2020-21 NBA Season Discussion

[70sFan]

i think it becomes exxagersted as most era related narratives are, but i definitely think perimeter defense is a weakness that older centers didnt have to worry that much about before

would it make, lets say shaq un playable today? no, but ir would reduce his defensive impact (i dont believe it would tire him more, post defense likely is more tiring)

would it make boban a superstar? no, but it would make him a less situational player and inprove his defense impact

Boban would never be above average defensive player. He's way too limited on that end, he's not even a good rim protector.

[MartinToVaught]

Why would Silver be salty?

It's easier to market the Lakers, the Celtics, Steph/LeBron/Luka, etc., and the NBA has been taking the path of least resistance marketing-wise ever since they became fully dependent on Jordan in the '90s (if not even earlier than that).

Just look at how they treated one of the greatest players of all time, Tim Duncan - they let him be written off as boring and barely tried to promote him just because he was in the "wrong" market.

[Texas Chuck]

Just look at how they treated one of the greatest players of all time, Tim Duncan - they let him be written off as boring and barely tried to promote him just because he was in the "wrong" market.

Maybe. Or maybe Duncan declined to do a lot of promotional work for the league. Which wouldn't surprise me since he didn't really do endorsement deals/commercials much either. I think he valued his time and wasn't interested in the spotlight. And I certainly think he would be troubled by being singled out as a singular star apart from Admiral originally and then Parker/Manu after that.

You are right that they want to highlight the Lakers and then the more flamboyant stars. And of course Kobe was delighted to be seen as a face of the league as was Lebron as was Steph.

Were Stockton/Malone not featured because Salt Lake City? Or not featured because they were "boring"? Or not featured because those guys weren't into all that? Arguments for all three you have to think.

But is Silver thrilled to get Jokic or LA(who comes with Kawhi/PG) or Booker/Paul plus young studs in Ayton/Bridges? Absolutely. I think Utah is the toughest sell in terms of star power because casuals have no idea how good Gobert is, but man is Utah the absolutely best representative of their product as they play the most beautiful basketball in the league.

[HeartBreakKid]

Duncan wasn't hard to market because he played in San Antonio (Gervin and Robinson played in the same market and are big stars).

Duncan was hard to market because he was a big coming up in the post Jordan era (literally the year after Jordan retired). Everything was about perimeter players and finding the "next Mike". Duncan was not only a big, but a very by-the-books big unlike someone more unique skill set like Dirk or Garnett, or freakish physical attributes like O'Neal or Ming. He didn't have a flamboyant personality. He doesn't care much about the press.

Anthony Davis plays in the biggest market and he's still a relative nobody. If you don't watch basketball you don't know who Anthony Davis is, and if you do you probably don't care about him. Some guys are marketable, some guys are not.

Not to mention there are huge stars that played in markets a fraction the size of San Antonio like Durant in the Thunder. Thunder in the finals were a big deal, and no one really cared it was in the smallest market in the NBA. The NBA wanted the Durant/Westbrook Thunder deep in the post season every time.

[MartinToVaught]

Maybe. Or maybe Duncan declined to do a lot of promotional work for the league. Which wouldn't surprise me since he didn't really do endorsement deals/commercials much either. I think he valued his time and wasn't interested in the spotlight. And I certainly think he would be troubled by being singled out as a singular star apart from Admiral originally and then Parker/Manu after that.

On the other hand, how much can we blame Duncan for that, rather than the league's failure to come up with ways to market Duncan that would be suitable for his low-key personality? I'd argue that Parker and Manu were undermarketed as well.

Were Stockton/Malone not featured because Salt Lake City? Or not featured because they were "boring"? Or not featured because those guys weren't into all that? Arguments for all three you have to think.

Honestly, I think the real reason that the Jazz weren't featured all that much was because of Malone's personal life.

[parsnips33]

Kinda unrelated to anything being discussed rn, but do you guys see Jokic as more effective offensively in the post or as the roll man? It's kinda incredible to me he's so good, and so comfortable, in either role

[70sFan]

Kinda unrelated to anything being discussed rn, but do you guys see Jokic as more effective offensively in the post or as the roll man? It's kinda incredible to me he's so good, and so comfortable, in either role

It depends on matchups, he's really good at both.

[parsnips33]

Kinda unrelated to anything being discussed rn, but do you guys see Jokic as more effective offensively in the post or as the roll man? It's kinda incredible to me he's so good, and so comfortable, in either role

It depends on matchups, he's really good at both.

Definitely matchup (and teammate) dependent, I guess I mean in a vacuum where does he bring the most offensive value? I want to say PNR, even tho he's such a natural in the post

[Outside]

Good on the Clips for winning that series, but "end of the curse" and all that narrative crap requires a lot more than coming back to beat a very flawed Mavs team. I didn't watch the Clips very much this season, but I was not impressed by them in this series, even discarding the games they lost. I will be shocked if they get by Utah.

I've seen Utah enough to be impressed by their depth, three-point shooting, and defense. The Clips had enough trouble dealing with Boban, who is likeable as hell and tries really hard but I think I can give him a run for his money hop-wise even with my knees being listed as a federal disaster area, and Porzingis, who may not be the longest, tallest, and most overpaid player in league history but belongs in the discussion. Now LA has to deal with Gobert, light years better defensively than what the Mavs had for rim protection and has learned how to thrive on a spot basis as a finisher and occasional cutter within the great spacing that the perimeter shooters provide. Ibaka is hurt, Zubac is a nice in the backup role, and Marcus Morris has only six fouls to give. This is the series tailor-made for Gobert to show that he deserves the "best player on the Jazz" chatter.

The Clippers were better defensively against the Mavs in games 6 and 7, but only for stretches, not consistently, and mainly from an individual effort perspective from Kawhi and Paul George, not as a cohesive team defense. The Mavs had plenty of open looks but didn't make them.

The Clippers offense was also heavily dependent on Kawhi and George making things happen individually, though I thought George was effective at penetrating and kicking. I question whether relying on Kawhi and George to get half your points and then Reggie Jackson, Nicholas Batum, and Marcus Morris to get the bulk of the other half is a recipe for success. The Clippers are actually very thin.

The Mavs fell back to earth after two very hot shooting games. That the Clippers needed the Mavs to do that in order to squeak out a series win says more to me about the Clippers than it does about the Mavs.

[BIGJ1ER]

General Board proved again that majority of posters there don't even watch games. After game 7, there are some many ridiculous hot takes about Luka right now there that you can't even describe it.

I always wonder, why people engage in topics they know so little about? It's av very strange phenomenon and it's not strictly related to sports.

That's a discussion I've had plenty with people, on why people feel so inclined to chime in on topics they clearly don't know much about, wether it be scientific, societal, political, sports based you name it, highly uninformed people will always find a way to join in and make bold claims and be impossible to have reasonable discussions with.

I've never understood it, for example when I was younger (and still to an extent to this day) I didn't really join in on political discussions because I knew I didn't know enough to make any meaningful contributions, and If I did give my two cents I'd always preface it with the fact that I'm uninformed and that I could definitely be wrong and am open to having my mind changed.

Unsure if it stems from a certain psychological trait, or an education flaw or what? It's an interesting phenomenon nonetheless, and if anyone here knows more about the topic I'd love to learn more.

[HeartBreakKid]

General Board proved again that majority of posters there don't even watch games. After game 7, there are some many ridiculous hot takes about Luka right now there that you can't even describe it.

I always wonder, why people engage in topics they know so little about? It's av very strange phenomenon and it's not strictly related to sports.

That's a discussion I've had plenty with people, on why people feel so inclined to chime in on topics they clearly don't know much about, wether it be scientific, societal, political, sports based you name it, highly uninformed people will always find a way to join in and make bold claims and be impossible to have reasonable discussions with.

I've never understood it, for example when I was younger (and still to an extent to this day) I didn't really join in on political discussions because I knew I didn't know enough to make any meaningful contributions, and If I did give my two cents I'd always preface it with the fact that I'm uninformed and that I could definitely be wrong and am open to having my mind changed.

Unsure if it stems from a certain psychological trait, or an education flaw or what? It's an interesting phenomenon nonetheless, and if anyone here knows more about the topic I'd love to learn more.

Most people do NOT like learning, even in topics they care about. Now, learning something via the news, trends or common misconceptions is easy - you just have to turn on the TV or look at some memes for that.

Many people assume that if they heard about it - it must be true, especially if enough people say it. Overestimation of their knowledge on a topic.


So a combination of people will just go with what they heard about with the assumption that already makes them informed and people hate "digging" into topics because from most peoples perspective that requires work. An underestimation of what it takes to know about a topic and tendencies to dismiss digging further.


I think it probably stems from education. School is there to educate the masses in many different topics in finite time. So people grow up learning many topics very lightly, and assuming you pass or even get good grades - then they often assume their knowledge in that topic must be sufficient - because why else would they have passed so many different classes throughout their lives if not. This is even true in undergraduate college. People often do not put together that you can dig further or more importantly learn how to dig further, since school organizes that for them. And naturally once they meet someone who has dug further, they don't want to believe that they are ignorant and become dismissive of the well informed individual.

[MisterHibachi]

Nets look like the best team in the playoffs right now. Giannis hasn't been able to get to the rim against them so far

[falcolombardi]

Nets look like the best team in the playoffs right now. Giannis hasn't been able to get to the rim against them so far

i think part of it is because they are not forcing nets to spread enough in defense

i think bucks needs to go full small ball: giannis/forbes/tucker/jrue/midieton and switch a lot

playing López inside with giannis outside is not exactly going to lead to drives, whether by giannis or by anyone else

[MartinToVaught]

Nets look like the best team in the playoffs right now.

Of course they do, they have an easy road because nobody in the East is equipped to compete with them.

[MisterHibachi]

Nets look like the best team in the playoffs right now.

Of course they do, they have an easy road because nobody in the East is equipped to compete with them.

Even from the West, if it's not the Clippers, I don't see any team bothering them. And they'll be better next with everyone healthy and improved chemistry. Yikes

[Basileus777]

The Bucks offense struggling like this against the Nets is honestly just embarrassing. You can't blame the Nets star talent for that.

[falcolombardi]

i am failing to see the logic of playing brook lopez inside the paint when giannis is in the game,

it clogs the lane for giannis, and López inside with giannis floated in the perimeter leads to clogged lanes for everyone else

say whatever you want about vogel, at least he tries different thinghs when somethingh is clearly not working

[TheGOATRises007]

I can't believe people thought the Bucks would win with a healthy Harden.

They look completely outmatched without Harden.

[falcolombardi]

I can't believe people thought the Bucks would win with a healthy Harden.

They look completely outmatched without Harden.

i think nobody expected them to be this trash on offense to be fair

[TheGOATRises007]

I can't believe people thought the Bucks would win with a healthy Harden.

They look completely outmatched without Harden.

i think nobody expected them to be this trash on offense to be fair

People thought the Nets wouldn't play defense in the playoffs for whatever reason.

And why were people so confident the Bucks offense wouldn't go through lulls?