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.

Shoutout to Wemby

A couple of years ago, I was on the verge of quitting the NBA.  I've now been a fan for over 30 years and, besides the rigging, after awhile you get tired of the redundancy.

But what I've come to realize, via my affinity for Wemby, is that the NBA truly is a fan-driven league.  Who's more important, the players or the organization?  When it comes to filling seats, definitely the players.

I'd venture to say that you'd be hard-pressed to find a fan who can name even one or two NBA owners.  An owner would have to be akin to a reality TV star to be known to the general public.  And no, I'm not talking about those minority celebrity types like Jay-Z or A-Rod.  I mean the big dawgs, like Cuban or Dolan.

In fact, the reason I started watching the NBA to begin with, back in '91, was due to the rise of Micheal Jordan.  You know, you see dude everywhere, selling Gatorade and sneakers and shit, and after awhile wand to see what the hype is about.  Then, it's up to the player to deliver.  And deliver he did, time and time again.

Since then, there's been quite a few must-watch players - Lebron, Kyrie, Luka and so many others I can't mention here but most notably, imo, Shaq and Curry.  Also, let's not forget Vinsanity.  Hard to believe that there was a time when he was more popular, in (American) basketball circles, than even Iverson, Kobe or MJ himself(!).  Granted, that was during Jordan's stint with the Wizards.  But still, Carter is an interesting case study.  I can't think of any other NBA superstar who went from A+ lister to obscurity, you know, like ever.

So anyway, the point I wanted to get at is it being Wemby, more than anyone else, who made me not quit the NBA.  And you know, let's be honest - it isn't only about skill.  There's a lot of skilled players out there who never even made an All-Star Game.

Also, whereas novelty (such as being dumb tall, super athletic, etc.) really helps a player's popularity, with Wemby it isn't all about that either.  As I stated before (and later found out that Shaq said the same thing), Bol Bol was actually like a pre-Wemby.  He's likewise tall AF yet, unlike any 7-footer that came before him, had the agility and skillset of a 2guard.

And that us brings to the third and arguably most important factor ultimately attributing to superstardom, the thing that made MJ an icon while conversely leading to Vince disappearing from the spotlight, why Bol Bol never got the flowers he deserved.  And that, dear reader, is likability or, let's say within the context of professional sports, marketability.  Lebron, Kobe and I would even venture to say Steph, no superstar since MJ has a mug as likable as Wemby.  It looks almost like someone slapped a kid's head on a 7-foot body.

And let me repeat - likability matters.  Let's go back to the Big Diesel for instance, you know, who the powers-that-be helped win two of those first three championships.

There was a time when he was perhaps the most hostile player in the league, which totally isn't fair when you're also the biggest and strongest.  But still, fans loved him.  He was one of the NBA's very first reality TV stars, in a manner of speaking.  And you know, even though he may not have had the top-selling jersey or whatever and only won one MVP(!) in his career, people loving you definitely matters when, you know, it's time to rig games and shit like that.

So now you have Wemby, who's not only dominant but also has the most-marketable face of a superstar since Jordan.  Even if not this year, I think it's safe to say that, barring serious injury, t's only a matter of time before he wins a championship. 

And you know, it's not only about skill, dominance or rigging.  Fixing games isn't the only way superstars receive favor.  There's also the team itself become more popular, being able to finagle its way to a superior roster.

You see how the Spurs landed De'Aaron Fox, who appears to be just about the only player on the team who isn't adversely affected by the Knicks' defense.  And as I pointed out in the last post, San Antonio, win or lose at this point, has some work to do this offseason.  You see that last play of Game 4, when Anunoby was able to crash the boards despite there being three Spurs' players underneath the basket.  Dudes needs somebody to hold down the middle while Wemby is out on the perimeter, trying to block jumpshots(!) and shit like that.

CONCLUSION

Thank you, Victor, for re-piquing my interest in the NBA - not only your height + skill but also making it such that dudes have to respect the post again.  I was also tired of all of that threepoint shit.  But please, San Antonio, get son some backup downlow and, if you lose, don't try to blame it on Castle since, as a 2guard, you shouldn't really expect him to be like your second-best post player.

Yes, it is super exciting that the Knicks appear to be on the verge of winning a championship (and would be even moreso if they won at MSG).  But the biggest draw of this series, honestly, is Wembanyama.

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.

Big Shot Bob, an All-Time Great?

Yesterday I was watching a game from that controversial 2002 Western Conference Finals series between the Kings and Lakers.  At first, (spoiler alert?), Sacramento was on the verge of blowing the Lakers out, in Los Angeles.  But by the time all was said and done, the day was saved by a clutch shot made by Robert "Big Shot Bob" Horry.  In fact at the end of the game, he was the one who the broadcaster interviewed, not Shaq or Kobe.

Robert Horry has more championship rings than any player in NBA history outside of the 1950-60s Celtics, who won like every year.  He has more than Jordan, more than Magic, and by looks of things, neither Lebron or Steph are going to catch up with Big Shot Bob.  Yet, you never hear Horry's name mentioned when it comes to all-time greats or even in terms of being considered for induction into the Naismith Basketball Hall of Fame, where even the likes of Tim Hardaway, who like never won jackshit, have made it.

I think part of the reason is because Horry was never a franchise player or even considered like the second-best player on the various teams he played for.  But if you don't know his history and see this relatively-unknown dude's name up there higher on the championship list than Kareem or Pippen, you'd probably think that he was riding the bench and was jut fortunate enough to find himself on good teams.  But even then, how many benchriders have seven championships, in any sport and furthermore amongst three different teams?  If such a person exists, you'd have to conclude that he or she is at least a good luck charm or something.

But that wasn't the case with Big Shot Bob.  He was a starter with the Rockets when they won championships in 1994 and 1995.  He was primarily a bench player during the Shaq + Kobe threepeat, as he was when he won championships with the Spurs in 2005 and 2007.  But he played a key and sometimes even savior-like role with all of those franchises.

For instance, it is widely considered that the NBA rigged Game 6 of that 2002 series between the Kings and Lakers.  But let me say, if that is in fact the case, that the NBA would have never been in a rightful position to do so if Horry didn't make that clutch shot in Game 4.  Because if he had missed it, Sacramento would have had a 3-1 lead over LAL.  And you know, it's a lot easier to pull off the rigging of one nationally-televised game that everyone is watching than having to do two in a row.

Horry may not have gotten sneaker deals and commercials and allstar nods and shit like that, but he was one of the more popular players of his day to actual NBA fans, as he was the most clutch shooter of the 2000s.  And his ability to make clutch shots was, I believe, founded in his overall fearlessness.

It takes a high degree of courage, for lack of a better way of putting it, to consistently make three-pointers during some of the most-crucial moments in NBA history.  But that same 'fearlessness' sometimes resulted in Big Shot doing dumb shit, like that time he threw a towel in the face of Danny Ainge, who's not only respected in NBA circles but also was Horry's coach at the time.  And it's like to this day, he still doesn't give AF.

CONCLUSION

So we may never see Horry in the Hall of Fame.  If you were a superstar player, you'll definitely make it into the Hall.  If you were a player with mainstream name recognition  who hasn't won any championships, you can also make it.  But if, as a key role player, you won two championships with one team, three championships with another and yet two more with a different franchise, obviously that's not good enough.

2023 NBA Finals Ruminations (June 10th)

SHOUTOUT TO BRUCE BROWN

One of the biggest problems with having a group of superstar divas on the same roster, like what the Nets had been dealing with up until recently, is that the other quality players on the team tend to get overlooked.  That's what happened to Bruce Brown last season.  There were games, to my remembrance, in which both KD and Kyrie played, but Brown was the most-effective player on the squad.  And I was saying to myself that if there's any 'role player' who Brooklyn should go out of its way to retain, it would Bruce.

But in reality, the Nets' braintrust really isn't that smart to begin with.  For example, I like Cam Johnson but don't know if I would really risk breaking the bank for him.  Also, for some reason they like refuse to give Cam Thomas burn, even though he's obviously one of the best scorers in the league.

AARON GORDON - THE LAST TRUE POWER FORWARD

I remember back later in his career, Shaq used to refer to himself as something like 'the last true center in the NBA'.  He wasn't stepping outside settling for midrange shots like others, and since he was 'the last true center', it was like other teams didn't really have a strategy for defending him.

And that's the same thing I see when I look at Aaron Gordon dominating like this.  The NBA has become so guard/wing oriented that teams like Miami have no answer for him, and I doubt it would be much different if the Celtics were here in their place.  Hell, even Gary Payton II, who's only listed at 6'2", is able to dominate inside these days.  So as I have been predicting for the longest, the teams that do still respect interior presence, at the top of the list currently being the Nuggets, are going to dominate into the future.  Or as the old saying goes, nothing is new under the sun.  And any team that doesn't have a couple of Splash Bros., of which currently there is only one, shouldn't be trying to win every game via the usage of three-pointers.

FUK HAPPENED TO MO BAMBA?

When the Lakers unexpectedly went out and got Mo Bamba a couple of months ago (while simultaneously getting rid of Thomas Bryant), I thought they were going to actually play dude.  They could have definitely used him, for instance against these selfsame Nuggets.  He's one of those types of players I'm talking about, a lumbering big, the type who's no longer en vogue but virtually every team needs one.  So it'll be interesting to see where he ends up next season after being devalued by both the Magic and LAL.  Hopefully, it'll be on a roster where he actually gets some burn.

THE FUTURE OF THE HEAT

Even if the Heat somehow go on to miraculously win this series, it's obvious that their roster needs adjustments.  I mean, that's been obvious pretty much all season.  Jimmy Butler is one of my favorite players, but looking at him on the surface, you wouldn't know how much NBA mileage his body has endured.  Dude was playing for the Bulls way back in the Rose + Noah days.  So it ain't like he's a spring chicken, and I don't know how much of an onus the Heat should realistically be placing on him by this point.

So the future of this team, obviously, is with Bam Adebayo.  Herro is also a keeper, and like might as well play him by this point.  Maybe he'll prove to be the additional star the Heat need, now that Denver seems to have more or less neutralized Miami's wily role players.  And Butler is also someone you would want to keep around, though primarily as a defensive specialist by this point.  'Playoff Jimmy Butler' is real sometimes, but at this age not all the time.  So come this offseason, if I were Miami I would basically slot Bam into the PG position and then do what they have to do from there (like maybe finding a way to get rid of Lowry's contract).

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? (CHRIS PAUL EDITION)

CP3 is the type of PG that can literally fit in with any team, though whether as a starter or bench player depends on the squad.  But as soon as I heard that the Suns were finna to cut him, even til now I can't think of any team that would be an ideal fit that he would actually want to go to.

The thing about these superstars, how they sorta self-sabotage themselves these days, is that they're always switching teams.  If, after your rookie contract expires, you spend your entire career bouncing around to teams that are instantly in position to win championships, that likely means there isn't a quality core of young players developing under you.  So what happens is that these contenders become too old to compete, which is not how aging is supposed to work.

In other words as you age, no matter what walk of life you're in as far as I could tell, you need youngsters to have your back.  So if you're on a team that's gradually building into a champion and then just be like 'fukit, I'm leaving, I want to win now', you know, when the time comes that you need youth on your side, you're may not have it.  And that's also a problem a lot of the better teams in the NBA are facing, even the Warriors in a way.

What I would really like to see is CP3 go to a team that could really use him as a starter, like the Rockets or Magic, but again, that's not likely.  So I need to think some more before pinning down an actual contender he can go to.  Off the top of my head the Bucks keep poppin into mind, but him alongside Jrue Holiday may be too undersized.

SHOUTOUT TO MIKE MALONE

I sorta dissed Mike Malone in my last post for only using a eight-man rotation despite having at least three quality bench players who aren't getting any burn in the Finals whatsoever.  But the strategy is working, in part I would say because Miami really isn't on Denver's level to begin with.  And the cool thing about it nonetheless is that DeAndre Jordan is on the verge of finally getting a ring, whereas neither CP3 nor Blake Griffin have been as lucky.

Steph Responds

The homeys can try to flip it however they want, but we all know it was recently NBA Inception that was like "Steph Curry has destroyed organized basketball".  Of course he didn't ruin the sport itself, being one of the most electrifying players ever.  But the Warriors' dynasty, for whatever, reason caused the entire NBA to go 3-point crazy.  No one except the Lakers kinda were like 'since they're going small, let's rather go big' - you know, counteraction.  Instead everybody tried to build teams more formidable at shooting 3s than the Splash Brothers were in their prime, which is impossible since Steph and Klay are like a once-in-a-generation combination.

My anti-Curry sentiments date back a few years, watching one of those Finals series where the Warriors beat the Cavs.  That year, like I really wanted the Cavs to win.  I believe that was the 2015 Finals, the one where Andre Igoudala won MVP.

So it's like they're playing in Cleveland in a pivotal game, and Steph had two defenders on him hard.  And dude was deadass chuckin', like not passing the ball or even really looking to pass.  And I'm sitting there like 'smh, look at this MF  Isn't he supposed to be a PG?'.  And then, like I don't know WTF.  Steph dribbled around one dude and then another, not actually shaking the defenders but not allowing them to steal the ball either.  And remember there's two - might've even been three - guys on him hard.  Then he stepped behind the 3-point, still chuckin' his ass off, shot a three, and it deadass went in.  And I'm sitting there like 'man, what the f*ck is this?'  And then he kept doing shit like that, with this being the crunchtime of a Finals game.

THE GREATNESS OF STEPH

Steph Curry is the most dominant player to grace the NBA since Shaq.  Shaq was in a different weight class than the rest of his peers, so defending him was virtually impossible.  And Steph's unfair advantage is his shooting ability + handle.

The Lakers having their dynasty under Magic Johnson caused players to idealize running the point and making timely passes (i.e. Lebron's obsession with playing PG to this day).  During the Bulls dynasty, having an alpha player like Michael Jordan who was willing and able to always 'take the last shot' became en vogue.  And with Steph, players chucking up 3s has now become a standard.

CONCLUSION

But you know, it's kinda late to be having this discussion anyway.  If this was a couple of years back maybe I would even propose some anti-Steph measures, like not allowing players to shoot, say 25 feet away from the basket unless the clock is winding down.

But now, even if Steph is still in the MVP coversation, his game has notably digressed.  And some NBA teams even seem as if they have come back to their senses and started like running plays and posting up again.  But it's like at one point too much Splash Brothers, buttressed by the likes of KD and Draymond, had the NBA going absolutely bonkers.

The Luck of the Draw

A couple of days ago, even before Cade Cunningham debuted and promptly proceeded to stink the place up, I began writing an article which in part touched on how rookies such as himself and Jalen Green are overrated.  And I don't mean that in a literal sense, like they will never become legitimate NBA stars.  But my argument is rather that the NBA has devolved into a league that for whatever reasons fans and even organizations seem to actually believe that a top-notch draftee is going to come in and instantly transform a garbage team into a competitive or even contending one.  Meanwhile, this belief has very little historical basis, even as far as number one picks go.  And as for the few rookies who did come in and instantly transform a plagued squad's fortunes, those tend to be some of the best basketball players in the history of the sport, not just the next hot thing coming out of college or high school or whatever.

In fact to my knowledge there is only one player who, as a rookie, led his team to the NBA Championship, as in being named MVP of the series.  But don't forget that Magic also had Kareem on his squad, who averaged a solid 33 points during the 1980 NBA Finals.  In other words the Lakers, who got to the Semifinals the year prior, wasn't a garbage team when they drafted Magic.  And the only reason they had the number-one pick was as the result of a deal they made with the Jazz a few years earlier.

Then there is Tim Duncan, who was named Finals MVP in 1999, i.e. his second season in the NBA. I remember watching one documentary where someone said something like 'Tim Duncan was the most unanimous number-one pick in NBA history'.  And in fact some people actually referred to the 1997 Draft as "the Tim Duncan Sweepstakes".  And even though the Spurs did in fact suck the season prior, they weren't a garbage team but rather had a roster that was decimated by injuries, most notably to the Admiral, who played in less than 10 games.  So it's sorta like they unintentionally tanked.

Another honorable mention is Shaq, who in the very least made the Magic a universal threat in his rookie season.  Also, buttressed by Penny, he led the squad to the NBA Finals in just his third year.  But of course they ended up getting their asses bust by the Rockets.

Another player I can think of who at least made his team must-watch during his rookie year was Allen Iverson.  Lebron took what had to be the most-mediocre team to ever make the NBA Finals to the big dance in just his fourth season.  And to note, AI also accomplished a comparable feat in his fifth season with the Sixers.  And again, all of the players mentioned above were number-one draft picks.

And I didn't forget Dwayne Wade who, as a fifth-overall pick, won Finals MVP in just his third season.  But as with Magic and the Lakers, that Heat team wasn't garbage either.  Oh yeah, Hakeem Olajuwon was another number-one pick who eventually won a couple of championships for the Rockets, but it took them a decade to do so.  Also the likes Jordan, who as a number-three pick did it in like six years, though not with the roster he met when he came to Chicago.  And please, in all due respect, don't even mention Kobe and the fact that the Lakers began their three-peat during his fourth season, as some may even argue that he wasn't the best player on the Lakers during his post-Shaq championships.

So basically, out of the last 40 years, only a handful number-one picks had managed to lead the team that drafted them (or usually any team for that matter) to the big dance.  Therefore, logic would dictate that perhaps we shouldn't expect too much out of them.  And if that's true for the top pick, then how much more for players like Jalen Green, who didn't even go number one?

 CONCLUSION

These days most of the top draft picks play only a year in college or wherever before coming to the NBA.  If not for that, many of them would be coming in straight out of high school, which would likely create an even bigger disaster in terms of questionable draft picks than we're currently facing.

I remember coming across an article a while back where some insider was saying that one of the drawbacks of the one-and-done system is that NBA scouts only have a very-limited time to familiarize themselves with prospects, which would at least partially explain why they seem to fuck up so often these days.  But that said, these aren't amateurs talking shit at a computer like myself.  These GMs and executive braintrusts are actually paid big money to make educated draft choices.  But instead, it seems like a lot of times they're just dickriding and going along with popular opinion.  You know, nobody wants to take the blame if a draft pick proves to be a bust.  So perhaps the safest thing to do is to just go along with the consensus, so that if the player doesn't work out then you can just be like 'well, I picked who anyone else would have under the circumstances' and put the onus of the blame on the player himself, which in a way is totally what these professionals are paid not to do.