2021 NBA Offseason

[The Q]

LOL, sincerely doubt it affects the Lakers two years in a row. Some other team will be forced to earn it's playoff seeding for more than 82 games. At least baseball recognized that the Covid rules changes were temporary and should remain so.

More so that the ignorant crybaby said someone should get fired for inventing it

 

[The Q]

They should be just as eager to find a way to build around him better as he is for the help.

the gm has done a really good job.

but when he missed, he missed big

 

[shopson67]

the gm has done a really good job.

but when he missed, he missed big

2nd statement debunks the first?

 

[shopson67]

More so that the ignorant crybaby said someone should get fired for inventing it

It's a stupid money grab gimmick. No team that fights for too long of a season already should have to re-earn it's playoff seeding. Now, with a full length season coming up, they're still going to extend it even longer for this play-in crap? While the other teams sit on their hands for a week and get rusty?

 

[trojanfan12]

LOL, sincerely doubt it affects the Lakers two years in a row. Some other team will be forced to earn it's playoff seeding for more than 82 games. At least baseball recognized that the Covid rules changes were temporary and should remain so.

Meh, I'm willing to take a look and see how it pans out after an 82 game season. I'm never gonna hate watching more basketball.

 

[msgkings322]

Meh, I'm willing to take a look and see how it pans out after an 82 game season. I'm never gonna hate watching more basketball.

I love it, don't see any downside to the 7-10 play in games.

 

[trojanfan12]

I love it, don't see any downside to the 7-10 play in games.

It'll take some getting used to. But, expanding playoffs or adding games always does. It's been if you're in the top 8, you're in the playoffs. Now, you could potentially have the 7 and/or 8 seeds not getting in.

Of course, the flipside of the argument is (or could have been) the Lakers. A 7 seed because of injuries that may very well be in the finals right now had they stayed healthy in the playoffs. if not for a couple of late wins, they may have been a 9 or 10 seed.

. Bottom line, as long as it makes money, it ain't going anywhere.

 

[msgkings322]

It'll take some getting used to. It's been if you're in the top 8, you're in the playoffs. Now, you could potentially have the 7 and/or 8 seeds not getting in.

Of course, the flipside of the argument is (or could have been) the Lakers. A 7 seed because of injuries that may very well be in the finals right now had they stayed healthy in the playoffs. if not for a couple of late wins, they may have been a 9 or 10 seed.

But, expanding playoffs or adding games always does. Bottom line, as long as it makes money, it ain't going anywhere.

Yes and it used to be there was no 3 point line. I'm already 'used to' it, I love it. Again, no downside for us fans.

If your team is a 7 or 8 seed (like the Ws were for me) and they don't make the playoffs, ok well, so what? They were gonna get clobbered in the first round anyway.

 

[tlance]

These guys also take winning into play when deciding on what money they'll sign for. Denver is very unlikely to be the favorite in West in the near future, although they'll be in the mix. Signing with a team like the Clippers or Lakers could make them a big favorite. Barton may be a better fit with George than Kawhi, although both have their injury histories. George seemed to blossom a bit with Kawhi sidelined this past postseason.

Denver and Barton are both interested in a new deal, but it will have to be on Barton's terms this time.

Barton hasn’t really gotten a big contract yet though.

Typically guys who leave money on the table to sign with a contender are vets who have been around and are on the downside of their careers.

 

[bksballer89]

If your team is a 7 or 8 seed (like the Ws were for me) and they don't make the playoffs, ok well, so what? They were gonna get clobbered in the first round anyway.

this isn't always the case. It is almost never the case for the 7 seed

 

[msgkings322]

this isn't always the case. It is almost never the case for the 7 seed

I still love it. Makes the game better for the fans, full stop.

 

[bksballer89]

I still love it. Makes the game better for the fans, full stop.

I don't mind it. I just feel bad for 7 seeds who may end up in 3 way tie for 5th or finish 1-2 games out of HCA in round 1 to deal with this crap even though they may have finished 5-7 games better than the 8th seed.

I would remove the 7th seed from it. Keep it the same but eliminate the 7 vs 8 game.

Keep it as 9 vs 10 and the winner plays the 8th seed

 

[bksballer89]

I would even like it if they judge it by how close the 8th finish to 7th and let that determine if the 7 vs 8 is necessary.

Like if the 7th seed finish 4 or more games better than the 8th, they are not in the play-in game.

It is not the end of world but those are the little things I would like to eventually see....highly unlikely though

 

[wildturkey]

 

[shopson67]

Barton hasn’t really gotten a big contract yet though.

Typically guys who leave money on the table to sign with a contender are vets who have been around and are on the downside of their careers.

Is he really a big contract guy? If you don't get one by age 30...

 

[The Q]

Is he really a big contract guy? If you don't get one by age 30...

he’ll get 8 figured annually. Again.

he’s just never going to get that 100m deal

 

[tlance]

Is he really a big contract guy? If you don't get one by age 30...

Depends how you define big contract.

No, he isn’t getting any type of mega deal, but a guy like him is also going to be a lot less likely to leave money on the table than would somebody like David West who had made a lot more money when he made that choice.

 

[shopson67]

Depends how you define big contract.

No, he isn’t getting any type of mega deal, but a guy like him is also going to be a lot less likely to leave money on the table than would somebody like David West who had made a lot more money when he made that choice.

Weird example to use. West never made more than $12m-ish on average of any of his contracts and jumped to league minimum. Barton turned down $15m and we're expecting him to be in the range of MLE (nearly $10M per), not league min.

 

[tlance]

Weird example to use. West never made more than $12m-ish on average of any of his contracts and jumped to league minimum. Barton turned down $15m and we're expecting him to be in the range of MLE (nearly $10M per), not league min.

But that is my point.

I think he gets bigger offers elsewhere and he is likely to take one.

You are suggesting he might sign in LA for the MLE. I think he will get more than that and I think he will max out his earning/big role potential.

 

[shopson67]

But that is my point.

I think he gets bigger offers elsewhere and he is likely to take one.

You are suggesting he might sign in LA for the MLE. I think he will get more than that and I think he will max out his earning/big role potential.

If he was going to max out that potential with a good team, his best option is staying put or S&T (bird rights). If he's frustrated with Denver and their perceived ceiling, his options are short for contending teams needing a starting SG.