Minnesota Sports Forum

If I was a 76ers fan I would be fine with what they're doing (because they could potentially build a dynasty like that) UNLESS I was a season ticket holder during these down years.

I wouldn't be up for shelling out money to watch a team TRYING to tank.

mrhockey89 wrote:If I was a 76ers fan I would be fine with what they're doing (because they could potentially build a dynasty like that) UNLESS I was a season ticket holder during these down years.

I wouldn't be up for shelling out money to watch a team TRYING to tank.

Dynasty?

They're 3 years from being a playoff team even in the east. Then it's a few years to be a contender, then to actually win multiple titles. That's a hell of a long wait for a chance at a dynasty.

Thunder looked like they would be a dynasty. They've won 0 titles. Dynasty? Give me a break

alex, I agree they're a ways away, but a team like the 76ers isn't going to be a contender any other way. And it's always fun to watch a team grow. The point is that they're all going to be about the same age, and they're all extremely high upside guys. If they connect on even 2-3 of them, then they'll be near the top of the standings every year once they get some years under their belt.

mrhockey89 wrote:alex, I agree they're a ways away, but a team like the 76ers isn't going to be a contender any other way. And it's always fun to watch a team grow. The point is that they're all going to be about the same age, and they're all extremely high upside guys. If they connect on even 2-3 of them, then they'll be near the top of the standings every year once they get some years under their belt.

I disagree. It sucks to watch a team grow. I hated watching the Wolves "grow" in their 25 win seasons. I would much rather of been like the Mavs, who have been retooling rather then growing

Growing is why Love wants to leave because "grow"="losing". Dirk and Duncan sign for less because they know their owners are trying to retool and win not "grow"

Give me the Mavs approach over the 76ers 100/100 times

25 wins is the early point of the growing process alex, you know that. Maybe you didn't like watching Rubio as a rookie, but most of us did. The offense looked transformed prior to his injury. Growing isn't why Love wants to leave. He wants to leave for 2 reasons, 1) the team is growing too slowly and 2) he never liked Minnesota, he's always had visions of grandeur

And what are you talking about the Mavs and Spurs? Those are teams that are already established. COMPLETELY unrelated. In fact, didn't the Spurs only get into a position to get TD in the first place because David Robinson got injured and they essentially tanked?

mrhockey89 wrote:25 wins is the early point of the growing process alex, you know that. Maybe you didn't like watching Rubio as a rookie, but most of us did. The offense looked transformed prior to his injury. Growing isn't why Love wants to leave. He wants to leave for 2 reasons, 1) the team is growing too slowly and 2) he never liked Minnesota, he's always had visions of grandeur

And what are you talking about the Mavs and Spurs? Those are teams that are already established. COMPLETELY unrelated. In fact, didn't the Spurs only get into a position to get TD in the first place because David Robinson got injured and they essentially tanked?

Compared to a team that made the playoffs like a Nuggets and watching them in the playoffs despite the fact they had no chance to win the title? Yea I'll take the Nuggets. I think a lot of fans just forgot what it's like to root for a team in the playoffs. your second reason for Love is just propaganda from the anti Love crowd.

Spurs tanked for one year after coming off a pretty nice run. And it wasn't so much tanking as it was with Robinson going down for the year. Thats apples to oranges compared to what the 76ers are doing

alex, the point is the Spurs aren't the Spurs if they don't end up with the #1 pick and bottom out, even if just for a year. The fact that they had a superstar that was injured that helped make that happen doesn't make it prove your point. You HAVE to build off key pieces, and I can't think of a team ever that didn't build that way (by landing a star and building around him). Even the Heat don't do what they just did if they didn't bottom out and get Wade during a great draft.

mrhockey89 wrote:alex, the point is the Spurs aren't the Spurs if they don't end up with the #1 pick and bottom out, even if just for a year. The fact that they had a superstar that was injured that helped make that happen doesn't make it prove your point. You HAVE to build off key pieces, and I can't think of a team ever that didn't build that way (by landing a star and building around him). Even the Heat don't do what they just did if they didn't bottom out and get Wade during a great draft.

Lakers? Kobe was the 13th pick, Shaq was a FA

Pistons? Sheed and Wallace were trades, Chauncy was a FA

alex, I don't have time to argue with you...but p-lease. If you think you're pulling the Kobe/Shaq card on me you're crazy.

Pistons are your 1 team that I might give you, but that team had a LOT of pieces fall their way.

Easier then saying the 76er way is the way to go. No team in history has had success doing it that way. Mostly because I can't think of another team that has taken tanking to the extent as the 76ers have. Probably because no other teams want to be that big of an asshole to their fanbase.