The Tank Thread

[jy23]

10 hours ago, KB21 said:

Then all the talk about tanking to draft an MVP caliber talent is crap.

Bruh we’re tryin to win championships, I couldn’t care less if we did it with an mvp or not. Just get me the best combination of players possible to get this thing done. Durant didn’t win until he went to golden state. Lebron didn’t win until he went to Miami. I don’t think any of us feel we’re one player away. We just want a great piece to add to the team and keep adding more pieces until the time is right for us to strike. 

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, jy23 said:

Bruh we’re tryin to win championships, I couldn’t care less if we did it with an mvp or not. Just get me the best combination of players possible to get this thing done. Durant didn’t win until he went to golden state. Lebron didn’t win until he went to Miami. I don’t think any of us feel we’re one player away. We just want a great piece to add to the team and keep adding more pieces until the time is right for us to strike. 

I raised the issue of MVP previously in the thread to emphasize that I thought developing nice rotations players was secondary to getting an player who is good enough to hit MVP level or who is good enough to attract a free agent who is good enough to hit MVP level or to be traded for a player who is capable of hitting MVP level.

I don't think a team of players like Sap, Zach Randolph, Mike Conley, Jeff Teague, etc. has any realistic probability win a ring unless paired with someone who can play at that level (they can be essential pieces in support of that top player like Horace Grant was to Jordan or Sam Cassell was to Hakeem).  I do call out the 1-time champion Pistons as the exception to that statement where they merely had 4 All-Stars and a DPOY.

26 minutes ago, KB21 said:

From a statistical standpoint, the only player I can come up with who had a similar usage percentage and came close to Young's assists percentage is Steph Curry at Davidson.  Step had a 38.3% USG% as a junior at Davidson with a 40% AST%.   Trae Young has a 37.3% USG% with a 49% AST%.  

Trae Young has a 58.8% TS% with a 52.8% 3PAr.  

Steph Curry had a 60.4% TS% with a 48.9% 3PAr.  

The largest separation between the two is that Steph Curry had a much better turnover percentage at 13.5% compared to Trae's 18.3%.  

There is enough there from an advanced analytical analysis on this player to make you really take a long, hard look.......because no freshman has ever done what he has done this year.  Curry was a junior when he put up those numbers.

If our GM believes in him the most, he should take him.  His TS% and range is the single most encouraging thing about him to me.  I don't buy into the usage driven stats as much (ala Pistol Pete being inflated by dominating the ball) but the fact that he has kept up some nice scoring efficiency while he has had such a high usage rate is encouraging.  

I am eager to see if his efficiency is for real or driven by a red hot start to the season.  So rest of season for him is very important for me.

FG% by month:

November 49.0%

December 46.2%

January 42.6%

February 36.4%

March 26.3% (only 1 game)

[AHF]

Just looked and here is how he rates right now among the top 100 freshmen by total WS from 2009-10 to the present in per minute PER and WS/48 numbers:

Trae Young:

WS/48 #33 (behind Elias Harris and Simmons and ahead of Melo Trimble and CJ McCollum)

PER #14 (behind Hassan Whiteside and Ben Simmons and ahead of Jabari Parker and Anthony Bennett)

 

Others:

Ayton:  #8 in WS/48 and #4 in PER

Bagley: #9 in WS/48 and #7 in PER

JJJ:  #10 in WS/48 and #20 in PER

Bamba:  #30 in WS/48 and #18 in PER

Carter Jr:  #11 in WS/48 #45 in PER

[AHF]

Rk	Player	Class	Season	School	PER	TS%	TRB%	AST%	STL%	BLK%	TOV%	USG%	ORtg	DRtg	WS/48
1	Karl-Anthony Towns	FR	2014-15	Kentucky	31.4	0.627	18.5	11.6	1.4	11.5	14.2	23.7	126.8	78.1	0.374
2	Anthony Davis	FR	2011-12	Kentucky	35.1	0.654	19	7.5	2.5	13.7	8.6	18.8	139	80.7	0.371
3	Zach Collins	FR	2016-17	Gonzaga	30.9	0.703	18.3	4.4	1.5	9.8	17.8	24.8	125.1	79.4	0.357
4	Mike Daum	FR	2015-16	South Dakota State	34.5	0.656	16.7	9.5	1.4	1.7	12.4	31.9	129	97.8	0.354
5	DeMarcus Cousins	FR	2009-10	Kentucky	34.2	0.579	22.5	9.2	2.4	7.5	13.6	30.5	118.5	83.9	0.349
6	Jared Sullinger	FR	2010-11	Ohio State	30.3	0.591	20.1	7.4	2	2	9.9	27	126	89.6	0.340
7	Cody Zeller	FR	2011-12	Indiana	31.3	0.665	14.9	9.5	2.9	4.3	12.4	24.3	132.1	96.3	0.318
8	DeAndre Ayton	FR	2017-18	Arizona	32.3	0.657	21.2	9.9	0.8	6.1	11.2	26.1	131.5	98.8	0.312
9	Marvin Bagley III	FR	2017-18	Duke	30.9	0.634	18.5	9.4	1.6	3.1	12.7	26.9	126.1	95.9	0.303
10	Jaren Jackson Jr.	FR	2017-18	Michigan State	27.4	0.654	14.7	9.4	1.7	14.5	17.4	23.8	121.2	86	0.295
11	Wendell Carter Jr.	FR	2017-18	Duke	29.1	0.638	18.7	13.3	1.5	7.9	15.7	22.6	127.2	92.8	0.294
12	Jameel Warney	FR	2012-13	Stony Brook	27.7	0.612	15.8	8.1	1.6	6.6	10.2	22	122.8	86.7	0.294
13	Anthony Bennett	FR	2012-13	Nevada-Las Vegas	28.3	0.609	17.1	8.8	1.5	4.6	12.3	27.5	117.6	89.6	0.288
14	Seth Tuttle	FR	2011-12	Northern Iowa	27.6	0.675	16.2	11.8	2.3	2.3	13.6	20.7	130.9	96.9	0.284
15	Lauri Markkanen	FR	2016-17	Arizona	25	0.635	14	5.6	0.8	1.8	8.1	22.4	134.1	100.4	0.282
16	Jahlil Okafor	FR	2014-15	Duke	30.7	0.641	16.6	9.4	1.5	4.5	15.6	27.6	119.9	95.4	0.281
17	Domantas Sabonis	FR	2014-15	Gonzaga	24.7	0.675	19.1	7.5	1.3	1.5	17.7	21.5	123.9	91.3	0.280
18	Cameron Krutwig	FR	2017-18	Loyola (IL)	25.1	0.632	16.8	14.8	1.3	3.6	13.8	22.3	124	93.1	0.279
19	D'Angelo Russell	FR	2014-15	Ohio State	26.6	0.573	9.8	30.1	2.8	1.1	14.8	30.2	115.7	94.5	0.275
20	Pascal Siakam	FR	2014-15	New Mexico State	26.1	0.614	15.7	10	1.7	5.9	15.3	21.2	122.7	92	0.270
21	Landry Shamet	FR	2016-17	Wichita State	20.2	0.629	5.8	22.2	1.6	0.9	10.7	18.8	132.1	95	0.270
22	TJ Leaf	FR	2016-17	UCLA	26.6	0.66	14.9	13.2	1.1	3.5	10.8	22	130.6	101.2	0.266
23	Devin Booker	FR	2014-15	Kentucky	19.4	0.6	5.4	10.9	1.3	0.3	10.4	22.8	123.1	92.2	0.265
24	James Thompson IV	FR	2015-16	Eastern Michigan	26.9	0.663	18	3.9	1.3	5.1	11.5	18.8	134.3	101.2	0.263
25	Ben McLemore	FR	2012-13	Kansas	23.2	0.633	9.4	12.6	1.8	2.2	14.2	23.2	121.4	93.7	0.262
26	Zhaire Smith	FR	2017-18	Texas Tech	23	0.63	9.8	11.5	2.3	4.4	11.3	18.4	129.7	95.1	0.260
27	Lonzo Ball	FR	2016-17	UCLA	24.7	0.673	9.3	31.4	2.8	2.1	18.6	18.1	131.3	100.7	0.258
28	Stanley Johnson	FR	2014-15	Arizona	22.5	0.551	14.1	11.6	3.2	1.6	14.7	26.6	111.1	87.6	0.253
29	Ivan Rabb	FR	2015-16	University of California	24.2	0.636	16.5	6.6	1.1	4.1	13.4	20	124.8	95.3	0.251
30	Mohamed Bamba	FR	2017-18	Texas	27.7	0.589	20	3.5	1.5	13	12.7	21.2	117.3	88.7	0.251
31	Ben Simmons	FR	2015-16	Louisiana State	29	0.6	18.2	27.4	3.1	2.5	17.4	26.4	117.2	98.4	0.250
32	Elias Harris	FR	2009-10	Gonzaga	24	0.609	13.7	7.9	1.8	1.6	13.3	24.2	118.7	95.5	0.250
33	Trae Young	FR	2017-18	Oklahoma	28.6	0.588	5.8	49	2.5	0.7	18.3	37.3	115.4	108.1	0.250
34	Melo Trimble	FR	2014-15	Maryland	22.8	0.628	6.8	21.2	2.3	0.2	16	25	120.7	99.1	0.250
35	C.J. McCollum	FR	2009-10	Lehigh	25.8	0.593	8.8	17.1	2.3	0.7	11	28.4	118.8	101.2	0.246
36	Temetrius Morant	FR	2017-18	Murray State	21.4	0.569	11.4	33.6	1.6	1	18.1	20.3	123.1	98.2	0.246
37	Jabari Parker	FR	2013-14	Duke	28.4	0.558	17.1	8.6	2.1	4	11.9	32.7	115	99.3	0.246
38	Rondae Hollis-Jefferson	FR	2013-14	Arizona	20.3	0.544	13.1	11	1.8	4.3	12.1	19.9	117.4	89.6	0.245
39	Tyler Haws	FR	2009-10	Brigham Young	20.4	0.62	9.1	10.3	1.6	0.6	11.4	19.3	127.9	97.8	0.244
40	Hassan Whiteside	FR	2009-10	Marshall	29.1	0.548	18.3	2.2	1.2	18.8	13.6	25.8	107.9	85.8	0.243

[Diesel]

43 minutes ago, jy23 said:

Bruh we’re tryin to win championships, I couldn’t care less if we did it with an mvp or not. Just get me the best combination of players possible to get this thing done. Durant didn’t win until he went to golden state. Lebron didn’t win until he went to Miami. I don’t think any of us feel we’re one player away. We just want a great piece to add to the team and keep adding more pieces until the time is right for us to strike. 

It's always the lottery teams whoose argument for tanking is saying.. we're trying to win a championship.. .we just need good pieces.   Championship winning doesn't start in the lottery... if it did, there would be a whole lot of teams who have been to the lottery several years in a row that would be championship calibre.   It's fools gold and it puts you out of contention for FAs that can put you in that championship calibre. 

A few days ago somebody asked what teams went to the championship without a lottery draft pick that they drafted. 

Shaq and Kobe.  Detroit. a few others.

I think that we have been blinded by Lebron  who has been in the finals 8 times that we miss the point.   Not even the great Lebron won a championship within his first 5 years with Cleveland.   Lebron James was drafted in 2003.  They didn't win a championship unitl 2016.  And honestly that was gifted to them.   Bogut's injury and Draymond's suspension meant a whole lot for the Cavs.  Not to mention it took them getting three #1 pick overalls to get there.   It's fool's gold. 

Championships are built on building correctly. 

[davis171]

30 minutes ago, Diesel said:

It's always the lottery teams whoose argument for tanking is saying.. we're trying to win a championship.. .we just need good pieces.   Championship winning doesn't start in the lottery... if it did, there would be a whole lot of teams who have been to the lottery several years in a row that would be championship calibre.   It's fools gold and it puts you out of contention for FAs that can put you in that championship calibre. 

A few days ago somebody asked what teams went to the championship without a lottery draft pick that they drafted. 

Shaq and Kobe.  Detroit. a few others.

I think that we have been blinded by Lebron  who has been in the finals 8 times that we miss the point.   Not even the great Lebron won a championship within his first 5 years with Cleveland.   Lebron James was drafted in 2003.  They didn't win a championship unitl 2016.  And honestly that was gifted to them.   Bogut's injury and Draymond's suspension meant a whole lot for the Cavs.  Not to mention it took them getting three #1 pick overalls to get there.   It's fool's gold. 

Championships are built on building correctly. 

I think drafting your superstar or acquiring assets to trade for the star starts though lottery picks. Drafting well by no means guarantees a championship and I don't think that's what anyone here thinks. Drafting well in the lottery is a component but so is knowing when to cut bait, who to cut bait on, who to trade, who to keep, and who to sign all factors into winning a championship but you need the pieces and assets to complete those deals. The hawks had no true assets left when Schlenk got here and the quickest way to acquire those assets is through the draft (regardless of if they are trade bait (Wiggins and Sabonis off the top of my head) or plan to be built around for the future. (Also Detroit an anomaly and if you want the hawks to emulate the Lakers then you will be waiting a long time)

 

Edited March 5, 2018 by davis171

[jy23]

30 minutes ago, Diesel said:

It's always the lottery teams whoose argument for tanking is saying.. we're trying to win a championship.. .we just need good pieces.   Championship winning doesn't start in the lottery... if it did, there would be a whole lot of teams who have been to the lottery several years in a row that would be championship calibre.   It's fools gold and it puts you out of contention for FAs that can put you in that championship calibre. 

A few days ago somebody asked what teams went to the championship without a lottery draft pick that they drafted. 

Shaq and Kobe.  Detroit. a few others.

I think that we have been blinded by Lebron  who has been in the finals 8 times that we miss the point.   Not even the great Lebron won a championship within his first 5 years with Cleveland.   Lebron James was drafted in 2003.  They didn't win a championship unitl 2016.  And honestly that was gifted to them.   Bogut's injury and Draymond's suspension meant a whole lot for the Cavs.  Not to mention it took them getting three #1 pick overalls to get there.   It's fool's gold. 

Championships are built on building correctly. 

Not doing this, you can say that and I can find plenty of examples tonargue the opposite. Let’s jist agree to disagree and move on 

[jy23]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

I raised the issue of MVP previously in the thread to emphasize that I thought developing nice rotations players was secondary to getting an player who is good enough to hit MVP level or who is good enough to attract a free agent who is good enough to hit MVP level or to be traded for a player who is capable of hitting MVP level.

I don't think a team of players like Sap, Zach Randolph, Mike Conley, Jeff Teague, etc. has any realistic probability win a ring unless paired with someone who can play at that level (they can be essential pieces in support of that top player like Horace Grant was to Jordan or Sam Cassell was to Hakeem).  I do call out the 1-time champion Pistons as the exception to that statement where they merely had 4 All-Stars and a DPOY.

If our GM believes in him the most, he should take him.  His TS% and range is the single most encouraging thing about him to me.  I don't buy into the usage driven stats as much (ala Pistol Pete being inflated by dominating the ball) but the fact that he has kept up some nice scoring efficiency while he has had such a high usage rate is encouraging.  

I am eager to see if his efficiency is for real or driven by a red hot start to the season.  So rest of season for him is very important for me.

FG% by month:

November 49.0%

December 46.2%

January 42.6%

February 36.4%

March 26.3% (only 1 game)

The mvp caliber player is fine...that’s not lebron and Durant tho. Those are generational talents...top 10 all time guys. And I’m saying we don’t need one of those to win. D wade wasn’t thought of like that coming out but he was a good prospect that matured into the player that he became. Basically what I was saying is I don’t care if we don’t draft the greatest player ever, I just want this player to be a big step towards us contending for championships

[AHF]

1 minute ago, Diesel said:

 Championship winning doesn't start in the lottery... if it did, there would be a whole lot of teams who have been to the lottery several years in a row that would be championship calibre.   

There can only be 1 champion in any season.  There will never be "a lot of recent teams that are champions" or some criteria like that.  Instead, let's look at the champions and see if they meet this definition:

Defining the lottery as #1-14 in the draft here are the champions that spent time in the lottery prior to 'getting good' and the champions that didn't spend time in the lottery:

Golden State Warriors lottery years lead to drafting of core with MVP, years include:  

2008-09 29 wins (draft Curry)

2009-10 26 wins 

2010-11 36 wins (draft Klay)

2011-12 23 wins (draft Barnes & Green)

2014-15 NBA Champions

2016-17 NBA Champions

 

Cleveland Cavs lottery years lead to acquisition of core good enough to lure MVP, years include:

2010-11 19 wins (draft Kyrie and TT)

2011-12 21 wins (pick traded for JR Smith & Iman Schump)

2012-13 24 wins (bust)

2013-14 33 wins (clean cap sheet, Kyrie and pick traded for Love lure LeBron as a FA)

2015-16 NBA Champions (all players averaging double figures drafted or traded for with lottery picks other than LeBron - Kyrie 25/5 in playoffs)

 

San Antonio Spurs lottery years lead to drafting of two MVPs, years include:

1986-87 28 wins (draft David Robinson)

1987-88 31 wins*

1988-89 21 wins (draft Sean Elliot)

1994-95 NBA Finals (Robinson and Elliot score more than next 4 players combined)

1996-97 20 wins (draft Tim Duncan)

1998-99 NBA Champions (Duncan, Robinson and Elliot are only players scoring 10 or more points per game)

(+3 more championships with/0 without)

 

Miami Heat lottery years lead to drafting of Finals MVP good enough to lure MVP, years include:

2001-02 36 wins (pick traded for Shaq)

2002-03 25 wins (drafted Dwyane Wade)

2005-06 NBA Champions (Wade Finals MVP)

2010 - Wade is good enough to lure FA LeBron & Bosh

2010-11 NBA Finals

2011-12 NBA Champions

2012-13 NBA Champions

 

Dallas Mavs lottery years lead to lottery pick swap used for drafting MVP, years include:

1991-97 Lottery Seasons

1997-98 19 wins (draft Dirk)

2005-06 NBA Finals (Dirk is driving force)

2010-11 NBA Finals (Dirk is driving force)

 

LA Lakers - NO SIGNIFICANT LOTTERY RUN

Smartly trade for lottery pick to draft Kobe and use LA market to sign FA Shaq.  No significant lottery contribution.

 

 

Abbreviated years:

Boston Celtics lottery years lead to drafting Finals MVP PP and trading picks for MVP KG and Ray Allen

 

Detroit Pistons trade lottery pick for DPOY defensive core on way to winning but stand out as an example without a significant lottery run on way to winning a the sole championship without an MVP level player in ~40 years

 

Chicago Bulls lottery years lead to drafting Michael Jordan (#3) and lottery pick swap to draft Scottie Pippen (#5) as well as supporting piece Horace Grant (#10)

 

Houston Rockets lottery years lead to drafting Hakeem (#1) along with Ralph Sampson (#1) on way to early 90's rings

 

Detroit Pistons lottery years lead to drafting of Finals MVP and MVP vote recipient Isiah Thomas (#2) along with supporting players 

 

Boston lottery years lead to Bird (#6 pick and MVP), Parrish (#1 pick traded to get him) and McHale (#3) trio and rings

 

LA Lakers - NO SIGNIFICANT LOTTERY RUN

Lakers clean up again without losing big, b*&#$s.  Somehow get #1 overall picks Magic Johnson and James Worthy without a significant run of terrible play.  Manage to flip #2 overall pick (theirs after 30 win season), #8 overall pick (they acquired for their #31 pick), #3 overall pick (they got for their #13 pick), #12 overall pick (theirs) for MVP #1 pick Kareem (who forced his way out of MIL after winning a ring to LA).  It's nice when MVPs want to play for you.

 

 

* = Somehow made the playoffs this year despite a worse point diffential than this year's Hawks only to be swept by an average of double digit margins.

[AHF]

35 minutes ago, jy23 said:

The mvp caliber player is fine...that’s not lebron and Durant tho. Those are generational talents...top 10 all time guys. And I’m saying we don’t need one of those to win. D wade wasn’t thought of like that coming out but he was a good prospect that matured into the player that he became. Basically what I was saying is I don’t care if we don’t draft the greatest player ever, I just want this player to be a big step towards us contending for championships

LeBron and Durant are MVP level players by definition.  Durant is not close to top 10 All-Time at this point in his career (he has time to make a case for it) but I do think that applies to LeBron today.  

Agree with you that you don't have to have a generational player but it sure helps.  Generational guys like Shaq, Kobe, Jordan, LeBron, Bird, Duncan, Curry, Magic, Kareem, etc. have ended up with a big % of the total championships won - like a significant majority of them.

[jy23]

51 minutes ago, AHF said:

There can only be 1 champion in any season.  There will never be "a lot of recent teams that are champions" or some criteria like that.  Instead, let's look at the champions and see if they meet this definition:

Defining the lottery as #1-14 in the draft here are the champions that spent time in the lottery prior to 'getting good' and the champions that didn't spend time in the lottery:

Golden State Warriors lottery years lead to drafting of core with MVP, years include:  

2008-09 29 wins (draft Curry)

2009-10 26 wins 

2010-11 36 wins (draft Klay)

2011-12 23 wins (draft Barnes & Green)

2014-15 NBA Champions

2016-17 NBA Champions

 

Cleveland Cavs lottery years lead to acquisition of core good enough to lure MVP, years include:

2010-11 19 wins (draft Kyrie and TT)

2011-12 21 wins (pick traded for JR Smith & Iman Schump)

2012-13 24 wins (bust)

2013-14 33 wins (clean cap sheet, Kyrie and pick traded for Love lure LeBron as a FA)

2015-16 NBA Champions (all players averaging double figures drafted or traded for with lottery picks other than LeBron - Kyrie 25/5 in playoffs)

 

San Antonio Spurs lottery years lead to drafting of two MVPs, years include:

1986-87 28 wins (draft David Robinson)

1987-88 31 wins*

1988-89 21 wins (draft Sean Elliot)

1994-95 NBA Finals (Robinson and Elliot score more than next 4 players combined)

1996-97 20 wins (draft Tim Duncan)

1998-99 NBA Champions (Duncan, Robinson and Elliot are only players scoring 10 or more points per game)

(+3 more championships with/0 without)

 

Miami Heat lottery years lead to drafting of Finals MVP good enough to lure MVP, years include:

2001-02 36 wins (pick traded for Shaq)

2002-03 25 wins (drafted Dwyane Wade)

2005-06 NBA Champions (Wade Finals MVP)

2010 - Wade is good enough to lure FA LeBron & Bosh

2010-11 NBA Finals

2011-12 NBA Champions

2012-13 NBA Champions

 

Dallas Mavs lottery years lead to lottery pick swap used for drafting MVP, years include:

1991-97 Lottery Seasons

1997-98 19 wins (draft Dirk)

2005-06 NBA Finals (Dirk is driving force)

2010-11 NBA Finals (Dirk is driving force)

 

LA Lakers - NO SIGNIFICANT LOTTERY RUN

Smartly trade for lottery pick to draft Kobe and use LA market to sign FA Shaq.  No significant lottery contribution.

 

 

Abbreviated years:

Boston Celtics lottery years lead to drafting Finals MVP PP and trading picks for MVP KG and Ray Allen

 

Detroit Pistons trade lottery pick for DPOY defensive core on way to winning but stand out as an example without a significant lottery run on way to winning a the sole championship without an MVP level player in ~40 years

 

Chicago Bulls lottery years lead to drafting Michael Jordan (#3) and lottery pick swap to draft Scottie Pippen (#5) as well as supporting piece Horace Grant (#10)

 

Houston Rockets lottery years lead to drafting Hakeem (#1) along with Ralph Sampson (#1) on way to early 90's rings

 

Detroit Pistons lottery years lead to drafting of Finals MVP and MVP vote recipient Isiah Thomas (#2) along with supporting players 

 

Boston lottery years lead to Bird (#6 pick and MVP), Parrish (#1 pick traded to get him) and McHale (#3) trio and rings

 

LA Lakers - NO SIGNIFICANT LOTTERY RUN

Lakers clean up again without losing big, b*&#$s.  Somehow get #1 overall picks Magic Johnson and James Worthy without a significant run of terrible play.  Manage to flip #2 overall pick (theirs after 30 win season), #8 overall pick (they acquired for their #31 pick), #3 overall pick (they got for their #13 pick), #12 overall pick (theirs) for MVP #1 pick Kareem (who forced his way out of MIL after winning a ring to LA).  It's nice when MVPs want to play for you.

 

 

* = Somehow made the playoffs this year despite a worse point diffential than this year's Hawks only to be swept by an average of double digit margins.

Just pin this somewhere so we don’t have to have this discussion anymore lol

[jy23]

46 minutes ago, AHF said:

LeBron and Durant are MVP level players by definition.  Durant is not close to top 10 All-Time at this point in his career (he has time to make a case for it) but I do think that applies to LeBron today.  

Agree with you that you don't have to have a generational player but it sure helps.  Generational guys like Shaq, Kobe, Jordan, LeBron, Bird, Duncan, Curry, Magic, Kareem, etc. have ended up with a big % of the total championships won - like a significant majority of them.

True...kobe, Jordan, curry...those guys weren’t known to be the commodities they ended up being like magic, lebron, Shaq, Kareem etc. so us looking at these prospects and saying “there’s no lebron here” doesn’t mean anything to me basically is my overall point. 

[AHF]

45 minutes ago, jy23 said:

True...kobe, Jordan, curry...those guys weren’t known to be the commodities they ended up being like magic, lebron, Shaq, Kareem etc. so us looking at these prospects and saying “there’s no lebron here” doesn’t mean anything to me basically is my overall point. 

Agreed.  There are guys who come in looking like generational talents and who are considered absolute no-brainers at #1 overall (Kareem, Hakeem, LeBron, Shaq, Duncan, Oscar, Oden, etc.) and there isn't a big miss rate with those guys.  Then there are guys who are attractive enough to be drafted in the lottery but who aren't no-brainer #1s and who turn into generational talents (Jordan who slipped behind Bowie; Curry; Bird; Dirk; Garnett; etc.).  Those players are rare and they don't come around very often and the teams that get them generally enjoy a lot of success. 

Agree that there could be one lurking in this draft but there is nobody who is so dominant that he is like Karem or Shaq or LeBron as far as absolute no-brainer prospect projections.  

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, davis171 said:

I think drafting your superstar or acquiring assets to trade for the star starts though lottery picks. Drafting well by no means guarantees a championship and I don't think that's what anyone here thinks. Drafting well in the lottery is a component but so is knowing when to cut bait, who to cut bait on, who to trade, who to keep, and who to sign all factors into winning a championship but you need the pieces and assets to complete those deals. The hawks had no true assets left when Schlenk got here and the quickest way to acquire those assets is through the draft (regardless of if they are trade bait (Wiggins and Sabonis off the top of my head) or plan to be built around for the future. (Also Detroit an anomaly and if you want the hawks to emulate the Lakers then you will be waiting a long time)

 

Here's the problem...  most championship teams learn how to acquire talent without having to ditch talent.  We made ourselves into NOTHING with no vet talent and no championship talent and we think that somehow we will get a superstar or acquire one via trade or FAcy??  Please. 

Let's say we did get a modestly talented guy.  Somebody like Smoove.  Talented but Flawed.    First thing... No Hawks fan is going to want to trade him, so we keep him.   He's talented enough to get us close to the playoffs, but not talented enough to get us in.  Therefore, the second year of our tank move to the midrounds.  This is the blueprint for a mediocre team.   This is the Tank Blueprint.   Look around.   The only reason why Philly got so many shots at the Lottery was Injury.  The reason the Cavs got so many shots is because the Lottery is rigged and this was payback for Lebron Leaving.  

So what that means is that lottery lurching with little talent means that YOU Must get a superstar and he has to have the power to bring players to the franchise.   People talk about Philly being the poster child for why tank.   At the same time Embiid is begging whatever superstar will come to join him.   He realizes that they will not win if they don't get real talent. 

So.. Tankfans believe that if we get lucky in the lottery a few times that we will get there.  The problem.. Luck is not involved. Second. we're on the path to mediocre

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

There can only be 1 champion in any season.  There will never be "a lot of recent teams that are champions" or some criteria like that.  Instead, let's look at the champions and see if they meet this definition:

Defining the lottery as #1-14 in the draft here are the champions that spent time in the lottery prior to 'getting good' and the champions that didn't spend time in the lottery:

Golden State Warriors lottery years lead to drafting of core with MVP, years include:  

2008-09 29 wins (draft Curry)

2009-10 26 wins 

2010-11 36 wins (draft Klay)

2011-12 23 wins (draft Barnes & Green)

2014-15 NBA Champions

2016-17 NBA Champions

 

Cleveland Cavs lottery years lead to acquisition of core good enough to lure MVP, years include:

2010-11 19 wins (draft Kyrie and TT)

2011-12 21 wins (pick traded for JR Smith & Iman Schump)

2012-13 24 wins (bust)

2013-14 33 wins (clean cap sheet, Kyrie and pick traded for Love lure LeBron as a FA)

2015-16 NBA Champions (all players averaging double figures drafted or traded for with lottery picks other than LeBron - Kyrie 25/5 in playoffs)

 

San Antonio Spurs lottery years lead to drafting of two MVPs, years include:

1986-87 28 wins (draft David Robinson)

1987-88 31 wins*

1988-89 21 wins (draft Sean Elliot)

1994-95 NBA Finals (Robinson and Elliot score more than next 4 players combined)

1996-97 20 wins (draft Tim Duncan)

1998-99 NBA Champions (Duncan, Robinson and Elliot are only players scoring 10 or more points per game)

(+3 more championships with/0 without)

 

Miami Heat lottery years lead to drafting of Finals MVP good enough to lure MVP, years include:

2001-02 36 wins (pick traded for Shaq)

2002-03 25 wins (drafted Dwyane Wade)

2005-06 NBA Champions (Wade Finals MVP)

2010 - Wade is good enough to lure FA LeBron & Bosh

2010-11 NBA Finals

2011-12 NBA Champions

2012-13 NBA Champions

 

Dallas Mavs lottery years lead to lottery pick swap used for drafting MVP, years include:

1991-97 Lottery Seasons

1997-98 19 wins (draft Dirk)

2005-06 NBA Finals (Dirk is driving force)

2010-11 NBA Finals (Dirk is driving force)

 

LA Lakers - NO SIGNIFICANT LOTTERY RUN

Smartly trade for lottery pick to draft Kobe and use LA market to sign FA Shaq.  No significant lottery contribution.

 

 

Abbreviated years:

Boston Celtics lottery years lead to drafting Finals MVP PP and trading picks for MVP KG and Ray Allen

 

Detroit Pistons trade lottery pick for DPOY defensive core on way to winning but stand out as an example without a significant lottery run on way to winning a the sole championship without an MVP level player in ~40 years

 

Chicago Bulls lottery years lead to drafting Michael Jordan (#3) and lottery pick swap to draft Scottie Pippen (#5) as well as supporting piece Horace Grant (#10)

 

Houston Rockets lottery years lead to drafting Hakeem (#1) along with Ralph Sampson (#1) on way to early 90's rings

 

Detroit Pistons lottery years lead to drafting of Finals MVP and MVP vote recipient Isiah Thomas (#2) along with supporting players 

 

Boston lottery years lead to Bird (#6 pick and MVP), Parrish (#1 pick traded to get him) and McHale (#3) trio and rings

 

LA Lakers - NO SIGNIFICANT LOTTERY RUN

Lakers clean up again without losing big, b*&#$s.  Somehow get #1 overall picks Magic Johnson and James Worthy without a significant run of terrible play.  Manage to flip #2 overall pick (theirs after 30 win season), #8 overall pick (they acquired for their #31 pick), #3 overall pick (they got for their #13 pick), #12 overall pick (theirs) for MVP #1 pick Kareem (who forced his way out of MIL after winning a ring to LA).  It's nice when MVPs want to play for you.

 

 

* = Somehow made the playoffs this year despite a worse point diffential than this year's Hawks only to be swept by an average of double digit margins.

What about all the other teams in the lottery constantly???

Charlotte.  Sacramento, LAL, NY, Brooklyn, Orlando, New Orleans, Memphis, Utah, Milwaukee, Denver, 

Denver has been out of the Playoffs since 2012.  When they had Melo since 2003, they went 10 times in a row and was put out in the first round in nine of those.  That's the subject of mediocrity.   In 2003, they got the player that you speak of now.  It's 2018.. they're not in the playoffs anymore.   Now.. I'm sure that you will say bad management or bad drafting or bad moves... but which of these things are the Hawks immune to again?

 

Here's the problems AHF.. You want to tell us about GS and San Antonio and Cleveland... teams that got Generational Superstars in the Lottery.   However, there are 13 other teams that go to the Lottery every year... please compound this... and they never make it to the finals.   They never get Championship calibre. 

So the bottom line is that you're saying that tanking works from the perspective of the EXCEPTION.  However, a whole lot of teams will tell you that Tanking and being in the Lottery doesn't get you to the finals.. that's the RULE!

[AHF]

18 minutes ago, Diesel said:

What about all the other teams in the lottery constantly???

Charlotte.  Sacramento, LAL, NY, Brooklyn, Orlando, New Orleans, Memphis, Utah, Milwaukee, Denver, 

Denver has been out of the Playoffs since 2012.  When they had Melo since 2003, they went 10 times in a row and was put out in the first round in nine of those.  That's the subject of mediocrity.   In 2003, they got the player that you speak of now.  It's 2018.. they're not in the playoffs anymore.   Now.. I'm sure that you will say bad management or bad drafting or bad moves... but which of these things are the Hawks immune to again?

 

Here's the problems AHF.. You want to tell us about GS and San Antonio and Cleveland... teams that got Generational Superstars in the Lottery.   However, there are 13 other teams that go to the Lottery every year... please compound this... and they never make it to the finals.   They never get Championship calibre. 

So the bottom line is that you're saying that tanking works from the perspective of the EXCEPTION.  However, a whole lot of teams will tell you that Tanking and being in the Lottery doesn't get you to the finals.. that's the RULE!

You could simplify your "rule" to be simply that "being in the NBA doesn't get you to the finals....that the RULE!"  It is always the exceptional teams that win rings.  Your run of the mill team isn't even a contender let alone a champion.  

What the lottery does is give you a wider range of outcomes for your team building.  Most of the time that does not end up in a championship.  It is certainly the path the worst outcomes but also the path to the best outcomes - that is what a wider range of outcomes means. 

The fact that you are not likely to get a championship is 100% true regardless of the way you try to build.  But the EXCEPTIONAL teams that win rings generally lose a bunch of games and build from the lottery.  As noted above, even the teams that don't lose a bunch of games still generally build from the lottery (LA drafting Magic, Worthy, Kobe, etc. from the lottery while not losing games).

I've said before and I'll say it again that I don't care if we lose a bunch of games or not - what I care about is that we get good lottery picks to use for players or trade/recruiting leverage.  If we can deal Dennis for the #1 pick then I'm just as happy doing that as I am to lose a ton of games and get the #1 pick but you have to get to those top picks.  Draft Hakeem #1 after losing a ton of games; draft Jordan #3 after losing a ton of games; draft Curry in the mid-lottery after losing a ton of games; trade for the #1 and take Magic; trade your lottery pick for Shaq; draft Wade and use him to attract MVP talent; draft your finals MVP and trade your lottery picks for Ray and KD; etc.  All of these varied approaches worked out to make EXCEPTIONAL teams.

The key is looking at what factors are common among the EXCEPTIONAL teams and there is a common element - building with lottery assets.  So what does that tell you about resolving to build without being in the lottery?  You are very unlikely to be EXCEPTIONAL if that is your path.  What does resolving to build through the lottery tell you?  It sure as heck doesn't tell you that you are guaranteed to get a ring.  Anyone who claims that is almost surely throwing out red herrings while attacking the idea of building through the lottery.  What building through the lottery does tell you is that your range of outcomes include the possibility of a ring if you hit big because most of the teams that won rings did exactly that.

Short version:

Many will enter, few will win.  You don't enter, you don't win a ring.

[davis171]

53 minutes ago, Diesel said:

Here's the problem...  most championship teams learn how to acquire talent without having to ditch talent.  We made ourselves into NOTHING with no vet talent and no championship talent and we think that somehow we will get a superstar or acquire one via trade or FAcy??  Please. 

Let's say we did get a modestly talented guy.  Somebody like Smoove.  Talented but Flawed.    First thing... No Hawks fan is going to want to trade him, so we keep him.   He's talented enough to get us close to the playoffs, but not talented enough to get us in.  Therefore, the second year of our tank move to the midrounds.  This is the blueprint for a mediocre team.   This is the Tank Blueprint.   Look around.   The only reason why Philly got so many shots at the Lottery was Injury.  The reason the Cavs got so many shots is because the Lottery is rigged and this was payback for Lebron Leaving.  

So what that means is that lottery lurching with little talent means that YOU Must get a superstar and he has to have the power to bring players to the franchise.   People talk about Philly being the poster child for why tank.   At the same time Embiid is begging whatever superstar will come to join him.   He realizes that they will not win if they don't get real talent. 

So.. Tankfans believe that if we get lucky in the lottery a few times that we will get there.  The problem.. Luck is not involved. Second. we're on the path to mediocre

You think Celtic fans wanted to trade Pierce and KG. We missed our opportunity to do what you are saying by not moving Sap. What did Sabonis show in OKC that really flashed that warranted trading PG-13 for him the rookie doesn't even have to flash to make a deal for one just find the right moment same with buddy hield and boogie. Get an interesting prospect or 2 and wait for the time to be right. that doesn't mean we have to be bad for 20 years either waiting for the right time. Sign free agents try and move them watch what the Celtics do. They traded a guy no one would sign in Isaiah Thomas as a key part in landing Kyree Irving. Had the hawks had more assets you don't think we could have made a similar move with Paul when he was on his second or even first contract? We had talent that A) was old and expensive B) Talent that weren't assets to building a champion as in negative contracts that are hard to trade if the right deal came along. You really think for example for Boogie you want a 30+ year old PF making 30 million no you want the guy on the rookie deal that shows a lot of promise or the free agent on a manageable deal that blew up. Look who was in trade talks around the deadline Lou Williams guy on reasonable contract that has blown up, Tyreke Evans signed discount in memphis. Those are the guys that other teams want attached with future picks.

Edited March 5, 2018 by davis171

[Diesel]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

You could simplify your "rule" to be simply that "being in the NBA doesn't get you to the finals....that the RULE!"  It is always the exceptional teams that win rings.  Your run of the mill team isn't even a contender let alone a champion.  

What the lottery does is give you a wider range of outcomes for your team building.  Most of the time that does not end up in a championship.  It is certainly the path the worst outcomes but also the path to the best outcomes - that is what a wider range of outcomes means. 

The fact that you are not likely to get a championship is 100% true regardless of the way you try to build.  But the EXCEPTIONAL teams that win rings generally lose a bunch of games and build from the lottery.  As noted above, even the teams that don't lose a bunch of games still generally build from the lottery (LA drafting Magic, Worthy, Kobe, etc. from the lottery while not losing games).

Wider in comparison to what??  FAcy?  What exactly is your comparison?

IF it's FAcy, It's a losing cause.   FAcy helped put every Championship team in Championship Contention.   Remember, for as great as Steph has been, in the 2 times that his team has won the finals, it was a FA that was named Finals MVP.. Not Steph or Klay. 

Take our history.  For 5 straight times, we made Lottery picks.   But our best team came from a collection of FAs  Sap, DMC, and a trade for Korver.   Our best team was built from concept not blindly hoping that we can find a great player or collection of players that will help lift us. 

 

[DBac]

Why bring up Brooklyn as a perennial lottery team? They don’t even get to pick there. I’m confused. 

 

 

[Diesel]

17 minutes ago, davis171 said:

You think Celtic fans wanted to trade Pierce and KG. We missed our opportunity to do what you are saying by not moving Sap. What did Sabonis show in OKC that really flashed that warranted trading PG-13 for him the rookie doesn't even have to flash to make a deal for one just find the right moment same with buddy hield and boogie. Get an interesting prospect or 2 and wait for the time to be right. that doesn't mean we have to be bad for 20 years either waiting for the right time. Sign free agents try and move them watch what the Celtics do. They traded a guy no one would sign in Isaiah Thomas as a key part in landing Kyree Irving. Had the hawks had more assets you don't think we could have made a similar move with Paul when he was on his second or even first contract? We had talent that A) was old and expensive B) Talent that weren't assets to building a champion as in negative contracts that are hard to trade if the right deal came along. You really think for example for Boogie you want a 30+ year old PF making 30 million no you want the guy on the rookie deal that shows a lot of promise or the free agent on a manageable deal that blew up. Look who was in trade talks around the deadline Lou Williams guy on reasonable contract that has blown up, Tyreke Evans signed discount in memphis. Those are the guys that other teams want attached with future picks.

To answer your question... NO.  We've always been more into our players who play well than building.   There are several trades like the one you proposed that we passed up because we were so into our players.   So many times, we could have traded Smoove while he had value or Sap when he had value but we elected to keep the talent.   That's the Hawks. 

Also, I'm glad that you mentioned OKC.  They went to the lottery a few times.   Came away with Westbrook, Harden, and KD... three likely League MVPs after this year.  No rings.   No team.  Now, OKC is clawing for scraps.   After this season, they may not have anything left in OKC.  This is the case more often than not. 

My contention is get something from this players even if they are over 30.   Get something.