PDA

View Full Version : At what point does diminishing return exceed potential?



Giannis94
12-10-2017, 01:57 PM
Figured we could talk about this. And we can use "GOD Embiid" as the example.

The 76ers threw away multiple seasons to draft in the top 3, and then 2 full seasons with him.

They then gave God-Embiid $148 Million at a $4.7M per game played.
God embiid is still not playing back-to-back games.

So I am kind of wondering how we can keep talking about potential when he has yet to consistenly produce. We can use other players too.

Phrase the question like:

What does Ebmiid have to accomplish the rest of his career to justfy the ~$165M in contracts, plus the losing seasons, and everything else- to be considerd a sucess?

Becasue even if he does play the rest of the season, he's still missed the majority of 3 seasons. Which is a weird predicament. And hard to quantify financially, and in terms of general basketball talent.

I am not taking a shot at God Embiid. I am just wondering other people's oppinions. As we kind of breifly talked about or noted this in a oast thread.

Vee-Rex
12-10-2017, 02:04 PM
The key is to look at END GOAL.

What is the END GOAL?

In Embiid's case, you want to see him improve his game, but more importantly improve his durability. He looks fantastic and everyone's cheering for him, but how does he look after an entire season? How does he look vs. tough competition when he's not completely well rested? In April? A tough, physically demanding 7-game playoff series? June in the finals?

It's still a giant question mark. As such, I have a ceiling as to how much I actually praise Embiid until he shows me that he can maintain his impressive (and yes, it is impressive) level of production in more than 2 minutes per game, 2 games per month.

I'm obviously exaggerating to make a point (regarding Embiid's case). To the larger point: potential is what teams dream for, but there's a ton of cases where players never reach that potential. That's the next step: reaching it.

IndyRealist
12-10-2017, 04:09 PM
I don't think you know what diminishing returns means.

Jamiecballer
12-10-2017, 07:51 PM
Pretty much

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120A using Tapatalk

lol, please
12-10-2017, 08:01 PM
I don't think you know what diminishing returns means.This lol

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

STRIKERC
12-10-2017, 08:04 PM
Diminishing returns :confused:

At what point did Embiid become a detriment to the Sixers?

FlashBolt
12-11-2017, 01:41 PM
Diminishing return in this context involves: Did the Sixers make the right choice tanking or did they screw themselves over. It's certainly appropriate to use diminishing return if we take a look at the past few years. But this is just a troll question by a troll user who has a lovefest with Sixers fans because he loves Giannis too much. I believe that contract has contingencies so it's not exactly a guaranteed full amount. Second, Embiid's trade value is still very high. I would not be surprised if most NBA teams would be willing to take on his contract even with the risks involved. With that being said, the Sixers losing all those games and tanking isn't the end-all, be-all with Embiid. Ben Simmons is an absolute beast.. in case you didn't notice. Valid argument can be made that Ben can be a better player than Giannis. I mean, what does Giannis do better than Ben? He's more athletic and probably a better "scorer" but Ben hasn't really looked to score and is honestly playing his first NBA season. Ben is a better rebounder, passer, and looks to be capable of attacking the rim just like most NBA elites. So your diminishing return argument only works if Simmons/Embiid/Fultz all turn out to be injury prone because we all know Simmons/Embiid are absolute monsters when healthy.

More-Than-Most
12-11-2017, 01:49 PM
I don't think you know what diminishing returns means.

:laugh:

Giannis94
12-11-2017, 02:45 PM
Diminishing return in this context involves: Did the Sixers make the right choice tanking or did they screw themselves over. It's certainly appropriate to use diminishing return if we take a look at the past few years. But this is just a troll question by a troll user who has a lovefest with Sixers fans because he loves Giannis too much. I believe that contract has contingencies so it's not exactly a guaranteed full amount. Second, Embiid's trade value is still very high. I would not be surprised if most NBA teams would be willing to take on his contract even with the risks involved. With that being said, the Sixers losing all those games and tanking isn't the end-all, be-all with Embiid. Ben Simmons is an absolute beast.. in case you didn't notice. Valid argument can be made that Ben can be a better player than Giannis. I mean, what does Giannis do better than Ben? He's more athletic and probably a better "scorer" but Ben hasn't really looked to score and is honestly playing his first NBA season. Ben is a better rebounder, passer, and looks to be capable of attacking the rim just like most NBA elites. So your diminishing return argument only works if Simmons/Embiid/Fultz all turn out to be injury prone because we all know Simmons/Embiid are absolute monsters when healthy.

Ebmiid is not a monster. He is a GOD. But hes never healthy/present.

tredigs
12-11-2017, 03:21 PM
I'll try to take this seriously.

I'll say that the Sixers were last in home attendance % in 2014, 2015 and 2016. So their fans did not stick with them during the rebuild (not a knock), and they are only now coming back in full force. In that regard, they may have lost a little $ during that time frame in drafting Embiid due to the tank (who else should they have got?), but his injuries unintentionally extended the tank long enough to sign Simmons. And HIS injury unintentionally landed them another #1 pick (Fultz is an afterthought right now of course, but don't be surprised if this kid is an impact player next year). Simmons alone is going to keep fans in the seats, and he has the potential of a generational talent.

Embiid is also a potential generational talent, and frankly you just take the risk on him from a salary standpoint (especially considering they have massive $ provisions if he does not stay healthy, which was miraculous for them to pull off). This cap space has to be spent on someone, and you're far better off keeping him than finding middling players in free agency (it's next to impossible for your random team to sign a superstar). And they could still trade him if they got cold feet (another saying that I don't understand in the least btw but we'll use it anyway).

In short, yes, for them it was clearly worth it. Hot-Dog sales from 2014-2016 be damned.

warfelg
12-11-2017, 03:38 PM
And HIS injury unintentionally landed them another #1 pick (Fultz is an afterthought right now of course, but don't be surprised if this kid is an impact player next year).

Actually Simmons Injury landed us at the #5 pick, which because of a trade by Hinkie landed us at the #3 pick thanks to a swap, then we traded up to the #1 pick.

So no we didn't unintentionally land another #1 pick, we made moves that got us the number one pick.

Hawkeye15
12-11-2017, 03:39 PM
Let me know when my Wolves ever get equal return value for that Wiggins deal they just gave out..

tredigs
12-11-2017, 03:56 PM
Actually Simmons Injury landed us at the #5 pick, which because of a trade by Hinkie landed us at the #3 pick thanks to a swap, then we traded up to the #1 pick.

So no we didn't unintentionally land another #1 pick, we made moves that got us the number one pick.

Which likely will turn out to be the wrong end of the trade, but yes, you guys did trade up. Regardless, my point is that the injuries kept the tank chugging.

TheDish87
12-11-2017, 04:02 PM
christ, troll harder

Giannis94
12-11-2017, 04:06 PM
christ, troll harder

If I wanted to do that I would post a thread about how embiid is one of the biggest busts of all time. Which is actually somewhat true. If I wanted to to do that, I would post a thread like MTM did about giannis. But I won't. Until I need to. This one is a legitimate topic. And has credability.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
12-11-2017, 04:13 PM
Let me know when my Wolves ever get equal return value for that Wiggins deal they just gave out..

That Wiggins contract is bad. But i'm scared to see Jabari Parker get the same deal with acl injuries.

tredigs
12-11-2017, 04:14 PM
If I wanted to do that I would post a thread about how embiid is one of the biggest busts of all time. Which is actually somewhat true. If I wanted to to do that, I would post a thread like MTM did about giannis. But I won't. Until I need to. This one is a legitimate topic. And has credability.

It doesn't fully make sense and is just an attempted troll on Embiid, but that aside this post shows a special amount of ignorance/stupidity. There are two types of "busts". Players that never showed they could play to their draft expectations, and players that got hurt and never made it. Many players prove to be both. Embiid has already shown/is-showing that he has surpassed the talent level of your average #3 pick (and average #1 pick). Now he just needs to stay on the court, which for the most part he has this season. If he has even 3 impact seasons in the NBA (especially if it includes playoff impact), he will be far better off than most #3 picks.

Just stop being such a tool with this guy. The Bucks would give their left nut to switch him for Jabari if given the chance right now.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
12-11-2017, 04:24 PM
It doesn't fully make sense and is just an attempted troll on Embiid, but that aside this post shows a special amount of ignorance/stupidity. There are two types of "busts". Players that never showed they could play to their draft expectations, and players that got hurt and never made it. Many players prove to be both. Embiid has already shown/is-showing that he has surpassed the talent level of your average #3 pick (and average #1 pick). Now he just needs to stay on the court, which for the most part he has this season. If he has even 3 impact seasons in the NBA (especially if it includes playoff impact), he will be far better off than most #3 picks.

Just stop being such a tool with this guy. The Bucks would give their left nut to switch him for Jabari if given the chance right now.

Will Embiid be ready at the end of the season? He wont be use to it since 76ers haven't had playoffs in like what 5 years the final year of Holiday,Young,Hawes and what not. Parker will be ready in February. Embiid is out now with a sore back after taking back to back nights off. I'm sure he will be tweeting something about having a date if hes a all star this year.

tredigs
12-11-2017, 04:33 PM
Will Embiid be ready at the end of the season? He wont be use to it since 76ers haven't had playoffs in like what 5 years the final year of Holiday,Young,Hawes and what not. Parker will be ready in February. Embiid is out now with a sore back after taking back to back nights off. I'm sure he will be tweeting something about having a date if hes a all star this year.
I'd take my chances if I'm Philly, that's for damn sure. You take the potential game/series shifter over the injured/middling Jabari Parker. Everybody would. Especially the Bucks. That's NOW. And he was taken after Parker. So what are we talking about here? Just a confused troll.

Giannis94
12-11-2017, 04:34 PM
It doesn't fully make sense and is just an attempted troll on Embiid, but that aside this post shows a special amount of ignorance/stupidity. There are two types of "busts". Players that never showed they could play to their draft expectations, and players that got hurt and never made it. Many players prove to be both. Embiid has already shown/is-showing that he has surpassed the talent level of your average #3 pick (and average #1 pick). Now he just needs to stay on the court, which for the most part he has this season. If he has even 3 impact seasons in the NBA (especially if it includes playoff impact), he will be far better off than most #3 picks.

Just stop being such a tool with this guy. The Bucks would give their left nut to switch him for Jabari if given the chance right now.

I would not give up my left nut for embiid. I am happy that we don't have that headache. Jabari has played 3x more games than he has and has showed ability on the court.

If you want, I can post a thread topic and see what PSD thinks?

tredigs
12-11-2017, 04:44 PM
I would not give up my left nut for embiid. I am happy that we don't have that headache. Jabari has played 3x more games than he has and has showed ability on the court.

If you want, I can post a thread topic and see what PSD thinks?
You'd be fired on the spot if Embiid was offered for Jabari today and you turned it down.

Make the thread if the lopsided results will help you grasp reality, sure.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
12-11-2017, 04:44 PM
I'd take my chances if I'm Philly, that's for damn sure. You take the potential game/series shifter over the injured/middling Jabari Parker. Everybody would. Especially the Bucks. That's NOW. And he was taken after Parker. So what are we talking about here? Just a confused troll.

Just saying if Bucks had Embiid over Parker like you suggested. Then I said he probably wont be healthy at end of season for a playoff series. Since he cant last a whole season. Besides his new max contract. You guys lucky ya put in the terms of same recurring injuries this deal is null and void.

Vee-Rex
12-11-2017, 04:54 PM
I would not give up my left nut for embiid. I am happy that we don't have that headache. Jabari has played 3x more games than he has and has showed ability on the court.

If you want, I can post a thread topic and see what PSD thinks?

I would give up both my nuts then takes yours from you and offer them all together for Embiid.

IndyRealist
12-11-2017, 05:04 PM
I don't think trading nuts for players is allowed in the current CBA.

valade16
12-11-2017, 05:14 PM
Not only would any sane GM trade Parker for Embiid, you can argue Parker has bear negative trade value at the moment coming off a major injury and imminently needing a new deal of which he will likely demand mega money.

Giannis94
12-11-2017, 07:05 PM
Not only would any sane GM trade Parker for Embiid, you can argue Parker has bear negative trade value at the moment coming off a major injury and imminently needing a new deal of which he will likely demand mega money.
Bruh he's played I'm 3x the games God has. So He worth $714 million based on the contract God has. So as long as we get him for less than that, I'm cool with it.

valade16
12-11-2017, 08:06 PM
Bruh he's played I'm 3x the games God has. So He worth $714 million based on the contract God has. So as long as we get him for less than that, I'm cool with it.

And Embiid has been 3x as good, but I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

Parker is an above average player coming off a major injury and due for a massive payday. He's the worst possible type of player for a franchise to have at that point because he's good enough they are compelled to pay him a massive amount that he won't be worth and they have no guarantees he will even be that good again.

The Bucks are in a good position right now and have a lot of good pieces. If they're over the cap it won't matter how much they sign Parker for because it won't reduce their flexibility much.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
12-12-2017, 08:26 AM
And Embiid has been 3x as good, but I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

Parker is an above average player coming off a major injury and due for a massive payday. He's the worst possible type of player for a franchise to have at that point because he's good enough they are compelled to pay him a massive amount that he won't be worth and they have no guarantees he will even be that good again.

The Bucks are in a good position right now and have a lot of good pieces. If they're over the cap it won't matter how much they sign Parker for because it won't reduce their flexibility much.

I hate to trade Parker. But I hate to pay him $20M to $25M per and watch him get injured like Redd either. Hold our cap hostage. This wont happen but if Bulls or Jazz want him. I'm all ears and listening for a Mitchell or Markkanen. They wont do it but who knows. Bucks need a guy back on a rookie deal that's been decent. Hard to have like Giannis, Bledsoe, Middleton,Parker all on new deals. Even if Brogdon and a 2022 pick dumps Telly and Henson for Jordan.

Scoots
12-12-2017, 02:11 PM
And Embiid has been 3x as good, but I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

Parker is an above average player coming off a major injury and due for a massive payday. He's the worst possible type of player for a franchise to have at that point because he's good enough they are compelled to pay him a massive amount that he won't be worth and they have no guarantees he will even be that good again.

The Bucks are in a good position right now and have a lot of good pieces. If they're over the cap it won't matter how much they sign Parker for because it won't reduce their flexibility much.

The Warriors were in that situation with Curry, but he agreed to reasonable contract that turned into a great contract. Curry said he did it because of Bob Myers ... I don't know if Parker would take a reasonable deal for Jon Horst or Jason Kidd.

JAZZNC
12-12-2017, 02:21 PM
I hate to trade Parker. But I hate to pay him $20M to $25M per and watch him get injured like Redd either. Hold our cap hostage. This wont happen but if Bulls or Jazz want him. I'm all ears and listening for a Mitchell or Markkanen. They wont do it but who knows. Bucks need a guy back on a rookie deal that's been decent. Hard to have like Giannis, Bledsoe, Middleton,Parker all on new deals. Even if Brogdon and a 2022 pick dumps Telly and Henson for Jordan.

Yeah, definitely not getting Mitchell for a guy coming off two major knee injuries. Maybe swap ya a Favors.

KnickNyKnick
12-12-2017, 06:57 PM
Known Troll there... the trollercoaster has created a thread lol. Funny thing is Philly will probably be better off in a few years than your Bucks. Ben Simmons is almost averaging a Tripe double in his rookie year lol. Move over Russ Westbrook. And we haven't even seen Fultz yet.... So Embiid can take his time getting healthy while these guys get broken in. I cant imagine Simmons game in 2-3 years. But Phillys is headed towards being a winning team in my view. Along side NY and IND in the East. I think some players will be begging to come out Milwaukee in a few years... :bang: