Tank World Order V (Rise of the Phoenix)

[YogurtProducer]

This sh*t is dead and that's from someone who wants the tank as bad as anyone, but ya'll just in denial.

It's painfully obvious we're closer to being around IND or MIA's level (if not better), than we are WAS or Utah and in a couple of months our record will reflect that and some of you will be claiming it was "fake" when you're just in real denial.

I think it's more likely we end up in the 7-12 range tbh unless we get some devestating injuries or lucky lottery balls.

I think 7 is flat out too high...we're already sitting at 6th and we're barely starting to get healthy and still missing our starting guards and a HUGE chunk of our shooting ie/ IQ, Dick & Olynk. That's gonna take us up yet another (substantial) level and of course the schedule slowly will transition to a cake walk ESPECIALLY when all those teams will be trying to out tank each other.

I keep saying it but I don't think we're gonna be in the top 10 personally.

We're easily blowing by POR, so 7 is the absolute high side....then you have CHI & BKN wanting to trade away all their best players, the Pels are already too far out to close the distance to make a Playoff run PLUS Zion has no clear time table to return PLUS Ingram just signed with Klutch *ahem he's ready for his move (most likely back to LAL). Then you have the Glass family *ahem, Ball family -- LaMelo is ALREADY dealing with injuries (AGAIN), good luck with him making through the rest of the season healthy.

That's ELEVENTH right there and we're not even factoring the health of either of Cunningham or Haliburton who are on teams that I'm not convinced (at all) are better than our team when fully healthy. OR of course Embiid (especially) & PG's crappy track record and/or Morey's lack of fear to make bold decisions ie/ tank. Ohhh and a lil ol team in San Antonio that has a long track record of showing no fear resting their players and/or tanking in recent memory to add another high level prospect (or two) with Vic.

I'm sorry to be a broken record but unless the FO trades Yak or blatantly tanks with extremely questionable play calling and/or "resting" players, I have little to no confidence that we'll be in the top 10 personally.

I agree with you. And for whatever reason you saying this gets you labeled as "wanting" this to happen.

Personally I have no interest in being 6 through 12ish in the conference as it would absolutely suck, but there is also the other side of "if we were healthy all year, would we be higher than 6th".

Its a tricky situation, one I dont envy Masai/Bobby, because ultimately there is no "right" choice here

[YogurtProducer]

Then why are you questioning there ability to beat worse teams later in the year? The last 20 games of our season is a cakewalk.

Scase is all over the place.

Beating teams early in the year doesnt count because it is early.

But in 2023 winning games late in the year doesnt count because it was late.

So what... only games won between Jan and Feb mean anything?

Yeah I was busy working and was going to basically post this.

Why do competitive games early on not matter against good team? And they definitely don't count when those teams 'take their foot off the gas' which has been an argument used earlier.

So there is a weird window in the middle of the season when if your team plays well, it matters.

Don't worry, Scase has the excuse ready.

"The season is long and in January and February all the games blend together and teams take their foot off the gas from early season excitement. Teams will start gearing up for the playoffs in March and we won't get these fake wins anymore"

[Ell Curry]

C's are hard to deal, that's the problem. Most teams only spend big money on one traditional big (guy who can only play one position). It's tough to come up with many teams who'd want to spend 20 mill on a C and who'd give up assets. It's probably more likely he gets injured than traded.

That's why I think the likeliest Poeltl deal right now is:

Cole Anthony, Goga and the worst of Orlando or Denver's 1st for Poeltl + PDX 2nd rounder

We move up 10 picks or so in the draft and get Goga, who isn't as good as Poeltl but is cheap and 25 and maybe can be 85% as good while we develop a center we draft with one of our now 4 first rounders in the next 2 years. Anthony's extra bad year is no big deal, might even help make a move next year when he's expiring.

Goga-DRAFT
Barnes-Mogbo
Barrett-Agbaji
Dick-Walter
Quickley-DRAFT

Olynyk + Cole Anthony in the 11th and 12 spots next year and together they make 25M in expiring money to add with other players and picks for a star.

Doesn't completely tank us, but Poeltl for Goga, maybe 1 more injury, tell Mogbo to shoot 3s and we can get to 50 losses and the 7th pick or so, then it's go hard this summer/next year, tank is over.

[ConSarnit]

C's are hard to deal, that's the problem. Most teams only spend big money on one traditional big (guy who can only play one position). It's tough to come up with many teams who'd want to spend 20 mill on a C and who'd give up assets. It's probably more likely he gets injured than traded.

I've been on the "Poeltl won't be easy to trade" train for a while. The vast majority of teams already have a C that they can talk themselves into being better than or equal to Poeltl. And as you said, most teams don't want to spend $20m for a positionally locked backup C. Teams that could really use Poeltl won't want him because they're in the tank (CHA, NOP, WAS) and some teams that could use an upgrade don't have any assets (PHX). There aren't a lot of great suitors for Poeltl at the moment. NOP was a clear trade partner and their season has gone off the rails.

I always like to look at the up and coming teams wanting to make a push for the playoff-in or a top 6 seed because they typically aren't capped out like the contenders and have a bit more flexibility. Teams like the Kings, Spurs, Pistons, Magic, Hawks are sorta in that territory. But how many of those teams need a 20 mill C?

Maybe the Pistons? Even then they are probably ok with their Duren/Stewart platoon. Kings and Spurs don’t need one. Magic and Hawks probably talk themselves into already having Poeltl-equivalent centers. It just doesn’t look like the C market is all that strong right now.

[Ell Curry]

this thread is very over reactionary. i'd be surprised if they don't 1 - 4 to close out this home stand.

this team is on pace to win 26 games and they'll finish the season right around 25 to 30 wins. they'll head into the lottery in similar position as last season in the 6 to 8 range. then they'll move up to a top 4 pick. just decide now if you prefer Demin or Harper.

Eh, if we're a 26 win team with Barnes out for half the time and Quickley out for 90% of games, we're probably close to a 36 to 40 win team with both healthy. Barnes is a near all-star level player and Quickley will reduce the 3pt gap that's a big math problem right now.

If I was betting right now, I'd bet on the 9th draft slot.

[PushDaRock]

Sitting Jak to allow someone like say Chomche to get minutes is an easy way to edge us towards losing without trading or making up injuries. Is Chomche super raw? Yeah, but that's kind of the point.

As much as I'm on board for trading Jak, I don't think it is entirely necessary, limiting minutes is a much easier option. Trading Jak would be a much more long term move.



I was a little bit disjointed in my response and could've been clearer

There have been more than a few people arguing that because our diff means we are "better than our record" so I was just using the Pistons as an example. They are rocking a better diff than us, and we lost to them twice, both with and without Cade. Everyone kept saying how they would be much worse than us this year, and we lose to them regardless. They've also beaten better teams than we have in the Lakers and Hawks, healthy or unhealthy we should be beating teams like the Hornets and Pistons if we are better than advertised.

I don't put stock into us being "competitive losers" against good teams. We are competitive yet lose in the last quarter or few minutes all the time, so yeah, until the good teams decide to take the game more seriously we're in it, but it isn't some indication that we are much better than what has been shown.

The garbage dumpster raptors team beat the 72 win bulls, but that wasn't some precursor to the team being good lol. I'm not comparing that team to the current year one, but just being close, or winning games doesn't dictate future success. We had the C's this year within 3 points, by no means does that tell me that we can hang with the C's on a regular basis.

Competitive losses to me are good for the tank, it shows guys are playing hard, and that they care. Also a lot more entertaining to watch, I just won't put stock in them meaning anything, we have been competitive overall this season, with both good teams and bad ones. Doesn't mean much.

You can't just gift players minutes in the NBA that aren't ready for them.

I just find it odd that you discredit all our wins as teams not taking us seriously and how they're all mid and NRTG is somehow only relevant for good teams but then also ignore the injuries which obviously have played a significant factor in how the season has gone. Saying stuff like "healthy or not, we should still beat them" makes no sense at all. The Pelicans were a 49 win team last year and now are 4-18 because of their injuries, you think it doesn't matter for them? The Sixers injuries have them at 5-14. Why are our injuries being downplayed when you see the impact they have had on other teams?

You absolutely can, if the point is to artificially inflate the loss column. Chomche isn't out there because he is NBA ready, but rather because you know the falloff from Jak to him will be big enough that you still get to have RJ/Scottie showing how good or bad they are, while also kneecapping the team at a key position so it doesn't result in too many wins that put you into play in/mediocrity territory. The east is pathetic this year, we need to adjust for that.

Net rating is meaningless (mostly) for this team because it shows a number with no context, sure if we keep the game close for 3 quarters then drop the ball in the 4th then it shows when the game is on the line we will still lose. And that's fine, we're a young team, but it also doesn't mean that because the numbers are close together, that we are "competitive" with those teams.

First game against DEN, it was competitive and went to OT, but we also got outscored in the 3rd, the 4th, and in OT. They had a clear adjustment made after the half where their offence started to pick up, and they had a massive defensive shift in the latter half of the 4th. I will quote this endlessly because it is always relevant

"I think the good teams win even when they play bad, and bad teams always find a way to lose games, even when they’re up." - Nikola Jokic

Being close matters in horseshoes and hand grenades. If you want to ascribe some future success to current competitive losses, be my guest, but I don't see the translation. And as for injuries, every team deals with them, we are not an outlier. Not all injuries are created equal as well, Embiid being out is more impactful than us losing RJ/Scottie/IQ combined. He has missed 15/19 games and PG has missed 9/19 games, both players would immediately and irrefutably be the best players on our teams had they been on the roster. And yet they are only half a game behind us.

NOLA was missing damn near their entire rotation, they were putting out lineups that would have made our end of season rosters from last year, look like true playoff contenders. And so on. RJ has missed 3 games, and Scottie 11, IQ is the biggest impact to our roster from a games missed perspective. I do not believe and will never be convinced that missing players like KO/BB would have any impact on the results of these games. You do not add without taking away from someone else.

But if I replace Embiid with Drummond, yeah that kinda has a pretty big impact. What if IQ was healthy all year, do we get to see Ochai blossom like he has? Does Gradey? You can't pretend that just because our players were injured that immediately means that we would win these close games. Both Gradey and Ochai are playing better basketball this year than IQ did last year, so at best it's probably a wash, maybe we win a couple close losses, but there is no reason to think that the inverse isn't true. Maybe we lose that 3 point win against the heat/kings.

You can't play the what if game, it's pointless, we lost games and we've won games. But acting like picking up wins in the beginning of the season is some predictor of future success is a fools errand. The Spurs won 3 of their first 5 games last year beating a Suns team back to back that went 49-33, they went on to win 19 more games the rest of the season. The rockets won 6 straight in the first 9 games last year, and then 11 straight in the last 20 games, they were 41-41 picking up those 11 wins almost exclusively in the back half against tanking teams. And so on and so on.

I didn't discredit our wins as teams not taking us seriously, I "discredited" them as being almost exclusively against bad teams. I simply don't think that teams like the celtics winning by 3 is any indication that we are anywhere close to their level because we got close in one game, we still lost.

No serious organization is throwing out a player nowhere close to being ready, setting them up for failure for the sake of chasing losses. We might as well sign a bunch of G Leaguers and force feed them 30 mins a game if the goal is artificially inflating losses.

You say NRTG is meaningless for our team but somehow I would think you would react differently if this team had a -10 NRTG with the same record and suddenly NRTG justifies how much this team actually sucks even worse than their record indicates right?

lol so your argument is that we would have the same record with IQ healthy? We are playing Mitchell and Shead at PG who are both putting up 48% TS and can't shoot killing our spacing. Are you really trying to say IQ doesn't help that at all? Assuming Gradey and Ochai don't break out with IQ playing also makes little sense. Ochai is not a high usage guy and playing with better offensive players just means his quality of looks increase. Gradey maybe has reduced usage with IQ but it also means his quality of looks would go up not having to take as many tough shots so his efficiency probably is higher with IQ.

IQ was putting up 18.6 ppg and 6.8 apg as a Raptor on 56.4% TS, how are Ochai or Gradey both doing better than that this year? Why are we also pretending like IQ couldn't be improved this year? All our young players have taken steps, why wouldn't he?

What difference would it make if we beat the Celtics instead of losing by 3? You already said those wins don't count early in the year.

[Ell Curry]

I agree with you. And for whatever reason you saying this gets you labeled as "wanting" this to happen.

Personally I have no interest in being 6 through 12ish in the conference as it would absolutely suck, but there is also the other side of "if we were healthy all year, would we be higher than 6th".

Its a tricky situation, one I dont envy Masai/Bobby, because ultimately there is no "right" choice here

The OG trade was fine, but guys like RJ in your starting lineup are death because they're too good to tank with by keeping your offence from being truly terrible, but you can't really win big with them either. You end up picking between 10-20 every year.

RJ is the right age and Poeltl isn't, but we know Masai loves Poeltl and I'd be surprised if he really rates RJ. I could see him getting dealt for very little and too much offense put on Dick, Walter and Agbaji which maybe helps their development and the tank simultaneously.

[Tripod]

I agree with you. And for whatever reason you saying this gets you labeled as "wanting" this to happen.

Personally I have no interest in being 6 through 12ish in the conference as it would absolutely suck, but there is also the other side of "if we were healthy all year, would we be higher than 6th".

Its a tricky situation, one I dont envy Masai/Bobby, because ultimately there is no "right" choice here

The OG trade was fine, but guys like RJ in your starting lineup are death because they're too good to tank with by keeping your offence from being truly terrible, but you can't really win big with them either. You end up picking between 10-20 every year.

RJ is the right age and Poeltl isn't, but we know Masai loves Poeltl and I'd be surprised if he really rates RJ. I could see him getting dealt for very little and too much offense put on Dick, Walter and Agbaji which maybe helps their development and the tank simultaneously.

You guys are seriously overrating draft picks when you have RJ being a 23pt guy and you think a pick will be better than him.

I don't see RJ getting moved at all in the near future because like it or not, it's good for business to have him on the team AND playing well.

Be prepared for the trades to be Boucher, Brown and possibly Davion. Bruno...could be gone depending what filler we get back in trades. Unless someone way overpays, Yak will still be here as will RJ.

[Scase]

You can't just gift players minutes in the NBA that aren't ready for them.

I just find it odd that you discredit all our wins as teams not taking us seriously and how they're all mid and NRTG is somehow only relevant for good teams but then also ignore the injuries which obviously have played a significant factor in how the season has gone. Saying stuff like "healthy or not, we should still beat them" makes no sense at all. The Pelicans were a 49 win team last year and now are 4-18 because of their injuries, you think it doesn't matter for them? The Sixers injuries have them at 5-14. Why are our injuries being downplayed when you see the impact they have had on other teams?

You absolutely can, if the point is to artificially inflate the loss column. Chomche isn't out there because he is NBA ready, but rather because you know the falloff from Jak to him will be big enough that you still get to have RJ/Scottie showing how good or bad they are, while also kneecapping the team at a key position so it doesn't result in too many wins that put you into play in/mediocrity territory. The east is pathetic this year, we need to adjust for that.

Net rating is meaningless (mostly) for this team because it shows a number with no context, sure if we keep the game close for 3 quarters then drop the ball in the 4th then it shows when the game is on the line we will still lose. And that's fine, we're a young team, but it also doesn't mean that because the numbers are close together, that we are "competitive" with those teams.

First game against DEN, it was competitive and went to OT, but we also got outscored in the 3rd, the 4th, and in OT. They had a clear adjustment made after the half where their offence started to pick up, and they had a massive defensive shift in the latter half of the 4th. I will quote this endlessly because it is always relevant

"I think the good teams win even when they play bad, and bad teams always find a way to lose games, even when they’re up." - Nikola Jokic

Being close matters in horseshoes and hand grenades. If you want to ascribe some future success to current competitive losses, be my guest, but I don't see the translation. And as for injuries, every team deals with them, we are not an outlier. Not all injuries are created equal as well, Embiid being out is more impactful than us losing RJ/Scottie/IQ combined. He has missed 15/19 games and PG has missed 9/19 games, both players would immediately and irrefutably be the best players on our teams had they been on the roster. And yet they are only half a game behind us.

NOLA was missing damn near their entire rotation, they were putting out lineups that would have made our end of season rosters from last year, look like true playoff contenders. And so on. RJ has missed 3 games, and Scottie 11, IQ is the biggest impact to our roster from a games missed perspective. I do not believe and will never be convinced that missing players like KO/BB would have any impact on the results of these games. You do not add without taking away from someone else.

But if I replace Embiid with Drummond, yeah that kinda has a pretty big impact. What if IQ was healthy all year, do we get to see Ochai blossom like he has? Does Gradey? You can't pretend that just because our players were injured that immediately means that we would win these close games. Both Gradey and Ochai are playing better basketball this year than IQ did last year, so at best it's probably a wash, maybe we win a couple close losses, but there is no reason to think that the inverse isn't true. Maybe we lose that 3 point win against the heat/kings.

You can't play the what if game, it's pointless, we lost games and we've won games. But acting like picking up wins in the beginning of the season is some predictor of future success is a fools errand. The Spurs won 3 of their first 5 games last year beating a Suns team back to back that went 49-33, they went on to win 19 more games the rest of the season. The rockets won 6 straight in the first 9 games last year, and then 11 straight in the last 20 games, they were 41-41 picking up those 11 wins almost exclusively in the back half against tanking teams. And so on and so on.

I didn't discredit our wins as teams not taking us seriously, I "discredited" them as being almost exclusively against bad teams. I simply don't think that teams like the celtics winning by 3 is any indication that we are anywhere close to their level because we got close in one game, we still lost.

No serious organization is throwing out a player nowhere close to being ready, setting them up for failure for the sake of chasing losses. We might as well sign a bunch of G Leaguers and force feed them 30 mins a game if the goal is artificially inflating losses.

You say NRTG is meaningless for our team but somehow I would think you would react differently if this team had a -10 NRTG with the same record and suddenly NRTG justifies how much this team actually sucks even worse than their record indicates right?

lol so your argument is that we would have the same record with IQ healthy? We are playing Mitchell and Shead at PG who are both putting up 48% TS and can't shoot killing our spacing. Are you really trying to say IQ doesn't help that at all? Assuming Gradey and Ochai don't break out with IQ playing also makes little sense. Ochai is not a high usage guy and playing with better offensive players just means his quality of looks increase. Gradey maybe has reduced usage with IQ but it also means his quality of looks would go up not having to take as many tough shots so his efficiency probably is higher with IQ.

IQ was putting up 18.6 ppg and 6.8 apg as a Raptor on 56.4% TS, how are Ochai or Gradey both doing better than that this year? Why are we also pretending like IQ couldn't be improved this year? All our young players have taken steps, why wouldn't he?

What difference would it make if we beat the Celtics instead of losing by 3? You already said those wins don't count early in the year.

I have said multiple times that W/L is what matters, you only bother looking at NETRTG if the team isn't actively tanking, otherwise it's meaningless.

Also I said the what if game is pointless, yet here you are jumping right back into it. IQ is a 15FGA player, those shots need to come from somewhere, and that is going to be from a very efficient Jak or a HYPER efficient Ochai. You don't get to pretend adding a player to the roster has only positive impacts, I'm tired of going around in circles with you.

If you want to think the team is leagues better than they are, go for it. If you want to think you can just drop a player into a lineup and everything else remains the same, be my guest. I have no interest circling the drain on this topic, we disagree on it, best to leave it at that.

[PushDaRock]

You absolutely can, if the point is to artificially inflate the loss column. Chomche isn't out there because he is NBA ready, but rather because you know the falloff from Jak to him will be big enough that you still get to have RJ/Scottie showing how good or bad they are, while also kneecapping the team at a key position so it doesn't result in too many wins that put you into play in/mediocrity territory. The east is pathetic this year, we need to adjust for that.

Net rating is meaningless (mostly) for this team because it shows a number with no context, sure if we keep the game close for 3 quarters then drop the ball in the 4th then it shows when the game is on the line we will still lose. And that's fine, we're a young team, but it also doesn't mean that because the numbers are close together, that we are "competitive" with those teams.

First game against DEN, it was competitive and went to OT, but we also got outscored in the 3rd, the 4th, and in OT. They had a clear adjustment made after the half where their offence started to pick up, and they had a massive defensive shift in the latter half of the 4th. I will quote this endlessly because it is always relevant



Being close matters in horseshoes and hand grenades. If you want to ascribe some future success to current competitive losses, be my guest, but I don't see the translation. And as for injuries, every team deals with them, we are not an outlier. Not all injuries are created equal as well, Embiid being out is more impactful than us losing RJ/Scottie/IQ combined. He has missed 15/19 games and PG has missed 9/19 games, both players would immediately and irrefutably be the best players on our teams had they been on the roster. And yet they are only half a game behind us.

NOLA was missing damn near their entire rotation, they were putting out lineups that would have made our end of season rosters from last year, look like true playoff contenders. And so on. RJ has missed 3 games, and Scottie 11, IQ is the biggest impact to our roster from a games missed perspective. I do not believe and will never be convinced that missing players like KO/BB would have any impact on the results of these games. You do not add without taking away from someone else.

But if I replace Embiid with Drummond, yeah that kinda has a pretty big impact. What if IQ was healthy all year, do we get to see Ochai blossom like he has? Does Gradey? You can't pretend that just because our players were injured that immediately means that we would win these close games. Both Gradey and Ochai are playing better basketball this year than IQ did last year, so at best it's probably a wash, maybe we win a couple close losses, but there is no reason to think that the inverse isn't true. Maybe we lose that 3 point win against the heat/kings.

You can't play the what if game, it's pointless, we lost games and we've won games. But acting like picking up wins in the beginning of the season is some predictor of future success is a fools errand. The Spurs won 3 of their first 5 games last year beating a Suns team back to back that went 49-33, they went on to win 19 more games the rest of the season. The rockets won 6 straight in the first 9 games last year, and then 11 straight in the last 20 games, they were 41-41 picking up those 11 wins almost exclusively in the back half against tanking teams. And so on and so on.

I didn't discredit our wins as teams not taking us seriously, I "discredited" them as being almost exclusively against bad teams. I simply don't think that teams like the celtics winning by 3 is any indication that we are anywhere close to their level because we got close in one game, we still lost.

No serious organization is throwing out a player nowhere close to being ready, setting them up for failure for the sake of chasing losses. We might as well sign a bunch of G Leaguers and force feed them 30 mins a game if the goal is artificially inflating losses.

You say NRTG is meaningless for our team but somehow I would think you would react differently if this team had a -10 NRTG with the same record and suddenly NRTG justifies how much this team actually sucks even worse than their record indicates right?

lol so your argument is that we would have the same record with IQ healthy? We are playing Mitchell and Shead at PG who are both putting up 48% TS and can't shoot killing our spacing. Are you really trying to say IQ doesn't help that at all? Assuming Gradey and Ochai don't break out with IQ playing also makes little sense. Ochai is not a high usage guy and playing with better offensive players just means his quality of looks increase. Gradey maybe has reduced usage with IQ but it also means his quality of looks would go up not having to take as many tough shots so his efficiency probably is higher with IQ.

IQ was putting up 18.6 ppg and 6.8 apg as a Raptor on 56.4% TS, how are Ochai or Gradey both doing better than that this year? Why are we also pretending like IQ couldn't be improved this year? All our young players have taken steps, why wouldn't he?

What difference would it make if we beat the Celtics instead of losing by 3? You already said those wins don't count early in the year.

I have said multiple times that W/L is what matters, you only bother looking at NETRTG if the team isn't actively tanking, otherwise it's meaningless.

Also I said the what if game is pointless, yet here you are jumping right back into it. IQ is a 15FGA player, those shots need to come from somewhere, and that is going to be from a very efficient Jak or a HYPER efficient Ochai. You don't get to pretend adding a player to the roster has only positive impacts, I'm tired of going around in circles with you.

If you want to think the team is leagues better than they are, go for it. If you want to think you can just drop a player into a lineup and everything else remains the same, be my guest. I have no interest circling the drain on this topic, we disagree on it, best to leave it at that.

Do you think Scottie coming back has been a net positive for the team? After all, he's taking away shots from the hyper efficient Jak and Ochai.

No, things don't just remain the same. They're generally improved when players get to play with other good players.

[Duffman100]

No serious organization is throwing out a player nowhere close to being ready, setting them up for failure for the sake of chasing losses. We might as well sign a bunch of G Leaguers and force feed them 30 mins a game if the goal is artificially inflating losses.

You say NRTG is meaningless for our team but somehow I would think you would react differently if this team had a -10 NRTG with the same record and suddenly NRTG justifies how much this team actually sucks even worse than their record indicates right?

lol so your argument is that we would have the same record with IQ healthy? We are playing Mitchell and Shead at PG who are both putting up 48% TS and can't shoot killing our spacing. Are you really trying to say IQ doesn't help that at all? Assuming Gradey and Ochai don't break out with IQ playing also makes little sense. Ochai is not a high usage guy and playing with better offensive players just means his quality of looks increase. Gradey maybe has reduced usage with IQ but it also means his quality of looks would go up not having to take as many tough shots so his efficiency probably is higher with IQ.

IQ was putting up 18.6 ppg and 6.8 apg as a Raptor on 56.4% TS, how are Ochai or Gradey both doing better than that this year? Why are we also pretending like IQ couldn't be improved this year? All our young players have taken steps, why wouldn't he?

What difference would it make if we beat the Celtics instead of losing by 3? You already said those wins don't count early in the year.

I have said multiple times that W/L is what matters, you only bother looking at NETRTG if the team isn't actively tanking, otherwise it's meaningless.

Also I said the what if game is pointless, yet here you are jumping right back into it. IQ is a 15FGA player, those shots need to come from somewhere, and that is going to be from a very efficient Jak or a HYPER efficient Ochai. You don't get to pretend adding a player to the roster has only positive impacts, I'm tired of going around in circles with you.

If you want to think the team is leagues better than they are, go for it. If you want to think you can just drop a player into a lineup and everything else remains the same, be my guest. I have no interest circling the drain on this topic, we disagree on it, best to leave it at that.

Do you think Scottie coming back has been a net positive for the team? After all, he's taking away shots from the hyper efficient Jak and Ochai.

No, things don't just remain the same. They're generally improved when players get to play with other good players.

And you know who's shots get reduced?

Mitchell, Boucher etc

Honestly is the argument that adding our better player doesn't make us better?

[Badonkadonk]

Vecenie posted an RJ vid but he spends the first few minutes talking about the "ethical tank", leading into what he categorizes as an RJ leap, what he originally thought of RJ coming out of Duke etc.

If the Raps traded for an ex 3rd overall pick that is actually going to play to that level, they've definitely expedited things.

Watch on YouTube

[YogurtProducer]

I have said multiple times that W/L is what matters, you only bother looking at NETRTG if the team isn't actively tanking, otherwise it's meaningless.

Also I said the what if game is pointless, yet here you are jumping right back into it. IQ is a 15FGA player, those shots need to come from somewhere, and that is going to be from a very efficient Jak or a HYPER efficient Ochai. You don't get to pretend adding a player to the roster has only positive impacts, I'm tired of going around in circles with you.

If you want to think the team is leagues better than they are, go for it. If you want to think you can just drop a player into a lineup and everything else remains the same, be my guest. I have no interest circling the drain on this topic, we disagree on it, best to leave it at that.

Do you think Scottie coming back has been a net positive for the team? After all, he's taking away shots from the hyper efficient Jak and Ochai.

No, things don't just remain the same. They're generally improved when players get to play with other good players.

And you know who's shots get reduced?

Mitchell, Boucher etc

Honestly is the argument that adding our better player doesn't make us better?

This is wild. We have now resorted to "better players dont make us better"? What am I reading? Why are we wanting to tank if better players are not going to help us? Just pure lunacy.


Yhis completely ignores that yes, those 15FGA need to come from somewhere, however that is missing so much context.

Maybe a handful are late clock shots that RJ or Scottie currently takes and he takes 1/2 away from them and makes them at a higher rate (I have more faith in an IQ late clock 3 than those 3).

Maybe a few come from Poeltl, and as a result his efficiency increases even more.

Possibly the improved shooting gives RJ more driving lanes, and as a result his efficiency increases.

Duff already mentioned, but Davion was taking 7 as a starter, so there we already got half.

Scase never disappoints with wild takes. Just once I would love to see him adjust his position and admit he was wrong.

[YogurtProducer]

I agree with you. And for whatever reason you saying this gets you labeled as "wanting" this to happen.

Personally I have no interest in being 6 through 12ish in the conference as it would absolutely suck, but there is also the other side of "if we were healthy all year, would we be higher than 6th".

Its a tricky situation, one I dont envy Masai/Bobby, because ultimately there is no "right" choice here

The OG trade was fine, but guys like RJ in your starting lineup are death because they're too good to tank with by keeping your offence from being truly terrible, but you can't really win big with them either. You end up picking between 10-20 every year.

RJ is the right age and Poeltl isn't, but we know Masai loves Poeltl and I'd be surprised if he really rates RJ. I could see him getting dealt for very little and too much offense put on Dick, Walter and Agbaji which maybe helps their development and the tank simultaneously.

I think we need to accept that the next step in our franchise is not with a "winning big" as the short term goal.

Get to being a 45-50win team first. Then make small moves to get to 50-55 wins. Then make a big splash to go for the championship. You need guys like RJ (ahem, Demar) and Poeltl (ahem, JV) to be those good but not great guys to take those smaller leaps.

[Ell Curry]

I think we need to accept that the next step in our franchise is not with a "winning big" as the short term goal.

Get to being a 45-50win team first. Then make small moves to get to 50-55 wins. Then make a big splash to go for the championship. You need guys like RJ (ahem, Demar) and Poeltl (ahem, JV) to be those good but not great guys to take those smaller leaps.

I really don't disagree that this is the plan, but the odds of another Kawhi trade have to be really damn low.

I think the odds of a 55 win team (by definition a contender to me) being built here around Barnes this way are lower than if we say give up Poeltl and Barrett, nail a top 5 draft pick and it's:

Barnes and our 2025 pick on the wing as high-usage guys. Flagg, Harper, Demin, Bailey, Edgecombe, Johnson all look promising and Masai gets more right than wrong in the draft.

Quickley-Dick-Walter-Agbaji on the perimeter shooting 3s to space the floor.

Mogbo playing the backup 4 minutes, and whatever picks/players we get back for Poeltl and Barrett around as contracts/filler and 2 firsts in the 2026 draft.

That's a lot of bullets to get a center. We'll very likely be able to move our pick or Indy's in 2026 (or both) for a starting center. Can also draft a center with the PDX 2nd this year to add to Chomche in the "develop a center" portfolio.

Or we keep our picks and gamble on an MLE signing (Hartenstein was available for instance, Bitadze got waived, maybe we get lucky on the next guy) as a bridge for the next 2-3 years in which we're not a real contender anyways while we develop a 2026 drafted center.

And that's assuming no real assets from a Poeltl or Barrett deal.

The big risk here is that it infuriates Barnes and he demands out, but we just paid him, drafted Mogbo, can probably placate him for a couple years.

[mihaic]

I think we need to accept that the next step in our franchise is not with a "winning big" as the short term goal.

Get to being a 45-50win team first. Then make small moves to get to 50-55 wins. Then make a big splash to go for the championship. You need guys like RJ (ahem, Demar) and Poeltl (ahem, JV) to be those good but not great guys to take those smaller leaps.

I really don't disagree that this is the plan, but the odds of another Kawhi trade have to be really damn low.

I think the odds of a 55 win team (by definition a contender to me) being built here around Barnes this way are lower than if we say give up Poeltl and Barrett, nail a top 5 draft pick and it's:

Barnes and our 2025 pick on the wing as high-usage guys. Flagg, Harper, Demin, Bailey, Edgecombe, Johnson all look promising and Masai gets more right than wrong in the draft.

Quickley-Dick-Walter-Agbaji on the perimeter shooting 3s to space the floor.

Mogbo playing the backup 4 minutes, and whatever picks/players we get back for Poeltl and Barrett around as contracts/filler and 2 firsts in the 2026 draft.

That's a lot of bullets to get a center. We'll very likely be able to move our pick or Indy's in 2026 (or both) for a starting center. Can also draft a center with the PDX 2nd this year to add to Chomche in the "develop a center" portfolio.

Or we keep our picks and gamble on an MLE signing (Hartenstein was available for instance, Bitadze got waived, maybe we get lucky on the next guy) as a bridge for the next 2-3 years in which we're not a real contender anyways while we develop a 2026 drafted center.

And that's assuming no real assets from a Poeltl or Barrett deal.

The big risk here is that it infuriates Barnes and he demands out, but we just paid him, drafted Mogbo, can probably placate him for a couple years.

I doubt we will trade RJ any time soon.

I also happen to think we shouldn't, he is a natural scorer and takes that pressure away from Scottie at various points in the game. Complementary players. Less automatic doubles for Scotties out of fear of RJ scoring.

I think they will trade Quick at some point if he doesn't explode some time soon.

[Basketball_Jones]

I’m a pro tank guy but I honestly hate the idea of trading Yak just to tank. He’s not really old or out of prime and his contract is value. It’s just bad management. You need to find other ways to tank then getting rid of plus value for money guys.

[720]

I agree with you. And for whatever reason you saying this gets you labeled as "wanting" this to happen.

Personally I have no interest in being 6 through 12ish in the conference as it would absolutely suck, but there is also the other side of "if we were healthy all year, would we be higher than 6th".

Its a tricky situation, one I dont envy Masai/Bobby, because ultimately there is no "right" choice here

The OG trade was fine, but guys like RJ in your starting lineup are death because they're too good to tank with by keeping your offence from being truly terrible, but you can't really win big with them either. You end up picking between 10-20 every year.

RJ is the right age and Poeltl isn't, but we know Masai loves Poeltl and I'd be surprised if he really rates RJ. I could see him getting dealt for very little and too much offense put on Dick, Walter and Agbaji which maybe helps their development and the tank simultaneously.

We should absolutely be looking to see if RJ has real value around the league (my thinking is he doesn’t, which is why we’re probably gonna keep him at least this season). Him and/or IQ will be guys we move on from at some point in the future to get us over the hump once Barnes, Gradey, 2025 prospect, all develop even more.

Poeltl should absolutely get traded this deadline (along with Brown and Olynyk). But our FO are unpredictable when it comes to that. They let Fred walk for nothing when it made all the sense in the world to trade him.

[Los_29]

I have said multiple times that W/L is what matters, you only bother looking at NETRTG if the team isn't actively tanking, otherwise it's meaningless.

Also I said the what if game is pointless, yet here you are jumping right back into it. IQ is a 15FGA player, those shots need to come from somewhere, and that is going to be from a very efficient Jak or a HYPER efficient Ochai. You don't get to pretend adding a player to the roster has only positive impacts, I'm tired of going around in circles with you.

If you want to think the team is leagues better than they are, go for it. If you want to think you can just drop a player into a lineup and everything else remains the same, be my guest. I have no interest circling the drain on this topic, we disagree on it, best to leave it at that.

Do you think Scottie coming back has been a net positive for the team? After all, he's taking away shots from the hyper efficient Jak and Ochai.

No, things don't just remain the same. They're generally improved when players get to play with other good players.

And you know who's shots get reduced?

Mitchell, Boucher etc

Honestly is the argument that adding our better player doesn't make us better?

I can’t believe he wrote that. I admire his perseverance though. Even with no logical argument, he doesn’t quit.

IQ absolutely makes us a better team. His presence would just make it easier for guys like Ochai and Gradey. It would also mean less minutes for our least productive players.

[Scase]

I have said multiple times that W/L is what matters, you only bother looking at NETRTG if the team isn't actively tanking, otherwise it's meaningless.

Also I said the what if game is pointless, yet here you are jumping right back into it. IQ is a 15FGA player, those shots need to come from somewhere, and that is going to be from a very efficient Jak or a HYPER efficient Ochai. You don't get to pretend adding a player to the roster has only positive impacts, I'm tired of going around in circles with you.

If you want to think the team is leagues better than they are, go for it. If you want to think you can just drop a player into a lineup and everything else remains the same, be my guest. I have no interest circling the drain on this topic, we disagree on it, best to leave it at that.

Do you think Scottie coming back has been a net positive for the team? After all, he's taking away shots from the hyper efficient Jak and Ochai.

No, things don't just remain the same. They're generally improved when players get to play with other good players.

And you know who's shots get reduced?

Mitchell, Boucher etc

Honestly is the argument that adding our better player doesn't make us better?

Is he going to replace them while being on the bench, or do you seriously expect us to be running an IQ/Mitchell tandem on the regular?

You don't just look at FGA taken and subtract and add with no thought put into it. Boucher probably loses some for sure, but he only takes like 7/g, I highly doubt that IQ and Mitchell will be sharing the court so much that those FGA will be shaved off while they play together. IQ isn't playing 40mpg, and Mitchell is his replacement.

Boucher is also the only real consistent scoring threat from our bench, so the cutback for him will be limited. So unless Mitchell and Boucher give up 100% of their shots, those 15FGA are going to have to come from somewhere besides bench players. IQ/Scottie/RJ/Jak/Ochai or GD depending on the SL will be where those shots will primarily have to come from as that's who most of his minutes are shared by.

Lastly I never said that adding him wouldn't make the team better, I was criticizing the incredibly simplistic concept of adding him = net positive only. This isn't just moving numbers from one place to another, you need to take into account when and where those numbers are coming from.