2018 NBA offseason

[WiggyRuss]

He is getting the "lions share " credit when they win? BS.

RW will.

a LOT more than if he played with LBJ that is for sure and you know that.

 

[Bolts]

Kobe helping a Celtic?

 

[trojanfan12]

Kobe helping a Celtic?

First sign of the Apocalypse.

 

[Wamu]

Well I'm disgusted. I knew the Celtics should have included Tatum in a deal for Kawhi. Ya fucked up Danny. Watch next Tatum will be saying the Earth is flat.

 

[Battlelyon]

First sign of the Apocalypse.

Kobe smartly rather work with him than a Ball brother

 

[msgkings322]

First sign of the Apocalypse.

Thanks Obama!

 

[tlance]

Yeah, you're right. But there are huge differences between...

A) a drive thru worker at a Mcdonalds leaves for Carls Jr

B) A CFO of a mens clothing company leaves to join a tech software startup

C) The CEO of FedEx leaves to become the CEO of UPS

All 3 of those guys have every right to do whatever they want (assuming contracts and agreements allow it) and SHOULD do whatever will make them the happiest.

But only 1 of those examples is going to be viewed as a betrayal, and for good reason.

That is very true, and a good point.

But, maybe it shouldn't be viewed like that.

Because businesses and teams are always going to do what is in their best interest. So if people are going to criticize player loyalty when they leave via free agency, those same people should be criticizing franchises that trade key players. Like Toronto did with deRozan and Boston did with IT.

It is such an unbelievable double standard it is crazy.

As more and more stats move, the stigma gets less, but still. There are very few (maybe no) businesses where standard employees get looked down upon for seeking a better opportunity. The CEO example is a bit different IMO, because the CEO is probably more like the NBA owner.

 

[Wamu]

Thanks Obama!

 

[Raw_Bee808]

 

[gordontrue]

That is very true, and a good point.

But, maybe it shouldn't be viewed like that.

Because businesses and teams are always going to do what is in their best interest. So if people are going to criticize player loyalty when they leave via free agency, those same people should be criticizing franchises that trade key players. Like Toronto did with deRozan and Boston did with IT.

It is such an unbelievable double standard it is crazy.

As more and more stats move, the stigma gets less, but still. There are very few (maybe no) businesses where standard employees get looked down upon for seeking a better opportunity. The CEO example is a bit different IMO, because the CEO is probably more like the NBA owner.

I completely agree with that.

I think the reason for it comes down to the fact that (most) fans have their loyalty to a team, a franchise, a company, not to a player. Which leaves them siding with the billionaire owners over the players, and causes this double-standard.

Which is another peculiarity with sports. Its the only industry where brand loyalty is praised and shopping brands or moving to better brands is criticized and disgraced.

 

[Raw_Bee808]

 

[msgkings322]

That is very true, and a good point.

But, maybe it shouldn't be viewed like that.

Because businesses and teams are always going to do what is in their best interest. So if people are going to criticize player loyalty when they leave via free agency, those same people should be criticizing franchises that trade key players. Like Toronto did with deRozan and Boston did with IT.

It is such an unbelievable double standard it is crazy.

As more and more stats move, the stigma gets less, but still. There are very few (maybe no) businesses where standard employees get looked down upon for seeking a better opportunity. The CEO example is a bit different IMO, because the CEO is probably more like the NBA owner.

Fans will always side with owners/teams over players because they are rooting for laundry. Players come and go but the team is your tribe.

 

[msgkings322]

I completely agree with that.

I think the reason for it comes down to the fact that (most) fans have their loyalty to a team, a franchise, a company, not to a player. Which leaves them siding with the billionaire owners over the players, and causes this double-standard.

Which is another peculiarity with sports. Its the only industry where brand loyalty is praised and shopping brands or moving to better brands is criticized and disgraced.

You ninja'd me

 

[WiggyRuss]

That is very true, and a good point.

But, maybe it shouldn't be viewed like that.

Because businesses and teams are always going to do what is in their best interest. So if people are going to criticize player loyalty when they leave via free agency, those same people should be criticizing franchises that trade key players. Like Toronto did with deRozan and Boston did with IT.

It is such an unbelievable double standard it is crazy.

As more and more stats move, the stigma gets less, but still. There are very few (maybe no) businesses where standard employees get looked down upon for seeking a better opportunity. The CEO example is a bit different IMO, because the CEO is probably more like the NBA owner.

i do not get what the dispute is here.

Durant is obviously free to do whatever the hell he wants to do.

Fans are free to rake him over the coals or hold him up as the best thing since sliced bread depending what they want to do.

Fans are under absolutely ZERO responsibility to say "awwww Durant did what he thought was best for him and I respect that"--- Fans dont give a fuck. WE dont watch the NBA because we care about the particulars of KEvin Durant's personal life. We care about how and where he plays as it effects the NBA.

 

[Raw_Bee808]

 

[WiggyRuss]

I completely agree with that.

I think the reason for it comes down to the fact that (most) fans have their loyalty to a team, a franchise, a company, not to a player. Which leaves them siding with the billionaire owners over the players, and causes this double-standard.

Which is another peculiarity with sports. Its the only industry where brand loyalty is praised and shopping brands or moving to better brands is criticized and disgraced.

but its not like we are siding with the owners either--- no fan ever said-- WOW- GREAT move by Arison- that dude just saved himself a TON of money by using his first round pick to get off that contract!

We care how the ownership acts as it relates to the team.

The thing is- the interests of ownership and the interests of fans seem to overlap far more than the interests of fans and the interests of players.

 

[gordontrue]

but its not like we are siding with the owners either--- no fan ever said-- WOW- GREAT move by Arison- that dude just saved himself a TON of money by using his first round pick to get off that contract!

We care how the ownership acts as it relates to the team.

The thing is- the interests of ownership and the interests of fans seem to overlap far more than the interests of fans and the interests of players.

yeah exaclty, its not that fans are fans of the owner. But they just happen to be on the same side as the owner, both are invested in the team moreso than any one player. (Although you could split hairs that owners care about money and fans care about success, which do not always lineup perfectly)

 

[WiggyRuss]

yeah exaclty, its not that fans are fans of the owner. But they just happen to be on the same side as the owner, both are invested in the team moreso than any one player. (Although you could split hairs that owners care about money and fans care about success, which do not always lineup perfectly)

unless you are a fan of a Dan Gilbert team- and winning is more important to the owner than money- at least as it relates to the drop in the proverbial bucket that the Cavs payroll is relating to Gilbert's net worth.

I am sure Gilbert wouldnt be cool with running 150M dollar deficits each year to fund his hobby- but running 50M dollar deficits to fund his hobby seems palatable to him.

 

[tlance]

unless you are a fan of a Dan Gilbert team- and winning is more important to the owner than money- at least as it relates to the drop in the proverbial bucket that the Cavs payroll is relating to Gilbert's net worth.

I am sure Gilbert wouldnt be cool with running 150M dollar deficits each year to fund his hobby- but running 50M dollar deficits to fund his hobby seems palatable to him.

I am going to laugh really hard when Gilbert is back below the salary cap for years to come when this bad contracts clear.

 

[LAD]

The Lakers have plenty of playmakers that can't be left alone and their 3 point shooting isn't likely to be as bad as last season.

Who is going to be a threat to the point that they can't be left open other than Kuzma - who will most likely be coming off the bench?

Rondo? He's ALWAYS left open lol. Same scenario with Ball. In each of those cases the better teams are capable of playing the passing lanes to interrupt the ball movement. Lance? He might get hot every once in a while but again, he's not exactly a threat. Just by adding LBJ won't change the fact that those guys are not good shooters. In fact one could argue that there's only potential for their # of attempts to go up, which has the potential to lower their % if they can't hit those shots.

So now, there are potentially 2-3 guys in your lineup that the defense can lag off of or completely leave open effectively forcing them to try to score. I'm not sure that's a good plan. But, that's just my opinion. We will see how it plays out on the court.