Real Deal

Wow...Kobe, Duncan and Manose are all playing terrible basketball.

The Lakers would still contend, but you have to keep in mind that Kobe wouldn't be playing at the peak of his prime anymore.

How bad is it over there? Still talking blizzard or what? I want to see a complete mess of a game.

Haha, this game has a big "L" written all over it. Hopefully, it's Kobe time. And Gasol time, and maybe even Odom time.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/gametracker/recap/NBA_20101227_DET@CHA

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/gametracker/recap/NBA_20101227_ORL@NJ

Don't feel bad. I've had a numbing shot in my eyeball and eyelid before, some of the worst pain I've ever felt until they pushed the plunger...but the initial pain was crazy, had my head strapped down for it. Sucked. I think the pain was already coming on when I saw the needle getting closer and closer, lol. It won't be as bad as it sounds, though (a shot in the head). They may actually numb the area with a Q-tip, beforehand. They were going to do that with my eye, but they couldn't because of the previous surgery.

Felton is not a better point guard than Steve Nash. Nash is still an all-star point guard that can run any system handed to him, and make it his own in the process. He's not the player Felton is back on defense (even though Felton isn't a good defender, either), but Nash is, by far, a better offensive player. Replace Felton with Nash (on the Knicks), giving him Amare back, along with Gallo and Fields...and suddenly, Nash starts up another 50/40/90 shooting season, he racks up 11-12 assists per game, and the Knicks become a legit 60-win contender out East. In addition to that, Amare has less of a load and is saved for the playoff run. By the way, Felton is not better in every category. In fact, Nash is putting up better numbers given the six less minutes he's playing, and he's also shooting at a higher percentage.

It's funny how you can do so well, maintain your lead for a long time, then get crushed by one bad week. The difference between an 11-point week, and a 4-pointer, can sometimes be the difference between 1st and 7th place, the way this is going.

Added "Other" to the list, removed Cleveland's duo. Why did you leave out Wade and LeBron?

Copy and paste the code below, filling in the blanks. All correct answers get you five points. No late entries accepted. If you don't turn yours in by the tip-off of the first game, you miss out, no exceptions. Wednesday, December 29th LA Lakers @ New Orleans Winner: Leading scorer: Thursday, December 30th New York @ Orlando (TNT) Winner: Leading rebounder: San Antonio @ Dallas (TNT) Winner: Leading passer: Friday, December 31st Toronto @ Houston Winner: Player with the most threes made: Atlanta @ Oklahoma City Winner: Leading scorer: Saturday, January 1st Golden State @ Miami Winner: Leading scorer: Sacramento @ Denver Winner: Player with the most free throws attempted:

I can't stand Luke Walton.

Blake The Quake. The Los Angeles Blaker. Shake N Blake.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/gametracker/recap/NBA_20101226_MEM@IND

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/gametracker/recap/NBA_20101226_ATL@NO

Haha, wow...I've never seen a team with 12 consecutive road games. But, I guess so, if you want to count the Hornets playing in OKC.

Got it for Christmas. This game is seriously fun as hell, and really addicting. I love 2k11, but Jam has caught my attention right now. I DVR'ed the Bulls/Knicks and Blazers/Warriors games just so I could play the PS3 for a while, and I was hooked. My friend, brother and I were throwing oops left and right, swatting shots and trying to beat the Heat on "Insane" difficulty (good luck). Plus, the game mode where you win by shattering the opponents' backboard...it's sick. The only thing I didn't care for was the camera view when you're playing 21, but overall, the game is awesome.

NBA Jam (PS3) - parents UFC 2010 (PS3) - girlfriend Kobe hoodie - brother Kobe shirt - brother KU shorts & shirt - girlfriend's brother Nike dri-fit shorts - parents Nike shorts - brother Nike socks, a few other shirts, cologne - parents Terry spent $70 on the Kobe hoodie alone. It's a monster. The shirt was $30. :o Anyway, I just took a picture of some of the clothes. The two games...I left over at the parents' house (with my PS3), so Terry can play it tomorrow while he's off work, since I'll be preoccupied with extended family all day and most of the night. Love the hoodie. Also, Jessica received a coffee maker and a toaster for the house, so I guess that counts as part of mine since it's our house, haha (don't drink coffee, though). http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs213.ash2/47656_472566326652_502396652_6294062_5626427_n.jpg http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs213.ash2/47656_472566331652_502396652_6294063_1401786_n.jpg http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs413.snc4/47656_472566336652_502396652_6294064_3669922_n.jpg

Why was anyone surprised at this loss? We were blown out by the damn Jenning-less Bucks the previous game, in our house. There were only three Lakers that wanted to win this game badly, and that was Kobe, Fisher and Phil. I have no idea what happened with Lamar, who acted like he wanted to drop 40 points to start the game, then decided he was going to dribble the ball for a bit and pass it back to his teammates. Over at TLN, I stated (before the game) that Kobe should defend LeBron, Artest on Wade. I had a gut feeling the production from both Wade and Kobe wouldn't really mean much, otherwise, and that LBJ would eat Artest alive AGAIN. Wade wouldn't want a physical battle with Ron, and Artest has lost enough weight to keep up with him a little, while Bron would try and take Kobe in the post, which would be a mistake (like it was in 2008-09, when Bryant was defending him). What I didn't expect, however, is Gasol getting absolutely raped by Bosh and Big Z. Good to see Kobe (and Phil, sort of) call out the team after the game. Bryant made it known that the regular season games mean more to opponents than they do the Lakers, and it needs to change. Dude was not happy.

Merry Christmas, you guys. I'd get all of you jerseys of your favorite players if I had the money.

The Lakers would be short $9 million, and they don't have any draft picks to offer to Denver in the first place. No interest here. The Howard/LA rumor has more legs to it than this, by far.

Anyone know when the last time the big marquee Christmas match-up was also the NBA Finals match-up? Last year, it was LA and Cleveland. The year before, I believe we played Boston. We played Phoenix in 2007, saw Boston in the Finals. The Spurs didn't even play on Christmas in 2006. Miami played the Lakers in 2005, met the Mavs in the Finals. Spurs didn't play on Christmas in 2004. Lakers played the Rockets in 2003, lost to the Pistons in the Finals. No Spurs in 2002's Christmas showdowns (do the Spurs EVER play on Christmas?)... The dynasty Lakers played the Spurs, Blazers and Sixers (in that order) and didn't play them in the Finals the same season. Second dynasty Bulls didn't play in 1995, then the Pistons and Heat the following two seasons. Houston played the Suns in 1993, nobody the following season. First dynasty Bulls played the Pistons, Celtics and Knicks on Christmas. The 86 Celtics played the Knicks in 1985, beat Houston in the Finals. The 82 Lakers played the Suns, beat the Sixers in the Finals. In 1980, the Celtics played the Knicks, then beat the Rockets in the Finals. I'm stopping there. Since the 1979-80 season, the two Finals teams were not the two that met on Christmas Day...and it has probably never happened in the history of the league (tired of looking). Last year, we lost to Cleveland. Devastating. Cleveland was nowhere to be found in June. I think a Lakers/Celtics match-up would've been much more interesting.

The NBA didn't die in the 80s because of Mike, Magic and Larry. There was no other reason. Those three saved a league that was on the verge of dying, and this was made clear over and over again. I don't see a single player in the league doing that. Kobe is too old, Shaq is out of his prime, Duncan and Garnett are out of their primes. LeBron and Wade are on the same team, and one is a conceited, big-headed sell-out that thinks he should be the commissioner. The draft wouldn't increase to three rounds because there wouldn't be enough room for 72 rookies on 24 teams. Young players would enter the draft, become ineligible for the following college season, probably get drafted late second or third round, then never make a team and do nothing with their lives for at least a full year. Bad idea. The draft was cut down to just two rounds for that very reason. And yes, early retirement makes sense. Guess who wouldn't be in the NBA right now, if there were 24 teams and a hard cap? Theo Ratliff, who does more in practices with Gasol than he would in a game. There are others who are important to a team without actually producing on the court. Like I said, 90 current players would be cut. Three from each team, on average. For the Lakers...Caracter, Ratliff, Walton? From the Heat...Dampier, Howard, Magloire? Boston would probably cut Bradley, even though he can be a contributor on defense once he fully heals up. You'd also lose 12 out of the draft. There would probably be no reason to have a D-League, or a Summer League, because the only rookies that would make their teams would be first-round picks. Plus, six coaches (and their staff) would lose their jobs. John Kuester, Keith Smart, Paul Westphal, Lionell Hollins, Jay Triano, Jim O'Brien? Less jersey and merchandise sales, less teams, less fans. If Memphis, Sacramento, Charlotte, New Orleans, Minnesota, and Milwaukee were to all lose their teams...most of those fans are done with the NBA. How many Seattle fans are now rooting for the Thunder? None that I know of. Many are still pissed off about it, and they refuse to watch until they get their team back. If the NBA contracts, they will lose a lot of fans. Nobody wants to see a bunch of stacked teams playing each other for 82 games because popular players like Gilbert Arenas would be getting 10 less minutes on the court, forced to take a backseat to others. Players' careers would be shorter because guys like Bryant would have to play EVERY elite team three or four times a season (ex. Boston), and the teams would be stronger and geared to stop him, so everyone's numbers would likely decline just due to the extra help for AND against them. This is a bad, bad idea. If the league were to do this, I would strongly consider not watching pro basketball again, and I consider myself to be one of the biggest fans out there in regards to watching every single game and team that I can.

Cutting teams AND using a hard cap means less talented players. I suddenly feel sorry for guys like Manu Ginobili, picked late in the draft and not having the opportunity to show his true potential. That's about 90 less players in the league just by cutting six teams. Hard cap brings earlier retirements, younger pool of players and younger teams, less maturity, less veteran leadership and teaching. Also, six less teams means 246 less games, less playoff games, less money for the NBA as a whole. Smaller draft (48 picks, instead of 60). Smaller free agent classes, minimal attention in the off-season due to less attention given by teams (because of the hard cap). Less foreign interest due to lack of scouting overseas (based on smaller draft, less money offered to assist in buying out contracts). The NBA would fold and die in 5-6 years max.