Poll: Would you lose interest in the NBA if Leonard went to Lakers

[Moranis]

I think you could make a pretty good argument that the mid-80's Sixers were fairly equivalent to this hypothetical Lakers team.  They had an aging, but still very good Dr. J.  They had Malone still in his prime.  They had a rising star in Barkley.  They had HOF role players in Cheeks and Jones.  They had an old former MVP in McAdoo riding their bench.  As well as some other quality depth (guys like Sedale Threatt).  For Barkley's rookie year they also had recent all star Andrew Toney (though Barkley wasn't as good that year).

How old are you, Moranis? 12?  You clearly are not old enough to remember the mid-80's basketball landscape. For you to argue that the mid-eighties 76er team is the equivalent to the hypothetical Laker team is bogus to an insulting level. I hereby revoke your Moderator card for the next season.

If Leonard joins the Lakers (which I expect he will), they will have 3 of the top 5 players in the NBA who will be able to play next season. Since Durant and Thompson are out, they don't count.  Other than Giannis and (maybe) Embiid, there is no one else worth discussing. And forget arguing that Davis didn't make all NBA last season; we all know that if he played the entire year and avoided the Rich Paul shenanigans, he is likely a first team all NBA. Same with Lebron (whom I know you realize is still one of the top 2-3 players).

Stop this contrarian BS.

tough but fair. I’ve heard a lot of nba historians and star geeks discuss the history of the league, and this is the first time I have ever heard the 82-83 76ers as a super team in the league. The contrarian take has really gone off the rails.

This is worse, CC. He is arguing that the 84/85 Sixers (Barkley's rookie year) was better.

84-85 Erving was like 34 and averaging 20 points a game. They had one true superstar in Malone. Cheeks was an elite role player then. Barkley was a rookie and only averaged 14 points. Quite a bit off from Durant, klay, curry and draymond all in their primes

Hypothetical Lakers team is not the same as the Warriors.  I mean if you are going to quote my posts, at least read them before commenting. 

The 83 Sixers are considered one of the greatest teams in league history.  And they have that catchy Fo, Fi, Fo slogan.  Until the 01 Lakers they had the best playoff record of any team in history (which the warriors also eclipsed in 17).  They had 2 MVP's in their prime (Dr. J and Moses), perhaps the greatest defender of the generation (Jones), and another all league defender (Cheeks).  They had a rising star in Toney (injuries derailed his career).  They inexplicably lost early in the 84 playoffs (one of the greatest upsets in league history) and just got beaten by a bit better Celtics team in 85 before Malone got injured and then left and Dr. J continued the inevitable aging process.  Had Malone stayed though with the rise of Barkley who knows what the late 80's in the East would have looked like as Malone was still a beast through the end of the decade.

In any given season only 2 or 3 teams have realistic shots at winning the title (and many of those seasons there is in fact a heavy favorite - ala the Warriors, the Heat, the Lakers, the Bulls, etc.).  This has been borne out time and time again.

You should probably reply to footey not me. I just agreed with him. Also weren't you 4 years old during the 83 philly team? It feels like you are describing them like you watched them 3 years ago.

For what it's worth:

I was going to law school in Philadelphia in the early 80's, and went to some of those games in the Spectrum vs. the Celtics.  Great rivalry.

The '83 Sixer team was an awesome team.  A dominant team.

BUT:  It did not have 3 out of the top 5 players on the NBA playing on it, like the new Laker roster would have. No one ever has in modern league history if memory serves me.  That includes the recent Warriors.

Maybe, maybe 2: Moses Malone (definitely) and Dr. J (maybe). It also had great role players. Actually the guy who absolutely was the Celtics' Achilles Heal was Andrew (a/k/a Android) Toney. 

Other contemporaries playing then clearly among top 5: Larry Bird; Magic Johnson; Kareem; Sidney Moncrief.  Erving and Malone were first team all nba, but no Sixer was on the 2nd team.

In addition, Moranis was arguing that the 84/85 Sixer team had more talent than the hypothetical Laker team. (it's up there above somewhere). That was Barkley's rookie year.  It was also the year that Toney started experiencing foot problems, which would end up curtailing his career. That team was not very good.  Only Malone made All NBA (he was on 1st team). No other Sixer made 1st or 2nd team.

my post was actually referring to the 85/86 team when Barkley had clearly started his rise (that is why I mentioned the prior season being Barkley's rookie year).  He obviously wasn't yet at his peak, but even that season and playing next to Moses he went for 20 and 13 and finished 6th in MVP voting.  Moses went for 24 and 12 (10th in MVP voting).  Dr. J was obviously on the down side but was still an 18/5/3.5 player.  Cheeks was still very much in prime making his 2nd all star game and the 1st of 3 straight averaging 15/3/9 as a 1st Team All Defense.  Jones was still a good defender, but wasn't elite any more, but he was their 5th best player.  They had former MVP (and HOFer) McAdoo on their deeper bench and long time starter Sedale Threat on the rise.

Obviously it isn't meant to be an exact comparison, but in that scenario you have the HOF talent that hasn't yet proven himself (Barkley/Davis).  The MVP candidate in his prime and the discussion for best player in the world (Moses/Kawhi).  The again HOFer who can still perform at a high level (Dr. J/Lebron).  Now those aren't all exactly the same comparison and Lebron will almost certainly outperform Dr. J (though I'm not so sure Davis and Kawhi outperform Barkley and Moses).  The Sixers also had things the Lakers aren't going to have in a player like Cheeks.  They may find a Jones or McAdoo type (though a former MVP on the last legs probably isn't happening).  And Kuzma is better than Threatt, but I'm not sure he ends up with a better career.  That was the point I was trying to make.  The league is littered with teams with all sorts of great players that are playing on the same team.  Heck that Sixers team had 4 former or future MVP's playing on it.  I don't think any team in history can claim that.  The Thunder are the only team I can think of with 3 (I didn't exactly look so maybe it has happened before).

As for things like PER, it is very difficult for teammates to finish in the top ten, let alone 3 teammates all doing it.  So it would have to be situations in which players were on different teams the prior season.  You know like the trio of James, Wade, and Bosh who finished 1, 2, and 4 in the 2009-2010 season (you know the year before they joined up).  So clearly the person with the check mark didn't do a very good job of fact checking.

These posts have reminded me of those scenes in the tianto. Where the captain decides to go down with the ship. Tp for battling like hell in the face of 70% opposition

to be fair the poll question and this debate aren't the same (it is also 60/40 in voting).

I don’t mean to be condescending here but your comment is very strange like you don’t understand polls. About 3% of people say this would make them more interested in the league. 57% say they would lose at least a little interest. 85 76ers aside that’s bad man. Keep being you though man

I understand polls quite well.  The poll says 40% have no loss in interest (or a gain in interest) while about 60% would.  But that isn't the same thing we've been discussing.  Maybe the same type of poll would have the same results at various other points in league history.  Also, there are people that say they would lose interest because it was the Lakers, not because the league was somehow less competitive.  I'm sure some people voted that way because it was Lebron and Klutch Sports that they don't like and are just sick of them.  I'm sure people voted that way because they are just tired of players moving so frequently.  I'm sure there are countless reasons for the way people voted many of which might have nothing to do with the league actually being less competitive than at other times in league history.

[ChillyWilly]

I know everyone wants him back in Toronto but not me I careless about parity in the league.

Just get him out of the East.

[celticsclay]

I think you could make a pretty good argument that the mid-80's Sixers were fairly equivalent to this hypothetical Lakers team.  They had an aging, but still very good Dr. J.  They had Malone still in his prime.  They had a rising star in Barkley.  They had HOF role players in Cheeks and Jones.  They had an old former MVP in McAdoo riding their bench.  As well as some other quality depth (guys like Sedale Threatt).  For Barkley's rookie year they also had recent all star Andrew Toney (though Barkley wasn't as good that year).

How old are you, Moranis? 12?  You clearly are not old enough to remember the mid-80's basketball landscape. For you to argue that the mid-eighties 76er team is the equivalent to the hypothetical Laker team is bogus to an insulting level. I hereby revoke your Moderator card for the next season.

If Leonard joins the Lakers (which I expect he will), they will have 3 of the top 5 players in the NBA who will be able to play next season. Since Durant and Thompson are out, they don't count.  Other than Giannis and (maybe) Embiid, there is no one else worth discussing. And forget arguing that Davis didn't make all NBA last season; we all know that if he played the entire year and avoided the Rich Paul shenanigans, he is likely a first team all NBA. Same with Lebron (whom I know you realize is still one of the top 2-3 players).

Stop this contrarian BS.

tough but fair. I’ve heard a lot of nba historians and star geeks discuss the history of the league, and this is the first time I have ever heard the 82-83 76ers as a super team in the league. The contrarian take has really gone off the rails.

This is worse, CC. He is arguing that the 84/85 Sixers (Barkley's rookie year) was better.

84-85 Erving was like 34 and averaging 20 points a game. They had one true superstar in Malone. Cheeks was an elite role player then. Barkley was a rookie and only averaged 14 points. Quite a bit off from Durant, klay, curry and draymond all in their primes

Hypothetical Lakers team is not the same as the Warriors.  I mean if you are going to quote my posts, at least read them before commenting. 

The 83 Sixers are considered one of the greatest teams in league history.  And they have that catchy Fo, Fi, Fo slogan.  Until the 01 Lakers they had the best playoff record of any team in history (which the warriors also eclipsed in 17).  They had 2 MVP's in their prime (Dr. J and Moses), perhaps the greatest defender of the generation (Jones), and another all league defender (Cheeks).  They had a rising star in Toney (injuries derailed his career).  They inexplicably lost early in the 84 playoffs (one of the greatest upsets in league history) and just got beaten by a bit better Celtics team in 85 before Malone got injured and then left and Dr. J continued the inevitable aging process.  Had Malone stayed though with the rise of Barkley who knows what the late 80's in the East would have looked like as Malone was still a beast through the end of the decade.

In any given season only 2 or 3 teams have realistic shots at winning the title (and many of those seasons there is in fact a heavy favorite - ala the Warriors, the Heat, the Lakers, the Bulls, etc.).  This has been borne out time and time again.

You should probably reply to footey not me. I just agreed with him. Also weren't you 4 years old during the 83 philly team? It feels like you are describing them like you watched them 3 years ago.

For what it's worth:

I was going to law school in Philadelphia in the early 80's, and went to some of those games in the Spectrum vs. the Celtics.  Great rivalry.

The '83 Sixer team was an awesome team.  A dominant team.

BUT:  It did not have 3 out of the top 5 players on the NBA playing on it, like the new Laker roster would have. No one ever has in modern league history if memory serves me.  That includes the recent Warriors.

Maybe, maybe 2: Moses Malone (definitely) and Dr. J (maybe). It also had great role players. Actually the guy who absolutely was the Celtics' Achilles Heal was Andrew (a/k/a Android) Toney. 

Other contemporaries playing then clearly among top 5: Larry Bird; Magic Johnson; Kareem; Sidney Moncrief.  Erving and Malone were first team all nba, but no Sixer was on the 2nd team.

In addition, Moranis was arguing that the 84/85 Sixer team had more talent than the hypothetical Laker team. (it's up there above somewhere). That was Barkley's rookie year.  It was also the year that Toney started experiencing foot problems, which would end up curtailing his career. That team was not very good.  Only Malone made All NBA (he was on 1st team). No other Sixer made 1st or 2nd team.

my post was actually referring to the 85/86 team when Barkley had clearly started his rise (that is why I mentioned the prior season being Barkley's rookie year).  He obviously wasn't yet at his peak, but even that season and playing next to Moses he went for 20 and 13 and finished 6th in MVP voting.  Moses went for 24 and 12 (10th in MVP voting).  Dr. J was obviously on the down side but was still an 18/5/3.5 player.  Cheeks was still very much in prime making his 2nd all star game and the 1st of 3 straight averaging 15/3/9 as a 1st Team All Defense.  Jones was still a good defender, but wasn't elite any more, but he was their 5th best player.  They had former MVP (and HOFer) McAdoo on their deeper bench and long time starter Sedale Threat on the rise.

Obviously it isn't meant to be an exact comparison, but in that scenario you have the HOF talent that hasn't yet proven himself (Barkley/Davis).  The MVP candidate in his prime and the discussion for best player in the world (Moses/Kawhi).  The again HOFer who can still perform at a high level (Dr. J/Lebron).  Now those aren't all exactly the same comparison and Lebron will almost certainly outperform Dr. J (though I'm not so sure Davis and Kawhi outperform Barkley and Moses).  The Sixers also had things the Lakers aren't going to have in a player like Cheeks.  They may find a Jones or McAdoo type (though a former MVP on the last legs probably isn't happening).  And Kuzma is better than Threatt, but I'm not sure he ends up with a better career.  That was the point I was trying to make.  The league is littered with teams with all sorts of great players that are playing on the same team.  Heck that Sixers team had 4 former or future MVP's playing on it.  I don't think any team in history can claim that.  The Thunder are the only team I can think of with 3 (I didn't exactly look so maybe it has happened before).

As for things like PER, it is very difficult for teammates to finish in the top ten, let alone 3 teammates all doing it.  So it would have to be situations in which players were on different teams the prior season.  You know like the trio of James, Wade, and Bosh who finished 1, 2, and 4 in the 2009-2010 season (you know the year before they joined up).  So clearly the person with the check mark didn't do a very good job of fact checking.

These posts have reminded me of those scenes in the tianto. Where the captain decides to go down with the ship. Tp for battling like hell in the face of 70% opposition

to be fair the poll question and this debate aren't the same (it is also 60/40 in voting).

I don’t mean to be condescending here but your comment is very strange like you don’t understand polls. About 3% of people say this would make them more interested in the league. 57% say they would lose at least a little interest. 85 76ers aside that’s bad man. Keep being you though man

I understand polls quite well.  The poll says 40% have no loss in interest (or a gain in interest) while about 60% would.  But that isn't the same thing we've been discussing.  Maybe the same type of poll would have the same results at various other points in league history.  Also, there are people that say they would lose interest because it was the Lakers, not because the league was somehow less competitive.  I'm sure some people voted that way because it was Lebron and Klutch Sports that they don't like and are just sick of them.  I'm sure people voted that way because they are just tired of players moving so frequently.  I'm sure there are countless reasons for the way people voted many of which might have nothing to do with the league actually being less competitive than at other times in league history.

58% have a negative feeling about him caring
4% have a positive feeling
38% don’t care

Now if you want to go all Fox News or cnn kn me you can spin this as 60:40 but that is really disingenuous. I do think you could be a good politician for what it is worth.

[footey]

I think you could make a pretty good argument that the mid-80's Sixers were fairly equivalent to this hypothetical Lakers team.  They had an aging, but still very good Dr. J.  They had Malone still in his prime.  They had a rising star in Barkley.  They had HOF role players in Cheeks and Jones.  They had an old former MVP in McAdoo riding their bench.  As well as some other quality depth (guys like Sedale Threatt).  For Barkley's rookie year they also had recent all star Andrew Toney (though Barkley wasn't as good that year).

How old are you, Moranis? 12?  You clearly are not old enough to remember the mid-80's basketball landscape. For you to argue that the mid-eighties 76er team is the equivalent to the hypothetical Laker team is bogus to an insulting level. I hereby revoke your Moderator card for the next season.

If Leonard joins the Lakers (which I expect he will), they will have 3 of the top 5 players in the NBA who will be able to play next season. Since Durant and Thompson are out, they don't count.  Other than Giannis and (maybe) Embiid, there is no one else worth discussing. And forget arguing that Davis didn't make all NBA last season; we all know that if he played the entire year and avoided the Rich Paul shenanigans, he is likely a first team all NBA. Same with Lebron (whom I know you realize is still one of the top 2-3 players).

Stop this contrarian BS.

tough but fair. I’ve heard a lot of nba historians and star geeks discuss the history of the league, and this is the first time I have ever heard the 82-83 76ers as a super team in the league. The contrarian take has really gone off the rails.

This is worse, CC. He is arguing that the 84/85 Sixers (Barkley's rookie year) was better.

84-85 Erving was like 34 and averaging 20 points a game. They had one true superstar in Malone. Cheeks was an elite role player then. Barkley was a rookie and only averaged 14 points. Quite a bit off from Durant, klay, curry and draymond all in their primes

Hypothetical Lakers team is not the same as the Warriors.  I mean if you are going to quote my posts, at least read them before commenting. 

The 83 Sixers are considered one of the greatest teams in league history.  And they have that catchy Fo, Fi, Fo slogan.  Until the 01 Lakers they had the best playoff record of any team in history (which the warriors also eclipsed in 17).  They had 2 MVP's in their prime (Dr. J and Moses), perhaps the greatest defender of the generation (Jones), and another all league defender (Cheeks).  They had a rising star in Toney (injuries derailed his career).  They inexplicably lost early in the 84 playoffs (one of the greatest upsets in league history) and just got beaten by a bit better Celtics team in 85 before Malone got injured and then left and Dr. J continued the inevitable aging process.  Had Malone stayed though with the rise of Barkley who knows what the late 80's in the East would have looked like as Malone was still a beast through the end of the decade.

In any given season only 2 or 3 teams have realistic shots at winning the title (and many of those seasons there is in fact a heavy favorite - ala the Warriors, the Heat, the Lakers, the Bulls, etc.).  This has been borne out time and time again.

You should probably reply to footey not me. I just agreed with him. Also weren't you 4 years old during the 83 philly team? It feels like you are describing them like you watched them 3 years ago.

For what it's worth:

I was going to law school in Philadelphia in the early 80's, and went to some of those games in the Spectrum vs. the Celtics.  Great rivalry.

The '83 Sixer team was an awesome team.  A dominant team.

BUT:  It did not have 3 out of the top 5 players on the NBA playing on it, like the new Laker roster would have. No one ever has in modern league history if memory serves me.  That includes the recent Warriors.

Maybe, maybe 2: Moses Malone (definitely) and Dr. J (maybe). It also had great role players. Actually the guy who absolutely was the Celtics' Achilles Heal was Andrew (a/k/a Android) Toney. 

Other contemporaries playing then clearly among top 5: Larry Bird; Magic Johnson; Kareem; Sidney Moncrief.  Erving and Malone were first team all nba, but no Sixer was on the 2nd team.

In addition, Moranis was arguing that the 84/85 Sixer team had more talent than the hypothetical Laker team. (it's up there above somewhere). That was Barkley's rookie year.  It was also the year that Toney started experiencing foot problems, which would end up curtailing his career. That team was not very good.  Only Malone made All NBA (he was on 1st team). No other Sixer made 1st or 2nd team.

my post was actually referring to the 85/86 team when Barkley had clearly started his rise (that is why I mentioned the prior season being Barkley's rookie year).  He obviously wasn't yet at his peak, but even that season and playing next to Moses he went for 20 and 13 and finished 6th in MVP voting.  Moses went for 24 and 12 (10th in MVP voting).  Dr. J was obviously on the down side but was still an 18/5/3.5 player.  Cheeks was still very much in prime making his 2nd all star game and the 1st of 3 straight averaging 15/3/9 as a 1st Team All Defense.  Jones was still a good defender, but wasn't elite any more, but he was their 5th best player.  They had former MVP (and HOFer) McAdoo on their deeper bench and long time starter Sedale Threat on the rise.

Obviously it isn't meant to be an exact comparison, but in that scenario you have the HOF talent that hasn't yet proven himself (Barkley/Davis).  The MVP candidate in his prime and the discussion for best player in the world (Moses/Kawhi).  The again HOFer who can still perform at a high level (Dr. J/Lebron).  Now those aren't all exactly the same comparison and Lebron will almost certainly outperform Dr. J (though I'm not so sure Davis and Kawhi outperform Barkley and Moses).  The Sixers also had things the Lakers aren't going to have in a player like Cheeks.  They may find a Jones or McAdoo type (though a former MVP on the last legs probably isn't happening).  And Kuzma is better than Threatt, but I'm not sure he ends up with a better career.  That was the point I was trying to make.  The league is littered with teams with all sorts of great players that are playing on the same team.  Heck that Sixers team had 4 former or future MVP's playing on it.  I don't think any team in history can claim that.  The Thunder are the only team I can think of with 3 (I didn't exactly look so maybe it has happened before).

As for things like PER, it is very difficult for teammates to finish in the top ten, let alone 3 teammates all doing it.  So it would have to be situations in which players were on different teams the prior season.  You know like the trio of James, Wade, and Bosh who finished 1, 2, and 4 in the 2009-2010 season (you know the year before they joined up).  So clearly the person with the check mark didn't do a very good job of fact checking.

Wow, 85/86 Sixers? You keep digging in. And your hole keeps getting deeper. Your tenacity and perseverance are only outweighed by your poor foundation (85/86 Dr J = 19/20 Lebron, LOL, 85/86 Moses Malone = 19/20 Kawhi, ****, 85/86 Barkley = 19/20 Davis, not so bad). 

You did raise a good point about Miami, and I must have had a blind spot about that formation.  That is probably the best equivalent to what the Lakers may pull off today if they sign Kawhi.  The only major difference being that the last piece is a guy who just garnered Finals MVP, but that is not a significant point in terms of talent pooling. 

I would be interested in finding out if Adam Silver picks up the phone and calls Kawhi, and says, "hey, dude, you're a free agent, but it would be bad for the league if you signed with the Lakers. Just sayin'".  Probably not, and even if he did, would it sway Kawhi? Probably not.

[KGs Knee]

I think you could make a pretty good argument that the mid-80's Sixers were fairly equivalent to this hypothetical Lakers team.  They had an aging, but still very good Dr. J.  They had Malone still in his prime.  They had a rising star in Barkley.  They had HOF role players in Cheeks and Jones.  They had an old former MVP in McAdoo riding their bench.  As well as some other quality depth (guys like Sedale Threatt).  For Barkley's rookie year they also had recent all star Andrew Toney (though Barkley wasn't as good that year).

How old are you, Moranis? 12?  You clearly are not old enough to remember the mid-80's basketball landscape. For you to argue that the mid-eighties 76er team is the equivalent to the hypothetical Laker team is bogus to an insulting level. I hereby revoke your Moderator card for the next season.

If Leonard joins the Lakers (which I expect he will), they will have 3 of the top 5 players in the NBA who will be able to play next season. Since Durant and Thompson are out, they don't count.  Other than Giannis and (maybe) Embiid, there is no one else worth discussing. And forget arguing that Davis didn't make all NBA last season; we all know that if he played the entire year and avoided the Rich Paul shenanigans, he is likely a first team all NBA. Same with Lebron (whom I know you realize is still one of the top 2-3 players).

Stop this contrarian BS.

tough but fair. I’ve heard a lot of nba historians and star geeks discuss the history of the league, and this is the first time I have ever heard the 82-83 76ers as a super team in the league. The contrarian take has really gone off the rails.

This is worse, CC. He is arguing that the 84/85 Sixers (Barkley's rookie year) was better.

84-85 Erving was like 34 and averaging 20 points a game. They had one true superstar in Malone. Cheeks was an elite role player then. Barkley was a rookie and only averaged 14 points. Quite a bit off from Durant, klay, curry and draymond all in their primes

Hypothetical Lakers team is not the same as the Warriors.  I mean if you are going to quote my posts, at least read them before commenting. 

The 83 Sixers are considered one of the greatest teams in league history.  And they have that catchy Fo, Fi, Fo slogan.  Until the 01 Lakers they had the best playoff record of any team in history (which the warriors also eclipsed in 17).  They had 2 MVP's in their prime (Dr. J and Moses), perhaps the greatest defender of the generation (Jones), and another all league defender (Cheeks).  They had a rising star in Toney (injuries derailed his career).  They inexplicably lost early in the 84 playoffs (one of the greatest upsets in league history) and just got beaten by a bit better Celtics team in 85 before Malone got injured and then left and Dr. J continued the inevitable aging process.  Had Malone stayed though with the rise of Barkley who knows what the late 80's in the East would have looked like as Malone was still a beast through the end of the decade.

In any given season only 2 or 3 teams have realistic shots at winning the title (and many of those seasons there is in fact a heavy favorite - ala the Warriors, the Heat, the Lakers, the Bulls, etc.).  This has been borne out time and time again.

You should probably reply to footey not me. I just agreed with him. Also weren't you 4 years old during the 83 philly team? It feels like you are describing them like you watched them 3 years ago.

For what it's worth:

I was going to law school in Philadelphia in the early 80's, and went to some of those games in the Spectrum vs. the Celtics.  Great rivalry.

The '83 Sixer team was an awesome team.  A dominant team.

BUT:  It did not have 3 out of the top 5 players on the NBA playing on it, like the new Laker roster would have. No one ever has in modern league history if memory serves me.  That includes the recent Warriors.

Maybe, maybe 2: Moses Malone (definitely) and Dr. J (maybe). It also had great role players. Actually the guy who absolutely was the Celtics' Achilles Heal was Andrew (a/k/a Android) Toney. 

Other contemporaries playing then clearly among top 5: Larry Bird; Magic Johnson; Kareem; Sidney Moncrief.  Erving and Malone were first team all nba, but no Sixer was on the 2nd team.

In addition, Moranis was arguing that the 84/85 Sixer team had more talent than the hypothetical Laker team. (it's up there above somewhere). That was Barkley's rookie year.  It was also the year that Toney started experiencing foot problems, which would end up curtailing his career. That team was not very good.  Only Malone made All NBA (he was on 1st team). No other Sixer made 1st or 2nd team.

my post was actually referring to the 85/86 team when Barkley had clearly started his rise (that is why I mentioned the prior season being Barkley's rookie year).  He obviously wasn't yet at his peak, but even that season and playing next to Moses he went for 20 and 13 and finished 6th in MVP voting.  Moses went for 24 and 12 (10th in MVP voting).  Dr. J was obviously on the down side but was still an 18/5/3.5 player.  Cheeks was still very much in prime making his 2nd all star game and the 1st of 3 straight averaging 15/3/9 as a 1st Team All Defense.  Jones was still a good defender, but wasn't elite any more, but he was their 5th best player.  They had former MVP (and HOFer) McAdoo on their deeper bench and long time starter Sedale Threat on the rise.

Obviously it isn't meant to be an exact comparison, but in that scenario you have the HOF talent that hasn't yet proven himself (Barkley/Davis).  The MVP candidate in his prime and the discussion for best player in the world (Moses/Kawhi).  The again HOFer who can still perform at a high level (Dr. J/Lebron).  Now those aren't all exactly the same comparison and Lebron will almost certainly outperform Dr. J (though I'm not so sure Davis and Kawhi outperform Barkley and Moses).  The Sixers also had things the Lakers aren't going to have in a player like Cheeks.  They may find a Jones or McAdoo type (though a former MVP on the last legs probably isn't happening).  And Kuzma is better than Threatt, but I'm not sure he ends up with a better career.  That was the point I was trying to make.  The league is littered with teams with all sorts of great players that are playing on the same team.  Heck that Sixers team had 4 former or future MVP's playing on it.  I don't think any team in history can claim that.  The Thunder are the only team I can think of with 3 (I didn't exactly look so maybe it has happened before).

As for things like PER, it is very difficult for teammates to finish in the top ten, let alone 3 teammates all doing it.  So it would have to be situations in which players were on different teams the prior season.  You know like the trio of James, Wade, and Bosh who finished 1, 2, and 4 in the 2009-2010 season (you know the year before they joined up).  So clearly the person with the check mark didn't do a very good job of fact checking.

Wow, 85/86 Sixers? You keep digging in. And your hole keeps getting deeper. Your tenacity and perseverance are only outweighed by your poor foundation (85/86 Dr J = 19/20 Lebron, LOL, 85/86 Moses Malone = 19/20 Kawhi, ****, 85/86 Barkley = 19/20 Davis, not so bad). 

You did raise a good point about Miami, and I must have had a blind spot about that formation.  That is probably the best equivalent to what the Lakers may pull off today if they sign Kawhi.  The only major difference being that the last piece is a guy who just garnered Finals MVP, but that is not a significant point in terms of talent pooling. 

I would be interested in finding out if Adam Silver picks up the phone and calls Kawhi, and says, "hey, dude, you're a free agent, but it would be bad for the league if you signed with the Lakers. Just sayin'".  Probably not, and even if he did, would it sway Kawhi? Probably not.

No way Silver would be foolish enough to try to sway Kawhi in any direction.  Anyone who found out and was negatively affected would have a legitimate case for a lawsuit on their hands.  Collusion is strictly forbidden, especially on behalf of the league itself.

But if the league determines it's in the best interest of the game to change the rules so that the stars have to make an actual decision between money and location, I'm fine with that.  As it stands right now, stars don't have to make such a choice.  With contracts being so short and the cap constantly increasing by amounts that yield higher max contract values each year than the standard raise can account for, the stars can pretty much have their cake and eat it too.

The league will never get the players union to go back on max contracts, though.  There are more players that stand to lose than gain by eliminating the max contract.  What the league could probably get the union to get on board with is allowing max contracts to come with raises that proportionally mirror yearly cap increases (or the standard raise - whichever is greater), but only from the team with Bird Rights.  You could also make it so that if a player becomes eligible for a higher tier max during the course of their contract, that is accounted for as well, but again, only for the team with Bird Rights.

[celticsclay]

I think you could make a pretty good argument that the mid-80's Sixers were fairly equivalent to this hypothetical Lakers team.  They had an aging, but still very good Dr. J.  They had Malone still in his prime.  They had a rising star in Barkley.  They had HOF role players in Cheeks and Jones.  They had an old former MVP in McAdoo riding their bench.  As well as some other quality depth (guys like Sedale Threatt).  For Barkley's rookie year they also had recent all star Andrew Toney (though Barkley wasn't as good that year).

How old are you, Moranis? 12?  You clearly are not old enough to remember the mid-80's basketball landscape. For you to argue that the mid-eighties 76er team is the equivalent to the hypothetical Laker team is bogus to an insulting level. I hereby revoke your Moderator card for the next season.

If Leonard joins the Lakers (which I expect he will), they will have 3 of the top 5 players in the NBA who will be able to play next season. Since Durant and Thompson are out, they don't count.  Other than Giannis and (maybe) Embiid, there is no one else worth discussing. And forget arguing that Davis didn't make all NBA last season; we all know that if he played the entire year and avoided the Rich Paul shenanigans, he is likely a first team all NBA. Same with Lebron (whom I know you realize is still one of the top 2-3 players).

Stop this contrarian BS.

tough but fair. I’ve heard a lot of nba historians and star geeks discuss the history of the league, and this is the first time I have ever heard the 82-83 76ers as a super team in the league. The contrarian take has really gone off the rails.

This is worse, CC. He is arguing that the 84/85 Sixers (Barkley's rookie year) was better.

84-85 Erving was like 34 and averaging 20 points a game. They had one true superstar in Malone. Cheeks was an elite role player then. Barkley was a rookie and only averaged 14 points. Quite a bit off from Durant, klay, curry and draymond all in their primes

Hypothetical Lakers team is not the same as the Warriors.  I mean if you are going to quote my posts, at least read them before commenting. 

The 83 Sixers are considered one of the greatest teams in league history.  And they have that catchy Fo, Fi, Fo slogan.  Until the 01 Lakers they had the best playoff record of any team in history (which the warriors also eclipsed in 17).  They had 2 MVP's in their prime (Dr. J and Moses), perhaps the greatest defender of the generation (Jones), and another all league defender (Cheeks).  They had a rising star in Toney (injuries derailed his career).  They inexplicably lost early in the 84 playoffs (one of the greatest upsets in league history) and just got beaten by a bit better Celtics team in 85 before Malone got injured and then left and Dr. J continued the inevitable aging process.  Had Malone stayed though with the rise of Barkley who knows what the late 80's in the East would have looked like as Malone was still a beast through the end of the decade.

In any given season only 2 or 3 teams have realistic shots at winning the title (and many of those seasons there is in fact a heavy favorite - ala the Warriors, the Heat, the Lakers, the Bulls, etc.).  This has been borne out time and time again.

You should probably reply to footey not me. I just agreed with him. Also weren't you 4 years old during the 83 philly team? It feels like you are describing them like you watched them 3 years ago.

For what it's worth:

I was going to law school in Philadelphia in the early 80's, and went to some of those games in the Spectrum vs. the Celtics.  Great rivalry.

The '83 Sixer team was an awesome team.  A dominant team.

BUT:  It did not have 3 out of the top 5 players on the NBA playing on it, like the new Laker roster would have. No one ever has in modern league history if memory serves me.  That includes the recent Warriors.

Maybe, maybe 2: Moses Malone (definitely) and Dr. J (maybe). It also had great role players. Actually the guy who absolutely was the Celtics' Achilles Heal was Andrew (a/k/a Android) Toney. 

Other contemporaries playing then clearly among top 5: Larry Bird; Magic Johnson; Kareem; Sidney Moncrief.  Erving and Malone were first team all nba, but no Sixer was on the 2nd team.

In addition, Moranis was arguing that the 84/85 Sixer team had more talent than the hypothetical Laker team. (it's up there above somewhere). That was Barkley's rookie year.  It was also the year that Toney started experiencing foot problems, which would end up curtailing his career. That team was not very good.  Only Malone made All NBA (he was on 1st team). No other Sixer made 1st or 2nd team.

my post was actually referring to the 85/86 team when Barkley had clearly started his rise (that is why I mentioned the prior season being Barkley's rookie year).  He obviously wasn't yet at his peak, but even that season and playing next to Moses he went for 20 and 13 and finished 6th in MVP voting.  Moses went for 24 and 12 (10th in MVP voting).  Dr. J was obviously on the down side but was still an 18/5/3.5 player.  Cheeks was still very much in prime making his 2nd all star game and the 1st of 3 straight averaging 15/3/9 as a 1st Team All Defense.  Jones was still a good defender, but wasn't elite any more, but he was their 5th best player.  They had former MVP (and HOFer) McAdoo on their deeper bench and long time starter Sedale Threat on the rise.

Obviously it isn't meant to be an exact comparison, but in that scenario you have the HOF talent that hasn't yet proven himself (Barkley/Davis).  The MVP candidate in his prime and the discussion for best player in the world (Moses/Kawhi).  The again HOFer who can still perform at a high level (Dr. J/Lebron).  Now those aren't all exactly the same comparison and Lebron will almost certainly outperform Dr. J (though I'm not so sure Davis and Kawhi outperform Barkley and Moses).  The Sixers also had things the Lakers aren't going to have in a player like Cheeks.  They may find a Jones or McAdoo type (though a former MVP on the last legs probably isn't happening).  And Kuzma is better than Threatt, but I'm not sure he ends up with a better career.  That was the point I was trying to make.  The league is littered with teams with all sorts of great players that are playing on the same team.  Heck that Sixers team had 4 former or future MVP's playing on it.  I don't think any team in history can claim that.  The Thunder are the only team I can think of with 3 (I didn't exactly look so maybe it has happened before).

As for things like PER, it is very difficult for teammates to finish in the top ten, let alone 3 teammates all doing it.  So it would have to be situations in which players were on different teams the prior season.  You know like the trio of James, Wade, and Bosh who finished 1, 2, and 4 in the 2009-2010 season (you know the year before they joined up).  So clearly the person with the check mark didn't do a very good job of fact checking.

Wow, 85/86 Sixers? You keep digging in. And your hole keeps getting deeper. Your tenacity and perseverance are only outweighed by your poor foundation (85/86 Dr J = 19/20 Lebron, LOL, 85/86 Moses Malone = 19/20 Kawhi, ****, 85/86 Barkley = 19/20 Davis, not so bad). 

You did raise a good point about Miami, and I must have had a blind spot about that formation.  That is probably the best equivalent to what the Lakers may pull off today if they sign Kawhi.  The only major difference being that the last piece is a guy who just garnered Finals MVP, but that is not a significant point in terms of talent pooling. 

I would be interested in finding out if Adam Silver picks up the phone and calls Kawhi, and says, "hey, dude, you're a free agent, but it would be bad for the league if you signed with the Lakers. Just sayin'".  Probably not, and even if he did, would it sway Kawhi? Probably not.

I also find his repeated mentioning of jones and mcadoo really bizarre also. They were both 34 years old and played about 20 minutes a game. The lakers will probably end up signing rondo, iggy and carter. 20 years from now moranis would be arguing how they had hall of gamer Vince carter on their roster and a finals mvp and former all star in iggy. I have to think of all the strangest comparisons I have seen on this board, some with jiri welch and Brandon hunter are up there, but this 85-86 76ers comparison to a hypothetical team with Lebron, Davis and Leonard is right up there! Tps footey for pointing out the absurdity of this as someone who actually went to these games

[rondofan1255]

Thank You Kawhi for not joining Boston’s biggest rival and LeBron 

[JSD]

 Lakers went from favorites to win the title to “do the Lakers make the playoffs in the stacked west”


Unbelievable turn of events

[Moranis]

I think you could make a pretty good argument that the mid-80's Sixers were fairly equivalent to this hypothetical Lakers team.  They had an aging, but still very good Dr. J.  They had Malone still in his prime.  They had a rising star in Barkley.  They had HOF role players in Cheeks and Jones.  They had an old former MVP in McAdoo riding their bench.  As well as some other quality depth (guys like Sedale Threatt).  For Barkley's rookie year they also had recent all star Andrew Toney (though Barkley wasn't as good that year).

How old are you, Moranis? 12?  You clearly are not old enough to remember the mid-80's basketball landscape. For you to argue that the mid-eighties 76er team is the equivalent to the hypothetical Laker team is bogus to an insulting level. I hereby revoke your Moderator card for the next season.

If Leonard joins the Lakers (which I expect he will), they will have 3 of the top 5 players in the NBA who will be able to play next season. Since Durant and Thompson are out, they don't count.  Other than Giannis and (maybe) Embiid, there is no one else worth discussing. And forget arguing that Davis didn't make all NBA last season; we all know that if he played the entire year and avoided the Rich Paul shenanigans, he is likely a first team all NBA. Same with Lebron (whom I know you realize is still one of the top 2-3 players).

Stop this contrarian BS.

tough but fair. I’ve heard a lot of nba historians and star geeks discuss the history of the league, and this is the first time I have ever heard the 82-83 76ers as a super team in the league. The contrarian take has really gone off the rails.

This is worse, CC. He is arguing that the 84/85 Sixers (Barkley's rookie year) was better.

84-85 Erving was like 34 and averaging 20 points a game. They had one true superstar in Malone. Cheeks was an elite role player then. Barkley was a rookie and only averaged 14 points. Quite a bit off from Durant, klay, curry and draymond all in their primes

Hypothetical Lakers team is not the same as the Warriors.  I mean if you are going to quote my posts, at least read them before commenting. 

The 83 Sixers are considered one of the greatest teams in league history.  And they have that catchy Fo, Fi, Fo slogan.  Until the 01 Lakers they had the best playoff record of any team in history (which the warriors also eclipsed in 17).  They had 2 MVP's in their prime (Dr. J and Moses), perhaps the greatest defender of the generation (Jones), and another all league defender (Cheeks).  They had a rising star in Toney (injuries derailed his career).  They inexplicably lost early in the 84 playoffs (one of the greatest upsets in league history) and just got beaten by a bit better Celtics team in 85 before Malone got injured and then left and Dr. J continued the inevitable aging process.  Had Malone stayed though with the rise of Barkley who knows what the late 80's in the East would have looked like as Malone was still a beast through the end of the decade.

In any given season only 2 or 3 teams have realistic shots at winning the title (and many of those seasons there is in fact a heavy favorite - ala the Warriors, the Heat, the Lakers, the Bulls, etc.).  This has been borne out time and time again.

You should probably reply to footey not me. I just agreed with him. Also weren't you 4 years old during the 83 philly team? It feels like you are describing them like you watched them 3 years ago.

For what it's worth:

I was going to law school in Philadelphia in the early 80's, and went to some of those games in the Spectrum vs. the Celtics.  Great rivalry.

The '83 Sixer team was an awesome team.  A dominant team.

BUT:  It did not have 3 out of the top 5 players on the NBA playing on it, like the new Laker roster would have. No one ever has in modern league history if memory serves me.  That includes the recent Warriors.

Maybe, maybe 2: Moses Malone (definitely) and Dr. J (maybe). It also had great role players. Actually the guy who absolutely was the Celtics' Achilles Heal was Andrew (a/k/a Android) Toney. 

Other contemporaries playing then clearly among top 5: Larry Bird; Magic Johnson; Kareem; Sidney Moncrief.  Erving and Malone were first team all nba, but no Sixer was on the 2nd team.

In addition, Moranis was arguing that the 84/85 Sixer team had more talent than the hypothetical Laker team. (it's up there above somewhere). That was Barkley's rookie year.  It was also the year that Toney started experiencing foot problems, which would end up curtailing his career. That team was not very good.  Only Malone made All NBA (he was on 1st team). No other Sixer made 1st or 2nd team.

my post was actually referring to the 85/86 team when Barkley had clearly started his rise (that is why I mentioned the prior season being Barkley's rookie year).  He obviously wasn't yet at his peak, but even that season and playing next to Moses he went for 20 and 13 and finished 6th in MVP voting.  Moses went for 24 and 12 (10th in MVP voting).  Dr. J was obviously on the down side but was still an 18/5/3.5 player.  Cheeks was still very much in prime making his 2nd all star game and the 1st of 3 straight averaging 15/3/9 as a 1st Team All Defense.  Jones was still a good defender, but wasn't elite any more, but he was their 5th best player.  They had former MVP (and HOFer) McAdoo on their deeper bench and long time starter Sedale Threat on the rise.

Obviously it isn't meant to be an exact comparison, but in that scenario you have the HOF talent that hasn't yet proven himself (Barkley/Davis).  The MVP candidate in his prime and the discussion for best player in the world (Moses/Kawhi).  The again HOFer who can still perform at a high level (Dr. J/Lebron).  Now those aren't all exactly the same comparison and Lebron will almost certainly outperform Dr. J (though I'm not so sure Davis and Kawhi outperform Barkley and Moses).  The Sixers also had things the Lakers aren't going to have in a player like Cheeks.  They may find a Jones or McAdoo type (though a former MVP on the last legs probably isn't happening).  And Kuzma is better than Threatt, but I'm not sure he ends up with a better career.  That was the point I was trying to make.  The league is littered with teams with all sorts of great players that are playing on the same team.  Heck that Sixers team had 4 former or future MVP's playing on it.  I don't think any team in history can claim that.  The Thunder are the only team I can think of with 3 (I didn't exactly look so maybe it has happened before).

As for things like PER, it is very difficult for teammates to finish in the top ten, let alone 3 teammates all doing it.  So it would have to be situations in which players were on different teams the prior season.  You know like the trio of James, Wade, and Bosh who finished 1, 2, and 4 in the 2009-2010 season (you know the year before they joined up).  So clearly the person with the check mark didn't do a very good job of fact checking.

Wow, 85/86 Sixers? You keep digging in. And your hole keeps getting deeper. Your tenacity and perseverance are only outweighed by your poor foundation (85/86 Dr J = 19/20 Lebron, LOL, 85/86 Moses Malone = 19/20 Kawhi, ****, 85/86 Barkley = 19/20 Davis, not so bad). 

You did raise a good point about Miami, and I must have had a blind spot about that formation.  That is probably the best equivalent to what the Lakers may pull off today if they sign Kawhi.  The only major difference being that the last piece is a guy who just garnered Finals MVP, but that is not a significant point in terms of talent pooling. 

I would be interested in finding out if Adam Silver picks up the phone and calls Kawhi, and says, "hey, dude, you're a free agent, but it would be bad for the league if you signed with the Lakers. Just sayin'".  Probably not, and even if he did, would it sway Kawhi? Probably not.

I also find his repeated mentioning of jones and mcadoo really bizarre also. They were both 34 years old and played about 20 minutes a game. The lakers will probably end up signing rondo, iggy and carter. 20 years from now moranis would be arguing how they had hall of gamer Vince carter on their roster and a finals mvp and former all star in iggy. I have to think of all the strangest comparisons I have seen on this board, some with jiri welch and Brandon hunter are up there, but this 85-86 76ers comparison to a hypothetical team with Lebron, Davis and Leonard is right up there! Tps footey for pointing out the absurdity of this as someone who actually went to these games

Jones was still an excellent defender.  Not all world like he was in his prime, but still very good.  The year before he actually played less mpg, started less games, and was on the 2nd Team All Defense.  It isn't like he was 40 and barely playing.  He was still a very solid role player.  Different skill set but very similar vein to JJ Redick last year for the Sixers.

[Moranis]

Lakers went from favorites to win the title to “do the Lakers make the playoffs in the stacked west”


Unbelievable turn of events

I don't see that at all.  As they were a clear playoff team before and they are still a clear playoff team now.  Danny Green was a big addition for them.  they brought back KCP and McGee, so their roster is filling out.  They need a point guard, but otherwise have a pretty balanced team at the other spots.

PG - ?
SG - Green, KCP, Daniels
SF - James, Dudley
PF - Kuzma
C - Davis, McGee

[gouki88]

Lakers went from favorites to win the title to “do the Lakers make the playoffs in the stacked west”


Unbelievable turn of events

I don't see that at all.  As they were a clear playoff team before and they are still a clear playoff team now.  Danny Green was a big addition for them.  they brought back KCP and McGee, so their roster is filling out.  They need a point guard, but otherwise have a pretty balanced team at the other spots.

PG - ?
SG - Green, KCP, Daniels
SF - James, Dudley
PF - Kuzma
C - Davis, McGee

If by balanced you mean having 2 stars, one solid role player and nothing else, then yeah they're balanced. They have absolutely no bench