truepg

You see, I get the logic behind why they are allowing it. It's yet another means to continuously sell as many different jerseys as possible and generate revenue – the same reason that black (and navy) are shoehorned into and made dominant in so many teams' identities – and in case of shoes, to provide a platform to showcase and market the models/colorways to boost their sales. It's just that all that is happening at the expense of aesthetics and professional image of the product. Similarly as the game itself that is played in the NBA is currently dictated by the analytics maximizing efficiency, which in turn results in a gameplay that is not pretty at all nor fun to watch (one could argue if at all watchable). There has to be a certain limit, though, an extent, to which you take advantage of the strategic opportunities, while still maintaining a professional and attractive appearance and gameplay that is pleasing and interesting to watch, respectively. A certain amount of balance, so to speak. But, as long as the current state of things sells, it will stay the way it is. Unless the dissatisfaction reaches some really noticeable levels. But will it ever?

Well, yeah, the shoes have been such an eyesore and have cheapened the look (alongside the current uniform policy and ever-changing one-and-done alternates) the last few years ever since they allowed to wear any color you want, and the players have taken full advantage of that. I'm not even advocating for only black/dark or white with accents as it used to be with that Hardaway situation, all I'm saying is stick to team colors. There is plenty of room to show individuality and style within those conditions.

Maybe there wasn't a strict rule in place (even though I'd argue there was), but the NBA used to have a clear uniform protocol where the home team wore a white (light) uniform, and the visitor wore dark that was always adhered to, apart from just some very few singular exceptions. It not only acted as a professional standard for the league, the way things were done, but foremost was also a direct indicator of which the home team was of the two. On another note, same applies to shoes. It's a total mess and a clown-show now that they let players wear colors that don't belong to or fully contradict the team brand, as they often do. It was such a nice and refreshing experience taking a glimpse into international level competition just recently, where they wear shoes matching their uniform colors. So professional-looking and stylish.

Because "doing whatever you want" is not an attribute of a professional context.

I'm ok with the Wolves wearing the classics at home in this case instead of their regular whites, since those aren't any better. Would've definitely been nice to see the Magic wear their throwbacks too. I even forgot there was a navy Knicks uni, that's how pointless and irrelevant it is. What about the Cavs – so, after they shoved the dark uniforms at home thing down the throat this season, they're all of a sudden wearing white both at home and on the road? I miss the days when the NBA had a professional uniform designation that made sense and instantly indicated the home team so much.

No, it isn’t, but I don’t see any reason why they had to come up with this. I’m sure there was a primary logo version with the wordmark included. And it’s not like they had to add a basketball, the logo already featured a basketball motif in the form of the rim. Looking at the original font now, it sure does look a bit too Chinese in style, but it could’ve been just updated and streamlined to an extent. I like that overall character style for the Rockets which the R logo has too. The Agency font, on the other hand, is too bland, and has been that for the Pacers as much.

It's just that the Rockets shouldn't be using black to begin with. They jumped on the black bandwagon only during the last ten years and similarly to several other teams eventually dragged it all over their identity. Eliminate black, and all of a sudden there is one red & black team less. I never liked the yellow for the Rockets, and the 00s' color scheme felt just right. At the end of the day, just throwing thoughts around, the red & blue color scheme and style seen on the City(?) uni could work equally well with powder blue instead, if they ever wanted to take that route, now that the Clippers failed to capitalize on it.

Agree on the throwback unis. But I, for one, think that the Wolves had established a look of their own, which is the green tree trim pattern, first and foremost, and that grayish blue and black base colors.

Other than the LA-monogram, I suggest a swap. The parent club logos are farm league level, can have them all down to the compass C. Add another secondary logo with the script capital C wrapping around the sail shape, and we're good. I bet the farm club logos was the direction the design agency wanted for the main rebrand, and the path taken instead was the "vision" of the ownership.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, should've been the basis for the main team's logo. As if someone was writing down all the notes after the official unveil for this....

Yes, but teams tend to use simpler and more convenient fonts for their websites and other digital appearance and communications... At the end of the day, it might be just a choice for a particular graphic layout style, similar as what the Lakers have done on their social media posts, for example:

Maybe there's something I don't know, but that doesn't look like anything out of their brand.

Without the unnecessary basketball lines and that "LA" crammed into the sail, this is a better view on the structure of the logo. It only further shows, though, that this kind of a logo is totally unsuitable for the Los Angeles Clippers. They should've made a primary logo using their script wordmarks and focused on the sails alone as the symbol.

Their regular sets were always overthought and over-designed from the beginning (just like the new Clippers logo) and didn't really work, even though there were some interesting elements thought up for the updated identity at the time. So a new design has long been looked forward to. (I had to actually check if those regular sets were still relevant, since I don't remember when I last saw them worn because of all the City-and-what-not uniform mess that is constantly used instead.)

Now that we see the complete package, there are some really good parts to this, and some that are not at all. The logo is technically sound, but as already said, is very drab and totally misses the mark while looking dated at that. It just... exists. Too many things crammed into one resulting in less than the sum of its parts. A forgettable placeholder. Very similar effect to when the Timberwolves redesigned their primary logo dropping much of its swagger, only that this doesn't have any to begin with and falls into the most irrelevant depths of NBA logos. What's worse, the logo, along with the use of colors, makes the court look inexcusably dull, which doesn't fit an LA team at all. The compass makes the ship look like being in a target, and I don't know if the partial C logo is meant to also resemble some hooks, but either way, it is an unappealing letter logo. The main blue color for the uniforms should've been the lighter blue, and it's used way too little. Light blue number outlines would've made a big difference at least. The waistband monogram patches are also somewhat off, the color application should've been done differently. Also, I would've better made a graphic pattern of the nautical flags on the side panels of the red jersey, instead of just plastering them on separately with outlines like that. I think the new logo should've been based on the sails, even in an abstract way similarly to how it was done in the retro San Diego logo. That would've suited LA more and kept some of the needed flare. All in all, the updated script wordmarks and the monogram are on point, the color palette works – if only the navy was relegated to a secondary role in favor of the lighter blue – as well as the uniforms with some little tweaks and an added emphasis on the lighter blue.

Looks like another red and navy color scheme à la '10s Hawks, but I don't hate what I'm seeing, and it could look sharp. The supposed primary logo, though, has too much going on with everything thrown into one, similarly to the forced basketball in the Hornets' logos. Also, that capital C which might be intended to depict compass directions, I suppose, and is seen as a partial logo on the players attire, resembles a target sign to me more. EDIT: No sign of black is definitely an unexpected positive.

Of all the things the NBA has introduced, the LED court was actually refreshingly fitting and an appropriate addition for the All-Star competitions.

Don't really think I need a wooden court to mimic concrete... Gray courts don't look exciting at all on screen anyway.

A bit bizarre to see the flight attendants being taller than Isiah Thomas, regardless of them wearing heels..

Other than they've been pushing really hard to be a black team, from the court to the uniforms.

Those aren't that good to me either, I much prefer all the 00s' sets to these, even the sleeved one included. But I ain't getting my hopes up for that mentioned new red uniform one bit, given all the City and what-not redundant uniforms they are doing now.

Another year that the All-Star court doesn't match the uniforms. This further supports my theory that they've had the uniform assignments messed up.

Are both teams gonna have same warmups?

Those colors of the All-Star unis are really pleasant and the design is not bad at all, considering what has been rolled out all these past years, even though I can see the issue with not enough contrast between the two. I need the wordmarks to be East and West, though, now that the usual format has been reinstated. I also can't help thinking that this design was intended for the event held in Cleveland, given how the actual ones had a very Hornets-y feel, and the fact that they had the uni assignments for these games messed up these past years. Still, these are not quite on the level of All-Star game unis and branding that there used to be in the 00s, when you could tell what the unis looked like just by naming a sepcific year and the city. I really miss that level of branding for this event.

Ok, I see. Well, the Sixers' is not the same thing.