OT Paul Pierce Compares KD Joining Dubs to Kid Getting Beaten Up, Joining Bullies

[blue9]

This is technically correct, but at least in the 90's the Bulls weren't blowing out every team by 30 points in the process.

And they weren't a "super team". They had the GOAT and a HOFer in Pippen, and then guys like BJ Armstrong, Horace Grant, Billy Goat Cartwright, Will Perdue. Sure they had Kerr and Rodman for the 2nd 3-peat, but excepting Rodman, those Bulls teams were 2 HOFers, a smattering of good role players, and a bunch of nobodies.

 

[Minstrel]

IMO, if you want to get rid of superteams, get rid of the max contract. Artificially holding down the salaries of players like James, Curry, Durant, etc, is what allows teams to put together 3 or 4 superstars. If James or Durant made $40-50M per season, good luck putting together more than two superstars and still filling out the rest of your roster.

 

[Minstrel]

Steve Kerr could return for Game 2

 

[BlazerWookee]

"I'm just not built like that," the Truth said. "I'm not a guy who goes into the neighborhood, gets beat up by the bully's gang and then now I want to join your gang

What a twat. Paul Pierce is human garbage.

 

[Blazers Roy]

I see that a lot of people compare this current "Warriors" abomination to legitimate past teams (Miami, Boston).

1.Celtics traded their then promising young players to Seattle and Mini for KG and Ray Allen. The Wolves and the Sonics were not even playoffs rivals of the Celtics. That Celtics team was formed under the rules of the NBA salary cap.

2.Lebron James indicated before his departure that his contract extension is not written in stone. Lebron decided to leave the Cavs via a sign and trade deal to the Miami Heat. Lebron didn't join the team who beat him (The Celtics).
The Lebron "superteam" was formed under the NBA salary cap restriction which meant they could only add low paying role players to that team.
It is also worth noting that the 2009-2010 Heat team did not play the Cavs and Lebron in the playoffs as they were eliminated in the first round, Lebron actually joined a lower ranked team. Durant joined a record-setting team.

3.GSW used a short window in which the NBA salary cap was non-existent. They were only able to achieve their current status because of the incompetence of Adam Silver and the weak mentality of Kevin Durant.


So yeah, members of the 08' Celtics and Lebron can talk all the shit they want on this Whorriors abomination because that's not how the league should have handled that TV deal and that's definitely not how a competitive hall of fame player should handle a defeat.

 

[dviss1]

They got the 1st pick in the draft for Parish. You usually got to give up quite a bit for the top pick.

McHale and Ainge were drafted. The only guy they really stole was DJ.

Know your NBA history:

 

[dviss1]

I see that a lot of people compare this current "Warriors" abomination to legitimate past teams (Miami, Boston).

1.Celtics traded their then promising young players to Seattle and Mini for KG and Ray Allen. The Wolves and the Sonics were not even playoffs rivals of the Celtics. That Celtics team was formed under the rules of the NBA salary cap.

2.Lebron James indicated before his departure that his contract extension is not written in stone. Lebron decided to leave the Cavs via a sign and trade deal to the Miami Heat. Lebron didn't join the team who beat him (The Celtics).
The Lebron "superteam" was formed under the NBA salary cap restriction which meant they could only add low paying role players to that team.
It is also worth noting that the 2009-2010 Heat team did not play the Cavs and Lebron in the playoffs as they were eliminated in the first round, Lebron actually joined a lower ranked team. Durant joined a record-setting team.

3.GSW used a short window in which the NBA salary cap was non-existent. They were only able to achieve their current status because of the incompetence of Adam Silver and the weak mentality of Kevin Durant.


So yeah, members of the 08' Celtics and Lebron can talk all the shit they want on this Whorriors abomination because that's not how the league should have handled that TV deal and that's definitely not how a competitive hall of fame player should handle a defeat.

JESUS. THANK YOU!!

 

[MickZagger]

Know your NBA history:

Uh, so Auerbach fleeced a couple incompetent GM's. Not really sure what that has to do with the current day shenanigans of shopping rings. It doesn't cheapen any of the Celtics rings, they did a great job assembling that team.

 

[Minstrel]

they did a great job assembling that team.

So did the Warriors. People blast Durant for joining the Warriors because the Warriors were already a great team--they were a great team because of the drafting and lower-key signings they had already done. They also didn't rush to extend Harrison Barnes, which is an underrated factor in even being in position to sign Durant. A lot of teams extend their young, emerging players the year before they hit RFA--the Warriors inquired into whether they could get Barnes at a decent price, decided they couldn't and let it ride. Worked out pretty well for them.

As the years go by, and distance is gained from the fan-created soap opera, no one's going to care. People insisted at the time that James' rings would be tainted when he formed the Miami superteam. Not so much, it appears.

 

[MickZagger]

So did the Warriors. People blast Durant for joining the Warriors because the Warriors were already a great team--they were a great team because of the drafting and lower-key signings they had already done. They also didn't rush to extend Harrison Barnes, which is an underrated factor in even being in position to sign Durant. A lot of teams extend their young, emerging players the year before they hit RFA--the Warriors inquired into whether they could get Barnes at a decent price, decided they couldn't and let it ride. Worked out pretty well for them.

As the years go by, and distance is gained from the fan-created soap opera, no one's going to care. People insisted at the time that James' rings would be tainted when he formed the Miami superteam. Not so much, it appears.

I never denied that they didn't do a great job assembling that team. The pieces were in place already, adding Durant just makes it corny.

I still think the Cavs win this series though.

 

[ripcityboy]

I swear. There is a reason that the Yankees and Celtics have won so many championships. The excellence extends from the playing field to the front office. Red Auerbach, Ed Barrow, George Weiss are all in their sport's HOF for a reason. So many lopsided trades.... Well I guess a sucker is born every minute.

 

[PDXFonz]

Pierce knows a thing or two about bullies.

 

[Blazers Roy]

As the years go by, and distance is gained from the fan-created soap opera, no one's going to care. People insisted at the time that James' rings would be tainted when he formed the Miami superteam. Not so much, it appears.

This league exists to entertain the fans, a non competitive league is a shitty product.
These playoffs have been a failure for the fans,players,broadcasting TV networks and the league.

The salary cap exists for a reason, this is bigger than a few OKC fans feeling sad about losing their star.

 

[Minstrel]

This league exists to entertain the fans, a non competitive league is a shitty product.
These playoffs have been a failure for the fans,players,broadcasting TV networks and the league.

Game 1 was the third-highest rated game 1 on ABC. IMO, it's just a small (but vocal) subset of fans who hate the league, the Warriors and Durant. The league has usually had one or two dominant teams (except the 1970s, a period of time in which the league almost folded). The Celtics winning nearly every title in the '60s, the Lakers and Celtics splitting up nearly every title in '80s, the Bulls winning most of the titles in the '90s (and probably 8 of them if Jordan hadn't retired the first time, maybe 9 if he hadn't retired the second time).

In all those eras, there were one or two dominant teams, a bunch of decent teams with little hope and a bunch of totally crap teams (except in the '60s, when there weren't enough teams in the league for a "bunch" of anything). Personally, I don't think the Warriors' (and Cavaliers') dominance will bring down the league. History suggests that most fans enjoy dominance.

 

[Blazers Roy]

Game 1 was the third-highest rated game 1 on ABC. IMO, it's just a small (but vocal) subset of fans who hate the league, the Warriors and Durant. The league has usually had one or two dominant teams (except the 1970s, a period of time in which the league almost folded). The Celtics winning nearly every title in the '60s, the Lakers and Celtics splitting up nearly every title in '80s, the Bulls winning most of the titles in the '90s (and probably 8 of them if Jordan hadn't retired the first time, maybe 9 if he hadn't retired the second time).

In all those eras, there were one or two dominant teams, a bunch of decent teams with little hope and a bunch of totally crap teams (except in the '60s, when there weren't enough teams in the league for a "bunch" of anything). Personally, I don't think the Warriors' (and Cavaliers') dominance will bring down the league. History suggests that most fans enjoy dominance.

I don't understand any of your arguments...

-Fans who want to see a competitive league with the same limitations on all teams are "fans who hate the league" ?? what?

-"most fans enjoy dominance"?? since when? why not abolish the salary cap then? lets watch the richest owner win it all each year.

-Rating for a game doesn't indicate success , TV networks deal with quantity not quality for 1 game. 2 teams sweeping the playoffs is not good by any stretch of the imagination.

-Who cares about the 60's-90's now? I mean yea, little kids will always like to watch this type of season because for them its amazing to watch MJ or Curry "smash" everyone else, but i would like to think that the NBA should be more than superhero entertainment for kids.

-Just because the league was fucked in the 70's-80's doesn't mean it's ok to have it all over again. There's a reason rules,caps and regulations where put in place since then!

-People still watch the NBA because they love basketball, it doesn't mean that the NBA should put an inferior product just because "people would watch it anyway".

 

[Minstrel]

I don't understand any of your arguments...

-Fans who want to see a competitive league with the same limitations on all teams are "fans who hate the league" ?? what?

Who hate the current league for being "uncompetitive."

-"most fans enjoy dominance"?? since when? why not abolish the salary cap then?

You mean, like it was in the 1980s? Also known by many as the NBA's "golden age."

Rating for a game doesn't indicate success , TV networks deal with quantity not quality for 1 game. 2 teams sweeping the playoffs is not good by any stretch of the imagination.

Two teams sweeping the playoffs is historically unusual. Let's see it keep happening before we start worrying about the league being in deep trouble, eh? I'd be willing to bet it doesn't happen again next year.

-Who cares about the 60's-90's now? I mean yea, little kids will always like to watch this type of season because for them its amazing to watch MJ or Curry "smash" everyone else, but i would like to think that the NBA should be more than superhero entertainment for kids.

Can you support that it's only "little kids" who enjoyed the NBA in the 1960s, 1980s, 1990s or today? I'd guess probably not, because it's pretty obviously silly.

 

[BBert]

I'm not only boycotting the finals, I'm boycotting the finals thread. I won't watch one minute or read one word. I don't even want to know who wins the games. One team loading up and dominating their way to a trophy in the absence of any real competition is not "sport". I might watch great marksmen compete in the Olympics, but I'm not interested in watching them shoot fish in a barrel.

 

[BigGameDamian]