Who's rebuild is better: Boston or Philly?

[Rondo9]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

That's sort of the point of tanking.  It's is the correct strategy for teams that pretty much have no other option but to hope they get lucky.  It's generally a poor strategy for teams who have a legitimate chance to do something else.

Right, but holding onto your star whose contract is up next year is also a risk. If he leaves for nothing than you've wasted two years with nothing but slightly improved gate receipts to show for it, along with the added wins the player ostensibly adds to your team to worsen your lottery odds.

Also, I want to point out again that only the first three picks are technically a lottery. After that it's based on record so yes, losses do "guarantee" you something even if it's not the first three picks. If Exum ends up being a star then a win here or there would have made a huge difference.

What if Smart becomes a star? Would a win here and there make a huge difference?

It depends on the draft but yes, sometimes one slot can make a huge difference. Smart may become a solid player but he doesn't have great athleticism and he plays a position that is very deep. Other skills can be developed, athleticism and height cannot. That was the cost of drafting sixth.

Frankly, the goal should be to secure someone who could be the best or second-best player on a title team and it didn't happen in year one of the rebuild. We got some more talent but they are more complementary pieces than the main ones.

Athleticism can be overrated at times. Smart is athletic not as athletic as Wiggins, but surely you see the competitive spirit, passing, ball handling, defense and versatility. Do you really believe that Exum and Gordon have higher ceilings than Smart because of their athletic ability. Smart is the perfect size to play point guard and is a little undersized to play the two but his skills more than make up for it. You keep lamenting that the coin toss prevented the Celtics from getting Exum, but do you really think that he's a guy who you can legitimately say he's a star more so than Marcus Smart. Smart I feel has the tools to be a star. The Celtics have pieces to make moves and I'm confident that they'll land a star one way or another.

[pokeKingCurtis]

As far as I know, Smart is not an elite athlete but he's a very good athlete.

This is not factoring his strength, which still awes me.

[Neurotic Guy]

Perhaps an unfair conclusion, but after 3 days, 5 pages of posts and 54 votes on Cblog -- with the result a dead heat -- I conclude that Philly wins this opinion poll in a landslide. 

[cman88]

both really are question marks right now of whom is doing it better and we likely wont know for a couple of years at least.

Philly is banking on the draft to get them a superstar

the Celtics are banking that their "assets" will allow them to trade for one. Personally I think there is a higher percentage of the celtics plan working than Philly which is pretty much just playing the odds

[Sketch5]

As far as I know, Smart is not an elite athlete but he's a very good athlete.

This is not factoring his strength, which still awes me.

His quick reflex's has awed me. In SL he was deflecting pass's from the guy he was guarding. Thats pretty good, and some thing you can't teach.

[MBunge]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

That's sort of the point of tanking.  It's is the correct strategy for teams that pretty much have no other option but to hope they get lucky.  It's generally a poor strategy for teams who have a legitimate chance to do something else.

Right, but holding onto your star whose contract is up next year is also a risk. If he leaves for nothing than you've wasted two years with nothing but slightly improved gate receipts to show for it, along with the added wins the player ostensibly adds to your team to worsen your lottery odds.

Also, I want to point out again that only the first three picks are technically a lottery. After that it's based on record so yes, losses do "guarantee" you something even if it's not the first three picks. If Exum ends up being a star then a win here or there would have made a huge difference.

What if Smart becomes a star? Would a win here and there make a huge difference?

It depends on the draft but yes, sometimes one slot can make a huge difference. Smart may become a solid player but he doesn't have great athleticism and he plays a position that is very deep. Other skills can be developed, athleticism and height cannot. That was the cost of drafting sixth.

Frankly, the goal should be to secure someone who could be the best or second-best player on a title team and it didn't happen in year one of the rebuild. We got some more talent but they are more complementary pieces than the main ones.

1.  We have no idea how good Smart can be and even less of a clue about Young.

2.  Anthony Bennett, Otto Porter, Ben Mclemore, Austin Rivers, Thomas Robinson, Derrick Williams, Jimmer Fredette, Ekpe Udoh, Hasheem Thabeet, Jonny Flynn, Joe Alexander, Greg Oden, Yi Jianlian, Adam Morrison, Patrick O'Bryant, Shelden Williams, Ike Diogu and Rafael Araujo.  All lottery picks over the last 10 years.  All pretty much busts with only the first three possibly having a chance to turn it around.

And that's just counting busts, not guys like Marvin Williams who get taken #2 in the lottery and never become better than okay players.  Who got picked after Williams?  Deron Williams, Chris Paul, Martell Webster, Andrew Bynum, Danny Granger, Nate Robinson, Jarrett Jack, David Lee, Brandon Bass, Ersan Illyasova, Ronny Turiaf, Monta Ellis, Andray Blatche, Ryan Gomes, Amir Johnson and Marcin Gortat.

Mike

[Moranis]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

That's sort of the point of tanking.  It's is the correct strategy for teams that pretty much have no other option but to hope they get lucky.  It's generally a poor strategy for teams who have a legitimate chance to do something else.

Right, but holding onto your star whose contract is up next year is also a risk. If he leaves for nothing than you've wasted two years with nothing but slightly improved gate receipts to show for it, along with the added wins the player ostensibly adds to your team to worsen your lottery odds.

Also, I want to point out again that only the first three picks are technically a lottery. After that it's based on record so yes, losses do "guarantee" you something even if it's not the first three picks. If Exum ends up being a star then a win here or there would have made a huge difference.

What if Smart becomes a star? Would a win here and there make a huge difference?

It depends on the draft but yes, sometimes one slot can make a huge difference. Smart may become a solid player but he doesn't have great athleticism and he plays a position that is very deep. Other skills can be developed, athleticism and height cannot. That was the cost of drafting sixth.

Frankly, the goal should be to secure someone who could be the best or second-best player on a title team and it didn't happen in year one of the rebuild. We got some more talent but they are more complementary pieces than the main ones.

1.  We have no idea how good Smart can be and even less of a clue about Young.

2.  Anthony Bennett, Otto Porter, Ben Mclemore, Austin Rivers, Thomas Robinson, Derrick Williams, Jimmer Fredette, Ekpe Udoh, Hasheem Thabeet, Jonny Flynn, Joe Alexander, Greg Oden, Yi Jianlian, Adam Morrison, Patrick O'Bryant, Shelden Williams, Ike Diogu and Rafael Araujo.  All lottery picks over the last 10 years.  All pretty much busts with only the first three possibly having a chance to turn it around.

And that's just counting busts, not guys like Marvin Williams who get taken #2 in the lottery and never become better than okay players.  Who got picked after Williams?  Deron Williams, Chris Paul, Martell Webster, Andrew Bynum, Danny Granger, Nate Robinson, Jarrett Jack, David Lee, Brandon Bass, Ersan Illyasova, Ronny Turiaf, Monta Ellis, Andray Blatche, Ryan Gomes, Amir Johnson and Marcin Gortat.

Mike

to be fair to Marvin Williams, he is a lot better than you are giving him credit for.  Pretty similar to Jeff Green statistically (at least per minute).  http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=greenje02&p2=willima02

[MBunge]

Is tanking a plan?  It is so luck dependent.  It can work or it can falter but if that is your sole plan then you are cruising for a bruising.

That's sort of the point of tanking.  It's is the correct strategy for teams that pretty much have no other option but to hope they get lucky.  It's generally a poor strategy for teams who have a legitimate chance to do something else.

Right, but holding onto your star whose contract is up next year is also a risk. If he leaves for nothing than you've wasted two years with nothing but slightly improved gate receipts to show for it, along with the added wins the player ostensibly adds to your team to worsen your lottery odds.

Also, I want to point out again that only the first three picks are technically a lottery. After that it's based on record so yes, losses do "guarantee" you something even if it's not the first three picks. If Exum ends up being a star then a win here or there would have made a huge difference.

What if Smart becomes a star? Would a win here and there make a huge difference?

It depends on the draft but yes, sometimes one slot can make a huge difference. Smart may become a solid player but he doesn't have great athleticism and he plays a position that is very deep. Other skills can be developed, athleticism and height cannot. That was the cost of drafting sixth.

Frankly, the goal should be to secure someone who could be the best or second-best player on a title team and it didn't happen in year one of the rebuild. We got some more talent but they are more complementary pieces than the main ones.

1.  We have no idea how good Smart can be and even less of a clue about Young.

2.  Anthony Bennett, Otto Porter, Ben Mclemore, Austin Rivers, Thomas Robinson, Derrick Williams, Jimmer Fredette, Ekpe Udoh, Hasheem Thabeet, Jonny Flynn, Joe Alexander, Greg Oden, Yi Jianlian, Adam Morrison, Patrick O'Bryant, Shelden Williams, Ike Diogu and Rafael Araujo.  All lottery picks over the last 10 years.  All pretty much busts with only the first three possibly having a chance to turn it around.

And that's just counting busts, not guys like Marvin Williams who get taken #2 in the lottery and never become better than okay players.  Who got picked after Williams?  Deron Williams, Chris Paul, Martell Webster, Andrew Bynum, Danny Granger, Nate Robinson, Jarrett Jack, David Lee, Brandon Bass, Ersan Illyasova, Ronny Turiaf, Monta Ellis, Andray Blatche, Ryan Gomes, Amir Johnson and Marcin Gortat.

Mike

to be fair to Marvin Williams, he is a lot better than you are giving him credit for.  Pretty similar to Jeff Green statistically (at least per minute).  http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=greenje02&p2=willima02

I'm not saying he's bad.  He and Green are what I'm talking about, though.  One went #2 and one went #5 and neither will probably make even one all-star team.  The tank fanatics think that's how you get superstar players but more often than not, you get good but not great guys like Williams or Green.

Mike