FINALLY. Bud says what some have been waiting to hear since June

[KB21]

5 hours ago, AHF said:

Tim Duncan Lottery Pick - NBA and Finals MVP - In 2014, during the finals Duncan was #1 on the team in offensive rebounds, defensive rebounds, and blocks, #2 in points (behind Parker), #5 in assists.  He further led the team in both PER and Win Shares.  The Spurs have won exactly zero rings without him.

Dwayne Wade Lottery Pick - NBA Finals MVP - No rings without him.

Dirk Nowitzki Lottery Pick - NBA and Finals MVP - No rings without him.

Kobe Bryant Lottery Pick - NBA and Finals MVP - No rings without him (assuming you aren't talking Magic era or earlier).

Paul Pierce Lottery Pick, KG & Allen acquired by trading lottery picks - NBA Finals MVP - No rings without PP.

 

You cannot seriously be pretending that any of these teams won without the lottery.  Beyond that you haven't made the case that a single one of these teams was like the Hawks (who is our guy who is an MVP level player?) such that continuing down that path was a reasonable path to contender status.  Try again.

Taurean Prince -- Lottery pick.

There.  We have our one lottery pick like those teams had.  Now tell me, how many years did those teams spend in the lottery and when did they exactly intentionally structure their roster to lose so they could get a high draft pick?  Never.  In all cases, those were good teams who fell off because of injuries and not self inflicted decisions like Philly's tank and Atlanta's current tank.

 

[KB21]

3 hours ago, Diesel said:

All this is interesting.  But I looked at it from the other side.  Let's take the 2010 Hawks.

• J Teague = 19
• Kirk Hinrich = 7
• Mike Bibby = 2
• Joe Johnson = 10
• Josh Smith = 16
• Al Horford = 3
• Marvin Williams = 2
• Jamal Crawford = 8
• Jason Collins = 18
• Ethan Thomas = 12
• Jamal Crawford = 27

With a team full of lottery picks and 3 of them top 3 picks...  We finished with 44 wins.  We wasn't able to attract other free agents.   This is your Lottery Built Middling team that you want to deny can happen. does happen.  Happens most of the time. 

 

 

Actually, most of the time, teams in the lottery simply become consistent losers.  They don't even get to 44 wins.

This idea that you have to tank to get good is the biggest con job in sports, and fans end up falling for it every single year.  The fans get excited about the "Next great thing" prospect the shoe companies are pushing, and they feel like their team has to suck to get him.  When they get him, they realize that the "Next great thing" isn't all that.  See Andrew Wiggins.  In fact, see that entire 2014 lottery.  That particular lottery was the one where some Hawks fans wanted Atlanta to tank and get into.  I'm sure most of you pro tankers would have been very excited at the thoughts of having Josh Smith, I mean Aaron Gordon, or Julius Randle with our draft pick?  

 

[AHF]

50 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Taurean Prince -- Lottery pick.

There.  We have our one lottery pick like those teams had.  Now tell me, how many years did those teams spend in the lottery and when did they exactly intentionally structure their roster to lose so they could get a high draft pick?  Never.  In all cases, those were good teams who fell off because of injuries and not self inflicted decisions like Philly's tank and Atlanta's current tank.

 

Why do you make these crazy over generalizations?  There is a legit issue to talk about but you keep going to red herrings instead of real issues.

 

What was the injury that the Lakers had that caused they to fall off when they drafted Kobe?  None.  They were a solid team and traded away a solid player to get cap room and the lottery pick they needed to draft him.

Who was the injury that the Mavs suffered that caused them to fall off when they drafted Dirk?  None.  In what world were the Mavs a good team prior to drafting Dirk?  Please educate me.  (Hint:  They weren't good and it had nothing to do with injury.)

Who was the injury that the Celtics suffered when they drafted Pierce?  None.  In what world were the Celtics a good team prior to drafting PP?  Please educate me.  (Hint:  They weren't good and it had nothing to do with injury.)

 

"In all cases they were good teams" - What?  Clearly not true.  

"who fell because of injuries."  What?  Also, blatantly wrong. 

If you offered up any facts to support these crazy arguments it would be nice.

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

Why do you make these crazy over generalizations?  There is a legit issue to talk about but you keep going to red herrings instead of real issues.

 

What was the injury that the Lakers had that caused they to fall off when they drafted Kobe?  None.  They were a solid team and traded away a solid player to get cap room and the lottery pick they needed to draft him.

Who was the injury that the Mavs suffered that caused them to fall off when they drafted Dirk?  None.  In what world were the Mavs a good team prior to drafting Dirk?  Please educate me.  (Hint:  They weren't good and it had nothing to do with injury.)

Who was the injury that the Celtics suffered when they drafted Pierce?  None.  In what world were the Celtics a good team prior to drafting PP?  Please educate me.  (Hint:  They weren't good and it had nothing to do with injury.)

 

"In all cases they were good teams" - What?  Clearly not true.  

"who fell because of injuries."  What?  Also, blatantly wrong. 

If you offered up any facts to support these crazy arguments it would be nice.

Everything I have put out there is a fact, but those facts still get completely ignored.

How many years was it after Boston drafted Paul Pierce, with the 10th overall pick (not a top 3 pick) before they won a championship?  10 years.  Again, it was not a team built on lottery picks.  It was a team that was made with the addition of VETERAN PLAYERS.

Dallas spent 9 years in the lottery before they got Dirk, and then it took them 13 years to win a championship.  Again, it was a team that was not built on lottery picks.  It was built upon veteran acquisitions like Shawn Marion, Tyson Chandler, and Jason Kidd.

[AHF]

6 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Everything I have put out there is a fact, but those facts still get completely ignored.

Stop changing the subject and tell me the facts.

You said every one of those teams was good before drafting those guys in the lottery.  How were Boston and Dallas good before drafting PP and Dirk?

You said every one of those teams suffered a key injury ala David Robinson and that was the only reason they drafted those guys.  Team me the injured players.

Stop changing the subject and give me the facts.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

In all cases, those were good teams who fell off because of injuries and not self inflicted decisions like Philly's tank and Atlanta's current tank.

 

Give me the facts.  How were they good and what specific injuries caused them to fall off before they drafted their MVP/Finals MVP cornerstones?

[noble]

I think we all agree that the way to a championship is having a Superstar. Let's be clear about that, a superstar in their prime. It was obvious we weren't getting that type of player in free agency, even when we had a nice set of complimentary players, still no superstar wanted to come to Atlanta. Sure, some of that was terrible ownership, but there were other reasons, like they didn't see the complementary players as pieces to a championship puzzle.

So what does a team do? Were you okay with being a middle of the road team that was never a real contender, but made it to the playoffs? I don't know what you want them to do. You want a championship as much as anyone on the board, that much is obvious, but how would you propose that should have happened? We couldn't even keep the All-Star level complementary pieces we had.

My issue isn't your problem with the tanking, my issue is what would you have rather seen? I and many others here were not happy with just making the playoffs over and over and losing over and over. Just not much to be excited about when you just know you aren't getting a ring. How would you have liked this team to get a Superstar? Pray you hit in the middle of the draft? Trade pieces and picks for a high pick? You say we probably aren't getting one with a lottery pick, okay, how would you have liked to have gotten one?

[Peoriabird]

Not just not getting a ring but getting blown out in the playoffs after a 60 win season

[KB21]

11 hours ago, noble said:

I think we all agree that the way to a championship is having a Superstar. Let's be clear about that, a superstar in their prime. It was obvious we weren't getting that type of player in free agency, even when we had a nice set of complimentary players, still no superstar wanted to come to Atlanta. Sure, some of that was terrible ownership, but there were other reasons, like they didn't see the complementary players as pieces to a championship puzzle.

So what does a team do? Were you okay with being a middle of the road team that was never a real contender, but made it to the playoffs? I don't know what you want them to do. You want a championship as much as anyone on the board, that much is obvious, but how would you propose that should have happened? We couldn't even keep the All-Star level complementary pieces we had.

My issue isn't your problem with the tanking, my issue is what would you have rather seen? I and many others here were not happy with just making the playoffs over and over and losing over and over. Just not much to be excited about when you just know you aren't getting a ring. How would you have liked this team to get a Superstar? Pray you hit in the middle of the draft? Trade pieces and picks for a high pick? You say we probably aren't getting one with a lottery pick, okay, how would you have liked to have gotten one?

My strategy would not be centered finding a superstar, because in my view, there are maybe 2-3 superstar caliber players that can actually effect a team at a championship level (James and Durant are really the only true superstars in the league, maybe Harden).  My strategy would be centered on building a complete team that plays well together and is unselfish, and I would only target players that put the team before themselves.  I'd rather take my chances on getting a Giannis or Kawhi at the 15th pick than hoping I will get a James or Durant in the top 3.  

[hazer]

3 hours ago, KB21 said:

My strategy would not be centered finding a superstar, because in my view, there are maybe 2-3 superstar caliber players that can actually effect a team at a championship level (James and Durant are really the only true superstars in the league, maybe Harden).  My strategy would be centered on building a complete team that plays well together and is unselfish, and I would only target players that put the team before themselves.  I'd rather take my chances on getting a Giannis or Kawhi at the 15th pick than hoping I will get a James or Durant in the top 3.  

You speak of how long the odds are of landing a superstar in the lottery, yet advocate a strategy that has won exactly 1 Championship (Pistons) in the modern era. Schlenk's way has won 2 in the last 3 years, 3 straight appearances, can show you his rings...

Edited November 2, 2017 by hazer

[KB21]

4 hours ago, hazer said:

You speak of how long the odds are of landing a superstar in the lottery, yet advocate a strategy that has won exactly 1 Championship (Pistons) in the modern era. Schlenk's way has won 2 in the last 3 years, 3 straight appearances, can show you his rings...

Correction.  Schlenk's way is following the 76ers model of bottoming out the roster just to lose games, and that model has exactly ZERO playoff appearances 5 years into the tank job.

[NBASupes]

2 hours ago, KB21 said:

Correction.  Schlenk's way is following the 76ers model of bottoming out the roster just to lose games, and that model has exactly ZERO playoff appearances 5 years into the tank job.

LOL, this man got his troll game on 10.

Since when did we sell all vets. Add no vets and put together a squad of D-Leaguers? 

 

This team has a lot of decent players. The problem is, we got no good, really good, a star or superstar player right now. Dennis is the best and he's above average. We are just average but in the NBA. Everyone got at least three good players. Some got three superstars. But for us and Dallas. The best players on Dallas are just above average. For us, we got more average players than Dallas but we got only one above average player. 

Edited November 3, 2017 by NBASupes

[hazer]

4 hours ago, NBASupes said:

LOL, this man got his troll game on 10.

Since when did we sell all vets. Add no vets and put together a squad of D-Leaguers? 

 

This team has a lot of decent players. The problem is, we got no good, really good, a star or superstar player right now. Dennis is the best and he's above average. We are just average but in the NBA. Everyone got at least three good players. Some got three superstars. But for us and Dallas. The best players on Dallas are just above average. For us, we got more average players than Dallas but we got only one above average player. 

I've had enough of it, I didn't want to but after that last nonsense I've put him on ignore. It's a total waste of our time, utterly obtuse. Done with it...

[Sothron]

8 hours ago, hazer said:

I've had enough of it, I didn't want to but after that last nonsense I've put him on ignore. It's a total waste of our time, utterly obtuse. Done with it...

Thank you. I just hope more people will join me with ignoring him. I'm frankly tired of the board being turned into someone's daily diatribe and everyone feeding that.

[hazer]

55 minutes ago, Sothron said:

Thank you. I just hope more people will join me with ignoring him. I'm frankly tired of the board being turned into someone's daily diatribe and everyone feeding that.

No, I amean I ctually activated the “ignore” setting for him. I will no longer be able to see his posts. It smells better around here already, no longer the rotten stench of a beaten dead horse stinking up every single frikin’ thread 

[KB21]

14 hours ago, NBASupes said:

LOL, this man got his troll game on 10.

Since when did we sell all vets. Add no vets and put together a squad of D-Leaguers? 

 

This team has a lot of decent players. The problem is, we got no good, really good, a star or superstar player right now. Dennis is the best and he's above average. We are just average but in the NBA. Everyone got at least three good players. Some got three superstars. But for us and Dallas. The best players on Dallas are just above average. For us, we got more average players than Dallas but we got only one above average player. 

This team is made up of players who mostly aren't even replacement level players as far as veterans go, along with young players.  You can't win with non replacement level players and youth.  That's what makes it similar to the Philly tank.  The decision was made to intentionally structure the roster so that it cannot win, and that's exactly what Philly did.  You will see that when you see them move Dennis and Dedmon before the trade deadline.

[Peoriabird]

33 minutes ago, KB21 said:

This team is made up of players who mostly aren't even replacement level players as far as veterans go, along with young players. 

Be specific...Who are you talking about as non replacement players?

[Watchman]

38 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Be specific...Who are you talking about as non replacement players?

I can't speak for KB, but let's see:  Delaney, Brussino, Magette, Dorsey, Plumlee, Babbit, and arguably, Bazemore, Muscala and IT.

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, Watchman said:

I can't speak for KB, but let's see:  Delaney, Brussino, Magette, Dorsey, Plumlee, Babbit, and arguably, Bazemore, Muscala and IT.

Yep.  This is what Travis Schlenk gave Bud to work with this season.  As I said before the season, the combine projected VORP for these players isn't even 10.  A replacement level team will win 10 games, and this team appears to be on a 13-15 win trajectory right now, so if anything, it is barely above replacement level as a whole.

[AHF]

2 hours ago, KB21 said:

The decision was made to intentionally structure the roster so that it cannot win

That fits GS during its build to its current team.

That fits Clev during its build to its current team after LeBron left.

That fits OKC during its build to its current team.

That fits Minny during its build to its current team.

That fits Philly during its build to its current team.

That fits almost every team that decides to tear down the old players and start building with youth.  The team will almost always be structured so it cannot win enough games to get into the playoffs.

It is a very broad label that fits almost every flavor of rebuilding.