Mavs -- Dirk, a franchise star drafted high (would go even higher today with better overseas scouting)
Drafted 8th, not that high. And Dirk wasn't going to be drafted that high because that was considered to be a good draft anyways. Pierce went 10th and everyone knew he'd be good. He was drafted where he was drafted, don't make excuses.
Lakers -- recent titles aided by Bynum, a high pick;
LOL! Bynum was 10th dude, and Bynum was a minor part on those title teams. They win it both years without him. He barely played in the 2010 Finals. And you do know the Lakers were out of the playoffs ONE year? They were able to stay in the playoffs, then traded 2 1sts, a mid-level first (Crittendon) and Gasol (2nd rounder) for Gasol to put them back as contenders.
earlier titles fueled by poaching Shaq from Orlando, which the Celtics can't hope to emulate
I love how you used this example. Shaq just fell from a tree right? All luck? After Magic retired in 91, the Lakers dipped into mediocrity. They were never bad enough to get a high pick and draft an impact guy. Jerry West made great picks (Peeler, Eddie Jones, Campbell, Van Exel) , decent signings (Threatt, Ceballos) and the Lakers stayed in the playoffs for all but one year (94 and didn't miss by much), and then were back to being a 50 win team in 95 and 96. So how were they able to covince Shaq to go there? Because they were already good, and they were adding Kobe! They were a 50 win team + Kobe Bryant. That made Shaq's decision a little easier.
Heat -- drafted Wade, their franchise star, high. without Wade in place they wouldn't have gotten LeBron and Bosh to come to Miami.
Again, one year. You're advocating years of sucking.
Pistons -- the one team in the last 40 years to win a title without a franchise superstar. good luck replicating that.
70, 73 Knicks (none of those guys were franchise superstars, just borderline allstars that played together as a team), 79 Sonics, 04 Pistons.
I also like how you left out the Spurs, who have remained one of the best teams in the NBA with Duncan declining. Their whole team is late first rounders, quality free agent signings, and good coaching.
In recent seasons, we've seen multiple trades for stars that involved players drafted high in the lottery.
e.g. Favors #3 for D-Will, Knicks package highlighted by Gallinari #6 for Melo, Gordon #7 + T-Wolves pick (anticipated high lottery pick) for Chris Paul.
-The Dwill with the Nets thing could absolutely blow up in their faces. -Melo demanded a trade to the Knicks, and even so, Gallinari was just one guy. The rest, besides Chandler (a borderline lotto pick) were all mid level stuff. Not 3-4 years of high lottos.
-Not sure I want to go the Clippers rout. 4 playoff appearances in 33 yeras. And that Wolves pick was acquired with Marko Jaric (mid level talent, picked in the 2nd round.)
Having young stars in place is what gets big name free agents to come, though.
Example? I just showed that they join good teams (Shaq joining an already 50 win Laker squad) or that they come in packages (Heatles.)
That has been well established over the last few years. You forgot to mention Amare joining the Knicks.
This is your example? Amare didn't join the Knicks because of 'young talent.' Gallinari didn't look like a future star at all at the time, and the rest of their roster was crap. He joined the Knicks because Carmelo and another free agent (many thought Chris Paul) were going to be next in line, and because it was New York.
Absolutely. If you want to run your team just to keep the fans happy from year to year, don't pretend that you have any interest in winning a championship
You owe it to your fans to at least give them a plan. I'm sorry, but turning your roster into an NBDL squad and then promising them lollipops and marshmellows down the road isn't going to cut it. Don't you remember the fall-out and the disgust fans had with Danny after the 07 lottery? If those KG-Ray trades weren't made then the Celtics would be beyond meaningless in Boston.
Fans who are really dedicated to the team, and care most about seeing it climb back to the ranks of the true elite, will stay on board. The rest will jump off the bandwagon and follow the Red Sox and Bruins until the C's become contenders again, anyway.
Ah, except those people are important to the team. You need to make money. You need to give people a reason to watch you play. If your spinning your wheels for 10+ years (Bulls), then the franchise starts losing money, and then you become no different than any other small market team who gets fleeced out of their stars. Boston is not a basketball town. They won't watch unless you are winning, or at the very least, have a plan to get back on top. And they sure as hell won't watch when the Sox, Bruins, and Patriots are contending year in and year out.
This Celtics team was built using a #5 pick, a bunch of solid prospects highlighted by a #15 pick who turned into a much better player than expected, and a #10 pick who became a Hall of Fame franchise superstar.
Was moreso built by mid to late first rounders, and even good second round picks, and acquiring other future draft considerations. As I pointed out a thousand times, Seattle was taking that trade if they could've got an expiring for Ray and a lesser pick as opposed to Wally at near max. Maintain your flexibility and its easier to make trades. Celtics did not have flexibility at the time so they HAD to have that high pick. This time, we WILL have flexibility.
That's not really "rebuilding with mid to late first round picks." That's like trying to build a championship contender with the Rondos, Zach Randolphs, Darren Collisons, Kevin Martins, and Monta Ellis's of the league. It just doesn't happen. You have to pick high to go high in the NBA.
That doesn't mean you keep all those players. You package the Rondos, the Randolphs and you get Gasols, Allens, and Garnetts.
Topic: Restoring some sanity here: Quality rebuilding talk, and how long will it take? (Read 12056 times)