Analyzing the 65-Game Rule

There's been a lot of debate lately about the NBA's "65-Game Rule" when it comes postseason-award eligibility.  The mainstream media, d*ckriders that they are, appear to be against it, instead arguing that exceptional players like Edwards, Cunningham and Doncic should be awarded, despite their regular inability to take the court.  (And let's not mention the fact that with a couple of those guys, their teams are actually playing better with them injured).  I'm not calling these journalists d*ckriders as an insult, but when it comes to celebrities and especially entertainers, you know, you can't be a fan and objective at the same time.  A reporter shouldn't sound like a celebrity's publicist or agent.

So I agree with Adam Silver that the rule is working as intended.  And furthermore I would say that it's doing so on a couple of fronts.

DISCOURAGING TANKING

If the best player on your team is forced to suit up 65 games for at least 20 minutes, it should be harder for said team to lose because, if he's aiming to potentially land a postseason award, it's not like he can just go out there and do nothing.  You know, he can't pull a Rozier type shit.

DISCOURAGING LOAD MANAGEMENT

At the end of the day, you can't get angry at someone for being (genuinely) injured.  But I've been speculating for awhile that a lot of these injuries are suspect, not the player pretending per se but also like the organization preserving star's strength or minimizing their risk of injury for the postseason.  And you know, that logic is sorta understandable in today's NBA.

And that's why, yes, even a quality B-lister who can suit up 65+ games deserves a postseason award more than a regularly-injured A-lister.  This is what some people may term as an entitlement mentality and may even argue is contributing to the degradation of society.

Awards are supposed to be based on achievement and, in the case of team-based professionals, contribution to the organization.  So yeah, in the case of the Timberwolves for instance, maybe someone like Julius Randle or Naz Reid needs to be recognized this season more than Anthony Edwards.  They'll never be as popular or make more money that Ant-Man but at least are there for the team and fans.

THIS IS PROFESSIONAL "ATHLETICS", AFTER ALL

An "athlete", i.e. someone who's considered more athletic than the average person, isn't just an individual who can jump higher, run faster or shoot better.  What makes a person an athlete, and especially a multimillion-dollar one, is also supposed to be there endurance, i..e the ability to achieve the aforementioned feats on a consistent basis.

If some dude goes out there and averages 20ppg, afterwards gets injured and henceforth can't even walk straight without painkillers, then dear reader, I would contend that you or I are probably more athletic at that point than he is.  When you hear the word "athlete", the first thing that's supposed to come to mind is health and geniune strength, not big muscles and shit like that.  Those skinny-ass marathon runners are some of the best athletes in the world.

And that's one of the problems with the modern NBA, that I've already cried about numerous times in this blog.  You have these incredibly skilled players whose bodies simply aren't strong enough to consistently be on the grind.  I would speculate that most people couldn't endure an NBA season, which is supposed to be the main factor - not the ability to shoot jumpshots or dribble or rebound - that differents us average people from NBAers.  Roughly 80% of the NBA game is running up and down the court, which btw is pretty damn big.  And that's one you have someone like Dennis Rodman, with no discernible basketball skills to speak of, arguably being the best defender in history.

CONCLUSION

That said, I'm definitely not advocating anyone going out there and destroying their body in the name of a postseason award.  If you can play half a season's game (or less) and still make a gazillion dollars, like Joel Embiid for instance, then more power to you.  Ultimately, the biggest award is a championship, I guess.  And speaking of the likes of Embiid, George and Tatum, they're not going to win any individual awards this year, but at least they're fit(?) for the playoffs.

But at the end of the day, this is really about the fans.  Adam Silver, he's like a man of the people.  He knows that we want more teams, and he also knows that organizations intentionally fielding scabs is a betrayal to the customer.  Merchandising, TV deals, ticket sales - all of the ways the league makes money ultimately traces back to the fans.  And I'm glad that the Commissioner is that not letting this hardcore capitalist way of thinking, i.e. charging premium for an inferior product, take over the NBA.

Let Giannis Play

Sometime last year - I believe circa the end of last season or the beginning of this one - I started to really get pissed off about "load management".  It was Kawhi who sorta brought that standard to the forefront, and now things have totally gotten out of control, to the point where some NBA games have become virtually unwatchable.

For instance, I recently peeping this match between the Grizzlies who were competing against, if I remember correctly, the Warriors.  The most-popular player on the court was Draymond "Dino" Green.  Granted, Dray is an A-lister but not necessarily for on-court production.  That's not to say that he isn't a good or entertaining basketball player, even at this age.  But when Green makes headlines, it's usually for spazzing, not like willing his team to a victory.

So besides Draymond and a few C-listers - like Zach Edey, Santi Aldama and Podziemski - the rest of the players were basically scabs.  Mind you, I'm not dissing anyone.  My philosophy is that every NBA player is more or less as good as the next one.  You can't beat a champion unless you prove yourself worthy to get in the ring with him to begin with.  But that said, you'd have to be like a diehard NBA fan to want to pay to watch those dudes.

In a worst-case scenario, you actually bought season tickets or paid the price of admission well in advance, anticipating that at least two or three stars would be on the court and preferably both teams in a state of competitiveness.  And those are the people I feel most sorry for - the paying fans who are truly getting gypped by load management, these suspect "season-ending" injuries, the proliferation of NBAers whose bodies aren't strong enough for multiple seasons, etc.

MONETARY CONSIDERATIONS VS. FANS

The NBA business model, if a team actually wants to win games, is naturally against fans in a way.  And I'm not talking solely about tanking for draft position.  But now that we're on that subject anyway, let me say that it's pathetic that the best strategy a team full of professional, multi-million dollar athletes (besides high-paid executives) can come up with is 'let's wait to next year, hopefully get a high draft pick and rely on a youngster whose never played an NBA game in his life'.  Like someone isn't doing their job correctly, because half the time draft picks don't even pan out as anticipated.

And besides tanking, there's also the incentive to rest dudes so that they won't get injured, in this current tender age of the NBA.  That's what's apparently happening with Giannis.  Usually this is done to minimize the risk of a healthy-yet-tender player getting hurt before the playoffs.  But in Giannis's case, what's making it interesting is the Bucks already being out of the postseason chase, yet Giannis not being lazy or sheisty to rest, even though he has the opportunity.

F*CK THE BUCKS

So by this point, outside of Milwaukee being able to offer him more money, there really doesn't seem to be much of a reason for Giannis to stick around.  You can't count on this braintrust to turn the situation around and assembly another championship-level team, like LAL did with Kobe.

If Giannis plays and reinjures himself this season, it won't matter either way to the team's current fortune.  But what it could affect is his value in a forthcoming trade.  So it's like they're (over)protecting his health, saving him for a future trade.  Or at least that's what I want to believe.  I'd hate to think they're shitting on fans here and now by looking forward to maybe being better next (regular) season.  Only the truly low organizations, like the Jazz, would do some shit like that.

The idea of the Bucks getting a high draft pick and then trading it for a star to pair with Giannis, I don't really support that.  Remember, it was this blog that incepted the Dame trade.  And I learned a bitter lesson with that one, that you should never, ever count on a injury-prone star, regardless of how good he is.  So if Milwaukee does decide to go that draft-trade route, they better get someone(s) really sturdy - I'm thinking an Anunoby type and maybe a Josh Hart also.  Giannis is exactly a spring chicken himself, so they should continue with the trend established earlier this season (before he came back), of building a roster that can compete without him.

Meanwhile, even though the Bucks suck and aren't even going to make the Play-Ins(!), Giannis wants to suit up for the rest of this season.  He truly is a man of the people, you know, including his loyalty to Milwaukee and all.  But concerning that commitment, if they really do force him to sit even though he wants to play, that should be the straw that breaks the camel's back.  He should no longer feel if he demands a trade that he's somehow selling out or breaking his word, because once an organizations shits on its own fans, I mean you can't really sink any lower than that.

It's one thing to put the future over today, if you actually know the future.  'Hey, I'm getting paid tomorrow, so I'm going to starve today but eat well once I get my money'.  But it's another thing when you decide to suffer today in anticipation of a probable future.  In other words, rest Giannis or not, there's no guarantee the Bucks are going to be any better in 2026-27 than they are now.  Draft picks aren't always reliable, and neither is the health of established stars.

SHOUTOUT TO CAM THOMAS

Cam is, by all accounts, a gifted scorer.  But it was revealed, many moons ago, that he would never be a true alpha in this league.

That was a few years back when the Cam Thomas hype train was at its peak.  Remember that dude averaged 20+ points for a couple of seasons.  So there he was, in Golden State, facing the ultimate test - playing against an inspired Steph.  I don't think they had any direct beef or anything, but the implication was this being Thomas's chance to really prove himself.  And he was doing his thing, going blow-for-blow with the Dubs for most of the game.  So it was like 'oh shit, maybe this dude really is legit, not just prospering because he's on a bad team, like he's out here in Cali, bringing it to Steph'.

But then once that became obvious, that he was trying to show up an all-time great, Curry turned it up a notch in the 4th and humbled him on a crunch-time iso play.  I think he may have even done that "night-night" shit afterwards - like that's how testy the unspoken Thomas vs. Curry motif of the game had become.  You have a young upstart who's trying to prove he's just as good as the old great, and you have the old great out to show, um no, he isn't.  That's the game that broke Cam's career, in a manner of speaking.  That's when it was proven that he's an exceptional albeit "inefficient scorer" as opposed to someone who can win games.  It was sorta like what Lebron did to Lenny Cooke.

THE BET THAT BACKFIRED?

More recently, Thomas betted on himself by not taking an extension with the Nets.  That can be risky sometimes, like when Dennis Schroder shot himself in the foot a few years back.  I disagreed when Dennis made that decision, but I was feeling Cam, in a way.  Schroder was/is a role player, but Thomas was a borderline allstar just last season.

In hindsight, even though the Nets offering him $15/mil a year was kinda insulting, you know, it was only a two-year contract.  But Cam, betting on himself, rather played this season for a mere $6mil, after averaging 24ppg just last year.

Someone shoulda told him that you need to be wise or at least know your worth before getting into contract disputes with your employer, as the Nets proceeded to actually limit his minutes this season, even going as far as to bring him off the bench if I remember correctly.  Was that actually a compliment to Cam, i.e. cutting his minutes, since Brooklyn is supposed to be tanking?  Maybe.  But in the Nets' defense in terms of not offering him more dough, if any team has smarted in recent years due to putting too much faith in high scorers, its Brooklyn.

I felt really good about Thomas going to Milwaukee, that he would get a chance to prove himself on a team that was at least semi-competitive at the time, but I also understood it was a make-or-break type of situation.  And now, it's like he was waived so late in the season that can't even sign with a playoff team.  And to make matters worse, the Bucks gave his roster spot to like some totally no-name dude, like a G-leaguer or some shit.

It's hard to imagine that this is the end of Cam Thomas' career.  Maybe by the time all is said and done, it'll turn into some type of amazing redemption story, of a player who was once undervalued ultimately leaving his mark.  But in the meantime, he doesn't seem to be someone who organizations particularly like.  Is it those tight, homoerotic shorts he used to wear?  I don't know.

CONCLUSION

I don't really know the profitability of being a NBA season ticket holder these days.  So if you are and actually intend to attend games, better to be a fan of a supeream like the Knicks, i.e. one with 3 or more stars, thus making it nearly impossible (though not unheard of in this day and age) for all to be hurt or resting simultaneously.

My solution - offer some kind of waiver where dudes can get their money back or a discount or some shit if stars aren't playing, and that includes fans who pay for streaming.  I'm not trying to be an A-hole, but who really wants to see the Bucks without Giannis, especially now that they're not winning or even in the playoff chase anymore?

Has Golden State Become the Dumbest Braintrust in the NBA?

There's a couple of reasons why it's hard to appreciate just how ass-backwards the Warriors' braintrust has become.  First is that Steph, when he's actually active here and there, remains a MVP-caliber player, at least offensively.  Also, if you compare GSW to the other older teams, like the Lakers or Nuggets for instance, it's like 'oh, these guys ain't that bad'.  It's only when you compare them to a team like the Thunder can you truly appreciate this braintrust's inability to transition into the current decade, even though it's already halfway over.

LITTLE RESPECT FOR YOUNG, DEVELOPING PLAYERS

It all started, of course, with the trading of Jordan Poole.  I'll admit that dude has his flaws, even back during his stint in Cali.  I'll also admit that he hasn't proven as good as I thought he would since leaving.

But trading away Jordan was like, say, a father trying to trade away his son.  The organization proved more committed to getting rid of than developing him like they should.  And this is something you probably can't fully appreciate unless you go back and revisit the 2022 season, like watch every game pass January.  The Warriors were facing some key injuries (like they are now) and sucked (like they do now), but man, were they putting up some admirable fights (like they are now?).  And it proved worthwhile in the long run, as those increased minutes for role players - learning how to live without Steph, if you will - paid off and eventually contributed to the Dubs winning an unexpected championship.

Besides Poole, the other key young player - the other budding star, if you will - was Jonathan Kuminga.  There were a lot of unknown dudes who stepped up in 2022, some since losing their place in the NBA even.  But Kuminga was someone you could look at and be like 'yeah, this team has a future'.

You have Poole and Kuminga and the Gauntlet and Moody, etc., hanging in games with contenders even with Steph or Klay absent - some of those guys really young or just rookies - and you could feel confident as a Warriors' fan, that Curry and co. would be able to age disgracefully.  Instead, it's become sort of a lebronesque situation where you have older divas, if you will, exerting so much financial control and overall influence over the braintrust that limited attention is given to younger players, totally neglecting the fact that you need someone to hold your hand once you're forced to walk with a stick.

So like the Lakers, the Warriors also suck at player development.  Beside Andrew Wiggins, they haven't drafted an all-star or turned a into an all-star since the acquiring big 3, well over a decade ago.  

Let's further go on to say, for the sake of argument, that GSW, in effect traded Poole and Kuminga for CP3 and Butler.  The latter two, it's safe to say, are future HOFers.  They are also the two most-notable additions this team has made since 2022, with Jordan and Jonathan being the two most-notable subtractions (besides Klay, who left in free agency).

That should help illustrate just how intelligent this braintrust is.  Paul wasn't a good fit, period.  I knew that from the jump and undoubtedly noted it in this blog but was also thinking like 'okay, if Steph and them want him, maybe they know something I don't'.  But now in hindsight, I realize no, they may be geniuses on the court but not basketball gurus.

Butler fit a lot better in the grand scheme of Dubdom.  But then there's the age factor of course, you know, dude being in his mid-30s and all, in the modern-day injury-ridden NBA, besides Butler having already established a notable injury history.  The logic should have been like okay, grab your Jimmy, but don't go as far as to like prioritize him over a younger, healthier and at this stage more-promising Kuminga.

STEVE KERR vs JONATHAN KUMINGA

The latter is someone who, since his rookie campaign, I've always been convinced was a potential star.  Like you could see it, but his name got lost in the sauce.  a couple of reasons.  A number of dudes drafted higher than him were generating more headlines.  Also, it's like Steve Kerr wasn't giving Jon ample playing time, compared to his draft classmates.

Steve Kerr is someone who, as a coach, I've always questioned his aptitude.  He's had his moments here and there and is tougher than he looks.  But he more or less inherited a championship-ready roster from previous head coach Mark "Selfie" Jackson.  Then, going on to win a couple more with KD, i.e. GSW fielding arguably the best offensive team in history, isn't anything to pat yourself on the back about as a coach.  It's the dude in the background, who drafted the big 3 and arranged for KD's acquitistion, who deserve more credit.

But that said, 2022 was once again amazing is definitely something Keer should be proud of.  The mistake he and the braintrust made was afterwards not reading the graffiti on the wall, that you need to really start having mercy on the Splash Bros' legs.

The argument was that as time progressed, Kuminga would inevitably get more run.  And he did but was never truly appreciated for what he brought to the table.  Coaches these days, more or less NBA-wide, are unable to properly strategize with different players' attributes.  So it's like if a dude can't shoot 3s, then he's instantly a liability.  Come on, man.  So Jon became more like a scapegoat.

Another theory I have is that Steve Kerr is intimidated by big black dudes.  Perhaps we all are.  But in the Kuminga case, I'm thinking more along the lines of hatin' then intimidated per se.

CONCLUSION

Steph is destined to go the way of Lebron.  Some aged superstars make too much money and have too much influence for a contender to be built around them during the latter years.  The Warriors make a little bit of noise here and there, but Al Horford and them ain't intimidating nobody.  So next year, we're going to have another season of Steph + Dray + Butler?  Okay.