₦airaland Forum

What's there not to change about that call biko? That's a 50-50 ball imo.

Lakers legends are going one by one

Rest in Peace Jerry West.

Khanben:
Yes it is a low ball offer based on the circumstances. If it was to coach the Hornets or Cavaliers then that is understandable, but for the Lakers with all the external headaches that comes with it, add the fact that he will be leaving an ideal situation, then they should have offered him closer to what Monty got in Detroit.

Lol, I think you're turning the whole thing upside down. Bad teams lure good coaches with a lot of money. This is because they have nothing else to use as a bargaining chip. That's why a Detroit would give Monty 13m and Philly would give Nick Nurse 8m. And money isn't the only thing the Lakers use to lure people to LA. Why do you think the Lakers have been a landing spot for the best players down the years? It's the history, it's the allure of winning, it's the city, it's little things such as the weather.

birdman:
Then yall proceeded to whine all season. WB is very laid back, he even forgave Durant. But he seems to still be holding a grudge against you. I heard he liked the tweet that announced the Hurley fail. You guys turned a good man into a monster

Lmao. That's savage. Petty but savage

But what else was he expecting? You can't be that bad and expect us to keep quiet. Air ball after air ball. From one costly turnover to another. The worst of them all was when he went for a 2 for 1 when we had the lead. Like are you brain-dead? Get the ball to a good FT shooter and let them foul. Or better still let them foul you so you can make at least 1 and increase your lead. Omo. See the scorn on LeBron and AD's faces when he did that.

birdman:
No problems here, what you are saying sounds reasonable as a GM. You definitely dont want to overpay. Then we remember your westbrook saga and we have to laugh at you anyways

Westbrook was on a contract now. We felt that 46m was worth a gamble for a former MVP

birdman:
Lets step back and think about this. First, kudos to Lakers front office for trying to make a big move. The problem with big bold moves is that if you fail you fail bad. So its not all bad. What then is the problem here?

You have Hurley who rebuilt a Division 1 program, got everyone to buy into his culture, won back to back championships and is now considered a godfather other programs are trying to steal. He has players returning, excellent recruiting prospects, has the support of fan base and university, and strong family network. And he is about to get paid big because uconn does not want to lose him. The future is bright!

steady986 , you as a Lakers GM, you want this man to leave all of that, leave family support, to come to LA, coach a team that has one almost retired superstar, has been swept multiple times in the playoffs, has bad habits and does not play hard until it has to, and fires coaches every 2-3 years. Did I mention how injury prone the franchise players are? Please tell me, what do you offer this man to sweeten his mind to make the jump from certain greatness to probable failure? Are you going to offer him less than he stands to make where he is, or will you offer him more to make the risk worth it?

Now you know why Lakers deserve to be called block heads here. If you are going to go big and bold, go big and bold all the way. Dont go out recruiting talent like a lion, and when its time to pay up, you pay like bingo wey dey waka street!

The moment you accept that 70m is an enormous amount of money to offer anyone in any circumstance, you'd better understand this whole situation. Has Hurley touched 70m in his entire life? And it's not like he was asked to leave UConn to come to the Pistons or some poverty franchise. It's the Lakers we're talking about.

70m is a lot of money to offer a first time head coach. Him rejecting that offer was purely for basketball reasons. Why do you think college coaches like the great John Wooden with 10 NCAA championships and Mike Krzyzewski with 5 NCAA championships never coached in the NBA? Do you think it's because they were never sought after or they weren't offered enough money? None of that. Those guys found their niche in the collegiate level and they built their legacies there. Dan Hurley clearly wants to follow that path.

You listen to all these daily sport shows and everybody is spilling the same thing saying it's because of money. Is there an amount of money that cannot be turned down? Sure. But you would be more willing to part with such money if it were a Steve Kerr or a Spoelstra, not Dan Hurley who has never coached a single NBA game. You might think the Lakers have become a laughing stock after this incident but they would have become a bigger laughing stock if they offered say 15m per year and he turned out to be a disaster.

birdman:
He will get paid more where he is. He said the nice honorable and classy things you say when you decline a job offer, but in the next paragraph the money issue was brought up. If you already know this guy would get a big check staying at college, why would you go after him and not offer him more? E no make sense.

Bro, he might have won the shiniest things in college, but it's still college. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here If you're suggesting to make a first time NBA coach straight out of college the highest paid coach in the league, then you better wake up. Kerr, Popp and Spo make 17.5, 16 and 15 respectively. You're suggesting he gets paid similar amounts?

When the rumors of $100m were flying around last week, I just laughed it off as ridiculous and I knew it wasn't going to happen. I think that $70m was the right offer and I'm glad the Lakers didn't bulge.

And you can take this to the bank, he's not getting offered anything near the 70m Lakers offered him

birdman:
The real issue was the low ball offer. Same mistake with Ty Lue. It explains why it took Hurley this long to respond. Probably liked the opportunity, but could not get past the disrespect. As much as you want to think Lebron had a hand in all this, I think its the opposite. I dont think Lakers front office listen to any players. I wonder who they go after now

What are you even saying? $70m 6yr contract is a low ball offer? Even if it would have made him the 5th highest paid coach in the league? I don't think money was the issue in all this. Hurley didn't want to take on the challenge, moreso because he was a king in college basketball and had the opportunity of doing a 3-peat. And who knows, UConn would probably table a better offer than the 6yr $32m they gave him.

benji93:
I don tell times without number you are not serious.

Showing a lot of promise early on in your professional career is not the only path toward being considered a generational talent. If no be say i like you i no go tell you say na Nonsense you write for here. Absolute Nonsense.

The pool of generational talents first and foremost includes trailblazers. Anyone who was at the center of a seismic shift in a game is automatically considered a generational talent. Maybe at the top of the list of generational talents self.B
So does the list of generational talents include those that came in with certain unique physical features, the combination of which are rare, and may not be seen again in decades? Of course. But so are the players that did things at a level only a few have. Infact i am willing to consider that Westbrook is a generational talent, whatever you think of the man. He did something only very few have done in the history of the NBA. In sports, there are certain levels of performance that cannot be ascribed to talent alone. The two may be so welded together that you cannot see one without the other.

The point is that possessing rare physical qualities or showing capacity very early is not the only way to be generational. There are other ways to describe those.

Bro, there are different terms you can use to describe all these things you just mentioned. All-time great, influential, gifted, etc. Pick one

Android17:
Generational talent simply means a talent you would only find in a generation. The only contention we can have is the definition of a generation. Talent should be easy to define. One easy way to spot generational talents though is, the retinue of other players that come after said player modeling their game after him in almost all his essence and basically trying to clone or reproduce him.

That said, MJ is the archetypal generational talent. What is he, 61 today and his name is still on everyone's lips as far as basketball is concerned. Players know that if they can replicate his moves, they'd have a better shot of making it in the NBA. Everyone wants branded shoes, signature dress style, smoking cigars after winning titles, crying with the O'Brian trophy etc. This is apart from his winnings and general charisma.

Steph Curry is a generational talent. He has paved the way for what the NBA calls diminutive players. His pattern of crazy shots from everywhere. The no look quick releases etc. He literally affected the paradigm called basketball and revolutionized the game. If there is no Steph, there is no Caitlin Clark. You can add other names.

Lebron is a generational talent and freak of nature per his athleticism. He superceded expectations people had for him and has records that will last generations. But he is the MJ clone who is trying to find his own way. That's what the Lebumites here are doing a bad job of trying to hide. Lebron is generational especially with respect to dumping teams for the next upstart. He started the player's ownership mentality in terms of their careers and many are beneficiaries of his boldness. He should be given that credit. He studied the game and found how to dominate it the way he met it. MJ and Steph changed things.

All this eulogy and you still got the meaning of generational talent wrong. Na wah o

The NBA should not make this useless mistake again. How on earth is there a 1 week break between the end of the Conference Finals and the start of the Finals?

donlittle25:
Can you hear yourself. You admitting a SF that has been an assist leader. A SF, An assist leader, brings the ball down the court, not an uncanny 3 pt shooter like curry.

Look at all those redeeming qualities and ask yourself, Does a player like this need the ball in his hands to be the best at what he does?

Are you the one that gave him the tag of SF?

LeBron is a basketball player that can play the 5 positions on a basketball court. I say this because he has actually played the 5 positions on a basketball court.

afrodoc2:
Which is exactly why he needs the ball. Assist leaders are typically point guards, and they are the ones who often have the ball most. How can you lead the league in assists if you don't have the ball a bunch of times?

He needs the ball to give it up in the end.

afrodoc2:
Not enough shooting on the Lakers and frankly speaking not enough balls. If they are allowed to play with 2 balls or they outlaw the 3-point shot then the Lakers can win.

Melo will stop the ball and start that his jab step marathon. Best case scenario 2 points. Westbrook will also need his own ball and score 2 points at an inefficient clip. Bron will also need his own ball, although he will make far better use of it than the previous 2.
The interior defense will be awesome though and the rebounding discrepancy would be huge.

Meanwhile the Warriors are passing and moving and spamming EFFICIENT 3s from all angles.

Replace Melo and Russ with 2 stars that can play off the ball and shoot, and then we are talking. For example, replace Melo with prime T-Mac.

This notion that only 3pt shooting is what wins you games is a fallacy. The Warriors can have all the shooting, but you see that rim, the Lakers would own it, both offensively and defensively. Every single rebound is theirs. Layups and dunks and alley-oops would be like water. The Warriors would march the Lakers to the line like clockwork. You know what that means? Free points. Common todays Lakers that the Warriors complain of too much FTs , not to talk of this team.

The PnR would be unstoppable too, with Steph and Klay getting hunted every single time Imaging Steph having to guard Bron or Melo

Khanben:
Are you guys saying generational talents as in what their career became or what they were known as before the NBA, because as far as I understand the tag generational talent is for guys who when there were 14, 15 it was a concensus that they would be one of the best players in the NBA. So the list is not that long, I'll say LeBron, Kareem and maybe Shaq

This is exactly my definition. You know a generational talent even before he steps in the NBA.

And I don't even kind of you put KAJ in that list. He's kind of a unique player.

Khanben:
Wait is it the versions that played with these teams or each and everyone of these players in their prime?

Each of them in their prime

larride:
Them go too slap Lakers. Please what's Dwight Howard going to be doing here?

It's not like he's a very good perimeter defender, Klay and Curry will just be dumping those 3s on his big head.

Tell me you're a gen z without saying you're a gen z

birdman:
No need. if the NBA goat, and the most uncanny 3pt shooter ever are not generational talents, your definition of generational talent is wrong.

See, when you construct your argument, always look at the conclusions in isolation to see if they make sense. Because sometimes you can get lost in your logic and mix in half truths. (This happens to Khanben a lot too. Sorry bro, I had to send you a stray bullet, just because ) Your assignment now is to walk back your logic to see what half truth or emotional truth you imbibed that led you down this dark path You better thank me, dem for rob you

When you understand what generational talent means, then you can fully understand the argument. You're basing your argument off their body of work There are so many all time greats I didn't put in that list of generational talent for a reason. When Steph was coming into the league, did you feel like he was one of a kind and was going to tear the league apart? Absolutely not.

Also, there are folks who say Kareem is the GOAT. Bird as well. Same with Russell. Does it mean all those guys are generation talents. If so, then every member of the top 75 would be a generational talent.

donlittle25:
Bron doesn't need the ball? Na back of the tv you they watch for lebron 20 years in the league?

Bron has been an assist leader in this league. He knows how to feed others.

etidy:
The problem I see here is westbrick and carmelo both of them just disrupt the flow of the game by their selfish nature and stat hunting. You can't have two of them in the same starting 5. One is enough

They can be selfish all they want. There are 3 other guys in Bron, AD and Dwight that don't necessarily need the ball

This question was posed on Twitter and I can't believe there are people who are saying the Warriors

larride:
Zion, Giannis are generational talent but MJ isn't?

Must be premium delulu

Yes, the phony GOAT is not a generational talent

birdman:
You have confused yourself. Take a deep breath bro, slow down.

Make your argument let's hear

etidy:
But the argument is flawed, he's arguing that Jokic and curry are not generational talents because they don't have freak athleticism like lebron and Wemby.

How many Jokics or Steph's have we seen?

It's like saying doncic is not a generational talent because he plays the game like an 80 year old and then claiming Tatum is generational because of his athleticism.

Generational genetics doesn't equate to generational talent.
There are other important factors like skill set and mindset.

And before I forget, Mindset has nothing to do with being a generational talent Look at Zion, where the mindset dey? Then look at Kobe with all that mindset.

etidy:
But the argument is flawed, he's arguing that Jokic and curry are not generational talents because they don't have freak athleticism like lebron and Wemby.

How many Jokics or Steph's have we seen?

It's like saying doncic is not a generational talent because he plays the game like an 80 year old and then claiming Tatum is generational because of his athleticism.

Generational genetics doesn't equate to generational talent.
There are other important factors like skill set and mindset.

Tatum is not a generational talent. Let's get that out of the way.

I've said this here before, you know a generational talent even before they enter the NBA. Luka is a generational talent. He had been killing it even as a kid. He didn't get drafted 1st just because he wasn't American and didn't attend college in America. Giannis, who is a generational talent, wasn't noticed early enough. This is due to the fact that he actually started playing basketball late, and also he isn't American and didn't attend college in America.

Curry and MJ are great players but they aren't generational talents. Obviously they are very skilled players but their mentality and hard work made them who they are. Heck, if they were generational talents why weren't they drafted number one? Who passes up on a generational talent at no. 1? I'm not saying that you have to be drafted no. 1 if you are a generational talent, or all no. 1s are generational talents. No. Take KD for instance. I think he's a generational talent. But the guy who was drafted no.1 in his draft class turned out to be a bust. It can happen.

Zion Williamson is a generational talent, but sadly he hasn't put in the work to live up to that talent. If you put Steph and MJ in the category of generational talent then it means the list of generational talents would be endless. Because we have seen guys like them before. The only difference is that they did it better than we would probably ever see.

Look at this list

KD
Shaq
Wemby
Luka
LeBron
Zion
Wilt
Giannis
Magic

What do you notice? There's a combination of skill and physical attributes that we don't associate with regular NBA players. And you can go as far back as when the NBA began, you won't be able to show me 2 other players that are like these people.

[quote author=etidy post=130251139][/quote]These skewed graphics though Why are you giving me mid-series odds?

And the Grizzlies odds, was it before or After Ja went down?

The entire internet wants to crucify Gilbert Arenas for saying Steph Curry is not a generational talent But he is very right. Curry is not a generational talent.

etidy:
I thought Celtics were heavily favoured to beat that warriors in 2022. I remember espn's BPI gave Celtics an 82% chance to beat the warriors.
and that was the expert consensus at that time.

Who made a team with 3 all-stars underdogs?

You mean LeBron was the underdog 7 out of the 9 times he was in finals in the East?

Dennis Schroeder trying out football in the German 4th division

This Celtics vs Pacers just reminds me of Lakers vs Denver. Lakers can control the entire game but essentially hand it over to Denver in the clutch.

Makes me wonder what would happen if the Celtics are playing against a clutch team like Dallas, wetin go come happen?

We dey watch.

Roland Acuña Jr. to miss the rest of the season. Omo