timschochet's thread - Ranking hemorrhoids (1 Viewer)

[Gr00vus]

I think hibbert is a nice pickup for the lakers. He is 28 but if he can regain his form from a few years ago, he and Russell and Randle could be a nice little core for a few years.

I just find it funny that the Lakers have been denied every single free agent they've talked about or coveted the last several years but now they "love love love" this move of course.

I don't see him as much more than a salary placeholder.

 

[Capella]

Love love love the Hibbert dice roll.

so funny

 

[Abraham]

I think hibbert is a nice pickup for the lakers. He is 28 but if he can regain his form from a few years ago, he and Russell and Randle could be a nice little core for a few years.

I just find it funny that the Lakers have been denied every single free agent they've talked about or coveted the last several years but now they "love love love" this move of course.

I don't see him as much more than a salary placeholder.

Really? He's not a bad player and will be playing for his last big contract.

 

[Gr00vus]

I don't think he cares. The guy has regressed over the last 2 seasons. I don't see much in the Laker situation that will turn it around. And even if he does get back to all star form, we've already seen the Lakers aren't able to bring in free agents, so he'll probably just cash in somewhere else in that case. But there's the worst case scenario for the Lakers - he plays at a level high enough to keep them from a bottom 3 pick and then goes on to be a contributor on some other team. Where can I bet on that outcome?

 

[Jayrod]

I normally like piling on the Fakers, but that Hibbert signing is a good move. Their front court will be stout. Hibbert is much better when he can just play D and rebound, because that's really all he's good at.

Kobe is the key to whether they are a playoff team or flame out and don't make the playoffs. No way are they good enough to win the West vs SA or GSW, but they can be fun to watch again.

 

[Gr00vus]

I'd also bet on it being painful (or gratifying if you're a Laker hater) watching Bryant play this year. I figure he'll get another season ending injury at some point. They're not making the playoffs either way.

 

[Jayrod]

I'd also bet on it being painful (or gratifying if you're a Laker hater) watching Bryant play this year. I figure he'll get another season ending injury at some point. They're not making the playoffs either way.

If Bryant plays almost the whole season, I'd bet they make the playoffs.

 

[thecatch]

I don't mind the Hibbert trade. Better to roll the dice on a guy than let the cap space go to waste. I mean, he's no Kosta Koufas, but

the Lakers did what they could.

 

[Gr00vus]

I'd also bet on it being painful (or gratifying if you're a Laker hater) watching Bryant play this year. I figure he'll get another season ending injury at some point. They're not making the playoffs either way.

If Bryant plays almost the whole season, I'd bet they make the playoffs.

If I were a message board bettor kind of person I'd take the other side of that bet.

 

[tommyGunZ]

I think hibbert is a nice pickup for the lakers. He is 28 but if he can regain his form from a few years ago, he and Russell and Randle could be a nice little core for a few years.

I just find it funny that the Lakers have been denied every single free agent they've talked about or coveted the last several years but now they "love love love" this move of course.

Why? Those other FA bigs are gone. At this point, the Hibbert move was by far the best option available, and there is upside. This isn't bringing in a cold body like Boozer. Hibbert gets a year to turn his #### around, and if not the Lakers cut bait. Additional bonus is that Hibbert's big $ prohibits Jimbo from overpaying for a 5th tier option on a multi year deal.

 

[tommyGunZ]

I don't think he cares. The guy has regressed over the last 2 seasons. I don't see much in the Laker situation that will turn it around. And even if he does get back to all star form, we've already seen the Lakers aren't able to bring in free agents, so he'll probably just cash in somewhere else in that case. But there's the worst case scenario for the Lakers - he plays at a level high enough to keep them from a bottom 3 pick and then goes on to be a contributor on some other team. Where can I bet on that outcome?

Dude, I'm not going to tell you how to fan, but this is pretty pessimistic, even for you.

 

[NutterButter]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

 

[tommyGunZ]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

 

[sports_fan]

I like the move for Hibbert. Players don't earn that much in the playoffs. Basically go to a team guaranteed not to make the playoffs for the duration of your contract to maximize your earnings per minute played.

 

[NutterButter]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

I don't see how this can be considered anything but a win for LA. They lose nothing and it doesn't effect their cap space next summer. If it gives them a better season this year, that at the least will increase their appeal come next summer.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Remember when Lakers fans used to think big free agents were always just dying to play for them? It wasn't true then, and it's really not true now. Bryant is basically an albatross at this point; no star wants to play second fiddle to him.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Stuckey re-signs with Pacers, 3/$21.

 

[msudaisy26]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

I don't see how this can be considered anything but a win for LA. They lose nothing and it doesn't effect their cap space next summer. If it gives them a better season this year, that at the least will increase their appeal come next summer.

I disagree and think it hurts the Lakers a lot. Hibbert isn't going to push them into the playoffs and all it does is increase their chances of losing their pick this year.I know people keep saying this next draft is weak and 2017 is loaded, but a lot of things change between the 2015 draft and the 2016 draft. The only way I see this as a win for the Lakers is if Hibbert is having an All-Star type year and they trade him at the deadline and actually get something, but knowing the Lakers they would think Hibbert is the second coming of Shaq and sign him to a max deal.

 

[simmonjm]

As fun as it is to laugh at the Kings, Knicks, and Lakers, the Blazers and Clippers had by far the worst offseasons in the league.

No way the Knicks had a bad offseason, This was a team devoid of talent and by some shrewd moves they now actually have a roster can make the playoffs. Even more they have actually have positioned themselves for future with only Melo and Lopez as long contracts. Lopez, Derrick Williams, Grant, Porzingis, and KOQ ill put those names up against alot of other teams offseason.

 

[Freelove]

As fun as it is to laugh at the Kings, Knicks, and Lakers, the Blazers and Clippers had by far the worst offseasons in the league.

No way the Knicks had a bad offseason, This was a team devoid of talent and by some shrewd moves they now actually have a roster can make the playoffs. Even more they have actually have positioned themselves for future with only Melo and Lopez as long contracts. Lopez, Derrick Williams, Grant, Porzingis, and KOQ ill put those names up against alot of other teams offseason.

I agree the Knicks didn't really do anything embarrassingly bad this offseason. They had limited opportunities available to them, and did the best with them they could, all without getting desperate and overpaying for non-talents.

Still, that isn't a playoff roster.

 

[Abraham]

Disagree. Healthy melo and Lopez are enough in the East to be competitive for the 8 seed.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Heat and Pacers (at least) will probably be better next year. Knicks might have to be around .500 to make it.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Knicks didn't do anything dumb (amazingly) but they'll still at best be a borderline playoff team. Injuries for them, and for the teams they'll be fighting with for the last two spots, will have to break their way. Roster is still very thin and they'll be banking on a couple rookies contributing right away.

 

[Jayrod]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

I don't see how this can be considered anything but a win for LA. They lose nothing and it doesn't effect their cap space next summer. If it gives them a better season this year, that at the least will increase their appeal come next summer.

I disagree and think it hurts the Lakers a lot. Hibbert isn't going to push them into the playoffs and all it does is increase their chances of losing their pick this year.I know people keep saying this next draft is weak and 2017 is loaded, but a lot of things change between the 2015 draft and the 2016 draft. The only way I see this as a win for the Lakers is if Hibbert is having an All-Star type year and they trade him at the deadline and actually get something, but knowing the Lakers they would think Hibbert is the second coming of Shaq and sign him to a max deal.

Maybe not, but Hibbert + Russell + healthy Randle + healthy Kobe could be very competitive, even in the West. You have a pass first athletic PG, scoring from the wing, scoring from the post and a defensive anchor. It's a good formula on paper. Whether it works in reality remains to be seen. The biggest key besides health, will be Kobe's ability to lead. I don't know if he has that in him or not, but if you can get these young kids to buy in and play along together, they could be very good (like 6-8 seed good).

 

[modogg]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

I don't see how this can be considered anything but a win for LA. They lose nothing and it doesn't effect their cap space next summer. If it gives them a better season this year, that at the least will increase their appeal come next summer.

I disagree and think it hurts the Lakers a lot. Hibbert isn't going to push them into the playoffs and all it does is increase their chances of losing their pick this year.I know people keep saying this next draft is weak and 2017 is loaded, but a lot of things change between the 2015 draft and the 2016 draft. The only way I see this as a win for the Lakers is if Hibbert is having an All-Star type year and they trade him at the deadline and actually get something, but knowing the Lakers they would think Hibbert is the second coming of Shaq and sign him to a max deal.

Maybe not, but Hibbert + Russell + healthy Randle + healthy Kobe could be very competitive, even in the West. You have a pass first athletic PG, scoring from the wing, scoring from the post and a defensive anchor. It's a good formula on paper. Whether it works in reality remains to be seen. The biggest key besides health, will be Kobe's ability to lead. I don't know if he has that in him or not, but if you can get these young kids to buy in and play along together, they could be very good (like 6-8 seed good).

Yikes. Saying the Lakers are a possible 6-8 seed in the West, is like saying the Sixers are a possible 4-5 seed in the East because they have 3 dominant big men who have many future all star appearances and picked up a SG who can shoot 45% from 3.

 

[Jayrod]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

I don't see how this can be considered anything but a win for LA. They lose nothing and it doesn't effect their cap space next summer. If it gives them a better season this year, that at the least will increase their appeal come next summer.

I disagree and think it hurts the Lakers a lot. Hibbert isn't going to push them into the playoffs and all it does is increase their chances of losing their pick this year.I know people keep saying this next draft is weak and 2017 is loaded, but a lot of things change between the 2015 draft and the 2016 draft. The only way I see this as a win for the Lakers is if Hibbert is having an All-Star type year and they trade him at the deadline and actually get something, but knowing the Lakers they would think Hibbert is the second coming of Shaq and sign him to a max deal.

Maybe not, but Hibbert + Russell + healthy Randle + healthy Kobe could be very competitive, even in the West. You have a pass first athletic PG, scoring from the wing, scoring from the post and a defensive anchor. It's a good formula on paper. Whether it works in reality remains to be seen. The biggest key besides health, will be Kobe's ability to lead. I don't know if he has that in him or not, but if you can get these young kids to buy in and play along together, they could be very good (like 6-8 seed good).

Yikes. Saying the Lakers are a possible 6-8 seed in the West, is like saying the Sixers are a possible 4-5 seed in the East because they have 3 dominant big men who have many future all star appearances and picked up a SG who can shoot 45% from 3.

He may be a complete ###, but Kobe is still a HOFer and capable of winning a lot of games with a good team around him. No one on the Sixers can compare to him. That's an apple and oranges comparison.

 

[Abraham]

Lou williams to lakers.

 

[Abraham]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

I don't see how this can be considered anything but a win for LA. They lose nothing and it doesn't effect their cap space next summer. If it gives them a better season this year, that at the least will increase their appeal come next summer.

I disagree and think it hurts the Lakers a lot. Hibbert isn't going to push them into the playoffs and all it does is increase their chances of losing their pick this year.I know people keep saying this next draft is weak and 2017 is loaded, but a lot of things change between the 2015 draft and the 2016 draft. The only way I see this as a win for the Lakers is if Hibbert is having an All-Star type year and they trade him at the deadline and actually get something, but knowing the Lakers they would think Hibbert is the second coming of Shaq and sign him to a max deal.

Maybe not, but Hibbert + Russell + healthy Randle + healthy Kobe could be very competitive, even in the West. You have a pass first athletic PG, scoring from the wing, scoring from the post and a defensive anchor. It's a good formula on paper. Whether it works in reality remains to be seen. The biggest key besides health, will be Kobe's ability to lead. I don't know if he has that in him or not, but if you can get these young kids to buy in and play along together, they could be very good (like 6-8 seed good).

Yikes. Saying the Lakers are a possible 6-8 seed in the West, is like saying the Sixers are a possible 4-5 seed in the East because they have 3 dominant big men who have many future all star appearances and picked up a SG who can shoot 45% from 3.

He may be a complete ###, but Kobe is still a HOFer and capable of winning a lot of games with a good team around him. No one on the Sixers can compare to him. That's an apple and arranges comparison.

It has been years since Kobe showed himself capable of winning a lot of games with a good team around him.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

I don't see how this can be considered anything but a win for LA. They lose nothing and it doesn't effect their cap space next summer. If it gives them a better season this year, that at the least will increase their appeal come next summer.

I disagree and think it hurts the Lakers a lot. Hibbert isn't going to push them into the playoffs and all it does is increase their chances of losing their pick this year.I know people keep saying this next draft is weak and 2017 is loaded, but a lot of things change between the 2015 draft and the 2016 draft. The only way I see this as a win for the Lakers is if Hibbert is having an All-Star type year and they trade him at the deadline and actually get something, but knowing the Lakers they would think Hibbert is the second coming of Shaq and sign him to a max deal.

Maybe not, but Hibbert + Russell + healthy Randle + healthy Kobe could be very competitive, even in the West. You have a pass first athletic PG, scoring from the wing, scoring from the post and a defensive anchor. It's a good formula on paper. Whether it works in reality remains to be seen. The biggest key besides health, will be Kobe's ability to lead. I don't know if he has that in him or not, but if you can get these young kids to buy in and play along together, they could be very good (like 6-8 seed good).

Yikes. Saying the Lakers are a possible 6-8 seed in the West, is like saying the Sixers are a possible 4-5 seed in the East because they have 3 dominant big men who have many future all star appearances and picked up a SG who can shoot 45% from 3.

He may be a complete ###, but Kobe is still a HOFer and capable of winning a lot of games with a good team around him. No one on the Sixers can compare to him. That's an apple and oranges comparison.

You mustn't have watched Kobe over the last 2 years. He is a massive detriment to that team. They'd win more games with him sitting.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Lou williams to lakers.

An inefficient chucker that doesn't play D? Thought they already had that in LA?

 

[Abraham]

Cavs interested in joe Johnson.

 

[Capella]

Lakers as a 6-8 seed

 

[Bobcat10]

Cavs interested in joe Johnson.

Something like Haywood and Andy for JJ and hopefully convince West to come aboard.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Lou williams to lakers.

An inefficient chucker that doesn't play D? Thought they already had that in LA?

LOL at hating on the 6th man of the year.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Lou williams to lakers.

An inefficient chucker that doesn't play D? Thought they already had that in LA?

LOL at hating on the 6th man of the year.

Watched every game he played last year. He'll win 6-7 games on his own when he gets hot. The rest he's pretty useless at best or he'll lose the team games. He gives the Lakers the exact same thing they have in Young and Kobe.

 

[thecatch]

As fun as it is to laugh at the Kings, Knicks, and Lakers, the Blazers and Clippers had by far the worst offseasons in the league.

No way the Knicks had a bad offseason, This was a team devoid of talent and by some shrewd moves they now actually have a roster can make the playoffs. Even more they have actually have positioned themselves for future with only Melo and Lopez as long contracts. Lopez, Derrick Williams, Grant, Porzingis, and KOQ ill put those names up against alot of other teams offseason.

I agree the Knicks didn't really do anything embarrassingly bad this offseason. They had limited opportunities available to them, and did the best with them they could, all without getting desperate and overpaying for non-talents. Still, that isn't a playoff roster.

The embarrassing aspect of NY's offseason was the same thing that was embarrassing about LAL- couldn't get any free agents to come to the two marquee franchises in the league (or even get meetings, in NY's case).

 

[saintfool]

Remember when Lakers fans used to think big free agents were always just dying to play for them? It wasn't true then, and it's really not true now. Bryant is basically an albatross at this point; no star wants to play second fiddle to him.

it's not just Kobe, i think. no one wants to play for byron. there is no leadership in the front office. there is no blueprint for the future either. they need Randle or someone to get the fans and franchise excited for the future. until then? Clips are the show in LA...

 

[Britney Spears]

Who did they give up to get Hibbert?

Essentially nothing. Pacers wanted to dump his $15M salary.

I don't see how this can be considered anything but a win for LA. They lose nothing and it doesn't effect their cap space next summer. If it gives them a better season this year, that at the least will increase their appeal come next summer.

I disagree and think it hurts the Lakers a lot. Hibbert isn't going to push them into the playoffs and all it does is increase their chances of losing their pick this year.I know people keep saying this next draft is weak and 2017 is loaded, but a lot of things change between the 2015 draft and the 2016 draft. The only way I see this as a win for the Lakers is if Hibbert is having an All-Star type year and they trade him at the deadline and actually get something, but knowing the Lakers they would think Hibbert is the second coming of Shaq and sign him to a max deal.

Maybe not, but Hibbert + Russell + healthy Randle + healthy Kobe could be very competitive, even in the West. You have a pass first athletic PG, scoring from the wing, scoring from the post and a defensive anchor. It's a good formula on paper. Whether it works in reality remains to be seen. The biggest key besides health, will be Kobe's ability to lead. I don't know if he has that in him or not, but if you can get these young kids to buy in and play along together, they could be very good (like 6-8 seed good).

Yikes. Saying the Lakers are a possible 6-8 seed in the West, is like saying the Sixers are a possible 4-5 seed in the East because they have 3 dominant big men who have many future all star appearances and picked up a SG who can shoot 45% from 3.

He may be a complete ###, but Kobe is still a HOFer and capable of winning a lot of games with a good team around him. No one on the Sixers can compare to him. That's an apple and oranges comparison.

You mustn't have watched Kobe over the last 2 years. He is a massive detriment to that team. They'd win more games with him sitting.

Serious question: How much of Kobe's anticsthe last 2 years were because it was a hopeless situation? Just racking up points gunning for the record, sly tanking, eshameless losing, etc.

Is he really going to be shooting 30 times a game with this new talent on the team (I hate the Lakers and actually think they did the best they could given the sorry state they are in - aka no blunders)? If he plays like last years Kobe, I agree they are hosed regardless. But if he brings the volume way back to his normally unreasonable levels, you'd think his efficiency would climb as well as their chances of winning a game here and there. If he somehow gains shot selection logic, he is still uber talented and can facilitate well when he wants to (rare).

His ability to lead a team solo has always been highly questionable. At this stage of his career you'd have to think he might be willing to share the stage. If he does, I think it could be a dramatic turnaround. Outside shot at .500?

PS, 6th seed is crazy talk, regardless.

 

[NutterButter]

Isn't this likely kobes last year? If so, with him and Hibbert off the books, they are going to have a dump truck of free cash. Another horrible year isn't going to give any FAs the confidence that this team is heading in the right direction. And it might hinder the development of the 2 good young players they have. They don't need another low lottery pick.

 

[Jayrod]

I admittedly haven't watched the Lakers much in last two years, and I hate Kobe, but I have a hard time believing he will play that badly with two young studs and a competent center.

Sure, 6 seed is a stretch, but it seems the bottom playoff teams in the west are usually within a couple games of each other. There are a lot more "what ifs" on this team than sure things, but the talent is there.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I admittedly haven't watched the Lakers much in last two years, and I hate Kobe, but I have a hard time believing he will play that badly with two young studs and a competent center.

Sure, 6 seed is a stretch, but it seems the bottom playoff teams in the west are usually within a couple games of each other. There are a lot more "what ifs" on this team than sure things, but the talent is there.

And those bottom teams are around 50 wins most years. Lakers will be lucky to be .500.

 

[Jayrod]

I admittedly haven't watched the Lakers much in last two years, and I hate Kobe, but I have a hard time believing he will play that badly with two young studs and a competent center.

Sure, 6 seed is a stretch, but it seems the bottom playoff teams in the west are usually within a couple games of each other. There are a lot more "what ifs" on this team than sure things, but the talent is there.

And those bottom teams are around 50 wins most years. Lakers will be lucky to be .500.

New Orleans got in with 45 last year and two playoff teams from last year are decidedly worse from this offseason.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I admittedly haven't watched the Lakers much in last two years, and I hate Kobe, but I have a hard time believing he will play that badly with two young studs and a competent center.

Sure, 6 seed is a stretch, but it seems the bottom playoff teams in the west are usually within a couple games of each other. There are a lot more "what ifs" on this team than sure things, but the talent is there.

And those bottom teams are around 50 wins most years. Lakers will be lucky to be .500.

New Orleans got in with 45 last year and two playoff teams from last year are decidedly worse from this offseason.

Because they were ravaged by injuries, as was OKC. Those are 50 win teams when healthy and they both got better.

Lakers don't sniff the playoffs in the West or East.

 

[metoo]

No way the Lakers make the playoffs.

 

[simmonjm]

As fun as it is to laugh at the Kings, Knicks, and Lakers, the Blazers and Clippers had by far the worst offseasons in the league.

No way the Knicks had a bad offseason, This was a team devoid of talent and by some shrewd moves they now actually have a roster can make the playoffs. Even more they have actually have positioned themselves for future with only Melo and Lopez as long contracts. Lopez, Derrick Williams, Grant, Porzingis, and KOQ ill put those names up against alot of other teams offseason.

I agree the Knicks didn't really do anything embarrassingly bad this offseason. They had limited opportunities available to them, and did the best with them they could, all without getting desperate and overpaying for non-talents. Still, that isn't a playoff roster.

The embarrassing aspect of NY's offseason was the same thing that was embarrassing about LAL- couldn't get any free agents to come to the two marquee franchises in the league (or even get meetings, in NY's case).

Your setting an impossible standard for the Knicks and Lakers granted the lakers bring it on themselves with fans assured they were going to get Love, dwight would resign, Aldridge, etc. if you count the Knicks offseason as a fail because they didn't get Aldridge then guess what 29 other teams failed as well.

 

[msudaisy26]

I admittedly haven't watched the Lakers much in last two years, and I hate Kobe, but I have a hard time believing he will play that badly with two young studs and a competent center.

Sure, 6 seed is a stretch, but it seems the bottom playoff teams in the west are usually within a couple games of each other. There are a lot more "what ifs" on this team than sure things, but the talent is there.

And those bottom teams are around 50 wins most years. Lakers will be lucky to be .500.

New Orleans got in with 45 last year and two playoff teams from last year are decidedly worse from this offseason.

There are also several teams that are much better, OKC is a top 4 team if healthy, New Orleans won 45 with a ton of injuries, Phoenix should be better as well with all their injuries at the end of the year as well too.

 

[thecatch]

As fun as it is to laugh at the Kings, Knicks, and Lakers, the Blazers and Clippers had by far the worst offseasons in the league.

No way the Knicks had a bad offseason, This was a team devoid of talent and by some shrewd moves they now actually have a roster can make the playoffs. Even more they have actually have positioned themselves for future with only Melo and Lopez as long contracts. Lopez, Derrick Williams, Grant, Porzingis, and KOQ ill put those names up against alot of other teams offseason.

I agree the Knicks didn't really do anything embarrassingly bad this offseason. They had limited opportunities available to them, and did the best with them they could, all without getting desperate and overpaying for non-talents. Still, that isn't a playoff roster.

The embarrassing aspect of NY's offseason was the same thing that was embarrassing about LAL- couldn't get any free agents to come to the two marquee franchises in the league (or even get meetings, in NY's case).

Your setting an impossible standard for the Knicks and Lakers granted the lakers bring it on themselves with fans assured they were going to get Love, dwight would resign, Aldridge, etc. if you count the Knicks offseason as a fail because they didn't get Aldridge then guess what 29 other teams failed as well.

Where did I say they failed? The national media has been poking fun at them because everyone from LA and NY loves to talk about how they are going to get every mega star that hits FA, as you recognized.

 

[Mr. Retukes]

As fun as it is to laugh at the Kings, Knicks, and Lakers, the Blazers and Clippers had by far the worst offseasons in the league.

No way the Knicks had a bad offseason, This was a team devoid of talent and by some shrewd moves they now actually have a roster can make the playoffs. Even more they have actually have positioned themselves for future with only Melo and Lopez as long contracts. Lopez, Derrick Williams, Grant, Porzingis, and KOQ ill put those names up against alot of other teams offseason.

I agree the Knicks didn't really do anything embarrassingly bad this offseason. They had limited opportunities available to them, and did the best with them they could, all without getting desperate and overpaying for non-talents. Still, that isn't a playoff roster.

The embarrassing aspect of NY's offseason was the same thing that was embarrassing about LAL- couldn't get any free agents to come to the two marquee franchises in the league (or even get meetings, in NY's case).

Your setting an impossible standard for the Knicks and Lakers granted the lakers bring it on themselves with fans assured they were going to get Love, dwight would resign, Aldridge, etc. if you count the Knicks offseason as a fail because they didn't get Aldridge then guess what 29 other teams failed as well.

The Knicks are paying Phil Jackson big money because he could supposedly attract the upper level free agents. Hell, Isiah Thomas could have signed Kyle O'Quinn.

 

[SWC]

i like the move for la because now when kobme stinks up the joint they can blame it on hibbert so bam instant scapegoat take that to the bank bromigos

 

[Freelove]

As fun as it is to laugh at the Kings, Knicks, and Lakers, the Blazers and Clippers had by far the worst offseasons in the league.

No way the Knicks had a bad offseason, This was a team devoid of talent and by some shrewd moves they now actually have a roster can make the playoffs. Even more they have actually have positioned themselves for future with only Melo and Lopez as long contracts. Lopez, Derrick Williams, Grant, Porzingis, and KOQ ill put those names up against alot of other teams offseason.

I agree the Knicks didn't really do anything embarrassingly bad this offseason. They had limited opportunities available to them, and did the best with them they could, all without getting desperate and overpaying for non-talents. Still, that isn't a playoff roster.

The embarrassing aspect of NY's offseason was the same thing that was embarrassing about LAL- couldn't get any free agents to come to the two marquee franchises in the league (or even get meetings, in NY's case).

Your setting an impossible standard for the Knicks and Lakers granted the lakers bring it on themselves with fans assured they were going to get Love, dwight would resign, Aldridge, etc. if you count the Knicks offseason as a fail because they didn't get Aldridge then guess what 29 other teams failed as well.

The Knicks are paying Phil Jackson big money because he could supposedly attract the upper level free agents. Hell, Isiah Thomas could have signed Kyle O'Quinn.

Kyle O'Quinn was a decent value and will remain under contract that way as the cap surges and he becomes an even better value. He'll never be more than a role player on a decent team, but that's the level they're paying him, so all is well. Isiah Thomas wouldn't have signed him because he'd have moved mountains to bring overpriced, roster-wrecking albatrosses on board instead. Sometimes, non-moves (or little moves) are the best moves you have a chance to make.