If we didnt trade Chauncey

BayAreaTreyArea · Post #1 » by **BayAreaTreyArea** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 11:04 pm

Do you guys think we could have got to another NBA Finals with that crew? Sure Boston was around and they and Cleveland were doing work. I still think our team could have made a 2 or 3 year run at something if we didnt trade Chauncey. I think that was the biggest mistake of the Dumars era, even worse than Darko. Everybody wanted Milicic and who knew he was going to be such a bust. I see what the Spurs are now with their old big 3 and vision us being like that if we brought in more pieces instead of trading Chauncey. I always get mad when I think about this.

sc8581 · Post #2 » by **sc8581** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 11:38 pm

Is it mandatory we have a thread about this every few months or something?

epheisey · Post #3 » by **epheisey** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 11:43 pm

No. We might have made another couple ECF's at best.

The problem was Joe D's "retooling" strategy. Had we simply started right into rebuilding we might already be back or close to contending again. Even though we're hopefully close to the end of a "rebuilding" phase now, Joe D did his best to avoid rebuilding which is why we've been stuck with crap contracts like CV/BG/Smoove.

wallacex2jc · Post #4 » by **wallacex2jc** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 12:24 am

We could've let Rip, Dice and Sheed go (maybe with Sheed signing for less). Who knows what we can do with the cap space, maybe Chris Bosh goes to this team (amazing front-court with Sheed and Bosh). Also with Joe's ability to sign solid (if not great) role player, the "zoo crew" would still be one of the second units in the league.

Under Chauncey's leadership, Stuckey can grown into the role of the scorer for this team. Prince will still be a rock for this team. We could've competed for multiple chips

kurtis48239 · Post #5 » by **kurtis48239** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 1:35 am

If larry had stuck around ,probably (at least another finals apperance).If dumars would have upgraded the bench and kept larry,I really think we could have made it back,but I dont think we would be a dynasty like the spurs are with the same players,because pop is a great coach especialy with developing talent and getting the most out of his players.Larry is a great coach,but stinks developing new talent or rookies and thats the difference between us and the spurs.

ComboGuardCity · Post #6 » by **ComboGuardCity** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 1:47 am

No way in hell with Curry.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

sc8581 · Post #7 » by **sc8581** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 2:02 am

kurtis48239 wrote:If larry had stuck around ,probably (at least another finals apperance).If dumars would have upgraded the bench and kept larry,I really think we could have made it back,but I dont think we would be a dynasty like the spurs are with the same players,because pop is a great coach especialy with developing talent and getting the most out of his players.Larry is a great coach,but stinks developing new talent or rookies and thats the difference between us and the spurs.

I thought Larry Brown was doing a fine job developing Prince but that's just me I guess. *shrug*

ImHeisenberg · Post #8 » by **ImHeisenberg** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 2:13 am

In a vacuum with Curry as HC, no Ben Wallace. Detroit is a regular second round playoff team and that's about it. LeBron began his ascension, Boston was great at that point, and SVG's Magic were very good as well. One of those 3 teams would have bumped Detroit off each of those years.

Even then, keep Chauncey only kept the window open for a couple more years. That's it.

The problem was Dumars' moronic belief that he could "re-tool on the fly", and handed out 3 of the truly worst contracts in recent NBA history to Gordon, Villanueva and repeating his mistake with Josh Smith.

kurtis48239 · Post #9 » by **kurtis48239** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 2:19 am

sc8581 wrote:
kurtis48239 wrote:If larry had stuck around ,probably (at least another finals apperance).If dumars would have upgraded the bench and kept larry,I really think we could have made it back,but I dont think we would be a dynasty like the spurs are with the same players,because pop is a great coach especialy with developing talent and getting the most out of his players.Larry is a great coach,but stinks developing new talent or rookies and thats the difference between us and the spurs.

I thought Larry Brown was doing a fine job developing Prince but that's just me I guess. *shrug*

Larry didnt really develope prince,prince got an opertunity and suprised alot of people (including brown) and brown went with it.Brown was notorious for not wanting to play rookies or give them opertunites.

kurtis48239 · Post #10 » by **kurtis48239** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 2:23 am

ImHeisenberg wrote:In a vacuum with Curry as HC, no Ben Wallace. Detroit is a regular second round playoff team and that's about it. LeBron began his ascension, Boston was great at that point, and SVG's Magic were very good as well. One of those 3 teams would have bumped Detroit off each of those years.

Even then, keep Chauncey only kept the window open for a couple more years. That's it.

The problem was Dumars' moronic belief that he could "re-tool on the fly", and handed out 3 of the truly worst contracts in recent NBA history to Gordon, Villanueva and repeating his mistake with Josh Smith.

I didnt mind the gordon signing,it was re-signing rip.

BayAreaTreyArea · Post #11 » by **BayAreaTreyArea** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 3:57 am

sc8581 wrote:Is it mandatory we have a thread about this every few months or something?

Im new to the forum and didnt know this was a topic discussed often. figures though. its not often you compete and if you ruin your team in the middle of a great run fans tend to question why the frick you would do such a thing.

Post #12 » by **Snakebites** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 4:41 am

2 more years as a strong playoff team and not much more.

Its overstated, probably because Iverson was such agony to watch in every way that year.

Far worse was what we in conjunction with/following the move. Rip's extension was a devastatingly absurd payday for one of Dumars' buddies, and we proceeded to spend a whopping 55 million on another guy who played the same position and money on Charlie V. as well. The ripple effects of these moves are still felt to this day.

Oh, for good measure we also gave away Amir Johnson and Arron Afflalo to create cap space, too. Yikes.

TurboTitan · Post #13 » by **TurboTitan** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 5:14 am

I'm still scratching my head about that trade. Lets just say its one of Joe D's many mistakes...

NorCalFan · Post #14 » by **NorCalFan** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 10:17 am

Joe d got a lot of slack cause of that ring.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Redeemed · Post #15 » by **Redeemed** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 11:08 am

That team stopped being hungry and started feeling entitled. Joe would have needed to make some moves. Keeping Chauncey would have meant improving the development of Stuckey. Dude could have possibly been legit instead of a headcase.

Rip and/or Prince would gotten moved. You can't resign both of those declining players. Move Rip while he still had value or better yet, move Stuckey in that trade with Boston bringing in Rondo. Rondo and Billups in the backcourt would have been NICE. Speaking of nice, you definitely keep Dice.

Finals? Probably not. Crap? Definitely not. Another requirement would have been the coaching selections. With the team coming up for sale we have still been stuck with cheap coaches and barely rotation level players.

Rondo
Billups
Sheed
Dice
? (Amir Johnson)

Billl · Post #16 » by **Billl** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 12:55 pm

In retrospect, once Larry Brown left, the run was doomed. Not only was he a great coach, he was the dominant personality of that bunch. He's the one everyone would follow. He never took a day off, or even a play off, and his never ending drive kept the team unified. That was really the magic of that team. When he left, the team relied on Billups and sheed as the vocal leaders, and neither of them had the same, consistent focus as Brown. Sure, they were still a top team, but they floated and "flipped the switch" and tried to rely on their talent to carry them.

Coherence · Post #17 » by **Coherence** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 4:31 pm

sc8581 wrote:
kurtis48239 wrote:If larry had stuck around ,probably (at least another finals apperance).If dumars would have upgraded the bench and kept larry,I really think we could have made it back,but I dont think we would be a dynasty like the spurs are with the same players,because pop is a great coach especialy with developing talent and getting the most out of his players.Larry is a great coach,but stinks developing new talent or rookies and thats the difference between us and the spurs.

I thought Larry Brown was doing a fine job developing Prince but that's just me I guess. *shrug*

This, LB just wasnt interested in developing slugs like Darko who everyone but Joe knew was a slug.

chrbal · Post #18 » by **chrbal** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 6:31 pm

Trade Chauncey and never extend rip. Use cap space in following season to absorb short contracts and 1st round picks.

The Penguin · Post #19 » by **The Penguin** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 11:07 pm

1) Keep Chauncey

2) keep Afflalo & Amir

3) don't sign Gordon / CV31

4) sell high on Rip, Prince, Stuckey

Building blocks of Chauncey, Afflalo, Amir with draft picks from Rip/Prince/Stuckey. That would have been nice. Dumars did the opposite.

kurtis48239 · Post #20 » by **kurtis48239** » Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:11 am

Coherence wrote:
sc8581 wrote:
kurtis48239 wrote:If larry had stuck around ,probably (at least another finals apperance).If dumars would have upgraded the bench and kept larry,I really think we could have made it back,but I dont think we would be a dynasty like the spurs are with the same players,because pop is a great coach especialy with developing talent and getting the most out of his players.Larry is a great coach,but stinks developing new talent or rookies and thats the difference between us and the spurs.

I thought Larry Brown was doing a fine job developing Prince but that's just me I guess. *shrug*

This, LB just wasnt interested in developing slugs like Darko who everyone but Joe knew was a slug.

brown was notorious for not developing his rookies,theres alot of past players of his who have commented on it.He put you in the dog house and you stayed there.Also alot of GMs wanted darko and thought he was going to be the next big center,and I also believe if larry had at least tried to develop darko,he would have turned into a much better player.