SOUL wrote:There are very obvious holes in the front office's strategy (2nd rounders), but they're building the team how I wish they started the last one (obviously having more draft luck back then would've helped too). The thing is, people keep grouping the Hennigan years and the Vuc-Fournier-Gordon years with the Franz-Banchero years and while I get the appeal to do that, there is clearly a line in the sand where a rebuild era was needed and begun again. In only 2 years, they have improved from being bad to a damn decent team that was competitive in a lot of games last year.
However, what I've been trying to word amongst the paragraphs of anger about this team that I honestly didn't see coming after the season we had is that we are set up well for the future.
There are obvious points of contention:
1. When is evaluation over?
2. When should we make moves to start improving the team aggressively?
3. What if they extend players and create logjams?
For 1, I think evaluation is in different stages for many players. We've found that Cole is an ideal sixth man, we're seeing that Fultz is a solid starter but may not be anything more than that if his shot doesn't improve, we're seeing that WCJ has become a reliable, dependable big, and we've seen Suggs start very slow but have that "it" factor on defense that all playoff teams need in a guard.. even if he doesn't become what people thought he should become. It also showed them that they didn't feel comfortable with any of them as the future yet.
Most of those things we would not have known last year at all if we didn't let it play out, and that information is valuable. And guess what? Some weren't even cool with evaluating last year, which is crazy to me considering we were literally off of 1 year of rebuilding.
For 2, I liken us to a team like the Knicks.. but a bit different. They were also a team that were in a playoff drought for a long time, started becoming decent last the last 2-3 years but have a different dynamic with Brunson now. They have the Villanova connection like we have the Michigan connection, they're a team that hasn't done a lot of aggressive movements in the draft (slightly more in FA last year, but still, their roster has had some tweaks but nothing huge), but I think our upside is way higher.
The difference is, they had RJ and Randle as building blocks before they found their Brunson, and we have Franz and Paolo as our building blocks before we find our own Brunson, whoever that is, whatever role he is, I think he will be coming in the next year.
For 3, it just doesn't make sense to worry about it. I see people overrate and underrate player ceilings all the time, and someone who you think is/isn't part of the future suddenly becomes a player you never saw coming. Mikal Bridges was seen as a super luxury connector piece/top tier role guy, now he possibly can be a #2 guy on a winning roster. We see guys in baseball like Alek Manoah go from Cy Young candidate to getting demoted to AAA baseball in a year. Brunson was unplayable in the playoffs for Dallas one year and now he was the Knicks' hero.
I'd rather lose a bit of value from overevaluating than move guys all willy nilly because we decided a year or two is too long and we need to make our Ibaka move again. I get that people may not trust the front office to make a move at the right time, or they may extend players and things won't make sense.. but for me I want to see what happens first before bringing out any pitchforks.
Ok fine. I'll bite.
There are obvious points of contention:
1. When is evaluation over?
2. When should we make moves to start improving the team aggressively?
3. What if they extend players and create logjams?1. Pepe already kinda went into the evaluation part of this. It's a very easy thing to say you are perpetually "evaluating young talent". Isaac, Okeke, Carter, Fultz, Harris and the rest of the role players are not
young talent. For as much as Cole is young and has grown he really isn't either, or can't be coming up on his deal. I agree to some extent that this doesnt really apply in every scenario, but it cant just be used as a blanket statement to not make roster decisions for all the guys I just listed. Were they really fielding calls on Bamba and Bol prior to the absolute last minute or were they evaluating?
Was Evan, Ross, and Bamba still being "evaluated" up until they were traded for nothing*? *second round picks in this organization ARE nothing* Again, this "evaluating" talk has been around before the teardown and it doesnt take 3-4 seasons to know if a player needs to be moved or not. Especially if we are talking about handing out multiple larger deals and not staggering contracts, just look at the list of guys expiring soon. Do we retain value on those deals?
2. To me this makes sense after doubling down on Paolo and Franz as the core guys. This "evaluating" isn't really "evaluating" its
waiting. As expressed, they cannot and should not retain a majority of this roster. There aren't enough minutes or money to go around. Moreover, the roster doesn't really make sense still with those decisions in the air. Black needs to be as good or better than Fultz (he is). He also needs to show he doesn't have the glaring flaws he does in a very short timeframe. Jett Howard can't be a bust. He needs to be the answer for the poor floor spacing. The rest of the money should be retaining Cole/Suggs IMO and filling out whoever else is left after Paolo and Franz. Orlando isn't New York, LA, or Miami and never will be. We already know who is getting the 2 max level deals here. The rest is filling out a roster around those two. It doesn't take another 2 more seasons to figure that out given what we already know.
3. Huh? When do they worry about it then? They need to make these trades sooner than later. Next season is basically a "watch these guys develop more" season and see what the rookies can bring. Fultz, Harris, Cole, Chuma, and Goga are up after this season. After that its Suggs, Isaac, and Franz. Decisions should be made because thats the majority of the roster in 1.5 seasons. If they wait they are merely resigning guys to larger deals to be moved when they
feel comfortable. Sorry, but thats a waste of time, money and value.
They should absolutely not be taking a page out of their first seasons here as the FO by sacrificing long term cap flexibility for short term success that wont mean anything anyway because half of those guys will eventually be moved regardless. Make a decision between Fultz and Cole. Period. You can't pay both AND split minutes with Black going into next season. Thats not an "Ibaka" situation. Thats called managing assets appropriately.
There are two things being discussed here that I don't think people understand fully. Number one is that making these decisions doesn't mean you are outright trading a bunch of players in a blockbuster move. You don't have to "go all in" by moving Fultz or Isaac's corpse for cap relief, late picks, vets, or prospects. Second, there is addition by subtraction in regards to minutes and cap flexibility in those moves. They should make a lot of these smaller decisions to add up to a bigger one. Avoiding handcuffing themselves to a bad contract is just as good as trading a guy that cant get minutes for one that will.
People say "wait and see" with this front office like we didn't watch them hand Hennigans roster new contracts and wait around until they absolutely couldn't pull the "evaluation" talk for the 4th consecutive season. Sorry but they've lost the benefit of doubt by playing that card already. I said it before AG got his contract with them that it pissed me tf off. I'm too lazy to go back and find the receipts. Basically the writing was on the wall that his return would be bad. That's why Im bringing up the same thing with Fultz and how it will be handled with this new rook. You know its going to happen because its in their track record. I know for certain you will not be upset at all when they hand everyone new deals. It will probably be "welp whatdoyado?!?".
