Bensational wrote:I don't think Gay is good enough to propel us into mediocrity all on his own. He may be the difference of a few extra wins in this latest slump, but he's not going to make us playoff contenders overnight. This team has shown that we're more than just 1 player away from being consistent. Right now, the moment either BBD or Jameer aren't around, this team falls to ****. It's because of the prominence of youth on this team and the abundance of little things they've yet to learn which help you close out games.
Again, someone please tell me the alternative option which taking Gay on will rule out? The only thing it might impact is a few less ping pong balls this year and next year. But if your philosophy for improving relies on a LOTTERY, then you've got a pretty weak business model right there.
Lottery implies that there's a certain degree of luck involved, which is certainly true in determining where we pick. The hope is that, regardless of how many ping-pongs we have, we can start culminating good talent through the draft. I'd much rather lay low and strategically decide when the time is right
to make our big moves, rather than jumping at the first big name that comes on the market.
Still a weak business model
for an entertainment business -- provide subpar exhibitions. Not to mention RDV's thoughts on the matter and, unfortunately, his age.
How long do you stay low?
How many seasons do you let season ticket holders not renew?
How many seasons of reduced game ticket sales?
How many seasons of concession dwindling money?
How many seasons of reduced exposure on national TV?
How many seasons of reduced customer opinion of your franchise?
How many seasons of reduced advertising?
How many seasons of reduced merchandising?
How many seasons of ...?
As been said many times regarding silly trade scenarios ... this isn't NBA Live where a financially down season has no impact what so ever.