NBA Offseason 2013 Thread

[Skywise316 211]

If you're the Pacers, why not just start Granger and George together at the 2 and 3?

[JJZFL 620]

Do people understand the difference between tanking and just not being good? One is purposeful, the other is a result of a flawed, incomplete, or an otherwise inept roster. We aren't going to lose on purpose, we're going to lose because we're not that good. There's nothing wrong with losing while developing young players and maintaining roster flexibility, there is however something wrong with intentionally losing. We're in the former category, not the latter

 

I don't think most people believe that players or coaches would intentionally try to lose (throw games). But the roster doesn't happen by accident. If we have a "flawed, incomplete, or an otherwise inept roster", it's because we've chosen to do so as part of a rebuilding strategy. So in a sense there is still purposeful losing, by constructing a roster (and possibly a coaching staff) that is known to have little chance of winning. As SVG pointed out, there can be other approaches to a rebuilding strategy that don't require you to hit absolute bottom.

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

I don't think most people believe that players or coaches would intentionally try to lose (throw games). But the roster doesn't happen by accident. If we have a "flawed, incomplete, or an otherwise inept roster", it's because we've chosen to do so as part of a rebuilding strategy. So in a sense there is still purposeful losing, by constructing a roster (and possibly a coaching staff) that is known to have little chance of winning. As SVG pointed out, there can be other approaches to a rebuilding strategy that don't require you to hit absolute bottom.

 

 

 

 

You're presenting a roster decision in the silliest way possible.

 

Yes, it is correct that if the Magic wanted to mortgage all hope of ever being good, they could probably win more games now. Specifically, they could get to "fighting for an 8th seed" level quality. That's what Milwaukee has done the last couple years, and it was a terrible strategy long term.

 

Choosing to keep and develop assets that are worse now but better in the long term is a pretty obvious, and pretty simple, strategy, and trying to imply that it's some kind of GM version of losing on purpose is disingenuous.

[Murphy13 185]

If you're the Pacers, why not just start Granger and George together at the 2 and 3?

 

For the sake of depth, I imagine. Their starting five can't compete w/Miami even with Granger. But if he can return to form, he can still put up starter type mins but give them a dynamic Miami can't match.

[Mauro Pedrosa 1,032]

If you're the Pacers, why not just start Granger and George together at the 2 and 3?

Their bench stinks. Starting Lance at 2 would make the team more balanced

 

I cringed every time I saw Sam Young play in the ECF

[the notorious S.A.C. 89]

Im surprised we arent likely to use the D12 exemption. Cleveland was able to parlay their Lebron exemption into a top 5 pick in the draft. It seems taking on a one or two year bad deal for a high pick would be a decent decision (and no I dont sit at Hennys desk to see what opportunities came across it for trade). Im just saying Cleveland turned it into a solid asset with minimal liability.

 

It makes me think ownership may just intend to build the team as cheaply as possible, particularly in the short term, because the arena will most likely be under 50% full for home games this year. Quite frankly with what the previous gm did to their checkbook I could see them still licking various open wounds and being a little disheartened with the make up of todays nba player. With the hiring of Vaughn and Henny as bargain basement priced contracts I sure hope the ownership MO isnt about being as cheap as possible. Maybe Henny will surprise us and pull the rabbit out of the hat at the last minute.

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

Im surprised we arent likely to use the D12 exemption. Cleveland was able to parlay their Lebron exemption into a top 5 pick in the draft. It seems taking on a one or two year bad deal for a high pick would be a decent decision (and no I dont sit at Hennys desk to see what opportunities came across it for trade). Im just saying Cleveland turned it into a solid asset with minimal liability.

 

It makes me think ownership may just intend to build the team as cheaply as possible, particularly in the short term, because the arena will most likely be under 50% full for home games this year. Quite frankly with what the previous gm did to their checkbook I could see them still licking various open wounds and being a little disheartened with the make up of todays nba player. With the hiring of Vaughn and Henny as bargain basement priced contracts I sure hope the ownership MO isnt about being as cheap as possible. Maybe Henny will surprise us and pull the rabbit out of the hat at the last minute.

 

It has to do with what Cleveland's situation was versus what ours currently is.

 

Cleveland could take on a bad contract because, given the state of their own CAP, they were several years from having CAP space anyway, and they were able to pick up a high pick in a relatively weak draft. Plus, Cleveland was able to use the foresight of an upcoming amnesty provision to take on all that additional salary without really affecting them long term. We don't have that option, because the amnesty provision has passed.

 

In our situation, we already will have max CAP space next off-season, which we'd be stupid to threaten, and we're coming up on what people are saying is one of the deepest drafts in at least a decade, so no one is really going to want to give up A pick, much less a high one, just to dump salary.

[the notorious S.A.C. 89]

It has to do with what Cleveland's situation was versus what ours currently is.

 

Cleveland could take on a bad contract because, given the state of their own CAP, they were several years from having CAP space anyway, and they were able to pick up a high pick in a relatively weak draft. Plus, Cleveland was able to use the foresight of an upcoming amnesty provision to take on all that additional salary without really affecting them long term. We don't have that option, because the amnesty provision has passed.

 

In our situation, we already will have max CAP space next off-season, which we'd be stupid to threaten, and we're coming up on what people are saying is one of the deepest drafts in at least a decade, so no one is really going to want to give up A pick, much less a high one, just to dump salary.

 

DOM...all true...but youd think somewhere Henny could sneak up on some sucker gm. There is more than one out there. Somebody usually thinks just one more player will be the missing piece and willingly mortgages all their future for the chance. Ask me how I know....vurp. The fact of what Otis did to us (repeatedly) both financially and talent wise knowing he was surely gone if it didnt work makes me believe someone out there will make a similar foolish move. Just looking at the move of Philly's gm last year gives me hope. Bynum was an absolute no win situation for Philly (and the Lakers) 90% of the time and they dumped Harkless and Vooch for the tiny chance he would show up. Head case, massive injury concerns, 3 point shooting center wanting a max long term deal.....gee maybe he will be great....uhhh not likely. Yet Philly took the bait! Obviously other gms will be cautious with him after his trades last year but as they say in the car business there is an a$$ for every seat!

[Soul Bro 1,421]

I'm ready to trade AA for Andre Roberson and change already. Rack 'em!

[Mauro Pedrosa 1,032]

Luis Scola for Miles Plumlee, Gerald Green and 2014 top 14 protected pick from Indiana.

 

Phoenix doing some nice moves

[JJZFL 620]

You're presenting a roster decision in the silliest way possible.

 

Yes, it is correct that if the Magic wanted to mortgage all hope of ever being good, they could probably win more games now. Specifically, they could get to "fighting for an 8th seed" level quality. That's what Milwaukee has done the last couple years, and it was a terrible strategy long term.

 

Choosing to keep and develop assets that are worse now but better in the long term is a pretty obvious, and pretty simple, strategy, and trying to imply that it's some kind of GM version of losing on purpose is disingenuous.

 

I realize I'm in a minority on this board who have doubts about the current strategy. We will see how it works out in the next 3-4 years.

 

The GM obviously knows that his strategy means the team will lose a lot of games for at least a couple of seasons. It is a purposeful strategy hoping for a big medium to long term payoff.

 

No less than SVG has mentioned that there are other approaches to rebuilding. If you want to call him "silly" also, be my guest.

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

I realize I'm in a minority on this board who have doubts about the current strategy. We will see how it works out in the next 3-4 years.

 

The GM obviously knows that his strategy means the team will lose a lot of games for at least a couple of seasons. It is a purposeful strategy hoping for a big medium to long term payoff.

 

No less than SVG has mentioned that there are other approaches to rebuilding. If you want to call him "silly" also, be my guest.

 

Your logical fallacy is: Appeal to Authority.

 

Also: not recognizing, I guess, that Houston's roster situation was different than ours. And that Houston's entire approach was predicated on James Harden being handed to them on a plate.

 

And that they were still an 8th seed last season, and had they missed out on Dwight Howard they'd just be a mediocre team stuck paying Jeremy Lin over 8m a season to do nothing particularly well.

 

The truth is that there ARE lots of strategies for rebuilding. And much like choosing strategies in a war, you choose your strategies based on your current situation. It wouldn't make much sense to plan for massive air strikes if your military has no aircraft, now would it?

 

We couldn't use Houston's strategy because we don't have the CAP space and fringe all-stars on our roster, and because no one is looking to gift wrap a star wing-player to us. Or at least, I don't know of any. If you do, by all means: share that information.