Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, MemphisX said:

The thing is this group is not going anywhere.  We do not want to be like New Orleans with Anthony Davis.  We want to peak in 5-7 seasons with Jaren.  We need to be building up assets to do so and need to have a clear vision of what type of team we want to put around him.  Trying to compete now is just silliness.  Letting this last little rebuilt value of Mike and Marc to go without milking it will hurt also.

We should be maintaining cap flexibility and acquiring 1st round picks if possible while identifying bargains that we can lock up for cheap.

Sounds like you agree with FO pursuing Frank N then.     Because that is clearly a move with an eye on the future.   As long as Mike, Marc and Jaren  are playing we will be too good to tank.   So only way to add lottery type talent is to grab guys like Frank or Fultz.   According to  to rumors last season we could've had Mudiay in a Tyreke deal.  Now in hindsight that looks like a mistake because he is becoming a solid player.   His emergence is a big reason why Frank is available.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, GrizzTigerFan said:

Sounds like you agree with FO pursuing Frank N then.     Because that is clearly a move with an eye on the future.   As long as Mike, Marc and Jaren  are playing we will be too good to tank.   So only way to add lottery type talent is to grab guys like Frank or Fultz.   According to  to rumors last season we could've had Mudiay in a Tyreke deal.  Now in hindsight that looks like a mistake because he is becoming a solid player.   His emergence is a big reason why Frank is available.  

Nope because Frank is not good.  I don't think he is better than Jevon Carter.  He can't play PG because you simply can't have a PG that shoots so poorly.  Also, we will be in the lottery this season with or without Mike and Marc.  We won't keep the pick but we will be there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, MemphisX said:

The thing is this group is not going anywhere.  We do not want to be like New Orleans with Anthony Davis.  We want to peak in 5-7 seasons with Jaren.  We need to be building up assets to do so and need to have a clear vision of what type of team we want to put around him.  Trying to compete now is just silliness.  Letting this last little rebuilt value of Mike and Marc to go without milking it will hurt also.

We should be maintaining cap flexibility and acquiring 1st round picks if possible while identifying bargains that we can lock up for cheap.

We are headed to being exactly like a poor mans New Orleans. JJJ being just enough to keep us mediocre in 3/4 years. Too good to get a good pick.

But anyway, losing is usually, more times than not, needed in order to build assets. As always you can find exceptions. They got JJJ by losing. And Mike. Even diamond in the rough low round picks like Marc or a Khris Middleton or Will Barton or Nikola Jokic, etc are more likely to play on bad teams. Good teams dont have time to develop. Its just the way it is and the system will always be set up that way. Trying to buck the trend and "rebuilding on the fly" without getting bad or getting picks is almost impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Dwash said:

We are headed to being exactly like a poor mans New Orleans. JJJ being just enough to keep us mediocre in 3/4 years. Too good to get a good pick.

But anyway, losing is usually, more times than not, needed in order to build assets. As always you can find exceptions. They got JJJ by losing. And Mike. Even diamond in the rough low round picks like Marc or a Khris Middleton or Will Barton or Nikola Jokic, etc are more likely to play on bad teams. Good teams dont have time to develop. Its just the way it is and the system will always be set up that way. Trying to buck the trend and "rebuilding on the fly" without getting bad or getting picks is almost impossible.

I said it was a stupid strategy a couple years ago when it became apparent that that was what they were attempting to do. You can’t rebuild around non lottery picks and bargain free agency pickups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dwash said:

We are headed to being exactly like a poor mans New Orleans. JJJ being just enough to keep us mediocre in 3/4 years. Too good to get a good pick.

But anyway, losing is usually, more times than not, needed in order to build assets. As always you can find exceptions. They got JJJ by losing. And Mike. Even diamond in the rough low round picks like Marc or a Khris Middleton or Will Barton or Nikola Jokic, etc are more likely to play on bad teams. Good teams dont have time to develop. Its just the way it is and the system will always be set up that way. Trying to buck the trend and "rebuilding on the fly" without getting bad or getting picks is almost impossible.

That is true but a market like ours cannot handle multiple consecutive lottery seasons that it would take to get that talent.  They blew the chance to remain competitive and still get top picks by not trading one of Mike, Marc or Zbo when they still had value.   Which is what SAS did with George Hill to get Kawhi. 

    We need to at least get back to playoffs this year and maybe next then tank after that to keep fanbase interested.   When JJJ is the ripe old age of 22 and still on rookie deal.   Mike nor Marc will get us a lottery pick so no reason to even suggest that anymore. 

I believe best strategy going forward is to move off BOS pick this season.    Ride this Mike and Marc train for another couple of seasons while developing JJJ into the Star we need.    Make smart low-risk moves on MLE type guys (like Kyle) and try to find "diamond in the rough" young guys.  

In other words pretty much what we are doing now.   Our present path is the only logical course of action because we wasted all the better opportunities long ago.   

Literally only guys that should be considered truly part of the core going forward are Jaren, Mike, Marc, Kyle, and Dillon.   Everyone else should be used as assets to improve the team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GrizzTigerFan said:

Sounds like you agree with FO pursuing Frank N then.     Because that is clearly a move with an eye on the future.   As long as Mike, Marc and Jaren  are playing we will be too good to tank.   So only way to add lottery type talent is to grab guys like Frank or Fultz.   According to  to rumors last season we could've had Mudiay in a Tyreke deal.  Now in hindsight that looks like a mistake because he is becoming a solid player.   His emergence is a big reason why Frank is available.  

But you do know that getting Fultz would cost the Grizz somewhere between 4-5 M next year don't you? You willing to gamble that much on him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GrizzTigerFan said:

That is true but a market like ours cannot handle multiple consecutive lottery seasons that it would take to get that talent.  They blew the chance to remain competitive and still get top picks by not trading one of Mike, Marc or Zbo when they still had value.   Which is what SAS did with George Hill to get Kawhi. 

    We need to at least get back to playoffs this year and maybe next then tank after that to keep fanbase interested.   When JJJ is the ripe old age of 22 and still on rookie deal.   Mike nor Marc will get us a lottery pick so no reason to even suggest that anymore. 

I believe best strategy going forward is to move off BOS pick this season.    Ride this Mike and Marc train for another couple of seasons while developing JJJ into the Star we need.    Make smart low-risk moves on MLE type guys (like Kyle) and try to find "diamond in the rough" young guys.  

In other words pretty much what we are doing now.   Our present path is the only logical course of action because we wasted all the better opportunities long ago.   

Literally only guys that should be considered truly part of the core going forward are Jaren, Mike, Marc, Kyle, and Dillon.   Everyone else should be used as assets to improve the team. 

They.have been bad for 2 or 3 years in a row before. The league has revenue sharing. Saying they cant afford to be bad is a myth. Small markets can handle a few years of losing and bad attendance numbers because of revenue sharing. How many small market teams have been bad for a few years and the team didnt move? Plenty.

What small markets cant afford to do? Poor long terrm signings like Parsons and trading potential premium picks like the one to Boston. The financial system will bail them out of bad attendance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This article is a bit dated- but still relevent points. And doesn't include some of the more recent moves that have happend in big league sports, especially once fans stopped going to games. Memphis is bad about not supporting teams when we are not good. Look at the tigers from last year. Memphis used to pack out the forum,  but look what happend during a short downturn. Anyhoo, here is the article. You guys know my two cents. a few bad years, and I think the grizz to to Seattle, or any other real major market. I love Memphis, but we are really a small market at best. 

https://www.thestreet.com/story/11983990/1/5-cities-abandoned-by-professional-sports.html 

PORTLAND, Ore. (TheStreet) -- A professional sports franchise isn't a right, as money-hungry owners and cash-strapped cities are all too aware.

Since 2000, six franchises from Major League Baseball, the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League have pulled up stakes and switched towns. While baseball's Montreal Expos jumped to Washington in 2005 and the NHL's Atlanta Thrashers left for Winnipeg in 2011, the NBA has seen the Vancouver Grizzlies flee to Memphis in 2001, the Charlotte Hornets break for New Orleans in 2002, the Seattle Supersonics slip off to Oklahoma City in 2008 and the New Jersey Nets pay a few tolls on the way to Brooklyn in 2011.

 

( I didn't post the entire article) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hornets were a playoff team when they left.

Seattle got screwed by ownership. ould have happened regardless of the on court product which was not bad for many years cause they had Ray Allen/Rashard Lewis and then KD.

Sacramento didnt move, was bad many years

Cleveland has never moved

Minnesota, still there

Milwaukee never moved

Orlando, stays terrible, still there.

Grizzlies have sucked, never moved

Attendance may go down, but so will payroll.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dwash said:

Hornets were a playoff team when they left.

Seattle got screwed by ownership. ould have happened regardless of the on court product which was not bad for many years cause they had Ray Allen/Rashard Lewis and then KD.

Sacramento didnt move, was bad many years

Cleveland has never moved

Minnesota, still there

Milwaukee never moved

Orlando, stays terrible, still there.

Grizzlies have sucked, never moved

Attendance may go down, but so will payroll.  

I think its wishful thinking on your part. And you forget, the Grizzlies moved here. ;)

Not that it matters for the sake of this argument, but each of those markets you named are far larger than Memphis. And For everyone that didn't move you have one that did. And, we are I suspect one of the poorest big league markets as well, which means a smaller pool of the population can afford tickets. I am just saying we have a lot of things working against us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a market like Memphis, given the smaller pool of paying fans that can afford to go to games regularly (season tix, etc.), the Front Office has to be laser sharp in getting the right players in the right system to remain compelling for Memphis fans. The Grit- n- Grind stuff was not only marketing genius, but it was  recipe for success in Memphis, without having to win big (they never even won their division). A marketer told me recently that the best brands don't sell their product to people, but synergy  and aspiration.  If you are selling cars, there are those who want to make a statement about their net worth (luxury cars work for them). Others want to make a statement about how they value the environment (Subaru or Prius cars work for them). With NBA basketball, the Grizz style of G-N-G resonates with the city. An underdog, scrappy , resourceful, strong style that emblemizes what people in Memphis think about the city and ourselves. That is what sold the Grizz, not winning big, because they never did. 

So, the FO needs to keep that in mind when bring player in. Winning is a must, and winning big will cut across any marketing strategy. But short of getting a division title or a ring, getting the right players in the right style can sustain the Grizz through any "rebuild" they may have to go through. But losing for  sustained period is not an option at this point. Revenue sharing will not be enough to keep a person like Pera from moving the team if he could make more money in Seattle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Blackwatch said:

In a market like Memphis, given the smaller pool of paying fans that can afford to go to games regularly (season tix, etc.), the Front Office has to be laser sharp in getting the right players in the right system to remain compelling for Memphis fans. The Grit- n- Grind stuff was not only marketing genius, but it was  recipe for success in Memphis, without having to win big (they never even won their division). A marketer told me recently that the best brands don't sell their product to people, but synergy  and aspiration.  If you are selling cars, there are those who want to make a statement about their net worth (luxury cars work for them). Others want to make a statement about how they value the environment (Subaru or Prius cars work for them). With NBA basketball, the Grizz style of G-N-G resonates with the city. An underdog, scrappy , resourceful, strong style that emblemizes what people in Memphis think about the city and ourselves. That is what sold the Grizz, not winning big, because they never did. 

So, the FO needs to keep that in mind when bring player in. Winning is a must, and winning big will cut across any marketing strategy. But short of getting a division title or a ring, getting the right players in the right style can sustain the Grizz through any "rebuild" they may have to go through. But losing for  sustained period is not an option at this point. Revenue sharing will not be enough to keep a person like Pera from moving the team if he could make more money in Seattle. 

well said- Owners work in dollars and cents, NOI, and ROI. If those don't make sense, no amount of revenue sharing will keep the team here. And- to the argument that the minority group could buy out the other owners and keep them. Why would they if we are not profitable? I don't buy it. Why throw money away on a team that no one is supporting? We need to be the spurs, in as much as we are able to be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Memphisyank said:

I think its wishful thinking on your part. And you forget, the Grizzlies moved here. ;)

Not that it matters for the sake of this argument, but each of those markets you named are far larger than Memphis. And For everyone that didn't move you have one that did. And, we are I suspect one of the poorest big league markets as well, which means a smaller pool of the population can afford tickets. I am just saying we have a lot of things working against us

They moved to Memphis 18 years ago. Revenue sharing has since developed. In 2017 ESPN came out with a report that 14 teams operated in the red. Yet not one has moved. The Grizzlies were one of them after 7 straight playoff appearances so what did this achieve? It had like 6 playoff teams on the list that lost money. Most smaller market teams were on the list. They will likely all operate in the red even if they try to due to increased salaries. The article went on to state that these owners werent really in trouble. Again, attendance goes down but so does payroll.

My point is, hanging on to mediocrity wont mask them from being a small market team. They will always have to be budget conscious, winning or losing. Right now as they are winning they still have to be conscious because of the big salaries you have to keep just to be competitive. You guys sound like an abused spouse trying to keep her cheating husband around by cooking and cleaning extra hard. If Pera has big market dreams, being .500 every year wont stop them.

Focus on building your team with talent. Not trying to keep a few extra people in the stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Memphisyank said:

well said- Owners work in dollars and cents, NOI, and ROI. If those don't make sense, no amount of revenue sharing will keep the team here. And- to the argument that the minority group could buy out the other owners and keep them. Why would they if we are not profitable? I don't buy it. Why throw money away on a team that no one is supporting? We need to be the spurs, in as much as we are able to be. 

Spurs lost money too that year after they had to pay the tax

https://www.sbnation.com/2017/9/19/16334596/nba-teams-losing-money-revenue-profits-why-matters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Dwash said:

They moved to Memphis 18 years ago. Revenue sharing has since developed. In 2017 ESPN came out with a report that 14 teams operated in the red. Yet not one has moved. The Grizzlies were one of them after 7 straight playoff appearances so what did this achieve? It had like 6 playoff teams on the list that lost money. Most smaller market teams were on the list. They will likely all operate in the red even if they try to due to increased salaries. The article went on to state that these owners werent really in trouble. Again, attendance goes down but so does payroll.

My point is, hanging on to mediocrity wont mask them from being a small market team. They will always have to be budget conscious, winning or losing. Right now as they are winning they still have to be conscious because of the big salaries you have to keep just to be competitive. You guys sound like an abused spouse trying to keep her cheating husband around by cooking and cleaning extra hard. If Pera has big market dreams, being .500 every year wont stop them.

Focus on building your team with talent. Not trying to keep a few extra people in the stands.

The abused spouse statement was unnnessary and crass- 

I understand your point, I just dont agree. Making the playoffs especially in the west is not in any way mediocrity. In My opinion, a few years tanking risks losing the team. And- why would you want to surround our potential supserstar with a losing culture? at 19 you are still developing work habits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Blackwatch said:

In a market like Memphis, given the smaller pool of paying fans that can afford to go to games regularly (season tix, etc.), the Front Office has to be laser sharp in getting the right players in the right system to remain compelling for Memphis fans. The Grit- n- Grind stuff was not only marketing genius, but it was  recipe for success in Memphis, without having to win big (they never even won their division). A marketer told me recently that the best brands don't sell their product to people, but synergy  and aspiration.  If you are selling cars, there are those who want to make a statement about their net worth (luxury cars work for them). Others want to make a statement about how they value the environment (Subaru or Prius cars work for them). With NBA basketball, the Grizz style of G-N-G resonates with the city. An underdog, scrappy , resourceful, strong style that emblemizes what people in Memphis think about the city and ourselves. That is what sold the Grizz, not winning big, because they never did. 

So, the FO needs to keep that in mind when bring player in. Winning is a must, and winning big will cut across any marketing strategy. But short of getting a division title or a ring, getting the right players in the right style can sustain the Grizz through any "rebuild" they may have to go through. But losing for  sustained period is not an option at this point. Revenue sharing will not be enough to keep a person like Pera from moving the team if he could make more money in Seattle. 

 

28 minutes ago, Memphisyank said:

well said- Owners work in dollars and cents, NOI, and ROI. If those don't make sense, no amount of revenue sharing will keep the team here. And- to the argument that the minority group could buy out the other owners and keep them. Why would they if we are not profitable? I don't buy it. Why throw money away on a team that no one is supporting? We need to be the spurs, in as much as we are able to be. 

+100 well said both of you.  maybe once the team hits 30y old with numerous statues of icons in front of FEF then we can afford to gamble on the #Process.      These are the years a team builds up its cult folowing.  It has been a long hard fought battle but i have finally relinquished the "championship or bust" model.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blackwatch said:

In a market like Memphis, given the smaller pool of paying fans that can afford to go to games regularly (season tix, etc.), the Front Office has to be laser sharp in getting the right players in the right system to remain compelling for Memphis fans. The Grit- n- Grind stuff was not only marketing genius, but it was  recipe for success in Memphis, without having to win big (they never even won their division). A marketer told me recently that the best brands don't sell their product to people, but synergy  and aspiration.  If you are selling cars, there are those who want to make a statement about their net worth (luxury cars work for them). Others want to make a statement about how they value the environment (Subaru or Prius cars work for them). With NBA basketball, the Grizz style of G-N-G resonates with the city. An underdog, scrappy , resourceful, strong style that emblemizes what people in Memphis think about the city and ourselves. That is what sold the Grizz, not winning big, because they never did. 

So, the FO needs to keep that in mind when bring player in. Winning is a must, and winning big will cut across any marketing strategy. But short of getting a division title or a ring, getting the right players in the right style can sustain the Grizz through any "rebuild" they may have to go through. But losing for  sustained period is not an option at this point. Revenue sharing will not be enough to keep a person like Pera from moving the team if he could make more money in Seattle. 

That makes sense from a fans view point. The problem is that the team is Pera's. He doesn't view it any other way (IMO). He didn't buy the team for Grizzlies fans or for Memphis. He bought it for himself. To me, it looks like the F.O. operates with more concern for Pera's investment vs. what is best for the long term success of the franchise. Every gamble made since he bought the team has been for short term success, not future success. Drafting Conley, trading for Mayo, Gay, and Marc was all done for future success. Even Thabeet the bust was done with the idea of future success. I believe 5 years from now everyone will be shaking their heads in disgust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Father Pat said:

That makes sense from a fans view point. The problem is that the team is Pera's. He doesn't view it any other way (IMO). He didn't buy the team for Grizzlies fans or for Memphis. He bought it for himself. To me, it looks like the F.O. operates with more concern for Pera's investment vs. what is best for the long term success of the franchise. Every gamble made since he bought the team has been for short term success, not future success. Drafting Conley, trading for Mayo, Gay, and Marc was all done for future success. Even Thabeet the bust was done with the idea of future success. I believe 5 years from now everyone will be shaking their heads in disgust.

Thank you. The only long term piece doing anything was acquired unintentionally (JJJ). Can you imagine had this team not unexpectedly fell apart last year and have no JJJ? Hot mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good debate going on here.

My view, while not shared by many, is that when the team makes the playoffs for 7 consecutive years that would and should be viewed as a sucess of some sort. I would think it likely that the FO or owner would view it as such as well.

IF the stated goal of the owner is MUST WIN a championship, then the obvious blueprint is to spend over the cap to bring the best players in to achieve this.

I dont necessary think there's a good probability of being a championship team just by being in a big market city AND staying under the cap. You would need to fluke the draft for at least 3-5 years, take a punt on wheeling and dealing players and all these deals work perfectly or take losses (tank) for a few years straight but that alone wont work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All in all, it would seem the best way foward is to just put up with Chancun's uselessness, wait for him to drop of the books and not make any deals unless we get good 1st picks back or take on salary that's gonna stay on the books longer than Chancun's contract expiry, and then with Marc and Conley's contacts also coming up, either the stay for less (thereby opening up further cap flexibility) or move them for middling pieces and use the cap space to bring in a couple of borderline stars.

We just have to put up with Parsons for a bit longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont want rubbish that the Knicks wanna dump who cant shoot.

Also Temple >> Pumpfake Lee

Also if JaM wants to stay for the same money AND accepts a bench role, fine, otherwise move him, or let him drop off the books.

I don't just accept that if we have capspace only overpriced mediocre players are gonna come here. If we are in the playoffs or in the hunt, good players on crap teams will recognise us a a reasonable choice.

Also if we make a few smart buys like Anderson and Temple then we can assemble a very good team without busting the cap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now