As a Suns fan who went through 10 miserable years (I can't imagine 15...), I felt like the Kings' success and all the trappings of it ("Light the beam!") was the single best storyline of the entire season. It reminded me of how incredible it felt to have the psychic weight of losing lifted during the Bubble Suns run (before they experienced greater success and now the psychic weight of "ringz" or "poverty franchise"). Most fans have some sort of similar experience with their own franchises.
There's this movement that's spread from NBA Twitter to the general discourse to suck every ounce of joy from the league and to constantly denigrate or punch down on others all the time that I absolutely don't understand.
Really compelling article. I catch myself in this binary mindset from time to time, and have to say I appreciate the way you broke everything down. It’s true that the NBA would be a miserable product if 5 teams were hunting a chip and 25 teams were tanking. One thought I’d add that I’ve heard (either Lowe Post or BS Podcast, can’t remember which) is teams can either sell winning or hope. Trades that get fans most excited usually strive for one or the other. OKC can sell hope. Milwaukee can sell winning. Chicago, by standing pat and doubling down on their core, believes they’re selling winning. But since they’re not doing much winning, from the marketing side of things they might be better served pivoting and selling hope. Totally understand there are a million other variables at play and fans just love the excitement of trades and reactions — just thought it was another interesting take.
That 2013 article you wrote is what I remembered when I signed up for GMIB way-back-when you announced it. I always appreciate that nuanced take.
Nuance is key. It's true that there are teams who should be rebuilding an aren't. And it's true there are some just looking to take a step in the right direction. I think it's far more accurate to say that teams (and their team building approach) become stale than it is to say they should be at one extreme or another (as if it's binary). Nuance can show us that Denver wasn't stale. They were building and loyal and also navigating injuries. So they modified around the margins (after the Gordon trade) while they waited for Murray to get healthy. Portland is stale. They peaked with the Stotts era and are now more moves away from being contenders than years left on Dame's contract.
Truly excellent essay about the league, and in a larger sense, American culture, making everything into a horse race where winners and losers must be declared at every turn. The mindset has obviously been super-beneficial to political discourse.
And honestly, I'd get league pass if there was a chance that twenty-five teams would be outright tanking. It would be the most entertaining season the NBA has ever seen.
Right there with you, Tom. My random baseline is 50 wins, a .600 team. Do that and you’ve had a very successful regular season. And then things start over for the playoffs. Again, it’s a random bar, but one that I think makes more sense than 1 winner & 29 losers.
Great way to look at a trade, especially for the fans who are interested in the entire league. The hype and narrative around trades has always intrigued me, but I am even more interested in the tangential subplots. How do players feel about their salaries being public knowledge? How do players and their families handle the options and logistics of such moves? Does the league, agents individual teams or the union have resources or programs to smooth the transitions? Has the union ever interceded on behalf of a player who did not want to be included in a trade? Why isn't a less stringent version of a no trade clause part of the CBA? Who tracks the details like pick swaps, protections, future considerations, etc of complicated multiteam deals ?
As a Suns fan who went through 10 miserable years (I can't imagine 15...), I felt like the Kings' success and all the trappings of it ("Light the beam!") was the single best storyline of the entire season. It reminded me of how incredible it felt to have the psychic weight of losing lifted during the Bubble Suns run (before they experienced greater success and now the psychic weight of "ringz" or "poverty franchise"). Most fans have some sort of similar experience with their own franchises.
There's this movement that's spread from NBA Twitter to the general discourse to suck every ounce of joy from the league and to constantly denigrate or punch down on others all the time that I absolutely don't understand.
Really compelling article. I catch myself in this binary mindset from time to time, and have to say I appreciate the way you broke everything down. It’s true that the NBA would be a miserable product if 5 teams were hunting a chip and 25 teams were tanking. One thought I’d add that I’ve heard (either Lowe Post or BS Podcast, can’t remember which) is teams can either sell winning or hope. Trades that get fans most excited usually strive for one or the other. OKC can sell hope. Milwaukee can sell winning. Chicago, by standing pat and doubling down on their core, believes they’re selling winning. But since they’re not doing much winning, from the marketing side of things they might be better served pivoting and selling hope. Totally understand there are a million other variables at play and fans just love the excitement of trades and reactions — just thought it was another interesting take.
That 2013 article you wrote is what I remembered when I signed up for GMIB way-back-when you announced it. I always appreciate that nuanced take.
Nuance is key. It's true that there are teams who should be rebuilding an aren't. And it's true there are some just looking to take a step in the right direction. I think it's far more accurate to say that teams (and their team building approach) become stale than it is to say they should be at one extreme or another (as if it's binary). Nuance can show us that Denver wasn't stale. They were building and loyal and also navigating injuries. So they modified around the margins (after the Gordon trade) while they waited for Murray to get healthy. Portland is stale. They peaked with the Stotts era and are now more moves away from being contenders than years left on Dame's contract.
Truly excellent essay about the league, and in a larger sense, American culture, making everything into a horse race where winners and losers must be declared at every turn. The mindset has obviously been super-beneficial to political discourse.
And honestly, I'd get league pass if there was a chance that twenty-five teams would be outright tanking. It would be the most entertaining season the NBA has ever seen.
Right there with you, Tom. My random baseline is 50 wins, a .600 team. Do that and you’ve had a very successful regular season. And then things start over for the playoffs. Again, it’s a random bar, but one that I think makes more sense than 1 winner & 29 losers.
👏 Couldn’t agree more. Been saying the same for years, far less eloquently.
Necessary article
Great way to look at a trade, especially for the fans who are interested in the entire league. The hype and narrative around trades has always intrigued me, but I am even more interested in the tangential subplots. How do players feel about their salaries being public knowledge? How do players and their families handle the options and logistics of such moves? Does the league, agents individual teams or the union have resources or programs to smooth the transitions? Has the union ever interceded on behalf of a player who did not want to be included in a trade? Why isn't a less stringent version of a no trade clause part of the CBA? Who tracks the details like pick swaps, protections, future considerations, etc of complicated multiteam deals ?