NBA Draft Lottery/Draft/Offseason thread.
 

Someone will win the chance to take Blake Griffin tonight. I believe its approx 830.

The Draft is June 24th.

does anyone really want to win the Blake Griffin lottery?

Don't get me wrong, I think he'll be an okay player, a nice depth guy, but I don't see him as being a superstar.

And before Icy gets here and gets upset - don't forget that the #1 team could also take Ricky Rubio!

I'd be happy with Blake Griffin at #1. I think he could be an Elton Brand-level player, which is good value for #1.

Big fan of Rubio though, very interested to see how he handles the transition to the NBA game.

Fixed. (in more ways than one)

Bill Simmons and Malcom Gladwell have a chat where they talk about getting rid of the draft all together.

Kind of a neat idea--anyone over 18 can sign an employment contract with any team.

But the NFL and NBA have done such a good job of making the drafts into events that I don't see them going anywhere. Nor would the teams want to have to compete for the young free agents. I'm sure that every company in the world would love to be able to "draft" young talent out of college/grad school and have them work for an artificially depressed wage for 4 years before having to pay them market value. And the unions cares so much more about the current players than the future players (as they should) that they will never push to get rid of the draft.

How do other sports do it in other countries? Does football/soccer allow players to sign contracts at any age, or are the players restricted in some way early in their careers?

Sure, Blake Griffin isn't the greatest #1 in the world, but it sure as hell beats picking 10th or 20th in this draft. It's not like the NFL where a bad early draft pick can hurt you cap-wise. They're relatively cheap compared to veterans so it's not a burden to pick too high.

SI

Yeah, that's called baseball and international players/transfers. I'd rather have the NBA's system any day and even the NFL's, tho they're going to fix that in a couple of years. The idea of the draft is to be a leveler so the rich don't get richer and if you let any team sign any player, you're talking about a competitive balance mess.

SI

I think another good analogy would major college sports where the winners continue to get richer and the poor get poorer.

SI

I might take Rickey Rubio number one.
My favorite part of the lotto show is when a team expecting to pick 8th doesn't see their name there. That means they are in the top 3 and their fans usually go crazy.

This is probably the worst class since the one where KMart went number one.

After Blake Griffin carried my Top Gun team to victory, I have complete faith in him. Come on, Warriors! Make the leap!

Ok so what are the chances that Oklahoma City gets #1 to keep Griffin there (Westbrook, Durant, Green and Griffin would be a nice young nucleus there) and then New York gets #2 so NY gets their point guard in Rubio who would totally flourish under D'Antoni and would team with Lebron in 2010?

Agreed on the weakness of the draft - after those two its pretty meh. There are some good athletes and some guys that might turn out to be decent players but from Thabeet on down I don't see anyone who looks to be an impact player next season.

It sucks that the Pistons finished one spot out of the lottery. They really need some help, and I don't see many enticing players in that spot (15th).

James harden will be a good player.

Worst.idea.ever.

You might as well fold up 6-10 teams right then and there. In the NBA all it takes is one stud to turn a horrific franchise into one that can a) be a playoff contender and more importantly b) sell out the arena and boost merchandise sales - just look at the Cavs. Every top player would go to sign with NY, LA, Boston, Chicago and the other major markets. You'd have the equivalent of college sports - the top guys will go to the top teams until they run out of money (scholarships) and then they have to go look at the next tier of teams until they have no place to go but Memphis and Sacramento.

And if someone wants to draft me and pay me an artifically depressed seven figure wage show me where to sign up and I'm there!

There's talk of them trading it to Washington along with Rip assuming Washington doesn't land in the top 2 for their pick and maybe Nick Young or something...not that Thabeet and Nick Young would be much help though. The Pistons can get the help they need in free agency (hopefully) - wouldn't hurt to hire a coach who knows what he's doing either.

I would love to see the Nets get Griffin, Griffin and Lopez would be a sweet frontcourt.

Yeah, I heard that rumor too, and I totally agree about Curry. He sucks. Either bring in an experience, or give Lamb a shot, at least he's coached for a few years and has won a lot. Joe seems to really be slipping in his decisions. I hope he gets back to his old self soon.

Just resign AI and let him run the show. :)

The Pistons freed up cap space with the Chauncey trade, but I despise their nucleus now. I like Rip and I like Prince (as a third option type of guy), but where do you go from there?

Is it Boozer? Do you think Stuckey will be able to run the show next year? I like his size, but he shot horribly the last three months of the season. (which went into the playoffs) and he's not an especially great playmaker to have an under 45% true shooting clip.

I'm hoping that the Wolves can win the 3rd pick and get Thabeet, Blake Griffin does nothing for them and I don't want Rubio. Of course with the way Taylor continues to mismanage the franchise they probably won't even have a GM for the draft and McHale will again be able to trade whoever they pick for a worse player drafted a few spots back and absolutely nothing of value. :(

I like Simmons idea better of giving each team in the lottery the same odds. You stop the late season tanking a little and allow a semi-decent team a chance to grab a star. Look what it did for a team like Chicago who was a fringe playoff team and immediately became a pseudo-contender in the East by the end of the year. Maybe you can give a slight advantage to worse teams so that you don't have teams tanking the 8 seed in the playoffs.

I personally would put every team in the lottery. Weight it down so that the worst team has maybe a 10% chance while the best has under 1%. It wouldn't punish teams like the Pistons who run a good organization and finish in the playoffs every year. They never have a shot at top talent in the draft which is a bit unfair while teams like the Bobcats get to squander picks in the top 5 year in and year out.

The other thing I'd do is not just have the lottery for the top 3 picks. It would be for the whole draft. Again, the odds are not in a team's favor to move up a lot, but it can happen. You might see an Orlando squad get a little lucky and pick 8th this year or something. The championship Bulls squads never really got a chance to add good young talent to their teams. Wouldn't it have been interesting to see them grab a top 10 pick one year to play alongside Jordan? Wouldn't it be entertaining to see a Lakers team have a shot at grabbing a Brandon Jennings? Maybe Miami getting Ricky Rubio?

The problem with the current system is that you have these young stars being brought into inept, shitty organizations. It'll take 4-5 years before most of them can even be on a contender. Do we really want to see a talent like Griffin end up in Memphis or Milwaukee? I'd rather see a Utah or New Orleans have a shot at getting that pick and being able to add him to the puzzle. I think it benefits the NBA as a whole as well as stops rewarding horrible organizations for their failures.

Note: I'm of course a little bias on this but curious what other people think. Was Derrick Rose being on the Bulls (market size out of the equation) better for the NBA than him being drafted by Washington where he'd have won 25 games?

I don't think Rubio is a true #1. While he's got just about every major skill required to play PG in the NBA, he's just not all that quick compared to the premier guards in the league. With this league being all about speed, I think the safest bet is still Griffin who will be a guaranteed 20/10 guy for years.

this is why I hate ESPN. If I wanted to watch a pregame show I would watch the pregame show.

Im just praying OKC gets a bust.

Even ignoring my own personal opinion of Thabeet's pro chances (not good), is he such a good fit? Kevin Love looked good by season's end, and I don't know that a Love-Jefferson frontcourt gives them much of a need to upgrade that spot. Rubio would be great for these guys.

If it's Kings or TWolves at #1, I think both would need to at least consider Rubio at that spot, given their needs.

Ooh...that music is so riveting.

lol.

bah, Nets pick 11

I think the real question is whether Oklahoma City will jump to get the #1 pick.

The Griz move up

Yeah. I didn't expect they would jump high and I'm fine with that. The 11th pick in a weak draft isn't too bad.

lol.

Kings get fucked

The Kings sent Chris Webber? Interesting.

I wish they'd do this thing like a regular lottery. Even if it was more "boring" that way...it's hard to watch and think "c'mon did they really not rig this?" Make a reality show out of it.

I can't believe OKC won't try to move up.

Poor Blake

Ouch, the two interesting players in the draft could go to the two biggest joke franchises in the league.

Donald Sterling is already paying Baron Davis too much money. I'm sure he can be convinced to move down two spots in exchange for say, OKC's 1st round next year and a player or two.

So who got #2, OKC or Memphis? What the hell even happens now besides a trade. Those two teams drafted PG's top 5 the last few years no?

Memphis #2, OKC, #3

The 2009 lottery draft order goes as follows:
1. L.A. Clippers
2. Memphis
3. Oklahoma City
4. Sacramento
5. Washington
6. Minnesota
7. Golden State
8. New York
9. Toronto
10. Milwaukee
11. New Jersey
12. Charlotte
13. Indiana
14. Phoenix

Griffin needs to smoke weed or refuse to workout. The clippers will ruin your life.

I was hoping OKC would get #1. They'd have a real fun team with Griffin.

I'm glad Hijack City didn't win.

You stay classy, prick. :rolleyes:

Not OKC fault that their owner and David Stern are shitbags.

Memphis is very interested in Rubio. If they get him, Conley will be shipped out or turned into a backup PG.

In Europe, it's pretty much a free market. Some countries have restrictions on when a player can sign a 'professional' contract, but those countries simply see their players scooped up by other countries who don't.

A 17 year old made his debut for Manchester United (pretty much biggest/best team in world) late in the season this year and scored a few massive goals.

He left Italy to sign with Manchester United because he couldn't sign a pro deal in Italy until he was 17... whereas he signed with Man U at 14/15.

Wayne Rooney made his debut for Everton when he was 16, then was sold to Man U in a massive deal (£25.6 million) when he was like 18.

Some exceptional talents break into teams around 16, but they're already collecting money being part of the reserves/youth teams.

I'm sure someone even more familiar with the details can provide a bit more insight into the details of what players are compensated for being parts of academy programs.

The bottom line is that instead of adding players to your team in the 18-23 range like teams do in the NBA/NFL... you're literally getting them into your academy programs when they're like 10, grooming them to be a part of your team, then signing them to pro deals from there.

The other huge difference is that players have a lot of power there. Pretty much enough sulking or talking to the press can get you transfered (sold) to another team if that's what you really want. Guys are bought and sold for crazy amounts regularly.

You really wanted the Oklahoma City Thunder to just happen to win the lottery so they could just happen to pick a Oklahoma Sooner? 25 years after the Patrick Ewing Conspiracy to the Knicks?

And you can't trade for a player's contract like you can in the big North American sports. You can buy a player's registration and then must agree to a new contract with the player.

I can't wait to see if the Thunder continue their string of drafting bigmen projects that don't pan out by selecting Thabeet.

My quick mock of the lottery now would be:

1. Clippers - Blake Griffin
2. Grizzlies - Ricky Rubio
3. Thunder - Hasheem Thabeet (Harden would be the wise choice)
4. Kings - Brandon Jennings
5. Wizards - Jordan Hill
6. Timberwolves - James Harden
7. Warriors - Tyreke Evans
8. Knicks - Stephen Curry
9. Raptors - Demar DeRozan
10. Bucks - Ty Lawson
11. Nets - DeJuan Blair
12. Bobcats - Earl Clark
13. Pacers - Eric Maynor
14. Suns - Gerald Henderson

Grizzlies will take Thabeet. They need size real bad.

I like the Curry to New York pick. Perfect fit for that style. He'll need to put on some muscle but will be a great outside threat for Lebron to kick the ball out to in 2010. :)

This is the Clippers 20th trip to the lottery. LOL.

+jillion

Nets will take James Johnson unless someone snaps him up earlier, which seems unlikely.

King Obama can buy GM and force Chrysler into bankruptcy. But he can't take 3 seconds to seize the Clippers , fire David stern and move the team to Seattle? Fuckin priorities man.

Scuttlebutt is that they are not high on Thabeet. I tend to agree, while they need size, they need attitude as well. I would rather take Blair than Thabeet. They also need to upgrade their PG spot, if Rubio is as good as advertised, I take him and then run and gun.

I would love a full lottery, every spot up for grabs, no weighing. Aside from being spectacular television, I think it would just make the whole league more interesting.

Blake Griffin to the Clippers is not fun or interesting. Blake Griffin to the Celtics or Hawks or Nuggets or Spurs would be extremely interesting.

The only downside of course is that theoretically, it's harder for bad teams to get better. But I just don't think that would be a huge issue. You still have the salary cap. I think a team like the Clippers might actually benefit. Instead of being in perpetual rebuilding mode, knowing that they can always count on a top-5 guy coming in to give them hope, they'd have to change their outlook and look to build their team in other ways.

You'd have way more trades involving draft picks. Teams wouldn't be able to plan around a few bad seasons and the draft picks that come with them. There would always be pressure to maintain at least an "OK" team, because you never know when the #1 pick will drop in your lap.

This is one of those fun, creative ideas that will never happen with a conservative major league. The only way we'll ever seen any innovation in league structure, in any sport, is if a competitive league ever emerged.

I agree in some respects, but you know, what if the Lakers win a championship and then get 3 top-5 picks in a row.

I think a weighted lottery from top to bottom of the first round, with a higher chance of teams moving a few spots would be better. The NBA champion would still have an incredibly remote chance of getting the #1 that way, but bad teams will still have the best chance.

The NHL did this after the lockout and I was riveted as a Wings fan as Detroit kept getting closer to #1 from where they'd normally pick. Granted I think we only got to #22 but that was awesome.

Also though it was for the rights to Crosby which sure didn't hurt.

. I think this happened in the early 80s. They got Worthy number 1 thanks to the cavs.

Part of Simmons' point was that you keep giving these teams high picks, and they still end up in the same slots a few years down the road anyway. It's rewarding continued failure.

I think any teams that end up in the lottery for the 3rd year in a row should automatically be given the highest spots outside of the lottery. If three teams all qualify, they get the 14th-16th picks and the three worst playoff teams move up, and everyone else moves up as well.

Then they'd have a shot at a major dynasty, but they'd also be limited by the cap.

Would they really want to devote that much cap space to 3 guys who very well might never pan out + Kobe? That's be an extremely risky (and interesting) decision. It could fail spectacularly, which would be entertaining, or it could make them the super-villains of the league, which would also be interesting.

Chad Ford said they were considering taking Thabeet even if they had the #1 pick. If they take Rubio, they have a lot of small guys and literally no one inside. I just don't know how they can pass on a big guy if they aren't able to grab one in free agency or through a trade.

Personally I'd try and unload Conley and go with Rubio. Guys over 7'2 rarely stay healthy and it's tough to pass up on a guy who can be leading the point for the next 10-15 years.

I think it would be better if there were just 10 picks in the entire draft, and every other player was available to be signed. Then the teams in the draft would most likely have a powerful trading chip.

Give the bottom 15 teams in the league an equal amount of chips and the top 10 choices would come out of that. Salary cap space would actually mean something as well.

That comes down to bad GM'ing. Unless the draft has a LeBron James or slightly lesser talent in it, you just aren't going to rebuild through the draft. The wise teams are the ones that use their draft picks to acquire players, outside of the draftees if need be, who will help them win right now.

My issue with Thabeet is that the guy is massive and reasonably athletic. He should have been a completely dominant player this season, but far too often he was a non-factor for large stretches of the game. There is no excuse for a guy with his size and his draft status to be invisible on a college basketball court. In that respect he reminds me quite a bit of Roy Hibbert. Thabeet has the better physical tools, but they both did not dominate like you'd expect them to, yet Hibbert at least had a decent touch around the basket.

I have no doubt Thabeet can be a defensive presence in the NBA, but he is so far from polished that if I were a GM I could never justify selecting him top-5, even in this weak draft. Drafting for need is a horrible mistake to make that high in the draft.

If I'm the Grizzlies I take the best player available at #2 - ie. Rubio - and then worry about my frontcourt later. Rubio is FAR less likely to bust than Thabeet IMO, and the Grizzlies need talent above all else. They have a good SG, a SF that has some value but is yet to prove a "winning" player, and that's about it. They have some young big guys who, while they'll never be stars, can at the very least fill the gaps until the Grizzlies are in a position to land a more permanent solution.

Honestly, I think Curry to New York makes so much sense that I wouldn't be surprised if Golden State or Minnesota grab him first and try and make NY trade for him.

Some of you guys really suck.

--Resident Clippers fan

I wasn't aware Mike Dunleavey or Elgin Baylor posted here.

You may not have heard, but if Elgin posted here, I doubt he would have anything complementary to say about the Clippers.

And if Dunleavy posted here, I doubt I would have anything complementary to say about Dunleavy.

I agree with everything you said and was really surprised to read the Grizzlies were so enamored with Thabeet. I honestly feel he's a nice top 10 pick, but not a #2. I think a Marcus Camby is the ceiling for him.

But it's the Grizzlies so I'm assuming that whatever is the logical pick they'll do the opposite.

Please no more of that shit for Minnesota, especially while Glen Taylor is making sure that any competent GM candidate isn't going to want the Wolves job. :(

I heard an idea on a Warriors message board that was even better than molson's idea:

Have the lottery the same day as the draft, and as soon as the team for pick #1 gets revealed, start the clock.

wait a minute here. Isn´t that what used to be the requirements to get drafted by the Clippers ? :D

Curry to New York ---> reportedly he´s been given a promise weeks ago that the Knicks would take him, unless they would have moved in the Top3, to convince him to declare in the first place.
And yeah, the Pick makes sense. And now don´t be shocked if he´ll actually run the Point as a starter. Imo even with the rising apreciation for his PG skills he´s still really underrated in that aspect. Remember me talking about Aaron Brooks not being able to play a lot of passes ? Imo Curry can do a whole lot of different and difficult passes. Had he played with a Top10 school i could have seen averaging 7,5+ assists with maybe 3 TOs max instead of 5,6/3,6.
So imo all that talk about him being a spot up shooter and come-off-screens scorer is way overblown.


Why would the Grizzlies need size so bad ? I mean, the other Gasol won´t be an all star, but he averaged 12/7,5 on good shooting while getting to the line pretty well (4,6 times a game for a 12 PPG scorer is good). Isn´t much of a shotblocker, but could very well put up 15/9 with good position defense and good passing for a big for a couple years.
Thabeet and him could never see the floor together.

Thabeet is raw, sure. But imo he´ll be helped a bit by the different structure of the nBA game on offense. There´s more Pick & Role and more penetrating and giving it to the big guy when that guys defender helps.

I wouldn´t take him over Rubio though, who will be a star. Maybe not immediately, but eventually he´ll be great.
Imo Memphis should take him. It´s not like they haven´t had good experiences with spanish guys so far, too ;)

Would love to see him on OKC though. They could play some really intriguing defense and then get out on the break with the athletes they got. Plus Durant isn´t the type of scorer that needs the ball all the time or organizes the teams offense and runs the plays, so he´d be getting fine usage there.
They´d still need a shooter on the 2 spot though or shooters in general, they were like dead last in 3 point attempts if i recall correctly.

Rubio
Shooter X
Durant
Green
Krstic

Westbrook coming off the bench backing up both guard spots. Sefolosha is a pretty good defender, too.

couldn't you see westbrook as a decent SG in that setup though? He might not be an All Star SG, but he'd at least be decent - particularly if you want to run an up-tempo mike d'antoni type offense and run and penetrate

Gasol is a crappy rebounder and defender. Those are two things the Grizzlies desperately need. He's also probably better suited to play PF if they can get him to drop 30 pounds.

I like Rubio's game but I still don't think he's the sure thing a lot of you guys are making him out to be. He's only 18 and that's always a huge question mark. He's also not very quick or athletic compared to the premier point guards in the game. Sure that doesn't come into play much in the international game, but how does he handle going against faster guards like Paul, Rose, Rondo night in and night out? The current NBA rules are built for speed and quickness, something Rubio doesn't thrive in.

Not saying the Griz shouldn't take him at #2, just saying I think he's going to have some growing pains in the NBA. He's not going to adjust as quickly as guys like Paul and Williams did. It's going to take him 4-5 years before he is at a high level while Thabeet can step in and give you 10 boards and a few blocks every night right off the bat.

The Pacers need to do something to get out of mediocrity. They are about the worse play to be record wise in the NBA right now. They'd be better off being terrible.

Local radio doesn't get this. I've heard several people praise the team for staying competitive, but IMO that's the worst possible scenario. Grainger is a borderline star, but after that they're just a collection of role players. If they're going to be competitive they have to have another star, and the chance of getting one in the middle of the draft is slim.

Rubio ran the point for the Spanish national team against in the Olympics and more than held his own against the US (Paul, Williams & Kidd). Admittedly, Kidd can't guard anyone decent anymore, but anyone who can perform as Rubio did at 18 is special.

To further the argument, I can get a stiff white guy to give me 10 boards and some blocks if I'm willing to play him 35 minutes a night.

Yeah, but for me he´s a prototypical 6th man. Plus imo you need a shooter other than your best player on the floor to prevent teams from packing it in. If you have a true PG and a 25 PPG (or whatever he so pleases) scorer + an athletic 4 with an SF skillset (Green) you really don´t need another ballhandler/scorer to start the game.
I´m not saying he isn´t starting material. Just that with Rubio at PG i wouldn´t start him but look for a shooter and play him 30 minutes of the bench with 15 at PG and another 15 at SG when Durant or Green take a rest.



Gasol is not a crappy defender imo. He´s not great and certainly not a great "presence" but he doesn´t make many mistakes, rotates well and works hard for position. Pretty much serviceable considering his offensive input.
He´s not going to be able to play PF defensively.
They could of course allways trade Gasol. 7 footer that puts up that numbers with 2 years at a little over 3 mio will propably land you sth.
Although their salary structure sin´t ideal, only expiring they could send along is Milicic and then you have only Thabeet left at C. And Haddadi ... (although he didn´t look all that bad actually when he got some burn)

Nowaday most PGs can´t guard each other anyway with the new rules and mindset. See Celtics/Bulls. 2 great defensive PGs, neither remotely able to keep the other out of the lane by themselves.
Rubio is faster and quicker than people think as well, imo. But yeah, i don´t see him putting up 18/10 in year 1 either ;) Maybe either 30 minutes starter with like 10-12 points with 6 or 7 assists or coming off the bench to change the pace for 25 minutes a game.
Depends on the team a lot.

I don't think he's a good defender at all. He doesn't have the speed to help out on players going to the hole and his shot blocking ability is a little below average. He is serviceable in the half court game but gets run on by fast centers. I still think the rebounding is a bigger issue though as the Grizzlies were last in the league in that category. They desperately need a guy who can give them big boards.

I think trading him would be stupid since his contact is really good. The only way they would do that is if they could unload a real bad contact on someone else with Gasol (do they even have a bad contract on the rosters?).

That's my point though. Rubio isn't a Rose/Rondo style PG who can't be guarded. He has a ton of other skills but is just not that quick compared to what we're seeing out of the elite PGs in the game. Conley also played real well down the stretch and may be worth keeping at the point.

Yeah, but a lot of his deficits only are a problem because his teammates are piss poor defenders. Considering their athleticism it is an absolute joke what guys like Mayo and Gay offer defensively, even Conley should be much better. And they had like zero options at PF, Arthur isn´t as good as that good start made him out to be ...
Their only bad contract is Jaric, 7-7,5 mio and even that is only until 2011.
On offense Rubio´s quickness will be fine and he´ll have more sucess there than in Europe due to the increased possibilities for Pick & Roll play. Kind of like Nash in that regard, of course minus the ability to hit pull ups like nobody´s business when the defender goes under the screen.
Dude is a terrific Pick&Roll player and will thrive there without the grabbing and holding allowed and with the wider NBA court inside the 3 point line and less packing the lane (def 3 rule) .

Pacers have a good young team and I think they are in the position to just draft the best player regardless of position ... IMO that would be Terrance Williams if he is still on the board. With no guarantee that Dunleavy will recover from the knee problems T-Will can take the SG position or back up Rush and Granger. If they decide to go with a PG then I hope they take Flynn from Syracuse.

This is the worst time of the year being a Twolve fan. They never move up during lottery night and than in a month we get to watch McHale blow the pick. Traded Brandon Roy 2 years ago and OJ Mayo, and Mario Chalmers 1 of which is a star, 1 of which will be a star and a nice piece. Atleast we came out of the draft with a deeper bench the past 2 years. Did I ever mention that Kevin McHale is the worst GM in the history of sports? It took Danny Ainge all of 1 year to find the right fit for KG while McHale wasnt able to do it in 13 years.

He should have held on to KG so there wasnt any solid proof of how clueless he really is.

Glen Taylor isn't helping either. After first saying it will be McHale's decision to come back as a coach, then saying whoever he hired at GM would have option to hire a new coach, now he's back to saying it's up to McHale. That paired with offering a lowball salary, and the insistence that the new GM be forced to keep Hoiberg around also it's not surprising Taylor has been turned down 3 times so far. Probably a few more times coming soon with a first time GM not wanting to be held back when trying to make over a lousy roster by having to hold onto a bad coach and bad front office assistants.

So even though McHale may not be making the pick this year I'll be surprised if they don't manage to epically screw this draft up again. Maybe it can even pass last years, "We were going to keep Mayo (yeah, right), but then once they offered to throw in Mike Miller, who could turn that down?" and the decision to build the team around 2 players who play the same position, share the same defensive weaknesses, and do little to compliment each other.

Eh, fuck it, at least we've got Tubby, Royce and Rodney for basketball in Minnesota. If the Gophers can land Barnes and the Wolves screw up this offseason and the Wolves may as well just leave town.

I'm counting on McHale to stick around so he can somehow spark the next Celtics championship contender.

I believe he'll go to New York because he fits their system and is good friends with Lebron. But I really don't think he's going to be a great NBA player. He's the 4th or 5th best PG in the draft and that is even a stretch considering he isn't really a true PG. He was a great college player but is going to struggle in the NBA. He's at best a late 1st rounder in my book.

strongly disagree. That´s more or less a myth in my book. "True PG" is an awfully overused term. The guy can make every pass you have to be able to make as an NBA PG and then some more, he is a good ball handler, sees the floor very well and is more athletic than people give him credit for. People look at him shoot the ball a ton and think "oh, he can´t pass" when in fact he basically wasn´t "allowed" to pass on a team living and dying on his scoring. Again, put him on a big school and he still drops 20-24 points but also gets 8 assists a game. He´s going to be just fine in the league.
I just don´t buy that "he isn´t a PG" when he showed he´s capable of executing every pass he needs on a team without reliable options next to him (Lovedale excluded propably)
But i guess we´ll have to wait to see how it turns out ;)

He's still the 4th or 5th best PG in the draft. I'm sure he can make the pass, but that's not what's holding him back. The other guys are just better.

This is why I'm very keen to see how Patty Mills does in the NBA. He made Chris Paul and Deron Williams seem SLOW at the Olympics - CP3 in particular. I think his game is better suited to the NBA than the NCAAs, but I do wonder about his playmaking abilities. I think he could be, at worst, Aaron Brooks, but his upside is higher.

Pacers should go PG or PF, but I think the PGs that will be around where they pick will be better value than the PFs. Worst thing they could do is pick Mullens.

Congrats to the Lakers.

dola-

Unless there is some sort of gag-order on coaching movement throughout the NBA Finals, I'd assume Mike Brown will not be fired.

Which is pathetic.

You really feel he should be fired? I'd be interested to hear why.

I guess you haven't watched his coaching decisions for the last 4 seasons?

Do we even need to spell this out, I mean, are you the only fellow Cavs fan that actually thinks he doesn't need to be gone after the playoffs this year?

I am stunned that the expectations for Cavs fans can be higher than Eastern conference finals.

You do realize that there is exactly one above average NBA starter on that team, right? And that not even the likes of Michael Jordan or Wilt Chamberlain, nor even the exalted Kobe Bryant won titles when they had that caliber of talent around them.

This is as far as teams with one great player go. To expect more is to not understand the NBA.

I think when you compare the coaching jobs of Mike Brown and SVG to some of the other coaches in the playoffs, those two really get exposed. For example, I truly believe that if the Cavs were coached by Rick Adelman, they would have been in the Finals instead of the Magic. While I don't think the Magic would have beaten with Adelman as their coach, I do think the series would still be going on. Take a look at the list of coaches in this playoffs. I would take eight coaches before I chose SVG or Brown. Considering that four of the others are first year head coaches and a fifth is named Mike Woodson, the quality of their coaching skills leave a lot to be desired.

If the Cavs feels that they have to win a title or Lebron is going to leave, then they can not afford to be outcoached. They are in a win now situation. They can't wait for Mike Brown to grow into a good to great coach.

Van Gundy is a different situation. He reminds me a lot of Ozzie Guillen of the White Sox. I think he may have blown the one shot he had of taking the Magic to a title.

I don't get the negativity toward SVG. Sure he made some bad moves when put under a microscope. He also took an above average team to the finals and exposed the best team in the regular season. They got beat in the Finals but the Lakers were just a better team.

This is why the NBA is such a joke to me. SVG takes his team to the FINALS and he is on the hot seat? A team that most people wouldn't have expected to be in the finals at the beginning of the season. Weren't Turkoglu and Jameer Nelson mediocre starters/fringe players a few years ago? The turnover for coaches and the expectations placed upon them are so absurd, most of them are better off never accepting a head coaching position, and building something in the college ranks. You seemingly get one season, sometimes half a season to take a group of selfish, self-absorbed players and make them play together. NBA has become so out of touch that it is becoming more and more irrelevant to a lot of people. Wish it was the early-mid nineties again for the NBA.

I can't comment on the Finals since I have been in Germany for the last two weeks(Telekom Baskets is up 1-0 after winning game one of the best of five Basketball Bundesliga Finals against EWE Baskets). I just don't think he did a quality coaching job overall in this playoffs. Game 6 against the Sixers was his best game IMO. He was fortunate that his mistakes were not exposed due to inept coaching on the opposite bench and that his team had more talent than the team they were facing.

You mean 1992 when Mike Dunleavy Sr was slightly pushed to taking the job with the Bucks after leading the Lakers to the FINALS the previous year and getting them to the playoffs the next year despite losing Magic Johnson right before the 91-92 season due to his HIV announcement?