The Unpopular Opinion thread

[OkayC]

Heres one. I feel that teams(much like players) can get so heavily criticized that they become underrated. Like the spurs, thunder, or bulls for example. The spurs every year are too old to compete(not counting this year), yet they've been a top 3 seed every year for like the last 6 or 7 years. Okc is too poorly coached, and westbrook and durant can't figure out how to play toghether(or whatever the narrative is), yet theyve made a deeper and deeper run into the playoffs since their first year in the playoffs back in 2010. I could go on but i think some get the point. Teams have their deficiencies, but it gets irritating to hear teams and individual players get underrated because of constant criticism the media gives them.

[turty11]

i wouldnt say anyone underates the spurs, i think its just that they heavily lack media attention because they dont have that 25+ ppg guy, or someone making the top 10 every night like alot of these other teams.

[ThatKidNamedTae]

I feel that teams drafting on potential instead of current ability is ridiculous.

[702]

I love Jordan Crawford.

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Quote: Originally Posted by ERA

If Brandon Roy wasn't forced to retire, he'd be up there with LBJ and KD in MVP votes. I miss Brandon Roy so much.. Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk now Free

He was one of my favorite players at the time and hated to see him retire .

With that said IMO Damien Lillard has more upside .

[Taer]

Quote: Originally Posted by ehh

Yeah, I think it's safe to say that people who had their primes in the 50's would not transcend eras. That was a very, very different game of basketball....

I believe that people who had their primes in the 50's would do better in today's era than today's stars would do in the 50's. With the advances in medicine, training, rule changes etc. making success more likely.

George Mikan (perhaps the best Laker of all time) is one of those players that would tear the League up today (6'10" 245lbs).

The shot clock, widening the lane from six to twelve feet ("The Mikan Rule"), and a lot more can be directly or indirectly attributed to him either as a player or an official.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by Taer

I believe that people who had their primes in the 50's would do better in today's era than today's stars would do in the 50's. With the advances in medicine, training, rule changes etc. making success more likely. George Mikan (perhaps the best Laker of all time) is one of those players that would tear the League up today (6'10" 245lbs). The shot clock, widening the lane from six to twelve feet ("The Mikan Rule"), and a lot more can be directly or indirectly attributed to him either as a player or an official.

Then you account for advancements in what players TRY to do based ONLY on the fact they've watched other greats improve on their game in ways that weren't even imaginable in the 50's. Players see one guy do it, they work to duplicate and then improve on it... next generation does the same, rinse and repeat. Factor in the availability of games for kids to watch as the years went on, to break downs in youtube videos, and now even big guys doing the Mikan drill look different than in the 50's.

I think it's really hard to say players of either era could/could not play in the other. How much are we assuming they've benefited over time? Are we assuming that today's players in the 50's have the basketball knowledge of the 50's players?

[ojandpizza]

Unpopular opinion:

I feel that the MVP award is based far too much on team record. I do think winning should play a role in the voting process. Because basically nobody wants to vote for someone who just puts up great numbers on a bad team, for example: Kevin Love should not win the MVP award..

But I do strongly feel that making the playoffs is "good enough".. I don't think being a 1 seed should hold a higher MVP voting status than say a 5th seed team. Once the playoffs begin higher seeding means nothing other than home court. I feel that if you lead your team to the playoffs you've done your job, after that it's a fresh start..

Obviously the conferences as they currently stand are unbalanced.. For example a 8th seed in the West is basically equivalent to a middle seed in the East. So I could see voting in the East being limited for teams that finished closer to the 8th seed, where as in the West position wouldn't matter as much.

Now if you dominated the regular season and took the best record in the league, and someone similar to you in numbers finished 5th or something, then I could see it going to the highest seed player.. But if a player outplayed you all year long you should not be rewarded the MVP award just because your team reached a slightly higher playoff seeding.. Since the award comes before the playoffs even start, if both players made the playoffs technically they have the same amount of regular season success.