Hilarious. What is with with pro-tankers like you who insult anyone who disagrees, tell everyone they "don't understand basketball," and then eventually demand the "high road?"
I would rather do it the other way around, I would have no issue sending them both for good assets not some mediocre pick.
Portland has had 2 arguably top 25 players for 4 years and have been 1st round fodder and only made it 2 the WCF once. It's sure been easy for them. Utah the same.
Okay? Not sure what that has to do this conversation. I'm not saying Oladipo and Wood, alone, make a championship squad. I'm saying Wood is a budding star, so pair him with a guy like Oladipo, and it's way easier to either trade for a third piece or attract one through free agency.
I agree with you 1000%. Lillard and McCollum are nearly redundant; they've been trying to build around two small guards. Oladipo-Wood is a more balanced 1-2 punch. People are writing off this season too early.
And I say Utah and Portland have had better players than those 2 and they have more 1st round exits than deep playoff runs. So no it's not as easy as that. Also look at Oladipo's previous team as proof.
Again, the core of our disagreement is the players themselves. I view Wood and Oladipo more favorably than you. That's fine. And I never said it was "easy," just way easier than tanking and praying we land a guy as good as Wood. Shall I list the teams that have tanked for years with no success?
I know those teams and they have been in the same boat as the mediocre teams. What I do know is that Philly and Boston have tanked as well as the Lakers so i don't know what you think Success is?
Again, I ask, what is it with you pro-tankers and asking questions like, "Do you know what success is?"
I am not a pro tanker just responding to talking about teams that tank. So do you think the tanking teams I named are successful?
Where did I say they need to be bad? I wasn't betting on anyone, why should that matter that much to me? Do you really think a grown up has nothing to do than watch the standings every day? Especially in Covid times......just your insecurity projecting. You might think too highly of my commitment to basketball, Houston 77. I come in here, give my 2 cents and go on doing other stuff.
Frankly, the Celtics are a good analogy. We have a 1-2 punch in Wood and Oladipo comparable to Brown and Tatum. We have defensive glue guys like Tate comparable to Smart. We have a large contract with Wall comparable to Walker. We have a deep bench and a ten-man rotation. We have a ton of future assets. Because of their positioning, the Celtics were competitive in the Harden sweepstakes and will likely land a guy to put them over the top in the near future, either via trade, free agency, or landing him in the draft.
Do you honestly think that any gm views Oladipo and Wood as comparable to Tatum and Brown? Recall that Ainge wouldnt consider giving up Brown for Harden and Tatum is better than Brown. So, in your mind, is Oladipo and Harden "comparable"?
I can help. Since 2015, no team with the first overall pick has made it to the Conference Finals. Only 2011 features a player who made it to the Conference Final with his original team from 2010- on (Kyrie). Cleveland had 3 cracks at the first overall pick before they could find a way to convince LeBron to return and trade for Kevin Love. The 76ers are the most notable success story with "tanking" and they have yet to make the Conference Finals even though they got close one year by trading for a disgruntled star (who was drafted 30th!), using players and picks that had nothing to do with their "tanking." Boston traded with the Nets and let them do the tanking for them while staying flexible. That could be the Rockets move. The Rockets, never tanked, lucked into a generational talent with Harden with a savvy move. Staying flexible is always better than overcommitting. Maybe tanking becomes the move down the line, or maybe it doesn't. The Rockets have a ton of assets to pounce if another distressed asset becomes available. The best young players in the NBA right now are probably Luka and Jokic. Luka was acquired by Dallas aggressively moving future assets combined with their #5 overall pick. If the Rockets had the #5 overall pick this year, it would go to OKC. - Jokic was a lucky pick in the second round. There is no blue print to finding the next generational talent. The Warriors featured Steph and Klay as top 15 picks, neither in top 5. Draymond is what tied them all together, he was a lucky pick in the second round. There is no one way to compete. We could get lucky and get the first pick but if history is a good judge, you are still over five years out from being a decent contender and you may never get there. You could be in a Zion year or you could be in a year where Malcom Brogdon is rookie of the year. The Rockets were competitive yet underwhelming from 2010-2012 and then lucked into James Harden. They were in the conference finals within three seasons. That's six seasons, and they were better contenders than every other team with a first overall pick in that span (other than Cleveland, that's 10% of the #1 picks translating into a championship). We cannot get stuck in thinking there is one way to contend. There is no blue print and every new contender was formed in a combination of ways. High picks sometimes, lucky sometimes. It's possible the Rockets never win a championship again. It's also possible they luck into a superstar out of the blue. Maybe he's here already.
