RealGM

So, we all think that the Jazz are faithfully pursuing the San Antonio/OKC method of rebuilding into a title contending team. However, is this method even viable or were these teams full of dumb luck?

Let's face it, San Antonio was extremely lucky (their injuries and tanking helped too) to get tim Duncan in draft while they still had David Robinson. Pure genuis or pure luck also brought them Parker and Ginobli (late 1st and 2nd rd picks).

Similarly, OKC was extremely lucky to get Durrant with their 2nd pick (they could have ended up with Oden or Horford) and then have the 4th and 3rd picks in consecutive years to land Westbrook and Harden, and have their late 1st of Ibaka turn out so well.

These teams got not only all stars, but superstars to build their teams around, with only a brief period of mediocrity/badness.

Houston and the Raptors (and throw in the Clippers too) this year have taken on big contracts, and to a certain extent gambled somewhat, to land their all stars. The impacts have been immediate. Is this not the better method to pursue??

there is no method or system, good management/coaching stuff is the reason why some teams are good or are bad over the years, plus Jazz over last 3 decades was a good example how to run the team, we dont have to look on others to know how to rebuild or how to be successful

The Jazz aren't following the OKC model. That's a big complaint many have. Why do you think they're faithfully following it?

It's true that the San Antonio/OKC model won't work unless you're fairly lucky. However, that's true of basically any model for building a championship caliber team. If you can't somehow land a superstar or two, you're probably not going to win a championship. There are exceptions to this rule (the 03-04 Pistons, for example), but they're not particularly common.

The thing about the San Antonio/OKC model is that, especially for a small-market team, it's probably the best bet for finding a superstar or two. You know superstars aren't going to sign here and, while it's vaguely possible we could eventually trade for a superstar, that could be very difficult in the player-driven league the NBA's become. For example, if we had tried to trade for CP3, it wouldn't have worked out, because he almost certainly would have expressed an unwillingness to sign an extension with us (especially given what we would've had to give up to get him).

So, while the San Antonio/OKC model requires quite a bit of luck, it holds a hell of a lot more upside than struggling to get to the 8th seed and a first round sweep with a bunch of mediocre, transient veterans. Thanks to some of the trades we've made, we might be able to become great without first being terrible, but whether or not that happens depends a lot on whether our young guys develop into the players we think they can be. If we had followed the OKC model, they'd probably be farther along that road. Or, worst case scenario, they'd prove to be busts, we'd be terrible, and we'd get a few more chances to find a superstar in the draft.

Golden State is also lucky. How do you go from a **** team, to top contendor in the playoff race....you know how...they bombed the season on purpose, Barnes and Bogut are the reason they turned around, I mean they had Monta, Curry, Lee and Thompson, then also had Nate Robinson, and Brandon Rush.

I thought Jazz had a good system. The only problem is, the system only works if your bringing in Picks every year, and last year we only got Murphy, and set us back an entire year. Could you imagine if we would have gotten Lillard or even Barnes...

I don't even understand what the OKC/SuperSonic model is? Durant was draft as a Sonic, the following year they got Westbrook, and then got Harden, Ibaka, Perkins, etc. I guess I can just google it.

Also, pointing to the Raptors as a team to emulate sort of makes your question rhetorical.

When people say they want to follow the SA/OKC model, that means putting time into developing your players. Both of those teams go out and find good talent, then develop the players. That is what the front office was saying they wanted to do once they hired Lindsey.

RyanStorm wrote:Golden State is also lucky. How do you go from a **** team, to top contendor in the playoff race....you know how...they bombed the season on purpose, Barnes and Bogut are the reason they turned around, I mean they had Monta, Curry, Lee and Thompson, then also had Nate Robinson, and Brandon Rush.

I thought Jazz had a good system. The only problem is, the system only works if your bringing in Picks every year, and last year we only got Murphy, and set us back an entire year. Could you imagine if we would have gotten Lillard or even Barnes...

I don't even understand what the OKC/SuperSonic model is? Durant was draft as a Sonic, the following year they got Westbrook, and then got Harden, Ibaka, Perkins, etc. I guess I can just google it.

Except Curry was injured all year last year and Bogut has been out all year this year. Barnes has been mediocre.

SA and OKC aren't built the same way. SA was built through extremely strong and steadfast management, good scouting, and a bit of luck. OKC was about tanking and collecting much higher draft picks, not wasting them (and getting a bit lucky with some), and having guys that have the right personality.

The SA and Utah models are actually very similar, and both teams' front offices have pretty much said they mirror each other. The primary difference is that SA got a bit luckier in drafting and has a better scouting department (Raul Lopez vs. Tony Parker).

d-will8 wrote:Also, pointing to the Raptors as a team to emulate sort of makes your question rhetorical.

That's kind of it, though isn't it? How many years have the Raptors been a lottery team, and still they have stunk until this last move and they looked like a completely different team with Gay and Lowry. Houston similar situation.

If the OKC model was so great, SAC, Was, Charlotte, etc would be on their way to awesome, but so far they are not.

The Jazz are following their own model, which consists of getting extremely luck and landing a superstar PG then trading him away in the hopes they can get lucky and land a superstar forward. Presumably, they would then trade him away for a shot at getting lucky and landing a superstar wing player who they could build around.

So, what's this ultra-intelligent "OKC model" people keep gushing about?

Draft the best player available?

Ground breaking! I am enthralled.

Neon Black wrote:So, what's this ultra-intelligent "OKC model" people keep gushing about?

Draft the best player available?

Ground breaking! I am enthralled.

Trade your vets, play your young guys, get several high draft picks, draft really well...

Let's look at what SEA/OKC did in detail:

2006-07:

This team, led by Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis, went 31-51. Allen and Lewis both missed over 20 games. They landed the second pick in the 2007 draft despite having just a 10% chance of getting it. They used that pick, of course, on Kevin Durant. In the second round of that draft they picked Carl Landry and Glen Davis. They traded Landry to the Rockets for cash then traded Glen Davis and Ray Allen to the Celtics for Jeff Green and fillers.

They then traded Lewis to the Magic for a 2nd round pick and a TPE.

10 days later they traded that 2nd round pick to the Suns for Kurt Thomas, a 2008 1st round pick and a 2010 1st round pick. Phoenix basically gave them two first round picks for absorbing Kurt Thomas's contract.

2007-08:

They turned the team over to Durant and Green. Durant played more minutes on that squad than anyone except Earl Watson. Green was third in minutes played. The team went 20-62 and ended up with the 4th pick in the draft as well as the 24th from the Phoenix trade. They used the 4th pick on Russell Westbrook and the 24th pick (acquired from Phoenix) on Serge Ibaka.

2008-09:

Once again they let Kevin Durant lead the team in minutes. The top three players in minutes played were Durant (PER 20.8), Green (13.9) and rookie Russell Westbrook (15.2). The team finished 23-59 and received the 3rd pick in the draft, which they used to select James Harden.


Would the Jazz FO have traded Allen and Lewis and handed the team over to the young guys the way SEA/OKC did? I think we know the answer to that one. The day the Jazz traded Deron Williams they should've followed it up by cleaning house the rest of the way, letting the young guys play and acquiring a few more lottery picks along the way.

Instead they've done this half-assed rebuild that's not helping anyone. It would be like if OKC had kept Allen and Rashard Lewis after drafting Durant and tried to make the playoffs with that core. Would Durant be the same player he is today if he was playing third fiddle to those guys? Would OKC have ended up with Westbrook or Harden? Seems unlikely.

The Jazz had a real opportunity to set this franchise up very nicely in the long term but they've sacrificed that chance for short-term revenue. I guess whatever keeps the Landcruisers rolling.

StocktonShorts wrote:

Neon Black wrote:So, what's this ultra-intelligent "OKC model" people keep gushing about?

Draft the best player available?

Ground breaking! I am enthralled.

Trade your vets, play your young guys, get several high draft picks, draft really well...

Let's look at what SEA/OKC did in detail:

2006-07:

This team, led by Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis, went 31-51. Allen and Lewis both missed over 20 games. They landed the second pick in the 2007 draft despite having just a 10% chance of getting it. They used that pick, of course, on Kevin Durant. In the second round of that draft they picked Carl Landry and Glen Davis. They traded Landry to the Rockets for cash then traded Glen Davis and Ray Allen to the Celtics for Jeff Green and fillers.

They then traded Lewis to the Magic for a 2nd round pick and a TPE.

10 days later they traded that 2nd round pick to the Suns for Kurt Thomas, a 2008 1st round pick and a 2010 1st round pick. Phoenix basically gave them two first round picks for absorbing Kurt Thomas's contract.

2007-08:

They turned the team over to Durant and Green. Durant played more minutes on that squad than anyone except Earl Watson. Green was third in minutes played. The team went 20-62 and ended up with the 4th pick in the draft as well as the 24th from the Phoenix trade. They used the 4th pick on Russell Westbrook and the 24th pick (acquired from Phoenix) on Serge Ibaka.

2008-09:

Once again they let Kevin Durant lead the team in minutes. The top three players in minutes played were Durant (PER 20.8), Green (13.9) and rookie Russell Westbrook (15.2). The team finished 23-59 and received the 3rd pick in the draft, which they used to select James Harden.


Would the Jazz FO have traded Allen and Lewis and handed the team over to the young guys the way SEA/OKC did? I think we know the answer to that one. The day the Jazz traded Deron Williams they should've followed it up by cleaning house the rest of the way, letting the young guys play and acquiring a few more lottery picks along the way.

Instead they've done this half-assed rebuild that's not helping anyone. It would be like if OKC had kept Allen and Rashard Lewis after drafting Durant and tried to make the playoffs with that core. Would Durant be the same player he is today if he was playing third fiddle to those guys? Would OKC have ended up with Westbrook or Harden? Seems unlikely.

The Jazz had a real opportunity to set this franchise up very nicely in the long term but they've sacrificed that chance for short-term revenue. I guess whatever keeps the Landcruisers rolling.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Exactly my thoughts on how this was handled.

I have to admit that I have wondered if the Jazz are helping their young players by slowly bringing them along while keeping a culture of veterans and winning, or have hampered them, or even worse ruined them, by not letting them take over even if a few learning lumps are encountered along the way. It does seem that most of the best/better players in the NBA were playing significant minutes by year two or three. Then again, there are teams like Sacramento and the Wizards which counterbalance these arguments.

StocktonShorts wrote:

Neon Black wrote:So, what's this ultra-intelligent "OKC model" people keep gushing about?

Draft the best player available?

Ground breaking! I am enthralled.

Trade your vets, play your young guys, get several high draft picks, draft really well...

Let's look at what SEA/OKC did in detail:

2006-07:

This team, led by Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis, went 31-51. Allen and Lewis both missed over 20 games. They landed the second pick in the 2007 draft despite having just a 10% chance of getting it. They used that pick, of course, on Kevin Durant. In the second round of that draft they picked Carl Landry and Glen Davis. They traded Landry to the Rockets for cash then traded Glen Davis and Ray Allen to the Celtics for Jeff Green and fillers.

They then traded Lewis to the Magic for a 2nd round pick and a TPE.

10 days later they traded that 2nd round pick to the Suns for Kurt Thomas, a 2008 1st round pick and a 2010 1st round pick. Phoenix basically gave them two first round picks for absorbing Kurt Thomas's contract.

2007-08:

They turned the team over to Durant and Green. Durant played more minutes on that squad than anyone except Earl Watson. Green was third in minutes played. The team went 20-62 and ended up with the 4th pick in the draft as well as the 24th from the Phoenix trade. They used the 4th pick on Russell Westbrook and the 24th pick (acquired from Phoenix) on Serge Ibaka.

2008-09:

Once again they let Kevin Durant lead the team in minutes. The top three players in minutes played were Durant (PER 20.8), Green (13.9) and rookie Russell Westbrook (15.2). The team finished 23-59 and received the 3rd pick in the draft, which they used to select James Harden.


Would the Jazz FO have traded Allen and Lewis and handed the team over to the young guys the way SEA/OKC did? I think we know the answer to that one. The day the Jazz traded Deron Williams they should've followed it up by cleaning house the rest of the way, letting the young guys play and acquiring a few more lottery picks along the way.

Instead they've done this half-assed rebuild that's not helping anyone. It would be like if OKC had kept Allen and Rashard Lewis after drafting Durant and tried to make the playoffs with that core. Would Durant be the same player he is today if he was playing third fiddle to those guys? Would OKC have ended up with Westbrook or Harden? Seems unlikely.

The Jazz had a real opportunity to set this franchise up very nicely in the long term but they've sacrificed that chance for short-term revenue. I guess whatever keeps the Landcruisers rolling.

This.

That is a very solid break down of the good drafting and luck of OKC in the 10% shot a KD. Oh does Deron miss coach sloan these days but what is done is done.

My opinion is that Derrick Favors should get at least 30 minutes a night next season. It is time to turn over the reigns to him at PF in 2013-14.

The good news with this new CBA is for small markets like my Nuggets and your Jazz... that we now have a shot to compete as the NBA is trying to be more like the NFL. We'll have two franchise players at most per team and not 3.

So the draft becomes more important these days. While everyone else is complaining about how this is a poor draft the Jazz need to be out there trying to figure out who they want and how to get him.

As mentioned elsewhere I think the guy is Marcus Smart. On my best available list he is 6th. But depending on the team I could even have him higher based on need. But others have him as low as 10.

My efforts would be on how to we trade up for Marcus Smart or is he going to fall rather than worrying about signing vets.