If you had NBA contracts that are partially guaranteed a team is still penalized for offering it, as a portion would could against the cap for a player not on your roster. I suggest a third of the contract. In the NFL its the signing bonus that counts against the cap. If you arn't paying a player there is nothing against the cap. Yeah I agree there should be more of a reward for higher seeds. I suggest letting the #1 seed pick their first round opponent, then #2, etc. Another idea is have a "play in" single elimination tournament for the 8th and or 7th seeds. The HCA seeds would get a few days of rest while the other teams play a quick back to back right before taking on a playoff opponent. Sort of similar to the playin games in the NCAA to get the 16th seed.
You think LA isn't an MVP candidate then I have to assume? Not sure what Durant has to do with Jackson, Lamb and Adams getting positive attention for the same thing the Blazers are doing, but getting negative attention.
Bummer for them, but that's professional sports I guess - the good and the bad happen all the time and unfortunately for OKC, they have to go through some of that stuff now just as the Bulls go through it with Rose and the Celtics with Rondo and the Blazers did before. As for what it means for Portland's games against them - after all these years with Blazers injuries, I have to admit that I am less concerned about "proving yourself against fully healthy teams" stuff - you got to live through the tough times, you should enjoy any good times, even if they come against less than healthy opposition.
All these injuries happening are in the first few months of the season. They don't look like breaking down after a long season injuries. How does shortening the season help exactly?
If Aldridge mixes up his play with a lot of inside moves and the team wins he has a chance. He's has no chance shooting primarily under 45% difficult two point jumpers. I was rambling about Durant. The OKC bench is vastly outperforming the Blazer bench so I have no issue with their bench getting much more positive press. Their bench players are also 'sexier' since they are very young and have potential to improve. Mo Williams and Wright don't have upside, and Freeland is rather plain. Our starters are getting all of the national recognition and rightly so.
Same amount of time, less games. If the team had 23 instead of 29 games in this period - that's a bit more time for the body to rest and heal. The issue imho is actually more problematic at the start of the year because not all of these guys were 100% in shape at the start of the year...
If there are less games, they can be spread out a bit more to eliminate things like four games in five nights.
I agree. The cheap owner didn't account for injuries and built a lethal but shallow team. OKC is probably figuring they will make their run in the playoffs, when it counts. But if that team isn't 90% healthy, I think they struggle in the playoffs.
The increase in quality of play might get a slight increase in attendance or ratings, but it would be very hard for this to cover the revenue lost from going to even an 70 game schedule.
I know some here will think I'm insane (OK, some already do), but I think Westbrook being out makes the Thunder better in two ways. Westbrook has always been a high volume, low efficiency chucker, and was even worse this year than in the past. His shooting percentages are abysmal, but because he thinks he's Batman, and not the Robin he really is, he takes shots away from the much more efficient Kevin Durant. Look at these numbers and tell me if you don't see the obvious problem with Westbrook's game: Russel Westbrook: USG% = 32.6 FGA/36 = 19.6 3FGA/36 = 4.8 FG% = .424 3FG% = .309 FT% = .793 TS% = .518 eFG% = .462 Kevin Durant: USG% = 29.8 FGA/36 = 17.5 3FGA/36 = 4.3 FG% = .490 3FG% = .424 FT% = .886 TS% = .628 eFG% = .542 What a bizarre world Russell Westbrook lives in that he actually thinks he deserves to have a higher USG% and more FGA/36 and more 3FGA/36 than Kevin Durant. Durant is phenomenally more efficient and just flat out one of the best offensive players in the league. So, if Westbrook is out, that should mean more shots for Durant which means OKC's offensive Eff should go up substantially. Reggie Jackson is also a much better shooter than Russell Westbrook - but without Westbrook's incredibly narcissistic arrogance (I realize that could be considered redundant, but it's the only way I can think of to describe Westbrook's self-love and self importance). In addition to taking shots away from Durant in general, Westbrook especially freezes out Durant in the 4th quarter of close games. He thinks he's the man, so he's going to be the one taking the big shots, when by all rights it should be Kevin Durant taking the big shots with the game on the line. Westbrook consistently freezes out Durant and calls his own number in the 4th quarter of playoff games. I think OKC will close out close games better with Durant rightly getting the bulk of the shots with the game on the line. He's much more dangerous, especially from 3-point range, more likely to get fouled and more likely to make his FTs when he does. In case, you can't tell, I absolutely hate Russell Westbrook's game. Which is why I'm glad he plays for OKC. In my opinion, Russell Westbrook dominating ball during the 4th quarter of close playoff games is the biggest obstacle to Kevin Durant winning an NBA championship. There is no denying the guy has talent, just not nearly as much as he thinks he does. He could be a great number 2 option, if he ever realizes that's what he is. He has the second best player in the world as a teammate, but he truly thinks he's better to the detriment of his team. Of course, there are also two areas where Westbrook's absence will hurt OKC. They will definitely miss his defense. And, although I think moving Reggie Jackson into the starting line-up will improve OKC's offensive efficiency (better shooters getting more shots), it kills their depth at PG. The drop off from Reggie Jackson to Derek the Dinosaur Fisher is monumental (17.0 - 7.5). So, look for Jackson to play big minutes until Westbrook comes back. He'll have to. So, all-in-all, I don't think this injury isn't as significant as many here seem to think. I think OKC's offensive efficiency will actually increase, but their defensive efficiency will get worse. Those two factors will offset each other, but due to the lack of a quality back-up PG, I suspect OKC will lose a couple more games without Westbrook than they would have with him. But, no way in hell do I think OKC suddenly goes from a .821 team to a .500 team or a .600 team. I suspect they will continue to win around 3/4ths (.750) of their games, give or take. The Blazers upcoming schedule looks to be much tougher than the Thunder's. So, we can't let up and just expect OKC to go away because Russ the ballhog is out. They won't, and the experience gained by guys like Reggie Jackson and Jeremy Lamb will just make them better come playoff time. The game on Tuesday, without Westbrook, is not a gimme. The Thunder are playing at home and they still have Kevin Durant. They will be fired up to be playing the other top contender in their division, looking to make a statement and looking for revenge for their loss in Portland. Can Portland win? You be they can, but they will need to play one of their best games of the year - they will definitely need to play better than they did against the Clippers last night. BNM
I disagree. His defense is overrated because he blocks a lot of shots, but he gets most of his blocks by playing help defense. There is a lot more to defense than blocking shots and Ibaka is not an exceptional 1-on-1 defender. He's basically average and he routinely gets schooled by taller and/or stronger power forwards. The time Aldridge lit him up was not an isolated instance. Ibaka has always struggled to guard Aldridge - so much so that Scott Brooks had to switch and put Kendrick Perkins on Aldridge most of last season. And, I LOVE when OKC has to do that as it means they are playing 4-on-5 on offense. Ibaka cannot guard LaMartcus 1-on-1, not even close, and I can't believe how over the hill Perkins is at 29. He was never that good, but he's flat out awful now. Steven Adams has the size/length/athleticism to match up with Aldridge (in theory), but he's an unproven 20-year old rookie, and if he's on Aldridge, who's going to guard Lopez. This is one benefit to having a true center next to Aldridge. Opponents can't simply let their center guard Aldridge and let their smaller power forward guard our center (like they did with Hickson last year). Now, they need some muscle and size to battle with Lopez down low, which means LaMarcus has a missmatch in his favor most nights. BTW, who do you consider a better defender, Ibaka or Aldridge? Guess what, according to 82games.com, it's Aldridge by a significant margin. Here's the relevant stats (from 82games.com) at their primary position of power forward Serge Ibaka: Own Production: PER = 17.8 PTS/48 = 21.7 Opponent Production: PER = 14.8 PTS/48 = 21.4 Net Production: PER = +3.0 PTS/48 = +0.3 LaMarcus Aldridge: Own Production: PER = 24.3 PTS/48 = 30.1 Opponent Production: PER = 14.6 PTS/48 = 16.8 Net Production: PER = +9.7 PTS/48 = +13.3 So, Ibaka basically gives up as many points as he scores, but Aldridge outscores his opponents by an average of 13.3 PTS/48 and holds his opponents to 4.6 fewer PTS/48 than Ibaka does. And, since Aldridge NEVER gets mentioned as all-defense candidate, Ibaka shouldn't either. BNM
You're asking too much from "experts", let alone some fans, to accept this stuff. It doesn't fit a populous narrative. But I do enjoy the effort and read.
Agree. 70 would be fine. I know he's hated around these parts, but I like Bill Simmons' FA Cup-style tournament for the last 2 seeds. Also gives the NBA an easier way to draw the casual fan in after March Madness wraps up and before the playoffs starts.
Also, too damn many pre-season games. There should be 4 preseason games, about 60 regular season games, and 6 teams per conference playoff, with the top two seeds getting byes. Of course, the teams that get buys would need to not be punished for it financially, like have the league pay them something? I doubt this will ever happen though because how would teams make up the revenue? Increase ticket prices? They'd really be banking on the hope that these moves would increase interest to an NFL like level.
