Lombardi's_kid_brother

I think this team is entirely too young right now and the vets they do have are the wrong kind of vets. I don't know how John Wall can learn to be an NBA point guard or anyone can develop their games when the offense has the two worst ballstoppers in the league and there is not really one veteran who can show these guys how to be professionals. Ted seems like he would be happy with nothing but first and second year players fighting for minutes and the ball. The fact that any future hope seems to lie entirely with MORE rookies is even crazier. You know who this team needs? Derek Fisher.

I think Ted is a bigger problem. He seems to have learned the absolutely wrong lessons from the Caps rebuild. The Caps didn't get good because they sucked and drafted high. They got good because they sucked at the proper time and were able to draft outstanding players. Just winning the lottery is not enough; you need to win it in the right year and then make the right choice. Irving is probably going to be a good player but Cleveland is not going to win a title because of him. (By the way, "waiting for a superstar" can be endlessly frustrating too. I've been in Houston since 2008 and the Rockets are perfectly poised to trade or sign a top ten player...except they can't get one).

I asked. I have not gotten an answer. It's annoying considering I don't start threads that often.

I've watched a little more of the Wizards than normal this year because there has been a free League Pass special on Directv. I honestly don't know if I've ever seen a roster that is the unique combination of hopeless from a talent standpoint AND badly put together from a team-building standpoint. I don't even know what the Wizards want to be in their dream world where everyone fills the roster spot to the level that they envisioned to do so. That might be a fun game. If every player on this team maxed out their ability and played hard every night, what kind of team would the Wizards be. Who would they resemble? What would their offense look like? I guess, theoretically, it would be a little like the Magic of the past few seasons crossed with Bulls' offense. A great shotblocker anchors the D and triggers John Wall who penetrates and either finishes or kicks to great shooters. Is that kinda the idea?

Okay. I'd rather watch the NFL halftime show. This is just putrid basketball by both teams. I think in six minutes I saw a ball dribbled off a leg five times.

I just flipped to this game on League Pass. Seriously? Down 14 at the half at home to the T-Wolves? Flip shouldn't even be allowed to coach the second half.

That may be true. But it didn't work. It's unfair, but I tend to think that if players didn't improve in weak areas, they didn't work on them enough. I'm probably wrong about that, but I think I share that perception with others.

It's that old Bobby Knight idea: you don't need players who love to play, you need players who love to practice. Obviously, when I say "practice," everyone thinks of Iverson. And actually, he is a perfect example. He played his balls off every night. No NBA player in history gave more effort in games. But his game never really developed beyond what it was when he was a rookie. The great ones do what Kobe Bryant did when he showed up one year with Hakeem's post game. Or when Magic Johnson suddenly and inexplicably became the best free throw shooter in basketball. That's what everyone wants from Wall. He needs to come into camp every year with something new that he developed in the summer.

Scouting in the NFL is difficult because you are not measuring people against even competition. I think Justin Blackmon is going to be awesome. However, it may turn out that he simply cannot get away from press coverage. If that is the case, he will be out of the league in three years. The fun thing is this: no one knows. It's almost impossible to learn some things because they don't appear in the college game and there is no way to simulate them. That's why players bust in the NFL. You honestly do not know if a QB is going to crap his pants in the face of double A gap blitz. It's always those random things that kill NFL draft picks. NBA draft picks typically bust for reasons that should have been known. The reason is because the NBA - like MLB and unlike the NFL - drafts on potential so often. Kwame Brown is the ultimate example of this. Outside of his little baby hands, he fit every measurable you could ever desire in an NBA player. On paper, he looked like someone who could have turned into David Robinson. But, he didn't. So, there you go. If they reach their full potential, you get Kobe. Where I think NBA teams screw up is they pick potential over legitimate talent too often. Durant and Oden is the great example of this. Oden had some obvious skils. But he had no offensive game and had only played a handful of games. It was almost impossible for Durant to fail. At the absolute worst, he was going to be some kind of all O/no D perimter player like Kevin Martin. Oden's bottom was, well, Kwame if he was healthy. (And let's be honest, Oden when he was healthy could not stay on the floor because he was a fouling machine). Portland's logic was "I would rather have the best defensive center in the league over the best forward in the league." My logic would have been "I would rather have Kevin Martin than Kwame Brown." NBA teams shoot for the stars in their draft. Everyone knew that Big Baby Davis and Dejuan Blair were good enough to be in an 8-man rotation. But they were never going to be stars. On paper, Thabeet had the potential to be a star. That's the NBA in a nutshell.

I think those kind of players are a dime a dozen and are relatively easy to draft once you get your really good core group. At that point, you are more or less drafting for one skill - a spot up shooter, a shot-blocker, a big bodied-forward who can defend other big-bodied forwards. ---------- Post added January-5th-2012 at 05:16 PM ---------- It's really more than that. It's having a lotto pick in the RIGHT year - in the Duncan, Lebron years not the the Kwame year. (If you could do the Kwame year over, Gasol is the obvious top pick but no one on earth knew he would be this great. I never hold teams to crystal ball standards, like saying they should have drafted 18-year-old Jellybean Bryant's kid).

The problem with the Wizards is that they are too young and they have nobody outside of Wall with any kind of basketball IQ. And Flip is the wrong coach for them. The Thunder realized that they were too young last year. That's why they got Perkins. That's why they kept Collison around and frankly overpaid him. I also think they had the right coach for the kind of team they had in Brooks. However, I don't think Brooks is the right coach to get them to the Finals. Honestly, the best trade the Wizards could make is sending Flip to coach the Thunder and getting Brooks back. Flip knows how to coach in the playoffs; Scott knows how to coach an NBA team that is essentially a college team.

Yes it is. It absolutely is. The only proven method of winning titles is stealing a superstar (Shaq, Garnett, etc) or drafting one - usually in the lottery. Dirk and Kobe are among the only Championship MVP players who didn't go in the top five - and they were both lottery picks. Go back to 1981. The Lakers won because of Kareem (the #1 overall pick) and Magic (#1 overall). The Celtics had Bird (#1) and McHale (#3 overall). The 76ers and Moses and Doc who would have been the #1 overall picks in their years if the ABA didn't steal them first. The ABA more or less broke the law to sign Moses to a contract. The Pistons had Isiah (#1 overall). The Bulls had Jordan (#3 overall) and Pippen (#5 overall). The Rockets had Hakeen (#1 overall). The Lakers had Shaq (#1) and Kobe (#13 as a high schooler). The Spurs had Duncan (#1) and Robinson (#1). - As an aside if you have the dominant center, you don't really need a great second player. John Wall is not a dominant center. - The Heat had Wade (#5) and Shaq (#1). The Celtics had Pierce (#10), Allen (#5), and Garnett (#5). The Cavs and Heat got to the Finals with Lebron (#1). The Mavs won with Dirk (#9) and a supporting cast that included Kidd (#2) and Terry (#10). The Nets went to two finals because of Kidd (#2) and, I guess, Kenyon Martin (#1). The only team that followed your formula and had any kind of sustained success is the mid-decade Pistons. ---------- Post added January-5th-2012 at 04:48 PM ---------- That's silly. There aren't enough good basketball players in the US to fill a massive minor league system and there is no way financially it makes any sense. The NBA has a free developmental league with plenty of top-notch coaching. It's called the NCAA. You are thinking about a problem that existed in the league a dozen years ago when teams stupidly wasted lottery picks on high schoolers that they had no way of evaluating and no interest in developing. The age requirement has fixed that problem to a large degree. If you notice how many insanely great players have entered the league since then, you can see that one year with even an iffy coach like Rick Barnes seems to be good for players.

I agree with that. I'm operating under the assumption that Wall is that guy. The Clippers were operating under the assumption that Blake was that guy, and it got them Paul. Now, the Clippers are the Clippers and are capable of screwing this up. But any other franchise would be set for the next six years if they were in that position. By the way, you are off a little bit about Shaq. He went to LA because that is where he wanted to be. He wanted money, fame, and the uniform. Kobe was 18 years old when Shaq signed there and I'm not even sure he had been drafted yet. He didn't even become a starter until Shaq's third year there. The Lakers are just the luckiest goddamn franchise in history and only they would stumble into the second, third or fourth best shooting guard ever during the same year they sign the most dominant player of his era. Nobody expected this from Kobe Bryant in 1996. He was Jellybean Bryant's weird and talented son and nothing more. (I also don't think Shaq had the same drive a lot of players had. He won titles because he was THAT much better than anyone else and he worked just hard enough to win them, because he found that winning titles made him even more famous. I don't think Shaq ever wanted to be the best player in the world. I think he wanted to be the most famous player in the world. Playing in LA helped that goal. So did winning. He may be the only player who ever won titles as secondary result of his true goals). Anyway, I don't know what the Wizards need to do because DC has never been a destination for free agents. But the only sane thing to do is look at the team as Wall and bunch of assets. However, I will even go this far: Let's say that Westbrook completely loses his mind and demands a trade in the next 18 months. Wouldn't the Wizards have to consider dangling Wall in that situation? Wall could become an All-Star. Westrbook is an All Star and might be a top ten player in the right situation. (I'm just speculating now, but the Wizards are looking at some kind of 13 win season here. They can't act like any idea is stupid).

I think Ted is a good owner who is completely wrong about the proper way to build an NBA team. Stockpiling picks and picking in the top five year after year makes you the Timberwolves or what the Clippers have historically been. Cleaing cap space, and packaging whatever assets you have for a superstar is how you become good. This is not the NHL. There are only two ways to become good in the NBA: draft Lebron or acquire Lebron after he has been drafted. I know people here love John Wall, but he ain't Lebron. He's more like a Chris Bosh (not in terms of play but in terms of where he will ultimately fit in the NBA heirarchy). He's the guy the puts you over the top after you get the guy that makes you good. You can draft a dozen Chris Singleton's and it will - at most - make you an 8 seed. ---------- Post added January-5th-2012 at 10:31 AM ---------- Is there any chance in hell that John Wall is going to suffer through two and a half more years of this and decides to stay long term? The only player in recent NBA history who stuck with a bad team through a long period of time is Paul Pierce and Paul Pierce seems to have been born in 1928. Even "good guys" like Ray Allen have forced their way out of bad situations. (I guess Garnett showed a lot of loyalty to Minnesota for an inconceivably long time as well). I know this draft is deep but I don't know yet if there is one franchise-changing player in it yet. If there is a Duncan/Lebron/Durant type and the Wizards get him, then everything will be okay. If the Wizards end up with a Bargnani/Bogut solid but not transcendent type, then this is never going to end.

So...when are the Wizards going to get their first win? The 10th at home against Toronto looks like a possibility. The Wizards will have a day off before that and it will be the 2nd of 3 in a row for Toronto. After that, probably one of the two back to backs against Philly. (By the way, has anyone looked ahead to their February schedule? Eegads is that brutal...) 3 home games to Clips, Toronto, and NY and then 5 straight road games over 10 days

I don't think so. Even cities with insane demand (like Pittsburgh) are experiencing some bleed-off.

Is anyone else sick of the whole concept of the GM? This idea was refreshing and new in the late 90s, but it's as a big a cliche now as a Russian wrestler was in '87.

It is sort of remarkable how an angle that began with the intent of making CM Punk a super duper star has morphed into an angle that apparently made HHH the only face on Raw. I've never been a big fan of the "HHH is holding everyone down and only cares about himself" conspiracy theorists, but this has been remarkable.

He came from the era when you were supposed to "live the gimmick." Unfortunately, the gimmick took over his life. It's pretty difficult to feel sorry for a 62 year old man who continues to live like a 24 year old carny.

Flair is a disaster, but I'm not sure that story really needed to be told. Particularly on a site like Grantland that originally seemed to be striving to being a sort of online New Yorker of Sports. I also hate the headline. Flair is not The Ram. Flair is still making a quarter of a million a year to wrestle at age 62. Flair should be worth close to $50 million, I would think. There are guys like Ricky Morton make $100 a weekend in the indies trying to pay off debts they accumulated 25 years ago when they were making $100K a year. Flair is more like Redd Foxx or Willie Nelson whose objective was to finally be cornered by their creditors the day of their funeral. Flair's biggest problem is that I don't think he ever really expected to still be alive at this point. Which is sad in a completely different way. This should be it's own thread, but is Grantland the worst thing ever or is it just me?

This is going to be interesting. If Nash is there to do a job to Punk and look tough behind HHH or Steph or whoever, he will be an asset to the company. If he and HHH are going to wind up being the top stars, all the good will WWE has built up over the Summer of Punk will be gone. I don't think HHH is dumb, but the history of wrestling says the person running the creative side ALWAYS puts himself and his friends on top. Always.

I was wondering why the fight wasn't stopped by the ref or doctor. Now, I know. That was ridiculous.

Vlad won easily. Embarrassingly easy. Even with a bogus point deduction. He jabbed Haye relentlessly if delicately, landed one decent combination per round, and never got hit. Haye just kind of stood there and took it. It was an awful awful fight.

That Rashard Lewis contract is awe-inspiring.

I've always wanted to have a discussion about Taboo 2 here. Maybe this is the place.