[討論] 雷霆隊到底是很會選人還是很會養人?
昔日的雷霆三少 今年都是MVP的有利競爭者
往年最會"選人" 也是最會"養人" 同時也是最會"留人"的應該是聖安東尼奧馬刺隊
可惜雷霆對礙於小市場 在留人方面實在不行
總管S.Presti是馬刺體系出身的 在打造隊伍的理念如出一轍
回顧07到09年選秀
07第二順位K.Durant 在他之前的是G.Oden
08第四順位R.Westbrook 在他之前的是D.Rose/M.Beasley/O.J.Mayo
09第三順位J.Harden 在他之前的是B.Griffin/H.Thabeet
07不用說一定選KD 08沒選K.Love/B.Lopez 甚至是原本看好的J.Bayless
09年也放掉原先看好的R.Rubio 後面還有S.Curry/D.DeRozan
選人部份沒話說 但會不會其實是雷霆養人養不錯阿
假設這三年雷霆選到的是上述其他人 例如:Oden/Rose/Griffin或Beasley/Thabeet
結果是不是一樣現在大家稱讚的雷霆三少?
當年總教練S.Brooks雖然戰術 體系不怎麼樣 但帶心 團聚力這點蠻強的
三少即使分開至今也念念不忘恩師 季前鬧不合的巫師雙衛配合也越來越好
KD一進隊就有無限開火權 甚至後來練出百搭身手
西河這種腦衝 外線不佳 甚至進雷霆隊之前才剛打控衛沒多久
在別的教練體系下 很容易養壞
鬍子在替補席上練出了一身救火功夫和帶雜魚的本事
會不會是雷霆養人能力夠強而讓大家覺得當年選的很好
總之"留人"還是一大難題
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 60.250.201.140
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/NBA/M.1486359455.A.155.html
→
02/06 13:38, , 1F
02/06 13:38, 1F
→
02/06 13:39, , 2F
02/06 13:39, 2F
→
02/06 13:40, , 3F
02/06 13:40, 3F
推
02/06 13:41, , 4F
02/06 13:41, 4F
推
02/06 13:42, , 5F
02/06 13:42, 5F
推
02/06 13:42, , 6F
02/06 13:42, 6F
推
02/06 13:43, , 7F
02/06 13:43, 7F
推
02/06 13:44, , 8F
02/06 13:44, 8F
→
02/06 13:44, , 9F
02/06 13:44, 9F
推
02/06 13:44, , 10F
02/06 13:44, 10F
推
02/06 13:45, , 11F
02/06 13:45, 11F
推
02/06 13:45, , 12F
02/06 13:45, 12F
→
02/06 13:45, , 13F
02/06 13:45, 13F
→
02/06 13:47, , 14F
02/06 13:47, 14F
推
02/06 13:49, , 15F
02/06 13:49, 15F
→
02/06 13:49, , 16F
02/06 13:49, 16F
→
02/06 13:50, , 17F
02/06 13:50, 17F
推
02/06 13:51, , 18F
02/06 13:51, 18F
推
02/06 13:56, , 19F
02/06 13:56, 19F
推
02/06 14:00, , 20F
02/06 14:00, 20F
推
02/06 14:03, , 21F
02/06 14:03, 21F
推
02/06 14:04, , 22F
02/06 14:04, 22F
推
02/06 14:04, , 23F
02/06 14:04, 23F
推
02/06 14:06, , 24F
02/06 14:06, 24F
推
02/06 14:07, , 25F
02/06 14:07, 25F
→
02/06 14:07, , 26F
02/06 14:07, 26F
推
02/06 14:08, , 27F
02/06 14:08, 27F
推
02/06 14:09, , 28F
02/06 14:09, 28F
推
02/06 14:10, , 29F
02/06 14:10, 29F
→
02/06 14:10, , 30F
02/06 14:10, 30F
推
02/06 14:11, , 31F
02/06 14:11, 31F
→
02/06 14:11, , 32F
02/06 14:11, 32F
→
02/06 14:11, , 33F
02/06 14:11, 33F
推
02/06 14:12, , 34F
02/06 14:12, 34F
→
02/06 14:12, , 35F
02/06 14:12, 35F
→
02/06 14:12, , 36F
02/06 14:12, 36F
推
02/06 14:13, , 37F
02/06 14:13, 37F
推
02/06 14:17, , 38F
02/06 14:17, 38F
→
02/06 14:17, , 39F
02/06 14:17, 39F
→
02/06 14:30, , 40F
02/06 14:30, 40F
推
02/06 14:33, , 41F
02/06 14:33, 41F
推
02/06 14:34, , 42F
02/06 14:34, 42F
推
02/06 14:43, , 43F
02/06 14:43, 43F
推
02/06 14:51, , 44F
02/06 14:51, 44F
→
02/06 14:51, , 45F
02/06 14:51, 45F
→
02/06 14:51, , 46F
02/06 14:51, 46F
推
02/06 14:55, , 47F
02/06 14:55, 47F
推
02/06 15:00, , 48F
02/06 15:00, 48F
推
02/06 15:09, , 49F
02/06 15:09, 49F
推
02/06 15:22, , 50F
02/06 15:22, 50F
推
02/06 15:28, , 51F
02/06 15:28, 51F
→
02/06 15:28, , 52F
02/06 15:28, 52F
推
02/06 15:34, , 53F
02/06 15:34, 53F
→
02/06 15:34, , 54F
02/06 15:34, 54F
推
02/06 15:38, , 55F
02/06 15:38, 55F
推
02/06 15:42, , 56F
02/06 15:42, 56F
推
02/06 16:00, , 57F
02/06 16:00, 57F
推
02/06 16:41, , 58F
02/06 16:41, 58F
推
02/06 16:46, , 59F
02/06 16:46, 59F
推
02/06 16:47, , 60F
02/06 16:47, 60F
→
02/06 16:48, , 61F
02/06 16:48, 61F
推
02/06 17:35, , 62F
02/06 17:35, 62F
→
02/06 17:35, , 63F
02/06 17:35, 63F
噓
02/06 18:17, , 64F
02/06 18:17, 64F
推
02/06 19:01, , 65F
02/06 19:01, 65F
推
02/06 19:22, , 66F
02/06 19:22, 66F
推
02/06 19:35, , 67F
02/06 19:35, 67F
推
02/07 23:48, , 68F
02/07 23:48, 68F
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文:
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 4 篇):