2024-25 NBA Season Discussion

[Doctor MJ]

Not saying that denver is not a threat, they are on fire currently and have jokic after all so if they catch fire offensively they have a good shot. But i am a bit perplexed they are the team picked as a "favorite" to upset current okc

Mainly because the team to take them down last year (wolves) basically played a similar version of what mark daigneaukt likely would do vs denver

Put a sturdy center on jokic (towns/harstentein), use your lankier/super long center in a secondary rim protection role (gobert/chet) and use your unit of elite defensive guards and long wing defenders to cut passing lanes, double jokic and recover and chase nuggets cutting players across the court

In fact, they are probably better equipped to do this/a better defensive team than minnesota so they should be a even bigger challenge to jokic and mike malone to solve

In the other end, just like with minnesota, they have the ability to use two centers together without compromising their offense thanks to their center shooting (towns/chet) and have a all nba guard to exploit jokic drop defense (shai/ant)

People also remember last year version of okc being "destroyed" by dallas size (in a close 6 game series where both teams scored exactly the same total points), and forget lost mainly in the offensive end (where dallas defense was a lot tougher that currently below league average denver)

The offensive rebounding from dallas helped them to win, but it was only because it made up for how well okc limited kyrie and (an admittedly not 100%) luka.okc defense still held dallas to a low scoring series

and that was a weaker defense than current okc, without harstentein (okc notoriously suffered when chet sat yet won the holgrem minutes) that had exploitable weak links like giddey for dallas to attack in the first games.

If people told me they have doubts about okc offense becauae it struggled last year i would find it understandable and a obvious concern to have, but doubting okc -defense- is what is puzzling me

Good post. Not going to say I'm picking Denver or anyone else over a healthy OKC team, but their success to this point has been about playing a radical defense with smaller guys, and I'm skeptical they'll really be able to play the same way against a star with serious mass. Certainly the hope has to be that IHart can stand up to Jokic because KAT & Gobert are both much more like IHart in sturdiness than Chet.

Not saying okc doesnt have weaknesses that could be exploited or lead to a loss, almost by definition teams lose because they had weaknesses compared to rivals, otherwise they never would lose

I am just a bit confused people are now saying that a "smaller" (and reminder no other team in the playoffs is going to play 2 shot blocking 7 footers together or have as much lenght across the court) is such a fatal flaw.

It is starting to remind me of 2015 warriors and "no jumpshooting team would win a ring"

Hmm.

1. Let me emphasize that when I talk about "serious mass" this is not something that can be rebutted by pointing out that Chet is 7 feet tall. The point is that this guy...



Might need to gain some weight before he wins an NBA championship.

Cool if you believe that IHart provides the necessary mass and Chet can just hover around the edges so as to not to break another hip, but you translating "mass" with "height" is taking us in circles because distinguishing those two concepts was the whole point.

2. I didn't say OKC couldn't win a title, I said that this was a concern I had. You're essentially saying I'm the one thinking in absolutes because when I say non-absolutes you're reminded of absolutes. Just stop doing that and you won't be reminded of the opposite thing that the person you're talking to is talking about.

[parsnips33]

Dunno exactly what impact the move will end up having (how much it moves the needle), but regardless, I’m glad the Warriors made the move for Butler. It was becoming pretty frustrating to watch them play, would’ve sucked if they just rode it out with that incredibly mediocre team.

You and me both, and I honestly don't know if they pull the trigger on it if Lakers didn't get Luka. Optics are not great if you just stand pat after that

Thank you Nico and Rob

[rk2023]

OKC is the class of the west. It’s a 13 SRS team we’re talking about, but agree in that we don’t have much of a sample of playoff excellence - so that could have folks hesitant to assume they will just walk through the West.

I think Dallas and Denver are their two biggest threats for different reasons, but still feel pretty good about them winning both series.

Now whether I’d take them over Boston (who I would think wins the East handily), I don’t know.

[bballcool34]

OKC is the class of the west. It’s a 13 SRS team we’re talking about, but agree in that we don’t have much of a sample of playoff excellence - so that could have folks hesitant to assume they will just walk through the West.

I think Dallas and Denver are their two biggest threats for different reasons, but still feel pretty good about them winning both series.

Now whether I’d take them over Boston (who I would think wins the East handily), I don’t know.

I would guess AD is out for the year unless Dallas gets to at least the semi finals. Hope he comes back but that is not a trivial injury. Without him, Dallas stands no chance

[tsherkin]

Now whether I’d take them over Boston (who I would think wins the East handily), I don’t know.

Cleveland and New York remain interesting, but it does seem those three are the big choices in the East. Boston's 3pt shooting is trending upward again in February despite their record, though, so we'll see what happens. They have that first title in the bag now, so the playoffs should be interesting. We'll see if Tatum can figure out how to be better and hit some shots this time around, but they have a blueprint of efficacy for when his shot isn't going, so unless they get buried by an avalanche of Cleveland 3s, they should be pretty nasty as an opponent.

[falcolombardi]

Good post. Not going to say I'm picking Denver or anyone else over a healthy OKC team, but their success to this point has been about playing a radical defense with smaller guys, and I'm skeptical they'll really be able to play the same way against a star with serious mass. Certainly the hope has to be that IHart can stand up to Jokic because KAT & Gobert are both much more like IHart in sturdiness than Chet.

Not saying okc doesnt have weaknesses that could be exploited or lead to a loss, almost by definition teams lose because they had weaknesses compared to rivals, otherwise they never would lose

I am just a bit confused people are now saying that a "smaller" (and reminder no other team in the playoffs is going to play 2 shot blocking 7 footers together or have as much lenght across the court) is such a fatal flaw.

It is starting to remind me of 2015 warriors and "no jumpshooting team would win a ring"

Hmm.

1. Let me emphasize that when I talk about "serious mass" this is not something that can be rebutted by pointing out that Chet is 7 feet tall. The point is that this guy...



Might need to gain some weight before he wins an NBA championship.

Cool if you believe that IHart provides the necessary mass and Chet can just hover around the edges so as to not to break another hip, but you translating "mass" with "height" is taking us in circles because distinguishing those two concepts was the whole point.

2. I didn't say OKC couldn't win a title, I said that this was a concern I had. You're essentially saying I'm the one thinking in absolutes because when I say non-absolutes you're reminded of absolutes. Just stop doing that and you won't be reminded of the opposite thing that the person you're talking to is talking about.

I am a bit confused by your post here or the random dig about chet hip, so i will go back to my own comment wording

Not saying okc doesnt have weaknesses that could be exploited or lead to a loss

I dont ever say okc has no weaknesses, one of which would be.....

this is not something that can be rebutted by pointing out that Chet is 7 feet tall. The point is that this
Might need to gain some weight before he wins an NBA championship.

Indeed, lower pounds across the court is one of those advantages other teams would have over okc, the same way lenght is an advantage okc has over most other teams, which essentially we all agree on

back to what my comment actually says

I am just a bit confused people are now saying that a "smaller" (and reminder no other team in the playoffs is going to play 2 shot blocking 7 footers together or have as much lenght across the court) is such a fatal flaw.

It is starting to remind me of 2015 warriors and "no jumpshooting team would win a ring"

you should remember how "jumpshooting teams dont win rings" was a big talking point, as was "guard led teams are too small to win rings" and variations of it

both of which consisted on picking a dominant team like the 2015 warriors and focusing on their weaknesses as some unsurmountable failure point their other various advantages could never overcome to win

The whole point here is not that okc is "perfect" or "flawless" not i have at any part of my comment said, nor i have accused you of...whatever you are implying heee i accused you of? (Sorry here, but your wording is that unclear to me here)

You're essentially saying I'm the one thinking in absolutes because when I say non-absolutes you're reminded of absolutes. Just stop doing that and you won't be reminded of the opposite thing that the person you're talking to is talking about.[

No? I am saying that unless we can point which team in the association is "perfect" and below no one at any aspect of the game then the league most dominant regular season team since the full health 2017 warriors shouldnt be as dismissed based on a single flaw as it has been (notice that i never said you did this).

Lack of previous playoff success will always be a concern in any breakout team. You never truly know which will be a playoff dropper and which will be the new dinasty. That healthy scepticism about unproven teams is natural and correct which is why i have never said okc will for sure win or cannot be upset.

But i am wondering why size is now becoming the sine qua non of championship contention compared to literally anythingh else like lack of rim protection (denver), lack of point of attack defense (cleveland), lack of mvp level first option scorers (boston). You may not be treating it as an absolute flaw impossible to overcome, but is still being treated like such by a lot of the media in a way other teams weaknesses are not

Is why i am bringing up the comparision to curry warriors as a team where people picked up in their flaws and held firm belief they could never be able to overcome them...until they did, and then it looked obvious in retrospect that a 67 win team that thrived in both ends was able to win rings

[Doctor MJ]

Not saying okc doesnt have weaknesses that could be exploited or lead to a loss, almost by definition teams lose because they had weaknesses compared to rivals, otherwise they never would lose

I am just a bit confused people are now saying that a "smaller" (and reminder no other team in the playoffs is going to play 2 shot blocking 7 footers together or have as much lenght across the court) is such a fatal flaw.

It is starting to remind me of 2015 warriors and "no jumpshooting team would win a ring"

Hmm.

1. Let me emphasize that when I talk about "serious mass" this is not something that can be rebutted by pointing out that Chet is 7 feet tall. The point is that this guy...



Might need to gain some weight before he wins an NBA championship.

Cool if you believe that IHart provides the necessary mass and Chet can just hover around the edges so as to not to break another hip, but you translating "mass" with "height" is taking us in circles because distinguishing those two concepts was the whole point.

2. I didn't say OKC couldn't win a title, I said that this was a concern I had. You're essentially saying I'm the one thinking in absolutes because when I say non-absolutes you're reminded of absolutes. Just stop doing that and you won't be reminded of the opposite thing that the person you're talking to is talking about.

I am a bit confused by your post here or the random dig about chet hip, so i will go back to my own comment wording

Not saying okc doesnt have weaknesses that could be exploited or lead to a loss

I dont ever say okc has no weaknesses, one of which would be.....

this is not something that can be rebutted by pointing out that Chet is 7 feet tall. The point is that this
Might need to gain some weight before he wins an NBA championship.

Indeed, lower pounds across the court is one of those advantages other teams would have over okc, the same way lenght is an advantage okc has over most other teams, which essentially we all agree on

back to what my comment actually says

I am just a bit confused people are now saying that a "smaller" (and reminder no other team in the playoffs is going to play 2 shot blocking 7 footers together or have as much lenght across the court) is such a fatal flaw.

It is starting to remind me of 2015 warriors and "no jumpshooting team would win a ring"

you should remember how "jumpshooting teams dont win rings" was a big talking point, as was "guard led teams are too small to win rings" and variations of it

both of which consisted on picking a dominant team like the 2015 warriors and focusing on their weaknesses as some unsurmountable failure point their other various advantages could never overcome to win

The whole point here is not that okc is "perfect" or "flawless" not i have at any part of my comment said, nor i have accused you of...whatever you are implying heee i accused you of? (Sorry here, but your wording is that unclear to me here)

You're essentially saying I'm the one thinking in absolutes because when I say non-absolutes you're reminded of absolutes. Just stop doing that and you won't be reminded of the opposite thing that the person you're talking to is talking about.[

No? I am saying that unless we can point which team in the association is "perfect" and below no one at any aspect of the game then the league most dominant regular season team since the full health 2017 warriors shouldnt be as dismissed based on a single flaw as it has been (notice that i never said you did this).

Lack of previous playoff success will always be a concern in any breakout team. You never truly know which will be a playoff dropper and which will be the new dinasty. That healthy scepticism about unproven teams is natural and correct which is why i have never said okc will for sure win or cannot be upset.

But i am wondering why size is now becoming the sine qua non of championship contention compared to literally anythingh else like lack of rim protection (denver), lack of point of attack defense (cleveland), lack of mvp level first option scorers (boston). You may not be treating it as an absolute flaw impossible to overcome, but is still being treated like such by a lot of the media in a way other teams weaknesses are not

Is why i am bringing up the comparision to curry warriors as a team where people picked up in their flaws and held firm belief they could never be able to overcome them...until they did, and then it looked obvious in retrospect that a 67 win team that thrived in both ends was able to win rings

falco honestly I think I've been pretty clear on my side of things - though I got a bit chippy on the last post, which I apologize for.

I didn't say OKC couldn't win a chip, and I didn't even predict that any other team would beat them, I just pointed to one specific concern which might end up being an issue in particular matchups. Maybe it won't.

[Peregrine01]

It doesn't seem like either Falco or Doc MJ are disagreeing about anything. But one side seems particularly more sensitive when some conceivable flaw is pointed out about his team.

[IlikeSHAIguys]

I think the league not letting CP3 and Wemby get interviewed is sorta missing the point of all star weekend lol

[falcolombardi]

It doesn't seem like either Falco or Doc MJ are disagreeing about anything. But one side seems particularly more sensitive when some conceivable flaw is pointed out about his team.

You can just call me out directly lol

I acnowledge i am biased here so that can colour my perception a lot, but i think the conclusions being drawn in the basketball side are somewhat misguided even misasigning what okc actual weak points are (in my opinion)

I dont push back much if people say experience or lack of a elite offense 2nd option will tank okc since that is kind of what happened last year and is still a valid concern, but i believe people are drawing all the wrong conclusions about last year loss to dallas

Dallas was held to a 106 offense rating, so was okc. It was a series where neither team could score/allowed scoring whether it be assigned to good D or bad O which is where the concerns about chet/jalen in a 2nd option role are valid still

But we didnt exactly lose because chet was skinny and abused in post ups, we still won chet minutes, we still slowed -heavily- dallas offense. We lost the rebounds battle and couldnt score well ourselves. Not having any center when chet sat was a bad matchup to face a team like dallas which paired two real centers together

The current okc directly adressed the chet-less minutes and rebounding woes by incorporating harstentein (for the record okc in games where harstentein play have been a decent rebounding team) and they have rebounded very, very well im both ends in the admittedly tiny sample of chet+ihart

This is a team that more or less leads the league in points per play allowed at every area of the court as well as steals before incorporating a top 3 rim protector like chet and has even looked strong rebounding wise in the limited full health sample.
Is functionally one of the bigger teams league wise in all ways that "matter"

Tldr: if this team chokes or fails it likely wont be on the -defensive- end

[Dr Positivity]

OKC running into a matchup issue with the massive JJJ Edey frontcourt seems plausible.

[Doctor MJ]

So just putting a few more thoughts down as we come back from the all-star break:

- I would consider OKC the favorite to win the title...but I also want to emphasize that I don't expect to be all the discouraged for them if they get upset. They are still so young!

- I think the way things have come together for Presti a second time after the Durant-Westbrook-Harden trifecta is amazing. I definitely feel like there are a few GMs in the league who continue to run circles around the rest, and he's absolutely one of them.

- All the more because I think arguably Presti's biggest weakness was in picking coaches, but Mark Daigneault was my COY last year and I think I'd have him COY again this year to this point.

- Presti did of course have some luck with Shai becoming what he's become, and man, who'd have thought Shai would be this good? ftr, I consider Jokic to be having probably the best offensive season in history, but I have Shai as my MVP. He's been that valuable. I still think Shai is more dependent on offensive fit than Jokic is by a significant margin, but it's hard for me to see much of an argument that there's a more valuable offensive guard this season than Shai, and Shai is a valuable part of the best-in-world defense the team has.

- Right now Jokic is on pace to win my OPOY for the 5th straight time. He'll be the first to do that if he does.

- Wemby continues to seem like possibly the greatest basketball talent we've ever seen the way he's rising up. Still not a serious challenger for MVP/POY even ignoring the Big 2 of Shai & Joker, but I think he'll probably get there next year.

Going through some other relevant teams hoping to be contenders:

- The Cavs have to be thrilled with how the season has gone but I'm still skeptical about them in the playoffs - a bit like I am with OKC, but more so. But Garland is back to thriving, and Mobley might be my MIP. Has to feel so good for Cleveland to have some legit after nearly two decades of "LeBron or Suck".

- The Celtics are defending champs and so I don't want to take their regular season step-back too seriously. I'd probably still have them as my Eastern playoffs fave. It's going to be really interesting to see how they deal with the 2nd apron going forward. There's absolutely no question in my mind that Tatum is my untradeable franchise player and that Brown's similar mega-contract makes him someone I'm always listening to offers on.

- I do think the Nuggets remain extremely scary even if Murray ain't cooking, and if he is, we may well see them rip off another chip. Not predicting they get to the Finals - picking OKC - but they're certainly the 2nd most likely.

- I gotta give a lot of credit to Leon Rose over on the Knicks. Seems like every year he's making great moves that I personally was so-so on. This year I was all for getting rid of Randle, but was skeptical about KAT. It's turned out great, and the Knicks have a solid core at this point like few other teams in the league. Shout out also to OG, Hart, Mikal, and of course Jalen Brunson who has turned out to be one of the best culture setters in the league.

- Taylor Jenkins deserves a ton of praise over in Memphis, and JJJ has bounced back and then some from last year. I still have a hard time seeing them make the finals. I think we're all hoping to see Ja go full Ja again but within the Grizz new offensive structure, but right now Ja's quiet - which is at least better than him being a loud wannabee gangster.

- Ime Udoka deserves a lot of credit in Houston, but honestly, there's no Top 4 seed in either conference anywhere near as suspect as the Rockets. Match-up makes the fight, but it won't surprise me at all if they get "upset" in the first round. They are of course full of exciting young players led by Sengun and now Amen.

- Pacers aren't suspect in my mind as a #4 seed, but I don't think I'll take them seriously as a contender until I see Hali & Pascal both looking their absolute best together.

- Lakers are a team that seems likely to upset someone in the playoffs, and of course they made THE deal of the season, but I think they're a good off-season away from true contention.

- I like the Butler move for GS a lot. It might blow up in their face, but I agree with their own assessment that they need to make one more big swing to build around Steph, and if LeBron & KD didn't want to come play, Butler might be the best vet to come to the Bay. The odds they break through as a contender again are low, but they are certainly scary.

- The Bucks may be the #5 seed in the East, and may well upset a team in the playoffs, but I really don't see them as a contender, and I think they're in a pretty damn dark place to be honest. The thing that I've been shaking my head around for a while now is that they built their original championship core around Giannis with guys considerably older than Giannis, and then when it came time to re-build with younger guys, they instead traded for Dame. It got Giannis to re-sign, but I think it basically doomed the Bucks to be in a place where only Giannis being unusually loyal will keep him from wanting out, and while Giannis is a grateful foreigner who has really embraced Milwaukee, we'll see how he endures being on mediocre aging teams in the midst of what's left of his prime.

- Clippers are worth a shout out for Norm Powell alone, and I'll be considering Norm very seriously for MIP. The Kawhi-Harden team though feels like a bee that's already used its stinger, as do the Bucks, Suns, Kings, and others.

- Pistons & Magic have to feel good about where they are given their youth, though will be dependent on their stars taking bigger leaps forward to be contenders - Rockets in a similar boat. Incidentally, I'm high on Franz...but low on Paulo, and that makes things exciting but iffy for the Magic.

- Timberwolves, like the Kings a year earlier, feel like a team where everything went right for them one year, and then things came back down to earth. For Minny of course a significant part of the deal is that they traded away KAT for Randle, but while that made them a worse team, I still think they were always going to struggle to match-up well with 4 straight playoff opponents with the Gobert-KAT duo.

- Finally I'll speak to Dallas. Obviously they were almost certainly going to be seen as the trainwreck of the season after the Luka trade no matter what, but AD not even getting through a single game before being lost indefinitely is just a nightmare. I'll be pulling for AD to come back healthy -as I always do - and I think this Mavs team can be quite good when healthy...but I don't see them as likely to ever make the finals with this new core, and that's just a brutal fact that will likely lead to various exits in the not-too-distant future.

I don't expect Harrison to get fired this off-season, though I could see him resigning, but unless things turn up aces, he probably gets fired in the next couple years and then struggles to get any high profile position in basketball ever again. I think he's a man with strengths who is doing his best, but he was also clearly not someone who should have ever been hired directly into the role of GM without working his way up in a front office, and for this I think pretty clearly the blame has to go to Cuban who had deluded himself about many things, but relevant here: a) that he personally didn't need a GM because he personally was a basketball expert, and b) that those he sold the team to would want him being the head basketball man.

I'll reiterate: I personally get seeing Luka as a timebomb whose physical issues and bad habits make him likely to be someone who ages very poorly, and I get believing AD is a better fit with Kyrie, but a) I wouldn't have been considering trading Luka right now unless he wanted out, b) I would see Luka's super-max contract to be a good thing for trade value and would want to wait for it to kick in, and c) the top priority for me in trading Luka would be to milk the negotiation for tons of assets Herschel Walker (or Paul George) style.

[MartinToVaught]

I think he's a man with strengths who is doing his best, but he was also clearly not someone who should have ever been hired directly into the role of GM without working his way up in a front office, and for this I think pretty clearly the blame has to go to Cuban...

This wasn't even Cuban's first time making this mistake! He learned nothing from his previous brilliant idea to put the gambling guy from Bill Simmons' podcast in charge of the front office.

I remember posting a few years ago (and getting some pushback) that Cuban's ego was out of control and running off Carlisle and Donny wasn't a good idea. I really wish I hadn't been right about this.

[Texas Chuck]

I would guess AD is out for the year unless Dallas gets to at least the semi finals. Hope he comes back but that is not a trivial injury. Without him, Dallas stands no chance

Do you have a link to this? Because all the reporting I have seen is just talking about how Dallas is refusing to say anything about his status. Curious where you got this timeline?

[Texas Chuck]

, but he was also clearly not someone who should have ever been hired directly into the role of GM without working his way up in a front office, and for this I think pretty clearly the blame has to go to Cuban who had deluded himself about many things, but relevant here: a) that he personally didn't need a GM because he personally was a basketball expert, and b) that those he sold the team to would want him being the head basketball man.

So let me start by saying I do not know. And I am theorizing just as you are. Just giving a different perspective.....

Niko was hired because Cuban wanted a second star with Luka and for all the stuff Donnie Nelson was really good at, having relationships with star NBA(especially American) players was never one of them. But Niko had relationships with lots of star players and he believed Niko would be able to lure a star here via trade or free agency.

We need to take a brief interlude to mention they failed to see the star they had in house in Brunson.

Now that never really materialized here. Maybe in part because they got Kyrie(definitely a star, but definitely not in Dallas because of Niko connections). And now we may never know because I tend to agree with you that he isn't long for the Mavericks and old Kyrie and injured AD aren't the lures that entering his prime Luka Doncic is. Oh maybe they can bring in your Dame or your Paul George or some other guy nearing the end, but no real star in his prime I wouldn't think.

And I agree that I think Cuban viewed himself much as Jerry Jones sees himself with the Cowboys--a legit basketball(football) guy. That he's been so hands on for so long, that it was okay having an inexperienced guy. I think there was also a lot of confidence in Michael Finley who did take the work his way up and who plays a major role in the FO. And of course Cuban was always way ahead of the league in having huge staffs with experts in every aspect on the payroll. Most have been assets, some like Harlabob have been high profile disasters.

And yeah all the reporting when he sold, told us he would still be the managing partner even as a minority stakeholder. That appears to have been some face-saving for Cuban at the time or the Vegas guys quickly changed their mind because they wanted to play with their expensive toy themselves.

Cuban/Nelson was a great FO partnership for a long time. Not perfect, not the class of the league, but a pretty clear top 5 pairing. Us Mavs fans realize if we are lucky this new group will be on the level of the Carters, but I fear this is Ross Perot Jr all over again and a bleak winter is coming and coming quickly.

[sp6r=underrated]

, but he was also clearly not someone who should have ever been hired directly into the role of GM without working his way up in a front office, and for this I think pretty clearly the blame has to go to Cuban who had deluded himself about many things, but relevant here: a) that he personally didn't need a GM because he personally was a basketball expert, and b) that those he sold the team to would want him being the head basketball man.

So let me start by saying I do not know. And I am theorizing just as you are. Just giving a different perspective.....

Niko was hired because Cuban wanted a second star with Luka and for all the stuff Donnie Nelson was really good at, having relationships with star NBA(especially American) players was never one of them. But Niko had relationships with lots of star players and he believed Niko would be able to lure a star here via trade or free agency.

We need to take a brief interlude to mention they failed to see the star they had in house in Brunson.

Now that never really materialized here. Maybe in part because they got Kyrie(definitely a star, but definitely not in Dallas because of Niko connections). And now we may never know because I tend to agree with you that he isn't long for the Mavericks and old Kyrie and injured AD aren't the lures that entering his prime Luka Doncic is. Oh maybe they can bring in your Dame or your Paul George or some other guy nearing the end, but no real star in his prime I wouldn't think.

And I agree that I think Cuban viewed himself much as Jerry Jones sees himself with the Cowboys--a legit basketball(football) guy. That he's been so hands on for so long, that it was okay having an inexperienced guy. I think there was also a lot of confidence in Michael Finley who did take the work his way up and who plays a major role in the FO. And of course Cuban was always way ahead of the league in having huge staffs with experts in every aspect on the payroll. Most have been assets, some like Harlabob have been high profile disasters.

And yeah all the reporting when he sold, told us he would still be the managing partner even as a minority stakeholder. That appears to have been some face-saving for Cuban at the time or the Vegas guys quickly changed their mind because they wanted to play with their expensive toy themselves.

Cuban/Nelson was a great FO partnership for a long time. Not perfect, not the class of the league, but a pretty clear top 5 pairing. Us Mavs fans realize if we are lucky this new group will be on the level of the Carters, but I fear this is Ross Perot Jr all over again and a bleak winter is coming and coming quickly.

Just wanna say I always appreciate your Dallas takes. You clearly follow the team and havve a good memory. I had totally forgotten about the mavs giving a NBA bettor huge say in mgmt because he is good at betting on games

And there is nothing worse than terrible ownership or a city where the financials of pro sports is unworkable. Everything else is fixable but if one of those 2 is in play you are screwed.

[MartinToVaught]

Read on Twitter

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills every year when this discourse comes up. The All-Star Game has always been a joke, you can go all the way back to the '60s and find final scores like 153-131 or 150-130 even back then. Chuck himself played in many an ASG with similar no-defense final scores. It's never been treated like Game 7 of the Finals and never will be, it's just another excuse for people to whine about the league, and a silly one when there are so many more legitimate things to complain about.

[70sFan]

Read on Twitter

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills every year when this discourse comes up. The All-Star Game has always been a joke, you can go all the way back to the '60s and find final scores like 153-131 or 150-130 even back then. Chuck himself played in many an ASG with similar no-defense final scores. It's never been treated like Game 7 of the Finals and never will be, it's just another excuse for people to whine about the league, and a silly one when there are so many more legitimate things to complain about.

To be fair, 1960s AS games at least looked like real basketball games.

I agree that whining about AS weekend is silly though.

[TheGOATRises007]

There have been good AS games even in recent memory. 2022 was close at the end. 2020 4th quarter was highly competitive(easily the best since 2001). 2018 was fairly competitive too.

2008 and 2006 were good. 2001 obviously very good.

Not always a blowout.

[RCM88x]

Read on Twitter

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills every year when this discourse comes up. The All-Star Game has always been a joke, you can go all the way back to the '60s and find final scores like 153-131 or 150-130 even back then. Chuck himself played in many an ASG with similar no-defense final scores. It's never been treated like Game 7 of the Finals and never will be, it's just another excuse for people to whine about the league, and a silly one when there are so many more legitimate things to complain about.

Everyone knows the AS game was great until 2016 when Draymond first played in it, duh.