Backcourt chaos…what’s next?

[Skybox]

Also, when you score a big hitter like Paolo (and, to a less highly visible extent, Franz)...you're on the clock. Improve aggressively or implode with overpays, extensions, passive depreciation of culture. Fish, Fish, Fish...then when you catch one, the job really starts in earnest. That's where we are and it's a good thing...No success to celebrate, just now becoming an opportunity not to be wasted.

It’s a 7-8 year clock and we’ve yet to start playing year 2. It’s simply too early to move for ‘best fit’ pieces now. Look how many years it took for teams like Milwaukee, Boston, Denver and Philly who have all been built through the draft (initially), who are present day contenders. It took them years to get here.

Part of the trick is knowing that if you have poor fitting pieces but one still has a higher ceiling than most of the available better fit guys, then you’ve gotta maximise the development to trade them for peak value. If we have to trade Fultz/Cole/Suggs/Black/etc, then let’s make sure we trade them for the guy who will put us over the top like AG, or Horford, or Paul, instead of moving guys for mediocre and overpaid guys now like FVV.

That sounds like some kind of sweatshop churning out players year after year ...for other teams.

You took Martins' 2030 thing to heart, huh?

[Skybox]

Why lock in mediocrity?...we had a "highly encouraging" 34 win season. There should be a substantial improvement in each young player and some attributed to chemistry/familiarity, but how far does that realistically take you? Why even have a GM? Take BPA year after year and hope they fit...uh uh

Also, when you score a big hitter like Paolo (and, to a less highly visible extent, Franz)...you're on the clock. Improve aggressively or implode with overpays, extensions, passive depreciation of culture. Fish, Fish, Fish...then when you catch one, the job really starts in earnest. That's where we are and it's a good thing...No success to celebrate, just now becoming an opportunity not to be wasted.

Your idea of improvement seems centered around getting rid of players. You’re willing to sacrifice too much in the name of shooting. More shooting is good, but not at the expense of defense, passing and driving.

Generally, you trade things you've piled up that you don't need for OTHER things...you don't just put them on the curb (unless you've held on until the whole league saw zero value...like Bamba, Ross, Fournier, AG haul was NOT much-but either was he, when showcased as a failed PG, instead of what he's perfectly suited for). I'm not the guy that hates our players...it's more about hating the fit. Generally, you get better players back when you give some value to the other team (hopefully, with their needs in mind).

We have 6 good guards...zero great ones and zero that are even clear NBA starters (apologies to the rooks-just being fair)...they're all good, with various traits...they just don't fit together or with our 2 sure things at forward. Don't cling to stuff that's not working....But, I'm definitely not advocating just throwing them away. Fultz, for example, if we hang on any longer, will be most valuable as an expiring. If he plays really well, his trade value will be compromised because he's potentially a "rental".

[Bensational]

Also, when you score a big hitter like Paolo (and, to a less highly visible extent, Franz)...you're on the clock. Improve aggressively or implode with overpays, extensions, passive depreciation of culture. Fish, Fish, Fish...then when you catch one, the job really starts in earnest. That's where we are and it's a good thing...No success to celebrate, just now becoming an opportunity not to be wasted.

It’s a 7-8 year clock and we’ve yet to start playing year 2. It’s simply too early to move for ‘best fit’ pieces now. Look how many years it took for teams like Milwaukee, Boston, Denver and Philly who have all been built through the draft (initially), who are present day contenders. It took them years to get here.

Part of the trick is knowing that if you have poor fitting pieces but one still has a higher ceiling than most of the available better fit guys, then you’ve gotta maximise the development to trade them for peak value. If we have to trade Fultz/Cole/Suggs/Black/etc, then let’s make sure we trade them for the guy who will put us over the top like AG, or Horford, or Paul, instead of moving guys for mediocre and overpaid guys now like FVV.

That sounds like some kind of sweatshop churning out players year after year ...for other teams.

You took Martins' 2030 thing to heart, huh?

What's the sweatshop churning? What Milwaukee/Boston/Denver/Phoenix/GSW/Philly did to build contenders?

I took a realistic timeline based on Paolo/Franz as a franchise core. What timeline are you working to? What rookie contract players have lead teams to finals?

[Skybox]

It’s a 7-8 year clock and we’ve yet to start playing year 2. It’s simply too early to move for ‘best fit’ pieces now. Look how many years it took for teams like Milwaukee, Boston, Denver and Philly who have all been built through the draft (initially), who are present day contenders. It took them years to get here.

Part of the trick is knowing that if you have poor fitting pieces but one still has a higher ceiling than most of the available better fit guys, then you’ve gotta maximise the development to trade them for peak value. If we have to trade Fultz/Cole/Suggs/Black/etc, then let’s make sure we trade them for the guy who will put us over the top like AG, or Horford, or Paul, instead of moving guys for mediocre and overpaid guys now like FVV.

That sounds like some kind of sweatshop churning out players year after year ...for other teams.

You took Martins' 2030 thing to heart, huh?

What's the sweatshop churning? What Milwaukee/Boston/Denver/Phoenix/GSW/Philly did to build contenders?

I took a realistic timeline based on Paolo/Franz as a franchise core. What timeline are you working to? What rookie contract players have lead teams to finals?

The idea of choosing BPA, regardless of fit, stockpiling talent, spending years developing redundant players just to hopefully trade them for, what- future picks to repeat the cycle?

There’s certainly a middle ground between building up your stock of young talent, then shifting towards building a team…it’s just my opinion that we are at a point where we could make an aggressive move to better balance our roster without really upsetting our upward trajectory.

Off the top of my head…weren’t Shaq, Penny and 3D a perfectly matched trio on rookie deals? Mix in some vet toughness (Grant) and some upper tier supporting players (Nick) that fit perfectly and accelerate the ascent.

[drsd]

The idea of choosing BPA, regardless of fit, stockpiling talent, spending years developing redundant players just to hopefully trade them for, what- future picks to repeat the cycle?

Clearly the Magic value Howard over Dick, so in retrospect I am happy the Magic did not go with the Duke'y at 6.

But equally I am happy the Magic did not draft Bilal Coulibaly or Jarace Walker. I guess the Magic could have gone with Taylor Hendricks at 6. But clearly the Magic didn't see it with him.

Orlando was never going to draft Cason Wallace at 6.

So: what choice did Orlando have but to draft Black? If there are players available, BPA over fit must be the correct call.

That being the case, I am fairly confident Howard will have a better NBA career than Black. Nothing to date has changed my mind on that.

[Skybox]

The idea of choosing BPA, regardless of fit, stockpiling talent, spending years developing redundant players just to hopefully trade them for, what- future picks to repeat the cycle?

Clearly the Magic value Howard over Dick, so in retrospect I am happy the Magic did not go with the Duke'y at 6.

But equally I am happy the Magic did not draft Bilal Coulibaly or Jarace Walker. I guess the Magic could have gone with Taylor Hendricks at 6. But clearly the Magic didn't see it with him.

Orlando was never going to draft Cason Wallace at 6.

So: what choice did Orlando have but to draft Black? If there are players available, BPA over fit must be the correct call.

That being the case, I am fairly confident Howard will have a better NBA career than Black. Nothing to date has changed my mind on that.

I actually like the picks...I'm more concerned about other moves to make the picks matter...or, they could have traded the picks or other players for existing NBA players who have a clear path to a significant role...I keep coming back to (a guy like) Tyler Herro...wouldn't he be a perfect fit? could we trade a couple players and/or a future pick to get him or someone just like him and wouldn't that be better than picking a non-shooter PG who we have no intention of replacing Fultz with?

I'm not saying they couldn't and won't trade next week or that I know what their intentions are with Fultz/Black...I just hope it's not draft BPA, regardless of fit and throw them on the pile..."sorting it out in camp" and "earning your spot" are HS concepts...this is high-stakes team building business with limited resources, limited minutes, limited time frames before other pressures from within and without present themselves.

[VFX]

Like I’ve said before, I would prefer that a strategy be formed according to the players on the team instead of dumping talent in order to conform to a strategy.

So much of the perceived dilemma is a result of people here blocking off options; people refuse to consider a Cole/Suggs/Fultz/Black guard rotation even though it keeps all of our productive point guards and offers more passing, driving and ballhandling to the starting lineup.

What is your realistic minute distribution between the guards?

[VFX]

The idea of choosing BPA, regardless of fit, stockpiling talent, spending years developing redundant players just to hopefully trade them for, what- future picks to repeat the cycle?

Clearly the Magic value Howard over Dick, so in retrospect I am happy the Magic did not go with the Duke'y at 6.

But equally I am happy the Magic did not draft Bilal Coulibaly or Jarace Walker. I guess the Magic could have gone with Taylor Hendricks at 6. But clearly the Magic didn't see it with him.

Orlando was never going to draft Cason Wallace at 6.

So: what choice did Orlando have but to draft Black? If there are players available, BPA over fit must be the correct call.

That being the case, I am fairly confident Howard will have a better NBA career than Black. Nothing to date has changed my mind on that.

Dick went to Kansas.

[J the Drafter]

Like I’ve said before, I would prefer that a strategy be formed according to the players on the team instead of dumping talent in order to conform to a strategy.

So much of the perceived dilemma is a result of people here blocking off options; people refuse to consider a Cole/Suggs/Fultz/Black guard rotation even though it keeps all of our productive point guards and offers more passing, driving and ballhandling to the starting lineup.

What is your realistic minute distribution between the guards?

The best two of Cole/Suggs/Fultz/Black start together as point guards in a dual-point guard lineup. The worst two of those four come off the bench for same. Black comes off the bench as a small forward. Gary is relegated to the end of the bench.

Things get crowded if Okeke is still in the team’s plans, but there are the options of running a three-headed monster at small forward or, possibly, trading for a backup center.

[VFX]

What is your realistic minute distribution between the guards?

The best two of Cole/Suggs/Fultz/Black start together as point guards in a dual-point guard lineup. The worst two of those four come off the bench for same. Black comes off the bench as a small forward. Gary is relegated to the end of the bench.

Things get crowded if Okeke is still in the team’s plans, but there are the options of running a three-headed monster at small forward or, possibly, trading for a backup center.

So nobody is classified as a shooter in any of those lineups as of now and Black splits minutes with Franz and Jett as well?

[J the Drafter]

The best two of Cole/Suggs/Fultz/Black start together as point guards in a dual-point guard lineup. The worst two of those four come off the bench for same. Black comes off the bench as a small forward. Gary is relegated to the end of the bench.

So nobody is classified as a shooter in any of those lineups as of now and Black splits minutes with Franz and Jett as well?

I wanted to say Howard would get time at small forward, not Black. Sorry about that.

The best shooter at the guard spots would be Cole, barring a return to form from Fultz. The lineup would sacrifice shooting for driving and playmaking.

[Residual-Heat]

Surprisingly, Cole and Suggs shot the same % last season on catch and shoot 3s.

Fultz-Suggs-Cole-Black guard rotation isnt going to work IMO. Why do we need dual PG line ups, when we have 2 point forwards?

I still think the best option is to trade Fultz+ for a PG/combo guard that can shoot. Markelle's trade value right now is (sadly) as high as it has been since arriving to Orlando.

[Skybox]

Dual PG lineups are only, historically, a thing when they’re both scorers too…kind of a mythical vision

Dame and CJ vision doesn’t support Fultz/Black pairing.

[fendilim]

Why lock in mediocrity?...we had a "highly encouraging" 34 win season. There should be a substantial improvement in each young player and some attributed to chemistry/familiarity, but how far does that realistically take you? Why even have a GM? Take BPA year after year and hope they fit...uh uh

Also, when you score a big hitter like Paolo (and, to a less highly visible extent, Franz)...you're on the clock. Improve aggressively or implode with overpays, extensions, passive depreciation of culture. Fish, Fish, Fish...then when you catch one, the job really starts in earnest. That's where we are and it's a good thing...No success to celebrate, just now becoming an opportunity not to be wasted.

Your idea of improvement seems centered around getting rid of players. You’re willing to sacrifice too much in the name of shooting. More shooting is good, but not at the expense of defense, passing and driving.

Its not as easy as that though.

We build our offense according to our best player’s strengths.

Fultz is nice to watch. When you watch him play, you’ll be amazed how easy basketball is to him. He can get to places whenever and wherever he wants with the ball, but he doesn’t offer anything elite that let’s you build around him.

Paolo and Franz are better, however. and their strength is clearly driving to the basket and creating opportunities for others. Fultz doesn’t play to their strengths.

Fultz doesn’t space the floor, Fultz’ defender leaves Fultz open and crowds the paint.

In fact, the only way for Fultz to be effective is to have the ball.

So at the end of the day, we need to ship out players that don’t fit around those two, long term. And unfortunately, Fultz… well… 5 years on… still can’t space the floor.

[fendilim]

Surprisingly, Cole and Suggs shot the same % last season on catch and shoot 3s.

Fultz-Suggs-Cole-Black guard rotation isnt going to work IMO. Why do we need dual PG line ups, when we have 2 point forwards?

I still think the best option is to trade Fultz+ for a PG/combo guard that can shoot. Markelle's trade value right now is (sadly) as high as it has been since arriving to Orlando.

Did it ever go up though?

[Residual-Heat]

Surprisingly, Cole and Suggs shot the same % last season on catch and shoot 3s.

Fultz-Suggs-Cole-Black guard rotation isnt going to work IMO. Why do we need dual PG line ups, when we have 2 point forwards?

I still think the best option is to trade Fultz+ for a PG/combo guard that can shoot. Markelle's trade value right now is (sadly) as high as it has been since arriving to Orlando.

Did it ever go up though?

I think at some point he had negative value given his contract and injuries. Now I would say he has positive value, though not much.

[jibba jones]

2 men enter, one man leaves....