.
Just thought I'd share some ruminations on LeBron...

Firstly, I have to admit that when he first came to prominence, I was a fan. I thought he was an amazing basketballer, and he came across as a pretty nice guy. With time tho', I found that this was eroded somewhat. Yes, he's still an amazing basketballer (for my money, currently the best in the NBA), but I found that I felt LeBron was immature, petulant, egotistical and a bit of a jerk.

But if I'm completely honest, those are all labels that could apply to probably 80% of the NBA. If not more.
The guy's still young, and still coming into who he is as a person as well as a player - and with more honesty, those are all labels that Kobe wore (probably more deservedly so than LeBron) at the same age. I think Kobe's come a long way since his mid-to-late twenties... or at least has become more aware of how he's perceived. There's every chance that LeBron becomes more adept at dealing with perceptions too (and perceptions are the key word here).
And the pressure that's going to be on LeBron to achieve a title is going to be enormous in the next season... or rather, whenever the next season ends up occurring. After the last season, nothing short of a ring is going to stop the flow of criticism. And heaven help him if he does win, yet plays anything less than amazingly. For if he wins, and Wade gets the Finals MVP, then the criticism won't stop - it'll just change a little.

I for one am going to try to be less critical of him. It's something I've oft-pointed out to the anti-Kobe crowd: you're missing out on some amazing basketball if you focus too much on your hate. I'm definitely not as rabid as some are in the way I've regarded LeBron, but it's not been positive.
I think focusing less on what I don't like about LeBron and looking more towards simply enjoying basketball will be a good thing for me. No reason I can't be a Laker fan and enjoy LeBron's basketball.
It's gonna be hard... but I'm gonna try.

That is... when the goddamn season actually starts.

.

That we're at this point leaves me incredulous.  I'm in a state of disbelief that the NBA season is in jeopardy, and that the ground made in popularity of the Association over the last few seasons is being undermined to such an extent by those that get the most benefit out of it's existence.
And at this point in time, I'm losing interest in "who's to blame".  For the most part, both sides of the argument are.

Ownership...
You got yourselves into this mess, the last CBA was something you pushed through and signed off on.  Yes, the players have become unbelievably entitled and arrogant... but who made them so?  The owners did.  And it seems that every time there's a hue and cry about empty pockets, one of their ilk will hand out an "Eddy Curry contract" - vastly overpaying a player to a ridiculous extent.  It's hard to plead poor when Rashard Lewis exists.
First secret about finding yourself in a hole, put down the shovel.

Players...
Really?  You deserve more than half the gross, with no responsibility for costs or risks.  An interesting business model.  I could agree with the 53-57% if they undertook a like amount of the costs (I'm sure the NBA would be giddy if that were to occur too), but that'll never happen.  I am yet to see a convincing argument where a 50/50 split of Basketball Related Income (BRI) isn't a reasonable outcome.  "Because we had more last time" doesn't work as a logical line of reasoning. 
Anyway, post the first two weeks of the season lost, any monetary potential for the first season is lost, and then some (the difference from 50 to 53% for the first season is around $120 million.  The players lose about $84 million a week).  Come early January, any $$$ that could be earnt for the duration of 6 year CBA is gone.

And now the complaints about the cap?  When both sides of the fence recognise that those teams that overspend need to be reined in a bit to encourage at least a smaller disparity between the haves and have-nots... there's only one group stamping their collective feet insisting that teams should have the right to blow salary caps out of the water.
The suggested changes aren't a hard cap, but they do discourage spending, and encourage teams that are exceeding the cap to cut back on that.  I really fail to see how encouraging a "more equal" (it'll never be actually equal) playing field is a bad thing for the sport. 

More than all of this, I'm just aghast that they can't find a reasonable way to divide the pie.  Stern, Hunter, Fisher... all of them.  They're all to blame.  And sure, both owners and players lose in this.  But the biggest loser in this is the fan, and the sport itself.
Colour me disgusted.

Edit: you can read more #NBAFanVoice pieces over at Celtics Blog - all the links are up there.

Latest word on Twitter... Sean Deveney reports:

Great news if this is on the mark... however, I remain dubious.  Whilst the Sporting News have run with this as a story, until I see a more reputable media outlet reporting it, I'm going with a more pessimistic approach.

From Lakers Promotions division...

Not particularly good news, if not unexpected.  Keep our collective fingers crossed that this is all that's canceled, even if it's not looking good.

Up again.  This time around, it's Z-Bo vs K-Love.  Remembering the parameters...

Which of the two players would you choose to play for your fictional team next season. You only have this player for one season and one season only. So, who ya got: Zach Randolph or Kevin Love?

Don: Both guys are amazing talents - and this would be a tough one to mess up, but for a one-off year I'm going to go Zach.
It's a rare player that is able to actually discernibly lift during the playoffs, but that's exactly what Randolph did last year. The guy has undergone a major transformation, from being someone who never hit expectations to someone that routinely exceeds them.
Now... Kevin Love. An amazing player - he just seems to devour rebounds... but that's part of my problem. Love seems to be more interested in statistical excellence than winning games. I have at times witnessed him overpowering his own teammates in his desire to get the board. The guy plays to win - that's not in doubt... but sometimes individual pursuits need to take a back seat to the success of the team. As often as not - it amounts to the same thing. But not always, and I think Love's still in the process of working that out.

Rob: This one is an easy one for me. Randolph has shown increasing maturity throughout his career and is coming off a very successful season with Memphis and some outstanding playoff performances. Love's Chamberlain-like pursuit of individual stats diminishes him in my eyes. He is not a guy I want on my team. Randolph all the way.

---

Check out the Bloguin vote on this at Hoops Manifesto, and look at  Rose v CP3, Amare v Melo, Kobe v Wade...

Make your selection, same deal as has gone in previous issues...

Which of the two players would you choose to play for your fictional team next season. You only have this player for one season and one season only. So, who ya got: Chris Paul or Derrick Rose?

Rob: Kobe vs Wade took quite a bit of thought and processing of information to arrive at a choice that left plenty of conjecture either way. Amar'e vs 'Melo took quite a bit of thought and processing to determine who would have less downside. CP3 vs D-Rose is on the same level as Kobe vs Wade. Here you have two outstanding PGs, both with tremendous athleticism and ability, both with international gold medals, both with league honours.... Rose has an edge in PPG, but CP3 has significantly higher RPG, APG and SPG and this is the tie breaker for me. These are the numbers that I want to see from my PG so I'm taking CP3.

Don: On choosing between Chris Paul and Derrick Rose, it all comes down to one number for me. And that's how many games is Chris Paul likely to miss? Because for all his vaunted point-man prowess, he possesses a frail left knee. Either way - on impact on the court I think that at the moment, they're pretty much a wash. Rose's youth and durability give him the nod for me.

---

Check out the Bloguin vote on this at Hoops Manifesto, and look at Amare v Melo, Kobe v Wade...

A lockout has a major impact upon an NBA season: old teams are fresher and more competitive, teams with chemistry issues tend to finish lower than expected, and therefore the needs of a team can be slightly shifted. As the a Knicks proved in 1999, a team peaking at the right time in a lockout year can surprise many.

However this offseason we're not even sure if there'll be a shortened season like there was in '99. There's every chance it may be skipped all together - making the 2012 offseason one of the richest FA classes in ages - and this could be a ploy by team owners in current negotiations because it floods the market with players, lowering the value of talent.
If the season were to say, go for 40 games (a best case scenario as of right now), here's some discussion on the current free agent crop (unrestricted and restricted)...

1. Jamal Crawford: His stock has to take a hit as JC is a guy that inevitably requires time to fit into his role with his new teams. You can ignore the scoring explosions on arrival to NYK and GSW – NYK and GSW are notable exceptions due to playing style and pace, and not the rule. For teams like CHI and MIA who would have been considering JC, he now has less appeal.

2. Jeff Green: See above. Jeff Green is like the Euro atm – in danger of decertification and worthlessness. Green's temperament itself is not conducive to quickly fitting into a system and offering value; he's too unselfish (a good long term trait) and has confidence issues. I expect him to re-sign in Boston.
3. Dante Cunningham is the perfect guy to benefit from a lockout. He's a contributor, he's efficient, he's selfless - and because he's a hard hat type player he can slot in straight away. Instant defense and underrated offense. His stock will be on the rise and my tip is Charlotte doesn't give him an offer sheet worth considering.
4. Kurt Thomas is a veteran – and veterans adapt better/quicker!  Especially the likes of Thomas. 
Damn good mid range game?  Check.
Solid defender?  Check.
Great role model on/off the court?  Check.
Thomas will see another season on a contender at the very least.  Look for Miami to move here!!!
5. Nene Hilario will take a massive jump. Defense will get good starts to this "half season" and will almost certainly get a playoff berth.  Nene can bring that and then some.  Pair him up with another even half decent big and all of a sudden you can make a title "run" without having to run the full length.
Think New York here and how this would allow for sliding Amare to the 4. Their 3/4/5 would be the best in the league hands down.
6. Tayshaun Prince is a guy that could take a young team a bit further and realize some potential.  We all know the Clippers have always been interested and even tried to make a move last season, but now they will be actively trying to get Prince.  A Jordan/Griffin/Prince/Gordon/Williams starting 5 has a nice balance to it and could result in a jump in the elite 8 of the West whilst teams like Portland get caught sleeping.
7. Chuck Hayes: see Kurt Thomas but subtract a bit of age.  Once again teams like NYK, SAS, and MIA could overpay this guy on a deal hoping that he gets them over other teams in the shortened season.  Chuck Hayes is a stock-winner in a shortened season – guaranteed returns.
8. DeAndre Jordan: Jordan's value takes a hit here because he is still developing.  On an 82 game season he is definitely worth the offer of a starting salary but on a shortened season... this is where a team like Indiana or Houston could pounce – both in need of solid C's and probably out of contention this season.  If you couple the Clippers thinking they're a shot they may not match the offer and look for a downgrade/trade.
9. Leon Powe: Has everyone forgotten Cleveland?   Powe has been injury ravaged.  Powe has gotten healthy again.  This guy could be a steal and be your 2nd guy off the bench or even a starter.  He's still relevant.
10. Kris Humphries: You could get this guy cheap is you get the Nets second guessing.  Plus on the right team he comes in and gives toughness at the 4 spot – something many teams require right now.  I say he gets overpaid.
11. Carl Landry: I think CL will be a steal for someone and I think that will be a contender.  He plays bigger than his height and is efficient.  I say underpaid but only because of my next player...

Another choice of two:  Amare or Melo... in the same vein as the Kobe/Wade piece.

Which of the two players would you choose to play for your fictional team next season. You only have this player for one season and one season only. So, who ya got: Amare or Melo?

Don: Amare... or Melo.
Pick the guy that's a one-way player who is an offensive dynamo but can't play a lick of defense, or... pick the guy that's a one-way player who is an offensive dynamo but can't play a lick of defense.
Gee. I dunno.

But seriously, there's more upside to Amare - and surprisingly his defense wasn't completely and utterly last season. I thought that the Knicks often looked better when Melo wasn't playing. I mean - taking Amare, this doesn't mean he'd have to be my team's centerpiece does it? Because that would suck. I think Amare's a good 2nd, but as my primary? Ugh...


Rob: If I was looking to build a team around a guy I would pass on both of them.

However, if I'm looking for the guy who is going to give my team their best chance to win right now, I'm picking Amar'e. I can't imagine a set of circumstances where 'Melo is going to help my team make a run for the title.

For the sake of this argument I'm putting Amar'e on the Celtics roster. Doesn't play much D? That's ok, I figure he'll get plenty of help. On the upside you have a high scoring, multifaceted, big body playing the C and providing additional options for the other guys on the floor.

Not even close on this one.

The consensus over at Hoops Manifesto was Melo.  Go figure...

Again, via Jeff at Hoops Manifesto - discussing who you would take if you had to take one player, for one season only.  Here are the parameters...

Which of the two players would you choose to play for your fictional team next season. You only have this player for one season and one season only. So, who ya got: Kobe Bryant or Dwyane Wade?

Rob (Brumbygg) & I have differing views on this one...
Rob: One season - the next season - of ball? I'm taking D-Wade. I think Wade's next season in the NBA will be the best of his career and the one that defines it. I think Kobe is going to see a drop off in his production after 15 years in the NBA. I'm not saying that Kobe is done. I think he will still be one of the elite players in the league, but for my one 'glory or bust' year it's Wade.

Don: Now? For one season only? I go Kobe. Sure, D-Wade's younger but Kobe's got the points on the boards. It's - overall - a bit of a wash on offense and Kobe's a better defender (no, taking lots of chances in the lanes does not equate to "good defense"), and is more durable. Better leadership qualities too.

The consensus over at Hoops Manifesto was Kobe (click the link to read why)...

With a place in the Olympics on the line, Australia win the first game of the best-of-three Oceania series against New Zealand's Tall Blacks, 91-78.  But not without some fireworks...