SmartWentCrazy wrote:This is baiting. Knock it off. And the last part is just wholly offensive and unnecessary— you're better than that.
Well, thanks for that. I've never reported a post here, and never will. Have also never attacked that dude, and am far from the only one here with strong opinions or sharp elbows expressing them. Also didn't start the "take the L" thread being referred to, nor was I the one to bring it up in this one until I was I namelessly invoked by another poster.
Beyond that, there is a legitimate discussion to be had here. Not every group of posters shares every opinion on every topic, but in the bigger picture, there was absolutely a pretty sizable contingent of folks here who were adamant about (a) not wanting to tank, (b) giving IT a 4-5 year max, and (c) letting Smart walk for nothing (even if keeping him only meant matching an offer sheet smaller than his current deal). A lot of folks were pretty vocal about all that, and had no problem letting people who disagreed with any of that know exactly how they felt about their opinions.
Well, dust has settled enough to look back on all that. In the even bigger picture beyond this board, there is a hypothetical conversation about what the team could have or should have done during this rebuild. I, for one, am glad that we don't live in the world where those posters got their way, and we had a team with a maxed, broken-down IT and no Smart. And had I been someone who advocated for all that while mocking people who disagreed, I probably wouldn't want to revisit those past takes, either.
I, for one, have also been a big supporter of Ainge, Smart, and this rebuild in general. One thing I would have done differently is tank a little harder back when winning didn't matter. Not a scorched earth approach that Philly used, but certainly more than we did. Hard to say what that alternate universe looks like, but chances are high that we would have sacrificed some of our recent short-term success in order to land better prospects with our own draft picks (and better lottery odds in those drafts). Probably wouldn't even be talking about Smart right now had we done that.
With that approach, we are probably looking at Embiid or Gordon instead of Smart. If it were Embiid, we are probably putting him on the shelf his first year and tanking the next year or two as Philly did. Maybe the next year is Porzingis or Winslow, and given that the Nets were still going to be awful regardless, we have two very good shots at Ben Simmons the next year (maybe you even get him *and* Jaylen, or at least Hield). Still land Tatum the next year.
Of course, that alternate universe could have easily meant Jabari Parker and WCS (or perhaps even Paul George and AD). Either way, I'd take it over the no tank, maxed IT, and no Smart approach. Those weren't great opinions to be so jacked up about for so long. And ducking years of one hating on Smart over a 5% improvement on FGs that is largely attributable to the change in his role last year is... umm... an entertaining lack of accountability, IMO.
