You see this is what I'm talking about. In my honest opinion, the Thunder lost this trade. This most likely is just the 5-8 best team in the West, and honestly doesn't really put them over anyone. PG has no inclination to stay in OKC, and on top of that Westbrook may see the same as PG and decide to leave as well. They also sort of continue to butcher their bench depth in the process, if there was any to begin with. PG is a top 15 player no doubt, but he's not a natural scorer like KD. KD can make up for losing 4-5 bench guys, having to give up a decent starter for PG just doesn't seem like a great incentive to me. The only argument I see backing the Thunder is that they got him for next to nothing, and I will argue that. Everyone agrees if Westbrook goes with PG, they can start a rebuild. Why then did you just give up two young and pretty good prospects in Oladipo and Sabonis? You put yourself back and not only that, you don't have your pick this year, so if they both leave, you have to wait another year to get a young prospect. The Thunder kinda screwed themselves bad in this, but hey, if they make it to the Finals then this rant will be pointless.

Mike321 said: Like I said before this offseason is better than the playoffs, Timberwolves are looking kinda nasty I might start calling myself a wolves fan

I remember that Warriors vs. Wolves game I went to when the Wolves won by 1. Curry and Klay are beasts, but Towns might honest to God be the best player I have ever seen.

Remember back in the late 90s and early 2000s when the East sucked so bad that pretty much whoever won the West (was usually the Lakers for a bit) would end up winning the finals.  The West just dominated with huge and top notch power forwards and centers.  All the best big men were in the West pretty much.

I do wonder where Rondo will end up. I was hoping New Orleans since they are in need of a quality point guard but it looks like they are going to overpay their current guy which just makes so much sense (sarcasm).

Also, what about Wade? Will the Bulls buy him out? And then there is Melo... Gordon Hayward is probably going to Miami (even though I want him to go to Boston) and with all the talent leaving the East, he may end up an all-star out there. Honestly, he is an underrated player. He has a, "black" game and I think a lot of people overlook him because he is white (and maybe because he is in Utah) and that is a disservice to his sheer quality.

Cleveland may end up doing absolutely nothing and still come out of the East because it is looking so barren. No offense to John Wall but the Wizards are still a piece or two away from contending and Boston, without a key addition, will pose no real threat. I still think Chicago, had Rondo not gotten injured, would have been the only real challenge to Cleveland in the East... weird to say an 8 seed would have been the biggest threat but we all know that they were probably one of the best 8 seeds in recent years.

Wow, I just rambled.

It really has been. So many unexpected things have happened.

Mike321 said: Like I said before this offseason is better than the playoffs, Timberwolves are looking kinda nasty I might start calling myself a wolves fan

Join the bandwagon. We need more fans.

I would say out of all my regional teams (Nuggets West, Thunder South, Wolves North, Bulls East) I would most definitely root for the Wolves (KAT is my second favorite player in the league). I was concerned the Wolves would never get going due to the new Warriors superteam, luckily for the Wolves Thibedou decided to speed up the rebuild process.

Really, though, what is the NBA going to do about the Eastern Conference? Not only has it been worst conference for years, it now seems like it's dropping even further. Unless you get to play on LeBron's team, why even go? (Well, unless you have a big contract provision for an All-Star appearance) The NFL, on the other hand, has done a fantastic job of creating parity. The NBA has to want that--though I don't know about the Player's union.

The NFL I find to be completely different than the NBA, and not really comparable in that sense. In the NFL, it's more of an all around team game. There's only one person in the NFL who could single handedly carry his team to the playoffs (Brady, who at this point IS the GOAT), and even then he needs a little help on the O-Line and Defensive ends. In the NBA, the best players win. Period. Allen Iverson had a team of complete bums, and led them to the Finals where he won a game against Kobe and Shaq. Lebron did the same in 07, only difference is he got swept. The big 3 Heat and the Warriors today have shown us the only thing that matters is star power. Outside of Bosh, Wade, James, and maybe Allen when he was there, can you name a DECENT player. The Warriors may have Iggy and Livingston, but they always find a way to have 1-2 of their big 4 constantly in the game, mainly because they're not THAT deep. When it comes to all around depth, I would argue pre trade deadline that the Lakers were one of the more well rounded teams when it came to players who were all around decent. They ended as the second worst team in the league.

In the NBA, it's about the names. Why do you think the Timberwolves who were considered up and coming are all of a sudden now considered Davids going against Goliath when all they did was add 2 people and got rid of a pretty decent young guy? You can build a decent team in the NBA, but the stars are what put you over. In the NFL, you need every position to be good for you to have a chance, in the NBA, you need to have 3-5 great pieces and everything else just be passable.

Also Just in, reportedly JJ Reddick is becoming a 76er on a 1 year $23 million deal. Way too much money if you ask me, and probably shows they have no interest in Lowry, but nice veteran presence and shooter on a young team that will probably be a top 5 seed in the WeakEast Conference.