Tank World Order V (Rise of the Phoenix)

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

1 of our 'expensive players' hasn't played this season really. (quickley)
Another has missed half the games (Barnes)
Another has been cast into the #1 role when he isn't set for that. (barrett)

Who else?

I don't think they turn into Zach Lavine type bad. But Barnes and IQ don't age well, if we stay here long. It's a lot of money owing.

If you're concerned they're injury prone, that's one argument.

If you're concerned about salary to record performance - at least let them actually... play?

It's a form of rebuild that typically isn't done. It's a reduced runway.

Like, year one...but the clock's been running for a while.

[Badonkadonk]

Here is our schedule for the next 25 games until the end of January:



Going 8-17 would give us a record of 14-32 just before the trade deadline (Feb 6th).

If we're able to pick up a couple of extra wins to go 12-13 over this stretch of games, our record after playing more than 60% of our schedule would still be just 18 wins with 28 losses.

Even at that win rate (39%) we'd probably be out of contention for the play-in tournament and would still likely be positioned as "sellers" at the trade deadline with Bruce Brown and Jakob Poeltl the most likely candidates to be dealt.

I see the logic with these selections, but if the team continues to play as well as it has at home despite the crazy roster imbalance to start the year, they may win against some 'better' teams at Scotia.

Actually blows my mind the team is 5-4 at home this year.

[dohboy_24]

Going 8-17 would give us a record of 14-32 just before the trade deadline (Feb 6th).

If we're able to pick up a couple of extra wins to go 12-13 over this stretch of games, our record after playing more than 60% of our schedule would still be just 18 wins with 28 losses.

I see the logic with these selections, but if the team continues to play as well as it has at home despite the crazy roster imbalance to start the year, they may win against some 'better' teams at Scotia.

Actually blows my mind the team is 5-4 at home this year.

[YogurtProducer]

Who exactly is a bad contract?

Are you aware of other teams cap situations? Are we significantly worse than any other rebuilding teams?

1 of our 'expensive players' hasn't played this season really. (quickley)
Another has missed half the games (Barnes)
Another has been cast into the #1 role when he isn't set for that. (barrett)

Who else?

I don't think they turn into Zach Lavine type bad. But Barnes and IQ don't age well, if we stay here long. It's a lot of money owing.

You are worried about Barnes and IQ aging?

Barnes is 23 locked up through his age 28 season
IQ is 25 locked up through his age 29 season

Barnes is already only the 24th highest paid player in his final year (and will drop down that list fast as more extensions come in).
IQ is 21st highest paid in his final year (only 34 players are extended that far out, not even Scottie, so again he will drop fast)

We have next to no long term money locked up on anything that is risky.

[Duffman100]

1 of our 'expensive players' hasn't played this season really. (quickley)
Another has missed half the games (Barnes)
Another has been cast into the #1 role when he isn't set for that. (barrett)

Who else?

I don't think they turn into Zach Lavine type bad. But Barnes and IQ don't age well, if we stay here long. It's a lot of money owing.

You are worried about Barnes and IQ aging?

Barnes is 23 locked up through his age 28 season
IQ is 25 locked up through his age 29 season

Barnes is already only the 24th highest paid player in his final year (and will drop down that list fast as more extensions come in).
IQ is 21st highest paid in his final year (only 34 players are extended that far out, not even Scottie, so again he will drop fast)

We have next to no long term money locked up on anything that is risky.

Barnes might be the riskiest.

[YogurtProducer]

I don't think they turn into Zach Lavine type bad. But Barnes and IQ don't age well, if we stay here long. It's a lot of money owing.

You are worried about Barnes and IQ aging?

Barnes is 23 locked up through his age 28 season
IQ is 25 locked up through his age 29 season

Barnes is already only the 24th highest paid player in his final year (and will drop down that list fast as more extensions come in).
IQ is 21st highest paid in his final year (only 34 players are extended that far out, not even Scottie, so again he will drop fast)

We have next to no long term money locked up on anything that is risky.

Barnes might be the riskiest.

Maybe, but even if he never develops his offensive game he is going to be a top 25-30 guy in the league at minimum IMO. He has to much versatility all over the court that if he ever gets to be a #2 with an actual stud he is going to wreck havoc.

IQ is a guy I could feasibly see not improving and ends up being a guy who is a bench player. $32M for that is bad.

[Duffman100]

You are worried about Barnes and IQ aging?

Barnes is 23 locked up through his age 28 season
IQ is 25 locked up through his age 29 season

Barnes is already only the 24th highest paid player in his final year (and will drop down that list fast as more extensions come in).
IQ is 21st highest paid in his final year (only 34 players are extended that far out, not even Scottie, so again he will drop fast)

We have next to no long term money locked up on anything that is risky.

Barnes might be the riskiest.

Maybe, but even if he never develops his offensive game he is going to be a top 25-30 guy in the league at minimum IMO. He has to much versatility all over the court that if he ever gets to be a #2 with an actual stud he is going to wreck havoc.

IQ is a guy I could feasibly see not improving and ends up being a guy who is a bench player. $32M for that is bad.

True, again it's his defense that almost worries me the most. Without an elite first step and more of an off ball guy, he needs to be a positive on the defensive side.

[Dexjackson]

Barnes might be the riskiest.

Maybe, but even if he never develops his offensive game he is going to be a top 25-30 guy in the league at minimum IMO. He has to much versatility all over the court that if he ever gets to be a #2 with an actual stud he is going to wreck havoc.

IQ is a guy I could feasibly see not improving and ends up being a guy who is a bench player. $32M for that is bad.

True, again it's his defense that almost worries me the most. Without an elite first step and more of an off ball guy, he needs to be a positive on the defensive side.

IQ's defense has really disappointed me. I didn't expect the next Jrue Holliday when he was traded me but he's been quite poor in my opinion. I can see why he would get muscled with his size but there's no reason why he's getting blown by so much. He has to be better in terms of positioning and moving laterally at least. I'm not thrilled with the price for IQ. I could also see that deal being bad (and 5 years is a major commitment). I'd love to be wrong though.

I just don't see how all three of Dick, RJ, and IQ can be long term pieces with them being such poor defenders. I think you can have a great defense with maybe one of them (maybe except Dick...he would get targeted over and over), two I have a hard time seeing it, and three just isn't going to happen. Maybe that's a problem for when we're closer to being competitive and for now you just maximize all three of their values. I just miss watching good defensive basketball lol.

[Ell Curry]

You are worried about Barnes and IQ aging?

Barnes is 23 locked up through his age 28 season
IQ is 25 locked up through his age 29 season

Barnes is already only the 24th highest paid player in his final year (and will drop down that list fast as more extensions come in).
IQ is 21st highest paid in his final year (only 34 players are extended that far out, not even Scottie, so again he will drop fast)

We have next to no long term money locked up on anything that is risky.

Barnes might be the riskiest.

Maybe, but even if he never develops his offensive game he is going to be a top 25-30 guy in the league at minimum IMO. He has to much versatility all over the court that if he ever gets to be a #2 with an actual stud he is going to wreck havoc.

IQ is a guy I could feasibly see not improving and ends up being a guy who is a bench player. $32M for that is bad.

Can't call Barnes risky unless he gets hurt. A bunch of mid-range teams with guard talent (Warriors) or a questionable defensive star center (Kings) or just not enough talent (Heat) would send us 4- 5 1sts and expiring money for Barnes today if it was on the table, just have to choose the right one in terms of the picks you get back (or get picks from another team that is trending down), like sending Barnes to OKC for Hartenstein and other team's picks, and Hartenstein going to a 3rd team.

We do have to be open to the possibility that this re-build will culminate in needing a 2nd rebuild, but instead of starting at about even draft-pick level (Lost the Dillingham pick, gained the Mogbo pick and the 2026 Pacers pick, don't have our 2nd this year but do have Portland's), we'd ideally be starting up about 6-8 firsts (4-5 for Barnes, let's say 1-2 for Quickley and one more guy fetches 1).

[YogurtProducer]

Barnes might be the riskiest.

Maybe, but even if he never develops his offensive game he is going to be a top 25-30 guy in the league at minimum IMO. He has to much versatility all over the court that if he ever gets to be a #2 with an actual stud he is going to wreck havoc.

IQ is a guy I could feasibly see not improving and ends up being a guy who is a bench player. $32M for that is bad.

Can't call Barnes risky unless he gets hurt. A bunch of mid-range teams with guard talent (Warriors) or a questionable defensive star center (Kings) or just not enough talent (Heat) would send us 4- 5 1sts and expiring money for Barnes today if it was on the table, just have to choose the right one in terms of the picks you get back (or get picks from another team that is trending down), like sending Barnes to OKC for Hartenstein and other team's picks, and Hartenstein going to a 3rd team.

We do have to be open to the possibility that this re-build will culminate in needing a 2nd rebuild, but instead of starting at about even draft-pick level (Lost the Dillingham pick, gained the Mogbo pick and the 2026 Pacers pick, don't have our 2nd this year but do have Portland's), we'd ideally be starting up about 6-8 firsts (4-5 for Barnes, let's say 1-2 for Quickley and one more guy fetches 1).

To do that you'd have to pull the plug on Barnes/IQ within 24 months which seems extremely unlikely

[Ell Curry]

To do that you'd have to pull the plug on Barnes/IQ within 24 months which seems extremely unlikely

I mean if we stall out as a 40 win team in 2-3 years dealing Barnes and Quickley and hard tanking for 2-3 years might be the better option than trading 4-5 firsts just to become a high 40s win pseudo-contender. If we're in the same spot as the Kings for instance, you kind of have to pick a direction, and if I was a Kings fan, I'm not sure I'd be excited about trading a couple of firsts for Jerami Grant or whatever semi-desperate move they can make or either accept a play-in spot.

My point is just that we should have positive contracts and if we do rebuild after this core goes bust, we should be in better shape than say Washington picks wise for our next rebuild, though maybe not quite a Utah level of picks in the chamber.

[earthtone]

To do that you'd have to pull the plug on Barnes/IQ within 24 months which seems extremely unlikely

I mean if we stall out as a 40 win team in 2-3 years dealing Barnes and Quickley and hard tanking for 2-3 years might be the better option than trading 4-5 firsts just to become a high 40s win pseudo-contender. If we're in the same spot as the Kings for instance, you kind of have to pick a direction, and if I was a Kings fan, I'm not sure I'd be excited about trading a couple of firsts for Jerami Grant or whatever semi-desperate move they can make or either accept a play-in spot.

My point is just that we should have positive contracts and if we do rebuild after this core goes bust, we should be in better shape than say Washington picks wise for our next rebuild, though maybe not quite a Utah level of picks in the chamber.

2023 was Sacramento’s first winning season in 16 years, I’m sure fans there are would be more than happy to do what’s needed to extend the playoff window

[disoblige]

This isnt a proper rebuild.... May be Masai thinks highly of 5-10.

Khaman Maluach?

[Shwaguy]

Since last year they have been following the definition of a rebuild to a Tee.

They already drafted one of their star players. If Scottie's playing they simply are too good to tank.

top 3 pick would be nice. I hope it happens. I want another dude good like Scottie. Personally don't feel remotely hopeless if they don't draft top 5 though. Anything from this lotto should be a huge benefit if we don't **** the pick up.

[Shwaguy]

This isnt a proper rebuild.... May be Masai thinks highly of 5-10.

Khaman Maluach?

Would love getting this dude. Even if we're a bit out of range could envision Masai/Bobby trading up for him.

Maybe Pacers will tank for us next year anyways lol

[Shwaguy]

To do that you'd have to pull the plug on Barnes/IQ within 24 months which seems extremely unlikely

I mean if we stall out as a 40 win team in 2-3 years dealing Barnes and Quickley and hard tanking for 2-3 years might be the better option than trading 4-5 firsts just to become a high 40s win pseudo-contender. If we're in the same spot as the Kings for instance, you kind of have to pick a direction, and if I was a Kings fan, I'm not sure I'd be excited about trading a couple of firsts for Jerami Grant or whatever semi-desperate move they can make or either accept a play-in spot.

My point is just that we should have positive contracts and if we do rebuild after this core goes bust, we should be in better shape than say Washington picks wise for our next rebuild, though maybe not quite a Utah level of picks in the chamber.

I think it's horrendous to even want this to happen and would not be more likely to result in a more successful rebuild than the one we are currently on.

The Raptors could draft 12th this year and they will still likely be better than a 41-41 team in 2-3 years. They are about to be above .500 when Barnes is healthy this very season after tonight.

The future of this franchise might be easier/more cleanly reached, if they get a top 5 pick this year instead of picking like 8-14 range.

But to insinuate that the rebuild will probably fail if they don't get a top 5 pick this season is obnoxiously likely to be incorrect.

[RoteSchroder]

Since last year they have been following the definition of a rebuild to a Tee.

They already drafted one of their star players. If Scottie's playing they simply are too good to tank.

top 3 pick would be nice. I hope it happens. I want another dude good like Scottie. Personally don't feel remotely hopeless if they don't draft top 5 though. Anything from this lotto should be a huge benefit if we don't **** the pick up.

team has a legit shot at playoffs...we may be looking at 15+, lol..that gives us some leeway to go for high-upside players with higher risk though

[Shwaguy]

Since last year they have been following the definition of a rebuild to a Tee.

They already drafted one of their star players. If Scottie's playing they simply are too good to tank.

top 3 pick would be nice. I hope it happens. I want another dude good like Scottie. Personally don't feel remotely hopeless if they don't draft top 5 though. Anything from this lotto should be a huge benefit if we don't **** the pick up.

team has a legit shot at playoffs...we may be looking at 15+, lol..that gives us some leeway to go for high-upside players with higher risk though

Well it depends I'd be surprised if they made outright, and would also be surprised if they made it through the play-in.

Silver lining to the East being so **** it's hard to tank is that, if they make the play-in and lose they can still draft like 9th or 10th.

Right now Detroit is in the last Playoff spot in the East and if they lost in the play-in they would have the 9th best lottery odds still.

The disadvantage of making the play-in not there as much in the east this year the disadvantage only comes from winning the play-in lol

[PhilBlackson]

Here is our schedule for the next 25 games until the end of January:



Going 8-17 would give us a record of 14-32 just before the trade deadline (Feb 6th).

If we're able to pick up a couple of extra wins to go 12-13 over this stretch of games, our record after playing more than 60% of our schedule would still be just 18 wins with 28 losses.

Even at that win rate (39%) we'd probably be out of contention for the play-in tournament and would still likely be positioned as "sellers" at the trade deadline with Bruce Brown and Jakob Poeltl the most likely candidates to be dealt.

I'm willing to bet we win AT LEAST 11 of those games....and I actually counted probably closer to 12-13 especially as we continue to add guys back into the lineup so I think we're gonna be close to 19-20 Ws and 26-27Ls. I wouldn't be surprised if they got kinda hot and took another game or so and catch a couple teams sleeping.

Yeah that's not a great record but it's still going to push us WAY out of the top 5 and be a gap impossible to close especially as our schedule lightens up and we get healthier. If we don't trade Yak, I won't be surprised finished with 32-35+Ws by the time the season is over when most of the teams actually committed to the tank want to create space between teams like us that want to suddenly throw the season.

[Ell Curry]

2023 was Sacramento’s first winning season in 16 years, I’m sure fans there are would be more than happy to do what’s needed to extend the playoff window

Agreed. We're not in that situation, though. Should be patient if that's what it takes to build a contender.