To be fair, the Jazz have never done a proper rebuild. Tanking one year ever - after pissing away two years on the Al Jefferson teams - doesn’t count.
The Warriors and Cavs disagree, for starters. Also famously, the Spurs.
The Cavs didn't get a championship until Lebron had come back as a free agent. The Spurs tanked for one year with an already-talented roster. The Warriors did pick up Curry and Thompson across three years of tanking, and still tanked another year to only get Barnes out of it. Four years for one great player and one very good one.
Championships: 0
However, it often does not lead to championships.
I know you can be a bit of a purist, but I thought you were above magical thinking.
I wanna address this in particular: winning a championship is a rare thing for a franchise. They usually occur in runs/dynasties, which means that the odds of winning one if past is prologue is even lower than dumb luck would suggest.
Thank you.
I was only pointing out the limited effectiveness of tanking, not making a moral point.
No single thing. Tanking can help, but it also takes good drafting in later positions (Draymond Green in the second round, for example), good free agent recruitment, and not a small amount of luck.
"Often ineffective" =/= "bad".
The spurs? They traded robinson away for a full rebuild and picks? Huh, I thought robinson got hurt.
I know y'all want to grasp at whatever you can to rationalize this curse you've convinced yourselves exist, but the fact of the matter is that talent on the whole is concentrated heavily at the top of a draft and elite talent is what separates the fortunes of franchises. You can add all the caveats you want in the world and it won't change that.
I was simply pointing out that those who want to trade rudy and donovan for a bunch of picks and young players and tank will likely be disappointed as it almost certainly wont lead to a championship. Im not even saying im against that plan. Just saying that the best way to win a championship is to have a really good team with some all star players and then make that team better.
I didn't move the goalposts. I was never simply talking about tanking. I was also talking about trading away all stars and then tanking. You think we can tank with gobert and donovan? Im totally down with going the spurs route. Lets hold gobert and mitchell out next season and tank and then win the lottery and draft a player that is better than both of them and top 10 player of all time. Sounds good to me. But what really good teams traded away their all stars for a total rebuild and then tanked and then won a championship within, say, 7 years later? Give me a list. You say the sonics traded away ray allen. Was this just a year after they had the best record in the nba? Or were they not really a good team anyway when they made that trade? Same with warriors and monta. Where they a number one seed a year before trading him away?
Again, you're adding all of these caveats and it's really drifting from the point that the best and most reliable talent is found most often at the top of the draft. As important as the part where the Jazz are obviously all the way broken, they don't have ways to improve their talent in the near future. This team will just get worse and more checked out.
Im not talking about caveats. Im talking about what the jazz would need to do (trade gobert and mitchell and do a full rebuild and tank) and if any team had ever gone the assumed jazz route to a title. Has a really really good team ever traded away a couple all stars in their primes on long term deals for a full rebuild and then tanked and then won a title? That is what the jazz would be doing so it seems relevant to see if its ever been done and worked before.
Okay, that's well and good. But how do they get better.
