2018-2019 NBA Regular Season Thread

[dtgold88]

I follow the C's pretty closely... and I haven't noticed any such pattern at all.

Rather, Baynes has simple had a number of bumps and bruises and missed stretches of time this year.

But you did notice in those 15 wins where he played 15 minutes or more nearly all of them were against also-rans and bottom feeders, right?

No doubt he also struggles to stay healthy.

 

[dtgold88]

The one thing that is clear is that Curry is the better choice over Kyrie - his 3 titles as a leader in GS is the only proof we needed while Kyrie continues to struggle as the team's leader in Bos. The only person this isn't clear to is you.

You might have something if I didn't make nearly the same point.

Of course, even with Kyrie's level of crazy you could have put him on GS instead of Curry the last 2 years and this one and I doubt anyone thinks GS would not have won the title if he was/is healthy.

 

[dtgold88]

Because Randall wanted to be paid & LA didn't want to pay him what he wanted. There isn't much to straighten out in that case.

Then your argument is not with me it's with those who said Randle didn't want to stay because of how he was treated. Get 'em.

 

[dtgold88]

Kyrie's a damn good player. But he'll never be the guy that puts a team on his shoulders & wins a title. That's not who he is.

He's definitely a different kind of cat and a bit of a nutjob. And while I agree with you, I have no doubt if a healthy Kyrie was on GS instead of Curry the last 2 years and this one they would still be going for and would get a 3-peat. Just too much talent.

 

[dtgold88]

Sometimes it's hard for people to see what's right in front of their nose

Even though said person did see this. I did say Curry goes before Kyrie. Just said it was much closer than the distance between Lebron and everyone else.

Next time you (or anyone else) can't follow something, just ask.

 

[msgkings322]

Even though said person did see this. I did say Curry goes before Kyrie. Just said it was much closer than the distance between Lebron and everyone else.

Next time you (or anyone else) can't follow something, just ask.

Eyeroll emoji

 

[msgkings322]

He's definitely a different kind of cat and a bit of a nutjob. And while I agree with you, I have no doubt if a healthy Kyrie was on GS instead of Curry the last 2 years and this one they would still be going for and would get a 3-peat. Just too much talent.

You have clearly shown that you underestimate system, fit, chemistry. It matters, which is why the Pistons beat the Lakers in 2004 for example.

 

[dtgold88]

You have clearly shown that you underestimate system, fit, chemistry. It matters, which is why the Pistons beat the Lakers in 2004 for example.

Did I say it didn't matter? I simply say a team of Kyrie, Durant, Green, Klay et al win the title the last 2 years and again this year. You disagree? Who's beating them?

 

[dtgold88]

Eyeroll emoji

If I was drafting a top 8 I'd pick Lebron #1 and it's not close, Curry then Kyrie (and those 2 are close), Love, Klay, Green, Barnes then TT.

Apology accepted

 

[trojanfan12]

why couldn't he? There was plenty enough to keep Randle and sign Lebron.

Look at the date Randle signed with the Pelicans and the date that Lebron signed with the Lakers and then admit you were wrong and drop it.

 

[dtgold88]

The one thing that is clear is that Curry is the better choice over Kyrie - his 3 titles as a leader in GS is the only proof we needed while Kyrie continues to struggle as the team's leader in Bos. The only person this isn't clear to is you.

If I was drafting a top 8 I'd pick Lebron #1 and it's not close, Curry then Kyrie (and those 2 are close), Love, Klay, Green, Barnes then TT.

Not in you to admit your gaffe, I realize, but apology accepted

 

[dtgold88]

Look at the date Randle signed with the Pelicans and the date that Lebron signed with the Lakers and then admit you were wrong and drop it.

what's the diff? There was enough to sign both. Not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

 

[trojanfan12]

Actually Lebron signed first. First reports of a deal being struck was July 1st. Julius Randle looks like agreed to terms on July 2nd. So it actually helps your argument that they basically had no opportunity to try and smooth things over with Randle. Once Lebron decided to join it was a done deal in having to renounce Randle's rights.

Report: Julius Randle, Pelicans Agree to Contract After 4 Seasons with Lakers

LeBron James officially signs with Los Angeles Lakers | NBA.com

Agreeing to and signing are 2 different things.

 

[flyerhawk]

I follow the C's pretty closely... and I haven't noticed any such pattern at all.

Rather, Baynes has simple had a number of bumps and bruises and missed stretches of time this year.

Yeah. He's played too few games too sporadically to get any idea of what Stevens wants to do with him. Seems to me it is entirely based on his health and the situation.

 

[dtgold88]

Report: Julius Randle, Pelicans Agree to Contract After 4 Seasons with Lakers

LeBron James officially signs with Los Angeles Lakers | NBA.com

Agreeing to and signing are 2 different things.

OK. And Randle makes less than the guys they added so clearly there was room for both him and Lebron.

 

[CitySushi]

Report: Julius Randle, Pelicans Agree to Contract After 4 Seasons with Lakers

LeBron James officially signs with Los Angeles Lakers | NBA.com

Agreeing to and signing are 2 different things.

There's a moratorium, which I'm sure you're aware that took place preventing guys who have agreed to deals to sign. We all know we go by the Woj and Sham bombs at midnight the start of free agency on what's been agreed upon. Unless you're DeAndre Jordan, usually those are 99% likely to go through.

 

[trojanfan12]

what's the diff? There was enough to sign both. Not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

The difference is that they couldn't sign or agree to anything before Lebron signed.

Randle signed with the Pelicans before Lebron signed with the Lakers. That meant the Lakers couldn't sign him no matter how much they may have had available.

It's really not that complicated.

Virtually everyone on here disagrees with you and virtually everyone has explained this to you.

 

[CitySushi]

OK. And Randle makes less than the guys they added so clearly there was room for both him and Lebron.

Also have to look at deal structure. Second year of Randle's deal is a player option. I doubt the Lakers wanted to give him anything past a 1 year deal, as evident with all their other signings. You'd have to either over-pay in a 1 year scenario heavily (ala JJ Redick) or you'd have to give options for future years. Randle wasn't sacrificing potential income in trying to stay with the Lakers, nor should any young player. You get money when you can get it.

 

[trojanfan12]

There's a moratorium, which I'm sure you're aware that took place preventing guys who have agreed to deals to sign. We all know we go by the Woj and Sham bombs at midnight the start of free agency on what's been agreed upon. Unless you're DeAndre Jordan, usually those are 99% likely to go through.

Either way, Randle signed first. So the Lakers couldn't do anything at that point.

 

[dtgold88]

Also have to look at deal structure. Second year of Randle's deal is a player option. I doubt the Lakers wanted to give him anything past a 1 year deal, as evident with all their other signings. You'd have to either over-pay in a 1 year scenario heavily (ala JJ Redick) or you'd have to give options for future years. Randle wasn't sacrificing potential income in trying to stay with the Lakers, nor should any young player. You get money when you can get it.

I don't disagree, but they had enough cap space to figure something out. I don't think it would have taken JJ money. He wouldn't take, say, 15 mil on a 1 year deal over 18 mil for 2 if that's what LA wanted to do?