S90 Town Hall 4

[Mike Lowry]

Does indecision hurt team building?
Or are rash decisions made on a whim more dangerous?
What is your experience of either holding off on a trade that you probably should have made, or diving into a trade without thinking it through, and regretting it after?

Rules: 1 point if you give thoughtful answers, which I will award after the timer ends for responses. The timer ends for responses at the moment the corresponding week's Sim is run.

Note: Use approximately 5 sentences as your bare minimum for 1 point. If you write 3 long, complex sentences, you'll still get a point. If you write 5, 3 word sentences, you will not get a point. Don't @ me.

Due: Deadline for Sim 6

[BigDaddyd8720]

To state the obvious, it really depends on your build and vision. If you’re a mid to lower tier team and just holding on to players, you’re hurting yourself. Even if you’re a good team, you should always be looking for ways to make your team better, if possible. In my experience, I had drafted Dominique Wilkins. Immediately I became a playoff team. But I had 3 first round exits in a row and had a decision to make. I decided to trade him and other starters away and enter a rebuild. That led to me eventually getting KJ, Pinckney, Perdue in drafts and I was able to make moves to get Bowie, Clyde, and worthy. So it worked out even better that I traded away a #1 pick in Wilkins when he was entering his prime years. On the opposite side of this, I had a good team last year and made a quick decision and my team went from looking like a good chance at winning the division to losing it and having a first round exit. But I was still able to come back even better this season. So ultimately, I think indecision does more harm to your team because it really just mean you have no movement where as even a quick decision could still set you on the path to get your team back to competing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[K-100]

Does indecision hurt team building?
Definitely, you should always be flexible to adapt when the situation warrants itself, but playing the game with hesitation will always limit your success.

Or are rash decisions made on a whim more dangerous?
Indecision is still worse. The game rewards creativity so making bold moves tend to payoff if there is some follow through with the execution. When you go all-in you just have to commit, once you hesitate then you start ground.

What is your experience of either holding off on a trade that you probably should have made, or diving into a trade without thinking it through, and regretting it after?
I think the only trade I've regretted is Doc Rivers to the Bucks. I just did not have any points to train him properly and Quail did an excellent job boosting him into a star. With regards to Sam Bowie, I really do not regret trading him right now. I just did not care enough to haggle more and figured my tank would be mad easy if I just dumped him. If the Mavs end up with Mutombo next season, it was worth it. If I end up losing the lottery, then it will probably be a decision that costs me the next few seasons.

[WigNosy]

Does indecision hurt team building?
Or are rash decisions made on a whim more dangerous?
What is your experience of either holding off on a trade that you probably should have made, or diving into a trade without thinking it through, and regretting it after?

The second question rather moots the first; given the second question the first should properly be, "is indecision or rash decision-making more dangerous?" Once you see this, it's obvious that the assumption baked into the line of questioning is that both "indecision" AND "rash decisions" are dangerous, meaning the first question is merely rhetorical.

So let's deal with "which is more dangerous." A single instance of indecision probably isn't dangerous to the long-term health of a team, particularly if you're "waiting for additional data" - however, a consistent pattern over time of paralysis due to indecision at every juncture is NOT "indecision" - it is actually itself a decision (to be passive/inactive) and I would posit that passivity is an incredibly dangerous thing for a team - because it keeps you from taking corrective action when it's clear corrective action is needed. On the other hand, the natural ebb and flow of, "doing well, getting poor draft picks, sucking, getting good draft picks" will naturally lead to the team having some ups and downs - at least you're getting ups.

On the other hand, rash decision-making can lead to exaggerations in this cycle, and the odds of a negative move (overcommitting to a contract, trading away a franchise superstar) are much greater than that odds of a positive move - simply because there are far more ways to ruin a team to build it. A couple of rash decisions that don't work out can cripple a team for a decade, while a rash decision that does work out isn't going to help you for more than 3-4 years.

So... I guess I think "Rash Decisions" are the more dangerous. I'll save the second question for a CWAC.

[Darth Vegito]

Does indecision hurt team building?
Or are rash decisions made on a whim more dangerous?
What is your experience of either holding off on a trade that you probably should have made, or diving into a trade without thinking it through, and regretting it after?

Rash decisions are fine. Just don't Frye up. And if you do minimize the risk. Trade for shorter 1-2 year contracts. If you miss if doesn't kill you long term. NEVER trade for or sign a long term deal that has a decent chance to go bad after a year or two. Rash decisions are fine, as long as you don't combine rash and stupid. Stick with rash and smart. And sure "smart" is subjective for some people. Not so much for me.

Indecision is the robber of joy. Period. The only way you can be indecisive is if you have 5 purple players and you're running thru the league which actually applies to 2 teams in my Conference. But otherwise, if you ain't trying then you won't. And we're talking about winning. It's all that matters. Win. So if you aren't all moves should be actively directed towards winning. Whether that's getting better in the draft or making moves. Either way, you should always be looking at which moves can improve your team even at small increments.

[Mike Lowry]

Might surprise some people with this one but I think the rash decision is more dangerous.
It's important to make the deals that make you better, but understanding what that means is complex, and it involves more than trading for better current attributes or production.
I'm going to go with regret on handling Calvin Natt.
First I traded the pick that landed Isiaah Thomas to get him. Then I traded him for Jack Sikma. The second part was a much bigger blunder than the first. But at least Chad won the ship because of it.