When have you been less excited for the start of a Blazers season?

[Phatguysrule]

Your strategy has worked a few times for other teams. But it hasn't worked very often. So to say keeping those guys is 100 % wrong is more of a guess than fact. Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to which direction is best, but it's all a crap shoot.

Of course, that's why I've been saying "in my opinion".

Nobody is saying you can't have your opinion. This is a discussion. It just so happens that far more teams who have tanked until getting a generational player have turned into championship contenders then the ones who haven't if you exclude the few destination cities.

The odds say it will take us six or seven hard tanks to draft a generational player or multiple all NBA players. And you need one or both in order to win championships in NBA if you aren't a destination City.

 

[Phatguysrule]

FIFY

I still put a pretty fair amount of faith in the development of Sharpe and Scoot. The development of both has been stunted a bit. Last season should have been Sharpe's breakout year, but he missed a major chunk of it with the ab injury that required surgery. That doesn't change the fact that he's an athletic freak who has shown signs of All-Star potential. Scoot was a deer in the headlights last season as he tried to make the leap from G-League to NBA. He also dealt with injuries. To me, the talk of him being a bust is incredibly short sighted. He's got the athletic talent to be a top-tier guard. He just needs off-season work on his game, particularly shooting and finishing, and a chance to gain game experience. If those two develop into All-Stars, what the Blazers have done is form a solid foundation. They added a promising front line piece in Clingan. They will no doubt lose enough games this season to be in position to grab a very good prospect in a deep draft. Flagg would be great, but there are plenty of good picks available.

I have no problem with trading Grant and/or Simons, but it should happen at the point that a good return is offered; not just because message forums are clamoring for it to happen immediately. I have little doubt that they'll be gone by the deadline.

I don't disagree with anything there. I'm simply trying to play the odds. The odds are that both Scoot and Sharpe will not develop into all stars. The odds are that we're going to get less value from Grant and Simons then we would gain by losing more games, not more value.

If keeping Grant and Simons wins us three games that prevents us from drafting #1 it probably doesn't matter what we get out of them. We have shot ourselves in the foot.

 

[e_blazer]

I don't disagree with anything there. I'm simply trying to play the odds. The odds are that both Scoot and Sharpe will not develop into all stars. The odds are that we're going to get less value from Grant and Simons then we would gain by losing more games, not more value.

If keeping Grant and Simons wins us three games that prevents us from drafting #1 it probably doesn't matter what we get out of them. We have shot ourselves in the foot.

I bet the Hawks don't wish that they'd lost three more games last season. The Pistons would have done better by winning a few more games. The league has made it very hard to gain a certain advantage by tanking.

 

[Pinwheel1]

he probably would if he was a decent ball-handler, but he's not. Of course, an Ayton with handles is like an Oden with good knees...fictional characters

but yeah, in his own way, Ayton can dominate the ball. In the last 2 months of last season, in those games that Ayton fans like to point to when he averaged 23 points, he also averaged 19.2 FGA. For perspective, Jokic led all NBA C's last season in FGA with 17.9; Wemby was 2nd at 16.7. Obviously, the runway for Ayton's 'ball hoggishness' was cleared with Simons-Grant-Brogdon sitting. When 2 or 3 of those guys played, Ayton only averaged a shade over 13 FGA

And that is part of my point. If you put together a team that has multiple scoring options, then the likeliness of someone dominating the ball while others stand and watch will go down. If it continues then that is on the coach.

Some fans complained about Dame doing that, but would he have if there were 3 other legitimate scorers on the floor? I am pretty sure he was encouraged to shoot anytime and from anywhere on the court.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I bet the Hawks don't wish that they'd lost three more games last season. The Pistons would have done better by winning a few more games. The league has made it very hard to gain a certain advantage by tanking.

It's not a decision you make for one season. That's the point.

 

[kjironman1]

But we all also know that the injury risks were why they got those players in those positions. We never would have gotten Roy if he hadn't had injury concerns. I've also heard rumors that that weighed in on Chicago making the trade with Aldridge.

Except Oden. So just getting the number one pick also isn't a guarant.

So the Blazers had something extraordinary happen and that those players were available when they were picking. I'm saying that we can't count on that happening. And if it does happen, there's probably a reason.

If something extraordinary were to happen and we're just too good with young players to keep losing then that's great. But that's not the case now. So we're just hurting ourselves by keeping older players who have proven they can help us beat bad teams but aren't all star caliber. They are simply hurting our chances at getting a better drafting. It's all about probabilities.

You're right, it might not take 6,7 or 8 years. And that would be great. But we haven't started by getting the best draft picks we can. We've missed out on some great players that we would have had a better chance at drafting if we have lost more. Likely one of the best of all time.

So we've kind of screwed the pooch on our first few years of the tank. Hopefully Scoot and Sharpe turn into All Stars. But we should absolutely not count on that being the case. We aren't going to have the opportunity to tank in a few more years of their develop. We really need to make the most of our opportunity right now, IMO.

Well Sure. Now you have made enough disclaimers that nothing can be relied upon and I do agree. Very little can be considered a sure thing.
I personally feel it's one more year to get a good pick maybe two simply because they still won't be any good, and make really good trade decisions with Grant and Ayton or Simons. Both Simons and Ayton would fit pretty much any team they build. Getting rid of Grant leaves them again searching for a PF that can guard the perimeter and create a shot but that is why I think he will be coveted by a team at the trade deadline.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Well Sure. Now you have made enough disclaimers that nothing can be relied upon and I do agree. Very little can be considered a sure thing.
I personally feel it's one more year to get a good pick maybe two simply because they still won't be any good, and make really good trade decisions with Grant and Ayton or Simons. Both Simons and Ayton would fit pretty much any team they build. Getting rid of Grant leaves them again searching for a PF that can guard the perimeter and create a shot but that is why I think he will be coveted by a team at the trade deadline.

Yeah I mean that sounds like a great way to have a team that might make it out of the first round someday.

Awesome.

I mean I hope it works out. I hope we are the better than that. But there is a reason I don't go to the casino.

 

[kjironman1]

Yeah I mean that sounds like a great way to have a team that might make it out of the first round someday.

Awesome.

I mean I hope it works out. I hope you win the better than. But I don't go to the casino for a reason.

So 5 lottery picks ain't enough? We have Sharpe. Henderson and Clingan. This year will most certainly be at least another #7 pick. Next year is another #7 pick even trying to win. Then you wait it out with the vets you have until you get another couple first round picks available out of them from teams that want to add depth for a playoff run.
Then you get in the playoffs with a promising group and try to add through FA whatever the team is lacking.
That is what the Blazers have done three times in the last 40 years and three times it got them to the finals or at least the conference finals. They did it with Drexler. They did is with Wallace and they did it with Lillard. Missed out on Roy due to injuries or it would have been 4 times in 40 years. I'll take 75% odds sure.

 

[Phatguysrule]

So 5 lottery picks ain't enough? We have Sharpe. Henderson and Clingan. This year will most certainly be at least another #7 pick. Next year is another #7 pick even trying to win. Then you wait it out with the vets you have until you get another couple first round picks available out of them from teams that want to add depth for a playoff run.
Then you get in the playoffs with a promising group and try to add through FA whatever the team is lacking.
That is what the Blazers have done three times in the last 40 years and three times it got them to the finals or at least the conference finals. They did it with Drexler. They did is with Wallace and they did it with Lillard. Missed out on Roy due to injuries or it would have been 4 times in 40 years. I'll take 75% odds sure.

75% odds at not winning a championship. Awesome.

They got a generational player in Drexler (at #14… you can't count in that). They got a generational player in Roy. They got what should have been a generational player in Wallace (but we traded foe him because he had baggage) and Sabonis, and we could spend more than every other team in the league at that time. Which kind of made us a destination city. You have advantages then that we don't have now.

How many non-destination cities have won championships that way? Detroit? And they lucked into a situation where they had a very motivated Wallace for 6 months and incredible coaching...

So yeah, five lottery picks might not be enough. If we don't get a generational talent by then. We have screwed the pooch the last 3 years, when we should have been taking the hardest if we were going to trade Dame. I understood it the first year or two. We were going to trade the pic to couple somebody with name. That didn't work out.

Simons was clearly not good enough last year. Grant was clearly not good enough either. They probably should have both been dealt before now. We are not ever going to get great value out of them. Value that will move the needle. It's just more than likely not going to happen. We shouldn't count on that happening. We should definitely not put ourselves in a worse situation to get the best possible talent with an I on that happening.

These are all the wrong decisions. These are how you suck for a long time. We need to turn the corner and suck hard to give ourselves a chance to accrue the kind of talent we will need to compete with the top teams of the NBA.

If we don't do that it's probably just going to be more of the same. We have a choice right now. That choice will be gone in 3 or 4 years and we'll be looking at starting the whole process over and another six or seven years of sucking to get it done right.

 

[Pinwheel1]

One reason I would prefer to wait before dumping them is if some like Kuminga became available. He is not a star, but he is young with still a lot of upside. I think he would fit well with Scoot, Sharpe, Deni, and Ayton. (and Ant/DC)

Does GS want to pay him? Would they trade him to dump Wiggin's contract? Grant and Williams for Wiggins and Kuminga and Melton? I really we could move Melton and Wiggins and give GS any picks that might come with it.

Anyway, that is just one example and we need to have large contracts to acquire large contracts....if someone becomes available. To me, that is better than moving them for just future picks.

 

[Whyachi]

I bet the Hawks don't wish that they'd lost three more games last season. The Pistons would have done better by winning a few more games. The league has made it very hard to gain a certain advantage by tanking.

it looks like the Spurs ran mild tanks in 2020-2022. They traded everyone, and went full tank in the next 2 years. SAS landed Wemby. They might need a couple more tanks to become formidable.

Portland landed Shaedon, Scoot, Clingan with Cronin's 3 tanking seasons. The media insists Toumani Camara is obviously more valuable then Lillard's supermax contract. Portland found their diamond in the rough, while also acquiring Avdija with spare parts from Lillard's escape plan.

"Sutainable build" was Cronin's last statement to retort the stinky basketball question. "Committed to bringing a championship to Portland" is Jody's only public adaptation.

Risk vs. Reward:

losing games by 60 might turn into Portland beating teams by 60. Only time will tell if Cronin's lose on purpose experiment works.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Plenty of teams trade away picks then end up high in the lottery. Look at the Houston pick a few months ago - it was #3 sent from Brooklyn, when the Nets acquired Harden they believed they would still have a dynasty at this point and it would be an end of the first round pick, whoops.

Thats why getting a 2029 Lakers pick or something for Grant would be a great haul. Sure there is a chance it could be at the very end of the draft, but theres a chance it could be high in the lottery as well. That is the smart type of gamble a team like the Blazers should take.

I think any pic we get from Grant or Simons will likely be top end lottery protected.

 

[Foxx]

Maybe for some it is - I've fully accepted that I'm damaged goods in terms of rooting for the Blazers.

ROFL.

well, that’s unfortunate cause we have a very solid young core and a GM who knows what he’s doing. I won’t try to persuade anyone of that, but I can certainly reveal things as they are.

 

[Phatguysrule]

ROFL.

well, that’s unfortunate cause we have a very solid young core and a GM who knows what he’s doing. I won’t try to persuade anyone of that, but I can certainly reveal things as they are.

I hope you are right.

 

[bemac]

Easily the most exciting year in the past decade...And I get to watch games for free. So many intriguing stories to follow with this team.

 

[e_blazer]

It's not a decision you make for one season. That's the point.

The Pistons have been following your program for the last 5 years. Their record is a cumulative 94-290 over that period. For their dismal efforts, they've had the following lottery picks:

2023-24 Record: 14-68 (Worst in league) Draft Pick: 5 Ron Holland (Whiffed on Sarre)
2022-23 Record: 17-65 (Worst in league) Draft Pick: 5 Ausar Thompson (Whiffed on Wemby)
2021-22 Record: 23-59 (3rd Worst in league) Draft Pick: 1 Jaden Ivey (meh)
2020-21 Record: 20-52 (2nd worst in league) Draft Pick: 1 Cade Cunningham (meh)
2019-20 Record: 20-46 (5th worst in league) Draft Pick: 7 Killian Hays (bust)

So, in 5 years of offering their fans the most miserable basketball in the league, the Pistons have moved up in the draft order twice, moved down three times, and are IMHO absolutely no closer to contention than they were 5 years ago. But keep on tanking, I guess.

 

[Phatguysrule]

The Pistons have been following your program for the last 5 years. Their record is a cumulative 94-290 over that period. For their dismal efforts, they've had the following lottery picks:

2023-24 Record: 14-68 (Worst in league) Draft Pick: 5 Ron Holland (Whiffed on Sarre)
2022-23 Record: 17-65 (Worst in league) Draft Pick: 5 Ausar Thompson (Whiffed on Wemby)
2021-22 Record: 23-59 (3rd Worst in league) Draft Pick: 1 Jaden Ivey (meh)
2020-21 Record: 20-52 (2nd worst in league) Draft Pick: 1 Cade Cunningham (meh)
2019-20 Record: 20-46 (5th worst in league) Draft Pick: 7 Killian Hays (bust)

So, in 5 years of offering their fans the most miserable basketball in the league, the Pistons have moved up in the draft order twice, moved down three times, and are IMHO absolutely no closer to contention than they were 5 years ago. But keep on tanking, I guess.

You can find all the isolated cases that you want. The reality is that you are more likely to get better players with a higher pick. The more often you do that the more likely you are to get more talent.

This is very simple and has been shown to be consistent throughout the history of the NBA.

Yes there are certain teams which cannot draft. They screw everything up. Those teams just have bad management. It doesn't mean they didn't have great opportunities. It means they didn't take advantage of those opportunities.

The problem with being a non-destination team is that you have trouble accruing talent. The most likely way for a non destination team to accrue maximim talent is via the draft.

If you don't disagree with any of these facts then I don't understand what your point of contention is.

I am simply advocating that if we're going to roll the dice we should roll the dice with the best odds that we can possibly get.

We will still need to make good choices. But if we put ourselves in the most advantageous situations we will have more and better options.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The Pistons have been following your program for the last 5 years. Their record is a cumulative 94-290 over that period. For their dismal efforts, they've had the following lottery picks:

2023-24 Record: 14-68 (Worst in league) Draft Pick: 5 Ron Holland (Whiffed on Sarre)
2022-23 Record: 17-65 (Worst in league) Draft Pick: 5 Ausar Thompson (Whiffed on Wemby)
2021-22 Record: 23-59 (3rd Worst in league) Draft Pick: 1 Jaden Ivey (meh)
2020-21 Record: 20-52 (2nd worst in league) Draft Pick: 1 Cade Cunningham (meh)
2019-20 Record: 20-46 (5th worst in league) Draft Pick: 7 Killian Hays (bust)

So, in 5 years of offering their fans the most miserable basketball in the league, the Pistons have moved up in the draft order twice, moved down three times, and are IMHO absolutely no closer to contention than they were 5 years ago. But keep on tanking, I guess.

Do we attribute that to a bad strategy, or poor player evals? Had they taken Haliburton in '20 (mocked above Hayes by most), they would have been on a completely different trajectory. If we believe our front office to be competent in their draft evals, we should have no problem with the tanking strategy.

 

[julius]

The Pistons have been following your program for the last 5 years. Their record is a cumulative 94-290 over that period. For their dismal efforts, they've had the following lottery picks:

2023-24 Record: 14-68 (Worst in league) Draft Pick: 5 Ron Holland (Whiffed on Sarre)
2022-23 Record: 17-65 (Worst in league) Draft Pick: 5 Ausar Thompson (Whiffed on Wemby)
2021-22 Record: 23-59 (3rd Worst in league) Draft Pick: 1 Jaden Ivey (meh)
2020-21 Record: 20-52 (2nd worst in league) Draft Pick: 1 Cade Cunningham (meh)
2019-20 Record: 20-46 (5th worst in league) Draft Pick: 7 Killian Hays (bust)

So, in 5 years of offering their fans the most miserable basketball in the league, the Pistons have moved up in the draft order twice, moved down three times, and are IMHO absolutely no closer to contention than they were 5 years ago. But keep on tanking, I guess.

the 2022 pick wasn't #1, it was #5.

 

[e_blazer]

the 2022 pick wasn't #1, it was #5.

Oops. Good catch.

 

[kjironman1]

75% odds at not winning a championship. Awesome.

Nah bro that's 75% chance of getting a solid team that makes it to the Conference finals and we all know that if you get there anything can happen.
By the way Non destination is a matter of opinion but ain't many people taking trips to Milwaukee, San Antonio, Detroit. Denver, Cleveland not to mention Portland has won also. The warriors were in Oakland when they won so not much to look at there either. Guess we better hope Los Vegas doesn't get a team because every championship will be LA, Vegas or New York... Wait how many have New York won? Isn't Brooklyn pretty close to New York? Oh yeah people just go to Boston instead of New York? Wait again? This isn't working out the way you said it would?
My point stands. Hold Grant until we get a good offer seems like a good strategy to me. That as well as Ayton and Simons. those players ain't winning many games the way this team is constructed. Tank another year and they will lose next year anyway.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Nah bro that's 75% chance of getting a solid team that makes it to the Conference finals and we all know that if you get there anything can happen.
By the way Non destination is a matter of opinion but ain't many people taking trips to Milwaukee, San Antonio, Detroit. Denver, Cleveland not to mention Portland has won also. The warriors were in Oakland when they won so not much to look at there either. Guess we better hope Los Vegas doesn't get a team because every championship will be LA, Vegas or New York... Wait how many have New York won? Isn't Brooklyn pretty close to New York? Oh yeah people just go to Boston instead of New York? Wait again? This isn't working out the way you said it would?
My point stands. Hold Grant until we get a good offer seems like a good strategy to me. That as well as Ayton and Simons. those players ain't winning many games the way this team is constructed. Tank another year and they will lose next year anyway.

Milwaukee, - lucked into generational talent, best player in the draft

San Antonio, - Tanked into generational talent

Detroit - lucked into generational defensive talent and had excellent coaching. This is about the only exception I can find, and what we'd be hoping to replicate by stopping the tank before drafting a known generational talent.

Denver - lucked into generational talent.

Cleveland - tanked to generational talent #1 pick

Portland - Generational talent #1 pick, ABA dispersal draft. Other "success" came from having the wealthiest owner in sports and very few limits on spending. Portland didn't have success until Paul Allen was able to make lopsided trades weighted with cash.

New York - Among worst ownership in pro sports

So your hope is that we luck our way to success. I get it. Losing sucks. I just disagree with this strategy.

All of the success you listed came from teams who drafted generational talent or had advantages we don't have.

 

[kjironman1]

Milwaukee, - lucked into generational talent, best player in the draft, and had talent from tanking

San Antonio, - Tanked into generational talent

Detroit - lucked into generational defensive talent and had excellent coaching

Denver - lucked into generational talent

Cleveland - tanked to generational talent #1 pick

Portland - Generational talent #1 pick, ABA dispersal draft. Other "success" came from having the wealthiest owner in sports and very few limits on spending.

New York - Among worst ownership in pro sports

So your hope is that we luck our way to success. I get it. Losing sucks. I just disagree with this strategy.

You just made my point. You have now said Drexler was a lucky pick. Broy was a lucky pick, You have said getting the first round pick and taking Oden was lucky and then unlucky.
Now you just said all those players on all those teams were lucky picks. You do realize the rules for getting the number one pick now have changed since both the Spurs and Cavs tanked right?
Every number one pick from now on is Lucky. The Spurs just got lucky again.

Oh yeah then there is new York. Can you honestly say The Blazers ownership is better? That is a different conversation but an honest question brother.
I really just wish the team was owned by a better owner or group of owners. The cost cutting and bad deals over the last 10 years has kept this team irrelevant.
Paul Allen (Rest his soul) is gone. The Blazers need new ownership.

 

[Phatguysrule]

You just made my point. You have now said Drexler was a lucky pick. Broy was a lucky pick, You have said getting the first round pick and taking Oden was lucky and then unlucky.
Now you just said all those players on all those teams were lucky picks. You do realize the rules for getting the number one pick now have changed since both the Spurs and Cavs tanked right?
Every number one pick from now on is Lucky. The Spurs just got lucky again.

Oh yeah then there is new York. Can you honestly say The Blazers ownership is better? That is a different conversation but an honest question brother.
I really just wish the team was owned by a better owner or group of owners. The cost cutting and bad deals over the last 10 years has kept this team irrelevant.
Paul Allen (Rest his soul) is gone. The Blazers need new ownership.

The Blazers lucked into Drexler and didn't find success until they had the richest owner in sports.

The Blazers didn't have any success with Roy.

Any success the Blazers were going to have with Roy would have come from tanking to the number one pick. And the number two pick.

If Roy had healthy knees we never would have gotten him with that low of a pick.

You are more likely to get a generational talent the higher you draft.

I understand that you don't like losing. What you are doing right now is being illogical.

I'm not making any judgments about current Blazers ownership or management. I wish they would sell to Phil Knight. I don't believe that's going to happen.

It doesn't matter necessarily if we have the number one. I'm not saying we get the number one pick or bust. I'm saying we need multiple opportunities having the highest odds to get the highest pick that we possibly can. That is how you shift the odds in your favor.

We need to do it five or six times. We have now done it one out of three times. I sincerely hope we try to do it two or three more times unless we draft a player who is so damn good that we can't possibly do it.

Neither Grant or Simons is good enough to trade for a player that will help us as much as a generational high draft pick. We need to get rid of them so we can go get that player.

Nobody is going to offer more for Grant than the Lakers. That's his value. And nothing they are offering us is going to help us as much as drafting higher in the draft.

We're going to wind up in the same place with Simons. He doesn't have much value. He's not going to have much value. The best we can hope to get from him is better draft position.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

You can find all the isolated cases that you want. The reality is that you are more likely to get better players with a higher pick. The more often you do that the more likely you are to get more talent.

This is very simple and has been shown to be consistent throughout the history of the NBA.

Yes there are certain teams which cannot draft. They screw everything up. Those teams just have bad management. It doesn't mean they didn't have great opportunities. It means they didn't take advantage of those opportunities.

The problem with being a non-destination team is that you have trouble accruing talent. The most likely way for a non destination team to accrue maximim talent is via the draft.

If you don't disagree with any of these facts then I don't understand what your point of contention is.

I am simply advocating that if we're going to roll the dice we should roll the dice with the best odds that we can possibly get.

We will still need to make good choices. But if we put ourselves in the most advantageous situations we will have more and better options.

I would counter with the last time we were legit contenders(01’) most of those players were traded for or were free agent signings. Not accrued through tanking and the draft.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I would counter with the last time we were legit contenders(01’) most of those players were traded for or were free agent signings. Not accrued through tanking and the draft.

Right, when Paul Allen was the owner and we had a collective bargaining agreement that allowed Paul Allen to trade players away and still pay their contract.

We did that because we had the richest owner in sports who made incredibly lopsided trades. That's it.

We don't have that advantage anymore.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

The Blazers lucked into Drexler and didn't find success until they had the richest owner in sports.

The Blazers didn't have any success with Roy.

Any success the Blazers were going to have with Roy would have come from tanking to the number one pick. And the number two pick.

If Roy had healthy knees we never would have gotten him with that low of a pick.

You are more likely to get a generational talent the higher you draft.

I understand that you don't like losing. What you are doing right now is being illogical.

I'm not making any judgments about current Blazers ownership or management. I wish they would sell to Phil Knight. I don't believe that's going to happen.

It doesn't matter necessarily if we have the number one. I'm not saying we get the number one pick or bust. I'm saying we need multiple opportunities having the highest odds to get the highest pick that we possibly can. That is how you shift the odds in your favor.

We need to do it five or six times. We have now done it one out of three times. I sincerely hope we try to do it two or three more times unless we draft a player who is so damn good that we can't possibly do it.

Neither Grant or Simons is good enough to trade for a player that will help us as much as a generational high draft pick. We need to get rid of them so we can go get that player.

Nobody is going to offer more for Grant than the Lakers. That's his value. And nothing they are offering us is going to help us as much as drafting higher in the draft.

We're going to wind up in the same place with Simons. He doesn't have much value. He's not going to have much value. The best we can hope to get from him is better draft position.

so lets say 5 to 7years of tanking for top five or better? And what if in that time, no generational talent arises?
Or we dont luck into that number one?
We could tank for a decade and never get that rop pick. Thats very possible.
Btw. You mentioned milwauikie licked into generational talent. But it wasnt via a top pick so they should nit be in the equation supporting your view.
Same with Denver i believe. Jokic was not atop pick right?

so to me, scouting seems to be as important or possibly more important than draft position.

What is more plausible? We keep tanking aNd get the number one?
Or we out scout and find the diamond in the rough in the late lotto or first round?

seems its a crapshoot either way and to then say someone is being illogical for not sharing your opinion is a bit off the mark. Both ways are crapshoots, but with scouting at least there is semblance of control vs luck.
Neither opinion is illogical.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Right, when Paul Allen was the owner and we had a collective bargaining agreement that allowed Paul Allen to trade players away and still pay their contract.

We did that because we had the richest owner in sports who made incredibly lopsided trades. That's it.

We don't have that advantage anymore.

ahh gotcha. Rules have changed alot. Im not privy to all of the changes and impacts on managements ability to team construction.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Milwaukee, - lucked into generational talent, best player in the draft

San Antonio, - Tanked into generational talent

Detroit - lucked into generational defensive talent and had excellent coaching. This is about the only exception I can find, and what we'd be hoping to replicate by stopping the tank before drafting a known generational talent.

Denver - lucked into generational talent.

Cleveland - tanked to generational talent #1 pick

Portland - Generational talent #1 pick, ABA dispersal draft. Other "success" came from having the wealthiest owner in sports and very few limits on spending. Portland didn't have success until Paul Allen was able to make lopsided trades weighted with cash.

New York - Among worst ownership in pro sports

So your hope is that we luck our way to success. I get it. Losing sucks. I just disagree with this strategy.

All of the success you listed came from teams who drafted generational talent or had advantages we don't have.

I would add GS to that list. As much as I dislike Draymond, he made that engine run. 35th pick in the draft.

And Curry was lucky as well when you consider Johnny Flynn and Thabeet were drafted ahead of him
Thompson went 11th. (That was a strange draft as Kawhi and Jimmy Butler were drafted behind him)

Then you have teams like Philly who were told to trust the process, has it worked? I guess they can be considered contenders, but they still haven't made the finals for two decades.

I understand your philosophy, and it is just as good as any other, but is it any better than the others?

 

[kjironman1]

Players get sick and tired of losing just like fans.
Players will not stay in a tanking situation.
If Portland continues this for 3-4 more years they will lose the players they have as well as begin a coaching carousel that all terrible teams seem to have.
That does not mean to say they should not tank this year. They will just because they will suck anyway. Next year also.