IF this is the new Lopez.....

[Trader_Joe]

It's scary to think of all the potential FAs between 2016 and 2017, especially if you assume the 2015 will want in on it.

All unrestricted...

M.Gasol
Jordan
LMA
Rondo
LBJ
Love
Dwight
Durant
Horford
Noah
Hibbert
Conley
Batum
Millsap
Derozen
Griffin
Westbrook
Ibaka
Curry
Parsons
B.Lopez
Monroe
etc....

The more I think about it, I really hope we don't resign any of Brook, Thad or Teletovic this off-season unless they are very friendly deals so they can be moved if needed/wanted.

[MaxZaslofskyJr]

someone like ben wallace doesnt come around very often.

The main thrust being however you want to classify players - the Pistons weren't built by chasing superstars...especially in the case of Wallace.

no, but one team getting lucky and falling backwards into one of the best defensive anchors of the past 20 years isnt exactly a model to copy or try and recreate outside of that you are looking at championships with

Lebron
Duncan
KG
Kobe
Shaq
Dirk
Wade
Jordan
Hakeem
Isiah
Magic
Bird
Karrem
Dr. J/Moses

those players comprise 44 of the last 45 championships.

you can focuse on that 1 out of 45, and say you dont need a superstar. id say you are likely inaccurate with that. not only do you need a superstar, but you probably either need multiple or need a top 5 player/shoe in hall of famer

Yeah. But now we need to name all of the teams thru the years that did have superstars but didn't win. The exposure would be in the hundreds. Malone, Stockton, Barkley, the years Hakeem didn't win, the years Magic didn't win, etc. etc. Plus I know that I am in the minority but I never considered Thomas as a superstar (at least, insofar he could have ever carried that Pistons team on his back). Borderline on that call. Anyway, that was a team effort.

[MaxZaslofskyJr]

The main thrust being however you want to classify players - the Pistons weren't built by chasing superstars...especially in the case of Wallace.

no, but one team getting lucky and falling backwards into one of the best defensive anchors of the past 20 years isnt exactly a model to copy or try and recreate outside of that you are looking at championships with

Lebron
Duncan
KG
Kobe
Shaq
Dirk
Wade
Jordan
Hakeem
Isiah
Magic
Bird
Karrem
Dr. J/Moses

those players comprise 44 of the last 45 championships.

you can focuse on that 1 out of 45, and say you dont need a superstar. id say you are likely inaccurate with that. not only do you need a superstar, but you probably either need multiple or need a top 5 player/shoe in hall of famer

Yeah. But now we need to name all of the teams thru the years that did have superstars but didn't win. The exposure would be in the hundreds. Malone, Stockton, Barkley, the years Hakeem didn't win, the years Magic didn't win, etc. etc. How many contending teams thru those years can you really think of like say today's Hawks (yes, I think they deserve to be called a contender), the Bibby-Divac-Stojakovic Kings, or the like. Not nearly as many. It's easy to grab a superstar. It's often the case that you lose with one also.

Plus I know that I am in the minority but I never considered Thomas as a superstar (at least, insofar he could have ever carried that Pistons team on his back). Borderline on that call. Anyway, that was a team effort.

Teams like the Supersonics did it. or the GS Warriors too years back.

[MaxZaslofskyJr]

.... those guys never sign until the max guys sign.

Wouldn't you agree that's in least in part because everyone is still all in on the top dogs?

not really. its about setting the market. unless a second tier guy is getting massively overpaid, he isnt siging until someone else gets a max and sets the market

Naturally, neither of us has anyway of knowing for sure what somebody would hypothetically do.

However, I think back on AK47 and how he squeezed himself out of the market.

Have to believe that scenario would be on players minds.

[Prokorov]

Also, for those against preserving as much cap space as possible, consider this...

if anthony davis signs the qualifying offer instead of an extension next season, he becomes a free agent along with durant in 2016.

Lets say durant and davis want to team up with say noah or conley. do you want to pass up the chance on having daivs and durant on the same team becasue you wanted to extend brook and no stretch deron williams?

Anthony Davis would need to demonstrate a remarkable consistency in the ability to remain healthy to sign a QO.

Even though Greg Monroe has done it, no one recommends it. He's a guy who is a good player but wants star money and considering how he mostly plays below the basket he has a better shot of not taking crazy spills.

AD on the other hand is quite injury prone, makes very athletic plays, but is constantly being injured because of his above the rim play. There's no way I see him risking playing on a QO instead of taking the guaranteed max contract under the increased cap.

antohony davis could miss all of next year and would still get a max deal.

[Prokorov]

The main thrust being however you want to classify players - the Pistons weren't built by chasing superstars...especially in the case of Wallace.

no, but one team getting lucky and falling backwards into one of the best defensive anchors of the past 20 years isnt exactly a model to copy or try and recreate outside of that you are looking at championships with

Lebron
Duncan
KG
Kobe
Shaq
Dirk
Wade
Jordan
Hakeem
Isiah
Magic
Bird
Karrem
Dr. J/Moses

those players comprise 44 of the last 45 championships.

you can focuse on that 1 out of 45, and say you dont need a superstar. id say you are likely inaccurate with that. not only do you need a superstar, but you probably either need multiple or need a top 5 player/shoe in hall of famer

Yeah. But now we need to name all of the teams thru the years that did have superstars but didn't win. The exposure would be in the hundreds. Malone, Stockton, Barkley, the years Hakeem didn't win, the years Magic didn't win, etc. etc. Plus I know that I am in the minority but I never considered Thomas as a superstar (at least, insofar he could have ever carried that Pistons team on his back). Borderline on that call. Anyway, that was a team effort.

thats kind of an absurd point... i mean:

44 out of the last 45 teams to win it all had superstars. to say you dont need a superstar because lots of superstars didnt win is complete illogical.

how many teams without a superstar won? 1? maybe 2?

having a superstar doesnt gaurantee you a title, but it is still a perquisite to getting one

[MaxZaslofskyJr]

thats kind of an absurd point... i mean:

44 out of the last 45 teams to win it all had superstars. to say you dont need a superstar because lots of superstars didnt win is complete illogical.

how many teams without a superstar won? 1? maybe 2?

having a superstar doesnt gaurantee you a title, but it is still a perquisite to getting one

Let's see if I can explain to ya better where I'm coming from.

I'm a red-headed guy with freckles. Stats show that in the last 50 years, only a small % of Red-headed guys with freckles win the lottery. BTW. 1 out of every 10 guys have red-hair and freckles.

But you see, once I get myself in the mix and buy that lottery ticket it doesn't matter.

45 out the last 50 lottery winners didn't have red-hair and freckles.
5 out of 50 did.
There is a parallel.

I stipulated from the get-go that:
(1) definitions of superstars may vary. I count 3 piston teams and the Supersonics and the Warriors in the last approximate 50 years as not having that dominant player. That's 5 by me. Maybe less by you. Doesn't matter. The idea still holds.
(2) the chances of assembling a balanced contending team were lesser. (I take that as a given but draw the distinction that once assembled that teams chances of contending or winning are less.)

Because of (2) you have to get a very large sample size to monitor such a low-probability. 50 years may not even be enough.

Digressing...Just out for the sake of discussion:
how would you think a team with the 30th thru 34th best players would do? contend?
how would you think a team with the 20th thru 24th best players would do? contend?
how would you think a team with the 11th thru 15th best players would do? contend?
Isn't it a priori a matter of degree?

Look. You want to run the race starting out a leg behind. I want to take the short-cut through the unknown swamp that nobody else is trying. Who's to say whose way might work? Let's leave it at that.

[Paradise]

WOJ: Nets committed to keeping Lopez

"The interesting thing for Lopez if he wait till 2016, he'd be one of those players who'd be able to get a no-trade clause in his deal, I believe. and that might be important to him. I dont know how much of a priority that is. To have some degree of control, considering how much he's been involved in trade talks and how close he's come several times to being moved.

"The decision for him and his agents this summer is do we do a get-some-security If he opts in for next year, he'd get $16.7 milion, what i've been told is that his extension number might be in that $13 - $14 million range if he's healthy and continues to check out medically. His production's been excellent this year. He could sign an extension this year, with the Nets or elsewhere or he could roll the dice and go and play more year and go into free ageency next year (2016). It's a decision that needs to be made. I know it hasn't been fully addressed yet."

"I think the fact that they didn't trade him tells you they would be aggressive. I think if they felt they weren't going to commit to him financially long term, I think they would have moved him. And because they know they are at the risk of losing him, if he opts out and can walk, that tells me the Nets are committed to trying to keep him based on the fact they that turned, walked away from a couple of different deals at the deadline."

Audio: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/audio/joe-benigno-and-evan-roberts/adrian-wojnarowski/

[Trader_Joe]

[quote="Paradise"][b][size=150]WOJ: Nets committed to keeping Lopez[/size][/b]

[quote]"The interesting thing for Lopez if he wait till 2016, he'd be one of those players who'd be able to get a no-trade clause in his deal, I believe. and that might be important to him. I dont know how much of a priority that is. To have some degree of control, considering how much he's been involved in trade talks and how close he's come several times to being moved.

"The decision for him and his agents this summer is do we do a get-some-security If he opts in for next year, he'd get $16.7 milion, what i've been told is that his extension number might be in that $13 - $14 million range if he's healthy and continues to check out medically. His production's been excellent this year. He could sign an extension this year, with the Nets or elsewhere or he could roll the dice and go and play more year and go into free ageency next year (2016). It's a decision that needs to be made. I know it hasn't been fully addressed yet."

"I think the fact that they didn't trade him tells you they would be aggressive. I think if they felt they weren't going to commit to him financially long term, I think they would have moved him. And because they know they are at the risk of losing him, if he opts out and can walk, that tells me the Nets are committed to trying to keep him based on the fact they that turned, walked away from a couple of different deals at the deadline."

Audio: [url]http://newyork.cbslocal.com/audio/joe-benigno-and-evan-roberts/adrian-wojnarowski/[/url] [/quote][/quote]




Except the logic in his paragraph makes no sense. They thought they had him traded and had to wait until the bitter end to find out OKC found something better.

[Paradise]

Brook is the first player this season to be named Player Of The Week in consecutive weeks.


[tweet]https://twitter.com/NBA/status/585155283078385664[/tweet]

[Zachbretton]

Brook is the first player this season to be named Player Of The Week in consecutive weeks.


[tweet]https://twitter.com/NBA/status/585155283078385664[/tweet]

Truly on a beastly roll


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[MrDollarBills]

Well deserved honors for THE BEAST.

[Prokorov]

some numbers on lopez....

% of FGM assisted on:

nov-feb: 61.2%
March: 72.8%

% of FGA from 16-20 feet:

nov-feb: .298
March: .077

Dunks:

nov-feb: 19
March: 16

shooting less, dunking more, playing closer to the rim and creating less of his own offense and working more off others.

all great signs