Author Topic: The NBA thread (Read 1519564 times)

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3240 on:** December 13, 2011, 01:00:24 AM »

fuck me, i think i am simultaneously the oldest person in this thread and the only one not completely blinded by nostalgia

Flannel Boy · « **Reply #3241 on:** December 13, 2011, 01:03:24 AM »

I think it's an objective fact that the NHL and NBA were better in the 80s, mostly because everyone refused to play defense.

Flannel Boy · « **Reply #3242 on:** December 13, 2011, 01:09:22 AM »

Matt Duchene

Beezy · « **Reply #3243 on:** December 13, 2011, 03:27:04 AM »

Quote from: Stringer Bell on December 13, 2011, 12:16:21 AM

That team was pure insanity.

In fact, I can think of so many teams I hated back then due to the sheer amount of amazingly good players. You had the Jazz with Stockton and Malone, the aforementioned Sonics, the Phoenix Suns with Barkley, the Pacers and Reggie Miller, The Bulls, The Magic, The Spurs and David Robinson...

Goddamn, the NBA in the 90's was the best sport.

My parents will never forget what he did to the Knicks.

etiolate · « **Reply #3244 on:** December 13, 2011, 04:23:03 AM »

Mitch

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3245 on:** December 13, 2011, 05:34:00 AM »

what was his final line though? didn't look to me like he continued his 34 avg against MJ

benjipwns · « **Reply #3246 on:** December 13, 2011, 05:47:49 AM »

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199701300SAC.html

etiolate · « **Reply #3247 on:** December 13, 2011, 06:56:03 AM »

It was always Mitch vs Jordan and refs. 10 FTAs to 2FTAs in that game.

Flannel Boy · « **Reply #3248 on:** December 13, 2011, 01:45:28 PM »

Quote from: etiolate on December 13, 2011, 06:56:03 AM

It was always Mitch vs Jordan and refs. 10 FTAs to 2FTAs in that game.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #3249 on:** December 13, 2011, 02:27:56 PM »

Quote from: Billy Rygar on December 13, 2011, 12:38:28 PM

Quote from: Cormacaroni on December 13, 2011, 01:00:24 AM
fuck me, i think i am simultaneously the oldest person in this thread and the only one not completely blinded by nostalgia
Hey, I'm not blinded by Nostalgia, I just saw Jordan play the Jazz in two finals, and I can honestly remember more people getting REALLY EXCITED for basketball. For a fan that means a lot. It's like how Etiolate hates basketball now that the Kings suck. Makes perfect sense to me.

Wait... the Kings didn't suck at some point?

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3250 on:** December 13, 2011, 07:09:07 PM »

Quote from: Billy Rygar on December 13, 2011, 12:38:28 PM

Quote from: Cormacaroni on December 13, 2011, 01:00:24 AM
fuck me, i think i am simultaneously the oldest person in this thread and the only one not completely blinded by nostalgia
Hey, I'm not blinded by Nostalgia, I just saw Jordan play the Jazz in two finals, and I can honestly remember more people getting REALLY EXCITED for basketball. For a fan that means a lot. It's like how Etiolate hates basketball now that the Kings suck. Makes perfect sense to me.

Jordan was something special, sure. Like the Beatles or Elvis, that's a phenomenon that can only happen once. But getting nostalgic for the whole damn 90's NBA requires HIGHLY selective hindsight.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #3251 on:** December 13, 2011, 07:11:30 PM »

I prefer 80's basketball to 90's basketball. And while you absolutely have to respect and admire Jordan (on the court) there was often a lot of preferential calls that annoyed me.

pilonv1 · « **Reply #3252 on:** December 13, 2011, 07:15:40 PM »

Quote from: Cormacaroni on December 13, 2011, 07:09:07 PM

Quote from: Billy Rygar on December 13, 2011, 12:38:28 PM
Quote from: Cormacaroni on December 13, 2011, 01:00:24 AM
fuck me, i think i am simultaneously the oldest person in this thread and the only one not completely blinded by nostalgia
Hey, I'm not blinded by Nostalgia, I just saw Jordan play the Jazz in two finals, and I can honestly remember more people getting REALLY EXCITED for basketball. For a fan that means a lot. It's like how Etiolate hates basketball now that the Kings suck. Makes perfect sense to me.

Jordan was something special, sure. Like the Beatles or Elvis, that's a phenomenon that can only happen once. But getting nostalgic for the whole damn 90's NBA requires HIGHLY selective hindsight.

Agreed, people don't remember the playoff series where teams would struggle to break 90 points more than once. It's just like any era, there's good and bad.

I'm glad to see that not only the international people are getting screwed with League Pass pricing this year

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3253 on:** December 13, 2011, 07:28:41 PM »

....and if memory serves, Cohen is/was a Jazz fan. Of course he remembers those particular years as being a more exciting time than the past decade of being trounced by the Lakers.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3254 on:** December 13, 2011, 09:46:39 PM »

The only way I can interpret your Etiolate comment is that you are saying the entire league now sucks, as opposed to being awesome like back in the day. Which is at odds with what you're saying above (that you were happy with last season). And also not something I can agree with in any way. So clarify please.

I can understand the angst of small-market fans like etiolate, of course, but you have to remember that for every one that falls, another one rises. LeBron brought the Cavs back to relevance (and a trip to the Finals), as did Dwight and the Magic, Paul and Hornets, and on and on. Even the Jazz looked like contenders again for a while, and they never really went away. So those 'interesting' 90's teams like Reggie's Pacers or Barkley's Suns are just being moved around. You can of course debate which team was better, or more fun, or more interesting all day - I enjoy that too. But you can't simply say one era was awesome and the one we have now can't compare. That's nonsense.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3255 on:** December 13, 2011, 10:15:00 PM »

Quote from: Flannel Boy on December 13, 2011, 01:03:24 AM

I think it's an objective fact that the NHL and NBA were better in the 80s, mostly because everyone refused to play defense.

Not sure about that. I've been watching some NBA classic games and the officials definitely allow much harder fouls in the 70s and 80s. The higher scoring seemed to be due more to quicker pace, more passing, less dribbling and better midrange shooting.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3256 on:** December 13, 2011, 10:23:08 PM »

...which would be weird since the stats are pretty definitive on shooting having consistently improved, IIRC. Defenses of course are keeping pace, with greatly increased sophistication and scouting, so to the casual eye it might seem like more shots are going in. But there are way more guys who can hit a set shot for sure.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3257 on:** December 13, 2011, 10:29:58 PM »

But shooting% also goes up when you call more fouls since the missed shots don't count. I don't know if that was accounted for but perhaps that could be the reason. Also, maybe today's players drive more?

After MJ came on the scene, younger players all wanted to fly like him instead of practicing their outside shots. Just based on what I see, it did seem like that players used to make open midrange shots a lot more consistently.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3258 on:** December 13, 2011, 10:55:37 PM »

It's a complicated issue.

First, true shooting percentage takes into account FT%, as well as 3s. That's what I'm referring to when I talk about shooting, mostly.

Second, coaches these days realize that the long 2 is the worst shot in the game, and make shooters step back for a 3 instead. Very few players have the latitude to take those Jordan shots anymore (Kobe being the obvious exception - he rules around the key. Dirk is even better but hardly Jordan-esque, form-wise...he barely leaves the ground...).

So you have players shooting a much higher adjusted percentage (taking into account the extra point from the 3) even though they maybe shoot a worse % on that 3, vs a 2pt'er from a couple feet closer in. The true beasts are those who can shoot a high percentage around the rim/from the stripe AND be efficient from long range (i.e. Kevin Martin, Dirk)

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3259 on:** December 13, 2011, 10:58:55 PM »

As an aside, think about how many 3pt shooters there are in the league now. Every team has to have them, and in fact many teams like to have 3 or even more on the court at all times. Whereas back in the 90s, players like Reggie Miller/Steve Kerr/Dan Majerle were still something of an aberration, viewed with distrust. Guys shot the 3, but very very few made their living from it, or were encouraged by the coaches to take it regularly.

Mandark · « **Reply #3260 on:** December 13, 2011, 11:02:18 PM »

Cohen just said that Jordan made other players "seem more important" when they played against him, which sounds right to me. I'll bet more casual and non-fans know Karl Malone because of those finals than know Hakeem Olajuwon, who actually won two rings. He wasn't saying the 90's had a better standard of play or anything.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3261 on:** December 13, 2011, 11:05:59 PM »

Quote from: Cormacaroni on December 13, 2011, 10:55:37 PM

So you have players shooting a much higher adjusted percentage (taking into account the extra point from the 3) even though they maybe shoot a worse % on that 3, vs a 2pt'er from a couple feet closer in. The true beasts are those who can shoot a high percentage around the rim/from the stripe AND be efficient from long range (i.e. Kevin Martin, Dirk)

Yeah, because if you can score at the rim then you can create for others. Having a reliable outside shot reduces the effectiveness of double-teaming and gives you the chance to score a clutch basket when the paint is almost always crowded.

According to Marc Stein:

Became very real tonight that Lakers could focus on CP3 over Dwight and aim for CP3/Kobe/Bynum core thru Pau-centric offer to NBA's Hornets.

Crazy if that goes through. At this stage of Pau's career, most GMs would probably consider him to be less valuable than Gordon + a lottery pick.

Although I hate things going the Laker's way, I've started thinking it might actually be interesting to see how Kobe would react to Paul passing more to Bynum and others than Kobe would approve of.

Mandark · « **Reply #3262 on:** December 13, 2011, 11:17:46 PM »

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/stats.html

Useful chart for looking at leaguewide averages throughout the years. Quick summary: free throw shooting percentage has remained remarkably close to 76% the whole time, free throws were more common in the 80's than now, offensive efficiency is extremely close, and the biggest difference is a huge gap in pace (the league slowed way the hell down in the early-mid 90's and never sped back up).

Mandark · « **Reply #3263 on:** December 13, 2011, 11:21:58 PM »

I remember being in France when Jordan dropped 55 in his fifth game back in the '95 season. My host's older brother relayed the news, and both of them were pretty much in awe.

It's hard to explain now just how big a deal MJ was at his peak as a celebrity.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3264 on:** December 13, 2011, 11:26:23 PM »

Even now MJ is a big deal. It's ridiculous how many of his shoes are still being sold. It would be ridiculous even for an active superstar.

T-Short · « **Reply #3265 on:** December 14, 2011, 02:45:54 AM »

Quote from: Smooth Groove on December 13, 2011, 11:26:23 PM

Even now MJ is a big deal. It's ridiculous how many of his shoes are still being sold. It would be ridiculous even for an active superstar.

urm. I wouldn't really associate the continued popularity to Jordan sneakers to kids loving MJ, the sneaker brand is its own beast now. kids who know NOTHING about ball are buying the Jordan III Retro Black/Cements because it's THE SHOE and TINKER HATFIELD OMG

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3266 on:** December 14, 2011, 04:08:58 AM »

I guess our generation wants to think MJ is still a big deal, but really, half the kids playing in the NBA are only paying lip service when they talk about idolizing him. There are draftees now who've only known the LeBron era. The sports writers who've been around for decades will continue to try to keep things in perspective of course, but it's always a losing battle. Iverson is already being forgotten about. Shaq will probably build his brand even further thanks to TV, but if not for that, they'd already be forgetting him too.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3267 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:39:23 AM »

the era where he's been the best player and the biggest star, yeah.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #3268 on:** December 14, 2011, 10:08:30 AM »

Nene reups with the nuggets. Skilled guy but I can't help but feel he is over-rated.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7350826/sources-denver-nuggets-re-sign-nene-5-year-67m-plus-contract

Flannel Boy · « **Reply #3269 on:** December 14, 2011, 03:38:20 PM »

Quote from: Smooth Groove on December 13, 2011, 10:15:00 PM

Quote from: Flannel Boy on December 13, 2011, 01:03:24 AM
I think it's an objective fact that the NHL and NBA were better in the 80s, mostly because everyone refused to play defense.

Not sure about that. I've been watching some NBA classic games and the officials definitely allow much harder fouls in the 70s and 80s. The higher scoring seemed to be due more to quicker pace, more passing, less dribbling and better midrange shooting.

It was a flippant comment, but defensive systems are much tighter, leading to fewer breakaways in hockey and fewer fastbreaks in basketball.

Himu · « **Reply #3270 on:** December 14, 2011, 03:44:26 PM »

Quote from: Stoney Mason on December 14, 2011, 10:08:30 AM

Nene reups with the nuggets. Skilled guy but I can't help but feel he is over-rated.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7350826/sources-denver-nuggets-re-sign-nene-5-year-67m-plus-contract

Meanwhile Marc Gasol is staying with the Grizzlies.

FFFFUUUUUUUUU The Rockets got fucked in the ass. Thanks Stern! Houston still lacks a center. :'(

Joe Molotov · « **Reply #3271 on:** December 14, 2011, 04:51:40 PM »

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7352909/no-timetable-chris-paul-trade-new-orleans-hornets-gm-dell-demps-says

Uh, you guys realize the season starts in a week and half, right? No rush, though.

Flannel Boy · « **Reply #3272 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:13:13 PM »

Quote from: AWESOM-O on December 14, 2011, 04:43:32 PM

Quote from: Cormacaroni on December 14, 2011, 05:39:23 AM
the era where he's been the best player and the biggest star, yeah.

Naming an era after LeBron is a huge insult to all the other guys who have eras named after them.

Russell, Magic/Bird, Jordan, Shaq/Kobe... LeBron. Yeah, doesn't fit at all.

I'd vote 03-07 as the Tim Duncan era. 08-10 as the Kobe era. Are we in an era right now? It's hard to tell. Depends on who wins the next few titles. There might be a LeBron era in the future, but there sure as hell hasn't been one yet.

From 2007/08 to 2009/10, LeBron won two MVPS and crushed the league statically.

PER
2007-08 NBA 29.1 (1st)
2008-09 NBA 31.7 (1st)
2009-10 NBA 31.1 (1st)

vs.

2007-08 NBA 24.2 (8th)
2008-09 NBA 24.4 (6th)
2009-10 NBA 21.9 (13th)

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Yes, Kobe did get two rings.

[close]

Great Rumbler · « **Reply #3273 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:17:17 PM »

Bill Russel - 11
Magic Johnson - 5
Larry Bird - 3
Michael Jordan - 6
Shaquille O'Neal - 4
Kobe Bryant - 5

LeBron James - 0

Flannel Boy · « **Reply #3274 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:19:20 PM »

Let's just call it the Dirk Nowitzki era.

Himu · « **Reply #3275 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:24:44 PM »

Robert Horry

Flannel Boy · « **Reply #3276 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:26:18 PM »

He didn't win seven rings by accident.

Mandark · « **Reply #3277 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:49:28 PM »

For ten years in a row and 12 out of 14, the NBA champions had either Horry or Steve Kerr on their roster. Bananers.

Himu · « **Reply #3278 on:** December 14, 2011, 05:52:50 PM »

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #3279 on:** December 14, 2011, 06:31:55 PM »

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3280 on:** December 14, 2011, 07:21:18 PM »

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-wojnarowski_chris_paul_clippers_121411

Quote

The NBA has reached an agreement to trade New Orleans Hornets point guard Chris Paul to the Los Angeles Clippers, league sources told Yahoo! Sports.

The Hornets will receive guard Eric Gordon, center Chris Kaman, forward Al-Farouq Aminu and the Minnesota Timberwolves’ unprotected first-round pick.

Gordon AND Minny's doubtless high pick! That's too much. But the Clips were in such great shape they have some latitude to overpay I guess. They'd also eventually run into the problem of having to figure out how to pay Griffin, Gordon AND Paul while staying competitive with their role players (no-one will ever take less to play on the Clippers). Gordon will be utterly, utterly wasted in NOLA though.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3281 on:** December 14, 2011, 07:28:46 PM »

Crap! I really wish they hadn't give up Gordon. The lottery pick was OK since it might not have panned out but Gordon is almost certain to be a perennial All-Star. Also, he's perfect to counter Westbrook and Rose if they ever meet in the playoffs. Maybe Westbrook and Rose can't stop Paul because of his passing and outside shot, but Paul would have an even harder time keeping up with those two. Westbrook and Rose are going to become more skilled but Paul's athleticism is just going to be on a steady decline.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3282 on:** December 14, 2011, 07:30:20 PM »

For Kobe fans, there should just be the:

Iverson/Vince Carter era
Tracy Mcgrady era
Dwyane Wade era
Lebron James era

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3283 on:** December 14, 2011, 07:36:08 PM »

Quote from: Smooth Groove on December 14, 2011, 07:28:46 PM

Crap! I really wish they hadn't give up Gordon. The lottery pick was OK since it might not have panned out but Gordon is almost certain to be a perennial All-Star. Also, he's perfect to counter Westbrook and Rose if they ever meet in the playoffs. Maybe Westbrook and Rose can't stop Paul because of his passing and outside shot, but Paul would have an even harder time keeping up with those two. Westbrook and Rose are going to become more skilled but Paul's athleticism is just going to be on a steady decline.

The

part of course is that there is no f'ing way Gordon will re-up with the Hornets. Why would he? As David West said, they have no owners and no indication that anyone will buy. So the franchise can never be good. And Gordon is a restricted free agent as of July 31st next year, and the Hornets can't possibly sign him to a big contract. Which basically means the Hornets will get nothing for him beyond 66 games.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3284 on:** December 14, 2011, 07:42:35 PM »

Wow, that's even worse than CP3 playing just 2 years for the Clips. Clips should insist on CP3 signing a contract extension before the trade so that they don't have go through this BS again next year.

I guess one of their major concern probably was on how to pay 3 top-tier stars while still having a competitive team. Heat had an unique situation where all 3 guys were willing to take less money but you can't assume that players would do the same for a franchise like the Clippers.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3285 on:** December 14, 2011, 07:50:36 PM »

There is no way he will sign a contract extension now with anybody; the new CBA makes it much more favorable for him to opt out next year, THEN re-sign. This is what D-Will and Dwight Howard have already announced they will be doing, no matter where they plan to play at the time.

I have mixed feelings about this. The Clips were on their way to Thunder-like success built on great drafting and relative fiscal prudence. They are going all-in with Paul and Griffin in the hopes that both will re-up, but i'm not sure that's enough to ever get them over the hump. Oh well. They could well be giving up the first pick in supposedly a great draft year next year....and watching Gordon become an All-Star will be tough on them. Stat-wise, he'll probably have a greater year than CP3, playing on a no-hope team with all the shots he wants.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #3286 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:00:14 PM »

The clippers are cursed. Blake will get either get an ACL tear before the All-Star break or Sterling will make some horrible verbal gaffe early in the season like saying he loves how his slaves are playing for him. The clippers are the epitome of bad luck/bad owner. They will find a way to screw it up.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3287 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:05:52 PM »

Deal is one of the worst in recent memory if that pick turns out to be Anthony Davis or Andre Drummond. Those two could come right in and dominate like Blake. With a twin towers combo like the Spurs, a good PG won't even really be needed. Also, they'd still have plenty of pieces to package for a PG upgrade if Billups really doesn't pan out.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3288 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:07:22 PM »

I guess one of the main positives of signing CP3 is that he already knows what it's like to play for one of the crappiest franchises in pro sports.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3289 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:12:33 PM »

WTF, didn't think that it was possible for Kendrick Perkins to get into this kinda shape. I wonder how he would have played with the Celtics if he were in his current condition.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3290 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:16:41 PM »

Yeah - first time I saw that pic I thought it was Danny Pudi

Mandark · « **Reply #3291 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:16:57 PM »

Wow, that's a big haul. I feel like the NBA was bluffing with the CP-for-Pau talk, trying to regain some of the leverage they pissed away, but if so it sure worked.

Hornets have to keep Gordon though, right? Surely they don't have so much committed in contracts for next year that they couldn't match whatever offer he gets. Hoopshype's database says they've just got Okafor, Ariza, and Jarrett Jack.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3292 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:17:26 PM »

Quote from: Stoney Mason on December 14, 2011, 08:00:14 PM

The clippers are cursed. Blake will get either get an ACL tear before the All-Star break or Sterling will make some horrible verbal gaffe early in the season like saying he loves how his slaves are playing for him. The clippers are the epitome of bad luck/bad owner. They will find a way to screw it up.

Yeah, but I think Paul's knee is the obvious candidate for the Clipper Curse.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3293 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:18:36 PM »

Quote from: Mandark on December 14, 2011, 08:16:57 PM

Wow, that's a big haul. I feel like the NBA was bluffing with the CP-for-Pau talk, trying to regain some of the leverage they pissed away, but if so it sure worked.

Hornets have to keep Gordon though, right? Surely they don't have so much committed in contracts for next year that they couldn't match whatever offer he gets. Hoopshype's database says they've just got Okafor, Ariza, and Jarrett Jack.

Yeah, but why would he want to re-sign? Same as Paul...he just threatens not to re-sign and then they have to trade him. A 4 year contract with a star is only really 3 years innit

Mandark · « **Reply #3294 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:21:25 PM »

RFA means that they can just match any offer sheet he gets and force him to stay, though, right? Unless something changed in the new CBA.

Smooth Groove · « **Reply #3295 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:22:15 PM »

Are there any teams willing to trade a decent SG for Bledsoe or Billups? Two quality PG backups seem unnecessary for a team that seems to be going for broke.

benjipwns · « **Reply #3296 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:23:43 PM »

From Chad Ford:

Quote

Barring an extension, Gordon will be a restricted FA on July 1st. If no deal with NO, he's an unrestricted FA in summer of 2013.

Quote from: Smooth Groove on December 14, 2011, 08:22:15 PM

Are there any teams willing to trade a decent SG for Bledsoe or Billups? Two quality PG backups seem unnecessary for a team that seems to be going for broke.

Lakers?

Mandark · « **Reply #3297 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:30:58 PM »

I've always wondered why more young players looking to bolt don't sign 2-year offer sheets (which I think is the minimum for an RFA). If their current team was determined to match, that gives them the earliest exit possible without sitting out a year and not getting paid.

The two likely reasons are 1) two or three years of extra guaranteed money is a huge, huge deal and players aren't about to give that up for a shot at better digs two seasons in the future, and 2) a team wouldn't offer 2-year contracts to RFA's just to facilitate earlier free agency for fear that everyone would start doing it and undermine their own ability to control their players' movement.

Anyway, this just emphasizes that a team gets to control a player they draft in the first round (through no merit of their own, let's remember) for an absolute minimum of six years, more likely eight, and they only sacrifice one year if they expect to be rewarded for losing the player. Footy teams in Europe hear NBA owners whinging about player power and laugh bitterly.

benjipwns · « **Reply #3298 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:32:16 PM »

They can sign for one year, the qualifying offer, then become a UFA the next season. Olowokandi did this when he didn't get the maximum contract offers he was looking for.

Cormacaroni · « **Reply #3299 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:33:03 PM »

Quote from: Smooth Groove on December 14, 2011, 08:22:15 PM

Are there any teams willing to trade a decent SG for Bledsoe or Billups? Two quality PG backups seem unnecessary for a team that seems to be going for broke.

They also have Mo Williams. Anything could happen. They can't trade Billups for one year I believe (since he came off waivers)

News:

Author Topic: The NBA thread (Read 1519564 times)