I agree with you that the Heat are basically Lakers' East due to their destination which makes it very easy to rebuild through FA and even trades since players can force trades to go over there much like they do with the Lakers.
I agree with you that the Heat are basically Lakers' East due to their destination which makes it very easy to rebuild through FA and even trades since players can force trades to go over there much like they do with the Lakers.
You're missing the point. I'm saying, places like the ones I mentioned can do as many things "right" as anyone and still not have a chance to sign a player of his caliber due to location. Meanwhile, the Heat can have a bleak looking situation and still have a chance.
When James signs with the Lakers it's primarily for off court reasons, but when Butler signs with the Heat it's because of "culture"? Don't believe the hype.
Prepare? The infallible geniuses that the media makes them out to be had overpaid for mediocrity (Whiteside, Winslow, Waiters, Johnson), Dragic was aging and Adebayo and Herro (overrated) were random decent prospects with uncertain futures.
I don't buy that Butler would have stayed in Minnesota and Philadelphia is a big market with a future Hall of Fame player and at the time another thought to have that potential.
So all they have to do is unearth a good core out of late lottery picks who fit a narrow minded criteria, simultaneously build up a treasure trove to acquire the next available star and have a team leftover that'll appeal to him enough to forgo preferring a big and/or glamour market? Good luck threading that needle.
When you create mediocrity from UDFAs and castoffs, that's impressive. The key after that is knowing how to leverage that created value into trade pieces. As I said, the benefit of someone like Richardson isn't what he actually did for Miami on the court, but that he could be a centerpiece in a trade for Butler. The Heat also developed many players but fell in love with basically none of them outside of Winslow. That's a lesson the Spurs would be wise to implement going forward. The Spurs have a decent amount of created value now, but if they sign them to big money and pretend like they're a franchise core, they are going to waste their opportunities. The White trade makes me think they'll be willing to make the moves they need to, but they'll have to be apply that to some of the other players too.
You can believe that if you want, but if a player is willing to sign an extension and THEN force a trade, that's way better than them just walking. Butler wanted and extension from Minny. That much we were told. Had he gotten it, maybe he still holds out, maybe he presses the Wolves to dump Towns or whatever. Maybe he's still there. All of those maybes are better than the reality of not ever having him for a team like the Spurs.I don't buy that Butler would have stayed in Minnesota and Philadelphia is a big market with a future Hall of Fame player and at the time another thought to have that potential.
We don't know what trades are out there now, but I strongly doubt the Spurs can't get multiple top-10 picks in this draft if they wanted to. They don't actually have to continue to try to draft and develop a core in such a linear fashion. Intermediate trades and signings are part of that, as is taking the risk of trading for a player who isn't directly trying to force his way to SA and then selling the team to them. Not every star wants to go to a big market. I'd contend that fewer want to go than end up there. Big markets tend to have the capital to afford big tax bills and stars that do care about that sort of thing. What guys want is to be paid and to look good. Any franchise can do that if they can field the team. When you have a bad front office like the Wizards, guys like Beal will get wandering eyes. But a bunch of smaller-market teams in the league right now have stars who at best only get mentioned for leaving because the media loves pushing the narratives.So all they have to do is unearth a good core out of late lottery picks who fit a narrow minded criteria, simultaneously build up a treasure trove to acquire the next available star and have a team leftover that'll appeal to him enough to forgo preferring a big and/or glamour market? Good luck threading that needle.
What you call "create", I call stumbling into. Mediocrity isn't difficult to achieve; the Spurs just approached/achieved it with one of the least talented rosters in the league mostly by having a cadre of competent two-way young veterans.
Richardson was a centerpiece for Butler only because the latter's antics tanked his value and teams almost always trade players of or above that caliber out of conference and to non re-building teams, which narrows the field considerably.
Fine, but no matter what Butler thought of Towns, he was and is a significantly better asset than any the Spurs have had since S bag.
Nah, just virtually every American one. That may be true elsewhere, but here you barely register on the national scale even if you're a superstar.
Do you lack reading comprehension skills? I mentioned "In the last 30 years only, the Raptors won a le along with the Bucks with having a star player who wasn't a top 10 pick." It is rare AF. The Bucks and Raptors are the only 2 teams in the last 41 years to win les with their stars not being a top 10 pick. When you do the math 2/41 is 4.8 percent. That's a very small percentage of having a chance to win a le without a top 10 pick. You wouldn't be confident if your doctor told you had only a 4.8 percent chance of surviving a deadly illness. I like to be optimistic about things but I don't like to be blindly optimistic.
Last edited by daslicer; 05-22-2022 at 08:12 PM.
Wow, on a spurs forum and you don't count a spurs team in your list. Duncan wasn't the star on that team. Furthermore, there's a reason that the teams that have done this have happened recently yet you're still going back 30 years. Who gives a what happens 15-30 years ago. It's not the same era.
Not to mention that not every team that won with a top 10 pick drafted that player.
Oh, and if you want to talk about percentages, what percentage of top 10 picks win NBA les? Its ing low. Insert stupid doctor analogy here too. The chances of any NBA team winning a le in any given year, whether they have top 10 picks or not, are ing low so I don't know why you think pulling one bull low percentage chance over others somehow makes a point. Especially when you're skewing the percentages in a dishonest and irrelevant way just to make your point "stronger".
Look the point isn't that you don't see a positive relationship with the quality of players and the earlier draft picks. Obviously that is the case. A #1 pick is more likely to be a franchise player than later draft position. This isn't debatable. My initial post you replied to was showing that tanking for a top pick isn't the only way to get a star. Plenty of all NBA players are drafted at later positions. This too isn't debatable. The Spurs don't need to go on an all out tank in order to get a - by your definition the important threshold - a top 10 pick. They have a top 10 pick this year without a tank. But thinking that you have to draft a top 10 player in order to win in TODAY'S NBA is demonstrably false as there are plenty of recent examples of teams that this doesn't apply to and its sure as not 5%.
Because if you go back you get more data points to support the argument. He buried you in this argument.
Statically during the playoffs Duncan was the best player on the '14 Spurs le team. He was still an all-star caliber player back then. Yes who gives a about what happened the last 40 years lol. Lets go by the last 11 years. Only the Bucks and Raptors won a le in the last 11 years with a star player that wasn't a top 10 pick. 2/11 is 18 percent which is still not a good percentage. You and I both want the Spurs to get better but you are delusional.
The Spurs may get lucky in this draft and get a hidden gem but it's highly unlikely. I just like to play the odds and the odds are not with the Spurs getting a superstar out of this draft
Usually, you actually do have to have a top 10 draft pick to have a chance at being elite in the NBA. Denver with Jokic and the Bucks with Giannis are the only exceptions and that's still less than 5 percent.
You know how many top 10 picks in the past 10 drafts have won a le? 2. Anthony Davis and Harrison Barnes. 2%. That is less than any of the percentages you have given. You can go back 20 years and it improves slightly, but the percentage is still under 10% and that is with guys like Dwight Howard, Shaun Livingston, and Bogut picking up rings where they were role players at best.
There's a reason why I mentioned all NBA players, as NBA les are extremely rare to begin with as only 1/30 teams wins it each year. If either the Celtics or Warriors win the le this year, this will go up, but only as role players for the Warriors and either way its not going up more than 2-3% at best. This is why your percentage bull is nonsense. You're taking extremely rare events, saying that WOW THIS IS RARE AND CAN ONLY BE DONE BY X when X itself is ALSO incredibly unsuccessful in general. Its a completely stupid way to look at the situation and only works if you take it out of context.
Adding data points doesn't do for an argument when the data points aren't representative of the current system. Drafting in the NBA 30 years ago isn't the same as Drafting the NBA the past decade. The G Leauge, international players, and NCAA Basketball are all substantially different not to mention what type of players are necessary for today's NBA. Tim Duncan was drafted after 4 years of college. That was far more common in the 90s than it is now. Scouting now has to happen not just in the NCAA but also overseas in every professional league. Not that drafting was a sure thing back then, but drafting 21 and 22 years olds after years of NCAA scouting is extremely different than drafting 18-19 year olds. There's a reason why - although still low - the success rate for 2nd round draft picks and undrafted players is much higher today than it was 30 years ago.
In case you're wondering, 2/30 is actually more than five percent.
Anyway, I think you can argue that 7/16 teams in the playoffs this year didn't do so thanks to drafting in the top-10. I think it's dishonest to talk about a team like Brooklyn which hasn't drafted in the top-10 since like Derrick Favors as evidence just because they signed stars who years and multiple franchises ago were drafted at the top of the first. I also wouldn't count teams that have top-10 draftees on their team that didn't contribute much like NOP and Chicago. Then you have team Phoenix whose top-10 pick is at best their third-best player but is arguably their fifth-best. Finally, you have Utah, who has also been an elite regular-season team despite not having a top-10 pick besides I guess Conley?
Arguing that the most talented players tend to be drafted highly doesn't do anything. I'd argue that it's willfully ignoring the actual debate. Drafting guys does not mean keeping them, and having RoFR doesn't mean a player is going to see the ends of their contracts. The Spurs should absolutely look for way to get a top pick in this year's draft. But their greater responsibility is to be a team with the infrastructure to take advantage of whatever talent they can acquire. It's my firm belief that a Spurs team that fully tanked to draft Tim back in 1997 would have seen him walk in 2000. That they had a roster who'd basically made it to the WCF a couple of years before is a huge part of why Duncan saw the early success with the Spurs that they were able to use to convince him to stay.
And Duncan was MVP, finals MVP, all nba first team and all defensive first team that year
I don’t get the discussion since the Spurs have 9th pick, which is a top 10 pick. That means they can win a le right?
Not to mention they have Collins who was a top-10 pick.
Being the steals leader should have been enough for 2nd team tbh ... I mean how often was the DPoY determined on blocks per game alone? Yes, the Spurs were not good defensively overall but its weird that the media might have used that to not vote for him. One is really screwed in SA when you don't win championships ...
Jakob was 9
Sure, but 10>9, so Collins gets the shoutout.
To look on the bright side a bit, Dejounte finished 12th in the league in voting for defensive abilities. That's still an accomplishment in a league with 150 starters (30x5) and 30 6th men. From that pool of 180 or so players, being 12th is still pretty nice.
Oklahoma did pretty good for tanking another season
damn we gonna have 3 top 10 picks on the team to start the next season. We should be the favorites to win the chip
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)