NBA Season 2012-2013 discussion

[Aubergine~!]

When was he playing decent defense, given that he almost never played, period? In two seasons in the NBA he's played a total of 44 games, averaging 2 pts, and 2 rebs in 7 mpg. He was a complete nonentity. Meanwhile, during that period, the Thunder have playoff wins against the Grizzlies (Gasol, Randolph), The Lakers (Gasol, Bynum) and the Spurs (Duncan) proving pretty conclusively that they can hang with teams with size while getting absolutely no contribution whatsoever from Cole Aldrich. Thabeet may suck on ice, but he should be more than capable of playing 5 minutes of garbage time every other game, which is pretty much all Aldrich did. He also shouldn't have any problem fouling Dwight Howard under the basket, which is pretty much all Aldrich would be any good for against the Lakers.

*Shrug*

Disagree, think they'll need more than Perkins and Collison against the Lakers. Thabeet is a black hole of suckage, while Aldrich at least looked like he could turn out to be a decent defender.

Regardless, don't think this changes much for the Thunder, in that they were going to struggle to get past LA.

I must have missed the press conference announcing they'd cut Orton. My bad.

Ah, alright, was wondering about that.

[Vic Vega]

What a message to send to the OKC fanbase. Being perennial contenders with a legit shot at a chip is too expensive to maintain, so they will just go thru the motions instead.

I'd take their financial situation more seriously if I didn't know that the Thunder are a license to print money.

[kalorama]

What a message to send to the OKC fanbase. Being perennial contenders with a legit shot at a chip is too expensive to maintain, so they will just go thru the motions instead.

I'd take their financial situation more seriously if I didn't know that the Thunder are a license to print money.

How are they a "license to print money?"

As for Trading Harden . . . they basically made a decision that they couldn't afford to pay max or near max money to both Harden and Ibaka and decide that they valued Ibaka more. I can't really see much of a problem with that. Young productive bigs with all-star upside (and a good head on their shoulders) are harder to get ahold of than SGs who can score. Pretty much any team that gets ne is going to value them more highly than almost anything else.

[kalorama]

Thabeet is a black hole of suckage, while Aldrich at least looked like he could turn out to be a decent defender.

I'd still like to know what you were looking at when you saw this, because he didn't play enough (or well enough when he did play) to come to that conclusion based on any real observable evidence. Yeah, Thabeet is a bust, but so is Aldrich. Aldrich just had the good fortune of being a bust who was taken lower in the lottery by a team with a lot of depth at his position that had playoff succes, so no one noticed him wasting the team's time and money at the end of the bench, well out of the spotlight.

[Vic Vega]

How are they a "license to print money?"

As for Trading Harden . . . they basically made a decision that they couldn't afford to pay max or near max money to both Harden and Ibaka and decide that they valued Ibaka more. I can't really see much of a problem with that. Young productive bigs with all-star
upside (and a good head on their shoulders) are harder to get
ahold of than SGs who can score. Pretty much any team that gets
ne is going to value them more highly than almost anything
else.

They sold out the past 4 seasons in a row, got deep into the playoff at least 2 years in a row and had a trio of popular, likeable, Superstars.

All that adds up especially when you consider that Kobe and Nash probably won't even be in the NBA in 2 years.

[Superchino]

Celtics vs. Lakers; KG and co. get their revenge from the last finals meetup with the Lakers.

[BYC]

OKC should have waited until the end of the season before making a decision on Harden. Sign and trade and all that. I think Harden is a restricted free agent, so if he signed an offer sheet that was lower, OKC could have resigned him for less.

Trading him on right before regular season begins...not to mention OKC made tons of money last 2 seasons. I think this is Presti's biggest misstep (resigning Perkins for that amount was the other). Not to mention, they could have amnestied Perkins to avoid the luxury tax hit.

[kalorama]

They sold out the past 4 seasons in a row, got deep into the playoff at least 2 years in a row and had a trio of popular, likeable, Superstars.

All that adds up especially when you consider that Kobe and Nash probably won't even be in the NBA in 2 years.

Harden was not and likely never will be a superstar. The fact that people talk about him like he is is probably a big part of why he wasn't able to reach a deal in OKC. As for the rest . . . nothing lasts forever. They've had a nice run recently, but all of that can turn on a dime. A small market team like OKC can't afford to spend money like it's coming out of a spigot with no off lever.

Another thing to consider . . . with Eric Maynor out all last season, Harden basically became the team's primary backup PG/playmaker by default. With Maynor back this season, Harden would have gone back to his role as complementary scorer, a role that Martin is more than capable of filling. I think OKC will be fine (even with the devastating loss of Cole Aldrich).

[Aubergine~!]

I'd take their financial situation more seriously if I didn't know that the Thunder are a license to print money.

That's a bit of a strange statement, yeah. OKC's a small market.

I'd still like to know what you were looking at when you saw this, because he didn't play enough (or well enough when he did play) to come to that conclusion based on any real observable evidence.

I basically saw enough in him that I thought he was a decent defender.

[JDogindy]

Another reason for me to not like ESPN because of the Pacers. Here are some magazines I've read with preseason predictions and their summaries:

Sports Illustrated: 2nd in East. Great team, but without superstar, Eastern Conference finals is possibly limit.
USA Today: 3rd in East. Very good team that should capitalize in Central while Bulls are without Derrick Rose.
ESPN the Magazine: 8th in East. Last season was built entirely out of luck and good fortune.

[Aubergine~!]

Another reason for me to not like ESPN because of the Pacers. Here are some magazines I've read with preseason predictions and their summaries:

Sports Illustrated: 2nd in East. Great team, but without superstar, Eastern Conference finals is possibly limit.
USA Today: 3rd in East. Very good team that should capitalize in Central while Bulls are without Derrick Rose.
ESPN the Magazine: 8th in East. Last season was built entirely out of luck and good fortune.

Wow.

That's ridiculous.

Pacers are going to be top 4 in the east at least, IMO. If I had to pick now, I'd have em facing the Heat in the Eastern Finals.

[kalorama]

I basically saw enough in him that I thought he was a decent defender.

Well seeing as he's played a grand total of about 300 minutes in his two seasons in the NBA (the equivalent of 6 full (48 minute) games worth of PT spread out over two years/44 games) . . . you must not blink much, because if you did you'd have easily missed his entire NBA career.

[BYC]

Let's get ready for basketball. Can't wait for Celtics at Heat tonight.

[BYC]

I just found a site that validates my beliefs that the Knicks are idiots for not signing Lin, and Thunder made a mistake not signing Harden to a max deal (and yes, I got there from Simmons).

http://www.forbes.com/nba-valuations/list/

Unless I am reading these numbers way incorrectly, the Knicks especially, can afford players. The only thing this doesn't show is the impact of the new luxury tax, but if I'm reading it right, the Knicks are still making around 95 mil in profit.

[kalorama]

Throw around all the numbers you like, the argument still has the same flaw: it presumes that there's no correlation between a player's marketability off the court and his performance on it. If Lin faltered on the court (as it appear he's doing in Houston) then his ability to generate profit off of it takes a dive. At which point the team that signed him is stuck with an overpaid player who's not helping them win games, not helping them move t-shirts or sell tickets, and whose bloated contract is taking up salary cap space that prevents them from upgrading their talent. Lin is not (and most likely will never be) a $15 mill player on the court, so paying him like one hurts the team's bottom line, both financially and competitively

Yes, the NBA is a business and business want to make money. But just because a company is running a profit doesn't mean it's good business for them to over spend on assets of questionable (at best) value.