Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A new take on tanking - opponents of this need not click this thread

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

  • Matt52 wrote: View Post
    p00ka feel free to not contribute. You've made your stance clear. The topic may hold no appeal to you whatsoever. That is cool.

    However, among the people who support tanking, I'm am interested how badly they would want to do it. Therefore I would ask a little bit of courtesy to talk among posters who favour this approach to team building.

    Also there is a benefit of trading everyone away for peanuts: it ensures the Raptors own pick is likely to be dreadful. If you are getting established rookie contract players like Monroe, or intriguing prospects like Giannis 'Po, or solid players who have never had a chance to shine like Tobias Harris, maybe your team does better than one would have thought.
    I actually think this is the route MU is going to take. Target young players like Tobias and Giannis (not going anywhere imo after Bucks traded Harris last year) so you are still acquiring young players who can grow with your team without having to pray on lottery luck.

    I want him to overhaul this roster because it's not that good talent-wise, however I would not be upset if he is getting back players like A. Bennent, T Harris, B McLemore that might make you better sooner than expected.

    Comment


    • Matt52 wrote: View Post
      I agree.... Start that thread any time.

      I suspect talent evaluation comes down to you either have it or you don't. Kind of like height or any other talent such as sining.
      Ok, so let me sidejack this thread a bit.... A good example from baseball is a guy like Pat Gillick, being one of those guys with a true gift for talent evaluation. Contrast that to the whole Moneyball approach, which can also be successful. Basketball equivalents of each would be, say, Jerry Krause (old school) vs. Daryl Morey (new school).

      Another example is the Spurs. Yes, they lucked out by getting Tim Duncan more than a decade ago, but that doesn't that doesn't explain a recent moves like being able to develop George Hill into a valuable enough asset that could be traded for a mid-1st round pick and then using that pick wisely to select Kawhi Leonard. Is that all luck and Tim Duncan? Same type of asset development seems to be happening with Cory Joseph, who looked like an absolute scrub in his rookie season. They seem to do it again and again. Draft, acquire or sell talent which exceeds the perceived value of the asset when they picked it up. Not 100%, but seemingly a better track record than most. Why?

      Comment


      • golden wrote: View Post
        Ok, so let me sidejack this thread a bit.... A good example from baseball is a guy like Pat Gillick, being one of those guys with a true gift for talent evaluation. Contrast that to the whole Moneyball approach, which can also be successful. Basketball equivalents of each would be, say, Jerry Krause (old school) vs. Daryl Morey (new school).

        Another example is the Spurs. Yes, they lucked out by getting Tim Duncan more than a decade ago, but that doesn't that doesn't explain a recent moves like being able to develop George Hill into a valuable enough asset that could be traded for a mid-1st round pick and then using that pick wisely to select Kawhi Leonard. Is that all luck and Tim Duncan? Same type of asset development seems to be happening with Cory Joseph, who looked like an absolute scrub in his rookie season. They seem to do it again and again. Draft, acquire or sell talent which exceeds the perceived value of the asset when they picked it up. Not 100%, but seemingly a better track record than most. Why?
        Excellent coaching and leadership is a big part of their development, but it all comes together with their scouting. They target guys that work for them or that they feel they can develop and not just draft popular picks/names. Duncan was lucky in that he stepped onto a team with David Robinson, Avery Johnson, Sean Elliott, etc to lead by example, and now Duncan does the same. The Spurs are the perfect example of brilliance on the bench and in the front office which leads to on the court.
        Heir, Prince of Cambridge

        If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.

        Comment


        • Axel wrote: View Post
          Excellent coaching and leadership is a big part of their development, but it all comes together with their scouting. They target guys that work for them or that they feel they can develop and not just draft popular picks/names. Duncan was lucky in that he stepped onto a team with David Robinson, Avery Johnson, Sean Elliott, etc to lead by example, and now Duncan does the same. The Spurs are the perfect example of brilliance on the bench and in the front office which leads to on the court.
          By the way the following is not directed at you, just a little background rambling before I make my point.


          The Spurs have this urban legend about how they never make a bad draft pick. Hardly. They've drafted a few, "Who?". They've traded guys who never got a shot (Scola, Barbosa, and Dragic come immediately to mind). However when you look at the overall body or work over the last 15 years or so and compare it to the rest of the league, they are pretty ridiculously incredible at finding value at the back end of the first round and second round of the draft. In contrast, take a look at Toronto. They've hit a few home runs early in the draft but more often than not struck out - especially in the 2nd round.

          So to my point about your post, the bold. It most certainly all comes together with scouting. Another name for scouting would be talent identification. The problem in Toronto is that they have been building around guys who have talent levels that are inferior to what is needed to build a winner. Role players are treated as corner stones. Deep bench guys are your role players. Your deep bench guys are D-League equivalents.

          Toronto currently have two guys running the basketball show (Ujiri and Weltman) who have worked their way up through the league front offices with a start in scouting. In private business and sports, you don't typically go from a nobody to a significant decision maker without serious success behind you. For these men starting in scouting it would be talent recognition. Both men have shown great success in identifying and drafting talent in the middle of the first round and later in to the 2nd round.

          This is why I want Toronto to trade their main pieces right now for prospects and picks. I have the utmost faith in the front office's ability to identify talent. Combine that with a cap guru who worked for the league office on creating the CBA and you have a serious recipe for success.

          Comment


          • Matt52 wrote: View Post
            By the way the following is not directed at you, just a little background rambling before I make my point.


            The Spurs have this urban legend about how they never make a bad draft pick. Hardly. They've drafted a few, "Who?". They've traded guys who never got a shot (Scola, Barbosa, and Dragic come immediately to mind). However when you look at the overall body or work over the last 15 years or so and compare it to the rest of the league, they are pretty ridiculously incredible at finding value at the back end of the first round and second round of the draft. In contrast, take a look at Toronto. They've hit a few home runs early in the draft but more often than not struck out - especially in the 2nd round.

            So to my point about your post, the bold. It most certainly all comes together with scouting. Another name for scouting would be talent identification. The problem in Toronto is that they have been building around guys who have talent levels that are inferior to what is needed to build a winner. Role players are treated as corner stones. Deep bench guys are your role players. Your deep bench guys are D-League equivalents.

            Toronto currently have two guys running the basketball show (Ujiri and Weltman) who have worked their way up through the league front offices with a start in scouting. In private business and sports, you don't typically go from a nobody to a significant decision maker without serious success behind you. For these men starting in scouting it would be talent recognition. Both men have shown great success in identifying and drafting talent in the middle of the first round and later in to the 2nd round.

            This is why I want Toronto to trade their main pieces right now for prospects and picks. I have the utmost faith in the front office's ability to identify talent. Combine that with a cap guru who worked for the league office on creating the CBA and you have a serious recipe for success.
            I think their scouting prowess goes beyond just the draft though. They constantly are able to acquire low radar free agents and trades and find guys that fit their system and that they can make the most out of. Danny Green is the most recent example, but the last decade plus is full of guys like that
            Heir, Prince of Cambridge

            If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.

            Comment


            • Axel wrote: View Post
              I think their scouting prowess goes beyond just the draft though. They constantly are able to acquire low radar free agents and trades and find guys that fit their system and that they can make the most out of. Danny Green is the most recent example, but the last decade plus is full of guys like that
              You're absolutely right.

              The draft is a big part of scouting/identifying talent but scouring the foreign leagues, minor league, and the buried on the end of other team's benches all play significant roles in finding talent too.

              Comment


              • The Washington Wizards, trying to strengthen their hand for a playoff push in the Eastern Conference, have acquired center Marcin Gortat from the Phoenix Suns, sources close to the talks told ESPN.

                The Wizards will get a scoring presence in the paint in Marcin Gortat to go with their prized young backcourt of John Wall and Bradley Beal.

                Sources said the deal sends Gortat and guards Shannon Brown, Malcolm Lee and Kendall Marshall to the Wizards for the expiring contract of veteran big man Emeka Okafor and a protected 2014 first-round pick (to No. 12).

                http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/98...ka-okafor-pick
                I think we just got an idea of what a 2014 protected pick from a playoff bubble team is worth.

                Tankers should be smiling tonight.

                Comment


                • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                  You're absolutely right.

                  The draft is a big part of scouting/identifying talent but scouring the foreign leagues, minor league, and the buried on the end of other team's benches all play significant roles in finding talent too.
                  Sure-fire talent isn't a lock either. Developing and maintaining is a key component. And that's where I think that culture and coaching come into play. Indiana is a great example. Who would ever think that a starting 5 of Hibbert, West, George, Stephenson and Hill could give Lebron & Co. all they could handle? All without their supposed best player & leader, Danny Granger. I still look at that roster and think that they could easily be a perennial playoff bubble/first round exit team or worse - and nobody would be surprised. There's no Tim Duncan there, so can't use the 'just get great talent and it will work out' theory. Frank Vogel has to get a ton of credit for developing the players and the culture. Hibbert doesn't even look like the same player when he entered the league. Paul George came out of nowhere. David West is definitely underrated, but always considered a notch below the perennial all-stars. There's definitely something else going on with the Pacers, besides talent identification.

                  I think there a handful of guys that will be great on any team, in any era (Lebron, Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, etc...). Then there are guys that can go either way, either (a) be uplifted by the situation they are put in, or (b) be brought down by the organization, culture or lack of development. Problem is, it's really difficult to know if a guy is sucking simply because he doesn't have the talent or because he's not being developed properly, although Bargs comes to mind as a very talented prospect who was likely handled improperly (so says Smitch, anyways).
                  Last edited by golden; Fri Oct 25, 2013, 09:41 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Xixak wrote: View Post
                    And you are?
                    An occasional poster, who happened to be reading this thread, and felt like pointing out some bulls***
                    "Stop eating your sushi."
                    "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                    "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                    - Jack Armstrong

                    Comment


                    • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                      You're absolutely right.

                      The draft is a big part of scouting/identifying talent but scouring the foreign leagues, minor league, and the buried on the end of other team's benches all play significant roles in finding talent too.
                      The other thing that they (the Spurs) have mentioned is that they scout players with specific roles for them in mind, and then, once they have them, make a point of developing the skills that role requires while also making it explicitly clear to the player what is expected of them. Sounds simple, but it probably happens less than you'd think.

                      Or maybe it can't happen at all until you have some cornerstones in place, at which point it's easy to see what skills need to be filled in around them.
                      Last edited by JimiCliff; Fri Oct 25, 2013, 10:47 PM.
                      "Stop eating your sushi."
                      "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                      "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                      - Jack Armstrong

                      Comment


                      • JimiCliff wrote: View Post
                        The other thing that they (the Spurs) have mentioned is that they scout players with specific roles for them in mind, and then, once they have them, make a point of developing the skills that role requires while also making it explicitly clear to the player what is expected of them. Sounds simple, but it probably happens less than you'd think.

                        Or maybe it can't happen at all until you have some cornerstones in place, at which point it's easy to see what skills need to be filled in around them.
                        This is the key point. Its easy to say that you draft for specific roles when you already have Duncan, Parker and Manu (this is going back a few years). Also, what role was parker drafted for - superstar PG? Sure! Ill take one of those!

                        The bottom line, is you can go back and forth a million times, but everything in this league starts and ends with superstars .. you have to do everything you can to find them .. once you do, the rest, believe it or not, is relatively easy.

                        See guys like Danny Green, even Serge Ibaka, who look REALLY good and seem to play a perfect role .. but a massive part of that is having KD/RW or TD/TP around them.

                        If we (the raps) were to target Danny Green types, that would be the WORST possible thing we could do (notwithstanding what the advanced stats guys say)

                        Comment


                        • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                          Toronto currently have two guys running the basketball show (Ujiri and Weltman) who have worked their way up through the league front offices with a start in scouting. In private business and sports, you don't typically go from a nobody to a significant decision maker without serious success behind you. For these men starting in scouting it would be talent recognition. Both men have shown great success in identifying and drafting talent in the middle of the first round and later in to the 2nd round.
                          I agree with this. This is another reason why i'm against tanking as we clearly don't NEED high draft picks to find talent with Ujiri and Weltman running the show.

                          Comment


                          • special1 wrote: View Post
                            I agree with this. This is another reason why i'm against tanking as we clearly don't NEED high draft picks to find talent with Ujiri and Weltman running the show.
                            I don't know enough (and am not going to get into the "you need x number of superstars" argument) to know if you can succeed without high draft picks that are acquired because you have a team that sucks for some number of years. I don't know what the Raps will be able to do with trades in the coming years. I believe it is possible to trade for higher picks, given you have something to trade with. But one thing we do know for a fact is that extremely good talent is available outside of the top five picks in the lottery. Superstar status even.

                            It's less likely these days, with the level of scouting that occurs, to find those diamonds in the rough, but it is a skill like any other. The Raps may have that skill on staff now. Even if the team can avoid busts (Andrea comes to mind in the sense of someone who did not live up the the spot he was picked at) then they are doing better than many teams. And good, young talent with upside can get you superstars in the right circumstances.

                            Quite frankly I don't care particularly strongly if the Raps win the championship or not. I don't live that vicariously. I do want to see them become a team that has chances to be perennial contenders, because I enjoy watching the "Heroes of the Hardwood" play strong competitive basketball. If they can get there without tanking (I think they can) then all the better.

                            Comment


                            • JimiCliff wrote: View Post
                              The other thing that they (the Spurs) have mentioned is that they scout players with specific roles for them in mind, and then, once they have them, make a point of developing the skills that role requires while also making it explicitly clear to the player what is expected of them. Sounds simple, but it probably happens less than you'd think.

                              Or maybe it can't happen at all until you have some cornerstones in place, at which point it's easy to see what skills need to be filled in around them.
                              How do you explain the Hibbert-West-George Pacers or the Billups-Prince-Wallace(s)-Hamilton Pistons? Neither was built through high draft picks or sure-fire, perennial all-star talent. No clear "cornerstone" piece was in place before everything came together.

                              Comment


                              • mountio wrote: View Post
                                This is the key point. Its easy to say that you draft for specific roles when you already have Duncan, Parker and Manu (this is going back a few years). Also, what role was parker drafted for - superstar PG? Sure! Ill take one of those!

                                The bottom line, is you can go back and forth a million times, but everything in this league starts and ends with superstars .. you have to do everything you can to find them .. once you do, the rest, believe it or not, is relatively easy.

                                See guys like Danny Green, even Serge Ibaka, who look REALLY good and seem to play a perfect role .. but a massive part of that is having KD/RW or TD/TP around them.

                                If we (the raps) were to target Danny Green types, that would be the WORST possible thing we could do (notwithstanding what the advanced stats guys say)
                                Duncan and KD, I'll give you, but Westbrook was drafted AFTER Beasley and Mayo - why aren't they superstars too? By this logic, adding Beasley to Wade should have been automatic contender, right? And we all know how low Parker was drafted. You have to give OKC and Spurs credit for talent identification there. But again, nobody's commenting on the Pacers, Pistons type way of building a contender. No superstar in sight. No top 5 pick (unless you count Darko, lol).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X