2013-14 NBA Thread part 1

You're absolutely right that it's nothing more than a nice farewell contract. And that's the Lakers' prerogative. But it likely means that they won't be competing for a championship again until 2015-16.

 

Unless he plays insanely well this year, no one would sign him to a contract which pays more than $10mm. That is just a cap crushing deal for a team which could have reinvented itself this off season.

 

Were they going to realistically have a shot at a title before then?

And they with it being LA there's still an outside shot. I honestly think Melo somehow lands there.

 

The clear difference being that this Pacer crew is far more mentally stable.

I agree the 05 Pacers were probably the best team in the league until the Palace brawl, but that roster was also a ticking time bomb from the beginning with the headcase hat trick of Artest, Jackson and Tinsley in the same lineup. Even if that night in Detroit hadn't happened, I suspect that group still would've found some way to implode that season.

This Pacer crew is built quite differently. Injuries might derail them. But the crazies won't.

 

Apparently, the goal was to pay Bryant while still having enough space left to sign one big free agent next summer.

 

I know it's only 14 games -- about a sixth of the season -- but LeBron's shooting slash is 61/49/80. Averaging 26-7-6.

He's good.

 

Can we just cancel the Eastern Conference until the conference finals? A whopping three teams -- Indiana (13-1), Miami (11-3) and Atlanta (8-6) have winning records. Toronto, at 6-7, is your Atlantic leader. Philadelphia, so hard in trying to tank the official team slogan is "Together We Build," is the current No. 8 playoff seed, at 6-9 (though Philly is fun to watch -- they've got a "Major League" fuck-'em vibe that's palpable, and Michael Carter-Williams is a budding star).

Three teams expected to content -- Detroit, Cleveland and Brooklyn -- have stepped on their peeners, especially Brooklyn, which I thought was being overrated, but I didn't think the Nets would be 3-10 bad. Same with the Knicks, which apparently never recovered from losing Chris Copeland, or whatever.

 

Is Cleveland tanking? Would the NBA actually allow them to have the No. 1 pick three times in 10 years?

 

Cleveland isn't tanking, but Anthony Bennett might end up faring worse than Larue Martin for worst No. 1 pick ever. That's a big statement to make after 11 games, but they've been ghastly.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bennean01.html

 

I forgot about Bennett. So would the NBA let Cleveland have the No. 1 pick four times in 10 years? (LeBron, Irving, Bennett, 2014?)

 

John Wall has been making a lot of players look very, very stupid lately.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/84002/cataloguing-john-walls-99-points-over-the-last-three-games

 

Followed by 8 vs. Indiana, in a game Washington had zero fast break points. In Wall's defense, Jan Vesely started.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201311290IND.html

Speaking of the Pacers, at 16-1 after winning at the Clippers yesterday, they are seven games away from tying the Knicks for most wins with only one loss. It'll be tough to get -- Indiana has four more games on its West Coast trip, including Portland (a surprising 14-3) tomorrow, and ending at San Antonio and Oklahoma City. And the first game at home is against Miami. If by some miracle Indiana sweeps that section, it'll be 21-1 heading into home games with Charlotte and Detroit.

By the way, your Atlantic Division leading today -- Toronto, at a mighty 6-10. The only division winner I can think of offhand with a losing record is Milwaukee at 38-44 in 1975-76.

And, finally, Anthony Davis broke his non-shooting hand. Big blow for New Orleans.