Raptorman Show full post »
moremilk
Pzabby_2nd wrote:


Yeah, but it's important to remember that you can't "chase" luck. Cause then you get the Knicks. Seen this way, it's not luck that got us here, it's great organizational culture, patience, and development which allowed us to be in a great position asset wise to "capture" the lucky instance.


If upper management sucks, you would need the mother of all luck's to build a title challenger. But that's irrelevant, the reality is that the raptor model is very hard to replicate, as evidenced by how few teams can actually do it.

So the key question is how hard is it, because if it's hard enough, you can't even call it a model.

If there are certain steps that when done right, it will lead to a high chance of success, it's one thing. But if you can do everything right, and still fail most of the time - it'sa whole different matter.

At the end of the day, it's a clear fact that the higher the pick, the likelier it will develop into a great player.

So you could easily make the argument that if Masai was able to turn mediocre picks into a winning team, he would have done far better with better picks :)
Quote 0 0
Pzabby_2nd
moremilk wrote:


If upper management sucks, you would need the mother of all luck's to build a title challenger. But that's irrelevant, the reality is that the raptor model is very hard to replicate, as evidenced by how few teams can actually do it.

So the key question is how hard is it, because if it's hard enough, you can't even call it a model.

If there are certain steps that when done right, it will lead to a high chance of success, it's one thing. But if you can do everything right, and still fail most of the time - it'sa whole different matter.

At the end of the day, it's a clear fact that the higher the pick, the likelier it will develop into a great player.
 
So you could easily make the argument that if Masai was able to turn mediocre picks into a winning team, he would have done far better with better picks 😉


Not really. There's a whole host of factors which complicate drafting and make it the crapshoot it is. Prospects like Hasheem Thabeet aren't a result of poor drafting, since they were slotted to go in the high lottery regardless of which team got them. They're a result of the inherent risk of drafting for potential, coupled with the difficulty of grooming a winner of a player in an organization which lacks a winning culture. 

Raptors and Spurs model aren't luck; they're sustained. The lottery is luck, and dumb one at that too.
Quote 1 0
LX
moremilk wrote:


If upper management sucks, you would need the mother of all luck's to build a title challenger. But that's irrelevant, the reality is that the raptor model is very hard to replicate, as evidenced by how few teams can actually do it.

So the key question is how hard is it, because if it's hard enough, you can't even call it a model.


Bah. Hard to replicate? It’s the only thing to replicate. Scouting scouting scouting and development. What do you suppose the Spurs have done for 40 years? Yeah you still need some good fortune. There’s just no getting away from that. But if you know as much as possible about every draft pick, as well as those you don’t pick but might have a chance to acquire at some point, as well as players in the league that fit a prticular vision and might be able to be acquire, then all of that knowledge pays off to some extent and you can build and build upon successes.

Can’t even call it a model, because acquiring all that knowledge is so hard? That’s pretty lame.
Quote 0 0
moremilk
Pzabby_2nd wrote:


Not really. There's a whole host of factors which complicate drafting and make it the crapshoot it is. Prospects like Hasheem Thabeet aren't a result of poor drafting, since they were slotted to go in the high lottery regardless of which team got them. They're a result of the inherent risk of drafting for potential, coupled with the difficulty of grooming a winner of a player in an organization which lacks a winning culture. 

Raptors and Spurs model aren't luck; they're sustained. The lottery is luck, and dumb one at that too.


Come on, it's either skill or luck. If we drafted well because of skill, at the very least we'd draft just as well at a higher spot.

Thabeet in particular, was a clear example of drafting poorly, since he wasn't highly regarded.
Quote 0 0
Halph-Breed Baller
moremilk wrote:



Here's some more muddying.

Rumour had it that Masai, in his first season, wanted to trade into the draft to pick up Giannis, but wasn't able to.

The reason he wanted to trade in was because our pick went to Houston in the Lowry trade.

So had BC not traded that pick for Kyle, we may have had Giannis today ...



Yah we could have had Durant if the NBA didn't change the rule about high schoolers the year we drafted Bargs... c'est la vie
Quote 0 0
moremilk
LX wrote:


Bah. Hard to replicate? It’s the only thing to replicate. Scouting scouting scouting and development. What do you suppose the Spurs have done for 40 years? Yeah you still need some good fortune. There’s just no getting away from that. But if you know as much as possible about every draft pick, as well as those you don’t pick but might have a chance to acquire at some point, as well as players in the league that fit a prticular vision and might be able to be acquire, then all of that knowledge pays off to some extent and you can build and build upon successes.

Can’t even call it a model, because acquiring all that knowledge is so hard? That’s pretty lame.


Who's arguing that?

My point was that having the elite drafting skills and player development in the bag, can a GM, having normal luck, build a 55+ wins team using exclusively non or poor lottery picks, free agents and trade on a consistent basis?

It's a rethorical question, since you can't prove it either way. But it's the key question nevertheless. Hopefully, we won't need to worry about it anytime soon. Unfortunately, the Spurs won't be able to provide further evidence since Popovic is about to retire.

However, the scarcity of GMs who were able to pull this off at least for two cycles, shows that, at the very least, it's a damn hard thing to do.

Quote 0 0
moremilk
Halph-Breed Baller wrote:



Yah we could have had Durant if the NBA didn't change the rule about high schoolers the year we drafted Bargs... c'est la vie


Or Oden ...
Quote 0 0
Raptorman
I posted it as an oddity.  Wasnt trying to say one way is better than the other. 

When people get hung up on one way to do things, they often get stuck. GSW has done it with their own picks. We are doing it with our assets and scouting. You need to be flexible and willing to learn to make a good team...in any sport.


Quote 1 0
moremilk
Raptorman wrote:
I posted it as an oddity.  Wasnt trying to say one way is better than the other. 

When people get hung up on one way to do things, they often get stuck. GSW has done it with their own picks. We are doing it with our assets and scouting. You need to be flexible and willing to learn to make a good team...in any sport.




yeah, it devolved, like all topics do.

Still, we can't discount the lottery picks we traded to acquire some these guys. Like you said, more of an oddity than anything else - we just happen to trade all our remaining lottery guys in less than a season (demar, poeltl and now JV). For the past 5 years until now, we had a bunch of lottery picks on the roster every season, we just gradually traded them for more veteran players.

Unfortunately, the side effect is that our team is now fairly old, kyle, green, ibaka and Gasol are all in their 30s, sometimes seriously so 😉 

This is not uncommon, a lot of contenders make this tradeoff, what's special about us is that we managed to retain quite a few quality young pieces that could jumpstart the next phase, if it all falls apart this summer.
Quote 0 0
Raptorman
moremilk wrote:

we managed to retain quite a few quality young pieces that could jumpstart the next phase, if it all falls apart this summer.



THIS lets me sleep at night. 
Quote 0 0
3forthewin
Raptorman wrote:



THIS lets me sleep at night. 


Agreed, I'm glad they didn't go all Brooklyn and handcuff themselves for years.
Quote 0 0
LeBronIsYourDaddy
the big thing is the 905. Getting that team close by has been huge. the cohesion between the teams has been huge. its a game changer.
Quote 0 0