beyond the tank and anti-tank: a more comprehensive list of management strategies

[jimmie]

The strategy should always be to assess all available strategies and adopt the one that best suits the team's current situation.

The goal should be to create a franchise that no matter the situation, will be able to adapt. I believe that a strong staff/culture are far more important than picking the right strategy.

Agreed 100%. Unfortunately, this team has a lot of mistakes to undo just to get back to the Mendoza line, mistakes that limit the ability to embark on a different strategy. The current situation is that Toronto has very little ability to adapt on the fly, given the contracts and players in hand. Ujiri has to look a few years down the road (post-divestiture of those contracts/players, whether it's a tank this year, trade the expirings next year, whatever), vs. what can we do to compete NOW, when contemplating the end goal and his strategy to get there.

The point being, there's a lot of work to be done before this will be a Finals-calibre team, and finding some flexibility needs to be Job #1.

[Quirk]

Don't forget this strategy:

[Puffer]

Don't forget this strategy:

The Trank? You can spot the second when the dart hits him.

[blackjitsu]

The thing that kills most long term thought is the speed that teams fire coaches. How can a team build a philosophy when teams dump coaches in a heartbeat? That was BC biggest crutch -- fire the coach. And now even good teams are firing coaches for no reason (Memphis). IF the Raptors can find a long term head coach then the threat of benching players becomes real...

Maybe there should be a build a team around a coach strategy? Would anyone say Thibideau (m/s), Karl teams fit in this category?

[planetmars]

The thing that kills most long term thought is the speed that teams fire coaches. How can a team build a philosophy when teams dump coaches in a heartbeat? That was BC biggest crutch -- fire the coach. And now even good teams are firing coaches for no reason (Memphis). IF the Raptors can find a long term head coach then the threat of benching players becomes real...

Maybe there should be a build a team around a coach strategy? Would anyone say Thibideau (m/s), Karl teams fit in this category?

I think that's a great strategy as one of the most important things a GM needs to do is find the right coach. Unfortunately MU never really had the experience in finding a coach since Karl was already there in Denver. But the Raptors are in a bit of a predicament with Casey right now - do they keep him, let him go, or do they fire him? Casey seems like a lame duck coach to me (in his final year, MU watching what he does, etc).. but MU has to decide on whether or not he wants to rebuild now or retool before he even looks at another coach.

If he wants to rebuild, you're going to have a lot of trouble finding a veteran coach like Hollins or Thibs to come here. Those guys will want to win now. If you want to retool then you may have a better chance of luring a top rated coach and it would make sense to get their input on roster decisions. However I just don't see how the Raptors retool with the lack of flexibility that they have going for them. Maybe if they unloaded picks in trades but that's probably against MU's m.o.

[mcHAPPY]

Similar thread topic to one I did a couple of weekends ago.

Anyone arguing for just one model is doomed for failure. The people labeling posters here as "pro-tankers" are not listening to the arguments. It is all about obtaining financial flexibility and assets. Relying just on free agency is doomed for failure. Relying on making a huge trade is doomed for failure. Relying on just the draft is doomed for failure. As many others have said it takes a lot of luck to have everything work out and is a combination of finding value contracts, drafting talent in all areas of the draft, obtaining elite talent, and finding the free agents to put you over the top.

This is my breakdown on what the Raptors should be doing the next few years. It employs a number of strategies and leaves all opportunities open. The reality is moving forward with this mismatched roster is a failure. I am curious as to what happens over the next 20 games - there is not a single gimme for the Raptors in any one (BKN, MIA, DEN, @GSW, @PHX, @LAL, SAS, PHI, @CHI, CHA, @DAL, @OKC, @SAS, @NYK, NYK, @CHI, IND, @WSH, @MIA, @IND). We'll see if the 4th seed choir boys are still singing loud and proud the virtues of this Colangelo creation.



2013-15:

STEP 1) The OKC Model (aka TANKING 101):
Hit up the 2014 and 2015 drafts at the top end hoping to luck out with franchise talent. 2014 appears to have a number of franchise changers that may or may not pan out.

STEP 2) The HOUSTON Model (aka HOARDING):
Stock your roster with prospects and extra draft picks while maintaining financial flexibility.

STEP 3) The INDIANA Model (aka PATIENCE 101):
Draft wisely and develop from within (Ross, JV, Acy, future picks). Maintain financial flexibility. Cap space, exceptions, and traded draft picks are not to be used until the core is established.


2015-17:

STEP 4a) The BOSTON Model (aka CASH IN YOUR CHIPS):
Use cap space, your prospects, future picks to bring in established star talent via trade. Key here is already having 2 All-NBA talents on the roster.

STEP 4b) The MIAMI Model (aka PLAYERS UNITE 'CAUSE "WE CAN'T DO IT ON OUR OWN"):
Have a tonne of cap space. Hope Toronto has added some pizzazz (hat tip: ebrian). Hope Drake is still relevant. Hope there is one All-NBA talent who is friends with and respected by other All-NBA talent who is free agent (Love in '15? Durant in '16?)

**CRAZY REALIZATION OF THE DAY TIME: Raptors will have enough cap space in 2015 to sign a max free agent AND in 2016 if the roster included JV's cap hold, 2 top 5 picks from '14 and '15 draft, '15 max free agent signing then in 2016 there would be enough cap space to sign another max free agent. Just throwing it out there**


2017-32:

STEP 5) The SPURS Model (aka PERENNIAL CONTENDER):
With your franchise talent in place led by great coaching, management tweaks the roster each year to compliment the All-NBA talent and be a contender to win year in and year out.

STEP 6) The BROOKLYN Model (aka DRUNKEN SAILOR ON WEEKEND PASS):
The Raptors have the 4th largest NBA market with multi billion dollar corporation ownership. The luxury tax becomes a joke as the Raptors amass a 5 man core of 5 max contracts. (lol)

[octothorp]

Thinking about moneyball a little more, I separated out moneyball in my original list into two slightly different approaches, one of which is more short-term, the other longer-term. When Beane was implementing the strategy with Oakland, he was unsympathetic about trading rookies and young players, because other teams valued potential much higher than they should. That's a huge distinction from the way that moneyball strategies are usually implemented in the NBA, where potential still needs to be valued. Traditional moneyball is really win-now for small market teams.

I am NOT trying to turn this into another 'tanking' thread. I repeat, I am NOT trying to turn this into another 'tanking thread'!!! lol

I just wanted to point out that when I present my preferred team-building strategy, the 'tanking' I support is really all about undoing BC's mess, to allow MU to implement a proper, well thought out, methodical team-building strategy that follows one/several of the options in the OP. I want MU (whoever the Raps' GM might be) to stick to a plan that is sustainable, rather than bounce around from one approach to another in a knee-jerk way, that is more about saving his own ass than actually building a sustainable winner.

This is an excellent point. I think you could thus differentiate between tanking for flexibility, and tanking for stars. Obviously if you're tanking for flexibility you're still hoping that you draft a star in the process. As I understand it, the big difference would be how long you decide that you need to continue to tank. One would believe that you need to tank only until you've removed all liabilities from your roster; the other would believe that you need to continue to tank until you've drafted (or elsewhere acquired) someone you believe will develop into a franchise saviour.

The thing that kills most long term thought is the speed that teams fire coaches. How can a team build a philosophy when teams dump coaches in a heartbeat? That was BC biggest crutch -- fire the coach. And now even good teams are firing coaches for no reason (Memphis). IF the Raptors can find a long term head coach then the threat of benching players becomes real...

Maybe there should be a build a team around a coach strategy? Would anyone say Thibideau (m/s), Karl teams fit in this category?

Yeah, something interesting about this is that it's what NCAA basketball is all about. Obviously very different environments. Probably when you have situations where the coach is involved both in player personnel decisions as well as recruiting free agents, then you're heading into this territory. I wonder if GMs are reluctant to implement it at times because it potentially creates a situation where the coach has more job security than the GM. It definitely fits with the asset acquisition model as well, where you have a high amount of turnover in players and the coach is the relatively permanent fixture on the team.