NBA 2013-2014 Season Thread

[thatshortguy]

Let's be fair here, the East is a mess outside of Indiana and Miami, but the Hawks are currently 3rd and have one of the better offenses in their conference. Second only to the Heat in PPG, if memory serves.

Losing Horford means it's Brand & Milsap in the frontcourt. I'm okay with that. Will we win the division/conference/championship? Hell no. Are we looking respectable? Surprisingly, yes.

[DYSI]

Anyone know of a way to watch NBA games without cable? I'm looking to ditch cable soon but I think there isn't a way to watch my shitty Nets play like a dysfunctional high school team. I read up on NBA League Pass but apparently you can't watch your local team(s).

[phatman]

I had league pass two years ago and you could watch pretty much any game you wanted... That was kind of why league pass was appealing to me, don't know if it's changed or anything...

[Quom]

It's different in America and Canada because of TV rights, if a game is being televised then it will be blacked out on LP.

You could check out ballstreams which is profiting off a loophole. Apparently its legal to rebroadcast games wherever they're based. They've been doing it for years with hockey. No idea of the quality, I have league pass.

[thatshortguy]

Let's be fair here, the East is a mess outside of Indiana and Miami, but the Hawks are currently 3rd and have one of the better offenses in their conference. Second only to the Heat in PPG, if memory serves.

Losing Horford means it's Brand & Milsap in the frontcourt. I'm okay with that. Will we win the division/conference/championship? Hell no. Are we looking respectable? Surprisingly, yes.

And hey, whaddya know? Horford's out for the season. Millsap showed that he could be solid inside...against the Celtics.

It's amazing, really, how bad the East is overall when Atlanta can completely retool and change identities, yet be a few games up of the competition as we hit the 25% mark of the season.

[Benjamin]

This Golden State / Heat game has been fantastic.

[VerbalPuke]

God, the Pistons have been frustrating. They've flashed some brilliance early, but it's like that other unnamed Detroit team, they can't get their shit together in the fourth quarter. The biggest problem is shooting and defense. The defense is weird, you'd think with Smith, Drummond, and Pope that would be a solid three to work with, but the effort isn't there. The shooting isn't surprising, our starters only feature one good jump shooter (Pope, who is a rookie and hasn't exactly lit the world on fire with his shooting) and the big three. A move needs to be made before the team can go anywhere, and a lot of folks aren't sure Cheeks is the right motivator for this team.

Of course you can't exactly fire Cheeks, how would that look given our track record with coaches? Luckily, the team has enough talent to sneak into the playoffs and possibly save Dumars job. I still like a lot of the pieces, but I think the jumbo trio needs to be split and a good wing player brought in to play where Smith is at.

[phatman]

I think they've got no choice but to move Monroe at this stage... Too much money invested in Smith for them to move him... Too much potential in Drummond to move him... They didn't want to extend Monroe in the offseason, he just seems to be the easy out at this point...

I'd go all out and try and revisit a deal for Rondo if its possible... I'd offer a deal with Jennings, Monroe and a 1st for Rondo and I think Boston would be stupid not to look at it hard...

There is nothing wrong with Cheeks... I think he has done well with what he's got... They just don't space the court well enough in the couple of games I've watched and some of the offensive choices they make are painful to watch... Yet they occasionally flash something special...

I do think they'll make the playoffs as is but they aren't going far without some tweaks...

[Plubby]

KNICKS

...it doesn't happen often I gotta get excited when it does.

[Meacon Keaton]

We can't beat Toronto, but we took down the Spurs alright!

[VerbalPuke]

I think you're mostly spot on with what you're saying, but I do think that is a lot to give up for a PG with a bum knee. If Boston was to offer something else, Jeff Green perhaps, then I pull the trigger. At the same time, Boston may balk at that idea. The one thing we do have is tradeable assets so help might be on the way with the right move. Drummond is the only.untouchable, otherwise I'm ok with anybody being moved.

Edit - In response to phatman.

[Benjamin]

Yeah, that lost to NY was the worst.

[thatshortguy]

Local talking heads are egging on the notion of Bynum to the Hawks.

Yeah, let's bring in a guy who boinked a coach's wife (allegedly!) to a team that's finally starting to get some sort of cohesive idea.

I'm beginning to hate our local media.

[gunnar hendershow]

Let us not forget Andrew Bynum's knees are made of rubberbands and hope.

[livid]

Local talking heads are egging on the notion of Bynum to the Hawks.

Yeah, let's bring in a guy who boinked a coach's wife (allegedly!) to a team that's finally starting to get some sort of cohesive idea.

I'm beginning to hate our local media.

I don't know, is it not to cut salary? It's why the Lakers have been talking about a Gasol-Bynum swap. If they trade for him and cut him before the 7th, they could eliminate $12M in cap space. After the 7th, his contract becomes guaranteed and he ceases to have any trade value.

[thatshortguy]

The Hawks situation is much different. They likely don't have a single player they could swap for Bynum and I can't see them packaging people together. Plus, we've already taken our chances with an older big guy with terrible knees (Elton Brand, who's actually playing respectable defensive ball, all things considered).

[VerbalPuke]

I'll always be a less is more guy. I want a four team college football playoff, four team baseball playoff, and twelve team pro football playoff. You start making it more than that and you're taking away the importance of the regular season.

Take the NBA for example. More teams make the playoffs than not. I think that's ridiculous. Why have an 82-game season to weed out only 14 of the 30 league teams? The NFL needs to start thinking with their heads and not their wallets. /oldfartwitholdbeliefs

If anything, the NBA should contract, but I agree with you there. I'm honestly not bothered by a division winner with an inferior record getting home field advantage over a wildcard with a better record. I do think there is something a bit fucked when Arizona at 10-6 is outside, while Green Bay is in at 8-7-1 (of course if Detroit had won their division there would be no complaint from me ). I remember when Seattle got in at 7-9 because of how bad the West was that year, and they did end up pulling off the upset over the Saints. Or the year the Pats missed the playoffs at 11-5. Yeah, it's odd how that all works but I kind of feel like oh well, that's just how it goes.

I don't want to derail this from NFL discussion, but the NBA would be a prime sport for promotion/relegation. That and MLB are the sports it could serve best in the US. Obviously it will never, ever happen but it's nice to dream about an 18-team top flight for basketball with the top 4 making playoffs, the bottom 3 being relegated. It would kill tanking dead, which is a serious problem in the NBA.

I brought this here because as you said, we don't want to derail the NFL thread. I still think it's a good discussion to have, but yeah it's obvious that the talent disparity between NBA teams is absurd. I wonder if it would help cure that annoying superstar mentality crap of "I'm only playing for this team or that team", which is getting absurd after the Miami Heat's big deal a few years back. I don't know, guys are entitled to play wherever they want as free agents, but you don't see that shit in the NFL. There are bigger and smaller market teams in the league, but everybody has a fighting chance, and free agents or guys being traded don't shun teams that aren't in ideal cities. 18 seems like a drastic cut in teams, but it makes sense honestly. Off the top of my head, the Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Pistons, Bulls, Heat, Knicks, Cavaliers, Mavericks, Rockets, Thunder, Pacers, 76ers,Trailblazers are pretty good bets to have hang around. It's get trickier after that and I don't know the exact figures of who is and isn't a viable NBA market, but it seems that the Warriors, Suns, Pelicans, and Bucks? I'm just throwing teams out there at this point. You could combine the Lakers/Clippers, Nets/Knicks, Magic/Heat, Warriors/Kings and do that sort of thing. It seems shit to have three teams in Texas, but all three are viable markets with good histories.

Speaking of tanking, there was an interesting Grantland article where there was a discussion of eliminating the lottery and doing a sort of rotation for the NBA draft. It has a lot of obvious flaws, but there was some interesting points to be made, and it could actually make things different. I can't find the article now, I'll see if I can at some point, you might even be familiar with it already.

Basically it's a 30 year system, every team gets the #1 pick at some point, and the #30, and it sort of rotates you going from 1 to 30, 2 to 29, etc. etc. which I know sounds weird how I describe it. I'll have to find the article.

[gunnar hendershow]

I'll always be a less is more guy. I want a four team college football playoff, four team baseball playoff, and twelve team pro football playoff. You start making it more than that and you're taking away the importance of the regular season.

Take the NBA for example. More teams make the playoffs than not. I think that's ridiculous. Why have an 82-game season to weed out only 14 of the 30 league teams? The NFL needs to start thinking with their heads and not their wallets. /oldfartwitholdbeliefs

If anything, the NBA should contract, but I agree with you there. I'm honestly not bothered by a division winner with an inferior record getting home field advantage over a wildcard with a better record. I do think there is something a bit fucked when Arizona at 10-6 is outside, while Green Bay is in at 8-7-1 (of course if Detroit had won their division there would be no complaint from me ). I remember when Seattle got in at 7-9 because of how bad the West was that year, and they did end up pulling off the upset over the Saints. Or the year the Pats missed the playoffs at 11-5. Yeah, it's odd how that all works but I kind of feel like oh well, that's just how it goes.

I don't want to derail this from NFL discussion, but the NBA would be a prime sport for promotion/relegation. That and MLB are the sports it could serve best in the US. Obviously it will never, ever happen but it's nice to dream about an 18-team top flight for basketball with the top 4 making playoffs, the bottom 3 being relegated. It would kill tanking dead, which is a serious problem in the NBA.

I brought this here because as you said, we don't want to derail the NFL thread. I still think it's a good discussion to have, but yeah it's obvious that the talent disparity between NBA teams is absurd. I wonder if it would help cure that annoying superstar mentality crap of "I'm only playing for this team or that team", which is getting absurd after the Miami Heat's big deal a few years back. I don't know, guys are entitled to play wherever they want as free agents, but you don't see that shit in the NFL. There are bigger and smaller market teams in the league, but everybody has a fighting chance, and free agents or guys being traded don't shun teams that aren't in ideal cities. 18 seems like a drastic cut in teams, but it makes sense honestly. Off the top of my head, the Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Pistons, Bulls, Heat, Knicks, Cavaliers, Mavericks, Rockets, Thunder, Pacers, 76ers,Trailblazers are pretty good bets to have hang around. It's get trickier after that and I don't know the exact figures of who is and isn't a viable NBA market, but it seems that the Warriors, Suns, Pelicans, and Bucks? I'm just throwing teams out there at this point. You could combine the Lakers/Clippers, Nets/Knicks, Magic/Heat, Warriors/Kings and do that sort of thing. It seems shit to have three teams in Texas, but all three are viable markets with good histories.

Speaking of tanking, there was an interesting Grantland article where there was a discussion of eliminating the lottery and doing a sort of rotation for the NBA draft. It has a lot of obvious flaws, but there was some interesting points to be made, and it could actually make things different. I can't find the article now, I'll see if I can at some point, you might even be familiar with it already.

Basically it's a 30 year system, every team gets the #1 pick at some point, and the #30, and it sort of rotates you going from 1 to 30, 2 to 29, etc. etc. which I know sounds weird how I describe it. I'll have to find the article.

I read that article. It's probably never going to happen but the intention is great. 1) It makes tanking worthless and 2) It prevents Billy King-esque decisions from destroying a franchise. The first is something that is going to happen so long as there is a draft, but the second thing should be explored I think. Billy King traded away 4 1st rounders to build a team that is downright awful this year. Obviously that's the price you pay, but it does a lot to screw up the league's competitive balance when he can just willingly trade a 1st rounder to Portland, protect it only for the top 3 picks, and that pick happens to turn into Damian Lillard. Yes, the Nets literally traded Gerald Wallace for Damian Lillard and then traded Gerald Wallace and more picks for a washed-up Kevin Garnett, one year of Paul Pierce, and Jason Terry. Basically there needs to be something in place to keep that from happening in the future because after King gets fired the next GM is going to have to wallow in that mess for a few years before they can do anything.

[DYSI]

I read that article too and it was brought up on talk radio around here. The one thing is, what if "the next big prospect" is ready to come out but the Bucks have the first overall and next year the Lakers do? He'll just wait a year and go to LA. I'm not against the proposed idea, but there are always ways to work around them if you try hard enough.

[HC]

The purpose of the draft is to make the bad teams better, and this would defeat that. Tanking is overblown, honestly. A GM can intentionally field a bad team, but I don't think players are intentionally tanking so the organization can draft a guy that could take one of their jobs. The lottery already assures that simply tanking won't get you the first overall pick anyway. I'm all for a new format, but this isn't it. The wheel format would favor the big market teams to the point of being ridiculous.

Like DYSI said, you'd have the issue of a potential LBJ type prospect ducking the draft because a team like Memphis picks this year and a big market team picks first next year. And could you imagine if the Heat got the number one pick right now? How fair would that be? Not to mention that if a team drafts a bust with their top pick, they won't see another one for years.A big market team could fix that with free agency, but the smaller markets would be fucked. I think it would just screw up the competitive balance further and teams like LA, Miami, Chicago, etc. would dominate with a mix of high power free agents and top picks. There needs to be some type of compensation for teams that lose their stars in free agency. I know sign-and-trade deals exist, but something like how the MLB does with compensation picks from the team signing the star would be ideal.

And Damshow mentioned the Nets getting fucked over, but that's what happens when you mortgage your future and try to build a championship team over night.