I think basketball is the one team sport where the best single player usually wins.

Lebron. Michael Jordan. Duncan. Shaq/Kobe.

Look at who wins- it is the generational talent.

Utah's nice, but they ain't winning.

New Orleans was a surprise, but they ain't winning.

Golden State vs. Houston is the real finals match up. Whoever wins that, despite what Briggs says, is going to crush the East.

The process wasn't about just losing and stocking up on good players. It was finding the generational talent.

Vmart wrote:

franco12 wrote:actually I think the model is simple- have the most talent and have the best player on the court for the series.

I think basketball is the one team sport where the best single player usually wins.

Lebron. Michael Jordan. Duncan. Shaq/Kobe.

Look at who wins- it is the generational talent.

Utah's nice, but they ain't winning.

New Orleans was a surprise, but they ain't winning.

Golden State vs. Houston is the real finals match up. Whoever wins that, despite what Briggs says, is going to crush the East.

The process wasn't about just losing and stocking up on good players. It was finding the generational talent.

I agree.

definitely need 2 guys, Labron isn't doing by himself, neither can kobe, mike, wilt, hakeem, shaq, ewing.

At the end of the day, it still take a 2 to make it right, coaching and roll(the kerrs, avery johnson, horry types ), players.

We need guys that fit roles on smart deals. We did good grabbing a guy like Burke, Beasely, Jack etc. Role players that fit roles on 1 year deals. These guys are out there every year.

If we draft a player like Bridges this year we can start to build a defensive culture and have the players in place that will do the dirty work when we have some cap space to bring in a real difference makers.

This year should be about maximizing guys like Lee, Hardaway, Noah so we can find ways to move them. Play Frank big minutes, play our rookie big minutes and let them grow.

The Pacers somehow were able to get two budding stars trading a guy on a free agent deal. We have to look to the future and see how we beat them, Boston and Philly. We are way behind each of those teams and need to start being smart.

MS wrote:Recipe of success is not giving contracts to the likes of Ron Baker, Lance Thomas and Noah and tying up cap space in guys that aren't difference makers and give you a couple of extra wins here and there in order to sabotage your draft position.

We need guys that fit roles on smart deals. We did good grabbing a guy like Burke, Beasely, Jack etc. Role players that fit roles on 1 year deals. These guys are out there every year.

If we draft a player like Bridges this year we can start to build a defensive culture and have the players in place that will do the dirty work when we have some cap space to bring in a real difference makers.

This year should be about maximizing guys like Lee, Hardaway, Noah so we can find ways to move them. Play Frank big minutes, play our rookie big minutes and let them grow.

The Pacers somehow were able to get two budding stars trading a guy on a free agent deal. We have to look to the future and see how we beat them, Boston and Philly. We are way behind each of those teams and need to start being smart.

Allow me to correct your logic. Baker, Thomas, and Noah epitomize the kind of team and culture you are trying to create. If you do not reward them then you are shooting yourself in the foot. Playing hard, playing defense, playing for the team and coach, leaving it on the floor - all that stuff matters and players get it.

I can't even wrap my head around these tank discussions. You cannot build a winning culture on the back of trying to lose. And its obvious that who you pick matters much more than where you pick.

And we already have started building a defensive culture. The idea that we haven't means you don't watch games, understand Frankie, Baker, Thomas, the departure of Willie, and so on.

djsunyc wrote:

franco12 wrote:actually I think the model is simple- have the most talent and have the best player on the court for the series.

I think basketball is the one team sport where the best single player usually wins.

Lebron. Michael Jordan. Duncan. Shaq/Kobe.

Look at who wins- it is the generational talent.

Utah's nice, but they ain't winning.

New Orleans was a surprise, but they ain't winning.

Golden State vs. Houston is the real finals match up. Whoever wins that, despite what Briggs says, is going to crush the East.

The process wasn't about just losing and stocking up on good players. It was finding the generational talent.

is your definition of success championship or bust? or perceived championship or bust?

you quickly dismiss utah and new orleans - if you were hired the GM of those teams today, what would you do? would you look to add or tear it down?

My thought exactly. If it's championship or bust, you need one of the best players in the league at any given time, plus additional stars. But if you're trying to become a good team first, and build on that, then there are plenty of other ways to build. New Orleans and Utah should continue to build on what they have. They are showing that 2-way players at key positions will always trump teams led by flawed stars, even if there is more overall talent. Davis/Holiday are the foundation to their success. Mitchell/Gobert in Utah. Simmons/Embiid in philly. The common theme are all teams have a ball handler/big man combo that are elite on both sides of the ball. Utah and New Orleans both beat more talented teams with this foundation.

You don't give Noah, Baker (Justin Holiday was better and signed for less) or Thomas deals, because they are a dime a dozen players. We don't have stars, so you don't pay role players. Lance Thomas is making 7MM next season Ron Baker 4.5MM those guys should barely be on a roster, let alone taking up 11.5MM in salary. Noah couldn't stay healthy before we signed him so I am just confused why you think you reward these guys because they try.

Burke was had for nothing. Same with Beasley. You only reward role players when they are within a championship or playoff roster.

Look at the following one year deals signed last offseason, all were a position of need for the Knicks.

Rondo - $3.3MM
KCP - $18MM
Tyreke Evans - $3.2MM
Reddick - $23MM

You don't rush to sign guys that aren't in demand, nor do you tie up room on guys that aren't producing wins. The three guys you said are exactly the guys you reward can't score and aren't elite defenders.

Explain the defensive culture we are building with Burke, Hardaway (Rudy Gay 2 years 17MM, player option), Kanter, Kornet. Are we a top 15 defensive team in this league? No. Top 20, no.

meloshouldgo wrote:To me it's simple. Two way players and lots of them
GS has so much depth, few teams can push them. I think they'll beat Houston, because they play defense and Houston doesn't.

except that there's no defense for harden's step back J, quite lethal from all over the court.

franco12 wrote:

djsunyc wrote:

franco12 wrote:actually I think the model is simple- have the most talent and have the best player on the court for the series.

I think basketball is the one team sport where the best single player usually wins.

Lebron. Michael Jordan. Duncan. Shaq/Kobe.

Look at who wins- it is the generational talent.

Utah's nice, but they ain't winning.

New Orleans was a surprise, but they ain't winning.

Golden State vs. Houston is the real finals match up. Whoever wins that, despite what Briggs says, is going to crush the East.

The process wasn't about just losing and stocking up on good players. It was finding the generational talent.

is your definition of success championship or bust? or perceived championship or bust?

you quickly dismiss utah and new orleans - if you were hired the GM of those teams today, what would you do? would you look to add or tear it down?

I'm dismissing Utah and New Orleans as far as advancing this year. I was surprised New Orleans was as good as they were this year.

Success is by definition, winning it all.

I don't know enough about either Utah or NOP's roster as to weather they should tear it down. But I understand how going to ownership and saying - I want to trade Anthony Davis because we can't win with him is going to get you fired.

I wonder if that is legit what Phil did with KP & Dolan.

Look- Detroit, Dallas all won with 'less than'. They both kinda got lucky against better teams - the Lakers were at war and falling apart and Miami was just starting to get it together.

We need more talent.

KP looked like a generational talent for the first ten games. I mean, if he can grow his body and sustain that kind of play, we can certainly hope for play offs and more.

KP will always look like a generational talent for certain stretches. Obviously health is the big concern, but never the talent. We can only hope his health cooperates where he can play 65-70 games a year at a high level and be ready for playoffs.