Official Speculation Thread ‘19-'20 I: Big decisions on the horizon

[j-ragg]

The talent at 16 this year seems as good as many of our lottery years. You could argue that almost any player we take at 16 could've been a top 6 pick in other drafts.

Hmm... I'd say it's the exact opposite. The ceilings of our prospect choices @ 6 were a lot higher than this year @ 16. Not even close imo.

[basketballRob]

The talent at 16 this year seems as good as many of our lottery years. You could argue that almost any player we take at 16 could've been a top 6 pick in other drafts.

Hmm... I'd say it's the exact opposite. The ceilings of our prospect choices @ 6 were a lot higher than this year @ 16. Not even close imo.

Okpala and Langford look pretty intriguing. Both with 7' wingspans that play SG.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[zaymon]

The talent at 16 this year seems as good as many of our lottery years. You could argue that almost any player we take at 16 could've been a top 6 pick in other drafts.

Hmm... I'd say it's the exact opposite. The ceilings of our prospect choices @ 6 were a lot higher than this year @ 16. Not even close imo.

Okpala and Langford look pretty intriguing. Both with 7' wingspans that play SG.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

I have the same feeling that this year top 6 is way weaker but middle of the draft stronger.

[VFX]

In other words you want to tank.

Trading for Conley absolutely does not hurt Orlando's ability to add pieces through the draft. The Magic have ALL their picks moving forward.

Even in the biased and negative scenario you just used where Magic are at most a fringe playoff team, just like you don't know what #16 will be in this supposedly bad draft, you also don't know what #14 or #18 or whatever will be.

What we do know is that Weltman and Hammond have a track record of finding quality rotation players in all areas of the draft, in the G-L, and overseas. OG Anunoby, P Siakim, D Wright, F VanVleet, M Brogdon, N Powell, K Birch, I Briscoe, W Iwundu etc. The ones that are 2nd rounders and non-drafted types have incredible value because they come with the lowest minimum non-guaranteed salary possible in NBA.

Winning environments ARE the most proven developmental context. Its not about "positivity" crap. Its about playing in a higher competitive context vs teams actually trying and where accountability to teammates matters. Its more meaningful reps in 82+ meaningful games. The foundation is playing to win...that is the foundation of ALL the best player development teams, which just so happen to also be some of the best franchises in the NBA.

What’s with you and tanking?
Not wanting to draft late in the first round for another 2-3 years, to a team that requires talent, isn’t being pro-tank. Acquiring Conley and being a fringe playoff team for 2-3 years is less important than building a team capable of competing years down the line. We’ve established a defensive identity. There isn’t an offense outside of Vuc and whatever vets that are acquired. That problem needs to be solved and won’t be answered drafting role players and watching vets shoulder the load for a mediocre team.

What is it with you refusing to acknowledge that what you want is for the Magic to tank. You want the Magic to not add players that will cause them to win enough games to hurt their odds at getting a high lottery pick. That is intentionally constructing rosters to not succeed in order to game a draft system based on odds. You can do whatever semantic gymnastics you want to convince yourself that its not losing intentionally...but its not changing what it is.

You are not building a team capable of competing years down the line by constructing rosters full of youth learning how to lose and learning how to play for their own stats. That's why that strategy always fails and why those teams are always broken apart.

You see centerpiece on this roster? You see a player that we can build around for multiple playoff runs and true contention down the line? Orlando has good players. Good isn’t good enough. Until Orlando finds a player that can earn becoming the face of the franchise, nothing else matters. Talent wins in the nba and you refuse to acknowledge that. Those players likely aren’t getting here drafting 16-20, not walking through the door in free agency, and more than likely wont be acquired for the value we have via trade. Could something break our way? Maybe. It’s about putting the franchise in a position to acquire those players. The years Orlando was competitive and fun to watch we had drafted Shaq, Dwight, etc. to build successful rosters around.

[Nyce_1]

If Fultz is healthy this trade can paradoxaly make us less competetive becouse we end up without starting level sg without potential rotation piece in #16 and without free agent flexibility in 2020. And if Conley injuries himself like he is used to boy oh boy...

If Fultz is healthy, it makes us less competitive? Huh? What?

I guarantee you our FO does not see Fultz exclusively as a PG. They see him a Guard with great skill. If he is healthy, he'll be on the floor as a PG or with whomever else is playing PG.

Hypothetically:
Conley/ Fultz/Gordon/Isaac/Bamba

...could be a heavily used lineup.

We traded for Fultz becouse his strength is playing on ball and now we want to force him off the ball ? Doesnt make sense to me. Fournier is a better fit next to Fultz and i am not even mentioning defense. 6.1+6.5 vs 6.5+6.7. Second option obviously more flexible. You take into account Conley age, injury risk, contract + #16 and i say its not worth it. Still i can be wrong and you right so i wont be too angry if that happens.

As a fan, I agree, but I just hope fans have an open mind about Fultz and how management potentially slots him with our core. I, like most, viewed him as strictly a PG, but when I heard how Lloyd and the FO view him, it opened me up to other potential possibilities.

I'd love to get a Klay to put next to him, but just for discussion, what if the plan is to use him like VO/Wade and pair him with another PG who can play off ball, defend, and hit 3s.

No clue what management is thinking until we see it.

[Popsicle1228]

What’s with you and tanking?
Not wanting to draft late in the first round for another 2-3 years, to a team that requires talent, isn’t being pro-tank. Acquiring Conley and being a fringe playoff team for 2-3 years is less important than building a team capable of competing years down the line. We’ve established a defensive identity. There isn’t an offense outside of Vuc and whatever vets that are acquired. That problem needs to be solved and won’t be answered drafting role players and watching vets shoulder the load for a mediocre team.

What is it with you refusing to acknowledge that what you want is for the Magic to tank. You want the Magic to not add players that will cause them to win enough games to hurt their odds at getting a high lottery pick. That is intentionally constructing rosters to not succeed in order to game a draft system based on odds. You can do whatever semantic gymnastics you want to convince yourself that its not losing intentionally...but its not changing what it is.

You are not building a team capable of competing years down the line by constructing rosters full of youth learning how to lose and learning how to play for their own stats. That's why that strategy always fails and why those teams are always broken apart.

You see centerpiece on this roster? You see a player that we can build around for multiple playoff runs and true contention down the line? Orlando has good players. Good isn’t good enough. Until Orlando finds a player that can earn becoming the face of the franchise, nothing else matters. Talent wins in the nba and you refuse to acknowledge that. Those players likely aren’t getting here drafting 16-20, not walking through the door in free agency, and more than likely wont be acquired for the value we have via trade. Could something break our way? Maybe. It’s about putting the franchise in a position to acquire those players. The years Orlando was competitive and fun to watch we had drafted Shaq, Dwight, etc. to build successful rosters around.

Tanking is no longer an effective strategy giving the rule changes and how they relate to draft odds. It is debatable on whether it was an effective strategy before the rule changes, but it hardly debatable post rule changes. You are so afraid of the Magic being a treadmill team that you would put us in lottery purgatory for many years to come.

This year was the first in many (seven) where we could see the beginnings of establishing a winning culture and making Orlando an attractive place to play again. After 7 years of lottery purgatory when the draft odds were better, this franchise will not go forward by going backwards again. In my opinion, two years of Conley with our young guys is much more attractive then trying to hit the lottery in hopes that a generational talent will not only fall to us, but actually develop into a the generational talent they are supposed to be. The winning culture starts now and we should continue to build on that.

I say all this with respect because we both want the same thing. We want the Magic to be successful.

[MagicFan101]

The talent at 16 this year seems as good as many of our lottery years. You could argue that almost any player we take at 16 could've been a top 6 pick in other drafts.

No one can see the future and say you’re wrong but that is very much against what just about anyone following the prospects is saying.

I would not describe this class as talented. I would describe it as deep.

I believe that we have a fantastic chance at finding someone at #16 who is every bit as impactful as guys who will go closer to #6 ... this year. That doesn’t mean it compares well to top 10 picks of previous classes.

The ceiling on players in the middle of this class is lower than many years but I see a lot of really strong safe picks.

This was the perfect season to make a push for the playoffs once it was clear a top 3 pick was extremely unlikely.

[ezzzp]

You see centerpiece on this roster? You see a player that we can build around for multiple playoff runs and true contention down the line? Orlando has good players. Good isn’t good enough. Until Orlando finds a player that can earn becoming the face of the franchise, nothing else matters. Talent wins in the nba and you refuse to acknowledge that. Those players likely aren’t getting here drafting 16-20, not walking through the door in free agency, and more than likely wont be acquired for the value we have via trade. Could something break our way? Maybe. It’s about putting the franchise in a position to acquire those players. The years Orlando was competitive and fun to watch we had drafted Shaq, Dwight, etc. to build successful rosters around.

Except that's not how it usually ends up...look around the NBA.

First of all, drafting high doesn't guarantee that "centerpiece." Despite the odds and media hype screaming "upside," its actually pretty uncommon.

When it does happen, its an extreme rarity that "centerpiece" carries that drafting team (who intentionally bottomed out for one or more seasons) to "contention" while with that drafting team.

Usually that player is gone the first chance at unrestricted free agency, often forcing their way out early. This is why the Supermax was invented, and now those teams are even more screwed as guys like John Wall - who is a "centerpiece" - essentially destroy that team's salary cap and chances at ever constructing a true contender.

On top of that, teams that bottom out for multiple years, are forced into rookie scale contract clusters that all mature into full NBA contracts in a cluster. The vast majority of time those players are too young to gauge accurate value...but the franchise is forced to give massive overpays based on "potential" and that they don't want to lose the asset they wasted an entire season (aka lots of $ losses) for. That's how you get Wizards, T Wolves etc.

...and even in the extremely rare situations when cluster drafting works, then it becomes impossible to pay everyone - creating ego/role issues and the team breaks apart (see OKC).

The route that HAS worked in modern era contender roster construction has actually been teams that construct rosters using all three levers of improvement: trades, free agency AND drafting and developing guys often found later in draft (aka Jokic, Giannis, P George, etc).

[VFX]

You see centerpiece on this roster? You see a player that we can build around for multiple playoff runs and true contention down the line? Orlando has good players. Good isn’t good enough. Until Orlando finds a player that can earn becoming the face of the franchise, nothing else matters. Talent wins in the nba and you refuse to acknowledge that. Those players likely aren’t getting here drafting 16-20, not walking through the door in free agency, and more than likely wont be acquired for the value we have via trade. Could something break our way? Maybe. It’s about putting the franchise in a position to acquire those players. The years Orlando was competitive and fun to watch we had drafted Shaq, Dwight, etc. to build successful rosters around.

Except that's not how it usually ends up...look around the NBA.

First of all, drafting high doesn't guarantee that "centerpiece." Despite the odds and media hype screaming "upside," its actually pretty uncommon.

When it does happen, its an extreme rarity that "centerpiece" carries that drafting team (who intentionally bottomed out for one or more seasons) to "contention" while with that drafting team.

Usually that player is gone the first chance at unrestricted free agency, often forcing their way out early. This is why the Supermax was invented, and now those teams are even more screwed as guys like John Wall - who is a "centerpiece" - essentially destroy that team's salary cap and chances at ever constructing a true contender.

On top of that, teams that bottom out for multiple years, are forced into rookie scale contract clusters that all mature into full NBA contracts in a cluster. The vast majority of time those players are too young to gauge accurate value...but the franchise is forced to give massive overpays based on "potential" and that they don't want to lose the asset they wasted an entire season (aka lots of $ losses) for. That's how you get Wizards, T Wolves etc.

...and even in the extremely rare situations when cluster drafting works, then it becomes impossible to pay everyone - creating ego/role issues and the team breaks apart (see OKC).

The route that HAS worked in modern era contender roster construction has actually been teams that construct rosters using all three levers of improvement: trades, free agency AND drafting and developing guys often found later in draft (aka Jokic, Giannis, P George, etc).

I don’t disagree with your assertions to talent acquisition, league trends, and probabilities. Where I disagree is the idea that it is essential to acquire a player(s) that vault organizations into that level of conversation. It can be done finding guys like Jokic, Giannis, etc., but that is the exception and not the standard.

Paul George doesn’t stay in OKC without Westbrook (drafted #4) and Toronto doesn’t land Kawhi without trading DeRozen (drafted #9). That’s the nature of the league. Porzingis probably doesn’t view Dallas as a good destination without them drafting Doncic (#3). You get the point... etc etc.

Again, you aren’t wrong that trades, free agency, and the draft are the ways of improving. However, the first two options mean and provide far less without having that foundational player. Yes, it’s not viable to have an entire team of youth having to pay them all at the same time. Decisions must be made, but those are easier decisions to make with multiple years of data on rookie contract players. That is far easier than making a bold trade for an oft injured vet on declining value or adding role players with specific skill sets in free agency.

The window is important, like you said, because of players pushing their way out on their own terms. Also, i agree that it matters that you have to field a competitive roster around them. That being said, there are of course a number of examples of franchises making bad decisions and failing to construct viable rosters around their stars. The Twolves, Pelicans, Wizards, and Knicks are all examples of this.

After finding that cornerstone player it all comes down to winning and building around them. Orlando doesn’t have that player, so it’s my opinion they continue searching instead of treadmilling. There is no one true way of building a contender. However, finding an elite two way player that you can build around is a good place to start.

[ezzzp]

I don’t disagree with your assertions to talent acquisition, league trends, and probabilities. Where I disagree is the idea that it is essential to acquire a player(s) that vault organizations into that level of conversation. It can be done finding guys like Jokic, Giannis, etc., but that is the exception and not the standard.

Paul George doesn’t stay in OKC without Westbrook (drafted #4) and Toronto doesn’t land Kawhi without trading DeRozen (drafted #9). That’s the nature of the league. Porzingis probably doesn’t view Dallas as a good destination without them drafting Doncic (#3). You get the point... etc etc.

Again, you aren’t wrong that trades, free agency, and the draft are the ways of improving. However, the first two options mean and provide far less without having that foundational player. Yes, it’s not viable to have an entire team of youth having to pay them all at the same time. Decisions must be made, but those are easier decisions to make with multiple years of data on rookie contract players. That is far easier than making a bold trade for an oft injured vet on declining value or adding role players with specific skill sets in free agency.

The window is important, like you said, because of players pushing their way out on their own terms. Also, i agree that it matters that you have to field a competitive roster around them. That being said, there are of course a number of examples of franchises making bad decisions and failing to construct viable rosters around their stars. The Twolves, Pelicans, Wizards, and Knicks are all examples of this.

After finding that cornerstone player it all comes down to winning and building around them. Orlando doesn’t have that player, so it’s my opinion they continue searching instead of treadmilling. There is no one true way of building a contender. However, finding an elite two way player that you can build around is a good place to start.

Actually no, it is not the exception, it is literally how nearly all contenders are constructed...trades + FA + draft/development.

Paul George did not join OKC - he was traded there. He forced his way out of the team that drafted him. If he was a free agent, he would be a Laker.

He stayed on in OKC because once LeBron joined LA he didn't want to be turned into role player in the LeBron sideshow...just like all the other top FA's that all stayed clear of LA that summer. AND, conveniently left out of your statement was that OKC had just been dumped by Durant their "centerpiece" and most important player they tanked for. OKC was forced to supermax Westbrook to salvage the situation...the results are they've been an easy out 1 first round team two years in a row and are in comically deep luxury tax - entering next season with a LOL $149m dollar payroll...all are repercussions of clustered drafting and the bad chemistry and cap issues that creates.

Kawhi forced his way out of the team that drafted him. Even the most respected franchise in the NBA can't control player movement. Also, not only was Kawhi a late pick, but so was DeRozan. The 9th pick isn't a high lottery pick...you have constantly harped about how the Magic failed to tank properly with picks in the 5-6 range. Now somehow the 9th pick is this amazing pick were you can find a "centerpiece" that allows you to trade for an MVP?

You assume that drafting is only way to acquire a foundational player. It is NOT. Houston and Boston are two key recent examples of that. Both franchises refused to "intentionally lose" (put all their eggs in the draft basket)...instead they chose to stay competitive (what you call treadmill/fringe playoff) and they built up the value of ALL their assets in that context and gradually flipped up until they had the right combination to strike when the right opportunity arose.

Years of NCAA data IS NOT more informative than actual NBA data from players who have actually played vs NBA competition AND fyi most also have that NCAA or overseas data on top of that.

Those teams you say made bad decisions...were forced to make those decisions because of the built-in financial timebomb in cluster drafting, and the culture-of-losing built into the mechanism of cluster drafting.

Acquiring a player like Conley is exactly how you build the value of your assets. You put them next to a player whose value in the NBA is high because of his reputation of making the players around him better. You improve development of everyone on roster, increasing the likelihood of either developing that "centerpiece", trading for that "centerpiece", or making free agency more appealing to acquire that "centerpiece."

[VFX]

I don’t disagree with your assertions to talent acquisition, league trends, and probabilities. Where I disagree is the idea that it is essential to acquire a player(s) that vault organizations into that level of conversation. It can be done finding guys like Jokic, Giannis, etc., but that is the exception and not the standard.

Paul George doesn’t stay in OKC without Westbrook (drafted #4) and Toronto doesn’t land Kawhi without trading DeRozen (drafted #9). That’s the nature of the league. Porzingis probably doesn’t view Dallas as a good destination without them drafting Doncic (#3). You get the point... etc etc.

Again, you aren’t wrong that trades, free agency, and the draft are the ways of improving. However, the first two options mean and provide far less without having that foundational player. Yes, it’s not viable to have an entire team of youth having to pay them all at the same time. Decisions must be made, but those are easier decisions to make with multiple years of data on rookie contract players. That is far easier than making a bold trade for an oft injured vet on declining value or adding role players with specific skill sets in free agency.

The window is important, like you said, because of players pushing their way out on their own terms. Also, i agree that it matters that you have to field a competitive roster around them. That being said, there are of course a number of examples of franchises making bad decisions and failing to construct viable rosters around their stars. The Twolves, Pelicans, Wizards, and Knicks are all examples of this.

After finding that cornerstone player it all comes down to winning and building around them. Orlando doesn’t have that player, so it’s my opinion they continue searching instead of treadmilling. There is no one true way of building a contender. However, finding an elite two way player that you can build around is a good place to start.

Actually no, it is not the exception, it is literally how nearly all contenders are constructed...trades + FA + draft/development.

Paul George did not join OKC - he was traded there. He forced his way out of the team that drafted him. If he was a free agent, he would be a Laker.

He stayed on in OKC because once LeBron joined LA he didn't want to be turned into role player in the LeBron sideshow...just like all the other top FA's that all stayed clear of LA that summer. AND, conveniently left out of your statement was that OKC had just been dumped by Durant their "centerpiece" and most important player they tanked for. OKC was forced to supermax Westbrook to salvage the situation...the results are they've been an easy out 1 first round team two years in a row and are in comically deep luxury tax - entering next season with a LOL $149m dollar payroll...all are repercussions of clustered drafting and the bad chemistry and cap issues that creates.

Kawhi forced his way out of the team that drafted him. Even the most respected franchise in the NBA can't control player movement. Also, not only was Kawhi a late pick, but so was DeRozan. The 9th pick isn't a high lottery pick...you have constantly harped about how the Magic failed to tank properly with picks in the 5-6 range. Now somehow the 9th pick is this amazing pick were you can find a "centerpiece" that allows you to trade for an MVP?

You assume that drafting is only way to acquire a foundational player. It is NOT. Houston and Boston are two key recent examples of that. Both franchises refused to "intentionally lose" (put all their eggs in the draft basket)...instead they chose to stay competitive (what you call treadmill/fringe playoff) and they built up the value of ALL their assets in that context and gradually flipped up until they had the right combination to strike when the right opportunity arose.

Years of NCAA data IS NOT more informative than actual NBA data from players who have actually played vs NBA competition AND fyi most also have that NCAA or overseas data on top of that.

Those teams you say made bad decisions...were forced to make those decisions because of the built-in financial timebomb in cluster drafting, and the culture-of-losing built into the mechanism of cluster drafting.

Acquiring a player like Conley is exactly how you build the value of your assets. You put them next to a player whose value in the NBA is high because of his reputation of making the players around him better. You improve development of everyone on roster, increasing the likelihood of either developing that "centerpiece", trading for that "centerpiece", or making free agency more appealing to acquire that "centerpiece."

Actually, yes. It is an exception that teams are being built around players drafted in the second round or much later first round of the draft. That’s why Jokic, Giannis, and Draymond are extraordinary examples at all.

Weird tangent about Paul George... You think he resigns there without Westbrook? Interesting take.

I never gave a pick range.... don’t know where you are getting that. Drafts vary and picks 1-8, give or take 2 picks, are usually decent prospects. Not always home runs, but there are rankings for a reason. Hence why I don’t think teams drafting 6-12 are all necessarily “tanking” per se. Some of them are just bad teams.

Funny examples with Houston and Boston. Both extremely rare situations not extending Harden and allowing him on the market. They will regret that decision forever. Boston acquiring Irving after getting fed up with Lebron to join up with other stars. Entirely situational exceptions. Neither of which would happen to Orlando in its current state.

The data I’m talking about is the duration of Rookie contract data, not NCAA data. Reading comprehension.

You have to have the players talented enough and that have the skill sets that make them elite centerpieces. Acquiring Conley will make players look better to an extent, but his presence isn’t going to make players become elite allstar talent if they lack that capability in the first place. That doesn’t make sense. They either have the talent potential or don’t. Memphis had him for all those years and didn’t draw talent. Now he’s getting replaced with the #2 pick in the draft at the same position. Go figure.

[Bensational]

Except that's not how it usually ends up...look around the NBA.

First of all, drafting high doesn't guarantee that "centerpiece." Despite the odds and media hype screaming "upside," its actually pretty uncommon.

When it does happen, its an extreme rarity that "centerpiece" carries that drafting team (who intentionally bottomed out for one or more seasons) to "contention" while with that drafting team.

Usually that player is gone the first chance at unrestricted free agency, often forcing their way out early. This is why the Supermax was invented, and now those teams are even more screwed as guys like John Wall - who is a "centerpiece" - essentially destroy that team's salary cap and chances at ever constructing a true contender.

On top of that, teams that bottom out for multiple years, are forced into rookie scale contract clusters that all mature into full NBA contracts in a cluster. The vast majority of time those players are too young to gauge accurate value...but the franchise is forced to give massive overpays based on "potential" and that they don't want to lose the asset they wasted an entire season (aka lots of $ losses) for. That's how you get Wizards, T Wolves etc.

...and even in the extremely rare situations when cluster drafting works, then it becomes impossible to pay everyone - creating ego/role issues and the team breaks apart (see OKC).

The route that HAS worked in modern era contender roster construction has actually been teams that construct rosters using all three levers of improvement: trades, free agency AND drafting and developing guys often found later in draft (aka Jokic, Giannis, P George, etc).

I don’t disagree with your assertions to talent acquisition, league trends, and probabilities. Where I disagree is the idea that it is essential to acquire a player(s) that vault organizations into that level of conversation. It can be done finding guys like Jokic, Giannis, etc., but that is the exception and not the standard.

Paul George doesn’t stay in OKC without Westbrook (drafted #4) and Toronto doesn’t land Kawhi without trading DeRozen (drafted #9). That’s the nature of the league. Porzingis probably doesn’t view Dallas as a good destination without them drafting Doncic (#3). You get the point... etc etc.

Again, you aren’t wrong that trades, free agency, and the draft are the ways of improving. However, the first two options mean and provide far less without having that foundational player. Yes, it’s not viable to have an entire team of youth having to pay them all at the same time. Decisions must be made, but those are easier decisions to make with multiple years of data on rookie contract players. That is far easier than making a bold trade for an oft injured vet on declining value or adding role players with specific skill sets in free agency.

Most current contenders can be traced back to a draft pick origin. It's true that what often vaults a team from playoffs to contenders is having one premier talent, and then being able to another to them. Those additions often come via trade, and often off the back of an asset that was once a draft pick. Look at this year's contenders:

GSW - Curry, Klay, Dray - all drafted. Durant signed as FA.
MIL - Giannis, Brogdon - drafted. Middleton traded with Knight for Jennings (drafted). Bledose traded for Monroe who signed as FA.
TOR - Kawhi traded for DeRozan (drafted). Siakam drafted. Lowry traded for a future 1st. Gasol traded for Val (drafted).
POR - Lillard, McCollum - drafted.

All tying back to draft picks. However... apart from Durant, none of those picks were higher than a #5 pick, and he was the least important name amongst them.

#2 - Durant
#5 - Valanciunas
#6 - Lillard
#7 - Curry, Monroe
#9 - DeRozan
#10 - McCollum, Jennings
#11 - Klay
#15 - Kawhi, Giannis
#18 - Bledsoe
#24 - Lowry
#27 - Siakam
#35 - Draymond
#36 - Brogdon
#48 - Gasol

So really, it just emphasises the importance of maximising your picks and getting the best value regardless of where you're drafting, and then handling those assets effectively. This really does highlight that talent can be found all over the draft, and those pieces can still be packaged for other pieces that help you win.

In our case, we've got Gordon who's developing well, and Isaac, Bamba and Fultz who are all still very raw/unproven and developing. That's still 4 pieces that, if managed well, could become or could net us a Kawhi, Middleton, Gasol, etc. We're just in that unfortunate limbo of not knowing what we've got with 3/4's of them.

[MasterGMer]

You never know how BIG is going to turn out to be... Issac could easily become another Siakam.

[zaymon]

I agree with most things here i preached the importance of building your assets value for a long time but...
Why the flying f Conley ? Becouse he is all star and he is available in trade talks ? So we suddenly cant wait for a better occasion ? If we talk about developing Gordon and Isaac, Dj is as good or even better to do it becouse he is much better shooter, he has no problem to involve others and dont dominate the ball. We are competetive with Dj, Fournier and Vucevic so this argument regarding Conley also fails. If we want to remain competetive our priority is Vucevic not Conley and if Fultz is healthy Conley makes more sense on Grizzlies backing up Morant than here. I am not opposed to trade for some veteran help but i dont think Conley of all people makes much sense

[SOUL]

I agree with most things here i preached the importance of building your assets value for a long time but...
Why the flying f Conley ? Becouse he is all star and he is available in trade talks ? So we suddenly cant wait for a better occasion ? If we talk about developing Gordon and Isaac, Dj is as good or even better to do it becouse he is much better shooter, he has no problem to involve others and dont dominate the ball.

I half agree with you, it's probably not worth it in the state we're in right now.. especially if we are losing assets. Though I 100% disagree that DJ has "no problem involving others" and "doesn't dominate the ball", the guy dribbles the air out of the ball and can't see over bigger defenders. Conley would make a big difference, but not a big enough difference that justifies trading for him, IMO.

[zaymon]

I agree with most things here i preached the importance of building your assets value for a long time but...
Why the flying f Conley ? Becouse he is all star and he is available in trade talks ? So we suddenly cant wait for a better occasion ? If we talk about developing Gordon and Isaac, Dj is as good or even better to do it becouse he is much better shooter, he has no problem to involve others and dont dominate the ball.

I half agree with you, it's probably not worth it in the state we're in right now.. especially if we are losing assets. Though I 100% disagree that DJ has "no problem involving others" and "doesn't dominate the ball", the guy dribbles the air out of the ball and can't see over bigger defenders. Conley would make a big difference, but not a big enough difference that justifies trading for him, IMO.

He is just not good enough to break defenses consistently but his usage rate 17,2% shows he is actually very unselfish. We still dont appreciate him enough

[SOUL]

I agree with most things here i preached the importance of building your assets value for a long time but...
Why the flying f Conley ? Becouse he is all star and he is available in trade talks ? So we suddenly cant wait for a better occasion ? If we talk about developing Gordon and Isaac, Dj is as good or even better to do it becouse he is much better shooter, he has no problem to involve others and dont dominate the ball.

I half agree with you, it's probably not worth it in the state we're in right now.. especially if we are losing assets. Though I 100% disagree that DJ has "no problem involving others" and "doesn't dominate the ball", the guy dribbles the air out of the ball and can't see over bigger defenders. Conley would make a big difference, but not a big enough difference that justifies trading for him, IMO.

He is just not good enough to break defenses consistently but his usage rate 17,2% shows he is actually very unselfish. We still dont appreciate him enough

Yeah, the playoffs encapsulated what he is as a player. Moments of brilliance like G1, but then games where he is largely ineffective and can't penetrate or set people up that well. Ultimately a top tier backup, which is why we need Fultz to work out. The reason why DJ has been such a journeyman is because the years where he HASN'T shot well, he isn't really doing much out there. But his shooting saved us a lot of games this season.

[VFX]

Except that's not how it usually ends up...look around the NBA.

First of all, drafting high doesn't guarantee that "centerpiece." Despite the odds and media hype screaming "upside," its actually pretty uncommon.

When it does happen, its an extreme rarity that "centerpiece" carries that drafting team (who intentionally bottomed out for one or more seasons) to "contention" while with that drafting team.

Usually that player is gone the first chance at unrestricted free agency, often forcing their way out early. This is why the Supermax was invented, and now those teams are even more screwed as guys like John Wall - who is a "centerpiece" - essentially destroy that team's salary cap and chances at ever constructing a true contender.

On top of that, teams that bottom out for multiple years, are forced into rookie scale contract clusters that all mature into full NBA contracts in a cluster. The vast majority of time those players are too young to gauge accurate value...but the franchise is forced to give massive overpays based on "potential" and that they don't want to lose the asset they wasted an entire season (aka lots of $ losses) for. That's how you get Wizards, T Wolves etc.

...and even in the extremely rare situations when cluster drafting works, then it becomes impossible to pay everyone - creating ego/role issues and the team breaks apart (see OKC).

The route that HAS worked in modern era contender roster construction has actually been teams that construct rosters using all three levers of improvement: trades, free agency AND drafting and developing guys often found later in draft (aka Jokic, Giannis, P George, etc).

I don’t disagree with your assertions to talent acquisition, league trends, and probabilities. Where I disagree is the idea that it is essential to acquire a player(s) that vault organizations into that level of conversation. It can be done finding guys like Jokic, Giannis, etc., but that is the exception and not the standard.

Paul George doesn’t stay in OKC without Westbrook (drafted #4) and Toronto doesn’t land Kawhi without trading DeRozen (drafted #9). That’s the nature of the league. Porzingis probably doesn’t view Dallas as a good destination without them drafting Doncic (#3). You get the point... etc etc.

Again, you aren’t wrong that trades, free agency, and the draft are the ways of improving. However, the first two options mean and provide far less without having that foundational player. Yes, it’s not viable to have an entire team of youth having to pay them all at the same time. Decisions must be made, but those are easier decisions to make with multiple years of data on rookie contract players. That is far easier than making a bold trade for an oft injured vet on declining value or adding role players with specific skill sets in free agency.

Most current contenders can be traced back to a draft pick origin. It's true that what often vaults a team from playoffs to contenders is having one premier talent, and then being able to another to them. Those additions often come via trade, and often off the back of an asset that was once a draft pick. Look at this year's contenders:

GSW - Curry, Klay, Dray - all drafted. Durant signed as FA.
MIL - Giannis, Brogdon - drafted. Middleton traded with Knight for Jennings (drafted). Bledose traded for Monroe who signed as FA.
TOR - Kawhi traded for DeRozan (drafted). Siakam drafted. Lowry traded for a future 1st. Gasol traded for Val (drafted).
POR - Lillard, McCollum - drafted.

All tying back to draft picks. However... apart from Durant, none of those picks were higher than a #5 pick, and he was the least important name amongst them.

#2 - Durant
#5 - Valanciunas
#6 - Lillard
#7 - Curry, Monroe
#9 - DeRozan
#10 - McCollum, Jennings
#11 - Klay
#15 - Kawhi, Giannis
#18 - Bledsoe
#24 - Lowry
#27 - Siakam
#35 - Draymond
#36 - Brogdon
#48 - Gasol

So really, it just emphasises the importance of maximising your picks and getting the best value regardless of where you're drafting, and then handling those assets effectively. This really does highlight that talent can be found all over the draft, and those pieces can still be packaged for other pieces that help you win.

In our case, we've got Gordon who's developing well, and Isaac, Bamba and Fultz who are all still very raw/unproven and developing. That's still 4 pieces that, if managed well, could become or could net us a Kawhi, Middleton, Gasol, etc. We're just in that unfortunate limbo of not knowing what we've got with 3/4's of them.

Agreed. Maximizing draft value and finding players of that ilk to build around is the goal. Which is why trading picks and creating further distance from that objective is a shortsighted bad decision. Orlando can talk about making those trades when they know they have that particular player. In my opinion, that player doesn’t exist on this roster yet. I’d be happy to be wrong about that, but I don’t think I am.

[Viper1500]

Signing one makes zero sense to me. Lets be last years team, yet worse? I'd MUCH rather sign neither

[NotACat]

I still don't think our FO trades for a PG, but our FO would like Jrue Holiday more than Mike Conley. I think there's a chance we take a swing on Jrue and offer DJ Augustine + Moz + 16 (depending on who's available).

Jrue is bigger and more versatile than Conley, and Jrue could play alongside Fultz if he gets healthy and we can move on from Fournier (who will be expiring next year). He's also on contract till 2022 which could be problematic since he's about to be 29yo.

Jrue-Fournier-AG-Isaac-(Vuc/Bamba).



Again, our FO has stated financial flexibility is a priority so I don't think we make drastic changes to our roster this offsesason, but wanted to put this out there as food for thought.