NBA Chatter '07-'08 - Page 2

The Los Angeles Lakers - your 2008 NBA World Champions.

There. I said it.

They're looking real good. But I have a hard time conceding it to them given all of the question marks surrounding their health. And, we haven't exactly seen Shaq or Kidd acclimate themselves to their new surroundings. And there's the little matter of the Hornets still being great and adding a nice piece in Bonzi Wells. I can't wait for the playoffs.

Hey, I'm still going with my Pistons. Last time we met a Lakers superteam in the finals what happened? Mavs scare me more than the Lakers, and Celtics scare me more than both of those teams.

If I were you I'd be more afraid of the Cavs at this point. I'm always amazed how much people overlook LeBron, considering that I saw Jordan's entire career up close and I think LeBron might actually be better.

Malone got hurt.

Not an excuse, but the series did suffer some good games (from a Laker perspective) because of that.

Fuck that, Malone was well past his prime then. They lost in a 5 game sweep, because they relied on slow names, Pistons couldn't do shit about Kobe, so they focused elsewhere and out hustled and out rebounded.

The Lakers got better with Gasol, that's true. And they're obviously the rising power in the west. That said, we'll have to see what happens this year. Kobe and the Gang put up a lot of points on the Suns the other night. But I don't know that they'll be able to do that over a seven game series. Kobe's obviously able to put up some huge numbers, but I doubt he'll be able to do 40 points a night. Plus he's injured. That may take it's toll over the remainder of the season. There's only so much tape can do.

Keep in mind that Lakers will get both Byrum and Ariza back before the playoff. Lakers are doing great with Gasol now, but I believe they will get even better down the stretch. Provided that Kobe's pinky doesn't get worse, I think they will go to the Finals this year.

I also think you can't downplay enough how nice of a deal Ferry pulled off at the deadline for the Cavs. Wallace might be a shell of his former self, but these guys are going to be the supporting cast of role players that Lebron needs. All he needs are solid players around him, not superstars. Teams can get burnt triple-teaming him and forcing him to beat them on his own now. All of these deals have turned a solid NBA season into the best in a long time.

I love how people think Shaq is going to perform significantly better in the future, as opposed to relatively similar, if not worse. Listening to people go gaga over how fresh he looked in the fourth quarter just boggled my mind. What, was he supposed to be tired after 29 minutes? The guy was running on two months of rest.

Care to bet on how energetic he'll be after 25 games?

The Phoenix Suns aren't winning a god damn thing until they start playing defense, and that wont happen until long after Steve Nash retires (and Shaq, contrary to popular belief, does not help their situation any). The Lakers, on the otherhand, are even better than the Spurs when healthy, and the two of them are a clear step above the rest of the field.

As for the history lesson, yes, Malone's presence would've changed things, but the thing is, when you hitch your wagon to a slew of guys in their mid-to-late thirties, injuries are to be expected. All pointing to Malone's injury does is underline the flaw in that team's construction.

Why am I a Knick fan? They always suck bad enough to miss the playoffs and get enough wins to get a low draft pick. Even worse: they still have Isiah Thomas running the show. Worst team in sports.

The Suns beat the Celtics handily last night -- playing solid defense and out rebounding their opponents. Shaq had a lot to do with that.

I don't think anyone believes that Shaq is going to be the dominant player of the past, but Phoenix doesn't need him to be. He's there to be a solid presence in the paint and get rebounds. So far he's doing that. Yes it's early, but it seems like it's working out okay. At least better that many people predicted.

Next year it'll be different, but I think this year he'll be great. He's motivated to prove people wrong and he's in a better situation than Miami.

Two weeks ago, if someone tried to put Shaq on the Suns in some NBA2k8 2v2, I would have vetoed that shit immediately. You can't put Shaq on the Suns!

The tradegasm is awesome news for the league. Scott Pollard is a legend in his own time.

You're not getting away with that. We seem to hear this more and more these days, though not as much as Kobe/Jordan talk. I understand Lebron is a very, very good player, but how does one come to a conclusion such as this so early in Lebron's accomplishment deprived career? I'm no Jordan apologist, but it's like people just forgot what he was like.

I don't think LA will win it all. The playoffs are an entirely different story than the regular season, so adding Gasol to Kobe and a relatively unexperienced cast of supporters (except Fisher) doesn't necessarily mean a ring. I still like the Spurs until someone proves otherwise.

Accomplishment deprived? At age 23, LeBron dragged that Cavs team to the Finals with far less talent around him than Jordan ever did. At this point in his career, Jordan wasn't nearly the shooter LeBron is now, and he was never as good a passer, even in his prime. People forget that Jordan played seven seasons before he won a title, and LeBron is simply better now than Jordan was then. And I never thought that about Kobe, for the record.

I live in Chicago (basically). I watched Jordan's entire career, and I do mean entire. I've been watching basketball ever since I can remember. And LeBron James is the most talented player I've ever seen in my life. Ever. He may not win as many titles as Jordan if the Cavs can't build a good team around him, but odds are he'll win at least one or two by sheer force of will. I have no doubt about it.

Jodan was up against the 86 Celtics, Sixers and tough Piston teams. LeBron has no competition in the East outside an aging Detroit team. Iverson led a just as shitty Sixers team to the NBA Finals. The East blows, it ain't that hard.

When I see someone better than Jordan I won't be afraid to say it. LeBron ain't there.

And by 1991 none of those teams you mentioned were left. The East was just as bad then as it is now, and Jordan was almost 30 at the time we went to the Finals for the first time. Yes he won and LeBron lost, but Jordan had a better team, and he was fortunate that a relatively mediocre Lakers team upset the Blazers, who would have given the Bulls a much, much tougher series.

The's crap. The Knicks were tough and a bit dirty, The Pacers had Miller and a decent cast, Morning and Johnson with Charlotte, Cleveland was still good, Miami was coming on.

What was there last year? The Pistons and that's it. This year it's the new look Celtics and Pistons.

Jordan had a much tougher road to get to the Finals. There were less teams and more talent back then. Expansion has dispersed the talent. Jordan and ESPN made the upcoming talent think one on one highlights and not fundamentals of team play.

LeBron is very good, Jordan is the best ever.

The 91 Knicks were garbage, I remember watching the Bulls mop the floor with them in the playoffs, I mean really dominate them. The Pacers were nothing special before Mark Jackson and Jalen Rose arrived, Larry Johnson and Alonzo Mourning were at UNLV and Georgetown (respectively) in 1991, and Miami was riding the coattails of Harold Minor. The Celtics were on their last legs, with Bird's gimpy back forcing him to defer to Reggie Lewis (who was a good player, but no Larry Bird), and the Pistons' entire frontcourt turned to dust before my very eyes that year. There was nobody in the East in 1991. Nobody.

EDITED TO ADD: And I always get a kick out of people who say that fundamentals and team play were better back then. That's a sign to me that you don't really watch basketball, or if you do you don't understand it. The relaxation of the illegal defense rules over the last ten years has made team basketball far more common than it was in the 90s. The 90s were all about the two-man game, where there was a pick-and-roll on the strong side of the court while the other three guys stood around. The defenders covering those three guys couldn't help because of the illegal defense rules, so six players on the court became totally irrelevant. Now you can't do that, NBA offenses rely so much more on draw-and-kick and motion offenses that rely on moving the ball.

Man, if you're going to make a statement like Lebron might be better than Jordan, you better come with something a little stronger than a trip to the finals, especially when you were swept.

[QUOTE= Yes he won and LeBron lostQUOTE]

Yes, won and won often. Well said.

My opinion is based on watching him play, not purely on the results. The Spurs were so much better than the Cavs that they really didn't stand a chance.

Keep in mind that I'm a Bulls fan and a huge admirer of Michael Jordan, but I actually remember his entire career, including his first few seasons when he was criticized for being too selfish and not helping his team and being all hype. I actually remember what his career was like before he was crowned the official and unquestioned God of Basketball who shall never be usurped, and the cult of personality that followed. For God's sake I loved watching him play, it was a joy to have him on my team, but it's not completely inconceivable that someone might dare to come along who might be his superior.

You do realise the Bulls went to more than NBA finals. The teams I mentioned may not have competed in 91, but at some point in the Bulls run were light years better than any team(besides Pistons) playing now.

You're comparing Jordan's entire career to LeBron's first four-and-a-half seasons? Talk about a straw man.

What you're saying is that Jordan in his prime was better than LeBron is now. Yeah, no shit. What I'm saying is that LeBron at this point in his career is ahead of where Jordan was. And based on what I've seen of his game (which is more well-rounded than Jordan's was) I think he's more talented and will probably end up being a better player. Which doesn't necessarily mean he'll win as many championships as Jordan. In fact I doubt he will. Doesn't change my opinion.

Ugh, this Suns/Pistons games is about as ugly as Jeff Van Gundy. As a Suns fan, this makes me want to stick my head out the window....

No I'm saying that LeBron James had nowhere near the level of competition in the East that Jordan did in his first 4 seasons. And many of the teams Jordan faced in his Championship years were superior to anything LeBron is facing now.

In his 2nd season Michael Jordan faced one of the greatest teams of all time(Celtics) and put 63 on them. Nobody on the Celtics could cover him. What would Jordan have don against the Wizards, Bulls, and Pistons? He would have won too.

Hey, be fair, Pistons are playing great. I was very interested in this game, and now here we have a 30 point win. Its not about to get any easier for the Suns, we'll see if they're any good considering they're still getting adjusted.

The Pistons are certainly firing on all cylinders (get it?), but the Suns played very sloppy. They need to stop with the turn-overs.

Pistons vs. the NBA: 98 PPG
Pistons vs. the Suns: 116 Points

Amazing how often teams manage to fire on all cylinders against the Suns, just this strange coincidence I tell yah.

As for that Jordan argument, yeesh, nobody is even listening to each other. You've got one guy arguing raw tools, and another arguing how their careers compare in a historical context. I'd say you're both right, if not for all that best ever nonsense. I don't know about you, but I'm long past that sycophant stage where I ignore absolutely everyone who played basketball before 1990.

I never once said best ever, I said better than Jordan. I've never been one of these people who blindly accepts Jordan as the best basketball player who ever lived, and again: I live in Chicago.

Raw tools is the only way to compare them at this point. Until LeBron's career is over, comparing them historically is unfair and pointless.

You do realize that the way rules have changed since Jordan retired make the game far less physical and more conducive to offense. Jordan would've scored 40 points per game, shooting over %50 in this league. But that's forgetting the fact that Jordan was not only the best offensive player in the league, but perhaps the best defensive one as well. Lebron can't touch that.

Disagree. Team defense has changed drastically, as I talked about earlier. Yes, you can't be as physical one-on-one, but it's so much harder to isolate with the illegal defense rules gone. Every time LeBron goes to the basket he faces triple, sometimes quadruple teams. Jordan faced double teams, but not like this.

I'm not sure where to find these sorts of stats, but I'm pretty sure scoring overall is down from the early 90's, which wouldn't be the case if the rules favored offense today.

As for Jordan's defense, he didn't develop into a great defensive player until later in his career, and I think it was partially prompted by Pippen's arrival, who was a great defensive player from Day 1. When Jordan was young, he wasn't particularly interested in playing defense. I think LeBron has the ability to be one of the best defensive players in the league if he's interested, though it remains to be seen if that will ever happen.

EDIT: Found the scoring stats: Last year the scoring average across the NBA was 98.74 per game, down almost eight points from the early 90's (106.30 in 1991 for example) and over ten from late 80's (109.94 in 1987). And don't tell me that this is due to expansion, there are only three more teams than there were then, and the league wasn't importing talent from overseas nearly as much. So I don't buy the idea that the talent pool is diluted, that's just simplistic romanticism of the past. Scoring is down because the rules make it harder to isolate, and therefore harder to score, not easier.

SAN ANTONIO SPURS.

2008 NBA CHAMPIONS.

Had to be said.

I was making a distinction between you and Anya, and pointing out that you're not even really arguing with one another. As for the "best ever" aside, that was Anya, not you, obviously, and we apparently agree there.

See, I don't think so. I just think the Bulls were the wrong fit for him. Kind of like how Randy Moss was a superstar in Minnesota, then went to shit with the hapless Raiders, only to rise to superstardom again with New England.

Wallace will play D, rebound and pick up grabage points, and will serve as a Charles Oakely-ish "enforcer" for LeBron, which is exactly what that team needs.

The Spurs just beat the Mavs in a down to the wire game with around 20 lead changes. Awesome game, but I thought it was kinda strange they pulled Jason Kidd in the last 2 minutes. I guess he's still working out their game strategies or something, but he didn't make that big of an impact that I could see.

GO SPURS GO

Lakers.

13-1 for the month of February.

This is only the beginning.

I guess no one gives a shit about the Rockets and their current hot streak? Or is everyone dismissing the importance of it since they believe the Rockets won't be able to do anything come playoff time?

I'm a Rocket fan, so I am obviously biased, but I think this team stands a lot better chance than most are giving them of getting out of the first round and really making some noise this year. I am actually starting to doubt, in my mind, if the team is that much better with Yao on the floor. There are just some things that they can do with more athletic players on the court that they can't with Yao. And it seems right now that those things really play well to our current cast of players.

(As a casual observer) There's no doubt what the Rockets are doing is impressive. But the Lakers are back, on a great run, their big move redefining and revitalizing the team... and the defending champs are on a streak almost as good as Houston's. Add to that Yao being out, even if you end up being better able to utilize other strengths without him, and T-Mac's playoff record, and it becomes clear why the streak isn't as big a deal as it could be.

Well, the Rockets will prove me wrong and make it into the playoffs.

Hopefully, they'll prove me right again when they get knocked out in the first round.

Rockets area good team, but god will they miss that size even just coming off the bench. I expect them to get taken out in the first round, assuming they make the playoffs. The Lakers are a great team right now, come playoffs, though, is when we will see if they can grind it out with a team. The Spurs should never be counted out, fundamental ball playing and talented players will always serve them well, age not so much. The Suns look like a bust right now, if they don't get their business together and soon, the playoff might look like a pipe dream, Golden state should be their biggest worry. The Hornets, so much potential to play spoiler, lack of experience in the playoffs will be the question mark as to how far they go. The one thing thats scares me most is of course a Pistons/Jazz finals, Utah has our number and then some, but first we need to figure out how to beat the Celtics.

Excellent. None of the pundits at ESPN want to give any credit to the Rockets for the streak. No one here seems to think it is indication of anything other than a team being hot and that a first round exit is again in the works. Makes it all the more sweeter when they advance.

Dwyane Wade out for the season? Riley scouting college games?

I'm calling it now: the Heat are tanking to make sure they retain the best chance at Micheal Beasley. A few wins and they might eke their way out of the cellar.

Doesn't Riley wear multiple hats with the Heat, though? Since this season is obviously lost, I can't fault him for putting draft stuff as his first priority. That doesn't necessarily equate to tanking games. Sure, if that's a direct result, they probably won;t turn down the extra balls in the hopper, but there is a strategy to it that justifies the decision beyond just trying to lose.

With Wade, I mean, even as little attention as I pay to the NBA, I have heard about the guy's workload and reckless playing style. If he is hurting, it's just smart to shut him down. Again, you can say "tanking", but if there's a compelling team reason other than ensuring yourself of the worst record, then I say it's difficult to blame them.

This strikes me as very similar to the year David Robinson sat out with a foot injury....Which happened to be the year before Tim Duncan came out in the draft.

That is the king of all tank jobs. I think they changed the lottery rules specifically as a result of that season.

22 games now.

This Houston Rockets streak is as impressive as this sausage.

Denver over Seattle: 168-116.

Unbelievable. How many games can you score 116 points and STILL lose? Congrats to Denver for making history, and congrats to Seattle for being the ones that got slaughtered for it. Gee, I can't wait until The Sonics make their way to Oklahoma City.

So it looks bad for the Mavs. Nowitzki (sp) went down pretty hard in the 3rd. No real details are known yet, but it's an ankle and leg injury. What a time for your starter to go down. If he's out for an extended period of time, I could see them falling out of the playoff hunt, being usurped by Denver.

Which would be great, cause then LA and Denver get to duke it out in the 1st round, while the Suns quietly dispatch the Spurs.

That is one bad mama-jamma of a sausage.

Seems like Donnie Walsh's gonna be the next Knick president and Isiah will be shown the door for good. Sure, it's three years late, but the Dolan Brain has finally seen the light!!! I swear to God, if they decide to keep Isiah on as coach....

Sure, I'd prefer Colangelo or Jerry West, but my dead grandfather could run this team better then Isiah has.