Basketball Thread

[Orboknown]

My gut tells me we'll get a deal "fleshed out" a week from now.

welp this was wrong.im doubtin we get a season now.

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

Haha, I did go on to say if a deal couldn't be reached by January we wouldn't have a season. XD

 

[theeboredone]

We might be seeing more players go overseas now.

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

BASKETBALL NEVER STOPS.

I do like those commercials.

 

[Apathy]

BASKETBALL NEVER STOPS.

I do like those commercials.

Agreed.

This lockout is starting to hit me hard. The most disappointing thing ever. I was following it very closely up until recently, when it looked like (and seems all but confirmed) the season would be wiped out.

It's disappointing because it's a stark look at the way of the world and how powerless we, the fan, seems to be. We are a commodity to be manipulated.

I don't really side with either side. What the owners are proposing is silly if it restricts player movement, because player movement is what excites fans. But shortening contract length will promote player movement, so it's not all bad.

The players, if united, have all the power. But they are clueless. What they should've done is (I read this at the Wages of Wins) threatened to strike right after the All-Star break. If a deal is not reached by the playoffs then they follow through and sit out and disband the union. They should have partitioned funds away 1-2 years prior to set up their own league in the meantime, because the owners would assuredly lock them out for the following season.

But they're dumb and they're going to get bent over by the owners, who hold all the leverage.

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

I personally have not been a big fan of player movement. I love franchise players, with veteran journeymen coming and going as they're needed.

The greatest players always stick with their team, through thick and thin. That's why I had no problems with KG leaving Minnesota after giving them everything he had for a decade.

 

[Apathy]

When I mention player movement, I mean the Tyson Chandlers of the world. The Brendan Haywoods and Erick Dampiers not getting 5- and 6-year contracts, but 3-year deals.

The franchise players already stay 8-10 years. The stars are always going to be underpaid.

As that touches on the subject of parity, it goes to show you how well Stern plays the PR game that fans believe parity is possible. One phrase disproves that: the short supply of tall people.

 

[theeboredone]

I'm fine if these "overpaid" and unproven players get 2-3 year contracts so franchises aren't stuck with them. At the same time, I do wonder how they would treat franchise players like LBJ, Durant, and CP3. I'm guessing they can sign for long term contracts?

With that being said, the NBA was heading towards a bad direction. Who knows what CP3 had in plan with Melo and Amare, and whether those rumors held true. There were rumors that Wade, Bosh, and LBJ was premeditated going back to the Olympics. It just makes for lesser competition...and that's just dull.

 

[127crazie]

I'm frustrated with David Stern. (Actually, I'm frustrated with all sides involved, including Billy Hunter. But whatever.) I agree that the owners needed more BRI%, but having this kind of hardline attitude with such severe restrictions leads to the sort of NHL model, post-2005 lockout. And we all know what has happened to the NHL since the 2005 lockout. Basketball is a different game that has a much bigger fan base (well, had, before this lockout at least).

Then again, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. But Stern and Hunter need the boot.

 

[The Real Gamer]

So I wore my lebron jersey today...

On my way to class some random dude yells from across the street, "lebron has no rings!!"

I yelled back, "just wait until the season starts!"

He then yelled, "there's not gonna be a season!"

Part of me died at that moment. ;.;

 

[Apathy]

It just makes for lesser competition...and that's just dull.

I disagree. How competitive were the 76ers, Magic, Bucks/Sonics, Mavericks, etc. when they had Iverson, T-Mac, Allen, Finley? Somewhat competitive, maybe, but compared to last season? Last season was the most competitive season I've ever been apart of (I'm 23).

I prefer a league of haves and have-nots. It's easier to watch and you get the highest quality of play possible.

I think the owners were pissed they got screwed so badly during the last labor negotiations. LeBron staging The Decision, along with D-Will/Melo/Paul/Howard holding their teams hostage, hurts them not because it's bad for basketball but because they don't want the players having too much power.

The owners want a guaranteed profit whilst being insulated from poor management.

 

[tko112]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/ian_thomsen/11/16/David.Stern.lockout/index.html

I don't know why, but I think this is something they should have done at at least one of their meetings

 

[Apathy]

Great article! Thanks for sharing.

 

[theeboredone]

I disagree. How competitive were the 76ers, Magic, Bucks/Sonics, Mavericks, etc. when they had Iverson, T-Mac, Allen, Finley? Somewhat competitive, maybe, but compared to last season? Last season was the most competitive season I've ever been apart of (I'm 23).

76ers made it to the Finals once. The Magic made it to the Finals with Dwight Howard AND made it to the ECF. LeBron took his team to the Finals, and the ECF twice. Wade won pretty much on his own (sorry Shaq.) Detroit in 04 showed teams can win. Dallas proved it last year you only need one super star. The Spurs won their share of titles with a strong cast, led by superstar Duncan. Hakeem won his share of titles being the center star player.

Last season was the FURTHEST thing from competitive. Are you kidding me? Boston showed its age, leaving only Chicago (one superstar) and Miami. Orlando was/is falling apart, and every other team got torched. Knicks have a chance to get better, but that's top 3 heavy teams with everyone else regressing. Like the 76ers, Hawks, or Pacers are a threat.

Look at the West has ALWAYS been competitive dating back to a good 4-5 years. You know Dallas, LA, San Antonio are gonna be there. Then you got your every year new contender (two years ago was Phoenix, this year was Memphis.) Overall, the West is far more "balanced."

I prefer a league of haves and have-nots. It's easier to watch and you get the highest quality of play possible.

This works for TV ratings when big teams are playing each other. However, how does this effect stadium sales for the lesser teams unless a good team is coming to town? Like I'd give a crap about any team outside the top tier teams. At least Kevin Love made me pay attention to their highlights to see how he was doing. Same with Blake Griffin, Steph Curry, and Monte Ellis. But this leads to my next point...

And if this trend continues, don't you see what will happen? Kevin Love would jump ship. Dwight Howard would jump ship. Chris Paul would jump ship. Blake Griffin would jump ship. Pretty soon, you'll only have 4 true good teams per conference. So you got 8 strong teams, and then 22 other teams that would be GARBAGE. Then, in a 8 seed per conference playoff system, the latter 4 are under .500. Oh wait, that's already happening in the East. It's probably gonna get worse. I can see it now, 5th seed Phili 76ers with a record 32-50.

I think the owners were pissed they got screwed so badly during the last labor negotiations. LeBron staging The Decision, along with D-Will/Melo/Paul/Howard holding their teams hostage, hurts them not because it's bad for basketball but because they don't want the players having too much power.

Again, let's just have 8 good teams in the league, and everyone else be garbage. Call me old schools, but legacies are made when a superstar or two finds a way to carry their team on their own. I don't want to see 3-4 superstars per team. It just tarnishes their legacy and only adds argument to that the old school players are far superior than the modern ones. If you have a superstar per team, you get to see in the playoffs...more balance and see who truly has the guts to get to the top.

 

[Apathy]

Last season was the FURTHEST thing from competitive. Are you kidding me? Boston showed its age, leaving only Chicago (one superstar) and Miami.

Huh? Boston, Miami and Chicago were neck-and-neck all season. Did you follow the regular season? There was no prohibitive favorite entering the postseason, at least not by any objective measure. In fact the biggest favorite were the Lakers, and both the Bulls and Spurs finished with better records than them.

Furthermore, the competition wasn't merely top-heavy. The Trail Blazers were picked to win by more than a few analysts over the Mavericks, our eventual champions. The Spurs, Lakers, Mavericks, Thunder, Nuggets, Trail Blazers, Bulls, Heat, Celtics and Magic were all capable of winning the title. When's the last time we had 10 legitimate contenders?

And if this trend continues, don't you see what will happen? Kevin Love would jump ship. Dwight Howard would jump ship. Chris Paul would jump ship. Blake Griffin would jump ship.

They only "jump ship" when the management can't put complimentary pieces around them. Have Tim Duncan or Dirk Nowitzki jumped ship? Furthermore, Howard and Paul (and D-Will, Bosh, Melo, etc.) are virtually guaranteed to give their original teams six to eight years of service. Isn't that enough? Why should they be tethered to a poor organization their entire careers? Does the free market mean nothing to you?

 

[theeboredone]

Huh? Boston, Miami and Chicago were neck-and-neck all season. Did you follow the regular season? There was no prohibitive favorite entering the postseason, at least not by any objective measure. In fact the biggest favorite were the Lakers, and both the Bulls and Spurs finished with better records than them.

Furthermore, the competition wasn't merely top-heavy. The Trail Blazers were picked to win by more than a few analysts over the Mavericks, our eventual champions. The Spurs, Lakers, Mavericks, Thunder, Nuggets, Trail Blazers, Bulls, Heat, Celtics and Magic were all capable of winning the title. When's the last time we had 10 legitimate contenders?

Yes, I followed the regular season, and you should know that three of the top tier teams that fell apart were Boston, LA, and SA. All due to age or other factors. If you honestly can tell me that Boston had a legitimate shot to beat Miami, then you don't know much about basketball. A puncher's chance, but that's all. Hell, Miami had so many early season struggles...factor that out and they would have been the one seed EASILY.

And the favorites at least on the East had been clearly predicted to be either Chicago or Miami with a small minority favoring Boston. And how do your statements still stand for the lesser teams that all finished -.500?

They only "jump ship" when the management can't put complimentary pieces around them. Have Tim Duncan or Dirk Nowitzki jumped ship? Furthermore, Howard and Paul (and D-Will, Bosh, Melo, etc.) are virtually guaranteed to give their original teams six to eight years of service. Isn't that enough? Why should they be tethered to a poor organization their entire careers? Does the free market mean nothing to you?

Tim Duncan won early so it's understandable. He still could have left later in his prime to play for any other team. Dirk clearly has shown LOYALTY to his team through thick and thin despite winning nil until recently. Both Howard and Paul have experienced success with their teams, with injuries derailing CP3's team more than anything else. You can't do much following a first seed year when Tyson Chandler, David West, and Peja are going through injury issues.

And what right does Melo have to complain? That guy got to the WCF two years ago, and now feels like his team isn't going anywhere? They still have a solid core in Nene, K-Mart, JR Smith, and the up and coming Ty Lawson. Carmelo jumped because he was interested playing in a big market. The guy never cared about winning.

I never considered Bosh a superstar. There's a reason why he couldn't do much in the Leastern Conference. D-Will had success with Boozer, but it also seemed like things fell apart with him and Sloan more than anything else. Plus when your team is constantly harbored by injuries, your team as a whole will struggle.

And again, superstars coming to play together is a trend that was clearly STARTING. You honestly think K-Love would stick around in Minnesota hell? If the Clippers don't progress, you see Griffin sitting there? The same can be said for every other star player.

Look, management has to do their job in getting the pieces to build around their franchise player, but at the same time, how can that be done if players are deciding to jump ship ASAP? A good example of things working out is Durant. Like hell someone would want to play in OKC, but he stayed loyal, the team built around him...and they've progressed every year.

And again, how does having 8 top heavy teams, and 22 crappy teams good for the NBA? Stadiums will be less likely to sell out, if one of those eight teams are not featured on tv, no one would give a crap, and the bottom bracket of each conference's playoffs would be utter garbage.

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

Ya'll can continue the arguing(even if I side with Bored on the lack of balance issue), but I'd like to point out that the Cavs had talent around LeBron when he left. He did jump ship, and only to play on his dream team.

The concept of a Dream Team is something everyone should want to avoid, it wouldn't be fun. It's only fun when America assembles a monster crew for international play, not in the NBA.


As for last season being competitive: It was very much so in the West. In the East, the playoffs looked an awful lot like "First Four", or whatever NCAA called their opening round of the tourney.

 

[Apathy]

I'd like to point out that the Cavs had talent around LeBron when he left.

.

NBA fans don’t seem to care much about competitive balance. To illustrate, the NBA was much more balanced in the late 1970s, but it was not very popular. As noted, since Stern took over the NBA has not been balanced at all. And yet per game attendance has risen from about 11,000 in 1983-84 to more than 17,000 this past season. Furthermore, the league’s television contract has risen from less than $40 million per year (for the entire league) in 1984 to more than $900 million per year today.

"Competitive balance" is PR. Stern knows the fans (who are, by definition, "fanatics" and therefore extremely irrational) will eat it up. The actual issue is a hard cap.

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

Which is needed for competitive balance... :?

And fans will still support their teams, but you have to understand the basketball culture in terms of teams. Players receive more support than the team in many cases, and they define the franchise. LeBron isn't defined by Miami or the Cavs. They were defined by him.

Dwight Howard IS Orlando. Dirk IS Dallas. T-Mac and Yao WERE Houston.
But, if you look back to the 80's: The Bulls were Jordan and Pippen. The Jazz were Stockton and Malone. The Bad Boy Pistons.


The culture has glorified players over teams, and now the players are beginning to realize they can go anywhere and still be successful. That's why I hated what happened in Miami the most, it essentially ruined the viability of teams without talent. The proposed hard cap will limit this unbalance, and help avoid a team like the Yankees.



And I wasn't joking about the Cavs talent, they had a multitude of fantastic role players, and they stormed through the East the year we swept them in the Finals. Obviously they're not a good team without LeBron, but James alone didn't win 60 games a season. I'm just not jaded around superstars anymore after growing up with The Twin Towers and team basketball.

 

[theeboredone]

People made a big deal about the Cavs sucking without LBJ when they fail to realize that...

1. The team was built around LeBron.
2. Some of their core players did leave that same year.
3. Dallas built around Dirk, and when Dirk was out for 10+ games this past season, Dallas posted a TERRIBLE record. Just goes to show that if built right, a franchise guy is that much more important to the team. Look how the Rockets have been fairing these past two years without Yao. Portland, with all of its injuries...the biggest one of course being Bradon Roy. While they still managed to stay "competitive", they haven't been the same.

And I agree with Maaaan, it's a shame that fans of the NBA root more for the players than the team (one thing College has over the NBA), but players are coming to that realization and are realizing they can play with anyone and whomever they want.

 

[Masmasher@]

if you dont have competitve balance then the nba becomes like college ball
the are some games that are basically unwatchable because they all suck on the field

98% of the teams in the nba are watchable

dream teams arent good
jordan even said he didnt wanna play with other superstars
and that the mentality that alot of these players need to instill

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

Yeah, but Jordan was a ****wad. :D

It's what made him the GOAT.

 

[theeboredone]

Yeah, but you also didn't see guys like Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Ewing jump ship either. Somewhere down the line, the NBA players lost their pride of becoming the true top dog, and decided to play with their friends.

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

Well, I think Melo and Amare don't count in this sense. Both of them left for NY to shine like superstars for a offensive coach. The fact that they compliment each other's game is a lucky break imo.

 

[Apathy]

Which is needed for competitive balance... :?

There's no proof that a hard cap leads to, or will lead to, competitive basketball in the NBA.

That's why I hated what happened in Miami the most, it essentially ruined the viability of teams without talent.

Most people hate change.

The proposed hard cap will limit this unbalance, and help avoid a team like the Yankees.

A team like the Yankees is impossible in the NBA.

And I wasn't joking about the Cavs talent, they had a multitude of fantastic role players

Their second-best player was Anderson Varejao...

Yeah, but you also didn't see guys like Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Ewing jump ship either.

Barkley played on the Sixers, Suns and Rockets. Malone teamed up with Payton, Shaq and Kobe in an attempt to win a ring. As to Stockton and Ewing, I call with Duncan and Nowitzki.

Somewhere down the line, the NBA players lost their pride of becoming the true top dog, and decided to play with their friends.

I don't even know what this means. Pride is more important than winning? What? What happened to sacrificing for the team? Wade, Bosh and LeBron all made sacrifices to come together.

if you dont have competitve balance then the nba becomes like college ball

The NBA has never had competitive balance.

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

There's no proof that a hard cap leads to, or will lead to, competitive basketball in the NBA.

The onus falls entirely on the organization's ability to build, cap or not. That won't change. The hard cap will prevent teams from abusing salary tricks like trades going over the cap. It's a tool, not a full-blown limiter.

Most people hate change.

This comment seems too silly. I don't know what you're trying to say, but I assure you I'm not a simple person who fears change. I for one enjoy the longer shorts of today's game.

A team like the Yankees is impossible in the NBA.

Take the spirit of my comment, not the literal meaning.

Their second-best player was Anderson Varejao...

Uhhh, Varejao is not numero dos. And Varejao was a damn fine role player. You need Varejao's to be competitive. Why does nobody remember Big Z btw?

Barkley played on the Sixers, Suns and Rockets. Malone teamed up with Payton, Shaq and Kobe in an attempt to win a ring. As to Stockton and Ewing, I call with Duncan and Nowitzki.

Barkley also shelved his ego everywhere he went and was a badass. Malone was a veteran chasing a ring. And what the hell does "I call with Duncan and Nowitzki" mean?

I don't even know what this means. Pride is more important than winning? What? What happened to sacrificing for the team? Wade, Bosh and LeBron all made sacrifices to come together.

Of course team comes first. But do not claim they made a sacrifice. They sacrificed chump change, they didn't calculate the other factors like fan hatred. In fact, an argument could be made that the fire they were put through forged their team even stronger. No glory in what happened though, just smart business for them. And smart business isn't always fair.

And once again, take the spirit of people's comments: Bored has a point. Wanting to be the top dog on your squad takes a special kind of baller. Allen Iverson is a prime example. Clyde the Glide too.

The NBA has never had competitive balance.

Smh. I normally don't let people bother me, but you're kinda' missing our points.

 

[theeboredone]

Barkley played on the Sixers, Suns and Rockets. Malone teamed up with Payton, Shaq and Kobe in an attempt to win a ring. As to Stockton and Ewing, I call with Duncan and Nowitzki.
.

Dumbest statement ever. Not worth arguing anymore. I'm sure you're Numbers in disguise.

 

[Apathy]

I feel the same way. From my perspective you guys have the typical ignorant perspective of the casual fan.

I've decided I won't argue circles around that. I'm here to post nuanced opinions and link to such. If I run into any NBA fans that appreciate the same, that's a pleasant surprise and an unlikely byproduct. But I won't contribute to the negativity of the world by sinking to your depths of myopic misunderstanding.

I'll just place y'all on the ignore list. I welcome you to do the same to me.
--

On a more positive note, I enjoyed this:

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/33386/john-amaechi-on-what-motivates-nba-players

 

[theeboredone]

First of all, calling you out for your "dumb statement" was rather...correct. I mean, why in the world would you give such an example? Why would you compare a guy like LBJ jumping ship in his PRIME to two "superstars" at the end of their careers and no longer considered "superstars." It was a very poor statement you made. Both Payton and Malone had given 12+ years to their respective franchise. Both clearly not in their prime, let alone considered superstars. The same can be applied to when KG applied 13 seasons and Ray Allen 11 seasons to their teams.

And I disagree with that guy. It's also a matter of principle. As a fan and a player, I love the game like anyone else, but if I was told, my players union was giving up 300+ million so the owners would not "lose money" and they refused to make concessions for the system issues AND things like player benefits post retirement...yeah, I'd have a big problem. If that meant sitting out a year, going through court and more negotiations, I'd do it.

I'm not disputing some players do play for the money. It's evident on some of their faces. At the same time, why would these players then bother even practicing? Have you seen LeBron and KD's summer workout routine? 1.5 hours of weights. 1 hour of cardio. 1.5 hours of point guard drills. If players were content with just making their money, or trying to press for a better deal, then why bother even working so hard at your "job"?

 

[Apathy]

Delete this post

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

Apathy, you just called two of the most active participants in this thread casual fans. :\

You silly homie.

 

[127crazie]

Does anyone here think that the season can be saved? Myself, I don't think so. But I want to hear what you all think.

 

[theeboredone]

Short answer, no. I've already said why I don't think it's gonna happen. Too lazy to type it up again.

 

[tko112]

http://www.nba.com/2011/news/featur...n-needs-to-mediate/index.html?ls=iref:nbahpt1

I lol'ed so hard when I read the title and the article itself, even though this is no laughing matter, I couldn't help but laugh at this

 

[Johnknight1]

First of all, calling you out for your "dumb statement" was rather...correct. I mean, why in the world would you give such an example? Why would you compare a guy like LBJ jumping ship in his PRIME to two "superstars" at the end of their careers and no longer considered "superstars." It was a very poor statement you made. Both Payton and Malone had given 12+ years to their respective franchise. Both clearly not in their prime, let alone considered superstars. The same can be applied to when KG applied 13 seasons and Ray Allen 11 seasons to their teams.

I'm not disputing some players do play for the money. It's evident on some of their faces. At the same time, why would these players then bother even practicing? Have you seen LeBron and KD's summer workout routine? 1.5 hours of weights. 1 hour of cardio. 1.5 hours of point guard drills. If players were content with just making their money, or trying to press for a better deal, then why bother even working so hard at your "job"?

I agree with this to an extent. I think the Miami Heat definitely deserve to get some "heat." However, they get extra hate for this because they aren't "traditional powers" like the Lakers of the Celtics. The majority of fans tend to like "familiar" teams being good (that's why there are Lakers and Celtics "fans" in every state), even if it screws with the balance. What Kareem did to Milwaukee after he won a Championship there (get traded for virtually nothing well before he was at his prime) was much worse in my opinion. Yet, this is often forgotten, because he went to the Lakers (where much of the time he was second fiddle to Magic).

I understand people hating on LeBron James from Cleveland (that is 100% justified) or Chris Bosh from Toronto (again justified, although I would want to dump a team that basically gave up instead of making a "playoff push"). Again, they aren't the first players to dump a team at the prime of their career. I find it ironic that ESPN roasted/is still roasting LeBron for this after his "Decision" special on said channel. If I was LeBron, I would never talk to anyone with connections to Disney ever again.

However, if a team drafted or traded in the draft/early in their career for like KG, LeBron, Kobe, and Shaq on the same team and they stayed, I don't mind it. If other owners hate it, throw money at one of them, or learn to draft and not throw huge money at backups and terrible prospects.

I do however, love seeing older players past their primes going to win rings. That creates more... unique drama. Because they want to win. They've given their lives with love for the game, love for the league, and love to compete, and it creates some great teams that are kind of unconventional. I love the whole "youth movement" like the Thunder and Bulls countering the "veterans" like the Mavericks and Celtics. It makes for interesting playoff basketball. Young guys dreaming of multiple championships. Veterans trying to put the icing on their legacy. It makes for some epic basketball, and it makes the competition better.

Edit: The "Bill Clinton" petition is PURE GOLD! It's golder than Golden State! HOLY CRAP! That was awesomely hilarious, yet painfully sad.

 

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

Good point about Kareem, the Lakers are exempt from this kind of criticism. If James had gone to LA, this wouldn't be an issue, that's sad.

And ESPN aired the decision, but I think the profits weren't theirs. I believe every penny of it went to charity, ESPN just took the free publicity.

 

[theeboredone]

I would have criticized LBJ coming over like that. But I'd be in the minority then.

Well, ESPN DID create a "Heat Index", which probably had the most homer columnists the world has ever seen. After every game, they'd be on the front page of ESPN. Annoyed the heck out of me.

 

[Xsyven]

...are people still debating about LBJ's decision?

 

[The Real Gamer]

It was one of the most radical and controversial moves in NBA history. It's going to be talked about for the rest of LBJ's life, without a doubt.

 

[Johnknight1]

I would have criticized LBJ coming over like that. But I'd be in the minority then.

Well, ESPN DID create a "Heat Index", which probably had the most homer columnists the world has ever seen. After every game, they'd be on the front page of ESPN. Annoyed the heck out of me.

I criticized LeBron (and to a lesser extent, Chrish Bosh) for doing that. However, I think ESPN blew "The Decision" out of proportion. ESPN shot it down at every Heat game. The majority of the opinion people at ESPN was actively shouting down the Heat, which they may or may not have done in order to create hype to this team. It is like ESPN was secretly rooting for the Heat to get to the NBA Finals to face the Lakers in what could have been the most viewed NBA Finals ever. That "Heat Index" example you gave is a perfect example of blowing the Heat out of proportion.

I remember at one point I was watching a game on ESPN and during halftime some opinion people had a playoff board, and said the "New look" Knicks would sweep the Heat if they met in the playoffs. I never laughed so hard in my life.

Cleveland couldn't possible blow that out of proportion though. That was their guy. "The Chosen One." He had been their icon for years, and their economy centered around basketball was in shambles. On top of that, they had one of the worst teams in NBA history without him (although much of that was due to injuries).

Good point about Kareem, the Lakers are exempt from this kind of criticism. If James had gone to LA, this wouldn't be an issue, that's sad.

And ESPN aired the decision, but I think the profits weren't theirs. believe every penny of it went to charity, ESPN just took the free publicity.

Sadly people don't question Kareem's career decision to go to Lakers for the fame rather than be the icon of Milwaukee. That's why in my eyes he will never compare to Michael Jordan. At least when Wilt Chamberlain went to the Lakers he went from a team stacked with future Hall of Fame members to a team stacked with future Hall of Fame members. Why this isn't compared to LBJ's move is silly. It is nearly the exact same thing!

The Lakers and their fans are exempt from everything. I used to live in the hills above Anaheim as a kid, and after the Lakers won each of their 3-peat championships at least one more street on fire than the last Championship. There were massive fires, cars flipped and exploded, and property destroyed. It scared the crap out of me as a kid. Thankfully nobody died, but many were severely harmed.

Now I live in Northern California. When the Giants won the World Series, I expected riots, extreme property damage, mob attacks, and fires. There was none of that. I was stunned! Everyone was peaceful (aside from that fence blocking them from Brian Wilson), and the focus was on enjoying the team's victory together. It was like night and day.

As for ESPN, even if the program's money went to charity, it still hyped the NBA season. ESPN has the rights to most nationally broadcast NBA games, including the NBA Finals. Hyping up "The Decision," especially if LeBron went to a "Dream Team" would only raise hype and awareness for the NBA on ESPN and ABC. And you know what=??? It worked.

...are people still debating about LBJ's decision?

No, we are debating the impact of LBJ's decision, and why it was hyped out of proportion by ESPN.