ConSarnit wrote:I think with the most recent (and current iteration) of this team you can see why they wouldn’t outright tank. I base a lot of this on the projections most would have made for Barnes.
2023: FVV/OG/Siakam core + 2nd year Barnes (ROY), didn’t really make sense to tank from the get go. Probably didn’t expect Barnes to regress (or stagnate at best).
2024: Barnes/OG/Siakam/Poeltl. Again, didn’t really make sense to tear that team down given the expectations for Barnes.
It could be as simple as miscalculating the rate of Barnes progress. Had 2nd year Barnes played like 3rd year Barnes things are probably different. Barnes stagnating in year 2 changed the trajectory of the team. Still a miscalculation by the FO but if they expected Barnes to progress faster than he did then keeping the team together made some sense.
I think Barnes progress (outside of 3pt%) in 3rd year is directly attributable to FVV leaving and FO making it clear Siakam is getting traded (during the summer) thus placing more offensive role on Barnes. If FVV and Siakam stayed last year, Barnes wouldn't have had that progress.
ConSarnit wrote:If I had to guess our FO works like this: see where we are to start the season, give the guys a chance and if we need to tank to 5th worst that’s doable (and isn’t that much different than tanking out of the gate and finishing 3rd worst). I think they think they can get near the bottom if they need to (as seen this year and in the Tampa season). Off-season moves might tip the FO’s hand to their belief in this team. I also think there could be a “no tank” mandate from MLSE, which is something we can’t really know. They are a soulless piece of sh*t company so it’s easy to see them not wanting to hurt the bottom line for an entire season.
I don't buy the "no tank" mandate from MLSE.
1. One of the keys of Masai's last extension was his autonomy.
2. If "no tank" mandate existed, why did Masai call out "play-in for what" after Tampa? He would have kept his mouth shut after conducting the Tampa tank, instead of publicly declaring his disdain for a "no tank" mandate.
3. Masai said himself, he wanted to give his guys (FVV+PS+OG) a chance, and that's what delayed this semi-teardown and cost us a lot of value.
I think the "no tank to start the season" is Masai's own preference. I think he doesn't plan a multi-year tank like Presti and he makes plan only 1 season ahead - always try to compete, and then incrementally add to it (which doesn't work if you don't already have a true #1 option).