2021-22 NBA Season Discussion

[eminence]

Folks don't have a good intrinsic understanding of how important possessions are to a team in my experience.

Individual turnover %s can also underrate how much a high volume/low turnover rate player changes a teams turnover % by absorbing 'difficult' possessions where lesser players would turn it over at heightened rates (-3.8 tov% delta commanded by MJ in '02, -0.2 by LBJ in '22). That's a ~2.5 possession per game gap from MJs team to LeBrons team explained by turnovers. Tack on LeBron being a pretty weak offensive rebounder for a 4 (team -2% with him on, becoming basically the worst offensive rebounding squad in the league, largely effort related imo) and there's a pretty big gap between how many shots the Wiz and Lakers are getting (yes, I feel it's mostly about the personal difference between MJ and LBJ, MJ hyper turnover resistant and LeBron a weak rebounder for a legit 4).

Total that's ~4 possession swing from MJ to LeBron? Given that turnovers/offensive rebounds both lead to high value possessions in opposite directions, I'd say around a 5 pt swing? Approximately 2/3 of the individual scoring efficiency gap.

Anywho, my original point was that I was curious if in '02 there was a crowd heavily reluctant to let go of their GOAT as a true superstar, MVP contender type. '22 LeBron is better than '02 MJ, though I disagree with Colbinii that's he's significantly closer to '98 MJ than '02 MJ.

Edit: Actually, I made a mistake adjusting the possession margin to per game and just looking at pts/100 to compare (doing it in your head on mobile will do this to ya). It's more than 2/3 of the gap. Probably somewhere between 80-90%.

Okay. I will say Lebron's cTOV% (creation-adjusted turnover rate, or turnovers committed as a percentage of offensive load) is 9% which is actually better than modern day creators such as Luka, or Jokic, and only a tad bit behind some one like CP3 who is the king of ball protection. I kind of expect the best passers to have cTOV% around this mark in today's game just simply because risky passers go for the most high-leverage assists and therefore the gamble is worth while even if it marks up their turnovers a bit.

Also Jordan was estimated to have created about 8.1 shots per 100 possessions, while Lebron this year is at about 11 shots per 100 possessions.

Nice talking to you all.

I'm not sure what the point of bringing in cTOV% here, neither LeBron or MJ are the sort to have their TOV% change significantly from their basic tov%. LBJ was at 9% cTOV% in a 12.3% TOV% league, MJ at 8% in a 13.6% TOV% league (also, MJ>CP3 for ball protection through their careers, 7.3% vs 7.7% for career I believe based on a quick calc, in a generally higher turnover league). Neither stat is that good at pinpointing players effects on team tov% though. In this case it'd give about half a possession back to the Lakers over the Wiz in this comparison if we decided to use cTOV% over the teams actual turnover %s (this seems unwise to me, but do you), turning the possession gap (including rebounding rate effects still) back down to around 2/3 of the individual scoring efficiency gap.

And by my calcs MJ was closer to 6 box creation in '02, unless Ben changed his formula in the last few years (which I suppose is possible). If it was closer to 8 that'd push his cTOV% a couple of tenths of a % lower.

[sp6r=underrated]

Watching the B team TNT half time crew. TNT got really lucky with the chemistry Ernie, Kenny and Charles have. It is a fun, lively show. ESPN's inability to re-create it isn't a product of their incompetence.

Shaq is terrible and his audience appeal alludes me. Wade is a pretty good halftime show guy. He makes his points quick. He was making an argument that Toronto matches up well with Philly. Maybe Wade is wrong but Shaq was so dismissive. And dismissive in a way that makes for bad TV.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Folks don't have a good intrinsic understanding of how important possessions are to a team in my experience.

Individual turnover %s can also underrate how much a high volume/low turnover rate player changes a teams turnover % by absorbing 'difficult' possessions where lesser players would turn it over at heightened rates (-3.8 tov% delta commanded by MJ in '02, -0.2 by LBJ in '22). That's a ~2.5 possession per game gap from MJs team to LeBrons team explained by turnovers. Tack on LeBron being a pretty weak offensive rebounder for a 4 (team -2% with him on, becoming basically the worst offensive rebounding squad in the league, largely effort related imo) and there's a pretty big gap between how many shots the Wiz and Lakers are getting (yes, I feel it's mostly about the personal difference between MJ and LBJ, MJ hyper turnover resistant and LeBron a weak rebounder for a legit 4).

Total that's ~4 possession swing from MJ to LeBron? Given that turnovers/offensive rebounds both lead to high value possessions in opposite directions, I'd say around a 5 pt swing? Approximately 2/3 of the individual scoring efficiency gap.

Anywho, my original point was that I was curious if in '02 there was a crowd heavily reluctant to let go of their GOAT as a true superstar, MVP contender type. '22 LeBron is better than '02 MJ, though I disagree with Colbinii that's he's significantly closer to '98 MJ than '02 MJ.

Edit: Actually, I made a mistake adjusting the possession margin to per game and just looking at pts/100 to compare (doing it in your head on mobile will do this to ya). It's more than 2/3 of the gap. Probably somewhere between 80-90%.

Okay. I will say Lebron's cTOV% (creation-adjusted turnover rate, or turnovers committed as a percentage of offensive load) is 9% which is actually better than modern day creators such as Luka, or Jokic, and only a tad bit behind some one like CP3 who is the king of ball protection. I kind of expect the best passers to have cTOV% around this mark in today's game just simply because risky passers go for the most high-leverage assists and therefore the gamble is worth while even if it marks up their turnovers a bit.

Also Jordan was estimated to have created about 8.1 shots per 100 possessions, while Lebron this year is at about 11 shots per 100 possessions.

Nice talking to you all.

I'm not sure what the point of bringing in cTOV% here, neither LeBron or MJ are the sort to have their TOV% change significantly from their basic tov%. LBJ was at 9% cTOV% in a 12.3% TOV% league, MJ at 8% in a 13.6% TOV% league (also, MJ>CP3 for ball protection through their careers, 7.3% vs 7.7% for career I believe based on a quick calc, in a generally higher turnover league). Neither stat is that good at pinpointing players effects on team tov% though. In this case it'd give about half a possession back to the Lakers over the Wiz in this comparison if we decided to use cTOV% over the teams actual turnover %s (this seems unwise to me, but do you), turning the possession gap (including rebounding rate effects still) back down to around 2/3 of the individual scoring efficiency gap.

And by my calcs MJ was closer to 6 box creation in '02, unless Ben changed his formula in the last few years (which I suppose is possible). If it was closer to 8 that'd push his cTOV% a couple of tenths of a % lower.

I suppose Ben has changed his formulas because of got the numbers straight from the website.

And the point of cTOV% was to shown Lebron's turnovers are right in line with the best playmakers of today and that turnovers for top tier playmakers are likely to be higher relative to their offensive load.

[falcolombardi]

Folks don't have a good intrinsic understanding of how important possessions are to a team in my experience.

Individual turnover %s can also underrate how much a high volume/low turnover rate player changes a teams turnover % by absorbing 'difficult' possessions where lesser players would turn it over at heightened rates (-3.8 tov% delta commanded by MJ in '02, -0.2 by LBJ in '22). That's a ~2.5 possession per game gap from MJs team to LeBrons team explained by turnovers. Tack on LeBron being a pretty weak offensive rebounder for a 4 (team -2% with him on, becoming basically the worst offensive rebounding squad in the league, largely effort related imo) and there's a pretty big gap between how many shots the Wiz and Lakers are getting (yes, I feel it's mostly about the personal difference between MJ and LBJ, MJ hyper turnover resistant and LeBron a weak rebounder for a legit 4).

Total that's ~4 possession swing from MJ to LeBron? Given that turnovers/offensive rebounds both lead to high value possessions in opposite directions, I'd say around a 5 pt swing? Approximately 2/3 of the individual scoring efficiency gap.

Anywho, my original point was that I was curious if in '02 there was a crowd heavily reluctant to let go of their GOAT as a true superstar, MVP contender type. '22 LeBron is better than '02 MJ, though I disagree with Colbinii that's he's significantly closer to '98 MJ than '02 MJ.

Edit: Actually, I made a mistake adjusting the possession margin to per game and just looking at pts/100 to compare (doing it in your head on mobile will do this to ya). It's more than 2/3 of the gap. Probably somewhere between 80-90%.

Okay. I will say Lebron's cTOV% (creation-adjusted turnover rate, or turnovers committed as a percentage of offensive load) is 9% which is actually better than modern day creators such as Luka, or Jokic, and only a tad bit behind some one like CP3 who is the king of ball protection. I kind of expect the best passers to have cTOV% around this mark in today's game just simply because risky passers go for the most high-leverage assists and therefore the gamble is worth while even if it marks up their turnovers a bit.

Also Jordan was estimated to have created about 8.1 shots per 100 possessions, while Lebron this year is at about 11 shots per 100 possessions.

Nice talking to you all.

I'm not sure what the point of bringing in cTOV% here, neither LeBron or MJ are the sort to have their TOV% change significantly from their basic tov%. LBJ was at 9% cTOV% in a 12.3% TOV% league, MJ at 8% in a 13.6% TOV% league (also, MJ>CP3 for ball protection through their careers, 7.3% vs 7.7% for career I believe based on a quick calc, in a generally higher turnover league). Neither stat is that good at pinpointing players effects on team tov% though. In this case it'd give about half a possession back to the Lakers over the Wiz in this comparison if we decided to use cTOV% over the teams actual turnover %s (this seems unwise to me, but do you), turning the possession gap (including rebounding rate effects still) back down to around 2/3 of the individual scoring efficiency gap.

And by my calcs MJ was closer to 6 box creation in '02, unless Ben changed his formula in the last few years (which I suppose is possible). If it was closer to 8 that'd push his cTOV% a couple of tenths of a % lower.

i am a bit confused here, you mention thst since lebron(2022) tov% is 12.5 and jordan (2002) was 10% then thst is a 2.5 possesion advantage?

that is how the stat works? jordan or lebron dont play 48 mins a game nor use 100% of the possesions on court while they are there so the real extra possesions would be more like 0.75-1.0~ possesions (roughly equivalent to 0.75-1.0 points) based on their actual minutes and usage?

i am wrong here ?

for comparision jordan had a -150 ts add in 2002 over 60 games , thst would mean jordan bad efficiency shooting was making the Wizards 2.5 points worse thsn league average each game

while lebron is around 150 ts add for 56 games, aka close to 2.5 points better than league average efficiency would have provide

i may be making a mistake here but it seems like lebron scoring was 5 points~ a game more valuable while jordan ball swcurity was only around .75-1.0 points in the comparision

[eminence]

I'm not sure what the point of bringing in cTOV% here, neither LeBron or MJ are the sort to have their TOV% change significantly from their basic tov%. LBJ was at 9% cTOV% in a 12.3% TOV% league, MJ at 8% in a 13.6% TOV% league (also, MJ>CP3 for ball protection through their careers, 7.3% vs 7.7% for career I believe based on a quick calc, in a generally higher turnover league). Neither stat is that good at pinpointing players effects on team tov% though. In this case it'd give about half a possession back to the Lakers over the Wiz in this comparison if we decided to use cTOV% over the teams actual turnover %s (this seems unwise to me, but do you), turning the possession gap (including rebounding rate effects still) back down to around 2/3 of the individual scoring efficiency gap.

And by my calcs MJ was closer to 6 box creation in '02, unless Ben changed his formula in the last few years (which I suppose is possible). If it was closer to 8 that'd push his cTOV% a couple of tenths of a % lower.

i am a bit confused here, you mention thst since lebron(2022) tov% is 12.5 and jordan (2002) was 10% then thst is a 2.5 possesion advantage?

that is how the stat works? jordan or lebron dont play 48 mins a game nor use 100% of the possesions on court while they are there so the real extra possesions would be more like 0.75-1.0~ possesions (roughly equivalent to 0.75-1.0 points) based on their actual minutes and usage?

i am wrong here ?

for comparision jordan had a -150 ts add in 2002 over 60 games , thst would mean jordan bad efficiency shooting was making the Wizards 2.5 points worse thsn league average each game

while lebron is around 150 ts add for 56 games, aka close to 2.5 points better than league average efficiency would have provide

i may be making a mistake here but it seems like lebron scoring was 5 points~ a game more valuable while jordan ball swcurity was only around .75-1.0 points in the comparision

Nah, I did the comparison based off the team turnover%s, not individual #s. Wiz 12.9% with MJ, 16.7% without, LA 14.3% with LBJ, 14.5% without. League numbers for comparison (13.6% vs 12.3%). Trying to apply it to the cTOV% like I did is probably not a completely legit operation.

Rough calc - the Wiz get roughly 3.8 more possession with him on the court than they otherwise would've had (roughly, adjusted to pace slightly less, we'll say 3.5). Meanwhile LeBron is basically not changing his team tov #s. For Oreb MJ is more neutral while LeBron is a negative effect for the team.

An easier way to present this may have been to look at team total stats:

The Wiz got +1.9% TSA (FGA+0.44*FTA) vs their competition.

The Lakers got -2.0TS% vs their competition.

I feel we have strong reasons/statistics to believe that a lot of that is due to differences in MJ/LeBrons play. Edit: Using the team numbers throws the numbers off a bit, as they clearly win the possession battle by more when he's on the court than in total. I feel it generally balances with what % of the credit MJ deserves for the team winning the possession battle like that (gotta give some love to Popeye as well).

Approximately a 4 pt swing in any scenario, my suspicion would be slightly higher due to the nature of these possessions (turnovers and offensive rebounds). In the 4.5-5.0 pt range.

[Doctor MJ]

For example, Ja Morant's team is 20-2 without him and has a -3.6 on/off (Lebron is at 0.9). While we know the Grizzlies aren't actually quite literally better without Ja, statistically, they actually do look better when he doesn't play. But we know, Ja is still a worthy All-NBA guy.

Just feel a need to jump in here: I don't.

Not taking a hard stance here, and I freaking love watching how Morant moves and am not betting against him going forward, but to me the basketball world is being absurd the way they are brushing aside the fact that the Grizzlies' regular season success is clearly about an ensemble cast playing well together, and not about Morant. If Morant ends up not making my All-NBA list, I won't feel at all weird about that.

[LukaTheGOAT]

For example, Ja Morant's team is 20-2 without him and has a -3.6 on/off (Lebron is at 0.9). While we know the Grizzlies aren't actually quite literally better without Ja, statistically, they actually do look better when he doesn't play. But we know, Ja is still a worthy All-NBA guy.

Just feel a need to jump in here: I don't.

Not taking a hard stance here, and I freaking love watching how Morant moves and am not betting against him going forward, but to me the basketball world is being absurd the way they are brushing aside the fact that the Grizzlies' regular season success is clearly about an ensemble cast playing well together, and not about Morant. If Morant ends up not making my All-NBA list, I won't feel at all weird about that.

I get Morant not being on an all-nba team, but I do think he has a fine argument which is why I believe he is worthy of it. I suppose opinions will vary but if the w final spots are between him, CP3, Booker, and Garland, I would have him ahead of at least 2 of those names certainly.

[Peregrine01]

A 20+ game sample size is huge so there will be questions about just how valuable Morant really is. I think it’s showing once again that a ball-dominant small guard who can’t really shoot isn’t as valuable as many think despite the highlight reel athleticism.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Harden has only made more than 4 shots in a game once since March 25th. It’s April 7th. Coasting until the Playoffs since he can just get by on being a crafty foul drawer at the moment...or I hope for his sake.

[maxwellcu]

Watching the B team TNT half time crew. TNT got really lucky with the chemistry Ernie, Kenny and Charles have. It is a fun, lively show. ESPN's inability to re-create it isn't a product of their incompetence.

Shaq is terrible and his audience appeal alludes me. Wade is a pretty good halftime show guy. He makes his points quick. He was making an argument that Toronto matches up well with Philly. Maybe Wade is wrong but Shaq was so dismissive. And dismissive in a way that makes for bad TV.

Shaq is terrible on TV. His voice and speech mannerisms border on inaudible at times, and doesn't come off as either charismatic or insightful.

[Colbinii]

For example, Ja Morant's team is 20-2 without him and has a -3.6 on/off (Lebron is at 0.9). While we know the Grizzlies aren't actually quite literally better without Ja, statistically, they actually do look better when he doesn't play. But we know, Ja is still a worthy All-NBA guy.

Just feel a need to jump in here: I don't.

Not taking a hard stance here, and I freaking love watching how Morant moves and am not betting against him going forward, but to me the basketball world is being absurd the way they are brushing aside the fact that the Grizzlies' regular season success is clearly about an ensemble cast playing well together, and not about Morant. If Morant ends up not making my All-NBA list, I won't feel at all weird about that.

The Grizzlies are very much like the 2015 Atlanta Hawks.

I think a player playing only 60 games is a mark against the All-NBA, though I will say my All-NBA criteria is currently about capturing the season as a whole and not necessarily the same as MVP or POY.

[MartinToVaught]

Harden has only made more than 4 shots in a game once since March 25th. It’s April 7th. Coasting until the Playoffs since he can just get by on being a crafty foul drawer at the moment...or I hope for his sake.

If there's one player known for taking his game up a notch in the playoffs, it's James Harden.

I think what we're seeing is just the convergence of many things - the aging process, his party lifestyle and overall lack of work ethic, and the lasting consequences of him getting fat on purpose to quit on the Rockets last year. If he had worked on anything other than new flopping techniques in his career, he wouldn't be going out like this. That max contract Morey is about to give him will be the worst contract in history - assuming he doesn't quit on the Sixers before they can give it to him, which is always a possibility.

[MartinToVaught]

For example, Ja Morant's team is 20-2 without him and has a -3.6 on/off (Lebron is at 0.9). While we know the Grizzlies aren't actually quite literally better without Ja, statistically, they actually do look better when he doesn't play. But we know, Ja is still a worthy All-NBA guy.

Just feel a need to jump in here: I don't.

Not taking a hard stance here, and I freaking love watching how Morant moves and am not betting against him going forward, but to me the basketball world is being absurd the way they are brushing aside the fact that the Grizzlies' regular season success is clearly about an ensemble cast playing well together, and not about Morant. If Morant ends up not making my All-NBA list, I won't feel at all weird about that.

The Grizzlies are very much like the 2015 Atlanta Hawks.

I think a player playing only 60 games is a mark against the All-NBA, though I will say my All-NBA criteria is currently about capturing the season as a whole and not necessarily the same as MVP or POY.

They're way better than the 2015 Hawks. That team didn't have anyone on Ja's level to put them over the top.

Personally, as a Clippers fan, Memphis is the team I'm most scared of in the West. I can't remember the last time the Clippers won a game against them or even kept it close. Our guys really tend to struggle against all that youth and athleticism. I'm just hoping that if we do get them in the first round, their playoff inexperience will kick in. In contrast, I wouldn't be scared at all of the 2015 Hawks. They had an impressive run, but their ceiling was just so low with that roster.

[Peregrine01]

I made a post in the GB questioning whether Embiid is even better than Jokic defensively at this point and despite stats arguing otherwise, most still think Embiid is better.

But after seeing the Sixers get diced up in high screen roll again and again, I think it's probably a wash. Neither of the two guys defend well in space but I think Jokic has better hands, anticipation and motor while Embiid is a better rim protector.

[sp6r=underrated]

This is my stance on Ja I wrote a week ago in a couple of Ja threads

When the record is this great without him it hurts.

1. I'm a believer in what I call the "soft on/off hypothesis." Basically it means on/off stats are essential for player analysis and over a large sample size tell you a lot about a player. I call it soft because the sample size of an NBA season or even career is too small to discard the box score. There are some hardcore on/off statheads who really do rank players on the basis of on/off solely.

2. With that out of the way, as a believer in soft on/off stats I do notice the Griz haven't Morant have just held their head above water, haven't just played the same without Morant but have actually played better without Morant.

That tells me he isn't quite helping the team as much as the counting box score stats show. For Morant the explanation is fairly easy, there is a long history of young players putting forth so/so on/off numbers. My theory is young players like Morant are given leadership on their team to learn the ropes before they are ready. Teams try to get the mistakes over with early on with HOF talents. And if they're wrong the feeling is it is better to be wrong/fast and waste a season or two rather than gradually ease someone into a role they can't fulfull.

Or to put it another way the Griz, quite correctly, see Morant has HOF potential and want him to take the lead even if it comes with slightly more errors.

The discrepancy between JA, his box score stats, and the team's performance is best understood by looking at historical data. We have plus/minus stats going back 25 years. A lot of elite playersstarted their career with mediocre plus/minus stats early in their career.

It wasn't because they were selfish. Most of these players were on bad teams so no one noticed they were making subtle mistakes that diluted their impact. As they matured into the HOFers they stopped making those mistakes. I suspect that is what happening with Ja. I am believer. He will be a face of the NBA in the 20s.

Ja is an unusual spot. He's a superstar level talent, who was drafted at the top and found himself with an elite supporting cast early in their career. Magic, Bird, Duncan had it but most don't.

3. As to the absurd record without him, I strongly suspect this is a classic sample size issue. If it really is that big of a difference he's a massive net negative, which is absurd IMO

Margin of Victory is a better indicator of team performance than record. The Grizzlies record is 21-2. Their MOV is 17.2. Their SRS, Margin of Victory adjusted for strength of schedule, is 15.7. That Margin of Victory is better than any team in NBA history.

To state the obvious, I don't think the Grizzlies can sustain this pace. I don't think any team in NBA history can sustain this pace. The Grizzlies are playing over their head which can happen in a small sample size. 23 games is about the size of the NBA playoffs. Fans focus too much on the post-season when ranking players and teams but it shouldn't be ignored either. The data is pretty clear this is a championship level supporting cast even after you adjust for sample size.

This is why I give the Grizzlies a chance at a title this year. I consider them a second line contender were they will need a few external breaks to go their way:

fluke shooting;
random injury to tough opponent;
random series were you get the majority of calls which happens all the time. And it happens for non-conspiratal reasons, small sample size.

So if Ja can figure out how to integrate his skills a bit better with his teammates or has a month or two of abnormally low mistakes and they get a couple of breaks they could win title. Unlikely but not impossible.

More importantly the sky is the limit for Memphis right now. The supporting cast is young. Ja is legitimate. I expect, maybe next year, they'll be a frontline contender for an NBA championship

[eminence]

I'm a little lower on Morant than that and see he/Bane/JJJ as a bit of a three headed trio fairly close to one another in value, but the record without is certainly in large part a sample size thing. The Grizz don't have far and away the best supporting cast in history, just like the Nuggets didn't have the worst supporting cast in history like Jokic's +/- would've told you earlier in the season.

I'm a bit worried for the Sixers, I was not high on Harden bouncing all the way back to MVP level (it's a long time ago back to '20 at this point), but I was expecting more than this. If this is Harden going forward I can't see them getting over the hump, which is a take that surprises me based off where they were at with Embiid/Maxey/solid supporting cast earlier in the season and one Ben Simmons up for trade.

[Colbinii]

I'm a little lower on Morant than that and see he/Bane/JJJ as a bit of a three headed trio fairly close to one another in value, but the record without is certainly in large part a sample size thing. The Grizz don't have far and away the best supporting cast in history, just like the Nuggets didn't have the worst supporting cast in history like Jokic's +/- would've told you earlier in the season.

I'm a bit worried for the Sixers, I was not high on Harden bouncing all the way back to MVP level (it's a long time ago back to '20 at this point), but I was expecting more than this. If this is Harden going forward I can't see them getting over the hump, which is a take that surprises me based off where they were at with Embiid/Maxey/solid supporting cast earlier in the season and one Ben Simmons up for trade.

The 76ers are going to be an in interesting situation if Harden disappoints this post-season. Do they resign him? Do they let him walk? Sign and Trade to a team willing to take him on?

On the flip side, it would be hilarious if Philadelphia decides to move on from Harden. Who would be the best suitors for Harden? Who would want him at this point?

[eminence]

I'm a little lower on Morant than that and see he/Bane/JJJ as a bit of a three headed trio fairly close to one another in value, but the record without is certainly in large part a sample size thing. The Grizz don't have far and away the best supporting cast in history, just like the Nuggets didn't have the worst supporting cast in history like Jokic's +/- would've told you earlier in the season.

I'm a bit worried for the Sixers, I was not high on Harden bouncing all the way back to MVP level (it's a long time ago back to '20 at this point), but I was expecting more than this. If this is Harden going forward I can't see them getting over the hump, which is a take that surprises me based off where they were at with Embiid/Maxey/solid supporting cast earlier in the season and one Ben Simmons up for trade.

The 76ers are going to be an in interesting situation if Harden disappoints this post-season. Do they resign him? Do they let him walk? Sign and Trade to a team willing to take him on?

On the flip side, it would be hilarious if Philadelphia decides to move on from Harden. Who would be the best suitors for Harden? Who would want him at this point?

I'm not up on who has money this offseason, but it feels to me more like he'd wind up as a max on a mediocre team than a contender finding a way to squeeze him into the budget.

[Colbinii]

I'm a little lower on Morant than that and see he/Bane/JJJ as a bit of a three headed trio fairly close to one another in value, but the record without is certainly in large part a sample size thing. The Grizz don't have far and away the best supporting cast in history, just like the Nuggets didn't have the worst supporting cast in history like Jokic's +/- would've told you earlier in the season.

I'm a bit worried for the Sixers, I was not high on Harden bouncing all the way back to MVP level (it's a long time ago back to '20 at this point), but I was expecting more than this. If this is Harden going forward I can't see them getting over the hump, which is a take that surprises me based off where they were at with Embiid/Maxey/solid supporting cast earlier in the season and one Ben Simmons up for trade.

The 76ers are going to be an in interesting situation if Harden disappoints this post-season. Do they resign him? Do they let him walk? Sign and Trade to a team willing to take him on?

On the flip side, it would be hilarious if Philadelphia decides to move on from Harden. Who would be the best suitors for Harden? Who would want him at this point?

I'm not up on who has money this offseason, but it feels to me more like he'd wind up as a max on a mediocre team than a contender finding a way to squeeze him into the budget.

The teams currently with money are as follows:

Orlando: $30 Million
Detroit: $27 Million
Indiana and San Antonio: $24 Million
Portland: $20 Million

Obviously things can change and a Sign and Trade is doable with many other teams in the league, but I have a hard time seeing any of these teams interested in James Harden.

A team that jumps out to me for Harden: Los Angeles Lakers

[eminence]

I can kinda see Orlando as a not terrible fit.

I'm not sure how I see him ending up in LA, what were you thinking?