Jump to content

22-23 NBA Season Thread


DG_ThenNowForever

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

Jayson Tatum's deal is up in 2026, where he'll be only be 27 years old (how?). I expect the Lakers to go all out to bring him to the same franchise as his idol.

 

I’m sure they will but new CBA means he’d have to take a 40 percent paycut to do so, not to mention trade a no-drama, well-run team that he knows (and gives him literally whatever he wants, including games off for his kid’s birthday) for a soap opera trainwreck of a front office.

 

If Tatum leaves I think it’ll be an end-of-career journeyman thing the way they let/pushed Paul Pierce out in his later years. Or if STL gets an expansion team ever.

 

re: the disaster show Mavericks, Luka has his flaws (and hasn’t been accountable for them) but this is 100 percent on their front office, which has somehow got off scot-free for making bad decision after bad decision (both on and off the court). The Luka move has obviously worked out but they’ve not done anything else to lead him to success — failure at assembling a coherent roster, failure at having a good coach. 

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, the other pro team that occupies the American Airlines Center, the Dallas Stars at least has a core of young players they can build upon when their older players leave, which is something the Mavs had before they made the Wood and Kyrie trades.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cujo said:

Sooo the league might strip the Mavs of their first round pick? Or what's the punishment?

 

 

Dallas missing the playoffs even with the reigning undisputed Cancer of the Year award winner is punishment enough. No need to throw salt on this wound.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Seadragon76 said:

 

Dallas missing the playoffs even with the reigning undisputed Cancer of the Year award winner is punishment enough. No need to throw salt on this wound.

 

Why not?  Fines won't do anything, so just take away their pick if it lands in the top 3.  Also, overhaul the lottery: give every team the same chance, and remove the salary cap.  Problem solved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

Probably not, but that would make him the same as the vast majority of NBA players.

 

Current potential lifers to me include Steph, Giannis, maybe Embiid, maybe Klay, and maybe Zion (if only because why would anyone else pay him?). 

 

The new CBA with the ownership clause might change things, but guys finishing their career with one team is extremely and increasingly rare, and I don't treat it as being more meaningful one way or the other.

 

IIRC someone wanted to trade Klay or make him available for trade before (but no longer?) and good thing (for them) that they didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cujo said:

Sooo the league might strip the Mavs of their first round pick? Or what's the punishment?

 

 

Seems like retaliation for Dallas protesting that Warriors game.

 

Wonder how much longer Cuban needs the headache.

1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said:

and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, sayahh said:

 

Why not?  Fines won't do anything, so just take away their pick if it lands in the top 3.  Also, overhaul the lottery: give every team the same chance, and remove the salary cap.  Problem solved.

 

Giving every non-playoff team the same chance of winning the lottery has felt like the most obvious anti-tanking solution that exists, so of course it's never been implemented by any leagues in North America that do a lottery. Every league should do that.

  • Like 2

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dont care said:

Seems like a dumb thing to punish a team for when “the process” was a thing not even a decade ago.


The difference (and it’s a very fine line) is that the Sixers weren’t benching good players in order to lose - they were avoiding even having any good players, and putting out lousy lineups that were guaranteed to lose. 
 

It’s basically the same, but technically they weren’t holding guys out or having ownership tell the coach to lose. 

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BBTV said:


The difference (and it’s a very fine line) is that the Sixers weren’t benching good players in order to lose - they were avoiding even having any good players, and putting out lousy lineups that were guaranteed to lose. 
 

It’s basically the same, but technically they weren’t holding guys out or having ownership tell the coach to lose. 

But the same time you have guys like doc rivers who rest people for “scheduled losses” I’m not picking on the 6ers but he is the only other coach who has gone out and said anything close to trying to not win games based on sitting players

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, dont care said:

But the same time you have guys like doc rivers who rest people for “scheduled losses” I’m not picking on the 6ers but he is the only other coach who has gone out and said anything close to trying to not win games based on sitting players


Oh sure - it’s insane that Glenn says that. I suppose the difference is that the Mavs have basically said they’re done for the year, even before being mathematically eliminated - and (correct me if I’m wrong) being on the edge of losing a protected draft pick, so they’re also operating in bad faith against whoever would get that pick. 
 

Tanking a game is harder to police than tanking your chance at making the playoffs. The Sixers also said their top 6 won’t play the final 2 games, so that’s also questionable from an ethical standpoint - but lots of teams do that, and they’re already locked in and not messing up anyone else’s season. 

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I wonder if gamblers or gambling sites could sue or take any kind of action when a coach freely admits that a game was a “scheduled loss”. I wonder if he says “schedule loss”, like they’re blaming it on the schedule as opposed to having the game already circled as one where nobody was going to play. 
 

 

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest thing is that the Mavs basically said "No" in trying to get into the play-in, which has been the NBA's biggest move to stop tanking. It isn't like they were 8 games out of a spot, and just kinda gave up and used the whole "We didn't Luka to get hurt/We wanted to see what we had in our young guys", they very easily could've made the play-in, and with Kidd saying he got the message from Cuban, and not just a fake injury excuse...yeah even as someone who mainly thinks tanking really isn't a problem, you can't really do that well saying that's what you're doing.

I have borderline personality disorder, if my posts ever come off as aggressive or word vomit-y to you, please let me know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the Nuggets can sit their entire starting five to make sure they're healthy for the playoffs, but the Mavs can't sit their star players to make sure they're healthy for next season?

 

What the Mavs did is like It's like when college players elect to sit out bowl games, knowing there's no title to be won and don't want to jeopardize their future.  They just went about it the wrong way. Instead of listing Luka as injured and sitting him for good, they thought it'd be cute to have him play a quarter just get a (pointless) curtain call for the fans. And then to make it worse pretty much spoke openly about it. But still, Silver's not taking a 1st rounder away from them. Gotta do farrrr worse to lose a 1st. (When was that last time what even happened in the NBA, if ever?)

6uXNWAo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are the Clippers going to job to Phoenix today to avoid playing those same Suns in the first round?  Warriors are obviously going to blow out Portland. Suns-Warriors & Kings-Clippers would be a fun first round. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cujo said:

Gotta do farrrr worse to lose a 1st. (When was that last time what even happened in the NBA, if ever?)

 

The Joe Smith thing?  Didn't MIN lose five 1st rounders?

  • WOAH 1

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.