NBA Changes 2017-18

[Conrad. 2,941]

^ In addition to those, the Mavs seem to be sticking with their current design. Plus, the Icon Pels uni:

 

[CitizenTino 648]

Vertically arched wordmarks on the white and navy jerseys are a huge and obvious upgrade for the Pels. Drove me nuts the past couple years that those jerseys had tiny radially arched letters while the red jersey had the vertically arched 'Pelicans'.

[orangefaniniowa 268]

Spurs' Nike version 2.0 (2002-2004)  is still my favorite and the iconic of them all.  It's going to be very difficult for Nike to beat that.  (Keep in mind version 1.0 was from 1997-02).  

[sayahh 876]

19 minutes ago, spockEars7 said:

Spurs unveiling coming this week

No chaps?

[BJ Sands 3,838]

 

[Teal 956]

2 minutes ago, BJ Sands said:

 

Wow... is it Iegit?

[BJ Sands 3,838]

It's @Conrad.. So yes.

[Teal 956]

Sweet! I was expecting trees on the sides.

[KGeeX5 1,142]

6 minutes ago, BJ Sands said:

 

 

 

[Conrad. 2,941]

^ edit those posts and move discussion over to the Timberwolves thread, please. thanks.

[FinsUp1214 5,728]

25 minutes ago, KGeeX5 said:

 

Just as I expected. Same crap set with a swoosh and sponsor.

 

 

 

[suns1977 261]

1 hour ago, FinsUp1214 said:

 

Just as I expected. Same crap set with a swoosh and sponsor.

 

 

 

 

I personally love these.  

[upperV03 7,756]

From that 2K video, a couple of screenshots showing the Knicks' and Celtics' updated shorts designs:

A better look at the Lakers white uniform:

And a whole bunch of looks at the new Nike NBA socks, which look to be customized for each team:

[Delux247 37]

3 minutes ago, upperV03 said:

From that 2K video, a couple of screenshots showing the Knicks' and Celtics' updated shorts designs:

 

That side piping looks incomplete and just awful

[Shadojoker 1,723]

Anybody else noticed the new layout for these boards?? 

[RichO 548]

It never thought about it- but are socks considered uniform and not personal and controlled by the players the way shoes are?

[JerseyJosh 269]

And if those are indeed the wolves new uniforms, I was right in expecting disappointment. 

[Colorsism 47]

4 minutes ago, RichO said:

It never thought about it- but are socks considered uniform and not personal and controlled by the players the way shoes are?

Technically yes, last season players had mainly 4 options for socks. Plain white and black or team versions of white and black that included their logo. They were required to wear stance socks under those constraints. 

[honeybadger 93]

Looking at the Knicks' and Celtics' shorts it almost makes me feel as if Nike went out of their way to make the template as unaccommodating as they could possibly get it to be for traditional uniforms.

[FinsUp1214 5,728]

52 minutes ago, suns1977 said:

 

I personally love these.  

 

They have a couple of pros, but too many cons for me to have ever fully gotten on board with them.

 

Pros:

- Music note wordmark and logos

- Number font

 

Cons:

- Navy and not purple

- Since they do insist on navy, the green is WAY too dark and has poor contrast. Should be Kelly or even teal

- side panels "cut to same degree as the ZZ's" or whatever look really corny and over-modernized

- besides that, the tri-color side panel is too thick and always looked better as a thinner trim

- shoulder trim and collar are mismatched

- the whole concept just looks awkward altogether being classic a throwback idea thrown into a blender with a modern design. If they want to go throwback (which they should and was always a good thing), they need to keep it to a more classic design to really look the part (which they don't).