Big Picture Stuff

[Coach Ellis]

If the Pacers somehow pull off the win would it change the discourse around the 2004 Pistons? Seems like the prevailing thought for a long while has been that you need a superstar to win it all, and the 2004 Pistons were one weird outlier. I wonder if that thought might shift now (or maybe its the league itself that has shifted).

... Or maybe I should be considering Haliburton a superstar?

EDIT: Maybe not the right thread, but I feel like this plays into what the Jazz might want to emulate as a small market team moving forward.

If the Pacers win it, Haliburton should be regarded as the superstar that runs the engine. But they have put a hell of a team around him.

 

[LogGrad98]

It dawned on me that Indiana tried to get Ayton and Toronto tried to trade Lowry to the Knicks. Big picture, the most important thing is that it's better to be lucky than to be good!

There is WAY WAY more truth in that than anyone recognizes. I read a study once that showed that the #1 indicator of financial success in the world is where you are born and who your family is. That's it. Not knowledge, skills, education, drive, what have you, but the luck of your circumstances at birth. Sure those other things matter, but way way way less than the luck of birth, something completely out of your control.

Look at our rotten luck this year, no #1 pick, again. Look at the Spurs and their "luck", yet another generational talent due to winning the top pick against the odds. Yeah. It is better to be lucky than good. And those who are lucky AND good end up ruling the world.

 

[slc]

If the Pacers somehow pull off the win would it change the discourse around the 2004 Pistons? Seems like the prevailing thought for a long while has been that you need a superstar to win it all, and the 2004 Pistons were one weird outlier. I wonder if that thought might shift now (or maybe its the league itself that has shifted).

... Or maybe I should be considering Haliburton a superstar?

EDIT: Maybe not the right thread, but I feel like this plays into what the Jazz might want to emulate as a small market team moving forward.

I would consider this idea for Jazz
If you can't get a top 5 player get 10 top 50 players and overwhelm teams

 

[HadAnEffectHere]

I would consider this idea for Jazz
If you can't get a top 5 player get 10 top 50 players and overwhelm teams

This is basically impossible for any small market team unless you luck into having a ton of young talent all develop while still on their rookie contract.

You need to go deep into the second apron to do this. The Celtics had to pay hundreds of millions in luxury tax payments to do this strategy for just two years.

 

[David Hume]

There is WAY WAY more truth in that than anyone recognizes. I read a study once that showed that the #1 indicator of financial success in the world is where you are born and who your family is. That's it. Not knowledge, skills, education, drive, what have you, but the luck of your circumstances at birth. Sure those other things matter, but way way way less than the luck of birth, something completely out of your control.

Look at our rotten luck this year, no #1 pick, again. Look at the Spurs and their "luck", yet another generational talent due to winning the top pick against the odds. Yeah. It is better to be lucky than good. And those who are lucky AND good end up ruling the world.

In evolutionary theory 4 general forces of evolution are recognized: natural selection, gene flow, mutation, and genetic drift. Natural selection more or less refers to merit, genetic drift refers to random factors (luck). They both matter in life. You could argue that Kobe’s book Mamba Mentality emphasizes adding to your skill set to increase the probability of achieving the desired goal. But I’m going way too far off on arcane tangents.

 

[HermanG]

If the Pacers somehow pull off the win would it change the discourse around the 2004 Pistons? Seems like the prevailing thought for a long while has been that you need a superstar to win it all, and the 2004 Pistons were one weird outlier. I wonder if that thought might shift now (or maybe its the league itself that has shifted).

... Or maybe I should be considering Haliburton a superstar?

EDIT: Maybe not the right thread, but I feel like this plays into what the Jazz might want to emulate as a small market team moving forward.

What is even more important is that arguably the 3 best players (sry JDub) in this series were acquired by these small market teams via trades.

"Small market teams can only acquire top talent by drafting" -argument is looking rather shaky.

 

[HadAnEffectHere]

What is even more important is that arguably the 3 best players (sry JDub) in this series were acquired by these small market teams via trades.

"Small market teams can only acquire top talent by drafting" -argument is looking rather shaky.

Kind of, but the two best players in the series were gotten via trading a star in their prime (George for SGA, Sabonis for Haliburton). The Thunder got George because they badly ripped off the Magic who made one of the worst trades ever (Oladipo and Sabonis for Ibaka), but the Pacers got Sabonis because they had drafted George (and then traded him for Sabonis and Oladipo).

So you can get a star... If you already have drafted a star... Or if you take advantage of a team making one of the worst deals in NBA history (a deal so bad that there is constant collusion allegations thrown at the Thunder as the Thunder hired the Orlando GM who made the Ibaka trade).

For Siakam, the Pacers were good enough to compete so they were the team willing to give Siakam a lot of money even if he might not age well. That's pretty standard stuff.

 

[fishonjazz]

If the Pacers somehow pull off the win would it change the discourse around the 2004 Pistons? Seems like the prevailing thought for a long while has been that you need a superstar to win it all, and the 2004 Pistons were one weird outlier. I wonder if that thought might shift now (or maybe its the league itself that has shifted).

... Or maybe I should be considering Haliburton a superstar?

EDIT: Maybe not the right thread, but I feel like this plays into what the Jazz might want to emulate as a small market team moving forward.

They would definitely qualify as that pistons mold if they won it all.
They won't win it all though

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

They would definitely qualify as that pistons mold if they won it all.
They won't win it all though

It's the closest team we can compare them too. The Ringer did a Top 100 NBA players on April 15th and they only had 3 players in the top 100 and only one in the top 30.

Tyrese was 19th and Pascal was 38th with Turner being 87th.

 

[homeytennis]

So are we tanking next season or was this just a head fake by Junior Ainge?