Reply With Quote
at least we're both using Serbian names for some odd reason.
Mavs had all the chance to win in 2006 and 2007. They could easily have won championships if they weren't too mentally weak.
at least we're both using Serbian names for some odd reason.
true (I think it's true that Slovenia became an independent country after the whole Serbia Bosnia thing but I'm not sure).
But worse than the Suns, or Trailblazers? I don't think so. Also, people in Portland actually care about basketball.
Clippers don't have a fanbase
2010 hasn't been too bad.
Mavs.
Winning against Spurs and Suns and then losing to an average Miami team. That must hurt more.
I would say it has to be sonics fans. Losing their franchise... nobody went through that this decade. And those fans were dedicated too. I remember the series against Seattle, they were so passionate and classless too
i agree that hurts. It's rainy/misting half the time up there so it seems like they could use all the indoor entertainment they could get.
Yeah, that was exactly my ing point, dip .
I agree with the sentiment that fans of perennial horrible teams like the Knicks and Clippers haven't had it as bad as fans of teams that were great or close to being great and then falling short.
I would say Mavs fan and Suns fan have suffered the most this decade. But, I would give it to Suns fan more than Mavs fan for a couple of reasons. First, while the Mavs came so close in 2006 and should have had an even better shot in 2007, at least they got to taste the NBA Finals, something the Suns haven't done this decade despite having a couple of teams that were good enough to at least make the Finals. Secondly and probably more importantly, Suns fan had to deal with a penny pinching owner like Sarver who wouldn't do anything and everything to try to get the team over the hump. At least Cuban is willing to make bold moves and spend any amount of money to try to get the Mavs in position to win it all. Sarver has had a few teams that, with a bold and major move or two, could have really made a serious run for at least one le. But Sarver sold first round draft picks, wouldn't keep Joe Johnson, and wouldn't make many big moves that might cost him a few extra million just to get over the top. Shaq is the one move he did make, but it was a move that was probably 2 years too late and he sold him after two years too. That would be much more frustrating to see than watching Cuban make stupid moves but still moves that he felt were in the best interest of his team to win.
+1 on Jamstoned. I feel bad for Nash, I hope he retires with a championship ring, but he's locked up in Pheonix and when his contract is up, I dont know if he still has the legs to play, training camp+ 82 games + playoffs season. he's what, 35?
Nash willingly signed an extension with Phoenix, there's no reason to feel bad for him. He was more than capable of letting his contract expire, signing with a contender for the MLE and changing his game around so he could contribute in a lesser role. He chose the route that led to more money and led to him being able to continue his fun loving ways, but made his chances at a le slim to none.
tbh there's different types of suffering. You can suffer with a good team when they underacheive and fail (Dallas in the 00's), and you can suffer because your team just licks balls nonstop (Dallas in the 90's). It's like the difference between having some slow, dull, undending pain, or not feeling any pain at all except for a direct kick to the nuts every so often.
imho i'd rather my team be good and fail than suck nonstop. the 90's were overall more filled with suffering for Mavs fans.
So maybe Mavs fans haven't "suffered" the most this decade, but we've definitely taken the most kicks to the groin.
I agree with most that was said here but not all of the blame rests on Sarver. Sarver is not an idiot, he knows that he doesn't have tons of basketball knowledge, and was always willing to listen to the people around him who were supposed to know about basketball, he still does for that matter.
With Joe Johnson it wasn't Sarver's fault. The blame for that debacle rests squarely on Bryan Colangelo's shoulders for not locking him up a year prior and then putting a sour taste in his mouth with a low ball offer. Once he signed Atlanta's offer sheet, everyone agreed they needed to keep JJ, so they unloaded Jake Voskul's salary and were ready to match ATL's offer....until JJ said he doesn't want them to match the offer and would prefer to move on because of how he was treated. That led to a sign and trade.
Selling draft picks should be blamed on D'antoni more than Sarver, this is evident by the fact Phoenix hasn't sold a single draft pick since D'antoni left, and that when D'antoni wanted him to spend money, Sarver was always willing to. The complacency with the team was also more D'antoni than Sarver, D'antoni refused to change his system and the team up so it could be more traditional and compete with San Antonio. Sarver simply trusted D'antoni too much and took too long to see D'antoni's flaws. When D'antoni wanted two of his favorite players extended (Diaw and Barbosa), Sarver didn't hesitate to give them each a lucrative extension neither one deserved. When D'antoni wanted a back up signed for Steve Nash, they threw WAY more money at Marcus Banks than he deserved.
The way D'antoni worked on draft day was he would have a select few players that he loved, none of which ever had any chance of being there when it was the Suns' pick. Once the Suns' pick came around and none were there, he had no interest in using the pick. Both he and Sarver figured what the , might as well sell it. If D'antoni said to Sarver we need to use this pick, Sarver would have been ok with it, just like he was ok with overpaying Diaw and Barbosa. Heading into the 2008 season, D'antoni said that his goal was to have more fun this season and 2007 was too stressful for him (that was code for he no longer gave a about doing his job). One way D'antoni planned on having more fun was going back to small ball and not using defensive role players like Kurt Thomas, and he openly stated he didn't plan on using Kurt Thomas at all that season, and that using Kurt Thomas was his reason for why they lost to San Antonio. Once Sarver realized that, he figured why the should I pay luxury tax when trading a player the coach had no interest in using will get me below the threshold; furthermore, he figured why the not use draft picks to unload the contract if we have to since D'antoni never uses those anyway.
There's plenty more I can talk about but my point is that Sarver's cheapness has gotten overblown. Since Kerr has had complete control as GM, Phoenix has for the most part been a well run team. Once it became clear Terry Porter wasn't gonna work, Sarver was even willing to fire him and be paying 2 different coaches for a rebuilding team. You can say Sarver is cheap by not wanting to pay luxury tax, but he was always willing to pay luxury tax when they were a contender. I don't blame him for not wanting to pay it for a rebuilding team.
I'm not sure there's a team in the League that can compete with the Suns injuries from 2000-2010. Penny and Amare had microfracture, Gugliotta had career-ending foot injuries six years into his career... Kidd, Clifford Robinson, Jason Richardson arrested... Amare had two eye surgeries, JJ got his face broke which drastically effected the 2005 WCF... Robert in' Horry... Bad trades of Kidd for Marbury, Thomas and picks for nothing, and other single picks for nothing. Trump card is Sarver...
Had Suns been healthy, 2000 was a legit le-type team with Kidd, Penny and Gugliotta (all three missed significant time, with Kidd and Googs missing the playoffs mostly). Also, 2005 and 2007 were also legit le-type teams, but were done in by a combination of poor coaching, injuries and stupidity (the first two could have trumped the third). Who knows what could have been with JJ retained, draft picks used and no surgeries for Amare?
DoK, Sarver was the one that refused to meet JJ's reasonable offer of 6 years, 50 million. He OK'd BC's offer 6/45, but wouldn't budge from that. He was quoted as telling JJ to "earn his money" that next season.
BC was far from perfect. But almost every single cost-cutting, low-ball-type move was a Sarver idea or Sarver push.
EDIT: Your part of D'Antoni fits pretty well. You're probably right on that. However, Sarver was fine selling picks before D'Antoni was GM, so while D'Antoni may not have wanted players, Sarver didn't have to sell them.
However, again, not all were absolutely on Sarver. Colangelo packaged the acquired picks from NY with Googs (an expiring contract) to save money prior to the end of the season. The second of those picks is a top-10 from this year's draft.
Last edited by JMarkJohns; 04-17-2010 at 03:01 PM.
seattle
Clippers sons!
The Magic deserve mention after failing to sign Duncan followed by the Grant Hill/TMac era, which also included blowing it to Detroit in the first round after leading 3-1, then following that season up with a 21-61 record despite very little roster turnover.
As if the TMac/Hill era wasn't bad enough, they followed it up with the Francis era. Crazy front office drama, injuries, and underperforming players stymied what could have been a threatening young and balanced team (though perhaps not a real le contender).
And in the 2010 postseason, Vince Carter completely choked as the primary offensive weapon, leading to a disappointing showing for the Magic in the Playoffs. (Pending)
Sarver's logic was simple, if his business wasn't going to use an asset, he's going to sell the asset to increase profits. He doesn't know anything about how the NBA works, once he had a year of Kerr as GM whispering to him, "Robby, this isn't how things are supposed to work," D'antoni was told either make changes to your philosophy or GTFO. I'm not saying Sarver is a great owner, but he's always done what he was told was in the best interest of the team, including when D'antoni said it wouldn't hurt to sell draft picks.
Regarding JJ, Sarver was prepared to match that offer sheet. They traded Voskul for nothing in preparation to match it and reduce payroll as much as possible. About the 6 year 50 million extension, hindsite is 20/20. He didn't cheap out on Diaw and gave him 5 years 45 mil, that extension turned out to be a disaster. Right now anyway, I don't want them overpaying for guys like BC loved to do. That's why what Kerr has done is so impressive, he's made the team better since he took over and helped their future cap flexibility.
Kings and the Wolves suffered a lot in the 2000s. They got so close to the Finals then everything went downhill for them.
Why do people keep mentioning the Queens? Im serious, can someone fill me in besides the atrocious Game 6 against the Lakers in 2002?
Try to put in yourself in the shoes of a Kings or Wolves fan, wouldn't you agree that those teams suffered in the 2000s?
Sorry, not really familiar with Sacramento's struggles/pain/euffering other than that year they got screwed by the refs against the Lakers hence the question.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions