Skybox wrote:eyriq wrote:Skybox wrote:
I don't disagree but, to me, the most sustainable way to do it is to get there quick, while your stars are still very young and inexpensive, if you're incredibly lucky enough (ORL is) to have them ready at such a young age. Nothing more sustainable than to create a situation with a much longer window...adjustments can be made, as needed, as long as the two or three main pieces aren't getting into max territory...It's true we have a big window-many of us disagree on how vital it is not to waste any of it.
Just because Giannis and Garnett, etc took a few years to be relevant is not reason to pump the brakes...Paolo & Franz are not Wemby or Coulibally, etc...they are near complete already.
Fair. I think the general objective is to get as good as possible organically and maintain maximum flexibility to re-tool once organic development is played out, but if some talent matures quicker I think it shortens the evaluation window. We may not get to fully evaluate AB and Jett but it seems like they are definitely going to be thorough with Suggs. We'll see what Suggs, Franz, and Paolo can do in the playoffs, and then likely start cashing in this flexibility during an off-season re-tool.
Absolutely...I've made it clear I'm in for Fireworks at the Trade Deadline (and the last one, and the summer, etc)...but I can totally buy in to taking some baby steps too. But, sticking with a Fultz, for example (instead of simply pitching a few srps for something functional) is like "punishing" Paolo & Franz, retarding their organic development for no apparent reason, except Weltman's greedily clinging to his pawns (srps) rather than going on any kind of offensive.
I don't care that Jett and AB are coming along slowly, or being held back, or whatever is happening...but not swapping unsuitable vets for more suitable vets (even just as a short-term band aid) is like putting handcuffs on your MVP's.
I could argue both sides of a Dejounte Murray deal - that's high stakes, of course. But no excuse, IMO, for just sitting on a PG rotation of Fultz and AB as we sail into a strong position with a favorable schedule and playoffs ahead. No great expectations but why not make it a little easier. I'm saying a "developmental season" is fine, but it doesn't have to look like player abuse...even a minor substitution, at the expense of a srp or two (or three even) makes for better quality development for all of the remaining players.
I don't love Tyus Jones' ceiling and I don't foresee him leading any team to the promised land. But he does everything efficiently. He makes very few mistakes. Steve Clifford would love him. Even as a rental, like coming in to do a seminar on ball movement for a few months, would be okay with me. Ideally, and realistically, he returns to his position of "Best backup PG in the league" after his visiting stint as "Professor of Playing the Right Way" in ORL. Don't build around him, don't pay him $17m x 4...but don't do nothing to help your players play better- that is certainly what "development" should be about. I don't feel bad about the idea of a couple of srps for that...it's how I see Ingles...he's not going to be here for the glory days, but he'll have made an impact on the development of some of the key guys before he's gone.
I think there is no arguing with you about helping Franz and Paolo. I agree we make it unnecessary tough for them. There were also rumours about us talking about Tyus Jones and Murray and Weltman confirmed they held talks.
Where we dont agree is asset management. You think 2nds doesnt matter and front office clearly disagrees. I think srp matter to this front office despite common belief. If they didnt they would not trade them into the future for many years, they would just use them righ away.
The analysis is simple. Front office value's 2-3 srp more than having more chance for the 6th seed.
If we want to be totally accurate its 2-3 srp and lower position in the draft vs more chance for 5-6th seed.
. 