Minnesota Sports Forum

Would you guys give Iggy 4 years $70 Mil? It may take an offer like that to pry him from the Warriors.

MinneapolisMatt wrote:Would you guys give Iggy 4 years $70 Mil? It may take an offer like that to pry him from the Warriors.

Pass. That's too much money for too many years for a guy that is already 33.

I think Klay is the biggest risk of leaving the big 4. At some point you have the titles and you want to be more than the 3rd wheel offensively who has the toughest defensive matchups every night right? Draymond on the other hand isn't good enough for me to think he's gonna want to leave to do more. He's a great defensive player. He provides little offensively outside of being a very good passer especially when his shot isn't falling. He's a support star like a Ben Wallace/Dennis Rodman in my mind. A super role player. I don't think that works on most teams if he moves up to the second or even first option offensively. Who knows? Maybe they'll all stay together. I just think once you already win multiple titles you start thinking about more personal goals and for guys like Klay, Draymond and even Steph to some degree, it's hard to achieve those individual goals on such a stacked team.

khans2k5 wrote:I think Klay is the biggest risk of leaving the big 4. At some point you have the titles and you want to be more than the 3rd wheel offensively who has the toughest defensive matchups every night right? Draymond on the other hand isn't good enough for me to think he's gonna want to leave to do more. He's a great defensive player. He provides little offensively outside of being a very good passer especially when his shot isn't falling. He's a support star like a Ben Wallace/Dennis Rodman in my mind. A super role player. I don't think that works on most teams if he moves up to the second or even first option offensively. Who knows? Maybe they'll all stay together. I just think once you already win multiple titles you start thinking about more personal goals and for guys like Klay, Draymond and even Steph to some degree, it's hard to achieve those individual goals on such a stacked team.

While that may be true about Draymond, he is the only one thick headed enough to think he could leave and be THE GUY on a title squad.

I think Klay understands why his role is his role a little better.

I personally think Golden State is probably the best NBA team ever assembled. You literally have three of the greatest shooters of all time on one team and one of the greatest role players of all time. You can't beat them unless you score 110-115 points or more, as they are impossible to defend well over a long stretch of time. And speaking of defense, they are also an elite defensive team.

I think one of the areas that surprised me, and this was mentioned before, is how well Golden State rebounded the ball. That was one areas where I thought a front line of LeBron, Love, and Thompson could take advantage of them. Nope. They had that base covered too, with great team rebounding.

I honestly don't think there is much to learn by watching Golden State (other than beholding their Greatness). They are an aberration created by a multitude of fortuitous circumstances. I mean adding Durant to a 73-win team.....ridiculous. The NBA can't let that happen again.

Q12543 wrote:I personally think Golden State is probably the best NBA team ever assembled. You literally have three of the greatest shooters of all time on one team and one of the greatest role players of all time. You can't beat them unless you score 110-115 points or more, as they are impossible to defend well over a long stretch of time. And speaking of defense, they are also an elite defensive team.

I think one of the areas that surprised me, and this was mentioned before, is how well Golden State rebounded the ball. That was one areas where I thought a front line of LeBron, Love, and Thompson could take advantage of them. Nope. They had that base covered too, with great team rebounding.

I honestly don't think there is much to learn by watching Golden State (other than beholding their Greatness). They are an aberration created by a multitude of fortuitous circumstances. I mean adding Durant to a 73-win team.....ridiculous. The NBA can't let that happen again.

Honestly, the Curry rebounding numbers in the finals couldnt even be done in NBA2K...

I was watching The Meaning of Life on Netflix last night and I had forgotten the Rugby game where the pros play the students. I thought it was kind of appropriate. I know ratings were high for the first couple of games but I tuned out for the last 2. I just don't know how the NBA can be excited about this product.

thedoper wrote:I was watching The Meaning of Life on Netflix last night and I had forgotten the Rugby game where the pros play the students. I thought it was kind of appropriate. I know ratings were high for the first couple of games but I tuned out for the last 2. I just don't know how the NBA can be excited about this product.

Do you want to return to a league dominated by one team for 6 (8) years and games where the losing team scores only 54 points?

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

thedoper wrote:I was watching The Meaning of Life on Netflix last night and I had forgotten the Rugby game where the pros play the students. I thought it was kind of appropriate. I know ratings were high for the first couple of games but I tuned out for the last 2. I just don't know how the NBA can be excited about this product.

Do you want to return to a league dominated by one team for 6 (8) years and games where the losing team scores only 54 points?

I guess I'm a sucker like everyone else. The season just ended and I'm on an NBA message board talking about it. I honestly just want to see competitive basketball. It happens in the playoffs every once and a while and it is amazing. Maybe it's just nostalgia at this point but I look back to those Lakers v Celtics finals and know that was what got me hooked. Part of the problem may just be that last year's Finals hinted at a new iteration of that type of rivalry and now turned into such a let down.

thedoper wrote:I was watching The Meaning of Life on Netflix last night and I had forgotten the Rugby game where the pros play the students. I thought it was kind of appropriate. I know ratings were high for the first couple of games but I tuned out for the last 2. I just don't know how the NBA can be excited about this product.

Last night's game was the highest rated ever. Game 5 elimination drew more viewers than any game 7 ever. That's what the league cares about. The longer their great play goes the more people will want to tune in to see them fall. That's sports and dynasties. The viewership grows because of the added dimension of wanting to see them fail more than just having feel good stories get to the end and half the country doesn't care about another city winning a title because of a feel good reason. Everyone thinks it's bad for the NBA, but this is the stuff that grows casual fans and most of the die hard fans aren't leaving the sport anyway. That's how the game grows. Die hard fan's don't matter for growing the league and making the TV deals worth it. It's all about brining in the casual fan market and giving them a narrative to root for and the narrative for a juggernaut conveniently goes from wanting to get to the top and then the longer they are on top the more people will want them to fall. The numbers just don't reflect that this is bad for basketball and both times basketball exploded in popularity before this recent 3 year stretch was with the show time Lakers and Celtics and Jordan in the 90's. It's actually what's best for basketball on a grander scale than what the die hard fan's think is best for basketball.