Ohio Chatter DEV

2quik4u

So the Lakers upgraded almost all their positions but are off season losers because another team got better? The fuck that shit makes no sense

Biggest offseason losers
By John Hollinger

Getty Images
Kobe Bryant's Lakers and Mikhail Prokhorov's Nets can thank LeBron for their disappointing summer.
In the NBA offseason, for every winner there must also be a loser.

I wrote Monday about the six teams that improved themselves the most so far this summer, but now it's time to look at the seamy underside: the teams that find themselves in a tougher position. In several cases, this isn't necessarily of their own doing, but rather from circumstances that were either somewhat or entirely out of their control.

Nonetheless, they're worse off for it, starting with our biggest loser from the summer:

Cleveland Cavaliers

Does anyone else want to hug a Cleveland fan "Good Will Hunting" style and remind them that it's not their fault? LeBron James' impossibly painful exit was made worse by the Cavs' inability to give anyone their money. Houston matched a generous offer sheet to Kyle Lowry, Matt Barnes took half the money to play for the Lakers, and they can't even find a workable sign-and-trade for Shaquille O'Neal.

The only major change so far has been a swap of Delonte West for Ramon Sessions, which means the Cavs are basically the same team that won 61 games a year ago … albeit with one glaring omission. Cleveland still has a huge trade exception and may be able to get something done before opening day, but at best this looks like a borderline playoff team.

Los Angeles Lakers

What, you ask, did the Lakers do wrong? Nothing -- in fact, they shored up the point guard spot with Steve Blake and got a tough gamer for peanuts in Matt Barnes. And, of course, they coaxed Phil Jackson to stay on the bench for one more season.

All that would have made the Lakers overwhelming favorites to repeat as champions next season, except for a little thing that went down in Miami. With the Heat looking like a super team, the Lakers find themselves downgraded to co-favorites at best, through no fault of their own.

Had James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh aligned themselves in any other combination with any other team, that wouldn't be the case. Thus, L.A. lost ground this summer, even though, in narrower terms, it won with the additions of Barnes and Blake.

Los Angeles Clippers

Not a great summer for basketball teams in SoCal. While the Lakers' misfortunes were entirely external, in the case of the Clippers, the offseason has been a full-on disaster. L.A. created enough salary-cap room to sign a big-fish free agent to a maximum contract, and walked away with Ryan Gomes and Randy Foye.

Yeesh. While I appreciate the Clippers' efforts to reconstruct the 2008 Minnesota Timberwolves (they also re-signed Craig Smith; can Greg Buckner and Mark Madsen be far behind?), those two additions do little or nothing to improve their prospects for this season.

L.A. added to its woes with a puzzling coaching hire, selecting the barely adequate Vinny Del Negro over the vastly more qualified Dwane Casey. The Clips have some talent, and if Blake Griffin delivers, they might contend for a playoff spot anyway, but they missed out on a glorious opportunity to rise among the elite in the Western Conference.

Toronto Raptors

Losing Bosh was bad enough, but that wasn't the only thing in Toronto that left us scratching our heads. The whole Matt Barnes saga was jaw-dropping: It appears both Barnes' agent and the Raptors' front office leaked to the media that Barnes would sign a two-year, $9 million deal with the Raptors in a sign-and-trade -- in fact, every major outlet reported it.

Only one problem: The deal wasn't even remotely legal under the salary-cap rules, revealing a shocking ignorance of a very important piece of the business on the part of NBA professionals.

Look, this is pretty basic stuff. I've seen stories suggesting this was some inscrutable piece of salary-cap arcana, and it's just not true. For starters, a sign-and-trade deal has to be at least three years. Has to. That's not a difficult rule to understand. I'm pretty sure all of you got it immediately. That's why every single sign-and-trade deal that any of these guys has ever done has been for at least three years. You'd think they'd at least know from experience. But right there, much energy was spent negotiating a deal that couldn't happen.

Second, Orlando couldn't sign-and-trade Barnes under those terms. He had no Bird rights because he had played only one year on his current contract; the most he could be offered by the Magic this season was about $1.9 million. Again, this isn't some obscure footnote; it comes up every single year because so much of the league's rank and file are on one-year deals.

Finally, Orlando could have re-signed Barnes using its midlevel exception, except that (A) the Magic had already used it, and (B) you can't do a sign-and-trade using the midlevel exception. Toronto couldn't use its midlevel on Barnes either, since it had already been bestowed on Linas Kleiza.

In a nutshell, the deal had to be a sign-and-trade for at least three years, starting at no more than $1.9 million a year, or it couldn't happen. This was obvious to anyone with any knowledge of the salary-cap rules. That it wasn't to the two parties involved is disturbing.

When the Raptors weren't trying to use imaginary exceptions to sign players they couldn't get, they were giving Amir Johnson a five-year, $34 million deal that's among the summer's most questionable. They used their midlevel exception on Kleiza, adding another bad defender to the league's worst defensive team.

Toronto did salvage a Hedo Turkoglu-Leandro Barbosa trade that dumps last year's big mistake, albeit for another guy who can't guard anybody. Unfortunately, an offseason-saving steal of a deal with Charlotte fell through, and they're left with a star-less team that still is the worst defensive squad in basketball.

New Jersey Nets

The Nets had all that cap space, and the new Russian oligarch owner, and they were coming to Brooklyn to make a big splash. Everybody was talking about them. Two months later, they have Billy King as their GM, Travis Outlaw as their big free-agent score and a lot of questions about whether new coach Avery Johnson is really the one calling the shots.

Outgoing GM Rod Thorn called it quits and almost immediately hinted he wouldn't mind working someplace else, a sure sign that Mikhail Prokhorov's regime isn't engendering great morale. It's equally puzzling why Prokhorov didn't push for a change; instead, he allowed the architect of a 12-win team to execute the Nets' draft and free-agent strategy before heading out.

New Jersey did one thing right: All its free-agent dollars went on players age 25 or younger, an admirable piece of restraint from a franchise that realistically is a couple of years away from doing anything noteworthy. In one case in particular (sharpshooter Anthony Morrow), the Nets got unbelievable value. Unfortunately, the deals for Outlaw ($35 million for five years) and Johan Petro (three years, $10 million) are ridiculous.

As a result, there will be no quick fix in New Jersey. The Nets have a decent foundation with Devin Harris, Brook Lopez and rookie Derrick Favors, and they'll at least double their win total, but Prokhorov's arrival as a power player appears to have been wildly overstated.

Minnesota Timberwolves

KAAHHHHNNNN!!! OK, had to get that one out. No, nobody is quite sure what the strategy is under Timberwolves general manager David Kahn.

I'd say they're rebuilding, but their big free-agent pickup was a 30-year-old point guard, and they traded their first-round pick for Martell Webster.

I'd say they're focusing on value contracts, but they just gave Darko Milicic a four-year, $20 million deal.

I'd say they're trying to corner the market on point guards, but the league has about 70 of them and the Wolves can hoard only 15 at any one time.

I'd say they're acquiring players who can thrive in coach Kurt Rambis' triangle system, except they're not -- they keep acquiring small pick-and-roll point guards with iffy outside shots.

I'd say they're building around character and discipline, but they traded for Michael Beasley and Milicic.

I'd say they're focused on opportunistic trades, except that they unloaded their best player for 50 cents on the dollar and repeated the exercise with Ramon Sessions.

The only thing I can confidently say is that they'll be terrible again this year, and probably for several years afterward. The Wolves have a rising star in Kevin Love and a couple of other interesting pieces (keep an eye on Euro import Nikola Pekovic), but it's not clear whether they're coming or going right now. I'm not sure they know, either.

wes_mantooth

Yeah, by what he is saying...everyone other than Miami are losers.

2quik4u

wes_mantooth;433634 wrote:Yeah, by what he is saying...everyone other than Miami are losers.

exactly save maybe the bulls

hoops23

John Hollinger is a fraud who only SQ would use in an argument.

thedynasty1998

Wasn't Varejao considered like the 2nd most valuable player to his team on one of Hollinger's mathematical formulas?

I don't really like Hollinger, but I do find some of his rankings to be interesting.

hoops23

Hollinger had Varejao in the MVP race at one point I do believe.

I did agree with Hollinger about Andy on defense and as 6th man as well, which Andy finished in the top 5 of both I believe.

Ironman92

I was going to say maybe he just is going away from what everyone else thinks.....but he's just being stupid here trying to create something that isn't there.

Anyone who puts Varejao in the MVP race at any time just wants to get attention with creativity.....but again...just stupid.

Commander of Awesome

2quik4u;433629 wrote:So the Lakers upgraded almost all their positions but are off season losers because another team got better? The fuck that shit makes no sense

Oh BooHoo, he isn't in love with your team. Get over it, god forbid someone that works for ESPN isn't totally sucking off the LA Lakers or the Heat.

2quik4u

Commander of Awesome;433756 wrote:Oh BooHoo, he isn't in love with your team. Get over it, god forbid someone that works for ESPN isn't totally sucking off the LA Lakers or the Heat.

eat a dick

Commander of Awesome

Oh sniff sniff. Sorry your post sounded like a teenage girl.

Trueblue23

I'm wiping away my tears with my championship t-shirts.

Commander of Awesome

Trueblue23;433928 wrote:I'm wiping away my tears with my championship t-shirts.

OH GOOD JOB DUDE! Way to be a lakers fan living in ohio! How did you become a fan? Oh, let me guess your grandpa lived there for a few years? Let me guess, youre a saints/colts/patriots fan as well? I bet two years ago you were a boston fan. You an alabama/nc tarheels fan too? Way to go jackass.

It sounds to me that you made a conscious decision one day to root for the teams that you like. My guess is they were successful at the time.

But for some, they don't really get to choose who they root for. On the surface that sounds dumb. But most fans are formed when they are young with their dads and grandpas or whatever. There is an emotional attachment there and the team ends up being chosen for them. Most people aren't willing to give up that emotional attachment even if it means rooting for a team that has more perennial success.

That is, if you had any kind of class. But for someone as old as you are, you appear to have the maturity of a 15 year old.

Skyhook79

Commander of Awesome;434121 wrote:OH GOOD JOB DUDE! Way to be a lakers fan living in ohio! How did you become a fan? Oh, let me guess your grandpa lived there for a few years? Let me guess, youre a saints/colts/patriots fan as well? I bet two years ago you were a boston fan. You an alabama/nc tarheels fan too? Way to go jackass.

It sounds to me that you made a conscious decision one day to root for the teams that you like. My guess is they were successful at the time.

But for some, they don't really get to choose who they root for. On the surface that sounds dumb. But most fans are formed when they are young with their dads and grandpas or whatever. There is an emotional attachment there and the team ends up being chosen for them. Most people aren't willing to give up that emotional attachment even if it means rooting for a team that has more perennial success.

That is, if you had any kind of class. But for someone as old as you are, you appear to have the maturity of a 15 year old.

Oh Boo Hoo, you didn't get to choose your team. Grandpa said your rooting for his team. Get over it.

wildcats20

Skyhook79;434152 wrote:Oh Boo Hoo, you didn't get to choose your team. Grandpa said your rooting for his team. Get over it.

Seriously.

LeBron left...GET OVER IT

Oh and way to edit your comment about Bron leaving out, COA

2quik4u

Commander of Awesome;434121 wrote:OH GOOD JOB DUDE! Way to be a lakers fan living in ohio! How did you become a fan? Oh, let me guess your grandpa lived there for a few years? Let me guess, youre a saints/colts/patriots fan as well? I bet two years ago you were a boston fan. You an alabama/nc tarheels fan too? Way to go jackass.

It sounds to me that you made a conscious decision one day to root for the teams that you like. My guess is they were successful at the time.

But for some, they don't really get to choose who they root for. On the surface that sounds dumb. But most fans are formed when they are young with their dads and grandpas or whatever. There is an emotional attachment there and the team ends up being chosen for them. Most people aren't willing to give up that emotional attachment even if it means rooting for a team that has more perennial success.

That is, if you had any kind of class. But for someone as old as you are, you appear to have the maturity of a 15 year old.

lol I sound like a teenage girl? the fuck do u call this post then u whiney little bitch shut the fuck up and go eat a dick

Trueblue23

Commander of Awesome;434121 wrote:OH GOOD JOB DUDE! Way to be a lakers fan living in ohio! How did you become a fan? Oh, let me guess your grandpa lived there for a few years? Let me guess, youre a saints/colts/patriots fan as well? I bet two years ago you were a boston fan. You an alabama/nc tarheels fan too? Way to go jackass.

It sounds to me that you made a conscious decision one day to root for the teams that you like. My guess is they were successful at the time.

But for some, they don't really get to choose who they root for. On the surface that sounds dumb. But most fans are formed when they are young with their dads and grandpas or whatever. There is an emotional attachment there and the team ends up being chosen for them. Most people aren't willing to give up that emotional attachment even if it means rooting for a team that has more perennial success.

That is, if you had any kind of class. But for someone as old as you are, you appear to have the maturity of a 15 year old.

LOL

My dad has been Lakers fan since he was a kid. Not that I have to prove anything to you. You need to hit the blunt a few times, get some of that "fuck it" in your system. I really don't wana turn on the news and see the Commander of Cock climbling a clock tower and sniping people off.

lhslep134

2quik4u;433629 wrote:So the Lakers upgraded almost all their positions but are off season losers because another team got better? The fuck that shit makes no sense

Honestly, don't know why you give a fuck. The Lakers are still the defending champs, and what Hollinger says has NOTHING to do with how well they'll perform this year.

I will say this, you'll see a lot of fans on here rooting for the Lakers when they go up against the Heat.

lhslep134

I don't understand the point in ANYONE questioning ANYONE's fanhood.

There's no such thing as a fake fan, only real fans. You either like a team, or you like someone else. I don't understand the fallacy in putting down people based on the teams they like.

If he's a frontrunner, so be it? How does it affect you? Continue rooting for teams that you root for, and he'll root for the teams he roots for. Simple as that.

enigmaax

2quik4u;433629 wrote:So the Lakers upgraded almost all their positions but are off season losers because another team got better? The fuck that shit makes no sense

I thought he explained his point pretty well. Without Miami's big signings, LA would have been the hands down favorite to win the title again. Many people think that Miami has set themselves up as the new favorite. That would move LA down a notch and thus, put them "in a tougher position", as the writer phrased it. They may have gotten better compared to last year, but worse where it counts - compared to other teams this year. What doesn't make sense there?

thedynasty1998

lhslep134;434291 wrote:I don't understand the point in ANYONE questioning ANYONE's fanhood.

There's no such thing as a fake fan, only real fans. You either like a team, or you like someone else. I don't understand the fallacy in putting down people based on the teams they like.

If he's a frontrunner, so be it? How does it affect you? Continue rooting for teams that you root for, and he'll root for the teams he roots for. Simple as that.

I've never understood that either. Because you live in a state you must root for that team? That's complete bullshit. Only Commander would criticize someone for not liking a team in their home state.

enigmaax

Commander of Awesome;434121 wrote:OH GOOD JOB DUDE! Way to be a lakers fan living in ohio! How did you become a fan? Oh, let me guess your grandpa lived there for a few years? Let me guess, youre a saints/colts/patriots fan as well? I bet two years ago you were a boston fan. You an alabama/nc tarheels fan too? Way to go jackass.

It sounds to me that you made a conscious decision one day to root for the teams that you like. My guess is they were successful at the time.

But for some, they don't really get to choose who they root for. On the surface that sounds dumb. But most fans are formed when they are young with their dads and grandpas or whatever. There is an emotional attachment there and the team ends up being chosen for them. Most people aren't willing to give up that emotional attachment even if it means rooting for a team that has more perennial success.

That is, if you had any kind of class. But for someone as old as you are, you appear to have the maturity of a 15 year old.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Because class has everything to do with which sports team - made up of players that the vast majority of fans don't know personally regardless of team - you choose to root for.

Just curious, do you still live with your parents? Do your parents still dress you? Are you still on your moms tit? I'm just wondering how you could have drawn yourself away from those emotional attachments if you can't even pick your own fucking sports team.

Sage

Yea, Hollinger is never rolling with the Lakers. Picked against them every series this year, I believe. Anybody who picked the Jazz to beat the Lakers, really, shouldn't be considered an analyst.

Archive

Hollinger the biggest laker hater