Jump to content
Fultz4thewin

2019-2020 Official Regular Season Thread

Recommended Posts

On 12/21/2019 at 2:21 PM, Gordon MVP said:

I’m starting to believe our ability to tank improperly is also to blame. We had these stupid culture wins which didn’t mean anything. We made the playoffs last year in hopes our young guys would improve and we look absolutely horrid this year. I’m starting to think that whole concept is now BS. You need real talent plain and simple and it doesn’t matter how many times you sneak in the 7th or 8th seed. A rotten apple is gonna stay rotten. 

Imagine if we actually tanked like Sam Hinkie — we could have has guys like Luka, Trae Young, Porzingis, etc 

How many times does it need to be explained that tanking doesn't work? That's *NOT* how you build a championship team.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/21/2019 at 9:40 AM, Luke_FfS said:

Exactly, we've abandoned the tanking to follow mediocrity (and a playoff berth that was very marketing needed) but after that you've to make more moves to complete the jump,  especially if you don't have that top 10 player in your roster already. Instead we seemed happy to confirm everyone, sit, have a hard cap situation that doesn't exactly help those moves, and hope for the better, while playing a style that is clearly not the right one for the actual era of basketball (coach has responsabilities in that, but was still management chosing him to do so - they know which was his style and his CV with Charlotte)

Dallas is anothter team very good in reinventing themselves, make risky moves, and find good rotation players from scratches.

I was very happy with the Fultz move last deadline, and with the big run in which we showed guts and improvement. But that same run has been our management chosing a stagnant path (forgetting the reality of the Toronto series) and I'm really really disappointed with them since Vuc FA signing.

When you're forced to do something, it's usually already too late. You're also desperate, other teams know that, and that could end in a bad move.

 

 

What moves can we make? We can't make moves because of all the years of tanking.

We have crap players on awful contracts like Fournier who are entirely immovable, and those contracts make it impossible to sign anyone else.

We have guys like Fultz and Isaac to build around, and a vet in Vooch, but everything else is entirely unmovable and hindering us from getting better. We are stuck in neutral until guys like Augustin and Fournier come off the books and open up some space for us. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/21/2019 at 6:23 AM, Soul Bro said:

The good news is Fournier and Vooch are very tradable, imho. Now if we re-sign Fournier to a monster deal, it’s a different story.

Nobody is trading for Fournier and that contract

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Franchise408 said:

How many times does it need to be explained that tanking doesn't work? That's *NOT* how you build a championship team.

No. It is how some championship teams got their star players though 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Franchise408 said:

Nobody is trading for Fournier and that contract

???. Do you know he’s posting career numbers and will most likely opt out this summer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Magicman28 said:

No. It is how some championship teams got their star players though 

Who?

Toronto didn't get their star player by tanking.

Golden State's star players were all over the draft, not by tanking for a top spot.

Cleveland's star was a free agent signing. They won nothing during LeBron's first run when he would have been considered a draftee.

San Antonio was built through years and years of drafting all through the draft. Only Duncan can be applied to "tanking", and that wasn't so much as a tank as it was their star center got injured. 

Boston was built through a whole lot of trades and had no longevity.

Lakers certainly weren't built through tanking.

Miami needed top end free agents in both of their runs.

Dallas' star was a #11 pick.

Detroit wasn't built by tanking.

Pretty sure that covers the last 20 years and not one championship team was via "tanking"

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Franchise408 said:

Who?

Toronto didn't get their star player by tanking.

Golden State's star players were all over the draft, not by tanking for a top spot.

Cleveland's star was a free agent signing. They won nothing during LeBron's first run when he would have been considered a draftee.

San Antonio was built through years and years of drafting all through the draft. Only Duncan can be applied to "tanking", and that wasn't so much as a tank as it was their star center got injured. 

Boston was built through a whole lot of trades and had no longevity.

Lakers certainly weren't built through tanking.

Miami needed top end free agents in both of their runs.

Dallas' star was a #11 pick.

Detroit wasn't built by tanking.

Pretty sure that covers the last 20 years and not one championship team was via "tanking"

GS tanked.

We tanked for Dwight. Didn’t win the ring but we wouldn’t even be in the finals without him.

Purposely sucking or sucking...Doesn’t matter. Teams suck draft stars usually. Miami had Wade (sucked). L.A. had Kobe (sucked) and SA had TD (sucked). Doesn’t matter why they sucked. They sucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Magicman28 said:

GS tanked.

We tanked for Dwight. Didn’t win the ring but we wouldn’t even be in the finals without him.

Purposely sucking or sucking...Doesn’t matter. Teams suck draft stars usually. Miami had Wade (sucked). L.A. had Kobe (sucked) and SA had TD (sucked). Doesn’t matter why they sucked. They sucked.

Even though Golden State didn't throw it all in the river for one god-awful year, they were still mired in one of the longest droughts of losing seasons in the NBA's history at that time. I don't think anyone in 2009 or the year they got Klay would have said "this is the makings of a championship team". But god yes did they ever suck.

Cleveland sucked forever without Lebron - before and after. The lack of a championship the first time around isn't on Lebron, it is totally on poor Cleveland management - he was a championship caliber player and saying he wasn't is ridiculous. It wouldn't have been such a big deal that we belted the Cavs in 2009 if he was just an ordinary player.

Dallas may not have tanked but they were one of the worst teams in the league for how long before Dirk came along?

Each of those three teams had multiple chances to do better and finally got it right enough after many, many chances. 

Miami is an interesting case though as if they didn't bottom out after the Mourning / Hardaway seasons, they'd have never had Dwyane Wade and their track record as a team that will pay for quality free agents that aren't right at the top of the rung is pretty much undisturbed. I don't think Shaq's value could have been any lower when he got traded. For him anyway. Shaq always says that Wade was the catalyst of that championship team and not him.

So for me the tanking narrative is a mixed bag of sorts really. The Lakers, Celtics and Spurs kind of dominate the narrative on perpetual success but there are so many other drivers toward those reasons and we have seen that nothing lasts forever. Same goes for the flip side, no bad franchise is bad forever but it still doesn't negate that acquiring lottery picks is not the most common building block for success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moreover, going through championship rosters over the last 30 years or so, it seems also pretty key that some of the bigger complementary players and significant role players are guys that are acquired early on in a players career, even if not acquired by draft or draft day trade. Continuity does count for something even if for us at the moment it counts toward our mediocrity too. 

Heaps of significant contributors to championships sometimes seem as if they began their career or weren't relevant until the team they won the championship with - Laimbeer, Otis Thorpe, Ben Wallace, Cartwright, Bruce Bowen, Mario Elie...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tanking is a pretty good strategy to shift rosters from post-contenting to rebuilding and obtain young talent. 

Tanking isn't something you do when you have young talent already because it just creates bad habits that those guys have to work through later on delaying their progress as players. 

Tanking is also a viable strategy when you bottom out completely, but it doesn't make sense to tank to get the 9th pick. 

 

But tanking mid season whenever things don't go your way is just a loser's mentality and creates a culture of "when things get hard and some obstacle is in your way just quit and stop trying". 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fultz4thewin said:

Tanking is a pretty good strategy to shift rosters from post-contenting to rebuilding and obtain young talent. 

Tanking isn't something you do when you have young talent already because it just creates bad habits that those guys have to work through later on delaying their progress as players. 

Tanking is also a viable strategy when you bottom out completely, but it doesn't make sense to tank to get the 9th pick. 

 

But tanking mid season whenever things don't go your way is just a loser's mentality and creates a culture of "when things get hard and some obstacle is in your way just quit and stop trying". 

Yup. Context is everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×