What's new
By:

2025 Playoffs Chat & Chill Thread

HermanG said:
We arent in the business of developing quality role players right now. We push a lot on their plates in hopes someone develops into something more.
Click to expand...
It's not an either or. I definitely think the FO is making this type of assessment, or trying to. It's not all about developing stars. It can't be, teams need role players as much as they need stars, as the Suns, Lakers and other have discovered to their detriments and OKC has discovered to its benefit. My question is whether thrusting young players into central roles and denuding the team of active, quality veterans is an effective way to assess a player's potential to be a solid, contributing role player on a winning team. Maybe it is. At least I think it's a valid question.
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
It's not an either or. I definitely think the FO is making this type of assessment, or trying to. It's not all about developing stars. It can't be, teams need role players as much as they need stars, as the Suns, Lakers and other have discovered to their detriments and OKC has discovered to its benefit. My question is whether thrusting young players into central roles and denuding the team of active, quality veterans is an effective way to assess a player's potential to be a solid, contributing role player on a winning team. Maybe it is. At least I think it's a valid question.
Click to expand...
What? We have had plenty of vets in our roster for a rebuilding/tanking team for the past 3 years. One could say "too many" rather than too few.

I would understand such ceiticism if it was directed towards Washington, Portland or even Charlotte...
 
HermanG said:
What? We have had plenty of vets in our roster for a rebuilding/tanking team for the past 3 years. One could say "too many" rather than too few.

I would understand such ceiticism if it was directed towards Washington, Portland or even Charlotte...
Click to expand...
Yes, plenty of vets who are held out for extended periods of time for spurious reasons and on a team that is actively trying to lose. It seems to be me to be a sub-optimal environment to evaluate a player's potential to be a solid, contributing role player on a quality, winning team. But, I was just musing in my earlier post and don't feel strongly enough about it to engage in a protracted back and forth. I could be wrong, and if I am, that's ok.
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
Yes, plenty of vets who are held out for extended periods of time for spurious reasons and on a team that is actively trying to lose. It seems to be me to be a sub-optimal environment to evaluate a player's potential to be a solid, contributing role player on a quality, winning team. But, I was just musing in my earlier post and don't feel strongly enough about it to engage in a protracted back and forth. I could be wrong, and if I am, that's ok.
Click to expand...
That wasnt the case in previous two seasons. This year they wanted a high pick bad but felt its better to keep the vets dusting in the corners.

I think the problem in this seasons approach is more related to what it does to the value of those vet contracts.. but having them around is better for rookies than not having them around.
 
The Midnight said:
It would have been great to have gotten either Flagg or Harper this year so all our young guys can fit in place.. we had a 50/50 chance …

Oh well..
Click to expand...
No we really had no chance. The league made sure of that. The expected franchises moved up.
 
NUMBERICA said:
So glad we gave them - a team whose entire draft we owned - the piece that made everything click on the court and in the locker room.

But anyway. Go Wolves I guess.
Click to expand...
I’d always thought it was a mistake to give them Conley - a cool and experienced head in the lockeroom.

They were falling apart when he arrived and they’ve only gone up since then.

Ainge might be clever but he outsmarts himself sometimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top