Finally this saga is over! I thought Gasol was part of the deal as well....? That's huge the Lakers didn't lose him as well.
spoiler alert: i linked this
Finally this saga is over! I thought Gasol was part of the deal as well....? That's huge the Lakers didn't lose him as well.
Thank god it's over. So sick of all the Dwight Howard talk
Dwight Howard is officially Shaq 2.0 and the Lakers are Miami Heat West.
Isnt it the other way around? LA has always been like the Yankees, in not developing talent but using the glitz and glamour of Hollywood to lure guys to them.
I mean in the early 90's they sucked so they trade for Shaq and get Kobes rights when both of those guys were cant miss guys and boom they win 3 rings, then they did it again with Gasol and get another 2 rings.
So my interest in the NBA went from -10 to a -50. The players absolutely run this league. The 2004 Pistons were a complete anomaly and it will be a while till a team like that comes around where there isn't a superstar on there.
The 2004 Pistons team is my favorite actaul "team" of all time. (With the exception of Larry Brown...)
What do you have against Larry brown? He was the difference between an NBA finals team and a really good regular season team. We forced him out over a petty rumor
Please leave again.
All of us
Brown openly flirted with other positions while he was in the Piston job. That was more than just a "rumor".
So what? Bo schembechler openly flirted with the Texas a&m job much more than Larry brown ever did. Imagine if we fired him preemptively
Bo weighed an offer from TAMU during the offseason.
Larry Brown repeatedly - despite being warned not to by his boss - spoke to other teams during the season, including during his "medical absence."
You don't see a difference?
It was neat to see the Pistons emphatically crush that spiralling Lakers team in 2004. However, they were a complete anomaly in the history of the sport and came during the precise window they needed to for a chance at a championship. Basketball is a star-driven game and although the distaste for stars aligning together is totally reasonable, no one would care about the NBA if not for Magic, Bird, and Jordan.
As if having a star on your team is something you shouldn't be proud of? The Pistons only won one championship with their model, and throughout NBA history a majority of the championships teams have contained 'superstars'. So, if the goal is to win championships, then players finding a way to be a part of a team with other 'superstars' is the way to go.
I just don't like that manner that it is done in. They bitch and pout that their team sucks (Lebron, Carmelo) and stop trying until they can just move on. I loved the 2004 Pistons, that was one of my greatest summers watching those playoffs. But I loved that team so much that I wish other teams like them existed.
LeBron made no trade demands and did not pout. If you were one of the best players in the world and you spend 7 years for a franchise that was only able to offer you Larry Hughes and Mo Williams as sidekicks then you would certainly consider signing elsewhere when your contract expired.
LeBron merely decided he would test free agency as every player has a right to do. I'm not condoning the Decision or the welcome party in AAA, but he had every right to leave. It's very unfair to lump LeBron in with Melo and Dwight, who created multi-season soap operas for their franchises with their attitudes.
I guess I was refering to his last NBA Playoff series as a Cavalier. You could tell he just gave up on that team towards the end. You lose respect in my book for doing that, not that he cares about my respect.
Because Kobe has pouted his way down the stretch of series he was going to lose, the Thunder didn't give up, but they got blown out of the water against the Heat this year...and had no fight by mid-way through the second quarter.
Ladanian Tomlinson sat on the bench with his helmet on in the middle of a game.
I could go on and on about different sports and different players.
What people don't realize is that NOT ALL OF THESE SITUATIONS ARE THE SAME!
Kobe was pouting trying to prove a point that the offense has to go through him, every time he got the ball, he passed and tried to be "one of the guys" until it was clear to everyone that he needs to jack up 40 shots for the Lakers to win.
As for LeBron, the guy had put his heart and soul in that organization for 7 years! They gave him nothing. I believe he just had nothing left, and when LeBron isn't playing like LeBron, it's a lot more noticable than Mo Williams not playing like Mo Williams. That team goes for an 8 out of 10 to the 2012 Cavs when LeBron just can't carry the team any longer.
Further proof of this is what he did next, he joined up with Wade and Bosh. He no longer has to literally carry a team each night for every game for his whole career. No player in the HISTORY of the league, including Michael Jordan has done that. With those Cavs teams, if LeBron wasn't LeBron, they lost. There was no Wade, no Pippen, No Worthy, No Parrish. You'll never win like that.
LeBron simply ran out of gas and his team got ran out the gym.
I dont think teams will win anymore unless they have atleast 2 superstars. The NBA is a joke, and a bad one at that. Oh well. Go Thunder and any small market team that can make a challenge any more...
I understand they built their team "the right way" by drafting all three guys and developing them, but that doesn't change that the Thunder will soon have 2 superstars themselves. Westbrook is probably a year away from growing into it, but it's not like the Thunder aren't a star-powered team.
EDIT: It's not as if NBA champions never had two superstars. Magic/Kareem, Bird/McHale, Jordan/Pippen, Duncan/Robinson,Shaq/Kobe, and Wade/O'Neal.
Oh i completely agree with you. They are going to be a big three, well big two and James Harden who could potentially be a third member. I like OKC because they did build their team the right way, but they are small market. I love the fact that teams that aren't in the biggest cities like Oklahoma City, San Antonio, Memphis, Indianapolis, etc. put a product on the floor that is comparable to the big cities and beat them. It is getting to the point where I'm going to stop watching professional basketball, because they are doing their best to kill the small market teams...
Fair enough. I totally can understand rooting for a small market franchise that makes noise in the playoffs. I hate all New York sports on principle, so I definitely see where you're coming from on that.
While the principle of building through the draft is nice, it pretty much means either have an awful team for at least 2-3 years or tank for better draft picks. It's real tough to build through the draft if your team is never miserable enough to land multiple top 5-10 picks.
I think the NBA's real problem lies in the price of mediocrity. Teams that earn 6-8 seeds or among the top several missing the playoffs usually have little hope of taking the next step to contention unless they add a major piece through trade/free agency or have young stars trending upward (ex: 2010 Thunder).
Don't believe the sports talk radio hype.
Small market teams have been doing just fine.
Here is the list of the last 10 years of NBA Finals participants:
Miami Heat 3x
Detroit Pistons 2x
San Antonio Spurs 3x
Oklahoma City Thunder
Los Angeles Lakers 4x
New Jersey Nets
Boston Celtics 2x
Dallas Mavericks 2x
So, breaking down that list, small market teams have been to 11 NBA Finals, while 9 big market teams have made Finals appearances.
In terms of NBA championships, small market teams have won 6, and big market teams have won 4.
So while people continually scream "The NBA is unfair to small market teams ! The NBA is unfair to small market teams!" the reality says otherwise.
Small market teams have been able to compete on equal terms in NBA Finals appearances, and championships won. If you include Miami in with the small market teams (As you should. Not including them with the small market teams or trying to recalibrate them in with the big markets as a "destination city" is a way NBA haters try to job the argument in their favor. The reality is, Miami is a small market.) then they've not only been competing, they've been kicking the ass of big market teams.
Last year's conference Finals featured 3 small market teams, and 1 big market team.
The two heavy favorites to win the NBA Finals next year (Miami, OKC) are both small market teams.
Small market teams are doing just fine.
Your definition of "small market" is pretty loose. I would not consider Miami or Detroit small markets - they're medium-sized, on the fringe of the top 10.
San Antonio, OKC, Cleveland and Orlando are small markets. They've had their success. But like many small-market franchises, two of them couldn't keep their best players (Cleveland and Orlando) and it remains to be seen if OKC can. San Antonio, with Tim Duncan staying put, is an anomaly.
In terms off actual media markets, Detroit is not small, but in terms of the NBA they're 13th. In the NBA, if you're the 13th biggest market, you have no advantages. I would love to see someone make the case how Detroit has so many great advantages over Celeveland and San Antonio thanks to their market size. When you throw in the always pertinient "It's Detroit!" factor, that makes things even worse for the Pistons.
Basically, in the NBA, if you're not one of the premier big market cities, you're a small market.
play in Auburn Hills, which is 40 minutes away from the actual city of Detroit. Other than the name the team really has very little connection to the actual city. Most of the surrounding areas around Auburn Hills are much nicer than Detroit. With that said, even the surrounding areas still can't effectively compete with some of the more exciting destinations in the league, but I don't think the whole Detroit aspect is as big of a negative as some make it out to be, at least in comparison to some of the mid-sized market teams
The main issue at the moment, is that there is currently only a handful of destinations that seem to be attractive for the best talent in the league. Now that in of itself is not that offputting, if free agents want to sign with those teams (like Lebron did) so be it, that is their right as a free agent. However, now we are starting to get the point where guys (Howard and Carmelo as the prime examples) are essentially trying to force their way on to those teams before they even hit free agency. That is a completely different animal, and I think that will be a trend that will continue, because the players know that more often they will end up getting their way. It is true that great players have always controlled the league to a certain extent, but it seems to be getting somewhat out of hand in recent years.
The NBA has always been like that. Superstars forcing their way out of one place to another. Wilt did it several times. Kareem did it with the Bucs. Barkley did it with both Philly and the Suns. Shaq did it to L.A. when he went to Miami. This isn't a new phenomenon.
When you throw in the always pertinient "It's Detroit!" factor, that makes things even worse for the Pistons.
I'm not sure the area's reputation is that poor among NBA players. If you're a young, single black player, the Detroit area (which has one of the largest African-American populations in the country) might not be so bad. That doesn't make it a prime destination but still probably more desirable than a lot of the truly small markets. Places like Minnesota, Utah, Milwaukee, etc. probably would lose out a free agent to Detroit, all else equal, so I don't think they can all be lumped in the same category. I see Detroit as a middle-tier market.
I was starting to think the Magic would get stuck with nothing again after the Nets and Rockets talks fell apart.
Nothing against Steve Nash (especially), Howard, or Darius Morris, but I hope the Lakers don't win the title. That is all.
Whenever I see your avatar I think of this:
Talkin' about my paddle on the blog ... that's a paddlin'.
Does this mean we won't have to hear Howard bitch again mid-season and get his coach and GM fired? I don't really like Lebron but at least he isn't the head case that Howard is, and Dwight hasn't even accomplished anything close to Lebron.
dwight was like the brett favre of the nba.
The NBA has a major problem and it all started with Jordan. When the stars are bigger than the league (forget about the teams) then the league sucks. I don't know how people can watch the NBA.
TMZ is reporting that Dwight Howard is in talks to star in two movies and to star in a video game. Both movies will be directed and produced by Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer. They are Kazaam 2 and Steel 2. The video game will be called Shaq Fu 2: Revenge of Shaq's Shadow.
I'm cautiously optimistic - it's going to be incredibly hard to win a title, but full marks to the front office for going all-in on Kobe's last two years and doing it intelligently. They'll still need a few more pieces but the Howard situation was going to have to be resolved first. I was skeptical that something would get done because we were hearing so much about this - Mitch Kupchak always operates on the down-low.
I'm not sure Howard is that much better than Bynum. He is probably the best big man defender, but his offense is lacking.
That is all.
That is all
Can't wait for next year. LeBron at the height of his power is something to behold.
Would you rather take the lakers with Kobe and Shaq or with Kobe and Howard?
Shaq/Kobe with both in their primes is one of the Top5 NBA pairings of all-time. Howard is a defensive beast but nowhere near the offensive skills Shaq had.
Yes, let's go with all of them in their primes. I'd have to go Shaq and Kobe as well.
Also - I gotta place most of the blame here on the owners for paying out such ridonkulous sums of money for scrubs in the first place - that's what got the ball rolling. (Google 'Jon Koncak' sometime) I mean, if you're J. Random 7 ppg backup center and the owner offers you $42 million/ 3 years, are you supposed to tell him to spend it on the better player with more athletic upside?
It's not over. ESPN-L.A. will now give updates on Dwight's house search and stuff. I am very interested in his choice of utensils.
In a year he'll be a free agent.
Haha that's because the best teams already had multiple stars on their teams. The 80s Celtics had HOF guys in Bird, McHale, Parish, Archibald/Johnson, and even Bill Walton in a supporting role for a couple years. The Lakers had Kareem, Magic, and Worthy. The Pistons had Thomas, Dumars, and Rodman.
The injustice of having the best players on the best teams...
Why the downvotes? This is correct.
If someone can point to a time when the NBA was not a superstar driven league I'd like to hear from them.
For one, a lot of those guys listed were not superstars, they were outstanding role players who were made famous by dint of winning championships. For two, I don't recall any of them pouting their way to another team, or colluding with other players to all sign in one city.
Well, then you either have a bad memory or haven't learned your NBA history.
Kareem pouted, cried, and ultimately forced his way off of the Bucs and to the Lakers.
Does no one remember how petulant and team destroying Magic Johnson was in the early 80s? He was one of the greatest coach killers of all time for a couple of years.The year after they won the Finals in '80, he bitched and moaned about all of his teammates. Got a few guys booted off of the team because Magic didn't like them, had coaches fired, didn't play hard, and was basically 2011 Dwight Howard before 2011 Dwight Howard. Kareem criticized him saying Magic forgot the things that made the team successful his first year in the league. Oh, and he singlehandedly lost them the '84 Finals. Magic was one of the greatest players ever, but let's not rewrite history.
As for the rest of that list, Thomas, Dumars, Walton, McHale, Bird, Rodman, Archibald, Parish, DJ, and Worthy are easily in the top 100 players of all time.
Kareem, Bird, Magic, Isiah, Tiny, Walton, Worthy, Parish, and McHale all made the NBA's 50 Greatest. I believe each and every one of those guys is in the hall of fame.
I'm not saying they're each on the level of LeBron, but they're certainly above guys like Chris Bosh, Amare Stoudemire, and Carmelo Anthony.
There are really only a couple of super teams in the NBA:
Oklahoma City Thunder
One of those teams just came together last night, and there is no guarantee that Dwight Howard makes them that much better. Bynum was an extremely underrated and vastly improving big man. Now that he's in a place where Kobe isn't eating all of his shots, we could see Bynum develop into the best big man in the game. Kobe has never had a point guard like Nash, so we'll see how he deals with no longer being the primary ball handler. It could take awhile for those two to mesh.
The second super team, the OKC Thunder, came together through the draft, so there was no collusion there.
Finally, we reach the Miami Heat. Dwade was already in Miami, and nobody likes Toronto, so Bosh was gone. Cleveland is the reason LeBron James isn't in Cleveland, full stop. Had they built an actual team around him instead of trading away all of their young assets for shitty, over priced, underperforming veterans, LeBron would have stayed.
The Celtics didn't force their way together. The Sonics were ready for a changing of the guard, and wanted to dump all of the last vestiges of the previous regime before they moved to OKC, and Ray Allen was the face of that franchise, so he had to go.
The Timberwolves saw that KG was getting older and were more than willing to part with him for a number of draft picks and young players. They recognized that the KG era in Minny didn't work, and wasn't going to work, so they ended up getting a pretty good deal in that trade.
The Knicks are not a super team, and the Nuggets ended up becoming a far better team than the Knicks thanks to that trade. They've set themselves up nicely as one of the 5 best teams in the West.
Chicago doesn't have a super team (sorry Bulls fans).
The Brooklyn Nets? Don't make me laugh. Atlanta threw themselves a party after they tricked Brooklyn into taking Joe Johnson and his massive contract.
New Orleans came away looking pretty damn good in that Chris Paul trade. They now have the best shooting guard under the age of 25 in Eric Gordon, and landed a guy who a lot of people feel could be the best player in the 2012 draft in Austin Rivers with that 10th pick.
In summation, the super team thing is a bit over blown. The NBA has always had loaded teams at the top, and horrible teams at the bottom. The only superstars who have really forced their way out of a place are Carmelo, and Howard. The only guys who colluded were LeBron, Wade, and Bosh, but Wade and Bosh were going to end up in Miami regardless. Cleveland had every opportunity to keep LeBron, and failed miserably.
I regret that I have but only upvote to give your comment. (Though the Laker homer in me would hasten to add that Magic only forced out one coach (Paul Westhead) and in retrospect it proved to be the right move... untilRileyworkedthemintothegroundin1989andhadusgointothefinalswithoutScottnonotbitteratall....)
But as a Cavs fan I have to take issue with this:
Cleveland is the reason LeBron James isn't in Cleveland, full stop. Had they built an actual team around him instead of trading away all of their young assets for shitty, over priced, underperforming veterans, LeBron would have stayed.
LeBron demanded a lot of those shitty trades. He wanted to try to "win now" because he had no intention of staying in Cleveland past his first allowable max contract.
Now, you can argue (as I did when they acquired the corpse of Shaq, for instance) that the GM should have told LeBron to shut the fuck up and worry about his jumpshot instead of playing GM, but what do I know?
This is a much more accurate comment about how LeBron felt in Cleveland. However, It's still incredible how much he elevated some of those Cavs teams with sub-par supporting casts. Clearly in his last couple years LeBron was getting frustrated with the quality of teammates he had. He was probably one Scottie Pippen level player away from seriously contending in Cleveland.
Assuming it's not Shaq right now, Kobe-Shaq >>> Kobe-Howard and it's not even a question. Howard is a great center but his greatness is magnified by there not being any real competition at the 5-spot that isn't named Andrew Bynum.
There are three things you need to be a great post player - a) gotta be able to get post position b) have moves to beat your guy once you get the pass and c) know how and when to pass out of the double team. Shaq could do all 3. Howard's shaky on b) and Bynum is shaky on c). With Nash, Kobe and Gasol, though, Howard is gonna be more vital on defense - offense should be just fine.
If all LA gave up was Bynum, they won the trade by a mile. And LA is once again the best in the NBA.
Seriously? He has stated he has two years left multiple times. I don't see how that is delusional
Kobe is an alphadog, there is no arguing that. But Dwight Howard is not Shaq no matter how much he tries to be...he needs an alphadog to make him reach his full potential.
I don't know how you could be a fan in the NBA. Small market teams have no chance to stay competitive. The stars get funnelled to LA, Bos, Mia, etc...so brutal
Enjoy your hockey and college basketball then I suppose. Why bother commenting on an NBA thread on a college blog?
Wait, those were the teams in the Western Conference Finals this year, you say? What?
Not to mention the Clippers (!) making the West Semis, even though they are in LA that's a downtrodden franchise that plays in the giant shadow of the Lakers and an upstart Indiana team giving the Heat all they could handle sans Chris Bosh in the East Semis.
GOD! How can you watch college football! It's just the big tradional BCS power teams that win every year. Small "market" colleges have NO SHOT!
Sound ridiculous? I thought so.
In addition, NBA small market teams have won 6 of the last 10 championships and have made 11 of the last 20 Finals appearances.
Compared with the NFL, which everyone upholds as a bastion of partiy, it's the same.
6 small market teams have won the Super Bowl (Steelers 2x, Packers, Bucs, Saints, Colts), while 4 big market teams have won (NE 2x, NYG 2x). 10 small market teams have made Super Bowl appearances, while 10 big market teams have made Super Bowl appearances.
So in terms of championships, the NFL and NBA are on even ground when it comes to the parity between big and small markets. In terms of championship game appearances, the NBA has a slight edge.
Also, the NBA and NFL have been relatively similar in terms of championship appearances by repeat teams, for example (CA- for championship appearance, W- for championship win):
LA Lakers - 4 CA, 2 W
NE Patriots - 4 CA, 2 W
Pitt Steelers - 3 CA, 2 W
Miami Heat - 3 CA, 2 W
San Antonio Spurs - 3 CA, 3 W
New York Giants - 2 Ca, 2 W
Detroit Pistons - 2 CA, 1 W
Inidanapolis Colts - 2 CA, 1 W
Boston Celtics - 2 CA, 1 W
Dallas Mavericks - 2 CA, 1 W
When you factor in that while Pittsburgh and Green Bay are constituted as small market teams (like Miami), they are traditional powers in the NFL, it actually looks like there is more parity the NBA.
Which makes sense. In the NBA, you're always 1 superstar away from being relevant. While in the NFL, not only to you have to find a superstar QB, you also have to do a lot more work in building a team around him.
YES! Another NBA thread on MGOHATENBA where everyone shits on the league that had its best TV numbers since Jordan. But no one is watching right?
STOP CLICKING NBA TOPICS IF YOU HATE THE NBA! I don't go into NHL or Hockey topics... Know why? I can't stand Hockey and so I have nothing useful to post in such a thread. Pretty crazy idea huh?
On topic thought
I hate my Bulls for being so cheap but I got to hand to to the Lakers for always doing whatever it takes to win. I wish my Bulls had the balls to the pull the trigger on some trades and pay some taxes. Kobe might have just have gotten number 6.
I couldn't agree more. I grew up playing and watching basketball. I've always been a hoops guy. While I respect the toughness of hockey players and the energy of a hockey crowd, the sport as a whole isn't my thing so I don't bother posting in hockey threads.
I think the overcoverage of annoying not-actually-about-basketball stories like the Dwight saga on the WWL lead hockey fans to have a certain bitterness towards the NBA because their sport receives far less coverage.
Anyways, that's kind of how I feel about this move. I hate the Lakers on principle, but with Kobe/Nash/Gasol at age 33/38/32, they needed to make this move not only to win now, but to position themselves two or three years down the road when the aforementioned guys are history.
Yesssss! Muwahahahaha Yesssss!
I love when fans of a blog dedicated to college football, the sport with the single most unfair playing field of any sport in the US with regard to the haves and have nots, complain about parity in the NBA.
now. I still hate the Lakers! It will be interesting to see how much gas Steve Nash has left in the tank. Either way, Nash is a HUGE upgrade from the Lakers point guard play from last year.
I'm pretty excited about this trade, though as others have pointed out above Howard is not that huge of an upgrade over Bynum - the bigger get was Nash. We still need to solidify our bench with a backup wing and while Mitch Kupchak has been great at steathly ninja moves to land big pieces, his record is much more spotty when it comes to roster spots 6-15. Plus, at this stage of the game, there just flat out isn't that much out there.
I do think the 'league is fixed in favor of the Lakers talk' is way overblown, obviously. I get why people don't like the Lakers - if I wasn't born in L.A. I probably wouldn't have either. L.A. definitely has some natural advantages that GM Kupchak capitalized on. But the fact is that we had a good GM to put a good team together. I roll my eyes at people talking about building a team 'the right way' In pro sports, the measuring stick is If you win. If you did, you did it the right way.
If you're tired of your team being mired in rebuilding hell, the answer is getting a better GM/owner. Small market OKC has good management, and they are - I think - still going to be better than us next year, albeit not by as much. New York has not had good management and... yeah. (You don't think LeBron ever asked himself if he'd rather play for an organization run by James Dolan or Pat Riley?)
* Also, no one talks about this and even I didn't realize it at the time, but the 2004 Pistons did us a HUGE favor in retrospect by dropkicking us out of the Finals that year.
I know and totally agree with the fact that quality GM work, ownership, and salary cap management is crucial to putting together a good team. The Clippers and Knicks are perfect examples.
It's also hard to deny, though, that OKC probably has a window of a chance for success, and no more. Superstar players see rings not as the goal in and of themselves, but the means to an end (that being, elevation of their personal brand) and the location of that success as just as important as the success itself (much easier to build your shoe brand playing in NYC or LA, or live the club-and-paparazzi lifestyle in LA or Miami). As long as that happens, it will take absolutely elite-level management to build an NBA team that can sustain success. The margin of error is clearly and obviously much, much thinner in a Detroit or a Cleveland than for the Lakers.
It's not so much "right way vs. wrong way", it's more "easy way vs. hard way." I mean, does anyone really think Pat Riley is some kind of genius GM for putting together a championship team?
I'd say he's a genius in that he changed the culture and made it a place the top players in the game want to go.
It's funny how people are ragging on Miami, lamenting all of these built in advantages that the Heat supposedly have over almost all of the other teams in the league. When in the Miami Heat's first 17 years of existence, nobody seemed to notice any of these things, and they didn't have an advantage over anyone.
In my opinion the two people that changed Miami from also ran, to premier franchise were Shaq, and Pat Reilly.
Had the Kobe vs. Shaw feud never happened Shaq wouldn't have left L.A., but when it was clear that the Lakers wanted to deal their aging veteran superstar to placate the younger one, the Miami Heat were all over it.
Shaq instantly turned around the Miami Heat franchise, and Pat Reilly's ability to land someone of Shaq's caliber sent a signal to the league that Miami was now a contender. The continued development of budding superstar Dwayne Wade made them the new version of Shaq and Kobe.
Winning a title in '06 got the monkey off of the Heat's back and signified that Miami's management was capable of winning a title.
Had Pat Reilly not changed the culture of the Heat, landed Shaq, and put all of the excellent young (and old) pieces around Shaq and DWade, they probably wouldn't have been able to land LeBron, and Bosh in 2011. The trade for Shaq set the stage for Miami eventually becoming one of the premier franchises in the league.
So as I said, yes, I give all the credit in the world to Pat Reilly for making those things happen.
When in the Miami Heat's first 17 years of existence, nobody seemed to notice any of these things, and they didn't have an advantage over anyone.
I wouldn't quite say that. Remember the Juwan Howard tampering fiasco in 1996? The Heat were set to sign Howard, back when he was a hot commodity, and pair him with Alonzo Mourning and Tim Hardaway, but screwed it up by tampering before he could sign officially, and the league voided the deal.
Your points are all well taken, but I would note that in today's global market it's far less relevant where in the US you play in terms of your brand. LeBron would've been a global superstar if he played in Circleville, OH. Certainly, a big-market location helps, but I would liken it to, I dunno, having a family member alum when applying to a college. It's a huge ace in the hole, but your high school record and personal intangibles are much biggest factors in terms of getting in.
eta: that was in reply to Maize n Blue Wahoo :)
I don't understand all this talk of "the right way" to build a team, by drafting guys. What that basically amounts to is "tank for the No. 1 pick"
I am a huge Bynum fan. It will be sad to see him go. I know Kobe loved the way he played. Dwight and Bynum had pretty comparable stats last year (20.6 ppg, 14.5 rpg, 2.1 blk for Dwight and 18.7 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 1.6 blk for Bynum), and Bynum shoots 20% higher from the FT line, plus he is two years younger. I don't see the Lakers winning a ton more games w/ Howard as opposed to Bynum. At least Bynum can now go to a team where he will be the focal point of an offense. I anticipate he will have a monster season in Philly, maybe 22-24 ppg and 15+ rpg
I've never understood why people acted like there was this HUGE gap between Bynum and Howard. Bynum is undoubtably the better offensive player. Howard is undoubtably the better defensive player. Both are extremely immautre team killers. Its apples to apples.
I think it's more granny smith apples to Fuji apples. Howard is nowhere near that low-post power that Bynum is but moves better without the ball, which will mesh a little better with the Princeton offense that Steve Nash will theoretically orchestrate next season. As good as Bynum was, he hadn't mastered stage 3 of low-post enlightenment which was knowing how and when to pass out of the double-team, and that made L.A. relatively easy to stymie on offense in the playoffs.
I think Bynum will do some great work with Philly and I'm kinda glad he is there next year to cause trouble for the Eastern Conference elite, because the 76ers at the very least will earn the coveted title of Team No One Wants To Play next season.
Seems to me sixers have been trying to copy the Dumars constructed pistons sans Sheed. This looks like an attempt to raise the collective talent level with a calculated risk on an enigmatic talented big man. I am thinking that the sixers however are not nearly as close as the pistons were and Bynum is not nearly as dynamic/ good as Sheed was. Lightning in that model will not strike twice in my mind.
Think that is accurate comparison? Assessment?
33 All star appearances in the starting 5 is pretty old yet awesome.
Does anyone believe this spells doom for Darius Morris? Regardless he played well enough in the Summer league to get a long look from other teams. I personally would prefer he go to Europe for a year or 2 and hone his skills while possibly making more money, but either way his future in LA just got a little more cloudy.
So what big name do you think is the next to leave their current team for bigger greener pastures?
My bet is Kevin Love will leave Minnesota, through upcoming free agency, and go to either one of the LA teams, or go to Brooklyn
He just signed a 5 year deal to stay. Wants to play with Rubio!
How has no one posted this gif yet?
Anything one question what the hell the Magic were thinking making this deal? Out of the 4 team, they have to have gotten the worst. There is no way Al Harrington is going to perform nearly to the level as he did last year as he's getting older. They couldn't have atleast gotten the draft picks un-protected? I feel like I would have way rather taken the Nets offer back in June than this.
Our long national nightmare is finally over. An overrated, prima-donna (who is admittedly a great defender) has moved on from a contrived and floundering team in Orlando to a star-studded but old team in LA, where he'll one day take over the mantle of one of the most successful franchises in all of sport and be reasonably successful while alienating man fans before proving mediocre in his "passions" beyond being tall and throwing a ball into a hoop while stopping others from doing so.
Great now my lakers fan friends will be even more insufferable lol