured and only played in 6 games in 96-97.

Take Kobe Bryant off the Lakers, LeBron off the Cavs, Dwayne Wade of the Heat, etc for an entire season due to injury, and the same thing happens to those teams.
The Lakers wouldn't be that bad without Kobe. Obviously not as good, but they'd be a borderline playoff team without him.

Kingspoint
02-15-2010, 12:44 AM
No, they didn't tank the season.

David Robinson was injured and only played in 6 games in 96-97.

Take Kobe Bryant off the Lakers, LeBron off the Cavs, Dwayne Wade of the Heat, etc for an entire season due to injury, and the same thing happens to those teams.

David Robinson was hurt, but they also tanked the season. They did everything they could to try to not win games that year.

NJReds
02-15-2010, 01:30 PM
David Robinson was hurt, but they also tanked the season. They did everything they could to try to not win games that year.

They did tank, they played the system, and I don't blame them.The way the NBA works, it doesn't pay to be a .500 team. You scrap everything and rebuild w/a top-5 draft pick and free agents. Or, in the case of the Celtics, have an ex-Celtic trade one of the league's best players to your team for very little in return.

I certainly don't blame the Nets, either. And in two years they will probably be contenders again. While a team like the Knicks continue to be mediocre on their best day.

KoryMac5
02-15-2010, 09:10 PM
Mavs made a good move to pick up another center with Dampier hurting. Butler's flexibilty in being able to play both the 2 and the 3 will also prove helpful.

Line up
Kidd
Butler
Marion
Dirk
Haywood

6th Terry

Not a bad line up, if everything gels. Still not as good as the Lakers though. Really does look like the Cavs are going to steal Amare. Lebron, Shaq and Amare would be scary.

Kingspoint
02-16-2010, 02:24 AM
Blazers trade Outlaw and Blake to the Clippers for Camby!!!!!


Kevin Pritchard does it again.

Booyah!

MasonBuzz3
02-16-2010, 02:43 AM
Phil has them playing the triangle about as well as it can be done. Even withut Kobe they get good shots. Lamar Odom has played very well the last few times I've seen the Lakers.

Lakers have to be the favorites. Denver might give them a tussle but that's all I see coming out of the West. The Cavs will probably meet them in the finals and Lebron is playing about as well as I've ever seen him play. But they still don't have the depth the Lakers have. After Kobe, they still have Odom, Gasol, Artest, Bynum, Fisher, Farmar, etc. Cavs still watch Lebron go 1 on 5 too much. Shaq hasn't been the answer.

The Cavs dont have the depth of the Lakers? The Lakers bench is about two deep.

After Odom, the Lakers bench is terrible and not used much Brown, Farmar, Walton, Vujacic. Give me the Cavs bench of Varejao, West, Z, Moon, Gibson. The Cavs are 12 deep, and los Lakers are about 6.5 deep.

I would also like to hear how Shaq hasnt been "the answer." He was brought in to handle Dwight Howard and help with the Laker bigs, and the Cavs have dominated all four games against those two teams. Shaq in 2010 can not be measured by his stats, his performance is only measured if you watch the games

TeamSelig
02-16-2010, 06:19 PM
I agree. LA's bench is pretty horrible aside from Odom.

Revering4Blue
02-17-2010, 08:47 PM
The Cavaliers have acquired Antawn Jamison from the Wizards, according to the Washington Post.

The trade has also been confirmed by sources that spoke to Brian Windhorst of the Beacon-Journal and Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo!

The Wizards will receive Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Al Thornton, Brian Skinner, the draft rights to Emir Preldzic and a first round pick, according to the source.

The Clippers are also involved and will receive Drew Gooden, who will be bought out.

Along with Jamison, Cleveland will receive Sebastian Telfair.

WVRed
02-17-2010, 09:11 PM
Cavs struck out IMO.

JJ Hickson is nice (the reason the Cavs have Jamison instead) but Amare would have likely given them a better chance of keeping LeBron. I have a feeling the Cavs are going to be a lottery team next season.

KoryMac5
02-17-2010, 10:12 PM
Jamison is a good player who is willing to play second string to Lebron. He definitely fills the role of side kick and is a good locker room guy as well. The Cavs with this trade seemed destined to come out of the East now. Plus key to remember is this, Jamison is signed through 2012 where as Amare can opt out after the end of this year. Can Cleveland afford to offer both Lebron and Amare max deals?

Great move by the Cavs.

Boston Red
02-17-2010, 10:57 PM
Jazz win again. Woo hoo!

BuckeyeRed27
02-17-2010, 10:58 PM
Jamison is a good player who is willing to play second string to Lebron. He definitely fills the role of side kick and is a good locker room guy as well. The Cavs with this trade seemed destined to come out of the East now. Plus key to remember is this, Jamison is signed through 2012 where as Amare can opt out after the end of this year. Can Cleveland afford to offer both Lebron and Amare max deals?

Great move by the Cavs.

This.

Cleveland will still have problems with the Lakers length if they meet in the Finals which Amare probably would have helped with, but overall I like this trade for Cleveland.

On a side note why in the world would the Clippers trade Thornton for Gooden? Oh right Mike Dunlevy still got to keep 50% of his job and is destroying the team...got it.

texasdave
02-17-2010, 11:11 PM
The NBA is hard to take seriously. According to CNNSI the Wizards are likely to buy out the contract of Ilgauskas and he will be back with the Cavs in 30 days. Drew Gooden gets traded twice in less than a week and his contract too is likely to be bought out and he will be back with the Mavs. If these things come to pass then one word will sum it up - RIDONKULOUS!!

KoryMac5
02-18-2010, 01:09 AM
How David Stern allows the Clippers to continue is beyond me.

reds44
02-18-2010, 01:25 AM
I agree. LA's bench is pretty horrible aside from Odom.
Horrible Shannon Brown had 28 and 10 last night. Odom, Brown, and Farmar are all more than adequate.

I would say the Cavs have an edge in bench play, but the Lakers starting 5 is far and away better than the Cavs.

And regular season results are meaningless. The Lakers were swept by the Magic last year, and we all saw how that worked out.

RichRed
02-18-2010, 10:24 AM
On a side note why in the world would the Clippers trade Thornton for Gooden? Oh right Mike Dunlevy still got to keep 50% of his job and is destroying the team...got it.

The Wizards are a trainwreck (MY trainwreck) but getting Thornton, the rights to Emir Preldzic, and the Cavs' #1 pick in exchange for the 33-year-old Jamison and Gooden was a pretty good haul under the circumstances. Thanks, Dunleavy!

In the process, they've also shed a bunch of salary - money that they'll almost certainly spend unwisely, but still...

texasdave
02-18-2010, 10:32 AM
Horrible Shannon Brown had 28 and 10 last night. Odom, Brown, and Farmar are all more than adequate.

I would say the Cavs have an edge in bench play, but the Lakers starting 5 is far and away better than the Cavs.

And regular season results are meaningless. The Lakers were swept by the Magic last year, and we all saw how that worked out.

Benches get shortened in the playoffs so depth is not as big of an issue. In spite of the Cavs getting Jamison, I still like the Lakers.

texasdave
02-18-2010, 10:37 AM
Mcgrady to the Kings (and possibly to the Knicks). So much for the McGrady sweepstakes being down to the Knicks or the Bulls.

From CNNSI:

The Houston Rockets have reached an agreement in principle to acquire Sacramento Kings guard Kevin Martin, league sources confirmed to SI.com. The deal will send Martin, along with Sergio Rodriguez, Hilton Armstrong and Kenny Thomas to Houston for McGrady, Carl Landry and Joey Dorsey.

The Kings now are reportedly negotiating with New York to possibly flip McGrady to the Knicks. New York, a source close to McGrady told SI.com, continues to be his No. 1 landing spot.

However, even if a deal with the Knicks cannot be hammered out before Thursday's 3 p.m. trade deadline, a source said the Rockets-Kings deal would still go through. Sacramento could negotiate a buyout of McGrady's $22.5 million salary and allow McGrady to sign with New York as a free agent.

NJReds
02-18-2010, 12:23 PM
Mcgrady to the Kings (and possibly to the Knicks). So much for the McGrady sweepstakes being down to the Knicks or the Bulls.

From CNNSI:

The Knicks don't want McGrady as a FA. They want to deal Jeffries. If they can't deal Jeffries, then I'm not sure if they'd bring McGrady in.

They have apparently traded Nate Robinson to the Celtics for fodder.

TeamSelig
02-18-2010, 02:03 PM
Horrible Shannon Brown had 28 and 10 last night. Odom, Brown, and Farmar are all more than adequate.

I would say the Cavs have an edge in bench play, but the Lakers starting 5 is far and away better than the Cavs.

And regular season results are meaningless. The Lakers were swept by the Magic last year, and we all saw how that worked out.

Any turd can have a good game.

I also wouldn't say that LA's starting lineup is that much better.

Personally I think Lebron is slightly > Kobe. Mo Williams > Fisher. Jamison isn't too far from Gasol. And when you take into account that Shaq will draw a double team and Bynum won't, that can be vital in the playoffs.

texasdave
02-18-2010, 02:38 PM
Tracy McGrady's nightmare is over: several reports confirm the fallen star will be traded to the Knicks today. New York has wedged itself into Wednesday's night Houston-Sacramento trade. Kevin Martin will join the Rockets, as will Knicks lottery pick Jordan Hill, Hilton Armstrong and Knicks albatross Jared Jeffries. The Knicks pick up McGrady and Sergio Rodriguez, a Spanish point guard with an expiring contract. The Kings will take on Carl Landry, Joey Dorsey and Larry Hughes, and hold onto the expiring contract of Kenny Thomas, which could be used in additional deals before today's 3 PM ET trade deadline.

By losing Jeffries, the Knicks are in position to bid for two top-level free agents this summer. The thinking has been that the Knicks won't be able to convince LeBron James, Dwyane Wade or Chris Bosh to join the club without assurance another one of the three would also sign with the team. It still remains to be seen whether any of them will but what the Knicks are selling, but the team's at least in position to make a bid now.

It comes with a steep cost, though. Hill has barely played this season, but was promising enough for the Knicks to spend a top-10 pick on him just a few months ago. The Knicks will also send its 2012 first-round pick to Houston -- there's no word on lottery protection just yet -- and has granted Houston the opportunity to swap its own 2011 pick with that of the Knicks. Unless the '11 or '12 picks are protected, it appears New York has no chance at a lottery pick until 2013 at the earliest. The team's 2010 pick belongs to Utah.

Houston's role in all of this is interesting, and it'll be worth following the next few days of explanations to see exactly how this came together. The Rockets had been working with the Knicks on the non-Martin, non-Landry portions of the deal for weeks. It seems as though Houston got tired of waiting and made the deal for Martin about 12 hours early, perhaps putting pressure on New York to give up those picks. It worked. It looks

Rockets did well if this is the actual deal. they lose mcgrady and landry. get back kevin martin, jordan hill, a 2012 first rounder and the option of switching 2011 first rounders with the knicks. no word if the picks are lottery protected.

BuckeyeRed27
02-18-2010, 05:03 PM
Rockets did well if this is the actual deal. they lose mcgrady and landry. get back kevin martin, jordan hill, a 2012 first rounder and the option of switching 2011 first rounders with the knicks. no word if the picks are lottery protected.

The Rockets freaking killed in this deal.
Have to feel pretty bad for the Kings fans. I mean how to you explain turning Kevin Martin into Carl Landry.

NJReds
02-18-2010, 05:31 PM
Rockets did well if this is the actual deal. they lose mcgrady and landry. get back kevin martin, jordan hill, a 2012 first rounder and the option of switching 2011 first rounders with the knicks. no word if the picks are lottery protected.

The 2011 pick is #1 protected and the 2012 pick is top-5 protected ... or so I hear.

The Knicks went all-in on their plan to get two max contract guys this summer. And when fat Eddie Curry falls off the payroll in 2011, they can chase Melo, too, if they so choose.

improbus
02-18-2010, 08:01 PM
The Rockets freaking killed in this deal.
Have to feel pretty bad for the Kings fans. I mean how to you explain turning Kevin Martin into Carl Landry.
Umm....the Rockets traded an often injured, solo gunner for a younger often injured solo gunner. I'm not sure that this is quite the all out win that people think it is. Martin has missed 31 games in 2008, 21 games in 2009 and has already missed 30 games this year. The biggest coup might be the the Knicks two draft picks. I'm not saying that Martin won't be amazing for the Rockets, but for a team that can't stay healthy, he might not be the answer.

TeamSelig
02-18-2010, 08:08 PM
I think the Rockets made an awesome deal. They were a worse team with TMac playing anyways.

WVRed
02-18-2010, 08:40 PM
I think the Rockets made an awesome deal. They were a worse team with TMac playing anyways.

If you look at it on the surface, it's TMac for Kevin Martin and Jordan Hill. Hill was a lottery pick but the Knicks really overpicked him.

I agree though on the draft picks. Donnie Walsh has really set them back, especially if they can't land a marquee free agent such as Carmelo. Utah has the Knicks first rounder this year and there is a possibility that they could lose both to the Rockets in 2011 and 2012.

NJReds
02-18-2010, 08:48 PM
I agree though on the draft picks. Donnie Walsh has really set them back, especially if they can't land a marquee free agent such as Carmelo. Utah has the Knicks first rounder this year and there is a possibility that they could lose both to the Rockets in 2011 and 2012.

Donnie Walsh didn't trade the pick that Utah now owns. That was Isaiah Thomas. Donnie did screw up the draft, though, by not taking Jennings. As for the 2011 pick, I believe Houston has the right to swap their pick for the Knicks pick (if the Knicks pick higher). If the Knicks get the free agents that they want, then 2012 won't be an issue.

Walsh had one job. Get the Knicks under the cap and get LeBron or another big name free agent. Part one has been accomplished.

Walsh's legacy with the Knicks will be completed this summer.

improbus
02-18-2010, 08:54 PM
The 2011 pick is #1 protected and the 2012 pick is top-5 protected ... or so I hear.

The Knicks went all-in on their plan to get two max contract guys this summer. And when fat Eddie Curry falls off the payroll in 2011, they can chase Melo, too, if they so choose.

Dream scenario for the Knicks:
-LeBron and Bosh to Knicks in 2010 with other vets hungry for a title signing on the cheap. (Jermaine O'Neal/Mike Miller/Camby types)

Nightmare scenario for the Knicks:
-Signing Amar'e and Joe Johnson to max deals and spend the next 6 years winning 42 games and have no money left for free agents.

New Fever
02-18-2010, 08:58 PM
The Rockets freaking killed in this deal.
Have to feel pretty bad for the Kings fans. I mean how to you explain turning Kevin Martin into Carl Landry.

That seems like a good trade to me. Carl Landry makes 3M a year while he averages 16 ppg. and 6 reb. off the bench for Houston. He will be a 20 and 10 man for Sacramento. In fact, he has more value than the often injured Kevin Martin. Sacramento also has this year's rookie of the year Tyreke Evans at guard and a first team all-rookie wing player, Omri Casspi.

New Fever
02-18-2010, 09:02 PM
If you look at it on the surface, it's TMac for Kevin Martin and Jordan Hill. Hill was a lottery pick but the Knicks really overpicked him.

Carl Landry also went to the Kings, his trade value is much higher than TMac's.

Revering4Blue
02-18-2010, 09:10 PM
Carl Landry also went to the Kings, his trade value is much higher than TMac's.

Plus, the expiring 13 million plus contract of Larry Hughes.

Tyreke Evan's future is at shooting guard, anyway.

KoryMac5
02-19-2010, 01:15 AM
Dream scenario for the Knicks:
-LeBron and Bosh to Knicks in 2010 with other vets hungry for a title signing on the cheap. (Jermaine O'Neal/Mike Miller/Camby types)

Nightmare scenario for the Knicks:
-Signing Amar'e and Joe Johnson to max deals and spend the next 6 years winning 42 games and have no money left for free agents.

Looks like scenario number 2 has a higher chance of happening than does scenario number 1. I think if Lebron is offered a max contract in Cleveland he stays, especially if they win it all this season.

TeamSelig
02-19-2010, 01:58 PM
IF lebron is offered a max contract in Cleveland? lol

WVRed
02-19-2010, 03:18 PM
Looks like scenario number 2 has a higher chance of happening than does scenario number 1. I think if Lebron is offered a max contract in Cleveland he stays, especially if they win it all this season.

Cleveland will offer a max contract, but I think it has more to do with "Are the Cavs willing to surround me with a solid nucleus to win it all?"

Yes, they got Jamison for nothing. Illgauskus will be cut and then resign with the Cavs in 30 days, but trading for Amare likely would have gone a long way in retaining LeBron IMO.

Hope Cavs fans like seeing JJ Hickson flying solo if LeBron leaves.

improbus
02-19-2010, 05:48 PM
Cleveland will offer a max contract, but I think it has more to do with "Are the Cavs willing to surround me with a solid nucleus to win it all?"

Yes, they got Jamison for nothing. Illgauskus will be cut and then resign with the Cavs in 30 days, but trading for Amare likely would have gone a long way in retaining LeBron IMO.

Hope Cavs fans like seeing JJ Hickson flying solo if LeBron leaves.

I'm not a huge Amar'e fan. He has had some strange and troubling injuries and has never given an ounce of effort on defense. I would never discount 21-9, but he should be so much more.

Revering4Blue
02-19-2010, 07:01 PM
Rivers, Jackson don't want Big Z back with Cavaliers:cry:


Fri Feb 19,2010 12:07 AM ET By Kurt Helin


Doc Rivers and Phil Jackson are very different as coaches, and as people, but the two agree on one thing -- the rule that allows Zydrunas Ilgauskas to return to the Cleveland Cavaliers sucks.

The Wizards just acquired Big Z (and his puppet) in a trade but are expected to buy out his contract in a few days, making him a free agent. Ilgauskas can sign anywhere -- Atlanta and Dallas are interested -- but if he waits 30 days he can sign with the Cavaliers again and go home. Like he never left. And Jackson (clearly thinking ahead to a Finals matchup) didn't like it.

"They're going to get Ilgauskas back and it's going to be one of those scenarios that we see in the NBA where you ship a player out, you get another player, then your player retires or they pay him off and then he comes back in 30 days," Jackson said. "I don't know what that does for the league."

It was more ironic to hear Rivers complain about it -- the Celtics did the same thing with Gary Payton back in 2005, when the Celtics traded the point guard for Antoine Walker, then got him back after the buyout.

"I have a problem with that," Rivers said. "I loved it three years ago when we did it with Gary Payton if you remember, but now I think it sucks. I think it's a terrible deal. I actually do have a problem with that though. We did it, and I'm joking, but I do think (there is a problem). I don't know what you do. Just not allow them to go back to the same team or whatever.

He added that it's something the league needs to think about.

"I do think that will be changed eventually, but I do have a problem with it."


http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/more_entries/3.php

MasonBuzz3
02-21-2010, 01:55 AM
Any turd can have a good game.

I also wouldn't say that LA's starting lineup is that much better.

Personally I think Lebron is slightly > Kobe. Mo Williams > Fisher. Jamison isn't too far from Gasol. And when you take into account that Shaq will draw a double team and Bynum won't, that can be vital in the playoffs.

Bynum is intimidated by Shaq, at least thats the feel around the league. Don't get me started on Shaq getting into Dwight Howard's head...And Lebron slightly over Kobe? come on man....its not even close.

But onto the Lebron leaving Cleveland issue, I have said for a couple of years on here that Lebron would be re-signing with the Cavs. I'm not changing my stance on that, and I might happen to have an insight into the situation.

Z will be back in Cleveland anyways, he only spent a couple of hours in DC and then came back home. The Cavs are probably the last team to exploit this rule, since it will likely be out in the new CBA.

Cavs lineup this playoffs:
C: Shaq, Z, Andy
PF: Jamison, Andy, Powe
SF: Bron, Moon, Jawad
SG: West, Parker,
PG: Mo, West, Boobie

sorry skip bayless, no team can match that depth

cincrazy
02-21-2010, 02:01 AM
Bynum is intimidated by Shaq, at least thats the feel around the league. Don't get me started on Shaq getting into Dwight Howard's head...And Lebron slightly over Kobe? come on man....its not even close.

But onto the Lebron leaving Cleveland issue, I have said for a couple of years on here that Lebron would be re-signing with the Cavs. I'm not changing my stance on that, and I might happen to have an insight into the situation.

Z will be back in Cleveland anyways, he only spent a couple of hours in DC and then came back home. The Cavs are probably the last team to exploit this rule, since it will likely be out in the new CBA.

Cavs lineup this playoffs:
C: Shaq, Z, Andy
PF: Jamison, Andy, Powe
SF: Bron, Moon, Jawad
SG: West, Parker,
PG: Mo, West, Boobie

sorry skip bayless, no team can match that depth

I don't think you can say "It's not even close" regarding Lebron and Kobe.

I'm not going to dispute Lebron's greatness. But Kobe Bryant doesn't have four rings by accident.

NJReds
02-21-2010, 09:57 AM
Bynum is intimidated by Shaq, at least thats the feel around the league. Don't get me started on Shaq getting into Dwight Howard's head...And Lebron slightly over Kobe? come on man....its not even close.


So you say that the Cavs depth is superior to the Lakers, and Lebron is far better than Kobe.

Then how does Kobe have 4 rings to Lebron's zero? Dumb luck?

TeamSelig
02-21-2010, 04:37 PM
This is the first year the Cavs have had crazy depth. Kobe has 4 rings because of Shaq and Gasol IMO.

Revering4Blue
02-21-2010, 04:53 PM
This is the first year the Cavs have had crazy depth. Kobe has 4 rings because of Shaq and Gasol IMO.

Exactly.

And the first 3 rings occurred before Lebron ever played in the NBA.

Not a fair comparison, IMO.

NJReds
02-21-2010, 09:22 PM
This is the first year the Cavs have had crazy depth. Kobe has 4 rings because of Shaq and Gasol IMO.

No player ever wins a championship without a supporting cast. Even Jordan never won a title w/out Pippen.

TeamSelig
02-21-2010, 09:37 PM
I agree. But I will add that Shaq was the reason Kobe has 3 of those rings. You can't judge a players ability on rings alone, otherwise Robert Horry would be one of the all time greats.

TeamSelig
02-21-2010, 09:47 PM
What is everyone's draft board at the moment?

Draft Express has
1) John Wall
2) Evan Turner
3) Derrick Favors
4) DeMarcus Cousins
5) Al-Faroq Aminu

NBA Draft.net
1) John Wall
2) Evan Turner
3) Wesley Johnson
4) Donatas Motiejunas
5) Al Farouq Aminu

Mine
1) John Wall
2) Evan Turner
3) DeMarcus Cousins
4) Derrick Favors
5) Wesley Johnson

NJReds
02-21-2010, 09:54 PM
I agree. But I will add that Shaq was the reason Kobe has 3 of those rings. You can't judge a players ability on rings alone, otherwise Robert Horry would be one of the all time greats.

You could just as easily say that Kobe and Wade carried Shaq to his rings.

I'm not a Kobe fan, but the guy is a great player. I think Lebron is better, but not be leaps and bounds.

TeamSelig
02-21-2010, 10:27 PM
You could argue that Wade "carried" Shaq to a championship, but I don't think its realistic to say that Kobe carried Shaq.

Boston Red
02-22-2010, 01:25 AM
My Jazz just rallied from 25 down in the 3rd to win in Portland and go 17-2 in their last 19. Nice!

Kingspoint
02-22-2010, 04:32 AM
My Jazz just rallied from 25 down in the 3rd to win in Portland and go 17-2 in their last 19. Nice!

Congratulations.

Nate McMillan did everything he could to lose that game by playing the injured (and thus worthless right now) Brandon Roy (-22 on the +/- for the night right before Rudy hit a meaningless 3-pointer with a couple of seconds left).

The game was over as soon as he put Roy back in with a 9-point lead in the 4th Quarter.

In the 1st Quarter, the refs got Roy out of the game with 2 quick fouls and the Blazers already down 5 points. It looked like another Jazz blowout. But, with Roy finally gone, the Blazers could run and the blew past the Jazz in every way possible going on a 33-9 run without Roy. Then Roy was put back into the game, and that was the end of the run in the first half.

NJReds
02-22-2010, 09:37 AM
My Jazz just rallied from 25 down in the 3rd to win in Portland and go 17-2 in their last 19. Nice!

Sloan is one of the most underrated coaches in any sport. I love the way the Jazz run their organization. A very easy team to root for.

BuckeyeRed27
02-22-2010, 11:55 AM
My Jazz just rallied from 25 down in the 3rd to win in Portland and go 17-2 in their last 19. Nice!

I'm a huge Jazz fan too. It's crazy, but I never thought for a second we were out of that game even down 25. This is a dangerous team. I still don't think they can take on the Lakers and win a series though.
Fresenko was so good last night though. If he can play that solid against big teams with length (like LA, Portland, Orlando) might be a difference maker.

TeamSelig
02-22-2010, 02:22 PM
It's hard for me to root for the Jazz when they just dump their players for a tiny bit of savings.

Boston Red
02-22-2010, 02:45 PM
Wasn't my favorite move ever given the timing, but getting a first-round draft pick for Brewer is more than fair. A shooting guard who can't shoot is not all that valuable.

TeamSelig
02-22-2010, 03:18 PM
A shooting guard who can defend is a rarity in the NBA. It is also a valuable piece to a team looking to win some playoff games.

15fan
02-22-2010, 03:22 PM
What is everyone's draft board at the moment?



Aminu can't shoot from the outside, and gets into a lot of trouble when he puts the ball on the floor. He's at his best when a PG has the ball in transition & he's running the floor, or when he's w/in a few feet of the hoop battling for rebounds.

He's going to have to put on a good bit more muscle if he's going to be able to hold his own in the paint in the NBA, though. He doesn't have the outisde game for a 3, and he certainly doesn't have the strength to play the 4.

BuckeyeRed27
02-22-2010, 04:02 PM
A shooting guard who can defend is a rarity in the NBA. It is also a valuable piece to a team looking to win some playoff games.

I like Ronnie Brewer but the Jazz won't miss him at all.
The combo of Matthews, Miles and Korver is fine and allows the Jazz to match up with almost any wings. Kirilenko can also slide into that role if the Jazz want to play big with Okur, Milsap and Boozer at the same time.
Brewer wasn't going to resign with the Jazz so getting a first round pick and either saving money or getting some flexibility to sign a vet down the stretch here is nothing except a good move.

cincrazy
02-22-2010, 10:45 PM
This is the first year the Cavs have had crazy depth. Kobe has 4 rings because of Shaq and Gasol IMO.

I disagree. You could say Magic has four rings because of Kareem, or vice versa.

Kobe was the closer on those teams. He would rip the heart out of the opposing team. Shaq was a great, great player in his prime, but at the end of games he was damn near a liability on the floor because of his foul shooting.

TeamSelig
02-23-2010, 04:35 PM
I'm just saying you can't say Kobe is better than Lebron because of championships. Lebron is younger and hasn't had the fortune of having a caliber player as Shaq in his prime or Gasol.

texasdave
02-23-2010, 09:53 PM
Using that kind of logic, I guess that would make Hakeem Olajuwon the best player of all-time. In the Rockets first championship season he had pretty much no help at all as far as high-caliber sidekicks. Otis Thorpe was second on the team in scoring at 14 PPG. Here is the Rockets roster from their 93-94 championship season: Not very impressive. See any Shaqs or Pippens on that roster? Me neither.



Scott Brooks
Matt Bullard
Sam Cassell
Earl Cureton
Mario Elie
Carl Herrera
Robert Horry
Chris Jent
Vernon Maxwell
Hakeem Olajuwon
Richard Petruska
Eric Riley
Larry Robinson
Kenny Smith
Otis Thorpe

Kingspoint
02-24-2010, 04:21 AM
Using that kind of logic, I guess that would make Hakeem Olajuwon the best player of all-time. In the Rockets first championship season he had pretty much no help at all as far as high-caliber sidekicks. Otis Thorpe was second on the team in scoring at 14 PPG. Here is the Rockets roster from their 93-94 championship season: Not very impressive. See any Shaqs or Pippens on that roster? Me neither.

Olajuwon was incredible that season. Ramadan didn't have the lingering effect on him as it did some other seasons. The Rockets were the best Defensive team in the league that season thanks to Olajuwon with major help from Otis Thorpe, Mario Elie, and Robert Horry, while Maxwell and Kenny Smith could cheat on their players and overplay them knowing that Olajuwon and Thorpe were waiting underneath.

That second Championship, he got major help from Clyde Drexler, who averaged 21-7-5 during the playoffs while leading the team in Steals during the playoffs.

BuckeyeRed27
02-24-2010, 01:57 PM
Olajuwon was incredible that season. Ramadan didn't have the lingering effect on him as it did some other seasons. The Rockets were the best Defensive team in the league that season thanks to Olajuwon with major help from Otis Thorpe, Mario Elie, and Robert Horry, while Maxwell and Kenny Smith could cheat on their players and overplay them knowing that Olajuwon and Thorpe were waiting underneath.

That second Championship, he got major help from Clyde Drexler, who averaged 21-7-5 during the playoffs while leading the team in Steals during the playoffs.

The thing that really helped that season was Michael Jordan thinking he could hit a curve ball.

Kingspoint
02-24-2010, 04:45 PM
The thing that really helped that season was Michael Jordan thinking he could hit a curve ball.

That did open the door. Though the Knicks-Rockets series went 7 games, I think the Bulls-Rockets series would have also gone 7 games with Houston coming out on top.

IslandRed
02-24-2010, 05:32 PM
Shaq was a great, great player in his prime, but at the end of games he was damn near a liability on the floor because of his foul shooting.

Chamberlain and Russell were miserable foul shooters too, but it doesn't seem to have hurt their legacy any.

I agree with the main point on this page, though. It's a team sport and even a truly great player needs some help to win a championship.

texasdave
02-24-2010, 08:04 PM
The thing that really helped that season was Michael Jordan thinking he could hit a curve ball.

Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda. We can play that game all night. The Rockets beat all comers in back-to-back seasons. That is the only thing we know to be a fact. Here is a little tidbit for you. In the Bulls' three previous championship seasons they met the Rockets six times in the regular season and the Rockets took five out of six. The Rockets matched up well with the Bulls. Does that mean the Rockets would have taken a seven-game series from the Bulls? It doesn't matter. That series never came to fruition.

Revering4Blue
02-24-2010, 08:44 PM
Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda. We can play that game all night. The Rockets beat all comers in back-to-back seasons. That is the only thing we know to be a fact. Here is a little tidbit for you. In the Bulls' three previous championship seasons they met the Rockets six times in the regular season and the Rockets took five out of six. The Rockets matched up well with the Bulls. Does that mean the Rockets would have taken a seven-game series from the Bulls? It doesn't matter. That series never came to fruition.

Exactly right, Dave.

The Bulls in all of their respective championship years never faced a team better equipped to knock them off in the finals than the 93-95 Rockets.

Were the '91 Lakers or '92 Blazers better than Hakeem's Rockets?

'93 Suns?

Not quite, especially after losing Cedric Ceballos in the WCF finals. That is akin to the 96-98 Bulls losing Toni Kukoc.

'96 Sonics and '98 Jazz? Well, you get the point.

WVRed
02-25-2010, 03:14 PM
I like Wojo's thinking here, but it would never happen.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&page=wojciechowski/100223&sportCat=nba


How rich is LeBron James? Put it this way: When God needs some walking-around money, he borrows it from LBJ.


Dwyane Wade isn't exactly slumming, himself. Some people donate to a church; Wade bought a church for his minister mom.


[+] EnlargeAP Photo/Kathy Kmonicek
Knicks fans are ready. As of Nov. 6, the clock was running on LeBron's availability.
And although Chris Bosh isn't in the same endorsement orbit as King James and D-Wade, he's still pushing $60 million in career salary earnings. So it's not as if Bosh is ordering the 89-cent, five-layer burrito from Denise.


LeBron, Wade and Bosh have money, lots of it. What they don't have is an NBA jewelry collection. Of their combined 30 fingers, only one has actually had an NBA championship ring wrapped around it.


Wade won his title in 2006, but the Miami Heat haven't sniffed a playoff-series win since then. James' Cleveland Cavaliers reached the Finals in 2007 -- and got swept. Bosh's Toronto Raptors have been to the postseason twice but haven't made it out of the first round.


All that could change if James, Wade and Bosh decide to put dynasties over dollars, basketball legacies over bank accounts. They just need a dotted line and some stones as big as the ones in Olympic curling.


As ridiculous as it sounds, there exists a scenario in which these three guys could play on the same team and win championships happily ever after starting next season. For once, someone could say, "It's not about the money," and actually mean it.


As you probably noticed, the recent NBA trade deadline isn't just about trading players. It's usually about trading contracts, preferably the expiring kind. It's white-flag economics, where teams essentially admit Steven Seagal has a better chance of winning an Oscar than they do of competing for a championship. So they start dumping salaries into the league's Port-o-Potty.


[+] EnlargeGregory Shamus/NBAE/Getty Images
D-Wade and the others would give up some salary; but in the right market, that wouldn't matter.
Four teams did a lot of flushing in recent weeks: the New York Knicks, Chicago Bulls, Sacramento Kings and the Los Angeles Clippers. (What? Donald Sterling? Go cheap?) And three other franchises also can stretch their legs when it comes to salary-cap space: the Heat, New Jersey Nets and Minnesota Timberwolves.


Without going all capology on you, it looks as though next season's projected salary cap will be between $50.4 million and $53.6 million. Now compare that to the financial wiggle room those seven teams have in 2010-11.


Right now, the Knicks are on the hook for only $18.6 million in contracts next season. The Nets are committed to just $26.6 million worth of deals, while the Heat are at $30.7 million, the Bulls at $31.9 million, the Clippers at $33.5 million, the Kings at $33.9 million and the T-Wolves at $35.2 million.


The numbers could change by July, but at least this gives you an idea of who has the most money to make a run at one of the great unrestricted free-agent classes in NBA history.


From a pure salary standpoint, there's no reason James, Wade and Bosh should bolt. If they max out with their teams, they'll get six-year deals with 10.5 percent annual salary increases. If they move, they'll get only five-year deals at a lower annual increase rate of 8 percent. LeBron could leave $30 million on the table if he ditches the Cavs.


I'd ditch them. If you're really serious about creating a brand and a basketball legacy, do something that's never been done before. Don't max out; min out.


Depending on the final salary-cap numbers, the Knicks could have about $33 million to spend on free agents in the summer. Under normal circumstances, that's enough to offer, say, James a max deal and then fill in the roster holes with whatever is left over.


But if James, Wade and Bosh truly want to make history, they could do the unthinkable and split the Knicks' $33 million three ways. It would cost them salary money, but can you imagine how much they'd make on the back end if they started reeling in NBA titles? In New York?


Whatever they'd lose on their paycheck stubs, they'd make up in endorsements. And it's not as if they're filing simple federal tax returns these days. According to a 2009 Forbes analysis, LeBron earned about $42.4 million in salary and endorsements -- more than Britney Spears, Jay-Z or Tom Cruise and almost as much as Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie combined.


[+] EnlargeGlenn James/NBAE/Getty Images
Chris Bosh, teamed with LeBron and D-Wade? NBA titles would be a slam dunk.
Wade was No. 12 on Sports Illustrated's 2009 Fortunate 50, earning $26.4 million in salary and endorsements. Bosh didn't make the top 50, but he is making $15.7 million from the Raptors this season.


Anyway, they all can afford to do something daring. Just think: James, Wade and Bosh at Madison Square Garden.


Seriously, who would touch them? Wade at guard. LeBron at point forward. Bosh in the post or on the wing. Three good guys who could handle the New York media. Three seven-year veterans who understand you get only so many chances to hug the Larry O'Brien Trophy. Three singular players who know careers are defined by championships, not just checkbooks.


Dream Team Jr. could get by on about $11 million each, couldn't it? Yeah, they'd take a cut in pay, but they'd get a raise in title runs.


Don't say no just yet, fellas. And whatever you do, don't tell your agents. (They'll melt like the gestapo guy in "Raiders of the Lost Ark.")


Instead, close your eyes and think about ticker-tape parades, victory cigars and championship rings the size of clementines. Now try to put a price tag on it.


I'll save you the trouble. You can't.

Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com. You can contact him at gene.wojciechowski@espn3.com. Hear Gene's podcasts and ESPN Radio appearances by clicking here.

Here's a better pipe dream. All three of those to the New Jersey Nets, who land the no 1 overall pick and take John Wall.

PG-John Wall
SG-Dwayne Wade
SF-LeBron James
PF-Chris Bosh
C-Brook Lopez

Might as well cancel the NBA for the next five seasons.

Roy Tucker
02-25-2010, 05:23 PM
I like Wojo's thinking here, but it would never happen.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&page=wojciechowski/100223&sportCat=nba



Here's a better pipe dream. All three of those to the New Jersey Nets, who land the no 1 overall pick and take John Wall.

PG-John Wall
SG-Dwayne Wade
SF-LeBron James
PF-Chris Bosh
C-Brook Lopez

Might as well cancel the NBA for the next five seasons.

Ehhh, that's why they play the games.

The Lakers of Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, and Wilt Chamberlain didn't win it all till their 4th year together.

KoryMac5
02-26-2010, 08:27 AM
Good game the other night between the Lakers and the Mavs, with Dallas pulling it out after 27 lead changes. Looks like the Butler, Haywood additions have re-energized Dallas for the playoff run.

Revering4Blue
02-26-2010, 11:09 AM
Too long to copy and paste, but well worth reading.

A fan-friendly solution to fix the NBA

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100224

Unassisted
02-26-2010, 11:44 AM
Too long to copy and paste, but well worth reading.


http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100224
The gist seemed to be that he wants teams to redistribute surplus revenue to the fans in the form of cheaper tickets, while the other half of the column argues that there really isn't any surplus revenue and teams are horribly overvalued. :confused:

Chip R
02-26-2010, 12:46 PM
I read that column and I have to say I was disappointed. It was basically complaining about how some lesser players are paid more than some excellent players. What sport doesn't have that? Most fabs would like to see decreased ticket prices when a team has a fire sale. Baseball fans have said this for ages but since Simmons is a Sox fan, he wouldn't know about that. He really didn't give any realistic solutions. It was a long whine about the problems of the NBA.

Revering4Blue
02-26-2010, 12:59 PM
The gist seemed to be that he wants teams to redistribute surplus revenue to the fans in the form of cheaper tickets, while the other half of the column argues that there really isn't any surplus revenue and teams are horribly overvalued. :confused:

Yeah, that doesn't make sense to me, either.

I do like this idea:


If I were running the NBA, eliminating the illusion of regret would be my biggest initiative. I would give every nonplayoff team the same odds for winning the lottery, just so these teams wouldn't destroy six to eight weeks of a season for paying customers. Then, I would cut the season by four games, guarantee only the top 12 playoff spots, then decide the seventh and eighth seeds in each conference with a double-elimination tournament for every nonplayoff team.

improbus
02-26-2010, 08:16 PM
I read that column and I have to say I was disappointed. It was basically complaining about how some lesser players are paid more than some excellent players. What sport doesn't have that? Most fabs would like to see decreased ticket prices when a team has a fire sale. Baseball fans have said this for ages but since Simmons is a Sox fan, he wouldn't know about that. He really didn't give any realistic solutions. It was a long whine about the problems of the NBA.
It wasn't his most inspired effort. The problem with the NBA is that it is a star based league with only about 5-6 real crowd drawing stars (Wade, LeBron, Kobe, Durant, Howard, and Paul.) Now, a hoops junkie (like me) will tell you that there are exciting reasons to watch every team in the league, but I can't blame Pacers fans for checking out about 3 months (or 3 years) ago.

Their entire marketing machine and financial system is star-based and the league doesn't have enough to go around.

improbus
02-28-2010, 10:29 AM
I'm really tired of people making fun of the Grizzlies for sending Thabeet to the D League. Everyone knew he was a project when he was drafted. The Grizzlies are fighting for a playoff spot and have two quality big men and really don't have time to develop him.

Thabeet is the very reason for the D League. The NBA, the media, and the players need to kill the negative stigma of getting sent to the D League. How many high draft picks have failed because they got to the NBA, sat on the bench, and never and the chance to develop? This is particularly true with big men. Thabeet needs minutes where the pressure to win isn't there, but only the pressure to improve his game. I hope the kid improves, makes it back to the league, and shuts up all of the critics.

This brings another story to my mind. Latavious Williams jumped directly from High School to the D League. This was a huge step for the NBA. It is a way to circumnavigate the NCAA, and can be a place for kids who aren't academically eligible. I hope that Williams is a huge success in the D League (he is currently averaging 6 ppg and 7 rb's) and his journey through the D League doesn't stigmatize him in the NBA.

Revering4Blue
02-28-2010, 11:18 AM
I'm really tired of people making fun of the Grizzlies for sending Thabeet to the D League. Everyone knew he was a project when he was drafted. The Grizzlies are fighting for a playoff spot and have two quality big men and really don't have time to develop him.

Thabeet is the very reason for the D League. The NBA, the media, and the players need to kill the negative stigma of getting sent to the D League. How many high draft picks have failed because they got to the NBA, sat on the bench, and never and the chance to develop? This is particularly true with big men. Thabeet needs minutes where the pressure to win isn't there, but only the pressure to improve his game. I hope the kid improves, makes it back to the league, and shuts up all of the critics.

This brings another story to my mind. Latavious Williams jumped directly from High School to the D League. This was a huge step for the NBA. It is a way to circumnavigate the NCAA, and can be a place for kids who aren't academically eligible. I hope that Williams is a huge success in the D League (he is currently averaging 6 ppg and 7 rb's) and his journey through the D League doesn't stigmatize him in the NBA.

+1



Grizzlies coach Lionel Hollins says that the team sent rookie center Hasheem Thabeet to the NBDL for his development.

"It's not a demotion. It's development," Hollins said. "To go down there and play gives him an opportunity to grow."

Hollins said that if he has any regret about sending Thabeet to the Dakota Wizards, it's that he didn't make the decision soon.

"He didn't get demoted from anything. He wasn't playing," Hollins said. "I think we don't take advantage of the D-League enough because of people worrying about the PR hit you're going to take. It's like people would rather have a guy sit on the bench and never play versus going to the minor leagues to play. Baseball has been doing it for years, and it works."

Revering4Blue
02-28-2010, 11:28 AM
Shocking news.


Zydrunas Ilgauskas has made up his mind and still intends to re-sign with the Cavaliers, sources told ESPN Cleveland.

The Cavaliers traded Ilgauskas to the Wizards in the three-team deal that landed them Antawn Jamison.

The veteran center reached a buyout agreement with Washington on Thursday.

He'll be eligible to sign with Cleveland on March 22.

improbus
02-28-2010, 11:39 AM
Shocking news.
I'm sure that the league will close this loop-hole in the new CBA, but hopefully they get rid of the need to salary dump that creates these types of deals.

Revering4Blue
02-28-2010, 12:16 PM
Draft Report: John Wall.

http://realgm.com/src_feature_pieces/875/20100224/draft_report_john_wall_of_kentucky/

What the lottery winner should specifically do to successfully build around John Wall.

Granted, some of the proposed deals are beyond bizarre.

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_feature_pieces/874/20100224/looking_at_john_walls_nba_team/

improbus
03-05-2010, 08:35 AM
Is anyone else loving what the rookies are doing?
Curry and Evans are going to be All-Stars. Curry is unbelievably efficient for a little guy. He is the anti-Iverson. He is also a better passer than I thought he would be (7.3 assists per game in Feb.) He is also getting 5 boards a game this month. Unreal.
Lawson has been great for the Nugs and will be an excellent floor general when Billups is gone. Flynn and Jennings have struggle with their shooting but are going to play in the league for a long time. darren Collison has been amazing in Paul's absence. Taj Gibson has been solid, and so have DeJuan Blair, Marcus Thornton, and Chase Budinger. Obviously Thabeet has really struggled, but anyone who thought he would be good this year was fooling themself. All of this has happened without Blake Griffin. I have to say that I'm impressed.

Kingspoint
03-06-2010, 09:40 AM
For the last 20 years, I've always thought that this would be the best way to run the NBA.

1. No more than 30 teams in the league, but less will work, while 30 is ideal.
2. Divide the League into 3 Divisions, Division 1, Division II, and Division III.
3. Have the best teams play each other more often than they play the worst teams every single year, so that that teams like the Lakers, Spurs, Jazz, Celtics, and teams that are traditionally in the Top-10 of the league every season play each other more often (6 times a year) than they play the lesser teams (2 times and 1 time a year). This would make for a greater number of "high-rating" games available to television throughout the year. The television season can then begin at the beginning of the season and continue throughout the season generating more interest and more money because there will be "premium" games on television all the time.

Here's how you do it while keeping things balanced and fair throughout the league every season:

Division breakdown:
D-I....Top-10 teams
D-II...11-20 teams
D-III..21-rest of teams

16 teams make the playoffs:
The Top-8 from D-I, The Top-5 from D-II, The Top-3 from D-III.

How it's determined who is in each Division every year.

The first year will be based on overall record from the year before. After that, the bottom 3 teams from D-I drop to D-II. The Top-3 teams from D-II advance to D-I. The middle 3 teams from D-II stay where they are. The Top 4 teams from D-III advance to D-II. The bottom 4 teams from D-II drop to D-III. The bottom 6 teams from D-III stay where they are.

This way, no team can drop two divisions in one year just because they had a rash of injuries. Not only will there be 16 playoff spots to play for every season, but there will be incentives throughout the league to the very last game so that a team won't tank games or play half-heartedly like they do every season. Every year in the NBA the teams that clearly aren't making the playoffs start losing at a greater pace than before. The last 25 games of the year are always a case of the haves-and-have-nots. With all of the incentives to play for, there will be more fans in the stands at half of the arenas in the league. Half the league is going bankrupt. They need television money and incentives for the fans to show up. This idea solves both problems.

Here's how you do the schedule, assuming there are 30 teams, 10 in each league (which is why 30 is an ideal number):

Each team plays 6 Intra-Division games with the other 9 teams (54 games).
Every D-I team plays each D-II team twice (20 games).
Every D-I team plays each D-III team once (5 home and 5 road alternating each season if a D-I team faced a D-III team the previous season. 10 games).

That's 84 games for the D-1 teams, 74 games for the D-II teams, and 64 games for the D-III teams.
Every D-II team plays each D-III team once (5 home and 5 road alternating each season if a D-I team faced a D-III team the previous season. 10 games).

That's 84 games for the D-1 teams, 84 games for the D-II teams, and 74 games for the D-III teams.
Every D-III team plays every D-III team one more time plus one team two more times splitting home and away. (10 games.)

That's now 84 games for every team. Cut out 2 pre-season games. They're useless, anyway.

What you end up with:

Division-III: 10 teams playing each other 64 of the 84 games, making it likely that 4 of the teams have better than .500 records and one or two more will be .440 or better with only 4 teams worse than that. The really bad teams will win more games. That will be more fun at the arena, causing more people to attend. People who go to games like to see wins. Reaching the playoffs, which is what is always on the mind of internet posters, isn't what's most important at the end of the game to people who are paying for a ticket. They want to go home having seen a win. Also, if a team is in the Top-3 from D-III then, they not only get into the playoffs, but they get in with an attitude of winning by both the fans and the team as they will likely have .550 records or better. Fighting for that 4th-place finish in D-III will also be fun as that team advances to D-II next season where 5 teams reach the playoffs (where the D-II Division has two of the five teams with home-court in the playoffs). The D-III playoff teams will be seeded 13, 15, & 16 respectively. That top team is probably going to be pretty good, be up-and-coming, and has a chance in the playoffs not having to play one of the Top-3 seeds. It got to be in D-III because it either didn't play well the year before, had some key injuries, was too young, or just wasn't very good. Whatever the reason, those reasons don't exist anymore and it's now an exciting team to watch. This would not likely be the case in the existing format of the NBA. Winning breeds confidence and this team has won a lot of games this season.

Division II: 10 teams playing each other 54 times, and the Top 4 or 5 teams are likely to be some pretty good teams while playing each other 6 times a piece. Again, 4 of the teams should be over .500 with one or two other teams playing between .440-.480 and with a lot more to play for. The Top 5 teams reach the playoffs, seeded 7, 8, 10, 12, & 14 respectively. In addition, the Top-3 teams reach Division-I next year, the team that finishes 6th gets to stay in D-II, and the bottom 4 fall to D-III, so there's incentives aplenty for all in the Division. There will be plenty of good games that could be put on television from this Division matching the top teams against either the #1 team in D-III, against another top team from D-II, or against most of the teams from D-I.

Division I: 54 games against the best teams in the league from the year before (Top-7 from D-I and Top-3 from D-II) for each and every one of the 10 teams in this division. That's 540 televisable games, plus so many more when they are playing against top Top teams from D-II and the Top one or two teams from D-III. Teams in this Division are seeded 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9 & 11 respectively with the top 6 obviously earning home court in the 1st Round. Even though the Top 8 teams make it to the playoffs, only the Top 7 stay in the Division. The bottom 3 will go to D-II the next season. So, you really want to stay in D-I and increase your chances for making the playoffs next season where there are 8 teams getting in versus 5 teams in D-II.

Playoffs are the playoffs. Even if the D-III 3rd place finisher pulled off a miracle and won the NBA Championship, that team still just goes to the D-II division the next season.

In the end, there would be about 600 marketable regular season games that people would want to watch. The ratings for 6 Celtics-Lakers matchups and 6 Lakers-Cavaliers matchups and 6 Lakers-Magic matchups, etc. would be a goldmine for the NBA in terms of television revenue. They could have Saturday Night NBA games on one of the Networks. It's the least watched evening in all of television, so it wouldn't hurt a major network to put a Lakers@Celtics game on @ 6:00 EST and a Miami@Utah or Orlando@Portland on @ 8:30 EST. They could do that every Saturday Night from the last week of October throughout the season. They could then have mid-week games on like they do now on TNT/ESPN/NBA-Network.

Television revenue would increase as would ticket revenue, where the NBA is struggling mightily. That's mostly because most teams suck most of the time, and that's because they're always comparing themselves to the Lakers, Cavs, Celtics or the Magic. Those comparisons wouldn't be made under this type of system. It's the same system they had in Major League Baseball for decades. It worked just fine. It's better suited for today's world where you want televised games to always be premier games.

If this had been the first year, then the Divisions would have been broken down like this:

Division I:

1. Cleveland Cavaliers
2. Los Angeles Lakers
3. Boston Celtics
4. Orlando Magic
5. Denver Nuggets
6. San Antonio Spurs
7. Portland TrailBlazers
8. Houston Rockets
9. Dallas Mavericks
10. New Orleans Hornets


Division II:

1. Utah Jazz
2. Atlanta Hawks
3. Phoenix Suns
4. Miami Heat
5. Philadelphia 76er's
6. Chicago Bulls
7. Detroit Pistons
8. Indiana Pacers
9. Charlotte Hornets
10. New Jersey Nets


Division III:

1. Milwaukee Bucks
2. Toronto Raptors
3. New York Knicks
4. Golden State Warriors
5. Minnesota TimberWolves
6. Memphis Grizzlies
7. Oklahoma City Thunder
8. Los Angeles Clippers
9. Washington Bullets
10. Sacramento Kings

Think of the ratings those Top-10 teams would create playing each other 6 times a piece this season. There will always be one or two, maybe even three or four down teams in the Top-10, but for those down teams, there would be 8 teams to watch among the other two divisions that are up-and-coming. In this case, Oklahoma City, Memphis, Toronto, Phoenix, Miami, Utah, Atlanta, and I'm sure a couple of others might throw their hat in the ring this season, and if this scenario was the real one, then even more would be trying to throw their hats in the ring.

This would be an exciting league, and it'd be better off than the crap that we get from College Football on Saturdays sometimes, and the junk that's on Saturday Afternoons and Nights during the Fall (infomercials and ladies golf). Those mid-week on the West Coast and Mountain time (@ Los Angeles, San Antonio, Dallas, Houston, Portland, Utah, Phoenix and Denver) games are never watched by most of the nation (East Coast and Mid-West viewers in the Eastern Time Zone (Ohio and over). This way, they'd all get one game from those time zones per week on a Saturday evening that ends before the 11:00 news, and there could be one scheduled on a Friday evening the same way because if it's a premier game among the elite teams, then it makes more sense for the networks to show it from 8:30-11:00 on Friday Evening. They need to not have TV Timeouts in these games, too, so that they don't make the broadcast too long and bore the viewers (3 hours is too long to sit and watch anything), and so that the games don't overlap (the game that starts at 6:00 needs to end before 8:30 instead of the 8:45 that's going on now with ESPN and TNT....marketing people are the dumbest people in the world as they never ever have a clue what their market wants.) From 1970 to 1980 NBA games lasted 2:10. You could set your watch to it. And, they shot 10 more free throws per game and took 20 more field goal attempts per game. That's not an exageration. That's what happened. There's just a billion-gazillion stop-gaps of too many reasons that need to be eliminated. The NBA game is really, really boring and the main reason is because of people like Nate McMillan who want to control everything and turn every posession into a one-on-four move by Brandon Roy. Let them play, Nate. It's a lot more fun. This basketball that's been watched the last 2 weeks has been the best all year and it's because you have had less control, and have been forced to let the guards run the team instead of you.

Kingspoint
03-06-2010, 09:48 AM
I'd also get rid of the 3-point line.

It was brought in to discourage defenses from packing it in the middle. They thought it would lead to more scoring.

Instead, it's lead to less scoring because fewer shots are now being taken. It slowed the game down. It encouraged isolation plays where 1 guy has the ball and the other 4 guys stand around at the 3-point line and do nothing for 15 seconds.

The 3-point line stagnated the game and made it boring. It is really boring basketball, and has been for the last 15 years with the exception of two or three teams over that span, and none of those teams play East of the Mississippi River where your greatest markets exist.

If the 3-point line was eliminated teams would be forced to run more in order to create easier baskets. Every team knows that the goal is to try to get the easiest baskets that you can, and the speed of the game would increase. The stupid isolation play would go away.

improbus
03-06-2010, 10:09 AM
I would have quoted your post, but I think the internet would have exploded. I love the enthusiasm, but there are a few realistic issues and a few cultural issues.
Realistic Issues
1) No owner is going to say, "sure, put us in the third division, sounds great!"
2) How do you handle the financial aspect of this league structure? The top teams are going to want a significantly larger portion of the TV contracts because they hold up the league completely. Now you have a significantly larger financial boondoggle than even exists right now.
Cultural Issues
1) I find it ironic that you post that 3 hours is too long to sit and watch anything on a baseball message board.
2) This solution still doesn't solve the (critical) issue of an 85% black league with an 85% white audience. Give the NBA a Peyton Manning/Tom Brady/Drew Brees/Brett Favre figure and watch it sail past baseball.

But, I don't want to completely kill your ideas (especially because it is significantly longer than my master's thesis...)
Great point:
1) The problem of late west coast games. It is no secret that the NBA's strength as been in the west for over a decade. Also, the West has had by far the more entertaining teams (2004-2008 Suns, 2000-2004 Kings, 1998-2002 Blazers, 1998-2004 Lakers) and very few people were able to watch them play on a nightly basis. Instead we got to watch the Pistons/early LeBron Cavs/Heat/Knicks/etc...

My solution is even more radical.
Implement the NFL schedule in the NBA.
-Play 16 games on Sundays afternoons starting in February. Think about the pressure of every game, every possession, and every fourth quarter would be a nail biter. Also, it would eliminate the idea that NBA players dog it (you try playing 82-100 hoops games a year.)
-Gentically engineer some white super-stars (just kidding...)
-The regular season ends in May, and then implement a one a done tournament for the playoff teams and a one and done tournament for the draft (winner gets the first pick, runner up gets the second pick, etc...)
-Imagine a one game final between Kobe and LeBron. Televisions around the world would explode. If the system works for the NFL, why can't it work for the NBA? Try it for one season and see what happens.

improbus
03-06-2010, 10:15 AM
I'd also get rid of the 3-point line.

It was brought in to discourage defenses from packing it in the middle. They thought it would lead to more scoring.

Instead, it's lead to less scoring because fewer shots are now being taken. It slowed the game down. It encouraged isolation plays where 1 guy has the ball and the other 4 guys stand around at the 3-point line and do nothing for 15 seconds.

The 3-point line stagnated the game and made it boring. It is really boring basketball, and has been for the last 15 years with the exception of two or three teams over that span, and none of those teams play East of the Mississippi River where your greatest markets exist.

If the 3-point line was eliminated teams would be forced to run more in order to create easier baskets. Every team knows that the goal is to try to get the easiest baskets that you can, and the speed of the game would increase. The stupid isolation play would go away.
I couldn't disagree more with this. It may have created less possessions, but it also created an alternative model for winning titles. Before the three point line, you HAD to have one of the two or three top centers in the league or you weren't going to get a sniff at the title. Think about the teams since the 3 point line to win it all. Jordan's Bulls, Isiah's Pistons (and the 2004 Pistons), the 2008 Celtics. This would have never have happened in the pre-three point line NBA.

Revering4Blue
03-06-2010, 10:50 AM
If the Pacers wind up with the 4th pick in the draft, and Wall, Turner and Cousins are off the board, who would you pick?

Favors? The perfect 4 this franchise needs.

Wesley Johnson? The Alex English comparison seems valid.

Hassan Whiteside? If he declares, this makes the decision even tougher. He'll go top 5 on potential alone.

Kingspoint
03-06-2010, 11:28 AM
I couldn't disagree more with this. It may have created less possessions, but it also created an alternative model for winning titles. Before the three point line, you HAD to have one of the two or three top centers in the league or you weren't going to get a sniff at the title. Think about the teams since the 3 point line to win it all. Jordan's Bulls, Isiah's Pistons (and the 2004 Pistons), the 2008 Celtics. This would have never have happened in the pre-three point line NBA.

There's not argument there.

But, to me it's more about the style of play. It's ugly right now. They have to do something to get the ball moving up and down the court faster. Eliminating the 3-point line would do that.

improbus
03-06-2010, 11:47 AM
There's not argument there.

But, to me it's more about the style of play. It's ugly right now. They have to do something to get the ball moving up and down the court faster. Eliminating the 3-point line would do that.
So, you want teams to employ the "Ole" defense of the 1980's? The biggest difference between the 1970's-1980s and now is perimeter defense. Dr. J and Magic were atrocious defenders and LeBron and Kobe are excellent defenders. That is what slowed the game down.

TeamSelig
03-07-2010, 05:37 PM
If the Pacers wind up with the 4th pick in the draft, and Wall, Turner and Cousins are off the board, who would you pick?

Favors? The perfect 4 this franchise needs.

Wesley Johnson? The Alex English comparison seems valid.

Hassan Whiteside? If he declares, this makes the decision even tougher. He'll go top 5 on potential alone.

I'd probably go with Favors/Johnson. I think there is a good chance that we might trade down to gain some other assets, if we don't land a top 3 pick.

Knowing Bird, I think we select Wesley Johnson. Long, athletic, a junior, etc. Half jokingly, we probably pick Cole Aldrich. But with Roy, I think Bird passes on picking up the best white guy in the draft.

Kingspoint
03-07-2010, 06:22 PM
So, you want teams to employ the "Ole" defense of the 1980's? The biggest difference between the 1970's-1980s and now is perimeter defense. Dr. J and Magic were atrocious defenders and LeBron and Kobe are excellent defenders. That is what slowed the game down.

I want the teams to go back to the exciting up-and-down tempo of the 1970's and 1980's.

The product they put out there today is junk. That's why over half the arenas are over half empty every night.

Redsfaithful
03-07-2010, 07:45 PM
Plus, you know, the whole recession/depression thing going on here.

Unassisted
03-08-2010, 02:31 PM
Spurs have lost Tony Parker for the season with a broken bone in his hand. The team is 7th in the west, with 22 to play, including games against Orlando, Boston and the Lakers. There's still some question about whether they'll be able to or even try to re-sign Ginobili in the offseason. Local fans are saying it's the beginning of the end of the Spurs dynasty.

Boston Red
03-08-2010, 02:42 PM
It's not the beginning of the end, it's the end. The end started a couple of years back.

Kingspoint
03-08-2010, 05:30 PM
Spurs have lost Tony Parker for the season with a broken bone in his hand. The team is 7th in the west, with 22 to play, including games against Orlando, Boston and the Lakers. There's still some question about whether they'll be able to or even try to re-sign Ginobili in the offseason. Local fans are saying it's the beginning of the end of the Spurs dynasty.

Even if they had him, they were still going to finish 8th in the standings as they have a brutal schedule from here to the end of the season. They'll lose another 8 games before the season ends.

Kingspoint
03-08-2010, 05:51 PM
Spurs have lost Tony Parker for the season with a broken bone in his hand. The team is 7th in the west, with 22 to play, including games against Orlando, Boston and the Lakers. There's still some question about whether they'll be able to or even try to re-sign Ginobili in the offseason. Local fans are saying it's the beginning of the end of the Spurs dynasty.

Someone's spreading false rumors.



SAN ANTONIO -- San Antonio Spurs guard Tony Parker will miss about six weeks with a broken right hand.

The team said Monday that Parker won't need surgery, meaning he may be able to return later this season. Tests show he fractured the fourth metacarpal in his shooting hand Saturday during a victory at Memphis.

Parker was averaging 16.5 points per game, but has been hobbled all season by a slew of injuries. Now the Spurs will be without their second-leading scorer until at least the playoffs.

Parker was not with the Spurs for Monday's game at Cleveland. George Hill was expected to start in his place.

Unassisted
03-08-2010, 09:51 PM
Someone's spreading false rumors.



SAN ANTONIO -- San Antonio Spurs guard Tony Parker will miss about six weeks with a broken right hand.

The team said Monday that Parker won't need surgery, meaning he may be able to return later this season. Tests show he fractured the fourth metacarpal in his shooting hand Saturday during a victory at Memphis.

Parker was averaging 16.5 points per game, but has been hobbled all season by a slew of injuries. Now the Spurs will be without their second-leading scorer until at least the playoffs.

Parker was not with the Spurs for Monday's game at Cleveland. George Hill was expected to start in his place.OK, he's out for the regular season. Even the most optimistic fans here don't believe they are a team that's equipped to go deep in the playoffs, so he'll be out for the majority of their season. Happy now? ;)

texasdave
03-09-2010, 10:36 AM
OK, he's out for the regular season. Even the most optimistic fans here don't believe they are a team that's equipped to go deep in the playoffs, so he'll be out for the majority of their season. Happy now? ;)

I wouldn't want to face the Spurs in the post-season. I think they could
beat any team out there. I don't expect it too happen, but it wouldn't be all that big of a surprise to me.

texasdave
03-10-2010, 11:13 AM
Mike Dunleavy and the Los Angeles Clippers parted company for good Tuesday, barely a month after he relinquished his head coaching duties to focus solely on being general manager.

This story appears on CNNSI if anyone wants to read more. I thought this might make some folks around here happy.

MasonBuzz3
03-11-2010, 01:02 AM
mike dunleavy out in LA? I guess that means Lebron will be heading to los Clippers in 2010, they are gonna let him pick his coach and GM...right ESPN?

Oh yeah, and as I have been saying Boston is a joke. First round and out, easy

Unassisted
03-14-2010, 08:39 PM
Here's a good column from one of the local paper's beat writers talking about how the Mavericks' recent trade has shifted the balance of power in the Western Conference.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Trade_turns_around_Mavs_season.html


Nobody needs a high-powered computer to see the difference in the Mavericks since the Spurs' Southwest Division rival traded Josh Howard and Drew Gooden to the Wizards for center Brendan Haywood, forward Caron Butler and swingman DeShawn Stevenson.

Check the Mavs' record since the new players arrived: 13-2

Kingspoint
03-15-2010, 06:27 PM
Here's a good column from one of the local paper's beat writers talking about how the Mavericks' recent trade has shifted the balance of power in the Western Conference.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Trade_turns_around_Mavs_season.html

Then the Mavs go and lose at home by 30+ points to the lowly Knicks.

Oklahoma City is playing better basketball than anyone in the NBA right now.

Shocking.

MasonBuzz3
03-16-2010, 02:29 AM
Then the Mavs go and lose at home by 30+ points to the lowly Knicks.

Oklahoma City is playing better basketball than anyone in the NBA right now.

Shocking.

the thunder's young talent is really playing well....but give me the bucks or cavs as the nba's hottest. but who would have thought the OKC vs. charlotte match up would be the best St. Patty's Day game? The thunder are the new Blazers.

Kingspoint
03-16-2010, 07:17 PM
The thunder are the new Blazers.

Then the Thunder should get over 300 games lost to injuries next year like the Blazers have had this year instead of the less than 10 games that they've had this season.

Charlotte, winners of 6 straight, against OKC will be a good game.

Yes. Milwaukee has been hotter.

KoryMac5
03-16-2010, 07:40 PM
Then the Mavs go and lose at home by 30+ points to the lowly Knicks.

Oklahoma City is playing better basketball than anyone in the NBA right now.

Shocking.

So the Mavs win 13 in a row, longest streak in the NBA this season and after one loss they are no longer hot. Ummmm OK.

Kingspoint
03-16-2010, 09:24 PM
So the Mavs win 13 in a row, longest streak in the NBA this season and after one loss they are no longer hot. Ummmm OK.

What have you done for me lately?

They had a chance to separate themselves from the Nuggets and have sole possession of 2nd place against the lowly Knicks. Instead, nobody showed up for the game. Great teams don't do that. Kind of like when the Mavericks lost in the first round to the Warriors a couple of years ago after having a great regular season record. Let's see how they respond with a couple of home games they should win against Chicago (Wednesday) and Boston (Saturday).

Kingspoint
03-16-2010, 09:27 PM
One has to take everything with a grain of salt in the NBA this time of the year. ALWAYS one-third of the league has already given up. There are 9 teams right now that don't even bother showing up any more, so it's really easy to win 7 out of 10 or 8 out of 10 or 9 out of 10 for the Top 15 teams, if you're playing 5 of those 10 against those teams that have given up and a couple of home games against the other teams.


Milwaukee is getting some quality wins.

texasdave
03-16-2010, 11:27 PM
The Rockets helped out their Texas brethren by stealing one from the Nuggets up in Denver.

texasdave
03-16-2010, 11:33 PM
One has to take everything with a grain of salt in the NBA this time of the year. ALWAYS one-third of the league has already given up. There are 9 teams right now that don't even bother showing up any more, so it's really easy to win 7 out of 10 or 8 out of 10 or 9 out of 10 for the Top 15 teams, if you're playing 5 of those 10 against those teams that have given up and a couple of home games against the other teams.


Milwaukee is getting some quality wins.

Agreed. Incidentally, the Bucks remind me of the Rockets. No superstars, just a ton of solid players.

Kingspoint
03-17-2010, 04:51 AM
San Antonio looked like doo-doo most of the season, but they've really stepped it up the last month. I have no idea how they're doing it. Pure veteran determination is what it looks like. They don't have the talent anymore.

They kicked Miami's booty in Miami last night (Miami had won 6 in a row at home). I wouldn't be at all surprised if they win in Orlando St. Patrick's Day (tonight).

texasdave
03-17-2010, 02:33 PM
People have been writing off the Spurs prematurely. They will be a difficult matchup in the playoffs - with or without Tony Parker.

MasonBuzz3
03-21-2010, 01:59 AM
Then the Thunder should get over 300 games lost to injuries next year like the Blazers have had this year instead of the less than 10 games that they've had this season.


more of a statement about the abundance of young talent up and down the roster and expectations of the next contending team...next


One has to take everything with a grain of salt in the NBA this time of the year. ALWAYS one-third of the league has already given up. There are 9 teams right now that don't even bother showing up any more, so it's really easy to win 7 out of 10 or 8 out of 10 or 9 out of 10 for the Top 15 teams, if you're playing 5 of those 10 against those teams that have given up and a couple of home games against the other teams.


Milwaukee is getting some quality wins.

You are wrong. It's never "really easy" to win 7-9 out of 10 games, all NBA teams are talented and rarely "give up", but Milwaukee has been playing well...next


San Antonio looked like doo-doo most of the season, but they've really stepped it up the last month. I have no idea how they're doing it. Pure veteran determination is what it looks like. They don't have the talent anymore.

They kicked Miami's booty in Miami last night (Miami had won 6 in a row at home). I wouldn't be at all surprised if they win in Orlando St. Patrick's Day (tonight).

San Antonio is "doo-doo," beating Miami is not a quality win and Orlando owned the YMCA players of the NBA, not surprisingly to most NBA fans

maybe you're better at picking NCAA games?



People have been writing off the Spurs prematurely. They will be a difficult matchup in the playoffs - with or without Tony Parker.

I feel your hometown spirit, but the Spurs are done this year. The Parker injury is insignificant. It was the letdown of the Jefferson trade that doomed the Spurs. Pop is not a magician. They might have one run left in them with TD, Blair, Hill and Parker if they can bring back Manu and get younger.

Razor Shines
03-21-2010, 03:54 AM
Maybe you should predict that San Antonio will go 12-0 on their way to the finals this year. You know, just to ensure that they won't.

Unassisted
03-21-2010, 12:40 PM
San Antonio looked like doo-doo most of the season, but they've really stepped it up the last month. I have no idea how they're doing it. Pure veteran determination is what it looks like. They don't have the talent anymore.
The key is that Ginobili has fully recovered from the surgery on his ankles. He hadn't been the same since getting hurt in the '08 Olympics and he finally is able to play like the Manu of 2007 again.

Let's see what the next week brings them before we put any bets on them going deep in the playoffs. According to a column by one of the beat writers (http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Spurs_bracing_for_brutal_stretch_of_opponents.html ) in today's paper:


What the Spurs (41-26) face between tonight and next Sunday is an NBA murderer's row of opponents. Beginning with the Hawks at Philips Arena, the combined record of the Spurs' next five opponents, as of Saturday morning, was 236-106, a winning percentage of .690.

How many wins they get against that gauntlet of opponents should tell us a lot about what kind of Spurs team this is without Tony Parker.

Kingspoint
03-21-2010, 03:33 PM
You are wrong. It's never "really easy" to win 7-9 out of 10 games, all NBA teams are talented and rarely "give up", but Milwaukee has been playing well...next





I couldn't be more right, and you couldn't be more wrong that.

Every season the last 25 games are nothing but the haves and the have-nots. The have-nots have quit making any effort whatsoever when it comes to trying to win a basketball game. They are just "showing up and collecting their paychecks". They've already given up. No more proof is needed than the fact that every season 1/3rd of the league loses 8 of 10 games, 7 of 10 games and 9 of 10 games over the last 25 games of the season, where none of that occurs during the first 57 games. The teams that benefit from this are the Top 12 to 15 teams where instead of winning 5 of 10 and 6 of 10 games during the season like they normally do, they get to add two wins to that total that they would have lost. It started this year earlier than ever with 30 games left.

You also need no more proof than the fact it will happen again next year. At any point during the first 50 games next season you won't see more than 5 teams from the bottom of the league losing 8 of 10 games, but pick a point with 20 games left or later, and you'll see 9 teams on the bottom of the league in the midst of losing 8 of 10 games.

Kingspoint
03-21-2010, 03:34 PM
more of a statement about the abundance of young talent up and down the roster and expectations of the next contending team...next





Not sure what you're talking about there.

It's just luck if there's injuries or not.

Kingspoint
03-21-2010, 03:36 PM
all NBA teams are talented....



Not!

No more than the Pirates are "talented" the way the Yankees and RedSox are "talented".

There are a lot of teams in the NBA with very little talent.

Kingspoint
03-21-2010, 03:47 PM
The key is that Ginobili has fully recovered from the surgery on his ankles. He hadn't been the same since getting hurt in the '08 Olympics and he finally is able to play like the Manu of 2007 again.

Let's see what the next week brings them before we put any bets on them going deep in the playoffs. According to a column by one of the beat writers (http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/Spurs_bracing_for_brutal_stretch_of_opponents.html ) in today's paper:



How many wins they get against that gauntlet of opponents should tell us a lot about what kind of Spurs team this is without Tony Parker.

With the Spurs schedule coming up, there isn't a team in the NBA that could go better than .500....not Cleveland, not the Lakers, not Orlando, not Denver.

They've already had some real "quality wins" over the last 4 weeks: @ Miami by 12, (lost @ Cleveland by 2), @ Memphis by 10, OKC by 8, @ Denver by 19, where OKC hasn't had the "qualtiy wins" over the last 4 weks: They've won home games against Utah and Dallas, and @ Toronto, but that's it.

OKC will lose a lot of games going forward as their schedule finally gets tough:

Home games against SA, LA, POR, DEN, PHO and road games @ BOS, @ DAL, @ UTA, @ POR. There's 5 losses at least, probably 6 losses. All of that in a 3-week period. They won't get those patsy games that they've had the last month.

Unassisted
03-23-2010, 05:31 PM
With the Spurs schedule coming up, there isn't a team in the NBA that could go better than .500....not Cleveland, not the Lakers, not Orlando, not Denver.

They've already had some real "quality wins" over the last 4 weeks: @ Miami by 12, (lost @ Cleveland by 2), @ Memphis by 10, OKC by 8, @ Denver by 19, where OKC hasn't had the "qualtiy wins" over the last 4 weks: They've won home games against Utah and Dallas, and @ Toronto, but that's it.
The games they split over the last 2 nights were a real grind. Duncan and Ginobili each racked up 76 minutes over the span. It'll be tough for them to be competitive against the Lakers or Cleveland with both of those guys worn out. I wonder if Popovich will dare to try to sit Duncan for either game.

On the plus side, George Hill looks pretty good at the point and some of the guys who've underperformed this season, especially Jefferson and Mason, are starting to contribute.

texasdave
03-23-2010, 11:57 PM
Didn't see this one coming. =)


Zydrunas Ilgauskas' agent called Cavaliers general manager Danny Ferry at 8:30 a.m. Monday, the first day Ilgauskas was eligible to re-sign with Cleveland.

It took a little longer than expected -- the deal wasn't announced until Tuesday afternoon -- but Ilgauskas is back with the only team he has ever known.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/basketball/nba/03/23/ilgauskas.cavaliers.ap/index.html?eref=sihp

Captain Hook
03-24-2010, 12:17 AM
Didn't see this one coming. =)



http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/basketball/nba/03/23/ilgauskas.cavaliers.ap/index.html?eref=sihp

I really don't like how some of these salary dump trades work out where the team trying to strengthen there roster is able to acquire better talent along with not even loosing the player they traded in the first place.I guess no one else that was contending wanted Z so it's not a real big deal.

I'm happy for Z though since this really seems like it could be the year the Cavs win it all.Z's been around a long time and it would be fitting to see him get a ring before hanging it up or disappearing to the end of the bench.

UKFlounder
03-24-2010, 08:33 AM
I actually think Dallas was interested in him, but he made it clear that he intended to go back to Cleveland, so there was no official negotiating with them.

I agree that this type of transaction stinks. Hopefully they find a way to change it (but does the league want to change it? Do they like it as is?)


I really don't like how some of these salary dump trades work out where the team trying to strengthen there roster is able to acquire better talent along with not even loosing the player they traded in the first place.I guess no one else that was contending wanted Z so it's not a real big deal.

I'm happy for Z though since this really seems like it could be the year the Cavs win it all.Z's been around a long time and it would be fitting to see him get a ring before hanging it up or disappearing to the end of the bench.

TeamSelig
03-24-2010, 10:40 AM
I don't see anything wrong with those trades. The Wizards didn't HAVE to release Z

Revering4Blue
03-24-2010, 08:18 PM
The hits just keep coming for the New Jersey Nets. Their owner and land developer Bruce Ratner got a special message today he'll likely never forget when someone hacked into an electronic traffic sign near his Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn. The sign at the corner of Flatbush and St. Marks avenues in Prospect Heights was tampered with in time for the morning rush and wasn't fixed until several hours later at about 10 am -- but not before many drivers and pedestrians got an eyeful.

Note: This is not my preferred method of expressing dissent.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/ratner_greeted_with_not_so_welcoming_J9QG48qBu0j6u M589wpmOM#ixzz0j2WHtV%20hm

improbus
03-27-2010, 09:39 AM
One of the biggest and most pleasant surprises has been the blossoming of Andrew Bogut. The attention this season has been placed on Brnadon Jennings, but it is Bogut's rebounding, defense, physicality, and effeciency that has pushed the Bucks into the playoffs. He is really starting to play like a #1 overall pick. I would currently rank him as the 4th best pure center in the league.
1: Howard
2: Yao (when healthy)
3: Gasol (and it is arguable that he is more of a PF)
4: Bogut
5: Kaman

Kingspoint
03-28-2010, 10:56 PM
As expected......

San Antonio continues to win games they "weren't supposed to" win, as they are a different breed and took their game to another level....as expected.

As expected......

Oklahoma City is falling in the standings as they play tougher games that other teams had already played earlier in the year and their youth is showing themselves....as expected.

When it's all said and done. Oklahoma City will be the 8th seed, while San Antonio and Portland share the 6th/7th seeds.

The cream will rise to the top among Utah, Denver, Dallas, and Phoenix, all currently separated by just one game in the loss column. The loser of the 4 loses out on home court in the 1st Round, while the Top 2 of these four won't have to face the Lakers until the 3rd Round. Those top 2 teams should be Denver and Phoenix.

RedLakerFan24
03-29-2010, 12:33 PM
Lakers are going to be champions again, just face it guys, Kobe Bryant going to win his
5th Ring, Lebron going to NY in the offseason, oh man, its going to be great

KoryMac5
04-04-2010, 12:01 PM
So much for the Bucks chances in the playoffs:


A source said early Sunday that Bogut suffered a dislocated right elbow, sprained wrist and broken right hand and would likely undergo surgery.

Kingspoint
04-04-2010, 03:14 PM
Lakers are going to be champions again, just face it guys, Kobe Bryant going to win his
5th Ring, Lebron going to NY in the offseason, oh man, its going to be great

The Fakers won't get out of the Western Conference.