Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How to Rebuild an NBA Franchise

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Great posts guys.

    Thanks for making this a thread other Forums would be envious of.

    Cheers

    Comment


    • #17
      JawsGT wrote: View Post
      I totally agree with all this, exactly what I was trying to say. I have no example, but I wonder if San Antonio has passed on more talented guys (in the draft) to find a player that fits their system and culture better? I guess the same could be asked in terms of trades. It certainly helps to have a core of Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili, but even those guys may have been picked/acquired because they were thought to be a better fit than other, possibly more talented players. In any event, if I have the option of trading with San Antonio or Sacramento, I'm trading with San Antonio, all else being equal.
      I think a lot of their draft success has been to take guys that are falling in the draft. It always seems like there's somebody who's falling in the draft, then San Antonio picks them, and everyone nods and says, 'damn, now he's going to be a good player'. Leonard, Blair, and Splitter were all guys who were dropping on draft night and ended up getting picked by San Antonio and turned into something useful. Probably that's having both the patience and confidence that they can develop these guys. They've certainly reached on some guys as well, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.

      Comment


      • #18
        JawsGT wrote: View Post
        I totally agree with all this, exactly what I was trying to say. I have no example, but I wonder if San Antonio has passed on more talented guys (in the draft) to find a player that fits their system and culture better? I guess the same could be asked in terms of trades. It certainly helps to have a core of Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili, but even those guys may have been picked/acquired because they were thought to be a better fit than other, possibly more talented players.
        It's not even about Manu and Parker, although they're certainly good pieces. San Antonio has been able to build the system and culture they have because they've been able to build around Tim Duncan, the best power forward to ever play the game and someone who at this point could be a Bill Russell-style player-coach if he wanted it (which he doesn't). Having a top-10-of-all-time player for the better part of two decades makes building a longterm dynasty a lot easier because you build around your star and worry less about what he's best at doing.

        Right now San Antonio's concern is that Duncan is at the tail end of his career and they don't have a superstar to replace him (Kawhi Leonard is great but he's not a Duncan-level player by a long shot). God knows how they pull that off.
        Last edited by magoon; Tue Nov 26, 2013, 05:01 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          octothorp wrote: View Post
          I think a lot of their draft success has been to take guys that are falling in the draft. It always seems like there's somebody who's falling in the draft, then San Antonio picks them, and everyone nods and says, 'damn, now he's going to be a good player'. Leonard, Blair, and Splitter were all guys who were dropping on draft night and ended up getting picked by San Antonio and turned into something useful. Probably that's having both the patience and confidence that they can develop these guys. They've certainly reached on some guys as well, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.
          I think another part of that perception has to do with the role those players played in SA, compared to much higher expectations and more significant roles they would likely have been expected to play on other teams. I think it ties into the ongoing conversations about team culture/identity and building a team the right way (ie: talented pieces that fit together and know their role, buying into the team concept).

          Comment


          • #20
            magoon wrote: View Post
            San Antonio has been able to build the system and culture they have because they've been able to build around Tim Duncan, the best power forward to ever play the game and someone who at this point could be a Bill Russell-style player-coach if he wanted it (which he doesn't).
            No.

            Wrong.

            while he was definitely huge part, hiss lkill isn't what has helped the most. Duncan was a star that was intelligent, selfless, and bought into the system. his demeanor and behaviour matched the culture you need to have a winner. Simply dismissing San Antonio's success as an anomaly based upon Duncan being a great player is bullshit. He IS a great player, but a great player that REINFORCES an already existing culture.

            Comment


            • #21
              Craig wrote: View Post
              No.

              Wrong.

              while he was definitely huge part, hiss lkill isn't what has helped the most. Duncan was a star that was intelligent, selfless, and bought into the system. his demeanor and behaviour matched the culture you need to have a winner. Simply dismissing San Antonio's success as an anomaly based upon Duncan being a great player is bullshit. He IS a great player, but a great player that REINFORCES an already existing culture.
              I think it's fair to say that his underlying talent is what has not only sustained his HOF career, but also what elevated him to his status of being such a culture-defining player and leader. Without having the talent, all the intangibles would not have had near the impact. I think talent and personality are both integral to becoming the personification of the team's culture and identity (which was started with Robinson).

              Comment


              • #22
                Craig wrote: View Post
                No.

                Wrong.

                while he was definitely huge part, hiss lkill isn't what has helped the most. Duncan was a star that was intelligent, selfless, and bought into the system. his demeanor and behaviour matched the culture you need to have a winner. Simply dismissing San Antonio's success as an anomaly based upon Duncan being a great player is bullshit. He IS a great player, but a great player that REINFORCES an already existing culture.
                Actually. he is right. Before Duncan they were good, but they never once went to the finals. They've had 2 good periods and a dynasty period. The George Gervin period (multiple MVP candidate, top 50 all time), the David Robinson period (multiple MVP Candidate, top 50 all time) and then merging with the David Robinson period, the Tim Duncan period (one of THE very greatest of all time). It's no coincidence, and the Spurs will take a huge step back when Duncan retires.
                9 time first team all-RR, First Ballot Hall of Forum

                Comment


                • #23
                  what if Duncan didn't have the personality or character to help grow such a wining culture. What if he were any of a dozen other greats his age?

                  Nobody denies that the talent part wasn't important, but its an "all things being equal with regard to talent" type situation. The talent ain't what made the culture.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Craig wrote: View Post
                    what if Duncan didn't have the personality or character to help grow such a wining culture. What if he were any of a dozen other greats his age?

                    Nobody denies that the talent part wasn't important, but its an "all things being equal with regard to talent" type situation. The talent ain't what made the culture.
                    I can't speak for others, but I'm not arguing the importance of the natural leadership abilities or his ability to help permeate the Spurs' desired culture/identity through to his teammates. I think you're just underestimating the impact of talent. You could easily say that all things being equal with regards to personality/character, he wouldn't command the respect of his teammates without having also earned it at least partly through his contribution on the court. Talent and character go hand-in-hand in order to become a leader among men.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      For me the answer is both, you need elite talent and high level of team buy-in. I would say it's harder to find the elite talent than it is to find the personality of players who play the right way. I think it's easier to get elite talent and hope the player makes the leap to great leadership, then to get someone with amazing leadership and intangibles and hope the player makes the leap to elite talent.
                      Last edited by ezz_bee; Wed Nov 27, 2013, 05:20 AM.
                      "They're going to have to rename the whole conference after us: Toronto Raptors 2014-2015 Northern Conference Champions" ~ ezzbee Dec. 2014

                      "I guess I got a little carried away there" ~ ezzbee Apr. 2015

                      "We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        octothorp wrote: View Post
                        I think a lot of their draft success has been to take guys that are falling in the draft. It always seems like there's somebody who's falling in the draft, then San Antonio picks them, and everyone nods and says, 'damn, now he's going to be a good player'. Leonard, Blair, and Splitter were all guys who were dropping on draft night and ended up getting picked by San Antonio and turned into something useful. Probably that's having both the patience and confidence that they can develop these guys. They've certainly reached on some guys as well, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.
                        These are decent pieces, but San Antonio has been riding the big 3 of Parker, Ginobli and Duncan for a long time now. Ginobli's decline has hurt them, and maybe cost them the championship against Miami.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Nice thread. I like how you're breaking down the "Tank vs Anti-tank" and looking at it more thoughtfully and thoroughly.

                          Could I throw out a 3rd option, just for conversation sake? Look at the Brooklyn Nets model. Go heavy into the luxury to sign a bunch of all-stars, quality FA's etc, and build a team to win now.

                          With a 2014 free agent class that includes Melo, Munroe, Bledsoe and (why not?) Dirk, why not go for it? Heck, it's not like Mayor Ford hasn't put Tdot on the map.

                          It would be expensive, require some thrifty trading for good back-ups (something we currently lack)

                          Try to keep Amir, Hansborough, Ross, Val.....and deal the rest.

                          Any thoughts as to this approach? (btw, I do believe that the Nets will turn it around as the year progresses, bodies get healthy and the playoffs come onto the radar)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Pele wrote: View Post
                            Nice thread. I like how you're breaking down the "Tank vs Anti-tank" and looking at it more thoughtfully and thoroughly.

                            Could I throw out a 3rd option, just for conversation sake? Look at the Brooklyn Nets model. Go heavy into the luxury to sign a bunch of all-stars, quality FA's etc, and build a team to win now.

                            With a 2014 free agent class that includes Melo, Munroe, Bledsoe and (why not?) Dirk, why not go for it? Heck, it's not like Mayor Ford hasn't put Tdot on the map.

                            It would be expensive, require some thrifty trading for good back-ups (something we currently lack)

                            Try to keep Amir, Hansborough, Ross, Val.....and deal the rest.

                            Any thoughts as to this approach? (btw, I do believe that the Nets will turn it around as the year progresses, bodies get healthy and the playoffs come onto the radar)
                            There is the CBA to work around though.

                            They have not signed any free agents to anything but an exception.

                            It was all trades and they resignings with Bird Rights.

                            This is what you've done when you've acquired your core or trade assets to add to your established core.

                            What are the Raptors going to get in return for their spare parts right now?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Matt52 wrote: View Post
                              There is the CBA to work around though.

                              They have not signed any free agents to anything but an exception.

                              It was all trades and they resignings with Bird Rights.

                              This is what you've done when you've acquired your core or trade assets to add to your established core.

                              [B]What are the Raptors going to get in return for their spare parts right now?
                              Question. Isn't the whole premise of your tanking philosophy that we can and should ship out guys like Gay and Lowry for cap relief and picks.

                              Why are you suggesting that wouldn't be a possibility if we wanted to go after marquee free-agents instead of tanking?


                              Tbh I don't see anything wrong with either strategy. If we were actually able to ship out Lowry and Gay for cap relief AND tank, I'd have no qualms with drafting a Smart or Exum and then going after Gordon Hayward (who would be an excellent pairing with DD on the wing btw) in free agency.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Nosike wrote: View Post
                                Question. Isn't the whole premise of your tanking philosophy that we can and should ship out guys like Gay and Lowry for cap relief and picks.

                                Why are you suggesting that wouldn't be a possibility if we wanted to go after marquee free-agents instead of tanking?


                                Tbh I don't see anything wrong with either strategy. If we were actually able to ship out Lowry and Gay for cap relief AND tank, I'd have no qualms with drafting a Smart or Exum and then going after Gordon Hayward (who would be an excellent pairing with DD on the wing btw) in free agency.
                                Because teams that trade marquee players typically want the following:

                                1) cap relief
                                2) prospects on rookie deals
                                3) draft picks

                                Raps can't offer guaranteed cap relief outside Lowry; prospects with high ceilings except JV (but even Brooklyn kept Lopez); but could do draft picks.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X