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.

Parity Achieved?

Incepting is a fine art.  On one hand, you want to subtlety influence thoughts.  But in doing so, there's the high possibility of what's being relayed not being understood in full or stretched.

Let me give you an idea of what I mean.  I was the first writer, at least that I know of, who was like wait a minute, the Lakers did not have an "A+" offseason.  Right after that post, I noticed the mainstream media began embracing that idea.  But I wasn't like criticizing LAL's roster per se.

Walker Kessler, as it currently stands, is far from an "A-list center", at least in terms of production (tho he's now like a celebrity).  But at least he holds more promise for the franchise than Ayton did.

Or let me say if I were dissing anybody, it wasn't Luka or Kessler or Reaves but rather the braintrust.  Dudes have been striking out for years now.  And even in my last post, when I implied that Doncic is in a worse position (in terms of potentially winning championship) now than he was with the Mavs, let me point out that offensively, he's by far the most-versatile PG in the league.  So the logic would sorta be that yeah, go out there and get him the best 5 you can afford and then fill out the middle, sorta like the Knicks have done, since wings are more or less in abundance these days.

I'm sure I even said this before, that one of the many major mistakes the Lakers have made of late was last year, they should have traded Lebron, not AD, for Luka.  They're fucked up because now, the mythic Lakers' mystique that made the best of the best want to play for the franchise is no longer there.

Being LAL, you're not even supposed to be out there chasing centers type shit.  They rather should want to play for you.  And Wemby just signed like a five-year extension, I'm pretty sure fully guaranteed, so who knows when or if Los Angeles will get the best C in the NBA again.

This is something else I noticed recently.  I was the first writer, at least that I know of, who was like yeah, if Lebron wants to win a championship with one of the teams on his shortlist, the Sixers are the best option.  Then, the mainstream picked up on that also.  Prior to making that statement, they were just as much, if not moreso, advocating the likes of the Nuggets, Heat or Cavs in terms of LBJ bringing home another trophy.

Then when he finally made his decision, I was like, big fun but still, not a guaranteed championship.  After posting that, now the mainstream is questioning 'his fit' in Philly.  But prior to making that statement, it seemed that they were all for it and super excited.

So this is what I wanted to clarify.  Embiid, not Lebron, is the x-factor.  There is one thing I've been saying for like five years straight that the mainstream media never reiterated, sometimes I believe because they're too afraid or perhaps are disallowed from doing so.  LBJ absolutely sucks on defense.  He's an alltime great defensively, you know, when you go back to earlier in the century.  But now, relatively speaking, he's old AF.

They say that, when NBA players start to age, the first thing to go is their athleticism.  But with some players, except those who are really locked in on that end (like Draymond), the first thing to go is rather their defensive awareness.  Go and look at some of Kareem's games later in his career.

I spoke of this many times before, based on my own experiences and observations.  Once dudes start circling 40, you can't really count on them to play defense anymore, nor can you chastise them for not doing so, because you know, they're like elders and shit.

EASTERN TEAMS THAT CAN DEFEAT PHILLY

So the way I see it, there are currently two, maybe three teams (if the Raptors actually get Kawhi) in the East than can defeat Philly, even if the Sixers are at full strength.  First is the Knicks, and I say that with a grain of salt, because losing Mitchell Robinson was indeed a big loss.

You'll notice that the two teams that made the Finals last season, neither was dealing with major injuries.  So here's to hoping that NYK lucks out like that again.

In 2025, when Robinson was injured during the postseason, NYK got upset by the Pacers.  I don't know much about 'the dreaded second apron' and shit like that.  But maybe in this case, you know, after just winning a historic championship, Dolan shoulda just bit the bullet.

The Knicks entered the last couple of seasons with the most all-around talented starting lineup in the NBA, even moreso than OKC.  But now, presuming that Lebron will start and also with the addition of Brown, Philly is more talented offensively.

And here's further testament to just how great James is.  He's made the world more or less forget that, oh shit, Giannis just teamed up with Adebayo, instantly giving the Heat the most potent twin towers in the league and arguably even of the last 40 years, since Olajuwon teamed up with Samson.  Off the top of my head, there's only like three other teams I can think of, maybe four, that currently have viable twin towers.  But unlike the rest, Miami has two 7-footers who are basically wings.

Some years back, I predicted that the NBA will eventually get to the point where you have teams with like five Giannises, you know, like five Garnetts type shit.  The Heat right now are closest to fulfilling that prophecy.  And let's not forget that they have more of a winning culture than the Knicks or Sixers.  Old ass Pat Riley, who deadass coached the Showtime Lakers, is still in the game calling shots.  And they're one of the top three organizations not only in developing talent but getting it to mesh.

THE VALUE OF A GLUE GUY

And let's not forget the Cavs also.  They've been getting dogged a lot of late, and no one really believes in them, understandably so, since they've been one of the deepest teams for like three seasons now but never really achieved shit as a unit.  But that said, finally making to the ECF, they have experienced progress.  And despite losing Dean Wade and perhaps one or two peripheral dudes, it's not like these guys are scrubs.  They have two lock future HOFs, one in his prime - and potentially a third also.

What Cleveland needs is a glue guy at the 3 who can make all of these pieces click which, all things considered, is a formidable task.  And that's an interesting observation, because how many years now have the Cavs needed that 3?  But instead, they're out there trading for PGs and shit.

People sleep on the likes on Josh Hart (and Draymond).  He may never put up the type of stats that rationalize a max contract, but trust me, it's unlikely NYK would have won that championship without him.

When a team is overtalented yet not necessarily compatible, you usually need someone who can make it all click.  If the Cavs had Hart, they could win a championship.

Back when Lebron teamed up with D-Wade and Bosh, that player was Mario Chalmers, who never got his flowers.  When Shaq played with Kobe, the Lakers had a number of glue guys.  But those types that can actually facilitate championships, they're rare, perhaps because they don't get ample love.

You have a better chance making a name for yourself as a chuck than someone willing to sacrifice.  So besides Hart and Green, currently I can't even think of anyone else who Cleveland can slot in there to desired effect.  That's how awkward - for lack of a better word - their starting lineup is.

PARITY ACHIEVED?

Whether or not parity has already been achieved depends on your definition of the word, whether it means everyone being in the middle, or rather everyone potential champions.  We're about to enter a season, for the first time ever that I can think of, with like 10 contenders - at least three in the West (don't sleep on the Rockets) and perhaps even six or seven in the East (don't sleep on the Wizards either).  This should be interesting, you know, if the U.S. doesn't bake and become too hot to even play basketball inside.

AMENDMENT (27 JULY)

In terms of mentioning the best twin towers of the last 40 years, I forget to shoutout Duncan + Robinson.

Free Agency Talk: Lebron to the Sixers

This may be the first time I wrote an article about a single free agency decision and also the first time I've written like five articles in a row about the same player.  But hey, it is Lebron, and presumably this is the last time an offseason will be highlighted by his always dramatic decision making.  Even when he chose the Lakers back in the day, the way I remember it he made that choice fairly quickly, but still, him going to LAL in the first place was more or less a shocker.

LBJ heading to Philly isn't as monumental as it may sound in the moment, unless they win a championship.  But it is very much exciting news nonetheless.

Since acquiring Jaylen Brown, the Sixers were already considered must-watch and contenders for this upcoming season.  They weren't in a sad state like, say, the Cavs when Lebron returned to Cleveland, or the Lakers when he decided to sign there.  So basically, his presence just makes them more must watch and more contenders.  You know, championship or bust.

But there's a whole lot of side stories associated with this latest decision.  This time around, unlike when he returned to Cleveland or went to LA, Lebron's presence is not demanding that the recipient team sacrifice young talent.  But there are still a lot of people affected on the periphery.

LEBRON JAMES (WINNER OR LOSER?)

Concerning his decision, three ideas emerged from LBJ's camp over this summer.  His goals were (#1) to win another championship, (#2) to be close to his family in Los Angeles and (#3) to make the right "business" decision.  And well, at least he's achieved one of them.

In terms of that whole "business choice" shit, I mean, James just signed a 2-year, $8mil deal, if you can imagine that.  The highest scoring player in NBA history, a reigning allstar and, based on this past offseason, still the King of the game is now being paid, relatively speaking, like a peasant.  That doesn't sound like a wise business decision.

But that said, the implication going into next season was that he was slated to make significantly more from endorsements, etc. than salary.  And that likely would've been the case regardless of which team on his shortlist he chose.

What excites me the most about Lebron's decision is that finally, he's wise enough to follow the path of Abdul-Jabbar.  When Kareem was nearing the end of his career, the team he was playing for were contenders with or without him.  A couple of seasons after he retired, the Lakers still proceeded to make the Finals (with Divac).

For all-time greats that want to compete to the very end, that's the way to go - let the younger, fresher guys carry most of the burden.  Lebron signing this paltry contract makes more sense if his intention isn't to regularly overexert himself.

JOEL EMBIID (WINNER OR LOSER?)

I've been saying for like five years now that the Sixers need to part ways with Joel.  His presence is both a gift and a curse.  He proved to the x-factor against the Celtics but then was more or less a nonfactor against the Knicks.  He isn't a bad player at all, you know, when he's actually available.  At the heart of the problem, even moreso than his injuries, is the fact that, all things considered, by this point he should be making like $20mil annually instead of the max.

Anyhow, given this new roster, he's definitely, once again, the x-factor.  But now that they're actually favorites, if he does somehow fail yet again, his inefficiencies will take front and center stage.  So finally, the rest of world may see what I was talking about when I said Philly should devise other viable, contender-level options at C.

BEN SIMMONS (WINNER OR LOSER?)

Ha, I bet didn't see this one coming!  But under the presumption that Philly will be playing a lot of smallball this coming season, it would make total sense to bring Simmons back.

First of all, as far as I know, neither Maxey nor Edgecombe are exceptional defenders, besides both being undersized.  So Ben would help mitigate that issue, as all he does is defend.  And given this current Philly roster, replete with alphas, I don't think anyone will be pressuring him to shoot when he doesn't want to.

Secondly, let's not forget that Simmons can actually play the 5.  And third, a while back, before shrinking into irrelevancy, he expressed a desire to return to the team that drafted him.

If he still has it in him, i.e. the ability to play elite defense, to reiterate, it would make total sense for Philly to bring him back (especially considering that now they wouldn't have to pay him shit).  After Embiid, he's been through the most ups and downs with this team over the past decade.

Meanwhile, in terms of Simmons emerging a loser from it all, you have to imagine that he now wants to return to Philadelphia, with Lebron in town, more than he ever has since leaving.  It's not going to be easy for him seeing the team he deserted at the top of the headlines every day.

WALKER KESSLER (WINNER OR LOSER?)

I know that Kessler isn't directly affected by Lebron's decision to go to Philly per se.  He was however affected by LBJ leaving the Lakers to begin with.

So now, here's something interesting to think about.  Walker is a B-lister, and even that standing was for the most part achieved via his name being in the headlines so much over the past couple of months, not due to his actual gameplay per se.  He has instantly been thrust from playing for one of the most obscure teams in the league to now playing for the organization that has literally employed the greatest Cs in NBA history, all to championship effect.

If he's able to rise to the challenge, this is definitely a lucky break for Kessler and his brand.  But if not, well, let's just say his name is going to be in the headlines daily nonetheless, as the player who more or less replaced Lebron in LAL, and the C playing in the shadow of AD, Gasol, Shaq, etc.

LUKA DONCIC (LOSER)

Let me say this for hopefully the final time - the Mavs did not fail in eventually surrounding Doncic with complementary talent.  Besides sharing the backcourt with Kyrie (and before him Brunson), he also had the likes of Gafford, Washington and Lively on the wings, i.e. athletic, multitalented, long dudes who could complete lobs with the best of them.  Kessler is tall, but is he even athletic like that?  And that's why it makes total sense that LAL is chasing Kuminga, because he's very similar to those aforementioned players who Luka prospered with.

So what I'm predicting is that Doncic may finally be exposed.  He's been one of my favorite players, but let me be honest - I'm a bit bitter with the way the Lakers favored him over Lebron.  Not that they favored him but rather the way they did it, because he is not the answer.

After Jordan, LBJ is the greatest player in modern NBA history.  And to truly achieve that status, sorry white European players, but you have to be exceptional on both offense and defense.

But yeah, we know the NBA has changed.  So you have Luka being paid the max, while players who have to mitigate his deficiencies, like Smart and Thybulle, are being paid as little as possible.

MIAMI HEAT (WINNER)

The Heat now have the advantage of entering next season as underdogs.  Meanwhile, whether or not the Sixers' roster is superior is a matter of debate.

Well, let me say that Philly is definitely deeper, but Miami looks better defensively.  Both Bam and Giannis are in the DPOY conversation annually.  Wiggins, to my understanding, is also an above average defender, as is also Mitchell, I think.  So we're looking at a really formidable defensive squad here.  By contrast, out of Philly's projected starters, only Brown, at this point, is exceptional on defense.

And let's not also forget that Bradley Beal is out there.  Remember a few years back, the Heat were actually after him.

At that time, I argued he was overrated, achieving stardom due to being an above-average player on a below-average team, and that foretelling aged well.  But still, he isn't exactly what you would call a bum if healthy.  And if the Heat do land him, he'll be in the least-pressure situation of his career.  Dude can solely focus on shooting, which is like his biggest attribute.

Let's not also forget that the likes of Rui Hachimura and DeMar DeRozan are out there.  I don't know how much money Miami has left to spend, but they could definitely use both of those dudes.  Hachimura has been one of the biggest beneficiaries, talent wise, of the now-forced-to-shoot-threes' era of the NBA.  And they're saying that Giannis and Bam can't score from midrange, but DeRozan is one of the very best scorers in the league, perhaps top two even, inside the three-point line.

CLEVELAND CAVALIERS (LOSERS)

I've been doing a lot of Beard bashing of late, but it isn't intentional.  He has also been one of my favorite players.  But Harden, all things considered, is like more show than accomplishment.

Going back to this idea that now offense is exponentially more valued than defense, he's definitely been a beneficiary of that phenomenon.  And that's part of the reason why it still doesn't make sense, at least to me, why the Cavs thought he would be the one to get them over the hump.

Meanwhile, losing Dean Wade and perhaps another dude or two I can't recall right now, while acquiring no one of note in return (unless whoever they drafted exceeds expectation), the roster has actually regressed this offseason.  Not sound braintrusting at all.  Out of all the teams on Lebron's shortlist with a realistic chance of winning a championship, they probably needed him most.

STEPH CURRY (LOSER)

It's hard to call the Warriors as a whole losers, because you can't really miss what you never had to begin with.  And their offseason, though nothing to write home about, hasn't been as bad as that of the Cavs.  Also, they still have like $15mil to spend and will likely end up with Hachimura or DeRozan, the latter of which I think would be really beneficial alongside Steph and especially with the absence of Butler.

I hate saying anything bad about Curry, because one way or the other I always come to regret it.  But simply put, he isn't the headliner he used to be.

For the most part, Golden State's braintrust has failed in surrounding him with the type of players that pique current fans' interest.  So unless the Warriors are like a top four team - which is possible I guess - no one is even going to really care to watch them.

As I said before, they needed Lebron more than anyone on his shortlist in terms of generating sales.  But instead, we're going to be treated to yet another season of neverending Draymond, hoping Steph stays healthy and waiting for Jimmy to get back on the court.

Hate to beat a dead horse, but if this were to be the case, i.e. the Dubs insisting on a core of 35+ year old players, then they should've just kept Klay around (or perhaps bring him back).  At least then, we can be treated to some true Splash Bros. magic every now and then, and I have to imagine that Thompson being back will also be exciting to fans (if they can win).

CONCLUSION

The Sixers, I mean it's hard to tell, because Kawhi may still be going to the Raptors.  It's hard to tell, whether with or without Lebron, if this team is the favorite in the East.  Their wing core cannot match defensively with that of the Knicks.  In other words, despite experiencing one of those extremely rare offseasons where a team lands two A-listers, there's still work to be done here.  And in hindsight, maybe they should've made more of an effort to acquire someone like Mitchell Robinson to backup Embiid.  

Lebron - The King of Player Empowerment

I don't think anyone foresaw that this offseason was going to be just as dramatic starring Lebron as "The Decision" was back in the day.  Back in 2010, the drama surrounded King James holding something like a news conference to announce his free agency decision which, like I can't think of any other sports star who ever did that, even to this day.

Now, a solid 16 years later, it's rather about dude taking his sweet, aged time in officially deciding where to go.  For all we know, he may even end up just being like 'fuck it, I quit'.

Sometimes, looking at the way he's behaving, you get the impression that maybe he's uninspired by this point, no longer being a max player and shit like that.  James Harden is slated to make more money than Lebron next season, if you can imagine that.

LBJ, defensive shortcomings and all, is more effective than many, if not most max players out there, which kinda makes you wonder why he's being forced to take such a massive paycut to begin with.  He's a reigning allstar, for crying out loud, about to take a vet min.  That's unheard of.

But that being said, since he is still delaying and still the biggest headline in the NBA, I wanted to use this opportunity to revisit how he may fare on the teams he shortlisted.  Nothing has really changed from three weeks ago, other than more stars from those franchises making their pitches.

What I do find interesting is that no player from other teams that could clearly use Lebron (like the Pistons) haven't at least pressed their luck.  No one wants to feel embarrassed or ignored or humiliated.  But at the same time, as the old saying goes, "you have to be in it to win it".

Lebron delaying has given us all a chance to think more deeply about his preferred options.  So here's an updated analysis of the LBJ sweepstakes:

FEELING SORRY FOR THE LAKERS

But first off, let's start with LAL because, they're now the shining example of braintrust asininity, of what happens when you put the wrong minds in charge of a premiere franchise.  Why would you force your most popular player out the door, just to come out of it all looking worse than before?  I dare anybody to call the Lakers a contender.

They aren't in the worse of situations tho.  They still have Luka, one of the few players who can consistently takeover games.  LAL also has been the recipient of perhaps more favoritism than any other team in recent years.  That favor doesn't translate into multiple championships like it used to, but maybe it still exists.  And also they're now, surprisingly enough, the whitest team in the NBA, and, you know, we are living in the Trump era.

That said, if these guys don't actually win games, they're going to quickly transform into the team you love you hate.  And when their mediocrity does become apparent, remember who pointed it out first, how this offseason has been a bust, unless the primary goal was simply to get rid of Lebron and come out of it all at least looking they're trying to compete.

Upon James's departure, these dudes instantly gained $50+ million in spending money - i.e. superstar, franchise player dough - and used it basically to sign Walker Kessler, who you can't even confidently predict will ever make an allstar game.  All things considered, they prolly would have been better off exercising patience and keeping it in the bank.

PHILADELPHIA 76ERS

A couple of weeks ago, I said out of all teams on Lebron's shortlist, Philly was the best option in terms of him actually winning a championship, and the media quickly picked up on that idea.  But I don't feel as strongly about that as I did before.  

If Lebron does go there, I'm foreseeing something like Embiid managing his load for the entire regular season and then returning for the postseason.  When it comes to load management, I guess you can pull it off and still win when your core consists of really talented, veteran players.  It didn't work for the Celtics last season, but you know what I mean.

The problem with Philly is that yes, they've had an exceptional offseason, but who's going to backup Joel?  Or put otherwise, why didn't they place more of a priority on landing a backup C, instead of focusing on wings?

When dude inevitably misses large swarths of the season or perhaps even postseason, are we really supposed to expect an aged Lebron to play the 5, now in the Wemby era?  Maybe it's possible that the Sixers + Lebron can win it all even with a hobbled Embiid, but all things considered I doubt it.

MIAMI HEAT

I've now come to favor the Heat more, based on one simple realization.  Actually, I was watching some 'NBA greatest highlights' clip which featured this ECF game, I think from 2007, where Lebron scored 25 points straight(!), mostly on jumpshots, and led the Cavs to a come-from-behind victory.

Then, I was thinking about those performances he put up against the Thunder a couple of months ago, as well as some of his past All-Star games.  And this is the realization I came to - Lebron can actually shoot.  I don't know what his percentages and all that kinda shit looks like, but in big games he can make jumpshots.

Even if they did score King James, it can be argued that Heat's roster lacks shooting as compared to competitors, but it isn't as bad as it may look on paper.  And the best thing about this scenario is that finally, Lebron would be on a roster, with Giannis + Bam down low, that actually rationalizes him playing like a G despite his size.

Also, here's another thing to keep in mind.  When Lebron returned to the Cavs, the implication was that he did so in part due to feeling guilty, given the way he deserted them the first time around.  Well, if that's the way you feel about it, then it can be said that he did the Heat even dirtier, because they were actually contenders when he bounced.  So, that's just something to keep in mind.

CLEVELAND CAVALIERS

Cleveland also has twin towers, and Lebron + Allen + Mobley would be absolutely fearful.  Those latter two may not be as all-around talented as Giannis + Bam, but needing the King's scoring more, they may be a better fit.

But that said, I'm still having a hard time picturing LBJ and the Beard playing together.  As the old NBA Inception adage goes, "two chucks don't make a right".

Spider, btw, is a chuck also, though more deservingly so than Harden imo.  But unlike the Beard, he knows how to defer yet still prove effective, so I can picture him coexisting with Lebron.

MINNESOTA TIMBERWOLVES

There hasn't been a lot less chatter of late about the possibility of LBJ going to Minnesota or Denver.  But here's an interesting observation about the Twolves.  Lebron is actually more level-headed at the point than LaMelo is, so it's not like he would absolutely have to play the 4.  Also, Lebron + Gobert may actually work, perhaps being an even better fit than Lebron + AD, because by this point in his career, LBJ is strictly offense, while Rudy is strictly defense.  James can not only play point but also mitigate Minny's lowpost scoring deficiencies.

In hindsight, yes, you have to applaud the Wolves for being aggressive and making bold, headline-generating moves.  Randle, all things considered, had to go.  But losing Reid hurts, and I'm not convinced Minny needs LaMelo as much as they needed Naz.  And if Lebron does come to town, LaMelo is going to have to learn to play off the ball, which I'm not sure he can do.

DENVER NUGGETS

The Nuggets, not OKC, is the poster child for a team who's paying so much for their core that they lack financial flexibility to put the right pieces around them.  And I guess you could say relatedly, they also have a really hard time retaining quality role players.  Concerning Denver's braintrust, they are above average and have been for like the last 20+ years.  But bold they are not.

So this coming season, even if they do re-sign Watson, they'll also likely be the poster child for a team that's unable to capitalize on the youth wave.  They aren't as confined to the geriatric ward as the Warriors are.  But calling these dudes contenders, even with (the overrated) Jokic, is a stretch.

And the interesting thing about it is that if Lebron does come over, he'll likely play the 2, replacing Braun basically, because there's no logical reason really to move Gordon or Watson out of the (starting) frontline to accommodate him.  Wow, old ass Lebron, despite his defensive deficiencies, is still a deserving starter, regardless of which of these teams he goes to.

GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS

I already made an argument for the Warriors in my last post.  LBJ's presence isn't likely to translate into a championship given their current roster (and the injuries thereof), but it will be really exciting from a fan standpoint.  Despite not looking like contenders on paper and despite headlining stars from a generation ago, the Warriors will instantly become the most must-watch team in the NBA (though it's going to be painful when Lebron or Steph are injured).

And I mean, who knows?  If Steph had just one consistent scoring partner, dudes actually would've made the playoffs last postseason.

You can believe in miracles with Curry on your squad.  And when dudes actually want to play together, I mean a lot of times shit like that doesn't work out.  But given LBJ's and Steph's resume, and if this organization can effectively embrace youth a bit more, maybe something special can happen.  And please, if you haven't already, get the Gauntlet back.  Like learn from the past type shit.

"A BUSINESS DECISION"

Note how Rich Paul most recently pointed out, twice, that choosing his next team is "a business choice" for Lebron.  He didn't say anything about being close to his family or the possibility of winning a championship.  And indeed, what would it really matter if Lebron won more championships?  Even if he did reach Jordan it wouldn't mean as much since, regardless of what team he goes to, he isn't likely to be the primary option.

That's something to also keep in mind, that out of all the teams on LBJ's shortlist the Warriors are in a position to pay him the most.  In the grand scheme of his finances, $15mil(!) may not be much.  But going back to the James Harden / max player argument presented earlier, how much you're paid is considered a sign of respect.  And btw, with Bronny and the fam being based in LA, San Fran is also nearer than any of his other options.

CONCLUSION

The way players are taking paycuts and shit like that, it may look like the ball is shifting back into the owners' court.  But the Lebron era has not officially concluded yet.  You have Silver and co. like 'dude, make your decision already, so we can put the TV schedule together'.  And his response is basically like 'kiss my ass, I'm taking my time'.

That's one thing we're going to miss if Lebron ever retires, as he is the king of player empowerment.  These young superstars dominating the league these days, they don't appear to have that type of destiny.

From Heroes to Zeroes: LAL + GM Lebron

I'm glad that I came across at least one article, via Yahoo!Sports, questioning what all the excitement is about concerning the Lakers' recent moves.  The fans have the freedom to express what the mainstream media cannot, that this incoming iteration of LAL is arguably "worse than last season's squad", which is saying a lot.

And in my eyes, that's not even the biggest problem, i.e. the quality of the roster per se, because some offseasons are more successful than others.  Nor is the fact that outlets like NBC have actually given the Lakers an offseason "A" for acquiring the likes of Walter Kessler, Quentin Grimes and whoever TF Sandro Mamukelashvili(?) is.  Anyone who reads this blog knows that I'm not into dissing players, so that previous sentence is not meant to be a dig against anyone.  But this is the Lakers, for crying out loud.  In days past, they made headlines for acquiring the likes of Kobe, Shaq, Gasol and Lebron - all-time greats.  And now, re-signing Austin Reaves and poaching a C-lister from the Jazz are supposed to be big deals?

As for Kessler, I've only heard positive, or let me more specifically say promising things about him these past couple of years.  It also seems that he spent most of last season injured.  Why they would want to pair a player with a concerning injury history with Doncic, who knows.  But let me say that Walker's name has never been in the headlines more than it has these past couple of weeks.  And it's never particularly inspiring when an NBAer is more popular as a free agent than he is as an actual player.  Those kind of scenarios usually end with someone being overpaid.

Also, wasn't he restricted?  So if he's so great - worthy even to be the center on the Lakers, the franchise that employed the greatest Cs of all time - why isn't anyone asking why the Jazz didn't match the offer?

THREE WHITES DON'T MAKE A RIGHT

Also, let me ask the burning question in my mind - you're actually trying to tell me that LAL is going to start three or four Whiteboys?  I don't know who Mamukelashvili is but, based on his last name, I'm presuming he's White(?).  Really, Los Angeles?  Talk about breaking away from tradition.

I'm actually an Austin Reaves fan.  He's the only young player, i.e. draftee I can think of, off the top of my head, who excelled under Lebron - so much so that I'm wondering if he'll continue to do so without him around.  But one of the concerns, with both him and Luka in the backcourt, has been defense.  Remember, this is now a guard-oriented league.  And L.A.'s braintrust totally failed to address that concern, even losing Marcus Smart in the process.

Let me further say, even though it may sound like I've been Luka bashing these last couple of posts, that I'm not.  Even from the time he was a rookie, I've been saying that Doncic is the most naturally talented player in the NBA.  He isn't the tallest or strongest or fastest, but it's almost as if he was born with a basketball in his hands.  Luka Doncis is the Lionel Messi(?) of the NBA.  But what became obvious a couple of seasons ago, when the Mavs made the Finals, was that he doesn't have the endurance of a traditional NBA superstar.

I'll admit that towards the end of last season, surprisingly to me, the Lakers did begin looking like contenders.  That is until Doncic, once again, found himself on the injury list at the most inopportune time.  Shouldn't they have at least tried to address that reality during this offseason?  When Luka inevitably goes down, you're trying to tell me that Reaves + Kessler + Grimes is going bring home the gold?  LMAO.

DAMN THAT LEBRON

I mentioned Lebron in the title, so you may be wondering what does all of this have to do with him?  Well he's the one who, imo, either directly or indirectly, has been most responsible for leading the Lakers down a path whereas, in the next couple of years, they may not be the premiere franchise in the NBA anymore, i.e. the one that children most fantasize playing for.  By 2030, that may rather be the Spurs.

LBJ does deserve credit for helping facilitate that championship in 2020 and most notably in that regard, recruiting AD.  Amidist all of that, LAL, if I remember correctly, lost Josh Hart, Lonzo Ball, Brandon Ingram, D'Angelo Russell and Julius Randle.  That was pretty much their future.  But, in true GM Lebron fashion, even if those guys had stuck around there's no guarantee they would have won a championship, so they had to go.  Or put otherwise, King James is definitely more concerned about today than he is tomorrow because, if he was actually concerned for the future of the franchise, he would have tried to develop those young players instead of discarding them.

He did the same thing, if you'll remember, in Cleveland, sacrificing a rookie Andrew Wiggins for Kevin Love.  Again, a championship, so what can you say?  But after the fireworks were finished, how many years did it take for the Cavs to become competitive again?  Lebron seems to know what it takes to win an instant championship, but after that, good luck.

Let's not also forget Miami.  If dude actually had patience, it would have been best if he stayed there throughout the years.  In 2014, the Big Three Heat had a down season (by their standards), in that they made the Finals and lost.  Although there were other factors, I think that, more than anything, is what pushed Lebron away, i.e. believing that he would better off alongside a young Kyrie Irving (who, if I remember correctly, won All-Star MVP that season) and also understanding he would have more personnel influence back home in Cleveland.  Either way, the Heat have made the Finals a couple of times since he left but have never looked as formidable.

Previously with Cleveland, when Lebron led them to the Finals in 2007, imo that's the greatest achievement of his career (besides his longevity).  But he had to leave and come back before they eventually won.  And when he left, oh my goodness were the Cavs garbage.  They had to get three number one picks in four years(!) before he was able to rationalize coming back.

Lebron has been in L.A. for eight seasons but only won one championship.  Idk if that actually classifies as a success story by Lakers' standards.  Magic won as a rookie.  Shaq + Kobe did it in four years.  And Kareem, I think it took him awhile to win in L.A., but by the time it was all said and done, he won five.

And the problem wasn't that King James came to L.A.  The problem is that, with his will exerted, they weren't able sustain a formidable roster.  Secondly, with Lebron aging and other franchises realizing what time it was in terms of him making and breaking franchises, less and less were compelled to pay the max to acquire him.

THE WANING DAYS OF KOBE

Now, let's compare what's happening with Lebron to the elder Kobe days with the Lakers.  By the time Bryant retired, LAL was very much garbage.  He was surrounded by young, unproven players, none of them even having B-list status the way I remember it, but he didn't demand out or that the franchise trade them to surround him with other superstars.  He understood he was old and embraced it with class, looking towards the next generation instead of trying to win as many championships as possible.

Even if Lebron wins another ring, will it really make a difference?  He'll then have five, which still isn't as many as Jordan (or Robert Horry).

Also, is King James really going to play on a veteran's minimum?  When I read that, I almost started crying.  Or let me say the first thing that came to my mind is that, why doesn't he just retire instead of settling for something like that?  Lebron is too great (and rich presumably) to be paid like someone who's lucky to have a contract.  He ran the Lakers masterfully during the Second Round, but they had no chance against OKC, even if Luka were healthy.

Anyway, the point being made is that Kobe actually left Los Angeles better off than Lebron did, because at least after Bryant's retirement, they were still the Lakers that we know and love.  You know, they still had hope type shit.  They were still the most desirable destination in the NBA - so much so that a prime Lebron signed with them, even though they weren't contenders at the time.

You can't say that shit now, folk.  Post-Lebron, we've gone from the days of Shaq + Kobe to Doncic + Kessler, with the media implying that the latter pair is just as promising.  That's why sometimes I have a hard time respecting the mainstream, because it feels more like they're telling you what you want to hear (or what they're being paid to say) rather than the truth.

CONCLUSION

But maybe embracing this mediocrity will eventually lead to LAL chasing Wemby, if and when he ever becomes available.  And just in case I'm not able to get off another post before LBJ makes his decision, I'm still advocating him going to the Pistons more than any other team.

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.

Unc vs. Neph

Neph is a feisty one, having the advantage of being more energetic and optimistic about life.  He believes, for instance, that despite being weaker and less intelligent, he can actually win.

And for a second there, neph surprises you.  In the back of your mind you're thinking 'oh sh*t, what if he actually wins? I can't let a small boy beat me.'  But inevitably unc prevails, and you're just hoping that neph doesn't come to tears upon losing, because after all, it is a game.

If the Spurs make any moves this offseason, it has to be along the lines of acquiring a true PF or perhaps even a C and, if the latter, then move Wemby to the 4.  In crunch time, against a team like the Knicks, grizzled vets like Olynyk and Barnes, who are more or less there for show or 'locker room presence', aren't going to cut it.  Also, taking nothing away from Champagnie, who gets his fair share of rebounds(?), but he's like ultra 3-and-D, like no consistent threat in the post at all.

Now that we're in the Wemby Era, it's inevitable that teams are going to have to start valuing bigs again.  The problem is that, there's not even a lot of quality big men out there to begin with.

If you took every big in the NBA and suddenly made them free agents, there still wouldn't be enough to send one truly starter-worthy - against someone like Victor on top of that - to every team.  Part of the reason is because professional basketball has been valuing jumpshooting so much over the past few years that dudes have forgotten how to post up.  Look at someone like Mobley for instance.

ONE C + FOUR WINGS

San Antonio has an interesting makeup.  This is the only championship-level team I've ever truly seen or can remember that features a dominant C basically surrounded by a bunch of wings.  You may consider Champagnie a 4 or Fox a 1.  But fundamentally, let's say Wemby is surrounded by four SG/SFs.

The closest to this I can think of, off the top of my head, is the Shaq + Kobe Lakers.  And btw, shoutout to O'Neal, who I totally forgot to mention in that recent post where I was talking about generational players.  Dude was so dominant that teams would rather foul than let him get off a shot.

Like the present-day Spurs, that iteration of LAL would play a lot with the C holding down the middle and every other player, even the 4, on the perimeter.  But one major difference is that Lakers' squad having been mad tall.

In 2000, when they won their first championship, their shortest starter was Ron Harper, who's 6'6", and you could tell is like average NBA size and big for a PG.  Meanwhile De'Aaron Fox, who's listed at 6'3", actually looks smallish on the court.  And even later in the Shaq + Kobe years, yes, Fisher isn't tall, but he's built like a linebacker.  In fact, he's more muscular than anyone currently on San Antonio.

I'm not writing the Spurs off but just saying that, until Wemby puts on more weight, if they're going to continue to play this style maybe they need to get a bit bigger.  And you know, I'm not saying that with 100% conviction because apparently, even at their current size they're better than every other team besides the Knicks.

But again, unc versus neph.  All those bumps and pushes and shit, they're out there making contact with Anunoby and KAT and Robinson and Hart, and after awhile, that shit starts to wear you down.  Even Bridges, you know, don't sleep on those stringy niggas.  And I guess what I'm saying in summation is something along the lines of yes, if the Spurs players on average were like five years older, they'd be a better match for NYK.

THE SCAPEGOAT

Recently, I was talking about how Stephon Castle has never truly received the flowers he deserves.  And sure enough, it seemed like a couple of days ago, I came across some article singling him out for underperforming or whatever.  And again, what do you expect him to really do against unc, who are not just playing a regular game but locked in to win a championship?  As spectators, we're focused most on the player with the ball.  But what about all the contact that's made before he even gets the ball into his hands?

GIANNIS, ANYONE?

It's funny how the rhetoric around Giannis has shifted in recent weeks.  He went from being the most-covetable free agent in years, a superstar many thought would never hit the market, to now, when he's actually available, interest in him being "tepid".  But I could definitely picture him with the Spurs, as another wing basically.  People always say that he's "ball dominant", but I don't really see it like that, if there's other viable options to bring it up or whatever.

Another interesting prospect is Anthony Edwards.  Remember how he advertised himself to San Antonio earlier in the playoffs.  He's also bigger than just about anyone on the Spurs besides Kornet and Wemby, like he'd definitely be their biggest wing.  But would even that make a difference against unc?  And all things considered, Giannis needs to keep his ass home anyway.  This was the last season of tanking(?), now making it more understandable why the Bucks wanted to lose.

CONCLUSION

I already predicted, even while the WCF was still ongoing, that the Spurs aren't likely to beat the Knicks, so it's not like if I reiterated that point now I'm bragging.  But going as far as saying that NYK is the better team, well, they do have a clearly better bench, I guess.  But what it looks like more than anything is that they're just stronger.  And furthermore, that strength may be more attributable to age more than anything else.

Jalen Brunson: The One That Got Away

I'll be honest and say that when the Mavs traded Doncic for Davis, yes, I was a bit surprised, but I wasn't one of those kinds of people who couldn't see the logic in the decision.  There were financial factors involved, i.e. do you want to supermax a player who you know isn't likely to lead you to a championship?  And you know, it's sorta like damned if you do, damned if you don't.  Luka was the face of the franchise, and you don't want to alienate your fanbase.  But at the same time, with a superstar like that, if you don't win a championship eventually, those same fans will diss you.

In hindsight, I would say the biggest mistake Dallas made wasn't trading Doncic in and of itself but rather trading one perennially-injured allstar for another, even older perennially-injured allstar.  Also, having Anthony around never panned out as idealized because, excuse my expression, he plays like a bum.

It was blaringly obvious that the Mavs needed an interior presence more than anything.  Remember, we're now in the Wemby Era.  But there goes Anthony, executing crossovers and jacking up three-pointers, as if he isn't 7-feet tall and shit.

But now, let's go back even further to the 2022 Playoffs.  And if you dig back through this blog, this is something I pointed out at that time.

During that postseason, the Mavs were playing better with Brunson and without Luka than they were playing with Luka and without Brunson or with both of them in the lineup.  These kinds of things, they aren't easy to explain logically because of course, Doncic was putting up better stats, perhaps more than anyone else in the entire playoffs.  But he was also of course regularly injured.  Yet the Mavs, depsite being underdogs without him, led by Jalen were pulling off upsets.  And once Luka did return like fulltime, that chemistry or magic was destroyed.

Again, this isn't something I can fully explain, how the team seemed to play better without Doncic, considering that Brunson is an even bigger chuck.  But I would say that maybe, the other Mavs players were able to fukwit him more because, not trying to sound racist or anything, but he plays more of a Black brand of basketball.

Also, back then Luka appeared sorta despondent towards his teammates.  Thankfully, that problem appears to have been solved, as he seems to be a lot more connected and supportive on the Lakers.

Now we can say that, no matter how much money Dallas offered, Brunson was going to bounce anyway, to be with his dad in NY.  If the Mavs' braintrust had inside knowledge of something like that, that they didn't even have a chance, then that would explain why they didn't really try to keep him.

Indeed, the general thinking at the time was, who would pay a king's ransom for Jalen and in the process risk losing Luka?  In other words, no one was even imagining that Brunson may be the better player.  Well, that is to say no one but me.

IS BRUNSON BETTER THAN DONCIC?

So recently I was watching this video about 'who turned out to be best player in each NBA draft', and when the presenter got around to 2018, I was sure he was going to crown Luka.  Remember that both Ayton and Bagley were selected before Doncic, and even the Hawks had a chance to land him but rather opted for Trae Young.  Those decisions have gone down as some of the biggest mishaps in recent draft history.

But who the presenter actually chose - who I had totally forgotten about - is SGA.  And I mean, he's right, now looking back from the future.

I'd still contend that Doncic is the most naturally-talented player in the NBA.  But all of the things people were predicting or hoping for Luka - MVPs and championships and shit like that - it's rather been Shai who's taken them home.  Yet and still, I wouldn't go as far as to say that SGA is the better individual player(?).

And that, dear reader, is the dilemma or confusion surrounding Doncic.  Dude commonly averages close to 10apg, so you can't turnaround and be like he doesn't get his teammates involved.  But it's just like, well, I don't think there's any team in the NBA - including the Lakers, marketing aside - who would rather have Luka than Brunson at this point.  None of them, except arguably the Knicks, could see this coming.

SHOUTOUT TO THE KNICKS

One of the reasons I'm calling this the Wemby Era, even if the Spurs don't win the championship, is because once dude fleshes out and like puts on more muscle, man, he's going to be an even bigger problem than he is now.  But as it currently stands, Victor's biggest weakness is his lightassednees.  It appears, at times, that the Thunder tried to exploit that, but they don't really have the personnel to do so, especially with Williams hurt

The Knicks, however, have the personnel.  They have the best all-around wing core in the league, and they are clearly physically stronger than the Spurs.  NYK's starting five is so stacked that Mikal Bridges is like the third or fourth option or some shit.

And the way I see it, going back to Brunson vs. Luka but also with Bridges vs. Durant, that's the biggest challenge of being an NBA braintrust, as far as roster decisions are concerned.  You're forced to constantly deal with this dilemma of having to choose between what the fans want, i.e. marketability, versus actually winning.  But of course, we don't have that problem at NBA Inception.  Here, we can tell the truth.

So if you dig back, you'll see that when the Suns traded KD for Bridges, I was like why?  Kevin is and by the looks of things always will be more popular.  But, as I argued back then, Bridges is the better all-around player.

CONCLUSION

In a perfect world, all braintrusts would be incepted, and every team would consequently be a contender(?).  But in the real world, you know, niggas be doing some dumb shit.  Like if the Lakers were going to trade AD - remember, this is a franchise that always had like the best C in the league and won accordingly.  So if you're going to trade AD, why for Luka anyway?  That was a Hollywood-inspired decision.  So anytime a superstar is involved in a transaction the question must be asked - is this decision based more on popularity or competitiveness?  The Rockets going after KD, was that more about popularity or competitiveness?  Could they have made wiser decisions in pursuit of the Larry O'Brien?  And on the flip side of the coin, what about players who are devalued because they aren't popular?

2026 Elimination Ruminations: Rockets, Sixers

HOUSTON ROCKET (2-4)

Somehow, I totally forgot to write about the Rockets when they got eliminated a week ago.  So I'm sitting here watching Thunder vs. Lakers and wondering how a team as mediocre as LAL made it all the way to the Second Round, how they're absolutely no match for their opponent.  And that's when I remembered the Rockets.

The Lakers, as far as I know, are the luckiest team in NBA history.  They exceeded most peoples' expectations this past season, but once Luka went down, I think everyone knew that was pretty much it. 

But let's say, if I were writing like a movie script for the 2026 NBA Playoffs that I wanted to make money yet also be believable, even if I knew LAL wouldn't make it to the end, I wouldn't want them getting eliminated in the First Round.  In other words, they really got lucky with that Durant injury, that seemingly popped out of nowhere and kept him out the entire round.

I won't go as far as saying that adding Durant but losing Fred "Care Bear" VanVleet (to injury) is one step forward, two steps backward.  But it doesn't make much difference anyway when both of them can't play.  So it's like this postseason's iteration of the Rockets was actually worst than the team they fielded last year with no Kevin, but at least then they had Fred. 

Without doing any actual research, I think it's safe to presume that Durant and VanVleet are the oldest players on the roster.  Dudes like Sengun, Thompson and even Smith Jr. are like from whole 'nother generation as far as the NBA is concerned.  That's something to consider, going into next year, that both of the scorers this team depends on were injured and unable to help the team this postseason, and generally speaking, age doesn't go in reverse.

So yes, I do advocate Houston going out and looking for younger scorers rather than continuing to depend on the elders.  You know, do the age-appropriate thing.  No one wants to see yet another First Round exit.  But since they're already contracted, I doubt if Kevin or Fred are going anywhere.

When making such gambles, putting your championship hopes on an aged Durant for instance, you have to have that dogged, Sixers' mentality of 'if only they're all healthy, then we'll win'.  Oh well.

By the time all is said and done, the Rockets' insistence on fielding these old dudes may result in the younger ones, who actually want to win or when they start demanding more money, bouncing.  I've been advocating for years that a superstar vet like KD needs to go to a young, up-and-coming team instead of always chasing an instant championship, but it wasn't supposed to look like this.  If you look back, I'm sure I even said he should go to the Pistons.  But this is what happens when there's too much reliance on a superstar which these days, even with younger ones is not ideal.

PHILADELPHIA 76ERS (4-7)

The good news is that the Sixers' big 3 was actually healthy for the majority of the postseason.  The bad news is it not really mattering, arguably being a detriment even, when 'healthy', in this context, is a slow Joel Embiid whose defensive presence is, I would argue, even more of a nonfactor than Lebron's has become.

Lebron's defensive decline is attributable to mileage + age.  The cause of Joel's is mileage + injuries.  Age, I would argue, can be counteracted more consistently than injury.

So the first question is, why do the Sixers insist on starting and giving major minutes to a hobbled C?  Part of it, as with James, lies in the fact that Embiid is still one of the best players on the team.

But that said, these failures have been going on for years already.  Dig through the blog if you want.  The signs that Philly needs to move on from Joel have been there for a minute.  It's not like a revelation and shit.

Dude didn't start playing basketball 'til he was 16 yet has made more money, in like just a decade, than most people with jobs they hate make in their entire lives.  Dude got a (questionable) MVP Award and an Olympic gold medal, you know, when he played for a stacked Team USA instead of a disadvantaged African squad.  So what else does he want?

If the answer is a championship, then the Sixers' braintrust, as outstanding as they are at times, needs to do better.  For instance, even though he has his moments, it's still not abundantly clear why they signed Paul George for $50+mil/year(!).

PG13 is an exceptional scorer, but he's no spring chicken either, and there's a lot of younger guys who can more or less score just as well (even if not as entertaining in doing so) and are less expensive.  One name that comes to mind off the top of my head is his former teammate, Normal Powell.

So what I foresee with Philly is sorta the same as Houston, though the latter is in a better position, as the former needs to embark on a mini rebuild.  The Rockets have a core of young players, so all they need to do is make a couple of adjustments.  The Sixers meanwhile, their core for the most part, looking to the future, only inarguably consists of Maxey and Edgecombe, which is a helluva combination.  But now, they need to put the types of players around that can complement such an undersized backcourt.  They need some of those strong, versatile, Knicks-like wings - I'm thinking someone like Scottie Barnes, but I know he isn't available.  And if Draymond is forced to move or whatever, he can probably help them a bit also.

Should Lebron Retire Already?

Lebron has earned many nicknames throughout the years - "King James"; "Rushmore"; "the Demoralizer" - some good, others not so flattering.  It is those latter realities - his humanness so to speak - that has put him in the undesirable position of being an aged, albeit skilled player that any team could use, but none can afford.

WHO WANTS LEBRON?

The problem with being great is that it seldom lends to humility.  Let's be frank - Lebron James is the best all-around player in NBA history.  He may not be as dominant as were the likes Shaq, Wilt and Kareem.  But he can literally play the 1 through 5, unlike anyone else who's ever graced the stage.

That's in addition to James, even going on a quarter century(!) in the league, remaining immensely popular.  I agree with Kendrick Perkins, that there isn't anyone currently poised to take over as 'the face of the league'.  You got players out there like Wemby and Ant-Man(?), neither of whom, you know what I'm saying?  Jokic is supposed to be like the best player, followed by dudes like Luka and SGA, but none of them niggas have swag.  Even Giannis, like he's cool, but you know what I mean?

Lebron isn't exactly Mr. Swag himself, not compared to his face-of-the-league predecessor, Michael "MJ" Jordan.  LBJ isn't exactly what you would call pretty.  But he's been so dominant for so long, like who can deny him?  Dude is averaging a half-triple double, even in his 40s.

So going back to who wants Lebron, I could imagine that every team in the NBA wouldn't mind having him, if not for one caveat.  And that, dear reader, would be the fact that he (now) sucks on defense - and as the seasons creep by is only becoming more aged in that regard.  Father Time can be defeated so to speak, but you still have to respect him.  Like niggas reach a certain age where you don't want to be chasing around whippersnappers anymore, not like as part of your job type shit.

The mainstream media is only now grasping that fact, that aged Lebron doesn't play defense for shit, but this is a discussion we've already been having for years at NBA Inception.  That's in addition to LBJ insisting to play out of position.  If he played more like an actual four - even a modern-day one - i.e. being able to function more off the ball, Lebron would sitll be invaluable, offensively at least.

But as it currently stands, if you were to put him on, say, the Thunder, if James played more than like 15mpg, he would totally fuck up the flow, and so it would be on virtually any team who are contenders.  Ideally, LBJ would be running a second unit by this stage in his career, or be surrounded by young dudes who could mitigate his defensive deficiencies.  Even at this age, he'd be the best sixth man in the league.  But again, it'd have to be a team who's second unit actually needs a leader, because you can't ask Lebron, after all these years of doing his thing, to suddenly become a role player.  Like you can't even ask him to come off the bench; he'd have to agree to do it himself.

HOW MUCH IS LEBRON WORTH?

Then comes the question of pay.  If Lebron were, say, on the Pacers - a team that's just taking up NBA space so to speak - and making $50+ million, then it's all good, because he would be the main draw, and they don't have any realistic title aspirations.  But on a squad that's actually trying to win it all - any squad, including Cleveland - earning that much makes him liability because, that's money that can be used for someone(s) who plays offense and defense.  Meanwhile, you can't ask him to play on any team that isn't a contender.  You can't like ask Lebron to go and play for the Magic, no matter how much they could pay him.  The days of LBJ being able to go on any team and instantly make them contenders are long gone.

And imagine, say, Lebron going back to the Cavs, salary reduced, while someone like the Beard is being paid the max.  Imagine Lebron on any team and not being the highest paid player.  There's only a handful of players he could humble himself to like that - Mitchell, a perennial all-star in his prime, maybe, but not the Beard.  I can't even see SGA making more money than Lebron if they were on the same team.  In the business world, when it comes to contracts and shit like that, we're supposed to be compensated based not only on our current performance but also past accomplishments.

So Lebron, arguably the G.O.A.T., can't bow out of the game like Vince Carter or CP3, on that veteran's minimum shit.  WTF for?  Is he broke?  Does he want to get at least one ring before he retires type shit?

CONCLUSION

I was the first one, at the beginning of this season - before any of these media dudes or the Cavs or even James himself jumped on the bandwagon - who suggested that Lebron should go back to Cleveland.  This was due to him, finally for the first time in his career, being on a team with a player who's inarguably better.  And I'm not saying that Luka, another defensive liability, is literally better than Lebron type shit.  It's more like young Luka is better than old Lebron.

Also, the implication when I made that suggestion was that LBJ would go back to Cleveland understanding that he'd be playing a reduced role, that Mitchell, Mobley and even the likes of Garland would have precedence.  It was more on some emotional boost type shit, after that sorely-disappointing postseason they had last year - to push them over the Haliburton hump so to speak.  But now that they've gone out and got Harden, like who wants to see him and Lebron on the same team at this stage in their careers?  This past All-Star Game also verified something I've been saying for years, that (professional) athletics is a youth game.

So yeah, LBJ should just call it quits already.  Go as hard as you can this coming offseason, but after that, like give it a break already.  Leave the game before it leaves you to type shit.  It would have been cool if you went back home this season.  But if the Cavs flunk again this coming postseason - as I'm confident they will - reacquiring Lebron next season, especially at some inflated price, would not be the solution. 

The Spurs Having OKC's Number

The Spurs apparently have OKC's number.  This is where, if you're a team like the Thunder, the NBA rigging in your favor becomes important.  And relatedly, this is also why it's imperative to have at least one hands-down superstar on your team.  You know, not just someone who's really good but a player who fans across the board want to win.

Every perennial champion or contender is going to have at least one team they simply can't beat, whether that team is also contenders or not.  That's been true going back at least to the 1990s.

The 1998 Bulls for instance couldn't hang with the 1998 Lakers, even before Kobe truly found his footing.  I remember Jordan and co. also had what looked like issues with the early-1990s' Nets, a relatively garbage team but one likewise replete with quality players who were younger (and faster) than the Bulls core.

The Lakers have also had problems with faster teams, even going back to the Kobe + Shaq championship days.  J.J. Redick finally admitted, indirectly, that LAL's core is too old and too white - something that we at NBA Inception understood since the time they traded for Doncic.  But this organization being unable to defend youth isn't anything new.  Derek Fisher used to always get burned by opposing star PGs.  The present-day Lakers have one of the most hardheaded braintrusts in the NBA, so again, you shouldn't realistically be expecting them to win a championship anytime soon unless, you know what I'm saying?  Is Luka really rig-worthy?

ARE THE SPURS CONTENDERS?

There's a difference between being able to beat a champion and actualy being a contender.  The conference playoffs have three rounds, meaning that even if San Antonio does luck out and face OKC, somewhere along the line there's two other teams they also have to beat before getting to the Finals.  And that's also presuming that the Thunder doesn't figure them out between now and then.

So I'm not in a rush to call these gusy contenders even though I'm glad there's at least one team out there has proven they can beat OKC.  The more interesting observation, in the grand scheme of it all, is that besides the Knicks and Nuggets, all of the other older teams in the NBA looked more or less washed.  But of course if you've been reading this blog over the past few years, then you knew this day was coming.

SHOUTOUT TO JALEN WILLIAMS

Something all star players should fear(?) is their team proving bettrer without than with them.  I know that isn't fully the case with Jalen, but you get what I mean.  You're looking from the sideline, watching your team go like 23 and 1 or some shit, and on one hand you're like 'wow, this is amazing'.  You're jumping out of your seat and cheering, as if you too are on the court.  But in the back your mind it's like 'what if they start losing when I come back?'

The NBA is a strange beast these days.  Predictability has, in large part, been thrown out the window.  Or rather let me say that dudes are now injured so often that, you know what I'm saying, you have to live with or without them.  And some teams learn to play better without a star player or two.  Wemby almost ended up there himself until, oh shit, the Spurs starting beating the Thunder.  Then it became obvious that even if they did having a higher winning percentage when he was injured, they aren't actually better without him.

CONCLUSION

Honestly, I don't want to see a non-superteam(?), you know, only lose like five game throughout the entire season.  When something like that happens, you know what I'm saying?  SGA isn't Jordan, like people don't want to see him winning all the time like that.  If he were Jordan, then Team Canada wouldn't be so garbage.  And when the Warriors only lost nine games, it's like with the roster they had, they should have won all 82.  So thank you Wemby and co. for at least making the NBA competitive again.  And as for the Thunder's braintrust, if you're looking forward to the benefit of rigging - which often separates champions from other contenders in the world of professional sports - then I suggest you like market your brand better or something.

Finally Sympathizing with Mavericks' Fan

At the time the Mavs' traded Doncic for AD, I didn't think it was that much of a big deal.  My arugment was that Dallas was not going ot win a championship with Luka, and it wasn't necessarily the fault of Doncic nor that of the team's braintrust.  They put a quality squad around him that more or less complemented his strengths.  The biggest concern, imo, was Luka's durability in terms of venturing deep into the playoffs, like he could get you to the big dance but then prove unable to deliver the ring.

But since then, I've come to a couple of conclusions, respectively by observing the Mavs and the Lakers.  One is, better to be a contender that never wins a championship than to be garbage.  And second, players can in fact workout and get stronger type shit.  Luka went from being your quintessential European girlie-man to now looking like he can last at least a good 4 out of 6 games(?).  Furthermore, he seems to be expeditiously supplanting Lebron's stature as the face of the Lakers.

For the first time in years, LAL seems to have an identity, almost like Lakers' pride is back.  Fans expect them to win just because they're the Lakers, and by golly, they're going to try their best to deliver.

Human beings, we're some funny creatures.  It's now obvious Luka actually needed to get out of Dallas, for his own good type shit.  He needed a bigger challenge, if you will. But Doncic never asked for a trade or tried to get out himself, rather being forced away all of a sudden, even his own surprise.

The Mavericks are easily the most disappointing team in the league, soemthing which I'll admit I wasn't expecting.  When they won the no.1 pick, I was like 'the draft is rigged'.  But now, you know, let's give Silver and co. some credit.  Maybe they were able to perceive that, oh shit, despite having three future hall-of-famers plus a slew of quality role players, these guys really do suck.

I've been on Jason Kidd's ass for awhile, but it was utlimately Nico Harrison who took the bullet.  Probably that's for the best, because the type of loons floating around these days, some jackass may be able to rationalize literally shooting him for being the main figure behind making the team suck.

And yes, dear reader, the Mavericks do in fact suck.  Luka is gone, and there's no use crying over spilt milk.  This team has enough quality pieces to at least, you know I'm saying, win sometimes type shit.  So yeah, my prediction is that the sacking of Harrison is just the inevtiable lead up to Jason also getting the boot.  Like Kidd is too popular or whatever for them to sack first, especially after losing Luka.

You've been dealt a weaker hand by the executive, but as a coach you have to make best with what you have.  Forcing a traditionally-statured, newbie whiteboy to run-and-gun with a bunch of (average) Black players is not trying your best.  That's a strategy that literally even a 12-year-old can come up with.

CONCLUSION

What we should also be looking forward to is LBJ evenutally coming back and totally fuckin up the chemistry this new iteration of LAL has built.  I'm sure that I'll be writing one of those 'Los Angeles-would-be-better-if-Lebron-relegated-himself-to the-4' articles soon.  But in the meatime yes, watching Luka drop 40 at will, spearheading a questionable roster to regular victories in the West even, while the Mavs went from making the Finals one season, getting the no.1 pick the next and now utterly sucking, you have to feel sorry for Dallas fans.  I'm just now feeling for them, even tho they got sh*t on a whole like six months ago, and by the looks of things the pain is not going to go away anytime soon.  Cooper may be a generational talent as far as American Whites go, but he obviulsy isn't a Luka.

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.