buzzcut

2018 NBA "Off"Season-Because It's Always On

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Wings said:

Magic says he'll resign if the Lakers miss out on top free agents. 

Key note that you might have missed is he'll use the next two seasons to try and lure in free agents and if he doesn't THEN he'll leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, WBeltz said:

Key note that you might have missed is he'll use the next two seasons to try and lure in free agents and if he doesn't THEN he'll leave.

No. I read the story. It was just a general post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dfwabel said:

 

Gross. Did you ever watch the NBA Fan-only broadcasts? They're brutal and I can't expect this to be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2018 at 8:08 PM, Lights Out said:

The Nepotism Era is over in LA. Austin Rivers has been traded to the Wizards for Marcin Gortat.

Gotta say, with the caveat of me being not a huge Wizards fan, I like this trade. Even I knew that the Wizards have struggled mightily with bench scoring the last couple of years. Rivers should provide that. Assuming they acquire another center, be it Boogie Cousins or Nerlens Noel, this is a solid trade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Crabcake47 said:

Gotta say, with the caveat of me being not a huge Wizards fan, I like this trade. Even I knew that the Wizards have struggled mightily with bench scoring the last couple of years. Rivers should provide that. Assuming they acquire another center, be it Boogie Cousins or Nerlens Noel, this is a solid trade. 

Don't expect much from Austin other than making pull-up threes at a surprisingly decent rate. When his shot isn't falling, he's basically unplayable. He won't contribute in other ways like creating for others, getting rebounds, playing defense, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather have LeBron, George, Ingram, Randle, Lonzo and Hart/Kuzma off the bench than LeBron, George, Kawhi, Lonzo, and a bunch of G-Leaguers. The Warriors have shown the last two years that you win with depth. It's cool to have a big three, but then what?

 

Plus who the hell knows where Kawhi's head is at. He's as likely to be an MVP as he is the next Bison Dele. Can you trust him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, DG_Now said:

I'd rather have LeBron, George, Ingram, Randle, Lonzo and Hart/Kuzma off the bench than LeBron, George, Kawhi, Lonzo, and a bunch of G-Leaguers. The Warriors have shown the last two years that you win with depth. It's cool to have a big three, but then what?

 

Plus who the hell knows where Kawhi's head is at. He's as likely to be an MVP as he is the next Bison Dele. Can you trust him?

If they trade for Kawaii I'd figure that they would rather send Ball out rather Kuzma; Ball certainly has the higher upside of the two as a player but Kuzma fits a Lebron-centric team much better.  Also, I'd imagine they would be able to assemble a decent surrounding cast of ring-chasing vets like the Big 3 Heat so the depth gap between the two scenarios isn't all that drastic.

 

Plus, I think Lebron really needs Kawaii or a similar caliber player to join up with to make the LA move feasible.  Sure, Paul George is good, but he really isn't much of an improvement (if he is at all) over Kevin Love.  If he can't get Kawaii, Chris Paul, or even Boogie to join him then the Lakers are at best a lateral move for him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George plays defense.

 

LeBron plus the defense of Kawhi, Ball and George would be pretty amazing to watch. It would be the exact opposite of the Cavs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Kawhi really should end up in Boston. They have much more attractive pieces to offer San Antonio than the Lakers do.

 

I still think the Celtics' current ceiling is just shy of being a championship calibre team. They need that top-five player to get them over the hump. That's Kawhi. I know it'd be a short-term gamble that he'd want to stay, but I really think they should go all-in on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, crashcarson15 said:

 

Kawhi really should end up in Boston. They have much more attractive pieces to offer San Antonio than the Lakers do.

 

I still think the Celtics' current ceiling is just shy of being a championship calibre team. They need that top-five player to get them over the hump. That's Kawhi. I know it'd be a short-term gamble that he'd want to stay, but I really think they should go all-in on him.

 

The Celtics were just shy of being a championship caliber team last season with Kyrie Irving out for the playoffs and Gordon Hayward out for the entire season. They'll be back next year, Tatum will be in year two and Brown in year three. The Celtics will be just fine.

 

Kawhi is a socially awkward dope who has his family run his entire life for him. He would be a disaster in Boston, or any other market big enough to get him the shoe deal he/his uncle wants. Trading for him is a terrible idea. I don't know why any sane franchise would give up anything of value for a guy currently embroiled in some pissant one-man rebellion against one of the most structured and reputable organizations in sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, who do you think said:

 

The Celtics were just shy of being a championship caliber team last season

lol

 

Boston wasn't close to being on the same level as Golden State or Houston last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, crashcarson15 said:

lol

 

Boston wasn't close to being on the same level as Golden State or Houston last year.

They were within one game of making the NBA Finals, no?

 

They had 10 less wins than Houston, and 3 less than Golden State.

 

They went 1-1 against both and had a higher winner percentage against the WC than Golden State.

 

Would they have beaten either team in the Finals? We don't know that. Maybe they could have won a game or two. That's as close as you can get to being championship caliber (especially considering so much of your cap being eaten by two people not playing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, crashcarson15 said:

lol

 

Boston wasn't close to being on the same level as Golden State or Houston last year.

 

lol

 

They came within one game of reaching the NBA finals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, who do you think said:

 

lol

 

They came within one game of reaching the NBA finals.

Look, I'm a Cavs fan, and I'll be the first to admit they weren't a championship-calibre team this season. If you're going to call the Celtics championship-calibre, then so are the Pacers, which I most certainly wouldn't do.

 

3 minutes ago, fnz said:

They were within one game of making the NBA Finals, no?

 

They had 10 less wins than Houston, and 3 less than Golden State.

 

They went 1-1 against both and had a higher winner percentage against the WC than Golden State.

 

Would they have beaten either team in the Finals? We don't know that. Maybe they could have won a game or two. That's as close as you can get to being championship caliber (especially considering so much of your cap being eaten by two people not playing)

Relying on regular-season win totals or results as a gauge of team calibre seems misplaced, unless you're going to argue that the Raptors are a better team than the Warriors.

 

Again, if the Cavaliers were truly a championship-calibre team (or close to a championship-calibre team), why would LeBron even entertain leaving? They aren't, they aren't particularly close, and neither was Boston last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing the argument here is that the Celtics with a healthy Kyrie and Hayward would be able to compete against the Rockets and Dubs in the finals, not that the 2018 playoff team was championship caliber (which IMO is a laughable statement).

 

I'm not so sure if it would be the case, since I think Hayward's absence let Tatum and Brown grow in a way that may not have happened if they were reduced to complimentary players around a Kyrie/Hayward/Horford core.  Now, I think the Celtics as currently constructed are on the Rocket's level and match up well against the Warriors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, crashcarson15 said:

Look, I'm a Cavs fan, and I'll be the first to admit they weren't a championship-calibre team this season. If you're going to call the Celtics championship-calibre, then so are the Pacers, which I most certainly wouldn't do.

 

Relying on regular-season win totals or results as a gauge of team calibre seems misplaced, unless you're going to argue that the Raptors are a better team than the Warriors.

 

Again, if the Cavaliers were truly a championship-calibre team (or close to a championship-calibre team), why would LeBron even entertain leaving? They aren't, they aren't particularly close, and neither was Boston last year.

I only used regular season wins because everyone always says the Eastern conference is too easy, so I used the only comparable WC for both teams.

 

But if we're ranking the NBA teams, it's not like the Cavs or Celtics are 25th/26th on the list, they were both top 6/7 at worst last season (but yes the jump between 1&2 to 3-7 is sizable). The Cavs could be close to championship caliber - any team that has Lebron certainly is - and we all know the reason Lebron would entertain free agency is that the Cavs have no assets to trade away, or wiggle room to make changes and improve. So many people say the Celtics are one star away from being a real Finals team. That is literally as close as you can get to being championship caliber in today's NBA. I really don't think the initial statement was that laughable. That one star could really be either of the guys coming back from injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, fnz said:

I only used regular season wins because everyone always says the Eastern conference is too easy, so I used the only comparable WC for both teams.

 

But if we're ranking the NBA teams, it's not like the Cavs or Celtics are 25th/26th on the list, they were both top 6/7 at worst last season (but yes the jump between 1&2 to 3-7 is sizable). The Cavs could be close to championship caliber - any team that has Lebron certainly is - and we all know the reason Lebron would entertain free agency is that the Cavs have no assets to trade away, or wiggle room to make changes and improve. So many people say the Celtics are one star away from being a real Finals team. That is literally as close as you can get to being championship caliber in today's NBA. I really don't think the initial statement was that laughable. That one star could really be either of the guys coming back from injury.

FWIW, I have the Cavs as the third-best team in the NBA and the Celtics as fourth-best. Neither is particularly close to the top two in my eyes.

 

To me, a team that's "just shy" of being championship-calibre would be a team that's a role player signing or a minor trade away from championship-calibre, and yeah, I think the idea that the Celtics were one tweak away from being able to seriously compete with Golden State in the Finals is a little laughable. Maybe we're working under different definitions here, I don't know.

 

I also think we know the answer as to whether or not that "one star" could be Irving -- it's not. The Celtics had him for most of the regular season, and I don't remember there being this huge idea in January or February (whenever it was before Kyrie had surgery) that the Celtics were good enough to beat the Warriors with him. Obviously, I think perceptions of the Boston role players have changed, and they're expected to continue to improve, but I also think there's typically odd things that happen when key players are out. Matthew Dellavedova and Timofey Mozgov looked great and stole two Finals games against Golden State in 2015, and neither were on the court much in 2016 when the Cavs won, and neither of them have played anywhere near that level since.

 

If I strike Irving, that leaves Hayward, who I love as a player, but he's not better than Irving even if he does come back to 100%.

 

IMO, the Celtics profile as, like, the third- or fourth-best team in the NBA for the foreseeable future. In most sports, that's good enough to get yourself a title, but I'm not convinced it is in the NBA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, crashcarson15 said:

FWIW, I have the Cavs as the third-best team in the NBA and the Celtics as fourth-best. Neither is particularly close to the top two in my eyes.

 

To me, a team that's "just shy" of being championship-calibre would be a team that's a role player signing or a minor trade away from championship-calibre, and yeah, I think the idea that the Celtics were one tweak away from being able to seriously compete with Golden State in the Finals is a little laughable. Maybe we're working under different definitions here, I don't know.

 

I also think we know the answer as to whether or not that "one star" could be Irving -- it's not. The Celtics had him for most of the regular season, and I don't remember there being this huge idea in January or February (whenever it was before Kyrie had surgery) that the Celtics were good enough to beat the Warriors with him. Obviously, I think perceptions of the Boston role players have changed, and they're expected to continue to improve, but I also think there's typically odd things that happen when key players are out. Matthew Dellavedova and Timofey Mozgov looked great and stole two Finals games against Golden State in 2015, and neither were on the court much in 2016 when the Cavs won, and neither of them have played anywhere near that level since.

 

If I strike Irving, that leaves Hayward, who I love as a player, but he's not better than Irving even if he does come back to 100%.

 

IMO, the Celtics profile as, like, the third- or fourth-best team in the NBA for the foreseeable future. In most sports, that's good enough to get yourself a title, but I'm not convinced it is in the NBA.

This makes sense (I kept having this false memory that Kyrie played like 8 games this season). I just think getting to Finals is a major step, and there anything can happen (Cleveland proved this in 2016), and that Brad Stevens is the type of guy who can make up for those "on paper" differences between teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crashcarson15 said:

Look, I'm a Cavs fan, and I'll be the first to admit they weren't a championship-calibre team this season. If you're going to call the Celtics championship-calibre, then so are the Pacers, which I most certainly wouldn't do.

 

Are you gonna show off those mental gymnastics at the next Olympics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now