PC Board OT thread
Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ
Re: PC Board OT thread
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,716
- And1: 50,290
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
As bad as OKC looked at times, they've been top 3 on both O and D for December and historically give SA trouble, I think they can hang with SAS.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/royceyoung/status/679923247282917376[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/royceyoung/status/679923247282917376[/tweet]
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: PC Board OT thread
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,716
- And1: 50,290
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
Texas Chuck wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/SBNation/status/679900993203523584[/tweet]
Watching this live with my Mavs bias on I thought Jack was being a punk mocking Wes like this, but seeing this montage I'm pretty amused.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/espn_macmahon/status/679869487299080192[/tweet]
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: PC Board OT thread
- spearsy23
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,481
- And1: 7,654
- Joined: Jan 27, 2012
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
Why are we writing off Philly when
Their most important player is a rookie
Their second most important player hasn't been drafted yet
Their third most important player hasn't played yet
Their 4th most important player hasn't played yet
Their 5th most important player is a sophomore who is trying to change positions
Their most NBA ready player is a 3/D wing that should have good value around the league.
Next year is the year to start judging them, when they have all 4 of their high upside guys (and that's without giving them the benefit of the doubt on Embiid). The idea that signing...who exactly?... Was going to be the difference maker in developing young guys seems ridiculous to me. Who do you bring in, and why do they want to go there to babysit? Aren't Landry and Marshall exactly the kind of guys being talked about?
Their most important player is a rookie
Their second most important player hasn't been drafted yet
Their third most important player hasn't played yet
Their 4th most important player hasn't played yet
Their 5th most important player is a sophomore who is trying to change positions
Their most NBA ready player is a 3/D wing that should have good value around the league.
Next year is the year to start judging them, when they have all 4 of their high upside guys (and that's without giving them the benefit of the doubt on Embiid). The idea that signing...who exactly?... Was going to be the difference maker in developing young guys seems ridiculous to me. Who do you bring in, and why do they want to go there to babysit? Aren't Landry and Marshall exactly the kind of guys being talked about?
“If you're getting stops and you're making threes and the other team's not scoring, that's when you're going to see a huge point difference there,” coach Billy Donovan said.
Re: PC Board OT thread
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,896
- And1: 13,698
- Joined: Jan 20, 2007
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
The attack on the Sixers isn't that they will be awful over the next five years but that they have been intentionally putting a bad team on the court to maximize their chances of getting a superstar in the draft.
The Sixers guard rotation is a disgrace. They are well under the cap and didn't even make any attempt to sign any of the second tier free agents in the off season who are well better than the scrubs Philadelphia's been rolling out. Harris and Hinkie, want to lose to maximize their chance in the draft.
The draft and the CBA encourages and rewards extreme losing while punishing middle class teams similar to Atlanta or Memphis that try to put forth a good team on a year to year basis. That's really bad and nothing you wrote refute that.
The Sixers guard rotation is a disgrace. They are well under the cap and didn't even make any attempt to sign any of the second tier free agents in the off season who are well better than the scrubs Philadelphia's been rolling out. Harris and Hinkie, want to lose to maximize their chance in the draft.
The draft and the CBA encourages and rewards extreme losing while punishing middle class teams similar to Atlanta or Memphis that try to put forth a good team on a year to year basis. That's really bad and nothing you wrote refute that.
Re: PC Board OT thread
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,716
- And1: 50,290
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
spearsy23 wrote:Why are we writing off Philly when
Their most important player is a rookie
Their second most important player hasn't been drafted yet
Their third most important player hasn't played yet
Their 4th most important player hasn't played yet
Their 5th most important player is a sophomore who is trying to change positions
Their most NBA ready player is a 3/D wing that should have good value around the league.
Next year is the year to start judging them, when they have all 4 of their high upside guys (and that's without giving them the benefit of the doubt on Embiid). The idea that signing...who exactly?... Was going to be the difference maker in developing young guys seems ridiculous to me. Who do you bring in, and why do they want to go there to babysit? Aren't Landry and Marshall exactly the kind of guys being talked about?
Sort of, my issue is just they really should have gotten a guard who was healthy from the get go. It hurt development and honestly, the players look demoralized and they went from being a team who played hard and kept games closer than expected to just getting murdered every night.
That said, this coming offseason is the final judgement as you said.
Oh, and Philly did try to go after Kawhi and Butler, they weren't interested.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: PC Board OT thread
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,896
- And1: 13,698
- Joined: Jan 20, 2007
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
bondom34 wrote:
Oh, and Philly did try to go after Kawhi and Butler, they weren't interested.
If the hottest girl in town turns you down the solution isn't to go home and not ask anyone else out for a date for another year. You ask a girl out in your range and you have a girlfriend. They didn't make any attempt to sign the Corey Joseph types and instead signed a few d league scrubs. They sat on tens of millions of cap space because they want to lose basketball games. That is a disgrace. I can't believe people are okay with this.
Philly is about $4 million under the $63 million minimum team salary floor, and they're only that close because they're paying JaVale McGee $12 million for exactly 61 glorious minutes as a Sixer. In real terms, Philly is almost $20 million below the floor.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/14287780/how-much-patience-sixer-fans-nba-process
Re: PC Board OT thread
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,716
- And1: 50,290
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
sp6r=underrated wrote:bondom34 wrote:
Oh, and Philly did try to go after Kawhi and Butler, they weren't interested.
If the hottest girl in town turns you down the solution isn't to go home and not ask anyone else out for a date for another year. You ask a girl out in your range and you have a girlfriend. They didn't make any attempt to sign the Corey Joseph types and instead signed a few d league scrubs. They sat on tens of millions of cap space because they want to lose basketball games. That is a disgrace. I can't believe people are okay with this.Philly is about $4 million under the $63 million minimum team salary floor, and they're only that close because they're paying JaVale McGee $12 million for exactly 61 glorious minutes as a Sixer. In real terms, Philly is almost $20 million below the floor.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/14287780/how-much-patience-sixer-fans-nba-process
They have the remainder of the season to get over the floor. They did last year, other teams didn't.
Again, this offseason is final judgement.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: PC Board OT thread
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,896
- And1: 13,698
- Joined: Jan 20, 2007
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
bondom34 wrote:sp6r=underrated wrote:bondom34 wrote:
Oh, and Philly did try to go after Kawhi and Butler, they weren't interested.
If the hottest girl in town turns you down the solution isn't to go home and not ask anyone else out for a date for another year. You ask a girl out in your range and you have a girlfriend. They didn't make any attempt to sign the Corey Joseph types and instead signed a few d league scrubs. They sat on tens of millions of cap space because they want to lose basketball games. That is a disgrace. I can't believe people are okay with this.Philly is about $4 million under the $63 million minimum team salary floor, and they're only that close because they're paying JaVale McGee $12 million for exactly 61 glorious minutes as a Sixer. In real terms, Philly is almost $20 million below the floor.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/14287780/how-much-patience-sixer-fans-nba-process
They have the remainder of the season to get over the floor. They did last year, other teams didn't.
Again, this offseason is final judgement.
Thank you for conceding the sixers entered the season with the intention of losing. Please explain to me why it is a good thing that the NBA is structured to reward being bad.
Re: PC Board OT thread
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,716
- And1: 50,290
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
sp6r=underrated wrote:bondom34 wrote:sp6r=underrated wrote:
If the hottest girl in town turns you down the solution isn't to go home and not ask anyone else out for a date for another year. You ask a girl out in your range and you have a girlfriend. They didn't make any attempt to sign the Corey Joseph types and instead signed a few d league scrubs. They sat on tens of millions of cap space because they want to lose basketball games. That is a disgrace. I can't believe people are okay with this.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/14287780/how-much-patience-sixer-fans-nba-process
They have the remainder of the season to get over the floor. They did last year, other teams didn't.
Again, this offseason is final judgement.
Thank you for conceding the sixers entered the season with the intention of losing. Please explain to me why it is a good thing that the NBA is structured to reward being bad.
It isn't, however it is structured to attempt to help bad teams become better. Similar to every other American sport. I know you feel strongly, and frankly I don't, but the draft is the best system out there for it.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: PC Board OT thread
- PaulieWal
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 13,909
- And1: 16,218
- Joined: Aug 28, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
With all the drama surrounding the Bulls I decided to look at Rose's season....how the hell is he getting a pass for his level of play? He's got to be one of the worst players in the league this year. 42% TS, 9 PER, -4.3 BPM, -7.4 On/Off.
JordansBulls wrote:The Warriors are basically a good college team until they meet a team with bigs in the NBA.
Re: PC Board OT thread
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,896
- And1: 13,698
- Joined: Jan 20, 2007
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
bondom34 wrote:It isn't, however it is structured to attempt to help bad teams become better.
If the NBA is "structured to attempt to help bad teams become better" the NBA is "structured to reward being bad."
Helping bad teams get better means you're giving them something that superior teams don't get. Getting something that other people don't get is a benefit. A benefit based on performance can fairly be described as a reward. In this case we reward clubs for being bad.
Similar to every other American sport.
sadly true, but America isn't the only place with major sports. Promotion/relegation is used throughout the globe and it works.
I know you feel strongly, and frankly I don't, but the draft is the best system out there for it.
For discussion I'll accept the premise the NBA should help bad teams. The draft is far from the best system to help bad teams. Instead of a rookies draft why not allow the bottom 4 clubs to claim one player each from the top 4 clubs every off season. The bad clubs would only be allowed to take a player who ranked in the top 4 in RS mp for the top 4 clubs. Under these rules, Steph Curry would be a Sixer. Lebron would be in Minnesota. Chris Paul would be in NY. That would help bad teams more than the draft. If you're going to call that proposal silly please explain to me why it isn't silly to send top young players to awful companies
The draft helps bad teams though and punishes good teams. Atlanta gets a lot of derision for being a treadmill team the last ten years. They consistently win 42-52 games along with last year's outlier There is truth to this argument. They'll never get a 20 year old Anthony Davis on the roster until they become bad enough to get a top pick.
The draft punishes fans because it shrinks the talent pool. In the absence of a draft teams would be all over the globe forming basketball camps to recruit people into the game. With a draft there is no point because should you identify a top player he'll just get drafted to another club. It punishes fans by allowing morons and scoundrels like Donald Sterling access to top talent. It punishes fans by encouraging smart men such as Hinkie to put a bad product out on the court. The draft stinks.
Markets aren't perfect but they work very well in industries similar to basketball. To the clubs that feel they can't compete without a draft I have this message:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4PE2hSqVnk[/youtube]
Re: PC Board OT thread
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,716
- And1: 50,290
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
sp6r=underrated wrote:bondom34 wrote:It isn't, however it is structured to attempt to help bad teams become better.
If the NBA is "structured to attempt to help bad teams become better" the NBA is "structured to reward being bad."
Helping bad teams get better means you're giving them something that superior teams don't get. Getting something that other people don't get is a benefit. A benefit based on performance can fairly be described as a reward. In this case we reward clubs for being bad.Similar to every other American sport.
sadly true, but America isn't the only place with major sports. Promotion/relegation is used throughout the globe and it works.I know you feel strongly, and frankly I don't, but the draft is the best system out there for it.
For discussion I'll accept the premise the NBA should help bad teams. The draft is far from the best system to help bad teams. Instead of a rookies draft why not allow the bottom 4 clubs to claim one player each from the top 4 clubs every off season. The bad clubs would only be allowed to take a player who ranked in the top 4 in RS mp for the top 4 clubs. Under these rules, Steph Curry would be a Sixer. Lebron would be in Minnesota. Chris Paul would be in NY. That would help bad teams more than the draft. If you're going to call that proposal silly please explain to me why it isn't silly to send top young players to awful companies
The draft helps bad teams though and punishes good teams. Atlanta gets a lot of derision for being a treadmill team the last ten years. They consistently win 42-52 games along with last year's outlier There is truth to this argument. They'll never get a 20 year old Anthony Davis on the roster until they become bad enough to get a top pick.
The draft punishes fans because it shrinks the talent pool. In the absence of a draft teams would be all over the globe forming basketball camps to recruit people into the game. With a draft there is no point because should you identify a top player he'll just get drafted to another club. It punishes fans by allowing morons and scoundrels like Donald Sterling access to top talent. It punishes fans by encouraging smart men such as Hinkie to put a bad product out on the court. The draft stinks.
Markets aren't perfect but they work very well in industries similar to basketball. To the clubs that feel they can't compete without a draft I have this message:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4PE2hSqVnk[/youtube]
Allowing teams to claim guys on contract elsewhere is entirely unrealistic. And the draft doesn't hurt good teams. It hurts teams that draft poorly, like how free agency hurts ones who can't recruit. American sports are not the same as in other countries, plain and simple. Sorry but I'm just gonna disagree with you on this.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: PC Board OT thread
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,896
- And1: 13,698
- Joined: Jan 20, 2007
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
bondom34 wrote:Allowing teams to claim guys on contract elsewhere is entirely unrealistic.
Why? We allow teams to trade guys on contracts. I would hate it but I also hate the draft. You seem to like the draft out of a concern for helping bad teams. Why not adopt my proposal? That would help bad teams far more than the draft.
And the draft doesn't hurt good teams. It hurts teams that draft poorly, like how free agency hurts ones who can't recruit.
Basketball is a zero sum game. The 30th pick is worth far less than the 1st pick because the quality of player available at the 30th pick is lower. Bad teams currently are rewarded the top picks. Good teams are punished with the low picks. The draft hurts good teams. It is a zero sum game.
American sports are not the same as in other countries, plain and simple. Sorry but I'm just gonna disagree with you on this.
fair enough but remember the draft and salary cap is what allowed donald sterling to take a massive dump on the game of basketball for 30 years. He sold the team for $2 billion. $2 billion for being a parasite that is what the draft gives you.
Re: PC Board OT thread
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,716
- And1: 50,290
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
sp6r=underrated wrote:bondom34 wrote:Allowing teams to claim guys on contract elsewhere is entirely unrealistic.
Why? We allow teams to trade guys on contracts. I would hate it but I also hate the draft. You seem to like the draft out of a concern for helping bad teams. Why not adopt my proposal? That would help bad teams far more than the draft.And the draft doesn't hurt good teams. It hurts teams that draft poorly, like how free agency hurts ones who can't recruit.
Basketball is a zero sum game. The 30th pick is worth far less than the 1st pick because the quality of player available at the 30th pick is lower. Bad teams currently are rewarded the top picks. Good teams are punished with the low picks. The draft hurts good teams. It is a zero sum game.American sports are not the same as in other countries, plain and simple. Sorry but I'm just gonna disagree with you on this.
fair enough but remember the draft and salary cap is what allowed donald sterling to take a massive dump on the game of basketball for 30 years. He sold the team for $2 billion. $2 billion for being a parasite that is what the draft gives you.
Because your idea also kills good teams and much worse than the draft. Its a fine system.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: PC Board OT thread
- spearsy23
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,481
- And1: 7,654
- Joined: Jan 27, 2012
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
sp6r=underrated wrote:bondom34 wrote:It isn't, however it is structured to attempt to help bad teams become better.
If the NBA is "structured to attempt to help bad teams become better" the NBA is "structured to reward being bad."
Helping bad teams get better means you're giving them something that superior teams don't get. Getting something that other people don't get is a benefit. A benefit based on performance can fairly be described as a reward. In this case we reward clubs for being bad.
The alternative is alienating your entire audience. Nobody would watch if bad teams had no chance of getting better. The reason the NBA 'rewards being bad' is because it's a business model that works. The Knicks were bad for years, the Lakers are bad now, Boston has had down years, those teams not having any hope of getting better would destroy the league.
Similar to every other American sport.
sadly true, but America isn't the only place with major sports. Promotion/relegation is used throughout the globe and it works.
The talent discrepancy between an NBA team and every other team on the continent is too large for relegation to work. Who do you promote? The D-league champion? Even if we ignore that they couldn't compete (and thus you'd be just continually cycling an NBA team down and up every year), you've now got a team in the league that can pay players 30k per year competing with teams with 90 million dollar payrolls.
I know you feel strongly, and frankly I don't, but the draft is the best system out there for it.
For discussion I'll accept the premise the NBA should help bad teams. The draft is far from the best system to help bad teams. Instead of a rookies draft why not allow the bottom 4 clubs to claim one player each from the top 4 clubs every off season. The bad clubs would only be allowed to take a player who ranked in the top 4 in RS mp for the top 4 clubs. Under these rules, Steph Curry would be a Sixer. Lebron would be in Minnesota. Chris Paul would be in NY. That would help bad teams more than the draft. If you're going to call that proposal silly please explain to me why it isn't silly to send top young players to awful companies
Brand loyalty. Fans root for the players of their favorite teams and they would be turned off by the system. Did you forget that the NBA is a business?
The draft helps bad teams though and punishes good teams. Atlanta gets a lot of derision for being a treadmill team the last ten years. They consistently win 42-52 games along with last year's outlier There is truth to this argument. They'll never get a 20 year old Anthony Davis on the roster until they become bad enough to get a top pick.
Atlanta has added a lot of good pieces through the draft. Good teams aren't disallowed from picking high, it just requires asset management.
The draft punishes fans because it shrinks the talent pool. In the absence of a draft teams would be all over the globe forming basketball camps to recruit people into the game.
The NBA already holds camps all over the world to promote the game...
With a draft there is no point because should you identify a top player he'll just get drafted to another club. It punishes fans by allowing morons and scoundrels like Donald Sterling access to top talent. It punishes fans by encouraging smart men such as Hinkie to put a bad product out on the court. The draft stinks.
Ask Clippers fans if they are punished by the Clippers obtaining top talent. Punishing fans would be implementing a system that makes it so their favorite team has no hope of ever being competitive.
Markets aren't perfect but they work very well in industries similar to basketball. To the clubs that feel they can't compete without a draft I have this message:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4PE2hSqVnk[/youtube]
Completely irrelevant.
“If you're getting stops and you're making threes and the other team's not scoring, that's when you're going to see a huge point difference there,” coach Billy Donovan said.
Re: PC Board OT thread
- Quotatious
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 16,999
- And1: 11,145
- Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
PaulieWal wrote:With all the drama surrounding the Bulls I decided to look at Rose's season....how the hell is he getting a pass for his level of play? He's got to be one of the worst players in the league this year. 42% TS, 9 PER, -4.3 BPM, -7.4 On/Off.
Yeah, he's horrible. For every good game, he has like 5 or 6 bad games. Also, there are 422 players ranked on ESPN's RPM list. Guess how "high" Rose ranks...417th.

The truth is, Rose is getting such heavy minutes (or any minutes, really), only because he's a former elite player, and he won the MVP for the franchise that drafted him. Similar to Kobe, both are awful basketball players right now (well, Kobe was pretty good for the last 7 games, before the blowout loss to the Thunder, but looking at the entire season, he's still horrible).
One really great game from Rose this season, that I remember, was his duel against Westbrook in early November (Bulls won that game, and Rose took over in the 4th quarter just like 2011 Rose would do). Well, he also had a great game a few days ago against Detroit, 34/4/8 on above 40% from the field, but as I've said earlier, he has like 5 or 6 bad games, where he's a big negative for his team, for every good game.
Re: PC Board OT thread
- bondom34
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 66,716
- And1: 50,290
- Joined: Mar 01, 2013
Re: PC Board OT thread
PaulieWal wrote:With all the drama surrounding the Bulls I decided to look at Rose's season....how the hell is he getting a pass for his level of play? He's got to be one of the worst players in the league this year. 42% TS, 9 PER, -4.3 BPM, -7.4 On/Off.
Worse than Kobe.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Re: PC Board OT thread
- spearsy23
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,481
- And1: 7,654
- Joined: Jan 27, 2012
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
Quotatious wrote:PaulieWal wrote:With all the drama surrounding the Bulls I decided to look at Rose's season....how the hell is he getting a pass for his level of play? He's got to be one of the worst players in the league this year. 42% TS, 9 PER, -4.3 BPM, -7.4 On/Off.
Yeah, he's horrible. For every good game, he has like 5 or 6 bad games. Also, there are 422 players ranked on ESPN's RPM list. Guess how "high" Rose ranks...417th.RPM is a stat that I really like, so I put fairly heavy emphasis on that.
The truth is, Rose is getting such heavy minutes (or any minutes, really), only because he's a former elite player, and he won the MVP for the franchise that drafted him. Similar to Kobe, both are awful basketball players right now (well, Kobe was pretty good for the last 7 games, before the blowout loss to the Thunder, but looking at the entire season, he's still horrible).
One really great game from Rose this season, that I remember, was his duel against Westbrook in early November (Bulls won that game, and Rose took over in the 4th quarter just like 2011 Rose would do). Well, he also had a great game a few days ago against Detroit, 34/4/8 on above 40% from the field, but as I've said earlier, he has like 5 or 6 bad games, where he's a big negative for his team, for every good game.
Even in the OKC game he wasn't dominating like vintage Rose though, he was hitting jumpshots time and time again. If his shooting matched that game he would be a productive player even against good defenses, let alone ones that switched Enes Kanter on to him repeatedly,
“If you're getting stops and you're making threes and the other team's not scoring, that's when you're going to see a huge point difference there,” coach Billy Donovan said.
Re: PC Board OT thread
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,662
- And1: 3,171
- Joined: Mar 12, 2010
Re: PC Board OT thread
sp6r=underrated wrote:bondom34 wrote:Allowing teams to claim guys on contract elsewhere is entirely unrealistic.
Why? We allow teams to trade guys on contracts. I would hate it but I also hate the draft. You seem to like the draft out of a concern for helping bad teams. Why not adopt my proposal? That would help bad teams far more than the draft.And the draft doesn't hurt good teams. It hurts teams that draft poorly, like how free agency hurts ones who can't recruit.
Basketball is a zero sum game. The 30th pick is worth far less than the 1st pick because the quality of player available at the 30th pick is lower. Bad teams currently are rewarded the top picks. Good teams are punished with the low picks. The draft hurts good teams. It is a zero sum game.American sports are not the same as in other countries, plain and simple. Sorry but I'm just gonna disagree with you on this.
fair enough but remember the draft and salary cap is what allowed donald sterling to take a massive dump on the game of basketball for 30 years. He sold the team for $2 billion. $2 billion for being a parasite that is what the draft gives you.
A few questions on this since it seems to be your pet peeve.
1) Is the system you advocate for an ideal or something you think could happen within the framework of the NBA (rather than some new, rival, power framework, such as might be formed during a lockout)?
2) What is it that you find reprehensible about Donald Sterling and why is he more representative of the NBA ownership (than say Holt, or just an average owner)? It seems like Sterling is raised to aggrivate people's distate for him, but your issue is with him is, I think, his being cheap (fwiw as noted by others previously he arrived in the NBA when it was more free market, including no salary cap, so I'm not sure this a market vs non-market thing). Also are you of the belief that there aren't bad, cheap, immoral or profiteering owners in non-US model sports, that there are less of them, or what?
3) Do you truly believe that the best framework for player scouting and development would be one in which U.S.-based pro teams were trying to keep their prospects underwraps and competing monetarily for them. At what age? Are governments going to be happy with this? How about foreign teams? This is by no means a suggestion that the US college system (and AAU before that) system is without flaws, but I'm wondering how considered this revamping of international player scouting/development is.
4) Do you consider this a moral matter or just one of basketball quality? If the former, who do you believe is harmed by the present system (and who is taking advantage)?
5) Are you of the belief that a national, non-developmental second tier league would be economically viable (and indeed sufficient for such teams to compete in terms of international scouting)? A third tier?
I'm not unsympathetic to your complaints and have a few issues with the system, though there are always tradeoffs. Genuinely curious as to what your stance is here. My own takes on the questions in spoilers.
Spoiler:
Re: PC Board OT thread
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,896
- And1: 13,698
- Joined: Jan 20, 2007
-
Re: PC Board OT thread
Owly wrote:A few questions on this since it seems to be your pet peeve.
1) Is the system you advocate for an ideal or something you think could happen within the framework of the NBA (rather than some new, rival, power framework, such as might be formed during a lockout)?
I advocate for it currently as an ideal as path dependency makes it extremely unlikely radical change will come to basketball. I have to come to realize that the draft along with the salary cap, max salaries, franchise territorial rights (a big issue that I and others should discuss more) impede the development of basketball strategy, growth of the labor pool and adoption of best practices. Pointing out that the current structure is really bad for consumers is important.
Long-term I think there is potential for promotion/relegation due to rapid growth in basketball popularity worldwide. Already NBA rookie cap salaries are below what can be offered in Europe and many of the best players are born overseas. The later typically come over when they can get off the rookie scale. In years to come when the salaries get better more and more will never come over. That with the growing percentage of top players being foreign born will result in the NBA getting less and less of the talented players in the league.
I expect that American rookies will eventually start heading to Europe especially if Silver and the owners adopt a 2 year age limit. All of this will put significant pressure on current owners and the union as fans begin to recognize the NBA really isn't in another class from other leagues.
At that point I could see some considering a change to a different system with relegation being a real possibility. So it is an ideal for now but possibility long-term.
Owly wrote:2) What is it that you find reprehensible about Donald Sterling and why is he more representative of the NBA ownership (than say Holt, or just an average owner)? It seems like Sterling is raised to aggrivate people's distate for him, but your issue is with him is, I think, his being cheap (fwiw as noted by others previously he arrived in the NBA when it was more free market, including no salary cap, so I'm not sure this a market vs non-market thing). Also are you of the belief that there aren't bad, cheap, immoral or profiteering owners in non-US model sports, that there are less of them, or what?
Sterling is brought up to show you can basically not give a **** in the NBA for decades and end up a big time winner with a who gives a **** about the consumer attitudes. People need to recognize there are costs to keeping every club in the big leagues no matter what.
Sterling and the owners have never really operated in a free market. I don't believe he was around in the ABA time. You can correct me if I'm wrong. The current cartel structure exists to protect them from competition from rival leagues. Currently owners have agreed they can veto another team moving to their city. The Celtics, as an example, make money hand over fist. Many small market owners complain about the financial strains on their franchise with trying to compete. In a true market they would just move to Boston and attempt to undercut the Celtics on price. Instead it just gets vetoed and the owners work as a cartel to suppress labor costs while also giving out welfare checks. That isn't anything close to an ideal competitive market.
I am sure there are other crappy owners in relegation leagues but at least they have a market check on their stupidity. They would either find a way to be cheap while maintaining interest in their club, change their practices or go away into bankruptcy. This is ideal for consumers.
Owly wrote:3) Do you truly believe that the best framework for player scouting and development would be one in which U.S.-based pro teams were trying to keep their prospects underwraps and competing monetarily for them. At what age? Are governments going to be happy with this? How about foreign teams? This is by no means a suggestion that the US college system (and AAU before that) system is without flaws, but I'm wondering how considered this revamping of international player scouting/development is.
I am extremely confident that a global competition for labor will result in improved conditions for human beings throughout the globe. I have begun to recognize how beneficial globalization is to the poor in the developing world.
Yes, I want foreign clubs trying to compete for talent all around the world. Yes, I want American clubs competing for talent all around the world. The desperate search for top flight basketball players will lead to investment in the poorest parts of the world which will help people improve their lives. As a side benefit, the quality of basketball will go up.
Owly wrote:4) Do you consider this a moral matter or just one of basketball quality? If the former, who do you believe is harmed by the present system (and who is taking advantage)?
The moral component is discussed a bit above. The lack of competition serves to limit the need for investment in poorer parts of the world. Consumers are also harmed due to its negative impact on basketball quality as I've stated in other posts. They are interrelated.
5) Are you of the belief that a national, non-developmental second tier league would be economically viable (and indeed sufficient for such teams to compete in terms of international scouting)? A third tier?
Yes, I think it could be economically competitive. The lower levels succeed in Europe and many of the minor leagues are big money makers in America. Minor League Baseball makes a lot of money. College Football and Basketball make a ton of money. Those professional minor league clubs are true ethically horrendous due to the student-athlete scam. There is a greater demand for basketball than currently being met by the NBA.
I am not sure if the top level will end up with 30 clubs though.
Owly wrote:I'm not unsympathetic to your complaints and have a few issues with the system, though there are always tradeoffs. Genuinely curious as to what your stance is here. My own takes on the questions in spoilers.
I hope you understand my position. I tried to avoid reading your take to avoid structuring my answers as a response.
Spoiler: