Originally Posted by SithCeNtZ:
It's because you have two different answers to this question depending on which conference you are in: "if I want to be the best team in my conference overall for the next decade, what is the best course of action?". In the east, the answer is simple: tank, load up a young core, and wait Lebron out. Once Lebron gets older, it's wide open, and because the celts won't go all in, your team has just as good of chance as anyone else to be the team of the decade in the east. The sixers have done this well, and I think that's why Ainge won't trade any of his high picks, because he thinks this is the way to go.
On the other hand, the west has no such plan. The Warriors probably won't fall off in a year or two. They are going to be great for the foreseeable future. So if you are a western conference GM, the only answer to my original question is go all in and if you fail well at least you can tell your fan base you tried. The rockets and the wolves are perfect examples. Guys aren't getting any younger, so push all the chips in and go for it. Who cares if the wolves won't be able to keep a butler Wiggins towns core together in 3 years? Who cares if Chris Paul and harden fail ? There's no downside because your goal will still be to beat the Warriors in 5 years. The east doesn't have to worry about that, so they can play the long game.
Thanks for the reply I appreciate it. I would agree with you if you are looking at this from the team's perspective but IMHO when it comes to the max players in the NBA they are the ones with all the power and are choosing to go West not East. Looking at GS they are set to dominate for 3 more years at least barring injuries so it just makes me curious why they are choosing the way they are other than they know they can't beat Lebron. They aren't going to beat GS either though. It would seem to me the easiest path is in the East with alot less work and you won't get beat up as much.
The West is going to be fucking brutal next season. [Reply]
Originally Posted by SithCeNtZ:
It's because you have two different answers to this question depending on which conference you are in: "if I want to be the best team in my conference overall for the next decade, what is the best course of action?". In the east, the answer is simple: tank, load up a young core, and wait Lebron out. Once Lebron gets older, it's wide open, and because the celts won't go all in, your team has just as good of chance as anyone else to be the team of the decade in the east. The sixers have done this well, and I think that's why Ainge won't trade any of his high picks, because he thinks this is the way to go.
On the other hand, the west has no such plan. The Warriors probably won't fall off in a year or two. They are going to be great for the foreseeable future. So if you are a western conference GM, the only answer to my original question is go all in and if you fail well at least you can tell your fan base you tried. The rockets and the wolves are perfect examples. Guys aren't getting any younger, so push all the chips in and go for it. Who cares if the wolves won't be able to keep a butler Wiggins towns core together in 3 years? Who cares if Chris Paul and harden fail ? There's no downside because your goal will still be to beat the Warriors in 5 years. The east doesn't have to worry about that, so they can play the long game.
It's amazing to me how much this appears to be a change in philosophy from not that long ago. Top 10 picks were being sold for cash. Teams didn't want draft picks outside of the top 5 because they were salary commitments. Now, teams actually want their picks for the ability to build through the draft. I love it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
Thanks for the reply I appreciate it. I would agree with you if you are looking at this from the team's perspective but IMHO when it comes to the max players in the NBA they are the ones with all the power and are choosing to go West not East. Looking at GS they are set to dominate for 3 more years at least barring injuries so it just makes me curious why they are choosing the way they are other than they know they can't beat Lebron. They aren't going to beat GS either though. It would seem to me the easiest path is in the East with alot less work and you won't get beat up as much.
The West is going to be ****ing brutal next season.
It's going to be a blast watching the Bucks rise, especially with their new building. [Reply]
The NBA should really consider switching up teams in the conferences. The situations are kind of fluid, but it's still not likely to change anytime soon. If LeBron leaves the East, it will be a barren wasteland over there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
The NBA should really consider switching up teams in the conferences. The situations are kind of fluid, but it's still not likely to change anytime soon. If LeBron leaves the East, it will be a barren wasteland over there.
Just do seeding 1-16 for the whole league. It'd be so much better. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
That wouldn't solve everything. You'd still have some East team as a #5 seed that deserves a #10, but that could be a decent start.
True but I am willing to bet they'd get eliminated quickly. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
Jesus. Enough with the sour grapes. Durant made OKC relevant. OKC repaid the favor by trading away his friends and labelling him a cupcake.
No doubt. Durants decision worked out pretty well for him, I'd say. I mean, he only won a championship and looks to be set up on a dominant team for years. That's what all these guys work their whole lives for.
Crying about it and calling him Judas is just pathetic sour grapes. [Reply]
What difference does it make which conference anybody is in for the next few years? No matter how good any team is in either the East or the West, the Warriors are still going to be better.
All roads lead to a Golden State beatdown eventually. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hoopsdoc:
No doubt. Durants decision worked out pretty well for him, I'd say. I mean, he only won a championship and looks to be set up on a dominant team for years. That's what all these guys work their whole lives for.
Crying about it and calling him Judas is just pathetic sour grapes.
Calling him Judas Durant is a joke. Why don't you lighten the f**k up?
You guys clearly have no idea what the word loyalty and competitive mean. I bet you were the class snitches in HS and if you lost in a game of bball would immediately want to join the team that beat you. Always looking out for yourself and the easy way out.
Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy:
Calling him Judas Durant is a joke. Why don't you lighten the f**k up?
You guys clearly have no idea what the word loyalty and competitive mean. I bet you were the class snitches in HS and if you lost in a game of bball would immediately want to join the team that beat you. Always looking out for yourself and the easy way out.
Pathetic in my book.
Loyalty doesn't exist in sports much anymore, either from the players or owners side. Anyway he gave them almost 10 years while they broke up a dynasty. I think he was "loyal" enough. [Reply]
