***2021-2022 NBA Season Thread***

[Going Commando]

11 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

McQueen's suggestion is really that every team aside from the Warriors should tank. I don't think that would be much fun. And it's also rather pointless since even if 20 teams tank, a few of those are going to end up the playoffs anyway.

 

Teams should tank when they haven't built a foundation that can spend their prime years together in contention.

 

Building that kind of foundation through the draft is easier than doing it through trades and free agency because you get more control over the players.  You can't make Tim Duncan leave the Spurs for you.  But if you draft him, you can control the first 8 or 9 years of his career and then have major advantages for signing him through year 13 or 14.

 

But teams shouldn't tank endlessly.  You only need two or three bad years if you draft well.  And in the case of the Celtics, they didn't need to tank at all because they already got the draft assets to rebuild from Brooklyn.

 

You have to look at Boston as occupying two distinct windows IMO.  Tatum is going to be hitting mid to late season walls for the next several years because that is natural to the development process of players his age.  There is no shortcut to this process either, you just have to be patient and let him go through it.

 

That means Tatum is almost certainly not going to be a star of a championship team in the window that Horford, Kyrie, and Hayward share.  So the first window is a team built around Kyrie, Hayward, and Horford.  I agree that team is probably good enough to make the Finals next year if LeBron goes West.  But it would get waxed by the top West teams.  And even still, I'm not sure I like their upside over a healthy Wizards team.   For the sake of argument, let's say Kyrie = Wall.  Do you think Hayward + Horford are better than Beal and Porter?  I don't, and wouldn't trade rosters with them.  Hayward and Horford seem like low upside max contracts.

 

Then we look ahead to the second window that is based around the careers of Tatum and Brown.  They'll hit the front end of their prime years in like 2024.  At that point Irving will be around 32 and Hayward will be like 33 if he's still there and Horford will be long gone.  Is a Tatum and Brown with an old Kyrie going to be better than the 76ers at that point?  Or whichever team Giannis is on?

 

That's why I said they need to get ahead of the treadmill by dealing Horford and Hayward.  Get out of this window, and try and position themselves to be a true contender in Tatum's window.  I think they're going to be too good to do this through the draft.  So they need to be trying to trade for guys who have the potential to be stars that came into the league around the same time as Tatum and Brown.  They need to get their hands on a true blue chipper.

[Going Commando]

I get why they avoided committing to a true rebuild around young talent though.  No team can walk away from a surefire 50 game winner and potential Finals team for the uncertainty of trying to contend five+ years later.  Not sure anyone has the job security to know with confidence that they would survive that process.  I'm just disappointed that I don't think we're going to see a homegrown dynasty built out of the draft bounty they swindled from the Nets.

 

I want to see the young stars of this draft end up on worthy teams where they play with other future stars picked in the classes surrounding their own.

I don't want to see the careers of Anthony Davis and Giannis Antetokounmpo unfold where they never get to truly compete for a ring with the team that drafted them because they never got a second star.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

14 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I get why they avoided committing to a true rebuild around young talent though. 

 

1. I swear to God you have a mental block on this. Kyrie Irving is 25. In seven years, barring he goes the Derrick Rose route, he's likely still going to be a star. Jayson Tatum is 19. In six years, he could possibly be Kyrie Irving. And that Nets' pick you are so horny about is probably going to be like #6 which is where you get a really nice player, but usually not a franchise changer. (Hell, Hayword is only 27. His injury really makes him a wild card going forward, but you are acting like the Celtics signed Artis Gilmore to a long-term deal). The Celtics could possibly be in the Finals with this core in 2023. Embiid could be out of the league with injuries by then. Simmons could have forced his way to Miami. At the same time, Irving could have punched Brad Stevens during a game and Hayword could be a missionary somewhere.

 

Moreover, I don't completely understand the Lakers/Kings pick, but it seems very likely that if the Celtics aren't top five in this year's draft, they will be top five or top ten in 2020.

 

The Celtics always have Memphis' pick in 2020 or 2021. It's unprotected in 2021.

 

So, if this all falls apart, they can tank in 2020 and maybe have three top ten picks in two drafts. Because I think Memphis is going to stink for a very long time going forward.

 

2. Your suggestion seems to be that every team in the league follow "The Process" - a plan that actually still hasn't been proven to work. You want 30 teams to go 20-62 in perpetuity, because eventually two teams are going to be good and when that happens, everyone else needs to tank again. "The Process" can only really work if you are the only team willing to be THAT bad for THAT long, and even then, you still need to get ridiculously lucky. If Embiid doesn't have a stress fracture, he goes #1, the Sixers are currently built around Aaron Gordon.

 

3. In all honesty, has any team really ever had two or three stars really blossom together over a five or six year period? It seems to always end in tears like Oklahoma City. Your beloved Wizards are on an endless cycle back to the 80s of ruining the nice young core they have. OKC with Durant, Harden, and Westbrook. The Toni Braxton Mavericks. Chris Weber blew up strong young cores twice in his career. Coleman and Anderson in New Jersey. Pierce and Walker in Boston didn't ultimately work. Garnett and Starbury. Ray Allen and Glenn Robinson. It never works. I guess, it's arguable that Jordan and Pippen worked.

 

You're going to throw GSW at me, but GSW feels like a team that re-wrote the rules of basketball more than anything. Curry, Thompson, and Draymond alone or even together on another team probably look a lot like they looked under Mark Jackson.

 

What always seems to work is pairing your young star with an older star that you already have in house or acquire. Bird and Tiny. Magic and Kareem. Kobe and Shaq. Duncan and Robinson. Or combining a few older stars. Kobe and Gasol. The Heatles. The Big 3 in Boston.

 

4. Again, you are hung on the Process - which has never worked. But I live in Houston which has followed its own process for a decade. They have never remotely tanked and are currently the team most likely to beat GSW this year out of everyone else. Morey's approach of stay good while trying to get better is very similar to Ainge's - though Ainge seems far more interested in name players than Morey who likes creating names out of nothing. Because this Clint Capela thing is ridiculous..

 

 

 

Edited February 13, 2018 by Lombardi's_kid_brother

[justice98]

19 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

1. I swear to God you have a mental block on this. Kyrie Irving is 25. In seven years, barring he goes the Derrick Rose route, he's likely still going to be a star. Jayson Tatum is 19. In six years, he could possibly be Kyrie Irving. And that Nets' pick you are so horny about is probably going to be like #6 which is where you get a really nice player, but usually not a franchise changer. (Hell, Hayword is only 27. His injury really makes him a wild card going forward, but you are acting like the Celtics signed Artis Gilmore to a long-term deal). The Celtics could possibly be in the Finals with this core in 2023. Embiid could be out of the league with injuries by then. Simmons could have forced his way to Miami. At the same time, Irving could have punched Brad Stevens during a game and Hayword could be a missionary somewhere.

 

 

 

Good points.  Guys currently 26 or younger:

 

Hayward 26

Irving 25

Smart 22

Rozier 22

Brown 20

Tatum 19

 

Plus multiple 1st picks in 18 and multiple 1st round picks in 19, depending on how protection stipulations play out.  They have a strong chance of getting a top 5 pick in 18.

 

The Celtics are in great shape.  Their only real issue is the Horford contract.  Next year he'll be on the books for $29mil, which is equal to Gortat and Mahinmi combined.  Horford's an OK contributor, but that's kinda ridiculous. 

Edited February 13, 2018 by justice98

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

10 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

Good points.  Guys currently 26 or younger:

 

Hayward 26

Irving 25

Smart 22

Rozier 22

Brown 20

Tatum 19

 

Plus multiple 1st picks in 18 and multiple 1st round picks in 19, depending on how protection stipulations play out.  They have a strong chance of getting a top 5 pick in 18.

 

The Celtics are in great shape.  Their only real issue is the Horford contract.  Next year he'll be on the books for $29mil, which is equal to Gortat and Mahinmi combined.  Horford's an OK contributor, but that's kinda ridiculous. 

 

I think Hayword is older than that, but yes.

 

Horford having a big contract is still fine, because:

 

1. Horford is an all-star, and

2. Tatum and Brown are still on rookie deals.

 

By the time, they need to sign one of them to a big deal, Horford will be gone.

[justice98]

12 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

I think Hayword is older than that, but yes.

 

 

Hayward turns 27 in March.

[Going Commando]

36 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

2. Your suggestion seems to be that every team in the league follow "The Process" - a plan that actually still hasn't been proven to work. You want 30 teams to go 20-62 in perpetuity, because eventually two teams are going to be good and when that happens, everyone else needs to tank again. "The Process" can only really work if you are the only team willing to be THAT bad for THAT long, and even then, you still need to get ridiculously lucky. If Embiid doesn't have a stress fracture, he goes #1, the Sixers are currently built around Aaron Gordon.

 

Not every team.  Only the ones that don't have a foundation of multiple star players whose prime years match up.

 

I don't think you need to do what Philly did.  They didn't execute the rebuild very well for one thing, because they didn't draft well.  They picked two no-brainers at their slot in Embiid and Simmons.  They may have done the same with Fultz.  And they whiffed on Noel and Okafor.  They drafted without a sense of direction, piling up centers who had no chance of being able to play together long term.  You have to get that one franchise player and then start drafting complimentary pieces.  You have to actually build, not stockpile talent.

 

And I also don't think you need more than one transcendent player to compete in a post-Warriors NBA.  The DPVE contract has basically given teams the ability to keep any one transcendent talent for the entirety of their good years.  That means I don't think you're going to see superteaming and the free flow of transcendent player movement that creates unbeatable super teams as much in the future.  I think you just need that one transcendent guy to build everything around and then one or two other All Star caliber players that compliment him and share the same prime years as him.

 

i.e., what the Spurs had during the Duncan/Manu/Parker run.

 

A good front office should be able to get their two (or preferably three but two can work) foundation players in two or three drafts.  Then after you have them, you need to stop tanking and start building a culture of competitiveness so that you can escape the talent churn that endless tanking creates.

 

That would mean that not every team is tanking at the same time.  Most would be building to a point of competitiveness where they can realistically compete for championships when their foundation players reach their late 20's.

 

Second, you also don't have to get your foundation players through the draft.  As you pointed out, Houston has done it with trades.  Same for the Pierce/KG/Allen Celtics.  The second Kobe dynasty was a mix of trades and draft picks.  The Heatles were done through free agency.  The reason I focus on the draft is because it's the only real avenue to do this for the majority of teams.  The Celtics and Lakers have massive advantages over other franchises.  They have the biggest fanbases in the league and they can absorb losses and draw players that others simply can't.  Miami and the Texas franchises also have big state income tax advantages that let them pay players more.  They are just more attractive destinations.  If you're a Milwaukee or a DC or an Indy or a Utah, you have to build through the draft because you will start off a build by getting LeBron or Shaq to come to you, or Chris Paul to force a trade to you.  You won't even get LaMarcus Aldridge to do it.

 

And beyond that, drafting is the surest route to rebuilding because it gives you the most control over your player's career.  You get the RFA rights to players you draft.  You can only offer a DPVE contract to a player you've drafted and never let go.

[Going Commando]

54 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

What always seems to work is pairing your young star with an older star that you already have in house or acquire. Bird and Tiny. Magic and Kareem. Kobe and Shaq. Duncan and Robinson. Or combining a few older stars. Kobe and Gasol. The Heatles. The Big 3 in Boston.

 

Tiny Archibald was not a foundation player for that Celtics dynasty.  He was a shell of the player he was before his injury.  That team was built around Bird, Parish, and McHale.  They got them through shrewd trading and drafting and they essentially brought them into the league together and had them grow up as a team together.

 

Robinson only got one ring with Duncan.  He wasn't around for the majority of San Antonio's championship contention with Dunacn.

 

Combining older players does work.  But it's less easy to control that kind of roster and your championship windows will typically be shorter because it is very hard to get star players away from the teams that drafted them within the first 7 years of their careers.  Miami realistically only had three years of contention with the Heatles because Wade got old too fast.  The Celtics only got two years from Pierce/Garnett/Allen.  The Kobe/Odom/Gasol Lakers only got the three years before it came crashing down.  I'm not crapping on only contending for two or three years, but more years is better than less and I would rather have a team built the way Golden State or San Antonio were.

 

Also, there are tons of examples of teams built through trades and free agency that fizzled too.  More roster builds fail than succeed.  The draft is just the most natural way to get a generation of foundation players.

 

If Shaq stays in Orlando, that dynasty probably happens there instead of in LA, and it would have happened with a team of draft picks.  Most teams can not count on Shaq choosing them.  And star player movement was looser back then.  They created post-rookie contract RFA in response to Shaq leaving Orlando.  They created the DPVE in response to LeBron and Durant leaving their teams post second contract.  The league has given teams the ability to effectively control the first 13 years of their superstar player's career.

44 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

1. Horford is an all-star, and

 

 

counterpoint: Al Horford is not an All Star in a year where four other All Stars don't go down with injury right before the game.  That's not a horrible contract, but it's not a good one.  They would have been better with someone like Blake Griffin or Paul George.

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

1. I swear to God you have a mental block on this. Kyrie Irving is 25. In seven years, barring he goes the Derrick Rose route, he's likely still going to be a star

 

counterpoint: Kyrie is turning 26 in a month, he's suffered a ton of injuries throughout his basketball career, and he looks and walks around like he's 38.  How confident are you in his longevity really?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

5 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Tiny Archibald was not a foundation player for that Celtics dynasty.  He was a shell of the player he was before his injury.  That team was built around Bird, Parish, and McHale.  They got them through shrewd trading and drafting and they essentially brought them into the league together and had them grow up as a team together.

 

 

Archibald was an All-Star during Bird's first years, and the second most important played on the team that won the title in '81.  Once he started really declining, the team was in some pretty serious trouble until Dennis Johnson got there.

 

The point is, Red made sure that first Bird team had veterans ready to win immediately when Bird got there. The Celtics won 61 games the year before the McHale/Parish trade. He had Dave Cowens - the oldest 31 year old in sports history - starting that year. He didn't really play, but Red signed the ghost of Pete Maravich for God's sake.

 

Obviously, having several great players in their primes is important. But, as long as they are in their prime - or performing like it - why does it matter where they are in their prime? Dirk was inexplicably still in his prime years in, like, year 15 or whatever he was when they won the title. Lebron will still be in his prime at age 48. Be prepared.

 

2 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

counterpoint: Kyrie is turning 26 in a month, he's suffered a ton of injuries throughout his basketball career, and he looks and walks around like he's 38.  How confident are you in his longevity really?

 More confident than I am in 29 year-old Steph Curry and his trick ankles -  who you have winning the next, like, 4 titles.

 

I'm of the opinion that all the modern stars are going to have a legit chance to have prime years until they are in their mid 30s unless they have some catastrophic or chronic type injury. None of these guys are building their own driveway or smoking....and most of them don't seem to be going out to the club until 4 any longer. There will obviously be outliers.

 

Like John Wall.

 

I'm declaring it now. It's over for Wall. Age and injuries have caught up to him. He'll be a backup for the Knicks in two years.

[Mr. Sinister]

I'm gonna need to find a way to audiobook this 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

20 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

 

counterpoint: Al Horford is not an All Star in a year where four other All Stars don't go down with injury right before the game.  That's not a horrible contract, but it's not a good one.  They would have been better with someone like Blake Griffin or Paul George.

 

They would be really good with Anthony Davis in that spot, but that wasn't an option.

 

120 guys are going to get contracts in that range every year going forward. Horford is the top, I know, 30 of those dudes.

2 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

I'm gonna need to find a way to audiobook this 

 

We can Skype tonight. I'm a one-take wonder.

[Renegade7]

7 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

I'm declaring it now. It's over for Wall. Age and injuries have caught up to him. He'll be a backup for the Knicks in two years.

Are you being sarcastic?  He's 27.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

4 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Are you being sarcastic?  He's 27.

 

He's done.

 

He was terrible this year before he was hurt.

 

No one wants to say it, but I'm just that brave.

 

It's over!

 

Change that thread to the Satoransky Era.

 

I for one look forward to he and Fultz shooting a combined 32 percent in Sacramento in three years.

Edited February 13, 2018 by Lombardi's_kid_brother

[Going Commando]

Just now, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

They would be really good with Anthony Davis in that spot, but that wasn't an option.

 

120 guys are going to get contracts in that range every year going forward. Horford is the top, I know, 30 of those dudes.

 

Paul George and Blake Griffin probably were options though, if they had max contract room available.  They certainly had the assets to beat the offers OKC and Detroit made.

 

I think they've straddled the fence of committing to build a long term foundation with the Brooklyn picks vs trying to win now with their cap space.  And the result is their upside won't be as high with either path.

 

Horford is also pretty fringey top 30 player.  I'm not sure I agree he's in that category.  And I'm pretty sure he won't be next season.

 

The Horford signing is the most perplexing move Ainge made IMO.  The Celtics didn't really have a foundation for contention in place when he made it.  Everything pointed to them using those Brooklyn draft picks to rebuild and then Isaiah Thomas turned into an All NBA second teamer on them all of a sudden.  But they didn't know that was coming when they signed Horford.  It feels like Ainge made that move just to use his cap space and avoid any regression.  The same thing Ernie Grunfeld was trying to do.  It wasn't clever.

 

 

[Renegade7]

8 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

He's done.

 

He was terrible this year before he was hurt.

 

No one wants to say it, but I'm just that brave.

 

It's over!

 

Change that thread to the Satoransky Era.

 

I for one look forward to he and Fultz shooting a combined 32 percent in Sacramento in three years.

Just because you're making a bold statement doesn't make you right.  He already signed an extension, so I'm not even sure how you expect us to get rid of him and he end up a backup somewhere within two years.  I'll go on record and say you're wrong, but I really shouldn't need to.

[Going Commando]

Just now, Renegade7 said:

Just because you're making a bold statement doesn't make you right.  He already signed an extension, so I'm not even sure how you expect us to get rid of him and he end up a backup somewhere within two years.  I'll go on record and say you're wrong, but I really shouldn't need to.

 

? He's trolling me.  This is what he does when he's tired of arguing.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

19 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Just because you're making a bold statement doesn't make you right.  He already signed an extension, so I'm not even sure how you expect us to get rid of him and he end up a backup somewhere within two years.  I'll go on record and say you're wrong, but I really shouldn't need to.

 

Cut him and just eat the money. There's no other choice.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

You can't have a league where 12 guys make max deals and everyone else is making $3 million per.

 

In the league as it stands, Horford for two more years at that price is more than okay.

 

 

[Destino]

2 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

counterpoint: Kyrie is turning 26 in a month, he's suffered a ton of injuries throughout his basketball career, and he looks and walks around like he's 38.  How confident are you in his longevity really?

I've never seen a 38 year old that can break down a defender like that.  It also seems like his injury history is more of the freak injury variety than the sort that deteriorates over time.  His only significant injury to this legs or back is when he fractured his knee cap.  Everything else seems to be broken bones (nose, jaw, and finger) and minor sprains (bicep and shoulder) that didn't result in him missing too many games.  

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

11 minutes ago, Destino said:

I've never seen a 38 year old that can break down a defender like that.  It also seems like his injury history is more of the freak injury variety than the sort that deteriorates over time.  His only significant injury to this legs or back is when he fractured his knee cap.  Everything else seems to be broken bones (nose, jaw, and finger) and minor sprains (bicep and shoulder) that didn't result in him missing too many games.  

 

 

You don't see the injuries caused by Steve's voodoo doll.

[Predicto]

Horford is fine.  He is reliable and efficient, he passes well and plays good defense, he can play multiple roles within the system, and his contract is not that long.  

 

As far as I can tell, the Celtics are doing just about everything correctly right now.  They are 40-18 despite a young roster and a tier 2 all-star that they just signed who has only played 5 minutes this season.  They have an excellent scorer, three young players who are developiong well, several more good draft picks coming up, and they got rid of Isiah Thomas before everyone figured out what a mirage he was.

 

Some serious nit-picking going on when someone wants to bash on Ainge for all of that.   I wanted to punch Ainge in the face when he was a player, but he has been an excellent GM.     

2 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

counterpoint: Kyrie is turning 26 in a month, he's suffered a ton of injuries throughout his basketball career, and he looks and walks around like he's 38.  How confident are you in his longevity really?

 

 

Kyrie walked around like he was 38 the day he came into the league.  He's not beating people with athleticism - he's doing it with great handlesand the best set of "old man embarassing you at the YMCA" moves anyone has seen since Larry Bird.  

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

11 minutes ago, Predicto said:

 

Some serious nit-picking going on when someone wants to bash on Ainge for all of that.   I wanted to punch Ainge in the face when he was a player, but he has been an excellent GM.     

 

Do you hate Kyrie Irving with the fury of a thousand suns?

 

You know a point guard with a history of injury whose body is breaking down? That John Wall fella.

Edited February 13, 2018 by Lombardi's_kid_brother

[Going Commando]

15 minutes ago, Destino said:

I've never seen a 38 year old that can break down a defender like that.  It also seems like his injury history is more of the freak injury variety than the sort that deteriorates over time.  His only significant injury to this legs or back is when he fractured his knee cap.  Everything else seems to be broken bones (nose, jaw, and finger) and minor sprains (bicep and shoulder) that didn't result in him missing too many games.  

 

 

He had a serious foot injury at Duke too.

 

He doesn't miss many games?

- Rookie season, missed 31 games

- 2nd, missed 23

- 3rd, 11

- 4th, 14

- 5th, 29

- 6th, 10

 

And this year he's already missed 6.

 

He has an extensive list of knee, foot, and shoulder injuries that have caused him to miss a lot of time throughout his career.

 

Kyrie has exceptional lateral quicks and dribbles the ball on a string but if you watch him walk and jump, he looks stiff.  He's taken a lot of punishment and has missed 20 games a year on average.

 

Of all the Kyrie nonsense in this thread...

[Predicto]

18 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Do you hate Kyrie Irving with the fury of a thousand suns?

 

You know a point guard with a history of injury whose body is breaking down? That John Wall fella.

 

 

I've always disliked Kyrie, and not because he is actually borderline crazy (which he is).  He is very good, but I also think he is overrated as a point guard because he doesn't run an offense that well or pass at an elite level.  He's really an undersized off guard, which is fine if you pair him with a second guard who is a great defender and the offense runs through someone else (like Lebron).   Basically, Kyrie's an all star, but he was voted as the all star starter way too many years because of ESPN highlights and name recognition.  His overall performance did not warrant it.  

Edited February 13, 2018 by Predicto