APBRmetrics

YaoPau wrote:It's not just OKC. They're the prime example, but every contender has a superstar they drafted (Bulls, Miami, Boston, Spurs, Mavs, Lakers, OKC) and then built around. Every single one.

The Bulls drafted Rose while having a really, really small chance (1.7%) at getting that first pick. They didn't tank in order to get that draft pick. They could have gotten even more lucky, if the Knicks pick in 2007 would have ended at 2nd or 3rd. Miami drafted Wade and they picked up Bosh and James (LEBRON JAMES, THE FREAKING MVP) for bargain contracts (the max salary is a joke). Boston traded for their BEST player in Garnett, picked Paul Pierce with the 10th pick back in 1998. Rondo was the 21st pick, which they got in a trade for the 2007 1st. The Spurs built through the draft, but they only tanked for Duncan, Parker was actually late first round pick and Ginobili even a late 2nd rounder, both picked up in years in which the Spurs tried to win. Nowitzki was the 9th pick in 1998, no other important player for the Mavericks was drafted by them. The Lakers traded for Bryant's draft rights, they gave up starting center Vlade Divac. Gasol was aquired in a loopsided trade at that time (Marc Gasol could have NOT signed that contract with the Lakers anyway, unless the Lakers would have been willing to use the MLE for him). Bynum was the 10th pick, when the Lakers failed to win more games also due to the injury by Bryant in 2005, hardly a tank job. That leaves the Thunder. Not even one of the other teams tanked in order to get their better players.
And besides the Thunder we have the example of the Bulls tanking at the beginning of the last decade and not getting anything out of this. We have the Trail Blazers with limited success, while getting unlucky with the injuries to Oden and Roy. We have the Timberwolves, which still need to show that they can win more games than they lose.

Tanking and rebuilding through the draft sounds great at first, until you realise that this also is related to luck and takes time, while at the same time the bills still have to be paid. Financially I doubt that this is a good strategy.

I completely agree with Evan and kjb, as a Bulls fan the years sucked, when the Bulls tried to rebuild through the draft. The only player left from that is Luol Deng. Noah was actually picked with the Knicks pick, Taj Gibson was the late 1st rounder from the Nuggets they got from the Thunder for Thabo Sefolosha. Btw, I would pick Gibson over Sefolosha, that just shows that the Thunder were not perfect at all in terms of chosing the right players.


Regarding the Warriors: Just hope that Bogut and Curry are healthy next season and that team should be in the playoffs.

I will say that it definitely made sense for the Warriors to tank this year. It was a perfect storm though. Through a bad deal with NJN, they were going to lose their pick to Utah if they didn't finish in the bottom 7. They had already been looking to trade Monta for a couple years now. They weren't going to make the playoffs in all likelihood once Curry got hurt. They were able to trade Monta (and Udoh) for Bogut, who was injured, presenting the opportunity to tank where it would have been difficult to do in any other conceivable fashion. And even with all the injuries and D-leaguers, they just barely managed to tank bad enough to have a good chance at keeping the pick. And they still could lose it in the lottery if a team jumps them.

But would I want to see it again next season? Not really. Like I said, it made sense this year, but everything had to work (or fail?) in a certain way. I want to see how the next couple years plays out with this group, and then re-assess. Either it works or it doesn't, but they've got more than enough talent now to give it a go.

With some editing...

mystic wrote:The Bulls drafted Rose while having a really, really small chance (1.7%) at getting that first pick.

Boston picked Paul Pierce with the 10th pick back in 1998.

Nowitzki was the 9th pick in 1998.

The Lakers traded for Bryant's draft rights (#13), they gave up starting center Vlade Divac. Bynum was the 10th pick, when the Lakers failed to win more games also due to the injury by Bryant in 2005, hardly a tank job.

That leaves the Thunder. Not even one of the other teams tanked in order to get their better players.

So these teams picked players in the lottery, but didn't have a #1 pick. The Warriors aren't going to have the league's worst record with Curry+Bogut on the roster, but as long as they are bottom 7 they get to keep their 1st rounder and have a shot at landing a premier player like these teams did.

There's no reason for David Lee to be on this team. He's their highest paid player at $14 mil per year for four more years, his w/prior RAPM is negative, and he'd be taking away minutes from their big 1st rounder this year (Sullinger/Henson) and Jeremy Tyler. If you can trade him for a mid-late 1st and expirings, you clear up your finances issue, you give yourself another 1st who could be a useful piece, the young guys immediately get minutes to develop, and you likely give yourself a better shot at finishing bottom-7. I'd consider doing the same thing with Dorell Wright too, whose contract is up after this season and might be too good a player for the team to finish bottom-7. I'm not sure you'll want to re-sign a 28 year old Dorell Wright to a multi-year extension (probably at a higher per-year cost) anyway.

Wright is already being written out of the picture. It's very unlikely that he starts next season.

And you'll get no argument from me on Lee, but his contract is virtually untradeable (although to my surprise not as untradeable as Amare). Tyler got a ton of minutes after the trade deadline, and was notably awful. He's young and has some potential, but he's nowhere near David Lee right now.

YaoPau wrote: So these teams picked players in the lottery, but didn't have a #1 pick.

Let us ignore the fact that Pierce is not good enough in order to be the best player on a championship team, but let us count all lottery picks since 1996. That makes 217 players picked within the lottery. How many of those were good enough in order to be the best player on a championship team and not the 1st pick? Well, probably Durant, Aldridge, Paul, Wade, Bosh, Nowitzki and Bryant. That's about it. 7 players which are worth it to build around. That really sounds like a slim chance.

YaoPau wrote:The Warriors aren't going to have the league's worst record with Curry+Bogut on the roster, but as long as they are bottom 7 they get to keep their 1st rounder and have a shot at landing a premier player like these teams did.

What does "premier" mean here? How many "premier" players are in the draft each year?

http://82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Check this out, maybe you will realise that there aren't many "premier" players in the draft.

YaoPau wrote: There's no reason for David Lee to be on this team. He's their highest paid player at $14 mil per year for four more years, his w/prior RAPM is negative, and he'd be taking away minutes from their big 1st rounder this year (Sullinger/Henson) and Jeremy Tyler. If you can trade him for a mid-late 1st and expirings, you clear up your finances issue, you give yourself another 1st who could be a useful piece, the young guys immediately get minutes to develop, and you likely give yourself a better shot at finishing bottom-7. I'd consider doing the same thing with Dorell Wright too, whose contract is up after this season and might be too good a player for the team to finish bottom-7. I'm not sure you'll want to re-sign a 28 year old Dorell Wright to a multi-year extension (probably at a higher per-year cost) anyway.

That is a big fantasy world. If Lee is worth cap relief and a first rounder, he would be valuable to the Warriors as a player as well. Which team is going to give the Warriors cap relief and a first rounder for Lee? Why should another team take off someone who has according to you no value at all? It makes no sense, really.

And you are talking about Tyler, Sullinger or Henson as if that is a given that they will become better professional basketball players than David Lee. Well, given the history there is a pretty good chance that those three will end up not being better. It is just that people seem to think that young players have always so much upside, while in reality they don't have that. And overall, changing something only to change something does not mean that an improvement will happen.

If they do draft a PF with their top pick, I'd shift Lee to the back-up small ball center for 2/3 or more of his time. Assuming Bogut comes back healthy I would not play Tyler or Biedrins at all as stated earlier, unless they decide to tank part way thru the season. The team and counterpart results for Lee at center are as good or better than with him at PF.

Some other team might get more of him at PF or C. His RAPM is near neutral. He isn't going to be a big help, not going to be a good value on this contract, but there are worse big men and worse starters.

It's just game theory. If you keep your team together and go for the playoffs this year, your team after this season will look like this:

PG Curry (who will need to be extended at big money)
SG Klay
SF Jefferson (who is still owed $11 mil the following year)
PF Lee (with 3 years at $15 mil per season left)
C Bogut (with 1 year at $14 mil left)

Your bench will be your 1st round pick in the upcoming draft, the Spurs' 1st round pick in the upcoming draft, Jeremy Tyler, Brandon Rush, and whoever they pick up cheap in free agency. If they draft big like Evan is saying, their #7 pick and Tyler will both be stuck behind Lee/Bogut this season.

Assuming Curry gets somewhere between the $10.5 mil per year than Gallinari got and the $15 mil that Love/Westbrook got, and the Warriors will have about $50 million tied up between Curry/Jefferson/Lee/Bogut, with no first round pick the following year, no room to play this year's 1st round pick, and Klay Thompson as the only other developing impact player. You aren't going to be selling out games with that team, your payroll will be near the cap, and you have no shot at a title unless you hit big on a future non-lottery 1st and everyone stays healthy.

OR...

Trade Lee this year. And of course you can get cap relief and a first for him. The Blazers got a 1st and cap relief for Gerald Wallace. The Lakers got a 1st and cap relief for Lamar Odom. The Rockets got a 1st and Dragic for Aaron Brooks. The Rockets also got a 1st and Thabeet for Shane Battier. Lee averaged 20 and 10 this year, he's about as healthy as it gets, just finished his age-28 season, and should have a lot of productive years remaining for the right team.

Then start your rookie in place of Lee, give Tyler and Klay Thompson big minutes, trade Dorell Wright if you can, and you should end up with a top 7 pick next year. Then draft another top prospect. They'll have a shot at getting a star, and a very good chance at landing a quality piece. That will give them the following team:

PG Curry
SG Klay
SF #7 pick of 2013
PF #7 pick of 2012
C Bogut

Plus Tyler, plus Rush, plus the Spurs' 2012 pick, plus picks received from the Lee and Wright deals. This team has tons of cap room, they've given their young players development minutes, and you've taken two shots at getting a star in the draft instead of one.

It's not exactly OKC's situation, but at least this strategy gives you a shot. And even if it takes a couple years for this team to develop, you still have four players (maybe five with Tyler) who are 25yo or younger and talented. I'm a Bulls fan too, and the years with Curry/Chandler/Crawford/Fizer were a blast to watch, even if it ended up not working out. That team had the upside to eventually contend, and fans knew it and still filled the stadium as they developed.

I'll admit this strategy rests on the assumption that GSW can draft well. And maybe that's a bad assumption after Udoh / Diogu / O'Bryant / Randolph / Pietrus in recent years. I don't get their selection of Klay over Alec Burks either. But strategy #2 is essentially trading David Lee's 4yrs and $57 mil remaining for the #7 pick in next year's draft, which should be a no-brainer move for a team with a dodgy financial situation and not enough talent to eventually compete.

I tend to agree with YaoPau's articulated strategy for the Warriors.

Whether they try to tank or not, I don't foresee a strong next season. They"ll probably get a top 10 pick even trying their hardest to win.

Maybe they wait and trade Lee between summer 2013 and trade deadline 2014.

You can have a bold strategy one way or the other or you can be less bold and definite in your choice or just get a result in between.

Crow wrote:I tend to agree with YaoPau's articulated strategy for the Warriors.

Whether they try to tank or not, I don't foresee a strong next season. They"ll probably get a top 10 pick even trying their hardest to win.

I think this needs to be qualified. If Bogut and Curry stay healthy, they will be much better than that (they were better than that last year when they got the 11th pick). If one or both get hurt, all bets are off.

YaoPau wrote: Trade Lee this year. And of course you can get cap relief and a first for him. The Blazers got a 1st and cap relief for Gerald Wallace. The Lakers got a 1st and cap relief for Lamar Odom. The Rockets got a 1st and Dragic for Aaron Brooks. The Rockets also got a 1st and Thabeet for Shane Battier.

We both know Wallace and Odom (last season) were better than Lee has ever been.

Aaron Brooks and Shane Battier never cost as much as Lee.

But yeah, if we can do something miraculous like that, I'm all for it.

YaoPau wrote: I'll admit this strategy rests on the assumption that GSW can draft well. And maybe that's a bad assumption after Udoh / Diogu / O'Bryant / Randolph / Pietrus in recent years. I don't get their selection of Klay over Alec Burks either. But strategy #2 is essentially trading David Lee's 4yrs and $57 mil remaining for the #7 pick in next year's draft, which should be a no-brainer move for a team with a dodgy financial situation and not enough talent to eventually compete.

I don't think you're much of an expert on GSW.

Udoh is arguably a better player than Monroe, despite the box score differences.

Klay is demonstrably better than Burks, who is not a good shooter.

Curry turned out to be a great pick, when people though they might take Jordan Hill.

You're mostly referrring to the years prior to Larry Riley becoming the GM. He did not draft Diogu/POB/Randolph etc.

Add to that the fact that Jerry West now probably has the biggest voice in their draft decisions.

I don't know man. It seems like you have some kind of agenda. Lakers fan.

And btw, did you see Indiana beat the Heat tonight? I guess they should tank, too.

YaoPau wrote: You aren't going to be selling out games with that team, your payroll will be near the cap, and you have no shot at a title unless you hit big on a future non-lottery 1st and everyone stays healthy.

Warriors were 11th in attendance *this* season. If the Warriors make it to the first round they will sell out every game the following year.

You're suggesting GSW goes for it now, so same to you. We're both strategizing off a bunch of imperfect measurements.

Burks is 2 years younger than Thompson, Udoh is 3 years younger than Monroe. RAPM has standard errors. There's no such thing as demonstrably better for two rookies with the same PER and same RAPM who were picked next to each other. But I like Burks because he's more athletic, had one of the top PERs in the nation in college despite being 19, and had a nice rookie year at age 20. And I didn't say Curry was a bad pick.

Klay Thompson is already one of the best shooters in the league. Burks has quite a ways to go to be better than that, regardless of his age.

I think you meant to say Monroe is 3 years younger than Udoh. I wasn't aware that age alone made a player better. If you have any faith in RAPM, the difference between Udoh and Monroe over two years is not ignorable.

You implied that GSW doesn't draft well. The last 3 years they have drafted well, and that is the current administration. If I have faith in anything they are doing right, it's drafting. Klay Thompson was "West's guy". I would have preferred Kawhi Leonard, but Klay certainly looks like a good pick in retrospect.

Maybe we'll luck out and get the #1 pick. I think we haven't moved up in the lottery in the last 15 years, so we're due*.


*I know, statistically speaking, it's not true. But still.

Bogut had a moderately weak offensive RAPM this season (-1.2 prior-informed). Never been meaningfully positive. Team offense with him on the court in raw terms was weaker than for any Buck save one this season. The defensive impact was much bigger and positive but it will be interesting to see if he imports both his offensive and defensive impacts or just one or if it is completely different.

I'd start Curry and Bogut and make it open competition for the rest of the spots and focus on fit with those two over picking the "best" at each position in isolation. I would plan to chose the best lineup or two out of maybe 5-10 best guess lineups given some run in the first 4-6 weeks of next season.

Barring major injury I expect at least 7 of the playoff teams in the west to repeat. It is going to be a spirited competition for the 8th seed. At the moment I would not consider the Warriors a top 2-3 contender for that last spot but I may be underestimating the impact of Bogut.