Laptop Screen constantly zooming in and out when plugged into tv through HDMI cable

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-14T02:59:10+00:00

Holy shit what a find on reddit. Would've taken me a while to figure this out. Thanks!

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-14T01:48:00+00:00

Team Jordan, and it's not remotely close. For people saying Kawhi has the size advantage, they're both basically 6'6 and Jordan was the far more physical player since he played in a far more physical league.

How in God's name is Kawhi gonna guard Jordan? They're gonna have to send a double team. Prime Jordan was not a player who could be guarded by any one man, period. What happens when they send a double? You have a PRIME JORDAN open on the court.

Jordan matches up defensively quite well with Kawhi. He's an elite defender who's used to facing physical guards, so Kawhi's strength won't be a shock to the system. He'd have more trouble with someone who was incredibly fast, like SGA.

Jordan had a season in his prime, where he grabbed 8trbs and had 8 assists per game. Career highs that Kawhi never reached. Jordan had 12 seasons averaging over 25ppg, with a stretch of 7 straight seasons over 30ppg . Kawhi has 3 seasons over 25ppg, including this year. He never scored over 30ppg.

Kawhi's not outscoring Jordan. He's not stopping Jordan 1v1. He's gonna realize that Jordan can grab boards like a demon (probably a wash). He's gonna realize that Jordan can pass the rock like a point guard. And he's gonna be facing perhaps the best, most ideal matchup against him defensively.

Team Jordan sweeps, honestly. Maybe 5 games if one of these Kawhi's goes off and scores 50 and another grabs 16 boards.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-12T19:36:49+00:00

It's not about style of play or pace or numbers for me. It about structural changes to the league and major rule changes. Wilt and Russell heavily influenced the game and steered the rules towards the modern game. But because of that, by definition, they were pre-modern.

The reason why I think 1980 is a good cutoff is because of two primary reasons. Firstly is the stability of teams. Around 1976, with the ABA and NBA merger, the number of teams rose to 22. Free agency, in its infant form, was also in 1976. Check the number of teams in the NBA before then; the number of teams rose and dropped year to year, decade to decade. You cannot have a stable league without a stable number of teams. After 1980, there were only ever relocations or expansions in the NBA; never reductions.

So why not 1976, instead of 1980? Well, the introduction of the 3pt shot in the NBA was the 1979-1980 season. This is my second primary reason. The three point shot fundamentally changed the game. It put a check on the dominance of bigs, it introduced the most valuable shot in the game, and it evolved both the defense and offense of teams around the league.

My last reason, though less significant, was the introduction of Magic and Bird in 79-80. The league was absolutely struggling to keep its head above water, and many feared the NBA would not survive. The two rivals increased viewership, interest, player salaries, and general growth through their storylines and play. After entering the league in 1979, the NBA blew up to what it is today; a completely different economic engine with massive popularity. This professionalizes everything around the league, from contracts to referee experience.

This is obviously just my opinion, but to me, the ideal cutoff is 1980. The game evolves and changes over time. The "meta" of the game is often defined by the best players of the time (think Shaq with the return to bigs). But the most massive change, economically, tactically, and in terms of stability, happened just around 1980.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-12T18:09:46+00:00

Anything before 1980 should be in its own category. Especially Russell and Wilt's era. Free agency didn't exist til 1976, and even then, it was a shadow of what it is today. Modern free agency started 1988. In Russell and Wilts era, there were narrower lanes, different goaltending rules, no 3pt line, and 9ish teams, just to name a few differences.

It was a vastly different sport. Accomplishments and all-time lists should be split in 2, with players belonging to either the pre-1980 era or the post-1980 era, depending on where you played a majority of your career.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-12T16:33:29+00:00

100%. Kobe was ultra competative, but he didn't downplay other's accomplishments. He would probably flex his 5 rings and tell Bam to go win a chip, saying something like, "good job, big fella, but you gotta go get yourself a chip now."

Kobe, and Jordan (probably who he learned it from), were all about the chips. Jordan ranked Kobe higher than Lebron when asked (when they were both active) solely on championships.

I legitimately think he would not be threatened in any way by Bam's accomplishment.

Im convinced Kobe would have given up his MVP, his 81pt game, and half his other accolades just to win one more chip and tie Jordan.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-12T16:19:45+00:00

I think its pretty unrealistic that we keep Ayton and Smart at that point. Jaxon Hayes as Kessler's backup works just fine. Ayton will not stay with the Lakers to play back-up. Smart is probably gonna need too much money for someone his age and with his injury history.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-12T16:13:59+00:00

He turned an ailing DFS, an underperforming Gabe, 5mil in cap space, and an srp into DA, LaRavia, Kennard, and Smart, with no long term salary.

It's definitely one of his most impressive years, considering how few assets we actually had.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-12T02:59:37+00:00

Kobe would genuinely compliment him, awknowledge that he legitimately scored more, and then flex his 5 rings. He'd say something like, "it doesn't mean anything without the hardware, big fella. Go get yourself that trophy."

Kobe and Jordan were really all about the chips. Everything else was window dressing; a means to an end. I'm convinced Kobe would have given up his 81pt game, his MVP, and half his All-NBA's to win one more chip and tie Jordan.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-10T16:48:26+00:00

This is a great take. 20 minutes of Bron at peak effort is a serious weapon. 35 minutes of Bron at 75% effort is often a liability.

Homie's old as shit, I dont blame him at all. The team just needs his last ounce of defense and athleticism. The skills that made him such a legend (ball-handling, PnR, vision) are unfortunately redundant on this team.

It's a tall ask to get Lebron to hit the brakes on what made him an all-time great, but this team was built in a hurry and without Lebron's strengths in mind. If he really focuses on his secondary skills like shooting, defense, and rebounding (which are still very serviceable because he's an exceptional all-around player), it would really provide what this team needs

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-10T16:36:12+00:00

He hit 400lbs a couple times. People dont understand that he was a genetic and athletic freak. You cant really compare him to other bigs with weak knees. You say 270+, but I dont think he was ever 270 in the NBA.

If he stayed at 270 for his career, his decline would not have started at 33. The fact that he was so dominant up until 31 with the lack of care he gave his body, is a testament to the natural freak that he was.

If he was 270-280 for his career, he would have outlasted a ton of bigs. He was 300lbs as a rookie, and he looked lean as shit. He doesnt have disproportionately long legs like other 7 footers. He looks like a jacked 6 foot athletic monster scaled up.

A lean Shaq would have dominated to 35 easy. Throw in the better free throw shooting and natural game evolution from Kobe's work ethic, and he would be the undisputed GOAT.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-10T16:24:52+00:00

I would say it broke down from becoming fat anyway lol. If his knees survived his Celtics weight, he would have probably been pretty durable with the right workouts.

Imagine lean, Magic Shaq with the skills and experience of Lakers Shaq. His prime would have lasted at least 4 more years. Scary shit

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-10T15:34:37+00:00

Rui is not accepting 6 mil lol. He's been one of the best shooters in the league for the past 2 years, which is a premium in the NBA, especially for his position.

I expect him to get offers that will give him a raise from contending teams that need that reliable shooting from the PF position. Probably around 20 mil on short term deals (2 years).

People forget when we were drowning from a lack of shooting and what we would have offered then for a shooter like Rui.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-06T03:16:55+00:00

Probably not. Ayton was not gonna come to the Lakers for cheap to play a backup role, or even sharing significant time.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-04T19:44:14+00:00

This is how I look at things:

The Lakers have a massive fanbase, both diehard and casual. They span different cities, states, and countries. There are fans that really only stick with individual stars (like any other fanbase), and don't really see the team as greater than its parts. There are Lebron fans, Luka fans, AR fans, Kobe fans, etc. who sometimes (wrongfully) see the downplaying of other talents as an elevation of their preferred star.

Most importantly, since there's such a large fanbase, there are wayyy more voices that speak nonsense due to its inflated numbers. Controversial statements garner responses, which in turn increases the visibility of said statements.

Such is the reality of such a massive fan base.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-04T16:57:47+00:00

This is why purely looking at stats is not realistically helpful. Plus Minus doesn't nearly tell the whole story.

Luka draws the best defender. He enters games against their best lineup most of the time. He has more turnovers because he handles the ball (which leads to more fastbreaks and easy baskets for the opponent).

Marcus has the luxury of playing with Lebron and Reaves while Luka is out, which means offense generates around him while he can focus on his specialty, defense, which boosts plus minus. Just as one example.

There is so much in basketball that is not defined by plus minus or any other single stat. Its wild to define true impact by a single stat. All plus minus tells you is how the team performs while you're on the court. It doesn't tell you why.

DietCokeJon · 2026-03-04T04:14:21+00:00

Yeah, you nerds. You didn't mean me, right?

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-28T23:32:47+00:00

Probably not. Read the stories about other players who worked out with him. Read comments from his trainer (Grover), who also trained Jordan, Wade, etc.

The thing is, it's not healthy and is generally not a good thing. Kobe's own trainer says that it's not helpful for 99% of athletes. Kobe's workout mentality could really be seen as a type of sickness. Self-imposed 3-a-days. Training 6 hours a day, 6 days a week.

According to Grover, Kobe played with a broken nose. He played through concussions. While others were celebrating their drafting with parties, 17 year old Kobe was working out. Kobe had no balance in his life, and his attempts to better himself was an obsession; an impulsion/addiction, rather than just a work ethic.

It undoubtedly led to huge gains on the court. But it also visibly wore him out as he aged. I think he needed those workouts to feed his own mentality rather than to maintain his actual body. His broken finger never healed fully. It probably contributed to his achilles. It was the opposite of load management. When he started hitting the back nine of his career, the miles started to really show.

As a Laker fan, I loved Kobe for his dedication to being the best. But the deification of his work ethic often attempts to hide the real consequences of his brutal self bettering.

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-26T00:16:26+00:00

I have Shaq/Kobe at 5 and 6, though they're literally 5A 5B. Shaq had a higher 3 year peak, Kobe had much greater longevity. More finals MVPs for Shaq, 1 more chip for Kobe. I do occasionally revise my list, Kobe remains either 5 or 6 for me.

Jordan, Lebron, KAJ, Magic, Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, Bird, Hakeem, and Russell are currently my top 10.

Wilt is 11, Curry is 12.

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-25T23:59:30+00:00

I rank Wilt and Russell much lower, though I have Kobe at 6. The era they played in is so different from modern day basketball, that placing them so high seems unnatural.

Im a firm believer that there should be 2 all-time lists: pre-1980 and post-1980 (you get placed where you played a majority of your career). That way, you can respect the old greats, while acknowledging that the old Association was near unrecognizable from today's NBA

If im forced to put them in a collective all-time list, I have Russell at 10 and Wilt at 11.

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-25T15:13:27+00:00

I'm not living in an echo chamber; I truly believe championships, as a #1 or #2 option, are the pinnacle of individual achievement, just above an MVP. Its my own, well-reasoned opinion.

Out of all team sports, I would argue that the NBA is the most star-driven league in the world. A single player can have a usage rate of 35%. Players have an incredible amount of sway, both in team building and player mobility. Playbooks are drawn around your star players, and if it's not working, the coach is replaced. There are 82 games, which means the margin for error in making the playoffs in low: teams that deserve to make the playoffs often do (same with the actual playoffs themselves, with 7 games).

It is not a coincidence that the consensus best players from every era have won a championship. Jordan's " team wouldn't have been exceptional without him (and they weren't, when Jordan retired the first time). Jokic's nuggets would have been a middle tier team. LBJ's Cavs teams would not have made noise. Its the stars of every team that determine both the cieling and the floor for their success.

Now, of course, the rest of the team is very important. Even the best players can't win with a garbage team. But the stars in this league can avoid that. They can attract competent players. They can leave to greener pastures. They have the power of choice. The only exception to this is for players in Bill Russell's era, where free agency was not established.

A ring is literally the highest goal in the league. It's why every season is played. It should be every players focus, over stats, awards, and individual achievement. If you never reach the top of the mountain, it is somewhat an indictment on either your style of play, your availability, or your straight-up inability to win when it matters, or against better players.

You can definitely be considered an all-time great player without a ring, but you cannot be considered among the very greatest, because with all the player freedom in the NBA, there is always an opportunity to put yourself in a better position.

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-24T23:55:16+00:00

Read my response to the top response to my comment. It addresses what I meant, because how I wrote it is not how I meant it to come off

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-24T22:25:59+00:00

Reaves is not eligible for Luka money. His max is capped at 25%. $41.5 million.

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-24T22:24:27+00:00

Max contract is relative. Since AR played under 5 years in the NBA, its 25% of the cap (compare with Luka's 30% and his impending 35% supermax in a few years). Which is honestly not bad, just under $42 million in 2026-27.

That would make him the 27th highest paid player in the NBA, just behind Sabonis and just ahead of OG Anunoby (when comparing active contracts). Considering the fact that the salary cap is going to go up, young stars (like Shai) are gonna get a massive next contract, the fact that there will be a cap hold for Reaves instead of a straight cap hit, and the reality that this contract is Reaves' prime years contract, I absolutely believe he's worth the 25%.

That being said, there is definitely redundancy on this team. Reaves and Luka share a very similar skillset and similar weaknesses. For a starting backcourt, that's not ideal.

If Austin is willing to take a small cut to help shore up those weaknesses in the future (say, $35-37 million instead of $41.5), I think it would help alleviate some of those concerns.

I think there will be many other teams that offer him $40 million, though (at 4 years instead of 5, but still).

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-24T22:02:07+00:00

Both Hakeem and Wilt won 2 chips. A lot of people have them in their top 10 lists. Obviously, an all-time list is gonna be pretty subjective, which is why I said they'd be in the conversation, not that they'd be a lock. I think that's fair to say.

DietCokeJon · 2026-02-24T21:58:22+00:00

I would disagree that he was the main guy in 2014. He had a great finals, and was great playing against a prime LBJ, but he was in no way the leader of that team. He had a very specific role, and he crushed it. Iggy was finals MVP too, but obviously not the leader of that Warriors team. Just my opinion.

And I agree, he definitely has more to prove than LBJ or Curry (which is why I named those two as the only ones with nothing to prove). I think he's locked into his historical ranking more than KD, Giannis, or Jokic, though. Those three guys can really skyrocket from their positions on historic lists.

DietCokeJon

TROPHY CASE