what does a full on rebuild look like? the wiz? the bobcats? the hornets? years of lottery picks? The wizards are going on 5 years of sub 30 win basketball. not sure i can take that. I just don't know how it works.
I mean mediocrity has its merits. look at memphis - that's a fun team who has been a 40 win team for a few years before the breakout this year. we had that going with Squiggs and all but things went awry with the bynum trade and now a full rebuild is probably the best (only) move but it's going to be years of rebuilding with uncertainty we will even get back to our (mediocre) heights.

Luzinski's Gut wrote:I am clearly biased about the state of play in the NBA. If this is what the public wants, have fun. I'd rather watch a league that is competitively balanced, that is driven by the quality of the actual game instead of two or three superstars, and has player acquisition guidelines that allow for teams to improve relatively quickly.

If you don't have a superstar and you can't draft in the top five (god help you if you do have a top pick in the top five during a shitty draft class, like we did with Evan Turner), and your city isn't in a major media market, then your team is going to be stuck in mediocrity for a long time.

People in DC have all but given up on the Wizards EVER improving. There's no draw for free agents to come to DC, there aren't any major tax breaks like Florida, it's not a major media market. You can take that formula and apply to at least half the teams in the NBA.

Again, perhaps the fan base doesn't care and are happy with just watching the two or three best stars. Seems like an odd way to appreciate a sport, but I guess I'm just out of touch.

The NBA has always been like this. Wilt vs. Russell, Bird vs. Magic, Jordan vs. the field. There are superstar, superteams that drive the league and drive interest in the league. The league is more exciting with larger than life superstars battling it out. The reason for that is because one player can have a bigger impact on a team and on a game than individual players can have in other sports. Because of this, the cream really rises to the top in the NBA and in basketball in general.

That's what makes the playoffs so intriguing to me. You get to see the teams that are really the best in the league fight it out to be king of the mountain. In the other major leagues, the regular season is a battle to make the playoffs and then anyone can catch fire and win the title. That unpredictability is appealing to a lot of people. However, I always argue that the NBA championship is the most fair championship in sports. You can look back on any NBA season and really know who the best team that year truly was. To me, the fact that you just need to make the playoffs and catch fire for a few weeks devalues other championships.

And even if you're one of the best players in the league, you aren't guaranteed a championship because it's so hard to win one in the NBA. LeBron's been the best player in the world for years and it's been kind of ridiculous to bother arguing for anyone else for the past five or six years. Yet he only has one ring. It's not a given that you're going to win it all.

The small market argument is the biggest farce ever, also. Look at all of the 50+ win teams in the league this year: Heat, Thunder, Spurs, Nuggets, Clippers, Grizzlies, and Knicks. Two out of those seven teams are in top 15 media markets and one of those is the red-headed stepchild of their town. The only large media markets that are really supposedly free agent draws are New York and LA. In the summer of 2010, when some of the best players in the league were free agents, the mythical Knicks, located right in basketball mecca and the biggest media market in the US, struck out on pretty much everybody and ended up overpaying Amare Stoudemire with an uninsurable contract. You're right: you need a superstar to win, but they don't normally come in free agency for anyone (outside of the Lakers). The only teams I can really think of that won it all and got their best player via free agency are the Lakers of the early 00's who won with Shaq as their best player and the current Heat, but LeBron seems to be shaping up to be the exception to a lot of rules.

Getting better is difficult, and that's frustrating for fans of bad teams, but it's because of the nature of the game where individual players can have such an impact. If you don't like basketball, that's a fair opinion to have, but it really bugs me when people act like the NBA is bastardizing basketball when it's not. Any time you watch a college game or lower levels, you see guys that have a bit of an advantage over other people that dominate. We've seen college phenoms like Hansbrough, Morrison, Beasley, and (sigh) Evan Turner dominate lesser competition and fizzle out fast and hard when they face actual quality players in the NBA.

Sorry for ranting for fifteen lengthy paragraphs. The tl;dr version is: success in the game of basketball, and not the NBA itself, relies on having a top tier player and media market has no impact on your ability to get top tier players.

Also, you don't trade Jrue. He's 22 so even if you suck for five years, he'll just be hitting his prime when the team is supposed to be good. Also, he's not overpaid and he's not good enough to really keep us from sucking. On top of that, you don't trade quality for quantity in the NBA: you consolidate young pieces for better players.

The only reason to trade Jrue is as the centerpiece of a package that can get a disgruntled top guy. Although, even then, we don't have a supporting cast in place for a guy like that so he'd just get disgruntled here too.

No issues Youseff. I think I'm just getting old.

I'm also pretty frustrated with how the Sixers have been run for the past decade. It's sad state of affairs when we as fans have to get our hopes up for a brokedick 25 year old with a terrible attitude towards the sport. I'd just like to see the Sixers be better...it just seems the entire organization is adrift and there is little to no vision towards getting better. I also think the owners are constrained by a lot of the leagues rules towards free agency and trades, so we're left floating in mediocrity until we luck into a great player through the draft or somehow Philly becomes a desired place to play...both are unlikely to occur in the short term.

Youseff wrote:sorry I said STFU, LG. I just get hyper-sensitive and protective b/c so many talk smack on the NBA. wears on my nerves, ya know?

the most desirable places to play are always going to be the ones with cap space. sometimes you're not the best team with cap space. sometimes you are. (PHILLYMAX!)

Houston just traded for an MVP candidate at the beginning of this season. The Clippers, who were historically terrible for decades, traded for one last year. Just gotta get back to the drawing board and build your assets over a few years then strike when the iron's hot. It almost worked last summer but the iron got really cold, really quickly. There will be other opportunities.

I want Aaron McKie to get a shot if they're going for someone that's already tied to the org. I have no idea if he knows what he's doing, but if they're going to suck next year anyway, I'd like to see Blue get a promotion.

I think the best choice is Brad Stevens, he would get a year to figure things out and go through the growing pains, hopefully they suck and get a top 5 pick, and you start building from there. He's gotta be the CHIP! of basketball coaches right now.

I'd really be disappointed if it's Curry, he deserves a shot, dragging this crap roster to defensive respectability was pretty ridiculous and all, but I'd like for him to get that shot somewhere else. He seems to veteranish to build a young team.

Doug Collins is a really good coach, he made Jrue and Thad much better players, he made Lou a much better player. He brought EB back from the grave. We're all too hard on the guy, the fact is that the roster was a pile of shit. This was his doing, and I'm aware of that, but the way that Liberty Ballers nerds marginalized his bball acumen was frustrating. The "long 2" became Andy with timeouts. The roster sucked, it was built around having an interior presence, and what they ended up with was Spencer Hawes and the worst front line in the league. They have perimeter players that can't create outside of Jrue. When you have bad players, you run a bad offense, you get bad shots in the NBA. That this team won the number of games that it won is pretty crazy.

I don't want to seem like I'm a staunch Doug defender, I'm sorta relieved to see him gone. He seemed like he had worn everyone out. He also has the same faults of a lot of old school coaches. But definitely a very solid basketball coach at the end of the day. Thad and Jrue both say he's the best coach they've ever had.

the "long 2" thing was and always will be a fair criticism. He designed his entire offensive gameplan on high risk/low reward shots and predictably we were a terrible offensive team

Doug has taken this assemblage of talent as far as it can go.

Now it's up to the GM and ownership to get really creative and see what the hell they can do. My hopes are probably at rock bottom with this franchise. I suppose that's good as any improvement will be leaps and bounds better than the bag of hot mess that currently wears the uniform.

Soren wrote:the "long 2" thing was and always will be a fair criticism. He designed his entire offensive gameplan on high risk/low reward shots and predictably we were a terrible offensive team

Do you feel that they'd have been as inefficient with a dominant low post presence?

Who are the shooters on the team? If Richardson stayed healthy, that would have helped. Other than that, we don't have too many good shooters from long range.

still optimistic that the owners spend what's needed to help in the turnaround.

pretty crazy that Kwame has a player option for next year

Eddie Jordan wrote:

Soren wrote:the "long 2" thing was and always will be a fair criticism. He designed his entire offensive gameplan on high risk/low reward shots and predictably we were a terrible offensive team

Do you feel that they'd have been as inefficient with a dominant low post presence?

long 2s are terrible shots to take consistently regardless of what kind of post up game your big men have.

Soren wrote:

Eddie Jordan wrote:

Soren wrote:the "long 2" thing was and always will be a fair criticism. He designed his entire offensive gameplan on high risk/low reward shots and predictably we were a terrible offensive team

Do you feel that they'd have been as inefficient with a dominant low post presence?

long 2s are terrible shots to take consistently regardless of what kind of post up game your big men have.

They wouldn't take long 2's with Bynum.

The only shots they could seem to get with this roster were long 2's. Doug isn't dumb, he knows that they're bad shots. The winning formula for DC here involved low risk offense, take care of the ball and win games on the defensive end. they lost an elite perimeter player that made that formula work.

When you lack bigs that will roll worth a damn or even venture anywhere near the paint, and you only have one guy that can really create for himself and others, and you have nobody to spread the floor... you're gonna get bad shots

I don't think Doug stays up at night drawing up plays to get long 2's.

Overall, he's probably not on the cutting edge X's and O's wise, but he knows how to get the best out of his players, and put them in roles where they'll flourish.

Eddie Jordan wrote:pretty crazy that Kwame has a player option for next year

I feel like there was a point in time when I was OK with this.

Eddie Jordan wrote:I want Aaron McKie to get a shot if they're going for someone that's already tied to the org. I have no idea if he knows what he's doing, but if they're going to suck next year anyway, I'd like to see Blue get a promotion.

I think the best choice is Brad Stevens, he would get a year to figure things out and go through the growing pains, hopefully they suck and get a top 5 pick, and you start building from there. He's gotta be the CHIP! of basketball coaches right now.

I'd really be disappointed if it's Curry, he deserves a shot, dragging this crap roster to defensive respectability was pretty ridiculous and all, but I'd like for him to get that shot somewhere else. He seems to veteranish to build a young team.

Doug Collins is a really good coach, he made Jrue and Thad much better players, he made Lou a much better player. He brought EB back from the grave. We're all too hard on the guy, the fact is that the roster was a pile of shit. This was his doing, and I'm aware of that, but the way that Liberty Ballers nerds marginalized his bball acumen was frustrating. The "long 2" became Andy with timeouts. The roster sucked, it was built around having an interior presence, and what they ended up with was Spencer Hawes and the worst front line in the league. They have perimeter players that can't create outside of Jrue. When you have bad players, you run a bad offense, you get bad shots in the NBA. That this team won the number of games that it won is pretty crazy.

I don't want to seem like I'm a staunch Doug defender, I'm sorta relieved to see him gone. He seemed like he had worn everyone out. He also has the same faults of a lot of old school coaches. But definitely a very solid basketball coach at the end of the day. Thad and Jrue both say he's the best coach they've ever had.

Doug was an awesome coach. The LB guys take things too far, because that's their thing, but I don't have a problem with Doug at all. I still like him.

That said, he's not the right coach to lead this team going forward. I don't even mind the long 2 offense, because really, what other offense was he supposed to run with this particular team? It's just that unless they re-up Bynum and he comes back ready to go next season, this team is not good.

They've got Jrue, Thad, ET, Hawes, J-Rich, Kwame, Lavoy, and Moultrie under contract. In my ideal world, the only ones who come back are Jrue, Thad, Lavoy, and Moultrie. J-Rich and Kwame aren't going anywhere though, so that's whatever. They should move ET and Hawes. They aren't going to re-sign ET anyway at his number, so cut bait and move on. Moving Hawes is just for my sanity, mostly. Also, still on Team Bynum. They're not going to be good for the next two, three years anyway without Bynum, so why not take the chance?

As for the new coach, I want Budenholzer. I'd like an assistant with a track record of success that hasn't coached before, somebody that can grow with the team.

laf837 wrote:what does a full on rebuild look like? the wiz? the bobcats? the hornets? years of lottery picks? The wizards are going on 5 years of sub 30 win basketball. not sure i can take that. I just don't know how it works.
I mean mediocrity has its merits. look at memphis - that's a fun team who has been a 40 win team for a few years before the breakout this year. we had that going with Squiggs and all but things went awry with the bynum trade and now a full rebuild is probably the best (only) move but it's going to be years of rebuilding with uncertainty we will even get back to our (mediocre) heights.

I'm with you... I thought last year was very fun. I'd rather just be good... A four or five seed and winning a round in the playoffs wouldn't be considered mediocre to me... Unless we are getting Lebron or Durant, we probably aren't winning a title... We had the second pick in the draft. It happened to be Evan Turner instead of Kevin Durant...

Either Doug was a bad motivator or a bad X&Os guy because this team took way too many long 2s and way too few FTs.

Doug Collins is a really good coach, he made Jrue and Thad much better players, he made Lou a much better player. He brought EB back from the grave. We're all too hard on the guy, the fact is that the roster was a pile of #$!&@. This was his doing, and I'm aware of that, but the way that Liberty Ballers nerds marginalized his bball acumen was frustrating. The "long 2" became Andy with timeouts. The roster sucked, it was built around having an interior presence, and what they ended up with was Spencer Hawes and the worst front line in the league. They have perimeter players that can't create outside of Jrue. When you have bad players, you run a bad offense, you get bad shots in the NBA. That this team won the number of games that it won is pretty crazy.

I don't want to seem like I'm a staunch Doug defender, I'm sorta relieved to see him gone. He seemed like he had worn everyone out. He also has the same faults of a lot of old school coaches. But definitely a very solid basketball coach at the end of the day. Thad and Jrue both say he's the best coach they've ever had.

his MO is to make people better, but wear htem out eventually. so, this just followed the pattern. this time, though, looks like he wore himself out.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/918 ... umn-part-1

Jrue is 40th on Simmons' trade value list. what a joke. was sure I wouldn't see him until part 2