Detroit tank next season for #1 pick - Luka Doncic

[Pharaoh]

Get your facts straight!

Dallas TRADED for Dirk.
Wade didn't win any ships on his own while he was drafted 5th, not top 3. They won their ships because they traded for Shaq and 2nd one they Signed Lebron and Bosh.
I already mentioned Duncan during the year when Robinson was injured, the rest of the team just sucked without Robinson. Spurs did not intentionally tank. That was in the 1997.
Cavs didn't win with Lebron before he left, then they tanked for Kyrie. But, they didn't tank for years on end. They were gifted Wiggins and the NBA helped set them up for a title run.
Lakers TRADED for Kobe who was a 13th pick while Pistons had many lower picks now. Lakers NEVER tanked for their championship teams.
If you read my post, the Warriors NEVER tanked or drafted a key player higher than 7th. Pistons drafted higher players the past few years than the Warriors key players.

Where do you come up with this stuff?

So, of those teams, only 2 had a SINGLE bad year then got lucky in the draft. Neither intentionally tanked.

Cleveland may have been the only true tanking team and that was for 2 years where they got Kyrie and Bennet.

Hahaha dude get YOUR facts straight!

I'm well aware Dallas traded Robert "Tractor" Taylor for Dirk and LAL traded someone (I think it was Divac) for Kobe but both of those teams told MIL & CHA who they wanted with pick so while they received them via trade, they still made the picks.

Miami did need Shaq but they wouldn't have won anything without the guaranteed hall of gamer Wade which was taken 5th in arguably the greatest draft ever so that's a bad example.

The Cavs on their tankathon got Waiters, Kyrie, Thompson, Bennett and Wiggins. So Yeah the Cavs did tank more than 2 years you peanut. They may not have picked the best but they still had the OPPORTUNITY which is what I'm banging on about.

Did you not follow the NBA when GSW won? Barnes was a key players high they tanked for and did so with Thompson regardless of him going 11th. I'm talking about tanking, not just tanking for top 5 picks but situational tanking. Like we should've done to get the 11th pick but no instead we win two meaningless games and finished with a better record, how the **** do you think that's a good move?

Miami didn't tank but drafted a HOFer, Dallas won 1 ring and fell off after that, Spurs tanked for one year and drafts a HOFer and the Lakers drafted a top 5 player with the 13th pick via trade 20 years ago and not to mention are LAL which automatically makes them a free agent destination.

Building an argument around drafting HOFers 20+ years ago or being in the greatest draft of all time is flimsy at best and gets us absolutely nowhere. In the modern day NBA you usually need a top 5 draft pick to land a star and there will be several teams tanking so it's join them or stay in basketball purgatory which we've been in for over a decade.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I think you're missing the point though:

You can be terrible for YEARS and not land the difference maker everyone wants.

Kings sucked for years after Divac, Webber, Peja...got Cousins and it didn't matter.

People will say they're organization is dysfunctional as **** - in between their golden run they've changed owners and GMs and still suck!

Or look at Phoenix - since the Nash era they've sucked!

Orlando - since McGrady theyve sucked!

Washington are the hot team atm - sucked forever with or without John Wall!

Charlotte, Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Dallas, Indiana, Lakers, Memphis, Minny, Bucks etc have all sucked or been treading water for YEARS and haven't won anything of significance

So the answer IS drafting Hall of Fame talent and YES in order to do that you likely need numerous top 5 picks BUT:

There is no guarantee you'll land a HOF player with 1 or 2 or 3 top 5-7 picks in a row...and then what?

You keep tanking?

There's not an owner in the entire league that's gonna let you as a GM/VP tank hard as **** for 3-5 years

It's a exercise in futility to even think about us tanking for 1 to 3 years - Gores will not sign off on it!

Sent from my SM-J110F using RealGM mobile app

[Pharaoh]

And to add to my post above:

That's what everyone misses when talking about Hinkie.

He didn't just tank hard as **** - he did it at a time when the Draft classes were looking pretty damn good for 3 or 4 years in a row!

It's not like he just said "TANK!" & off the went - those drafts were stacked with quality

Sent from my SM-J110F using RealGM mobile app

[A_dub06]

I think you're missing the point though:

You can be terrible for YEARS and not land the difference maker everyone wants.

Kings sucked for years after Divac, Webber, Peja...got Cousins and it didn't matter.

People will say they're organization is dysfunctional as **** - in between their golden run they've changed owners and GMs and still suck!

Or look at Phoenix - since the Nash era they've sucked!

Orlando - since McGrady theyve sucked!

Washington are the hot team atm - sucked forever with or without John Wall!

Charlotte, Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Dallas, Indiana, Lakers, Memphis, Minny, Bucks etc have all sucked or been treading water for YEARS and haven't won anything of significance

So the answer IS drafting Hall of Fame talent and YES in order to do that you likely need numerous top 5 picks BUT:

There is no guarantee you'll land a HOF player with 1 or 2 or 3 top 5-7 picks in a row...and then what?

You keep tanking?

There's not an owner in the entire league that's gonna let you as a GM/VP tank hard as **** for 3-5 years

It's a exercise in futility to even think about us tanking for 1 to 3 years - Gores will not sign off on it!

That can be true when an organisation doesn't commit to tanking and tries to do what we've done. There's no denying that the Kings have been the worst run team in the league for the past decade and they are similarly a poor example. They didn't commit to tanking, drafted poorly outside of the obvious cousins and tried to rise up the standings before having the adequate foundation. Had the Kings actually committed to tanking and kept Michael Malone, I think their story would have played out quite differently.

Phoenix have sucked since the Nash era but they now have a bevy of assets and have the potential to be contenders. Booker, Chriss, Ulis, Len, Bender plus a top 3 pick this year, thats a young exciting roster with quite a high ceiling. At minimum they are entertaining to watch and all of those assets have been acquired via tanking (either for the entire season or post all-star break).

Orlando should have continued to tank but drafted poorly and tried to compete too early which hurt the franchise. As I've said earlier tanking isn't 100% fool proof and is subjected to human error which Hennigan is now paying for.

Who says Washington are the "hot" team? They finished 3rd in the East and aren't considered contenders by anyone nor did they tank so I don't know what relevance they have.

The NBA is different now and I think since Hinkie's time in Philly and the changes to the CBA which allows teams to keep talented players, teams have started to realise that tanking is the best way to get 2 young stars and contend for years on end. I don't believe tanking has ever been as prominent in the NBA as what it is today, which shows that some are ahead of the curve.

I'm not missing the point at all, the options are proceed with a clear plan which involves playing youngsters heavy minutes which separates the men from the boys and acquiring high picks or continue to just keep playing and signing/trading for middle tier vets (ie Morris, Leuer, Baynes..etc) while competing for the 8th seed/end of the lottery. I would much rather continue tanking until we get the stars we need as opposed to playing the way we have been, we really wouldn't have missed out on anything had we been tanking the last 5 years. I'm well aware Gores and other owners are too proud and stupid to realise tanking pays long term dividends but thats ok when PHI, MIN, PHX and LAL are all contenders in the next 5 years i'll still be here to say to every anti-tanking idiot "I told you so".

[Pharaoh]

I think you're missing the point though:

You can be terrible for YEARS and not land the difference maker everyone wants.

Kings sucked for years after Divac, Webber, Peja...got Cousins and it didn't matter.

People will say they're organization is dysfunctional as **** - in between their golden run they've changed owners and GMs and still suck!

Or look at Phoenix - since the Nash era they've sucked!

Orlando - since McGrady theyve sucked!

Washington are the hot team atm - sucked forever with or without John Wall!

Charlotte, Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Dallas, Indiana, Lakers, Memphis, Minny, Bucks etc have all sucked or been treading water for YEARS and haven't won anything of significance

So the answer IS drafting Hall of Fame talent and YES in order to do that you likely need numerous top 5 picks BUT:

There is no guarantee you'll land a HOF player with 1 or 2 or 3 top 5-7 picks in a row...and then what?

You keep tanking?

There's not an owner in the entire league that's gonna let you as a GM/VP tank hard as **** for 3-5 years

It's a exercise in futility to even think about us tanking for 1 to 3 years - Gores will not sign off on it!

That can be true when an organisation doesn't commit to tanking and tries to do what we've done. There's no denying that the Kings have been the worst run team in the league for the past decade and they are similarly a poor example. They didn't commit to tanking, drafted poorly outside of the obvious cousins and tried to rise up the standings before having the adequate foundation. Had the Kings actually committed to tanking and kept Michael Malone, I think their story would have played out quite differently.

Phoenix have sucked since the Nash era but they now have a bevy of assets and have the potential to be contenders. Booker, Chriss, Ulis, Len, Bender plus a top 3 pick this year, thats a young exciting roster with quite a high ceiling. At minimum they are entertaining to watch and all of those assets have been acquired via tanking (either for the entire season or post all-star break).

Orlando should have continued to tank but drafted poorly and tried to compete too early which hurt the franchise. As I've said earlier tanking isn't 100% fool proof and is subjected to human error which Hennigan is now paying for.

Who says Washington are the "hot" team? They finished 3rd in the East and aren't considered contenders by anyone nor did they tank so I don't know what relevance they have.

The NBA is different now and I think since Hinkie's time in Philly and the changes to the CBA which allows teams to keep talented players, teams have started to realise that tanking is the best way to get 2 young stars and contend for years on end. I don't believe tanking has ever been as prominent in the NBA as what it is today, which shows that some are ahead of the curve.

I'm not missing the point at all, the options are proceed with a clear plan which involves playing youngsters heavy minutes which separates the men from the boys and acquiring high picks or continue to just keep playing and signing/trading for middle tier vets (ie Morris, Leuer, Baynes..etc) while competing for the 8th seed/end of the lottery. I would much rather continue tanking until we get the stars we need as opposed to playing the way we have been, we really wouldn't have missed out on anything had we been tanking the last 5 years. I'm well aware Gores and other owners are too proud and stupid to realise tanking pays long term dividends but thats ok when PHI, MIN, PHX and LAL are all contenders in the next 5 years i'll still be here to say to every anti-tanking idiot "I told you so".

Saying "I told you so" to whom?

Everyone knows that in order to become legit contenders all but a very select few franchises should TANK hard for years in order to acquire the framchise altering talents they really need.

Post-Hinkie it's almost universally accepted!

But you need ownership to agree to it and that's not happening with Gores right now.

And FYI: None of the teams I mentioned are contenders now and will not be contenders next season.

I'd say the average time frame from beginning of tank to legit contenders would be close to 7 or 8 seasons but we really have nothing to go on, including GSW because of the ankle injuries Curry suffered that reduced his contract value and allowed them to sign Iguodala

Can anyone think of a tanking team that went from tank to title contenders within 5 or 6 years other than CLE & GSW (due to serious extenuating circumstances they're excluded)?

Sent from my SM-J110F using RealGM mobile app

[In SVG We Trust]

Build a winning culture and good development is what turn a team into contender, not tanking. I know SVG and specially the team regressed this year, but aside from Drummond who has a deterrent attitude, we could give an opportunity to everyone. Even Dre and I hate him with my heart and soul because he wastes a B I G potential. Whiteside was out of the league at his age and now he's a beast, I think every guy can change in this world, there are so many guys who matures later than other ones.

I posted here a list of great players not being Top-5 picks. I can post a list of All-Stars with a late maturity, who are or have been real good players. I'm not saying tank one year for a specific prospect is a bad idea, but tank to load the team with young players while those youngers are not playing to win and have no real competitive experience is a bad idea.

And again, the Sixers have nothing aside this pick and Saric. They wasted Noel, Okafor makes Dre Big Ben on D and I'm pretty sure Embiid is not going to play 82 games in his whole career.

Kings are awful. Orlando tanked and they're trying to compete but they have to fix so many problems on their roster configuration. Lakers have good young prospects but so far away from being stars. Suns got Booker with a pick outside the top 10, so you don't need to tank to land a potential star anyway.

I'm pretty sure half of the Top-50 players right now in the NBA aren't Top-5 or even Top-10 picks. Nowadays is all about the development and got luck to fit in a system which could maximize you're strenghs and hide your weaknesses.

[tmorgan]

Player development is and has been our primary problem for the last decade. It has spanned multiple regimes, and, at least so far, it isn't getting any better under SVG. That's troublesome.

We draft guys and don't develop them, or we draft guys, trade them, and watch them flourish elsewhere. I've forgotten what it's like to draft a guy, watch him develop, and become a star. Drummond was supposed to be that guy, but he seems to have mental limitations that he just can't overcome.

Can we Frankenstein SJ's mind into Drummond's body? He'd still do dumb things, but it least he'd WANT IT.

[Pharaoh]

Here's a tanking plan:

We trade Dre & RJ and get back Knight, Chandler & Jamal Crawford along with the Suns pick - we'll say Jackson

Phoenix trade Tatum, Chandler & Knight for Dre

Clips trade Crawford for RJ...who CP3 can school before retirement

After doing this trade we let KCP walk

Chandler - Bobo
Jon - Mook - King
Jackson - SJ - Harris
JC - Knight
Knight - Ish

Add our #12 (Justim Jackson!) to that group

FWIW:

Knight has a 3 years remaining

Chandler & JC 2 years

I think Knight & Chandler are pretty good role models for younger guys and excellent tank commanders.

Crawford is the local kid made good

The name of the game over the next 3 years would be to Draft a superstar or 2 to team with SJ, the Jackson Brothers & King Henry

The top 10 of the 2018 Mock on DX features a lot of big men...

Sent from my SM-J110F using RealGM mobile app

[princeofpalace]

Would rather have Micheal Porter Jr but we wont tank

[mattao313]

I wouldn't be opposed to tanking but SVG wouldn't dare do it.

[buzzkilloton]

Wish we would tank but SVG isnt a good enough GM to do that. Maybe if we had a guy like Hinkiee but when your GM is your coach hes not going to do it.

Going to be late lotto or 6-8 playoffs with SVG running this team.

[BadMofoPimp]

Get your facts straight!

Dallas TRADED for Dirk.
Wade didn't win any ships on his own while he was drafted 5th, not top 3. They won their ships because they traded for Shaq and 2nd one they Signed Lebron and Bosh.
I already mentioned Duncan during the year when Robinson was injured, the rest of the team just sucked without Robinson. Spurs did not intentionally tank. That was in the 1997.
Cavs didn't win with Lebron before he left, then they tanked for Kyrie. But, they didn't tank for years on end. They were gifted Wiggins and the NBA helped set them up for a title run.
Lakers TRADED for Kobe who was a 13th pick while Pistons had many lower picks now. Lakers NEVER tanked for their championship teams.
If you read my post, the Warriors NEVER tanked or drafted a key player higher than 7th. Pistons drafted higher players the past few years than the Warriors key players.

Where do you come up with this stuff?

So, of those teams, only 2 had a SINGLE bad year then got lucky in the draft. Neither intentionally tanked.

Cleveland may have been the only true tanking team and that was for 2 years where they got Kyrie and Bennet.

Hahaha dude get YOUR facts straight!

I'm well aware Dallas traded Robert "Tractor" Taylor for Dirk and LAL traded someone (I think it was Divac) for Kobe but both of those teams told MIL & CHA who they wanted with pick so while they received them via trade, they still made the picks.

Get your facts Straight!!! I said these teams did NOT have to tank. Dallas didn't have to tank nor Lakers for Dirk nor Kobe. And, Kobe was the 13th Pick in the Draft, not a top 3 player. Dirk was drafted 9th. Thus, NO TANKING NEEDED!

Miami did need Shaq but they wouldn't have won anything without the guaranteed hall of gamer Wade which was taken 5th in arguably the greatest draft ever so that's a bad example.

So, Miami had a bad year which could be construed as a tank for th 5th Pick in the draft. Wow. One whole year versus 5 years in Orlando and how 3 top five picks including a 2nd overall. Dude, you are on a roll.

The Cavs on their tankathon got Waiters, Kyrie, Thompson, Bennett and Wiggins. So Yeah the Cavs did tank more than 2 years you peanut. They may not have picked the best but they still had the OPPORTUNITY which is what I'm banging on about.

I said the Cavs tanked! But, not for Wiggins.

Did you not follow the NBA when GSW won? Barnes was a key players high they tanked for and did so with Thompson regardless of him going 11th. I'm talking about tanking, not just tanking for top 5 picks but situational tanking. Like we should've done to get the 11th pick but no instead we win two meaningless games and finished with a better record, how the **** do you think that's a good move?

Teams tank for a top 5 pick. Warriors did NOT tank and none of their key players were drafted higher than 7th. Magic tanked for 5 freaking years and got jack crap to show for it. Tanking doesn't prove any GM is good at their job.

[BadMofoPimp]

I'd say the average time frame from beginning of tank to legit contenders would be close to 7 or 8 seasons but we really have nothing to go on, including GSW because of the ankle injuries Curry suffered that reduced his contract value and allowed them to sign Iguodala

Can anyone think of a tanking team that went from tank to title contenders within 5 or 6 years other than CLE & GSW (due to serious extenuating circumstances they're excluded)?

I wouldn't say GSW tanked for their team. Klay drafted 7th, Curry drafted 11th and Green in the 2nd round had worse picks than the Pistons or Magic have had.

What it comes down to is having a GM who drafts smart and makes great trades. The rest is coaching and development. GSW proved that you don't have to tank to win.

[BadMofoPimp]

Tanking is bull crap. Basically, it is saying that an organization can't draft smart or develop players and intend to waste everyones time for years praying to god they get lucky one time in drafting an elite talent. And, if history proves anything, it is that most teams that tank fail and don't go anywhere.

[vic]

Player development is and has been our primary problem for the last decade. It has spanned multiple regimes, and, at least so far, it isn't getting any better under SVG. That's troublesome.

We draft guys and don't develop them, or we draft guys, trade them, and watch them flourish elsewhere. I've forgotten what it's like to draft a guy, watch him develop, and become a star. Drummond was supposed to be that guy, but he seems to have mental limitations that he just can't overcome.

Can we Frankenstein SJ's mind into Drummond's body? He'd still do dumb things, but it least he'd WANT IT.

Our development culture has been 0 since Darko. Almost 15 years of putting square pegs in roundholes and mancrushes on combo guards, shipping out underdeveloped talent, and letting them blossom elsewhere.

The name of the franchise and the pride of the city is at risk at this point. We used to be a top 4 franchise in the league. We're sinking every year. Miami and San Antonio have passed us up. Those 3 championships are a thing of the past. We will sink lower if we don't get better Decision Makers in ownership and General Management.

[Pharaoh]

San Antonio didn't pass us - they've been THE model franchise for damn near 30 years!

They built the organisation around Pop!

David Robinson was drafted. They built a basketball team around him. A Hall of Famer

Got Tim Duncan. Built a basketball team around him. A Hall of Famer and the best PF that ever played the game.

You tank to draft Hall of Fame players. But that doesn't mean you'll win anything worthwhile

Look at Melo - Hall of Fame player (Olympics plays a large part), perennial All Star...has win bugger all in the league.

Dominique - Hall of Fame player. Won bugger all in the league.

While Bird had McHale, Parish & Ainge Nique had Doc **** Rivers!

Jordan had Pippen - Nique had Rivers!

Ewing had who?

While Lebron had Wade & Bosh and now has Love & Kyrie Melo had who?

KD had Westbrook - Melo had who?

It's not enough to draft a Hall of Famer - hate to quote Jerry Krause but "organisations win championships"

We can tank all we like but that's no guarantee of success - look at Orlando & Sacramento!

Tanking to some = hope that at some future point you'll have a great team. Hope in one hand and crap in the other and see which one is full!

Sent from my SM-J110F using RealGM mobile app

[JRK]

Is anyone watching FIBA EuroBasket 2017?

Semifinals are Spain - Slovenia and Russia - Serbia.

At this moment, Spain - Slovenia are live and Luka Doncic is dominating.

End of 3rd quarter, Slovenia has 73 - 57 advantage and Luka Doncic has 11 / 8 / 8.
VS Gasol brothers, Rubio, Navarro, Hernangomez brothers.

Luka Doncic is 18 years old.

[JRK]

Luka Doncic with 11 pts / 10 reb / 8 as.

5 minutes before end of 4th quarter, Slovenia leads 85 - 67.

Only triple double(s) in history of EuroBasket are Stojko Vrankovic in EuroBasket 1993 with 12 pts / 13 reb / 10 blk and Toni Kukoc in EuroBasket 1995 with 15 pts / 12 rebs / 11 as.

[Joe Berry]

Read on Twitter

Doncic is a unique talent. Closest thing to Larry Bird ever since, he is a franchise player no doubt.
There is just one problem, tanking doesnt work in the NBA. Even with the worst record you've got a 75% chance not getting the top pick. If you want to tank you need a new owner/coach/gm because its not happening with Gores/SVG anyway.

[JRK]

The End.

Slovenia wins vs Spain 92 - 72.

Luka Doncic with 11 pts / 12 reb / 8 as.

No triple double for him, coach got him out with 30 sec to end so he can get standing ovations of full arena.

What a player.

[tmorgan]

To reiterate:

You can be a NBA star, even superstar, without tremendous leaping ability or quickness or strength. But it's really rare. And to bank on a guy without those qualities is a risky proposition. I enjoy watching Luka play, and I have no doubt he'll be an impact player in the NBA, but taking him with the #1 overall pick is a risk. Taking anyone is a risk, certainly, but this is a particular type -- will he translate to a faster paced game? Also, given that he's so young, will he become even slower as he fills out further?

I love Jokic, and he's a bigger version of Doncic, and he's awesome. So it certainly can be done. But there are still reasons to doubt Luka, and other guys to consider picking before him.