Around the NBA

[Qwigglez]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH_mjJf2K5Q[/youtube]

[jcsunsfan]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH_mjJf2K5Q[/youtube]

I always find these plays interesting. Sometimes it is a good move. But everyone seems to get excited when a defender falls down, even if his falling really has nothing to do with the move. The #1 move on this list is no big deal.

At least Knight made the list and with a pretty good move. I like #s 8, 6, 4, 2 on this list.

[GMATCallahan]

Regarding Kobe.

Anyone else think this whole "Kobe last year mania" is absurd?

1. Kobe ran off shaq
2. Kobe almost left the Lakers after running off Shaq because he couldn't win by himself
3. Kobe wins 2 more rings with Gasol
4. After Gasol leaves, no one wants to play with Kobe because Kobe is a piece of work
5. Kobe demands the Lakers bring on more talent yet refuses to take a paycut.
6. The Lakers badly need to rebuild but they still give "grandpa Kobe" max money.
7. The Lakers are stuck paying "past prime" Kobe max money and no one else wants to come join the team.
8. The Lakers have a horrible season as the most selfish player in NBA history leads the team to the 2nd worst record in the league.

Kobe has crippled the Lakers all for his own interests. He may be a great player, he may have 5 rings, but his selfishness kept him from being an even better player.

Kobe should go down in history as the most self centered player in NBA history.

If fairness, Steve Nash headed over to play with him ...

Bryant is certainly one of the five or six greatest all-around shooting guards in NBA history, and he is arguably the best pure scorer that the league has seen since Michael Jordan. But I have always felt that he has been overrated historically. The fact that he never shot as high as .470 from the field in a season (and he was usually a below-average three-point shooter as well) is very revealing, even though the media never mentions that fact.

[GMATCallahan]

I suppose he could be but Lebron is constantly undermining the Cavs and Jordan punched teammates. Tim Duncan-type superstars are/were rare.

As for Shaq let's not forget his attitude issues. He was constantly out of shape and focused on other interests during that time. Remember the "hurt on company time" line. Kobe called him out publicly which was wrong and unprofessional but that relationship was never gonna last.

As for the Lakers they ended up bad enough to keep their pick so I don't think Kobe "crippled them". If the CP3 trade goes thru maybe things are different? Or if the Nash/Dwight thinks didn't backfire...

Like many in this inane "social media" age, James talks and Tweets too much, and Jordan was not necessarily a nice guy. (How many teammates did he really "punch," though? Yes, I know about the Steve Kerr incident.) However, neither of them threw up nearly as many bad shots as Bryant, and they were thus much more efficient field goal shooters. Neither of them stopped the ball the way that Bryant sometimes did, either.

If Bryant had really wanted to win at the end of his career, he indeed should have taken a lower salary for his post-thirty-five-year old seasons. Of course, the real onus is on Lakers' management for making foolish decisions by investing so much money in guards who were older than thirty-five (that means Steve Nash, too.)

[GMATCallahan]

I can't believe 4 teams in the east finished 48-34 in the east. It looks based on espn standings that Miami is the 3 seed playing Charlotte and Atlanta is the 4 seed playing Boston. They were probably all hoping to avoid Cleveland in the 2nd round.

Assuming Miami beats Charlotte, their series against Toronto (provided they can take care of Indiana) should be interesting. Who do you think has a better chance of beating Cleveland? Miami or Toronto?

... probably Toronto. Miami's players have not necessarily been together long enough, and some of them are past their prime and may not have the legs for the fourth quarter. The Raptors are younger and also enjoy better continuity.

That said, for Cleveland to not reach the NBA Finals would constitute a monumental upset.

[GMATCallahan]

Kobe has crippled the Lakers all for his own interests. He may be a great player, he may have 5 rings, but his selfishness kept him from being an even better player.

Kobe should go down in history as the most self centered player in NBA history.

No, Kobe is not actually able to force the Lakers to do anything. He seeks the best deals for himself which is appropriate, the Lakers should do the same. To the degree that Kobe has influence with the Lakers and the city, its because he well earned it.

I'm a Suns fan and loved every time we beat the Lakers and Kobe, yet its kind of insane to try and look back on his career as anything but a success. Yeah he could have been better I suppose, but what player could that not be said about? There isn't a perfect player.

Having a guy with that level of natural talent, obsessive passion to win and a ridiculous work ethic is extremely rare. If that means you have some personality conflicts along the way and a rough couple years at the end, so be it. You still get 20 years during most of which your team is relevant, plus five titles. If someone offered me that deal for the Suns I'd take it every time.

Kobe Bryant was the Suns' first choice in the 1996 draft; he ended up going two picks before Phoenix's turn. Whether he would have brought a title to Phoenix is anyone's guess.

Obviously, his career proved spectacularly successful, even if I find him overrated historically. Of course, he is lucky that he did not end up in jail given that he retrospectively admitted—more or less—that he had 'accidentally' raped someone ...

[bwgood77]

Tough loss for OKC tonight....Durant with a terrible shooting night. Charlie Villanueva must have thrown them off with this stunt..

[tweet]https://twitter.com/royceyoung/status/722215906869248000[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/royceyoung/status/722262921909133312[/tweet]

[saintEscaton]

That was hilarious when Adam's buzzer beater putback got called of. OKC has no shot vs the Spurs/Dubs they will never get over the second round hump. For all the love they get as underdog darlings, they are really just a perennially underachieving team with starpower and their MO is to always play down to competition.

[bwgood77]

That was hilarious when Adam's buzzer beater putback got called of. OKC has no shot vs the Spurs/Dubs they will never get over the second round hump. For all the love they get as underdog darlings, they are really just a perennially underachieving team with starpower and their MO is to always play down to competition.

I don't know about that. They went to the WCF and finals while very young, and then actually had a BETTER record the year after Harden, were the 1 seed, but Westbrook unfortunately went down in the first round, which they still won, and then they lost to a tough Memphis team. The next year, they also had a better record than their two last years with Harden, and lost to the #1 seeded Spurs in 7 in a series Ibaka was injured for half of.

Then last year Durant is out and this year they still finish with 55 wins behind two historically good teams. I wouldn't say they have really underachieved in any year. The year they lost to the Mavs in the WCF, the Mavs were the higher seed, so when healthy, they really haven't lost to a lower seeded team in the only six years they've made the playoffs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/OKC/

[gaspar]

Harrison Barnes is such a scrub when he doesn't play with Curry.

[DirtyDez]

I suppose he could be but Lebron is constantly undermining the Cavs and Jordan punched teammates. Tim Duncan-type superstars are/were rare.

As for Shaq let's not forget his attitude issues. He was constantly out of shape and focused on other interests during that time. Remember the "hurt on company time" line. Kobe called him out publicly which was wrong and unprofessional but that relationship was never gonna last.

As for the Lakers they ended up bad enough to keep their pick so I don't think Kobe "crippled them". If the CP3 trade goes thru maybe things are different? Or if the Nash/Dwight thinks didn't backfire...

Like many in this inane "social media" age, James talks and Tweets too much, and Jordan was not necessarily a nice guy. (How many teammates did he really "punch," though? Yes, I know about the Steve Kerr incident.) However, neither of them threw up nearly as many bad shots as Bryant, and they were thus much more efficient field goal shooters. Neither of them stopped the ball the way that Bryant sometimes did, either.

If Bryant had really wanted to win at the end of his career, he indeed should have taken a lower salary for his post-thirty-five-year old seasons. Of course, the real onus is on Lakers' management for making foolish decisions by investing so much money in guards who were older than thirty-five (that means Steve Nash, too.)

Maybe he should've kept signing 1-year deals and limiting his teams' options every year like Lebron. Frankly I don't really care. You're worth what a team will pay you. Kobe constantly complained about his teammates not being good enough and threatening trade demands in his prime. If he were doing that these past few years then it'd be a bigger issue.

As for Jordan he would've been toast had there been social media and camera phones back in the day but it's Kobe hating season so by all means continue.

[GMATCallahan]

That was hilarious when Adam's buzzer beater putback got called of. OKC has no shot vs the Spurs/Dubs they will never get over the second round hump. For all the love they get as underdog darlings, they are really just a perennially underachieving team with starpower and their MO is to always play down to competition.

I don't know about that. They went to the WCF and finals while very young, and then actually had a BETTER record the year after Harden, were the 1 seed, but Westbrook unfortunately went down in the first round, which they still won, and then they lost to a tough Memphis team. The next year, they also had a better record than their two last years with Harden, and lost to the #1 seeded Spurs in 7 in a series Ibaka was injured for half of.

Then last year Durant is out and this year they still finish with 55 wins behind two historically good teams. I wouldn't say they have really underachieved in any year. The year they lost to the Mavs in the WCF, the Mavs were the higher seed, so when healthy, they really haven't lost to a lower seeded team in the only six years they've made the playoffs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/OKC/

I agree that Oklahoma City has not really underachieved, but trading Harden may have curtailed a pending dynasty. Moreover, I have doubted for awhile now that a team can ever win a championship with Russell Westbrook as its best player or its co-best player. He is a breathtaking athlete, and the (puerile) media is infatuated with triple-doubles (which are not necessarily as revealing or valuable as the media would have you believe), but his lack of discipline, discretion, and nuance render the Thunder highly fallible in close games.

The situation is sort of like having a closer in baseball who throws 100 miles per hour and can strike out the side in any given appearance yet may also walk the bases loaded—or worse—in any given inning.

[bwgood77]

That was hilarious when Adam's buzzer beater putback got called of. OKC has no shot vs the Spurs/Dubs they will never get over the second round hump. For all the love they get as underdog darlings, they are really just a perennially underachieving team with starpower and their MO is to always play down to competition.

I don't know about that. They went to the WCF and finals while very young, and then actually had a BETTER record the year after Harden, were the 1 seed, but Westbrook unfortunately went down in the first round, which they still won, and then they lost to a tough Memphis team. The next year, they also had a better record than their two last years with Harden, and lost to the #1 seeded Spurs in 7 in a series Ibaka was injured for half of.

Then last year Durant is out and this year they still finish with 55 wins behind two historically good teams. I wouldn't say they have really underachieved in any year. The year they lost to the Mavs in the WCF, the Mavs were the higher seed, so when healthy, they really haven't lost to a lower seeded team in the only six years they've made the playoffs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/OKC/

I agree that Oklahoma City has not really underachieved, but trading Harden may have curtailed a pending dynasty. Moreover, I have doubted for awhile now that a team can ever win a championship with Russell Westbrook as its best player or its co-best player. He is a breathtaking athlete, and the (puerile) media is infatuated with triple-doubles (which are not necessarily as revealing or valuable as the media would have you believe), but his lack of discipline, discretion, and nuance render the Thunder highly fallible in close games.

The situation is sort of like having a closer in baseball who throws 100 miles per hour and can strike out the side in any given appearance yet may also walk the bases loaded—or worse—in any given inning.

Westbrook obviously adds more than he takes away, and without two historically good teams this year, I think they'd be right in the mix, but as Bill Simmons pointed out last night, he is the 4th worst 3 pt shooter of all time who has taken more than 1,500 (less than 30%). Of course Kobe isn't much better in that respect, and he was the best player on some championship teams.

Westbrook is so good with assists and rebounds that he makes up for it though imo. Last night they shot terribly. As for Harden, you are right to some extent but also they played better the two years after him in the regular season, only to have terrible injuries in the playoffs (Westbrook in year one and Ibaka in year two, and they still took the champion Spurs to 7 games as the lower seed without him for much of the series).

I think their bigger problem is having subpar role players around those two.

[Damkac]

OKC definitely underachieved imo. They drafted 3 MVP level players and many very good players (Ibaka, Reggie Jackson, Adams etc.). Looking just at their draft history they should make a dynasty. Of course they had very bad luck with all the injuries but bad management and bad coaching are also the reasons. Their owner didn't wanted to pay Harden but is willing to pay Kanter 18 mln

[bwgood77]

OKC definitely underachieved imo. They drafted 3 MVP level players and many very good players (Ibaka, Reggie Jackson, Adams etc.). Looking just at their draft history they should make a dynasty. Of course they had very bad luck with all the injuries but bad management and bad coaching are also the reasons. Their owner didn't wanted to pay Harden but is willing to pay Kanter 18 mln

Had they kept Harden they may have gotten further the year that Westbrook went down, but without Westbrook I suspect that still wasn't enough. MAYBE they do better the year they lost to SA in 7, but Ibaka being out a few games is what really hurt them because SA just went big inside. And SA was clicking on all cylinders that year when they crushed Miami in the finals.

This year they'd probably be better, but I'm not sure as good as the top 2 in the west. Each three of those players got better with higher usage when Harden left which is one reason OKC played better the two years without Harden (when healthy).

But if your argument is that they should have kept Harden, I don't disagree, but since they didn't, they still haven't really underachieved and lost to a lower seed in the playoffs like most all other teams have done, which imo is underachieving.

[Damkac]

Letting Harden go isn't their only roster mistake. They also should hire a better coach who would make them look like a team instead of two stars playing in turns.

[Qwigglez]

So in NBA2K16 I was looking at free agents and they had Nash in there so I signed him to a one year deal.

[lilfishi22]

What's his rating?

[Qwigglez]

What's his rating?

It was 72... but I needed some firepower off the bench so it's now 80. Ya know, I'm sure our training staff can help Nash play well into his 50's so it seems more realistic anyway.

[bwgood77]

Interesting column on Thibodeau..

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/lakers-missed-their-chance-with-tom-thibodeau-211151370.html