• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Bill Simmons on Chris Paul

Really great article...and I probably would have missed it too.
 
One problem I have with this board is that while I like the long ongoing threads on a certain topics, most thread starters don't change the title to reflect new info that would appeal to people who don't check the thread every day. The USMNT thread is the worst about this.

A relevant article on Paul would get buried in the Paul thread instead of thoroughly discussed.
 
PhillyDeac said:
My point is that some of these owners need to take accountability for how their team is run, who they give major deals too, etc. It's not LA or NY's fault for being 'bigger'
Click to expand...

I agree that mismanagement has played a role in many teams not being competitive. But the league is trending more and more towards big market consolidation.

Yes teams like OKC and Orlando, and hell, New Orleans are in the mix every once in a while. And thats because they bottom out and end up with a top shelf superstar like Durant, Howard, or Paul for a few years. But these days, as soon as they can, those players will flee to the big markets.

I'm not saying its right or wrong or that someone is necessarily at fault. Just that this is the way the league in constructed. And you have a core group of NBA fans who support it and want to see it, along with ESPN and the like. But there are 25 owners who are looking at the bigger picture and realizing that if it keeps trending this way, you will have 5 national fan bases, give or take, and 25 shells. The revenue sharing only accounts for so much. Owners make most of their money off ticket sales, and their teams dont get to play those 5 teams with the best players every night.

It all depends on what your definition of a healthy league is. Are you happy with having NBA fans staying home to watch the Lakers and channel all the money through ESPN rather than going to watch their local team in Memphis, Orlando, DC, Mil, Min, NO, Hou, Sac, etc., etc., etc.? Or do you want to have passionate fan bases around the country with a rooting interest in their teams? The 25 owners, who by the way own 83% of the league, have spoken. But I still don't think this will change anything in the long-run. And that will continue to be a problem for the league.
 
i feel the worst for dell demps. just an incredible trade for the hornets.
 
TwentyONE said:
I agree that mismanagement has played a role in many teams not being competitive. But the league is trending more and more towards big market consolidation.

Yes teams like OKC and Orlando, and hell, New Orleans are in the mix every once in a while. And thats because they bottom out and end up with a top shelf superstar like Durant, Howard, or Paul for a few years. But these days, as soon as they can, those players will flee to the big markets.

I'm not saying its right or wrong or that someone is necessarily at fault. Just that this is the way the league in constructed. And you have a core group of NBA fans who support it and want to see it, along with ESPN and the like. But there are 25 owners who are looking at the bigger picture and realizing that if it keeps trending this way, you will have 5 national fan bases, give or take, and 25 shells. The revenue sharing only accounts for so much. Owners make most of their money off ticket sales, and their teams dont get to play those 5 teams with the best players every night.

It all depends on what your definition of a healthy league is. Are you happy with having NBA fans staying home to watch the Lakers and channel all the money through ESPN rather than going to watch their local team in Memphis, Orlando, DC, Mil, Min, NO, Hou, Sac, etc., etc., etc.? Or do you want to have passionate fan bases around the country with a rooting interest in their teams? The 25 owners, who by the way own 83% of the league, have spoken. But I still don't think this will change anything in the long-run. And that will continue to be a problem for the league.
Click to expand...

no, it's mismanagement. put the heat ownership/front office/coaches/etc in cleveland, and the cavs ownership/front office/coaches/etc in miami. now where do you think lebron is playing this year?
 
PhDeac said:
Load of bull. History isn't some all important factor. Sure some cities have an edge in free agency because they're better places for a young guy with money to live. No doubt about that, but the small markets aren't choked by the might of the large markets in the NBA. Dumb GMs get owned by smart GMs. Dumb GMs aren't willing to trade Steph or Gordon to get the best PG of his generation. Smart GMs find a way to make it happen and give up good parts to do so.

In the NBA, every several years, a franchise gets a fair chance to redefine itself and get on the right track. The smart GMs take advantage of it. The Spurs had the #1 pick and decided it was worth it to wait on David Robinson. A lesser GM may have decided it was better to get Armon Gillam, Dennis Hopson, or Reggie Williams right away. Years later, Robinson got hurt and the Spurs wisely (although classlessly) tanked the season to improve their odds of getting Tim Duncan. Lesser GMs would have considered getting multiple high picks from the Celtics instead.

Look at the 2003 draft. The Cavs took Lebron. Gilbert didn't win championships because they didn't realize Lebron needed to not be the best player. They went after several complementary players instead of going all out to bring in another star.

The Pistons needed to keep their run going. They took Darko.

The Nuggets needed a breakthrough player. They took Carmelo.

The Heat took Dwayne Wade and made him THE MAN of that franchise and brought great players in to play with him.

Do you want to know why the Bucks always suck and the Mavs had an amazing resurgence? Good ownership and the Bucks traded Dirk Nowitski and Pat Garrity to get Tractor Traylor.

The Clippers have perennially sucked because they make horrible picks. Now they have made some good picks and they're getting decent.

The Lakers/Celtics/Knicks aren't guaranteed to be great. The Knicks have been in a rut for most of my lifetime. The Lakers and Celtics had extended stretches of mediocrity. Good management trumps all else in the NBA.
Click to expand...

So you don't read anything in to the recent trend? And you basically disagree with Bill Simmons that there is disparity and there should be.
 
PhDeac said:
One problem I have with this board is that while I like the long ongoing threads on a certain topics, most thread starters don't change the title to reflect new info that would appeal to people who don't check the thread every day. The USMNT thread is the worst about this.

A relevant article on Paul would get buried in the Paul thread instead of thoroughly discussed.
Click to expand...

yay! lets hear it for BostonDeac
 
Milhouse said:
i feel the worst for dell demps. just an incredible trade for the hornets.
Click to expand...

no doubt. instead of getting 3 top 50% starters at their position and a draft pick, you'll get nothing in july.
 
TwentyONE said:
So you don't read anything in to the recent trend? And you basically disagree with Bill Simmons that there is disparity and there should be.
Click to expand...

Recent trend? This isn't new. Poor management misuse good players and lose them to better owners in free agency all the time.
 
bmoneydeac said:
no doubt. instead of getting 3 top 50% starters at their position and a draft pick, you'll get nothing in july.
Click to expand...

it does save you from watching every lakers game with an erection
 
i hadn't considered that angle. did chris broussard give you that scoop?
 
PhDeac said:
Recent trend? This isn't new. Poor management misuse good players and lose them to better owners in free agency all the time.
Click to expand...

So the fact that Chris Paul will only sign with New York or LA is due to mismanagement on the part of New Orleans?

New Orleans best chance to win is not trading Chris Paul. Its getting other star players around him, but wait, no star player will go to New Orleans. So they are competing on a different playing field. They have no choice in their managerial decisions. Orlando is similar and they are not in the same ownership situation, and they haven't been completely mismanaged. But they are similarly fucked.

What I'm talking about is the recent trend of star players demanding to go to big markets. Milwalkee could be the best run team in the league, but good luck getting a star player to sign with them in today's NBA.
 
TwentyONE said:
This pretty much incapsulates the NBA fan. This is the way the league has grown. You can like or dislike it. But every kid grows up a psuedo Laker/Celts/Knicks fan. My generation were Bulls fans.

I personally hate it, because I really can't get in to a sport if I dont have a dog in the fight. Sorry. I dont have any warm feelings for the history of the big franchises. I just don't. I would like to think that my local team may have a fighting chance in hell some day. But the NBA is constructed to kill that notion. And that keeps me very much disiniterested in the NBA.

Imagine if NFL fans were saying, wow can you imagine Peyton, Calvin Johnson, and Adrian Peterson together in New York? I'm defintiely going to root for that team!..or something to that effect.
Click to expand...

that would be way more awesome than 2/3 of those players wasting their careers on shitty teams.
 
Milhouse said:
no, it's mismanagement. put the heat ownership/front office/coaches/etc in cleveland, and the cavs ownership/front office/coaches/etc in miami. now where do you think lebron is playing this year?
Click to expand...

Are you saying that Cleveland could have theoretically signed Bosh and Wade if they had better management? I simply disagree.
 
TwentyONE said:
So you don't read anything in to the recent trend? And you basically disagree with Bill Simmons that there is disparity and there should be.
Click to expand...

What I don't understand about the block -- the rules under the new CBA will create more parity due to the more punitive luxury tax, etc., and most likely reverse (or limit) the recent trend -- which to me, as a Bucks fan, is a good thing. Anything that makes the NBA more like the NFL is a good thing, in my mind. So what was the point of the muscle flexing in blocking this trade given the new rules -- I know the owners wanted more, but what they got is much better than what they had?
 
minifrostylin said:
that would be way more awesome than 2/3 of those players wasting their careers on shitty teams.
Click to expand...

This is what the Eagles did this year, and what the Skins try to do every year. It doesn't work. And this is why the NFL is great.
 
PhDeac said:
Load of bull. History isn't some all important factor. Sure some cities have an edge in free agency because they're better places for a young guy with money to live. No doubt about that, but the small markets aren't choked by the might of the large markets in the NBA. Dumb GMs get owned by smart GMs. Dumb GMs aren't willing to trade Steph or Gordon to get the best PG of his generation. Smart GMs find a way to make it happen and give up good parts to do so.

In the NBA, every several years, a franchise gets a fair chance to redefine itself and get on the right track. The smart GMs take advantage of it. The Spurs had the #1 pick and decided it was worth it to wait on David Robinson. A lesser GM may have decided it was better to get Armon Gillam, Dennis Hopson, or Reggie Williams right away. Years later, Robinson got hurt and the Spurs wisely (although classlessly) tanked the season to improve their odds of getting Tim Duncan. Lesser GMs would have considered getting multiple high picks from the Celtics instead.

Look at the 2003 draft. The Cavs took Lebron. Gilbert didn't win championships because they didn't realize Lebron needed to not be the best player. They went after several complementary players instead of going all out to bring in another star.

The Pistons needed to keep their run going. They took Darko.

The Nuggets needed a breakthrough player. They took Carmelo.

The Heat took Dwayne Wade and made him THE MAN of that franchise and brought great players in to play with him.

Do you want to know why the Bucks always suck and the Mavs had an amazing resurgence? Good ownership and the Bucks traded Dirk Nowitski and Pat Garrity to get Tractor Traylor.

The Clippers have perennially sucked because they make horrible picks. Now they have made some good picks and they're getting decent.

The Lakers/Celtics/Knicks aren't guaranteed to be great. The Knicks have been in a rut for most of my lifetime. The Lakers and Celtics had extended stretches of mediocrity. Good management trumps all else in the NBA.
Click to expand...

While the Spurs tanked, if the tanked to get Duncan they didn't do a great job of it. They were a long shot to get the #1 pick, it was a huge 'upset'. The Celtics had two chips and a high percentage chance of the #1 pick. The Spurs, if anything, tanked to get a lottery pick, they just got hugely lucky that the lottery turned into Duncan.

Similar situation with Dirk. I remember when he was drafted, it was not some staggering deal. It was a flier by the Mavs on Dirk's potential. You make it sound like the Bucks traded MJ's draft rights. Again, a huge amount of luck there.

All that being said, really Paul wanted to be a Laker? Based on the way Simmons presents Pauls 'appreciation' for basketball history, he never comes to Wake, he's over in Chapel Hill or Durham for the basketball history and the chance to wear those uniforms.

Unless Simmons has a quote from Paul saying 'gee I've always wanted to be a Laker' this just about as good as me saying he's always wanted to be a Laker.

In fact if you look at Paul's history, you'd say he'd be more likely to go to a traditional power team and take on the big boys. Of course times change and that may no longer be the case, but you can certainly argue that was more in his past than just following history.
 
Shooshmoo said:
This is what the Eagles did this year, and what the Skins try to do every year. It doesn't work. And this is why the NFL is great.
Click to expand...

the eagles have basic fundamental problems that have caused their shittiness this season. having an O-Line coach be your DC is a fucking fail from the start.

and it's not like the skins have been the model of successful management for the past 20 years. hell, i cant remember any good QBs they've had in my life (20 years)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top