Zombie The Next Siakam? Don't Sleep On Zach Collins.

Indy has proved you dont need to be a consistent tankard to build a solid contender. Mathurin is the highest pick they've had in years at 6. Go take a look at where they all were drafted. Nem was a second round pick.

 

On the other hand, OKC has proved you can be a contender by being a tankard and accumulating assets. They will be better equipped to create a dynasty and improve in the offseason too. Which is terrifying. I'm looking at you Giannis.

 

lol completely false, what is the main reason OKC is good now? SGA?

They were a solid team when they had Paul George and Westbrook.

So there were a good team and traded George for SGA and picks.

One of those picks turned out to be Jalen Williams .

So all in all, they got better mainly through a trade, which later netted them Jalen Willams.

That's far from being a contender by being a tankard.

Some of you still have tunnel vision with how to build a contender I see lol

 

I don't think anybody has suggested tanking and making no trades.

OKC is in such a good situation because they have a wealth of assets. This allows them to make trades to put themselves over the top.

If we had enough assets to trade for as many picks as they have we wouldn't have nearly the need to tank as long.

Unfortunately we haven't been in that position. So the best way for us to add assets has been to draft them.

 

It really isn't that hard to understand. I don't get the pushback. There are multiple ways to become a contender. Getting top assets is the most logical way to do so. Okc is in a 1,000% stronger position to improve this offseason because of their assets they hold than anyone else in the league.

Of course someone can pull a rabbit out of a hat and take Jokic in the 2nd.

 

Exactly.

 

The Mavs pulled a rabbit out of a hat and got the #1 pick somehow. Not to mention that San Antonio somehow pulled another rabbit and got the second pick.

 

agree...they were a very good team that couldnt take the next step a number of years ago. They have had numerous hall of famers / all stars through there of which all wanted to leave or were traded anyway. Thats how they got many of the assets. Plus they inherited a few HOF'ers from the sonics that witnessed the bye bye Dame shot.

 

Yes but what I’m trying to say is they’re in this position mainly because of trades, and mainly the Paul George for SGA and 5 freaking picks, which is crazy.

Great trade for OKC, but my point mainly was it was a trade that got them where they are today, not tanking over and over, which was his point but it was just incorrect when talking about why OKC is good now.

Oddly enough, the Pacers are also in the finals mainly as well via trades.

Traded for Haliburton and Siakam.

Final point is our best route can be via trade too and not just tanking and tanking until we get a star.

 

So the league is fixing things for small market San Antonio which has never generated great ratings? What is the motivation for that?

STOMP

 

you said OKC became a contender because of tanking, which is not true. They mainly became a contender by pulling off an all time swindle of a trade landing an elite young talent (SGA) plus picks. One of those was a late lotto pick which landed them another top 25 talent (Jalen Williams). Those are their two main do it all cogs on offense and both are super long and decent on D as well. At the time of the trade some fans said it was them tanking, but those fans were proven wrong.

STOMP

 

Who has said otherwise? Of course teams can become contenders through good trades, getting lucky with a Giannis or Jokic pick etc.

Tanking gives you better assets to try to make those things happen. Is it foolproof? No, but how many teams have tried the Pistons model and won?

 

The same dude that replied to me lol.

Phatguy. Same dude that will suggest tanking over and over is the best way, pushes back on anyone that disagrees with him and will reply to anyone randomly about it like he just did to me because he can’t help himself, I wasn’t even talking to him.

I was replying to Hoopguru just that OKC mainly got where they are via a big trade. That’s all.

 

Talent evaluation is very important obviously that doesn't start & end at the draft. That management acquired Deni & Camara for what they did is tremendous. Be it by draft or trade, if they continue adding that level of players to the mix we'll be watching a contender soon. Really excited about this draft and next season seeing what Scoot and Shaedon can bring

STOMP

 

...btw, I know he's content creating and part of that is taking big swings to generate interest, but I wish the OP had turned out to be correct

STOMP

 

And San Antonio isn’t really a small market.

 

I said a team can become a contender by being a tankard and acquiring assets. We may have a different definition of what being a tankard is. I don't necessarily think someone needs to tank 5 years in order to become a contender. Trading a prime player for an up and coming player and assets could be considered tanking at the time.

If anyone knew SGA would become this good, 9 gms should be fired for passing on him (Luka was fine being taken ahead of him). Obviously the potential was there but.....

Okc also was bad for multiple years acquiring good assets. Yes, they took Jalen Williams at the back end of the lotto. Which was fantastic. But they also took Giddey(who was dealt for Caruso), Holmgren etc that have been good pieces for this squad.

It doesn't have to be a this or that type of thing. OKC, in my opinion, has drafted well, made great trades and had/has great assets to build a potential dynasty.

OKC has also been committed to playing their young guys to grow.

 

there seems to be a bit of short memory going on. OKC tanked directly into drafting Durant with the 2nd pick; Westbrook with the 4th pick; and Harden with the 3rd pick....in three successive years. They also drafted Serge Ibaka at #24, getting a better player late in the draft than Portland has got outside of the lottery over the last 15-20 years. That was OKC's 1st tank

(OKC had the 2nd, 3rd, 4th & 24th picks about the same time that Portland had the 3rd, 2nd, 6th, 1st & 11th picks. OKC got Durant-Westbrook-Harden-Ibaka; Blazers got Webster-Aldridge-Roy-Oden-Bayless. Quite a gulf in results)

OKC's 2nd tank saw them draft Josh Giddey with a 6th pick and Chet Holmgren with the 2nd pick. (Little known fact in the one that got away department: OKC actually drafted Alperen Sengun with a 16th pick but immediately traded him for two future picks. Of course, Houston was making that call, but still...)

the big difference between OKC and Portland, and maybe it's foundational, is that in Sam Presti, OKC has a GM with the balls to make a trade that Neil Olshey and Joe Cronin have never show they had the courage to do. Presti traded Oladipo and Sabonis for PG13 when George had an expiring contract and could potentially walk away as a free agent a year later. It was a huge calculated risk that paid off when he re-signed PG13 then traded him for SGA and the pick he used on Jalen Williams

now that was a big swing

 

A team is doing a pretty piss poor job at tanking if they're comfortably making the playoffs. The year prior to the trade they won 49 games and finished 6th in the West. The year after the trade, they won 44 games and finished 5th. Despite trading both Paul George & Westbrook (for Chris Paul and a couple 1sts), there was no tanking going on. Again, yes some fans at the time of the trade said they were tanking, but those fans were proven wrong as they remained a good team.

OKC may have lucked somewhat into him blossoming much as he did as PG was forcing their hand to move him and he wanted to go back home to LA. But it's not like SGA struggled as a 20 year old rookie for the Clippers... he was obviously going to be a player. I'm crediting their management with great talent evaluation... which seems to be a trend for them.

STOMP