[NBA] The 2025 Finals

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

Do you think vlade trades Luka after seeing his potential in the league? Mistakes before the draft can be forgiven outside of passing on Wemby and lebron

You're asking me if I think the guy who passed up on drafting Luka, and who drafted some random dude named Giorgios in the 1st round would trade Luka many years later after seeing his potential in the league? It's Vlade...I wouldn't have been surprised.

 

[coolhandluke]

This thread has quickly devolved into a "What if?" zone haha.

How about them Pacers and Thunder? Are they any good?

 

[Joshyjosh31]

And beyond that people are griping about the WRONG THING. Gripe about the Kings inability to DEVELOP talent. Or even know what the talent is in front of them. Vlades mistake was seeing Giannis in Bagley. Like WTF? If he saw a bootleg Amare he's at least able to trade out of Bagley for something useful.

Bagley did look like he’d be a 20-10 guy at duke
Meanwhile we trade for a center who can’t shoot or really dominate down low in a wing driven league. Monte was easily worse

 

[Joshyjosh31]

You're asking me if I think the guy who passed up on drafting Luka, and who drafted some random dude named Giorgios in the 1st round would trade Luka many years later after seeing his potential in the league? It's Vlade...I wouldn't have been surprised.

Come on man he wouldn’t have traded him not after you see him living up to his potential in the league. Trading a young player who was doing what Hali was doing is criminal and trading him for a center a damn center!

 

[iowamcnabb]

But it's still SGA and a bunch of role guys/semi stars or not fully developed talent. They aren't the level of dominance of teams of the past and thus why the league has "parity" right now and why the Thunder can't get cute like they did tonight. Yeah, that parity is probably going to be changing at some point though. Personally I'd actually rather Giannis go to the Thunder because if the Spurs get him they'll probably be putting Fox, Wemby, and Giannis together which is bye bye parity if Wemby is healthy. Who would the Thunder give up? Certainly Holmgren to start and probably Williams too taking a big fat chunk of their talent core in the process.

the national nba podcasts seem to think the Spurs want a younger player. Jaylen Brown has been mentioned. They don’t want to give up Castle and picks for a 30 year old allegedly. As far as Giannis to the Thunder I’d be asking for JDub, Wallace and a bunch of picks if I was the Bucks. I think I’d be too nervous to build around Chet as my best player given the frame and injury concerns. The other thing about the Thunder is that they are a lot younger than those teams you mentioned. They are still very likely to win this series and they have a couple more years before they get expensive. If they keep Shai, Dub and Chet around they could in theory rival those legacy teams if they keep improving.

 

[kingdivac]

Funny comment from youtube, "Can't spell choke without OKC"

 

[kingdivac]

Not so funny comment "Thank you Sacramento Kings!"

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Yes. It was Rondo's "leadership" and the guy that made the engine work, blah, blah, blah. People forget out good Rondo was I think. Like I said, ground up you need an MVP level talent if he's your go to. Maybe Tyrese could be that guy, but I think he's a little more unselfish than you typically find in players like Luka. You design your offense around Luka's.

Give him the ball and stay out of his way, is really no offensive design

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

Come on man he wouldn’t have traded him not after you see him living up to his potential in the league. Trading a young player who was doing what Hali was doing is criminal and trading him for a center a damn center!

You're making it sound like Tyrese was putting up like All-Star/All 1st Team NBA/Hall of Fame type of numbers when we traded him...Which he was not. At the time, there was nothing "criminal" about trading Tyrese.

 

[kingdivac]

I find it amusing the Thunder are now 11 point favorites in game 2 after the 1 pt loss. I think there's a good chance they'll win, but its like "no 10 pts wasn't enought give em 11".

 

[Tizzy Flip]

You're making it sound like Tyrese was putting up like All-Star/All 1st Team NBA/Hall of Fame type of numbers when we traded him...Which he was not. At the time, there was nothing "criminal" about trading Tyrese.

He wasn’t putting up those numbers cuz of Fox, full stop. But everyone knew at the time we were giving up a multi all-star player who elevated the whole team up. Holmes will forever be grateful to Hali for getting him the bag he got, and now he can’t even get a min with the Wizards. What was criminal is Monte not having the foresight that lots of Kings fans did

 

[kingdivac]

Good nickname read: "Halibucket".

 

[Tizzy Flip]

Give him the ball and stay out of his way, is really no offensive design

Rondo might be the most laughable comparison I’ve ever seen. Wow really what are we doing here

 

[Tizzy Flip]

Luka no question if you're starting ground up. The Pacers aren't winning because Haliburton is superstaring them somewhere, they have chemistry and are rolling right now.

Glad to see you object to Steve Nash, LeBron, Paul Pierce, Paul George, etc etc who are all saying Pacers are who they are cuz of Hali and the identity he established.

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

He wasn’t putting up those numbers cuz of Fox, full stop. But everyone knew at the time we were giving up a multi all-star player who elevated the whole team up. Holmes will forever be grateful to Hali for getting him the bag he got, and now he can’t even get a min with the Wizards. What was criminal is Monte not having the foresight that lots of Kings fans did

But Fox was already putting up those numbers...From a front office point of view, why would they have gone with Tyrese, who, for all we know, could've easily bottomed out in the starting role with the Kings, if Fox was already doing his thing as the starter?

There are way too many "what ifs" in this scenario. I am not trying to say that those who are arguing against my point are wrong, per se. Because, at the end of the day, they may not have been wrong, and we may have been in a better position with Tyrese on our roster. But to come out and claim with 100% certainty that we would be better off today with Tyrese is pure speculation, because you can't tell me, again with 100% certainty, that the front office would've been able to nail all of the other moves since that time just because you believe that Tyrese would've been easier to build around.

 

[Tizzy Flip]

But Fox was already putting up those numbers...From a front office point of view, why would they have gone with Tyrese, who, for all we know, could've easily bottomed out in the starting role with the Kings, if Fox was already doing his thing as the starter?

There are way too many "what ifs" in this scenario. I am not trying to say that those who are arguing against my point are wrong, per se. Because, at the end of the day, they may not have been wrong, and we may have been in a better position with Tyrese on our roster. But to come out and claim with 100% certainty that we would be better off today with Tyrese is pure speculation, because you can't tell me, again with 100% certainty, that the front office would've been able to nail all of the other moves since that time just because you believe that Tyrese would've been easier to build around.

This is the difference between having foresight and not. Most people with a keen basketball sense could see Fox’s numbers were hollow and Hali was a Nash-like leader. Results and playoff wins for Fox were just further validation.

Bad organizations don’t see the value a player Hali would bring. Which is why we’re where we’re at and the Pacers are 3 games away from a trophy. That’s not pure speculation on the Pacers part, that is expert scouting and a winning vision that both their GM and owners had

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

But Fox was already putting up those numbers...From a front office point of view, why would they have gone with Tyrese, who, for all we know, could've easily bottomed out in the starting role with the Kings, if Fox was already doing his thing as the starter?

There are way too many "what ifs" in this scenario. I am not trying to say that those who are arguing against my point are wrong, per se. Because, at the end of the day, they may not have been wrong, and we may have been in a better position with Tyrese on our roster. But to come out and claim with 100% certainty that we would be better off today with Tyrese is pure speculation, because you can't tell me, again with 100% certainty, that the front office would've been able to nail all of the other moves since that time just because you believe that Tyrese would've been easier to build around.

Building a team is never certainty and full of what ifs. The essence of sport and competition. The smart owners and GM's have enough basketball iQ to figure out how to put it together. The rest get bedazzled by flash and numbers, while continuing to fumble over themselves, never building any real substance and consistency

 

[Joshyjosh31]

But Fox was already putting up those numbers...From a front office point of view, why would they have gone with Tyrese, who, for all we know, could've easily bottomed out in the starting role with the Kings, if Fox was already doing his thing as the starter?

There are way too many "what ifs" in this scenario. I am not trying to say that those who are arguing against my point are wrong, per se. Because, at the end of the day, they may not have been wrong, and we may have been in a better position with Tyrese on our roster. But to come out and claim with 100% certainty that we would be better off today with Tyrese is pure speculation, because you can't tell me, again with 100% certainty, that the front office would've been able to nail all of the other moves since that time just because you believe that Tyrese would've been easier to build around.

They tried trading fox first

You're making it sound like Tyrese was putting up like All-Star/All 1st Team NBA/Hall of Fame type of numbers when we traded him...Which he was not. At the time, there was nothing "criminal" about trading Tyrese.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1473886978659729413

 

[SacTownKid]

Give him the ball and stay out of his way, is really no offensive design

Except for plenty of teams I guess.

 

[coolhandluke]

 

[SacTownKid]

Glad to see you object to Steve Nash, LeBron, Paul Pierce, Paul George, etc etc who are all saying Pacers are who they are cuz of Hali and the identity he established.

Yes, but the question was who would you start with. It's much easier to get somewhere with a Luka. It just is. The Pacers were what before Siakam got there? Hali is a big part of the design of the Pacers, nobody is questioning that. I even brought it up in another post, Haliburton stepped back in this game and let his teammates take the lead. Put Luka on this team and that's not happening and the result may very well be an L.

 

[SacTownKid]

Rondo might be the most laughable comparison I’ve ever seen. Wow really what are we doing here

Apparently not reading very closely. Wasn't comparing them, I was comparing the "LEADERSHIP" part of the conversation. Which yes, was very much a part of the conversation when it came to Rondo's value back in the day as well.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Yes, but the question was who would you start with. It's much easier to get somewhere with a Luka. It just is. The Pacers were what before Siakam got there? Hali is a big part of the design of the Pacers, nobody is questioning that. I even brought it up in another post, Haliburton stepped back in this game and let his teammates take the lead. Put Luka on this team and that's not happening and the result may very well be an L.

That's the difference between insisting that you are the "superstar" and the team will win or lose with you hogging the shots.....vs trusting in your team and elevating everyone, which in turn makes the sum greater than the parts

 

[kingsboi]

that is one resilient bunch the Pacers have. 24 turnovers and down 15 in the fourth, looked like they were done for. Hali game winner was the cherry to finish it off

 

[megapoxy]

Pacers had a 12-0 record in playoffs when scoring 110+ points, and 0-4 when <110
They had 109 points in that last possession but Hali made the shot to keep the trend running (13-0)
Thunder scored only 11 points off 24 Pacers turnovers, had 14 steals (Indiana had 1) and only 7 turnovers themselves.
During 1st half OKC got several second chance points to add to Indiana turnovers, I think 21 more possessions if I remember well during the broadcast. But in 2nd half Pacers limited their turnovers and won the battle of the boards big.
OKC had 1 assist in the 4th quarter despite the great start that led them to +15 at one point with a fast break dunk by J-Dub.

That lane violation called in Siakam's 2nd missed free throw was a crucial call. Pacers won at Cleveland due to not called twice for lane violations in the end of the match when getting both offensive rebounds that they scored after.

Still OKC the way the play is the last team to complain about officiating with so many non-calls during the whole postseason. That challenge at the end was a tough one as well (could have been called either way).

Last but not least (i just like stats) Indiana is the first team to win a match for the NBA Finals in play by play era when down by 9+ points 3 minutes or less before the end of regulation or overtime. It was 121-0 so far for the teams that had the lead. It's almost unbelievable how many times they pulled this off with crazy buckets from Haliburton. I celebrated those buckets vs Knicks, Cavs and now Thunder but not against the Bucks (due to Giannis).

 

[Tizzy Flip]

Apparently not reading very closely. Wasn't comparing them, I was comparing the "LEADERSHIP" part of the conversation. Which yes, was very much a part of the conversation when it came to Rondo's value back in the day as well.

Just a terrible comparison. He was such a valued leader he played for 9 teams in 10 seasons

 

[Tizzy Flip]

Yes, but the question was who would you start with. It's much easier to get somewhere with a Luka. It just is. The Pacers were what before Siakam got there? Hali is a big part of the design of the Pacers, nobody is questioning that. I even brought it up in another post, Haliburton stepped back in this game and let his teammates take the lead. Put Luka on this team and that's not happening and the result may very well be an L.

What were they before Siakam got there? Well he took a 25 win team led by Sabonis and in his first full season improved that by 10, in spite of missing 26 games with an injury toward the end of the year when they were tracking toward a playoff spot. And they were 23-15 before they got Siakam. So come again?

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Just a terrible comparison. He was such a valued leader he played for 9 teams in 10 seasons

Ironically Carlisle couldn't stand him in Dallas

 

[SacTownKid]

That's the difference between insisting that you are the "superstar" and the team will win or lose with you hogging the shots.....vs trusting in your team and elevating everyone, which in turn makes the sum greater than the parts

Yeah, but a team has to have legit parts. Look at SGA going to Williams for example. This isn't the first time that Williams has kind of no showed the big moment.

 

[SacTownKid]

Just a terrible comparison. He was such a valued leader he played for 9 teams in 10 seasons

In terms of people's viewpoints? There is no terrible or good just was and is. Perhaps it was that leadership that made him desirable by so many teams.