2021-22 NBA Season Discussion

[parsnips33]

Thoughts on the effect of the CP3 injury? Seems like it could be good for Phoenix in buying him some rest before the playoffs, assuming there's no rust factor/lingering injury when he comes back.

Suns have a healthy lead on the 1 seed, but if they start to drop games with no CP and Warriors go on a run with Draymond back, it could breathe some life into the Steph MVP campaign provided his shooting numbers pick back up

[sp6r=underrated]

For the non-baseball fans Barry Bonds is maybe the greatest baseball player of all time. He also failed to make the HOF because voters believed the very strong evidence that Bonds is used very sophisticated PEDs for the 2nd half of his career. He was already a 3 time MVP prior to him using.

For sake of discussion, and I'm not accusing him, let's say it was proven Lebron started using PEDs beginning with his 2nd trip to Cleveland in 2016.

Do you think basketball HOF voters would exclude Lebron from the HOF.

[HeartBreakKid]

For the non-baseball fans Barry Bonds is maybe the greatest baseball player of all time. He also failed to make the HOF because voters believed the very strong evidence that Bonds is used very sophisticated PEDs for the 2nd half of his career. He was already a 3 time MVP prior to him using.

For sake of discussion, and I'm not accusing him, let's say it was proven Lebron started using PEDs beginning with his 2nd trip to Cleveland in 2016.

Do you think basketball HOF voters would exclude Lebron from the HOF.

Nope.

[sp6r=underrated]

For the non-baseball fans Barry Bonds is maybe the greatest baseball player of all time. He also failed to make the HOF because voters believed the very strong evidence that Bonds is used very sophisticated PEDs for the 2nd half of his career. He was already a 3 time MVP prior to him using.

For sake of discussion, and I'm not accusing him, let's say it was proven Lebron started using PEDs beginning with his 2nd trip to Cleveland in 2016.

Do you think basketball HOF voters would exclude Lebron from the HOF.

Nope.

I agree and I think that speaks well of basketball writers.

[penbeast0]

I agree and I think that speaks well of basketball writers.

If I understand right, it's a clear violation of the rules in both sports (and yes, I realize it is widespread. I would guess 80+% of the NBA uses PEDs and my estimate might be low). Is there a line you draw? Should Alec Groza (arguably 2nd best center of the 50s) be in the HOF despite being strongly suspected (though never convicted) of cheating? Would you feel differently if he'd had 4 more years as the best or 2nd best to Mikan?

I'm not disagreeing with you, I actually agree. Just trying to get a feel for myself of where the lines should be drawn.

[sp6r=underrated]

I agree and I think that speaks well of basketball writers.

If I understand right, it's a clear violation of the rules in both sports (and yes, I realize it is widespread. I would guess 80+% of the NBA uses PEDs and my estimate might be low). Is there a line you draw? Should Alec Groza (arguably 2nd best center of the 50s) be in the HOF despite being strongly suspected (though never convicted) of cheating? Would you feel differently if he'd had 4 more years as the best or 2nd best to Mikan?

I'm not disagreeing with you, I actually agree. Just trying to get a feel for myself of where the lines should be drawn.

I agree with you that they are ubiquitous. The ubiquity is why I don't care. The only way I would care is if there was some unique drug that was only available to one player and it was shown to dramatically improve performance.

Otherwise this is all keeping up with the Jones

[Texas Chuck]

I want to know the basis of the belief that 80% plus of the NBA is on PED's please. You'd think if were that widespread we'd all know about it, but I certainly don't.

[Texas Chuck]

Oh and cheating sucks, even if "everyone is doing it". Different for the baseball steroid guys because MLB was essentially not just ignoring it but actively encouraging it because the home runs were really helping a sport struggling to hold fan attention at the time.

But I disagree with well all the cyclists dope so Lance Armstrong should skate. Everyone takes PED's so its cool that Clemons and Bonds and Sosa and Arod and and and.... No, for me if you can't have the sport as it is without everyone doping, fix the sport. Not incentivize the substances.

[penbeast0]

I want to know the basis of the belief that 80% plus of the NBA is on PED's please. You'd think if were that widespread we'd all know about it, but I certainly don't.

From coaching. I would say that maybe a third of my teams were using in high school (and some in middle school) though I certainly didn't encourage it. If it's that common at the lower HS level where the kids are lucky to get interest from a Division 2 school, I would imagine it's much more common at the levels where the differentials are much smaller and the monetary incentives are much larger.

I have a feeling that finding players who don't use PEDs is like finding players who don't cheat on their partners on the road . . . there's the occasional A.C. Green out there but it's not the norm.

The NBA just isn't interested in finding or stopping it from what I can tell; MLB at least put in some effort.

[Dr Positivity]

For the non-baseball fans Barry Bonds is maybe the greatest baseball player of all time. He also failed to make the HOF because voters believed the very strong evidence that Bonds is used very sophisticated PEDs for the 2nd half of his career. He was already a 3 time MVP prior to him using.

For sake of discussion, and I'm not accusing him, let's say it was proven Lebron started using PEDs beginning with his 2nd trip to Cleveland in 2016.

Do you think basketball HOF voters would exclude Lebron from the HOF.

No but for the comparison to work you would need basketball PEDs that make as noticeable difference as the baseball ones. Like if Lebron got on a superdrug and started putting up a WTF 40/11/11 and then got busted would some people want to leave him off... maybe.

[MartinToVaught]

For the non-baseball fans Barry Bonds is maybe the greatest baseball player of all time. He also failed to make the HOF because voters believed the very strong evidence that Bonds is used very sophisticated PEDs for the 2nd half of his career.

Which, for the record, is still egregiously petty. Bonds already had a first-ballot HOF career before he took any PEDs.

[sp6r=underrated]

For the non-baseball fans Barry Bonds is maybe the greatest baseball player of all time. He also failed to make the HOF because voters believed the very strong evidence that Bonds is used very sophisticated PEDs for the 2nd half of his career.

Which, for the record, is still egregiously petty. Bonds already had a first-ballot HOF career before he took any PEDs.

It is insane. Everytime I think basketball is a poorly run sport I'm reminded of the doofus who run baseball whose marketing strategy consists of bashing every superstar, telling fans their teams have no chance and refusing to effectively alter the rules to increase balls in place/speed of game and reduce strikeouts/walks/home runs.

The first two are insanely self-destructuctive and for the last one MLB consider rules changes that does nothing to reduce true outcomes.

[falcolombardi]

For the non-baseball fans Barry Bonds is maybe the greatest baseball player of all time. He also failed to make the HOF because voters believed the very strong evidence that Bonds is used very sophisticated PEDs for the 2nd half of his career.

Which, for the record, is still egregiously petty. Bonds already had a first-ballot HOF career before he took any PEDs.

It is insane. Everytime I think basketball is a poorly run sport I'm reminded of the doofus who run baseball whose marketing strategy consists of bashing every superstar, telling fans their teams have no chance and refusing to effectively alter the rules to increase balls in place/speed of game and reduce strikeouts/walks/home runs.

The first two are insanely self-destructuctive and for the last one MLB consider rules changes that does nothing to reduce true outcomes.

Sports media already does this with basketball. no need for the nba itself to do it lol

hating on any player born after 1980 is the modus operandi of all basketball coverage these days

[penbeast0]

Sports media already does this with basketball. no need for the nba itself to do it lol

hating on any player born after 1980 is the modus operandi of all basketball coverage these days

Not sure who you read or listen to. I would say the norm I hear (outside of people who I to out of my way to listen to because of their analytics approach) is that they ignore anyone other than Kareem and occasionally Wilt who played before 1980 (not the same as born, admittedly) and only look at modern players, usually only active ones. Now some reporting may be mainly negative but it is only because certain commentators are basically negative about everyone.

[MartinToVaught]

For the non-baseball fans Barry Bonds is maybe the greatest baseball player of all time. He also failed to make the HOF because voters believed the very strong evidence that Bonds is used very sophisticated PEDs for the 2nd half of his career.

Which, for the record, is still egregiously petty. Bonds already had a first-ballot HOF career before he took any PEDs.

It is insane. Everytime I think basketball is a poorly run sport I'm reminded of the doofus who run baseball whose marketing strategy consists of bashing every superstar, telling fans their teams have no chance and refusing to effectively alter the rules to increase balls in place/speed of game and reduce strikeouts/walks/home runs.

The first two are insanely self-destructuctive and for the last one MLB consider rules changes that does nothing to reduce true outcomes.

Honestly, Silver is just as bad in a different way. So many problems with the NBA have gotten worse during his time in charge, but while he doesn't inflame them as much as Manfred does (outside of, for example, the Philly/Colangelo blunder), he just ignores them and tries to push more stupid gimmicks that nobody asked for. He doesn't seem to like the sport he runs either. He comes across as wishing he was in charge of a European soccer league instead.

The sad thing is that they both started off with a lot of promise. Silver got the ball rolling on Sterling's exit from the NBA. Manfred stepped up and showed real support for writing the MLB's wrongs in Montreal. I thought for sure that both leagues had upgraded from Stern and Selig. Boy, was I wrong.

What's even more incredible is that Bettman is still worse than both of them.

[falcolombardi]

Sports media already does this with basketball. no need for the nba itself to do it lol

hating on any player born after 1980 is the modus operandi of all basketball coverage these days

Not sure who you read or listen to. I would say the norm I hear (outside of people who I to out of my way to listen to because of their analytics approach) is that they ignore anyone other than Kareem and occasionally Wilt who played before 1980 (not the same as born, admittedly) and only look at modern players, usually only active ones. Now some reporting may be mainly negative but it is only because certain commentators are basically negative about everyone.

they talk mostly about modern basketball but from a incredible negative/diminishng angle

the whole nebulous stuff about softness or modern players being "divas" and older greats being real men kinda stuff

[Doctor MJ]

I agree and I think that speaks well of basketball writers.

If I understand right, it's a clear violation of the rules in both sports (and yes, I realize it is widespread. I would guess 80+% of the NBA uses PEDs and my estimate might be low). Is there a line you draw? Should Alec Groza (arguably 2nd best center of the 50s) be in the HOF despite being strongly suspected (though never convicted) of cheating? Would you feel differently if he'd had 4 more years as the best or 2nd best to Mikan?

I'm not disagreeing with you, I actually agree. Just trying to get a feel for myself of where the lines should be drawn.

I think the questions posed by beast give me a good place to jump in.

I'll say first: I don't think the NBA would treat its players like the MLB has its players, were the basketball world to find out that LeBron and others were on PEDs. I think the reality is that we've seen in the NFL that football fans just don't care about this stuff like baseball fans do, and I expect the same is true for basically all sports fans with a less rigid mindset than baseball fans.

In baseball, they built up box score stats in the minds of fans to the point where "fairness across eras" mattered, and where there was unfairness, you ran the risk of a moral majority-type reaction...a la congress getting involved.

None of this means that steroids don't deserve to be cracked down on - that's another question - but there's good reason to think it only really matters in things like baseball, or the Olympics, where a) people love to compare raw performances between eras, and b) where there's a moral identity associated with the event.

What's my own stance on PEDs specifically and cheating more generally?

1. I think the rule with PEDs has always got to be decided pragmatically. Whatever constraints you put in place need to be a) backed by evidence of major health risk and b) implementable with the technology of the day. For this reason I think it makes a lot of sense to identify a threshold of tolerance. Given that PEDs can actually help a player's body heal from injury, I think it probably doesn't make much sense to ban a level of PED that would be considered optimal for injury recovery.

2. By contrast, gambling is something in theory I feel much stronger about. If the audience comes to believe that "everything is rigged", it risks completely losing its audience. Folks might feel "People already say this all the time!" and think that means it doesn't matter, but I actually think it's a sign of how easily people could turn on the sport.

3. With that said, I've come to really, really change my tune on the college point-shaving scandals. So far as I can tell, the only reason any of it happened was that people made tons of money on gambling on these college players, while these players got paid nothing while on athletic scholarships that often didn't actually give any real education. Folks know I have a bit of an obsessions with Connie Hawkins. One of the things that stands out from his story is the fact that he wasn't remotely prepared to take college-level coursework, and that really wasn't something the University of Iowa was particularly concerned with rectifying.

It's one thing for the NCAA to ban players who get caught in these traps, quite another thing for the NBA to do it given they actually did pay their players, and quite another thing when you realize that the NBA really didn't even do any kind of due diligence in who they banned.

And of course we should note that the NCAA is now allowing players to make money in college, which means that the base motivation for players participating in stuff like this has now been effectively acknowledged to have been an injustice.

So yeah, to be perfectly honest, I think Alex Groza should be in the Hall. His lack of longevity would keep him off any Top 100 career consideration for me, but I think his story is important, and he really was someone who might have become the best player of the '50s.

4. But as I say all of that, a guy like Pete Rose, that compulsive behavior while being a pro, to me that's a whole different thing, and if you get any evidence of pro players actually throwing games, that has to be nailed to the wall.

[sp6r=underrated]

Which, for the record, is still egregiously petty. Bonds already had a first-ballot HOF career before he took any PEDs.

It is insane. Everytime I think basketball is a poorly run sport I'm reminded of the doofus who run baseball whose marketing strategy consists of bashing every superstar, telling fans their teams have no chance and refusing to effectively alter the rules to increase balls in place/speed of game and reduce strikeouts/walks/home runs.

The first two are insanely self-destructuctive and for the last one MLB consider rules changes that does nothing to reduce true outcomes.

Honestly, Silver is just as bad in a different way. So many problems with the NBA have gotten worse during his time in charge, but while he doesn't inflame them as much as Manfred does (outside of, for example, the Philly/Colangelo blunder), he just ignores them and tries to push more stupid gimmicks that nobody asked for. He doesn't seem to like the sport he runs either. He comes across as wishing he was in charge of a European soccer league instead.

The sad thing is that they both started off with a lot of promise. Silver got the ball rolling on Sterling's exit from the NBA. Manfred stepped up and showed real support for writing the MLB's wrongs in Montreal. I thought for sure that both leagues had upgraded from Stern and Selig. Boy, was I wrong.

What's even more incredible is that Bettman is still worse than both of them.

I'm more positive on Silver than you are. For instance I think he did a much better job handling China-Morey than a lot of other business leaders have.

I have a lot of respect for Lebron as a person. As far as I can tell he is an admirable person. But during the Hong Kong flap with Morey he betrayed the typical businessman attitude towards China, give the authoritarian government what it wants.

Silver, by the standards of Corporate America stood up to Chinese attempts to censor American culture. He is far more admirable than Hollywood which allows the Chinese government to censor major motion pictures to their liking. As an example, the Taiwan patch in Top Gun 2 was removed to please Chinese censors.

Manfred seems to genuinely dislike baseball.

[penbeast0]

I will also say that I'm sort of hyper-aware of the health risks with steroids as my cousin turned to competitive power lifting (and steroids) in his 20s and by 30 was on dialysis for the rest of his life.

That said, I found as a HS coach that I didn't have the information or the influence to enforce a steroid ban. They weren't getting it or doing it at school, it was coming from the gyms (and in one case from their AAU coach) and I really had no hard data on the guys who didn't actually tell me as to whether they were using or not. So, I worked hard at keeping their schoolwork up, trying to teach them what a zone defense was and how to slide to cover when teammates went to the basket, and never really got into the issue unless asked.

[sp6r=underrated]

3. With that said, I've come to really, really change my tune on the college point-shaving scandals. So far as I can tell, the only reason any of it happened was that people made tons of money on gambling on these college players, while these players got paid nothing while on athletic scholarships that often didn't actually give any real education. Folks know I have a bit of an obsessions with Connie Hawkins. One of the things that stands out from his story is the fact that he wasn't remotely prepared to take college-level coursework, and that really wasn't something the University of Iowa was particularly concerned with rectifying.

It's one thing for the NCAA to ban players who get caught in these traps, quite another thing for the NBA to do it given they actually did pay their players, and quite another thing when you realize that the NBA really didn't even do any kind of due diligence in who they banned.

And of course we should note that the NCAA is now allowing players to make money in college, which means that the base motivation for players participating in stuff like this has now been effectively acknowledged to have been an injustice.

So yeah, to be perfectly honest, I think Alex Groza should be in the Hall. His lack of longevity would keep him off any Top 100 career consideration for me, but I think his story is important, and he really was someone who might have become the best player of the '50s.

I agree with you on the NCAA. The NCAA is moral disgrace if you think about it. The Supreme Court famously once said of obscenity "I know it when I see it." So too with amateur sports. I can't give a great definition of amateurism but I know if you have national TV deals, tournaments that require "students" to be out of class for a month, and college coaches who are the highest paid employees in the state you don't have amateurism.

Is there a bigger disgrace than the 2021 tournament in which the NCAA required the players to stay in a bubble for 6 weeks without paying them? Per SI:

According to NCAA officials, the four bubbled hotels were only twice penetrated from the outside (no harm was done either time), and only one team (VCU) had to bow out of the dance because of COVID-19 issues. Of the 34 players and staff each team was allowed into the bubble and another few dozen NCAA personnel (about 2,400 total), not one escaped or sneaked out, officials say. At least, not that they know of.

Let's be real if a for-profit company did something like this everyone would recognize the company should be destroyed. If it occurred in China, it'd be pointed to as evidence of the government's awfulness. And yet institutions of higher learning did this.

It is a professional environment in which management has decided to ruthlessly exploit its labor. The whole thing makes me sour on all of the universities who generally project a self-interest of enlightened liberalism.

Given that reality I really don't hold anything against players for trying to make a $.

One of my fantasies is that at the Final 4 or National Championship game the players treat it like the pro bowl to thumb their nose at the schools.

4. But as I say all of that, a guy like Pete Rose, that compulsive behavior while being a pro, to me that's a whole different thing, and if you get any evidence of pro players actually throwing games, that has to be nailed to the wall.

I ripped baseball management before for their handling of Bonds/Clements/etc but I'll defend their handling of Rose. If you read the Dowd report and related news investigations of Rose it is very clear he (i) bet on the Reds to win; (ii) to support his bets altered his pitching rotations.

For non-baseball fans, altering your pitching rotations is a great way to increase your chances of short term wins at the cost of greater losses down the road. Starting pitchers are the biggest factor in setting baseball odds. If you sub out your 4th starter with your Ace your odds go up dramatically. But pitchers are very injury prone. Throwing a baseball is an unnatural act and starters with weird rotations have higher injury risks.

It'd be the equivalant if we found out Thibodeau always overplayed his starters because he bet on his team. In theory, what's the harm he's betting on his team. In reality we all understand that running your starters into the ground increases the risk of much greater losses later on.

His defense is he bet on the Reds. But he basically gamed his rotation to get favorable odds which he did by lowering their chances of winning. That has to result in a massive punishment


So yes if an NBA player was betting on games I think you have to drop the hammer on em.