Author Topic: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?  (Read 57429 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Azyiu

  • Posts: 2091
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #840 on: June 12, 2017, 09:06:20 PM »
As poorly as they played in the 2nd qtr, I bet the Cavs were glad to have that half time break to re-charge mentally. They seem to play a hell lot better in the 3rd qtr thus far. KD is the reason the Warriors are still ahead...
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953,
1954, 1972, 1980, 1982,
1985, 1987, 1988, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2009, 2010... 2020

Offline Accelerando

  • Disciple of Mark Tremonti
  • Posts: 3135
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #841 on: June 12, 2017, 09:15:38 PM »
KD will get Finals MVP if the Warriors manage to win this game

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 29945
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #842 on: June 12, 2017, 09:51:42 PM »
Dubs  :hat

Offline Accelerando

  • Disciple of Mark Tremonti
  • Posts: 3135
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #843 on: June 12, 2017, 09:53:34 PM »
Congrats to Bosk1 and Golden State!


Offline Azyiu

  • Posts: 2091
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #844 on: June 12, 2017, 09:54:58 PM »
I feel happier for KD for some reasons, lol!  :biggrin:
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953,
1954, 1972, 1980, 1982,
1985, 1987, 1988, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2009, 2010... 2020

Offline Accelerando

  • Disciple of Mark Tremonti
  • Posts: 3135
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #845 on: June 12, 2017, 09:59:39 PM »
Yeah, but does his Mom need to be on stage standing and celebrating next to the Warriors ownership?Lol

Offline Azyiu

  • Posts: 2091
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #846 on: June 12, 2017, 10:03:39 PM »
No KD no ring for the Dubs. I am happy he is named the Finals MVP.
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953,
1954, 1972, 1980, 1982,
1985, 1987, 1988, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2009, 2010... 2020

Offline Accelerando

  • Disciple of Mark Tremonti
  • Posts: 3135
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #847 on: June 12, 2017, 10:05:51 PM »
You're right. It would've been another ring for the Spurs :-P

Offline black_biff_stadler

  • 6th place finalist at New Orleans Skullet Fest 2010
  • DT.net Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13848
  • Gender: Male
  • blackwater_floyd, get it?
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #848 on: June 12, 2017, 11:17:15 PM »
Yeah, but does his Mom need to be on stage standing and celebrating next to the Warriors ownership?Lol

Considering how much she did to make him the person he is coupled with the fact that it's a coin flip, at best, to determine whether any sports team owner is a greedy dipshit that fell ass backwards into 8 figure net worth thanks to old money or an actual human being, I'd say there's no problem whatsoever with it.
Users who've sigged me (Join today!): LCArenas, Jakartabassplayer, LeeHarveyKennedy, Global Laziness, Portrucci, obscure, FlyingBIZKIT, alirocker08, senecadawg2, DebraKadabra, JayOctavarium, Cedar redaC, (almost) bout to crash, ? (the forum member, not the fucking punctuation mark), Zeltar, lonestar, ASacrificedSon

Offline Samsara

  • Queensr˙che Biographer and Historian
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8752
  • Gender: Male
  • Memory flows...like a river.
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #849 on: June 13, 2017, 08:32:49 AM »
Congrats to the Warriors and all of you who are fans of the Dubs.

Bring on the NBA draft. Can't wait to see who the Wolves grab.

I was listening to Mike and Mike this morning on the way into the office, and Stephen A. was on, and they were talking about Cleveland doing some overhauling. Apparently they think they need a playmaker at PG. No one said they should trade Irving, but said he's more of a shooter/scoring. The speculations centered on Love, of course, but they also mentioned needing a guy who can feed everyone other than Lebron. You can slide Irving to the 2, put JR Smith on the bench where he belongs as 6th man, and just play a small backcourt. Worked well for the Pistons back in the day.

Personally, i think a trade of Carmelo Anthony to CLE for Love and a pick makes the most sense for both clubs. The Knicks need a lot, but they need rebounding huge. A front line of Hermangomez, Porzingis, and Love at the 3 is a formidable frontline. Love can't play D anyway, so you can put him at the 3.

For my Wolves, I personally hope CLE comes asking for Rubio, if they really need a floor general.
Roads to Madness: The Touring History of Queensr˙che (1981-1997) - At the printer! Out in May 2024!

Pre-order now at www.roadstomadness.com!

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12820
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #850 on: June 13, 2017, 08:54:05 AM »
Congrats to Bosk1 and Golden State!

Awesome.  But don't congratulate me.  I've made no bones about the fact that I am not a long-time Warriors fan.  I can't claim this as "my team."  I just enjoy watching them do what they do, the way that they do it. 

As far as the game itself, it is interesting to look at the box score this morning.  As I was replaying certain aspects of the game on my drive in this morning, I realized that I could name only 5 bench players from the Warriors that I remembered seeing in the game, with one of them, Matt Barnes, only making a VERY brief appearance.  I checked as soon as I got into work, and sure enough, Kerr only played 5 guys off the bench last night, with Matt Barnes only getting 1 minute (another interesting thing is that Iguodala played almost as many minutes as the 4 starters not named Pachulia, and 4 guys off the bench had as many or substantially more minutes than Pachulia did). 

Looking at the Cavs, similar story for them.  Only 4 bench guys played.  Good production and time for 3 of them.  Only 4 minutes and no points from Shumpert. 

Really nice to see some of those old veterans the Warriors brought in be able to contribute throughout the season and earn a championship ring.  David West as been a consistent force this season on both ends of the floor.  Barnes was part of the Warriors' old guard years ago, and his career was basically over, so really nice to see him come back to his old team and contribute solid defense to keep them in games when the starters needed a break throughout the year.  Great to see McGee needing a second chance and able to come into a team and thrive as he did this season.  Is he the answer at center for next year if they don't keep Pachulia?

Then the young guys, McAdoo, Clark, and McCaw...  McCaw seems to be the one that rose up and began to pull away from the crowd in the playoffs.  Really nice to see Kerr trust him enough to give him solid minutes in a pivotal game, and to see him rise to the challenge and make solid contributions.  But all three of these guys are developing nicely.  I hope they find a way to keep them all. 

And I mentioned Pachulia above, but I actually kinda felt bad for him during the finals.  The last two games, especially, the Cavs were able to exploit him as the weak link on the floor quite often and force him into dumb mistakes.  It's a shame, because you could tell that he felt bad, and his teammates even got on him a couple of times, and that overshadowed some nice contributions in terms of some of the really nice picks he set to free up others on the floor, and some of the rebounding he did.  He's definitely not the best center out there, but he does some pretty nice things and has generally contributed what the W's needed him to contribute this year.  Interesting to see whether they keep him around.

Lastly, I think Klay Thompson deserves a lot more praise than perhaps his numbers garner him.  He is such a valuable, and yet frequently unsung, part of this team.  He got scored on A LOT these last two games.  But virtually every possession where he was matched up one-on-one against one of the Cavs' best players, I felt good about the matchup.  And even though he got scored on pretty frequently, he made his guy work HARD for the shot, almost always having to throw up a contested, high difficulty shot.  If guys are going to make those anyway, what more can you do?  As Mark Jackson said often during the series, if a guy is going to make that kind of shot on that kind of quality defense, you live with it.  If Thompson is your "weak link" on D that is getting scored on the most, I think just about any team would be content with that. 

Anyway, good series, despite the really poor officiating souring it substantially. 
« Last Edit: June 13, 2017, 11:21:13 AM by bosk1 »
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Destiny Of Chaos

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14474
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #851 on: June 13, 2017, 08:55:21 AM »
I'm over these superteams... I'd prefer the superstars spread out over more of the franchises. I'd like to go into a season with more than 2-3 teams with an actual shot at a championship. 

But with that said, kudos to the Warriors to assembling the majority of their team through the draft. Can't fault them if a top 5 player wants to join as a FA>.

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12820
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #852 on: June 13, 2017, 11:43:14 AM »
So, back to my post above about the individual players, I'm curious to see what the team does in the off season.  I would be shocked if they didn't keep their big 4 (Curry, Thompson, Green, and Durant) together.  And Iguodala and Livingston are both clutch players off the bench who can easily come in and start when needed.  I think they can, should, and will keep that core together.  But if they have to free up cap space and deal someone with some value, I can see one of those two guys going, which would be a shame.  I think they get more for Livingston, but may be more willing to deal Iguodala since I think he has less mileage left on him.  I dunno.  Both of those guys have been clutch so often.  Either way would be heartbreaking. 

For the rest, that leaves the veterans of Pachulia, West, McGee, and Barnes, and the new guys of McCaw, McAdoo, and Clark. 

I like Pachulia, but feel he is expendable, both because he is just "good" and because, while you need to have a good center, it is the least important position and easiest to fill given how the W's play.  Same with McGee.  They each bring something different and valuable to the table that has benefitted the team this year.  But I think they can find the same things in other guys.  However, on the flip side, I don't know that either of them have much trade value, and I don't believe their contracts are very expensive at all, so I don't know that they get any value by replacing them.  It's all about whether they can upgrade at that position without spending.

My last point stands for the other veterans as well.  I think both West and Barnes came fairly cheap.  West contributed more visibly, and I'd like him to stay around.  Barnes' main contributions were on defense (although he contributed on the offensive side as well when needed, and sometimes in pretty key situations).  But I think he is the most expendable of the bunch.  I don't expect him to return.

Of the new guys, the good news is that they are cheap.  I think McCaw and Clark fit well as all-around contributors.  McAdoo has been valuable on defense, but his contributions all around haven't felt as impactful as the other two.  Wouldn't surprise me to see them keep McCaw and Clark.

All that said, there are obviously a ton of other factors that enter into the equation, like cap space, and who is trying to deal who at any given time.  My intent really isn't to make any predictions, and more just commenting on my feelings as to the relative value of each player to the organization.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 74511
  • Gender: Male
  • Arthritic Metal Horns
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #853 on: June 13, 2017, 04:39:46 PM »
   

But with that said, kudos to the Warriors to assembling the majority of their team through the draft. Can't fault them if a top 5 player wants to join as a FA>.

I agree. The Warriors did nothing wrong. I think Durant can be looked at curiously, but definitely not the Warriors. This is not even Lebron's Miami situation.
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums........or WTF.  ;D
TAC got a higher score than me in the electronic round? Honestly, can I just drop out now? :lol

Online Grappler

  • Posts: 3471
  • Gender: Male
  • Victory, Illinois Varsity
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #854 on: June 13, 2017, 04:55:02 PM »
They've thrown in the towel. Fucking pathetic.

I don't watch the NBA at all and prefer college basketball, but I'm on a business trip and caught the last quarter of the game while I was doing some work in my hotel room.  So Golden State has a 9 point lead with 30 seconds left, and Cleveland just stands around and lets them dribble out the clock?  That's absolutely pathetic. Yes, the game is likely over, but watching a PROFESSIONAL team concede like that is so lame. 

In comparison, I thought it was awesome that an NFL team once sent guys crashing through the line on the "victory formation" when the quarterback takes a knee.  Dangerous play for the game?  Yes.  But awesome - do whatever you can to get to the ball while time is still left on the clock.  Don't stop playing because you think it's hopeless to come back from a 9 point deficit. 

It just reaffirms that I can't stand professional basketball. 

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 41963
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #855 on: June 13, 2017, 05:13:17 PM »
Cleveland fought like hell to the end.  Cleveland didn't cut the lead to 9 until there were 15 seconds left.  It was over.

0:36      LeBron James makes driving layup   117 - 129   
0:20      Stephen Curry misses 24-foot three point jumper   117 - 129   
0:19      Tristan Thompson defensive rebound   117 - 129   
0:15      JR Smith makes 24-foot three point jumper (LeBron James assists)   120 - 129   
0:00      End of the 4th Quarter   120 - 129   
0:00      End of Game   120 - 129   

Congrats to the Warriors. 

Oh, and the point spread on the game was 9 1/2.  :lol :lol :lol

Offline Azyiu

  • Posts: 2091
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #856 on: June 13, 2017, 07:35:23 PM »
It is official... RW is named MVP!

Shaqtin' A Fool MVP... lol  :lol  :lol  :lol... https://twitter.com/shaqtin/status/874787358289215488
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953,
1954, 1972, 1980, 1982,
1985, 1987, 1988, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2009, 2010... 2020

Offline j

  • Posts: 2794
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #857 on: June 14, 2017, 04:13:27 PM »
No KD no ring for the Dubs. I am happy he is named the Finals MVP.

I completely disagree.  The Warriors have been a fantastic team for a few years and I think they would certainly have won without Durant.  He played great and probably deserves finals MVP.  But I do think they'd have won without him, maybe in 6 games. :)

Dubs deserved this title no doubt, and Durant played extremely well.  But ultimately, he joined an already proven winner and won with them.  The championship to me personally would be practically meaningless if I had to achieve it in that way.  His decision to join GS sort of suggests a mindset that I can't really understand from a true competitor, but that may be my own shortcoming.  Congrats to he and the Warriors nonetheless.  I predict several more NBA championships from this franchise, they are scary good.  LeBron and Kyrie played championship-level basketball and the Cavs still fell far short.

-J

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12820
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #858 on: June 14, 2017, 04:23:14 PM »
No KD no ring for the Dubs. I am happy he is named the Finals MVP.

I completely disagree.  The Warriors have been a fantastic team for a few years and I think they would certainly have won without Durant.  He played great and probably deserves finals MVP.  But I do think they'd have won without him, maybe in 6 games. :)

I agree, but perhaps not for exactly the same reasons.  The thing is, if they don't get Durant, the roster looks a lot different this year.  They would STILL be better than last year's team and would have been better than simply = [this year's roster] - [Durant].  And even if it was that, I could still see them being the favorite and likely winning the series (although it would have been closer, I'm sure). 
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 41963
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #859 on: June 14, 2017, 08:08:37 PM »
No KD no ring for the Dubs. I am happy he is named the Finals MVP.

I completely disagree.  The Warriors have been a fantastic team for a few years and I think they would certainly have won without Durant.  He played great and probably deserves finals MVP.  But I do think they'd have won without him, maybe in 6 games. :)


There is no way to know for sure, but watching the series, Durant had to play the way he did for them to win. 

Also, it is worth noting that this year's Cavs team was better than last year's team (despite their record, which we all know wasn't great in the regular season because they didn't give a crap down the stretch), so the Warriors had to be that much better this year to beat them.

Dubs deserved this title no doubt, and Durant played extremely well.  But ultimately, he joined an already proven winner and won with them.  The championship to me personally would be practically meaningless if I had to achieve it in that way.  His decision to join GS sort of suggests a mindset that I can't really understand from a true competitor, but that may be my own shortcoming.  Congrats to he and the Warriors nonetheless.  I predict several more NBA championships from this franchise, they are scary good.  LeBron and Kyrie played championship-level basketball and the Cavs still fell far short.

If the Warriors rip off several more championships, history will be kind to Durant, but let's say for the sake of argument that Durant never wins another championship.  I don't think history will be as kind to him, since his one title will be viewed by many as "he had to join a 73-win team to get it."  I don't think that will happen, though.  That team is set up to be just as good for the next couple years, and I will be shocked if anyone takes them down next year.

As for James, to me, his legacy is in tact as the 2nd best player ever, and I don't think anything can happen anymore to knock him down.  Losing this final only enhanced his reputation (unless you are one of those knuckleheads who thinks your finals record, which is a TEAM stat, is all that matters).  And I think he will leave Cleveland after next season. 

Offline Azyiu

  • Posts: 2091
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #860 on: June 14, 2017, 08:14:58 PM »

There is no way to know for sure, but watching the series, Durant had to play the way he did for them to win. 

Also, it is worth noting that this year's Cavs team was better than last year's team (despite their record, which we all know wasn't great in the regular season because they didn't give a crap down the stretch), so the Warriors had to be that much better this year to beat them.

If the Warriors rip off several more championships, history will be kind to Durant, but let's say for the sake of argument that Durant never wins another championship.  I don't think history will be as kind to him, since his one title will be viewed by many as "he had to join a 73-win team to get it."  I don't think that will happen, though.  That team is set up to be just as good for the next couple years, and I will be shocked if anyone takes them down next year.

As for James, to me, his legacy is in tact as the 2nd best player ever, and I don't think anything can happen anymore to knock him down.  Losing this final only enhanced his reputation (unless you are one of those knuckleheads who thinks your finals record, which is a TEAM stat, is all that matters).  And I think he will leave Cleveland after next season.

Fair enough assessment...

As for your final statement, where do you think LBJ will or should go, if he is indeed leaving? Honestly, I really don't see him leaving yet again at this stage in his career.
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953,
1954, 1972, 1980, 1982,
1985, 1987, 1988, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2009, 2010... 2020

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 41963
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #861 on: June 14, 2017, 08:26:27 PM »
I could see him going to the Lakers.  I doubt he wants to stay in Cleveland and lose in the finals every year to Golden State for the rest of his career, not to mention going at it non-stop with Dan Gilbert about spending money and getting the right free agents.  The Lakers already have a good young player in Russell, and if they get Ball or another great young player next week who pans out right away, adding James would make them a threat.  Plus, you know Magic will do whatever it takes to make them relevant again.

Offline Azyiu

  • Posts: 2091
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #862 on: June 14, 2017, 08:40:52 PM »
I could see him going to the Lakers.  I doubt he wants to stay in Cleveland and lose in the finals every year to Golden State for the rest of his career, not to mention going at it non-stop with Dan Gilbert about spending money and getting the right free agents.  The Lakers already have a good young player in Russell, and if they get Ball or another great young player next week who pans out right away, adding James would make them a threat.  Plus, you know Magic will do whatever it takes to make them relevant again.

Wait a tick... I thought LBJ IS the Cavs' defacto GM since his return?  :lol  They won't trade for K-Love, and then re-sign TT and JR for that kind of money, or to bring back Jefferson (who originally planned to retire after last year) without his approval.  :natalieportman:

As for joining the Lakers... well, I'd rather take my chances, and try and beat the Dubs or the Spurs in the Finals, then losing in the Western semi every year, lol!   :lol :lol  As a Lakers fan, I don't think too highly of D-Russell but I am pretty high on Ingram, Clarkson and Nance Jr. Thanks to Jim Buss and his poor decision-making over the years, he set us back by more than several years now. The good news is, we ain't competing with the Dubs or the Spurs or the Rockets right now. So if we just keep drafting right from now on, and develop our youngsters the right way; we should be pretty good down the line, just when those teams start getting a little older. We will see.
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953,
1954, 1972, 1980, 1982,
1985, 1987, 1988, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2009, 2010... 2020

Offline Azyiu

  • Posts: 2091
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #863 on: June 14, 2017, 10:27:14 PM »
https://amp.timeinc.net/si/nba/2017/06/14/jerry-west-leaving-warriors-for-los-angeles-clippers?source=dam

Jerry West is leaving the Warriors to join the Clippers... Of all the NBA teams out there, why join the Clippers? Looks like he is plotting to get LBJ to LA?
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953,
1954, 1972, 1980, 1982,
1985, 1987, 1988, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2009, 2010... 2020

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12820
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #864 on: June 14, 2017, 10:28:24 PM »
I don't think Durant (or anyone else) should care whether history is "kind" to him.  He's on the team he wanted to be on that wanted him.  And they are (and look to be) incredibly successful together.  That should be the end of the story.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Nekov

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 10719
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #865 on: June 15, 2017, 06:10:54 AM »
https://amp.timeinc.net/si/nba/2017/06/14/jerry-west-leaving-warriors-for-los-angeles-clippers?source=dam

Jerry West is leaving the Warriors to join the Clippers... Of all the NBA teams out there, why join the Clippers? Looks like he is plotting to get LBJ to LA?

I was reading some rumors about that "super team" that was talked about with Carmelo, LBJ and Chris Paul happening in the Clipps though I doubt the team can make it happen since it would probably involve a sign and trade for Blake and also a trade for DJ
When Ginobili gets hot, I get hot in my pants. 

Offline TheOutlawXanadu

  • The Original Unseasoned Fan
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6985
  • Gender: Male
  • The Original Unseasoned Fan
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #866 on: June 15, 2017, 07:06:23 AM »
I don't think Durant (or anyone else) should care whether history is "kind" to him.  He's on the team he wanted to be on that wanted him.  And they are (and look to be) incredibly successful together.  That should be the end of the story.

I cannot emphasize this enough. It's getting really annoying how the only basketball discussions that the media have are oversimplified, under-thought debates about where Player X stands in history. While it's a fun topic of discussion, it's ultimately meaningless in a practical sense.

Kevin Durant gets up and goes to work in the morning like the rest of us. He clearly enjoys working for the Warriors more than he did the Thunder. By staying in Golden State, he guarantees himself a great life, great teammates, and tons of money. That's what really matters. This dude has a life to live; he's not just a statistic on a piece of paper.

Don't get me wrong. I love talking about basketball history as much as the next guy, but I think people are starting to overdo it a bit. And that's not a statement directed at anyone in particular. I'm just tired of the word "legacy". :lol
:TOX: <-- My own emoticon!

Offline Samsara

  • Queensr˙che Biographer and Historian
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8752
  • Gender: Male
  • Memory flows...like a river.
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #867 on: June 15, 2017, 11:27:56 AM »
Being a former member of the media, the whole Durant/GS thing is bullshit. So many teams have had that sort of talent. The Bulls had four legitimate all stars. The Celtics did too. So did the Lakers. I get it -- Durant is the highest profile guy to join an already great team. But he shouldn't be the guy taking the heat for it.

What I saw when that happened, was a team that knew, without doubt, they needed a legitimate superstar scorer to overwhelm people. People could beat up Curry. Thompson is streaky. Green is a wildcard. And at the time, Barnes was simply a fourth option. So what did GS do? They begged Durant to join with them, showing him how successful he could be surrounded by shooters.

Smart strategy. But I think instead of the people ripping Durant for his decision, they should be criticizing the other three for not believing in themselves enough (or Harrison Barnes) to go crawling on hands and knees to sway Durant. But instead, the media has focused not on the golden child of Steph (and the other two), but instead focused on making Durant a villain.  ::)

All this shit that it isn't good for basketball - it's just that -- bullshit. We'll see what happens. If you give Steph a max deal too, you're forcing Klay and Green to take less, basically, in order to field a team. My prediction is, Klay Thompson's not going to be giving more than a million or two discount, and Green will demand close to the max too. That's quite a large payday for four guys.

What I'm getting at is -- this stuff doesn't last. It goes in cycles. And it has been an amazing cycle for the Warriors that I expect will continue for a few more seasons at the top of the league (they may win another title or two). All those who say it is bad for the game don't really understand the history of basketball. It all goes in waves. Golden State will continue to win 60-65 games, and people will gun for them. And then someone else will come along (it won't be Lebron) and do something different, and the whole cycle will repeat in another decade.

Anyway, just some Thursday hoops rambling...
Roads to Madness: The Touring History of Queensr˙che (1981-1997) - At the printer! Out in May 2024!

Pre-order now at www.roadstomadness.com!

Offline j

  • Posts: 2794
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #868 on: June 15, 2017, 02:03:02 PM »
I don't think Durant (or anyone else) should care whether history is "kind" to him.  He's on the team he wanted to be on that wanted him.  And they are (and look to be) incredibly successful together.  That should be the end of the story.

I cannot emphasize this enough. It's getting really annoying how the only basketball discussions that the media have are oversimplified, under-thought debates about where Player X stands in history. While it's a fun topic of discussion, it's ultimately meaningless in a practical sense.

Kevin Durant gets up and goes to work in the morning like the rest of us. He clearly enjoys working for the Warriors more than he did the Thunder. By staying in Golden State, he guarantees himself a great life, great teammates, and tons of money. That's what really matters. This dude has a life to live; he's not just a statistic on a piece of paper.

Don't get me wrong. I love talking about basketball history as much as the next guy, but I think people are starting to overdo it a bit. And that's not a statement directed at anyone in particular. I'm just tired of the word "legacy". :lol

For my part, "legacy" has nothing to do with my feelings on Durant going to GS.  I think he's a fantastic player and I honestly couldn't give less of a shit what the pundits or NBA historians think about him.

As I stated, it's more that I don't understand the perspective of a dude who makes that move and also fancies himself a true competitor.
 These comparisons are cliched and porous I know, but could you see MJ joining the Knicks had the bad boys beaten his ass a few years in a row?  Insert practically any great player and hypothetical dominant rival franchise into that analogy.  Karl Malone sort of did it I suppose, but at the very very end of his career with the Lakers team that weren't ever really his peers; that seems different to me for several reasons.

Bottom line is, there was a time, I think, when competition was paramount to these guys.  The only option was to BEAT the dudes who you couldn't get past or die trying; joining them would certainly have been completely unheard of.  In hindsight I sometimes wonder if it was all in our minds and everything was always about stuff like money, job satisfaction, and "legacy."

-J

Offline Azyiu

  • Posts: 2091
  • Gender: Male
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #869 on: June 15, 2017, 07:21:05 PM »
Instead of blaming KD for joining the Dubs, or crying foul because the Dubs were able to sign him; I'd say this whole thing was years in the making, and the OKC management should take more blame for it instead. They had a pretty decent, borderline good team in 2012 that made it to the Finals with KD, RW, Ibaka and Harden off the bench. Instead of keeping this core and keep on developing themselves, they were too cheap to pay an extra $2M for Harden. In the end decided to trade him to the Rockets... that, IMHO, got the whole thing started... along the way the OKC management did virtually nothing to upgrade the team. If I were KD, I would have signed with another team too, if he wants an opportunity to eventually win a title. Just my 2 cents here...
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953,
1954, 1972, 1980, 1982,
1985, 1987, 1988, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2009, 2010... 2020

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12820
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: NBA thread 2016-17 v. The Age of The Land?
« Reply #870 on: June 16, 2017, 08:33:12 AM »
The last three posts nailed it.  Just a couple of things in response:

I agree with Samsara's overall point, except the point about "begging" Durant to come.  That isn't really accurate.  For reasons Azyiu pointed out, and others, Durant was already dissatisfied with OKC.  He was VERY seriously considering leaving no matter what.  The Warriors already knew this, and Curry and Green had been talking to him about it for the past three years.  Why pass up the opportunity on a free agent who is likely to go SOMEWHERE other than his current team?  They didn't "beg," but presented him with an opportunity to mutually benefit.  And it was a pretty unique opportunity.  Not only because he was going to a team that was already a prohibitive favorite, but because he was going to a team that is unique in its unselfish style of play to the point where he could come without largely diminishing either his own amount of touches or anyone else's.  And the proof is in the pudding that the experiment worked and wasn't merely lip service.  He fit right in because of the unique style of play of this team. 

As far as this somehow diminishing him as a competitor, I disagree with that as well.  As far as the examples given, the problem is that those are different situations.  Would Jordan have joined a rival team if the environment on the Bulls had become somewhat toxic and the front office showed little interest in developing and keeping a supporting cast around him?  We'll never know because it didn't happen.  But regardless, the environment wasn't good at OKC, and Durant wasn't happy.  Should someone stubbornly stay in a toxic environment and stay on a team that the front office has torpedoed and placed on a downward trajectory just to stay a competitor?  To me, that doesn't make sense. 

Also, consider the fact that Durant not only wanted to win, but he wanted to challenge LeBron.  He couldn't do that in OKC.  He just couldn't.  Again, going back to the front office not supporting building a strong enough team, the fact is that an OKC team couldn't challenge a LeBron-led team because the Cavs as a whole were much more stacked than OKC, which would have allowed the Cavs to disregard other OKC players and focus solely on RW and KD.  For him to truly go toe-to-toe with LeBron, he had to be on a team with the talent to spread the Cavs.  Yeah, he has an incredibly competitive nature.  But the team he was on would not have allowed him to express that in the way he wanted due to the dynamic of the Warriors/Cavs-led league.  He couldn't truly go at the one guy he views as his competitive rival in any meaningful way.  He changed the dynamic to make that happen.  And this year anyway, he came out on top. 

All in all, I think Azyiu hit it on the head.  Despite OKC managing to content this year even without KD, and despite them making and almost winning the WCC last year, they are and were a team on the decline and a team that, from my understanding, RW has made somewhat toxic.  If I were on that team, I'd have been looking for an exit as well.

Anyhow, I'm going to lock this thread since Josh has started a new one.  But if anyone wants to continue this discussion, feel free to copy/paste from here into that thread.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."