Thank you for taking this list out and saving me the time. We can see here that in 25 years there have only been 14 unique guys who have been catalysts for a ring. 14 X 25= 350. 14/350 = 0.04. 4% chance a lottery team gets a superstar. Those are ******* small odds. Secondly, by your own calculations you say that 4% is much better than the 0.5% chance of trading for a superstar. Let me ask you a question: is jumping from 0.5% to 4% worth of 6 years of rebuilding? Are 4 to 96 odds good enough to justify 6 years of watching the rockets lose game after game? Of buying tickets and rocket gear and spending your own time talking about a crap team? My analogy for this is selling all your possessions to buy thousands of lottery tickets. Sure you would incease your odds from just buying a couple of tickets, however the minimal increase in the odds doesn't justify running the risk of becoming broke and in debt.
Well, we'll see about that. And like I said, Morey has pushed very hard to land a top pick in the last two drafts to get a guy he wants.
But good/great GMs need some help from the lottery to get to where they want to go. Back to the San Antonio example, if David Robinson weren't lost for the season and the Spurs did not beat the lottery odds to get Duncan, who knows how many more "close but no cigar" seasons the Spurs would have had to endure? I'm not advocating deliberate tanking, especially since Morey's strategy is so far removed from it. But I can't help but think a losing season or two goes a long way in helping a team in the long run.
In my opinion, yes. It is worth the years of losing. I don't find those years any more painful than these years mired in mediocrity. In fact, I enjoy watching young players develop and I enjoy the excitement of draft day. So at least I would have those things to look forward to and talk about. What do I have now? I'd also add that those weren't the only 14 guys in 25 years worth building around. Some of them just had better teams built around them than others. There were other guys who could have won championships but just didn't.
We have more assets than we've ever had before. I'm sure Morey was close but our assets weren't as attractive before. It's bound to happen soon. Also, he's only had two drafts to attempt to trade up for a top pick. You know what they say, third time's the charm.
Bull****, the rockets have never had years of losing. The last time the rockets had consecutive years of below 40 wins was the 83 season, so don't pretend that somehow you've been through it. Most rockets fans have no idea what a real rebuilding process looks like.
"potentially" high draft picks are risky acquisitions...and that's a lot of talent to trade for picks. Plus, at their age they're not going to teams who will suck. They'll be going to teams that are on the rise or already at the top. you're basically trading them for late picks. Battier is the only exception as an expiring, but he's not getting you a high pick at this stage of his career. To get to that level of suckage you gotta lose players naturally, not trade them away. Our problem was not cashing in on yao/tmac/francis and making bad draft decisions. That kept us from rising, staying at the top for a while and riding out these guys until they retire, only to fall into the NBA cellar for years to come. That was actually my point, that they didnt have interest in us, but there were definitely a number of them that were or could have been available. More than anything yao's situation scared them off. In cp's case, they re-tooled quickly and kept him happy, for now. Same with Deron. It was a mixture of bad luck and yao's issue, but i don't think it was an unrealistic route to take or hope for, at least not in today's NBA where starts/superstars demand to be traded or want to explore other options. It just wasn't as prevalent in the past.
40 wins is losing. You have to win 42 games just to be at .500. And what was the result of those consecutive years of being below 40 wins in 83 anyway? Oh right. Ralph Sampson and Hakeem Olajuwon.
Yes, and the NBA changed the rules to stop that from happening. So tell me you are happy to be the sacramento kings.
I think what he was saying was: Superstars do switch teams, and this is before they are on their last leg. While I agree with most of what you said OP, I think the percentage of tier 1/2 superstars switching teams is very close to drafting a tier 1/2 superstar if you factor in the: Garnetts, Ray Allen, Tmac, Vince Carter, Grant Hill, etc (a lot of past superstars). The superstars being so early in their career not even @ their peak are likely to switch teams (at least some) such as Melo (obv this is going to happen), Paul (guessing), Griffin (lol clippers), Wall (if Wiz dont get better) and all these would make it around 5%. That being said, I have no problem tanking a year and taking a shot on getting a superstar. I'd love to be able to trade for one, but Houston is not LA or NYC, so getting a superstar to move here is a lot harder. If Morey can pull some magic and get a Melo or Paul, I'm all for it, I just have trouble believing he will.
Oh I agree. But I'm still ready to travel that road. As for them being late picks - not necessarily. I agree you would need to send players like Scola, Battier, Miller and Martin to winners. They all deserve that. But three way trades are possible. Also, occasionally good teams hold a bad team's draft pick. And I wouldn't advocate trading those guys JUST to trade them. If the right deals can't be had we trudge on mired in mediocrity. Essentially, I've been thinking for years that all we needed was a healthy McGrady or a healthy Yao and we'd be contenders. But now there isn't even that illusion to cling to. And the fact people here are actually talking about building around Kevin Martin, whose offense is largely based off his ability to get to the free throw stripe, blows my mind. It bothers me that Morey is such a great GM that we'll always be either in or on the fringe of the playoffs but we'll never have any hope of winning in the playoffs. Not without a miracle. I'm simply suggesting a path that makes that miracle a little more likely. I understand why people wouldn't want to take that path. But I find it difficult to understand why some here have such a hard time fathoming why I would.
You're forgetting brooks was injured during this time....We're definitely better than the suns and definitely better than Portland with a limping roy, im not sure how that's not evident. We're definitely not overachieving at this point, since the schedule isn't very difficult. You can say we havent played tough competition, but that doesn't mean we didnt beat these teams soundly most of the time. We're taking these wins, they're not being handed to us. And again, that's without brooks, a poor shooting budinger, and a team that is trying to gel and master this offense. They're level of play is steadily rising, like it should in this situation.
Because you are living in a fantasy land where you can tank a season, get a Tim Duncan and then compete for the championship for the next 15 years. The real world doesn't work that way.
Seriously, would you quit trying to put some words in my mouth that aren't there? I haven't once said that this is a guaranteed path to success. To the contrary, I've pointed out how slim the odds are of getting a Tim Duncan type player this route - they're just considerably higher than any other route. Further, I've said I would be willing to suffer through losing seasons for years if need be. So basically you're just making stuff up.
Of course, but you can only play the lotto once a year and you have to be homeless each year. Still would do it?
Fantasy world stuff, you do realise that players are not static, the coach, the other players, lockerroom, the organisation, etc... They all play a role in a players development. You ever wonder why the Clippers, who've basically been in the Lottery their entire existence, never can draft that Superstar, because their franchise just does not have the infrastructure to develop players. Meanwhile, perennial winning organisations have been able to draft players and develop them into superstars. Do you think Kobe would be Kobe if he went to the grizzlies? Do you think Duncan ould be Duncan if he ended up in the Clippers?
