Back on the treadmill

[OakleyDokely]

What's your solution?

Go the OKC route.

Get into the lottery and let Tolzman find the gems.

And how many Championships did OKC win going the OKC route?

Masai 1
Presti 0

[VC15Era]

we have a championship people... it's time to rebuild through the draft.

[brownbobcat]

There wasn’t no. Everyone said it back then here but after the title have this afterglow that makes them ignore all the playoff embarrassments.

Lebronto?

Winning a title is definitely hard - but I would be happy with a true contender that has a long term superstar.

Isn't that EVERYONE'S first choice? Who's against having long-term superstars here? The problem is how you get there. You're telling me that as soon as Kawhi left, you'd have preferred watching a total teardown and 4-5 years of wretchedness in the hopes that they could draft a superstar and then win within a 3yr window before he demanded a trade? Again, how did you manage to get through the first 20 years and wouldn't it just have been more satisfying to cheer for the Lakers or Heatles instead?

Dirk won one ring but his team was always a true contender.

A superstar as loyal as Dirk is exceedingly rare, especially in this era. After Nash & Finley left and following their Finals loss, the Mavs had a string of 1st round exits that was every bit as embarrassing as LeBronto. The later DeRozan Raptors got stomped by a Finals-bound team led by the greatest player of this generation. Nowitzki got crushed - CRUSHED - by teams that lost in the very next round while arguably facing zero superstars apart from Chris Paul. Dirk never got a 2nd star anywhere close to Nash/Finley and his supporting cast arguably got worse and older. Dirk himself was nearly 33 when they won, there were absolutely fans calling for that team to blow everything up.

Are people really saying they’re content with just the playoffs or do people want to win it all? What’s the aspirations.

If you’re happy with playoff exits - then that’s fine. That’s your choice.

I want to have a squad when the year begins we can say yeah I think we can win it all.

You think you're the only one who wants championships? I've got news for you, the all-or-nothing approach yields nothing the vast majority of the time. Why would players want to come to a franchise that wants to be intentionally bad year after year just so they can capitalize on a 3-yr window when they finally get a superstar? Why would Nurse or any other quality coach stay for that? Why would Masai? If they lose 40 games or miss the playoffs this year, then it makes sense to rebuild. But no successful franchise blows it all up this far in advance.

[brownbobcat]

What's your solution?

Go the OKC route.

Get into the lottery and let Tolzman find the gems.

Setting aside the fact that OKC was terrible before they decided to trade away Ray Allen, you're also underestimating how lucky they were to have rebuilt during a streak of good draft classes. If they were off by even 1 year, they end up with Aldridge/Gay/Conley (at best) instead of Durant/Harden.

[Pooh_Jeter]

You're being intentionally dense if you think every rebuild is some scorched earth 5 years in the high lotto. The process hasn't been repeated and won't ever be repeated in the same way. Teams that are perpetually in the lotto (Kings, TWolves, Pistons) just have terrible management. It hasn't been intentional for them to be in that position, they are just terrible organizations.

A rebuild means acquiring as many assets as you can. Yes, typically that means at least one or two high lottery picks, but it's also just about developing a war chest of assets and cap flexibility which you can utilize in a multitude of ways.

It's about playing the odds in more than one way. If you have a strong organization it makes much more sense to do this than it does praying that a one in a million Kawhi trade falls out of the sky. Having a sustained 10 plus year run should be the goal, not relying on a 1% Giannis or Kawhi chance.

[Pooh_Jeter]

Go the OKC route.

Get into the lottery and let Tolzman find the gems.

And how many Championships did OKC win going the OKC route?

Masai 1
Presti 0

You do realize what Presti has pivoted to is something different than he has done in the past, right? That incredible core he assembled was also hamstrung by a cheap owner.

[brownbobcat]

You're being intentionally dense if you think every rebuild is some scorched earth 5 years in the high lotto. The process hasn't been repeated and won't ever be repeated in the same way. Teams that are perpetually in the lotto (Kings, TWolves, Pistons) just have terrible management. It hasn't been intentional for them to be in that position, they are just terrible organizations.

The "OKC route" specifically means that the first and most important step is drafting high until you get 1 (or more) superstars. Unless you happen to be incredibly lucky, that means multiple tank years because doing it half-assed would just be treadmilling.

A rebuild means acquiring as many assets as you can. Yes, typically that means at least one or two high lottery picks, but it's also just about developing a war chest of assets and cap flexibility which you can utilize in a multitude of ways.

When are teams not trying to acquire assets and what does that term even mean? Siakam's an asset, as is Van Vleet, OG, Powell, Davis, Flynn, etc. What's being suggested is that any season without a superstar is a waste of time and they should immediately trade player assets for draft assets, since the conundrum is that having good player assets inherently impairs future draft assets. Taken to its logical conclusion, why stop at flipping Lowry back in 2019? If being a 50-win team is useless, why bother being a 40-win team? Memphis trading Conley made sense because they were already lottery-bound even with him.

I'm for trading anybody away if it means getting a superstar, just not as a fishing expedition. It's not as if Masai has been selling off 1st rounders for vets or anything and I seriously doubt he'll stick with this core unchanged for the next 5 years. It's very possible that 1 or more pieces of today's core could be moved this season.

[Steelo Green]

And how many Championships did OKC win going the OKC route?

Masai 1
Presti 0

You do realize what Presti has pivoted to is something different than he has done in the past, right? That incredible core he assembled was also hamstrung by a cheap owner.

Where’s Joe Dumars at? Shouldn’t a title winner have a free pass to be a GM?

No. You give them credit for the title and they go back to doing their job of being the general manager / president which they get paid millions of dollars to do.

Everything can’t be black and white - we won a title.

How we won a title is what needs to be looked at and the replicability of it.

Had Sacramento or Charlotte drafted any of these players, they would have had very different futures: Doncic, Trae, Booker, Donovan Mitchell, Bam Adebayo, Shai, Bradley Beal, Dame Lillard, Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, Kawhi Leonard, CH McCollum, Zach Lavine, TJ Warren, Pascal

That level of incompetence doesn’t show the lottery is a crapshoot when the same teams are missing on all the star level talent (or at least high level talent).

With our supposed elite scouting, gather assets, get multiple first rounders, and we should in theory get at least some of the above talent - now home grown and all growing together.

[ATLTimekeeper]

Guys ask out every year now. Until there's a new CBA, this is how it's going to go. The acquisition cost tends to be lower than a top 5 pick. Teams will just offer a spate of late firsts and swaps, they'll drop protections if that gets it done. So, it's not a bad idea to be a buyer these days.

One of the arguments for tanking it out seems to be that the Raptors are good at drafting, but they're also good at trading. So, why shouldn't they stay active looking to add those special pieces? They do come up on the market. In the meantime, enjoy the wins and do your laundry after the playoff losses.

[Fairview4Life]

Ignore those teams that lose all the time. They have terrible management.

Let's construct a team that loses a lot. That's the key to winning. Our management is good.

[dukes_wild]

A lot of terrible takes in this thread.

[Pooh_Jeter]

The "OKC route" specifically means that the first and most important step is drafting high until you get 1 (or more) superstars. Unless you happen to be incredibly lucky, that means multiple tank years because doing it half-assed would just be treadmilling.

The route the Thunder are going right now is different than before, but yeah they are definitely going for a high pick this year. I don't really care about the definition of "The OKC route" though. Ultimately, you can use the extra assets you have into acquiring another pick, a young player who is already in the league, or yes a star who is available to trade. There is much more fluidity to the process than a lot of people like to label it as.

When are teams not trying to acquire assets and what does that term even mean? Siakam's an asset, as is Van Vleet, OG, Powell, Davis, Flynn, etc. What's being suggested is that any season without a superstar is a waste of time and they should immediately trade player assets for draft assets, since the conundrum is that having good player assets inherently impairs future draft assets. Taken to its logical conclusion, why stop at flipping Lowry back in 2019? If being a 50-win team is useless, why bother being a 40-win team? Memphis trading Conley made sense because they were already lottery-bound even with him.

I'm for trading anybody away if it means getting a superstar, just not as a fishing expedition. It's not as if Masai has been selling off 1st rounders for vets or anything and I seriously doubt he'll stick with this core unchanged for the next 5 years. It's very possible that 1 or more pieces of today's core could be moved this season.

There are different types of assets. A team like the Lakers or Clippers are looking for win now moves, not futures.

Yes, guys like Siakam and FVV are assets, but given their salary and role/age they are limited in that only certain teams would be open to dealing for them. Draft picks or young players on rookie contracts are better assets because you have much more flexibility in terms of acquiring maximum value for them and frankly you just have more time.

I don't think anyone is saying that if you don't have a superstar that you should just throw in the towel and burn the organization to the ground. That is an oversimplification. The argument is that if you don't have a road to a title and don't have someone on your roster with superstar potential, it doesn't make that much sense to hold onto veterans in their prime. You can make a case for keeping guys like Siakam and FVV around, but what is the point of a Lowry on a team stuck in the middle like right now? Are you going to invest potentially 85-90M in salary to a Siakam, FVV and OG core? Yes, those guys are still assets, but it's much more complicated extricating value from vet players. It's why having more assets is desirable, because your margin for error becomes larger.

[Fairview4Life]

The point of keeping Lowry is that he is more valuable to the Raptors than anyone else, and the marginal returns you could get for trading him are outweighed by the shittyness of trading Kyle **** Lowry.

The argument was absolutely not an oversimplification. The oversimplification here is thinking there is only one "correct" road to a title, or not being able to see a road to a title without losing a whole lot of basketball games over several years.

We just went through this exact situation! The DD Raptors sure didn't look like there was a road to the title for them. Then all of a sudden there was a road to a title. And the Toronto **** Raptors won an NBA title. "What are the odds of that happening again?" (a) the odds of ANY team winning a title without like Lebron James or a healthy Kevin Durant are extremely low and (b) the odds of building from the ground up through the draft into a team as good as the CURRENT Raptors, let alone a team competing for a title is also extremely low. That argument doesn't fly at all. It's just jerking off over "hope".

[whysoserious]

What even is the consensus definition of a treadmill? Hallf the arguments on this board are just about people disagreeeing on that.

As far as Raps go, just have good management and keep the train rolling while adding talent and upgrading/retooling for championship runs.

[brownbobcat]

The route the Thunder are going right now is different than before, but yeah they are definitely going for a high pick this year. I don't really care about the definition of "The OKC route" though. Ultimately, you can use the extra assets you have into acquiring another pick, a young player who is already in the league, or yes a star who is available to trade. There is much more fluidity to the process than a lot of people like to label it as.

Yes, OKC's current path is the alternate solution as they're definitely trying to tank. They also lucked into the perfect storm by acquiring almost 2 All Stars' worth of assets for the price of 1 when Kawhi held LAC hostage. I'd be curious to see how they compare with Toronto this time when they don't draft 3 MVPS in a row.

There are different types of assets. A team like the Lakers or Clippers are looking for win now moves, not futures.

Yes, guys like Siakam and FVV are assets, but given their salary and role/age they are limited in that only certain teams would be open to dealing for them. Draft picks or young players on rookie contracts are better assets because you have much more flexibility in terms of acquiring maximum value for them and frankly you just have more time.

I don't think anyone is saying that if you don't have a superstar that you should just throw in the towel and burn the organization to the ground. That is an oversimplification. The argument is that if you don't have a road to a title and don't have someone on your roster with superstar potential, it doesn't make that much sense to hold onto veterans in their prime. You can make a case for keeping guys like Siakam and FVV around, but what is the point of a Lowry on a team stuck in the middle like right now? Are you going to invest potentially 85-90M in salary to a Siakam, FVV and OG core? Yes, those guys are still assets, but it's much more complicated extricating value from vet players. It's why having more assets is desirable, because your margin for error becomes larger.

As yet, I don't think Masai's really jeopardized any future assets with the choices he's made. Yes, Giannis re-signing was a setback but I think it was a totally reasonable risk to take and the opportunity cost might've been a mid-late round 1st or something similar. Siakam & VV are in their primes and still eminently flippable for younger assets or picks even at their salaries. We're 2 years removed from a title, I don't think there's any cause for panic right now just because the path forward to a 2nd one isn't crystal clear. Large contracts are not the albatrosses they used to be now that they're 4-5 years instead of 7, the cash you spend on those 3 isn't hugely important - and this is coming from someone who thinks Masai overpaid Siakam.

[Johnny Bball]

Do people actually think OKC isn't trying to tank this season?

[WaltFrazier]

All it took was playing the Heat instead of Charlotte to show that we are indeed that treadmill team.

[Tha Cynic]

How did people's opinions change from one preseason game to the next lol? Clearly players are trying things they worked on in the offseason. Siakam isn't going to be sitting at the three point line.

FVV I have no hope for. His game has been the same since he was a rookie.

[Tor_Raps]

Who knew that having 6 of your top 9 players be under 6'4 would be a bad thing lol.

[OakleyDokely]

All it took was playing the Heat instead of Charlotte to show that we are indeed that treadmill team.

Dude, it's the preseason.