Hammond Comments: Boston Model?

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

You keep saying they have made awful moves but can't name any of them (that are real). When you name letting Vlad Rad go as a bad move, it's obvious we disagree on team philosophy and player value.

they traded a bunch of veterans who are still in the league for a bunch of guys who arent in the league. this isnt rocket science but im not surprised you dont get it

Landry had no place on their team as a vet contract.

he was a 2nd round pick they gave away. they could have had him on a rookie minimum contract as a bench player for 2-3 years but they whiffed on his talent.

Ibaka is younger and better. They traded for Perkins who is better. Landry is an undersized efficient 4 who can't defend. He's not a starter on good teams

again... your not even aware of the circumstances surrounding him. they could have had him as a cheap asset and backup the way we had mam for several years. instead they dumped him for a future 2nd.

Who is Roddy? Beaubois? He stinks. Bledsoe is solid but so is Maynor. Gibson isn't better than Ibaka

these are more examples of players they completely whiffed on. drafted them, or could have had them and traded them away for zero. these players proved to have value once they left.... but none that presti ever saw.

You're reaching and reaching badly, and I think you know it. But you've always refused to give OKC credit, while at the same time backing the Bucks modus operandi. It's odd and laughable.

im not reaching at all. it just seems that way because i disagree with your cult leader.

Ibaka is just a guy? He's averaging 15.5/7.3/4.0 @ .598 TS per 36 at age 23

yeah hes a decent nba big. nothing to get super excited about tho. similar numbers to sanders there.

[LUKE23]

they traded a bunch of veterans who are still in the league for a bunch of guys who arent in the league. this isnt rocket science but im not surprised you dont get it

Name the moves that were made that hurt them long-term regarding their veterans. I'll be waiting because you cannot. Kurt Thomas? Vlad Rad? Landry? Luke Ridnour? Do you think a rebuilding team has any care about these players?

he was a 2nd round pick they gave away. they could have had him on a rookie minimum contract as a bench player for 2-3 years but they whiffed on his talent.

He had no big time use to a rebuilding team as a bench player. He was never going to be a core piece for a team that had bigger aspirations than 41 wins. He was only cheap for one more year before they moved him.

again... your not even aware of the circumstances surrounding him. they could have had him as a cheap asset and backup the way we had mam for several years. instead they dumped him for a future 2nd.

And it didn't hurt them at all.

these are more examples of players they completely whiffed on. drafted them, or could have had them and traded them away for zero. these players proved to have value once they left.... but none that presti ever saw.

And is completely irrelevant to the team they have currently built.

im not reaching at all. it just seems that way because i disagree with your cult leader.

Yes, I do recognize good management instead of just calling it "luck", while then defending a GM who is 20 games under .500 because he manages my favorite team. Sorry.

yeah hes a decent nba big. nothing to get super excited about tho.

Yeah, young, super efficient guy who leads the league in block rate. Ho hum.

[AussieBuck]

Contrast OKC's trading for and away Kurt Thomas to Hammond's with Jackson. It's depressing or hilarious depending on your point of view.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

Name the moves that were made that hurt them long-term regarding their veterans. I'll be waiting because you cannot. Kurt Thomas? Vlad Rad? Landry? Do you think a rebuilding team has any care about these players?

didnt hurt them long term. helped them. they made a ton of bad moves leading right up to a perfect storm in 3 back to back drafts. all they had to do was draft the available guy. if they hadnt sabotaged the team they would have picked further back like we do. perhaps it was by design and perhaps it was a poorly run team saved by ladyluck. hqard to know for certain.... i just have seen a gob of mistakes since so it makes you wonder.

He had no big time use to a rebuilding team as a bench player. He was never going to be a core piece for a team that had bigger aspirations than 41 wins.

so they traded him away for a 2nd rounder? nice try. thats what you do with players you dont think can cut it in the league that another team wants to take a shot on. they blew it bigtime..... he could have been worth a mid 1st rounder as soon as a single year later based on his performance in houston. its a total crock that landry somehow couldnt have helped on a team with no depth and bottom 5 in the league

And it didn't hurt them at all.
And is completely irrelevant to the team they have currently built.

of course.... because they had durant, westbrook, and harden fall directly into their laps. all sorts of other awful moves can all be described the way you have here

Yes, I do recognize good management instead of just calling it "luck", while then defending a GM who is 20 games under .500 because he manages my favorite team. Sorry.

see next answer

Yeah, young, super efficient guy who leads the league in block rate. Ho hum

post sanders per36 numbers next to ibakas. set them side by side. ho hum.

[LUKE23]

So let me get this perfectly straight. A team that:

1. Wants to go young with a long-term plan in mind
2. Wants to go as cap friendly as possible with a long-term plan in mind
3. Clearly wants to build through the draft, thus eliminating wanting any type of win now veterans that make any type of salary on the roster

is making poor moves by letting veterans go, even though that's what they want and it's also what helped their draft status.

The definition of a bad move is a move that is done with the intention of helping your team but ends up hurting your team. Gooden, Maggette, Salmons, Joe Alexander, trading for Stephen Jackson while dropping in the draft, etc. When you do something intentionally and it works out exactly as you hoped, it's not a bad move. You are literally the only person on the planet that will argue OKC hasn't been one of the most well managed, if not the best managed team since Presti took over.

[JimmyTheKid]

You are literally the only person on the planet that will argue OKC hasn't been one of the most well managed, if not the best managed team since Presti took over.

Agree.

[ReasonablySober]

He's referencing when the Thunder traded Taj Gibson for Sefolosha.

Oh. Well, that's idiotic.

On February 19, 2009, the trade deadline, Sefolosha was traded by the Bulls to the Oklahoma City Thunder for Denver's 2009 first-round draft pick, which Chicago used to draft Taj Gibson.

[LUKE23]

Right. And that deal was made at the trade deadline, when OKC knew they were going to be drafting late 1st.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

So let me get this perfectly straight. A team that:

1. Wants to go young with a long-term plan in mind
2. Wants to go as cap friendly as possible with a long-term plan in mind
3. Clearly wants to build through the draft, thus eliminating wanting any type of win now veterans that make any type of salary on the roster

is making poor moves by letting veterans go, even though that's what they want and it's also what helped their draft status.

The definition of a bad move is a move that is done with the intention of helping your team but ends up hurting your team. Gooden, Maggette, Salmons, Joe Alexander, trading for Stephen Jackson while dropping in the draft, etc. When you do something intentionally and it works out exactly as your hoped, it's not a bad move. You are literally the only person on the planet that will argue OKC hasn't been one of the most well managed, if not the best managed team since Presti took over.

they definitely ran the tank model to perfection. but it had more to do with WHEN they did it.... the HOW is what casts doubt about whether there was any skill involved.

ladies and gentlemen.... "the okc model"...............

1. trade all passable nba talent for non passable nba talent

2. go young and draft who falls into your lap at the top of 3 drafts

3. continue to make multiple awful moves giving away your secondary talent...... so your run at the top goes three drafts instead of two. because after all, if you get too lucky with talent acquistion late in the draft like they did you might get to good too fast.

bottom line is that they drafted durant, harden,and westbrook and virtually EVERY other move theyve made besides the ibaka pick was a wash or worse. im not not saying it didnt work. im just saying that there was virtually zero skill involved.

[LUKE23]

Yep. No skill involved in scouting, having patience, being frugal with your finances, purging the roster of any non-impact veterans that may add wins. No skill at all.

I'm pretty sure you don't believe what you say. You love being a vocal minority even if you don't have the argument to back it up. And you without question have zero argument here.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

He's referencing when the Thunder traded Taj Gibson for Sefolosha.

Oh. Well, that's idiotic.

im not saying they traded gibson for thabo... give me a break. im analyzing presti in RETROSPECT as you all do here on the board with hammond. im trying to find ANY move hes made besides his drafting of the big 3 and to some extent ibaka that would lend someone to believe there is some great skill involved here.

in this case they traded a pick with value for another wing player in thabo.
was it a bad move?
no.
was it a good one that should make presti the leader of your cult either?
of course not... in retrospect it backfired.

[LUKE23]

Besides drafting Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka, trading Green for Perkins, and trading a mid 20's 1st for an elite wing defender in Sefolosha, and amassing multiple 1sts wherever possible, I agree, Presti has done very little of significant impact.

[emunney]

I wouldn't say trading for Thabo backfired. He's played over 6000 minutes for them in the regular season and almost another 1000 in the playoffs. Compared to the average outcome of a late 1st, that's very strong.

The pick they gave up could have been Gibson if they kept it; it also could have been Toney Douglas or Wayne Ellington or DeMarre Carroll, the next three picks. The value of a draft pick isn't equivalent to the value of the player who was picked there or the value of the best player who was picked from then on. It's the average, expected outcome of making a pick in that slot. If every trade involving a draft pick was retrospectively analyzed according to who theoretically could have been picked there, nobody should have ever traded a draft pick. In reality, you win those deals more often than not.

[JimmyTheKid]

Besides drafting Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka, trading Green for Perkins, and trading a mid 20's 1st for an elite wing defender in Sefolosha, and amassing multiple 1sts wherever possible, I agree, Presti has done very little of significant impact.

Durant was the ONLY no-brainer on that list.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

our summations i suppose.....

Besides drafting Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka....

this is the only place where the case can be made..... an argument for luck vs skill as it relates to the tanking method. 3 great players made with basically no brainer picks. topped by his one superlative move... the drafting of serge ibaka late in the first round when the rest of the known world had him going early in the 2nd.

trading Green for Perkins, and trading a mid 20's 1st for an elite wing defender in Sefolosha,

these would be his overrated lateral moves

and amassing multiple 1sts wherever possible

which, as ive previously shown.....allowed presti to bomb virtually EVERY subsequent player evaluation and donate these multiple players back to the league

I agree, Presti has done very little of significant impact.

dont forget all the trades he made....... a recipe of trading current nba talent for non current nba talent with virtually no exception. skill or bad management? luck or unbelievable foresight? its a difficult evaluation. he has acquired some great talent, but there is also strong evidence that perhaps with all the moves hes made that he doesnt have the first fcking clue how this all fell into his lap.

[CanadaBucks]

The only bad move Presti made was the Allen trade imo. I just don't agree when people say there was no luck involved and that this is a model that is easily followed. You're relying on ping-pong ball drops, not drafting total busts, and multiple other factors that may interfere with "The OKC Model". h/t to Presti for a job well done but with bad luck it could have been a draft pool like 2006 or they get Oden instead of Durant in 07. Chicago trades LMA for Tyrus Thomas and then turns a 1.7% chance at the #1 pick into Rose. Yes they put themselves in that position but if they keep Aldridge do they still get Rose? What if the 8th team that year picked 1st? Joe Alexander for Derrick Rose is a very nice trade imo. Just saying there's luck involved here.

[Badgerlander]

Westbrook wasn't a "no-brainer" pick

[LUKE23]

GoS wrote:



The "only place a case can be made" is where he drafted three stars and another guy who will possibly see some all-star games in his career. Ok. And Green for Perkins is lateral? Green added nothing of value, while Perkins is a really good defender. Westbrook/Harden/Durant/Ibaka/Perkins/Sefolosha are guys that would be in the top 8 of any rotation in the league, and Presti acquired all of them. You're making yourself look like a fool.

dont forget all the trades he made....... a recipe of trading current nba talent for non current nba talent with virtually no exception. skill or bad management? luck or unbelievable foresight? its a difficult evaluation. he has acquired some great talent, but there is also strong evidence that perhaps with all the moves hes made that he doesnt have the first fcking clue how this all fell into his lap.

[El Duderino]

Westbrook wasn't a "no-brainer" pick

Neither was Harden at the third pick. He was projected to go between the the 3rd and 6th

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

maybe i shouldnt have said harden and westbrook were no brainers..... thats maybe not fair. durant was the one no brainer.

a better description would be that he picked players projected to go in the range they got picked. that was his shining moment..... he didnt blow it by reaching for guys further down the board.