2025-2026 NBA Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter duluoz
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 696
  • Views: 23K
  • Sports 
Delta74 said:
Hornets looking good tonight vs Knicks
Click to expand...

The Hornets are an amazing 35-15 against the spread in the last 50 games and have the 5th best record.

Kon now has 1378 points for the year with 9 games left. He has a good shot at getting over 1500. Rookies in the last 10 years with >1500 points include only Mitchell, Young, Luka, and Wemby.
 
Game and a half out of the 6 six spot and 2 out of the 5. Definitely have a shot.
 
Last edited:
www.espn.com

Sources: NBA presents 3 comprehensive anti-tanking proposals

The NBA presented three comprehensive anti-tanking concepts to its board of governors Wednesday as part of this week's meetings in New York, with modifications expected to each before a formal vote in May, sources told ESPN's Shams Charania.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

I like that they’re putting options out there to prevent tanking. It will definitely add to conspiracy theory fury when you end up with a really good team getting a top pick. But losing on purpose sucks. I would love to see the NFL try to take some steps to prevent it.
 
Last edited:
PTOHeel said:
www.espn.com

Sources: NBA presents 3 comprehensive anti-tanking proposals

The NBA presented three comprehensive anti-tanking concepts to its board of governors Wednesday as part of this week's meetings in New York, with modifications expected to each before a formal vote in May, sources told ESPN's Shams Charania.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

I like that they’re putting options out there to prevent tanking. It will definitely add to conspiracy theory fury when you end up with a really good team getting a top pick. But losing in purpose sucks. I would love to see the NFL try to take some steps to prevent it.
Click to expand...
I hate all of these ideas.

I'm pro-tanking and wish they'd increase the incentives for tanking, not decrease them.
 
GoHeelsweeeehoooo said:
GoHeelsweeeehoooo said:
Are the Hornets a flash in the pan or could they be even better next season?
Click to expand...
If they are healthy, I think they could be a lot better, at least record wise. Still a very young team that should just improve with age/continuity. Coby was a great add. I wouldn't be shocked at all if they wound up in the finals this year. They have been the best team in the league for the past few months, and that's with the bullshit Diabate suspension. Their offense is mind bending when everyone's healthy.
Click to expand...
 
GoHeelsweeeehoooo said:
Are the Hornets a flash in the pan or could they be even better next season?
Click to expand...
They should be better. They are playing with a starting five that is 28/24/24/23/20 years old.

The "old men" veterans on the roster are Miles Bridges (28) Grant Williams (27) and Coby White (26). Other than those three, the oldest guy on the roster is rarely used "locker room" guy Pat Connaughton who is 33. He is the only guy on the roster older than 28. Kneuppel and former first round pick Tidjane Salaun still can't legally buy a beer.

Even with no additions they should be better next year with more experience. Three rookies (Kneuppel, Sion James, and Ryan Kalkbrenner) get significant PT.
Hornets Roster

They have 2 first round picks in 2026, 3 in 2027, 2 in 2028, and 2 in 2029. Hornets Future Draft Picks

Given how well their young guys are playing plus their future draft capital, and that Charles Lee seemingly has convinced Lamelo Ball to tone down his Globetrotters act and play within a system, I'd say their future looks pretty bright. Construction is well along on their new practice/training facility across from the Spectrum Center Uptown which is scheduled to open for the 2026-27 season and is expected to be the best practice facility in the league. The new facility and the talented young core should be attractive to potential free agents that might have never considered the Hornets in the past.
 
Last edited:
Hornets with the bad loss to the Sixers at home 118-114. Up 5 going into the 4th and outscored in the 4th 26-17. Ball 7-26, 5-18 from 3.
 
Hornets shot horribly and had some questionable calls go against them late, still a one possession game. Call it a fluke as long as they take down the Celtics tomorrow.
 
bridgetender said:
Tanking teams are a horrible NBA product. What do you like about it?
Click to expand...
A couple of things...

1) No team has won an NBA title as lower than a 3 seed in over 20 years (Houston as a 6 seed in 1995, it was 1969 before that with Boston as a 4 seed). So that means that in any given year, there are 6, maybe 8, teams with any real shot at the title...leaving 22-24 teams who we pretty much know won't win it. A third of the teams in the NBA are going to miss the playoffs (including the play-in games) altogether. The worst thing you can be in the NBA is a team not good enough to win anything of note but not bad enough to really benefit by getting a high draft pick. So, if you're not going to be a top 3-4 seed in your conference, not a playoff team on the upswing with good young talent or, especially, if you're not good enough to make the playoffs, you should be trying as hard as you can to be as bad as possible so that you have the best chance to get a draft pick that leads you to a top-tier talent. In essence, if you can't be very good or better, you should be bad with a purpose. Top-tier talent is pretty much the only way to win anything of significance in the NBA and, if you don't have it, you should be doing everything you can to acquire it.

2) Small market teams, in particular, need to utilize the Draft and, therefore, tanking as a means of talent acquisition. For the most part, small market teams struggle to not only acquire talent (without massively overpaying for it), but to retain talent once they've acquired it. The surest way they can acquire talent is to draft it. If small market teams in the NBA (especially those without outlier talent draws like Miami) are to ever be anything other than cannon fodder for the bigger & (largely) better teams, then they have to be able to maximize their talent acquisition opportunities through the Draft and that essentially requires tanking. Again, if you're going to be bad, you should be bad with a purpose and do everything within your abilities to be as bad as possible so that you maximize your chances to acquire the top picks and, hopefully, the best talent coming into the league. (IMHO, if the NBA moves any further into anti-tanking territory, they might as well just cut/move a handful of small market teams because they are very unlikely to have any real consistent shot at talent acquisition.)

So, those are the reasons that I am pro-tanking in general and, specifically, for teams that are outside the playoffs and need additional talent.

In essence, IMHO, this ultimately comes down to one's opinion on a different question...is the NBA primarily a sports league or an entertainment company? If it's a sports league, then teams ought to be doing everything they do with the goal of acquiring the best talent possible, including being as bad as possible unless you're among the top teams with a real chance to compete or already on the upswing with suitable talent to get there. If the NBA is primarily an entertainment league, then the NBA should want to prevent truly bad teams in order to raise the nightly entertainment value of each game and therefore should be anti-tanking. If it's not obvious, I would prefer the NBA to primarily be a sports league and therefore I am pro-tanking.
 
SnoopRob said:
A couple of things...

1) No team has won an NBA title as lower than a 3 seed in over 20 years (Houston as a 6 seed in 1995, it was 1969 before that with Boston as a 4 seed). So that means that in any given year, there are 6, maybe 8, teams with any real shot at the title...leaving 22-24 teams who we pretty much know won't win it. A third of the teams in the NBA are going to miss the playoffs (including the play-in games) altogether. The worst thing you can be in the NBA is a team not good enough to win anything of note but not bad enough to really benefit by getting a high draft pick. So, if you're not going to be a top 3-4 seed in your conference, not a playoff team on the upswing with good young talent or, especially, if you're not good enough to make the playoffs, you should be trying as hard as you can to be as bad as possible so that you have the best chance to get a draft pick that leads you to a top-tier talent. In essence, if you can't be very good or better, you should be bad with a purpose. Top-tier talent is pretty much the only way to win anything of significance in the NBA and, if you don't have it, you should be doing everything you can to acquire it.

2) Small market teams, in particular, need to utilize the Draft and, therefore, tanking as a means of talent acquisition. For the most part, small market teams struggle to not only acquire talent (without massively overpaying for it), but to retain talent once they've acquired it. The surest way they can acquire talent is to draft it. If small market teams in the NBA (especially those without outlier talent draws like Miami) are to ever be anything other than cannon fodder for the bigger & (largely) better teams, then they have to be able to maximize their talent acquisition opportunities through the Draft and that essentially requires tanking. Again, if you're going to be bad, you should be bad with a purpose and do everything within your abilities to be as bad as possible so that you maximize your chances to acquire the top picks and, hopefully, the best talent coming into the league. (IMHO, if the NBA moves any further into anti-tanking territory, they might as well just cut/move a handful of small market teams because they are very unlikely to have any real consistent shot at talent acquisition.)

So, those are the reasons that I am pro-tanking in general and, specifically, for teams that are outside the playoffs and need additional talent.

In essence, IMHO, this ultimately comes down to one's opinion on a different question...is the NBA primarily a sports league or an entertainment company? If it's a sports league, then teams ought to be doing everything they do with the goal of acquiring the best talent possible, including being as bad as possible unless you're among the top teams with a real chance to compete or already on the upswing with suitable talent to get there. If the NBA is primarily an entertainment league, then the NBA should want to prevent truly bad teams in order to raise the nightly entertainment value of each game and therefore should be anti-tanking. If it's not obvious, I would prefer the NBA to primarily be a sports league and therefore I am pro-tanking.
Click to expand...
I understand that perspective and agree that middle of the road teams are in no man's land. Hell, I live it as a tortured Minnesota Vikings fan.

Where we disagree is on the intentional actions that NBA teams take. If the Vikings started playing their 3rd string quarterback to start throwing games to help their draft status, the NFL would move swiftly to address it. To your question about if they're more entertainment or sports, it's very much both. It's a high wire act and not protecting both ad fiercely as you can cause damage to both.
 
donbosco said:
The destructive power of capitalism is a potent force.
Click to expand...
And the ease with which so many acquiesce to that destruction and even embrace it is just staggering.

Enter tanking. Something that has absolutely no place in an ethical game and undermines the basic tenets of competition of any kind. No amount of rationalizing some potential greater good down the road begins to cover the stench.

What kids are learning instead of “it’s how you play the game” is instead “it’s how you manipulate the game and skirt the rules to come out ahead…” And we wonder how we wound up with an excuse for a president like this one.
 
Easy way to end tanking is give the teams with the most wins the highest picks (excluding playoff teams).

Teams could tank their way out of the playoffs into the first pick I suppose but that would be way more difficult and with a built-in penalty.
 
Bigs23 said:
Easy way to end tanking is give the teams with the most wins the highest picks (excluding playoff teams).

Teams could tank their way out of the playoffs into the first pick I suppose but that would be way more difficult and with a built-in penalty.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting idea.

When you say non-playoff teams, do you mean those outside the top 10 in each conference or do you include those who made the play-in games but failed to advance to the “best of” rounds?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top