Henry Abbott talks tanking and good and bad management

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Users who are viewing this thread

Nikolokolus

There's always next year
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
30,704
Likes
6,198
Points
113
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/39318/tanking-is-the-tip-of-the-iceberg

Lots of good stuff in the story, but I thought this section was interesting; providing a little bit of window into Cho's thinking.

"The process of rebuilding is extremely rough on everyone," says Raptors GM Bryan Colangelo, "and unfortunately made worse by the reality that the whole system is counterintuitive. Strangely, losing may help you eventually win. But players, coaches and management are all in this place trained as competitors. How in the world do you tell a player or coach to go out there and lay down? The answer is you don’t. But I continually stress that even in defeat we must win in other ways with the intent of moving the dial forward."

In other words, build with talent, build with coaching, build with culture and build with the long-term benefits of losing.

Or take this year's worst team, the Bobcats, now run by Cho, who is well-regarded. What's plaguing the Bobcats is a history of mistakes, but also the reality that the front office -- Michael Jordan, Rod Higgins, Cho and company -- is not doing all it can to win right now. If there are cheap free agents they could add to make this team better, they have not added them. If there are better coaches available, now would not be the time to hire them.

Cho says he made something like that a condition of his joining the team. "They called me the day after I got let go by Portland," he recalls of the Bobcats. Cho had three years left on his Portland contract, and had that finest of luxuries -- he simply didn't have to work. "I had thought about taking some time off, or teaching at a high school," he told me on a recent episode of TrueHoop TV. "I thought about maybe coaching high school tennis, which I've wanted to do for a long time."

But he flew to Charlotte for a conversation that came down to a key moment, when Cho asked if the Bobcats really wanted to win. As in, did they want to win so badly that they'd be willing to follow in the footsteps of Cho's former employer, the Thunder, who won 20 games one season, and then 23 the next, in the process of amassing the core of their current team?

In other words, Cho was asking, were they willing to lose? "Are you willing," Cho remembers asking, "to take a step back to take two steps forward?"

Cho says the room answered, unanimously, "yes." A few months later, that team is 7-40.

Cho explains how the Thunder did it. When they had cap room, they didn't use it. Massive losing streaks helped too. The team's point guard of the future (Russell Westbrook) learned on the job while leading the league in turnovers.

There is no suggestion that any of the players or coaches didn't try their hardest. But the fact is the front office trotted out a young, cheap and, frankly, bad team for a good long time. Intentionally. During those same years they could have been, with a different strategy, far more competitive. But if they had done that, they'd never be leading the Western Conference right now, because they wouldn't have gotten the good players that came with the good picks that came from losing.

Whether you were pro or con on Cho as the Blazers GM, I think it makes it pretty clear that he got fired when he asked Paul Allen and Larry Miller the same question he posed to Michael Jordan.
 
Last edited:
The Blazers have it right. Make the playoffs and get shit canned int he first round every year so you are just good enough to draft guys like Babbitt each year
 
The Blazers have it right. Make the playoffs and get shit canned int he first round every year so you are just good enough to draft guys like Babbitt each year

Oh please. San antonio seemed to rebuild on the fly by picking great players late. Sure they had duncan, we have aldridge (obviously not as good, but still an all star). How has that thunder model worked for the warriors, clippers (until now) and kings? It has more to do with your scouts, gm etc.
 
Yes, but with a good scouting team you will be better with the 5th pick rather than the 15th pick. Aldridge is an All Star, but not even in the same class as Duncan in his prime.
 
Let's be honest here. Had Seattle won the lottery, Sam Presti wouldn't be viewed as a 'genius' after picking Oden, and the Blazers would be title contenders with LMA and Durant, along with Chris Paul or Deron Williams, or whoever decided to come get a title in Portland.
 
Sure Durant was a bit of a stroke of luck, but it's all the follow-up moves that separate Presti and guys like Buford from everybody else. He hit on Harden, Westbrook, Ibaka and got some very good value free agents like Sefalosha, and made a series of very shrewd value based trades getting Maynor from Utah and Perkins from Boston. The only thing he might wish he had to do over is not voiding the Chandler deal and maybe a few other moves like drafting Aldrich, etc.

The lesson here for the Blazers is that it's going to take not just getting one big hit in the lottery this year, but a sequence of positive moves to get back to being competitive ... in other words installing decision makers with some savvy and vision.
 
Last edited:
@PapaG
well.. anybody, and I mean anybody (like off the streets anybody)... I am 99%+ sure.. would of picked the other from the Oden/Durant question... you did not have to be an employed GM to do it

but I understand what you mean..
 
Who in this draft is going to help rebuild the BobCats? There is no Durrant. Davis is a excellent piece but no where close to helping turn a team around. They better hope there is one next year (if they are lucky enough to get the top pick) I see it taking much longer than OKC.
 
Who in this draft is going to help rebuild the BobCats? There is no Durrant. Davis is a excellent piece but no where close to helping turn a team around. They better hope there is one next year (if they are lucky enough to get the top pick) I see it taking much longer than OKC.

I don't think anyone thought Westbrook would be all nba 2nd team when he was drafted.

Just let it play out.

For the record, I think Davis is a franchise player.
 
Who in this draft is going to help rebuild the BobCats? There is no Durrant. Davis is a excellent piece but no where close to helping turn a team around. They better hope there is one next year (if they are lucky enough to get the top pick) I see it taking much longer than OKC.

The more I see of Anthony Davis, the more I see a potential NBA superstar. He has handles and hops.

Conversely, the more I see of Thomas Robinson, the more I see Corliss Williamson. Dude should be a TE in the NFL.
 
I don't think anyone thought Westbrook would be all nba 2nd team when he was drafted.

Just let it play out.

For the record, I think Davis is a franchise player.

Yeah, Westbrook was a complete shock compared to who was drafted, and where he is now, but remember before that draft when he was shooting up the draft boards after some workouts.

You have to wonder about how shitty of a coach Ben Howland really is, though. He should have let those UCLA teams play ball instead of the slow-it-down BS that always stagnated in the Final Four.
 
I don't think anyone thought Westbrook would be all nba 2nd team when he was drafted.

Just let it play out.

For the record, I think Davis is a franchise player.


I have seen it play out. With the Clippers. I see a lot of similarities with their ownership and GM.
That strategy is fine, but it's far from fool proof.
 
Good lord, Cho lucks out with getting the #2 pick instead of the #1 pick and years later Cho is golden GM and KP is out.

If those ping pong balls turned out that Seattle got the first pick and Ptd the 2nd pick, KP would be the golden child and no one woulod be listening to Cho.

Looking forward to see what Cho can do with the Bobcats. Meanwhile I don't see many teams in the West following Cho's stategy. I wish Utah, Phx, Denver and the likes who will lose in the first round would tank so Blazers could get in, but looks like teams are playing with the idea of winning.
 
I have seen it play out. With the Clippers. I see a lot of similarities with their ownership and GM.
That strategy is fine, but it's far from fool proof.

I don't think anyone is saying it's fool proof.
 
Yeah, Westbrook was a complete shock compared to who was drafted, and where he is now, but remember before that draft when he was shooting up the draft boards after some workouts.

You have to wonder about how shitty of a coach Ben Howland really is, though. He should have let those UCLA teams play ball instead of the slow-it-down BS that always stagnated in the Final Four.

A shitty coach doesn't lead his team to 3 straight Final Four's.
 
The Blazers have it right. Make the playoffs and get shit canned int he first round every year so you are just good enough to draft guys like Babbitt each year

The draft.

Sonics get Oden instead of Durant.

Where is that team now after enduring that 5 year period of tear-down and miserable tanking?
 
The draft.

Sonics get Oden instead of Durant.

Where is that team now after enduring that 5 year period of tear-down and miserable tanking?

Right where we are. It's not an exact science.
 
Who in this draft is going to help rebuild the BobCats? There is no Durrant. Davis is a excellent piece but no where close to helping turn a team around. They better hope there is one next year (if they are lucky enough to get the top pick) I see it taking much longer than OKC.

You might be right, but I think Davis is going to be a total monster :dunno:

Then again I also remember some people talking about how skinny Durant was and how he might struggle to take the pounding of the NBA and wouldn't be able to play D ...
 
The draft.

Sonics get Oden instead of Durant.

Where is that team now after enduring that 5 year period of tear-down and miserable tanking?

With Ibaka, Harden, Westbrook and whomever else? They're still a damn good team ... who knows, maybe Oden never buys "Dance, Dance, Revolution" if he lives in OKC?
 
Harden is such a baller. I remember I was skeptical when they drafted him as high as they did. I was wrong. Dude is a stud.
 
A shitty coach doesn't lead his team to 3 straight Final Four's.

What's UCLA done lately, even with some first round NBA picks? Drew Gordon and Mike Moser both bailed on Howland, which is telling.
 
With Ibaka, Harden, Westbrook and whomever else? They're still a damn good team ... who knows, maybe Oden never buys "Dance, Dance, Revolution" if he lives in OKC?

I like Ibaka a lot for where he was picked, but he is a complimentary player. I think Harden is a stud, but not a franchise star. I think Westbrook is pretty overrated and don't think he is All-NBA caliber. I would hate to try and build a team around him. Not the type of player I like.

Without Durant, and having to commit much of the salary cap to 3 those three good players, they would be a good team that would never win a conference finals, let alone an NBA finals.
 
You might be right, but I think Davis is going to be a total monster :dunno:

Then again I also remember some people talking about how skinny Durant was and how he might struggle to take the pounding of the NBA and wouldn't be able to play D ...

I understand he is a total stud, but is he a much bigger stud than LMA is right now? And how good is Portland?

For Charlotte (or anyone) to turns things around as quickly as OKC they need a stud who can create his own shot at will like a Rose, Durant, LeBron or he even Kyle Irving. Big men are needed of course, but in today's NBA it is the PG's, SG's and SF's who are the major game changers. (Dirk being an exception) They are not easy to find and everyone is looking for them. I guess all you can do is build your team and hope to god one falls in your lap. Maybe there is one out there this year. But I don't know who it is.
 
Last edited:
I understand he is a total stud, but is he a much bigger stud than LMA is right now? And how good is Portland?

For Charlotte (or anyone) to turns things around as quickly as OKC they need a stud who can create his own shot at will like a Rose, Durant, LeBron or he even Kyle Irving. Big men are needed of course, but in today's NBA it is the PG's, SG's and SF's who are the major game changers. (Dirk being an exception) They are not easy to find and everyone is looking for them. I guess all you can do is build your team and hope to god one falls in your lap. Maybe there is one out there this year. But I don't know who it is.

I don't think the Bobcats are planning on being a contender next year with just the addition of Davis (assuming they get him I think his ceiling is much greater than LaMarcus') but I kind of like Kemba (who's had a quietly good rookie season after a rough start) and I think Biyombo could end up a real difference maker on the defensive end. They definitely need stud on the wing (preferably a shot creating 2 or 3) but who knows what they'll do?
 
Kemba's shooting percentages are laughable at best

Baby Damon
 
What's UCLA done lately, even with some first round NBA picks? Drew Gordon and Mike Moser both bailed on Howland, which is telling.

Thats cause he let Reeves Nelson rule the roost. I'm not a huge Howland fan, but about 5 years ago he went to the Final Four in 3 consecutive years. Few coaches have ever done that. I don't think he falls under the category of a shitty coach.
 
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/39318/tanking-is-the-tip-of-the-iceberg

Lots of good stuff in the story, but I thought this section was interesting; providing a little bit of window into Cho's thinking.



Whether you were pro or con on Cho as the Blazers GM, I think it makes it pretty clear that he got fired when he asked Paul Allen and Larry Miller the same question he posed to Michael Jordan.

Just the opposite.

The Blazers have been following that strategy for 9 years now.

The difference is Durant and Westbrook remain healthy while Oden and Roy are out of the league.
 
I understand the lack of faith people have in the Blazer front office. Here's the catch: no matter how little faith/respect you have for them, we are still better off with the 8-10 pick than with the 14+. The better the pick, the less chance they will get it wrong.

This team is desperate for an influx of talent. We don't have the assets to make block-buster trades, and free agency is fools gold. The draft is the one legit chance we have...period.
 
Back
Top