RealGM

A while back I saw a thread something that involved who the top 8 teams would be in the east and alot of people on our board had the nets being the 8th seed. Now with the roster that we had I said it was not possible..but I guess as fans we hope for suprises. The thing that worries me after listening to a 30 mintue conference call from Avery Johnson and reading q and a's from both derrick favors and damion james...they themselves feel that we " can be in alot of games and win some" Where does that mention playoffs? OUR TEAM doesnt in believe in our product are we really that screwed? How can we win if our team doesnt believe in it...

Because on paper, we suck. Simple as, these guys can be confident but our team is a lottery team, we've barely made any improvements, yes we've added pieces but the important ones are unproven and needs time to develop, now I'm not trying to sound bitter because in truth I want the 1st overall pick this year.

.. so conservative optimism is no longer good enough, we need hogwash? Devin put it well, we're good enough to get to the playoffs. You can count on one hand the number of teams that are publicly saying more than that at this point in the year. You do realize we're still two months away from training camp, don't you? Simmer down. I want us to be great ASAP just as much as anyone else, but it doesn't help us to make 55-win predictions after the season (and offseason) we've had. I'd be much more satisfied with our team if we set high and achievable goals, and then achieved them.

I feel the sum of this team's parts are greater than the whole. How good the Nets will be this season will be dictated by how hard these guys buy into Avery Johnson's DEFENSIVE game plan.

The team was completely lost defensively last year. I fully expect that to change this year.

I mean if you want to go this route you can also say that from 08-09 to 09-10 our team remained rather unchanged besides an aging, ball hog Vince Carter - and I believe Anthony Morrow and Travis Outlaw can effectively replace his role quite well. So barring injuries i see no reason why this team cannot win 30-40 games.

I think if Brook Lopez gets even better this year (20/10/2 blocks) and becomes an All Star along with Harris getting back to his All Star form (21/7) we'll have 2 All Star players and may be able to push for a 8th seed with a good bench we have.

OMG....Can we please wait til the season starts before we question the drive and optimism of our players...we have alot to look forward tonew players new coach new culture new brand of basketball...new approach..obviously the goal is playoffs it the start of august for crying out loud....u won't here any bold predictions around this time...all we have to do is place 2nd in our div...i think we have jus as much talent as NY TOR and PHI. BOS will be the fav to win the div again...but look at Mil last year..or even CHA they did it with defense...we can def be in play for that...wait til the season starts to see our product we put on the floor....PATIENCE

There is a big differenc between having the talent to win...and knowing HOW to win at this level.

THis team has plenty of talent. But most likely....it still doesnt quite know how to win. Talent for example can keep you in more games, but down the stretch...did you rush a shot? Did you fail to rotate? Did you get caught making a dumb foul? Did you forget to foul right away? DId you miss a ft underr pressure? There are plenty of things that take time to do well consitenly under pressue. ANd it isnt talent...its poise and experience.

The bigger question is...are we better served in the long run by having a good record? By making the playoffs? Or, do we leap from other teams in years to come by losing more now and adding even more talent through the draft?

Careful what you wish for. Slightly better results can cost you the bigger pay off in the long run.

enetric wrote:There is a big differenc between having the talent to win...and knowing HOW to win at this level.

THis team has plenty of talent. But most likely....it still doesnt quite know how to win. Talent for example can keep you in more games, but down the stretch...did you rush a shot? Did you fail to rotate? Did you get caught making a dumb foul? Did you forget to foul right away? DId you miss a ft underr pressure? There are plenty of things that take time to do well consitenly under pressue. ANd it isnt talent...its poise and experience.

The bigger question is...are we better served in the long run by having a good record? By making the playoffs? Or, do we leap from other teams in years to come by losing more now and adding even more talent through the draft?

Careful what you wish for. Slightly better results can cost you the bigger pay off in the long run.

JMO but I think at this point our best bet is playing to win. As we saw this year the lottery guarantees nothing. If the team wins the players on the team will increase their exposure and respective values considerably - the desirability for FA's will also benefit. Even as the 8th seed, say we get swept but TWill hangs a triple double on Wade in one game? His value around the league would triple. We have 2 potential franchise players on the roster and a handful of resources in place to continue to build the roster. If management believes in Favors (refusing to trade him) then we are probably closer then we all think we are as far as building the roster is concerned.

Devin is the wild card. If he can stay healthy and play the way he did in 08 he becomes another potential "keeper" - but at minimum he becomes a much bigger trade chip on a very reasonable contract. I think making that happen is potentially just as valuable as a top 5 draft pick.

The logic is flawed. Just because we got a lower pick than our record doesn't mean we didn't increase our talent value massively as a result of losing. You cant call Favors a potential superstar and not factor that in.

Of course there are no guarantees...but that has little to do with getting the pick you should have had by lotto luck.

You always play to win. No matter what. my point is...in reality...look at success and failure from both sides. Teams that get to the middle tend to stay in the middle..unless potential is turned into REALITY for those superstars. Say we make an 8th seed....so Twil gets us a superstar in trade? You think that is more likely than you actually DRAFT ONE from losing? And then...hey you still have Twill and all that other talent. What? You think the Thunder did that in one season? Green a #5 acquired for a superstar. Twill isn't getting you Ray Allen with some prime years left just because he dropped a triple double, and even if he did...I don't see Pierce and KG sitting around here.

The also drafted Durant a #2, Westbrook a #4, and Harden a #3 and still...ALL OF THAT got them into a one round and out playoffs that you seem to think we are primed for with our severely less experienced team...a team that you still refer to our top picks as...POTENTIAL rather than PROVEN superstars.

I think its hard to be a fan and root for losing...and that is why these conversations taste so bad. Its why no one wants to accept it. And perhaps the system is flawed. But...in a superstars league where money and market still rule the land...I have never heard a better solution to the problem than the system the NBA has created.

You are either a contender, a rebuilder or you are stuck in the middle...which means you are a pretender.

It would be unfortunate to end up becoming a pretender and blocking our path later to contender, but it would be stupid to deliberately TRY to become that team by trading ourselves into it. That is the one thing I hope we don't do.

I don't want to stomp on your right as a fan to be excited about the here and now. That's the last thing I want to do. Go ahead. Root as hard as you did last August. Believe...OK...we can do this or that...these guys can develop. But don't be discouraged if it doesn't happen...there is in fact great value in losing in this league for the long term. Paying those dues....has proven to pay off more often than it hasn't. And impatience or a quick rise to the middle has failed more often than it has paid off.

I generally agree with most of that post. As you said obviously the goal is to win a championship and many aspects of the NBA system are flawed. To have a shot at the title you need a top 3-4 player and after this offseason there's a good chance your going to need 2 top 10 players. Everyone in the league knows this and everyone in the league is competing within the same closed marketplace. The obvious benefit for bad teams is the draft but I think that is too unreliable IF you have other options. The lottery is a huge variable - so is the fact that even with the luxury of hindsight there are plenty of weak drafts that don't even put out a single top 10 player.

Obviously this doesn't mean you trade away draft picks and give up on the process, as with Favors and Lopez - there are excellent consolation prizes on occasion. In the same vain I wouldn't make a trade that limited our cap flexibility for next year's free agents. BUT If the team is 20-23 on the playoff bubble I would hope the team explores a trade for an expiring (or cheap) player to try to help the players on this team succeed even if it costs us a lottery pick.

Netaman wrote:I generally agree with most of that post. As you said obviously the goal is to win a championship and many aspects of the NBA system are flawed. To have a shot at the title you need a top 3-4 player and after this offseason there's a good chance your going to need 2 top 10 players. Everyone in the league knows this and everyone in the league is competing within the same closed marketplace. The obvious benefit for bad teams is the draft but I think that is too unreliable IF you have other options. The lottery is a huge variable - so is the fact that even with the luxury of hindsight there are plenty of weak drafts that don't even put out a single top 10 player.

Obviously this doesn't mean you trade away draft picks and give up on the process, as with Favors and Lopez - there are excellent consolation prizes on occasion. In the same vain I wouldn't make a trade that limited our cap flexibility for next year's free agents. BUT If the team is 20-23 on the playoff bubble I would hope the team explores a trade for an expiring (or cheap) player to try to help the players on this team succeed even if it costs us a lottery pick.

Why? If we're on the playoff bubble, that obviously means that we're not good enough to compete for the championship. As E said, from a fan's perspective and you'd want your team to win. I'd root for the Nets to win every game that they play in but the reality is that expiring contract that you will get will cost a young, talented player in the trade and even if we did improve we did improve slightly we're still stuck in the same position except we will have a cheap guy coming off the books, we'll have lost a player because of the trade, and we'll have traded our team out of the lottery with no chance of grabbing a top slot. The only time I wouldn't have that mindset is if you're a team like the Thunder. Each season you get better and you add piece after piece because you already have the superstar player and a great supporting cast. I think the fans of Seattle will be pretty pissed when they see the guy they drafted take OKC to the top of the Western Conference once the Lakers are done.

Agree to disagree. Obviously Im not advocating dumping a 1st round pick or Twill for a fruitless playoff series. Im talking about a low cost dump deal like Hump + a 2nd round pick for a moderate improvement like Diaw (or something in that vain). This would also be contingent on the fact that we are around the deadline and there is no big fish to be had over the next few months (i.e. Chris Paul isn't being moved).

The point isn't what we would be giving up - obviously we are in a place where we cannot give up any assets that could be valuable in the future. The point is if there's a deal out there so low cost that all things are equal, is it better to win games or play for the draft? I'd rather win games and distance ourselves from last year's embarrassment as much as possible. Looking at the NBA landscape even if we did everything possible to try to lose I don't see how this roster could get more then a 6% shot at the lottery - barring catastrophic injury. Maybe as the NCAA season starts we will see that this draft is loaded in the top 10 and that changes but even assuming next year's draft will be as deep as this year's draft (doubtful) I don't think it would be worth playing for a pick.

Obviously this is all hypothetical and much will depend on the team's record in January. Im personally hoping for a year similar to 1997 - a fun and athletic team without a superstar that had some young promising players who gave the Bulls a halfway interesting series.

I completely respect your right to fear embarrassment. I however say...bring on the embarrassment for a chance at greatness. We had a 25% chance of landing the #1 pick. Two teams with that less than 6% chance landed picks HIGHER than us. End of day...like they say in the NY Lotto....gotta be in it to win it.

Sure...on the bubble...you most likely get a lower pick. But other than short term gratification...what do you gain?

I guess I would put it to you this way. Challenge yourself. Do it coming and going. Without knowing what you are going to get in the draft...it is easy for you to take your position because your brain says....hey I can justify making the playoffs with the fact that most likely I get a 10-14 pick rather than a 1-3 pick anyway...and that isn't a roster changer most of the time. Man...it would be so great if we could make the playoffs....that feeling...the bragging rights as a fan, the pride....but that is where you have to realize...PRIDE is the sin that costs you the big picture.

So that would be coming in without a known choice....lets compare it going OUT with a known choice now.

Lets go back. Typically, making the playoffs is right around the .500 mark. Your point is hey...if we are on the bubble...totally worth it to me to make the playoffs...if we can give up just a little bit to get there. OK...so lets prove it.

Two year before this one...we won 33 games and missed the 8th seed by 3 games, the 7th seed by 6. The exact scenario you just described.

The team that won the 8th seed was the Hawks, the 7th seed was Phily.

The Hawks #15 overall pick was sent to the Suns to complete the Joe Johnson trade made a couple of years earlier. This was after a few years of protection had run out.

They made a trade deadline trade to acquire Mike Bibby to help get them into the playoffs. Now, their pick was gone so they weren't risking anything like you would want us to...but lets assume they had their own pick for the purpose of this example. I think its reasonable to say the Bibby trade was worth a few wins down the stretch, so in that regard it fits what you are talking about...right? But lets put that on hold for sec.

The 76ers didn't make a trade deadline deal, but they did have their own pick which ended up at 16.

Both of these teams were within striking distance for us. Under your example, you would have liked us to make the playoffs. You would have traded for a veteran like Atlanta did...a guy who is available at the deadline for low cost in assets. As you know, you get those lopsided deals in your favor because the guy you added is older and has a contract his team wants to dump.

While there are more bodies included here for the salary match, the basis was the same as what you described, a 2nd rounder and expirings. Bibby was acquired for Anthony Johnson, Tyronn Lue, Lorenzen Wright, Shelden Williams and a 2008 second-round pick.

So what were the results? Hawks had an exciting first round series with eventual NBA champion Boston and took them to a game 7. 76ers won two games against the Pistons. But....both lost as expected in the first round.

The Hawks #15 pick would have been Robin Lopez. Their cap space now filled by veteran PG Bibby for next year.

The 76ers drafted Maresese Speights with the 16th pick, and then spent their cap room on a veteran big man...Elton Brand.

We missed the playoffs by only a few games and drafted Brook Lopez with the #10 pick.

So now here is the question. If the Hawks had the pick to make...would you be saying, man so glad we added Bibby and that we got Robin Lopez. Totally worth that exciting series with Boston. Or, would you say...you know...we would have been better off missing the playoffs, had the expiring contracts, and drafted Brook Lopez to play center to make up a front line of Brook/Horford/Smith over the next decade.

At the time...that team wasn't much better in wins and losses than we were or how you imagine us possibly being this year at the trade deadline. The Hawks have continued to improve as their talent has matured, and have since made the playoffs two more years and will for the next few if healthy. But, was that ONE year of playoffs worth it in this hypothetical?

Would they be better served matching up in the playoffs with Brook if they had the pick, or was adding Bibby's contract to push into the playoffs and drop in the draft the better move? They paid off his prorated 13.5 for that season, and then ate his balloon payment year of 15mil rather than have cap space. He of course dropped to one of the 10 worst starting PG's in the NBA that next season.

Now Philly. Take their team and put in Brook over Speights. Was it worth making the playoffs? Then add Elton Brand's signing that summer with their cap space. It resulted in a 41 win season and another playoffs....first round exit. They got Jrue Holiday with the 17th pick, a very nice find for a such a low pick....and the first PG taken after the 5 drafted in the lottery. PG was a draft for need pick for them in a PG rich draft. Now we got Twil in that draft...I rather have him than Holiday and the playoffs, but I think the better comparison is the Bucks who got a PG, had the same record we did that season and missed the playoffs by 5 games as well.

The got Brandon Jennings one pick earlier than us with the 10th pick. So imagine Philly right now NOT "just making" the playoffs. Give them...Jennings, Turner, Brook Lopez in the last three drafts. Not adding Elton Brand to push them to the middle with a big ugly contract they would have given up the rights to Turner if they could have dumped it. Were the 1 round and out playoffs worth it? Or do you think...wow...I would rather have that trio set up for the next few years?

I think it becomes much more clear if you use a comparison like this. If you don't try to sell your brain on the...well...who knows what would have happened. The reality is...I can give you many examples like this. Sometimes being in the lottery moves you up. Sometimes it gives you a much better chance at a player who can help you for years to come. Are 4-7 extra games and your pride worth that?

It also highlights the thing I have been saying for years. I would MUCH rather win 10-20 games than win 30-40. You miss the playoffs you miss the playoffs. There is no...yeah...but we won 26 games and you won 12 like that Schmuck poster from the Nix board had to say. You suck, you suck. You can suck with 35 or even 40. But what does that get you?

I would rather have the season we had last year and get Favors than the season Toronto had and get Ed Davis.

You know that ties in another stupid myth we read all the time from someone like Demens. Hey...if you win MORE games...even 35 instead of 15...it will make us more attractive to free agents, or keep our players encouraged. Really? I already think 12 wins and Favors was better than 40 wins and Ed Davis for the long term future of our team...but it sure didn't look like Chris Bosh was encouraged to stay. He didn't seem to think...OK....we got close...and NOW we got ED DAVIS!!! ALRIGHT!!!!

Did Amare go to the Nix because they won 26 games instead of 12? NO!!! He went to their gutted roster for market and the MOST cash he could make. PERIOD.

And a loser is a loser in the NBA. The question is...what did you get for it? Are you on a path to going from 8th seed to 4th? Are you ready to jump in? Do you have enough talent to be a top 4 seed and all you need is experience? I say for us the answer is no. I say we need more. We need to either save that cap space for a TRUE star by trade or free agency...or we need to keep drafting some high picks and find our Lebron, Durant, or Paul, or Howard, etc. Sure...Favors and Brook might both be stars. But, maybe they are not superstars. Westbrook, Harden and Green are good. But no future without Durant has that core as potential contenders. As it stands they are still "just making it" into the playoffs. Will they make the jump to top 4 in the next two years? Maybe. But they added 4 top 5 picks to set all of that up. Several terrible seasons and giving away all stars to get there.

Just adding pieces, or just making it...is a path to no where. There will be playoffs soon enough if you have patience.

E, I'm all with you hoping we get a high lotto pick this year one last time, but more often then not, any pick outside the top 10 specifically is a crap shoot and historically I would almost bet without looking that the 15th and 16th picks have been better then the 11th through 14th and I am making this claim only based on I have looked up the recent history(last 10 to maybe 12 years) on later lotto picks and the success rate is rather wretched, yet there are more players in that 15 to 18 range that have become very high level players.
Now I know that is pretty superstitious and silly in a sense, but it's factual history none the less, maybe because teams are under less pressure with picks in the high teens then they are the late lotto and some really good players originally projected as lotto slip because of injury or character concerns or because guys with "potential" took their place in the late lotto, or a trickle down effect of a couple reach picks in the mid lotto, but it's history none the less.

Anyway, I kind of drifted from the real point I wanted to make and it's pretty simple.
Sometimes I think you have a disconnect with the human aspect of the players and their psyche, where as you see the logic in getting another high lotto pick to eventually become a great team, but the players see the reality of losing season after losing season and also have an ego that they feel they are good enough to become great on their own anyway and/or all the losing starts them questioning each other, the orginization and even themselves.

Winning can be contagious and cure all, losing can be cancerous, infectious and destroy.

Again, I am not saying to make a push now, or strive for mediocrity, I'm just saying it's not as simple and as black and white as you(or me or others on here) seem to make it most of the time.

I think these guys will be fine if we wind up with 20 something wins and high lotto again as long as we make true progress, are competitive night in and night out and they believe in Avery's vision, they are smart enough to see the bigger picture and know that growth often takes time, as long as it involves them for the long term.
But, if we have another horrid abomination of a season like last, I think trouble is going to start a brewin' and bad habits will be learned, along with a lot of name calling and finger pointing amongst each other, maybe creating a funk it is impossible to emerge from, that is why this specific and literal season is so important, not so much measured in the exact amount of wins, but in what is achieved and what progress is made.

I usually say there are no moral victories, but this is one of those situations when there actually is a lot of room for exactly that...

I think this is a great discussion and think there's a lot of merit to both sides. For me it comes down to a few simple questions - how talented is your foundation? Do you have assets to improve your team beyond the draft? I think in the 2 examples you cited Atlanta could have been very confident in the talent on their roster (Marvin, Horford, Smith), while Philly could not have. Philly had cap room but at the time the only potential building block on their team was Iguadala. As far as question 2 I think we have a lot more assets available to make further moves then both those teams did. Lopez is just as big of a building block as Horford (maybe bigger). Favors is more valuable then Smith + Marvin. JJ and Devin are comparable. Plus we have picks + cap room.

Right now we have Lopez at 10% of his sticker price and the clock is ticking down. We have 2 more seasons with him before we have to give him a deal that takes away cap room. IMO we have more assets then any other team out there so it's on our management to parlay those assets into a bonafide stud (top 10 player). Can they secure that player? Heading into Brooklyn that is the only measure of success in my mind.

I don't think the draft holds that answer. The GS pick could be incredibly valuable finding a great player to supplement the core like Harden or Jeff Green. Even if we only win 25 games next year we would be lucky if we could end up with another pick as valuable Favors. I think the odds of getting the next John Wall or Derrick Rose are too long to actively entertain.

Last thought on the issue - remember the importance of perception in this league through the lens of a superstar changing teams. Boston did everything they had to do to put themselves in position to get KG and he declined their trade. He declined 1 NBA Title and 1 appearance in the finals. Until they got Ray Allen. Did Ray Allen guarantee anything? No. He had never won a thing on his own and he was in his 30's coming off injury. But KG could look at Allen and at least know that he wouldn't be alone on the team he was going to and they were doing everything they could to win. Our roster can have that desirability without making any big moves so long as our players develop and get better. Winning games is a huge part of that development.

Netaman wrote:I don't think the draft holds that answer. Even if we only win 25 games next year we would be lucky if we could end up with another pick as valuable Favors. I think the odds of getting the next John Wall or Derrick Rose are too long to actively entertain.

I don't know why you say any of this.
Next year's draft has the makings of a VERY talented draft, essentially top heavy as always, but with maybe 5 or 6 truly marque talents and a slew of potential All Stars or at least above average starters and 3 of the likely top 10 guys are point guards.

Later in the draft things may get dicey, because with a possible lockout looming, only the guys almost guaranteed a top 10 slot are going to disregard that fact.

Things can easily and certainly change by then and we haven't even seen most of the likely top picks play a game in college yet, but chances are this is a very high quality draft for at least the top ten picks and especially so the top maybe 5 or so, with potentially players like Harrison Barnes, Kyrie Irving, Brandon Knight, Jared Sullinger, Perry Jones, Jan Vesely, Cory Joseph and Alec Burks dooking it out for those spots.

Also, you speak as though Favors is a given to be good, unless you're talking of his value as a trade chip in addition to his potential as a player. I don't mean to knock your optimism, because it's a great thing to have as a fan, but if you talking about Derrick Favors as if he arrived already, there is that obvious chance you're setting yourself up for disappointment, especially if you use this season as a measuring stick, because even if he becomes an awesome player, he's pretty damn raw right now and is a candidate to have the haters around the league and pessimistic Nets fans calling him a bust early in his career.

And to speak on the paragraph a couple above and relate it to your Wall and Rose comment, I think you'll be pleasantly suprised this year by two to as high as maybe 4 potential franchise level players that all play point guard coming into college ball this year and quite realistically all of them entering the 2011 draft if the lockout situation is solved and if they all pan out and at worst two of them...

It goes without saying that right now it's impossible to predict the draft - for the sake of this discussion I was treating next years draft as an average draft, though obviously in January the landscape of the this decision will be 1000% more informed. Out of the guys you listed the only ones I have actually seen are Brandon Knight and Irving so it's tough for me to make an accurate assessment, hence why I put things into a more historical perspective. I do hope your right though because a great draft would be great for the NBA competitively.

As far as Favors goes Im discussing him in terms of his value as a chip based on his potential. At the 3rd pick to get a guy with legitimate "franchise player" potential is a pretty big coup. I mean just looking at last year's draft I like Harden but would anyone put him in that category? In terms of on-court value now Favors is easily the biggest unknown on a team full of unknowns.

All in all I think this discussion was largely hypothetical and will be interesting to re-visit in 6 months. This may be the optimistic fan in me but barring a rash of major injuries, beyond Devin's annual respits, I simply don't see any way we finish lower then 6th or 7th.

vincecarter4pres wrote:E, I'm all with you hoping we get a high lotto pick this year one last time, but more often then not, any pick outside the top 10 specifically is a crap shoot and historically I would almost bet without looking that the 15th and 16th picks have been better then the 11th through 14th and I am making this claim only based on I have looked up the recent history(last 10 to maybe 12 years) on later lotto picks and the success rate is rather wretched, yet there are more players in that 15 to 18 range that have become very high level players.
Now I know that is pretty superstitious and silly in a sense, but it's factual history none the less, maybe because teams are under less pressure with picks in the high teens then they are the late lotto and some really good players originally projected as lotto slip because of injury or character concerns or because guys with "potential" took their place in the late lotto, or a trickle down effect of a couple reach picks in the mid lotto, but it's history none the less.

Elite superstars...the vast majority are found in the top 5 picks. You get lucky on occasion if you look back over drafts. The next batch of 5 picks has the next most success...be it studs, or all stars...or quality players. 10-15 is a drop...then 20-30 tends to be more of that crap shoot. That isnt to say sure...you can find someone who often slips in those specific spots...sure. But that isnt a practical logic as in...you know..I PREFER a lower pick than a higher one. It is...those GM's happened to screw up so having a pick in that range can often yield value.

Anyway, I kind of drifted from the real point I wanted to make and it's pretty simple.
Sometimes I think you have a disconnect with the human aspect of the players and their psyche, where as you see the logic in getting another high lotto pick to eventually become a great team, but the players see the reality of losing season after losing season and also have an ego that they feel they are good enough to become great on their own anyway and/or all the losing starts them questioning each other, the organization and even themselves.

Winning can be contagious and cure all, losing can be cancerous, infectious and destroy.

See, that's one of those things that sounds true...but isnt. True in Major league baseball where the divide from the best team to the worst isnt all that far in a 3 game series, and it happens in movies after some coach makes the big speech. Hell, NCAA hoops for one big game...it happens. But in the NBA? The ultimate superstars league???? You are so full of crap your are turning brown on that comment. Did you hear orchestra music in your head as you were typing that crap? Winning is contagious???? To what point? Hey, we won 3 in a row...playoffs here we come? You see lots of NBA upsets in the playoffs from 6-8 seeds in the HISTORY of this sport? 10 game winning streak...there's a final team baby! Teams that go far in this sport do it on the backs of the 5-10 best players in the sport...or teams so stocked, so proven it has players that WERE top 5-10 best in the sport. We have neither right now. We are best served long term by trading for superstars or drafting as much top of the draft talent as we can get to HOPE we get a guy or two who are truly special...and not just very good. Even very good doesnt cut it.

Everyone wants to win but that comment you made about thinking they can do it on their own...dont you realize how contradictory that is to your entire point? You are acting like ME rooting for losses is MY fault. Like my so called emotional disconnect is WHY they lose!!!! They will WIN or LOSE because OF THEM!!!!! I don't have a Brook Lopez voo doo doll.

If THEY aren't good enough...to win then CLEARLY they couldn't do it on their own. And you know what? THIS TEAM CANT. I want to get them help. But I want it in the top of the draft, or by trade for STARS. NOT FOR MEDIOCRITY. If they are good enough to contend? By all means...PROVE it on the court. But, trading out of the lottery for a few extra games of losing over that lottery pick...be it a 10-14 like Brook and Twill were...or a chance at moving up in the draft like Washington AND Philly did this year...is absolutely going to help those boo hoo losers MORE in the long term than this crap you are shoveling about contagious winning!! You will find many more examples like I gave where that 7-8 seed team that squeaked in would have been better off with the lottery for the long term than the one round and out they went through.

Look, this is a team that won 12 games last season. We added NO major free agents. Our hope, and promise is rolled into just how good is Favors. But make no mistake...this is a team that shouldn't win more than 25 wins as it is built this season. And my point is...LETS HOPE they don't win more than that IF the major trade isnt made. Because if they win 35...unless Favors in fact is a future HOF player, or unless we make that MAJOR superstar trade...this core group isnt going to have contagious winning with 35 into 50, in to 60. And you are absolutely selling a bad movie if you say they are. Know your history...and you know for the NBA what I am saying is absolutely true.

This winning conversation isnt for the betterment of the players. Its for US the fans!!! PERIOD. SO don't go selling the bull VC...because that's all that was.

Again, I am not saying to make a push now, or strive for mediocrity, I'm just saying it's not as simple and as black and white as you(or me or others on here) seem to make it most of the time.

I think these guys will be fine if we wind up with 20 something wins and high lotto again as long as we make true progress, are competitive night in and night out and they believe in Avery's vision, they are smart enough to see the bigger picture and know that growth often takes time, as long as it involves them for the long term.
But, if we have another horrid abomination of a season like last, I think trouble is going to start a brewin' and bad habits will be learned, along with a lot of name calling and finger pointing amongst each other, maybe creating a funk it is impossible to emerge from, that is why this specific and literal season is so important, not so much measured in the exact amount of wins, but in what is achieved and what progress is made.

I usually say there are no moral victories, but this is one of those situations when there actually is a lot of room for exactly that...

See this last section again seems to contradict yourself...or tells me you don't really grasp my point, now or in general. 20 wins (or less)...and player development is EXACTLY what I preach. EXACTLY!!!! I am ALL about the player progress...NOT the wins and losses during this period of team rebuilding.


As for Avery...he will be gone by the time we are good...unless of course we make that big trade. I just hope HE doesn't kill player motivation. A coach needs to create motivation from losing as well as winning. Truly great players? The ones that WANT IT? Losing festers. It builds...and it makes them work HARDER. And I am sorry...but 12 wins...20 wins? Come on! NO moral victory in the difference. As for worrying about the long term in general...again...over selling this. Its rare that players in this league who aren't superstars get to stay with one team for a long time in the NBA. On good teams...or bad ones.

I have said this before. AN NBA team averages a full roster turnover every 3 seasons. # of NBA players with 10+ years of experience who have only played with ONE team in the NBA. FOUR. Pierce, Kobe, Dirk, TD. It was five...(Z). Notice the caliber of those guys?

Nenad was our center of the future. We talked forever about him. Some work out, some don't. Some get traded, some move on. Same will be true from the FOUR players who returned that started the season with us last year. Not all of them will be back next year. Its a constant turnover...so lets not oversell the value of contagious winning.

Please re-read my points in that longer thread...because it seems to me you miss my points wildly.

My points are just simple observation. They take all the things that "sound true" and actually...ask...ARE THEY?

In business for YEARS I have said to people that work for me. "OK, you qualified your argument...can you quantify it?"

And that is all I have tried to do with the lottery VS, just making the playoffs. The 35 win team Vs the 20 and under win team.


The facts simply bare it out. Overachieving in a given season does not carry over into some moral victory that over comes good old fashioned talent. The best teams in the league rise to the top if healthy every single season. And in every season you can make a short list for the second round of the playoffs and beyond and be RIGHT with 75% or more of the teams...ON DAY ONE OF THE SEASON.

Its a superstars league. Talent beats effort and moral victories...and all you have to do is look at the facts to know that is true.

Adding another potential star after a losing season has the potential to help our team FAR MORE in the years to come than a few extra wins will.

Netaman wrote:I think this is a great discussion and think there's a lot of merit to both sides. For me it comes down to a few simple questions - how talented is your foundation? Do you have assets to improve your team beyond the draft? I think in the 2 examples you cited Atlanta could have been very confident in the talent on their roster (Marvin, Horford, Smith), while Philly could not have. Philly had cap room but at the time the only potential building block on their team was Iguadala. As far as question 2 I think we have a lot more assets available to make further moves then both those teams did. Lopez is just as big of a building block as Horford (maybe bigger). Favors is more valuable then Smith + Marvin. JJ and Devin are comparable. Plus we have picks + cap room.

I have to be honest...I dont really think you spoke to the point here, and I dont think you showed how there is merit to the other side. Your original point that prompted my long reply was about why you would prefer trading cap space, and low level assets that under your plan would drop us out of the lottery for a shot at an expected one round and out playoff series. You spoke to exactly that...being on the bubble.

I gave you a set of examples where we could have done JUST that and showed you one team that DID make a trade deadline deal and another that simply made the playoffs ahead of us in a year we certanly could have made one of those deals you refered to. I showed you what each of the three teams got out of it. No question...Hawks had talent, have talent and have continued to improve from within by learning how to win. But that wasnt the point. We won 12 games last year...have the youngest team in the NBA, and we are just starting to add some talent. We have added only ONE top 5 pick so far. ANd I pointed out how the lucky pick we got with a #10 in Brook impacts us. And, examples of how he could have impacted those other teams.

In the end you helped prove my point without actually speaking to it. Yes, the Hawks could have been cofindent in what they had....but obviously...you cant argue.....if they had a chance to add another big piece that team long term would have been better off than that first year of one round and out. The Bibby deal was an example of the type of trade you can get at the deadline. The type of trade YOU SAID you would prefer we make to SQUEAK in for a one round ouster effort rather than SAVE that cap space and those trade assets. Dont you see? It IS the contradiction. Why desire something that doesnt get your ultimate goal? You are being short sighted.

In addition...I think its very funny that you have such an HIGH locked in expectation of Favors the #3 pick being called a project with great upside yet...you prefer making the playoffs than a shot at another key piece. Consider this. Horford was a #3, Marvin a #2 pick for them. Crawford was a former #8 that won the 6th man of the year award. Joe Johnson who btw...DESTROYS Devin (and I think JJ is over rated) was a #10 and is a proven all star. Josh Smith the only one of their core players that wasnt a lottery pick...a true steal at #17. And you know what? This team is already about to slide. They have already maxed out in terms of how far they will get in the playoff picture. That's it...and we are no where close to being as good as this team at this point. You think if we take on a bad contract for low cost in assets to squeak into the playoffs that it helps us more than a lottery pick? You need to look no further than what you laid out.

Right now we have Lopez at 10% of his sticker price and the clock is ticking down. We have 2 more seasons with him before we have to give him a deal that takes away cap room. IMO we have more assets then any other team out there so it's on our management to parlay those assets into a bonafide stud (top 10 player). Can they secure that player? Heading into Brooklyn that is the only measure of success in my mind.

I agree. ANd why you would preach screwing that up by using up cap space, or any assets...or lowering our chance at another CORE asset for a shot at instant gratification should we be sitting on a chance to move into an 8th seed with a trade for a NON star...I dont get that at all.

I don't think the draft holds that answer. The GS pick could be incredibly valuable finding a great player to supplement the core like Harden or Jeff Green. Even if we only win 25 games next year we would be lucky if we could end up with another pick as valuable Favors. I think the odds of getting the next John Wall or Derrick Rose are too long to actively entertain.

You have no clue how valuable Favors is. And you have no clue where we would be drafting if we are in the lottery until the ping pong balls are selected. But you do know for a fact...that if we make a dumb trade for medicore talent at the deadline to push OUT of the lottery you WONT be moving up. The odds of adding a star player clearly drop if we were to make the trade you were saying you would like to see.

Last thought on the issue - remember the importance of perception in this league through the lens of a superstar changing teams. Boston did everything they had to do to put themselves in position to get KG and he declined their trade. He declined 1 NBA Title and 1 appearance in the finals. Until they got Ray Allen. Did Ray Allen guarantee anything? No. He had never won a thing on his own and he was in his 30's coming off injury. But KG could look at Allen and at least know that he wouldn't be alone on the team he was going to and they were doing everything they could to win. Our roster can have that desirability without making any big moves so long as our players develop and get better. Winning games is a huge part of that development.

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about...and I am sorry to say this...I dont think you do either. What NBA title and finals appearence did he decline? I dont understand what you are talking about. You mean a chance to join that Celtics team a year earlier? The one that had the second worst record in the NBA????

You basically just proved my point. Its all about the SUPERSTARS...NOT the low level deals at the trade deadline. Superstars...want to play with OTHER superstars. You think winning 35 instead of 12 makes Melo say.....OOOOOOH gotta leave my top 4 in the west Denver team????

Stars want to play with stars. Winning a few more games isnt going to mean anything. Players want:
Money, market and a the place they think is their best chance to win. They deem that their best chance is by teaming up with other stars. They prefer to have them come to THEIR team. But when they CHOSE to move...they do so to play with OTHER stars if the cash and market are equal. For the next two years...our market sucks. Our team is the youngest in the league. So going from 20 wins to 30 or to 40 because you added a Mike Bibby type veteran with a bad contract on the decline...isnt going to convince anyone that they should come here.

Our best chance of adding stars is clearly...TRADE for them....and that take the cap space you want to use plus prospects. Or you can DRAFT them. There is no history...NONE to support what you are preaching here. That making some low asset cost trade deadline deal helps us long term more than the lottery or waiting for the MAJOR trade of a superstar. NONE.