They escaped again. 4 double digit 4th quarter deficits in 6 games and no losses.
NBA 2017 - 2018 Westworld
- Thread starter gblews
- Start date
Wow, Cavs cleaned house, sending the two ex-Celts, Isaiah Thomas, Jae Crowder, and Derrick Rose, and Dwayne Wade They acquired some pretty good glue guys in Jordan Clarkson, Larry Nance, and Rodney Hood. All of those guys are low maintenance, young guys with lots of upside and very little playoff experience. They get rid of lockerroom problems an guys who weren't producing. But how does a team making these types of changes win in the playoffs, even in the east?
Lakers continue their quest to clear cap space enough to sign two max contracts and they acquire a first round pick in 2018, which they did not have before. The Lakers were the only team to get a first round pick at the trade deadline. If word is, if we stretch Deng's contract and renounce, or let Julius Randle walk in free agency, we'll have LeBron/Paul George money. I definity don't want to lose Randle, so signing PG and no eBron would work for me. But Magic and Pelinka seem determined oto go all out for both.
For the Lakers, it was a great deal for their future plans and they didn't have gie up any of their core to get it done. But the tale will be told this summer.
The rest of the trades were all pretty minor in nature.
Lakers continue their quest to clear cap space enough to sign two max contracts and they acquire a first round pick in 2018, which they did not have before. The Lakers were the only team to get a first round pick at the trade deadline. If word is, if we stretch Deng's contract and renounce, or let Julius Randle walk in free agency, we'll have LeBron/Paul George money. I definity don't want to lose Randle, so signing PG and no eBron would work for me. But Magic and Pelinka seem determined oto go all out for both.
For the Lakers, it was a great deal for their future plans and they didn't have gie up any of their core to get it done. But the tale will be told this summer.
The rest of the trades were all pretty minor in nature.
What's everyone's thoughts on all the format changes that have been under discussion?
Reseeding 1-16: I like it. Would make it so the above average east teams don't get to coast and avoid all the high powered west teams until the end.
7-10, 8-9 games: I dislike the idea, but don't mind too much. More like, eh, whatever. Nobody cares about the March Madness play-in games, nobody will care about this either and winners will be one and done. Might be fun for fans of average teams.
Shortening regular season: I like it, 82 games is more than necessary for teams to separate and shortens careers. 64-72 range seems better.
Shortening playoffs: This I absolutely hate. I think four rounds of seven game series is perfect format. It's exciting, it's dramatic, it forces teams to truly best their opponent to advance, and it gives very high odds of the championship team being truly the best team (Which is pretty much the main goal, right?). 3 games in the first round would be awful and add more statistical randomness to the outcome. If you want to beat the best team, you shouldn't just have to have one or two good games, you should also have to beat their adjustments to those one or two good games.
To be perfectly honest, I'd much rather them just chop off the first round and have 8 teams, 3 rounds of 7 game series than have any rounds in the playoffs of 3 game series.
Reseeding 1-16: I like it. Would make it so the above average east teams don't get to coast and avoid all the high powered west teams until the end.
7-10, 8-9 games: I dislike the idea, but don't mind too much. More like, eh, whatever. Nobody cares about the March Madness play-in games, nobody will care about this either and winners will be one and done. Might be fun for fans of average teams.
Shortening regular season: I like it, 82 games is more than necessary for teams to separate and shortens careers. 64-72 range seems better.
Shortening playoffs: This I absolutely hate. I think four rounds of seven game series is perfect format. It's exciting, it's dramatic, it forces teams to truly best their opponent to advance, and it gives very high odds of the championship team being truly the best team (Which is pretty much the main goal, right?). 3 games in the first round would be awful and add more statistical randomness to the outcome. If you want to beat the best team, you shouldn't just have to have one or two good games, you should also have to beat their adjustments to those one or two good games.
To be perfectly honest, I'd much rather them just chop off the first round and have 8 teams, 3 rounds of 7 game series than have any rounds in the playoffs of 3 game series.
I would much rather have a longer playoffs and shorten season than what is being suggested. Doesn't more playoffs equate to more revenue? Maybe not for the teams that are awful, but for the teams that are good that's the case.
Yeah, they're not going to shorten the playoffs, too much money there. They'll shorten the regular season if anything. That would be okay with everyone, I'de say.
As for re-seeding the playoffs, not sure I'm in favor of this either. This is being considered i suppose, because of the west's relatively recent dominance. But that has been only for about the last 20 years or so. Not all that long by NBA standards. The east dominated in nearly this same way from the around the mid-fifties to about the start of the '80's. It was pretty even through the '80's. The east took over again in the '90's, because of the Bulls, but the west started to come back by the late '90's and continues through to now.
I think we may be on the verge of a resurgence in the east. The Sixers are on the rise as are the Celtics and maybe even Milwaukee and Detroit. Beyond GSW in the west there is only the Rox and they don't appear to be built for the long haul. So, I think the re-seeding might be just in time to see the two conferences even things up again. We'll see.
But the draft order problem needs to be fixed. All the brazen tanking is making the league look bad. Only solution I've heard that wil stop it is a rotating system where each team gets the number 1 pick every years 6 years or so.
The war between the players and ref's alat large. so needs to be addressed. I just wonder if this might have to do with the general divisiveness that is affecting the nation at large..
As for re-seeding the playoffs, not sure I'm in favor of this either. This is being considered i suppose, because of the west's relatively recent dominance. But that has been only for about the last 20 years or so. Not all that long by NBA standards. The east dominated in nearly this same way from the around the mid-fifties to about the start of the '80's. It was pretty even through the '80's. The east took over again in the '90's, because of the Bulls, but the west started to come back by the late '90's and continues through to now.
I think we may be on the verge of a resurgence in the east. The Sixers are on the rise as are the Celtics and maybe even Milwaukee and Detroit. Beyond GSW in the west there is only the Rox and they don't appear to be built for the long haul. So, I think the re-seeding might be just in time to see the two conferences even things up again. We'll see.
But the draft order problem needs to be fixed. All the brazen tanking is making the league look bad. Only solution I've heard that wil stop it is a rotating system where each team gets the number 1 pick every years 6 years or so.
The war between the players and ref's alat large. so needs to be addressed. I just wonder if this might have to do with the general divisiveness that is affecting the nation at large..
Even in a league where a team in the East had equal chance of being great as a team in the West, there'd still be just slightly under a 50/50 chance that the best two teams are in the same conference in any given year. So that's why I'm in favor of the reseeding, for the same reason they stopped giving automatic 3 seed to division winners.
(Now I wish they'd fix that problem in baseball.)
(Now I wish they'd fix that problem in baseball.)
Although I continue to believe that the importance of the first game of a 7 game series is way overblown, that loss by the Cavs to the Pacers in Cle has to be VERY concerning to Coach Lue and Lebron.
Cavs of course, have plenty of time and the experience to come back and win the series, but this loss seems like further evidence that the Cavs really aren't the same team as they've been in the last few years.
If they can't come back, who then will become the team to beat in the east? Raptors won but at this point, beating the 8th seed in game 1 at home doesn't mean a whole lot. Celtics probably, and I say "probably", will beat the Bucks, but to what end? Next year for them. The Pacers might be the Cinderella here. Good defense, a star who can carry them in bad times. Who knows?
As for the west, I'm having a hard time seeing any team make it to the Finals 4 years in a row, especially when the team has had the kind of up and down year the Dubs have had. Looks to me like it's going to be the Rox.
Not that I'm a Dubs fan, I just have a healthy (or maybe unhealthy 
), grudge against most of the teams in the west, except the Dubs.
Rooting for the Pacers in the east and against the Thunder in west, for purely selfish reasons.
Cavs of course, have plenty of time and the experience to come back and win the series, but this loss seems like further evidence that the Cavs really aren't the same team as they've been in the last few years.
If they can't come back, who then will become the team to beat in the east? Raptors won but at this point, beating the 8th seed in game 1 at home doesn't mean a whole lot. Celtics probably, and I say "probably", will beat the Bucks, but to what end? Next year for them. The Pacers might be the Cinderella here. Good defense, a star who can carry them in bad times. Who knows?
As for the west, I'm having a hard time seeing any team make it to the Finals 4 years in a row, especially when the team has had the kind of up and down year the Dubs have had. Looks to me like it's going to be the Rox.
Not that I'm a Dubs fan, I just have a healthy (or maybe unhealthy ), grudge against most of the teams in the west, except the Dubs. Rooting for the Pacers in the east and against the Thunder in west, for purely selfish reasons.
I already thought Raptors were the favorite, but I think 76ers are looking very strong. As much as I love the Celtics, Horford looked exhausted by the end of the game today, and they missed multiple opportunities to close out the game in regulation. I think they'll get past the Bucks but will be underdogs vs 76ers without Kyrie. Al can't be their only real playoff experience if they want to beat great teams.
Sixers are like the 2010 Thunder with Durant, Westbrook, and Harden, they're brimming with young talent, but woefully inexperienced.
But, if I were the Celtics, I would say to heck with hoarding assets and make a move on Kawhi Leonard NOW because when the Sixers, with Embiid, Simmons, and Fultz, come of age, they are going to be hard to stop.
But, if I were the Celtics, I would say to heck with hoarding assets and make a move on Kawhi Leonard NOW because when the Sixers, with Embiid, Simmons, and Fultz, come of age, they are going to be hard to stop.
Yeah, if they could pull off Kawhi Leonard, that'd be the last championship ingredient. Though it'd be sad that this deal would probably involve Tatum, and he's possibly a future all star. Key next year whoever they end up with is of course staying healthy.
76ers are inexperienced, and clearly would be deer in headlights against Golden State or Houston, but they've got the energy and drive, I think they're 2:1 favorites against Boston and maybe only 2:3 underdogs against Toronto.
Even though I can't stand the Utah Jazz and their homer fans, I'm still glad they're up 3-1 over OKC. Still that's not a lock for the Jazz. They'll likely lose game 5 in OKC so they'll need to wrap it up in game 6 if they're going to win the series. Carmelo is worthless.
Seem like no matter how much time goes by for the current group of Raptors, they always manage to look underwhelming in the playoffs.
Good thing for Celts they have HCA.
If the Sixers get LeBron and with the rise of the Bucks, we may be looking at the makings of a power shift to the east.
Seem like no matter how much time goes by for the current group of Raptors, they always manage to look underwhelming in the playoffs.
Good thing for Celts they have HCA.
If the Sixers get LeBron and with the rise of the Bucks, we may be looking at the makings of a power shift to the east.
Second round in the West seems pretty straightforward, but both East series could go either way. Toronto versus Indiana is probably an easy win, but if it's versus Cleveland they've still got the Lebron X factor. Then Boston vs Philadelphia, Philadelphia seems the apparent favorite, but you can't underestimate Boston's coaching or their insane home court advantage. Bucks is the second series in two years they won in seven where every game was won by the home team (Last year the Wizards), so it would not shock me at all if the 76ers series went the exact same way.
LeBronto! 
So. Not like having a coaching advantage is important or anything. Or that it's important that Boston has the best coach in both NFL and NBA.
Yeah, Cleveland is the favorite, but I said the same thing about Philadelphia, so who knows?
In the words of the Dropkick Murphys, "Give it up to Boston, WHOAAAHHH!"
For the record, when Celtics were up 3-0, I said explicitly "I think Celtics will lose game 4 and win game 5."
Yeah, Cleveland is the favorite, but I said the same thing about Philadelphia, so who knows?
In the words of the Dropkick Murphys, "Give it up to Boston, WHOAAAHHH!"
For the record, when Celtics were up 3-0, I said explicitly "I think Celtics will lose game 4 and win game 5."
Celts have had the benefit of playing two talented but very inexperienced teams, so far. That advantage is over, so they'll have to now outplay and out coach a very experienced, well coached, and highly motivated team. Also, having HCA in both series also helped. BTW, HCA isn't going to be as important against the Cavs.
If they manage to get by the Cavs and into the Finals, then I'll give it up to Stevens and the Celts.
Last edited:
Cavs are clearly the favorite here, but the gap isn't as big as it was last season. I give Celts a legit shot as they are very hard to beat at home.
Which team would be considered better, Indiana or Boston?... I only ask because Indy took the Cavs to game 7.
^Boston by virtue of having made it this far. Indiana was much better than expected after the George-Oladipo trade, but their ceiling with their current roster is the second round. Boston has a chance to be much better than that, though they've yet to show that they can beat an experienced playoff team.
Similar threads
