NBA 2007-2008 season discussion (1 Viewer)

[Scott Merryfield]

I'm surprised that it took so little to get Gasol. I think the asking price was quite high last season.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Looks like Javaris Crittenden (former Ga. Tech player) will be playing closer to home in the trade to Memphis, TN.

 

[Jan H]

Man, that trade was a steal for the Lakers. When Bynum comes back, they will have the deepest, most talented team in the league. Even without Bynum, they match up well against anyone.

 

[Kirk Tsai]

I can't believe it. Amidst the Kidd trade talks, I don't think anyone saw this coming. Truth be told, I have sympathy with Kwame Brown; he's an underrated defensive player, seems like a genuinely nice guy, but happens to have hands made of brick. And I think Crittenton is going to be a good player in a couple of years, maybe even next year. But still, this is a heist, and kudos to Mitch for making such a move.

At full force, the lineup of Bynum, Gasol, Odom, Kobe, Fisher with backups of Farmar, Walton, Radmanovic, etc. are going to give every other team huge matchup problems.

 

[Kirk Tsai]

A second huge trade just occurred within a week. The Suns send Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks for Shaq.

From quickly looking at some of the articles written on the trade, the vast majority of basketball followers are stunned by the Suns making this trade. I agree with them. Shaq isn't nearly the player he once was, and he still has 2 years worth of $20 million each left. He also seems like a terrible fit for the run-and-gun, pick-and-roll Suns. Even prime Shaq was only effective offensively when close to the paint, and that would block Amare Stoudamire's moves. The Suns want him to play defense and rebound, but he's not really a great player at those.

Marion might not have been an All-Star on other teams, but he's a perfect fit for the Suns. He's their best defender and rebounder, a terrific finisher, and doesn't require any kind of isolation play to get his points. The Suns will miss him. Marion might have wanted out of Phoenix, but I can only imagine this was not the best option for the Suns. Even Ron Artest (whom the Kings have made clear are shopping) with all his baggage seems like a better fit than Shaq.

 

[Brandon_T]

Horrible trade for the Suns, doesn't make any sense really. As far as the Gasol trade, I have hears some rumblings that they only made that trade because there is a high chance that Bynum won't be returning this year. That remains to be seen, but it was a steal for them for sure.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

I'm thrilled with what the Lakers have done this year. Not only did they not trade Bynum and watch that work out very well for themselves but then they got Pau Gasol without giving up any of their core talent.

I've also been listening to a lot more NBA games on Sirius this year than I have in ages. Portland is a good story and so is New Orleans.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

The Suns are making a huge gamble. Shaq appears to have very little left in the tank, and he will be a huge burden on their salary cap. The one positive is Nash can run the pick and roll with Shaq's presense inside, and teams cannot double both Shaq and Stoudamire down low. If Shaq can play every night, he and Stoudamire will be tough to defend as a tandem.

Miami, meanwhile, has very little to lose in this deal. They have the worst record in the league, so they gain youth in dumping the aging O'Neal for Marion. They also gain a little salary cap room. Although I'm sure Marion is not cheap, he has to be less expensive than Shaq.

 

[Kirk Tsai]

Shaq for this year and the next two are at 20 million each year. Marion is at 16.4 this year, and 17 next year; he has the option of opting out next season. Marion wasn't happy with the Suns, and might have opted out. The way I look at it, Marion staying for his last contract year or opting out BOTH seem better than Shaq for the Suns next year. Shaq is only declining, so Marion would be a more productive player next year for sure. If he opted out, then the Suns suddenly have lots of cap space to sign a free agent.

The Heat don't need to intentionally tank to be in a good position this year's draft class of Michael Beasly, Derrick Rose, Eric Gordon, OJ Mayo, etc. They are pretty bad.

 

[Holadem]

I've not watched a single basket ball game from start to finish since Jordan retired from the Bulls the last time. The funny thing is that I've always rooted against him.

No subsequent played hyped as "The next Jordan" ever even came close. God is MJ, and when he left, he took basketball with him

--
H

 

[Andy Sheets]

That's the problem: I don't think he can play every night. They're clearly making the trade for the playoffs but I don't think Shaq has enough in the tank to put together one good playoff series, nevermind take them all the way to the finals.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I agree, Andy. I guess I should have made that a "big IF". It certainly was a curious trade, but it still had some logic to it from Phoenix's standpoint. I'm still trying to figure out what Memphis gained in the Gasol trade to the Lakers.

 

[Robert_Z]

About #1, the Spurs are the victims of more bad calls than anyone in the league. That is the only reason the Mavs beat them in the conference semis in '06. Otherwise, the Spurs would have already had their three-peat, and all this "Are they a dynasty or not?" talk would be non-existent.

About the NBA as a topic, I think the Spurs have a lot to do with it. They are THE dominant team, but they are not flashy or controversial. The biggest endorsement deal any Spurs player has is with local HEB grocery stores. They are not marketable.

As a huge Spurs fan, I could not care less about any of that. They win championships, and that is all I care about. If I did not like the Spurs, I would not comment either because the only things I could say are the only two things people already can and do say:

1. They are dirty. (That is mostly cry-baby talk from Suns fans, which is laughable given the Spurs' undeserved but long-standing reputation as a soft team.)

2. They are boring and bad for TV ratings. (I am not an advertising exec, so I don't give a rat's ass if TV viewers think they are boring. If people don't want to watch championship-caliber basketball, that's their choice.)

The funny thing about #2 is if you think back to the most-memorable playoff series in recent memory, almost all of them involve San Antonio:

'07 Western semis Spurs vs. Phoenix: The bloody nose, the knee, the trip, the hip-check, the coming-off-the-bench rule, the schooling by Ginobili (33 pts) Parker (30 pts) and Duncan (one block shy of triple-double) in clinching game 6
'06 Finals Heat vs. Mavs...Wade was unreal in crunch time...and Dallas' choke job was surreal.
'06 Western semis Spurs vs. Mavs (the best playoff series of the decade...simply unbelievable games, sadly marred by bad officiating that cost SA the series)
'05 Finals Spurs vs. Detroit...incredible game 5 and intense game 7
'04 Western semis Spurs vs. Lakers: .4 seconds (grrrr)
'03 Western semis Spurs vs. Lakers: In and out for Horry in game 5, and then a 28-point drubbing to eliminate the Lakers in LA.

Yeah, the Spurs are pretty boring.

 

[Jan H]

The Spurs are a great team and worthy of respect for winning 4 championships in the last 9 seasons. But nobody who knows basketball well would consider them in the same league with the '60's Celtics, the '80's Lakers, the '90's Bulls, or the threepeat Lakers of '00-'02. A team that can't win back-to-back titles shouldn't even merit inclusion in this discussion.

And, yes, the Spurs are dirty and boring. That's why they get no calls.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

This isn't really a negative comment on the Spurs but more a commentary on my opinion on the state of the league in general over the past few seasons. I'm not so sure the Spurs play championship caliber basketball as much as they are the least rotten apple in a bin full of them.

Also, a number of the series mentioned involve San Antonio, they also involve a number of teams that people would consider appealing to watch such as Phoenix, Dallas, and L.A. It takes 2 teams to make a series so you can't credit all of those series as proof that the spurs aren't boring without acknowledging the opponents.


Oh, and how was Dallas Vs. Golden State not on your list? Sure it doesn't prove your point but that series is way more memorable to me than San Antonio-Detroit. Although I don't discount the latter's worth especially to Spurs fans.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I think Robert's list is very subjective, and will vary with different fans. I would certainly put the Warriors upset over the Mavs on the list, and the Pistons - Pacers series in Detroit's championship year would also make my list.

 

[Andy Sheets]

I don't really have any major problems with the Spurs, but I have a feeling that plays like this might have something to do with why people are perhaps a little lukewarm on them (and the NBA in general):

 

[Robert_Z]

First, big boo-boo (HUGE) on my part to exclude Dallas-Golden State. That was an amazing series...unfortunately I missed a lot of it sleeping because the games started at 10 pm local time. In terms of excitement, that may have been the #1 NBA series in quite a while. And as a Spurs fan, I concede that SA did not match up well with Dallas last season, so we Spurs fans owe a big time "Thank you" to the Warriors for clearing the path for a 4th title run.

And you are right, it does take two teams to make a good and interesting series. Spurs vs. Suns/Mavs/Lakers are great series that NBA basketball fans would love to watch. Unfortunately for the Spurs, three of their Finals opponents have been boring teams. Some would argue all four, but for sure, the Knicks, Nets and Cavs are all boring teams who were all overmatched, although NJ at least put up a fight.

But as I said before, the media and Spurs detractors say the only thing they can: The Spurs are bad for TV ratings...this is the worst-rated series in XX number of years. I tell you what, if it were not for the Spurs, I would not have watched either, because the Knicks, Nets and Cavs are among the most boring teams around. Even with King James, the Cavs are mind-numbingly boring. But somehow, it is San Antonio's fault that they play boring teams in the Finals.

None of this talk would exist if the NBA seeded teams 1-16 based on record, regardless of conference. Then we could have had Finals series such as Spurs-Lakers/Mavs/Suns. Nobody would be complaining then, at least not about the boring part.

 

[Brandon_T]

Oh Sprewell.....ESPN - Ex-NBA star Sprewell sells $1.5 million yacht, home could be foreclosed - NBA

 

[Jan H]

The Mavs may or may not have acquired the services of Jason Kidd. As a Laker fan, this acquisition doesn't exactly have me shaking in my boots. I think the Mavs were about as good as they were ever going to be without him, and I'm not sure this really makes them better, if it all goes down.

Other thoughts:

The Celtics are on a nice run without Garnett. These guys are amazing. Their consistent day-to-day commitment to team defense is inspirational. Doc Rivers is the coach of the year.

The Spurs are doing quite well in the absence of Tony Parker. They're starting to hit their stride. Always a scary thought.

The Pistons win often and easy. Let's see if they're still interested, come playoff time.

The Suns are a work in progress. If it works, they'll win the championship. If not, they may be an 8th seed.

The Lakers? If Bynum comes back strong, I just don't see them losing to anyone in a 7-game series, no matter how healthy everyone else is.

Here's hoping every team in the league enjoys the best of health after the All-Star break. I want to see KG, Tony Parker, Andrew Bynum, Shaq, Josh Howard, etc, as soon as possible. This is shaping up to be one of the great years in NBA history.