NBA Changes 2016-17 Season

[BBTV]

24 minutes ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

Man, the Blazers have had some terrible luck with promising high potential draft picks going down ... Brandon Roy, Greg Oden, Yet they've still remained competitive. 

 

Competitive for what?  I don't really follow the NBA, but are they ever really in the discussion of legit title contenders?

 

The Sixers could have been "competitive", but there's nothing to gain by being a playoff team that's not really a contender.  You're not going to win, chances are you have a few ridiculously over paid veteran contracts, and you don't get any lottery balls.

 

It's arguable that it's actually worse to be the 5th best team than it is to be the worst team.

 

As for the draft, of course there's always the Tom Brady exceptions, but for the NBA it seems like you either get the #1 pick or you just need to really hope to get lucky.

[Tracy MidGrady]

Portland lost 4/5 starters last offseason and still won 44 games. There's no exact formula to being a contender,  acquiring premier talent playing elite defense and offense is your best bet but still there's no proven methodology of doing that. The notation that tanking is better than making the playoffs is false, the Thunder got a generational in KD and reached and got lucky with Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka. GSW were a 5th seed two years ago, the last champion that tanked was Boston, and they didn't keep any of their picks.

[VikWings]

5 hours ago, The Wolf Within said:

Durant was the #2 pick. Greg Oden went first to the Trailblazers. That didn't end well.

 

Typo. But either way the point still stands.

[JESSEDIEBOLT]

22 hours ago, Thomas said:

people on Facebook might get over it, but we here on this forum will not. That is the whole point of us signing up for this place, our love of sports and sports uniforms. And when someone pisses on our passion, we have every right to be upset and angry.

 

I get that. You can be angry...but I also have the right to say it's not that big of a deal.

 

21 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

You might.  I don't - or at least I don't wear conflicting logos.  My workout shirts have a UA logo or swoosh on them - so yeah, I voluntarily wear those - but the logo isn't infringing on another logo that's the focal point of the shirt.

 

As for the Ralph Lauren logo - it looks absurd on polo shirts - it's an ad, but we've been so conditioned for so long to expect some design there, so most people don't even realize that they're a billboard for a private company.  I've never seen it on a dress shirt, but that would be even more ridiculous, because you'd have to go way out of your way to find a dress shirt that had that logo, since literally 99.9% of them don't have any logo.

 

When I'm dressed for work, the brand I'm representing is my own.  I'm me.  My clothes are a part of my personal brand.  Until I'm famous enough for Ralph Lauren to pay me to endorse his shirts and wear the logo, you won't see it on my body.  That's for real.

 

 

I actually don't wear logos that often but society as a whole does. Whether or not one logo is interfering with another is besides the point...you're still wearing a logo.

 

20 hours ago, joey joe joe jr. shabadoo said:

 

Nope. They crossed my red line.

 

To me they are sacred, and I hope the uprising is loud and angry. Maybe it will be, maybe it wont be...but the NHL/MLB/NFL will no longer be getting a penny from me if the follow suit.

 

I dont have a dog in the fight regarding the NBA, let them continue to be a laughingstock...but they cannot let this drech spread. The NFL is already dangerously close to really upsetting its fan base with its petty uniform games and gimmicks. I think they're ok, but if you think Steeler nation or Eagles or Jets fans will tolerate a playtex patch on those uniforms you are sadly mistaken.

 

Fine, don't even think about sports ever again. Don't watch, read or associate with it at all. Maybe the ads will stick around and maybe the won't. Regardless, the players will keep on playing and sports will continue to grow. 

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

5 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Competitive for what?  I don't really follow the NBA, but are they ever really in the discussion of legit title contenders?

 

The Sixers could have been "competitive", but there's nothing to gain by being a playoff team that's not really a contender.  You're not going to win, chances are you have a few ridiculously over paid veteran contracts, and you don't get any lottery balls.

 

It's arguable that it's actually worse to be the 5th best team than it is to be the worst team.

 

As for the draft, of course there's always the Tom Brady exceptions, but for the NBA it seems like you either get the #1 pick or you just need to really hope to get lucky.

 

You know what I mean. They've been in the playoffs 6 of the past 8 years. Would you rather your team make the playoffs consistently or be a perennial bottom feeder? 

[BBTV]

19 minutes ago, tigerslionspistonshabs said:

 

You know what I mean. They've been in the playoffs 6 of the past 8 years. Would you rather your team make the playoffs consistently or be a perennial bottom feeder? 

 

Those aren't the only two choices.  

[Lights Out]

11 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Competitive for what?  I don't really follow the NBA, but are they ever really in the discussion of legit title contenders?

The Blazers have actually won a championship (in 1977), which is more than most NBA teams can say. They made the Finals two more times in the early '90s. Then they assembled one of the most stacked teams in recent memory in the late '90s, but had the misfortune of running into prime Duncan and prime Shaq and letting a dunce like Mike Dunleavy "coach" the team.

 

The "Jail Blazers" era is where their franchise started to fall off. The clear demarcation point was the 2003-04 season: before then, they had only missed the playoffs once in the previous 27 years; a run that included the aforementioned championship and Finals appearances. Since that season, they've missed the playoffs seven times and only won two series - one unfortunately coming against the hobbled Clippers this year.

 

That being said, if Roy and Oden had ever been able to stay healthy, or if the Blazers had picked Durant instead of Oden, they might have returned to their former glory.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

14 hours ago, VikWings said:

 

What? OKC is exactly what the Sixers are trying to become. They got Durant #1 overall and then Westbrook and Harden the next two years at 4th and 3rd respectively.

 

The Sixers picked Nerlens Noel at 6, Joel Embiid at 2, and Jahlil Okafor at 3.

 

Other players they could have had include Steven Adams, Giannis, Rudy Gobert, Marcus Smart, Julius Randle, Zach LaVine, Justice Winslow, Stanley Johnson, and so on. They also could have not picked three F/C in a row.

 

The point is 1.) they could be the Thunder by drafting well and 2) OKC didn't stock the team with #1 picks but instead smart picks throughout the draft. Minnesota took OJ Mayo over Westbrook. Philadelphia took Noel over Adams. For a guy whose whole deal was stockpiling draft picks, Sam Hinkie had no clue what to do with them.

 

11 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

Competitive for what?  I don't really follow the NBA, but are they ever really in the discussion of legit title contenders?

 

The Sixers could have been "competitive", but there's nothing to gain by being a playoff team that's not really a contender.  You're not going to win, chances are you have a few ridiculously over paid veteran contracts, and you don't get any lottery balls.

 

It's arguable that it's actually worse to be the 5th best team than it is to be the worst team.

 

As for the draft, of course there's always the Tom Brady exceptions, but for the NBA it seems like you either get the #1 pick or you just need to really hope to get lucky.

 

You've lived in Philly too long. In what sport is it better to lose all the time rather than contend? If you're in the playoffs and the other team's star player goes down, anything can happen. If your Super Bowl is the draft lottery year after year, you're doing it wrong.

[JayMac]

The NBA is a different beast. There are probably only a number of championship contenders that you can usually count on one hand. So it really is arguable to finish near the bottom to have the chance to get a lottery pick rather than make the playoffs as a 4-8 seed. In any other sport, you really have a shot to advance far into the playoffs as a lower seed. 

 

Back on topic, the ads are harmless and small now but it is a slippery slope. Also, since it's a trial period, what gets the Association to stop? Fan backlash? Probably not. It will make the Association money so I see it only getting worse.

[BBTV]

8 hours ago, DG_Now said:

 

The Sixers picked Nerlens Noel at 6, Joel Embiid at 2, and Jahlil Okafor at 3.

 

Other players they could have had include Steven Adams, Giannis, Rudy Gobert, Marcus Smart, Julius Randle, Zach LaVine, Justice Winslow, Stanley Johnson, and so on. They also could have not picked three F/C in a row.

 

The point is 1.) they could be the Thunder by drafting well and 2) OKC didn't stock the team with #1 picks but instead smart picks throughout the draft. Minnesota took OJ Mayo over Westbrook. Philadelphia took Noel over Adams. For a guy whose whole deal was stockpiling draft picks, Sam Hinkie had no clue what to do with them.

 

 

You've lived in Philly too long. In what sport is it better to lose all the time rather than contend? If you're in the playoffs and the other team's star player goes down, anything can happen. If your Super Bowl is the draft lottery year after year, you're doing it wrong.

 

Nobody ever said its better to lose all the time - just that it gets to a point where making playoffs every year but not really having a chance to win just sucks. 

 

It's easy to make the playoffs - you almost have to try not to. In the NBA unless you get super lucky, you'll never improve from 8th seed to champion. Scoring a player with the #10 pick in the nba draft is like the Patriots getting lucky with Tom Brady in the 6th round. 

 

I don't recall any of those Players you mentioned being discussed as possible top picks, and in terms of drafting "best available", nobody argued with the Sixers selections (exception of embiid, due to the injury). 

 

It's true that you need to know what to do with your picks - and maybe Hinkie didn't - we don't really know. We do know that they had a shot at having the 1 and 4 pick this year, and two other (albeit worthless) #1s. Now with actual basketball guys running it (though those guys that everyone is jerking off about haven't actually accomplished anything either) we'll see how it goes. 

[The_Admiral]

Is there something that needs fixing in the college game wherein anyone drafted after #5, out of all the hundreds of guys playing NCAA ball, is to be dismissed as a bum who will never amount to anything?

[VikWings]

43 minutes ago, the admiral said:

Is there something that needs fixing in the college game wherein anyone drafted after #5, out of all the hundreds of guys playing NCAA ball, is to be dismissed as a bum who will never amount to anything?

 

Yes. Everyone is leaving school before they're ready to chase the money.

 

The NBA could/should adopt the baseball rule. You can come out after high school, but if you go to college you have to stay at least 3 years. But unfortunately if they did that more and more players would just skip college altogether and really not be ready for the pros. It's not an easy fix.

[ScubaSteve]

10 hours ago, DG_Now said:

 

You've lived in Philly too long. In what sport is it better to lose all the time rather than contend? If you're in the playoffs and the other team's star player goes down, anything can happen. If your Super Bowl is the draft lottery year after year, you're doing it wrong.

 

Listen, I get what you're saying. But the thing that people forget is that the Sixers, throughout the history, have predominantly been a bad to awful team. We've had our years of exception, of course, but with the NBA we've had very little success. So for us, we have the patience, we just want to see it done right. We don't have to "win now" because we've never really won before (Championship aside).

[The_Admiral]

37 minutes ago, VikWings said:

 

Yes. Everyone is leaving school before they're ready to chase the money.

 

The NBA could/should adopt the baseball rule. You can come out after high school, but if you go to college you have to stay at least 3 years. But unfortunately if they did that more and more players would just skip college altogether and really not be ready for the pros. It's not an easy fix.

 

Draft players out of high school, retain their rights while they play in college without signing them or sign them and assign them to the D-League. I'd watch more college games to watch Bulls prospects develop.

[usulkane]

10 hours ago, DG_Now said:

 

The Sixers picked Nerlens Noel at 6, Joel Embiid at 2, and Jahlil Okafor at 3.

 

Other players they could have had include Steven Adams, Giannis, Rudy Gobert, Marcus Smart, Julius Randle, Zach LaVine, Justice Winslow, Stanley Johnson, and so on. They also could have not picked three F/C in a row.

 

The point is 1.) they could be the Thunder by drafting well and 2) OKC didn't stock the team with #1 picks but instead smart picks throughout the draft. Minnesota took OJ Mayo over Westbrook. Philadelphia took Noel over Adams. For a guy whose whole deal was stockpiling draft picks, Sam Hinkie had no clue what to do with them.

 

 

?? The sixers didn't pick Nerlens Noel over anyone....In fact The sixers didn't even draft Noel. They traded Jrue Holiday and  2nd rounder  -and received Noel and the 10th pick in the 2014 draft. It was a very good trade. 

 

 

10 hours ago, DG_Now said:

 

 

[JayMac]

41 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

Draft players out of high school, retain their rights while they play in college without signing them or sign them and assign them to the D-League. I'd watch more college games to watch Bulls prospects develop.

I like this idea a lot. It would bring back the excitement to college basketball. Maybe even help out the D-League.

[Lights Out]

3 hours ago, the admiral said:

Is there something that needs fixing in the college game wherein anyone drafted after #5, out of all the hundreds of guys playing NCAA ball, is to be dismissed as a bum who will never amount to anything?

It's mostly just ignorance on the part of fans, coaches and GMs who are still stuck in the old-school mentality. Steph Curry went 7th overall, Dirk went 9th, Kawhi Leonard went 15th, Steve Nash went 15th, Manu Ginobili was drafted in the second round, etc. In fairness, there are also terrible drafts like 2000 where even the top 5 have questionable talent.

 

It's still better to secure the highest draft pick possible in order to have the most options, but the idea that there's no talent outside of the top five every year is stupid.

[BBTV]

2 hours ago, usulkane said:

 

 

?? The sixers didn't pick Nerlens Noel over anyone....In fact The sixers didn't even draft Noel. They traded Jrue Holiday and  2nd rounder  -and received Noel and the 10th pick in the 2014 draft. It was a very good trade. 

 

 

 

 

Come on.  You know how it works (another stupid NBA thing.)  They drafted Noel.  The trade was done, it just wasn't allowed to be announced for some dumb reason.

 

Also, at the time, everybody nationally and locally thought Noel was a steal there. 

[DG_ThenNowForever]

Just to circle back on my original point, I don't think the Hinkie plan was as sophisticated as some of the Sixers fans thought it was. They viewed the #1 pick as a silver bullet, and sometimes it is. Except that Duncan without Parker and Manu and Leonard probably doesn't win 4 additional titles. Those guys were all value picks.

 

For Hinkie, tanking for high picks was the end of his strategy. Scouting and drafting well weren't there. And scorching the franchise behind him was a bad idea too, because it makes Sixers money worth less than other franchises. Yes, basketball is different than other sports in that one player can have outsized impact on the court. However, the other guys matter too, and the silver bullet approach isn't really an approach at all. It's simple mindedness posing as revolutionary thinking.

[eRay]

3 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

Draft players out of high school, retain their rights while they play in college without signing them or sign them and assign them to the D-League. I'd watch more college games to watch Bulls prospects develop.

This would indeed be a way to get more casual eyes on college basketball, but NCAA might have a problem with professional franchises with insane amounts of money, having direct interest in the well-being of college players. They don't allow a couple dollars going from school to a player's parents for rent, what happens when the Kings send three trainers, 2 tutors, a nutritionist, and the player's family to live just off the Baylor campus to look-over their soon-to-be best player?