2019-2020 Player of the Year Discussion Thread

[Sublime187]

I think AD has been outstanding but it doesn't seem like he can have his way with the defense when things slow down at all times. LeBron doesn't seem like his peak self in this regard either but as the 4th quarter showed last game he got to the line and made things happen when it didn't seem like there were many cracks to be had. AD seems like an in the flow of the offense type of guy.

Defense I will give to AD in this series but I think Bron was right there for prior series. He also was covering Butler for spurts and Butler was not attacking him at all.

I agree with another poster here that they are very close throughout the playoffs but I think they lose a little bit more here if they were to lose LeBron.

[Doctor MJ]

Lawrence Frank wins EOY:

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/259816/Lawrence-Frank-Named-NBA-Executive-Of-The-Year

A golden example of why our drastically superior to the NBA's awards. They make themselves look foolish to themselves over and over again with the way they award ignoring the same post-season they've placed all meaning in.

[HeartBreakKid]

Lawrence Frank wins EOY:

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/259816/Lawrence-Frank-Named-NBA-Executive-Of-The-Year

A golden example of why our drastically superior to the NBA's awards. They make themselves look foolish to themselves over and over again with the way they award ignoring the same post-season they've placed all meaning in.

Why is this a bad choice? I mean I know why - they lost in the 2nd round and came up way short of media expectations (but to be fair, people greatly underrated every team outside of LA and Milwaukee this year). But they're still better than they were last year, and have a better future in general. The Clippers are not checkmated yet, a lot can still go right for them.

He got a superstar and a player who was third in MVP voting while still retaining a roster of notable names. It didn't work out the way they thought, but do you think he was a bad executive for making those moves?

Maybe he wouldn't be my number one (I reckon no one did as much this off season as Pat Riley), but it's not like they gave it to Morrey or Elton Brand (lol).

By the way, would you put Pressi over Frank?

[Doctor MJ]

Lawrence Frank wins EOY:

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/259816/Lawrence-Frank-Named-NBA-Executive-Of-The-Year

A golden example of why our drastically superior to the NBA's awards. They make themselves look foolish to themselves over and over again with the way they award ignoring the same post-season they've placed all meaning in.

Why is this a bad choice? I mean I know why - they lost in the 2nd round, yeah. But they're still better than they were last year, and have a better future in general.

He got a superstar and a player who was third in MVP voting while still retaining a roster of notable names. It didn't work out the way they thought, but do you think he was a bad executive for making those moves?

I don't think he's a bad executive, but it's the Executive of the Year award and if they voted on things right now, let's just say he wouldn't win it.

As far as the analysis on his work here, I think it's important to recognize that it was far more contingent on how Kawhi & George played together than, say, Riley's work with the Heatles. Getting LeBron to come to your team and commit to a long-term deal was a huge win no matter how you looked at it. The fact that you also got Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade was still in the mix? Pure gold. Whether or not the team became a dynasty, every single franchise would have traded place with the Heat at that point with the possible exception of the Thunder.

The Clippers right now? Have a Big 2 that doesn't seem to fit that well and their much vaunted depth has been revealed to be regular season fool's gold. They had to fire their coach, and they are out a million draft picks. I understand that you can say "It was still worth the shot", but in terms of what they got and what they gave up, it wasn't anything people are going to rave about going forward, and I would argue that if we want to really have an EOY award, that "rave about it going forward" criteria is what's real.

As an example:

The greatest executive year in NBA history is probably Jerry West in '96-97. He drafted the guy who is generally considered to be the best guy in the draft with a pick outside of the top 10 and also convinced the greatest talent of his generation to come to the Lakers. I honestly don't know know what could top that.

It's telling that for the EOY voting that year was Bob Bass who ran the Hornets and acquired Vlade Divac traded Kobe to the Lakers. While it's unfair to blame the voters for not knowing that Kobe would become what he became, West clearly should have won the award by virtue of upgrading Divac to Shaquille O'Neal instead of Bass winning the award for getting Divac in a trade that in the grand scheme of things is a hard negative.

The nature of an exec's job makes it very hard to distill everything down to a single year criteria and so we should cut some slack for the fact that these awards don't actually line up with who was doing the best job all that often. You make it infinitely harder though when you force the decision to be made before you get to see even a single playoff series with new free agent pairings.

[therealbig3]

Lawrence Frank shouldn't have been within a country mile of EOY. The Clippers mortgaged their future for a 2nd round exit.

Riley or Presti should have won imo. Masai still had a great team despite losing Kawhi. I think Marks deserves consideration too.

[Doctor MJ]

Lawrence Frank shouldn't have been within a country mile of EOY. The Clippers mortgaged their future for a 2nd round exit.

Riley or Presti should have won imo. Masai still had a great team despite losing Kawhi. I think Marks deserves consideration too.

To me Riley is the guy here over Presti because I always think that you need to reward execs who are building up rather than tearing down. A good tear down is a great foundation for building up, but the potential to draft somebody good is not the same as having actually drafted someone good.

Now, there really aren't that many contenders this year so I think Presti is going to be on my ballot, but below Riley.

I think Tim Connolly of the Nuggets is someone who is a candidate, and may put him ahead of Presti, but don't think he'll be above Riley. He's an example of a guy where it's easy to give him a victory lap because he's built the team up for the past 7 years, and he made moves in the past year that were clear-cut good, but he lacks the show-y moves in the past year to make him that sexy of a pick. Still, Jerami Grant and Bol Bol were good acquisitions and his choice to go all in on Jamal Murray has proven wise (I was skeptical).

[Dupp]

Whens this award voted on, before playoffs or not? That makes a big difference.

Clippers still did great. They had to get PG to get Kawhi so they did. Individually PG wasnt worth the trade it appears but overall the move was worth it. They are in a position to contend for a while. They have holes but nothing too hard to tweak.

[therealbig3]

Whens this award voted on, before playoffs or not? That makes a big difference.

Clippers still did great. They had to get PG to get Kawhi so they did. Individually PG wasnt worth the trade it appears but overall the move was worth it. They are in a position to contend for a while. They have holes but nothing too hard to tweak.

Don't know if they're in position for a while...first of all, Kawhi and George are both free agents after next season. That could end up being a disaster for the Clippers if they both walk. I don't think they will, because they both want to play in LA, but still, you never know. Beyond those two, I'm not seeing anything that special about the Clippers that guarantees them long-term success.

But they're both almost 30, not exactly young guys, with significant injury history. Kawhi has a degenerative condition, it's not going to get better. I like Shamet, Reggie Jackson is a free agent, Harrell may leave (and I don't think he's that good honestly)...they're not exactly a young team that's set up for the next 5-10 years. They have like a 2-3 year window, and this was year 1.

And they traded 5 1st round picks and 2 pick swaps through 2026 to the Thunder. So they really have no chance of adding through the draft, or rebuilding through the draft in case this comes crashing down sooner than expected. It's very 2014 Brooklyn-ish to me.

IMO, it's the opposite of a long contention window...they traded away the potential to compete for a while for a 2-3 year window. And looking at their team, you gotta have serious concerns about their defense come playoff time, as well as the fit of their two best players and if Paul George can be relied on as a 2nd star (so far the answer is no).

[Dupp]

Whens this award voted on, before playoffs or not? That makes a big difference.

Clippers still did great. They had to get PG to get Kawhi so they did. Individually PG wasnt worth the trade it appears but overall the move was worth it. They are in a position to contend for a while. They have holes but nothing too hard to tweak.

Don't know if they're in position for a while...first of all, Kawhi and George are both free agents after next season. That could end up being a disaster for the Clippers if they both walk. I don't think they will, because they both want to play in LA, but still, you never know. Beyond those two, I'm not seeing anything that special about the Clippers that guarantees them long-term success.

But they're both almost 30, not exactly young guys, with significant injury history. Kawhi has a degenerative condition, it's not going to get better. I like Shamet, Reggie Jackson is a free agent, Harrell may leave (and I don't think he's that good honestly)...they're not exactly a young team that's set up for the next 5-10 years. They have like a 2-3 year window, and this was year 1.

And they traded 5 1st round picks and 2 pick swaps through 2026 to the Thunder. So they really have no chance of adding through the draft, or rebuilding through the draft in case this comes crashing down sooner than expected. It's very 2014 Brooklyn-ish to me.

IMO, it's the opposite of a long contention window...they traded away the potential to compete for a while for a 2-3 year window. And looking at their team, you gotta have serious concerns about their defense come playoff time, as well as the fit of their two best players and if Paul George can be relied on as a 2nd star (so far the answer is no).

Thats always a factor though. AD next year, Kevin Love after 2015 etc etc. Rarely does a player walk hen traded to a good situation. Unless you're kylie Irving.


Honestly with all the wholes they have they weren't that far off beating denver. Thats with PG playing like complete ass. Obviously he needs to get his **** together or theyre never winning anything.

2-3 window isnt even a bad thing, though i think its longer slightly. Cavs ended up with a 4 year (really only 3) when lebron went back to cleveland. Thats normal. Hurting your "future" for immediate success is fine. Theyve never been out of the second round, you take these opportunities.

What teams end up contending for 5-10 years? It never happens. Things change too fast in this sport, you try grad your opportunities while you can because not many teams win titles.

[Joey Wheeler]

So I'm pretty sure I'll have AD #1 and Lebron #2 and I imagine everyone will have those 2 as their top 2 in some order. No idea who to pick as a (very distant) third and even 4th and 5th though, there are quite a few candidates on a very similar level.

[Doctor MJ]

Whens this award voted on, before playoffs or not? That makes a big difference.

Clippers still did great. They had to get PG to get Kawhi so they did. Individually PG wasnt worth the trade it appears but overall the move was worth it. They are in a position to contend for a while. They have holes but nothing too hard to tweak.

Ah, but you already know when this was voted. You know precisely because the Clippers' GM won and we live in a world where the Clippers' coach got fired against the Clippers' GM's wishes. Nobody wins awards in such circumstances.

Of course, you also know because a) the playoffs aren't over yet, so they aren't including the playoffs, and b) the NBA's already said that nothing in the Bubble will count toward awards.

[limbo]

Isn't executive of the year also a regular season award? If we're using the Clippers failure to advance past the 2nd round of the Playoffs as a reason not to give Frank the award, then we might as well take Giannis' MVP away too... This is not me saying Frank deserves the award in the first place, just that i don't like this result-based retroactive evaluation of who was the best...

As far as i'm concerned, the Clippers made moves in the offseason (plus, middle of the season acquisitions) which turned them from a 1.09 SRS team last season into a 6.66 SRS team this season... I think only the Lakers made a bigger jump in SRS relative to last year.

There's room to argue why the Clippers eventually disappointed in the PS, and whether the pieces that were brought to this team were 'right' in terms of winning a title... You can say that ultimately they weren't 'right', because they didn't even get to the WCF, but again, should that be used against Frank? His job is to build the best possible roster to compete for the title, and given the fact that the Clippers were a mediocre team last season, i think he did a lot of good moves that brought them much closer to competing for the title... I don't think Frank can control how Doc Rivers coaches or if Kawhi/PG shoot 44% from the floor... That's not his job.

[Doctor MJ]

Isn't executive of the year also a regular season award? If we're using the Clippers failure to advance past the 2nd round of the Playoffs as a reason not to give Frank the award, then we might as well take Giannis' MVP away too... This is not me saying Frank deserves the award in the first place, just that i don't like this result-based retroactive evaluation of who was the best...

As far as i'm concerned, the Clippers made moves in the offseason (plus, middle of the season acquisitions) which turned them from a 1.09 SRS team last season into a 6.66 SRS team this season... I think only the Lakers made a bigger jump in SRS relative to last year.

There's room to argue why the Clippers eventually disappointed in the PS, and whether the pieces that were brought to this team were 'right' in terms of winning a title... You can say that ultimately they weren't 'right', because they didn't even get to the WCF, but again, should that be used against Frank? His job is to build the best possible roster to compete for the title, and given the fact that the Clippers were a mediocre team last season, i think he did a lot of good moves that brought them much closer to competing for the title... I don't think Frank can control how Doc Rivers coaches or if Kawhi/PG shoot 44% from the floor... That's not his job.

This is what I'm saying. The problem with the NBA's awards is that they are tied to the regular season while the actual legacy weight is focused on the playoffs, and that makes their awards destined to age terribly.

Re: should be used against Frank? I mean, the Exec has to think about everything.

"Is my coach too tactically backward to think of a way to fit two stars who play the same position? Maybe I should do something about that?"

You can point out all the reasons why Frank in practice perhaps couldn't do anything other than what he did, but if you're singling out just one GM in the entire league as the pinnacle of GM performance for the past year, why are you giving it to a guy where you have to make excuses for him? The bar of "he shouldn't get fired for this" isn't the same thing as "he had the best year out of anyone with his job".

But again, the reality is we all know that Frank has no prayer of winning this award if the playoffs are included so I really don't think there's anything to debate here. If you want an EOY award that ages well, you've got to include the playoffs. So we do. The funny thing is that the NBA doesn't.

[Heej]

So I'm pretty sure I'll have AD #1 and Lebron #2 and I imagine everyone will have those 2 as their top 2 in some order. No idea who to pick as a (very distant) third and even 4th and 5th though, there are quite a few candidates on a very similar level.

Just wanna say, I respect your commitment to the AD camp and wanna recognize that you definitely called your shot on the Lakers smoking everyone with that duo. That being said, I'm going with LeBron #1 but I can't state enough how much I'm here for the AD at #1 vote. Truly a spectacular season from a rather unappreciated player.

Re: EOTY vote. I think this year is finally where the regular season weighted approach for all these awards have truly hit the tipping point, and it's why I have a special appreciation for the RealGM poty stuff looking at seasons in totality. I'm sure I've worn some people out with my constant harping on it, but the metagame of the regular season and the postseason has diverged so sharply I don't think there's any reconciliation coming between the two.

As an executive, it's high crime that a professional like Lawrence Frank (who I think is one of the better basketball minds of this generation) didn't recognize the inherent structural concerns with having 1-way liabilities like Lou Williams and Montrezl Harrell on the team. He built a team that was primed to win every single regular seaon award and probably would've had the best record in the league if the full lineup tried to play every game; and yet they still got exposed in the playoffs due to the deficiencies they had that only come to light under intense scrutiny.

It's time for the NBA to admit that their approach is wrong. It makes no sense to make these awards regular season only. The whole point of the regular season is to build continuity and chemistry to make a run in the postseason (and making money lol). The things you do in the regular season are meant to inform what you do in the playoffs. You can no longer act like the Playoff sample is negligible as far as what the spirit of these awards is meant to capture

[limbo]

But again, the reality is we all know that Frank has no prayer of winning this award if the playoffs are included so I really don't think there's anything to debate here. If you want an EOY award that ages well, you've got to include the playoffs. So we do. The funny thing is that the NBA doesn't.

Ok, but it weird to me that you can argue Frank as a legitimate EOY award winner during 80% of the season, but once you include Playoffs, he no longer has an argument when he's not making any 'new moves' during the Playoffs, if you get what i'm saying Unlike the players or coaches, who actually preform and need to step up against better competition in the Playoffs, the executive gets most of the job done before and midseason.

And i realize the Playoffs offer a type of format which puts the question of 'how well is this team built' to the ultimate test, but there's still so many factors at play here that it's pretty much impossible for someone to predict how things are going to shake up 9 months prior to the fact... Anyone claiming to have that type of foresight is probably lying, especially in a season like this where the 'bubble' thing adds a whole other level of unpredictability...

I'll admit, i haven't really paid that attention that closely to what kind of moves the Clippers could've made with their roster/cap situation during the offseason. To me, signing Kawhi and PG was a no-brainer decision any basketball-watcher would've made.

It's easy for some people to pat their own backs now in hindsight, and talk about how the Clippers mortgage their future of what not, but when you have a chance of combining a Finals MVP with another guy who played like a Top 10 player the previous year you do that 10 out of 10 times... Even if you end up only winning one title out of it and the team just can't hold together after that, you still do it... As far as the roster after that, idk, what more could they realistically have done that would be any better?

For me, persuading Kawhi (especially after he just won a title and was sitting in a great basketball position) and PG to join a franchise like the Clippers is definitely a far more impressive move than the Lakers getting AD for example... When you're a brand like the Lakers and already have LeBron on your team it's like if a GM is playing with cheat codes... You don't really have to do much convincing to anyone... The Lakers could've arguably had an even better team this year if their GM didn't wait til almost every good player signed because he was baited by Kawhi.

Doc Rivers is now retroactively seen as a failure GM decision, because he has proved to be the wrong guy for the job, but maybe him being the head coach, and the experience/portfolio he had, was the catalyst for some of these key guys even joining the team in the first place... I'm sure Kawhi/PG were asked about Doc before joining the roster, and they probably approved of him being the head coach. Should the executive give a damn what Kawhi/PG think about a decision he should be having more knowledge/precedent over? Well... yes and no. I'm sure you don't want to hire a coach your star players don't respect for whatever reason...

I think most of the moves Frank made were great and made sense at the time, and the improvement in the regular season was noted... that's why i can't say he's not at least one of candidates for this award. Ultimately, the wheels fell off at the end, but again... asking Lawrence Frank to predict a season which abruptly ends midway, turns into a 4-month layoff, gets replayed in an unprecedented 'bubble' scenario, Doc Rivers getting outcoached, the dressing room getting lost, Paul George having mood swings, Kawhi not looking the spriest etc. is kind of asking too much and veering into clairvoyance territory, imo. I think if you put any other executive in the entire league in Frank Lawrence spot he'd done the exact same moves down to 99% accuracy.

But maybe that's just me. Not saying Frank deserved it, i'm just saying i can see a case for him, and think a lot of the stuff that happened with the Clippers, and in general with this season, was impossible to predict. And even if there were any inklings of things maybe going south because the team had a banquet of characters on the roster... i still think rolling the dice was the right move on his part. You trust the talent to make it work, and if it doesn't work (like it ended up not), then you evaluate why it wasn't working and make the necessary changes next season instead of kicking in the dark and trying to play clairvoyant without actually seeing this team play a full season together.

Who do you think deserved to get EOY this season? I'm definitely open to considering other options.

[Doctor MJ]

But again, the reality is we all know that Frank has no prayer of winning this award if the playoffs are included so I really don't think there's anything to debate here. If you want an EOY award that ages well, you've got to include the playoffs. So we do. The funny thing is that the NBA doesn't.

Ok, but it weird to me that you can argue Frank as a legitimate EOY award winner during 80% of the season, but once you include Playoffs, he no longer has an argument when he's not making any 'new moves' during the Playoffs, if you get what i'm saying Unlike the players or coaches, who actually preform and need to step up against better competition in the Playoffs, the executive gets most of the job done before and midseason.

And i realize the Playoffs offer a type of format which puts the question of 'how well is this team built' to the ultimate test, but there's still so many factors at play here that it's pretty much impossible for someone to predict how things are going to shake up 9 months prior to the fact... Anyone claiming to have that type of foresight is probably lying, especially in a season like this where the 'bubble' thing adds a whole other level of unpredictability...

I'll admit, i haven't really paid that attention that closely to what kind of moves the Clippers could've made with their roster/cap situation during the offseason. To me, signing Kawhi and PG was a no-brainer decision any basketball-watcher would've made.

It's easy for some people to pat their own backs now in hindsight, and talk about how the Clippers mortgage their future of what not, but when you have a chance of combining a Finals MVP with another guy who played like a Top 10 player the previous year you do that 10 out of 10 times... Even if you end up only winning one title out of it and the team just can't hold together after that, you still do it... As far as the roster after that, idk, what more could they realistically have done that would be any better?

For me, persuading Kawhi (especially after he just won a title and was sitting in a great basketball position) and PG to join a franchise like the Clippers is definitely a far more impressive move than the Lakers getting AD for example... When you're a brand like the Lakers and already have LeBron on your team it's like if a GM is playing with cheat codes... You don't really have to do much convincing to anyone... The Lakers could've arguably had an even better team this year if their GM didn't wait til almost every good player signed because he was baited by Kawhi.

Doc Rivers is now retroactively seen as a failure GM decision, because he has proved to be the wrong guy for the job, but maybe him being the head coach, and the experience/portfolio he had, was the catalyst for some of these key guys even joining the team in the first place... I'm sure Kawhi/PG were asked about Doc before joining the roster, and they probably approved of him being the head coach. Should the executive give a damn what Kawhi/PG think about a decision he should be having more knowledge/precedent over? Well... yes and no. I'm sure you don't want to hire a coach your star players don't respect for whatever reason...

I think most of the moves Frank made were great and made sense at the time, and the improvement in the regular season was noted... that's why i can't say he's not at least one of candidates for this award. Ultimately, the wheels fell off at the end, but again... asking Lawrence Frank to predict a season which abruptly ends midway, turns into a 4-month layoff, gets replayed in an unprecedented 'bubble' scenario, Doc Rivers getting outcoached, the dressing room getting lost, Paul George having mood swings, Kawhi not looking the spriest etc. is kind of asking too much and veering into clairvoyance territory, imo. I think if you put any other executive in the entire league in Frank Lawrence spot he'd done the exact same moves down to 99% accuracy.

But maybe that's just me. Not saying Frank deserved it, i'm just saying i can see a case for him, and think a lot of the stuff that happened with the Clippers, and in general with this season, was impossible to predict. And even if there were any inklings of things maybe going south because the team had a banquet of characters on the roster... i still think rolling the dice was the right move on his part. You trust the talent to make it work, and if it doesn't work (like it ended up not), then you evaluate why it wasn't working and make the necessary changes next season instead of kicking in the dark and trying to play clairvoyant without actually seeing this team play a full season together.

Who do you think deserved to get EOY this season? I'm definitely open to considering other options.

I think it needs to be understood that GMs are gambling with every move they make, and if that gamble doesn't pay off, it doesn't pay off. The fact that the move made sense at the time matters a great deal when it comes to a guy deserving to keep his job, but when it comes to being celebrated as the guy who made the best gambles in the past year, well, it doesn't matter that much to people.

How can it look good for most of the year and then all dissolve with the playoffs? Because the NBA has chosen a season schedule that makes the regular season not as important as the playoffs fundamentally, and chosen a playoff format that really diverges from the regular season. If a GM makes a move that works well in the regular season but badly in the playoffs, he made a bad move. Simple as that.

(To be clear, the story of the Kawhi-PG acquisition is still being written. I'm not saying it's set in stone that it was a "bad playoff move", just saying that the playoffs will always decide this stuff.)

Something I have to say though: Lawrence Frank didn't win the EOY because the Clippers got the #2 seed in the regular season. He got it because when he made the move it made the Clippers favorites and the Clippers players and coach spun a story of them coasting through the regular season to prime themselves for the playoffs.

EOY voters thus gave Frank the award based on essentially pre-crediting the team with playoff success as "a team well-built for the playoffs". And that's got everything to do with why Ballmer was so furious when the team lost, and why it really won't take much for him to fire Frank in another year if next season is problematic.

Re: not making moves in the playoffs so why influence? Executives cannot be judged in real time. Their impact is based on what the players actually do together, and is something that only truly gains its final form at the end of the playoffs.

That lack of real time analysis also pertains to why even doing a single-year award here isn't that great. But the award does become roughly 1000 times more meaningful when you factor in the playoffs. Bottom line is that this is not an award that Frank is feeling at all good about right now as he's getting that. What the hell's the point of giving an award out like that? Why give out awards people are embarrassed to accept because they've failed badly in between the voting and the ceremony?

Re: Kawhi/PG no-brainer. Well by that logic why give credit? If anyone would have done this, then maybe Frank deserves no blame for what happened because he would have deserved no credit for a title. That's not how I think of things but just saying, the argument of "it's what anyone would have done" is a double-edged sword.

Re: Doc. The idea of the EOY award is that the guy at the top is responsible for how people perform below him. It's an oversimplification of reality. The reality is that Frank may not have had the ability to get rid of Doc if he wanted before this season. This doesn't change the fact that the coach working "under" Frank looked like an absolute dinosaur out there in the playoffs when we're asking "Which Executive did the best job this year?" Again if we're asking about the very best, then if the argument for you immediately involves coming up with reasons why the stench of failure around your franchise is not your fault despite you being the official Executive of the team, there's really no way people are going to rate you at #1 above all others.

Who do I think EOY?

I'm expecting to vote for Pat Riley. The acquisition of Butler and other role players, the fact that they have rookies who performed great, the strong evidence of great player development, the outstanding culture. While it's hard to draw a line in the sand between what Riley did this year and what he did in the past, he has plenty to hang his hat on this year and I don't mind giving a nudge to a guy who was building up to this success in preceding years.

I think Tim Connolly of Denver has a similar, if milder case. He may well be 2 or 3 on my ballot.

Sam Presti had a great year and may also make my ballot. I don't like giving the nod for a tear down, but he's in the conversation at least because he did a great job at a bunch of things, most notably destroying the possibility of Frank likely ever being able to build through the draft on the Clippers.

Beyond that, I'll listen to what others have to say.

[jackpal]

NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said Tuesday that his “best guess” is that next season will not start until at least January, plus acknowledged that the later-than-usual schedule could mean top U.S. men’s players miss next summer’s Tokyo Olympics.

Silver, a guest in a series of panel discussions on CNN, did not indicate that any decisions are finalized. The league was originally hoping for a Dec. 1 start to next season, then shifted its focus to the chance of a late December start, and now the target has apparently moved again.

“I continue to believe that we’re going to be better off getting into January,” Silver said in a discussion with Bob Costas during part of the “Citizen by CNN” event. “The goal for us next season is to play a standard season ... an 82-game season and playoffs. And further, the goal would be to play games at home arenas in front of fans, but there’s still a lot that we need to learn.”

The NBA hasn’t played in arenas filled with fans since March 11 , when the league suspended its season because of the coronavirus pandemic. A very small number of fans — maybe 30 or 40 per game — have been allowed to watch inside the NBA’s restart bubble at Walt Disney World in recent weeks, all of the family members or close friends of players. Those guests all are tested daily for coronavirus, like everyone else in the bubble.

[eminence]

The greatest executive year in NBA history is probably Jerry West in '96-97. He drafted the guy who is generally considered to be the best guy in the draft with a pick outside of the top 10 and also convinced the greatest talent of his generation to come to the Lakers. I honestly don't know know what could top that.

This is an interesting topic, best executive years with hindsight. My mind goes to Bob Myers first year where he drafted Barnes/Ezeli/Green and extended Curry for the famous 4/44 deal.

[Doctor MJ]

The greatest executive year in NBA history is probably Jerry West in '96-97. He drafted the guy who is generally considered to be the best guy in the draft with a pick outside of the top 10 and also convinced the greatest talent of his generation to come to the Lakers. I honestly don't know know what could top that.

This is an interesting topic, best executive years with hindsight. My mind goes to Bob Myers first year where he drafted Barnes/Ezeli/Green and extended Curry for the famous 4/44 deal.

I feel kinda gross praising Myers for the Curry deal, but I can't deny that it was one of the most beneficial contracts to a franchise ever signed in the modern era of contracts.

[Doctor MJ]

Tonight I say to myself for the nth time:

I'm done with doubting Jimmy Butler.