- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The importance of losing
Posted on 2/5/13 at 1:09 pm to TigerinATL
Posted on 2/5/13 at 1:09 pm to TigerinATL
Still, after a horrible losing season last year, right now is a great time to pick up some fan interest, with the rebrand, young team, etc. Being competitive by the end of the year and possibly making a big FA signing would be huge for bringing in new fans next season
1
Posted on 2/5/13 at 7:24 pm to Cap Crunch
Posted on 2/5/13 at 7:25 pm to HeadyBrosevelt
Posted on 2/6/13 at 11:26 pm to WiskyMike
Maybe its just me, but im very competitive. I HATE to lose, period. Losing breeds losing. Year after year, if we arent magically a top 3 team in the NBA, you're going to say tank and hope to get a better player in the draft. I dont agree with this. In order to be a winner, you have to have a winning mentlity. But if you're ok with losing because you think you will get a great draft pick, you might as well get used to losing because its gonna happen for a long time.That being said, I like the direction this team is headed. Alot of potential, I want to develop the guys we have and instill a winning mentality in this program, and head into the next season with a lot of momentum
Posted on 2/7/13 at 12:39 pm to htran90
quote:And when your bottom of the 1st round picks don't develop into all-stars like your very unlikely scenario describes, then what?
I think we need to stop using OKC as the template and use San Antonio. one bad draft landed them duncan and since then it's been smooth sailing for the past decade. why?
pops took the time to develop players through his own picks or just free agents that came cheap.
For the record, I'm not interested in tanking. Using the Spurs highly unlikely model of just developing mediocre players isn't the way of proving your point.
This post was edited on 2/7/13 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 2/7/13 at 4:22 pm to Louie T
quote:
Using the Spurs highly unlikely model of just developing mediocre players isn't the way of proving your point
but it isnt just developing mediocre players. they have consistently found legitimate nba players late in the draft and off the scrap heap for over a decade now not because they are developmental wizards in SA.
they have a system and they acquire players that fit their culture. that is the real model.
no team will ever be able to match drafting parker and ginobili in those spots. but with good scouting and a clear understanding of the team fit, they can find a danny green or gary neal or george hill or dejaun blair or matt bonner or stephen jackson, etc.
the hornets need to build a system around the talents of davis/gordon and find players who fit that system-regardless of pedigree or overall skills
Posted on 2/7/13 at 9:28 pm to corndeaux
And you're asking a lot for Davis to turn into Duncan, Gordon to remain healthy and become a perennial allstar, and Monty become a top 2 coach of all time.
I like the direction this team is heading as much as anyone but hoping things work out even remotely close to how they have for the Spurs is asking a metric ton.
I like the direction this team is heading as much as anyone but hoping things work out even remotely close to how they have for the Spurs is asking a metric ton.
Posted on 2/7/13 at 9:34 pm to Louie T
quote:
And you're asking a lot for Davis to turn into Duncan, Gordon to remain healthy and become a perennial allstar, and Monty become a top 2 coach of all time.
I like the direction this team is heading as much as anyone but hoping things work out even remotely close to how they have for the Spurs is asking a metric ton.
Then how do YOU propose to build this winner? Do you think that nay-saying advances the rebuild?
Posted on 2/7/13 at 10:02 pm to Louie T
so almost everything needs to go right for the hornets to become perennial contenders?
that had to happen for SAS and every other championship team.
what are the other available choices besides building smartly around your 19yo potential HOF player and all-star caliber 24yo sg and hoping it works out?
that had to happen for SAS and every other championship team.
what are the other available choices besides building smartly around your 19yo potential HOF player and all-star caliber 24yo sg and hoping it works out?
Posted on 2/8/13 at 3:44 pm to corndeaux
quote:You are the type of poster that makes the Hornets Talk awful. I was one of the initial proponents for a Hornets board and can probably count on two hands the amount of times I've posted here.
Jester
quote:That's exactly what I want us to do, but teams generally do it through FA... not drafting two perfect complements and perennial all-stars at the back end of the 1st round. I'm just not getting my hopes up about doing it "the Spurs way". Smartly building =/= to what SA has done; they have been as close to perfect as you can get for a non-monstrous market team
what are the other available choices besides building smartly around your 19yo potential HOF player and all-star caliber 24yo sg and hoping it works out?
Posted on 2/8/13 at 3:51 pm to Louie T
quote:
I was one of the initial proponents for a Hornets board and can probably count on two hands the amount of times I've posted here.
seems like a personal problem to me.
edit: i don't like a lot of guys who post on here, but that doesn't stop me from posting.
This post was edited on 2/8/13 at 3:53 pm
Posted on 2/8/13 at 4:11 pm to quail man
I wouldn't necessarily call it a problem, more of a personal preference. I choose not to post and am more than happy to read other boards.
The shitty regulars like jester who incessantly post pics and gifs and don't actually provide insight make the board painful to navigate.
The shitty regulars like jester who incessantly post pics and gifs and don't actually provide insight make the board painful to navigate.
This post was edited on 2/8/13 at 4:17 pm
Posted on 2/8/13 at 6:04 pm to Louie T
quote:
but teams generally do it through FA
Large market teams have gotten their stars via trade and some have won titles by doing so. Teams have copied that success hoping it will work for them. That doesn't mean it's the best way to build a team. San Antonio has only made a move for one big FA (Jefferson) and that was a horrible bust.
Don't know if you saw this, but it is worth the read
LINK
quote:
not drafting two perfect complements and perennial all-stars at the back end of the 1st round.
I don't think anyone believes that drafting Parker/Manu in those spots is a realistic strategy. Most teams weren't even scouting foreign players when they picked them.
The thing to copy from SAS is that they have been able to keep their stars for below market value and they have been able to supplement them with viable players via late draft picks and FA scrap heap.
IMO, that is building smartly. Did they get lucky? Of course. Every title team has gotten lucky. No one else will ever find both a Manu and a Parker that late in the draft. They also got lucky in that those guys reached their ceilings. But it was smart of them to find a market inefficiency and exploit it. They've been doing the same thing with small school prospects and older players in the draft for years.
I don't expect Demps or whomever to find stars in the nether regions of the draft or the FA pile. But SAS has shown that you can consistently find quality NBA players in those places that can sustain a good NBA team for years.
Posted on 2/8/13 at 6:34 pm to corndeaux
I read it when you first posted it.
Our management has done a very good job of finding those quality value, complementary players in Vasquez and Anderson, but that's still a far cry from surrounding Davis with a Parker & Ginobili. This entire scenario is also operating under the assumption that Davis develops like we're envisioning, which likely will still never be a Duncan. When people say do things the SA way I'm taking it fairly literally, which is why we're probably disagreeing
Sidenote: I don't like the OKC comparison. Hitting on 3 all-stars (2 being top 12 players in the league) with early picks is hard enough, much less doing it with a late 1st and 2nd rounder. I don't think they're in any way comparable other than the premise of just having 3 really good players.
quote:Reinforces my point
Basically, it comes down to this. The Spurs have been smarter than everyone else, and that intelligence has yielded the necessary supporting characters for Tim Duncan that eveyone else has to go out and buy through free agency or trade. They're just better, and that's the explanation for their longstanding success; the same intelligence that yielded them Ginobili and Parker (and Hill and Leonard and...) is the same intelligence that helps them build with the right role players within the right system. Parker was drafted 28th, Ginobili 57th. You can find role-player veterans who can hit 3s and rebound, can find capable nondescript contributors to fit the system. But finding two vital cogs and spectacular players to go alongside your icon, late in the draft?
You just can't do that.
How do you do that?
How do you draft, at minimum, two Hall of Fame players, one in the high 20s, the other in the second round?
And that's the struggle. That's why you can't replicate what they've done. But there's another reason this combination is so special. And it has a lot to do with the conspicuous absence of a major team in the comparison spectrum.
Our management has done a very good job of finding those quality value, complementary players in Vasquez and Anderson, but that's still a far cry from surrounding Davis with a Parker & Ginobili. This entire scenario is also operating under the assumption that Davis develops like we're envisioning, which likely will still never be a Duncan. When people say do things the SA way I'm taking it fairly literally, which is why we're probably disagreeing
Sidenote: I don't like the OKC comparison. Hitting on 3 all-stars (2 being top 12 players in the league) with early picks is hard enough, much less doing it with a late 1st and 2nd rounder. I don't think they're in any way comparable other than the premise of just having 3 really good players.
Posted on 2/8/13 at 7:19 pm to Louie T
quote:
I read it when you first posted it.
I never know who actually reads the articles I post. Not that they are holy scripture or anything, but I get the feeling that they usually go unread. quote:
When people say do things the SA way I'm taking it fairly literally, which is why we're probably disagreeing
I agree with that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're focusing more on the star accumulation aspect, while I'm looking more at post star team building.
Either way, good going back and forth with you.
Posted on 2/8/13 at 7:55 pm to corndeaux
quote:That's right. The Hornets have already done an exceptional job with the complementary players, but finding stars through means other than high draft picks or being a FA destination is the more difficult part.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're focusing more on the star accumulation aspect, while I'm looking more at post star team building.
Posted on 2/8/13 at 9:09 pm to Louie T
quote:
finding stars through means other than high draft picks or being a FA destination is the more difficult part.
Definitely agree. It also involves a hell of a lot more luck than anything else.
If they manage their cap space wisely (no dumb contracts this summer), I could see them making a move for a third piece of the triforce on a capped out team next year when the repeater penalties will start to kick in.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News