"Go for the Playoffs? Playoffs?!" or "Patience is a Virtue"

[gm in training]

Probably no team has successfully drafted 5/5. But some teams have done a damn good job (Thunder comes to mind). However, we've seen from this draft that MKG and Taylor seem to be great picks. It'll take us another 2-3 years until we can really see how much impact they'll have, but from a visual standpoint both of them will at minimum be great defenders in the NBA.

A young team should always be aquiring assets and developing players. If you draft a better SG than the SG you drafted the year before, awesome. Trade out the last year's SG and play the better SG. It's all about continuing to get better.

Plus, the way Cho is going, I have the feeling if anyone could get 5/5 for drafting, it would be The Cho.

exactly! my point is that the thunders and spurs may be 6% percent of the lg. so we're suppose to base our system on a 6% percent success rate

[kitch0202]

lol you need to admit i mad more sense because right now ur trying to prove a pointless point. what team successfully drafted lottery picks 5 out of 5 years ,this is to funny.trick question

Sometimes when people get locked into differing sides of an argument they start to read what they want to in the other sides' statements. Nobody on here, of those who advocate not spending big money on free agents at present, is saying that we should be as bad as we can possibly be for a couple/few years as that will guarantee success through drafting high alone. What people like Whiz Kid are saying is that building through the draft is the best way to target sustainable success. If you go the free agency route (or short term, quick fix route) then because of who we are as a team and where we are in terms of market size, the best free agents will not want to come here. So if you're set on doing things the free agent route you either overspend on the best free agents (thus damaging your cap space and limiting your ability to complete your roster outside of one or two players, and that's assume you can get them here in the first place) or you overpay the lesser free agents (which has the effect of the previous example, but with worse players).

What most people on here are advocating is effectively hitting the reset button (which we did when we moved Crash etc.). Let's sign multiple 1st round draft picks (agree that there's no guarantee that any one of them will become a franchise player) and develop them. Let's not commit big money, in the long term, to average free agents so as to preserve our cap space. This way we should develop a young, well balanced squad with depth who are able to compete together, win games together and play together as a team. Once we have achieved this we then target a top tier free agent or two. Now that these top tier guys can see our team is in a good financial state, has a core of good players who have played together, won together and built an identity together we become a far more attractive option.

There is no guarantee that this reset/draft/develop then target a quality free agent or two approach will put us in contention for a championship. But it is the best option for us and other teams who aren't located in big markets to do so. And it is arguably our only option to gain a franchise player, as outside of the teams that draft them, these franchise types tend to look to bigger market teams to build their 'brand'.

One thing I agree with you about is that I hate the term tanking. It has connotations of giving up and not even trying to win. This team will try to win every game next season, but due to the lack of experience we probably won't win more than 25 games. Though in doing so we will have given our young players valuable playing time, have developed a style of play that is second nature to those guys and be ready to add anther one or two high draft picks to continue this process. This is our best, and arguably only, shot at having a truly successful team to support.

To steal Whiz Kids phrase, we need to Acquire/Develop/Mould talent. To continue with the housing analogy you used above, we are building a solid foundation before adding the hot tub and home cinema that will finish the place off. Or if you're more of an interior guy, we're making sure the plastering is smooth before chucking on the fancy wallpaper.

[QC Thundercats]

gmit,

I started this thread so that we'd all have a place to discuss and debate various points on what we think is the best philosophy to build going forward. I respect that you have an opinion on the matter, and I know other people have varying perspectives based on what each of us have observed to be successful in sports and other various areas of life. I will address your points but I did want to address a few things stylistically so that this thread doesn't go back down the same path to nonsense as the other one.

First, I see that you are very self-assured and confident in your opinions. This can be fine, however, you state them so authoritatively, and are so intransigent in your opinion that you can't even fathom the possibility that someone else has a point different than yours that could also be correct. Our thoughts and ideas aren't always mutually exclusive, as both sides can be correct on some points, and there are some truths to what everyone says. Its not a black or white thing, where everything is either all right or all wrong, but rather a ton of gray area where most things actually lie. It's okay to say someone else with a different point of view is right, and it's okay to say you were wrong about some other points. Nobody is 100% right on anything.

Second, I'm not picking on you, but are you typing on a phone? It's hard trying to decipher what you are saying a lot of times because your posts are full of half sentences, run-on sentences, misplaced, extraneous or unnecessary punctuation, bad grammar, and incomplete phrases. I'm sure there is a kernel of a good point hidden somewhere in the giant word salads you put together, but it can be hard to take seriously if your posts lack clarity. Just slow down, take your time to gather your thoughts, and the debates will be much better.

Last, please fully read and comprehend what someone has written before declaring yourself the champion of the world. Reread post #1 and #10 in this thread, as I have in fact explained logically and with examples some things that you seem to have missed or misunderstood. I don't see where you've addressed a single one, or acknowledged that, yes, this kind of ideology is in fact valid and actually works in the real world and in sports.

Now, in trying to address your post:

k im a true sports fan and im very realistic . the idea of tanking multiple seasons isn't logical and not beneficial .

I agree, tanking multiple seasons is a bad idea, and thats not what anyone wants. Nobody wants to go 8-74 next year, or deal with the sports media world crapping on Charlotte again.

there so many variables that can make tanking an horrible mistake.there is a huge difference from rebuilding and tanking.

Again, you're arguing against a straw man. You're trying to argue against something no one is debating, and it deflects from the real point thats being made. Everyone agrees tanking sucks, and if you again read post #10 above, I state why the things that I'm in favor of does not equal tanking. But you do identify a great word - rebuilding. This is what we're doing, and there are various ways to rebuild, some having a better chance of success long term, others being more of a gamble.

its like an old building that needs to be knocked down to rebuild a new one and everyone understands the process and why, tanking is the idea of letting the building become dilapidated with the inhabits unaware of the situation and are heavily effected.

Now I have no idea what you're talking about. It's irrelevant and does not apply, as nobody's hoping for a "dilapidated" team. To "rebuild" you don't let it sit and rot, you may need to demolish the building and start over from the ground up so that it doesn't have the same design flaws as the previous model.

nothing good comes from losing except the consolation of a lottery pick because in retrospect managment got fired, you lost fan support,players are traded or cut,respect ,and most important millions of dollars.the only time teams actually tank is at the half-way mark when they notice their not making the playoffs ,and trade their best assets, but not from the jump.

This is quite a leap in logic here. One cause doesn't always create the same effect. If you have a controlled "demolition," where everyone understands you're creating a solid foundation, then your management doesn't get fired, your fans support the moves, players are traded or cut only for the benefit of the team, and millions won't be lost, one because of the new CBA, and two because a team that continues showing gradual improvement will build on that excitement to a crescendo, which in turn will keep people intrigued by the progression and will continue paying to enjoy the ride.

now if we make the playoffs at 7-8,there is so much good that comes from that. as for the past 2 decades teams of late,evaluate and mold their team after playoff losses.

Yes, it can be good, but at the same time, it can also have some tougher consequences down the road. Like I said before, its not mutually exclusive. The options to improve are now different and could be limited based on positioning and cap space. And its not just the past 2 decades for teams to change after a season - every single team in existence, either in or out of the playoffs, evaluate their team after the season to address their weaknesses. The teams that don't are just horribly managed, and I don't want my team to act like that.

especially in our case we have young players and they well only get better ,so if we made the playoffs with a majority young core,why isn't that positive news to feed off for next year. mutiple lotteries doesn't result in success or superstars for teams in this new era , also if a player leaves the team and become successful thats still is considered a bust for the originally team who drafted them but here's my case in point;

I agree that our young guys will get better, and if they somehow made an incredible playoff run, with MKG actually being a superstar, Kemba scorching people for 20 and 10 a night, and Mully becoming a young Dirk, I'm pulling for them to go all the way to destroy the Heat and Thunder in the playoffs.

Regarding the lottery, it isn't an exact science, everyone knows that. High picks don't always pan out, or blend with each other - sometimes teams just make a bad pick. But because this sometimes happens, doesn't mean that its incredibly dumb to try to get talent in the lottery, which is what all your posts make it out to seem.

Whats the most effective, efficient way to build a roster with talent without taking up a lot of salary cap space? Higher lottery picks are more likely to be stars or at least long term starters, so logically, the more of these you have, the better. As these young players are still on their rookie contracts, they only take a very small percentage of the salary cap, leaving plenty of room to make signings or trades. If you can drive a Lexus for only $10,000, you would take it, right? You wouldn't insist on going out and buying a $100,000 Benz, when you can get 2 or 3 luxury cars at a bargain, right? Then you can use that extra money you save to buy a nicer house, better clothes, better food. Same principle applies here.

Again, its not foolproof, but betting on signing free agents or trading for the player you want is just as much, if not more of a gamble than acquiring talent through the draft. And if its less expensive to stockpile talent, while allowing you enough money to still sign a free agent or trade for the player you want, aren't you actually getting the best of both worlds, and not stuck with one option.

parentheses are draft bust or ok lottery picks not(all/superstars)....

basically i dont have the patience to break every team down but the point is to tank or to think multiple lottery's equal success isn't really true only a few teams actually built contenders or championships through the lottery(thunder,spurs,and maybe pacers). there are maybe 10 superstars in the lg and some teams have more than one,and the nba has 30 teams so, in the past decade there has been maybe 10 superstars and ya want to tank the season going out on a limb?the teams who have made a few lottery picks in a row never capitalized of their picks . shabazz and noel isn't even guaranteed stars. xavier henry ,lance stephenson, mullens,auston rivers, jeremy tyler,josh shelby and etc lead each of their h.s. classes and wasn't even lottery or some didn't even make the 1st round so lets be realistic.

I hope after reading what I've said above, that you see it addresses all these points and corrects the fallacy that anyone is advocating tanking. Multiple lottery picks don't guarantee success, but they sure increase the odds of building a team, either by giving you a deeper young core, or allowing you to trade them for better fits for your team, while at the same time preserving cap space and flexibility. If two or three different ways to build a team are all gambles, you take the one with the least amount of risk, most potential for reward, and most ability to alter your plans as necessary. Taking everything into account, the patient building approach has the higher chance of this than prematurely going for it all before everyone is ready.

damn im good

Please don't make this quote a trend. If the points you make are that incredible, then you don't need to say it, the words should speak for themselves. Jordan didn't need to tell everyone damn he's good. He just kicked their asses, and they knew he was good without him saying it.

[notdeadyet]

First, an organization needs to prioritize their goals and stick to their plan. These may vary from team to team in the sports world.
Do we go for having an exciting, dynamic hi-scoring run-and-gun team, a la Di Antoni's teams in Phoenix and New York? This SELLS, at least short term... Or
Do we maintain consistant competitiveness, like the Utah Jazz making the playoffs for 20 consecutive years (from 1983-2002)? A remarkable record to be proud of, but ZERO NBA trophies... But, some fans can be quite satisfied with this... Or
Do we "plan" to be in the top of next year's draft year after year, while avoiding bringing in expensive, experienced and talented FAs to get us into the playoffs this year? Risky, as management CANNOT miss on ANY of these high draft choices, all who are unproven in the NBA, AND could suffer a major injury (Greg Oden?). If they do miss, fans are gonna leave in droves! Or
Some combination?
Being as MJ is a very competitive guy, I tend to think he wants that trophy, and is willing to risk everything to get it. Hiring Dunlap was step 1, as he wants to see REAL effort on the court, and Dunlap already looks like the guy who can get it. What set Jordan the player apart was not just his talent, but from day 1 in the NBA he always gave MAX effort. We HAVE gone after FA talent this year, but because of last year's record getting FA's to "buy in" is a tough sell. And most here understand spending long-term big money on FA's now to get a few more W's for a year or 2 is a bad idea when your PRIMARY goal is a championship, which needs younger players who'll be around down the road once the team has build it's core...