NBA 2017 - 2018 Westworld

[gblews]

The Spurs have a young point guard they like. I don't think they'd want Kyrie. They would be losing a small forward (Kawhi), so Jaylen Brown fits the bill.

As for the Lakers, Ramona Shelburne and Woj, reported yesterday that Kawhi met with Pop. They further reported that Kawhi has let it be known that that he doesn't want to play in SA anymore and wants to be traded "to L.A., preferrably to the Lakers". Further, they report that he plans on letting teams know that he won't sign an extension with any team other than the Lakers.

If this is true, it sounds like he is trying to force his way onto the Lakers via trade. If he does this, it will kill the Spurs bargaining power in trade talks, similar to the Paul Geroge situation with Indy.

But, as much respect and admiration I have for Pop, I think he might let his emotions get the better of him when it comes to doing anything to help the Lakers. I guarantee you the Lakers wouldn't feel the same way about dealing with the Spurs.

I can see Spurs trading Kawhi to the Clippers just to "F" with the Lakers. Clips might think they have a chance of re-signing him because it is L.A.

As much as I love Brandon Ingram and feel he has a chance to grow into an all-star, I'd trade him straight up for Kawhi in a heartbeat.

 

[1001001]

Well, that’s an interesting development.

LeBron is a Laker.

 

[Thestral]

.... fuck.

 

[1001001]

In unrelated news, Lakers tickets just went up to $8000 apiece.

$39 million a year. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph.

 

[Pondwater]

Will it restore the Lakers to their former glory?

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I'm not surprised at all Lebron went to Lakers. I expected him to, and as much as I hate the Lakers, I'm frankly happy it's not the Sixers, because I don't want the Celtics to go down to Lebron in the conference finals again. I want them to fight valiantly and go down against KD and Steph!

Here's the thing about if they traded Kawhi for Brown. Unless Kawhi signs a contract extension as part of the deal, we have to consider him a rental. Brown has two years left on his rookie contract. If Celtics traded Brown for Leonard, they'd take a 15M loss, also have to give up probably the Kings draft pick, lose their ability to sign other free agents, and Leonard wouldn't even stick around. So we'd essentially be trading one good shot at a championship now for potentially several shots later. I don't think Ainge makes that trade.

If somehow the finals ends up Celtics/Lakers, I look forward to the rest of the country's collective groan.

 

[Borgminister]

Will it restore the Lakers to their former glory?

Not by itself, I don't think. Now if Kawhi ends up there, it becomes interesting, and depends a great deal on coaching IMO.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I don't know what Kawhi is thinking. Even suggesting if he doesn't get the deal he wants he'll sit out the season. It's like he's playing a game called "How can I get the smallest contract possible a year from now".

It's like the NBA is saying "You can't have your dessert until you eat your vegetables". And Kawhi is saying "Well, I'm not gonna eat my vegetables! No way you'll let me starve." And the NBA is saying "Okay, starve then."

If he's insisting so hard now he's only willing to play with the Lakers, next year Lakers will be like "Ok, here's your offer, way less than max. Whatcha gonna do, sign somewhere else?"

 

[gblews]

FAWell, needless to say, I am e cstatic about signing LeBron. Even though pretty much everyone has been saying he would do this for at least a year now, it was still shocking to actually see it happen. Laker Nation needed a pick me up after losing PG, which was also not a surprise.

But we may still end up with Kawhi, who is a considerably better player. I don't see Kawhi sitting out the season. He'd have to claim an injury or some such, or else be fined up the ying yang. But for now, it appears the Lakers are out of the Kawhi sweepstakes. I have been against us blowing up our young core to get him. With the acquisition of Bron, the Spurs lost most of their leverage. But, BTW, if it lasts long enough, there is no way the Lakers will offer less than a max deal in to Kawhi in 2019 FA, whether he sits out 2018 or not.

Just announced; Lakers renounce Julius Randle and sign Rajon Rondo to a one year $9 mil deal. Saves the Lakers at least $3 mil, so they are still setting things up for going after Kawhi in 2019 FA. I REALLY liked Julius and hoped to keep him, but at this point, I'll trust Magic and Pelinka's judgement.

Rondo's a good point guard, but he still can't shoot. Some analysts are saying it's a precursor to trading Lonzo. I do not see this happening.

But flying above it all, WE GOT LEBRON!

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Ok, if it's true that the Warriors signed Cousins for 5.3 million as ESPN is reporting, seriously, fuck him, fuck the Warriors, and fuck the NBA for not fixing this. Hopefully this is some kind of misinterpreted tweet. If it's true now we have superstars signing minimum contracts just for free championships.

 

[gblews]

Ok, if it's true that the Warriors signed Cousins for 5.3 million as ESPN is reporting, seriously, fuck him, fuck the Warriors, and fuck the NBA for not fixing this. Hopefully this is some kind of misinterpreted tweet. If it's true now we have superstars signing minimum contracts just for free championships.

Fix what? What is it you think is broken? Be specific.

Boogie's contract was over. As such, he could sign with whomever he wanted. That is entirely within the rules. Ordinarily, the Dubs wouldn't have been able to affoord him, but because of his injury, he was obliged to acccept considerably less than market value. So he took GSW's Taxpayer's Exception. Nothing underhanded went on.

Ask yourself if you would still be sqwuaking if the Celts had made this deal. I think not.

I think you want free agency in the NBA to be like the NFL, which is not really "free" agency at all. As I'v said before, you're anti free agency, and what is funny thing is, I don't think you even realize it.

Gotta give the Dubs credit. Maybe the west GM's are just smarter.

 

[Thestral]

May as well shutter half the league at this point. Why even bother pretending?

Oh for the days when Chris Paul to the Lakers got torpedoed... wouldn't even make a dent today.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

The only thing keeping me even mildly interested in watching the NBA this season is that my team is the favorite to win the minor league I mean Eastern Conference.

It’s absurd to let a single team get an all All Star lineup for less than the Celtics are paying Aron Baynes. Unless Warriors get major injuries, I think I will not watch a single non-Celtics game all season.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I think you want free agency in the NBA to be like the NFL, which is not really "free" agency at all. As I'v said before, you're anti free agency, and what is funny thing is, I don't think you even realize it.

Don't be a dick. Again, "There should exist some limits" is not the same as "Players should not have choice at all". I suppose you think because I think murder should be illegal that I'm a totalitarian? If you want to have a real debate please respond to the argument I make instead of making up straw men.

All I think is that there should be balancing mechanics so the all star team can't all be on the same team. A hard salary cap and no player maximum would do. I will not even so much as acknowledge any future input from you on the topic, unless you respond to THAT argument, the one that I made. What do I want? I want the boring predictability to end.

Yeah I wouldn't complain if it were the Celtics, but the rest of the league would be right to. Everyone's a hypocrite when it's their own team.

It'll be interesting to see where Kawhi goes now. Lakers must be thinking "We know you're going to sign with us next season, why the hell would we give up ANYTHING now?!" People are still bringing up Celts and Sixers, but again, how much do you really give up for someone you know will leave?

 

[gblews]

Don't be a dick. Again, "There should exist some limits"

There ARE limitations on Free Agency, plenty of them. But in the NBA, it is still "Free" agency, which means the players have a CHOICE as to where=, and for whom, they will work.

Your thinking I'm being a dick is really about your lack of knowledge of the NBA salary cap rules. You have no idea of the implications from what you suggest.

All I think is that there should be balancing mechanics so the all star team can't all be on the same team. A hard salary cap and no player maximum would do. I will not even so much as acknowledge any future input from you on the topic, unless you respond to THAT argument, the one that I made. What do I want? I want the boring predictability to end.

There ARE "balancing mechanics" in place, as there have always been since the dawn of free agency. A "hard cap" is what NBA owners have wanted for years, and still want. The reason they want that is because it would grant them more control over player movement under free agency. Why do you think the NFL owners have a hard cap in place? It is a control factor especially for the league's highest paid stars. It is for this reason the NBA players have rebelled against a hard cap.

Two seasons ago, there was a huge spike in the salary cap FOR ALL TEAMS. That spike is what allowed the Warriors to sign Durant. The spike was caused by new TV rights sales. The spike was kind of an anomaly with respect to the amount. EVERY team had the chance to sign Durant. He CHOSE the Warriors. I am against any rule that further restricts player movement, but a rule that is in response to an anomaly is even more insidious.

You really don't even understand your own position, do you?

Yeah I wouldn't complain if it were the Celtics, but the rest of the league would be right to. Everyone's a hypocrite when it's their own team.

At least you admit that your argument is nothing but self serving bullshit.

Your argument pretty much follows what the owners want which is, control over free agency. My position and the position of the players is, why should we cede control of free agency to the owners? What makes the owners deserving of that control? Should they have it because they "provide" the money? The players' respond, there would not be any money if not for the players.

As for the Warriors, anything could happen this season. Boogie might never be a factor. They might have injuries. Everything might work out for them and they still lose to Houston. There are no guarantees even with a loaded roster. But if you create rules, like what the greedy ass NFL owners have, that prevent even the possibility of a "super team" formed by the players, then you are doing more harm to the players than you probably realize.

It'll be interesting to see where Kawhi goes now. Lakers must be thinking "We know you're going to sign with us next season, why the hell would we give up ANYTHING now?!" People are still bringing up Celts and Sixers, but again, how much do you really give 888888up for someone you know will leave?

The pressure is 100% on the Spurs. That became a fact when LeBron announced he was signing with the Lakers even though he knew no other stars had done likewise. Where Kawhi has said he wants to sign has little to do with what is going on today. Spurs face the prospect of opening camp with everyone knowing their star player doesn't want to be there. It is the same situation Cle was in last season with Kyrie. Spurs have never been in this position before and their lack of experience shows.

 

[Borgminister]

Cuz turns down 2 years, 40 million to start next to AD once rehabbed for 5 million to head up the second team on the Warriors? Allllll righty then...! Then again, I'll stop laughing if the Dubs win it all and Boogie gets a ring.

 

[gblews]

Michael Lee, a sportswriter of note, I assume, addresses the GSW hate over the Boogie signing much more adroitly than I did. He tweeted this a couple of says ago, he is 100% correct.

GSW isn't bad for the NBA. You know what is? SAC being in the lottery 12 years & trading away its lone all-star...ORL being rudderless since dealing Dwight...PHX stumbling over itself once Nash got old...BKN trading its future to BOS...CHA passionately hugging mediocrity...
NYK needlessly searching out a savior...MEM leaving behind grit&grind...Awful, non-competitive franchises are bad for the NBA. A dynasty generates interest, ignites passion. Dominance is good for business. Nobody - outside of process trusters in PHI - enjoys paying to watch lousy.

 

[Thestral]

When your stars are all congregating on the same couple squads, it does leave an awful lot of non-competitive franchises, this is true.

 

[gblews]

When your stars are all congregating on the same couple squads, it does leave an awful lot of non-competitive franchises, this is true.

Incompetent management leaves more, and for longer periods of time.

 

[gblews]

Boy, did the Spurs screw this up. Not talking so much about the trade, but the way they mishandled the Kawhi situation. The organization is inexperienced with handling disgruntled stars and it shows. Instead of sticking by their player, they allowed him to be attacked by others in the organization, other players, and most importantly, the media. Through their own arrogance and naivete, thinking no one would want to leave such a wonderful organization, they practically pushed Kawhi out the door. They're now learning.

The other thing they screwed up was behaving like they actually had any leverage even after Kawhi let it slip that he no longer wanted to play for the Spurs. Spurs' leverage decreased by at least 50% at that point. But they acted like this was a situation where they were trying to move a bad seed. Instead of acting boldly and decisively, the Spurs became petulant and refused to deal with teams in their conference, specifically, the Lakers. The Spurs then reportedly made ridiculous demands for assets from the Celts and Sixers as well.

Once LeBron chose the Lakers, any remaining leverage went out the window. But the Spurs continued to act like they were in the cat bird's seat. They might have gotten at least one young budding star or more if they'd played it smart, but instead they end up with a good, but middle aged, head case and a top 20 protected first round pick. TOP 20 PROTECTED!

The Spurs might have done better than what they did, but inexperience and arrogance hurt them badly.