pokerface
ASFN Addict
- Joined
- May 20, 2004
- Posts
- 5,369
- Reaction score
- 807
Yes they did but I don't think that really changes much. You still have to get lucky enough so that you'd have a top pick in a draft with great players. Same still applies. That approach calls for losing until you no longer need to lose, not lose until you get the number one pick because there's no guarantee that the top player you get is actually a generational star.
We probably should not have gone down the tanking path (except in season closeouts). But since we did, we can either abandon it, start all over again from a lower spot than when we first opted to go all Hinkie or we can let it play out. Keep being bad until you get the game changer you're in search of. The Hinkie approach isn't designed so you can get a Jamal Murray or Damian Lillard, the goal is an Anthony Davis or Lebron James type star.
I know ....it's just seeming like long shot on top of long shot now. It's a long shot we get a top pick...then it's a long shot we get a generational superstar. I mean what good is getting top picks if they aren't being developed correctly? Was Bender really a washout? Was Chriss? Is Jackson? Are we flushing our draft picks because we don't know how to handle them? I think we have sufficient picks now to have seen ''some" difference...not more of the same. I get Booker and Warren are hurt but when they weren't hurting we still stunk. So I don't know ..I guess keep stinking because we don't have another choice but that hurts our free agency too . Lets see what next summer brings with more cap space available and another high draft pick. As far as this season I'm ticked off.