https://instagr.am/p/Bzk1WWZhR9V

and NOT OT ... Clippers waive Tyrone Wallace

Reports of Lakers' dynasty a bit premature?

The road to the NBA Championship is as wide open as I can remember. Lots of parity among the top teams - I can think of maybe 6 or 7 teams with legitimate shots at winning it all (especially since many of these teams add a player or two through trade deadline and buyout guys).

Should be an interesting and competitive 2019-20 NBA season.

And then there's the Knicks...

It'll probably come down to who is the healthiest down the stretch

The clippers have the most depth, so they will be able to load manage the best of all the title contending teams

LOLakers

Nobody is talking about Houston - mainly because they didn't make any splashy moves. There's something to be said for having a few years of continuity - most of the other contenders will be trying to fit new pieces together.

I know Harden and Chris Paul butted heads and didn't always mesh perfectly, but if they get off to a hot start I can see them patching things up and making a strong run at a championship. Of course both LA teams and Utah will be making a strong case as well in the Western Conf.

DCousins and RRondo to the LAL.

75bear said:

---

Nobody is talking about Houston - mainly because they didn't make any splashy moves. There's something to be said for having a few years of continuity - most of the other contenders will be trying to fit new pieces together.

I know Harden and Chris Paul butted heads and didn't always mesh perfectly, but if they get off to a hot start I can see them patching things up and making a strong run at a championship. Of course both LA teams and Utah will be making a strong case as well in the Western Conf.

---

The problem with Houston is that cp3 is only going to get worse every year, not better. And last year they couldn't even beat a durantless warriors team. Can't possibly see how they can beat either LA teams.

My way too early prediction is that the LA teams will be the top two teams. With Utah, nuggets, warriors, Houston and Portland all jockeying for the other playoff spots.

If Kawhi has stayed in tor, I thought the dubs had an outside shot at competing for a title. But now, I think the clippers are just too deep. I can see lacob trying to make a splashy move next offseason to try to get back in the race.

Are the Lakers better with the depth they added rather than with Kawhi and basically zero depth.

Kawhai and little bit less depth. They would have signed solid players at the minimums.

Kawhi was breaking down late in the year despite taking 20 games off. MeBron is never playing more than 60 games in a season either going forward.

Adding Cousins, Green, Pope, Cook, and resigning McGee/Rondo arguably makes them a better regular season than with Kawhi, but not as formidable in the post season when it matters.

ducky23 said:

---

It'll probably come down to who is the healthiest down the stretch

The clippers have the most depth, so they will be able to load manage the best of all the title contending teams

---

Agreed, health is critical.

And it is not predictable. Many of the best players are not so young and/or have already had significant injuries. Who knows what condition these stars will be in April...

What is predictable is that the league overall is getting stronger every year. It is also likely that 1919/20 will be great year overall.

south bender said:

---

It is also likely that 1919/20 will be great year overall.

---

I'm sure SFCityBear would agree.

Yeah - we can finally put that World War thing behind us and concentrate on what matters most - putting the ball through the hoop. Go Kansas City Buffaloes!

Do we start roaring yet?

"L.A. is NBA epicenter: "With Kawhi Leonard and Paul George agreeing to join the Clippers on Friday and the Lakers signing power forward Anthony Davis on Saturday, Los Angeles has emerged as the biggest winner in one of the wildest free agency seasons." (Reuters)

NBA's changing times: "The Clippers got better. The Lakers got better. The Jazz got better. The Rockets will still be good. The Bucks have the MVP. The Nets got Kyrie Irving. The Celtics got Kemba Walker. The Warriors lost Kevin Durant," per AP's Tim Reynolds.

The bottom line: "Right now, the odds-makers in Vegas are predicting next June it'll be Clippers vs. Bucks."
"A couple days ago the Lakers were the betting favorites."
Axios

GBear4Life said:

---

Kawhi was breaking down late in the year despite taking 20 games off. MeBron is never playing more than 60 games in a season either going forward.

Adding Cousins, Green, Pope, Cook, and resigning McGee/Rondo arguably makes them a better regular season than with Kawhi, but not as formidable in the post season when it matters.

---

The "MeBron" thing is tacky, IMO. Obviously, you're entitled to your own opinion and your freedom of expression, but I think it's uncalled-for and a bad look. It's the type of ridiculous name-calling that I would reserve for Stanfurdites.

Western Conference and specifically the Pacific Division is going to be fun as they beat the hell out of each other. Competition is good. The great NBA champions always had a legit rival if not an arch-nemesis. Agree the team who stays healthy has the best chance to go the furtherest. Even as a Lakers fan, I like things have balanced out and the superstars have been spread out. Better for the game.

Big C said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Kawhi was breaking down late in the year despite taking 20 games off. MeBron is never playing more than 60 games in a season either going forward.

Adding Cousins, Green, Pope, Cook, and resigning McGee/Rondo arguably makes them a better regular season than with Kawhi, but not as formidable in the post season when it matters.

---

The "MeBron" thing is tacky, IMO. Obviously, you're entitled to your own opinion and your freedom of expression, but I think it's uncalled-for and a bad look. It's the type of ridiculous name-calling that I would reserve for Stanfurdites.

---

Typically I would reserve the use of "Stanfurdites" for unevolved, infantile morons. But I don't hold it against you and give you the benefit of the doubt. I get it.

FWIW, while I root against LeBum with all my heart and soul, I acknowledge he is the GOAT.

GBear4Life said:

---

Big C said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Kawhi was breaking down late in the year despite taking 20 games off. MeBron is never playing more than 60 games in a season either going forward.

Adding Cousins, Green, Pope, Cook, and resigning McGee/Rondo arguably makes them a better regular season than with Kawhi, but not as formidable in the post season when it matters.

---

The "MeBron" thing is tacky, IMO. Obviously, you're entitled to your own opinion and your freedom of expression, but I think it's uncalled-for and a bad look. It's the type of ridiculous name-calling that I would reserve for Stanfurdites.

---

Typically I would reserve the use of "Stanfurdites" for unevolved, infantile morons. But I don't hold it against you and give you the benefit of the doubt. I get it.

FWIW, while I root against LeBum with all my heart and soul, I acknowledge he is the GOAT.

---

I know some folks don't like LeBron. That came out here the year the Cavs beat the Warriors in the Finals, but I'm not sure I get the enmity. Here's a guy who's shouldered the responsibility of being GOAT (or near-GOAT) pretty well. He's kept out of trouble, he gives back to the community and he's fairly well-spoken. On the court, he does it all and would just as soon make the great pass as make the great shot. He came back to his home town team, the pissant Cleveland Cavaliers, and got them a championship.

The only thing I can see as a strike against him is that he always tries to utilize his influence to the max (with the front office, etc.). I will admit that the way he treated his second-to-last Cavs head coach wasn't exactly a shining moment for him, but I figure, once you earn the status of a LeBron (or a Magic), well, at that point, you are bigger than the coach, usually. So be it.

On balance, LeBron James seems to me to be more "one of the good guys", than one of the bad guys.

I'd listen to any counter-argument.

Big C said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Big C said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Kawhi was breaking down late in the year despite taking 20 games off. MeBron is never playing more than 60 games in a season either going forward.

Adding Cousins, Green, Pope, Cook, and resigning McGee/Rondo arguably makes them a better regular season than with Kawhi, but not as formidable in the post season when it matters.

---

The "MeBron" thing is tacky, IMO. Obviously, you're entitled to your own opinion and your freedom of expression, but I think it's uncalled-for and a bad look. It's the type of ridiculous name-calling that I would reserve for Stanfurdites.

---

Typically I would reserve the use of "Stanfurdites" for unevolved, infantile morons. But I don't hold it against you and give you the benefit of the doubt. I get it.

FWIW, while I root against LeBum with all my heart and soul, I acknowledge he is the GOAT.

---

I know some folks don't like LeBron. That came out here the year the Cavs beat the Warriors in the Finals, but I'm not sure I get the enmity. Here's a guy who's shouldered the responsibility of being GOAT (or near-GOAT) pretty well. He's kept out of trouble, he gives back to the community and he's fairly well-spoken. On the court, he does it all and would just as soon make the great pass as make the great shot. He came back to his home town team, the pissant Cleveland Cavaliers, and got them a championship.

The only thing I can see as a strike against him is that he always tries to utilize his influence to the max (with the front office, etc.). I will admit that the way he treated his second-to-last Cavs head coach wasn't exactly a shining moment for him, but I figure, once you earn the status of a LeBron (or a Magic), well, at that point, you are bigger than the coach, usually. So be it.

On balance, LeBron James seems to me to be more "one of the good guys", than one of the bad guys.

I'd listen to any counter-argument.

---

He's no more controlling and hyper-competitive than Michael Jordan was, and off the court he's basically a model citizen.

If you want to give any one person credit...props to The Logo, Jerry West. He pulled off the Kawhi deal. Set up the W's minor dynasty and of course was an exception GM and player with the Lakers. The guy has crafted deals every place he's gone and has won. Remember watching him during the great winning streak of '72.

Big C said:

---

On balance, LeBron James seems to me to be more "one of the good guys", than one of the bad guys.

I'd listen to any counter-argument.

---

On balance, I agree. In a basketball context, he's always pushed for whatever benefits him, even if it puts his team in a bad state down the line. He saddled the Cavaliers with a bunch of bad contracts and bad trades to make a push for the title. He's always at odds with his coaches.

But philanthropically, he's done lots of good things and he's never been in any legal trouble that I'm aware of.

BearNakedLadies said:

---

Big C said:

---

On balance, LeBron James seems to me to be more "one of the good guys", than one of the bad guys.

I'd listen to any counter-argument.

---

On balance, I agree. In a basketball context, he's always pushed for whatever benefits him, even if it puts his team in a bad state down the line. He saddled the Cavaliers with a bunch of bad contracts and bad trades to make a push for the title. He's always at odds with his coaches.

But philanthropically, he's done lots of good things and he's never been in any legal trouble that I'm aware of.

---

Since the Cavs actually WON the title they were seeking, I'd have to say they turned out to be good contracts and good trades. The previous time the Cleveland Cavaliers won a title was never and that is probably the next time they will win one, as well.