|
On June 29 2012 06:27 Itsmedudeman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2012 03:43 Ace wrote:
I'm really averse to putting Dwight Howard in tier 1. What? Seriously? Man ace, I thought you were a bit more level headed than that... come on... But Dwight is by far the best true center in the game. Who comes close, really? Seriously, when's the last time a big man has lead their team to nba conference finals and nba finals in the past 5 years or hell, just to a decent level. Sure, he's not scoring 30 points a game like shaq, but the game isn't that way any more, and the days of shaq, robinson, ewing, etc. are pretty much over with dwight being the only one left. Kevin love is good, but apparently not good enough to make the playoffs yet, and he's certainly not as complete defensively.
It's not about him being the best Center in the league ( I dont really care). It's his offense. #1 option on offense = we run our plays through him. You can't run the offense through Dwight Howard. Stan Van Gundy refused to do it and I see why.
I'm not talking about defense here because while it's good his offense is a major red flag. Also the more I look at the perimeter players' numbers and realize Dwight has no effect on stopping some of these elite wings the more I realize he just isn't as valuable as they are.
Cyric stop arguing about the Laker's being smart and look at that Team USA 2008 stuff. Insane stats!
Too bad Wade won't be playing this year.
|
United States4471 Posts
On June 29 2012 06:49 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2012 06:27 Itsmedudeman wrote:On June 29 2012 03:43 Ace wrote:
I'm really averse to putting Dwight Howard in tier 1. What? Seriously? Man ace, I thought you were a bit more level headed than that... come on... But Dwight is by far the best true center in the game. Who comes close, really? Seriously, when's the last time a big man has lead their team to nba conference finals and nba finals in the past 5 years or hell, just to a decent level. Sure, he's not scoring 30 points a game like shaq, but the game isn't that way any more, and the days of shaq, robinson, ewing, etc. are pretty much over with dwight being the only one left. Kevin love is good, but apparently not good enough to make the playoffs yet, and he's certainly not as complete defensively. It's not about him being the best Center in the league ( I dont really care). It's his offense. #1 option on offense = we run our plays through him. You can't run the offense through Dwight Howard. Stan Van Gundy refused to do it and I see why. I'm not talking about defense here because while it's good his offense is a major red flag. Also the more I look at the perimeter players' numbers and realize Dwight has no effect on stopping some of these elite wings the more I realize he just isn't as valuable as they are. Cyric stop arguing about the Laker's being smart and look at that Team USA 2008 stuff. Insane stats! Too bad Wade won't be playing this year.
Very disappointing that Wade will likely not be playing this year. The increased familiarity and chemistry between him and Lebron, let alone Bosh, would be a huge benefit.
At a glance, it's looking like Bosh was more valuable to Team USA than people give him credit for.
|
Yea, Bosh, Wade, LeBron #s are off the charts. First time I actually looked at it. Chris Paul's numbers are perplexing but great. Defensively I'm impressed.
|
United States4471 Posts
On June 29 2012 07:16 Ace wrote:
Yea, Bosh, Wade, LeBron #s are off the charts. First time I actually looked at it. Chris Paul's numbers are perplexing but great. Defensively I'm impressed.
Well I remember that Team USA was killing teams defensively with an incredible pressure defense that no one could handle until the final game. Having D12, Bosh, Lebron, Wade and a dialed-in Kobe who didn't have to carry the offense made for a scary good defensive squad.
|
On June 29 2012 06:37 XaI)CyRiC wrote:
The spending more money argument is bullshit and anyone who has paid attention to what the Lakers have done knows it. You could argue that they have an advantage of being a more attractive destination due to being in LA, but that's about it and it doesn't even really fly since top FA's routinely sign in other cities for comparable money. The Lakers have been more successful because they've generally gotten the most of their resources and made smart decisions, not because they have more money at their disposal. Cuban has spent as much money as anyone in the league, Paul Allen is one of the richest owners in the league and has opened his pocketbooks many times, the Knicks have outspent most of the league for years, etc. Why aren't all these teams winning multiple championships?
Spending money clearly isn't the only thing needed to be done to create a championship caliber team, but it's absurd to think it's not an enormous part of it, and quite frankly THE most important part of it.
Yes, it was the Hornets organization's fault that the team was terrible. Who else was responsible? They made all of the decisions that led to the team to where it was. Did they have all the benefits of being located in LA? No. But there are plenty of other small market teams that did better with comparable resources. I still can't believe that you're holding the quality of the Lakers' organization and their willingness to make the moves that allow them to compete against them. It's up to each team and their personnel to do what it takes to make their team successful. Blame Shinn and his people for buying a team and then being unwilling to do what it took to be successful and keep their franchise player, don't blame the Lakers for doing what they're supposed to.
Holy shit, I am not blaming the Lakers for the Hornets woes over the years. I'm blaming the Lakers for being, at worst, abusively opportunistic against markets that they dwarf. The Hornets woes are a combination of poor management and crappy league parity that makes it easy for owners to suck the bottom of the barrel and never commit money to either a respectable FO or to players (Both things Shinn did and the fact that he couldn't anymore kind of begets why Benson now owns the team). I do not blame the Lakers for trying to get Paul or whatever, but it was an obnoxiously bad deal. I like how you even acknowledge small market teams have crappy resources but still purport that the Lakers are just so great and it has nothing to do with inherent lack of parity.
Stern was not the acting owner, and it wasn't "his" franchise. The league purchased the Hornets because they wanted to keep a team in NO, and Stern was simply in charge of the league. Also, and I've already repeated this many times, as part of the deal for the league buying the team and making sure it would be fair for the league as a whole, they made sure that the Hornets people (i.e. Demps) had control and authority for personnel decisions. The league recognized the blatant conflict of interest of the league owning an NBA team and set that condition to address it. Stern and the other owners were never supposed to be able to have final say on personnel decisions, THAT was the deal. Stern and the other owners violated their own condition and agreement to maintain fairness by making a decision that was inherently biased and unfair. They did NOT have the right to do whatever they wanted with the team, because that would be fundamentally and inherently against the idea of the Hornets being its own independent NBA team.
Was there a deal? Was there a contract saying that the owners, who owned the team, couldn't make decisions in the best interests of the team? Because that's what they did. Stop being a huge victim (as if the Lakers, a perennial playoff and championship churning machine could ever garner sympathy). Your team got on the wrong end of a deal because the owners of the Hornets actually fucking acted to make the team better instead of making it simultaneously worse AND unsellable.
You keep talking about how downtrodden and miserable the Hornets team was and how everyone should take pity on them and treat them with kid gloves by not dealing sharply with them. That's bullshit. The Hornets are an NBA team with people put in charge to run it as they see fit, and they are expected to run it competently to the best of their ability the same as every other team in the league. No other team in the league gets the kind of consideration you seem to expect for the Hornets, nor should they. Again, if you have a problem with your team's plight, then blame the people that were responsible for putting them there.
I don't want your pity. I can deal with shitty franchises. I've been a Saints fan since I could read. I want you to stop whining about getting the short end of the stick because the fucking Lakers and their fans have no goddamn room for the next fifty years to complain about that. The only reason this is a big deal is because it involved something that would've turned the Lakers back into arguably the best team in the West and it didn't get done. If this was some middling trade for Okafor that got veto'd because the Hornets could've gotten better you wouldn't even give a damn. You probably wouldn't even care if this exact same thing happened, only with the Celtics getting the short end.
The Lakers should never have had to come up with a "better" deal than the Clippers. In fact, the Clippers should never have had to give over what they did in their deal either. It was all a result of artificial leverage created by Stern's gross improprieties. The Hornets had made their terrible, shitty bed and should have had to sleep in like the rest of the league does. But for some reason you think that everyone else should have taken pity on the organization and given them more assets for CP3 just because they were so downtrodden even though the Hornets had no ground to stand on. Give me a break and go cry a river. THAT is entitlement, not the Lakers expecting to get what they earned through savvy team management.
If your team is so incompetent and pitiful that it's management needs to be protected from itself then it deserves to be at the bottom of the pile. If the people the league put in charge of the team make a bad decision, then the team should have to live with those decisions. That is how it works for EVERY other team in the league, and that's how it should have worked with the Hornets at that time. Stop crying about how bad your team was when it made itself bad, and stop expecting special treatment because your management was incompetent. It's just sad to see you pointing the finger at the Lakers for taking advantage of your team's incompetency when every other team, including the Hornets, would have done the same thing if given the opportunity.
The Hornets made their bed by drafting the all-star point guard that your team was so desperate to get, but clearly not desperate enough to actually put up stakes for because, unless you can swindle a superstar from a prone franchise going through massive management issues, it's not worth anteing up for. The Hornets are entitled to everything they could get in a trade with CP3 and that's what they got, Stern derision or no. A fucking impromptu scrapped up FO being rescinded because of management issues is no reason to sink a franchise when it's plainly obvious you can do better.
And guess what? Owners are management. The management protected itself. You're just grinding a stupid axe because you don't get to win three more titles after stepping on the balls of anyone who likes basketball in New Orleans.
edit: Anyhow, I'm gonna drop this. Feel free to respond and get the last word in, as I don't think we're going to come to an agreement. As much as I loathe the Lakers and the stereotype of their fanbase, I've got nothing against you personally even if I absolutely detest what you're saying on this particular topic.
|
|
|
I love when fans boo David Stern. It warms my heart. I also love how Stern reacts - he's perfect for the job.
|
Hornets with MKG - solid rebuilding pick but not the star they need. But I think it's a great selection.
|
Finally MJ made a good move!
|
Brad Beal to Wiz at 3. I think he's overrated but we shall see.
|
pretty standard pucks so far, beal should become a solid 2. he will be better than jordan crawford, but they seem like different players.
|
MKG at 2 was not what was expected, I think.
|
HOLY SHIT Dion Waiters at 4
EDIT: Cavs take Dion Waiters from Syracuse. ROFL. Keep bitching about big markets while everyone sees you making picks like this.
|
well that is the first jump, thought it would be thom rob.
|
Did not expect Waiters, was thinking Barnes..
Kings will surely pick Barnes or Robinson now
|
|
|
United States4471 Posts
On June 29 2012 07:39 TwoToneTerran wrote:
Spending money clearly isn't the only thing needed to be done to create a championship caliber team, but it's absurd to think it's not an enormous part of it, and quite frankly THE most important part of it.
As far as I know there is no evidence that spending money is the most important part of creating a championship caliber team. When's the last time the Lakers were able to successfully pull off a move solely by outspending another team? I can't recall any major transactions in which the Lakers simply outbid another team by paying more money. From what I recall, that's not how they got Kobe, not how they got Shaq, not how they got Odom, not how they got Pau, and not how they almost got Paul.
Holy shit, I am not blaming the Lakers for the Hornets woes over the years. I'm blaming the Lakers for being, at worst, abusively opportunistic against markets that they dwarf. The Hornets woes are a combination of poor management and crappy league parity that makes it easy for owners to suck the bottom of the barrel and never commit money to either a respectable FO or to players (Both things Shinn did and the fact that he couldn't anymore kind of begets why Benson now owns the team). I do not blame the Lakers for trying to get Paul or whatever, but it was an obnoxiously bad deal. I like how you even acknowledge small market teams have crappy resources but still purport that the Lakers are just so great and it has nothing to do with inherent lack of parity.
Abusively opportunistic? In what way? You really think they're hammering down the doors of other teams to force deals down their throats or utilizing some other form of duress? In every case, the other teams involved in the deals are glad to make the trades with the Lakers and believe they're getting a good deal. I've yet to see a report where a team reports that it begrudgingly accepted an offer from the Lakers. In fact, you see the exact opposite. It has nothing to do with taking advantage of market size, and everything to do with figuring out what other teams want and convincing them that they're getting it from the Lakers in a given transaction. What is abusive about that?
I never said small market teams have crappy resources. I said that the Lakers could be said to have some advantage by virtue of the city they play in, but that even that argument is questionable because there are plenty of smaller market teams who were and are able to do better than the Hornets did. Your parity argument is belied by the success of teams like the Spurs and Thunder. Plus, it's not like the Lakers have had cakewalks to all of their championships. They've had to fight hard through tough competition from smaller markets along the way, each of whom were contenders by virtue of good management with resources comparable to what the Hornets have had.
Was there a deal? Was there a contract saying that the owners, who owned the team, couldn't make decisions in the best interests of the team? Because that's what they did. Stop being a huge victim (as if the Lakers, a perennial playoff and championship churning machine could ever garner sympathy). Your team got on the wrong end of a deal because the owners of the Hornets actually fucking acted to make the team better instead of making it simultaneously worse AND unsellable.
Yes, they did and that's why there was a huge backlash from the media and pretty much every other source out there. There was not a single expert who took the position that Stern rescinding the trade was not a shady move and wholly improper. You're also assuming that the owners were acting in the best interests of the Hornets, when the weight of the evidence is that they were acting in their own best interests by trying to prevent the Lakers from getting CP3. The letter from Dan Gilbert summed it up perfectly by claiming that the trade would make the Lakers to become too good and it was unfair to the rest of the league. That move had nothing to do with taking care of the Hornets, and everything to do with preventing the Lakers from landing CP3.
The Lakers didn't get the wrong end of the deal. They got their deal negotiated and agreed to, and then had it rescinded after the fact by other parties who had no business doing so due to their inherent bias and conflicting interests.
I don't want your pity. I can deal with shitty franchises. I've been a Saints fan since I could read. I want you to stop whining about getting the short end of the stick because the fucking Lakers and their fans have no goddamn room for the next fifty years to complain about that. The only reason this is a big deal is because it involved something that would've turned the Lakers back into arguably the best team in the West and it didn't get done. If this was some middling trade for Okafor that got veto'd because the Hornets could've gotten better you wouldn't even give a damn. You probably wouldn't even care if this exact same thing happened, only with the Celtics getting the short end.
Again, this whole argument that the Lakers have no right to take issue with what Stern and the rest of the league did or not be as good as they would have been if it had not happened simply because they've won a lot previously is a bullshit argument. This whole "it's okay to break the rules and screw over a team if it's already experienced lots of previous success" argument is based entirely off of sour grapes and envy/jealousy. As I've said before, the Lakers had earned the right to expect to contend for a championship by making the moves that put them in that position. They weren't asking to be put there, they just wanted to keep what they had earned. Whether it was an intact roster with Odom and none of the drama/problems caused by the CP3 trade being rescinded or the completion of the trade agreement that they had fairly negotiated and achieved, they only wanted what they had fairly earned by managing their team the right way. They didn't expect anything more.
I would definitely have been very upset with Stern and the rest of the owners if they had done the same thing to the Celtics or any other team. I still think it's bullshit how Stern looked the other way in the Seattle-OKC situation, and I have no dog in that fight. Fair is fair and unfair is unfair. When the Lakers legitimately suck or make bad moves, I'm not complaining that it's unfair and don't expect the league to step in to help. I was a fan during the years between the Magic and Shaq eras, when the Lakers were far from contending. I wasn't arguing unfairness then or begrudging the Bulls or Spurs for being better. That's the kind of bullshit mentality I'll leave to others.
The Hornets made their bed by drafting the all-star point guard that your team was so desperate to get, but clearly not desperate enough to actually put up stakes for because, unless you can swindle a superstar from a prone franchise going through massive management issues, it's not worth anteing up for. The Hornets are entitled to everything they could get in a trade with CP3 and that's what they got, Stern derision or no. A fucking impromptu scrapped up FO being rescinded because of management issues is no reason to sink a franchise when it's plainly obvious you can do better.
And guess what? Owners are management. The management protected itself. You're just grinding a stupid axe because you don't get to win three more titles after stepping on the balls of anyone who likes basketball in New Orleans.
The Lakers did put up stakes to get CP3, they broke up a championship roster that was only a year removed from a two-peat by giving up the reigning 6th man of the year and an all-world PF/C. Anyone who claims that they weren't giving up enough to get CP3 is bullshitting themselves and focusing too much on what the Hornets were getting out to the deal and not enough on what the Lakers were giving up. I freely concede that the Hornets were not getting a great deal for CP3 on their end, but what did they expect when they had virtually no leverage? What I do take issue with are these claims that the Lakers were getting some sort of windfall when they were actually giving up a lot. I never heard of any proposed deals from other teams in which they gave up that much proven talent for CP3. If anyone swindled anyone, it was Houston for giving up Dragic, Scola and KevMart while the other two teams involved were giving up superstars (funny how no one ever points that out).
As for what the Hornets were entitled, they were entitled to what any other team in the league would be entitled to in the same circumstances. They were not entitled to Stern and the other owners stepping in and breaking up the trade to serve their own self interests. They were not entitled to a do-over on a trade when no other team has ever had that benefit. They were not entitled to the commissioner of the NBA negotiating the terms of a trade for them while creating leverage from nothing. The Hornets had already tried to get the most they could for CP3 on their own, and the best they could get was what the Lakers were offering or a much-reduced version of what the Clippers eventually gave up. That's what they were entitled to, that's what they deserved because that's what everyone else gets. What you're arguing for is special treatment above and beyond what any other team gets.
|
kings still have no clue what to do, end up botching an okay pick again???
|
If I have to hear another Wade comp...Marquette rode Wade into the Final 4 while smashing Pitt, Kentucky and Missouri.
EDIT: I don't hate Waiters, I just don't think he's super special AND he could have been gotten way later. Just leaving value on the table.
|
On June 29 2012 08:58 slyboogie wrote:
If I have to hear another Wade comp...Marquette rode Wade into the Final 4 while smashing Pitt, Kentucky and Missouri.
these guys were made for basketball....basketball was made for wade.
don't know if he is crying because of kings hat, or because of getting picked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
