none of those stories are interesting in today’s nba. Maybe if any of them had even just a 5% chance of making serious noise I’d consider it interesting, but they don’t, and it won’t be interesting.
But if you're going to artificially rig how teams can acquire players supposedly in the name of maintaining a certain level of competition, then a system that results in the Superfriends kind of shit the NBA has now is both wrong and useless.
RE: RE: Getting so tired of the 2011 Giants narrative.. Â
The fact that so many here reference that team as being mediocre is pathetic.
As compared to other NFL champions? Yes, within that subset they were absolutely mediocre by every measure.
This isn’t the 2005 Steelers beating Matt Hasselback and the Seahawks in the SB. I’ll take 9-7 and beating a 15-1 Packer team in Lambeau & Belichick/Brady along the way to a title.
is the weakest out of all of the leagues in regards to the salary cap. Too many loopholes and exemptions that tilt the field.
The NFL realized they had a problem in the 80's with superteams being assembled by outspending the competition. They instituted the salary cap. It is a model that had worked, and it is continually tweaked to allow all teams to be competitive if they make the correct moves.
The NBA has put a system in place that was intended to help with parity, but has resulted in the opposite effect because of terrible rules. They know it. We know it. The teams know it. Yet it doesn't change.
I'm with UConn. Parity or not doesn't matter to me. The way things are implemented or play out does.
I find dep's list pretty interesting. Yes, it's probably a foregone conclusion that Dubs will 3-peat, but I find those storylines compelling theater.
Also, how does LBJ do in LA? What does that roster look like? Where's Kawhi going? Is Jimmy Buckets out of MN next summer? How about Celts trading for AD? Is Kyrie interested in the Knicks?
That stuff, & a ton more, makes me love the NBA.
For all the bitching people do about the league, interest is up evidenced by TV ratings.
I try to keep telling myself that this signing could backfire on them. He could fracture the lockeroom, hurt their switching defense and just cause problems. How a talented offensive player who turns it over and doesn't try hard on D is the last type of center the Warriors need.
- ( New Window )
It definitely could - but the Warriors don't need Boogie. He's a luxury. If he starts giving half-assed efforts, he won't play
This is what really sucks. The Warriors have zero at risk here. If he causes any problems they simply cut him and lose nothing. It's not like they are even making a salary cap sacrifice.
But if he comes back strong and is motivated and dominating? This team could win 75+ games if they wanted to and won't be challenged even slightly in the playoffs.
Their 2 biggest challenges the last 2 years ( Cavs, Rockets) have gotten worse while they keep getting better.
For all the bitching people do about the league, interest is up evidenced by TV ratings.
People said the same thing about the NFL for a long time. My own hunch is the same one I had about the NFL - popularity looks massive on the surface but it's a mile wide and an inch deep, driven by extremely casual fans.
LOL, yeah.. I mean.. will Minny take the next step... that's a storyline? They have a zero percent chance of actually challenging the Warriors. I don't find that interesting at all.
but at the same time... some teams are just poorly run
choices teams make dictate their success... not the NBA rules.
its harder to quickly turn around in the nba--- for sure. but all the whining about the league... in particular in the NY area... is because we root for teams that are or were poorly run.
Charlotte languishes in the mediocrity of the NBA. Not because they are poorly run, but because they aren't drawing superstars to pair with Kemba Walker. An aging Dwight Howard didn't cut it. Lance Stephenson didn't cut it. An always injured Micheal Kidd-Gilcrest didn't cut it.
A team can draft fair and have one legitimate star and still be part of the NBA dregs and non-competitive.
LOL, yeah.. I mean.. will Minny take the next step... that's a storyline? They have a zero percent chance of actually challenging the Warriors. I don't find that interesting at all.
Eh, to each their own. I just love basketball. It's my favorite sport after football & doesn't have the moral issue that bothers me, i.e. I'm watching men who might not remember their name in 15 years beat the hell out of each other for my enjoyment.
The popularity NBA seems largely driven by soap opera-ish story lines and rivalries (whether real or imagined) between individual players more than anything else. Now, to be fair, it's always been this way to a much greater degree than other sports. Going back to Magic and Larry, the focus has always been on a few massive stars at the expense of the rest of the league, and given the small team sizes compared with the other three major sports that makes some sense. It still doesn't make for as compelling a product in my opinion.
By just about any definition. Across TV, attendance, whatever. Cherry-picking ABC rating doesn't change that. Not to mention this in an environment of declining TV ratings for almost everything else
LOL, yeah.. I mean.. will Minny take the next step... that's a storyline? They have a zero percent chance of actually challenging the Warriors. I don't find that interesting at all.
I am a basketball nerd. My team is going to suck so I have to watch other things. Phoenix should be a ton of fun to watch now. Minny needs a new coach but they have a ton of talent.
And there are a shitload of talent to watch even though their teams aren’t the warriors.
parity = good, no parity = bad. It’s how said parity is achieved that I have issues with.
I have no problem with the Pats dynasty, for example. I had no problem with GS originally when they hit HRs with Curry, Thompson, and Green. I had no problem with the Spurs success over the past 15/20 years.
Do you have a problem with the Warriors now? If so, when was the tipping point? Should they not have been allowed to sign Durant?
parity = good, no parity = bad. It’s how said parity is achieved that I have issues with.
I have no problem with the Pats dynasty, for example. I had no problem with GS originally when they hit HRs with Curry, Thompson, and Green. I had no problem with the Spurs success over the past 15/20 years.
Do you have a problem with the Warriors now? If so, when was the tipping point? Should they not have been allowed to sign Durant?
I think how easy it was for them to get on the teams want is the sticking point. They don’t sign long term deals anymore. 1-2 years with opt out clauses. It puts the team in huge binds.
parity = good, no parity = bad. It’s how said parity is achieved that I have issues with.
I have no problem with the Pats dynasty, for example. I had no problem with GS originally when they hit HRs with Curry, Thompson, and Green. I had no problem with the Spurs success over the past 15/20 years.
Do you have a problem with the Warriors now? If so, when was the tipping point? Should they not have been allowed to sign Durant?
You know the answer to that question already. I can simultaneously understand why Durant made the move and hate it at the same time. I don’t understand this notion to be all in one either side of this. LeBron and Durant and Leonard can do whatever the hell they want, but that doesn’t mean I have to accept it, like it, and watch the product.
My biggest problem was with Durant. He could have beaten the Warriors with a better individual showing in that conference final, and instead of being more motivated to do it the next year, he joined them and got a nice easy chip.
I'm not asking players to stay on awful teams for a decade just to placate fans or for the sake of competitive fire - but he had Russell Westbrook on his team and that team could have challenged GSW pretty easily the last couple of seasons if he had stayed there and they added a little more depth.
That move tipped the scales so heavily that it's comical now.
Yeah, Houston came close. And James Harden had some horrific shooting performances.
I don't need to see the type of parity we see in the NFL - but I'd like there to be more than 1-2 teams in each conference with any semblance of a chance. I don't think that's unreasonable.
Again, I'm way out of my element, but wasn't there a bunch of friction between him and Westbrook? Couldn't he also have been annoyed that Oklahoma didn't do more to retain Harden, or simply have identified that Golden State is a better organization?
And also, what about the benefit of being able to watch a truly great team? This Warriors team will be remembered forever. Doesn't that matter?
Durant had options and Harden leaving was basically old news by the time he left - that wasn't much of a deciding factor as far as I remember.
He and Russ weren't best buds, but they won a lot of games together and could have beaten Golden State if they gave it another shot. I wanted to see Durant be a competitor and say "I know I can beat those guys and I'm going to work harder than ever this offseason to get back there next year"
He took the easiest way out possible and the last two GS titles felt cheap. If I want to watch that shit, I'll just watch the Globetrotters play the Generals.
It doesn't excite or interest me to watch an all star team just steamroll pretty much everyone else.
Again, I don't need 20 teams to be in the mix or extreme parity. But there should be more than 2 teams in each conference that have more than a complete miracle of a chance at winning a title.
It's a deflating league when fans of like 28 teams already know they have no shot whatsoever come opening night. That sucks and isn't true in any other league but this one.
Again, I'm way out of my element, but wasn't there a bunch of friction between him and Westbrook? Couldn't he also have been annoyed that Oklahoma didn't do more to retain Harden, or simply have identified that Golden State is a better organization?
And also, what about the benefit of being able to watch a truly great team? This Warriors team will be remembered forever. Doesn't that matter?
I'm not as big of an NBA buff as some guys here, so I hope people correct me if I'm wrong, but:
a) I believe a lot of the acrimony between KD and Westbrook was due to the fact he left, and how
b) Harden was not the player he is now at the time he left OKC. I don't think anyone projected him to be someone who would end up being league MVP a few years later
there’s simply too much we don’t know. A fractured relationship is all it takes and in a sport where there’s only 5 players on the court together, having 2 not get along is a huge problem. As much as I hate what Durant did and what Leonard is doing, I have no right to tell them to suck it up and stay.
That said, joining the best team in the league was a bush league move and unfortunately for Durant I get to call him a pussy (I’m sure he doesn’t care). Is watching history happen worth something? To me, no. I get no enjoyment out of watching this GS team, it’s just so damn artificial at this point.
Westbrook could have left OKC too, but he stayed. I know some people don't like him, but that guy wants to compete. I never got the impression that Russ wanted to just join an all star team and get easy rings.
People say this is all LeBron's fault and that he started all of this, but LeBron never would have left Cleveland the first time if he had a player as good as Westbrook there. He left because he spent 7 years there and they continued to pair him with garbage like Larry Hughes and Antawn Jamison.
Durant could have won a chip in OKC and him going to GSW tipped the scales to a laughable degree. I really just think that move was absolutely awful for the NBA. And hey, he has every right to do it. But as a fan, it's my right to call it weak and disagree with it too.
That’s why this signing occurred . I hope he realizes he made a selfish decision that is antithetical to his family’s best interests
How do you know? Maybe among his family's interests are living in the Bay Area. Maybe he's confident that the Warriors' culture (there IS something to it) will help him become a better player in more ways than one, and prepare him for an even better future.
I think I see it the other way. Artificial, to me, would have been putting some mechanism in place to prevent Durant from making the move he wanted to make. Calling him a pussy or lauding him is up to each individual fan to decide at that point.
And if you listen to him on pods/interviews, you can really sense he had no idea what the blowback was going to be. He's really, really sensitive to it.
People say this is all LeBron's fault and that he started all of this, but LeBron never would have left Cleveland the first time if he had a player as good as Westbrook there. He left because he spent 7 years there and they continued to pair him with garbage like Larry Hughes and Antawn Jamison.
Durant could have won a chip in OKC and him going to GSW tipped the scales to a laughable degree. I really just think that move was absolutely awful for the NBA. And hey, he has every right to do it. But as a fan, it's my right to call it weak and disagree with it too.
Lebron did start it. He organized the signings before they were free agents. He could have stayed in Cleveland and easily signed Bosh as well. And again, lebron publicly stated who he wanted to play with. Lebron has controlled the organization before he left for the Heat. Either appease or he leaves. And if the team stinks, he leaves anyways.
The pattern is there, people are starting to see it.
People say this is all LeBron's fault and that he started all of this, but LeBron never would have left Cleveland the first time if he had a player as good as Westbrook there. He left because he spent 7 years there and they continued to pair him with garbage like Larry Hughes and Antawn Jamison.
Durant could have won a chip in OKC and him going to GSW tipped the scales to a laughable degree. I really just think that move was absolutely awful for the NBA. And hey, he has every right to do it. But as a fan, it's my right to call it weak and disagree with it too.
Durant joined the team that came back from a 3-1 deficit against him on OKC. GS had already won a title. A tremendously impactful move which altered the NBA.
Imagine losing a NFC title game to the Eagles, blowing a 14 point 4th quarter lead where Odell drops some crucial passes. He then joins the Eagles. From a competitive standpoint, it’s weak.
RE: RE: Athletes can’t win with some of you fucks. Â
Yeah, I can't think of another pursuit that engenders an indignant sense of entitlement more than sports fandom.
And I get that too. KD was 27 years old. He had lived in OKC for years. Perhaps he wanted to live elsewhere & see a different culture. He also has business interests in Silicon Valley.
I'm all over the map, Haha. I see both sides, though it rubs me that he went to the team he nearly beat to win the West.
I'll be honest... actually I'm kind of over it. For one, I've never been as much of a basketball fan as a football fan. But more importantly, I've discovered that the most gratifying aspect of following sports for me is to watch a terrible team finally emerge into a consistently great one. The Warriors have satisfied that desire more than I could ever hope a team would, but I'd rather the Giants do it. And I've found that once the team is at this level, it's just not as interesting to me anymore.
It's like how I find the origin story to be the best part of any well-done superhero movie.
People say this is all LeBron's fault and that he started all of this, but LeBron never would have left Cleveland the first time if he had a player as good as Westbrook there. He left because he spent 7 years there and they continued to pair him with garbage like Larry Hughes and Antawn Jamison.
Durant could have won a chip in OKC and him going to GSW tipped the scales to a laughable degree. I really just think that move was absolutely awful for the NBA. And hey, he has every right to do it. But as a fan, it's my right to call it weak and disagree with it too.
Lebron did start it. He organized the signings before they were free agents. He could have stayed in Cleveland and easily signed Bosh as well. And again, lebron publicly stated who he wanted to play with. Lebron has controlled the organization before he left for the Heat. Either appease or he leaves. And if the team stinks, he leaves anyways.
The pattern is there, people are starting to see it.
Actually, the 2008 Celtics were before LeBron went to Miami.
And LeBron just went to the Lakers. Who's there? Lonzo Ball, Ingram, Kuzma and Deng? Wow.. what a super team. At least he's trying to beat Golden State instead of find a way to join them.
I don't have to work hard to imagine Beckham dropping crucial passes in a playoff game...
I kid, I kid.
Anyway, in the scenario you painted I think it should still be up to Beckham to do what he wants. If you want to judge him as weak or whatever, that's up to you. But to install something that prohibits him from going to the Eagles would be wrong IMO.
I don't think players should be prohibited from joining certain teams, I just think the CBA sucks and that there are too many loopholes and exceptions.
There should be amore rigid cap structure. It would eliminate a lot of this nonsense.
I think I see it the other way. Artificial, to me, would have been putting some mechanism in place to prevent Durant from making the move he wanted to make. Calling him a pussy or lauding him is up to each individual fan to decide at that point.
I’m not asking for the move to be blocked. I’m asking for a system to be put in place that gives more teams the chance to succeed. I don’t know what the solution is, but the current system isn’t working, it’s pretty awful actually.
Quote:
The fact that so many here reference that team as being mediocre is pathetic.
As compared to other NFL champions? Yes, within that subset they were absolutely mediocre by every measure.
This isn’t the 2005 Steelers beating Matt Hasselback and the Seahawks in the SB. I’ll take 9-7 and beating a 15-1 Packer team in Lambeau & Belichick/Brady along the way to a title.
The NFL realized they had a problem in the 80's with superteams being assembled by outspending the competition. They instituted the salary cap. It is a model that had worked, and it is continually tweaked to allow all teams to be competitive if they make the correct moves.
The NBA has put a system in place that was intended to help with parity, but has resulted in the opposite effect because of terrible rules. They know it. We know it. The teams know it. Yet it doesn't change.
I'm with UConn. Parity or not doesn't matter to me. The way things are implemented or play out does.
Also, how does LBJ do in LA? What does that roster look like? Where's Kawhi going? Is Jimmy Buckets out of MN next summer? How about Celts trading for AD? Is Kyrie interested in the Knicks?
That stuff, & a ton more, makes me love the NBA.
For all the bitching people do about the league, interest is up evidenced by TV ratings.
Quote:
I try to keep telling myself that this signing could backfire on them. He could fracture the lockeroom, hurt their switching defense and just cause problems. How a talented offensive player who turns it over and doesn't try hard on D is the last type of center the Warriors need.
- ( New Window )
It definitely could - but the Warriors don't need Boogie. He's a luxury. If he starts giving half-assed efforts, he won't play
This is what really sucks. The Warriors have zero at risk here. If he causes any problems they simply cut him and lose nothing. It's not like they are even making a salary cap sacrifice.
But if he comes back strong and is motivated and dominating? This team could win 75+ games if they wanted to and won't be challenged even slightly in the playoffs.
Their 2 biggest challenges the last 2 years ( Cavs, Rockets) have gotten worse while they keep getting better.
People said the same thing about the NFL for a long time. My own hunch is the same one I had about the NFL - popularity looks massive on the surface but it's a mile wide and an inch deep, driven by extremely casual fans.
Overall ratings are down. Regular season ratings are down. Postseason ratings are up.
There's also an interesting article out there (I'll try to find it) about how the amount of each game being watched is down.
Basically, people tune into the end of games and the end of the season. The rest of the time they are ambivalent.
16-17: 112.0 bill.
15-16: 124.4
14-15: 114.8
13-14: 120.4
12-13: 128.1
NBA needs to fix problems - ( New Window )
choices teams make dictate their success... not the NBA rules.
its harder to quickly turn around in the nba--- for sure. but all the whining about the league... in particular in the NY area... is because we root for teams that are or were poorly run.
A team can draft fair and have one legitimate star and still be part of the NBA dregs and non-competitive.
Eh, to each their own. I just love basketball. It's my favorite sport after football & doesn't have the moral issue that bothers me, i.e. I'm watching men who might not remember their name in 15 years beat the hell out of each other for my enjoyment.
1. Is LBJ the GOAT?
2. Where will X player sign in FA?
3. Can you win with Russell Westbrook
Etc. I’d be curious to see how many of these casual fans are watching Bucks-Raptors on NBAtv in January.
I think that’s wonderful, but I do think the discussion regarding all sports now (mainly NFL & NBA) is very surfaced.
Attendance up TV ratings up merchandise up - ( New Window )
Season Network Rating
2017–18 ABC 2.2
2016–17 ABC 1.9
2015–16 ABC 2.3
2014–15 ABC 2.2
2013–14 ABC 2.3
2012–13 ABC 2.9
2011–12 (lockout shortened) ABC 3.3
2010–11 ABC 3.0
2009–10 ABC 2.3
2008–09 ABC 2.3
2007–08 ABC 2.2
2006–07 ABC 2.0
2005–06 ABC 2.2
2004–05 ABC 2.3
2003–04 ABC 2.4
2002–03 ABC 2.6
2001–02 NBC 2.9
2000–01 NBC 3.0
1999–2000 NBC 3.3
1998–99 (lockout shortened) NBC 4.3
1997–98 NBC 4.6
1996–97 NBC 4.7
1995–96 NBC 5.0
They have been flat since ABC/ESPN took over the games
I am a basketball nerd. My team is going to suck so I have to watch other things. Phoenix should be a ton of fun to watch now. Minny needs a new coach but they have a ton of talent.
And there are a shitload of talent to watch even though their teams aren’t the warriors.
I have no problem with the Pats dynasty, for example. I had no problem with GS originally when they hit HRs with Curry, Thompson, and Green. I had no problem with the Spurs success over the past 15/20 years.
Do you have a problem with the Warriors now? If so, when was the tipping point? Should they not have been allowed to sign Durant?
(2007–present)
Season ABC TNT ESPN NBA TV
2017–18 3.82M 1.74M 1.63M 0.31M
2016–17 3.27M 1.54M 1.57M 0.31M
2015–16 3.93M 1.68M 1.65M 0.35M
2014–15 3.59M 1.67M 1.50M 0.29M
2013–14 3.58M 1.90M 1.68M 0.32M
2012–13 4.70M 2.00M 1.77M 0.34M
2011–12 (lockout shortened) 5.42M 2.50M 1.86M 0.34M
2010–11 5.11M 2.40M 1.99M 0.25M
2009–10 3.69M 1.72M 1.56M ---
2008–09 3.68M 1.71M 1.68M ---
2007–08 3.18M 1.47M 1.47M ---
It has fluctuated year by year and is actually down since 2011-2012
Your definition of "every metric" doesn't seem to include the regular season.
I've already said the Finals ratings have steadily increased.
Quote:
parity = good, no parity = bad. It’s how said parity is achieved that I have issues with.
I have no problem with the Pats dynasty, for example. I had no problem with GS originally when they hit HRs with Curry, Thompson, and Green. I had no problem with the Spurs success over the past 15/20 years.
Do you have a problem with the Warriors now? If so, when was the tipping point? Should they not have been allowed to sign Durant?
I think how easy it was for them to get on the teams want is the sticking point. They don’t sign long term deals anymore. 1-2 years with opt out clauses. It puts the team in huge binds.
Yes. And not that I am against free agency either but it seems like players have ALL the power.
Quote:
parity = good, no parity = bad. It’s how said parity is achieved that I have issues with.
I have no problem with the Pats dynasty, for example. I had no problem with GS originally when they hit HRs with Curry, Thompson, and Green. I had no problem with the Spurs success over the past 15/20 years.
Do you have a problem with the Warriors now? If so, when was the tipping point? Should they not have been allowed to sign Durant?
You know the answer to that question already. I can simultaneously understand why Durant made the move and hate it at the same time. I don’t understand this notion to be all in one either side of this. LeBron and Durant and Leonard can do whatever the hell they want, but that doesn’t mean I have to accept it, like it, and watch the product.
I'm not asking players to stay on awful teams for a decade just to placate fans or for the sake of competitive fire - but he had Russell Westbrook on his team and that team could have challenged GSW pretty easily the last couple of seasons if he had stayed there and they added a little more depth.
That move tipped the scales so heavily that it's comical now.
Yeah, Houston came close. And James Harden had some horrific shooting performances.
I don't need to see the type of parity we see in the NFL - but I'd like there to be more than 1-2 teams in each conference with any semblance of a chance. I don't think that's unreasonable.
And also, what about the benefit of being able to watch a truly great team? This Warriors team will be remembered forever. Doesn't that matter?
He and Russ weren't best buds, but they won a lot of games together and could have beaten Golden State if they gave it another shot. I wanted to see Durant be a competitor and say "I know I can beat those guys and I'm going to work harder than ever this offseason to get back there next year"
He took the easiest way out possible and the last two GS titles felt cheap. If I want to watch that shit, I'll just watch the Globetrotters play the Generals.
It doesn't excite or interest me to watch an all star team just steamroll pretty much everyone else.
Again, I don't need 20 teams to be in the mix or extreme parity. But there should be more than 2 teams in each conference that have more than a complete miracle of a chance at winning a title.
It's a deflating league when fans of like 28 teams already know they have no shot whatsoever come opening night. That sucks and isn't true in any other league but this one.
And also, what about the benefit of being able to watch a truly great team? This Warriors team will be remembered forever. Doesn't that matter?
a) I believe a lot of the acrimony between KD and Westbrook was due to the fact he left, and how
b) Harden was not the player he is now at the time he left OKC. I don't think anyone projected him to be someone who would end up being league MVP a few years later
That said, joining the best team in the league was a bush league move and unfortunately for Durant I get to call him a pussy (I’m sure he doesn’t care). Is watching history happen worth something? To me, no. I get no enjoyment out of watching this GS team, it’s just so damn artificial at this point.
Durant could have won a chip in OKC and him going to GSW tipped the scales to a laughable degree. I really just think that move was absolutely awful for the NBA. And hey, he has every right to do it. But as a fan, it's my right to call it weak and disagree with it too.
How do you know? Maybe among his family's interests are living in the Bay Area. Maybe he's confident that the Warriors' culture (there IS something to it) will help him become a better player in more ways than one, and prepare him for an even better future.
I think I see it the other way. Artificial, to me, would have been putting some mechanism in place to prevent Durant from making the move he wanted to make. Calling him a pussy or lauding him is up to each individual fan to decide at that point.
Durant could have won a chip in OKC and him going to GSW tipped the scales to a laughable degree. I really just think that move was absolutely awful for the NBA. And hey, he has every right to do it. But as a fan, it's my right to call it weak and disagree with it too.
Lebron did start it. He organized the signings before they were free agents. He could have stayed in Cleveland and easily signed Bosh as well. And again, lebron publicly stated who he wanted to play with. Lebron has controlled the organization before he left for the Heat. Either appease or he leaves. And if the team stinks, he leaves anyways.
The pattern is there, people are starting to see it.
Durant could have won a chip in OKC and him going to GSW tipped the scales to a laughable degree. I really just think that move was absolutely awful for the NBA. And hey, he has every right to do it. But as a fan, it's my right to call it weak and disagree with it too.
Durant joined the team that came back from a 3-1 deficit against him on OKC. GS had already won a title. A tremendously impactful move which altered the NBA.
Imagine losing a NFC title game to the Eagles, blowing a 14 point 4th quarter lead where Odell drops some crucial passes. He then joins the Eagles. From a competitive standpoint, it’s weak.
And I get that too. KD was 27 years old. He had lived in OKC for years. Perhaps he wanted to live elsewhere & see a different culture. He also has business interests in Silicon Valley.
I'm all over the map, Haha. I see both sides, though it rubs me that he went to the team he nearly beat to win the West.
I'll be honest... actually I'm kind of over it. For one, I've never been as much of a basketball fan as a football fan. But more importantly, I've discovered that the most gratifying aspect of following sports for me is to watch a terrible team finally emerge into a consistently great one. The Warriors have satisfied that desire more than I could ever hope a team would, but I'd rather the Giants do it. And I've found that once the team is at this level, it's just not as interesting to me anymore.
It's like how I find the origin story to be the best part of any well-done superhero movie.
Quote:
People say this is all LeBron's fault and that he started all of this, but LeBron never would have left Cleveland the first time if he had a player as good as Westbrook there. He left because he spent 7 years there and they continued to pair him with garbage like Larry Hughes and Antawn Jamison.
Durant could have won a chip in OKC and him going to GSW tipped the scales to a laughable degree. I really just think that move was absolutely awful for the NBA. And hey, he has every right to do it. But as a fan, it's my right to call it weak and disagree with it too.
Lebron did start it. He organized the signings before they were free agents. He could have stayed in Cleveland and easily signed Bosh as well. And again, lebron publicly stated who he wanted to play with. Lebron has controlled the organization before he left for the Heat. Either appease or he leaves. And if the team stinks, he leaves anyways.
The pattern is there, people are starting to see it.
Actually, the 2008 Celtics were before LeBron went to Miami.
And LeBron just went to the Lakers. Who's there? Lonzo Ball, Ingram, Kuzma and Deng? Wow.. what a super team. At least he's trying to beat Golden State instead of find a way to join them.
I kid, I kid.
Anyway, in the scenario you painted I think it should still be up to Beckham to do what he wants. If you want to judge him as weak or whatever, that's up to you. But to install something that prohibits him from going to the Eagles would be wrong IMO.
There should be amore rigid cap structure. It would eliminate a lot of this nonsense.
Quote:
it’s just so damn artificial at this point.
I think I see it the other way. Artificial, to me, would have been putting some mechanism in place to prevent Durant from making the move he wanted to make. Calling him a pussy or lauding him is up to each individual fan to decide at that point.
I’m not asking for the move to be blocked. I’m asking for a system to be put in place that gives more teams the chance to succeed. I don’t know what the solution is, but the current system isn’t working, it’s pretty awful actually.