SSUBluesman wrote:Since you're so fond of putting thought first, it's a shame you didn't choose to do so here. I'm talking about RUNNING teams, i.e. teams that are built to run and live and die as such. No one, including you, would actually label those Lakers teams as being running teams along the lines of the Nets/Suns. All teams will push the ball to some extent, much like they all shoot 3's to some extent. There is a significant difference between teams BUILT to run/reign 3's and those that do so in varying amounts.
The truth is we don't really know how Al feels about all of this. We don't know how willing Kahn/Rambis are to move forward with Al. However at this point it doesn't look that great.
So what constitutes a running team isn’t based on what actually happened on the court, just your opinion. This has led you to conclude that the Adelman Sacramento teams, which, from 1999-2004 played at the fastest pace in the league every season but one (2001, when they played at the 2nd fastest pace in the league), and teams that played at a faster or equally fast pace to teams you labeled running teams, can’t be thought of as running teams. This isn’t because they did so in varying amounts or to some extent, but because they consistently did so over the course of an entire season, or seasons.
If your point is that teams built to live and die by one aspect of the game won’t be able to win consistently, you’re right, but that applies to more than just teams built to live and die by the run. By and large, one dimensional teams have trouble finding consistent success. You’re also right in agreeing with Devilz that the reason for implementing an up tempo system is to generate more interest/revenue. Kahn’s basically said as much.
Chances are the Wolves won’t win a title with an up tempo system, but that has more to do with there only being 8 franchises that have won a title in the last 30 years and it being unlikely to build a championship team than choosing an up tempo system.