2022-23 NBA Season Discussion

[parsnips33]

Curry, Klay and Draymond shouldn't get a pass here either. They're recruiting KD again because they're scared of another Western team getting him and making the West tougher for them.

None of these guys have a competitive bone in their body. They're so soft, Charmin might as well be sandpaper compared to them.

Cowards. What are you talking about? The point is to win not to win with the greatest degree of difficult possible.

The point is to compete and entertain the fans, i.e. the people who make it possible for them to get paid millions to play a kids' game for a living. Winning means nothing if it wasn't earned.

If a player said "I don't really care about winning, I just want to entertain people" they would get KILLED. And nobody would call them competitive for it. I mean come on

[sp6r=underrated]

His choice is to 26 million playing with Westbrook in Oklahoma or 26 million playing with Curry and Dray in the Bay Area.

He had several other choices besides those two, all of which would have also been more competitive than joining Steph's 73-win team that he had just choked/quit against.

And none of those other choices was as good as joining Dray, Steph in San Francisco. The rational actor model is a simplification but it explains a lot. People respond to incentives:
Winning is more rewarding than losing.
Playing with talented co-workers makes winning easier.
It is easier to attract talented players in a large city than a small one.
And big cities have more off the court business opportunities than small.

The NBA CBA makes Durant to Golden State the rational choice which is what happens. I also fail to see how it is really that much different than the 2011 Decision, other than your affection for Lebron. The Heatles didn't reach the GSW heights but they expected they would based on that rally. They were just like Durant trying to stack the deck in their favor.

And I don't blame them. Most players are going to make the rational choice. The owners created a CBA that encourages superteams. Blame them if this pisses you off so much instead of whining "boohoo KD isn't a big tough guy who wants a hard challenge." I don't know about you, but in my day to day life I try to make things easier on myself not harder.

Durant doing the rational thing doesn't reflect poorly on him. You seem to want people to be martyrs for your entertainment by trying to do things with maximum difficulty. Which is an unreasonable demand.

Keep the soft cap, but get rid of max contracts and you'll see what you actually want, players not pairing up and undesirable markets being able to attract top free agents. But when I brought up getting rid of max contracts you hated that idea too. Do you have any solution to what you consider a grave problem?

As long as we have the current systems, players are going to do the rational thing and pair up. And most of the pair ups will be in the two alpha markets (LA/NYC) or the second tier big markets.

His trade demand after things went sideways does but that is a different topic with different solutions.

[sp6r=underrated]

Cowards. What are you talking about? The point is to win not to win with the greatest degree of difficult possible.

The point is to compete and entertain the fans, i.e. the people who make it possible for them to get paid millions to play a kids' game for a living. Winning means nothing if it wasn't earned.

If a player said "I don't really care about winning, I just want to entertain people" they would get KILLED. And nobody would call them competitive for it. I mean come on

Could you imagine if a player said, I'm glad my teammate got hurt, or left in free agency, we were too loaded and it hurt competition. I want it to be harder. No one would be happy.

A lot of people want players to be irrational actors rather than respond to the incentives the owners created. Get rid of max contracts + keep the soft cap. Small market teams with cap space will actually be able to compete for superstars in free agency.

[MartinToVaught]

Cowards. What are you talking about? The point is to win not to win with the greatest degree of difficult possible.

The point is to compete and entertain the fans, i.e. the people who make it possible for them to get paid millions to play a kids' game for a living. Winning means nothing if it wasn't earned.

If a player said "I don't really care about winning, I just want to entertain people" they would get KILLED. And nobody would call them competitive for it. I mean come on

Nobody wants or expects players to say that, we just don't want players single-handedly ruining the entire product for years like Durant did. It's not hard to understand.

[Colbinii]

The point is to compete and entertain the fans, i.e. the people who make it possible for them to get paid millions to play a kids' game for a living. Winning means nothing if it wasn't earned.

If a player said "I don't really care about winning, I just want to entertain people" they would get KILLED. And nobody would call them competitive for it. I mean come on

Nobody wants or expects players to say that, we just don't want players single-handedly ruining the entire product for years like Durant did. It's not hard to understand.

It isn't durants fault for ruining the product. The NBA made a massive error with the Salary Cap and didn't instill cap smoothing like they will be moving forward.

Durant made a decision to put himself in the best opportunity to win.

[MartinToVaught]

And none of those other choices was as good as joining Dray, Steph in San Francisco.

Really? Nobody counts Durant's rings, not even Warriors fans can stand him, and he's spent an ungodly amount of time and energy since then arguing over his legacy with teenagers on the internet. He's just wasted three years of his career in Brooklyn trying to break the league all over again without having to share the credit with Steph this time. He comes across as a deeply unhappy person. Just from a mental health standpoint alone, I think literally any of his other options at the time would have been better than Golden State. That's not even getting into winning and legacy. If you don't think he would have won rings with the Spurs, you're out of your mind.

[Outside]

KD has four years left on his contract and doesn't have a no-trade clause. He can say he'd rather go to certain cities, but the Nets have zero obligation to honor that request.

This is not a free agent situation where players can recruit him. To portray it that way is false.

There is no trade with Golden State that Brooklyn would accept that would leave the Warriors with enough left to still be a contender. Giving the Nets anything other than Steph, Klay, and Dray would not be acceptable to the Nets. Wiggins, Poole, Kuminga, Moody, Wiseman, and whatever it takes to make the numbers work isn't good enough for Brooklyn. Wiggins' contract is $33 million and Durant's is $44 million, but Wiggins isn't 75 percent the player that Durant is. Wiggins is a really good complementary player, while Durant is a franchise centerpiece. Poole, Kuminga, Moody, and Wiseman have potential, but so have a lot of other players that never amounted to anything significant. The Nets price is a young, proven star, plus a boatload of draft picks. A trade with Golden State is not that. Besides the Nets not wanting that trade, I don't see why the Warriors would want that trade.

Trade talk with the Lakers is equally ridiculous. So the Nets will take Westbrook off the Lakers hands plus a bunch of draft picks in the 2030s?

The best reasons I've heard for the Warriors appearing to show interest are a) wanting to repair some of the bad feelings that occurred when Durant left; and b) doing what they can to boost the market for Durant, and thereby the price that any team getting Durant has to pay. If he goes to Phoenix, they want that trade to decimate the Suns' depth. If he goes to Miami, it will definitely cost Bam, plus Herro, plus anyone under 30 worth a damn.

It won't surprise me if Durant is still a Net a year from now. They need to totally crash and burn before they'll be willing to take what other teams are willing to offer. Assuming neither KD nor Kyrie get traded and both stay reasonable healthy and available, the Nets could be good this year. The Nets aren't going to trade them away for scraps.

[parsnips33]

The point is to compete and entertain the fans, i.e. the people who make it possible for them to get paid millions to play a kids' game for a living. Winning means nothing if it wasn't earned.

If a player said "I don't really care about winning, I just want to entertain people" they would get KILLED. And nobody would call them competitive for it. I mean come on

Nobody wants or expects players to say that, we just don't want players single-handedly ruining the entire product for years like Durant did. It's not hard to understand.

I don't even disagree that the product is more enjoyable when talent is spread out among multiple teams

But I think it's a bit silly to expect players to break out the whiteboard and do game theory on what move would make the overall NBA landscape most competitive prior to signing a contract

[Colbinii]

I dont get why the Nets don't run it back [I think they will].

Kyrie/Mills
Curry/Harris/Thomas
O'Neale/Warren
Durant/Edwards
Claxton/Sharpe

Seems like a strong team, weak title contender.

[Texas Chuck]

I count KD's rings just as I would any player who contributed as much to those rings as he did. Don't project your feelings onto all of us.

[MartinToVaught]

If a player said "I don't really care about winning, I just want to entertain people" they would get KILLED. And nobody would call them competitive for it. I mean come on

Nobody wants or expects players to say that, we just don't want players single-handedly ruining the entire product for years like Durant did. It's not hard to understand.

I don't even disagree that the product is more enjoyable when talent is spread out among multiple teams

But I think it's a bit silly to expect players to break out the whiteboard and do game theory on what move would make the overall NBA landscape most competitive prior to signing a contract

Or, you know, just use some basic common sense. Even KD himself had to know deep down what a jackass he looked like going to Steph's 73-win team that just beat him.

[sp6r=underrated]

I dont get why the Nets don't run it back [I think they will].

Kyrie/Mills
Curry/Harris/Thomas
O'Neale/Warren
Durant/Edwards
Claxton/Sharpe

Seems like a strong team, weak title contender.

I'd bring it back. I'd ignore Durant's trade demand completely the way LA did with Kobe and Houston did with Hakeem. The only possible package I could see for Durant appealing to me would be if Toronto offered the full list of picks + Barnes/OG/Siakam which they aren't going to do.

And with Kyrie I would tell him you're coming back next year. You'll be a starter. We will consider giving you a max and if you don't want to sign here you can still audition for a max elsewhere.

But if you act like a moron and try to sabotage our season or make similar antics to the last 3 years we will John Wall you and you'll enter free agency with your last two employers hating you, and a half decade removed from a full season beginning to end.

I think there is a very good chance Durant buys in. He's locked in for 4 years. And for Kyrie I prefer rolling him back to taking Russ.

[sp6r=underrated]

KD has four years left on his contract and doesn't have a no-trade clause. He can say he'd rather go to certain cities, but the Nets have zero obligation to honor that request.

This is not a free agent situation where players can recruit him. To portray it that way is false.

There is no trade with Golden State that Brooklyn would accept that would leave the Warriors with enough left to still be a contender. Giving the Nets anything other than Steph, Klay, and Dray would not be acceptable to the Nets. Wiggins, Poole, Kuminga, Moody, Wiseman, and whatever it takes to make the numbers work isn't good enough for Brooklyn. Wiggins' contract is $33 million and Durant's is $44 million, but Wiggins isn't 75 percent the player that Durant is. Wiggins is a really good complementary player, while Durant is a franchise centerpiece. Poole, Kuminga, Moody, and Wiseman have potential, but so have a lot of other players that never amounted to anything significant. The Nets price is a young, proven star, plus a boatload of draft picks. A trade with Golden State is not that. Besides the Nets not wanting that trade, I don't see why the Warriors would want that trade.

Trade talk with the Lakers is equally ridiculous. So the Nets will take Westbrook off the Lakers hands plus a bunch of draft picks in the 2030s?

The best reasons I've heard for the Warriors appearing to show interest are a) wanting to repair some of the bad feelings that occurred when Durant left; and b) doing what they can to boost the market for Durant, and thereby the price that any team getting Durant has to pay. If he goes to Phoenix, they want that trade to decimate the Suns' depth. If he goes to Miami, it will definitely cost Bam, plus Herro, plus anyone under 30 worth a damn.

It won't surprise me if Durant is still a Net a year from now. They need to totally crash and burn before they'll be willing to take what other teams are willing to offer. Assuming neither KD nor Kyrie get traded and both stay reasonable healthy and available, the Nets could be good this year. The Nets aren't going to trade them away for scraps.

Yup, great post. And I think you just explained to me why GS floated being in the market. I was confused. Now I understand. Really the only two teams with a possible package I see are TOR/MEM (not sure about that rookie rule thing). And even they won't really put up a package that will appeal to Brooklyn without making the trade pointless

[MartinToVaught]

I'd ignore Durant's trade demand completely the way LA did with Kobe and Houston did with Hakeem.

The Rockets actually didn't ignore Hakeem's trade request. Back in '92, Hakeem almost got traded to the Clippers in a big four-team trade also involving the Magic and Knicks. It fell apart when that fool Elgin Baylor decided he wanted Stanley freaking Roberts more than Hakeem. I wish I was kidding.

[sp6r=underrated]

If a player said "I don't really care about winning, I just want to entertain people" they would get KILLED. And nobody would call them competitive for it. I mean come on

Nobody wants or expects players to say that, we just don't want players single-handedly ruining the entire product for years like Durant did. It's not hard to understand.

It isn't durants fault for ruining the product. The NBA made a massive error with the Salary Cap and didn't instill cap smoothing like they will be moving forward.

Durant made a decision to put himself in the best opportunity to win.

I still think the bigger error is max salaries. We will still see a lot of teams struggle to keep players as long as they keep max salaries.

California is losing middle class people for cost of living reasons. But if you're a millionaire LA is amazing. And if you get the same for LA as Oklahoma, even with taxes, you're taking LA in most cases. Same with NY.

Max salaries are probably the most harmful thing in the CBA. Second, is rookie scale contracts. Rookie scale contracts encourages tanking. Basketball will always have a tanking problem as long as the draft is there but with rookie scale contracts teams have a massive incentive to lose.

For my entertainment as a fan, the Hinkie Sixers were far more harmful than the Durant Warriors (who I actually enjoyed). The Hinkie Sixers played unwatchable basketball for years. That really is harmful if you care about competition. Teams shouldn't try to forfeit games.

[sp6r=underrated]

I'd ignore Durant's trade demand completely the way LA did with Kobe and Houston did with Hakeem.

The Rockets actually didn't ignore Hakeem's trade request. Back in '92, Hakeem almost got traded to the Clippers in a big four-team trade also involving the Magic and Knicks. It fell apart when that fool Elgin Baylor decided he wanted Stanley freaking Roberts more than Hakeem. I wish I was kidding.

WHAT? I did not know that. Good god the Sterling era CLips were a mess.

[MartinToVaught]

I'd ignore Durant's trade demand completely the way LA did with Kobe and Houston did with Hakeem.

The Rockets actually didn't ignore Hakeem's trade request. Back in '92, Hakeem almost got traded to the Clippers in a big four-team trade also involving the Magic and Knicks. It fell apart when that fool Elgin Baylor decided he wanted Stanley freaking Roberts more than Hakeem. I wish I was kidding.

WHAT? I did not know that. Good god the Sterling era CLips were a mess.

The Houston Chronicle reported on it at the time:

https://bbs.clutchfans.net/threads/20-years-ago-rockets-nearly-trade-olajuwon-to-the-clippers.226358/

You could do a whole 30 for 30 series just on the Clippers' "what-ifs" that would have changed the entire history of the league. It really shows how atrocious Sterling and Baylor were that the Clippers' franchise played out how it did.

[parsnips33]

Nobody wants or expects players to say that, we just don't want players single-handedly ruining the entire product for years like Durant did. It's not hard to understand.

I don't even disagree that the product is more enjoyable when talent is spread out among multiple teams

But I think it's a bit silly to expect players to break out the whiteboard and do game theory on what move would make the overall NBA landscape most competitive prior to signing a contract

Or, you know, just use some basic common sense. Even KD himself had to know deep down what a jackass he looked like going to Steph's 73-win team that just beat him.

Yeah and he clearly chose winning over being popular.

See you can frame it any way you want to.

[sp6r=underrated]

The Rockets actually didn't ignore Hakeem's trade request. Back in '92, Hakeem almost got traded to the Clippers in a big four-team trade also involving the Magic and Knicks. It fell apart when that fool Elgin Baylor decided he wanted Stanley freaking Roberts more than Hakeem. I wish I was kidding.

WHAT? I did not know that. Good god the Sterling era CLips were a mess.

The Houston Chronicle reported on it at the time:

https://bbs.clutchfans.net/threads/20-years-ago-rockets-nearly-trade-olajuwon-to-the-clippers.226358/

You could do a whole 30 for 30 series just on the Clippers' "what-ifs" that would have changed the entire history of the league. It really shows how atrocious Sterling and Baylor were that the Clippers' franchise played out how it did.

The ease with which the CLippers brushed off the Sterling stigma leaves me ever more convinced the Knicks are the sleeping giant in all of North American sports. If NY ever gets strong management it will quickly become a massive free agent magnet.

[MartinToVaught]

WHAT? I did not know that. Good god the Sterling era CLips were a mess.

The Houston Chronicle reported on it at the time:

https://bbs.clutchfans.net/threads/20-years-ago-rockets-nearly-trade-olajuwon-to-the-clippers.226358/

You could do a whole 30 for 30 series just on the Clippers' "what-ifs" that would have changed the entire history of the league. It really shows how atrocious Sterling and Baylor were that the Clippers' franchise played out how it did.

The ease with which the CLippers brushed off the Sterling stigma leaves me ever more convinced the Knicks are the sleeping giant in all of North American sports. If NY ever gets strong management it will quickly become a massive free agent magnet.

I hope the Knicks can get a serious owner in there someday and get back to being competitive. Clips fans and Knicks fans are almost kindred spirits in a way, two savvy and loyal big-market fanbases who have been put through hell and back by our teams.