Jump to content

NBA Free agency 2018: Where's the King landing?


Red Tiger

Recommended Posts

Tea leaf reading suggests George is waiting for LeBron, who is waiting for the Lakers to go get Kawhi. I've also heard that Boston is in on Kawhi but not offering Brown or Tatum, which makes me happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny how differently things are looked upon when it's not your team that is helped by the decisions of free agents. And what's wrong with wanting to win? Kind of thought that was the whole point of sports, to win championships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

I'd be pretty pissed if Kawhi, LeBron, and PG ended up on the Lakers. But I think league wide criticism would be more muted, because KD to the Warriors has already so warped the competitive landscape of the league that everything else can seem like an understandable reaction.

You'd still be pissed?

For me, I want to see it. To me the bigger waste is if everyone goes back to their own unimproved teams and are made irrelevant again. The alternative means the Warriors run roughshod over the league again. Granted I agree it's irritating that it'd be the Lakers, the team who gets the biggest stars to come there generation after generation literally every single decade dating back to the 70s. I'm resigned to the NBA always being a league of haves and have nots and as a fan of one of the ultimate have not franchises I've made peace with this. 

All I care about is that another Superteam happens somewhere. Someone who is a legit threat to Golden State. If that's Philly or Cleveland or San Antonio or OKC that's fine too. But if it seems easiest and most likely to happen on the Lakers so be it. 

The league will have two star-laden superteams and then two other elite contenders in Boston and Houston. It's basically a return to what the NBA was in the 80s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, dbunting said:

It's funny how differently things are looked upon when it's not your team that is helped by the decisions of free agents. And what's wrong with wanting to win? Kind of thought that was the whole point of sports, to win championships.

Fans start to lose interest when the league champion is a given before the season even starts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, dbunting said:

It's funny how differently things are looked upon when it's not your team that is helped by the decisions of free agents. And what's wrong with wanting to win? Kind of thought that was the whole point of sports, to win championships.

Maybe Lebron should sign with the Warriors for the league minimum?  I mean, he'd win the championship.  We'd all be excited to see that, right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jaimstoyevesky said:

All I care about is that another Superteam happens somewhere. Someone who is a legit threat to Golden State. If that's Philly or Cleveland or San Antonio or OKC that's fine too. But if it seems easiest and most likely to happen on the Lakers so be it. 

No, the Lakers are a bridge too far.  Agree with the rest though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Jaimstoyevesky said:

You'd still be pissed?

For me, I want to see it. To me the bigger waste is if everyone goes back to their own unimproved teams and are made irrelevant again. The alternative means the Warriors run roughshod over the league again. Granted I agree it's irritating that it'd be the Lakers, the team who gets the biggest stars to come there generation after generation literally every single decade dating back to the 70s. I'm resigned to the NBA always being a league of haves and have nots and as a fan of one of the ultimate have not franchises I've made peace with this. 

All I care about is that another Superteam happens somewhere. Someone who is a legit threat to Golden State. If that's Philly or Cleveland or San Antonio or OKC that's fine too. But if it seems easiest and most likely to happen on the Lakers so be it. 

The league will have two star-laden superteams and then two other elite contenders in Boston and Houston. It's basically a return to what the NBA was in the 80s. 

My greatest basketball imperative, even greater than seeing my own team succeed, is to see the Lakers miserable and irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Jaimstoyevesky said:

You'd still be pissed?

For me, I want to see it. To me the bigger waste is if everyone goes back to their own unimproved teams and are made irrelevant again. The alternative means the Warriors run roughshod over the league again. Granted I agree it's irritating that it'd be the Lakers, the team who gets the biggest stars to come there generation after generation literally every single decade dating back to the 70s. I'm resigned to the NBA always being a league of haves and have nots and as a fan of one of the ultimate have not franchises I've made peace with this. 

All I care about is that another Superteam happens somewhere. Someone who is a legit threat to Golden State. If that's Philly or Cleveland or San Antonio or OKC that's fine too. But if it seems easiest and most likely to happen on the Lakers so be it. 

The league will have two star-laden superteams and then two other elite contenders in Boston and Houston. It's basically a return to what the NBA was in the 80s. 

Funny thing is that the 80's are regarded as the height of the NBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, DMBouazizi said:

No, the Lakers are a bridge too far.  Agree with the rest though.

 

25 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

My greatest basketball imperative, even greater than seeing my own team succeed, is to see the Lakers miserable and irrelevant.

Fair. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dbunting said:

Why is KD looked at so roughly? Did people react this way when Payton and Malone went to LA? Or when James and Bosh went to Miami? It's strange how this season James, George, Kahwi are all being talked about heading to LA together, but no one seems angry about them joining forces? Talk about James to Houston...a team that led the league in wins last year, just like GS did when Durant went to them and yet hadly a bad word about "if" James goes to Houston.

People seem to bag on Durant for leaving OKC and I don't understand why. OKC let Harden go because they wouldn't pay him, essentially telling Durant that this was as good as we are going to be. So in his mind he wanted to win and went to the place where he could do it. Hell I would have left too.

I am just a casual, very very casual NBA follower and read this forum today and was surprised to see the hatred for KD.

One other factoid that I didn’t see mentioned... he joined the team that beat him.  And he was close to beating them.  Arguably should have won that series, and rather than recruit another piece or go back and try harder, he joined them.

I might not have quite as much distaste for him had he been eliminated by the Spurs and he joined the Warriors.  But the “if you can’t beat em... join em” thing tings hollow here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

But the “if you can’t beat em... join em” thing tings hollow here.

Obviously you were never a fan of WCW's NWO (I mean, literally no one was at the end, but...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, DMBouazizi said:

Obviously you were never a fan of WCW's NWO (I mean, literally no one was at the end, but...)

Like... the Wolf Pack?  Or the regular old NWO?  Cause I’m pretty sure no one ever liked Konan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...