I'm not implying anything. I'm saying flat out that the coaches and GMs, specifically in LA and Phoenix, will actively try to lose games. It happens every season from teams at the bottom of the standings, why would this season be any different? Guys with minor injuries will be shut down. Veterans will be traded off for a nickel on the dollar. Guys like Robert Sacre and Ronnie Price will start playing key minutes in March and April. Don't know why anyone would think my position is controversial. Why wouldn't coaches and GMs want to lose games once their teams are toast? People think LA, who only keep their pick if it's in the top 3, are going to try to win games in the spring? Why?
The Nets bench is horrific and one can argue consists of several players who shouldn't be in the league and/or will be out of the league within two years. They are also starting a backcourt of Donald Sloan and Wayne Ellington. Certain night the veterans can carry them and catch an opponent sleeping but I wouldn't worry about them reeling off 4 in a row or 5 out of 7 anytime this season.
JJ's intensity level was the topic of conversation over at CelticsNuts earlier in the year. I attended the Celtics/Nets game when they didn't show up and we cruised to a 30-point win. JJ played about 30 minutes and I'm not joking when I say it was possible he didn't work up a sweat. Literally half jog to the halfcourt line, walk to spot up for 3. Trot back to halfcourt on D, walk back to follow his man. It was comical to say the least.
That moves seems like a step backwards in terms of talent, but is probably such a big improvement at the PG position that it might end up helping.
Agreed that the PG situation is so bad that almost anyone is an upgrade at this point.
I keep hearing people say this but the players on the floor are not tanking for Philly or LA. They are playing and competing to win. Brooklyn, without any front office incentive, have lost 15 of their last 17 since beating us a month ago because they really really stink even with Lopez. They are playing out the season with only Phoenix providing less resistance.
That's a quick rise for a New Zealander only 5 seasons from being an NBA player. Impressive and coming from a quality program.
I'm not saying Marks would turn the organization around with no draft picks to speak of for the next 4 years only that it's impressive how quickly he put himself into a position for a GM job. He may be better off sitting tight for another year or two for a better opportunity but of course money talks.
Job security and $. Failure isn't as lethal to a GM as never getting the shot. People in the league know it's a tough rebuild so even if he gets fired in 3 years there will be interviews waiting
Yeah - I don't get the idea of saying "no", unless you think you're about to be offered a better job soon, or the Spurs have told you that Buford is going to retire soon or something. Maybe you get a better job offer later, or maybe the sheen comes off you a bit, for any number of reasons.
Lets put it this way, according to BBref, between 1990 and 2000 there were 46 GMs hired and Kupchak is the only one remaining with that team. Of the other 45 only 16 got another shot someplace else so roughly 35% Between 2001 and 2010 there were 34 guys hired, 8 are still with the team that hired them, and of the remaining 26 guys only 7 got a chance somewhere else, so 27% So there isnt zero chance, but the odds are really against you getting another shot. Personally if it was me, looking at those odds, I'd probably just wait it out a little bit more because if you think the odds are tough to get a 2nd job, I'd imagine they would be really tough if things are as much of a struggle as I think they will be for him because I think people forget about some of the circumstances these guys are in far too frequently.
Any new GM position comes with challenges. Marks is going to have a ton of money to spend over the next few years without any contracts restricting him, an owner who will pay the luxury tax if necessary, and a chance to start from scratch in NY. It's not nearly as bad a situation as you are making it sound and the bar is very very low. If he can't make a marked (pun) improvement by Year 3-4 then he wasn't going to make much of an impact anywhere else while waiting for the gig.
This is where we disagree. Philadelphia in 2013 was a chance to start from scratch, a cap that could be cleaned up and an array of picks coming in, so you really could build a young core. We know the Nets pick situation and their cap can be cleaned up, but I think the issue is going to be getting anyone of consequence to go there. LA has proven that having a big, attractive market and a check with a lot of zeros doesnt necessarily get you talent. With regards to the current roster, I dont think there is anyone of consequence who is actually going to be better in 2 years than they are right now.
