What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2022-23 NBA Thread: “you’ll never let me down like the Heat did”, Miami fan says to giant pile of cocaine (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
With all of that said—if the other games in the series end up being as close and as exciting as last night—we’re all in for a treat. That was a fun game to watch.
I haven't watched a ton of basketball in years because I haven't liked where the game has gone with the whining and flopping and iso-ball. But that game last night was incredible and was definitely a treat to watch. I look forward to the rest of this series and I haven't looked forward to a basketball series in quite some time.
 
After that game 1 we just got I have a feeling tonight and tomorrow are going to be 95 to 88 finals.
Celtics are such a wild card right now. Can win big, lose big, play close high scoring, play close low scoring...just no idea what to expect.

Gun to my head, I predict Celtics win like 110-100, but I'm like 10% confident in that.
 
I have been down on the NBA\WWE this year. I am a Celtics fan who has been very bored watching people Jack up threes. I grabbed the package last year and haven't missed a Nuggets game since. They are REALLY fun to watch, and Jokic reminds me of Bird a bit. The league Whistle is back, and now the lotto fix last night is just par for the course in the Silver age unfortunately.

As for last nights game, the Lakers did get some bad Whistles which put Denver in some foul trouble fairly early in the second half. It's hard to defend anyone when you have four or five fouls. Denver is usually a good defensive team and were not that bad last night. Lakers were hitting shots. They played great.

The one foul call they switched to Jokic from Murray was funny to me because AD just blasted through the hole into his teammate. Bruce Brown and Christian have been getting bad fouls called all playoffs as soon as they check in. I wonder if that was why coach didn't put BB in at the end, and rode Murray and KCP who had five fouls each. Almost knowing the refs wouldn't foul them out, but wouldn't hesitate to ring up BB with the game on the line. Murray should have fouled out on one of the Lakers drives, but there was no call. I guess it worked. Bruce Brown has been in for KCP at the end of all the games for a while now until last night. I would expect him to have a monster game two as he's well rested.
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?

I ask for two reasons. First, I took a sports law class in law school taught by a prominent lawyer and part owner of a franchise. He was absolutely adamant that **** like this doesn't happen (other than like a rogue player or ref fixing games) and, obviously, the primary rule in sports law is that in professional sports there must be an uncertain outcome. This dovetails into the second reason which is that I can't imagine it would even be rational to "fix" something as big as the lottery because the league makes millions to billions and it just seems absolutely nonsensical to risk that revenue with putting the league's reputation in jeopardy.
 
After that game 1 we just got I have a feeling tonight and tomorrow are going to be 95 to 88 finals.
Celtics are such a wild card right now. Can win big, lose big, play close high scoring, play close low scoring...just no idea what to expect.

Gun to my head, I predict Celtics win like 110-100, but I'm like 10% confident in that.
Boston is a bit of a shotgun blast. Seeing / reading a couple of folks with strong convictions that the Heat will win the series. Maybe that happens, but on the surface, BOS is in a better place than last year this time. Brogdon added and Timelord healthier. Smart, Horford, and White missed some time in the series last year. MIA no longer has Tucker, Herro is out, and Oladipo can't play. And Jimmy has a nagging ankle issue. This time the C's get more games in Boston. All right, that one might not be a big plus, but BOS on paper is the more talented and healthier team. I think Butler wins a game on his own and Boston chokes one away. That leads me to Boston in 6. Unless the Celtics self-destruct (possible), Butler has an entire series of insane scoring (less possible), or the Heat get big scoring contributions from role players (I guess anything can happen there), a lot really needs to go Miami's way for them to take the series. Just one man's opinion.
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?

No, none. There’s zero chance there’s any malfeasance going on. There’s too much at stake and too many checks in place. And it would possibly/probably be the end of the league if it were true and fans found out.
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?

I ask for two reasons. First, I took a sports law class in law school taught by a prominent lawyer and part owner of a franchise. He was absolutely adamant that **** like this doesn't happen (other than like a rogue player or ref fixing games) and, obviously, the primary rule in sports law is that in professional sports there must be an uncertain outcome. This dovetails into the second reason which is that I can't imagine it would even be rational to "fix" something as big as the lottery because the league makes millions to billions and it just seems absolutely nonsensical to risk that revenue with putting the league's reputation in jeopardy.

The lottery isn't fixed and this coming from someone whose team get screwed over in the lottery more times than most. The fixed/rigged complaints come from fans that can see only one path to being good and that is get the best pick and pick the best player.

With all that said the NBA lottery is stupid, I don't know how to fix it, but the way they do it stupid. Teams that almost make the playoffs shouldn't have any chance to pick in the top 4.

This is just a idea, but if I ran the lottery I would change the odds and penalties. Obvious tanking makes your pick automatically drop to the end of the first round(looking at you Dallas). No team should allowed to drop or move up more than 2 spots in the lottery.

The NBA has all these rules against tanking and teams still do it. Make it easier to rebuild and teams will tank less.
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?
No. For example, in 2019 there were two incredible prospects at the top of the draft, and New York and Chicago were tied for the best lottery odds -- yet Zion and Ja ended up going to New Orleans and Memphis. That wouldn't happen if the league was putting its thumb on the scale in any meaningful way.
 
The NBA has all these rules against tanking and teams still do it. Make it easier to rebuild and teams will tank less.
The obvious question is how could the league make it easier to rebuild? There are more blue chip prospects in the lottery than mid- to late picks. If the best way to get an infusion of talent is through the draft, what other methods would they have? Limit teams to the top pick every 10 years and a Top 3 pick every 5 years (or something along those lines).

If you mean rebuilding not through the draft, not sure what direction you mean. By trade? Through free agency? Some destinations aren't popular locales for players, so not sure guys will flock to Minnesota or Detroit. Not sure how you get around that. Teams seem to trade decent players for picks . . . but is a pick that ends up in the 20s worth all that much?

What would you suggest to get the perennial mediocre teams an infusion of talent?
 
The NBA has all these rules against tanking and teams still do it. Make it easier to rebuild and teams will tank less.
The obvious question is how could the league make it easier to rebuild? There are more blue chip prospects in the lottery than mid- to late picks. If the best way to get an infusion of talent is through the draft, what other methods would they have? Limit teams to the top pick every 10 years and a Top 3 pick every 5 years (or something along those lines).

If you mean rebuilding not through the draft, not sure what direction you mean. By trade? Through free agency? Some destinations aren't popular locales for players, so not sure guys will flock to Minnesota or Detroit. Not sure how you get around that. Teams seem to trade decent players for picks . . . but is a pick that ends up in the 20s worth all that much?

What would you suggest to get the perennial mediocre teams an infusion of talent?

Off the top of my head some type of hard cap. So you have the regular salary cap, the luxury cap to resign your own players and then a hard cap. What those numbers would look like I have no idea, but other leagues make it work. It would force players to go to other cities to make more money.

Get rid of the trading all your first round picks. Let teams go for it if they want to tank it for the next 10 years. Teams will learn and adjust, this would also give teams more of a chance to stock pile picks like OKC.

Put a provision in the super max contracts. I think right now you can't trade a player for a year after he signs.a super max. Change that to two years into the contract not just after it is signed.
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?
No. For example, in 2019 there were two incredible prospects at the top of the draft, and New York and Chicago were tied for the best lottery odds -- yet Zion and Ja ended up going to New Orleans and Memphis. That wouldn't happen if the league was putting its thumb on the scale in any meaningful way.

That's the draft where Minnesota made a big trade for the 6th pick overall who is now playing for Rio Grande?
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?
No. For example, in 2019 there were two incredible prospects at the top of the draft, and New York and Chicago were tied for the best lottery odds -- yet Zion and Ja ended up going to New Orleans and Memphis. That wouldn't happen if the league was putting its thumb on the scale in any meaningful way.
At the same time, as a league that has historically prided itself on building and integrating itself into small and mid-level markets, much moreso than the other major leagues (except hockey cause lol), it has to support those markets if it wants to keep those teams afloat. Giving major draft talents to those teams would be one of the easiest ways to do that.
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?

I ask for two reasons. First, I took a sports law class in law school taught by a prominent lawyer and part owner of a franchise. He was absolutely adamant that **** like this doesn't happen (other than like a rogue player or ref fixing games) and, obviously, the primary rule in sports law is that in professional sports there must be an uncertain outcome. This dovetails into the second reason which is that I can't imagine it would even be rational to "fix" something as big as the lottery because the league makes millions to billions and it just seems absolutely nonsensical to risk that revenue with putting the league's reputation in jeopardy.
The frozen card back in the Ewing draft was probably a thing. Stuff like this happens way to often with the NBA. The refs bring them 99% of the distrust issues. Detroit got screwged.
 
So far I've seen reports that Portland (3), Houston (4), Indiana (7), and Dallas (10) are interested in moving their picks for vets who can immediately improve the team. That's a lot of discontent in a draft that's supposed to be relatively good. Also, I think it's probably a bad idea for all of those teams except Dallas.
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?

I ask for two reasons. First, I took a sports law class in law school taught by a prominent lawyer and part owner of a franchise. He was absolutely adamant that **** like this doesn't happen (other than like a rogue player or ref fixing games) and, obviously, the primary rule in sports law is that in professional sports there must be an uncertain outcome. This dovetails into the second reason which is that I can't imagine it would even be rational to "fix" something as big as the lottery because the league makes millions to billions and it just seems absolutely nonsensical to risk that revenue with putting the league's reputation in jeopardy.
The frozen card back in the Ewing draft was probably a thing. Stuff like this happens way to often with the NBA. The refs bring them 99% of the distrust issues. Detroit got screwged.
The two things can be true and still, who cares. Players control this league after a fashion.

Stern was definitely the type of A-hole who would have frozen a card to try and make NY relevant, and maybe he also had his hand on the scale when Lebron went to his hometown team, but I don't think the league cares or can keep that kind of secret anymore.

When Pitino went to Boston thinking that Tim Duncan was going to be his, only to see him go to San Antonio is all you need to see to prove that the league isn't tipping the scales anymore.
 
So far I've seen reports that Portland (3), Houston (4), Indiana (7), and Dallas (10) are interested in moving their picks for vets who can immediately improve the team. That's a lot of discontent in a draft that's supposed to be relatively good. Also, I think it's probably a bad idea for all of those teams except Dallas.

Portland should have gotten rid of Lillard. Since they didn’t and even signed him to an extension (he might not even be movable now), they can’t play the slow rebuild game.

I recall that the Pacers are anti-tanking on principle (they just often accidentally suck).

If the Rockets are truly interested in Harden, I guess it makes sense to try to win now.
 
So far I've seen reports that Portland (3), Houston (4), Indiana (7), and Dallas (10) are interested in moving their picks for vets who can immediately improve the team. That's a lot of discontent in a draft that's supposed to be relatively good. Also, I think it's probably a bad idea for all of those teams except Dallas.
The Spurs have a good amount of draft capital in the bank. Would be interesting to see if they could swap some/most/all of it to move up early in round 1 this year to grab another rookie to pair with Wemby (the way the Texans did in this year's NFL draft). Can only dream that they could pull such a deal for Scoot Henderson. Then bring back Poetl to do the heavy lifting down low and I think we have a playoff team.

Reality tolls for thee.
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?
No. For example, in 2019 there were two incredible prospects at the top of the draft, and New York and Chicago were tied for the best lottery odds -- yet Zion and Ja ended up going to New Orleans and Memphis. That wouldn't happen if the league was putting its thumb on the scale in any meaningful way.
At the same time, as a league that has historically prided itself on building and integrating itself into small and mid-level markets, much moreso than the other major leagues (except hockey cause lol), it has to support those markets if it wants to keep those teams afloat. Giving major draft talents to those teams would be one of the easiest ways to do that.
So... at times the league fixes it for the smaller market teams... but at other times they obviously fix it for the bigger market teams... and we just know that's happening?
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?
No. For example, in 2019 there were two incredible prospects at the top of the draft, and New York and Chicago were tied for the best lottery odds -- yet Zion and Ja ended up going to New Orleans and Memphis. That wouldn't happen if the league was putting its thumb on the scale in any meaningful way.
At the same time, as a league that has historically prided itself on building and integrating itself into small and mid-level markets, much moreso than the other major leagues (except hockey cause lol), it has to support those markets if it wants to keep those teams afloat. Giving major draft talents to those teams would be one of the easiest ways to do that.
So... at times the league fixes it for the smaller market teams... but at other times they obviously fix it for the bigger market teams... and we just know that's happening?
Who said anything about knowing?
 
People like Mark Jackson who claim it was a "mistake" to leave Jokic out of the top 5 should have their MVP votes taken away permanently IMO.
thats future philadelphia 76er coach mark jackson you are talking about take that to the bank brohan
I can hear him now coaching his MVP player Joel Embiid, everyday at practice 100 "Mama, there goes that man's".
maybe he is going to say momma there goes that man to poopbeard but it will be true when old poopster goes to some other team to ruin take that to the bank brochachos
 
Wembanyama is minus 20000 to be the first overall pick. I feel like those odds should be worse. Anyone got a couple million I can borrow for 2 months?
I heard that on a podcast on my way to the office today and though the same thing.
There's always a chance he finds out he needs back surgery or something.
Well, right - which is why the odds makers are still offering a bet. But I agree with daisy that the odds still seem "good."
 
Okay, seriously, I keep hearing that the league "fixes" the lottery. Is there any actual credible basis to suggest the league would do something this extreme?
No. For example, in 2019 there were two incredible prospects at the top of the draft, and New York and Chicago were tied for the best lottery odds -- yet Zion and Ja ended up going to New Orleans and Memphis. That wouldn't happen if the league was putting its thumb on the scale in any meaningful way.
At the same time, as a league that has historically prided itself on building and integrating itself into small and mid-level markets, much moreso than the other major leagues (except hockey cause lol), it has to support those markets if it wants to keep those teams afloat. Giving major draft talents to those teams would be one of the easiest ways to do that.
So... at times the league fixes it for the smaller market teams... but at other times they obviously fix it for the bigger market teams... and we just know that's happening?
Who said anything about knowing?
Lotta people in this thread making definitive, declaratory statements about a rigged lottery. :shrug:
 
So far I've seen reports that Portland (3), Houston (4), Indiana (7), and Dallas (10) are interested in moving their picks for vets who can immediately improve the team. That's a lot of discontent in a draft that's supposed to be relatively good. Also, I think it's probably a bad idea for all of those teams except Dallas.

Portland should have gotten rid of Lillard. Since they didn’t and even signed him to an extension (he might not even be movable now), they can’t play the slow rebuild game.

I recall that the Pacers are anti-tanking on principle (they just often accidentally suck).

If the Rockets are truly interested in Harden, I guess it makes sense to try to win now.
I agree that this is probably what all these teams are thinking -- IMO it's just ill advised.

Portland is more than 1 quality vet away from being a competitor. I understand that they want to reward Dame for being loyal, but at a certain point I think you have to put the team first and not sacrifice your future for another first round playoff exit. Sharpe, Simons, and Miller(?) could be a nice young core to take the reins once Lillard rides into the sunset. (I also think Dame is very much tradable -- Durant has a similar contract situation and was just dealt for a massive haul. Lillard isn't quite at KD's level, but is also younger.)

It does seem like Indiana just wants to be in the play-in mix again, and trading their pick would be consistent with that goal. IMO that's a bad goal, though. They struck gold with the Haliburton trade and should try to be more ambitious than that. He's still only 23.

I don't think the Rockets should be content moving forward with this young core, as the jury is still out on essentially every player in it. A top 4 pick is a great opportunity to take one last bite at the apple. It's important to finally get some adults in the room, but they have plenty of cap space to do that in free agency.
 
Wembanyama is minus 20000 to be the first overall pick. I feel like those odds should be worse. Anyone got a couple million I can borrow for 2 months?
I heard that on a podcast on my way to the office today and though the same thing.
There's always a chance he finds out he needs back surgery or something.
Well, right - which is why the odds makers are still offering a bet. But I agree with daisy that the odds still seem "good."
Seems like they are set right - there's virtually no financial upside in betting on it.
 
Wembanyama is minus 20000 to be the first overall pick. I feel like those odds should be worse. Anyone got a couple million I can borrow for 2 months?
I heard that on a podcast on my way to the office today and though the same thing.
There's always a chance he finds out he needs back surgery or something.
it's an interesting question as to what would have to happen to make him actually not go number 1. I think that even with any injury, he would still go number 1. MAybe if he lost a leg, that would drop him out.
 
Wembanyama is minus 20000 to be the first overall pick. I feel like those odds should be worse. Anyone got a couple million I can borrow for 2 months?
I heard that on a podcast on my way to the office today and though the same thing.
There's always a chance he finds out he needs back surgery or something.
it's an interesting question as to what would have to happen to make him actually not go number 1. I think that even with any injury, he would still go number 1. MAybe if he lost a leg, that would drop him out.
That's why I picked a back injury as my example. Maybe they find out that his spine is made out of swiss cheese like Michael Porter Jr.'s is/was, and obviously that hurt his stock. Any sort of traditional basketball injury (ACL, etc.) wouldn't, I agree.
 
After that game 1 we just got I have a feeling tonight and tomorrow are going to be 95 to 88 finals.
Celtics are such a wild card right now. Can win big, lose big, play close high scoring, play close low scoring...just no idea what to expect.

Gun to my head, I predict Celtics win like 110-100, but I'm like 10% confident in that.
Boston is a bit of a shotgun blast. Seeing / reading a couple of folks with strong convictions that the Heat will win the series. Maybe that happens, but on the surface, BOS is in a better place than last year this time. Brogdon added and Timelord healthier. Smart, Horford, and White missed some time in the series last year. MIA no longer has Tucker, Herro is out, and Oladipo can't play. And Jimmy has a nagging ankle issue. This time the C's get more games in Boston. All right, that one might not be a big plus, but BOS on paper is the more talented and healthier team. I think Butler wins a game on his own and Boston chokes one away. That leads me to Boston in 6. Unless the Celtics self-destruct (possible), Butler has an entire series of insane scoring (less possible), or the Heat get big scoring contributions from role players (I guess anything can happen there), a lot really needs to go Miami's way for them to take the series. Just one man's opinion.
i know i am bias here, but for me i think the Sixers did more to "lose" the series against Boston then win. They had game 6 and should have won if they literally could score another basket in the last 7 minutes of that 4th quarter (they got 1 point from a FT). add in the bad call disparity of 13-4, I think the Celtics got lucky to escape that game 6, then went on to game 7 and just utterly annihilate a Sixers team that seemed to have no fight in the 2nd half of the game. As for Miami, you are right that there isn't much they have outside of Jimmy that the Celtics need to game plan for. They do seem a little weaker this year, but I wouldn't be surprised if Kevin Love shows up for a game to help out.

Really seems like the series comes down to talent and depth (Boston) vs. will and grit (Miami). seems too simplistic, but my guess is Jimmy will want to cover Tatum, and it may come down to how much Brown can hit his shots and how much the Celtics can get him the ball in good space. On the same hand, i don't think anyone with any sincerity could have predicted half of the games in the Sixers-Celtics series like game 1 or game 5
 
Wembanyama is minus 20000 to be the first overall pick. I feel like those odds should be worse. Anyone got a couple million I can borrow for 2 months?
I heard that on a podcast on my way to the office today and though the same thing.
There's always a chance he finds out he needs back surgery or something.

The Blazers finding out that Greg Oden had one leg significantly longer than the other and was really 46 years old didn't keep them from drafting him #1 overall. Teams convince themselves they know better all the time.
 
So far I've seen reports that Portland (3), Houston (4), Indiana (7), and Dallas (10) are interested in moving their picks for vets who can immediately improve the team. That's a lot of discontent in a draft that's supposed to be relatively good. Also, I think it's probably a bad idea for all of those teams except Dallas.

Portland should have gotten rid of Lillard. Since they didn’t and even signed him to an extension (he might not even be movable now), they can’t play the slow rebuild game.

I recall that the Pacers are anti-tanking on principle (they just often accidentally suck).

If the Rockets are truly interested in Harden, I guess it makes sense to try to win now.
I agree that this is probably what all these teams are thinking -- IMO it's just ill advised.

Portland is more than 1 quality vet away from being a competitor. I understand that they want to reward Dame for being loyal, but at a certain point I think you have to put the team first and not sacrifice your future for another first round playoff exit. Sharpe, Simons, and Miller(?) could be a nice young core to take the reins once Lillard rides into the sunset. (I also think Dame is very much tradable -- Durant has a similar contract situation and was just dealt for a massive haul. Lillard isn't quite at KD's level, but is also younger.)

The Portland Problem is compounded by the fact that there really isn't any leadership. When Paul Allen owned the team, his fingerprints were all over it - not always for the best (more often than not he got in the way of his GMs) but the dude CARED. He loved the Blazers and the NBA. And he wanted to win. He sat courtside (usually with a highly paid escort who signed an iron clad NDA), would wolf down a Stanich Burger (one of the best in town) at half time and watch his team. Even when he was sick, he wanted to be there. That matters - A LOT.

Now? We have no clue who runs this team. His sister (a much bigger creep than her brother, and that's saying a lot) is nonexistent. The "Vulcan Group" is a nebulous, opaque organization without a figurehead. The current GM may or may not be any good at his job, jury is still out, but there's not doubt in my mind he plays the game scared. Who does he report to? Is his job secure? What does his boss want him to do? Is the team for sale?

So, there's myriad more problems with Portland than merely "What do we do with Dame?". There's also the not-so-little issue about what to do with Jerami Grant. This was Dame's handpicked player to come to Portland and help him win. It was fun, for about 12 games and then it wasn't.

What do you do with Nurk? You gave him a whole lot of money to be a petulant turd who quits when his feelings get hurt and they get hurt more often than my 10 year old daughter's. He'd make a great Italian soccer player with all his whiney antics and flopping but he's too stiff to kick a soccer ball.

The fan base is apathetic. I got an email from the Blazers last week asking me if we would be interested in renewing season tickets (we cancelled after COVID) and I simply replied back with "lol".

The best thing this team can do now (and should have done 2 years ago) is trade Dame and try to rebuild. It won't be popular but right now, neither is the team. Rip the band-aid off now, let Sharpe and {fill in the blank} cut their teeth, suck for a couple of years and hope that the future is brighter under a new ownership regime.
 
Big trade here:

Timberwolves send out KAT. Get back John Collins, Andre Iguodala, Jonathan Kuminga, and the #3 pick

Blazers send out the #3, Anfernee Simons, Jusuf Nurkic, and get back Ty Jerome and KAT and a 1st from Golden State.

Hawks send out John Collins and get Nurkic, Jordan Poole, and Patrick Baldwin.

Warriors send out a 1st, Kuminga, Iguodala, Poole, Jerome, and Baldwin and get Anfernee Simons.
 
Big trade here:

Timberwolves send out KAT. Get back John Collins, Andre Iguodala, Jonathan Kuminga, and the #3 pick

Blazers send out the #3, Anfernee Simons, Jusuf Nurkic, and get back Ty Jerome and KAT and a 1st from Golden State.

Hawks send out John Collins and get Nurkic, Jordan Poole, and Patrick Baldwin.

Warriors send out a 1st, Kuminga, Iguodala, Poole, Jerome, and Baldwin and get Anfernee Simons.
Why would Portland do this?
 
Big trade here:

Timberwolves send out KAT. Get back John Collins, Andre Iguodala, Jonathan Kuminga, and the #3 pick

Blazers send out the #3, Anfernee Simons, Jusuf Nurkic, and get back Ty Jerome and KAT and a 1st from Golden State.

Hawks send out John Collins and get Nurkic, Jordan Poole, and Patrick Baldwin.

Warriors send out a 1st, Kuminga, Iguodala, Poole, Jerome, and Baldwin and get Anfernee Simons.
Terrible
 
So far I've seen reports that Portland (3), Houston (4), Indiana (7), and Dallas (10) are interested in moving their picks for vets who can immediately improve the team. That's a lot of discontent in a draft that's supposed to be relatively good. Also, I think it's probably a bad idea for all of those teams except Dallas.

Portland should have gotten rid of Lillard. Since they didn’t and even signed him to an extension (he might not even be movable now), they can’t play the slow rebuild game.

I recall that the Pacers are anti-tanking on principle (they just often accidentally suck).

If the Rockets are truly interested in Harden, I guess it makes sense to try to win now.
I agree that this is probably what all these teams are thinking -- IMO it's just ill advised.

Portland is more than 1 quality vet away from being a competitor. I understand that they want to reward Dame for being loyal, but at a certain point I think you have to put the team first and not sacrifice your future for another first round playoff exit. Sharpe, Simons, and Miller(?) could be a nice young core to take the reins once Lillard rides into the sunset. (I also think Dame is very much tradable -- Durant has a similar contract situation and was just dealt for a massive haul. Lillard isn't quite at KD's level, but is also younger.)

The Portland Problem is compounded by the fact that there really isn't any leadership. When Paul Allen owned the team, his fingerprints were all over it - not always for the best (more often than not he got in the way of his GMs) but the dude CARED. He loved the Blazers and the NBA. And he wanted to win. He sat courtside (usually with a highly paid escort who signed an iron clad NDA), would wolf down a Stanich Burger (one of the best in town) at half time and watch his team. Even when he was sick, he wanted to be there. That matters - A LOT.

Now? We have no clue who runs this team. His sister (a much bigger creep than her brother, and that's saying a lot) is nonexistent. The "Vulcan Group" is a nebulous, opaque organization without a figurehead. The current GM may or may not be any good at his job, jury is still out, but there's not doubt in my mind he plays the game scared. Who does he report to? Is his job secure? What does his boss want him to do? Is the team for sale?

So, there's myriad more problems with Portland than merely "What do we do with Dame?". There's also the not-so-little issue about what to do with Jerami Grant. This was Dame's handpicked player to come to Portland and help him win. It was fun, for about 12 games and then it wasn't.

What do you do with Nurk? You gave him a whole lot of money to be a petulant turd who quits when his feelings get hurt and they get hurt more often than my 10 year old daughter's. He'd make a great Italian soccer player with all his whiney antics and flopping but he's too stiff to kick a soccer ball.

The fan base is apathetic. I got an email from the Blazers last week asking me if we would be interested in renewing season tickets (we cancelled after COVID) and I simply replied back with "lol".

The best thing this team can do now (and should have done 2 years ago) is trade Dame and try to rebuild. It won't be popular but right now, neither is the team. Rip the band-aid off now, let Sharpe and {fill in the blank} cut their teeth, suck for a couple of years and hope that the future is brighter under a new ownership regime.
You live in Portland?

Huh, never would have guessed.
 
Big trade here:

Timberwolves send out KAT. Get back John Collins, Andre Iguodala, Jonathan Kuminga, and the #3 pick

Blazers send out the #3, Anfernee Simons, Jusuf Nurkic, and get back Ty Jerome and KAT and a 1st from Golden State.

Hawks send out John Collins and get Nurkic, Jordan Poole, and Patrick Baldwin.

Warriors send out a 1st, Kuminga, Iguodala, Poole, Jerome, and Baldwin and get Anfernee Simons.
Why would Portland do this?

To pair Lillard with a 2-time all NBA center.
 
Big trade here:

Timberwolves send out KAT. Get back John Collins, Andre Iguodala, Jonathan Kuminga, and the #3 pick

Blazers send out the #3, Anfernee Simons, Jusuf Nurkic, and get back Ty Jerome and KAT and a 1st from Golden State.

Hawks send out John Collins and get Nurkic, Jordan Poole, and Patrick Baldwin.

Warriors send out a 1st, Kuminga, Iguodala, Poole, Jerome, and Baldwin and get Anfernee Simons.
Terrible
You dislike everything. Grumpy Grumperton.
 
Big trade here:

Timberwolves send out KAT. Get back John Collins, Andre Iguodala, Jonathan Kuminga, and the #3 pick

Blazers send out the #3, Anfernee Simons, Jusuf Nurkic, and get back Ty Jerome and KAT and a 1st from Golden State.

Hawks send out John Collins and get Nurkic, Jordan Poole, and Patrick Baldwin.

Warriors send out a 1st, Kuminga, Iguodala, Poole, Jerome, and Baldwin and get Anfernee Simons.
Terrible
You dislike everything. Grumpy Grumperton.
Half the time I read has name as Mopes.
 
Wembanyama is minus 20000 to be the first overall pick. I feel like those odds should be worse. Anyone got a couple million I can borrow for 2 months?
I heard that on a podcast on my way to the office today and though the same thing.
There's always a chance he finds out he needs back surgery or something.
Well, right - which is why the odds makers are still offering a bet. But I agree with daisy that the odds still seem "good."
Until you put $100 down to win fifty cents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top