Kobewade11 wrote:VaDe255 wrote:
Boston
- #3 Tatum
- #3 Brown
Traded for White, KP, Jrue, drafted Pritchard late
Drafted well to have their foundation players, and kept putting players around them until they found a great group.
OKC
- #11 SGA (in a trade for PG)
- #2 Chat
- #12 JDub
Built through trades and the draft; trusted a long-term rebuild and have tons of picks and flexibility.
Houston
- #16 Sengun (came back in a trade)
- #4 Amen Thompson
- #2 Jalen Green
Bottomed out, collected picks, and developed talent instead of chasing mid-tier success.
There are more examples, but these 3 didn't even win the draft lottery, and it only took them a few years to execute the rebuild. This doesn't even have to take long, 1-2 years could be enough depending on how many picks and young players you would get for Bam/Herro.
This really isn't anything new, it's how you can build a sustainable foundation with assets and cap flexibility.
Boston: The trades don't matter without Tatum and Brown, I clearly named them as one of the outliers in my previous post.
OKC: Didn't draft SGA, but they were fortunate that PG forced his way to LA.
Houston: Currently down 3-1 as the #2 seed and their fans want Jalen Green gone. What championships do they have to show for bottoming out and collecting picks? I thought that's what this was supposed to be about..."
winning championships in a sustainable way"?
So now that you got those 3 teams out of the way, you ready to go through an exercise of the teams that also followed the bottom out model? You know, the ones that aren't listed?
Boston isn’t an outlier, they made a conscious decision to rebuild when it was time. They traded Pierce and Garnett for picks, cleared cap space, and built a foundation through the draft. Tatum and Brown didn’t just fall in their lap, they were the result of smart planning, scouting and patience.
OKC is the same story. Yes, PG asked out, but they didn’t cling to false hope or chase a 6 seeds, they pivoted fast. They moved Westbrook shortly after, then Chris Paul. That created space for Shai to develop, gave them flexibility, and allowed them to play young guys in real minutes, something teams like the Heat would never do mid-cycle (they freaking tried to compete with Wiggins/Kyle, thank god they accidently picked up Davion, who is a great piece). They didn’t just luck into where they are now, it was a concious decision in a high pressure situation when they were forced to react.
Houston? Still in progress. They have a strong young core, flexibility, and a real defensive identity forming under Ime Udoka. They’re ahead of schedule compared to where most tanking teams are after three years and in the long run, they created the conditions for sustainable success: reps for young players, coaching continuity, and cap space. Amen is going to be great and they even have the #9 pick in this draft and could trade for a guy like Giannis who could be available.
The teams that do it well aren’t lucky, they’re deliberate, follow a plan and develop a winning culture in a stable environment. The teams that refuse to bottom out or chase fake contention stay stuck in the middle.
When you look at the last 20 years, most teams that win have a top guy who is a home grown talent and sometimes there is a trade for a final piece around that core, which pushes the team over the top. It's the exception that a championship team is built trading for a top guy or FA signing (especially now), it rarely happens.
