Skybox wrote:AaronB wrote:Skybox wrote:
the logic is too simple-also wrong
...we've only got one pick invested in PF - but I'd say we're set with PB
BRK gave up a lot to get Simmons, but he's a cadaver...still a position of need.
What you've invested is beyond irrelevant. Focus on what you need.
Sometimes logic is wrong (like your insistance on Simons being a worthwhile target for the Magic) and sometimes it is just different.
In this case, the logic is just different and not wrong. It is possible it could turn out wrong, but it is impossible to be even remotely predictive at this point about where Black ends up as a player.
I have proposed attempting to sign D Russell (a much better fit for the Magic than Simons, even though not a defensive wiz) in the off-season, but I still recognize this will negatively impact the development of Black.
Not sure that I like that. However, the more I see Black lately, the less I like his game and his overall makeup. His jersey thing with Dick was funny, but juvenile. I'm not sure I like handing over the reins of PG to someone that immature.
If this was college or High School, OK, but this is the pros and those are grown a$$ men on the other side fighting to get a paycheck.
Black just does not seem ready to me, and two months ago, I thought he would be much more of a contributor for next year.
Part of it might be the rookie wall, but there is a reason Coach has him even below Caleb. I think Caleb takes a very mature approach to the game, even if it is unidimensional.
I'm sure it's fun to come in and incorrectly use the word logic towards my interest in Simons, but you're still missing the WHOLE point of my post...the fact that we spent picks on guards should not preclude us from focusing on upgrading our weak spot ...guards. That's kind of in line with the way a few can't understand the concept of "sunk cost"...it doesn't mean anything specifically about BlackIt doesn't even imply that it wasn't a perfect pick for us. I think Black is going to be a good NBA player, maybe even a PG...hopefully, with ORL. But he clearly doesn't solve our needs today or for the near future...otherwise he'd be playing more for a team that clearly is lacking in the backcourt (outside of Suggs).
It just means that you start over, every f@#kin' day...assess your needs, your tools and assets at hand, and try to make a better team. You don't linger over how it looks, what you've spent...that's done. Maybe it's human nature by not wanting to get fired because your earlier investments aren't all home runs - but that's not LOGICal.
The problem is that you do not understand the concept of "sunk costs".
Sunk costs really only apply to decision theory when applied to fixed or depreciating assets.
I guess they might have some application to slowly appreciating assets.
None of which should apply to a rapidly appreciating 19 year old NBA player.
If Black for some reason shows that he is not capable of improvement, then he becomes a sunk cost.
If the Magic invest in another asset that negatively affects that appreciation of the asset (Black), then that now becomes a negative investment.
This is the only point that the other poster is making and is valid.
