My dudes, we employed Drew Gooden for three seasons.
ETA: I focused on the garbage player part and now realize y'all talking final possession. But I feel like it's always a good time to **** on Drew Gooden.
I have a soft spot for Drew. He hooked me up with some sweet lower level tickets against Minnesota some years ago. Of course, he was suspended for the game. Lol
Ron Swanson wrote:It's just weird that GS craters so badly (-11.0) when Curry sits despite it being largely the same core that was fine in non-Curry minutes last year (-0.1). I guess they really botched their asset management and roster construction this offseason more than people thought.
Beyond the obvious draft misses (Wiseman over Ball/Haliburton, Kuminga over Wagner), they'd probably be fine right now and likely overwhelming favorites to repeat if they had just gotten in on the Jerami Grant market or some other similar level player. I get the "have your cake and eat it too" desire, but how often does it actually work out where you can both compete for titles while also giving rotation minutes to and developing multiple 19-20 year old players? Myers is gonna have to swallow his pride and start bundling these picks and prospects for upgrades because right now, I'm not sure they have more than 6-7 guys on that roster that are currently actual NBA players/contributors.....
Absolute hubris to keep and make those picks. It's turning out a lot worse than I expected but this is what can happen when you choose the high variance route instead of punching it in. Pete Carroll energy.
Jazz win again last night. 17-14 and in 7th in the West. Walker Kessler continues his fine play.
Meanwhile T-Wolves are 13-15 and in 11th. Outside the play-in tournament at the moment. Predicting that next summer, the NBA Board of Governors will put limits on how many firsts and pick swaps a team can trade for a player.
In depth discussions here - shorter stuff on Twitter
If you zoom out from the Bucks and look at the bigger picture there are a lot of teams, the majority really, that are struggling for any kind of game to game consistency. That's a product of several things baked into the modern day regular season experience but safe to say the Bucks are not alone on some island of struggle that no other team with championship aspirations is going through.
Ron Swanson wrote:It's just weird that GS craters so badly (-11.0) when Curry sits despite it being largely the same core that was fine in non-Curry minutes last year (-0.1). I guess they really botched their asset management and roster construction this offseason more than people thought.
Beyond the obvious draft misses (Wiseman over Ball/Haliburton, Kuminga over Wagner), they'd probably be fine right now and likely overwhelming favorites to repeat if they had just gotten in on the Jerami Grant market or some other similar level player. I get the "have your cake and eat it too" desire, but how often does it actually work out where you can both compete for titles while also giving rotation minutes to and developing multiple 19-20 year old players? Myers is gonna have to swallow his pride and start bundling these picks and prospects for upgrades because right now, I'm not sure they have more than 6-7 guys on that roster that are currently actual NBA players/contributors.....
Absolute hubris to keep and make those picks. It's turning out a lot worse than I expected but this is what can happen when you choose the high variance route instead of punching it in. Pete Carroll energy.
I mean, they just won the title last year largely helped by one of the young guys.
Yea I don't see the long term boom future on account of missing on the high high picks you mentioned. But as far as the decision to do that route instead of trading them I certainly get it. First, they still won one more. Second, imagine if they did hit on those picks then they would be setup for the future. Essentially the fail was choosing the wrong guys, not going the route. Essentially they knew they couldn't win those two years with Klay hurt so why give away the picks to be mediocre, take a swing on hitting for the future.
Ron Swanson wrote:It's just weird that GS craters so badly (-11.0) when Curry sits despite it being largely the same core that was fine in non-Curry minutes last year (-0.1). I guess they really botched their asset management and roster construction this offseason more than people thought.
Beyond the obvious draft misses (Wiseman over Ball/Haliburton, Kuminga over Wagner), they'd probably be fine right now and likely overwhelming favorites to repeat if they had just gotten in on the Jerami Grant market or some other similar level player. I get the "have your cake and eat it too" desire, but how often does it actually work out where you can both compete for titles while also giving rotation minutes to and developing multiple 19-20 year old players? Myers is gonna have to swallow his pride and start bundling these picks and prospects for upgrades because right now, I'm not sure they have more than 6-7 guys on that roster that are currently actual NBA players/contributors.....
Absolute hubris to keep and make those picks. It's turning out a lot worse than I expected but this is what can happen when you choose the high variance route instead of punching it in. Pete Carroll energy.
I mean, they just won the title last year largely helped by one of the young guys.
Yea I don't see the long term boom future on account of missing on the high high picks you mentioned. But as far as the decision to do that route instead of trading them I certainly get it. First, they still won one more. Second, imagine if they did hit on those picks then they would be setup for the future. Essentially the fail was choosing the wrong guys, not going the route. Essentially they knew they couldn't win those two years with Klay hurt so why give away the picks to be mediocre, take a swing on hitting for the future.
The young guy who helped them win the title was a very late pick, nothing super significant to be gained there in a trade. But the Wiseman, Kuminga, Moody picks?
emunney wrote: Absolute hubris to keep and make those picks. It's turning out a lot worse than I expected but this is what can happen when you choose the high variance route instead of punching it in. Pete Carroll energy.
I mean, they just won the title last year largely helped by one of the young guys.
Yea I don't see the long term boom future on account of missing on the high high picks you mentioned. But as far as the decision to do that route instead of trading them I certainly get it. First, they still won one more. Second, imagine if they did hit on those picks then they would be setup for the future. Essentially the fail was choosing the wrong guys, not going the route. Essentially they knew they couldn't win those two years with Klay hurt so why give away the picks to be mediocre, take a swing on hitting for the future.
The young guy who helped them win the title was a very late pick, nothing super significant to be gained there in a trade. But the Wiseman, Kuminga, Moody picks?
Right, but they kept him instead of trading him for some vet and they won the title. And like i said, yes of course the other picks have flopped. I'm saying the draft/scouting/pick was the mistake here, not necessarily the plan to use/keep the picks and try to develop their next young stars while still winning. I'm just saying they chose the wrong guys, not that the choice to choose the picks was necessarily wrong.
You're not wrong that it was greedy of them to think they could pull it off. It's very tough in the NBA. It does happen a lot in MLB though. But you listed the guys that went right after their picks, if they had just made the right picks they'd be set up for a juggernaut. Essentially I think the 'plan' was correct but the 'execution' was the fail.
DingleJerry wrote: I mean, they just won the title last year largely helped by one of the young guys.
Yea I don't see the long term boom future on account of missing on the high high picks you mentioned. But as far as the decision to do that route instead of trading them I certainly get it. First, they still won one more. Second, imagine if they did hit on those picks then they would be setup for the future. Essentially the fail was choosing the wrong guys, not going the route. Essentially they knew they couldn't win those two years with Klay hurt so why give away the picks to be mediocre, take a swing on hitting for the future.
The young guy who helped them win the title was a very late pick, nothing super significant to be gained there in a trade. But the Wiseman, Kuminga, Moody picks?
Right, but they kept him instead of trading him for some vet and they won the title. And like i said, yes of course the other picks have flopped. I'm saying the draft/scouting/pick was the mistake here, not necessarily the plan to use/keep the picks and try to develop their next young stars while still winning. I'm just saying they chose the wrong guys, not that the choice to choose the picks was necessarily wrong.
You're not wrong that it was greedy of them to think they could pull it off. It's very tough in the NBA. It does happen a lot in MLB though. But you listed the guys that went right after their picks, if they had just made the right picks they'd be set up for a juggernaut. Essentially I think the 'plan' was correct but the 'execution' was the fail.
You both have some valid points.
Personally I would have gone the emunney route and used those picks in trades to try and get the most out of the Steph years. There's some similarity to the Pack picking Love, I understand the reasoning but both are 'have your cake and eat it too' moves.
Maybe it's different if they pick different players but uncertainty is the nature of the draft. Like half of all loto picks fail, it is what it is. The draft is hard.
I also think developing young guys on a contender is different than developing guys on a team not as focused on winning. Are guys like Wiseman and Kiminga different players now if they were given a ton of minutes and allowed to make a **** ton of young guy mistakes? Maybe But you can find examples of guys who developed bad habits on bad teams too.
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming Wow! What a Ride!-H.S.T.
emunney wrote: The young guy who helped them win the title was a very late pick, nothing super significant to be gained there in a trade. But the Wiseman, Kuminga, Moody picks?
Right, but they kept him instead of trading him for some vet and they won the title. And like i said, yes of course the other picks have flopped. I'm saying the draft/scouting/pick was the mistake here, not necessarily the plan to use/keep the picks and try to develop their next young stars while still winning. I'm just saying they chose the wrong guys, not that the choice to choose the picks was necessarily wrong.
You're not wrong that it was greedy of them to think they could pull it off. It's very tough in the NBA. It does happen a lot in MLB though. But you listed the guys that went right after their picks, if they had just made the right picks they'd be set up for a juggernaut. Essentially I think the 'plan' was correct but the 'execution' was the fail.
You both have some valid points.
Personally I would have gone the emunney route and used those picks in trades to try and get the most out of the Steph years. There's some similarity to the Pack picking Love, I understand the reasoning but both are 'have your cake and eat it too' moves.
Maybe it's different if they pick different players but uncertainty is the nature of the draft. Like half of all loto picks fail, it is what it is. The draft is hard.
I also think developing young guys on a contender is different than developing guys on a team not as focused on winning. Are guys like Wiseman and Kiminga different players now if they were given a ton of minutes and allowed to make a **** ton of young guy mistakes? Maybe But you can find examples of guys who developed bad habits on bad teams too.
Fair. And yea of course going the other route wouldn't have been wrong either, it was certainly the traditional/conventional way of doing it. I just think the Klay injury situation created a space/window to do it this route since they couldn't win those years anyway once KD left and they went for it. Most other teams don't get that chance as they only have picks late in draft. Spurs of course had it work with Duncan. Go back to the 80s and LA/Bos probably don't regret keeping their top picks they fell ass backwards into and integrating them into winning teams.
And when it comes to maximizing Steph's window aspects, well they still won a title the literal one year they could since KD left, helped by keeping a young guy instead of trading. So I'm not sure they missed on much on that aspect. Trading those picks for a mid level guy (who they also would have to pay a big contract while massively in the tax) would not have won the any more titles than they have. 5 months later we're talking like they're trash and a horrible roster. I'd guess the biggest issue on that team so far this year is Draymond. First, his attitude messing things up and second that he's just not that playing well. As far as roster construction stuff, besides picking wrong guys the other mistake they've made is not moving on from Draymond. But again, he did just help them win a title 5 months ago. I also think there's a good chance KD is still there if they told him they'd dump Draymond.
Personally, I think developing a young guy on a winning team/culture is more productive or better situation than to go to a trash spot. But of course who knows. But if I had to guess if Poole got put on say SAC/CHA/DET he wouldn't have become what he did.
I've still got stock in Kuminga being good and if Moody could get out of Kerr's doghouse he's shown flashes for a young player too. Both those guys at least look like rotational players on a contender. Wiseman on the other hand...
Baddy Chuck wrote:I want to win but I also love chaos.
"
