NBA Free Agency/Offseason

Off Topic
61

[quote]gregron wrote:
^^Agreed. The game goes through changes. Teams with big men used to win (wilt, bill russel, kareem) then we all know about Jordans Bulls winning 6 titles without great big men (although Rodman/grant were beasts and kinda filled the role defensively of a big man) and now in the current game its size that’s winning titles.

I’m sure it’ll come back around and teams without good big men will be winning rings but its just not happening these days.

.greg.[/quote]

Man it makes you realise how special MJ was…

62

[quote]LarryDavid wrote:

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:

I don’t really care where all these dudes go but id be very happy to see a distribution where they improve the NBA product as a whole.[/quote]

Who let David Stern into this thread…[/quote]

In alley

“Hey Crawford, ‘good’ calls in the 4th quarter of game seven. Your deposit is in a bank account in the Caymans XX-55…”

63

[quote]randman wrote:
I has to do with logic and lack of stupidity. Bynum is one of two true centers in the league right now. [/quote]

Read those two sentences together. Maybe you are defining a “true center” as “somebody who gives you 50-60 regular season games and averages less than 10 points in the playoffs.” He has a ton of potential, and I agree that you have to think long and hard before dealing talented young big men. But most talented young big men turn out to be more like Antonio McDyess than Shaq.

The reality is that, right now, Bynum is not even in the top 20 big men in the league, and he will probably never be a top-5 big man. He’s nowhere near where elite guys like Shaq/Duncan/Howard were at age 22 and he’s substantially below 2nd-tier stars like Gasol, Bos, or Amaree at the same age. Dominant big men, for the most part, are already dominant by age 22.

[quote]
No one ever said that the big man had to be the featured player or the best player on the team. I just said that no team in the past 12 years (i believe thats how far I went back) have won a championship without good players with size… and most had multiple big men. Its a team sport and there are 5 guys on the court so obviously all have to contribute to win but teams without good-great players with size HAVENT won in the past decade. [/quote]

Yeah, nobody’s arguing that. Teams without good-great players with size haven’t won in the past decade and teams without good-great players without size haven’t won. Teams win with great players, regardless of what position they play. Teams that win championships almost have one outstanding/transcendent player, one supporting star and several good role players, in some mix of guards and forwards.

I am not intending to make this a Bynum vs. Parker thread. My point is that Tony Parker has proven that he can be the 2nd-best player on a championship team and can play a huge part in carrying a team to the promised land. Bynum has proven that he can be the 5th or 6th-best player on a championship team and grab some rebounds while Kobe and Gasol carry his team to the championship.

There are plenty of reasons why the Lakers wouldn’t trade for Parker: he’s had some injury problems, his contract is huge, he’s more of a ball-dominant slasher than a distributor/shooter and might not fit perfectly with Kobe, etc. But if you seriously think that Bynum is a anywhere near the caliber of player that Parker is, you’re either a very biased Lakers fan or you don’t watch and/or know basketball.

And I don’t even know how this whole ridiculous argument started. I was talking about Tony Parker going to the Knicks.

64

[quote]red04 wrote:
You also have to consider defensive rule changes when comparing back before 00-02ish(those 3 years all had numerous rule changes referred to as the Shaq rules, plus the changes to hand checking[only allowed below the free throw line]). Comparing lineups that won with/without those rules is not the best idea.[/quote]

Well, if you want to go there, then you have to recognize that quicker, slashing guards are even more valuable now because of the hand-checking rules, charging rules, zone defenses that make it easier to double/front the post, etc.

65

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]red04 wrote:
You also have to consider defensive rule changes when comparing back before 00-02ish(those 3 years all had numerous rule changes referred to as the Shaq rules, plus the changes to hand checking[only allowed below the free throw line]). Comparing lineups that won with/without those rules is not the best idea.[/quote]

Well, if you want to go there, then you have to recognize that quicker, slashing guards are even more valuable now because of the hand-checking rules, charging rules, zone defenses that make it easier to double/front the post, etc.[/quote]

I think you could argue it’s actually the opposite. The reason there are so many point-forward type players now is because you don’t have to have elite guard skills to do what elite guards used to(because you had to be elite to deal with hand checking and forearm’s being allowed). Not to say there aren’t still guards that are clearly a step above, but it is so much harder to be a quality big man now which makes anyone who is(Gasol, Howard, Stoudamire, Duncan/Shaq[both old but both played with new rules]) worth a ton.

66

Also can we get off this “upside potential” thing with Bynum like he is going to turn into the second coming of Hakeem Olajuwan.

Bynum at age 22: 15 points, 8 boards, 1.4 blocks

Dwight at age 22: 21 points, 14 boards, 2.9 blocks
Garnett at age 22: 21 points, 10 boards, 1.8 blocks
Bosh at age 22: 23 points, 9 boards, 1.3 blocks
Amare at age 22: 26 points, 9 boards, 1.6 blocks
Duncan at age 22: 22 points, 11 boards, 2.4 blocks
Gasol at age 22: 19 points, 9 boards, 1.8 blocks
Zach Randolph at age 22: 20 points, 11 boards, 0.5 blocks
Carlos Boozer at age 22: 16 points, 8 boards, 1.0 blocks
Jermaine O’neal at age 22: 13 points, 7 boards, 2.8 blocks
Elton Brand at age 22: 18 points, 12 boards, 2.0 blocks

The only All-Star big men from the past 10 years that Bynum is ahead of at age 22 (after having 5 NBA seasons under his belt) are Vlade Divac, Brad Miller, Jamaal Magloire, David Lee, Chris Kaman, and maybe Al Horford or Jermaine O’Neal. You can throw in David West, Memo Okur and Kenyon Martin in there too because they weren’t even in the NBA at age 22.

Based on past history, the best case scenario for Bynum seems to be developing into an Antonio McDyess or Jermaine O’Neal-caliber player, but he’s not the same level of freakish athlete that those two were. I think a much more likely comp for him is Zyrundas Ilgauskas, a guy with a huge body, good hands and a naturally effective offensive game, but one who lacked elite-level explosiveness and who was hampered by injuries.

Unless he’s a truly unique player (which isn’t totally impossible), there’s almost no chance of Bynum becoming an elite-level (Shaq/Duncan/Howard/Hakeem), and very little chance of him becoming a 2nd-tier (Bosh/Gasol/Brand/Mourning) star.

67

[quote]red04 wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]red04 wrote:
You also have to consider defensive rule changes when comparing back before 00-02ish(those 3 years all had numerous rule changes referred to as the Shaq rules, plus the changes to hand checking[only allowed below the free throw line]). Comparing lineups that won with/without those rules is not the best idea.[/quote]

Well, if you want to go there, then you have to recognize that quicker, slashing guards are even more valuable now because of the hand-checking rules, charging rules, zone defenses that make it easier to double/front the post, etc.[/quote]

I think you could argue it’s actually the opposite. The reason there are so many point-forward type players now is because you don’t have to have elite guard skills to do what elite guards used to(because you had to be elite to deal with hand checking and forearm’s being allowed). Not to say there aren’t still guards that are clearly a step above, but it is so much harder to be a quality big man now which makes anyone who is(Gasol, Howard, Stoudamire, Duncan/Shaq[both old but both played with new rules]) worth a ton.[/quote]

I see your point, but I think you have to be careful to distinguish between the truly elite big men (or even 2nd-tier guys like Gasol/Stoudemire today or a guy like Mourning in the 90s) who are always going to be incredibly valuable and the decent-to-good guys who are now less valuable because the rule changes have opened the game up more.

68

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Read those two sentences together. Maybe you are defining a “true center” as “somebody who gives you 50-60 regular season games and averages less than 10 points in the playoffs.” He has a ton of potential, and I agree that you have to think long and hard before dealing talented young big men. But most talented young big men turn out to be more like Antonio McDyess than Shaq.

The reality is that, right now, Bynum is not even in the top 20 big men in the league, and he will probably never be a top-5 big man. He’s nowhere near where elite guys like Shaq/Duncan/Howard were at age 22 and he’s substantially below 2nd-tier stars like Gasol, Bos, or Amaree at the same age. Dominant big men, for the most part, are already dominant by age 22.
[/quote]

No one is saying Bynum is Shaq/Duncan or will be (although his potential is huge). Although I definitely disagree with your premise that he’s not one of the top 20 big men in the league. That’s a ridiculous statement. But I’ll leave that one alone for now.

Where I am focusing my attention is your premise that any GM with half a brain would trade Bynum from the Lakers based on the current make up of their team (where their number one trait is size) for a point guard. You keep going down these different tangents. It’s this statement that you made that got me coming out of the woodwork. It would be an idiotic move.

That’s the point! Bynum does a lot more intangibles even hurt to allow Kobe and Gasol to do their thing than you realize or are willing to admit. I don’t care where Tony Parker “ranks” on a championship team (and he wouldn’t be 2nd on the Lakers) it wouldn’t make any sense whatsoever to give up Bynum and get rid of size for Parker. Plain and simple. If Parker wants to come for less money, I’d gladly take him; but not for Bynum.

It is you who are coming across as not knowing basketball because you keep going back to these simplifications that Bynum is not near the caliber of Parker. Who the fuck cares? That’s not the point. The mix of Bynum on the Lakers makes a hell of a lot more sense than trading him and inserting Parker considering the make up of the team. I know if I type this enough over and over again you may just stop going down these different tangents. The premise is, you original statement, Paker for Bynum, would be a stupid GM move. Plain and simple.

[quote]
And I don’t even know how this whole ridiculous argument started. I was talking about Tony Parker going to the Knicks. [/quote]

Umm…it got started with you saying trade Bynum for Parker like it was a viable option or something. Reread your own post.

69

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Also can we get off this “upside potential” thing with Bynum like he is going to turn into the second coming of Hakeem Olajuwan.

Bynum at age 22: 15 points, 8 boards, 1.4 blocks

Dwight at age 22: 21 points, 14 boards, 2.9 blocks
Garnett at age 22: 21 points, 10 boards, 1.8 blocks
Bosh at age 22: 23 points, 9 boards, 1.3 blocks
Amare at age 22: 26 points, 9 boards, 1.6 blocks
Duncan at age 22: 22 points, 11 boards, 2.4 blocks
Gasol at age 22: 19 points, 9 boards, 1.8 blocks
Zach Randolph at age 22: 20 points, 11 boards, 0.5 blocks
Carlos Boozer at age 22: 16 points, 8 boards, 1.0 blocks
Jermaine O’neal at age 22: 13 points, 7 boards, 2.8 blocks
Elton Brand at age 22: 18 points, 12 boards, 2.0 blocks

The only All-Star big men from the past 10 years that Bynum is ahead of at age 22 (after having 5 NBA seasons under his belt) are Vlade Divac, Brad Miller, Jamaal Magloire, David Lee, Chris Kaman, and maybe Al Horford or Jermaine O’Neal. You can throw in David West, Memo Okur and Kenyon Martin in there too because they weren’t even in the NBA at age 22.

Based on past history, the best case scenario for Bynum seems to be developing into an Antonio McDyess or Jermaine O’Neal-caliber player, but he’s not the same level of freakish athlete that those two were. I think a much more likely comp for him is Zyrundas Ilgauskas, a guy with a huge body, good hands and a naturally effective offensive game, but one who lacked elite-level explosiveness and who was hampered by injuries.

Unless he’s a truly unique player (which isn’t totally impossible), there’s almost no chance of Bynum becoming an elite-level (Shaq/Duncan/Howard/Hakeem), and very little chance of him becoming a 2nd-tier (Bosh/Gasol/Brand/Mourning) star.
[/quote]

Is this baseball or basketball? Seriously, enough with the stats. Anyone with a good knowledge of basketball can “see” Bynum’s size, strength, footwork, and natural basketball instincts give him all the tools needed to be a dominant center in the NBA. And dominant centers are so rare to find in the NBA. The big gamble here is can he stay healthy? I don’t know why you keep going off of these tangents of Hakeem/Duncan. No one is intimating this. Stop going off on tangential arguments that no one is making.

Yes, you heard me say it. Bynum’s potential is still big. He’s 22 years old and has all of the skills. Can he stay healthy? Who knows.

70

Bynum was a difference maker this year of the Lakers beating the Celtics in the finals as compared to 08. Especially games 1 through 3. Games 4 on he had less of a presence/impact but still measurable. Just his presence on the floor is an imposing physical body for other physical teams like the Celtics.

I just typed that I would trade Bynum for Bosh but I would even have to second guess this because Bosh is more finesse and Bynum is physical prowess. Damn, this is a hard one. To me it would be a no brainer if I didn’t think injuries would continue in the future.

71

people also forgetting ‘bout my boy Ricky Rubio. Ya’ll best be prepared for this one…sayin’

72

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

That sucks about Bosh’s comments. I thought he was cooler than that. Oh yeah, I just got back from CO man. It’s gorgeous out there![/quote]

Yeah didn’t think he was like that, but oh well. Glad you liked it out in CO, did you go to Estes Park again with your GF?[/quote]

Yeah man, we spent 2 nights in Boulder, one in Ft. Collins, one in Estes and one in Denver. It was awesome. Hope all is well on your end homey. Be easy. Also, I really like that more people on T-Nation are getting involved on talking ball. It used to be pretty slim pickins around here. Glad everyone [even the trolls] have something to say. [/quote]

Awesome man, I’m about 25 miles from Ft. Collins. Let me know next time you’re here and maybe we can get together.

Completely agree re: more people talking ball. Usually it was just me, you and a couple of other guys. The first three NBA Playoff threads were pretty slim in terms of discussion and reads. This year blew the top off as we filled two threads with almost 2000 posts. Let’s do it bigger next year!
[/quote]

For sure man. We’re actually seriously considering moving to Boulder. Got to get some stuff figured out first, but I’ll definitely keep you posted.

73

[quote]randman wrote:
Umm…it got started with you saying trade Bynum for Parker like it was a viable option or something. Reread your own post.
[/quote]

Nay. I said [quote]Yes, but let’s be realistic, nobody wants DJ Mbenga, and Shannon Brown doesn’t have much trade value either. The Lakers would probably have to move Bynum to get Parker.[/quote], not that the Lakers should or would do that.

I was then surprised that the general consensus seemed to be overwhelmingly that the Lakers would not even consider Bynum for Parker. I agree that Parker would not be a great fit, and the Lakers probably wouldn’t pull that trade, but if I’m starting a team from scratch I’m taking Parker over Bynum ever time, even with the age differences. If I were the Lakers, I would think long and hard about it.

I understand that basketball is not a game like baseball that can be so definitely broken down into stats. Since I’m an East Coast guy and not a Lakers fan, I only see Bynum in a few regular season games plus the playoffs. It’s obvious he has very good hands and coordination for a big guy and a very promising low-post game. He’s got potential, I just think his ceiling is as a solid big man who might make a couple of All-Star games. His ceiling, to me, is a supporting star, the 2nd-best guy on a championship team, but more likely the 3rd-best. Parker is already at that level, although he may be on the way down. They play different positions, so it’s obviously tough to compare, but there’s no rule that says you need to get a center when you trade a center.

The point with the stats is to show that very few outstanding big men develop late in their careers. Bynum would be an anomaly if he even made 2 or 3 All-Star teams.

And here’s 20 big men who were better this season:

Kevin Garnett
Pau Gasol
Lamar Odom
Dwight Howard
Amare Stoudemire
Zach Randolph
David Lee
Marcus Camby
Al Horford
Dirk Nowitski
Luis Scola
Andrew Bogut
Tim Duncan
Brook Lopez
Kevin Love
Carlos Boozer
David West
Al Jefferson
Andrea Bargnani
LaMarcus Aldridge

74

I normally agree with most of what Jtrinsey says, but you’re wrong here man. One of the cardinal rules of the NBA is never trade small for big. Unless the Lakers feel Bynum can’t stay healthy he’s not going anywhere. Also, Bynum’s numbers have been curtailed due to playing with Bryant, Gasol and working in the triangle. Also, you completely lost me by mentioning Howard’s name along Olajuwon, Shaq, Duncan, etc… Howard doesn’t belong in the same arena as those guys, let alone the same sentence. Also, Jermaine O’neal was nowhere near the athlete as a young McDyess, and Bynum plays NOTHING like either of those guys. All 3 of their games are completely different. People forget how raw Bynum still is, and how potentially good he could be. Yeah, “potential” and 5 bucks can buy you a latte, but you can’t deny what he can bring to the table. He’s shown enough glimpses to ensure that if healthy he’s a big part of the Lakers future.

75

Game 7 4th-quarter play-by-play: Boston Celtics vs. Los Angeles Lakers - NBA Play-By-Play - June 17, 2010 | ESPN

Control+F: and search for Bynum. It won’t take you long to search the results.

Andrew Bynum got 4 rebounds, 1 block, committed 5 fouls and 3 turnovers, missed 1 shot and made 2 shots, in the 4th-quarter… of all 7 games combined. He was a total non-factor. Difference-maker? Please. He wasn’t even out on the court in crunch-time. He had a real nice Game 2. Other than that, he didn’t do jack.

I’m pretty sure Parker and any warm body at center would have contributed a bit more…

76

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]randman wrote:
Umm…it got started with you saying trade Bynum for Parker like it was a viable option or something. Reread your own post.
[/quote]

Nay. I said [quote]Yes, but let’s be realistic, nobody wants DJ Mbenga, and Shannon Brown doesn’t have much trade value either. The Lakers would probably have to move Bynum to get Parker.[/quote], not that the Lakers should or would do that.

I was then surprised that the general consensus seemed to be overwhelmingly that the Lakers would not even consider Bynum for Parker. I agree that Parker would not be a great fit, and the Lakers probably wouldn’t pull that trade, but if I’m starting a team from scratch I’m taking Parker over Bynum ever time, even with the age differences. If I were the Lakers, I would think long and hard about it.

I understand that basketball is not a game like baseball that can be so definitely broken down into stats. Since I’m an East Coast guy and not a Lakers fan, I only see Bynum in a few regular season games plus the playoffs. It’s obvious he has very good hands and coordination for a big guy and a very promising low-post game. He’s got potential, I just think his ceiling is as a solid big man who might make a couple of All-Star games. His ceiling, to me, is a supporting star, the 2nd-best guy on a championship team, but more likely the 3rd-best. Parker is already at that level, although he may be on the way down. They play different positions, so it’s obviously tough to compare, but there’s no rule that says you need to get a center when you trade a center.

The point with the stats is to show that very few outstanding big men develop late in their careers. Bynum would be an anomaly if he even made 2 or 3 All-Star teams.

And here’s 20 big men who were better this season:

Kevin Garnett
Pau Gasol
Lamar Odom
Dwight Howard
Amare Stoudemire
Zach Randolph
David Lee
Marcus Camby
Al Horford
Dirk Nowitski
Luis Scola
Andrew Bogut
Tim Duncan
Brook Lopez
Kevin Love
Carlos Boozer
David West
Al Jefferson
Andrea Bargnani
LaMarcus Aldridge[/quote]

I was going to ask what qualifies as a “big man” is it anyone who is 6’10"+? Cause there are quite a few players on this list who’s primary position isnt at Center like Bynum. I think you’d have to compare Centers to Centers… Not Centers to Slashy players (a slashy is a Forward slash center or power forward/center)

.greg.

77

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
One of the cardinal rules of the NBA is never trade small for big.[/quote]

Lol, why is this a rule? Sure, if they are of equal ability, the big man is more valuable because they are more scarce. But if Miami offers Dwayne Wade for Chris Bosh (assuming both are signed to identical contracts), Toronto would be idiotic to turn that down. Would Portland turn down Deron Williams for LaMarcus Aldridge?

You rarely see small for big because teams covetously hoard big men with potential because of the hope of a dominant franchise center. But the vast majority of these guys never pan out. So Portland takes Bowie over Jordan, and then turns right around and repeats the mistake with Oden over Durant.

And you’re right about the Bynum-McDyess-O’Neal thing. It’s tough for me to find a comparison for Bynum, simply because he just doesn’t have the athleticism that almost every other dominant big man has or had. I think the best comparison is a younger Ilgauskas, before he became more of a shooter.

78

[quote]gregron wrote:
I was going to ask what qualifies as a “big man” is it anyone who is 6’10"+? Cause there are quite a few players on this list who’s primary position isnt at Center like Bynum. I think you’d have to compare Centers to Centers… Not Centers to Slashy players (a slashy is a Forward slash center or power forward/center)
[/quote]

I’ll say a big man is either a guy who, at some point in the game, plays center and/or primarily plays on the block and also can/will guard the biggest guy on the other team.

79

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

That sucks about Bosh’s comments. I thought he was cooler than that. Oh yeah, I just got back from CO man. It’s gorgeous out there![/quote]

Yeah didn’t think he was like that, but oh well. Glad you liked it out in CO, did you go to Estes Park again with your GF?[/quote]

Yeah man, we spent 2 nights in Boulder, one in Ft. Collins, one in Estes and one in Denver. It was awesome. Hope all is well on your end homey. Be easy. Also, I really like that more people on T-Nation are getting involved on talking ball. It used to be pretty slim pickins around here. Glad everyone [even the trolls] have something to say. [/quote]

Awesome man, I’m about 25 miles from Ft. Collins. Let me know next time you’re here and maybe we can get together.

Completely agree re: more people talking ball. Usually it was just me, you and a couple of other guys. The first three NBA Playoff threads were pretty slim in terms of discussion and reads. This year blew the top off as we filled two threads with almost 2000 posts. Let’s do it bigger next year!
[/quote]

For sure man. We’re actually seriously considering moving to Boulder. Got to get some stuff figured out first, but I’ll definitely keep you posted.[/quote]

Wow, sweet! No more H-Town huh? Yeah if you get to Boulder we’ll def have to catch some Nuggets games and talk shop.

80

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
So Portland takes Bowie over Jordan, and then turns right around and repeats the mistake with Oden over Durant.
[/quote]

To be fair, this story has been covered/recovered so many times, and it is abundantly clear that basically every GM in the league would’ve made the same choice given Portland’s team, both times. They already had Drexler in the Jordan draft, and they already had B.Roy. They were staring down prospective big men(in Oden’s case people were using Russell’s name, you don’t pass that up).

The same thing happened this year to the Clippers, sure they could’ve drafted Evans or Jennings, but you don’t pass up strong, athletic, already somewhat polished big men, because you can’t predict that they will fracture a knee or tear an ACL.

It’s just like drafting QB’s in the NFL.