If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SeattlePI)   With his retirement fast approaching, David Stern can't resist giving one final "fark you" to the city of Seattle   (blog.seattlepi.com) divider line 130
    More: Obvious, Seattle, Adam Silver, Memphis Grizzlies, deputy commissioner, Seattle SuperSonics, Safeco Field, expansion team, Clay Bennett  
•       •       •

3672 clicks; posted to Sports » on 26 Oct 2012 at 9:40 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



130 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-26 05:44:04 AM  
"I don't have any current view on where such a team comes from," Stern said at a news conference Thursday,

Here is a helpful list
 
2012-10-26 09:49:56 AM  
So ... what about an expansion team for Seattle?

"What I would say is, I wouldn't preclude it," Stern said.


An expansion team would be fun. I would support this. And nowadays, you can probably make an expansion team competitive very quickly -- it's every GM's dream to have minimal salary commitments and one high draft pick. (Of course, in the expansion draft the unprotected players are likely to be all unwanted contracts so you'll wind up with some unwanted salaries, but presumably enough low-salary scrubs will be available around the league that you can just take on a couple of those as luxury picks.)
 
2012-10-26 09:57:49 AM  

mr_a: "I don't have any current view on where such a team comes from," Stern said at a news conference Thursday,

Here is a helpful list


Nice to see Seattle has no problem choosing a new team arbitrarily from a list. But BOOOOOOOO OKC! You team-stealing hicks!!
 
2012-10-26 10:11:10 AM  
Next up the Seattle Coyotes of the NHL
 
2012-10-26 10:16:43 AM  
I like the cities Stern mentioned:

KC, Virginia Beach, Pitt, Columbus, Louisville, Anaheim, Vancouver and Vegas

KC probably wouldn't be a bad choice. They have a nice venue just sitting there not being used for anything except concerts and arena football. I actually thought the Kings would move (back) there.
Virginia Beach and Louisville? Eh, no.
Vancouver already had their chance.
Anaheim.. venue is there, but could the LA area really support a third team? Whatever happened to the Clippers moving there?
Pittsburgh and Columbus.. eh Pittsburgh maybe.. can't really see Columbus when the Cavs have trouble drawing.
Vegas.. will never happen.
 
2012-10-26 10:17:04 AM  
I read today his last goal is to bring ball back to Seattle. I hope he succeeds.
 
2012-10-26 10:26:54 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: Nice to see Seattle has no problem choosing a new team arbitrarily from a list. But BOOOOOOOO OKC! You team-stealing hicks!!


Seattle = Lakers
Thunder = Chris Paul
OKC = Clippers
"Basketball reasons" = "Seattle won't build my friend a $500M arena a decade after a $200M upgrade to their current arena."
Kings/Hornets/Bobcats = Steve Nash/Dwight Howard

Stern used his own personal power to f*ck people and people/teams that should've been moved in the first place eventually will get taken by a more deserving place. The Hornets would've been out of NO in the first place if it weren't for Stern protecting them because of Katrina.
 
2012-10-26 10:31:03 AM  

Super Chronic: So ... what about an expansion team for Seattle?

"What I would say is, I wouldn't preclude it," Stern said.

An expansion team would be fun. I would support this. And nowadays, you can probably make an expansion team competitive very quickly -- it's every GM's dream to have minimal salary commitments and one high draft pick. (Of course, in the expansion draft the unprotected players are likely to be all unwanted contracts so you'll wind up with some unwanted salaries, but presumably enough low-salary scrubs will be available around the league that you can just take on a couple of those as luxury picks.)


An expansion team in a league where execs are talking about contraction?

An expansion team in a league where a half dozen teams (or more) lose money every year?

An expansion team in a league where there isn't enough competitive talent to fill the squads they have?

Sounds like a great idea. The NBA really needs more crappy teams.
 
2012-10-26 10:35:22 AM  
God knows I love Pittsburgh but they already had the The Pythons but couldn't hold onto them
 
2012-10-26 10:37:00 AM  

grinding_journalist: Super Chronic: So ... what about an expansion team for Seattle?

"What I would say is, I wouldn't preclude it," Stern said.

An expansion team would be fun. I would support this. And nowadays, you can probably make an expansion team competitive very quickly -- it's every GM's dream to have minimal salary commitments and one high draft pick. (Of course, in the expansion draft the unprotected players are likely to be all unwanted contracts so you'll wind up with some unwanted salaries, but presumably enough low-salary scrubs will be available around the league that you can just take on a couple of those as luxury picks.)

An expansion team in a league where execs are talking about contraction?

An expansion team in a league where a half dozen teams (or more) lose money every year?

An expansion team in a league where there isn't enough competitive talent to fill the squads they have?

Sounds like a great idea. The NBA really needs more crappy teams.


"What I would say is, I wouldn't preclude it," Stern said.

But of course, he's just David Stern and I wouldn't expect him to understand the current state of the NBA business model, competitive environment and growth projections as much as some guy posting on Fark.
 
2012-10-26 10:38:27 AM  

JohnBigBootay: God knows I love Pittsburgh but they already had the The Pythons but couldn't hold onto them


.. approaching that rare "obscure on Fark" threshold
 
2012-10-26 10:41:40 AM  
I honestly could not care less if we get an NBA team.

Hockey is a whole other matter.
 
2012-10-26 10:44:19 AM  

Super Chronic: But of course, he's just David Stern and I wouldn't expect him to understand the current state of the NBA business model, competitive environment and growth projections as much as some guy posting on Fark.


"I wouldn't preclude it" is his way of saying "We have no plans for that at this time.", and I understood that.

What I don't understand is someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do) thinking that another team would be "fun".
 
2012-10-26 10:53:31 AM  

grinding_journalist: What I don't understand is someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do) thinking that another team would be "fun".


The NBA is better off than it's ever been, both from a talent and a money perspective. There's a reason the owners don't show their books when they say they're going broke - they're not (at least not from their basketball investments; they might be outside of basketball, but that has nothing to do with the success of the league).

The articles that discuss an attendance problem note that attendance was the same after a lockout in 2012 as it was in 2011, while TV viewership was up. How is that an attendance problem? That's more people watching the game. Then they cite several teams whose attendance went down...because the team sucked and stopped competing. When you have cheap f*ckholes like Robert Sarver running things, yeah, you're going to lose fans every time you refuse to pay to keep stars, and keep the most marketable one only, just trying to kill his career and refusing to trade him to a contender because he makes too much money for you.
 
2012-10-26 10:54:03 AM  
The NBA in Pittsburgh? I don't see that happening.

For Seattle, I don't see the NBA expanding anytime soon for reasons already discussed. So if they get a team they're going to have to poach it from one of the league's bottom feeders. I'd say Bobcats, but I don't know if they'd move them so quick after coming back to the Charlotte market.
 
2012-10-26 10:54:09 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: mr_a: "I don't have any current view on where such a team comes from," Stern said at a news conference Thursday,

Here is a helpful list

Nice to see Seattle has no problem choosing a new team arbitrarily from a list. But BOOOOOOOO OKC! You team-stealing hicks!!


Also FTFA: "By the way - that relocation committee is chaired by none other than Clay Bennett. Yes, he who bought the Seattle SuperSonics in 2006 and moved them to Oklahoma City in 2008."
 
2012-10-26 10:55:03 AM  

grinding_journalist: someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do)


I do not. Haven't for four years, probably won't even if a team relocates to Seattle (I don't want to put another city through what Seattle went through), but may well if an expansion team comes to Seattle.
 
2012-10-26 11:05:45 AM  

Super Chronic: grinding_journalist: someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do)

I do not. Haven't for four years, probably won't even if a team relocates to Seattle (I don't want to put another city through what Seattle went through), but may well if an expansion team comes to Seattle.


Missing out the leagues great right now.
 
2012-10-26 11:14:50 AM  

Gunny Highway: Super Chronic: grinding_journalist: someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do)

I do not. Haven't for four years, probably won't even if a team relocates to Seattle (I don't want to put another city through what Seattle went through), but may well if an expansion team comes to Seattle.

Missing out the leagues great right now.


But I was assured that there isn't enough talent to go around, teams are losing money all over the place and contraction is on the horizon! Make up your minds, people!
 
2012-10-26 11:15:20 AM  
Thats what you get Seattle. Thats what you get for unleashing the Trollhawks.
 
2012-10-26 11:23:08 AM  
Pittsburgh gives zero farks about basketball, they aren't getting a team.
 
2012-10-26 11:23:51 AM  
Left my n***** house paid
Picked up a girl been tryin to fark since the twelfth grade
It's ironic, I had the blunt she had the chronic
The Lakers beat the Supersonics


Timeless Ice Cube
 
2012-10-26 11:23:57 AM  

Super Chronic: But I was assured that there isn't enough talent to go around, teams are losing money all over the place and contraction is on the horizon! Make up your minds, people!


When one person disagrees with another, it's not a contradiction.

Gunny Highway: Missing out the leagues great right now.


I'm going to assume this is a typo, as Gunny is pretty coherent- but as is, I don't know what this means. The league's greatest players are playing right now? Pretty sure that's a subject of endless debate. The talent level is higher than ever? That depends if you're talking on a per-team or per-player basis. That the greatest games and competition are happening right now? Also debatable.

I'm not going out of my way to hate on the NBA- I'm doing FBB for the first time this year, and I've slowly been watching more and more basketball over the past few years. I just can't possibly see how addiing more teams is what the NBA needs right now. Relocating the ones that exist? Sure, that's a good idea. But adding more to an already saturated market? How would that improve things?
 
2012-10-26 11:27:04 AM  
All of the sympathy I had for Sonics fans would get tossed out the window if they readily embrassed another fan base's hijacked team. The King's, which is the team I've read about most being relocated, have a very passionate fan base just so long as the team doesn't suck (which holds true with every fan base). Don't be hypocrites, Seattle.
 
2012-10-26 11:32:51 AM  

Gunny Highway: Super Chronic: grinding_journalist: someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do)

I do not. Haven't for four years, probably won't even if a team relocates to Seattle (I don't want to put another city through what Seattle went through), but may well if an expansion team comes to Seattle.

Missing out the leagues great right now.


Only if you live in :

New York
Chicago
Miami
LA
San Antonio
Dallas
Boston

No other city will win an NBA championship for the next 30+ years. Except maybe for rare one-off teams like OKC. The NBA is all about waiting out your first contract (maybe 2) and then signing with other stars on the super teams.
 
2012-10-26 11:33:55 AM  

grinding_journalist: Super Chronic: But I was assured that there isn't enough talent to go around, teams are losing money all over the place and contraction is on the horizon! Make up your minds, people!

When one person disagrees with another, it's not a contradiction.

Gunny Highway: Missing out the leagues great right now.

I'm going to assume this is a typo, as Gunny is pretty coherent- but as is, I don't know what this means. The league's greatest players are playing right now? Pretty sure that's a subject of endless debate. The talent level is higher than ever? That depends if you're talking on a per-team or per-player basis. That the greatest games and competition are happening right now? Also debatable.

I'm not going out of my way to hate on the NBA- I'm doing FBB for the first time this year, and I've slowly been watching more and more basketball over the past few years. I just can't possibly see how addiing more teams is what the NBA needs right now. Relocating the ones that exist? Sure, that's a good idea. But adding more to an already saturated market? How would that improve things?


Come on now... there's a lot more competition right now than it's been in the past. We don't see teams win 11 times out of 13 years. We don't see just 2 teams pretty much dominate a decade like the Boston/LA in the 80s. We don't see a team win 6 championships in 8 years like the Bulls.
 
2012-10-26 11:36:57 AM  

grinding_journalist: Super Chronic: But I was assured that there isn't enough talent to go around, teams are losing money all over the place and contraction is on the horizon! Make up your minds, people!

When one person disagrees with another, it's not a contradiction.

Gunny Highway: Missing out the leagues great right now.

I'm going to assume this is a typo, as Gunny is pretty coherent- but as is, I don't know what this means. The league's greatest players are playing right now? Pretty sure that's a subject of endless debate. The talent level is higher than ever? That depends if you're talking on a per-team or per-player basis. That the greatest games and competition are happening right now? Also debatable.

I'm not going out of my way to hate on the NBA- I'm doing FBB for the first time this year, and I've slowly been watching more and more basketball over the past few years. I just can't possibly see how addiing more teams is what the NBA needs right now. Relocating the ones that exist? Sure, that's a good idea. But adding more to an already saturated market? How would that improve things?


He is missing out by not watching. The last two seasons have been really exciting. I am not interested in open ended debates concerning this eras place in basketball history.

I am the first to admit that I am a fanboy so my opinions should be viewed that way.

/at a conference
//apologies for the vague post earlier
 
2012-10-26 11:39:35 AM  

Decillion: Gunny Highway: Super Chronic: grinding_journalist: someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do)

I do not. Haven't for four years, probably won't even if a team relocates to Seattle (I don't want to put another city through what Seattle went through), but may well if an expansion team comes to Seattle.

Missing out the leagues great right now.

Only if you live in :

New York
Chicago
Miami
LA
San Antonio
Dallas
Boston

No other city will win an NBA championship for the next 30+ years. Except maybe for rare one-off teams like OKC. The NBA is all about waiting out your first contract (maybe 2) and then signing with other stars on the super teams.


I don't deny that the big markets have an advantage over the smaller markets but just as San Antonio has proven that good leadership in the GM office with an owner that's willing to spend the money, just about any team can become competitive. And we've just had a major change in the CBA that's soon going to bite the teams that accumulate superstars hard in the pocketbook. As a fan of the Lakers I don't like it but I do believe it'll bring more parity to the league. Maybe not like the NHL where we've had different winners for the past 10 years but teams like OKC will become more of the norm than the exception.

There will always be the allure to play for a storied franchise and there will always be one or two superstars that will take a paycut to play there but that will be the exception once the luxury cap pentaly increases in the years to come.
 
2012-10-26 11:43:28 AM  

The Bestest: JohnBigBootay: God knows I love Pittsburgh but they already had the The Pythons but couldn't hold onto them

.. approaching that rare "obscure on Fark" threshold


Heh. I'm so old I saw it in the theater...
 
2012-10-26 11:43:38 AM  

ElwoodCuse: Pittsburgh gives zero farks about basketball, they aren't getting a team.


Look at how well Pirates games are attended. The Penguins and Steelers have set the bar way too high in that city.
 
2012-10-26 11:44:54 AM  

ElwoodCuse: Pittsburgh gives zero farks about basketball, they aren't getting a team.


Assuming there had been a team in Pittsburgh, then LeBron would've stayed with the Cavs just because.
 
2012-10-26 11:44:59 AM  

Decillion: Gunny Highway: Super Chronic: grinding_journalist: someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do)

I do not. Haven't for four years, probably won't even if a team relocates to Seattle (I don't want to put another city through what Seattle went through), but may well if an expansion team comes to Seattle.

Missing out the leagues great right now.

Only if you live in :

New York
Chicago
Miami
LA
San Antonio
Dallas
Boston

No other city will win an NBA championship for the next 30+ years. Except maybe for rare one-off teams like OKC. The NBA is all about waiting out your first contract (maybe 2) and then signing with other stars on the super teams.


So fans in say Indiana, Denver, OKC, Utah (always good), and Brooklyn shouldn't be excited for putting together solid units with potential for being one of those "one-off" teams?

The Knicks? shiat ownership so they won't win. SA? On the backslide but why cant there be another Duncan who shows allegiance to a great coach and builds a new powerful franchise? He may be the exception to the rule but saying only a handful of teams can win a titles for the next 30 years is unimaginative.
 
2012-10-26 11:59:05 AM  
Dear Seattle:

Your city didn't give a shiat about your team. You lost it. Stop whining already. Also, do yourselves a favor and stop dreaming about an expansion team that isn't going to happen.
 
2012-10-26 11:59:25 AM  

Gunny Highway: So fans in say Indiana, Denver, OKC, Utah (always good), and Brooklyn shouldn't be excited for putting together solid units with potential for being one of those "one-off" teams?

The Knicks? shiat ownership so they won't win. SA? On the backslide but why cant there be another Duncan who shows allegiance to a great coach and builds a new powerful franchise? He may be the exception to the rule but saying only a handful of teams can win a titles for the next 30 years is unimaginative.


And I like the implication that no one in the other leagues ever leaves a team to try to win a championship somewhere else. Hell, if players get more in control of things, more teams could have a shot at winning titles. Instead of having to be in a super-desirable location with a great front office and fanbase, you can just get a few players who like the area (or one who can convince others to go there).
 
2012-10-26 12:04:01 PM  

Gunny Highway: Decillion: Gunny Highway: Super Chronic:

No other city will win an NBA championship for the next 30+ years. Except maybe for rare one-off teams like OKC. The NBA is all about waiting out your first contract (maybe 2) and then signing with other stars on the super teams.

So fans in say Indiana, Denver, OKC, Utah (always good), and Brooklyn shouldn't be excited for putting together solid units with potential for being one of those "one-off" teams?

The Knicks? shiat ownership so they won't win. SA? On the backslide but why cant there be another Duncan who shows allegiance to a great coach and builds a new powerful franchise? He may be the exception to the rule but saying only a handful of teams can win a titles for the next 30 years is unimaginative.


The last 30 years:

Houston
Chicago
Miami
LA Lakers
San Antonio
Detroit
Boston

Add in Dallas and Philly as one-offs. I actually think other teams had more of a chance back then. Even against a league of Jordan, Bird, et al. Still can't believe the Suns, Jazz and even the Knicks never won.
 
2012-10-26 12:12:39 PM  
Seattle is too busy thinking the MLS is a good soccer and the Seahawks are a legit football team
 
2012-10-26 12:15:03 PM  

Decillion: Gunny Highway: Decillion: Gunny Highway: Super Chronic:

No other city will win an NBA championship for the next 30+ years. Except maybe for rare one-off teams like OKC. The NBA is all about waiting out your first contract (maybe 2) and then signing with other stars on the super teams.

So fans in say Indiana, Denver, OKC, Utah (always good), and Brooklyn shouldn't be excited for putting together solid units with potential for being one of those "one-off" teams?

The Knicks? shiat ownership so they won't win. SA? On the backslide but why cant there be another Duncan who shows allegiance to a great coach and builds a new powerful franchise? He may be the exception to the rule but saying only a handful of teams can win a titles for the next 30 years is unimaginative.

The last 30 years:

Houston
Chicago
Miami
LA Lakers
San Antonio
Detroit
Boston

Add in Dallas and Philly as one-offs. I actually think other teams had more of a chance back then. Even against a league of Jordan, Bird, et al. Still can't believe the Suns, Jazz and even the Knicks never won.


The Blazers, Pacers, Kings, Sonics all had really strong teams. Did they win titles? No. This does not mean they aren't good franchises. Titles are important but shouldn't be the only thing you care about as fans. The big dogs have advantages but I don't think it makes the league boring for the fans.
 
2012-10-26 12:16:31 PM  

Decillion: Gunny Highway: Super Chronic: grinding_journalist: someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do)

I do not. Haven't for four years, probably won't even if a team relocates to Seattle (I don't want to put another city through what Seattle went through), but may well if an expansion team comes to Seattle.

Missing out the leagues great right now.

Only if you live in :

New York (as much as I hope I'm wrong...meh)
Chicago
Miami
LA
San Antonio
Dallas (for this year, meh)
Boston
OKC
Denver
Memphis
Indiana
Atlanta (yeah, I said it)
Utah (yeah, I said it)
Philly if Bynum's healthy
Minnesota if they're full strength



No other city will win an NBA championship for the next 30+ years. Except maybe for rare one-off teams like OKC. The NBA is all about waiting out your first contract (maybe 2) and then signing with other stars on the super teams.


FTFY. All of those teams are at least competitive and entertaining. And yeah, there are the favorites for the championship, but there's a lot of talent to go around.
 
2012-10-26 12:21:39 PM  
FTFY. All of those teams are at least competitive and entertaining. And yeah, there are the favorites for the championship, but there's a lot of talent to go around.

Philly has 0 chance of winning in 2012-13...even if Bynam is 100%

They've gone from a average team to an above average team in the offseason.

The only teams who can really compete are Miami, Chicago, LA and OKC.
 
2012-10-26 12:21:49 PM  

FreakinB: Decillion: Gunny Highway: Super Chronic: grinding_journalist: someone who follows the NBA right now (and I assume you do)

I do not. Haven't for four years, probably won't even if a team relocates to Seattle (I don't want to put another city through what Seattle went through), but may well if an expansion team comes to Seattle.

Missing out the leagues great right now.

Only if you live in :

New York (as much as I hope I'm wrong...meh)
Chicago
Miami
LA
San Antonio
Dallas (for this year, meh)
Boston
OKC
Denver
Memphis
Indiana
Atlanta (yeah, I said it)
Utah (yeah, I said it)
Philly if Bynum's healthy
Minnesota if they're full strength


No other city will win an NBA championship for the next 30+ years. Except maybe for rare one-off teams like OKC. The NBA is all about waiting out your first contract (maybe 2) and then signing with other stars on the super teams.

FTFY. All of those teams are at least competitive and entertaining. And yeah, there are the favorites for the championship, but there's a lot of talent to go around.


Was there ever a time when the league had 100% was competitive? There have always been shiatty teams I have to image. If you don't play team defense you will a really tough time winning a title.
 
2012-10-26 12:24:22 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: mr_a: "I don't have any current view on where such a team comes from," Stern said at a news conference Thursday,

Here is a helpful list

Nice to see Seattle has no problem choosing a new team arbitrarily from a list. But BOOOOOOOO OKC! You team-stealing hicks!!


soonerpsycho.com
 
2012-10-26 12:25:04 PM  

MugzyBrown: FTFY. All of those teams are at least competitive and entertaining. And yeah, there are the favorites for the championship, but there's a lot of talent to go around.

Philly has 0 chance of winning in 2012-13...even if Bynam is 100%

They've gone from a average team to an above average team in the offseason.

The only teams who can really compete are Miami, Chicago, LA and OKC.


Before the start of last season would you have said the same thing? Boston was one game away from the finals? I don't think anyone had them as a competitor.

I don't think the Bulls are a contender this season. Solid D but if Rose comes back will be be his old self and if he doesn't come back who will score the ball?
 
2012-10-26 12:27:08 PM  

Gunny Highway: Was there ever a time when the league had 100% was competitive? There have always been shiatty teams I have to image. If you don't play team defense you will a really tough time winning a title


I think you're agreeing with me. That list I just made of at-least-good teams (in my opinion, of course) consists of over half the teams in the NBA. That's pretty damn good. There will always be shiatty teams, but the overall competitiveness of the league is high right now.
 
2012-10-26 12:28:24 PM  

Gunny Highway: Before the start of last season would you have said the same thing? Boston was one game away from the finals? I don't think anyone had them as a competitor.


Before the start of last season I would have said Miami, Chicago, Dallas, and OKC and would have picked both finals teams.

If I made a bet with you: I get Miami, LAL, Chicago, & OKC for the NBA champion, and you get the field, would you take that bet?
 
2012-10-26 12:28:46 PM  

FreakinB: Gunny Highway: Was there ever a time when the league had 100% was competitive? There have always been shiatty teams I have to image. If you don't play team defense you will a really tough time winning a title

I think you're agreeing with me. That list I just made of at-least-good teams (in my opinion, of course) consists of over half the teams in the NBA. That's pretty damn good. There will always be shiatty teams, but the overall competitiveness of the league is high right now.


I was. I was adding to your previous point and did a poor job of transitioning and tethering questions to your post.
 
2012-10-26 12:30:36 PM  

MugzyBrown: Gunny Highway: Before the start of last season would you have said the same thing? Boston was one game away from the finals? I don't think anyone had them as a competitor.

Before the start of last season I would have said Miami, Chicago, Dallas, and OKC and would have picked both finals teams.

If I made a bet with you: I get Miami, LAL, Chicago, & OKC for the NBA champion, and you get the field, would you take that bet?


No. At the start of any season in any sport if I gave you the 4 best teams against the field would you take it?
 
2012-10-26 12:30:50 PM  

FreakinB: FTFY. All of those teams are at least competitive and entertaining


Indiana I think did as best as that roster could possibly do last season, and I personally think they're at their ceiling: I just don't see Hibbert and Paul George developing much more beyond what they currently are, and Danny Granger, who is already kinda overrated, will turn 30 this season.

Denver to me is interesting though. They're so deep with "good" players that can play multiple positions, but don't have a defined go-to guy in late game situations.
 
2012-10-26 12:32:03 PM  

Decillion: I actually think other teams had more of a chance back then.


Do you have any particular reason to believe this?

1980s: FIVE teams made an NBA Finals (everyone went at least twice)
1990s: ELEVEN teams made an NBA Finals (six that went once)
2000s: ELEVEN teams made an NBA Finals (seven that went once)
2010s: Five teams have made an NBA Finals in three years (one team has gone more than once - though every team that has been is also a contender this year...but that doesn't mean they'll win. SA and Chicago, both top seeds from last year, haven't made a Finals this decade.)
 
2012-10-26 12:38:38 PM  

Gunny Highway: No. At the start of any season in any sport if I gave you the 4 best teams against the field would you take it?


Honestly, I probably would, largely because the nature of those sports and playoff setups are so much more inviting for upsets. The NBA championship is far more likely than any other sport to actually have the best team win the title (except when the league decides to get all Draconian when it comes to interpreting rules for certain teams and ignore them for others in order to suspend key players for pivotal games).

In the NHL, the season doesn't matter if you get a hot goalie (Kings). 162 games of baseball don't count for sh*t if your hitters go on a cold streak in the playoffs (Yankees, apparently now Tigers). The NFL? Anyone can win a one-and-done. The No. 6 seed in the NFC has won the Super Bowl two consecutive seasons - they probably wouldn't be in the top 4 list for anyone even heading into the playoffs, much less pre-season.
 
2012-10-26 12:38:48 PM  

Killer Cars: FreakinB: FTFY. All of those teams are at least competitive and entertaining

Indiana I think did as best as that roster could possibly do last season, and I personally think they're at their ceiling: I just don't see Hibbert and Paul George developing much more beyond what they currently are, and Danny Granger, who is already kinda overrated, will turn 30 this season.

Denver to me is interesting though. They're so deep with "good" players that can play multiple positions, but don't have a defined go-to guy in late game situations.


Agreed on Indiana, but even so they're good. And that Denver team is going to be so unbelievably fun to watch. I could see them as the 3 seed in the West. Just crazy deep and athletic. But yeah, the lack of one standout player is a little weird.
 
Displayed 50 of 130 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report