| . |
 |
Let's say you're the GM. Or at least, someone the GM would listen to seriously.
What route do you think is best for the franchise? The way I see it, the Pelicans have three potential pathways that they can go over the next three or four years.
1) Try and set up again with another superstar, and build around them again, hoping that better moves are made and that we have better luck this time. A trade that follows this route might be based around New York, where we could acquire a potential superstar in this year's draft (Zion, RJ, Ja) and a bunch of young players with potential that could go around that star like Knox and Robinson.
2) Abandon the superstar route and follow what could be called the 2004 Pistons model. They didn't have any singular transcendent player, but they had a bunch of really good solid players that fit well together and had complimentary skills. A trade that facilitates this route might be a Boston based trade, where we could potentially acquire Tatum and Brown, and maybe some solid mid-first picks like Sacramento or the Clippers depending on what conveys. Maybe you think Tatum does have all-star potential, but even if he doesn't, this kind of tactic would put a fairly solid floor on the team's results, even if it also capped off the ceiling a little lower than you might want.
3) Bungle it. Go the superstar route but then trade every pick again so we can't build around that star. Or go the Celtics route but fail to acquire Tatum. Just be awful again and re-run the last 7 years.
Obviously none of us want Option 3. So, out of Option 1 and Option 2, which would you prefer? Build around the superstar and shoot for the highest possible ceiling, or ensure at least some degree of success with a team of non-star-but-solid players? What's your call?
Watching Pelicans games is what Georges Bataille meant by limit experiences.
If you have a chance to get a superstar you always get them. We simply have to hope we hit some luck with draft picks too though.
The Utah or Denver route seems the best way forward for us. But they all begin with being extremely lucky and hitting on some picks.
Bol Bol.
2 is probably the safer route
Yep, and I've heard a few people (although I can't remember who because my memory sucks) say that they are done with superstar drama and would be totally happy to play a Memphis role, where they just trot out to 45-50 wins every year and never really have a chance of a ring but have that solid floor.Originally Posted by JJackisangry
So that's my question, really. Not what's safer, but if that's the option people would prefer.
Personally I'm interested in risking it all on the superstar, but I understand if other people wouldn't wanna do that.
You never really want to choose anything other than Option 1, because that's the one that leads to a championship. However, if you've grown up in New Orleans the past 50 years, you'd almost be happy with Option 2, if it just brought us consistent playoff appearances and a couple of deep runs a decade. I means, we've had 7 playoff appearances in 17 years.
Example: Atlanta Hawks. Before last season, they had made 10 consecutive playoff appearances. True, they only made it past the second round once in those ten years and lost in the Conf finals, but at least they were in the dance every year. The old phrase, "you can't win it if you're not in it" applies here. It would be nice for a change to have a team that at least is consistently decent and in the playoffs. Its still better than what we've had. It would also help build the fan base because they'd be relevant every year.
Last edited by RobertM320; 02-07-2019 at 05:52 PM.
Dallas and San Antonio won titles without the superstars (Dirk maybe being the only one on Dallas). The problem is that nobody is going to beat this Golden State team. If that team dismantles, I don’t think we need some crazy god-tier superstar to win a title.
Honestly I don't think that matters too much to us. If we're rebuilding, even if we take the second option, we won't be at our peak, where we're challenging for deep deep playoff success, for another 2 seasons probably. In that case, I think GSW will be kind of just naturally falling apart. Aging, maybe Durant leaves, Draymond is already receding, so on.
Has San Antonio won titles without superstars? I mean, I guess their 2014 championship.
The way I see it once Lebron starts breaking down and Golden State dismantles, the talent will spread out and it will be anyone’s game. I also think as a small market we are much less likely to succeed going the superstar route because let’s Face it- we’d struggle to bring another superstar in. Boogie really fell into our lap
Also, with a team concept instead of a single superstar, you're less likely to have anyone pressuring to get out of town the way CP3 and AD did.
That’s another good point. I think a “good team” can win a title, we are just unfortunately sandwiched between Lebron and Golden State atm.
In the West, I can see that. I think the East is kind of in the process of building powerhouses. If Niko stays in Milwaukee and they pay Middleton, that could be really scary, and obviously Philly is really loaded right now. If AD ends up in Boston with Kyrie, they're a finals threat, and if he ends up in NY with Kyrie and Durant obviously that's terrifying.
My personal view is that we should take the first route, go for the superstar and get Zion (preferably), but then have some patience beyond that, keep our picks and maybe get another year or two with top 10 picks to try and add possible stars naturally. In a way, that's kind of the Golden State route, but that does require some good drafting.
Nothing wrong with that. It’s a tad risky imo, and I’d rather trade AD to Boston so that they don’t form the New York trio. AD and Kyrie would be good, but I wouldn’t be terrified of them.
And yeah I think the difference in the 1st route is we need to be more patient whereas we could go either way with the 2nd
Pelicanidae,
I am just glad that someone is talking about having a strategic plan. I just hope Mrs. Benson and Loomis are thinking the same way. I think best case scenario is for the Pelicans to get a young star in the draft. A centerpiece to build around. That way you don't have to deal with the loyalty issue for about 6-7 years. If you win, they stay, simple as that.
Let's say you get lucky and draft Zion since he's the hot name right now. Acquire enough picks to draft a solid nucleus of young players that fit your system that. You should then be able to theoretically retain that core for at least 5 years. Let them grow together. Totally revamp your European scouting department and use late number ones and 2nds to go after international players. See if you can get them out of their contracts to come to the big leagues. Take a hard look at your training staff. I am not sold on the idea that the Saints' trainers are good enough to cross train basketball players. I want an elite training staff dedicated to the Pelicans.
Stop going after mid-level free agent that had one good year and throwing money at them. There's a reason that their team didn't pay them. Look at what Dallas has done. I think they are the best model to emulate given the Pelicans' resources. Analytics, scout and sign international players; make the Pelicans players feel like they are a primary focus (not just a sideshow to the Saints). The goal is to learn how to have sustained success. Not just a decent season every 4 or 5 years.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-...vericks-2015-4
I'm looking for real sports fans...not sheep! Are you with me?!!!
This is less about “overpaying free agents” and trading for a package (like Boston) that will put us in contention sooner. Tatum is hardly anything to scoff at as well. Zion is hardly a sure thing
I think it is a lot about overpaying for guys who are just looking for a payday. Asik, Hill, Ajinca, Gordon -- just to name a few. Those deals crippled this franchise and forced us into mediocrity. Regarding Jason Taytum, in this "new NBA," even if you get him, you have him for 2 years tops before he is leveraging his way out. That's if he is as good as you hope which is the best case scenario. If he isn't (gets hurt or just doesn't develop any further), then you really got nothing substantial for AD and here we go again, back in the lottery and the cycle repeats.
I would rather go draft a young superstar on a rookie contract day one. Then acquire more young talent to place around him that compliments the superstar and the coach's system. That's a team that can grow together and maybe you have something in about 4 years.
I have actually changed my mind about this as I used to prefer signing the big name established guy and then grabbing veteran free agents. I just don't think that will work in New Orleans. No loyalty to the ball club. Soon as something goes wrong, guys are looking to get out. Even taking less money to do so. Better to build it slow and get it right instead of trying to do it in a single season or two.
I’d run a little of both if possible.
1st- I’m asking for Tatum, Brown, Williams, and 3-1sts but I want Rozier to sign and trade him. I’m hoping Ja Morant falls to 4 and we could offer Rozier, clips 1st, and sac 1st. I hope that’s enough to get him but all depends how the draft falls
2nd- draft Hunter or Culver with our first
3- I’m resigning Mirotic in the offseason we should have enough for him and another decent big maybe Randle.
I’m starting
Jrue-Brown-Tatum-Mirotic-Okafor
With a bench of
Ja Morant-Jackson-hunter/culver-Randle-Williams(Boston’s) with Kenrich, Bluitte, Stanley, and Elfrid all mixed in.
Hopefully Elfrid and Stanley come fairly cheap. Have to trade Moore and Hill would be our 15th player till he expires or traded at the deadline. This has lots of youth and a few veterans which should compete.
Those names you mentioned were poor moves by Dell from the get go so not the best examples. A more competent GM wouldn’t have butchered the AD era. Which coincidentally is something that we need going forward
And also we had our superstar there. We couldn’t have added another if we tried because nobody would sign for us.
I totally agree with your assessment of Demps. IMO, letting this current administration handle this trade is like letting Michael Jackson babysit your kid. Maybe I can't prove to you that it's going to end up bad but... do you really want to take that chance?
I think the best plan is clearly option 2. Look at the Raptors and the Nuggets as clear examples. They have collected good players and assets over the years and have always been competitive. Nuggets struck gold with Jokic to set them over the top and the Raptors took advantage of the Kawhi situation to get their star. I think you just have to make smart decisions and manage your assets intelligently. Not every move has to be a home run.
I think both are realistic routes we can take, and there is a chance Zion is the unstoppable alpha monster we are looking for. I like both packages. Looking at the shape the franchise is in atm, I’d prefer we went with 2 because I believe it will bring a winning atmosphere to a franchise that desperately needs it. Hopefully we snag a bonfied star in this draft regardless of spot.
@ShamsCharania: Sources: The New Orleans Pelicans are releasing forward Markieff Morris, who is currently dealing with an injury.
m.twitter.com/ShamsCharania
Future doomed lol
@wojespn: After considering the possibility of shutting down All-NBA center Anthony Davis, the New Orleans Pelicans plan to allow Davis back into the lineup...
Mistake
WE ARE SO STUPID
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote