LeBron James: A new Castle for the King - Part two

LeBron James: A new Castle for the King - Part two
by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (6-14-13)

[Part one - King of Kings]



TODD:
LeBron James is exercising his opt out clause next summer and moving his castle out of Miami. The King will be returning home and the new and improved Big Three will now be in Cleveland. LeBron returns to Ohio to make amends and team with Kyrie Irving and Anderson Varejao. Long live the King.

The great part is, this threesome actually fits together stylistically better than the Big Three in Miami ever have. Of course Irving needs to improve his defense and Varejao needs to stay healthy and playing at last season's high level, but these guys have loads of talent. I repeat, LOADS. I did not include the Cavaliers on my list of teams that LeBron would have brought to the NBA Finals because in that hypothetical scenario he would have been replacing Kyrie Irving. However, if he opts out of his contract and decides to join the Cavs of his own volition, then watch out! Teamed with the ever improving duo of Dion Waiters and Tristan Thompson, this squad would be a force to rival anyone in the entire Eastern Conference from day one.

The only other location that LeBron would choose to move to is Los Angeles. People have been speculating he might opt out to join the Lakers, if he spurns Cleveland yet again. Those are the three most logical/likely choices (staying in Miami, signing with the Cavs, signing with the Lake Show). But would joining LA be better? I think the Cleveland team would be a better option personally, and as a basketball fan I want to see this happen. If you assume the Lakers' Big Three would become LeBron, Kobe Bryant (eventually, once he's healthy) and either Dwight Howard or Pau Gasol, is that better than what Cleveland would have? I'm not so sure. It certainly isn't as fun to root for.


DAN:
Did you suddenly become a Cleveland fan? Having LeBron return 'home' to rejoin the Cavaliers is what happens in movies, but rarely plays out in real life sports until the final year or two of a players contract. LeBron is not signing with Cleveland in the summer of 2014. Maybe for the final year or two of his career, so that puts us in the summer of 2020 then. He isn't joining the Lakers either. A Big Three of James, Kobe and Gasol (I'm assuming Howard is long gone - hated playing with Kobe) is amazing on paper, but who knows when Kobe will be back at 100 percent. Kobe's like a meaner, more controlling version of Dwyane Wade (both injured) and Gasol is a more consistent version of Chris Bosh with better defense. That's a crappy situation to spurn Miami for, even if it is Los Angeles. Let me make things simple. LeBron is not going to LA or returning to Cleveland for one reason and one reason only, his legacy.

I get the impression LeBron is a big picture guy. He joined the Miami Heat in order to win a string of championships and cement himself as the greatest of all time, at least that was the idea. And NBA legacies have been forged with strings of titles on one team, with the same coach, not spread across two or three different ones. Yes, yes, he's the face of a new generation that values the team less, but he isn't blind. Doing it all in one place is preferable.

The Heat have made the NBA Finals in every season LeBron's been there, and even if they lose this year, he's got one more season in South Beach for sure. Pat Riley is a basketball genius and the coach down there isn't half bad either. LeBron will approach his opt out clause with four straight NBA Finals appearances and either two or three rings (my prediction - barely a stretch). He isn't messing with that and neither is Pat Riley. This year's Miami team is old, but its not a permanent mess. Both Wade and Bosh can also opt out after next season, but don't expect things to make it that far. I predict Bosh gets shipped out of town this summer for youth and Riley gives Wade one more season to be healthy before he's traded too.

We've seen old teams suddenly get young from one season to the next and LeBron isn't about to break up the dynasty he has forming with Eric Spoelstra and Miami. DYNASTY. I realize the team has fallen apart around him this season, but that's what trades are for. The Heat might have limited financial wiggle room and be approaching an outrageous luxury tax, but what's more important? Winning multiple rings in a row, or winning three out of five rings or whatever it may be, or not paying a luxury tax? I think the Heat eat the tax and rake in the extra money from having the greatest NBA Franchise of the new decade. Imagine if LeBron actually gets the five or six rings he called for when joining the Miami Heat. Now that's a legacy.

[If you missed Part one - King of Kings]

NBA Playoffs: No Zzz's Please - Part one

NBA Playoffs: No Zzz's Please - Part one
By Dan Salem and Todd Salem (5-20-13)



DAN:
So its come down to this and I couldn't be less excited. The NBA playoffs are considered the real season, the second season, the good stuff if you will. Since almost half the league, sixteen teams, makes it we get the best competing against one another. And I'd agree that the best teams were in it this year, but that is NOT saying much.

Round one match ups fell on their faces. The Clippers, Celtics and Lakers, three interesting teams who are fun to watch, all bit the dirt. Only the Celtics made a peep against the Knicks. A peep. Round two pitted the most deserving teams against one another, to be sure. But defense is boring as hell. Memphis and Indiana are great and all, but slow basketball is boring basketball. We can even include San Antonio in that grouping, leaving one of the four match ups as not slow and boring. Yet the Miami Heat were in that final match up, and being better than everyone, absolutely destroyed the Bulls after getting woken up in game one from their "We are the best and you all know it" daze. Zzzzzzzz.

Finally round three, the conference finals! Oh nuts, Memphis made it so we are guaranteed one slow as hell series of games. I respect the hell out of their team, their defensive prowess and their ability to win despite never having done so. Yet can we all agree they make an awful television product? To make matters worse, the second best television product, the Golden State Warriors, were eliminated by the Spurs who aren't exactly a fast team either. I had the pleasure of seeing Golden State in person the first week of the regular season against the Clippers and damn are they fun to watch.They can shoot the lights out of any arena and the 2013 playoffs have now lost something without them in it. Spurs vs. Memphis is like asking to giraffes to fight. Eventually one will knock the other over, but who knows how long it will take.

In the east we have Miami against the Pacers. It would have been fun for the Knicks to keep playing since if nothing else, they are interesting. But it doesn't matter. It was a near certainty before the regular season began that the Heat would be back in the NBA Finals and low and behold, here they are on the brink of doing just that. They will win, possibly sweep, but definitely win. Thank you Lebron James. You are always fun to watch.


TODD:
I think you may be confusing popular teams with exciting teams. You've fallen into the television ratings hole that pedestrian NBA fans often do. First of all, the Celtics were not fun to watch. They were awful offensively, even with Rondo playing. I agree Indiana and Memphis are slogging, defensive black holes but San Antonio cannot be grouped in with them. They shoot a ton of threes, play fast-paced and share the basketball with a wonder only replicated in Miami. The Spurs series with the Warriors was one of the more exciting playoff rounds we've had in a while, especially before Stephen Curry tweaked his ankle.

By the way, what's more exciting than witnessing a player make "the leap"? Watching Curry become unstoppable offensively by being the most effective three point shooter in some time (in history?!?) was amazing. He set the league's all-time record for made threes in a year during the regular season while shooting a remarkable percentage; he somehow then managed to step his game up another notch during the playoffs by taking nearly 10 threes per contest, making a large chunk of them and striking pure fear into the hearts of anyone he is playing. There may not be a more terrifying player for your favorite team to face other than Curry and LeBron. It is remarkable that he did not even make the All-Star team this year.

But I digress. These NBA Playoffs are giving us what we want/expect every year from the NBA Playoffs: few, if any upsets and the very best teams playing for the title. Sure Oklahoma City should have been one of the final four, but injuries play a part and they fell victim. Otherwise, who is more deserving of making the conference finals than Miami, Indiana, Memphis and San Antonio? The NBA gets it right nearly every season. And some people enjoy watching great defense!


DAN:
I am not one of those people who enjoy watching great defense, but if San Antonio and Miami make the finals I will be elated. This would pit the old guard vs. the new, old dynasty vs. current. And the Spurs hall of famers would be playing one last time in the finals. At least I think it would be their last, as it seems every season for the last four they have managed to be great and ignore father time entirely.

I loved watching Steph Curry make the leap, but is there anything worse than watching a player unleap like Kevin Durant did?

[Part two - The 'Unleap' and the Miami Heat]

Playoffs!? Lakers and Celtics - In or Out

Playoffs!? Lakers and Celtics - In or Out

by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (2-8-13)

[Part One from Monday]

TODD:

Treading in the middle of the league every year does nothing for you, so bottoming out seems logical for Boston. However, the only way this is accomplished is by dismantling the roster further, i.e. trading Paul Pierce. I'm sorry but he will not be retiring as a Celtic if Boston wants any chance at a top pick this summer.

If trading Pierce is the only way to actually, legitimately bottom out and give yourself a chance at a top five pick, do you do it? Do you want the Celtics to trade the beloved Pierce for a young player or a first round pick (or both)? Or, would you rather Boston finish eighth or ninth in the east? Pretend you're Danny Ainge for a second here and actually make a decision that has some weight to it. "Sucking so bad" doesn't just happen on its own; people must be sacrificed.

DAN:

Damn it, I'll put on my executive hat and pretend I'm Danny Ainge. Its so much more fun to be the fan and want the best of both worlds. As Ainge I most certainly trade Kevin Garnett or Paul Pierce. Both if I can. Its time to stock up on draft picks and raise the likely hood of ping pong balls before the season is a total loss and the team is stuck with the eighth seed in the east. Making the playoffs is probably the worst case scenario for the Celtics right now. Their old guys just get older with extra minutes, games, travel, etc. And we all know they aren't good enough to beat Miami.

The problem is, who would want either player? If I'm Ainge I blow the team up, but my only viable trade asset is now getting reconstructive knee surgery. His predicament is approaching NY Jets territory. Its not like Pierce or Garnett puts anyone over the top, except MAYBE the Knicks but they already have Jason Kidd. There is one fail safe here. General Manager David Kahn of the Minnesota Timberwolves. I rest my case.

It's funny how the exact opposite is true of the Los Angeles Lakers. They HAVE to make the playoffs at all costs and the worst possible situation for them is to miss out on that coveted eighth seed in the west. I see them making a very sloppy move at the trade deadline to upgrade in the hopes of 'salvaging' their season. Not that they can win anything either, but with the Clippers playing out of their minds the Lakers have to keep pace. Now you're GM Mitch Kupchak What do you do?

TODD:

Boston is infinitely more interesting here, but I'll be Kupchak in a minute. First though, I believe Kevin Garnett has a full no-trade clause, so moving him might prove difficult. There are certainly teams in the league who are one piece away and that piece is either a very good defensive and jump-shooting power forward or a solid, shot-creating, scoring small forward. Pierce and Garnett both have value left; it's just a matter of getting a young piece of value back to make it worth it to Boston. Watch as the phones start ringing.

As GM of the Lake Show, we have to make the playoffs, win at all costs. That may mean making a rather impulsive roster upheaval. However, the difference exists in June between these two teams. If the Lakers sneak in as the eighth seed in the west, they can win rounds in the playoffs. In most match-ups, they will have four of the best six players on the court. Assuming Nash and Howard and Gasol get healthy heading into the final weeks of the season, a Lakers squad come June would be a scary opponent to face. The problem is getting there.

If I am Mitch Kupchak, I trade Pau Gasol. I realize he is now injured, but that just makes letting him go even easier. They are not using him correctly anyways. He is a center and one of the best low-post scorers in the world. He eviscerated the American team in the Olympics playing for Spain. LA is not using him in that spot or allowing him to play to his strengths on offense. He is no 18-foot jump shooter and I am not sure why Lakers brass thinks he is.

If they could get an athletic power forward or some outside shooting for Pau, I think they do it. To make this even more likely, Gasol still has value to other teams in the league who realize he is a center playing as a stretch forward. He will be itching to start fresh, coming off his rehab on a new team. With the Lakers selling low, they should still be able to gain a worthy piece in return for the Spaniard. Whether it would be enough to overcome their dreadfully slow start remains to be seen.

DAN:

I agree that Pau is the Lakers best trade asset, but they would be CRAZY to trade him. With Pau now injured and Howard somewhat injured, they are in a tough spot. But in the games they've won over the last week its been Pau who led the team in scoring and rebounding. They need him whenever he returns. More important than this, I think its only 50/50 whether Dwight Howard signs with the team after the year. Pau is the better player, teammate and asset for the Lakers at this point. Unfortunately I think Dwight Howard is untradable. They are stuck with what they got.

I'm leaning towards the side of panic with the Lakers. My prediction, they seemingly figure things out but fail to make the playoffs. Cause meet effect. The team gets blown apart this summer.

[If you missed Part One from Monday]

Who dies first? Celtics or Lakers

Who dies first? Celtics or Lakers

by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (2-4-13)

TODD:
The NBA has been flipped on its head this season. We all thought the strike-shortened year of 2011-2012 would be weird but this is something completely different.

In a sport where the best (nearly) always climbs to the top and the lengthy playoff rounds (almost) always guarantee the best teams advance, we are witnessing something special this season. The two most successful franchises in NBA history, the Boston Celtics and the Los Angeles Lakers, are both floundering. Both are bordering on the lottery with Boston currently sitting one game over .500 and the Lakers four below the .500 mark.

To make matters worse, Rajon Rondo tore his ACL, making him out for the rest of the season. And, on the other side of the country, it seems as though LA is actually considering trading one of their All-Star centers. What should happen here?

Pick a team and go. Should things be blown up, do they bottom out to try to get the best lottery pick possible? Is it worth scrounging together replacements (in Rondo's case) to go for that 7th or 8th playoff spot? Is the NBA (ratings-wise) in big trouble if neither of these teams make the playoffs or would the triumphant return of playoffs in New York help cover this?


DAN:
Asking to pick between the Celtics and Lakers isn't really fair; there's only one sane selection. As for the big picture, the NBA would be in trouble ratings-wise if it were any other point in its history, but there are SO many superstars in the league now. The Celtics and Lakers grab casual fans for sure, but last year's playoffs introduced the country to the OKC Thunder and crowned Miami. Those are the teams to watch. Throw in the Knicks and the Clippers and we have the two largest basketball markets with two excellent teams. If the Celtics OR the Lakers miss the playoffs the NBA is fine, but if both don't make it then there will be a ratings hit to the first round only. Neither team is getting any farther.

Now for my pick, which is obviously the Celtics. I adopted them as my basketball team way back when, living in Boston during college. Moving to Los Angeles solidified my disdain for their arch rival, the Lakers. Sure its fun out here when the Lakers are winning, but its vastly more fun when the Clippers are winning and the Lakers are losing. I'm proud to say I root for the Clippers too, so boo Lakers and yay Celtics. Here in the real world though, the Celtics suck. They were a floundering team who barely managed to show up on a nightly basis unless it was a nationally televised game. And this was BEFORE Rondo got hurt.

The Celtics have been playing a game of politics for a year or so now. They didn't want to alienate their fans by trading the "Big Three" who won them a title and yet they needed somebody to go. Ray Allen left last off season and no rebuilding happened, mainly because both Garnett and Pierce are still on the team. With Rondo going down they can officially throw in the towel on the season. They may have wanted to shoot for the lottery before, but now they have a legit excuse to be a worse team without being accused of tanking. Don't replace Rondo. Here's my ideal scenario. Pierce and Garnett both retire after the season with the Celtics sucking so bad they get a ton of balls in the lottery. High draft picks abound and with Rondo rehabilitated to a new-look Celtics team, they come back with a fury next year.

This season was over a month ago for the Celtics. Now they can put a bow on it.


TODD:
One major flaw exists with your ideal scenario. Out of Charlotte, Washington, Cleveland, Orlando, Phoenix, New Orleans, Sacramento or Minnesota, who is Boston worse than even without Rondo? There is no possible way the Celtics end up with ping pong balls for anything higher than the ninth best chance at the top pick.

Hell, they might even stay in the playoffs without Rondo. With the return of Avery Bradley and the guard play of Jason Terry and Courtney Lee sure to improve with more minutes coming their way, the Celtics still may have the seventh best team in the eastern conference. This, of course, doesn't mean any playoff advancement is in their future and, as all NBA fans know, you want to be at the top or at the bottom. Treading in the middle of the league every year does nothing for you.

[Part Two]