More Tank Talk! Plus, What is a Wing? (split from the [Game] thread}
- Thread starter AaronPDX
- Start date
I feel like it's too narrow to just put players in 3 categories. There's tons of non primary ball handling guards that don't really fit into what a wing is supposed to do. Maybe they have "wing" skills but they certainly can't hold their own on defense with most wings that play the 4.
If Monte said he was going to draft a wing on draft day and wound up drafting a non primary ball handling guard, we would all be up in arms about it because most people don't consider that player to be a wing.
If Monte said he was going to draft a wing on draft day and wound up drafting a non primary ball handling guard, we would all be up in arms about it because most people don't consider that player to be a wing.
Eh, I see a plan to rebuild at least starting from trading Cousins, (and probably from earlier that year after firing Karl) Part of the friction between Joerger and the front office is that the FO wanted another development year and Joerger on his last contract year wasn't motivated to tank.
Walton was clearly not going to be a winner, it got Vlade fired after a year, but he was an able tank commander, so he was retained.
Walton was clearly not going to be a winner, it got Vlade fired after a year, but he was an able tank commander, so he was retained.
Talk post Cousins trade was that Vivek got wishy washy at the 25th hour about maxing him out and told Vlade to trade him for Buddy (he's the next Klay!), not necessarily that it was a tank move.
Luke stuck it out because he was Vlade's buddy, the fact that he happened to be a great tank commander was just a lucky accident.
I'll concede the Joerger point though! You've unlocked a hazy memory about our FO wanting to give up that season and jockey for lotto positioning.
Luke stuck it out because he was Vlade's buddy, the fact that he happened to be a great tank commander was just a lucky accident.
I'll concede the Joerger point though! You've unlocked a hazy memory about our FO wanting to give up that season and jockey for lotto positioning.
I really hope we don't Kangz and fire Monte.
People have short memories, but still, it's too soon and too painful to remember over a decade and a half of irrelevance and incompetence. Monte has been the best (and most successful) GM since Geoff, and it's not even close. We have been competitive the last 3 years, and while we can (and should hope) for better results, I'll take it over what we saw earlier. More importantly, we have most of our assets going forward (and then some), depth at most positions, and a nice combination of vets and prospects. We do need some of your young guys to take a leap for the team to make the jump, or combine some of these assets to try and get a star, but these are possibilities we can at least discuss now, instead of resigning ourselves to lottery odds in January.
I understand the desire of some folks to commit to a full rebuild, and to blame Monte/Vivek for that. I didn't believe that to be a good idea to begin with (we were never able to form a chest of picks that can help you turn things around via the draft quickly), and doubt our ability to pull it off even if it were a good idea. Usually teams that do so are successful teams that go for a reset. Celtics for example, won in 2008, and had good runs over the next few years, before flipping Pierce and KG for picks and prospects that led to the core of the current roster.
Similarly, OKC drafted Durant, Westbook, and Harden (3 future MVPs) in consecutive years from 2007-2009, and reached the Finals in 2012. Had few successful runs despite trading Harden, only to lose Durant to Warriors (facilitated by new TV rights deal). I agree that this analogy is not as accurate as Celtics, since the current core was fueled more by the trades of Westbrook and Paul George.
If we want to do something like that, we will need to trade away not only Domas, but also Deebo, Lavine, and Monk. These are huge salaries for, in many cases, not elite players like KG/Pierce or Westbrook/George. We will need to take back junk to match salaries (not always easy, since often players with such high salaries are producing at a good level. Even our vets are doing that) if we want to be compensated with picks/prospects. Then, we hope that Keon, Carter, and Keegan will like to stick around and grow as franchise centerpieces.
Bottomline, full on rebuild is not easy. It's easier if you have high level stars surrounded by role players. Teams will pay for them. Highly/Reasonably paid good players, not so much.
People have short memories, but still, it's too soon and too painful to remember over a decade and a half of irrelevance and incompetence. Monte has been the best (and most successful) GM since Geoff, and it's not even close. We have been competitive the last 3 years, and while we can (and should hope) for better results, I'll take it over what we saw earlier. More importantly, we have most of our assets going forward (and then some), depth at most positions, and a nice combination of vets and prospects. We do need some of your young guys to take a leap for the team to make the jump, or combine some of these assets to try and get a star, but these are possibilities we can at least discuss now, instead of resigning ourselves to lottery odds in January.
I understand the desire of some folks to commit to a full rebuild, and to blame Monte/Vivek for that. I didn't believe that to be a good idea to begin with (we were never able to form a chest of picks that can help you turn things around via the draft quickly), and doubt our ability to pull it off even if it were a good idea. Usually teams that do so are successful teams that go for a reset. Celtics for example, won in 2008, and had good runs over the next few years, before flipping Pierce and KG for picks and prospects that led to the core of the current roster.
Similarly, OKC drafted Durant, Westbook, and Harden (3 future MVPs) in consecutive years from 2007-2009, and reached the Finals in 2012. Had few successful runs despite trading Harden, only to lose Durant to Warriors (facilitated by new TV rights deal). I agree that this analogy is not as accurate as Celtics, since the current core was fueled more by the trades of Westbrook and Paul George.
If we want to do something like that, we will need to trade away not only Domas, but also Deebo, Lavine, and Monk. These are huge salaries for, in many cases, not elite players like KG/Pierce or Westbrook/George. We will need to take back junk to match salaries (not always easy, since often players with such high salaries are producing at a good level. Even our vets are doing that) if we want to be compensated with picks/prospects. Then, we hope that Keon, Carter, and Keegan will like to stick around and grow as franchise centerpieces.
Bottomline, full on rebuild is not easy. It's easier if you have high level stars surrounded by role players. Teams will pay for them. Highly/Reasonably paid good players, not so much.
I ask again y’all really wanna run this bull crap roster that has a ceiling of a 8th seed next year vs trading for Zion? Hilarious!!
Dumbass really traded for Lavine with the thought of starting Lavine, monk, DD, and Sabonis. How do you justify building an all offense group when you don’t even have an elite offensive hub ala harden or Luka. Get Monte ass out of here and rebuild
Dumbass really traded for Lavine with the thought of starting Lavine, monk, DD, and Sabonis. How do you justify building an all offense group when you don’t even have an elite offensive hub ala harden or Luka. Get Monte ass out of here and rebuild
This might not be a popular opinion around here, but we’re getting pretty close to my ideal scenario that I called out a month or so ago…
- Miss the play-in and keep our 2025 1st. We can still trade our 2026 1st (11-30 protected) if we’re making some sort of big move this offseason so I don’t think it hamstrings our flexibility too much other than the 2026 SAC 2nd and 2027 SAC 2nd being tied up since they could convey to ATL still. However, the “2025 CHA 1st” will convey to a 2026 CHA 2nd and a CHA 2027 2nd so we’ll still have some ammunition to throw around
- Keep Monk, LaVine, & DeRozan “happy.” My concern with benching one of them or having one of them not close out games was that it could turn into a player publicly asking out which would diminish their trade value. If we continue to roll with the lineup everyone knows is extremely flawed, it may help us not lose out on value when we undoubtedly try to move at least one of those guys in the offseason.
- Don’t allow Keon Ellis to look too attractive. This is related to #2, but by keeping Ellis in this bench role, it may help us keep his next contract lower and resign him on a bargain. Considering he’s only averaging 23.5 mpg this year and we can make him a RFA this offseason, perhaps we can get a good deal.
I expect a committee approach. Bring in three guys and have them take a vote. Then do a trial run with media, Drapier and Kayte for example, to take the political temperature. Then after the vote Vivek will approve or not based on his limited knowledge of the day and a vote will be taken from the GM group on who should give the news to the media a week after the decision is made.
My guess is the ship has already sailed. Firing MB was likely a FO decision, now he’s just serving out the remainder of his sentence here.
Hopefully he lands on his feet somewhere. I expect he’ll be a hot prospect for another organization but may unfortunately not get a shot at the catbird seat again.
And of course word gets out so we likely won’t be seriously considered for any of the top up and coming management candidates
Hopefully he lands on his feet somewhere. I expect he’ll be a hot prospect for another organization but may unfortunately not get a shot at the catbird seat again.
And of course word gets out so we likely won’t be seriously considered for any of the top up and coming management candidates
