GustavBahler wrote:NardDogNation wrote:Knixkik wrote:NardDogNation wrote:Knixkik wrote:NardDogNation wrote:Knixkik wrote:Paris907 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knixkik wrote:fishmike wrote:CrushAlot wrote:Nalod wrote:In the scheme of things GS might have been the exception in the evolution of the NBA. You don't get Durant without 11th pick Play, 6th pick Curry and Draymond taken in the second round!
How many years does that have taken to occur? Then Mark Jax had to go and the team further evolved. Mad respect for GS and what they have done. The reserves of Livingston and iggy have been huge!!!
Its foolish to replicate what they have done as Curry is on another planet. Him being taken at the 6th pick, then allowed to mature both physically and emotionally has been a true thing of beauty to watch. Before you go off on Walsh for not making every human effort to draft him, and Minny passed on him twice, remember his status his first few years and look in the mirror and be truthful with yourself and know he likely would have been traded as part of the deal for Melo. Curry was not yet MVP curry.
Cav's continued relevance is based on the back of Lebron. Thats one way. GS is another. Celtics are taking a longer path and have retooled yet again. Major injury to star Haywood and they are still good. And a treasure trove of picks in part because they are patient. Took Tatum instead of Fultz. Way too soon to call that one, but they got the guy they wanted. sometimes its the path not well traveled.
Its hard to build a dynasty with a hard cap the way the NBA is situation. It breeds parity. GS did it with picks that turned out better than the positions they were drafted. WAY BETTER.
To give up on Frank is ignorant. Anyone really think Frank would be a break out pick in half a season? Regardless of his triangle label, it was a high conviction pick and as a fan I'd like to see it thru. No certainty, no guarantee.
Our rebuild started not when Phil walked in, but when KP was drafted. Might even say when Melo left and Frank came in.
Just because the tear down took longer than expected, that does not mean you accelerate it.
Briggs has every right to air his idea. We have every right to discuss it and agree or disagree.
The Spurs model is the model to emulate. They have won over 50 games for 20/21 years. The year they didn't was the lockout year and they won the championship. Roster, coaching and management continuity has been a huge part of their success. Perry/Mills seem to be trying to follow their model seeking players 25 and under to grow and mature together.
The only Spurs trade I recall recently is Kwahi for George Hill.
Agree. High IQ players who defend. Thats the only requirement. Sometimes that might be tough also but thats the starting point. Anything else is stop gap.
Other than Duncan, the Spurs have never drafted high or made any significant trade for an already established star. They build from within and stay patient. Their team always performs better than their talent indicates, to the point where it is expected that they will be good regardless of what their roster looks like from a talent standpoint. They do this by building chemistry. We can do that same. No major moves are needed right now. When the right piece is available, we will know it. I feel like for the first time in forever we can afford to be patient and build on this core group. Porzingis, Ntilikina, Hardaway, and Kanter have excellent upside. I just think if the Spurs had Porzingis and Ntilikina, there would be no question people would be taking about them as one of the next great young teams because they know what the Spurs can do with that sort of talent. Our starting 5 of Porzingis, Kanter, Lee, Hardaway, and Ntilikina i would like to keep in place next year while we build up the bench. We can add talent there and maybe find our long-term Lee replacement along the way. But i think this group can be very good if given the time to grow together.
I could not agree more. Start the same 4 + Frank next year. Hopefully elevate Dotson and Willy in the rotation. Hopefully add another prospect or two as well in the draft. This is what real building looks like.
Very well stated. Klay Thompson too was a later grab. That’s about where we will be picking and we should be so lucky.
Thompson, Booker, McCollum, and Mitchell. All guys drafted in this range in the last few years who look like legit #2 scoring options. These guys are out there every year. Hopefully the front office looks at this recent success stories and figure out why they dropped to the late lottery and what players in upcoming drafts possess those same underrated skillets. As for the previous post, i fully expect Dotson to become a rotation player and Willy to also re-establish himself as such. Dotson especially has a skillset built for today's league. He can shoot the three and is a good athlete who should become a solid defender. I think next year he moves ahead of Baker as a 3 & D rotation wing.
Is the norm to find those caliber of players that late in the lottery or is it more of an exception?
Add K. Leonard and The Greek Freak to that list, i would say it's more of the norm. Only a couple of years since 2010 that we haven't seen a star drafted between 10-15. But it's all about looking at these guys and figuring out why they stayed under the radar and what tools they possess to be able to develop like that.
But it is statistically more probable to find a star earlier in the draft. And with teams getting smarter, I think it will become less likely to see players like the aforementioned slip that far.
Yes it definitely is. But each draft there will be good players drafted all over the board.
And I completely agree with that, which is why I'm an advocate of investing throughout the draft. I wish we were in a position where we had multiple first rounders every year until KP finally gets his max contract and we officially have to be in win-now mode. In situations like that, we wouldn't even have to concern ourselves with tanking because those picks would give us leverage to trade up without sacrificing core pieces.
Unfortunately, the only way to actually be in a position to do any of that is to use our cap space to acquire unsavory contracts that playoff teams don't want. Given the way we've bungled our cap situation though, I don't even think we have the option to go this route, which leaves very little margain for error as we build this team. For all our sakes, I hope this upcoming pick is a game-changer because it will be our last chance to feasibly draft one.
Im all for building through through the draft. Only problem with a flood of draft picks over the space of a few seasons is finding the PT for all of them while putting enough vets on the court to keep the team competitive.
If there were a game plan for draft picks, I would want to see them combined to try and move up a few spots, try to find a game changer.
We are in the rare position of having good players, on reasonable or expiring contracts, who are available to trade. I hope Perry makes the best of that situation.
I don't believe that is as big a concern as it use to be. NBA teams now have the G-League to work with and control the agenda of the franchises they own. You can dictate touches, systems, playing time all to suit the needs of the players you draft. That can buy enough time to figure out what you have and whether they are worth keeping.
People have been throwing around the Celtics as a model we should emulate and I agree. They've had no less than two first round picks for several years now (despite being a playoff team), which has produced varying levels of success. But more importantly, not every pick was made/acquired exclusively with the intent to benefit them as a rotation player. Yes, certain guys like Marcus Smart always got minutes in the rotation. Other guys were brought along more slowly like a Terry Rozier or Jaylen Brown, which inevitably made guys ahead of them more expendable; while some were used to later facilitate trades or as leverage to try to move up in the draft themselves. And if all else failed, they cut plenty of first rounders on their rookie contracts that did not show enough promise like James Young and RJ Hunter.
But no matter if they kept the picks, moved the picks or stashed the picks abroad they continually generated value by making low-risk/high-reward moves while still fielding a competitive roster. If they could do it reasonably and responsibly, why can't we? It beats constantly having to spin the wheels in trades or hoping an overpaid free agents lives up to his contract. That's all we've ever done and it's never worked, even during the Ewing-era.
1/10/2018 10:43 PM