APBRmetrics

I wanted a new thread so that people could post their thoughts on the winners/losers etc...

Personally I really like what Rich Cho did. Dumping SJaxx (toxic player and contract), bringing in Maggette (useful player on a reasonable deal), having Biyombo slip, and nabbing Walker @ 9. I also am proud of the Jazz; resisting the urge to take Knight (who I believe will be awful) and getting Burks @ 12. The Raptors got lucky that Valanciunas slipped, Denver did well w/ the Felton swap and nabbing Faried, and Dallas trading the late 1st for a decent win-immediate Rudy Fernandez makes a lot of sense as well. The Spurs crushed as usual, no idea how Kawhi slipped so much. George Hill is a fine player but the Spurs got the best of that.

For all the adulation Morey receives, the Rockets' draft totally puzzles me. Maybe I'll eat my words, but I don't think Marcus Morris will be better than replacement level. The Brad Miller swap, taking on Flynn?, and getting Montajunas (who I think will be worse than Bargnani, if possible), ugh. The Kings swap (taking on more salary, moving down?) and the choice of Jimmer was poor - I don't buy a Jimmer/Tyreke backcourt.

Charlotte was the clear winner. Wonder how much influence Cho had in such a short time. My guess is quite a bit.

Pissed that my Warriors passed on Leonard. It's clear to me that Jerry West is the guy calling the shots, or at least, the guy who has Lacob's ear. Of course, the Spurs swooped in and picked him up and Bertans. I was happy we picked up Jenkins in the second round. From a stats perspective anyway. Dude was highly efficient.

I liked Tristan Thompson, but seems like a reach at 4. But with Valanciunas having buyout issues, that apparently made the difference. Tristan was maybe the only big man left after Kanter who had major upside on both sides of the floor.

Poor Kings fans.

Houston seems to be collecting young players, not caring about how horrible they were in their short NBA careers, probably hoping that they still pan out. You probably want to give every player 3-4 years before you declare him a bust. Dragic has been playing 3 years, Thabeet 2 years, Flynn 2 years.

Or they're just dumping salary

I think I can understand why most of the teams did what they did and think generally they did alright or better with the opportunities they has.

I think I am ok at the moment with what Houston did overall, especially if Flynn is going to move again (and hopefully Thabeet and Williams too). Charlotte addressed their need targets, but I am fairly skeptical whether it will actually get them where they want to go in a few years. I like Chicago's picks. I am not that favorable about what New York and New Jersey did. Portland did some work but probably has more sorting and changing to do and needs bigs. The Kings will probably be the worst team in the league with too many "scorers" and not much defense. I sort of like what the Bucks did because they changed a lot of pieces and I think that was wise and could give them a decent chance to go to a higher level.

Next year's draft is going to be so stacked. Anthony Davis will most likely be the big prize. Assuming the lockout is resolved at some point, and there actually is a season, I predict we'll see major tanking efforts.

The Warriors first round pick is top 7 protected, which means they would really have to tank to keep that pick. I don't think the front office is going to do that, but if I were running the team, that's what I would do. I would do my best to trade Ellis for *any* first round pick next year and an expiring contract. I would start Curry/Klay Thompson/Wright/Lee/Tyler. With two rookies in the lineup, we would be essentially guaranteed to have a losing season and keep that top 7 pick. I would make it explicit to the fans that we are re-building and to be patient, and realize that in the long run, it's about winning championships not being a mediocre team that never makes the playoffs.

If anyone's interested, I just laid out my re-building strategy on GSOM:

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2011/6 ... erm-future

I agree with those at GSM saying that Jackson won't willingly go along with a tank but maybe as a rookie coach you'll get something like tank results.

I generally agree with most of your long-term current player assessments but what about the rookies? Do you think Thompson is anything more than run of the mill? Do you think Tyler is likely to be anything beyond a bottom third big? Do you expect Jenkins to become a 25+ minute player?

In the long-run what is the vision- a strong balance of offense and defense or do you lean toward a strategy of emphasizing one a fair amount more than the other, given the coach or the players you have or the type of players it is easier to get or get for value or what these types of teams do in the playoffs or in the west as it looks now or where it looks like it is headed? And what will it take to get there, what types of pieces are you therefore looking to fit in and exactly where (starter or bench)? Can you put brief descriptors on them, say starting scoring center or backup defensive PG or whatever? What kind of #1 scorer do you want? Do you want to hit tons of 3s and / or or drive inside, by pick n roll or iso, run a lot or find the long lost post threat?

Crow, until the team finds a All-NBA caliber player, I wouldn't try to construct it in any particular way. I don't think any of the current roster are guys you build a team around. I don't see us being able to get a Dwight Howard or CP3 through free agency. The way that most teams get superstars is through the draft. You have to have at least one of those before you can seriously think about building a championship team, with the one possible exception of Detroit a few years ago, which was probably a once-in-a-generation type of team building scenario.

I accept that finding a All-NBA caliber player is the primary task and you can't make all the calls best optimally until you know exactly what kind of lead guy you have, but I am not sure I'd fully agree with "I wouldn't try to construct it in any particular way" until you got that guy. I think you might be able to make a call at the highest level of strategy before that guy arrives (which is more important the star or the team strategy / ethos?) and maybe some of the lower tactical calls too while you search for the lead guy. And you probably also would benefit from knowing what your 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices were as far as types of lead guys to look for and perhaps commit to. By position and type or play style.

If you do the full re-build with a rookie to become the lead guy it usually will be a 5+ year process. When do you get that guy? Next year would be nice but it could the next year, the year after or you might still be searching. Some stuff you do early could also build value and be spun off for a better fit if need be so I think you can do something productive til you find the guy. Of course that could cause wins and hurt future draft picks... unless you take and keep a really bad coach long enough or keep a really bad player influence or two around long enough.

Hasn't every champion in at least the last 30 years had an All-Star big (of some kind, usually two-way strong) and a high level perimeter scorer (usually two-way strong)? Sure this isn't very specific but can't you start with that basic assumption and do some other work around it beforehand? I'd think I might do a lot of other stuff (not all) in a similar way regardless of exactly who fills these roles. Which is the #1 guy matters and their uniqueness matters but if you can get some other stuff you feel good about going you might. Timing is key, the draft pick accumulation and then the leap forward worked out great for the Thunder.

When PGs have been mentioned prominently as leaders of a championship team they seem to generally be in addition to these ingredients and not a substitute for one of them. (Spurs with Parker, Pistons both eras, 80s Lakers & Celtics). A star level PG in his prime on title winners has been no more than a 50-50 proposition since the 80s.

(Billups may have had made up for the lower relative degree of perimeter scorer strength of Rip and Tayshaun compared to other champion wings. And I guess a similar thing with the first Rockets title winner. If I am forgetting about other exceptions, I'd appreciate the reminder.)