Embiid rebroke foot , wil miss next season too !

[PhoSita]

As a fan of basketball, I'd like to see the Philly situation work out.  The Eastern Conference needs more strong, talented teams, and a handful of young stars in Philadelphia -- a major market with a classic NBA franchise -- would be good for the league and the game.

And hey, if what the Sixers are doing works out like gangbusters for them, albeit after 3-5 years of total suckitude, maybe the league will do something to change the system.

Hate the game, don't hate the playa.

Or other teams will follow suit and the NBA will be painful to watch.

Well, if a number of teams did what the Sixers are doing, there would be a corresponding boost to a similar number of other teams because of all of the middle of the road talent getting sold off for minor consideration.

I think tanking like what Philly has been doing really affects the fans in that market a great deal more than it affects anybody else.

Sure, it's less entertaining when your favorite team plays the Sixers, but it's still a win most of the time.  And say what you want about the Sixers, but that team actually tries on defense and generally plays fast and hard.  They're not bad because the players don't try to win.  They've just got a roster primarily comprised of guys who belong in the D-League or overseas.

[MBunge]

The Embiid thing is definitely demonstrating that creating a culture of professionalism and targeting the right guys is a factor you must consider, even if talent, at the end of the day, is the most important thing by far.

The Sixers will still be fine if a couple of these draft picks hit and they start surrounding them with overpaid role players.  Hinkie, like Morey, has shown he can find role players off the bargain bin.  They'll have to overpay guys to go there, but that will change if they have a couple of young stars and they make a playoff appearance. 

All of the negativity will dissipate once there's some excitement around the team.  And it can turn around really quickly.  Look at how quickly it happened for the Bucks.


If Okafor isn't as good as they hope, Embiid never comes back from this injury, and Saric never comes over, then you start to wonder if they clean house and over-correct in the other direction like Charlotte.

Bucks never tanked the way Philly did. That's a terrible example. They got parker because of injuries and Sanders losing his mind after they were constantly in the middle. Second, they got the greek freak in the middle of the first round. Let's not compare Sixers to other teams like the Thunder and Magic.

The Thunder are a good comparison. They had no interest in retaining Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis because they wanted to fully rebuild.

They did a lot more tanking that that.  The Sonics/Thunder full on tanked for just over 2 years.

AAAAGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!

Why does this myth persist?

In 2007, Seattle went 31-51.  THEY WERE NOT TANKING.

They then got incredibly lucky in the draft and got Durant.  They then traded Ray Allen for the 5th pick (Jeff Green), Delonte West and Wally Z.  Trading an aging veteran for a top 5 pick and players cannot be considered a tanking move.

2008, they totally tanked.  No argument.

2009, they were not tanking.  They were just bad.  How do we know?  They traded a first round pick for Thabo Sefolosha.  Tanking teams don't trade 1st round picks.

So, Seattle only actively tanked for one season.  Philly is now entering year three of their tank fest.  There is no comparison.

Mike

Here is a post I made on this site about a year ago.  The Sonics/Thunder full on tanked for right around 3 years.

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=73833.msg1750863#msg1750863 

Sonics/Thunder

June 28, 2007 trade Ray Allen, 2nd for Green, West, corpse of Wally, future 2nd
July 11, 2007 trade Rashard Lewis for protected 2nd and trade exception
February 20, 2008 trade Kurt Thomas for Elson, protected 1st, contract of Brent Barry (who was immediately waived)
February 21, 2008 trade Wally, West for Newble, Marshall, Griffin (cost saving trade)
August 13, 2008 trade Ridnour, Griffin for Smith, Mason (lateral move)
August 14, 2008 lose Elson to free agency (thus solidifying the sell off of Thomas)
August 20, 2008 waive Marshall
September 29 & 30, 2008 sign a bunch of d-leaguers 3 of which are waived 1 month later (thus solidifying the only free agency move as re-signing Swift on Sept 11)
January 7, 2009 trade Petro, 2nd for Atkins, cash, protected 1st
February 17, 2009 - first real win now move by trading for Chandler, but trade is rescinded when Chandler fails physical
February 19, 2009 trade the January 7th acquired 1st for Sefolosha (win now move)
but follow that up on the same day by trading Wilcox for Malike Rose and cash (back to selling off)
July 27, 2009 trade Atkins, Wilkins for Thomas, 2nd, conditional 2nd (acquiring assets again)
Only real free agent signed in 2009 is Kevin Ollie (team re-signed Sefolosha)
December 22, 2009 this is when they start making win now moves by trading Peter Fehse for Harpring, Maynor
June 23, 2010 trade 2nd for Cook, 1st (to help Heat clear cap room for James and co.)
though they then turn around and trade the 1st the next day for a future 1st (the first they traded was Bledsoe, the 1st they acquired was Fab Melo)

From that point on they pretty much are more in the win now mold of trades, but for basically a 3 year period the Thunder were selling off as much as they could to acquire assets and tank for draft position.  No one thinks of them in the Philly mold because Durant, Westbrook, and Harden (and Ibaka to a lesser extent) were pretty darn good players from their first game in the league, but this Philly strategy has been done a lot more than people think, the difference of course is Philly took some players that had injuries or were overseas (but Noel is probably going to be the best player from his draft, Embiid certainly could be the best player from his, and Saric is one of the best players in Europe).

I don't know what to say other than you need to read your own posts more carefully.  They made one move in 2007 after the season was over and after the draft that was a tank move.  I think it's fair to include that in 2008.  They made several outright tank moves in 2008.  After that, EVEN YOU ADMIT, they began to make several moves that were absolutely not for tanking.  And I'd argue that trading Wilcox is hardly a tank move, since he averaged only 19.4 minutes per game, 11th most on the team.  That's hardly the equivalent of Philly trading Turner and Hawes for scraps when they were #1 and #4 for minutes per game on the team.

Seattle did not tank in 2007.  They clearly tanked in 2008.  In 2009, they weren't moving Heaven and Earth to instantly become a contender for the 8th seed in the playoffs but they were obviously no longer making moves with the goal of making the team as bad as possible.

Myths die hard.

Mike

[Rondo9]

As a fan of basketball, I'd like to see the Philly situation work out.  The Eastern Conference needs more strong, talented teams, and a handful of young stars in Philadelphia -- a major market with a classic NBA franchise -- would be good for the league and the game.

And hey, if what the Sixers are doing works out like gangbusters for them, albeit after 3-5 years of total suckitude, maybe the league will do something to change the system.

Hate the game, don't hate the playa.

Or other teams will follow suit and the NBA will be painful to watch.

Well, if a number of teams did what the Sixers are doing, there would be a corresponding boost to a similar number of other teams because of all of the middle of the road talent getting sold off for minor consideration.

I think tanking like what Philly has been doing really affects the fans in that market a great deal more than it affects anybody else.

Sure, it's less entertaining when your favorite team plays the Sixers, but it's still a win most of the time.  And say what you want about the Sixers, but that team actually tries on defense and generally plays fast and hard.  They're not bad because the players don't try to win.  They've just got a roster primarily comprised of guys who belong in the D-League or overseas.

Still bad basketball being played and they are painful to watch. Maybe you enjoy them but I prefer what the Celtics are doing right now.

[PhoSita]

Still bad basketball being played and they are painful to watch. Maybe you enjoy them but I prefer what the Celtics are doing right now.

I'll just kindly and patiently point out that I never said that I enjoy watching the Sixers or that I would prefer the Celtics to be doing what they are doing.

[Moranis]

The Embiid thing is definitely demonstrating that creating a culture of professionalism and targeting the right guys is a factor you must consider, even if talent, at the end of the day, is the most important thing by far.

The Sixers will still be fine if a couple of these draft picks hit and they start surrounding them with overpaid role players.  Hinkie, like Morey, has shown he can find role players off the bargain bin.  They'll have to overpay guys to go there, but that will change if they have a couple of young stars and they make a playoff appearance. 

All of the negativity will dissipate once there's some excitement around the team.  And it can turn around really quickly.  Look at how quickly it happened for the Bucks.


If Okafor isn't as good as they hope, Embiid never comes back from this injury, and Saric never comes over, then you start to wonder if they clean house and over-correct in the other direction like Charlotte.

Bucks never tanked the way Philly did. That's a terrible example. They got parker because of injuries and Sanders losing his mind after they were constantly in the middle. Second, they got the greek freak in the middle of the first round. Let's not compare Sixers to other teams like the Thunder and Magic.

The Thunder are a good comparison. They had no interest in retaining Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis because they wanted to fully rebuild.

They did a lot more tanking that that.  The Sonics/Thunder full on tanked for just over 2 years.

AAAAGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!

Why does this myth persist?

In 2007, Seattle went 31-51.  THEY WERE NOT TANKING.

They then got incredibly lucky in the draft and got Durant.  They then traded Ray Allen for the 5th pick (Jeff Green), Delonte West and Wally Z.  Trading an aging veteran for a top 5 pick and players cannot be considered a tanking move.

2008, they totally tanked.  No argument.

2009, they were not tanking.  They were just bad.  How do we know?  They traded a first round pick for Thabo Sefolosha.  Tanking teams don't trade 1st round picks.

So, Seattle only actively tanked for one season.  Philly is now entering year three of their tank fest.  There is no comparison.

Mike

Here is a post I made on this site about a year ago.  The Sonics/Thunder full on tanked for right around 3 years.

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=73833.msg1750863#msg1750863 

Sonics/Thunder

June 28, 2007 trade Ray Allen, 2nd for Green, West, corpse of Wally, future 2nd
July 11, 2007 trade Rashard Lewis for protected 2nd and trade exception
February 20, 2008 trade Kurt Thomas for Elson, protected 1st, contract of Brent Barry (who was immediately waived)
February 21, 2008 trade Wally, West for Newble, Marshall, Griffin (cost saving trade)
August 13, 2008 trade Ridnour, Griffin for Smith, Mason (lateral move)
August 14, 2008 lose Elson to free agency (thus solidifying the sell off of Thomas)
August 20, 2008 waive Marshall
September 29 & 30, 2008 sign a bunch of d-leaguers 3 of which are waived 1 month later (thus solidifying the only free agency move as re-signing Swift on Sept 11)
January 7, 2009 trade Petro, 2nd for Atkins, cash, protected 1st
February 17, 2009 - first real win now move by trading for Chandler, but trade is rescinded when Chandler fails physical
February 19, 2009 trade the January 7th acquired 1st for Sefolosha (win now move)
but follow that up on the same day by trading Wilcox for Malike Rose and cash (back to selling off)
July 27, 2009 trade Atkins, Wilkins for Thomas, 2nd, conditional 2nd (acquiring assets again)
Only real free agent signed in 2009 is Kevin Ollie (team re-signed Sefolosha)
December 22, 2009 this is when they start making win now moves by trading Peter Fehse for Harpring, Maynor
June 23, 2010 trade 2nd for Cook, 1st (to help Heat clear cap room for James and co.)
though they then turn around and trade the 1st the next day for a future 1st (the first they traded was Bledsoe, the 1st they acquired was Fab Melo)

From that point on they pretty much are more in the win now mold of trades, but for basically a 3 year period the Thunder were selling off as much as they could to acquire assets and tank for draft position.  No one thinks of them in the Philly mold because Durant, Westbrook, and Harden (and Ibaka to a lesser extent) were pretty darn good players from their first game in the league, but this Philly strategy has been done a lot more than people think, the difference of course is Philly took some players that had injuries or were overseas (but Noel is probably going to be the best player from his draft, Embiid certainly could be the best player from his, and Saric is one of the best players in Europe).

I don't know what to say other than you need to read your own posts more carefully.  They made one move in 2007 after the season was over and after the draft that was a tank move.  I think it's fair to include that in 2008.  They made several outright tank moves in 2008.  After that, EVEN YOU ADMIT, they began to make several moves that were absolutely not for tanking.  And I'd argue that trading Wilcox is hardly a tank move, since he averaged only 19.4 minutes per game, 11th most on the team.  That's hardly the equivalent of Philly trading Turner and Hawes for scraps when they were #1 and #4 for minutes per game on the team.

Seattle did not tank in 2007.  They clearly tanked in 2008.  In 2009, they weren't moving Heaven and Earth to instantly become a contender for the 8th seed in the playoffs but they were obviously no longer making moves with the goal of making the team as bad as possible.

Myths die hard.

Mike

The Thunder had 3 full off seasons of tanking moves: 2007, 2008, and 2009.  They didn't sign a single credible free agent during that time and traded veterans for future considerations.  They made a couple of moves using future assets, but so have the Sixers (McGee, Stauskas, etc.).  Those situations are pretty darn comparable, the only real difference is the Thunder took players that were pretty much immediate impact players, while the Sixers did not.

[Celtics4ever]

Thunder also, still have not made it to the promised land.    They also draft so well, that it is likely that they will win any matchup as they seem to find value wherever they pick.

[Moranis]

Thunder also, still have not made it to the promised land.    They also draft so well, that it is likely that they will win any matchup as they seem to find value wherever they pick.

Part of that is losing Harden for financial reasons and trading Green for Perkins because Brooks was a terrible coach.  Well Brooks being a terrible coach is really what sticks out for me.  A good coach in Thunder land it might have worked out differently for them (and they are still a favorite this year, so maybe this is their year).

Philly has tanked for 3 off seasons, just like OKC.  I think Philly probably won't start making win now trades this season, like OKC did in 09, but you never know.  I mean maybe Noel takes another jump, Okafor is a monster out of the gate (and they can play together), and guys like Staukas, Wroten, Thompson, etc. start to put it together and Philly decides to start using that cap space and future picks to add some talent and go for a playoff push.  I suppose stranger things have happened.

[PhoSita]

It seems pretty asinine to say the Thunder's rebuild hasn't "worked" just because all they've gotten out of it is a ton of regular season wins every year since 2009 and a number of playoff series victories, including a Finals appearance.

There's probably plenty more where that came from, too, provided Durant sticks around.

I'd be freaking ecstatic if the Celts ended up with a young team prepared to win 50-60 games every year for 5-10 years, even if they ultimately never won a title.  That's a wildly successful rebuild.

[Moranis]

It seems pretty asinine to say the Thunder's rebuild hasn't "worked" just because all they've gotten out of it is a ton of regular season wins every year since 2009 and a number of playoff series victories, including a Finals appearance.

There's probably plenty more where that came from, too, provided Durant sticks around.

I'd be freaking ecstatic if the Celts ended up with a young team prepared to win 50-60 games every year for 5-10 years, even if they ultimately never won a title.  That's a wildly successful rebuild.

Oh I agree.  The Thunder are a model of what tanking can do and can yield.  That is why it is a viable method, because you know it can work. 

[PhoSita]

It seems pretty asinine to say the Thunder's rebuild hasn't "worked" just because all they've gotten out of it is a ton of regular season wins every year since 2009 and a number of playoff series victories, including a Finals appearance.

There's probably plenty more where that came from, too, provided Durant sticks around.

I'd be freaking ecstatic if the Celts ended up with a young team prepared to win 50-60 games every year for 5-10 years, even if they ultimately never won a title.  That's a wildly successful rebuild.

Oh I agree.  The Thunder are a model of what tanking can do and can yield.  That is why it is a viable method, because you know it can work.

I know you didn't say it, but it's a sentiment I've seen thrown out there.  "Well, they haven't won anything, so obviously tanking didn't work THAT well for them, even in the best case scenario."

Assembling a team of multiple superstars, winning 50-60 games for 5+ years, and making it to the Finals . . . that's a fantastic outcome for a rebuild by any method. 

Heck, if the Celts had some worse luck in the '08 playoffs, we might be talking about the KG era in those terms.  If all we got out of the summer of '07 was a half decade of contention and a single unsuccessful Finals appearance, would you call that a failure?  I wouldn't.  Certainly it would have been short of our expectations.  Arguably what we got was well short of our expectations, thanks to KG's knee injury. 

But still, as a fan of a Celts team that right now seems like it could be anywhere from two years to a decade -- or two! -- away from contending with a roster featuring multiple superstars, I can't sit here and say that the Thunder have had a disappointing run.

[tankcity!]

It seems pretty asinine to say the Thunder's rebuild hasn't "worked" just because all they've gotten out of it is a ton of regular season wins every year since 2009 and a number of playoff series victories, including a Finals appearance.

There's probably plenty more where that came from, too, provided Durant sticks around.

I'd be freaking ecstatic if the Celts ended up with a young team prepared to win 50-60 games every year for 5-10 years, even if they ultimately never won a title.  That's a wildly successful rebuild.

First of all, the Thunder rebuild was totally different. They always had Collison and role players like sefalosha. They didn't trade every decent player that wasn't on rookie wage scale from their roster.

Philly aggresiously tanked.  Look I'm not saying it can't work, but I don't believe that way of tanking is the best solution.

[Monkhouse]

Feel pretty sad for Embiid. I mean, he still deserves to play, and injuries are always hard to see for any player to go through.