What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

2022-23 NBA Thread: “you’ll never let me down like the Heat did”, Miami fan says to giant pile of cocaine (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
thecatch said:
So what is your takeaway from that?
Click to expand...
He's had more experience and gotten farther than other players his age?

IIRC, he's second to Kobe in playoff points scored through his age 23 season. It took other stars to get into their mid to late 20's to win titles. Maybe that pays dividends down the road, maybe it doesn't. I guess it depends on whether people think that players play better and win more once they get to their prime years.

It's probably not as cut and dried as comparing Tatum to other 23-year-old players, as roster construction plays a big role in who wins and who doesn't. Part of what is being left out of the analysis so far has been that other players in the league didn't advance as far as the Celtics the past few seasons. That begs the question, which players had better seasons? The younger ones that get bounced out of the playoffs in the first and second round year after year, or the ones that get to the conference finals or finals and then lost?

It's a similar argument that went on in the Shark Pool many times. Which was a better accomplishment? Going 4-0 in Super Bowls with multiple first round exits (Montana) . . . or going 7-3 in Super Bowls with not many first-round exits (Brady)? IMO, the right answer is getting to more SB's and losing, as Brady had to win more games to then lose in the title game. I don't think players should get more credit for losing earlier and not advancing.

Part of the reason many people picked GS in the finals was for their experience. Many of the Boston players haven't hit their primes yet, so with more maturity and more experience it seems reasonable to think they will avoid the dumb mistakes and turnovers that cost them this time around.

 

 
gruecd said:
He's a really nice player, but he's not THAT GUY.   :shrug:
Click to expand...
This is kind of the thought process that I was referring to. Tatum just finished his age 23 season. Plenty of other guys never reached the finals by that age. Were those players considered not THAT GUY because they lost in the first-round multiple times? How many players in the past 10-20 years reached the conference finals three times and the finals once in their first 5 seasons? Plenty of young players have had a blend of missing the playoffs, multiple first-round exits, or maybe winning one series in their first 5 years. Maybe Tatum isn't THAT GUY, but if the bar is taking over the finals and winning the title at 23, there aren't many players that fit that model.

 
Anarchy99 said:
He's had more experience and gotten farther than other players his age?

IIRC, he's second to Kobe in playoff points scored through his age 23 season. It took other stars to get into their mid to late 20's to win titles. Maybe that pays dividends down the road, maybe it doesn't. I guess it depends on whether people think that players play better and win more once they get to their prime years.

It's probably not as cut and dried as comparing Tatum to other 23-year-old players, as roster construction plays a big role in who wins and who doesn't. Part of what is being left out of the analysis so far has been that other players in the league didn't advance as far as the Celtics the past few seasons. That begs the question, which players had better seasons? The younger ones that get bounced out of the playoffs in the first and second round year after year, or the ones that get to the conference finals or finals and then lost?

It's a similar argument that went on in the Shark Pool many times. Which was a better accomplishment? Going 4-0 in Super Bowls with multiple first round exits (Montana) . . . or going 7-3 in Super Bowls with not many first-round exits (Brady)? IMO, the right answer is getting to more SB's and losing, as Brady had to win more games to then lose in the title game. I don't think players should get more credit for losing earlier and not advancing.

Part of the reason many people picked GS in the finals was for their experience. Many of the Boston players haven't hit their primes yet, so with more maturity and more experience it seems reasonable to think they will avoid the dumb mistakes and turnovers that cost them this time around.

 
Click to expand...
But with all that extra experience, couldn't you also make the argument that Tatum should have perhaps been more ready for the moment than he was and certainly moreso than the typical 24 year old?  When are we going to get to the perfect combination of age/experience where we can finally start levying some legit criticisms against Tatum in the eyes of Boston fans?  

 
thecatch said:
But with all that extra experience, couldn't you also make the argument that Tatum should have perhaps been more ready for the moment than he was and certainly moreso than the typical 24 year old?  When are we going to get to the perfect combination of age/experience where we can finally start levying some legit criticisms against Tatum in the eyes of Boston fans?  
Click to expand...
I am not NOT criticizing Tatum. He didn't play well, he made some really dumb mistakes, he turned the ball over too much, and if he played better then BOS could have won. Part of Tatum's play stemmed from wrist and shoulder injuries. That's not making an excuse . . . the numbers back that up (he didn't play as well once he got dinged). Sure, it would have been nice if he gutted it out and played at a higher level. But he didn't. Boston as a whole need to #### and quit snapping at the refs, and Tatum was leading the charge in that area this season.

I did see an article that suggested Tatum and the Celtics could have actually done BETTER than expected the past 5 seasons (with last year being the one year they were really not good). Again, other teams led by young players haven't advanced as far as Boston has in recent years. It took Curry 5 years to win his first title . . . and without injuries to Kyrie and Love, GS probably wouldn't have won that season.

It took 10 years (and moving to GS) for KD to win a title. He played with Harden and Westbrook for a while at OKC. Durant went to two WCF's and lost in the Finals in another year in his first 5 seasons . . . just like Tatum. KD averaged 28/8/3.5 at 23. Tatum averaged 27/8/4.5. I am not suggesting that Tatum = KD, but the counting stat numbers are similar. (Yes, I know, it was harder to put up the numbers KD put up back then.)

Sure, I get it, people have been saying BOS should have won by now . . . like it's so easy to win a championship. Between Lebron, GS, and Giannis, there are plenty of other teams that haven't won. The Sixers should have won. The Nets should have won. Phoenix went to the finals last year and had the best record this year. Bottom line, it's not that easy to win.

IMO, the weakest link on the Celtics is Marcus Smart. His efficiency numbers over the years have been horrible. He hasn't even been league average in his 8 years in the league. His net rating is actually negative. For every charge he draws, he gets called for two blocking fouls. For every nice pass, there are just as many times he throws the ball away. Smart often views Boston as "his team," and that's one of the biggest issues. When Smart decides he wants to take shot after shot in crunch time, the Celtics are in trouble.

The Celtics certainly have issues late in the game and need to do better closing out close games. Having someone hold the ball until there are 2 seconds on the shot clock and then launching a three pointer is not how to win games. If they work on that, limiting silly turnovers, and quit complaining to the refs, they have as good a chance as anyone to get to the finals again next season.

 
Anarchy99 said:
It's probably not as cut and dried as comparing Tatum to other 23-year-old players, as roster construction plays a big role in who wins and who doesn't.
Click to expand...
It goes beyond just that. You are mixing apples and oranges on several players you identified:

  • Tatum's rookie season was his age 19 season, and he joined a team that was 53-29 the previous season (finished 1st in the Eastern Conference)
  • Lebron's rookie season was his age 19 season, and he joined a team that was 17-65 the previous season
  • Giannis's rookie season was his age 19 season, and he joined a team that was 38-44 the previous season
  • Duncan's rookie season was his age 21 season, and he joined a team that was 20-62 the previous season
  • Jordan's rookie season was his age 21 season, and he joined a team that was 27-55 the previous season
  • Curry's rookie season was his age 21 season, and he joined a team that was 29-53 the previous season
  • Thompson's rookie season was his age 21 season, and he joined a team that was 36-46 the previous season
Comparing through age 23 ignores the greater opportunity Tatum has had with more seasons than some of the others, and more overall playoff games in the league in some cases (Jordan for sure). Tatum is also the only one you identified who joined a team that was already a contender, which was a big advantage to him in this comparison.

One could argue that the data shows that Tatum and his Celtics teams have squandered more opportunities than the players you named and their teams did.

Another observation from my perspective that is impossible to prove. It looked to me like these Celtics teams lost a lot of playoff games this year that were there for the taking for them to win. Tatum himself was part of that when those games happened. I don't remember the same being true of these other players and their teams that you identified... their teams were more typically overmatched in their early career playoff losses.

 
Just Win Baby said:
It goes beyond just that. You are mixing apples and oranges on several players you identified:

  • Tatum's rookie season was his age 19 season, and he joined a team that was 53-29 the previous season (finished 1st in the Eastern Conference)
  • Lebron's rookie season was his age 19 season, and he joined a team that was 17-65 the previous season
  • Giannis's rookie season was his age 19 season, and he joined a team that was 38-44 the previous season
  • Duncan's rookie season was his age 21 season, and he joined a team that was 20-62 the previous season
  • Jordan's rookie season was his age 21 season, and he joined a team that was 27-55 the previous season
  • Curry's rookie season was his age 21 season, and he joined a team that was 29-53 the previous season
  • Thompson's rookie season was his age 21 season, and he joined a team that was 36-46 the previous season
Comparing through age 23 ignores the greater opportunity Tatum has had with more seasons than some of the others, and more overall playoff games in the league in some cases (Jordan for sure). Tatum is also the only one you identified who joined a team that was already a contender, which was a big advantage to him in this comparison.

One could argue that the data shows that Tatum and his Celtics teams have squandered more opportunities than the players you named and their teams did.

Another observation from my perspective that is impossible to prove. It looked to me like these Celtics teams lost a lot of playoff games this year that were there for the taking for them to win. Tatum himself was part of that when those games happened. I don't remember the same being true of these other players and their teams that you identified... their teams were more typically overmatched in their early career playoff losses.
Click to expand...
What's odd about the 2016-17 Celtics you referenced is they made hardly any attempt to keep that team together. They moved on from their three main players (Isaiah Thomas, Avery Bradley, and Jae Crowder). The only guys that were brought back were Brown, Horford, Smart, and Rozier. Everyone else got jettisoned. Essentially, they kept three recent draft picks and a veteran and started over . . . even after being the one seed. Sure, on paper the Celtics were a 53-win team, but they did almost a full rebuild in one offseason.

The 17-18 team brought in Hayward and traded for Irving. Hayward played 5 minutes before going down for the season. A case can be made that that incarnation of the team stunted the growth of their younger players (at least that's what some people say). That started rotating through multiple players (Olynyk, Rozier, Amir Johnson, Aron Baynes, Marcus Morris, Irving, Hayward, Kemba, etc.).

So technically, yes, Tatum went to a 53-win team, but that was far from a typical 53-win team that would keep most of its roster and swap out a couple of bench pieces. That 17-18 team became a core of Tatum-Brown-Smart, all of whom were very young. After trying to bring in multiple outside players, this year they mostly relied on home grown players (and bringing back old man Horford).

 
gruecd said:
He's a really nice player, but he's not THAT GUY.   :shrug:
Click to expand...


Too early to say that. Giannis wasn't the guy after Kawhi and the Raptors in the conference finals and then Butler and the Heat took them out in the 2nd round. Now he is the guy after 2021. 

Look at Curry. Before this year a lot people said the same thing you just said. Their first title wasn't legit because Love and Kyrie got hurt, then a healthy Love and Kyrie with Lebron beat them the next year. Durant comes in and is the guy and they win 2 more, then Durant gets hurt snd Curry couldn't lead them to a title against the Raptors. Now this year happens and he is the guy. 

 
I wouldn't bet against Tatum being THAT guy at 23 years old. What has he done every year since he's been the in the NBA?

IMPROVE. 

If continues to do so and his short history says he will, he can be THAT guy. I just hope Poole, Kuminga, Moody, and Wiseman are there to keep him off the top!!!

WAAAAAAAAAAARRRIORS!!!

 
Charlie Harper said:
I wouldn't bet against Tatum being THAT guy at 23 years old. What has he done every year since he's been the in the NBA?

IMPROVE. 

If continues to do so and his short history says he will, he can be THAT guy. I just hope Poole, Kuminga, Moody, and Wiseman are there to keep him off the top!!!

WAAAAAAAAAAARRRIORS!!!
Click to expand...
Tatum's points / rebounds / assists per game have gone up every year. Other than a 0.1 drop after Year 1, his PER numbers have gone up each season as well. In the playoffs since 2020, he average 24+ points in every series EXCEPT GS (which also was his worst shooting percentage in that time). IMO, a lot of people are writing him off based on his one mediocre series against the Warriors. Guess we will have to wait and see.

 
Tatum is really, really good but depending on what is meant by being THE GUY then I'd have to agree that he's not.  Maybe he takes the leap to top 3-5 in the league but I'm not sure yet.  But I do think he was hurt (not sure how much) so don't blame him too much for that.  To me Boston has much bigger issues - Smart's shot selection, Horford's age, keeping Time Lord healthy and in general what I said would lose them the Finals - they aren't deep enough.  If they get deeper then Tatum doesn't have to be MJ/Lebron/Kobe level for them to win a ring.

 
AAABatteries said:
Tatum is really, really good but depending on what is meant by being THE GUY then I'd have to agree that he's not.  Maybe he takes the leap to top 3-5 in the league but I'm not sure yet.  But I do think he was hurt (not sure how much) so don't blame him too much for that.  To me Boston has much bigger issues - Smart's shot selection, Horford's age, keeping Time Lord healthy and in general what I said would lose them the Finals - they aren't deep enough.  If they get deeper then Tatum doesn't have to be MJ/Lebron/Kobe level for them to win a ring.
Click to expand...
GWilliams, White, Pritchard, White, and Theis should have been sufficient and may have been if the starters played better. IMO, they made a tactical move that didn’t pay off (playing the starters way more and the reserves a lot less). That compounded the inefficiency of the starters and did not allow the reserves to get a rhythm. Unfortunately, there were a couple of times when the B team got mauled, which only made matters worse.  Hard to base season long decisions on the results of one series. They were a few minutes away from being up 3 games to 1.

IIRC, they have a couple of trade exceptions they have to use soon. Maybe they can pickup another piece or two.

 
AAABatteries said:
Tatum is really, really good but depending on what is meant by being THE GUY then I'd have to agree that he's not.  Maybe he takes the leap to top 3-5 in the league but I'm not sure yet.  But I do think he was hurt (not sure how much) so don't blame him too much for that.  To me Boston has much bigger issues - Smart's shot selection, Horford's age, keeping Time Lord healthy and in general what I said would lose them the Finals - they aren't deep enough.  If they get deeper then Tatum doesn't have to be MJ/Lebron/Kobe level for them to win a ring.
Click to expand...


I'm in this camp as well.  It could be inexperience but he reminds me of Harden in big games. 

 
Seems like Boston’s bigger issue is maybe they just got a little lucky in rounds 2/3 with the injuries and aren’t as good as you’d expect from a Finals team? 
 

I don’t know why we have to pretend like just because they made the finals they are clearly the second-best team. Highly unlikely they beat Milwaukee if they had Middleton. I don’t see them getting back unless they make some decent upgrades. 

 
Capella said:
Seems like Boston’s bigger issue is maybe they just got a little lucky in rounds 2/3 with the injuries and aren’t as good as you’d expect from a Finals team? 
 

I don’t know why we have to pretend like just because they made the finals they are clearly the second-best team. Highly unlikely they beat Milwaukee if they had Middleton. I don’t see them getting back unless they make some decent upgrades. 
Click to expand...
Kinda like Phoenix last year.

 
Capella said:
Seems like Boston’s bigger issue is maybe they just got a little lucky in rounds 2/3 with the injuries and aren’t as good as you’d expect from a Finals team? 
 

I don’t know why we have to pretend like just because they made the finals they are clearly the second-best team. Highly unlikely they beat Milwaukee if they had Middleton. I don’t see them getting back unless they make some decent upgrades. 
Click to expand...
The same can be said about a lot of teams. Rob Williams was playing on one leg. Smart had a bum foot. Tatum had wrist and shoulder injuries. GS was lucky they didn’t have to face a healthy DEN team or MEM at 100%. Anyone can substitute an alternative ending, but there only was one actual outcome. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
The same can be said about a lot of teams. Rob Williams was playing on one leg. Smart had a bum foot.
Click to expand...
These players are in no way Middleton. Milwaukee lost their second best player and their offensive closer. Boston had a great playoffs, I just don’t think they were the best team really in the East and certainly not the nba. Maybe they’ll make some significant changes. 

 
Capella said:
These players are in no way Middleton. Milwaukee lost their second best player and their offensive closer. Boston had a great playoffs, I just don’t think they were the best team really in the East and certainly not the nba. Maybe they’ll make some significant changes. 
Click to expand...
:shrug:

When healthy in 2022, Boston was statistically the best team and had the best record in the league. But regular season and the playoffs aren’t the same. Boston when Williams was healthy was destroying teams. Milwaukee probably would have won. Both sides at full health would have been interesting. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
:shrug:

When healthy in 2022, Boston was statistically the best team and had the best record in the league. But regular season and the playoffs aren’t the same. Boston when Williams was healthy was destroying teams. Milwaukee probably would have won. Both sides at full health would have been interesting. 
Click to expand...
Teams are rarely 'healthy' though.  GS starting line up played less than a minute together during the regular season.

 
Anarchy99 said:
:shrug:

When healthy in 2022, Boston was statistically the best team and had the best record in the league. But regular season and the playoffs aren’t the same. Boston when Williams was healthy was destroying teams. Milwaukee probably would have won. Both sides at full health would have been interesting. 
Click to expand...
I don’t care what that nerdy espn garbage said, Boston was like 83% to beat golden state which tells me everything I need to know about how stupid it was. Boston had a great team, a great year, was overvalued by the nerd stats and got lucky some in the playoffs. All things can be true. 

 
Boston needs to improve depth. But I think going forward they need to be willing to ditch Smart and focus on the young "big 3" of Jays + Rob. If they can find a team to dump Smart to, I think that's the move.

 
Capella said:
I don’t care what that nerdy espn garbage said, Boston was like 83% to beat golden state which tells me everything I need to know about how stupid it was. Boston had a great team, a great year, was overvalued by the nerd stats and got lucky some in the playoffs. All things can be true. 
Click to expand...


They were a great team from like January on.  The Warriors were great at the beginning of the season, then had some injuries, and regrouped for the playoff run.  Boston was legit.  Having said that, and I like both Tatum and Brown overall, they are both more Pippen than Jordan and probably overlap a little too much.  There is a way that they can win together, but they may be better off moving one of them for another all-star quality piece that is more complimentary to their game.  Easier said than done.

 
Leeroy Jenkins said:
They were a great team from like January on.  The Warriors were great at the beginning of the season, then had some injuries, and regrouped for the playoff run.  Boston was legit.  Having said that, and I like both Tatum and Brown overall, they are both more Pippen than Jordan and probably overlap a little too much.  There is a way that they can win together, but they may be better off moving one of them for another all-star quality piece that is more complimentary to their game.  Easier said than done.
Click to expand...
This tweet sums those two up

https://twitter.com/Kofie/status/1536551802543415299?s=20&t=P9SP0reR7haM1EYNtnma9w

 
ShamrockPride said:
Boston needs to improve depth. But I think going forward they need to be willing to ditch Smart and focus on the young "big 3" of Jays + Rob. If they can find a team to dump Smart to, I think that's the move.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I agree.   Clearly the future for the Celtics is bright.  Between Brown, Tatum, and Robert Williams—they have some solid young talent.  I think what they are missing is a bonafide point guard.  When you have Tatum, Brown and occasionally Smart playing as your pseudo-PG you are going to have games with sloppy high turnover counts.  I don’t think they can afford to dump Smart without getting a couple players that are capable ball handles and playmakers in return.  Honestly—a healthy Lonzo Ball type would be a nice fit for them—great vision, solid handles, capable of shooting from the outside and a nice defender.   If they can’t find somebody like that in return—I don’t think they can afford to lose Smart. 

On a side note—I do think that Boston’s mentality in the finals may have been off.  It seemed like they were more concerned with getting Tatum getting a “signature” monster game in a win—that they forgot that they are more than capable of winning without Tatum having to put up godly numbers.  Hell—they won the first game in the series with Tatum having a horrid shooting game—but a solid game distributing.   It was almost as though winning that way again wasn’t going to be acceptable for them after game 1.  I think that contributed to them losing.  They just needed to continue focusing on what worked for them (points in the paint using their size advantage with guys like Horford and Williams) instead of focusing soo much on getting Tatum going. 

 
Leeroy Jenkins said:
So what is the eventual Kyrie to Lakers trade going to look like?
Click to expand...


Man why would anyone trade for this fool?  He's possibly the least dependable person in NBA history.  He is probably #1 on the all time wasted talent list.  He played 11 games at Duke.  He barely plays in the NBA ... what like 25 games a year for the last 3 years.  50 a year for his career?   He rode a Lebron in his prime to win a title, and is otherwise a useless POS

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brunell4MVP said:
Man why would anyone trade for this fool?  He's possibly the least dependable person in NBA history.  He is probably #1 on the all time wasted talent list.  He played 11 games at Duke.  He barely plays in the NBA ... what like 25 games a year for the last 3 years.  50 a year for his career?   He rode a Lebron in his prime to win a title, and is otherwise a useless POS
Click to expand...


Simmons is a contenduh too

 
Leeroy Jenkins said:
So what is the eventual Kyrie to Lakers trade going to look like?
Click to expand...
KD won't play with Westbrook again, so that is pretty much a deal breaker. Stick those two together again (and Simmons if he can ever get back on the court) and KD will bolt as soon as he is able. (And didn't Kyrie want to get away from LeBron in the past?)

Lakers fans might have a better handle on their future draft picks, but IIRC correctly:

2022 - None
2023 - Lakers get the worse pick between their pick or New Orleans
2024 / 2025 - New Orleans gets to pick which year they get the Lakers pick . . . LA gets whichever year the Pels don't want.

Assuming Westbrook is out, and they want to keep Lebron and AD, who else do the Lakers have that can be used as salary filler? The rest of the roster that is currently signed only adds up to like $22 million. All the other guys they can bring back all had salaries less than $2 million.

The only way I see a viable trade is a multi-team trade where the Lakers move Westbrook and draft picks to a third team and that team supplies BRK with players. I guess at that point it depends on who the mystery team is, what the Lakers are willing to give up to get away from Westbrook and bring in Kyrie, and how badly to the Nets want to rid themselves of Kyrie. The third team might also want picks from the Nets as well (but they already moved a lot of their future picks for Harden or Simmons).

Last I saw, the Knicks and Clippers were also potential landing spots for Kyrie.

 
identikit said:
Simmons is a contenduh too
Click to expand...


Maybe one day.  He's a fraction of the talent Irving is.  And he's played 81, 79, 51, and 57 games in the seasons he played.  The MOST games Irving ever played in a reg season is 75.   But if the sitting out thing continues, Simmons will be heading that way too.  

 
Brunell4MVP said:
Maybe one day.  He's a fraction of the talent Irving is.  And he's played 81, 79, 51, and 57 games in the seasons he played.  The MOST games Irving ever played in a reg season is 75.   But if the sitting out thing continues, Simmons will be heading that way too.  
Click to expand...


When he's on the court, he's undependable too

Avoids layups

 
Brunell4MVP said:
Man why would anyone trade for this fool?  He's possibly the least dependable person in NBA history.  He is probably #1 on the all time wasted talent list.  He played 11 games at Duke.  He barely plays in the NBA ... what like 25 games a year for the last 3 years.  50 a year for his career?   He rode a Lebron in his prime to win a title, and is otherwise a useless POS
Click to expand...
Lakers are the team he cant ruin, cuz it's not a team.

i was the first to question Kancerie's mental/emotional health and declare that he was actually trying to destroy the Celtics to see if he could so, like you, i cant put aside what he is & does. if i could, he's as great an onball talent as i ever seen

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brunell4MVP said:
Man why would anyone trade for this fool?  He's possibly the least dependable person in NBA history.  He is probably #1 on the all time wasted talent list.  He played 11 games at Duke.  He barely plays in the NBA ... what like 25 games a year for the last 3 years.  50 a year for his career?   He rode a Lebron in his prime to win a title, and is otherwise a useless POS
Click to expand...
Come on now with the bold. Kyrie averaged over 27 in those finals including throwing up 41 in the pivotal game 5. He was really good in both finals he played more than one game of in and I still think 2015 could have gone different had he not hurt his ankle/foot game one. Lebron was an absolute menace that series.

 
Brunell4MVP said:
Man why would anyone trade for this fool?  He's possibly the least dependable person in NBA history.  He is probably #1 on the all time wasted talent list.  He played 11 games at Duke.  He barely plays in the NBA ... what like 25 games a year for the last 3 years.  50 a year for his career?   He rode a Lebron in his prime to win a title, and is otherwise a useless POS
Click to expand...


Well, he had success with Lebron in the past.  He is unquestionably a fantastic player when on the court.  Lebron was posting Kyrie highlights with him on his IG a week or so ago too . . .  But I hear you -- the dude believes the Earth is flat.

 
Juxtatarot said:
In my opinion, Kyrie is great enough to accept the flaking out risk. 
Click to expand...
Kyrie missed 123 games over the last 3 seasons (some self-inflicted) and couldn't finish the season in his two seasons in Boston. Even in Cleveland, he had three seasons with 50-something games played. Between his health, unpredictable behavior, and unreliability, not sure his game trumps all that. And that's not even factoring in him not being the best teammate or being a cancer in the clubhouse.

 
Anarchy99 said:
Kyrie missed 123 games over the last 3 seasons (some self-inflicted) and couldn't finish the season in his two seasons in Boston. Even in Cleveland, he had three seasons with 50-something games played. Between his health, unpredictable behavior, and unreliability, not sure his game trumps all that. And that's not even factoring in him not being the best teammate or being a cancer in the clubhouse.
Click to expand...
an NBA team should definitely sign a guy who can play 40 minutes a night, for 82 games.

he doesn't need to have any actual basketball ability, because we know that doesn't matter, he should just show up and shut his mouth. and take the vet minimum less 20% just for the opportunity.

we all know there's no precedent for talented players exhausting opportunity so why start now?

 
Anarchy99 said:
KD won't play with Westbrook again, so that is pretty much a deal breaker. Stick those two together again (and Simmons if he can ever get back on the court) and KD will bolt as soon as he is able. (And didn't Kyrie want to get away from LeBron in the past?)

Lakers fans might have a better handle on their future draft picks, but IIRC correctly:

2022 - None
2023 - Lakers get the worse pick between their pick or New Orleans
2024 / 2025 - New Orleans gets to pick which year they get the Lakers pick . . . LA gets whichever year the Pels don't want.

Assuming Westbrook is out, and they want to keep Lebron and AD, who else do the Lakers have that can be used as salary filler? The rest of the roster that is currently signed only adds up to like $22 million. All the other guys they can bring back all had salaries less than $2 million.

The only way I see a viable trade is a multi-team trade where the Lakers move Westbrook and draft picks to a third team and that team supplies BRK with players. I guess at that point it depends on who the mystery team is, what the Lakers are willing to give up to get away from Westbrook and bring in Kyrie, and how badly to the Nets want to rid themselves of Kyrie. The third team might also want picks from the Nets as well (but they already moved a lot of their future picks for Harden or Simmons).

Last I saw, the Knicks and Clippers were also potential landing spots for Kyrie.
Click to expand...


THT is the only salary the Lakers really have as filler and they can't trade a 1st until 27.

 
mr. furley said:
an NBA team should definitely sign a guy who can play 40 minutes a night, for 82 games.

he doesn't need to have any actual basketball ability, because we know that doesn't matter, he should just show up and shut his mouth. and take the vet minimum less 20% just for the opportunity.

we all know there's no precedent for talented players exhausting opportunity so why start now?
Click to expand...


the best ability is availability.  everyone knows that

 
mr. furley said:
an NBA team should definitely sign a guy who can play 40 minutes a night, for 82 games.

he doesn't need to have any actual basketball ability, because we know that doesn't matter, he should just show up and shut his mouth. and take the vet minimum less 20% just for the opportunity.

we all know there's no precedent for talented players exhausting opportunity so why start now?
Click to expand...
Yep. We all know that uber talented players will play for the league minimum and after 10+ years in the league, those guys turn into great teammates, gut out injuries, and take well to coaching. Someone will take a shot on Irving . . . and they will pay handsomely to learn that maybe all the issues he's had over the years haven't gone away. There was a story out today alleging that Kyrie held his own practices after the Nets held their official practices (apparently for the team to practice the way he wanted, not the way Nash wanted). Boston and Brooklyn both learned that no matter how talented Kyrie is, they'd be better off letting him be someone else's problem. But, hey, another franchise will straighten him out, no problem.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Energy Crisis: Has Your Electricity/Gas Bill Gone Completely Out Of Control Recently? (16/30)
Replies
6
Views
441
STEADYMOBBIN 22
STEADYMOBBIN 22
GordonGekko
Do You Believe That The Modern "Tipping" Culture Has Gone Completely Out Of Control? (1/30)
6 7 8
Replies
358
Views
10K
eighsse2
eighsse2
Willie Neslon
Girl sitting next to me on flight pukes in bag twice
2 3
Replies
144
Views
4K
Grahamburn
Grahamburn

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top