Why re-sign Nurkic if you keep Stotts???

[BonesJones]

Bones, you trade for somebody.... that player gets hurt and totally alters your season. You could have traded for like players, but the risk came with making the deal itself. I've seen in happen in baseball all the time down the stretch.

But that risk always exists. Were talking about added risk in isolation.

This is about you saying that "smart risks don't exist".

 

[ripcityboy]

But that risk always exists. Were talking about added risk in isolation.

This is about you saying that "smart risks don't exist".

But what risk is so small.... and the payoff SO HIGH that the risk is negated. I am having a hard time understanding a practical model for what you are saying. Talent is such a premium in the NBA that you rarely have deals where a potential talent passes hands for anything other than another major player. Almost every move in the NBA seems like a major one. In the NFL or MLB you can have a minor deal that is a smart risk turn into a major contribution to a team.

 

[BonesJones]

But what risk is so small.... and the payoff SO HIGH that the risk is negated. I am having a hard time understanding a practical model for what you are saying. Talent is such a premium in the NBA that you rarely have deals where a potential talent passes hands for anything other than another major player. Almost every move in the NBA seems like a major one. In the NFL or MLB you can have a minor deal that is a smart risk turn into a major contribution to a team.

A smart risk is where the reward outweighs a legitimate risk... Not all smart risks pan out, it's all about playing the odds.

 

[ripcityboy]

A smart rush is where the reward outweighs a legitimate risk... Not all smart risks pan out, it's all about playing the odds.

I am not disagreeing with you. I'd just have to see a litany of NBA deals with all the the eventual outcomes over a period of time.

 

[BonesJones]

I am not disagreeing with you. I'd just have to see a litany of NBA deals with all the the eventual outcomes over a period of time.

I'm just relying to you saying there's no such thing as a smart risk.

 

[ripcityboy]

I'm just relying to you saying there's no such thing as a smart risk.

Bones man, this is Sports Entertainment, not Linguistics 201 Semantics.

 

[BonesJones]

Bones man, this is Sports Entertainment, not Linguistics 201 Semantics.

Yet, this all started because someone used the term "smart risk" and you told them there's no such thing...

 

[ripcityboy]

Yet, this all started because someone used the term "smart risk" and you told them there's no such thing...

Bones, just write me a ticket, I'll pay the fine later.

 

[BonesJones]

Bones, just write me a ticket, I'll pay the fine later.

FTFY

 

[ripcityboy]

FTFY

Just like you wrote "a smart rusk" a couple of messages ago. But I had the good courtesy not to notice.
I am disappointed, Bones. That was cheap.

 

[BonesJones]

Just like you wrote "a smart rusk" a couple of messages ago. But I had the good courtesy not to notice.
I am disappointed, Bones. That was cheap.

Oh no!

 

[dviss1]

It's funny because the biggest win of his career in Portland, the win over Houston in the first round, was a shot by Dame that wasn't even designed by him. The ball was supposed to go to LMA, but Dame saw a mismatch and Batum got him the ball.

You're completely wrong about this and so is everyone who liked this.

Sure TT was the first option. But if you don't think that play was designed to have Dame come off those 2 screens and catch and shoot as the secondary option then again, you'd be wrong.

 

[Hoopguru]

Steve Kerr, Brad Stevens, and Greg Popovich are much superior.

There are bad coaches like Fred Hoiberg or Mark Jackson who Stotts is much superior to.

I don't think Stotts is worse than Mike DAntoni. That team was in a position to win the title if CP3 wasn't hurt or it's players could hit easy shots. With the right roster Stotts could coach a title winning team.

To the original poster, the problem is Nurkic is in a league where the advantage of big over small is much less than small over big. Kuzma on the Lakers destroyed Nurk forcing Stotts to remove him. The Nurkic contract could harm the team if we won't be able to play him in playoff series.

Wrapping up the coach angle, I do think it's possible to have a better coach than Stotts. Problem is none of those are available. A coach like Stevens NBA successs was unknown when hired. Hiring him was a gamble that could as easily turned into a Fred Hoiberg. If we fire Stotts it's far more likely we end up with a worse coach than a superior one.

Right now this team roster is 95% of the problem so fixing a coach or other changes won't make us contenders.

Most likely no action will make us a contender.

The best chance to contend is if somehow Neil makes a great trade or we hope one of our players improves to a star. Either is not impossible, but certainly not likely. Replacing Stotts is a bad gamble that hurts those chances more than it helps.

I agree with much of what you say except Pop, Kerr & Stevens all inherited teams with some great players.

 

[Reep]

As an assistant.

I get your point, but Stotts was the offensive coordinator and we are discussing the offensive side of the court right now. Stotts gets full credit for the Dallas Offense that won a title. I'm not saying I love the one he is running now, but to say he isn't a championship coach is inaccurate to me also.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

You're completely wrong about this and so is everyone who liked this.

Sure TT was the first option. But if you don't think that play was designed to have Dame come off those 2 screens and catch and shoot as the secondary option then again, you'd be wrong.

I'm sure the 750th option was for Dame to catch the ball falling out of bounds and throw up a no look hook shot.

 

[Natebishop3]

My point is that the roster will dictate whether or not Stotts can coach championship. If NateB , you think Stotts can’t coach us to a title, are you implying that you think we have a championship roster?

There isn't a team like the Warriors in the league, and there probably never will be. They are such a complete fluke that we will probably never again see 5 superstar players on the same team in their prime. Anyone could coach that team to a championship.

But could Stotts have taken the original Warriors championship team and molded them into a winner? No. I don't think he could. I don't think he would have used Draymond effectively, or Bogut, or Iggy, etc. I think Steph and Klay would have done what they do, but that team never would have won a championship under Stotts.

 

[blue9]

Well, we're stuck with him until the team gets bought. My guess is two more seasons. Team will sell next summer. New ownership will wait a year before clearing house.
Hopefully 2020 is a year of many positive changes.