Ironically enough, if they did that this year and the season ended right now... the playoffs would feature 8 Western Conference Teams and 8 Eastern Conference Teams. Coincidently, these would also be the exact 16 .500+ teams in the NBA.
Sir, there is no room for pragmatic and rational discussion here. The East is our bitch or gtfo.
This may be true, but East teams playing East teams more because that's how it goes does not equal West teams playing each other either.
This year, yes, though you would have to take the unbalanced schedule into account.
Even worse is when one conference is trash except for one really good team while the other has all the other great teams. Think 1987 where an injured McHale has to run himself into the ground for the Celtics to survive Jordan in the first round, a very good 50-32 Milwaukee team in the second, and then an extremely physical 52-30 Pistons team with some of the nastiest bigman depth we have ever seen who goes onto the Finals the next three years. Meanwhile in the WCF the Lakers get a 39-43 Sonics team with a worse record than the Bulls (40-42) that the Celtics had to play in the first round. In the second round the Lakers got a 42-40 Warriors team. In the first round a 37-45 win Denver team. I mean WTF you swap conferences and you don't even have to play McHale until the Finals. Lakers get an easy 11-1 run through the west while the Celtics have to play two 4-3 series vs Milwaukee and Detroit after getting the sweep over Chicago. So 11-6, McHale has to drag himself through 5 more games to get to the Finals while the Lakers cakewalk to the Finals. 1987 is the most egregious example but the balance of power was widely out of whack the entire decade.
Damn you are that much of a TOSB good sir?
Man I been a Spurs fan since people wore bags on their heads in the upper deck of Hemisfair. The good old Fast Breaking Siesta.
If Giannis has any control over this, he should be telling Milwaukee he wants New York or Minnesota.
True. I think the pudding proof would be if they played as even a schedule as could be made. The cream would rise to the top if the East actually had a balanced schedule with the West.
I have a hard time seeing them trading RJ and 2 picks for McDaniel.
I'd say they'd prefer to use someone besides us, but if they can't find a third team that Milwaukee prefers assets from that they'd still use us because they want to pair Ant and Giannis so badly.
I'm fine with trading Castle, but i'm not sure McDaniels is a big enough fish to pull the trigger on. That said, it would certainly balance the roster.
It is not a that great of package, but what better deal Bucks could realistically get at the deadline or the offseason? There is simply no godfather offer for him. He is little too old and too injury-prone to generate a massive haul. Unless it's Giannis-Banchero swap (few rumblings about that scenario) in which you settle for a couple of mediocre picks but talk yourself into a budding young star with former #1 pedigree, I don't see any purported trade packages beating the rumored Miami's offer especially with OKC/HOU/SA and even Blazers (Avdija+ MIL's own swapped picks) lack of/tepid interest..
That's interesting because I think the Spurs are firmly in or right on the edge of "overpay for player that could put you over the hump" that every championship level team has to eventually make to seriously compete for a championship. I also think McDaniels would easily be that player and really fits to how we want to play. Or should want to play you never know with Mitch
