1) Just yesterday Mark Cuban took some shots at the current NCAA system that forces players to play at least one year at the college level before heading to the NBA. Cuban suggested players be able to go straight to the pros if they are able to and if not can even start out in the D League and work their way up. Do you agree with Cuban or should the NCAA continue to make a year in college the path to the NBA?
Spencer-
I 100% am on the side of Mark Cuban. Why should a player be forced to go the college route if they believe they have the abilities to play at the professional level? In my opinion these guys can make the business decision for their life and career coming out of high school of where to go. If they think they can make it in the NBA like the Lebrons and Kobes of the world then they should be allowed to decide to do that. If they don't pan out then unfortunately you have to live with that decision. If that means getting caught up in the D League for a while then so be it. We all are forced to make that decision of where to go from high school whether it be college, start working or go into the armed forces. If these guys have the skill to make it to the NBA they should be allowed to choose that. And that isn't to say some of these guys maybe won't still go to college. I'm almost positive the college game will still be filled with guys who maybe aren't at the skill level of the NBA yet, looking to perfect their craft a little more first, and that is fine. But right now the NCAA basically requires these guys to go to school for a year so they can have these marquee players in their system to fill seats and make money. That's it. They NCAA might preach until they are red in face that their focus is to help guys become better players and get to the next level but that is crap. They don't care where these guys end up, they want to make their money. It's an unnecessary step for players to take and I think Cuban's system would work much better.
I 100% am on the side of Mark Cuban. Why should a player be forced to go the college route if they believe they have the abilities to play at the professional level? In my opinion these guys can make the business decision for their life and career coming out of high school of where to go. If they think they can make it in the NBA like the Lebrons and Kobes of the world then they should be allowed to decide to do that. If they don't pan out then unfortunately you have to live with that decision. If that means getting caught up in the D League for a while then so be it. We all are forced to make that decision of where to go from high school whether it be college, start working or go into the armed forces. If these guys have the skill to make it to the NBA they should be allowed to choose that. And that isn't to say some of these guys maybe won't still go to college. I'm almost positive the college game will still be filled with guys who maybe aren't at the skill level of the NBA yet, looking to perfect their craft a little more first, and that is fine. But right now the NCAA basically requires these guys to go to school for a year so they can have these marquee players in their system to fill seats and make money. That's it. They NCAA might preach until they are red in face that their focus is to help guys become better players and get to the next level but that is crap. They don't care where these guys end up, they want to make their money. It's an unnecessary step for players to take and I think Cuban's system would work much better.
Ty-
I agree with Mark Cuban too. Although I am for them expanding the age to 20 for the NBA entry be cause I think the 1 year situation is stupid because people expect the players to be great in one year learning a system. Then that player has to learn another system and way to play in the NBA. If they stay 2 years, then at least they have something to build on from the first year. I do think that going to the D-league is a viable option. Sure some of the kids would be served better to get an education, but they would get a better professional experience in the d-league. Although college is really competitive only 1% of the players in college make it to the NBA. While in the D-league those players can go up against NBA calibar talent more often. The only downfall would be that some players would enter the d-league even though they weren't necessarily ready. But it would also groom them better than going to college because they would already be adapted to the NBA game.
Ty-
This is hard to do because neither of the players have played a game yet. I will say that Danny Granger should be the better player, given his age and ability to play at an all-star level a couple seasons ago. Granger has not played well recently though, which was the main reason the Pacers traded him. He could be helped by the fact that he could potentially start for the Clippers because their small forwards are average at best. The Clippers also need another scorer to take pressure off of Chris Paul and Blake Griffin. But I think Granger has to play better for me to say he was a better pick up. As for the Thunder, Butler's signing may have come at the best time because of the injury to Thabo Sefalosha, that will sideline him for 4 to 6 weeks. Now Butler might actually start for the Thunder in his first game with the team. Butler was already playing well with the Bucks and might shoot better than Thabo was shooting and give the same effort on defense.
Spencer-
It is only a few days into both signings so the immediate impacts are unmeasurable so far, but I think in the long run the Thunder made out better. Butler is a little older than Granger, and his best days are certainly behind him, but he provides a little offense and defense or OKC. I haven't had time to see how the Thunder plan to use him and he hasn't played a game yet so no one really knows yet, but I assume he'll come of the bench. I think that will provide them with some spark when they give guys like Durant and Westbrook some rest. He is averaging 11.3 points per game and 4.5 rebounds, which is around what Harden used to average in his sixth man role with the Thunder a couple years back. I don't think he will become the sixth man but one place the Thunder struggle is scoring when their best players are off the floor. I think this helps patch that weakness up a little bit.
It is only a few days into both signings so the immediate impacts are unmeasurable so far, but I think in the long run the Thunder made out better. Butler is a little older than Granger, and his best days are certainly behind him, but he provides a little offense and defense or OKC. I haven't had time to see how the Thunder plan to use him and he hasn't played a game yet so no one really knows yet, but I assume he'll come of the bench. I think that will provide them with some spark when they give guys like Durant and Westbrook some rest. He is averaging 11.3 points per game and 4.5 rebounds, which is around what Harden used to average in his sixth man role with the Thunder a couple years back. I don't think he will become the sixth man but one place the Thunder struggle is scoring when their best players are off the floor. I think this helps patch that weakness up a little bit.
Spencer-
I love the concept of the Franchise Tag, unfortunately I think its meaning and favorability are a hard sell nowadays. To elaborate, I can see the point of it is to be able to keep a franchise player in your system for another year while you work out the ins and outs of an extension given your current pay roll. I can also see why it could be flattering for a team to dangle out there to a player like "Hey you are a franchise guy and we want to keep you here, that's why we want to tag you." However, as I said that isn't the business way of looking at it from a players perspective. For them they see it as a one year deal that could be their last baring injury. They also see it as taking less money for a year than they may really be worth to their franchise or other franchises. When you think about it like that you can see why players hate them and don't want to sign them and why I think they NFL should and will eventually get rid of them.
I love the concept of the Franchise Tag, unfortunately I think its meaning and favorability are a hard sell nowadays. To elaborate, I can see the point of it is to be able to keep a franchise player in your system for another year while you work out the ins and outs of an extension given your current pay roll. I can also see why it could be flattering for a team to dangle out there to a player like "Hey you are a franchise guy and we want to keep you here, that's why we want to tag you." However, as I said that isn't the business way of looking at it from a players perspective. For them they see it as a one year deal that could be their last baring injury. They also see it as taking less money for a year than they may really be worth to their franchise or other franchises. When you think about it like that you can see why players hate them and don't want to sign them and why I think they NFL should and will eventually get rid of them.
Ty-
The Franchise tag has always been a good thing and a bad thing. It is good because the non big market teams can keep their better players if they are free agents. The bad news is that they don't need to do that in the NFL because teams don't have a problem keeping players in certain markets. But it does buy time to help work out a deal with the player. This deal does duck for the player because the contract isn't guaranteed and they could jeopardize their future if they get hurt. As a redskins fan I think the Orakpo tag is an example of how the Franchise tag is bad. Orakpo wants to stay in D.C. but the Skins hit him with a franchise tag to save time. This sounds good but now Orakpo is overpaid for a linebacker who only had 10 sacks last year and only had double digit sacks in 2 years. So now it is hard to go back and get him to accept less money than the 11 million dollars he is getting with the franchise tag.
Ty-
This obviously should not have mattered to the league at all. I'm sure they did it because of how much the NBA relies on facial recognition to help expand the brand. But let's be real, everybody knows who LeBron . He wears the same number and is all over the place. The mask was also crazy because LeBron looked like a super hero. I'm sure Lebron will end up wearing a clear mask now but he is still going to be LeBron.
Spencer-
I've tried looking for the actual reasons the NBA gave James for why he couldn't wear the black mask, but I can't seem to find them anywhere. Either way I can't come up with any logical explanation in my mind as to why he was forced to change it so I disagree with Silver making him switch to clear. I don't think the color of any players protective facemask is detrimental to the game in any way, and I don't really see it as a distraction for him or the league either. If anything he helped the league out cause there were shirts being sold with James portrayed as Batman and Zorro on them and the NBA could of jumped on board in selling merchandise of their start player too. Regardless I think it is hard for league to explain the reason for the change and I think it was an unnecessary measure. In my opinion they should focus more on getting flopping out of the game than black protective facemasks.
I've tried looking for the actual reasons the NBA gave James for why he couldn't wear the black mask, but I can't seem to find them anywhere. Either way I can't come up with any logical explanation in my mind as to why he was forced to change it so I disagree with Silver making him switch to clear. I don't think the color of any players protective facemask is detrimental to the game in any way, and I don't really see it as a distraction for him or the league either. If anything he helped the league out cause there were shirts being sold with James portrayed as Batman and Zorro on them and the NBA could of jumped on board in selling merchandise of their start player too. Regardless I think it is hard for league to explain the reason for the change and I think it was an unnecessary measure. In my opinion they should focus more on getting flopping out of the game than black protective facemasks.
5) What did you learn?
Spencer- Syracuse was overrated, and Virginia is for real
Even as a Cuse fan I will firmly admit they aren't who I thought they were. At least not recently they aren't. The Orange are just struggling to play sound offense right now. One night CJ Fair is on, the next he goes cold. One night Cooney is knocking down threes the next he can't make a bucket. You can't win games when your best players can't score. I still believe they can play defense with anyone, but at a point they can't hold off teams with a number of good scorers and they start to cash in, while Syracuse can't keep up. I will say it right here and now, Syracuse doesn't deserve to be a number one seed and they are lucky to still be ranked in the top 10 cause I don't think they could beat any of those teams right now.
On the other end props to Virginia for taking it to them. How many people saw this team winning the ACC at the beginning of the year? Not me. Regardless they are a well rounded and great basketball team. They aren't the fanciest team and they don't have these house hold name guys that we all talk about but they just play hard and more importantly play together. The scariest part is other than their sharper shooter Joe Harris who is the second leading scorer on the team and has a .417 three point percentage, they won't lose much in terms of talent after this season. They have a handful of sophomores and juniors on their roster. I don't necessarily know if they will win it all in the big dance, but they have got the worlds attention and I wouldn't be surprised if they shock the world again by making a run at the title.
Ty- People still want to trade Russell Westbrook?
After last year's playoffs I thought that people were finally beginning to understand how valuable Westbrook was the the Thunder success. Every year before last years playoffs, people would continue to call for Westbrook to be traded for a more pass-first point guard to help supplement Kevin Durant. When Westbrook got hurt in the playoffs people began to see just how important he was.
Now less than a year later, people have jumped back on that bandwagon after Durant scorching January, many started jumping on the trade Westbrook band wagon again. Although Kevin Durant played out of his mind in January but he needs Westbrook in order to win a title. In the playoffs one player can't always carry you through an entire seven game series. Kevin Durant would have to play at an absurd level to beat top notch opponents in the western conference. It is unfair to count on a player for that much production.
The Westbrook hate was added too by the fact that the Thunder went 0-3 in his return, although the team played two really good teams (Miami, and the L. A. Clippers). The whole thing was blew out of proportion but now the Thunder is 2-3 since Westbrook's return. Yesterday Westbrook dropped a 10-1 2 shooting night for 26 points and 5 assists. Would you still trade Russell Westbrook?
The Westbrook hate was added too by the fact that the Thunder went 0-3 in his return, although the team played two really good teams (Miami, and the L. A. Clippers). The whole thing was blew out of proportion but now the Thunder is 2-3 since Westbrook's return. Yesterday Westbrook dropped a 10-1 2 shooting night for 26 points and 5 assists. Would you still trade Russell Westbrook?
