Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

PG as #1 option = Mediocre Team


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#31 bLACKpANTHER

bLACKpANTHER

    º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,445 posts

Posted 21 November 2013 - 09:23 AM

Jefferson has helped us win 1 game..

 

Like i said, the biggest difference for this team was the Steve Clifford hire. He has helped this team far more that Jefferson ever could. With basically the same team that put us in the #2 spot last year- Clifford has made this squad a playoff contender. Can I get an amen!?!



#32 Third Degree

Third Degree

    Come back soon, 89

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,400 posts
  • Location704

Posted 23 November 2013 - 09:30 AM

Unless they win a max of. 4-5 more games the rest of the season they won't be in position to pick wiggins, Parker or randle. I wasn't saying they would pass on Parker or wiggins, but that no one at Pf or Sf around where the cats will likely be picking aren't going to be better then zeller or mkg.

Heck if they win more then 25 or so games the cats likely won't have a first round pick. If that ends up being the case then signing Jefferson will go down as one of the biggest mistakes a NC based team has ever made.


What? They're going to have at least 1 and possibly 3 first-round picks. Get your facts straight, dude. Winning 25 games or so got Cleveland the #1 pick last year.

Hate to tell you this but the lottery is rigged, too. Bobcats could go 0-82 and pick third. The NBA is going to make sure Charlotte doesn't get the top pick. They could tank until 2040 and never pick higher than 2nd. Basically all
It means when you tank is you're saying "we don't know how to run a team, so we are going to put all our faith every year into one day and hope against hope our ping-pong balls get us a great player and until then we will dream of losses and unproven 20-year-olds in whom we will put all our faith."

#33 carpanfan96

carpanfan96

    play hard, hit harder

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,763 posts
  • LocationConcord, NC

Posted 23 November 2013 - 07:07 PM

What? They're going to have at least 1 and possibly 3 first-round picks. Get your facts straight, dude. Winning 25 games or so got Cleveland the #1 pick last year.

Hate to tell you this but the lottery is rigged, too. Bobcats could go 0-82 and pick third. The NBA is going to make sure Charlotte doesn't get the top pick. They could tank until 2040 and never pick higher than 2nd. Basically all
It means when you tank is you're saying "we don't know how to run a team, so we are going to put all our faith every year into one day and hope against hope our ping-pong balls get us a great player and until then we will dream of losses and unproven 20-year-olds in whom we will put all our faith."

 

If Charlotte is picking out of the top 10 then the pick goes to Chicago because of Tyrus Thomas trade. Right now Charlotte is on target to have a late first round pick via Portland and thats it. As it stands now, Charlotte's pick would go to Chicago and Detroit would keep it's pick.

 

Also right now there are 9 teams with winning percentages below .350 and a few under .150, I wouldn't be surprised to see about 6-7 teams finish with records in the 20-25 win range.So in all likely hood a 27-30 win team would be picking in the 8-12 range with how bad the league is this season.

 

 

So if the Cats actually win and the records stay similar, then Charlotte will have a very late first and thats it.



#34 carpanfan96

carpanfan96

    play hard, hit harder

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,763 posts
  • LocationConcord, NC

Posted 23 November 2013 - 07:08 PM

What? They're going to have at least 1 and possibly 3 first-round picks. Get your facts straight, dude. Winning 25 games or so got Cleveland the #1 pick last year.

Hate to tell you this but the lottery is rigged, too. Bobcats could go 0-82 and pick third. The NBA is going to make sure Charlotte doesn't get the top pick. They could tank until 2040 and never pick higher than 2nd. Basically all
It means when you tank is you're saying "we don't know how to run a team, so we are going to put all our faith every year into one day and hope against hope our ping-pong balls get us a great player and until then we will dream of losses and unproven 20-year-olds in whom we will put all our faith."

 

If Charlotte is picking out of the top 10 then the pick goes to Chicago because of Tyrus Thomas trade. Right now Charlotte is on target to have a late first round pick via Portland and thats it. As it stands now, Charlotte's pick would go to Chicago and Detroit would keep it's pick.

 

Also right now there are 9 teams with winning percentages below .350 and a few under .150, I wouldn't be surprised to see about 6-7 teams finish with records in the 20-25 win range.So in all likely hood a 27-30 win team would be picking in the 8-12 range with how bad the league is this season.

 

 

So if the Cats actually win and the records stay similar, then Charlotte will have a very late first and thats it.

 

 

Rigged or not, the draft is literally the only way a small market team can win consistently. So if you think it's rigged then you don't think Charlotte as any chance ever being better then the 8th seed and a first round exit in the playoffs. With out a superstar, that's the ceiling.



#35 CarolinaNCSU

CarolinaNCSU

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,307 posts
  • LocationRaleigh

Posted 24 November 2013 - 11:18 AM

I swear if they lose their 1st rounder to the Bulls THIS year...I'll riot. Or at least throw a remote or something. 



#36 Third Degree

Third Degree

    Come back soon, 89

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,400 posts
  • Location704

Posted 25 November 2013 - 03:24 PM

I swear if they lose their 1st rounder to the Bulls THIS year...I'll riot. Or at least throw a remote or something. 

If they lose the first-rounder to the Bulls this year, it means they got better as a team, and probably don't need a pick that high to at least contend to some extent.

 

I do find it amusing people say we suck if we lose, then get pissed if we win.



#37 carpanfan96

carpanfan96

    play hard, hit harder

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,763 posts
  • LocationConcord, NC

Posted 25 November 2013 - 03:38 PM

If they lose the first-rounder to the Bulls this year, it means they got better as a team, and probably don't need a pick that high to at least contend to some extent.

 

I do find it amusing people say we suck if we lose, then get pissed if we win.

 

 

Doesn't mean they can contend at all, the NBA is horrible this year as I've mentioned already. Just means that the team made a move to improve the team a season earlier then they should have. There's a reason NBA experts mocked the Cats for getting Jefferson and it wasn't just about his contract. It's when they made the move that's puzzling as well. 



#38 CarolinaNCSU

CarolinaNCSU

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,307 posts
  • LocationRaleigh

Posted 25 November 2013 - 03:44 PM

If they lose the first-rounder to the Bulls this year, it means they got better as a team, and probably don't need a pick that high to at least contend to some extent.

 

I do find it amusing people say we suck if we lose, then get pissed if we win.

 

That's cute and all, but won't win a championship. Or even the division. I'd rather have a 1st rounder than get murdered by LeBron this year. This team's ceiling right now is probably a 7th-8th seed. Even with great progression from young guys and signing another guy next year, their ceiling is probably a 5 or 6 seed. Championship teams need stars, no matter the sport. The Horncats have none. Kemba and Jefferson are a couple of good players, but 2nd/3rd/or even 4th bananas on a true contender. If you strive to be a mediocre .500 team year in and year out to "content to some extent", so be it. I'd rather not. 



#39 Third Degree

Third Degree

    Come back soon, 89

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,400 posts
  • Location704

Posted 25 November 2013 - 05:26 PM

That's cute and all, but won't win a championship. Or even the division. I'd rather have a 1st rounder than get murdered by LeBron this year. This team's ceiling right now is probably a 7th-8th seed. Even with great progression from young guys and signing another guy next year, their ceiling is probably a 5 or 6 seed. Championship teams need stars, no matter the sport. The Horncats have none. Kemba and Jefferson are a couple of good players, but 2nd/3rd/or even 4th bananas on a true contender. If you strive to be a mediocre .500 team year in and year out to "content to some extent", so be it. I'd rather not.


Good luck getting even decent players to re-sign with a team who tanks every single season. It's ironic how everyone's solution actually creates another problem.

#40 CarolinaNCSU

CarolinaNCSU

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,307 posts
  • LocationRaleigh

Posted 25 November 2013 - 07:47 PM

Good luck getting even decent players to re-sign with a team who tanks every single season. It's ironic how everyone's solution actually creates another problem.

 

Because this team will need to continue to tank if it lands a superstar? Seriously? 

 

Or better yet, wait it out because people WANT to sign here anyway? We have to overpay like hell to land middle of the road guys like Jefferson. Land a Durant/Westbrook/Harden/Duncan/Kyrie/George (small market examples only there) in the draft, and you no longer have to tank. Or overpay guys to come team up with them. 

 

As always, find me an example of a small market team winning ANYTHING without landing a superstar in the draft. One thing is going to save basketball in Charlotte and it's not a mediocre team simply rebranding into the Hornets. That nostalgia will be cool for a year at most if the team turns into their own version of the Hawks or Bucks. Landing a superstar to rejuvenate the fanbase, who can then cheer for a team who expects better than poo to .500 as a ceiling is the only way to save it. One way to do that in the NBA as a small market. Bottom out, get lucky. 



#41 Third Degree

Third Degree

    Come back soon, 89

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,400 posts
  • Location704

Posted 26 November 2013 - 12:19 AM

Because this team will need to continue to tank if it lands a superstar? Seriously? 

 

Or better yet, wait it out because people WANT to sign here anyway? We have to overpay like hell to land middle of the road guys like Jefferson. Land a Durant/Westbrook/Harden/Duncan/Kyrie/George (small market examples only there) in the draft, and you no longer have to tank. Or overpay guys to come team up with them. 

 

As always, find me an example of a small market team winning ANYTHING without landing a superstar in the draft. One thing is going to save basketball in Charlotte and it's not a mediocre team simply rebranding into the Hornets. That nostalgia will be cool for a year at most if the team turns into their own version of the Hawks or Bucks. Landing a superstar to rejuvenate the fanbase, who can then cheer for a team who expects better than poo to .500 as a ceiling is the only way to save it. One way to do that in the NBA as a small market. Bottom out, get lucky. 

 

Find me an example of a small-market team winning anything in the first place! Unless you consider Orlando or Cleveland to be small-market, which they may or not be, I don't think so but I digress, then we've not seen a small-market team make the Finals in the last 35 years. I might give you Portland or OKC, but that's all. 



#42 Third Degree

Third Degree

    Come back soon, 89

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,400 posts
  • Location704

Posted 26 November 2013 - 12:24 AM

Because this team will need to continue to tank if it lands a superstar? Seriously? 

 

Yes, seriously. I wanted to address this separately.

 

If it lands a superstar, it's got to find a way to keep that superstar beyond his rookie contract. Otherwise, you're what, in the East finals for a year maybe, then our boy signs with the Lakers/Heat/Thunder/Knicks/Celtics, and we're back to 18-64 and tanking another 5 years? 

 

I'm swimming upstream in this argument and I realize that. But I would be alright with the level of success the 1993-01 Hornets had, where they were a tough out but not quite Finals material. At some point you should accept that as a small-market team, there are some limitations, and to expect your team – which has nailed TWO first-round picks in its history – to mimic the Thunder is a pipe dream. I'm definitely not as much of a dreamer as some on here. Maybe that's good, maybe it's bad, but that's the way I see it.



#43 CarolinaNCSU

CarolinaNCSU

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,307 posts
  • LocationRaleigh

Posted 26 November 2013 - 01:11 AM

Find me an example of a small-market team winning anything in the first place! Unless you consider Orlando or Cleveland to be small-market, which they may or not be, I don't think so but I digress, then we've not seen a small-market team make the Finals in the last 35 years.might give you Portland or OKC, but that's all. 

 

tim-duncan-.jpg

 

Small Market. Multiple titles. How? Landed a superstar, and then drafted well and added others like Parker/Manu/already had David Robinson. This also lends to the BPA strategy in some threads surrounding Embiid I've seen, as the Spurs surely weren't going to pass up on Duncan because they already had Robinson down low and could've used some perimeter help. (Qualify this right quick, obviously I'm not saying Embiid is Duncan right now, or ever.) Also had one of the greatest coaches of all time however, which can't be overlooked in enabling their rise. They're the obvious gold standard for small market teams. OKC, arguably on their way until they blew it up by trading Harden, but still a contender. Indiana today has been a solid example in building a team and landing a superstar. 

 

A clip from an ESPN article on small vs. large market from last year's playoffs, just for clarification on small market examples...

 

"This is a league that prides itself on Oklahoma City, Memphis, Salt Lake City, Portland, San Antonio, Sacramento, Indianapolis, on and on and on."

 

San Antonio, obviously above.

OKC has been discussed.

Memphis acquired Gasol basically in a draft trade for his brother and also Conley.

Utah, Malone and Stockton

Portland, their run in the 90s with Drexler or even 79 I think it was with Walton (when healthy).Today, Aldridge and Lillard give a nice foundation. 

Sacramento, meh, only good for a couple of years by throwing money at CWebb

Indiana, George/Hibbert/Reggie in the 90s 

Cleveland, an obvious small market. Lebron made them a contender who never got over the hump. It was also his team's fault for never getting him help.

Orlando, probable small market as well. Dwight carried them to the Finals. 

 

One thing this also proves though, is that you don't always need a Top 3 or so pick. You have to draft well, but in doing so, find superstars. The original comment that started this, about possibly losing a pick to CHI in this loaded draft, prohibits the chance of doing so. Nearly all of these teams were beaten by large markets, sure. But these are the blueprints to actually competing. Not being the Bucks or Hawks and competing just to make the playoffs and bow out in the first round. 



#44 carpanfan96

carpanfan96

    play hard, hit harder

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,763 posts
  • LocationConcord, NC

Posted 26 November 2013 - 12:57 PM

Yes, seriously. I wanted to address this separately.

If it lands a superstar, it's got to find a way to keep that superstar beyond his rookie contract. Otherwise, you're what, in the East finals for a year maybe, then our boy signs with the Lakers/Heat/Thunder/Knicks/Celtics, and we're back to 18-64 and tanking another 5 years?

I'm swimming upstream in this argument and I realize that. But I would be alright with the level of success the 1993-01 Hornets had, where they were a tough out but not quite Finals material. At some point you should accept that as a small-market team, there are some limitations, and to expect your team – which has nailed TWO first-round picks in its history – to mimic the Thunder is a pipe dream. I'm definitely not as much of a dreamer as some on here. Maybe that's good, maybe it's bad, but that's the way I see it.


The 93-01 team had a few superstars come through as well as a few other really good players. LJ, Alonzo and Davis were all borderline superstars while the team also drafted chapmen, gill and JR Reid who all played well for the team.

There's a reason they were so good for so long, they had 5 drafts in the top 12 or so pick wise in a row that turned into the above players.

Point is that run was caused by being shitty and hitting in the draft to build a good team.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users