Coach Pop Still Looks Like He's Enjoying Coaching

[Mr. Body]

I mean, honestly, the way this league is set up the best scenarios are:

A) Be a contender (this roster is not it)

B) Be tanking to land a top 3 pick and hope you get a generational talent, or at least young promising assets you can develop and eventually have a good trade value (clearly a longer process)

The good-enough-to-be-first-round-fodder-but-miss-good-picks is really the worst place to be.

Heck, we did B) to land Duncan.

Teams like Phoenix are more of an aberration, tbh, especially since Sarver is a well known terrible owner. You can look at teams like the Nets or even Philly for counterpoints to that.

You couldn't be more wrong, but whatever. Most franchises take years and years to find 'generational' talent, or never do. It took way over a decade for Utah to start returning to relevance after Stockton and Malone departed. It took a huge amount of time for Philly to return to any compe iveness after AI left. Milwaukee was terrible forever. Phoenix has been trash. The huge problem with top picks is that they wind up being really expensive and it's easy to kill your franchise paying for them -- Phoenix and Minnesota are paying for ty players in Booker and Wiggins and it's throttling their ability to get better.

Tank when you have to. Peeling out a good team just to tank is ing stoooooopid.

[ElNono]

You couldn't be more wrong, but whatever. Most franchises take years and years to find 'generational' talent, or never do. It took way over a decade for Utah to start returning to relevance after Stockton and Malone departed. It took a huge amount of time for Philly to return to any compe iveness after AI left. Milwaukee was terrible forever. Phoenix has been trash. The huge problem with top picks is that they wind up being really expensive and it's easy to kill your franchise paying for them -- Phoenix and Minnesota are paying for ty players in Booker and Wiggins and it's throttling their ability to get better.

Tank when you have to. Peeling out a good team just to tank is ing stoooooopid.

Utah bet the farm on Favors and Hayward as stars (including handing them star contracts), and all they could be was perennial borderline playoff/1st round fodder, it actually goes straight to my point.

Philly is the same thing: They rode Iguodala to borderline playoff team, and once they decided they were going to tank and tank hard, they finally ended up landing Ben Simmons, which in turn enabled them to attract some decent talent around.

There's no doubt that tanking isn't a quick, sure fire way process, but it's clearly a much better direction long term than being perennial middle of the pack, where: you are not a contender, don't have the cap space and roster assets to make important trades and you also don't suck badly enough to land high value young talent on rookie deals.

I will give you that with the emergence of super tilted teams like the Dubs it's difficult no matter what you do, tbh, and economically, sustaining a tanking program for the Spurs could not be feasible long term. That doesn't invalidate what I said about the better options on this league, even if it sucks for fans.

[ZeusWillJudge]

Utah bet the farm on Favors and Hayward as stars (including handing them star contracts), and all they could be was perennial borderline playoff/1st round fodder, it actually goes straight to my point.

Philly is the same thing: They rode Iguodala to borderline playoff team, and once they decided they were going to tank and tank hard, they finally ended up landing Ben Simmons, which in turn enabled them to attract some decent talent around.

There's no doubt that tanking isn't a quick, sure fire way process, but it's clearly a much better direction long term than being perennial middle of the pack, where: you are not a contender, don't have the cap space and roster assets to make important trades and you also don't suck badly enough to land high value young talent on rookie deals.

I will give you that with the emergence of super tilted teams like the Dubs it's difficult no matter what you do, tbh, and economically, sustaining a tanking program for the Spurs could not be feasible long term. That doesn't invalidate what I said about the better options on this league, even if it sucks for fans.

Dead on perfect!

Tanking was actually a very good way to be profitable, but they've been tinkering with revenue sharing to try and prevent it.

[bklynspursfan]

CIA Poop already making plans for Trumps re-election Another 4 years of 1st round exits and using the spurs as a platform for political commentary

do you even remember what playoff basketball is at this point?

[GreekSpursfan]

My comparison was based on the parallels of needing the best player on the court to win it all (Lebron for Lue,Rigodeau-or however it was spelled,Ginobili etc for Messina) and his biggest asset being his good relations with his players instead of X's and O's.
I wasn't talking about coaching value and experience between the two.It was a different kind of analogy.

And it's up for debate what are Bud's and Doc's coaching weaknesses of course,just saying they are on another level in comparison.

You always need the best or close to that to win and Obradovic is great and all but aside from Badalona his teams had massive salaries or amazing talent that was about to explode(Danilovic, Djordjevic with Partizan) and he always had the best players on almost all his teams.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I mean, honestly, the way this league is set up the best scenarios are:

A) Be a contender (this roster is not it)

B) Be tanking to land a top 3 pick and hope you get a generational talent, or at least young promising assets you can develop and eventually have a good trade value (clearly a longer process)

The good-enough-to-be-first-round-fodder-but-miss-good-picks is really the worst place to be.

Heck, we did B) to land Duncan.

Teams like Phoenix are more of an aberration, tbh, especially since Sarver is a well known terrible owner. You can look at teams like the Nets or even Philly for counterpoints to that.

The Spurs have never really tanked on purpose. Robinson's injury opened that door to land Duncan, and yeah, he probably could have come back and played sooner, but the truth is that the Spurs weren't supposed to get the first pick the year they landed Duncan. They were looking at the draft, for sure, but that was precipitated by Robinson getting hurt, not the other way around. And when Robinson came along the Spurs were dealing with the post Gervin era, but I wouldn't say they were "tanking" with the intent of getting draft picks, they were just terrible. Hitting the lotter twice is pretty amazing, but I wouldn't count on a trifecta.

I hate playing the tanking game. And neither the Nets nor Philly have a banner up to show for all that tanking. Word out of Philly is that Brett Brown's job could be in trouble if they lose in the first round this year. Dominoes could start falling and that team could get blown up again.

A small market team like San Antonio is treading in dangerous territory if they tank to get better. If we can't attract top free agents when we're good, we'll never attract them if we suck.

Heck, once LMA loses a step we'll probably be in the lottery, so folks can celebrate then.

[Mr. Body]

The Spurs have never really tanked on purpose. Robinson's injury opened that door, and yeah, he probably could have come back played sooner, but the truth is that the Spurs weren't supposed to get the first pick the year they landed Duncan.

I hate playing the tanking game. And neither the Nets nor Philly have a banner up to show for all that tanking. Word out of Philly is that Brett Brown's job could be in trouble if they lose in the first round this year. Dominoes could start falling and that team could get blown up again.

A small market team like San Antonio is treading in dangerous territory if they tank to get better. If we can't attract top free agents when we're good, we'll never attract them if we suck.

The Spurs have had something like eight non-playoff seasons in their entire history. We don't tank, period. But as you say, it's extremely dangerous for a market like this. Start tanking and you're more likely to look at a lost decade. A lost decade and this team gets sold and winds up in Seattle.

Tanking. Doesn't. Work.

[BillMc]

Heck, once LMA loses a step we'll probably be in the lottery, so folks can celebrate then.

Don't disagree with anything you're saying on tanking, but, I do think LMA's game will age well. Of course, he may be in Portland by then, and Pop retired, so we indeed could be lottery bound. Unless DJ and White and a few others really develop

[Mr. Body]

Heck, once LMA loses a step we'll probably be in the lottery, so folks can celebrate then.

It'll happen sooner or later. Aldridge probably extended the compe ive life of this franchise by five years. I don't see another franchise FA coming on any time soon.

But, really, I had expected this to happen, like, ten years ago. In no way had I imagined the Spurs would have another period of compe ive viability and win in 2014. If Kawhi hadn't been hurt by Zaza and then quit as a human being, the Spurs might actually be in a position for another.

[exstatic]

The Spurs have had something like eight non-playoff seasons in their entire history. We don't tank, period. But as you say, it's extremely dangerous for a market like this. Start tanking and you're more likely to look at a lost decade. A lost decade and this team gets sold and winds up in Seattle.

Tanking. Doesn't. Work.

In 51 ABA and NBA seasons, the Spurs have missed the playoffs 5 times. In 42 previous NBA seasons, the Spurs have missed the playoffs 4 times. That's fewer times than the current Laker STREAK of playoff misses.

SA is the gold standard for NBA franchises. We own the highest regular season win percentage. I know that teams have more championships, but what most people don't know is that during that Boston streak in the 50s and 60s, you only had to win two playoff series to get a ring. Spurs have done at least that 11 times. I'm not even sure what the standard was for those trophies that the Minneapolis Lakers won in the 40s. Maybe there was only one series? East vs West?

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

In 51 ABA and NBA seasons, the Spurs have missed the playoffs 5 times. In 42 previous NBA seasons, the Spurs have missed the playoffs 4 times. That's fewer times than the current Laker STREAK of playoff misses.

SA is the gold standard for NBA franchises. We own the highest regular season win percentage. I know that teams have more championships, but what most people don't know is that during that Boston streak in the 50s and 60s, you only had to win two playoff series to get a ring. Spurs have done at least that 11 times. I'm not even sure what the standard was for those trophies that the Minneapolis Lakers won in the 40s. Maybe there was only one series? East vs West?

Totally agree. And there were only 11-12 teams in those early years, too.

Boston, with all their banners, has 4 rings since the ABA merger.

What the Spurs have accomplished is amazing...small market team...former ABA franchise...not a "premier" free agent destination. Folks love to throw stones at the FO, but doing so is just blind ignorance from my perspective.

[ElNono]

The Spurs have never really tanked on purpose. Robinson's injury opened that door to land Duncan, and yeah, he probably could have come back and played sooner, but the truth is that the Spurs weren't supposed to get the first pick the year they landed Duncan. They were looking at the draft, for sure, but that was precipitated by Robinson getting hurt, not the other way around. And when Robinson came along the Spurs were dealing with the post Gervin era, but I wouldn't say they were "tanking" with the intent of getting draft picks, they were just terrible. Hitting the lotter twice is pretty amazing, but I wouldn't count on a trifecta.

I hate playing the tanking game. And neither the Nets nor Philly have a banner up to show for all that tanking. Word out of Philly is that Brett Brown's job could be in trouble if they lose in the first round this year. Dominoes could start falling and that team could get blown up again.

A small market team like San Antonio is treading in dangerous territory if they tank to get better. If we can't attract top free agents when we're good, we'll never attract them if we suck.

Heck, once LMA loses a step we'll probably be in the lottery, so folks can celebrate then.

I don't think anybody likes tanking as a fan (even debatable as an organization), but whether it was pure luck or not, the fact that we ended up with a top 3 pick, and landed Duncan is without a doubt what changed this franchise and gave it new life. And, again, my post is just pointing out those are effectively the strategies that work in this league, due to salary caps, star power bringing more star power, etc. At the same time, it's silly to buy the koolaid that your first round fodder team is somewhat better than the franchises that decided to tank early and go for the next big talent.

I mean, it's actually egregiously obvious if you look at the standings any given season lately, half the league is tanking, the other half is either contenders or trying to hang around for one more piece... I actually don't like it works that way, but I can't pretend it's not happening.

[MultiTroll]

... I do think LMA's game will age well. Of course, he may be in Portland by then, and Pop retired,

If that is the case, Spurs should get as much trade value as possible for LMA.
Could get some juicy offers from some here and now contending teams. Like Houston offering 4 1st rounders for AD (or whatever it was). Of course LMA is not AD but you get the idea. Just let him play out his contract at the end of '20-21 and bail to Portland? Ya I guess that's option. Hope it's not this year and two more of 1st Round fodder.

[ZeusWillJudge]

Well I hope he enjoyed the out of that one.

[R. DeMurre]

I don't think anybody likes tanking as a fan (even debatable as an organization), but whether it was pure luck or not, the fact that we ended up with a top 3 pick, and landed Duncan is without a doubt what changed this franchise and gave it new life. And, again, my post is just pointing out those are effectively the strategies that work in this league, due to salary caps, star power bringing more star power, etc. At the same time, it's silly to buy the koolaid that your first round fodder team is somewhat better than the franchises that decided to tank early and go for the next big talent.

Orlando landed Shaq and Chris Webber, Minnesota landed Garnett, Cleveland landed LeBron, OKC landed Durant, Westbrook, and Harden, Dallas landed Dirk... None of those situations led to 5 rings for those franchises. In fact all of those teams combined went on to win two rings in total.
I think there's no question that Duncan was a huge part of the equation, but I don't think if he goes to a different organization, they just automatically win 5 rings. The Spurs did a lot of things right after the having the good fortune of getting Tim.

[MoSpur02]

Orlando landed Shaq and Chris Webber, Minnesota landed Garnett, Cleveland landed LeBron, OKC landed Durant, Westbrook, and Harden, Dallas landed Dirk... None of those situations led to 5 rings for those franchises. In fact all of those teams combined went on to win two rings in total.
I think there's no question that Duncan was a huge part of the equation, but I don't think if he goes to a different organization, they just automatically win 5 rings. The Spurs did a lot of things right after the having the good fortune of getting Tim.

[jjktkk]

Totally agree. And there were only 11-12 teams in those early years, too.

Boston, with all their banners, has 4 rings since the ABA merger.

What the Spurs have accomplished is amazing...small market team...former ABA franchise...not a "premier" free agent destination. Folks love to throw stones at the FO, but doing so is just blind ignorance from my perspective.

Couldn't agree more. Tanking doesn't guarantee anything. I would rather PATFO continue adding to this current team and keep doing it the
"Spur's way".