NBA 2011-2012 season

I didn't love the NBA because of expansion, I loved the product on the floor then. I pulled for the Hornets, well because they were the local team to pull for. So not sure what's so weird about that. I don't think the number of teams was an issue then as well, but it's a huge issue now imo. Plus there have been 3 more teams added since then.

 

Wow, that's almost as stupid as you insisting that Derrick Rose didn't have that much to do with the Bulls' improvement last season.

 

i just found it interesting that you'd mention contraction while also pining for the glory days of expansion. i'm sure having a new team in town that was finally scratching the win column is probably the over-riding factor in your interest just as having that same team leave the city after a sour relationship only to be replaced with a perennial loser has probably put a wet blanket on your enthusiasm.

not sure how contraction helps that unless you are hoping it puts the bobcats out of your misery.

 

ignoring the obvious mischaracterization of my statement about the bulls improvement last year, how do you figure the bulls didn't benefit from 6 new teams thinning out the competition?

glen rice, larry johnson, steve smith, shaq, mourning, chris webber, isaiah rider... that's just the list of high draft picks that went to lottery teams during the early 90's. throw in the general expansion of nba bodies needed and obviously the teams who were coming into their own at the end of the 90's were going to have an extended shelf life and extra wins against weak competition.

 

I explained it, it's really simple. The product on the floor was a lot different then. I also liked the fact back then you knew just about all the players and the history on them, today, not so much.

 

It's not a mischaracterization at all. You insisted that Derrick Rose had some but not a lot of impact on the Bulls' increased win total, and that he was less important than adding either Boozer or Thibodeau.

And duh, the players you named obviously wouldn't have gone to the Bulls' main competition anyway.

 

really? when did i say his improvement was less important than adding boozer or thibodeau? feel free to quote me.

unless going to those teams would have made them "main competition". but the point wasn't that any of those guys would have necessarily ended up on some mega team. the point is that the top picks in the draft were more-or-less erased by going to perennial losers. teams who would normally have been in line for a top draft pick instead had to wait in line behind this influx of even worse teams. once the expansion teams picked the top talent, the teams that "should have" picked them instead picked up the 2nd tier talent. which means the teams that were maybe "one piece away" from being contenders were not getting the 2nd tier talent, they were getting role players if they were lucky.

on a 12 man roster where you've typically got an 8 or 9 man rotation, a single player makes a big difference.

 

Not that he deserves his on thread but one of the biggest NBA bust Kwame Brown just left Charlotte for golden state. 1 year 7 mil

 

Glad to do so:

 

"edit: what put them over the top this year was getting boozer and a new coach."

you apparently don't understand what is meant by "putting a team over the top". it's the difference between being a 50 win team and a 60 win team. it's the difference between being a 2nd round sweep and a conference finalist.

"rose is great, but without thib and boozer, i doubt they do much better than the previous years... maybe they get to 50 wins. maybe."

so show me where i state that the bulls would get 50+ wins without thib and rose or without boozer and rose.