2026 NBA Offseason Grade (Pacific Division)

GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS: C

Some people say that the Warriors had the worst offseason of any fan favorite, but I don't wholly feel that way.  They're not lying when they say that if Butler is healthy, he would make a huge difference.  If he returns in form, that should instantly thrust the Warriors up to the same consideration of at least the Rockets.  This is the most 'what if they were healthy' team in the league.  Remember that Porzingis is an all-time injury great.

Their rookie, Yaxel Lendenborg, won the most notable summer league.  Those kinds of accomplishments don't really tend to make a difference in the long run, but better some good news than none.

The above grade does not take into consideration that the Dubs (if they're still called that) quote/unquote 'missed out on Lebron James'.  The "C" represents the fact that they're already a good team (on paper), who have decided to stand pat.  But they need miracles of sports science type shit.

LOS ANGELES CLIPPERS: B

All things considered, the Clippers should dedicate at least one entire season to testing Kawhi as the undisputed alpha.  In a way, it's like he never truly had that position in his entire career.  The sad thing though, if they are forced down that route, is that the braintrust didn't use this offseason to specifically build a team around him.

One thing you have to respect about this franchise is that they never tank.  Even when it looked like Leonard was leaving, they were dedicated to competing in the present.  The roster may be mediocre and nonprogressive, but they aren't approaching the season like pushovers.

LOS ANGELES LAKERS: B+

In terms of roster additions, the Lakers' offseason hasn't been inspiring at all.  I'd rather pair Jaxson Hayes with Luka than Walker Kessler.  But they did the best they could, I guess.

But if they had known, for an entire year and a half, that the plan was for Lebron, their best all-around player, to leave town, why weren't they better prepared?  'Oh, but we did prepare. We've been working on the Walker Kessler deal for the last 18 months'.  That sounds like an executive who wants to be replaced by AI.

But this is what I want you to also to keep in mind.  During the Trump era, the Lakers have now become the whitest team in the NBA, besides establishing a familial relationship with the White House.  You do the math.

They still need to work on star power though, which makes keeping Bronny around, despite whatever, more logical.  And if they get to flunking again, the 'Re-Trade Luka Movement' is going to start soon.

PHOENIX SUNS: C

Miles Bridges is a fine addition who should make this team more entertaining, but he doesn't solve their problem of too much iso.  Replacing Chris Paul with KD fuked Phoenix up in more ways than one because now, they don't even know how to play team basketball anymore.  But even if they did, with this roster it wouldn't make a whole world of difference.

Ideally, an organization would be one that players want to play for, even if you don't bribe (i.e. overpay) them.  That's what the Suns lack.  They have the best graphic designs in the league and something like a winning history but can never establish themselves like the big dogs, the types of franchises that old, valuable vets believe they can win a championship with.

SACRAMENTO KINGS: C-

The Kings are easily the most obscure franchise in the NBA.  They're so bad that even lineups that look almost perfect on paper end up falling to the bottom of the standings.

It's so bad that now the keys of the car are being handed to a #5 draft pick even though, you know, guys like Sabonis - arguably the best pure PF in the league - are still around.  And I'm like, don't put too much pressure on the kid.  In order to turn this sh*tshow around, he'd have to be an all-time great.  Lebron could come to this team, and they'd still suck.

CONCLUSION

There doesn't appear to be much noteworthy going on here.  The Pacific boasts an admirable level of celebrity.  But I mean, if the closest you appear to having a contender is the Lakers, that's not really anything to brag about.

Lebron and the (Forced) Waiting Game

I understand why Lebron is waiting things out, even more than usual.  Despite the fact that he's likely going to get paid around $10mil - i.e. more than most people earn in their entire lives - for a single season, he's 'no longer playing for the money'.

Even more than when he teamed up with D-Wade, now he wants an instant championship, as time is no longer on his side.  So instead of chopping some team's financial reserves and forcing them into a position where they can't properly flesh out the roster (i.e. what happened with the Lakers?), sit back, let the braintrusts prove their own worth and then, after the smoke has cleared, choose the team that best looks like it will win with your (aged) presence.

WHAT ABOUT THE KNICKS OR SPURS?

The media, including Rich Paul, makes it sound like the ball is all in King James's court, but idk. And the reason I say that is because, if he wanted to win a championship now-now-now, the best bet would of course be going to one of the two teams that just made the Finals.

That's the beauty of Lebron's game, in theory.  (Offensively) he can play any position, 1 through 5, at a superstar, impactual level. But the reason I say in theory is because even though he can still, to this day, dominate the post, he seems reluctant to go down there on a regular basis.  So a lot of times, you have LBJ chucking up threes like he's a little guy, despite there being actual little guys on the team (who can't play in the post like he can).  Though, in Lebron's defense, he's definitely clutch.

The Knicks just lost Mitchell Robinson, so they actually have space for another big.  That's not to say LBJ can defend Wemby or anything like that.  But now, out of all NYK's notable bench players, none of them are frontcourt - no disrespect to Drummond, who can average 10rpg in his sleep, but you know what I mean.  And that's going to be an interesting alternate look anyway, i.e. the times KAT can't play, and NYK starts Andre instead(?).

The Spurs would make even better sense.  When they lost to NYK, even before Lebron made himself available, I was saying that what they needed is another low-post presence besides Wemby (and Kornet).

Champagnie is an amazing shooter but, for a 4, appears as if they can't really do shit in the post.  Players like Castle and Harper make more noise downlow than Julian does.

San Antonio went out and got Harris, which is a sound move, i.e. potentially starting him alongside Julian.  You know, the two of them together makes sense rather than having one or the other, as Tobias also, given his size, is a shooter who's more or less a nonfactor downlow.

Lebron would be perfect because he shoots just as good as Champagnie(?) or Harris but furthermore can dominate in the post, while Victor is out on the perimeter.  His presence would free Wemby up to truly play like a guard sometimes, without having to worry about the consequences of not being in a position to get a rebound (i.e. that last-second play against the Knicks in Game 4),

But the way I see the situation, it reminds me of a saying one of my mentors used to have - "familiarity breeds contempt".  From the outside looking in, we all love Lebron.  But the people who actually know him, i.e. his colleagues, maybe all of them don't feel the same.  In other words, I find it interesting that the Spurs especially never seemed to entertain the idea of bringing the King in.

DETROIT PISTONS

The one team I've been pushing for Lebron to join, even before the offseason began, has been the Pistons.  At this point in his career, he's exactly what Detroit needs - "a secondary scorer" as the media puts it, i.e. someone who can put up points at will, but playing defense is a bonus.  It sucks that they got rid of Isaiah Stewart, but the Pistons, with Ausar Thompson may still have the defensive weapons to mitigate elder Lebron's deficiencies.

That's also presuming that Duren actually comes back.  Of late, the media has been bemoaning the idea that restricted free agents are powerless in negotiations, but I don't know.  Any contract where you can get paid tens of millions of dollars whether you're able to take the court or not sounds like a definite win on the part of the employee.  That's like being a don't-give-AF CEO of a big corporation.

But this appears to be another case where both sides aren't particularly interested.  Lebron didn't put Detroit on his list of preferred destinations, nor have they expressed an interest in having him.

And that's the interesting thing about those teams he did list.  Going to the Sixers (now with Brown) or the Heat (now with Giannis) may result in an instant championship, but neither is really guaranteed.  Philly may have depth issues (in light of the less-than-ideal health of Embiid), and Miami lacks shooting.

The teams that could more visibly slot LBJ in and instantly win - the Spurs, Knicks and Pistons, interestingly aren't even on his list (and vice versa).  Dude is feening but apparently ain't feening like that.  And the reason I didn't mention the Cavs, to reiterate, is because even though having the King buttressing Allen + Mobley would be ideal, I'm still having a hard time envisioning him and the Beard(?) playing together.

TORONTO RAPTORS

Toronto is a team which, even though they lost in the First Round, it was apparent that Cleveland wasn't necessarily better squad, and the Raptors are only one player away from being contenders.  Ideally that player would be a big, someone who could potentially play the 5 instead of Barnes, now that the NBA is embracing tallness again.

Quality, traditional-like bigs, as I foresaw years ago, are now in high demand but short supply.  So the next best thing, if you want a 4 who can play elite defense (keeping Scottie at the 5), would be to bring in Kawhi.  We were almost there, and shoutout to Steve Ballmer, who's always one step ahead in the game. Like you see how he tried to get Leonard out of there quick.

And after Kawhi, the next best available option may be Lebron.  He may not be an elite defender anymore.  But the thing about the King, besides being a giant, is that he also has a presence.

There's not many players, including some superstars, you can say that about.  LBJ may fall asleep, like a grandpa on his rocking chair, sometimes.  But when he's really vested, he always makes an impact.  James just getting a steal or dunking these days makes the crowd go crazy, even if he's away.  And all of that said, imagine if the Raptors somehow managed to get him and Kawhi(?).  Yet another reason for the King to sit back and wait.

HONORABLE MENTION: GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS

I haven't really been pushing the idea of James going to Golden State, but I'm not hating either.  If that's where he really wants to go, to finally compete in the NBA besides Curry, then the implication would be that even when they lose, you know, he won't really be vexed, since that's something they both want to do (and both have already won numerous championships).  And the only reason I remembered the Dubs is because just yesterday, Steph made some comment about wanting Lebron to come over.

The King would really have to want to be there also because, even though their roster doesn't suck, like dudes are old AF.  And this isn't even about the league trending young or anything like that.  It's about, oh shit, Butler and Porzingis?  The way Golden State's roster is designed, if they lose Jimmy again, that would be more or less akin to the Sixers losing Embiid.

It's really sad when you think about, how with some players, you can't really enjoy watching them for fear injury.  Players like Draymond, Butler and even Porzingis would help mitigate Lebron's defensive deficiencies.  But besides Green, long-term injury is more or less inevitable.

So on nights when, say, neither Jimmy or Kristaps can play, or the latter is playing but a nonfactor due to his plethora of ailments, how would this team look?  Imagine Lebron + Steph + Draymond, sans Jimmy (not to mention they recently lost Looney and Post), against a team like OKC or SA?  Like I don't even wanna see no shit like that, and they better re-sign Payton Jr.

The best way for a superstar to age is like Kareem, surrounded by younger stars, on a team that can win without always demanding too much out of him.  Lebron has been an allstar forever and probably will be this coming season also.  But still, at this point you don't want to force the onus on him.

CONCLUSION

King James is one of the few players in the NBA who could literally help any team on the court, due to his variety of styles.  And what he now lacks in defense, he makes up for in offense and ticket sales.

But that doesn't mean every team actually wants him.  It ain't like dude is some humble G-Leaguer trying to make it big.  He's the best player ever.

So yeah, it's understandable, since he's dealing with a shortlist instead of picking one specific squad and since he's willing to play for relatively nothing, that Lebron waits to see what his preferred destinations can put together without him.  None, as it currently stands, are definitively champions.  And none, as it currently stands, would have all of their shortcomings solved simply by bringing in the King.

Dear Lakers, Just Focus on Wemby

We live in the age of positivity thinking, prosperity gospel and shit like that.  When motivational speakers are indirectly berating us, one of their favorite themes is harping on this idea that we don't actually know what we're worth.  That's one of the reasons life if unfulfilling, because we don't know how valuable we actually are.  Something like that comes to mind when I look at the Lakers these days, how they're settling for C-listers instead of going after the best of the best.

THE FUK HAPPENED?

Traditionally LAL is a contender, and even if they aren't for a couple of seasons, it's only a matter of time before they pull off a blockbuster move and get right back up there.  They poached Shaq from Orlando, even though the Magic weren't garbage, and I'm sure they could have paid him just as much, if not more, than the Lakers.  They had the foresight to trade a borderline allstar C (Divac) for a popular yet unproven rookie (Kobe) - a move so bold that braintrusts to this day don't have the balls to do shit like that.

And if you look at the championships they've won over the last six decades, there's been some exceptional roster construction, but it ain't exactly rocket science.  LAL had Chamberlain, Kareem, Shaq, Gasol and AD holding down the middle.  The first three are literally the most dominant players in NBA history.  Pau is an international legend.  And as for Davis, sometimes I feel like he should retire, but either way, he's still the best C of his generation and a future hall of famer.

That isn't meant to be a knock against Ayton, Hayes or anyone else currently manning the 5 in L.A.  When the Lakers traded AD for Luka, when everyone else was gasping like it was some type of coup, I was like 'are you sure?'

It's bad enough that they let GM Lebron rule for half a decade.  But at least he was astute enough to bring in AD, while Anthony was still sorta in his prime, and they won that championship together.  Remember, the Lakers practically gutted their roster to get Davis.  I didn't really favor that move, sacrificing their future like that, but at least they were being true to the organization's winning tradition, going after the best C in the league.

Also keep in mind, if I remember correctly, that Lebron had nothing to do with the Luka trade.  There may be issues when it comes to LBJ exerting his influence over roster decisions, but he's probably wiser in that regard than LAL's current braintrust.

LAKERS DEVIATE FROM TRADITION

So now you have Luka saying something like he needs an "A-list" center.  Duh.  The Lakers already figured that shit out before you were born.  But I believe there were a couple of factors that led to them making their biggest trade in over 20 years without getting a premiere big in return.

One was the widespread belief that the NBA has 'gone small'.  TF does that mean anyway, in a league where the average height is 6'7"? 

And I was warning dudes like, the Warriors' dynasty was an anomaly, not the new norm.  Yes, countless players have since imitated Steph.  He made it legal for anyone bold enough to chuck from the three-point line to do so, and the way the Dubs were structured was such that you needed speed at the 5 to counteract them.  But I mean, do people even realize how unusual Curry really is, how difficult he is to actually replicate?  How many other championship teams in NBA history can you think of whose best player was a PG (not to mention that they had KD for a couple of years)?

Anyway, my belief is that LAL got caught up in the hype and actually thought they could now win with the top of the pyramid being in the backcourt instead of the front.  They're the winningest team in NBA history and apparently never won a championship that way.  But yeah, okay.

The second mistake this new ownership made was rushing the 'it's time to move on from Lebron' idea.  If that's the case, instead of doing something rash, why not just wait until his contract runs out, not re-sign him and take it from there?  LBJ only signs for what, one or two seasons at a time?

And I mean like really, think about it.  Who can you bring in to replace him?  Like 'okay, you play with Lebron now, and then when he eventually retires or leaves, we're giving you the keys to the car'.  Or even worse, 'we're snatching the keys out of his hands and giving it to you'.  Shouldn't they have chosen someone younger and/or healthier for that?  One thing I always like to point out in this argument is the fact that Dallas did not fail in surrounding Luka with teammates who complemented his strengths.

And here's the funny part.  When you look at the Lakers' performance from last season, now it appears that they're in a situation where they have to re-sign Lebron.  Or what, do you truly want to put your hopes in Luka?

You have to take the Kristaps approach with Doncic, like okay, we're a superteam when you're healthy, but we're still contenders when you're not.  His health doesn't dictate him making the most money on the team.  Nico Harrison knew that and, as time progresses, is gradually looking more like a pariah than a GM who dumbed out.

WEMBY OR BUST

So going back to this whole smallball thing, now there's actually a shortage of dominant Cs.  Dudes have been forced to focus so much on three-pointers that now, they no longer know how to post.  Or looking at it from another angle, it's less work to shoot jumpshots than to man yourself in the middle.  So if you give players the option, which are they going to choose?

And even then, there's only a handful of really good Cs and only a couple that are dominant.  One of the latter is Jokic, and I mean, I use the term dominant loosely in his case.  He's an outstanding offensive force but leaves something to be desired defensively.  And he's not winning shit unless he has a real good roster around him, and no, I don't mean Luka and a bunch of castaways.

The best of the best, of course, is Wemby.  Now, it seems unfathomable that anyone could potentially poach him from the Spurs.  As far as Lakers' comparisons go, San Antonio is the only team of the last 30 years to be just as successful, likewise winning five championships.

But let's go back to the beginning of this article.  You're the fucking Lakers, for crying out loud.

So there you are - a young, ambitious exec, trying to make a name for yourself.  You're tired of the rat race and willing to risk it all for a big raise with all the perks.  So you swallow your fears, go straight to the GM and boldly proclaim 'sir, we're the fucking Lakers. Historically, when it comes to 5s we only go after the cream of the crop. Let's pursue Wemby'. And he's like 'there's no way San Antonio is going to give him up, and they have his Bird Rights. Let's go after Ayton instead'.

Do you say 'yes sir', sheepishly walk away and pray he doesn't fire you for making a seemingly impossible suggestion?  Or do you slap his b*tch ass like he just pissed on the grave of Jerry West?

CONCLUSION

Fine, you got Luka for AD, a round of applause.  But what's the endgame?  If, say, Lebron doesn't re-sign, who are you even going to spend that extra money on?

I don't want to read anymore reports of the Lakers chasing C-listers, while the starting lineup isn't even ironed out.  If you're going to go after 'an A-list center', there's really only one who can mitigate Doncic's deficiencies, i.e. lead the team to victory even when he's hurt.

And that would be Wemby.  You've committed to Doncic, untraditionally prioritizing a 1 over a 5, so now pay the price.  Getting Luka wasn't a bad move, but now it's time to go back to the Lakers' championship formula.

If I Could Send One Player to Any Team (Pacific Division)

GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS (48-34) - BOL BOL

As it currently stands, the Dubs don't have a C to speak of, and if they traded Kuminga for, say, Keegan Murray, that wouldn't solve their problem with size.  But at the same time, they've already won a few championship without a widely-recognizable C, tho that was back in the Splash Bros.' days.

I'm going to once again go with Bol Bol here.  He's arguably the best big big still on the market, if you average his stats by the minutes he's been granted.  I get the Al Horford argument and can totally see how he would fit in Golden State.  But first of all, you have to question the logic of going even older.  Second, it seems that the Warriors are going to eventually get Horford anyway, whether Kuminga sticks around or not.

Imagine a starting front of Green + Kuminga + Butler?  They could arguably be the best from a defensive standpoint.  And on one hand it's like 'damn, they can't shoot threes'.  But isn't Steph on the team also?

LOS ANGELES CLIPPERS (50-32) - AL HORFORD

They're saying the the 2025-26 Clippers are the oldest team in NBA history.  So, why stop now?  They have the deepest roster since the turn-of-the-century Blazers.  Wearing the opponent down with an endless supply of good players is a viable strategy, esp. in today's NBA.

LOS ANGELES LAKERS (50-32) - AL HORFORD

Now we're seeing more of the aftereffects of Lebron coming to the Lakers.  The best brainstrust in the NBA has become such that they're in the present and future at the same time.  And funny thing once again is that these problems would be solved if LBJ just stuck to the 4 and played harder defense (more consistently) - the latter which he probably can't due to age.

Outside of the point, the Lakers aren't deep at any position.  I'm once again thinking about Horford, if they actually want to win now and has had a winning history, even when not winning championships.  Also, he can play like three different positions.

Another option is Gary Payton II, a player who knows how to make an impact without having the ball in is hands.

PHOENIX SUNS (36-48) - AL HORFORD

Phoenix has an exceptional braintrust that's difficult to figure out.  They're like a poker player being dealt a winning hand but then saying 'hey, let's gamble anyway, since we have the chips'.  The Suns' long-term relationship with Booker is inspiring but, you know what I'm saying?  Dudes really need to think outside the box.

Meanwhile Horford, at the age of 39(!), is arguably the best unrestricted free agent on the market.  He wouldn't make the Suns into contenders, but it's like if they remain healthy, who knows?

It's difficult for me to envision Kuminga on Phoenix's roster, and he wouldn't likely make them into contenders either, though the Suns may once again prove exciting.  That Bradley Beal contract, oh my goodness.

SACRAMENTO KINGS (40-42) - BEN SIMMONS

It's been years since I watched the Kings play, so this following suggestion is made based upon a presumption.  Anytime you pass the ball to DeRozan, Lavine or Sabonis in a halfcourt set, you have to more or less take for granted he's going to shoot.  And why not?  All three are consistent 20ppg scorers, and this is besides other viable scoring option on Sacramento's roster.  So what you rather need is a complementary player who isn't going to shoot the ball but excels at other areas.

It amazes me how NBA teams with a lot of firepower can't see that.  There needs to be a team that reminds the world that a championship can be won with two-pointers(?).

The Thunder just more or less did.  So if the Kings are going to be stuck with this core, might as well let them go buckwild - complete shoot-at-will though inside the arc type shit.  What the team would then need though is exceptional rebounding and perimeter defense, both of which I think Ben provides.

I can also envision the ScapeGOAT on this squad.  But at the end of the day the Kings are likely going to have to reboot, with like Sabonis being the only man untouchable.

CONCLUSION

It's funny how, after the youngest team ever just won a championship, the hottest free agent heading into this August is almost 40 years old.  I guess NBA players are like action stars.  We like what we're familiar with, even if the younger guys are more athletic.  Al Horford is like the Bruce Willis of the NBA.

2025 NBA Playoff Ruminations (June 5)

Not all of my predictions are correct; no one's is.  But when it comes to foretelling a roster's fortune, you're probably better off reading this blog than resorting to mainstream outlets, some of whom are unable to figure shit out until months after I've already said it, besides sometimes outright biting my shit, you know, without a shoutout or nothing.

For instance, I'm the first pundit that I know of who was like, why TF did the Knicks trade for KAT?  I made that statement all the way back when the transaction first occurred, i.e. October 2024.  I'm not saying it was a bad move, but I did say it was hasty one, considering they had just acquired Miles Bridges, in another trade in which they sent out a few rotation players, like a couple of days prior.  Based on the Knicks playing style in 2023-24, Bridges was a better selection than KAT.  Yet with KAT, as I anticipated, Miles never really got to show his true potential.

And that's the reason why NYK is arguably the most-frustrating braintrust in the NBA.  They can do something spectacular, like acquiring Jalen Brunson back when he was underrated, and then follow up a season later by starchasing instead of properly using their noodle.

'Well, we got further this season than we did last season, so at least that's progress'.  No one wants to hear that shit, Jalen. Why?  Because the Knicks didn't lose in the 2024 Playoffs because of lack of talent.  They lost because of injury, in fact being the most injury-laden team in NBA Playoffs history that I've ever seen.  But within the timespan of just two months, they totally forgot about that and went about more or less retooling the roster.  Well now, they had the talent + health for the most part, but lack the compatibility, i.e. the roster being poorly and overly built.

So now all of a sudden, KAT is the scapegoat.  Well at least he was, until they fired Thibs yesterday, finally.  Meanwhile, NYK prolly would've gotten swept out of the ECF if not for Karl's performance in Game 3.

I was also the first person, while every other pundit was giddy with excitement, who was like Lebron + Luka is not going to work out.  You'd never know it looking at their current makeup, but back in the days the Lakers were like really-really smart when it came to roster construction.  That was back when the likes of Pat Riley and Phil Jackson and what's his name, that original owner dude, were still around.  Now, in the Lebron era, like there's a reason why I always say that GM Lebron is to be feared on an organizational level.  His presence may result in a quick championship, but good luck to your roster in the years that follow.

In defense of these less-than-analytical mainstream reporters, I think there's an advantage, when you're trying to make predictions, to not actually watching NBA games.  When you watch games regularly, it's easy to form biases or favorites based on personal reasons, or something like that.  It's more easy to get caught up in hoopla when you're consuming all the marketing and hype rather than actually using your own noodle.  Like I can imagine the Knicks' braintrust just sitting around watching games all day.  'Hey, that guy KAT is really good, a double-double machine.  Let's get him, compatibility be damned'.  

That said, guru I may be, I'm not a betting man when it comes to the NBA, nor do I advocate such behavior, as in the grand scheme of things, predictions don't really mean shit if games are rigged.  But apparently, to be a long-term beneficiary of rigging, you have to be like a top-notch veteran.  And even these days, you know, I would say Lebron more or less fell out of the powers-that-be's graces a long time ago.  It's rather the Lakers' brand, so to speak, that's keeping him afloat.  And just forget about KD and them.  Like the mainstream is rightfully saying, there's a new day in the NBA, though I've also said that a long time ago, that professional athletics favors the young, and if the league doesn't rig for certain stars the youngsters would inevitably takeover, especially in this day and age of neverending injuries.

GIANNIS TO BOSTON?

My biggest fear when it comes to Giannis (please don't ask me to spell his last name) is that he ends up being a KD, a superstar bouncing around to different teams yet not winning shit.  Remember when Durant went to the Dubs back in the day - that was arguably the most-controversial free agency decision ever.  But it was also hella smart, because it doesn't look like he's going to win anymore championships beyond that.  Like there aren't any surefire squads in the NBA these days like the Dubs in their prime, except maybe OKC, who obviously doesn't need any roster additions.

Practically any team he goes to, except maybe some of those at the very bottom, will instantly become a contender.  Giannis can go to the Magic and, oh shit, they're contenders, like deadass.

But what I suggest, more than anything, is that he needs to go to an organization with a winning culture, and there aren't many of those.  The only two I can think of off the top of my head are the Celtics and Warriors.

I was reading an article a couple of days ago, I believe on Yahoo, that suggested Giannis stay in the East, since the Eastern Conference is easier, so to speak.  So on that note, I'd like to recommend the Celtics.  They're saying that Jayson Tatum may not come back next season.  But if Giannis comes to town, I'm sure that would expedite his return.

The problem is, who will Boston be willing to give up to get him?  This team needs it role players, even Jrue Holiday if Giannis shows up, since they're homeys type shit.  But you know, that's rich peoples' problems, not mine.

INDIANA PACERS vs OKC THUNDER

Of course I'm predicting the Thunder, as I have all season.  Imo, the only team with a roster that was able to beat them was the Nuggets, who they've already overcome.  That may have been the true Finals' series, so to speak.

But at the same time, I'm not going to completely count the Pacers out, because they're obviously on some miracle shit.  Like Steph Curry is a miracle-ass nigga, which is why you can never count Golden State out (unless he's hurt).  Meanwhile, Indiana has Tyrese "Steph of the East" Haliburton.  So this should be interesting, whether or not OKC can shut them down, like they did Minnesota.

Perhaps the bigger challenge, all things considered, will be the Pacers trying to stop the Thunder.  But they should've gotten some preparation in the regard facing the Knicks, who are apparently one of the better offensive teams in the league, even if they did disappoint.