Author Topic: Unconventional Wisdom  (Read 10530 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Unconventional Wisdom
« on: October 13, 2013, 02:25:26 PM »

Offline yoursweatersux

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 261
  • Tommy Points: 45
All this talk about trading Rondo and tanking made me want to start a thread to talk about that, so here goes.

Tanking Sucks

Ok, everyone knows that it's painful to sit through a season watching your team tank for a lottery pick. 40 minutes of Courtney Lee should be just about enough to make any grown man cry, after all.

But no pain, no gain, right? In the end it's worth it if you tanking helps your team set itself up for a championship, right? Well... what if I told you that it doesn't? That's right - it turns out winning is correlated with, well, winning, and losing is correlated with losing. Think of how many bottom-feeding teams there are in this league that fail to go anywhere DESPITE primo access to top draft picks. Charlotte Bobcats, anyone? How about those Wizards?

In fact, good teams that have good management and are consistently GOOD tend to continue to be good. Look at the Spurs, for example. When is the last time you saw the Lakers intentionally tank? Or the Heat? Or the Mavericks? Hell, even the Pacers, Grizzlies, and other teams that have been playoff threats over the last few years... none of them has "tanked" in the recent past. But this is just a lead-in to my primary example:

The Houston Rockets.

Daryl Morey wholly rejected the idea of tanking, and instead chose to persistently build the best possible team by sweeping up the good players and valuable ones (meaning good contracts on reasonably good players) until the final pieces of the puzzle fell together. He basically said to the league "Screw you, I'm better at evaluating talent. I'm going to put out a competitive team every year until free agent superstars who are serious about winning realize that this is where they can go to do just that, because I've built the perfect complementary pieces." Seems to have worked out for them.

What about the OKC model? Well, turns out that blind luck (which is what the lottery is) can't do everything for you. Sure it got them Durant, but the irony is that if they had been "lucky" enough to get the number 1 pick their prize would have been Greg Oden. What about Russell Westbrook and James Harden? Well, there goes that bad management again... OKC had a choice to make and they chose wrong, despite getting an absolute STEAL in the draft with Harden, again as a result of blind luck. Westbrook is seriously overrated, and sooner or later the league is going to catch on to that. Sure, blind luck was good enough for a finals appearance but when you lucked into getting the second best player in the league in Durant, you should be expecting more than that.

The bottom line is that both methods can work. It's just that tanking relies largely on blind luck, while doing it the old fashioned way can guarantee consistent results. Draft smart, acquire good/valuable players, save that cap room, and you're more likely to rise to the top than somebody who is collecting lottery draft picks left and right like the Pelicans.

Ok, this is Celtics Talk. How does this relate to the Celtics?

Well, Ainge has been doing essentially the opposite of that by picking up overrated, over-the-hill players and other assorted bums. Sure, he's made some great moves (bringing the big 3 together, drafting Rondo, Perk) but since then he's fallen off hard, to the point where even trying to stay competitive is an impossibility at this point. Ainge has had some success in the draft despite a lot of misses if you consider Bradley and Sullinger, so I'll give him credit there.

But his free agency moves have been flat-out horrendous. Selling high on Perk after his injury was a good idea, but what we got for him was fools gold - Jeff Green has so consistently failed to live up to the hype that now pretty much nobody expects him to do anything at all, except for the few crazies remaining who think he could be an all-star this year, who will undoubtedly be disappointed once again. The remainder of players that he has brought in is a veritable list of shame, all players past their prime or damaged goods:

Delonte West
Nenad Krstic
Troy Murphy
Jermaine Oneal
Marquis Daniels
Carlos Arroyo
Von Wafer
Ryan Hollins
Chris Wilcox
Keyon Dooling
Sasha Pavlovic

How many of those guys are even still in the league?

Now we have to deal with the contracts of Gerald Wallace (10 mil a year for 3 years, jesus) Jeff Green (9 mil a year for possibly 3 more years, ugh) Courtney Lee (5 mil a year for 3 more years) and Kris Humphries (12 mil for this year, WHAT?) Brandon Bass (7 mil a year for 2 years).

Not one of these is a high-value contract. That means we have absolutely zero assets, other than Rondo and Sullinger. We're basically in a position where it is IMPOSSIBLE for us to compete, and, hell, at this point we almost might as well tank because that's all we can do. We're in Bobcat territory now, and it's terrifying.

Compare this to the Rockets, who are paying Omer Asik and Jeremy Lin 5 mil apiece this year, and 1 mil a year for EXTREMELY solid players like Chandler Parsons, Patrick Beverly, Aaron Brooks, Terrence Jones and Omri Caspi.

That's how you're supposed to play the GM game, not the way Ainge is doing it.


Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #1 on: October 13, 2013, 02:45:49 PM »

Offline yoursweatersux

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 261
  • Tommy Points: 45
Also, I forgot to mention this: results of winning the lottery for the last decade+ by seeing how many championships they've won during that time

2012 - Hornets (0 championships)
2011 - Cavs (0 championships)
2010 - Wizards (0 championships)
2009 - Clippers (0 championships)
2008 - Bulls (0 championships)
2007 - Trail Blazers (0 championships)
2006 - Raptors (0 Championships)
2005 - Bucks (0 championships)
2004 - Magic (0 championships)
2003 - Cavs (0 championships)
2002 - Rockets (0 championships)
2001 - Wizards (0 championships)
2000 - Nets (0 championships)
1999 - Bulls (0 championships)
1998 - Clippers (0 championships)


You starting to get the point? You have to go all the way back to 1997 to Tim Duncan and the Spurs to find a team that won the draft and subsequently won a championship in recent history, and THEY ONLY GOT TIM DUNCAN BECAUSE OF CATASTROPHIC INJURIES RUINING THEIR SEASON IN THE FIRST PLACE, AND IT WASN'T A TANK JOB AT ALL.

The numbers don't lie: over the last fifteen years tank jobs are batting 0 for 15. Argue against me all you want, but the facts are the facts. Crime doesn't pay, and tanking is a crime.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2013, 02:46:24 PM »

Offline badshar

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 588
  • Tommy Points: 72
Very easy to say how someone should do their job, but twice as difficult when you actually try placing yourself in the person's shoes and then learn about the hundreds of things you have to worry about before making any decision.

It's also very easy to look at the success of those who got very lucky and then compare that with someone else. This thread wouldn't be here if you didn't have someone to compare Ainge to.

Since almost no other GM is in a position that Ainge is currently in, please tell us how Ainge should deal with this roster now that you don't have some lucky GM to compare him to.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2013, 02:53:53 PM »

Offline yoursweatersux

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 261
  • Tommy Points: 45
Very easy to say how someone should do their job, but twice as difficult when you actually try placing yourself in the person's shoes and then learn about the hundreds of things you have to worry about before making any decision.


Actually, I'm also criticizing his overall strategy, which he could change effortlessly. Ainge has clearly worked the Celtics into a "tank and rebuild" strategy, and I've just pointed out how flawed of a strategy that really is. Hell, it barely counts as a strategy due to its ineffectiveness.

His mistakes on free agency, though? Yes, it's easy to criticize him when there are clearly other GM's out there that are better. I'm not saying I could do a better job, but the Spurs and the Rockets have proven that there exist GM's (typically ones willing to use advanced stats, which Ainge is afraid of/doesn't understand) who will consistently outperform guys like Ainge. So I guess I'm not against Ainge for being Ainge, I'm against management for keeping Ainge around when clearly better options exist (perhaps someone who has worked as an assistant GM at one of the better-run teams).

EDIT:

looks like we both edited our posts. You said "lucky" GM? Sam Presti is a lucky GM, and he's managed to pretty much blow it for the Thunder. I doubt they even make the finals this year despite stumbling upon absolute gold in the draft.

Morey and Buford aren't "lucky"... they're just good. They outperform other GM's every single year, and that's not luck.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2013, 03:14:30 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
theres a reason why Ainge tanked and traded KG and Pierce THIS offseason and not any other offseason.  It's what separates this offseason from ones where the Bobcats take Cody Zeller or the Wizards take Bradley Beal...

THere's guys like Wiggins, Parker and Randle coming this year who could be franchise-changers.  It's like tanking for the 2003 draft... it's different. 

And really Ainge had a couple options...

Milk another 38-43 win season out of KG/Pierce and tank when there ISN'T a transcendent rookie class coming... or dump them now, bottom out in 2013, acquire future assets and have a shot at a franchise changer in the 2014 draft.  No-Brainer.  Tanking was the smart move.  Even if we get stuck picking in the 5-8 range (our ceiling, according to Celticsblog), it'll be worth it long-term.  Had to start the rebuild at some point.  Technically we're already 2 years late on starting this process.  Taking a shot at this huge 2014 draft is as good a time as any.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2013, 03:18:55 PM »

Offline European NBA fan

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 984
  • Tommy Points: 141
I would say that the verdict is still out with Green. Based on the end of last season, he is easily worth his contract. Let's see how this one plays out and not judge him based on four preseason games.

The only player of those you mention, who got more than the MLE, was Nenad Krstic. Most of them got the vet min. But what do you expect, when you have the Big 3 (plus Rondo) eating most of the salary cap.

Delonte West - was injured a lot, but overall played very well for us.
Nenad Krstic - was a necessary fill-in in the Green trade. Was at times our only center (and actually decent, PER=14.3). Went to Europe and was named two times to the All Euroleague 1st team.
Troy Murphy - was waived by the Nets before the Celtics picked him up. Anyone who thought he was a saviour were delusional. But what could Ainge have done better?
JO - that was probably a long shot, and we could have used that money better.
Marquis Daniels - I admit that he was inconsistant, but I loved him on the Celtics. One of my favorite blue-collar players. His freak accident was just too awful.

The rest of the guys, I more or less agree on, but still what do you expect to get for the veterans min?

And there was more than handful, that you didn't mention, who he also got for the minimum: Shaq, Rasheed, Pietrus, Stiemsma among others.

Please give me examples of players who he could have gotten for the minimum or the MLE, that would have helped more. (And Tony Allen or Stiemsma doesn't count).

...

The assets in the Nets deal were obviously the 1st round picks, which is a pretty good deal for three veterans, even if two of them are future HOFs. If any of the Nets contracts turn out to be worth anything, that is just gravy. They are most likely not considered part of any rebuilding plans.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2013, 03:19:01 PM »

Offline VitorSullyandKOFan

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 498
  • Tommy Points: 19
theres a reason why Ainge tanked and traded KG and Pierce THIS offseason and not any other offseason.  It's what separates this offseason from ones where the Bobcats take Cody Zeller or the Wizards take Bradley Beal...

THere's guys like Wiggins, Parker and Randle coming this year who could be franchise-changers.  It's like tanking for the 2003 draft... it's different. 

And really Ainge had a couple options...

Milk another 38-43 win season out of KG/Pierce and tank when there ISN'T a transcendent rookie class coming... or dump them now, bottom out in 2013, acquire future assets and have a shot at a franchise changer in the 2014 draft.  No-Brainer.  Tanking was the smart move.   

I don't think the team will tank they will play hard everyday but the talent gap will make lose a lot of games and like you said is the perfect time to rebuild a great draft class is due this year a talent like Wiggins, Parker or Randle could lure other star player in the future.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2013, 03:28:41 PM »

Offline badshar

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 588
  • Tommy Points: 72
Very easy to say how someone should do their job, but twice as difficult when you actually try placing yourself in the person's shoes and then learn about the hundreds of things you have to worry about before making any decision.


Actually, I'm also criticizing his overall strategy, which he could change effortlessly. Ainge has clearly worked the Celtics into a "tank and rebuild" strategy, and I've just pointed out how flawed of a strategy that really is. Hell, it barely counts as a strategy due to its ineffectiveness.

His mistakes on free agency, though? Yes, it's easy to criticize him when there are clearly other GM's out there that are better. I'm not saying I could do a better job, but the Spurs and the Rockets have proven that there exist GM's (typically ones willing to use advanced stats, which Ainge is afraid of/doesn't understand) who will consistently outperform guys like Ainge. So I guess I'm not against Ainge for being Ainge, I'm against management for keeping Ainge around when clearly better options exist (perhaps someone who has worked as an assistant GM at one of the better-run teams).

EDIT:

looks like we both edited our posts. You said "lucky" GM? Sam Presti is a lucky GM, and he's managed to pretty much blow it for the Thunder. I doubt they even make the finals this year despite stumbling upon absolute gold in the draft.

Morey and Buford aren't "lucky"... they're just good. They outperform other GM's every single year, and that's not luck.
Let's wait for the Rockets to actually do something in the playoffs before declaring their GM as great. Also, let's not forget that Ainge put together the first modern Big 3 (which led to copycats Heat and others) all while he was under pressure for losing his job.

If you are saying that the Rockets GM is a good GM because he signed a player who likes attention and money more than winning (Dwight Howard), then that's a very bad example. Didn't the Lakers GM assemble a Big 4 last year? How'd that go?

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #8 on: October 13, 2013, 03:38:53 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12765
  • Tommy Points: 1546
Tanking is a bad idea, it rarely ever works out.

It just breeds a losing culture, perpetuated by losers.  The odds of actually getting one of those "franhise changers" is so small, it just isn't worth it to tank.  The odds are heavily in favor of tanking teams not getting that franchise player, and being right back where they were the following season.

In the meantime, the players currently on the roster become conditioned to losing, and just begin to accept it.  Bad habits develop, and the losing just continues season after season.

And if that wasn't bad enough, while all this losing is going on, fans start to get tired of watching a crappy product, stop paying attention, and the team ends up just losing money year after year.

So yeah, as I said, tanking is just plain dopey and rarely ever works out.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #9 on: October 13, 2013, 03:50:51 PM »

Offline Boris Badenov

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5227
  • Tommy Points: 1065
Tanking is a bad idea, it rarely ever works out.

It just breeds a losing culture, perpetuated by losers.  The odds of actually getting one of those "franhise changers" is so small, it just isn't worth it to tank.  The odds are heavily in favor of tanking teams not getting that franchise player, and being right back where they were the following season.

In the meantime, the players currently on the roster become conditioned to losing, and just begin to accept it.  Bad habits develop, and the losing just continues season after season.

And if that wasn't bad enough, while all this losing is going on, fans start to get tired of watching a crappy product, stop paying attention, and the team ends up just losing money year after year.

So yeah, as I said, tanking is just plain dopey and rarely ever works out.

But how do you square this argument with the Celtics' very own experience in 2006-07?

We went 24-58 and arguably pulled Pierce from the lineup to tank. Rondo, Perk, TA, Powe etc. all went through this very "culture of losing" you describe.

And yet, we won the championship the next year. How can you say that the period of terrible play did any lasting damage, if we were able to turn things around so quickly?  Do you think Rondo was "conditioned to losing" and now "accepts it"?

And while you're right about the low probability of getting a #1 pick, we did get a valuable #5 pick that was a primary part of our rebuilding trades.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #10 on: October 13, 2013, 04:00:44 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12765
  • Tommy Points: 1546
Tanking is a bad idea, it rarely ever works out.

It just breeds a losing culture, perpetuated by losers.  The odds of actually getting one of those "franhise changers" is so small, it just isn't worth it to tank.  The odds are heavily in favor of tanking teams not getting that franchise player, and being right back where they were the following season.

In the meantime, the players currently on the roster become conditioned to losing, and just begin to accept it.  Bad habits develop, and the losing just continues season after season.

And if that wasn't bad enough, while all this losing is going on, fans start to get tired of watching a crappy product, stop paying attention, and the team ends up just losing money year after year.

So yeah, as I said, tanking is just plain dopey and rarely ever works out.

But how do you square this argument with the Celtics' very own experience in 2006-07?

We went 24-58 and arguably pulled Pierce from the lineup to tank. Rondo, Perk, TA, Powe etc. all went through this very "culture of losing" you describe.

And yet, we won the championship the next year. How can you say that the period of terrible play did any lasting damage, if we were able to turn things around so quickly?  Do you think Rondo was "conditioned to losing" and now "accepts it"?

And while you're right about the low probability of getting a #1 pick, we did get a valuable #5 pick that was a primary part of our rebuilding trades.

Tanking didn't work that year.

We ended up with the #5 pick, which turned into a bum (oh wait, sorry Jeff Green), not a franchise player.

It just so happened that we also had other assets on the roster from previous seasons that allowed us to make trades that really are very rarely ever available.  I'm not sold that tanking is what allowed us to make those deals.

Seattle wanted out from Allen's contract quite badly, and likely would have taken a lesser pick.  It's not as if there were many teams beating down their door to take a on a player who was, at the time, viewed as a fairly substantial risk.

How'd that Duncan draft work out by the way?

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #11 on: October 13, 2013, 04:02:19 PM »

Offline VitorSullyandKOFan

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 498
  • Tommy Points: 19
Even if we don't land Wiggins,Parke or Randle there is a lot of talent left like Exum, Smart, Harrison Robinson III and Saric. Personally I would love to have Exum he could mix with Rondo and play SG because de C's will not resigned Bradley or they will trade him.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #12 on: October 13, 2013, 04:06:17 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
All this talk about trading Rondo and tanking made me want to start a thread to talk about that, so here goes.

Tanking Sucks

Ok, everyone knows that it's painful to sit through a season watching your team tank for a lottery pick. 40 minutes of Courtney Lee should be just about enough to make any grown man cry, after all.

But no pain, no gain, right? In the end it's worth it if you tanking helps your team set itself up for a championship, right? Well... what if I told you that it doesn't? That's right - it turns out winning is correlated with, well, winning, and losing is correlated with losing. Think of how many bottom-feeding teams there are in this league that fail to go anywhere DESPITE primo access to top draft picks. Charlotte Bobcats, anyone? How about those Wizards?

In fact, good teams that have good management and are consistently GOOD tend to continue to be good. Look at the Spurs, for example. When is the last time you saw the Lakers intentionally tank? Or the Heat? Or the Mavericks? Hell, even the Pacers, Grizzlies, and other teams that have been playoff threats over the last few years... none of them has "tanked" in the recent past. But this is just a lead-in to my primary example:

The Houston Rockets.

Daryl Morey wholly rejected the idea of tanking, and instead chose to persistently build the best possible team by sweeping up the good players and valuable ones (meaning good contracts on reasonably good players) until the final pieces of the puzzle fell together. He basically said to the league "Screw you, I'm better at evaluating talent. I'm going to put out a competitive team every year until free agent superstars who are serious about winning realize that this is where they can go to do just that, because I've built the perfect complementary pieces." Seems to have worked out for them.

What about the OKC model? Well, turns out that blind luck (which is what the lottery is) can't do everything for you. Sure it got them Durant, but the irony is that if they had been "lucky" enough to get the number 1 pick their prize would have been Greg Oden. What about Russell Westbrook and James Harden? Well, there goes that bad management again... OKC had a choice to make and they chose wrong, despite getting an absolute STEAL in the draft with Harden, again as a result of blind luck. Westbrook is seriously overrated, and sooner or later the league is going to catch on to that. Sure, blind luck was good enough for a finals appearance but when you lucked into getting the second best player in the league in Durant, you should be expecting more than that.

The bottom line is that both methods can work. It's just that tanking relies largely on blind luck, while doing it the old fashioned way can guarantee consistent results. Draft smart, acquire good/valuable players, save that cap room, and you're more likely to rise to the top than somebody who is collecting lottery draft picks left and right like the Pelicans.

Ok, this is Celtics Talk. How does this relate to the Celtics?

Well, Ainge has been doing essentially the opposite of that by picking up overrated, over-the-hill players and other assorted bums. Sure, he's made some great moves (bringing the big 3 together, drafting Rondo, Perk) but since then he's fallen off hard, to the point where even trying to stay competitive is an impossibility at this point. Ainge has had some success in the draft despite a lot of misses if you consider Bradley and Sullinger, so I'll give him credit there.

But his free agency moves have been flat-out horrendous. Selling high on Perk after his injury was a good idea, but what we got for him was fools gold - Jeff Green has so consistently failed to live up to the hype that now pretty much nobody expects him to do anything at all, except for the few crazies remaining who think he could be an all-star this year, who will undoubtedly be disappointed once again. The remainder of players that he has brought in is a veritable list of shame, all players past their prime or damaged goods:

Delonte West
Nenad Krstic
Troy Murphy
Jermaine Oneal
Marquis Daniels
Carlos Arroyo
Von Wafer
Ryan Hollins
Chris Wilcox
Keyon Dooling
Sasha Pavlovic

How many of those guys are even still in the league?

Now we have to deal with the contracts of Gerald Wallace (10 mil a year for 3 years, jesus) Jeff Green (9 mil a year for possibly 3 more years, ugh) Courtney Lee (5 mil a year for 3 more years) and Kris Humphries (12 mil for this year, WHAT?) Brandon Bass (7 mil a year for 2 years).

Not one of these is a high-value contract. That means we have absolutely zero assets, other than Rondo and Sullinger. We're basically in a position where it is IMPOSSIBLE for us to compete, and, hell, at this point we almost might as well tank because that's all we can do. We're in Bobcat territory now, and it's terrifying.

Compare this to the Rockets, who are paying Omer Asik and Jeremy Lin 5 mil apiece this year, and 1 mil a year for EXTREMELY solid players like Chandler Parsons, Patrick Beverly, Aaron Brooks, Terrence Jones and Omri Caspi.

That's how you're supposed to play the GM game, not the way Ainge is doing it.

  You need to recognize the difference between a rebuilding team trying to add players with potential and a contending team trying to bolster it's ranks for a title run. Replace those (mainly) vet min additions you listed with players like Perk/Jefferson/TA/West/Rondo/Baby and the like and Morey doesn't look like he has much on Danny.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #13 on: October 13, 2013, 04:16:18 PM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • NCE
  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4205
  • Tommy Points: 777
I don't by the "losing culture" argument at all. Just doesn't hold water, but sounds good to crusty commentators. More likely, tanking doesn't work because tanking is rarely intentional (other than toward the end of the year trying to go from 3rd worst to 1st worst) but rather because the players are just bad (not "conditioned" to losing, just bad). Furthermore, as correctly pointed out, it's not definite that you'll get a franchise player. So you have a bad team of bad players and add to that a possibly not franchise player (and even franchise players can't do it all; Kobe missed playoffs when alone, KG before the trade, etc). It then takes several years to purge those bad players and actually have the base of a team that can contend.

For us, trading rondo to tank would likely be stupid. But trading hem and getting excellent value in return (whatever that might be) and ensuring a higher pick AS WELL is a different issue.

Alternatively, this could end up being a Spurs '97 year. Hold rondo back, take a chance at a franchise changing top 3 player to add to rondo, allow sully and olynyk some advancement, pray Green shows us something he hasn't in 6 years, and go from there.

Re: Unconventional Wisdom
« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2013, 04:28:49 PM »

fitzhickey

  • Guest
this draft is on a whole 'nother level.
multiple franchise caliber players.
plus if we lose but develop our young guys like sully and olynyk then we get something out of it.