Everything 2018 Off Season

[Shaolin Fantastic]

Hahaha khloe..go from former NBA big and noted womanizer and crack head Odom, to current NBA big and noted serial cheater womanizer and overall douchebag Canadian Thompson.

Women will never cease to amaze me. Gotta always go for the assholes that'll break their heart.

I see sexism is on the menu today.

[Nilanka]

Vince's teams were "trash" too if Pierce's were.

Again you're just being flat out dishonest or a homer or don't know basketball if you're calling Vince a superstar and Pierce not one. Pierce was just as good and he was actually that good for a lot fucking longer.

Star, superstar, good player, it's all semantics. But dude, no need to cry about it.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

Star, superstar, good player, it's all semantics. But dude, no need to cry about it.

Nice cop out. I'm not crying. My point is if Pierce wasn't a superstar, neither was Vince, c'est tout mon ami.

[Nilanka]

Nice cop out. I'm not crying. My point is if Pierce wasn't a superstar, neither was Vince, c'est tout mon ami.

I'm not comparing Pierce to Vince. You are.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[DanH]

Since 1990 there have been 140 top 5 draft picks. Guess how many of those 140 players have won a championship with the team that originally drafted them? (not counting coming back to that team, via trade or free agency).

Answer: 4 (Kyrie, Tristan Thompson, Duncan & DWade).

That's it..... only 4. That number balloons to 6, lol, if you count Jason Kidd and Lebron.

Again, this is my point. The 1990 and 1995 and 1998 and 2005 and even 2011 CBA's made it incredibly difficult for home teams to keep talent they drafted. Every CBA has made it progressively more difficult for teams to pry talented players away, and the 2017 CBA is no exception. My point is that when you pull from 1990, the data is practically meaningless. And of course when you pull from more recent eras, the data is still uncorrelated to the current system, and the very most recent data is too small (and short) a sample to have any meaning.

Ignoring the context of the system in place and trying to use blanket stats like looking at the past 140 top 5 draft picks (135 of which were not drafted into the current system) to wave away any argument... You can "lol" all you like, but you should also be super worried that our draft picks will leave after their first contract like T-Mac did - or wonder what contract value we will have to give them as soon as we draft them, that we may have to pay the entire salary cap to a star player, which player we might take with our 9th round pick, and should think MLSE could leverage their high revenues into simply outspending the opposition without having to worry about such a fictional concept as a luxury tax.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

The system right now is set up really well for teams that want to rebuild through to draft to be able to retain those players as long as they're willing to pay them what's necessary (particularly stars). It's actually become an even more viable way to build a championship team, and it already was one to begin with (as long as you could put that team together before they reached their 2nd free agency period and decide to leave because your team isn't any good).

[Primer]

The system right now is set up really well for teams that want to rebuild through to draft to be able to retain those players as long as they're willing to pay them what's necessary (particularly stars). It's actually become an even more viable way to build a championship team, and it already was one to begin with (as long as you could put that team together before they reached their 2nd free agency period and decide to leave because your team isn't any good).

This is the difficult part. Players will leave you even if you got close, like Durant leaving OKC for less money. Lebron leaving Cleveland for less money. Or if you never get close like Bosh leaving us for less money.

[MixxAOR]

Tanking is a process to get you talent. Once you do, new processes start: development, building a team around your talent and retaining talent. If you fail at retaining talent it doesn't mean tanking failed.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

Tanking is a process to get you talent. Once you do, new processes start: development, building a team around your talent and retaining talent. If you fail at retaining talent it doesn't mean tanking failed.

I think these are places where Masai and our franchise infrastructure have shown they can excel.

[Primer]

I think these are places where Masai and our franchise infrastructure have shown they can excel.

This is flat wrong. We have certainly developed lots of players, and specifically Derozan and Lowry. We also built a team around them and retained them. Just turns out they combined with Casey was not good enough. Masai has shown he can do all 3 of those things.

[DanH]

This is flat wrong. We have certainly developed lots of players, and specifically Derozan and Lowry. We also built a team around them and retained them. Just turns out they combined with Casey was not good enough. Masai has shown he can do all 3 of those things.

I think that's what he meant.

[DanH]

This is the difficult part. Players will leave you even if you got close, like Durant leaving OKC for less money. Lebron leaving Cleveland for less money. Or if you never get close like Bosh leaving us for less money.

OKC was going to lose Durant as soon as they proved they were too cheap to pay for a championship team, by trading off Harden.

Both examples are also players taking a bit less money to leave. The current system would mean, if the player is a true superstar, they are taking a LOT less money to leave. Slightly different equation.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

This is flat wrong. We have certainly developed lots of players, and specifically Derozan and Lowry. We also built a team around them and retained them. Just turns out they combined with Casey was not good enough. Masai has shown he can do all 3 of those things.

I think you read my comment as "can't"? I was saying that we are really good at those things and have proven it.

[Primer]

I think you read my comment as "can't"? I was saying that we are really good at those things and have proven it.

My bad, carry on.

[golden]

Tanking is a process to get you talent. Once you do, new processes start: development, building a team around your talent and retaining talent. If you fail at retaining talent it doesn't mean tanking failed.

It most certainly does mean you failed, because the objective of tanking is championship or bust. Supposedly more near-term pain (i.e. losing on purpose) for higher sustainable gain (i.e. championships).