View Poll Results: To Tank or Not to Tank

Voters
292. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I want to secure a high draft pick and develop the young players.

    209 71.58%
  • No, go for the most wins and play the vets.

    34 11.64%
  • I'm still pissed that Disney bought Star Wars.

    49 16.78%
Page 24 of 31 FirstFirst ... 142223242526 ... LastLast
Results 346 to 360 of 453
  1. #346
    Rising Star jlegg21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,679
    Thanks
    1,154
    Thanked 1,187 Times in 450 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by SmknJoe7 View Post
    Who said max? He didn't sign for max. Noone ever offered him max.
    Damn, you're right. I beg your pardon... 4 years, 46 mil is dirt cheap for an average SF who'll never make an All-Star team. Sure looked like he was worth every penny the other night, brickin dunks n shit.

    Besides, it's not like it would take the max to get him to Cleveland, right? Or would he take a bargain price to play in Cleveland on a lottery team? Rumor has it he turned down $52 mil, so... yeah.

    This argument is ridiculous. Dont refute my points, just refute the number I threw out there. Brilliant.

  2. #347
    All Star Giambiwannabe7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,132
    Thanks
    2,671
    Thanked 2,014 Times in 918 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by jlegg21 View Post
    Damn, you're right. I beg your pardon... 4 years, 46 mil is dirt cheap for an average SF who'll never make an All-Star team. Sure looked like he was worth every penny the other night, brickin dunks n shit.

    Besides, it's not like it would take the max to get him to Cleveland, right? Or would he take a bargain price to play in Cleveland on a lottery team? Rumor has it he turned down $52 mil, so... yeah.

    This argument is ridiculous. Dont refute my points, just refute the number I threw out there. Brilliant.
    Refute what? Your exagerrated innuendo and rumor based "facts" You heard he turned down 52mil? They let you do stand up all the time on message boards?

    Brickin dunks n shit? Ya, and hittin ridiculous game winners n shit too. Guys who play the worst half of basketball of their season and then go on to miss one game winner by a tenth of a sec and then nail another one sure would suck.

    The only thing factual about your post is the contract he signed. Besides that, you like to play soap opera rumor guy, Nostradamus, and comic all in one. Forgive me oh Genie in the bottle for not refuting what amounts to a pile of dung.

    Dude can absolutely ball, play great defense, is clutch....but, hey, since you know he won't be making any AS games at the ripe age of not quite 24, I'll just go back to trying to learn how to build a winner courtesy of jlegg21. Insight at its finest.

  3. #348
    Rising Star ice cream man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Cleveland
    Posts
    1,932
    Thanks
    1,152
    Thanked 532 Times in 232 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by SmknJoe7 View Post
    Refute what? Your exagerrated innuendo and rumor based "facts" You heard he turned down 52mil? They let you do stand up all the time on message boards?

    Brickin dunks n shit? Ya, and hittin ridiculous game winners n shit too. Guys who play the worst half of basketball of their season and then go on to miss one game winner by a tenth of a sec and then nail another one sure would suck.

    The only thing factual about your post is the contract he signed. Besides that, you like to play soap opera rumor guy, Nostradamus, and comic all in one. Forgive me oh Genie in the bottle for not refuting what amounts to a pile of dung.

    Dude can absolutely ball, play great defense, is clutch....but, hey, since you know he won't be making any AS games at the ripe age of not quite 24, I'll just go back to trying to learn how to build a winner courtesy of jlegg21. Insight at its finest.
    He's got talent, but he's soft. They paid him partially based on his potential. He could grow out of that and become as good as Rudy Gay (side note: Gay is overrated IMO). But right now, he's about as soft as Gay, if not, softer. Gee roughed him up so much he had him dribbling it off his foot, missing open dunks when he finally did escape from Gee on the fastbreak. The only thing he did in the 2nd half was hit open 3's. No one is saying he can't shoot.
    UNLEASH THE KARASEV

  4. #349
    Birthing All-Stars Löttery Göd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Space
    Posts
    4,044
    Thanks
    7,086
    Thanked 3,972 Times in 1,430 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by FiveThous View Post
    Only ~10 not 15 by your math if players are useless after 30.
    Please quote where I said players are useless after 30. I said players usually start declining after 32. That doesn't mean that they're useless after 32, but they're surely not as good as when they're in their upper 20s unless they're Steve Nash or Dennis Rodman.

    Quote Originally Posted by KI4MVP View Post
    Unselected lottery picks sure get way overvalued. Last year Toronto was a lottery team and they got Terrence Ross. Is anyone here trading Andy for Terrence Ross? Somehow their lottery pick next year is valued quite a bit higher than they guy they got with their lottery pick this past season. You can't tell how well a player will transition into the NBA until they get here. The fact is it often takes several years to figure it out. We know we already landed a star PG on our first try. We really can't afford to waste years of his career drafting players we hope pan out.
    Kyrie Irving was practically handed to us because the Clippers undervalued their lottery pick. Now imagine where we would be if we didn't make that trade. We'd be sitting here with only Tristan Thompson. What a utterly insufferable existence in which we would exist.
    Last edited by Löttery Göd; 12-05-2012 at 12:24 AM.
    "For the Tank God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Tank Son, Antawn Jamison, and whosoever believes in Him, will not perish, but have everlasting high draft picks." - Tank 3:16

  5. #350
    Rising Star jlegg21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,679
    Thanks
    1,154
    Thanked 1,187 Times in 450 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by SmknJoe7 View Post
    Refute what? Your exagerrated innuendo and rumor based "facts" You heard he turned down 52mil? They let you do stand up all the time on message boards?

    Brickin dunks n shit? Ya, and hittin ridiculous game winners n shit too. Guys who play the worst half of basketball of their season and then go on to miss one game winner by a tenth of a sec and then nail another one sure would suck.

    The only thing factual about your post is the contract he signed. Besides that, you like to play soap opera rumor guy, Nostradamus, and comic all in one. Forgive me oh Genie in the bottle for not refuting what amounts to a pile of dung.

    Dude can absolutely ball, play great defense, is clutch....but, hey, since you know he won't be making any AS games at the ripe age of not quite 24, I'll just go back to trying to learn how to build a winner courtesy of jlegg21. Insight at its finest.
    You sound ridiculous, but keep it up. Here's a quote and a link to get you started. Who am I to claim this did or didnt happen? I'm really not making this shit up as I go, but whatever.

    A vicious tug of war between the Portland Trail Blazers and the Minnesota Timberwolves this summer for the services of Nicolas Batum ultimately kept the fifth year forward from France in the Rose City. Batum expressed interest in playing for the Timberwolves but the Blazers matched his four year, $48 million dollar offer sheet.

    Though Batum got the contract he desired, it may not have been the largest offer. The Cleveland Cavaliers reportedly offered Batum $52 million to join their squad. The Timberwovles, Cavaliers, New Orleans Hornets and Toronto Raptors were the most aggressive suitors for Batum during his free agency.


    http://cleveland.sbnation.com/2012/1...ree-agency-nba

    Ill wait while you list the big time stars the Cavs are going to sign in FA or acquire in trades. Be sure to list past home runs we've hit with those two approaches. So far you've listed whiffing on Nic Batum as a mistake, and you evidently have him pegged as the next Scottie Pippen. Forgive me if I'm dubious.

    I'm on the record, repeatedly, that the best way for the CAVS to build a winner is the draft, and you only get high picks by flipping assets and tanking. Not sure what's difficult to understand. Unless you're "smokn" too much.

  6. #351
    formerly LJ4MVP KI4MVP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    11,032
    Thanks
    2,672
    Thanked 5,908 Times in 2,163 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by RMsDanielGibson View Post
    Kyrie Irving was practically handed to us because the Clippers undervalued their lottery pick. Now imagine where we would be if we didn't make that trade. We'd be sitting here with only Tristan Thompson. What a utterly insufferable existence in which we would exist.
    when we made that trade, we were cleaning house of guys who lacked the heart to play without LeBron. We traded a sulking Mo Williams and got an unprotected lottery pick. Last year we traded an expiring Ramon sessions and not only got a 1st round pick last year, we got the right to trade up what is likely to be the last pick in the first round to what may very well be a mid first round pick this year.

    We aren't talking about a sulking Mo Williams and we aren't talking about a backup PG. We're talking about a center putting up 15/15. If we didn't have Kyrie, then by all means trade Andy and get all that you can for him because we'd be a team that is still waiting to luck into their franchise player. But we have our franchise player, and Andy makes an incredibly good start in building a team around him. He's not just important for what he brings on the court, but also for the example he sets for our young bigs.

  7. #352
    All Star Giambiwannabe7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,132
    Thanks
    2,671
    Thanked 2,014 Times in 918 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by ice cream man View Post
    He's got talent, but he's soft. They paid him partially based on his potential. He could grow out of that and become as good as Rudy Gay (side note: Gay is overrated IMO). But right now, he's about as soft as Gay, if not, softer. Gee roughed him up so much he had him dribbling it off his foot, missing open dunks when he finally did escape from Gee on the fastbreak. The only thing he did in the 2nd half was hit open 3's. No one is saying he can't shoot.
    He may be soft(he is French lol) but he has great length which contributes to his good D. His perimeter game is perfect on a team like the Cavs. He's a good rebounder. Gee's a good defender, but Batum still did what he wanted in the second half. Those first half gaffes at the rim really had little to do with Gee. He was getting to the rack pretty easily, actually. But, he did much, much more than just hit open 3's in the second half. He got to the rack, got to the line, made clutch shots and played good D. The guy can score in numerous ways. He really has a much more rounded game than he gets credit for.

  8. #353
    Birthing All-Stars Löttery Göd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Space
    Posts
    4,044
    Thanks
    7,086
    Thanked 3,972 Times in 1,430 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by KI4MVP View Post
    when we made that trade, we were cleaning house of guys who lacked the heart to play without LeBron. We traded a sulking Mo Williams and got an unprotected lottery pick. Last year we traded an expiring Ramon sessions and not only got a 1st round pick last year, we got the right to trade up what is likely to be the last pick in the first round to what may very well be a mid first round pick this year.

    We aren't talking about a sulking Mo Williams and we aren't talking about a backup PG. We're talking about a center putting up 15/15. If we didn't have Kyrie, then by all means trade Andy and get all that you can for him because we'd be a team that is still waiting to luck into their franchise player. But we have our franchise player, and Andy makes an incredibly good start in building a team around him. He's not just important for what he brings on the court, but also for the example he sets for our young bigs.
    They key there is we HAVE a center that IS putting up 15/15. If things go right, I'm seeing us being in the finals no earlier than 2015-2016, and that's being very generous. What will Varejao be doing in the 34-36 year-old range? Will he still be putting up 15/15? I doubt it. Even if he is, he won't be on the team much longer after we get deep into the playoffs unless he wants to play until he's 40. He could also not resign with us or lock up our cap space with a 33-year-old player with a large injury history. Not a good idea for a young team to do.
    "For the Tank God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Tank Son, Antawn Jamison, and whosoever believes in Him, will not perish, but have everlasting high draft picks." - Tank 3:16

  9. #354
    All Star Giambiwannabe7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,132
    Thanks
    2,671
    Thanked 2,014 Times in 918 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by jlegg21 View Post
    You sound ridiculous, but keep it up. Here's a quote and a link to get you started. Who am I to claim this did or didnt happen? I'm really not making this shit up as I go, but whatever.

    A vicious tug of war between the Portland Trail Blazers and the Minnesota Timberwolves this summer for the services of Nicolas Batum ultimately kept the fifth year forward from France in the Rose City. Batum expressed interest in playing for the Timberwolves but the Blazers matched his four year, $48 million dollar offer sheet.

    Though Batum got the contract he desired, it may not have been the largest offer. The Cleveland Cavaliers reportedly offered Batum $52 million to join their squad. The Timberwovles, Cavaliers, New Orleans Hornets and Toronto Raptors were the most aggressive suitors for Batum during his free agency.


    http://cleveland.sbnation.com/2012/1...ree-agency-nba

    Ill wait while you list the big time stars the Cavs are going to sign in FA or acquire in trades. Be sure to list past home runs we've hit with those two approaches. So far you've listed whiffing on Nic Batum as a mistake, and you evidently have him pegged as the next Scottie Pippen. Forgive me if I'm dubious.

    I'm on the record, repeatedly, that the best way for the CAVS to build a winner is the draft, and you only get high picks by flipping assets and tanking. Not sure what's difficult to understand. Unless you're "smokn" too much.
    You must have difficulty in reading comprehension as this article was just brought up a week or two ago and refuted by numerous sources thereafter as garbage. Do you really believe Batum, as a RFA, and his agent would have turned down that offer after POR came right out and said they would match any offer for him? Gimme a break. This reminds me of that commercial about people believing shit just because they saw it on the internet. "Then it must be true!!" Don't be so naive.

    Again, your comprehension seems to be falling just a bit short. When did I say big time stars, in any way, shape, or form? Don't waste your time looking, cuz I didn't. I never believed we would get Bynum and going back to the LBJ years, I never got my hopes up for Joe Johnson. Hence...now follow along....there has to be some risk taking involved on players who have not yet peaked and still fit the mold of young, but experienced talent. Like my original point, Nic Batum being just one example.

    There's nothing at all difficult about understanding your regurgitated views on team building in CLE. The nice article about the fallacies in trading Andy just posted in another thread detail the flaws in all of this pretty nicely, so I won't bother repeating it. All drafts are a crap shoot, and weak ones like the one approaching make the large majority of picks a near waste, and certainly not in line with Andy's value. Nerlens Noel??? LMAO. Kid ain't Anthony Davis. And when you trade for someone's lottery pick(most likely protected), how do you know where you are landing in said draft? TOR's pick, for example, is 1-3 protected. So, in a weak draft, the very best you can do is 4. Awesome.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Giambiwannabe7 For This Useful Post:


  11. #355
    Private eyes, Watchin You Tornicade IED's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Columbus, oh
    Posts
    7,570
    Thanks
    2,012
    Thanked 4,685 Times in 2,066 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by RMsDanielGibson View Post
    Please quote where I said players are useless after 30. I said players usually start declining after 32. That doesn't mean that they're useless after 32, but they're surely not as good as when they're in their upper 20s unless they're Steve Nash or Dennis Rodman.



    Kyrie Irving was practically handed to us because the Clippers undervalued their lottery pick. Now imagine where we would be if we didn't make that trade. We'd be sitting here with only Tristan Thompson. What a utterly insufferable existence in which we would exist.
    There was never any question about trading mo williams for the approiate value. most people objected to just trade williams for the sake of trading him which is what many people advocated.

    Grant also never asked for an all star calber player for Mo wiliams. which he certainly is for Andy.

  12. #356
    Situational Stopper Baseline Runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    305
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 273 Times in 94 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by MYoung23 View Post
    First off, the Cavaliers dont have 4 talented players. They have one stud in Irving. A guy that's looks like he can be good but not great in Waiters. A rich man's Spencer Hawes or an approximation of early 30s Z and Tristan Thompson, who many people now are just hoping he becomes Tyrone Hill. Basically, there's 2 guys in Irving and Waiters.

    The Pistons made the playoffs Dumars rookie year and went to the ECFs in his 2nd, Finals in year 3 and champion in year 4. Everyone would love to be that mediocre. Olajuwon went to the Finals his 2nd year and he was absolute monster from day 1 in the league. It took the Rockets a long time to recover from Ralph Sampson's knees turning to jello. The Bulls won 50 games Scottie Pippen's rookie year and went to the 2nd round. Year 2 the ECFs, Year 3 the ECFs, and year 4 champion.

    So bad examples.
    I guess its more of a disagreement of semantics. I would consider any playoff team that is not a true contender to be "mediocre". There are the utterly bad teams, there are contenders, and the rest are mediocre.

    As for my specific examples, I wasn't talking about Olajuwon's rookie and sophomore years. Those teams were more about Sampson anyways. Olajuwon had a long stretch going into the early nineties where his teams truly were mediocre any way you look at it, i.e. playing .500 ball despite having a center putting up insane stats. Then that team went from mediocre to winning titles, in large part because Olajuwon smoothed out the rough edges in his game and elevated to a GOAT level of play.

    I know the Bulls were decent in the late eighties but no one considered them true contenders with the likes of the Celtics, Pistons and Lakers out there. They didn't emerge into contender status until Pippen became a legit second star which happened by the time of his fourth year. I remember their first finals series versus the Lakers and no was giving the Bulls much of a chance, even though the Lakers were over the hill. The Bulls were viewed as upstarts sort of like how are Cavs were perceived (and accurately) when we went to the Finals against the Spurs. No one knew that first year that they were seeing the start of a dynasty, even though Jordan was already perceived as perhaps the greatest player ever.

    Maybe the Pistons were a bad example but now that is getting into before my time territory. But in both the Bulls and Rockets case, they got better not by loading up draft picks but by their stars getting better and developing chemistry with each other, as well as adding key role players (guys like Mario Elie were key in those Rocket's championship runs). Thus if you believe that we already have our stars in Kyrie, Dion (yes I think he will be a Joe Dumars, Scottie Pippen like star) and Varejao, it is more a matter of those guys developing together over the next few years, and surrounding them with the right players. It is not about hogging draft picks trying to find more stars, and it certainly isn't about trading the stars you have for unproven commodities. If anything I think we should look to trade the draft picks we have.

  13. #357
    Private eyes, Watchin You Tornicade IED's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Columbus, oh
    Posts
    7,570
    Thanks
    2,012
    Thanked 4,685 Times in 2,066 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Baseline Runner View Post
    I guess its more of a disagreement of semantics. I would consider any playoff team that is not a true contender to be "mediocre". There are the utterly bad teams, there are contenders, and the rest are mediocre.

    As for my specific examples, I wasn't talking about Olajuwon's rookie and sophomore years. Those teams were more about Sampson anyways. Olajuwon had a long stretch going into the early nineties where his teams truly were mediocre any way you look at it, i.e. playing .500 ball despite having a center putting up insane stats. Then that team went from mediocre to winning titles, in large part because Olajuwon smoothed out the rough edges in his game and elevated to a GOAT level of play.

    I know the Bulls were decent in the late eighties but no one considered them true contenders with the likes of the Celtics, Pistons and Lakers out there. They didn't emerge into contender status until Pippen became a legit second star which happened by the time of his fourth year. I remember their first finals series versus the Lakers and no was giving the Bulls much of a chance, even though the Lakers were over the hill. The Bulls were viewed as upstarts sort of like how are Cavs were perceived (and accurately) when we went to the Finals against the Spurs. No one knew that first year that they were seeing the start of a dynasty, even though Jordan was already perceived as perhaps the greatest player ever.

    Maybe the Pistons were a bad example but now that is getting into before my time territory. But in both the Bulls and Rockets case, they got better not by loading up draft picks but by their stars getting better and developing chemistry with each other, as well as adding key role players (guys like Mario Elie were key in those Rocket's championship runs). Thus if you believe that we already have our stars in Kyrie, Dion (yes I think he will be a Joe Dumars, Scottie Pippen like star) and Varejao, it is more a matter of those guys developing together over the next few years, and surrounding them with the right players. It is not about hogging draft picks trying to find more stars, and it certainly isn't about trading the stars you have for unproven commodities. If anything I think we should look to trade the draft picks we have.
    1992-93 NBA Chicago Bulls* 57 25 .695 1 6.19 112.9 106.1 Won Finals P. Jackson (57-25)
    1991-92 NBA Chicago Bulls* 67 15 .817 1 10.07 115.5 104.5 Won Finals P. Jackson (67-15)
    1990-91 NBA Chicago Bulls* 61 21 .744 1 8.57 114.6 105.2 Won Finals P. Jackson (61-21)
    1989-90 NBA Chicago Bulls* 55 27 .671 2 2.74 112.3 109.0 Lost Eastern Conference Finals P. Jackson (55-27)
    1988-89 NBA Chicago Bulls* 47 35 .573 5 2.13 109.1 107.7 Lost Eastern Conference Finals D. Collins (47-35)
    1987-88
    NBA Chicago Bulls* 50 32 .610 2 3.76 109.0 105.5 Lost Eastern Conference Semifinals D. Collins (50-32)
    1986-87 NBA Chicago Bulls* 40 42 .488 5 1.27 108.6 107.6 Lost Eastern Conference First Round D. Collins (40-42)
    1985-86 NBA Chicago Bulls* 30 52 .366 4 -3.12 108.6 112.4 Lost Eastern Conference First Round S. Albeck (30-52)
    1984-85 NBA Chicago Bulls* 38 44 .463 3 -0.50 108.7 109.6 Lost Eastern Conference First Round

    Record: 50-32, Finished 2nd in NBA Central Division (Schedule and Results)
    Coach: Doug Collins (50-32)
    PTS/G: 105.0 (19th of 23) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 101.6 (1st of 23)
    SRS: 3.76 (5th of 23) ▪ Pace: 95.5 (23rd of 23)
    Off Rtg: 109.0 (9th of 23) ▪ Def Rtg: 105.5 (3rd of 23)
    Expected W-L: 50-32 (9th of 23)


    Chicago was the third seed in the ecf. im not sure how thats not a contender.

    Detroiit made a bunch of rules aimed to slow down jordan.

    the Jazz were a 5th seed that year and took the lakers to 7 games.


    Olajuwan averaged 20 points a game and took 15 shots a game. I say Sampson and hakeem were pretty much equals in that regards

    42-40 rockets advanced in the playoffs. After Sampson got hurt.

    out of their 4 first round exits. only one of them was in around the 50% range. Key for the rockets. adding robert horry, Sam cassell and Rudy tomjavanich defense.

  14. #358
    Situational Stopper Baseline Runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    305
    Thanks
    307
    Thanked 273 Times in 94 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Thanks for the post, that kind of proves my point. I said the Bulls made a gradual progression from bad too good. They didn't go from bad to contenders overnight like OKC did. It took them 7 years from the time Jordan was drafted until they won 60 games and a title. The Pistons and Rockets gradually got better and better too after they had their key pieces (Isiah and Olajuwon post Sampson).

    If we have our key pieces in Irving/Dion/Varejao/Zeller/TT, then lets gradually get better like those teams did.

  15. #359
    12 Reasons to Post MYoung23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    9,684
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 4,808 Times in 1,040 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    The Rockets teams were not about Sampson. No way.

    Nice try though.

  16. #360
    Orange and Blue Doctor K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    5,392
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 4,596 Times in 1,312 Posts

    Default Re: To Tank or not to Tank, that is the question

    Quote Originally Posted by Baseline Runner View Post
    Thanks for the post, that kind of proves my point. I said the Bulls made a gradual progression from bad too good. They didn't go from bad to contenders overnight like OKC did. It took them 7 years from the time Jordan was drafted until they won 60 games and a title. The Pistons and Rockets gradually got better and better too after they had their key pieces (Isiah and Olajuwon post Sampson).

    If we have our key pieces in Irving/Dion/Varejao/Zeller/TT, then lets gradually get better like those teams did.
    I like Kyrie and all, but wouldn't even think of him in the same class as an Isiah Thomas...

    I don't think Zeller and TT are key pieces... Maybe Zeller could be down the road and has potential to be a nice piece in a rotation, but nothing great.. I guess he could be our Olajuwon's Otis Thorpe (but then again, he's gonna have to make an all star team like Otis )

    TT is not an NBA player

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •