Confessions of a TANKER

[Axel]

It's an excellent point and I agree. Personally, I wouldn't make the trade with Bucks being discussed - I think they win that trade.

I'm not saying we would or wouldn't, I'm saying it would be nice to be the position for Masai to make that decision. The offer presented was merely an option to RJ saying "why would anyone with the Wiggins pick trade it".

[3inthekeon]

If the Bucks wind up #1 (although they also have a very real possibility of ending up as low as #5), the only way they trade their pick would be to the team picking right behind them, like the Brand/Chandler, Carter/Jamieson deals.

[Raptor Jesus]

If Lowry is over-paid and/or regresses, then how is this team any closer to being a championship contender? Since that was the stated goal, anything that doesn't progress us to that goal is a failure. Opportunity cost is a big component of the equation. If we miss the chance to draft/acquire Wiggins/Exum/etc because we kept Lowry, isn't that a failure?

To JawsGT and my point, the season wasn't an unmitigated disaster. I think I gather you aren't suggesting that either, it just wasn't a run away success.

I'm going to work backwards; We want a CHAMP, we'll need generational TALENT, at the moment of Gay trade Wiggins might have been TALENT, now doesn't look like it, KD is TALENT, whatever entices' KD gets us closer to CHAMP.

What's more attractive to KD? KLOE taking his ragtag team with an ensemble of JV, DD, TR, PP, et al to two consecutive playoff appearances and whatever success they wrought. Or an amalgam of picks, developing youth, cap space, or any combination thereof?

[JawsGT]

Agreed, but no one was expecting to be a contender over-night. Young talent + extra picks and financial flexibility with Masai in charge was the foundation for a beautiful future.



The Utah example doesn't work because Utah has Favors and Kanter, a pair of 3rd overall bigs entering their 3rd and 2nd year, waiting to take those minutes from Al Jeff (entering 9th season) and Millsap (entering 7th). Utah also needed to know what they had in Favors before he hit RFA. Favors wasn't getting enough minutes/touches behind those 2, so it made sense to move on. That said, Utah would have been better off trading them instead of letting them walk. An extra first, a future first, or future 2nds is better than nothing.

Pau and LA is also different because the Lakers do not need to build via normal means. The Lakers know that they can sign a marquee free agent (Kevin Love?) when the opportunity presents itself, so for them, cap space is more important than smaller bit pieces. Pau's large contract would have been very difficult to trade for smaller, yet still expiring contracts, so LA would have sacrificed cap space.

If Lowry walks, then you lost the chance to add young talent and future picks via trade (Hardaway JR and future picks is better than letting him walk).

If Lowry is over-paid and/or regresses, then how is this team any closer to being a championship contender? Since that was the stated goal, anything that doesn't progress us to that goal is a failure. Opportunity cost is a big component of the equation. If we miss the chance to draft/acquire Wiggins/Exum/etc because we kept Lowry, isn't that a failure?

Bold 1: Exactly, so the Utah example does work. They could have traded both those guys and got something in return, while Favors and Kanter got the playing time down the stretch. The fact that LA does not have to build via normal means is irrelevant to trading an expiring Pau. But taking on salary that chews up cap space is a good point, and probably the only reason he didn't get moved unless LA thinks they can resign him to a much more cap friendly deal in the offseason. Pau isn't what Pau used to be, but he can still be a very good piece on a team trying to make a quick turnaround.

Bold 2: I don't think so, but only because I do not believe that trading Lowry would have put us in a position to draft either of those players, or even anyone in the top 6. Now maybe you trade Lowry and the team misses the playoffs, and you can use that pick plus assets to move up in the draft, but then you just traded away Lowry, a decent pick, and other good assets for one 'unknown' NBA player. I'm not convinced that qualifies as good asset management.

In any event, I really think that the environment that our young players are playing in this season is very important, and ultimately worth losing a Lowry. The challenge of competing game in and game out and making a run at and in the playoffs could very well be more important long term than Lowry is, or any assets that would have been returned had he been traded (THJr and what, a 2nd rounder isn't bad, but the experience that DD, Ross, and JV are getting is more valuable IMO).

[Axel]

Bold 1: Exactly, so the Utah example does work. They could have traded both those guys and got something in return, while Favors and Kanter got the playing time down the stretch. The fact that LA does not have to build via normal means is irrelevant to trading an expiring Pau. But taking on salary that chews up cap space is a good point, and probably the only reason he didn't get moved unless LA thinks they can resign him to a much more cap friendly deal in the offseason. Pau isn't what Pau used to be, but he can still be a very good piece on a team trying to make a quick turnaround.

Bold 2: I don't think so, but only because I do not believe that trading Lowry would have put us in a position to draft either of those players, or even anyone in the top 6. Now maybe you trade Lowry and the team misses the playoffs, and you can use that pick plus assets to move up in the draft, but then you just traded away Lowry, a decent pick, and other good assets for one 'unknown' NBA player. I'm not convinced that qualifies as good asset management.

In any event, I really think that the environment that our young players are playing in this season is very important, and ultimately worth losing a Lowry. The challenge of competing game in and game out and making a run at and in the playoffs could very well be more important long term than Lowry is, or any assets that would have been returned had he been traded (THJr and what, a 2nd rounder isn't bad, but the experience that DD, Ross, and JV are getting is more valuable IMO).

Utah doesn't work, they had very good young talent ready to step into a bigger role. We have Greivis Vasquez, Julyan Stone and Dwight Buycks. NOT THE SAME THING!!

If you think trading Lowry wouldn't have sent this team into a Top 6 tail-spin, then yes, the opportunity cost would be different for you. I'd also have to say that's crazy. Without Lowry, this team would have completely fallen apart.

[BobLoblaw]

I really have to disagree with this. It doesn't even make sense to me. Too many good things have come out of this season so far to suggest that Lowry's possible departure in the offseason would be a failure. Teams let good expiring players walk all the time. Think of Utah...they even knew that Jefferson and Millsap would not be part of their future and still elected not to trade them. Pau in LA is another example, I'm sure they could have traded him for something if it was that important. You don't just trade a very important piece of your club simply because he will explore free agency in the offseason. Overpaying Lowry shouldn't really be that much of a concern, because we are likely talking an extra mil or two a year, and if that is enough to hamper the franchise's future then MU isn't worth a rat's ass. Regression is certainly a concern, but how would that make THIS season a failure?

I really don't understand how Lowry's future will dictate the success or failure of this season.

Stupid decision, if they actually did that by choice. I suspect they probably tried hard to make a trade and couldn't get it done. You can't know with them. There are no rumors from Utah, no tweets from Wojnarowski about Utah. Their front office is like KGB.

[BobLoblaw]

We still need a Tyler Ennis level point guard. And someone beyond 2pat on the bench.



I was taking it for granted in the hypothetical scenario.

The fact we now know they aren't generational talents gives us hay that we didn't liquidate for fools gold.

If the ceiling is All-star why trade a controllable AS for a potential AS? I mean there's nothing wrong with it in theory just why do it? If our ultimate goal is KD, and I personally think it should be, does Wiggins + whoever we get entice more than DD + Lowry?

I think you took this "2014 draft is overrated" thing to an extreme. Is there anyone knowledgable about the draft who actually thinks that Wiggins doesn't have superstar ceiling?

There may be no 100% safe can't-miss superstars in this draft but there seem to be multiple players with very high ceilings.

In general, we fans expect way too much out of freshmen, and then we get dramatic when players don't quite meet those expectations. That's not on players, that's on us. Michael Jordan was the 3rd best scorer on his team as a freshman. Hakeem Olajuwon was a backup and definitely not any better than Joel Embiid. Derrick Rose didn't shine until like mid-March. Their ceiling was ok.

We had a few super freshmen (Durant, Anthony Davis) and now we expect them all to be can't-miss superstars after the freshman year. But that's very rare. Most future superstars don't have a great consistent freshman season. It doesn't mean that their ceiling is low.

[special1]

I agree with this sentiment.

I always felt that trading DeRozan would have been a retooling trade, while trading Gay would have been a tanking or possibly rebuilding trade. The fact that the Gay trade has wound up looking more like a retooling trade is what has led to the unexpected winning this season.


Retooling: Trading for equal but different talent/salary that impacts the team within the same timeframe (ie: trade $10M starting guard for $10M starting forward).
Rebuilding: Trading current talent for future talent - prospect(s) and/or pick(s), likely with minimal contract filler - that is expected to become equal or better in the future.

Tanking: Trading talent for expiring crap, essentially hitting the 'reset' button on that spending and strategizing directly around the draft lottery (ie: Philly's approach this season).


The lack of a surefire prospect or draft pick, in favor of mostly expiring contracts, is what made the Gay trade feel to me like a tanking trade. Vasquez and Patterson were decent and young enough (be it as Raptors or trade bait in subsequent deals, along with Salmons' contract) to at least have the potential to bump the deal up to a rebuilding trade.

The blossoming of Lowry & DeRozan, development of Ross & Valanciunas, creation of an adequate bench, and shocking explosion of on-court chemistry and team play, definitely bumped the trade into the retooling realm for me; I don't think anybody predicted that outcome at the time of the trade. It's been a pleasant surprise this season, while also bringing increased financial flexibility along with it.

As per your definitions above, it seems that Masai Re-tooled and Rebuilt last year.

Rebuilt - Trading Bargnani for future picks
Retooled - Trading Gay for our bench

To say nobody predicted the Gay trade as a means to improve or retool instead of tanking is somewhat incorrect. MANY "anti-tankers" such as myself said that this trade could actually make us better. Obviously 3rd place is a huge surprise to everyone BUT there were quite a few who thought the team would actually play better after the trade. Unfortunately, "pro-tankers" were so committed to tanking that they couldn't see what many other fans started to see.....a better team.

[white men can't jump]

As per your definitions above, it seems that Masai Re-tooled and Rebuilt last year.

Rebuilt - Trading Bargnani for future picks
Retooled - Trading Gay for our bench

To say nobody predicted the Gay trade as a means to improve or retool instead of tanking is somewhat incorrect. MANY "anti-tankers" such as myself said that this trade could actually make us better. Obviously 3rd place is a huge surprise to everyone BUT there were quite a few who thought the team would actually play better after the trade. Unfortunately, "pro-tankers" were so committed to tanking that they couldn't see what many other fans started to see.....a better team.

In theory you could put it that way. The issue in practice is that Bargs was not really a contributor anymore, so it wasn't like trading current talent for future talent. It was somehow trading the biggest pile of deadweight shit of all time for future assets. I wouldn't call that part a rebuilding strategy. There's an implication in the rebuilding argument that any current talent you trade actually has value on the court. Bargnani really didn't. Hard to call it rebuilding. I just call it a miracle.

I think everything MU has done as mostly just been damage control. The Gay trade was re-tooling on paper for this season (getting serviceable pieces), but the main purpose wasn't to get a bench, it was to free the team from as much salary commitment as possible.

I don't think anything Ujiri has done is rebuilding or retooling. It's repairing.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

As per your definitions above, it seems that Masai Re-tooled and Rebuilt last year.

Rebuilt - Trading Bargnani for future picks
Retooled - Trading Gay for our bench

To say nobody predicted the Gay trade as a means to improve or retool instead of tanking is somewhat incorrect. MANY "anti-tankers" such as myself said that this trade could actually make us better. Obviously 3rd place is a huge surprise to everyone BUT there were quite a few who thought the team would actually play better after the trade. Unfortunately, "pro-tankers" were so committed to tanking that they couldn't see what many other fans started to see.....a better team.

Better by alleviating the glut created by the Gay-DeRozan-Lowry lineup and a bit of addition-by-subtraction, but nobody was arguing that MU went out looking for that deal to make the team better. I agree that there was hope that it would let DeRozan and Lowry play their natural games more, while providing more playing time for Ross to develop. Despite that sort of hope, I don't think any expert or fan (or even MU) predicted such a significant, sustainable turnaround would be the result of trading the team's premiere player.

I think this was a classic case of intentions/motivations not matching the outcome/results.

[special1]

In theory you could put it that way. The issue in practice is that Bargs was not really a contributor anymore, so it wasn't like trading current talent for future talent. It was somehow trading the biggest pile of deadweight shit of all time for future assets. I wouldn't call that part a rebuilding strategy. There's an implication in the rebuilding argument that any current talent you trade actually has value on the court. Bargnani really didn't. Hard to call it rebuilding. I just call it a miracle.

I think everything MU has done as mostly just been damage control. The Gay trade was re-tooling on paper for this season (getting serviceable pieces), but the main purpose wasn't to get a bench, it was to free the team from as much salary commitment as possible.

I don't think anything Ujiri has done is rebuilding or retooling. It's repairing.

LOL too funny. It was brilliant. I actually mentioned amnestying the guy last year. I had no idea the Knicks would be soooo foolish. I still chuckle when i think about it.

[Axel]

As per your definitions above, it seems that Masai Re-tooled and Rebuilt last year.

Rebuilt - Trading Bargnani for future picks
Retooled - Trading Gay for our bench

To say nobody predicted the Gay trade as a means to improve or retool instead of tanking is somewhat incorrect. MANY "anti-tankers" such as myself said that this trade could actually make us better. Obviously 3rd place is a huge surprise to everyone BUT there were quite a few who thought the team would actually play better after the trade. Unfortunately, "pro-tankers" were so committed to tanking that they couldn't see what many other fans started to see.....a better team.

Lots of Protankers felt that the trade would make us better based on better ball movement alone but nobody expected us to get up to the third seed. But still the overall point remains does that trade make us a championship contender? The answer seems to be clearly no. Not yet.

[BobLoblaw]

LOL too funny. It was brilliant. I actually mentioned amnestying the guy last year. I had no idea the Knicks would be soooo foolish. I still chuckle when i think about it.

And then they don't trade for Lowry, who's the exact type of PG you'd want next to Melo (a shooter/penetrator who plays defense), and just a massive upgrade over Felton. They would be sitting at no.3 in the conference right now.

[Scraptor]

Axel has said most of what I think. Tanking is and was a long-term plan. The only addition I would make is that I think you have to accurately separate the two scenarios.

A tank scenario would still have meant keeping Ross and JV, but they would have gotten more minutes and more FGAs.

The financial flexibility would have remained the same or been even better with a tank scenario.

1. So instead of a chance at resigning Lowry and the 20th pick, we might have Tim Hardaway Jr on a rookie scale contract for several years and a top five pick due to us being worse.

2. Instead of Demar, we might have another prospect or pick.

3. We might have had capspace to absorb a bad contract and get another pick.

So, much of the optimism is about whether or not you believe Kyle and Demar are "the guys" and whether or not we could have replaced them through the draft or capspace.

I am happy about our middling success, but I suspect reality is going to hit us like a ton of bricks come playoff time. We have a jumpshot-heavy offense with limited post capabilities. (And we've done little in the way of forcefeeding JV to prepare him for a bigger load. As a sophomore under Triano Demar got 14 shots a game; Val has gotten 8.)

To me your ceiling is defined by your best player. And a youthful treadmill is still a treadmill. In 08-09, Joe Johnson was 27. Josh Smith was 23, Al Horford was 22, Mike Bibby was 30, Marvin Williams was 22. They were playoff fodder year in and year out. (And Denver looks now to be in the same kind of muddle.)

I feel the Hawks should have built around Horford just like we should have built around Val.

But I will be happy to be proven wrong.

[mcHAPPY]

Axel has said most of what I think. Tanking is and was a long-term plan. The only addition I would make is that I think you have to accurately separate the two scenarios.

A tank scenario would still have meant keeping Ross and JV, but they would have gotten more minutes and more FGAs.

The financial flexibility would have remained the same or been even better with a tank scenario.

1. So instead of a chance at resigning Lowry and the 20th pick, we might have Tim Hardaway Jr on a rookie scale contract for several years and a top five pick due to us being worse.

2. Instead of Demar, we might have another prospect or pick.

3. We might have had capspace to absorb a bad contract and get another pick.

So, much of the optimism is about whether or not you believe Kyle and Demar are "the guys" and whether or not we could have replaced them through the draft or capspace.

I am happy about our middling success, but I suspect reality is going to hit us like a ton of bricks come playoff time. We have a jumpshot-heavy offense with limited post capabilities. (And we've done little in the way of forcefeeding JV to prepare him for a bigger load. As a sophomore under Triano Demar got 14 shots a game; Val has gotten 8.)

To me your ceiling is defined by your best player. And a youthful treadmill is still a treadmill. In 08-09, Joe Johnson was 27. Josh Smith was 23, Al Horford was 22, Mike Bibby was 30, Marvin Williams was 22. They were playoff fodder year in and year out. (And Denver looks now to be in the same kind of muddle.)

I feel the Hawks should have built around Horford just like we should have built around Val.

But I will be happy to be proven wrong.

Regarding bold, this was a major line of my original thinking.

1. Lowry might (and I use that knowing might not is as easily a possibility) return a prospect and/or pick along with a bad contract or TPE via sign and trade.

2. DeRozan - after a strong season and all-star appearance along with emergence of TR - might just be our Jrue Holiday.

3. Raps will have cap space to absorb contracts via trade (before a Lowry extension) and they also have Salmons very friendly $7M contract guaranteed for $1M.

I don't think the Raptors are locked in to having Kyle and DeMar as "the guys" and both have more value now than they did a year ago.

That is the basis of my optimism: there are lots of options moving forward and Ujiri has proven to be a patient, opportunistic, bad@ss mo'fo'.