What exactly was he 2 years ago? I personally think he sucks and his stats were inflated by playing for the Warriors.
Speaking of which, I have had trouble understanding why Granger is a bad player. I have heard this from Simmons and other sources, but never have I seen a reason why. I mean he consistently puts up all-star numbers, is a defensive force and seems to be nice guy. What gives?
He averaged 10-11 pts a game with the Warriors. With the Pacers he averaged 19-20 pts on 47.6% shooting, 2 years ago.
I'm sure O'Brien does not want to lose his job. I am sure players do not want to be traded (not 100% sure about that one). Soo it makes sense for them to try to win.
The Spurs David Robinson played 6 games the entire season before they got Tim Duncan. Sean Elliot, their second best player, only played 39. They were trying to win games with a 37 year old Dominique Wilkins. They didn't have the feisty little team that we have after losing a franchise center.
If Rockets had lost 2 extra games in 2005-06, they would have sold more tickets in 2006 to now and gone further in the playoffs. They would get more revenue from playoff tickets in the 2nd round and higher rounds possibly.
It's a thread like this that reminds me how grateful I am that random fans are not qualified to be General Managers in the NBA. You play to win, not to tank. What if that lottery pick is a bust? You waste the season for say, Jason Williams? We all know how that worked out. It's all about chance, so take your chances to win.
By only looking at this year in comparison with the last 15 years, you're leaving off a lot of teams who, over that span, have also drafted a franchise player to become, at one point, a "playoff contender" - including the Rockets of the last ~5 years. Also leaving off teams who were playoff contenders without drafting franchise players. A few more nitpicks from your original list - "Wade-Heat" is in the playoffs, but nowhere near a contender. They're hardly better than the Rockets are currently. I actually would pick the Rockets in a 7 game series against the Heat. "Amare-Suns" is only a playoff contender because of "Nash-Suns", which was an offseason transaction. Similar to that is "Pierce-Celtics" (KG-Celtics), who were at best low-tier playoff teams or 14th-pick types for 10 years before their offseason acquisition. Basically, I'm just saying there's no one method to it.
Like I said considering there have been 225 lottery picks the last 15 years and if tanking really worked every team should have a franchise player by now. What you fail to understand is that more important than getting a high draft pick is a good GM. Good GMs get more out of low draft picks than bad GMs with lottery picks. As for why the Pacers would win games, that's because that's what they're paid to do. Fans and the owner pay the team to win, and not to lose. If you're just watching tv then its ok to say tank because you don't have to watch, but if you paid hundreds of dollars for season tickets would you be ok if the team said they'll tank the season? LOL cough up the $$$ first, then tell me you'd be upset if the Pacers started winning games.
I think that what he's saying is that teams like the Cavs have obviously tanked for franchise players while we have refused to do that and thus have only had Ming as a franchise player via draft, which admittedly isn't bad, but by winning out we're doing so by mostly playing veterans in a losing season where we won't make the playoffs anyway. It's all in the percentages! Increase your losses, increase your odds. Whether or not you agree, everything is fine, as I don't think that there are right or wrong answers in this case.
how about all the fans that paid to be in the arena and cheering for the team? will you spend a lot of money, and cheered on a team that you know is not going to put any effort on the court? and you will you go to see a bunch of reserves, while all the starters are in the bench resting without any injury??
I would be happy for them to develop Hansbrough and Price, since it's already a forgone conclusion that they won't make the playoffs. Many of the fans on the Pacer's forum are upset with O'Brien aren't trying to develop Hansbrough and Price, even though they have no chance of making the playoffs. If the Pacers had kept position around 5th instead of dropping to 9th, they eliminate 4 chances of other teams taking their projected stars. They also sell more tickets the following seasons due to excitement about the star potential, instead of ending up with Aldrich(solid, but no star).
How about developing Danny Granger, Roy Hibbert, Brandon Rush who a) are still quite young, b) have still untapped potential, c) actually can play basketball, d) have actually a role to play in the organisations future ? And outside of a few select players in given draft, there isn't that much parity in quality to usually justify tanking. If you were guaranteed a pick in the top-3 and after that the draft sucks, MAYBE then. Sorry to say, but imo this thread is moronic.
Price, Rush, Granger, Hanbrough, and Hibbert should and can play together. They don't play the same position. If the Pacers don't want Price and Hansbrough, then they showcase them and trade them in the offseason. It would give them more value than rotting on the bench.
I hope the Pacers franchise utterely collapses like the Wizards and they try to get rid of Granger. The moment that happens, I want Morey to hop all over them.
Ok, forget about playing Hansbrough. He got an inner ear infection and will be out the rest of the season.
