ImageImageImageImage

GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion

Moderators: Knightro, SOUL, Def Swami, Howard Mass, UCFJayBird, UCF, ChosenSavior

ezzzp
Head Coach
Posts: 6,216
And1: 3,329
Joined: Aug 25, 2009
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#121 » by ezzzp » Sun Jun 2, 2019 1:35 am

Skin wrote:
ezzzp wrote:
Skin wrote:Can you expound on this? Why are you calling them trade assets in 2-3 years?

Is that the time frame of usefulness that you think they would have here?


Frame of usefulness? No.

It is the window for when the Magic should be in full consolidation mode, if they haven't already done so. It is the window when Fultz and Isaac will need extensions or hit RFA. It is also the window when Gordon hits free agency.

In other words it is the window when the Magic will have to decide on most of their key assets. That means trade decisions. Two of those assets will be on rookie scale contracts - which are very difficult to match and normally need to be packaged with other players for a transaction to work.

FYI, Vucevic will be 30 in year two, 31 in year three. Very much still in age where high production is common. Ross is younger than him.

But what happens to them in your ideal scenario in 2 years? You want to shop them around?


I'm not clairvoyant so answering that question is a fools errand. There is no specific "ideal" scenario since I don't know what the roster's performance, health etc will be like in two years.

GM's can accumulate and diversify their asset cache to lay the groundwork and prepare around things that are knowns. Things like when contracts are set to expire, when extensions are due, what the projected cap is and how their team's contract context fits into that etc.

If you want a fantasy answer, then the ideal scenario in 2 years is that the Magic win a championship.
User avatar
Skin
RealGM
Posts: 14,884
And1: 6,840
Joined: Jul 03, 2009
   

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#122 » by Skin » Sun Jun 2, 2019 3:28 am

ezzzp wrote:
Skin wrote:
ezzzp wrote:
Frame of usefulness? No.

It is the window for when the Magic should be in full consolidation mode, if they haven't already done so. It is the window when Fultz and Isaac will need extensions or hit RFA. It is also the window when Gordon hits free agency.

In other words it is the window when the Magic will have to decide on most of their key assets. That means trade decisions. Two of those assets will be on rookie scale contracts - which are very difficult to match and normally need to be packaged with other players for a transaction to work.

FYI, Vucevic will be 30 in year two, 31 in year three. Very much still in age where high production is common. Ross is younger than him.

But what happens to them in your ideal scenario in 2 years? You want to shop them around?


I'm not clairvoyant so answering that question is a fools errand. There is no specific "ideal" scenario since I don't know what the roster's performance, health etc will be like in two years.

GM's can accumulate and diversify their asset cache to lay the groundwork and prepare around things that are knowns. Things like when contracts are set to expire, when extensions are due, what the projected cap is and how their team's contract context fits into that etc.

If you want a fantasy answer, then the ideal scenario in 2 years is that the Magic win a championship.

That's not answering my question but nice dodge. Just wondering why you referenced them as trade assets in 2 years.

People always think that they are making good signings when they make them. But then you end up with contacts like Harris, Fournier, Biyombo and Mozgov that end up strapping a team down and are difficult to get value for.

If you have it in your head that Vuc and Ross are trade assets in 2-3 years then that's not showing very much faith in them in the first place. I have no problems bringing them back as transition pieces with that 2-3 year timeline in mind. The problem is they are most likely going to want a 4-5 year deal... and together that's a heavy cap burden over a long period of time.

Next year's salary cap is $109M. Giving Vuc ~$25M and Ross ~$15M is a move that WeHam will have to be fully confident in. No room for thinking they are hopefully trade assets in 2-3 years.
User avatar
MagicMatic
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,796
And1: 5,631
Joined: May 30, 2016
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#123 » by MagicMatic » Sun Jun 2, 2019 5:07 am

Skin wrote:
ezzzp wrote:
Skin wrote:But what happens to them in your ideal scenario in 2 years? You want to shop them around?


I'm not clairvoyant so answering that question is a fools errand. There is no specific "ideal" scenario since I don't know what the roster's performance, health etc will be like in two years.

GM's can accumulate and diversify their asset cache to lay the groundwork and prepare around things that are knowns. Things like when contracts are set to expire, when extensions are due, what the projected cap is and how their team's contract context fits into that etc.

If you want a fantasy answer, then the ideal scenario in 2 years is that the Magic win a championship.

That's not answering my question but nice dodge. Just wondering why you referenced them as trade assets in 2 years.

People always think that they are making good signings when they make them. But then you end up with contacts like Harris, Fournier, Biyombo and Mozgov that end up strapping a team down and are difficult to get value for.

If you have it in your head that Vuc and Ross are trade assets in 2-3 years then that's not showing very much faith in them in the first place. I have no problems bringing them back as transition pieces with that 2-3 year timeline in mind. The problem is they are most likely going to want a 4-5 year deal... and together that's a heavy cap burden over a long period of time.

Next year's salary cap is $109M. Giving Vuc ~$25M and Ross ~$15M is a move that WeHam will have to be fully confident in. No room for thinking they are hopefully trade assets in 2-3 years.


Here’s the answer- they won’t be. They are more valuable to Orlando because there is no established offense, which it hasn’t been addressed for years. The chance they go up in value will mean Orlando has failed developing the youth to the extent that their numbers will go up even with age and less potential.
ezzzp
Head Coach
Posts: 6,216
And1: 3,329
Joined: Aug 25, 2009
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#124 » by ezzzp » Sun Jun 2, 2019 6:17 am

Skin wrote:
ezzzp wrote:
Skin wrote:But what happens to them in your ideal scenario in 2 years? You want to shop them around?


I'm not clairvoyant so answering that question is a fools errand. There is no specific "ideal" scenario since I don't know what the roster's performance, health etc will be like in two years.

GM's can accumulate and diversify their asset cache to lay the groundwork and prepare around things that are knowns. Things like when contracts are set to expire, when extensions are due, what the projected cap is and how their team's contract context fits into that etc.

If you want a fantasy answer, then the ideal scenario in 2 years is that the Magic win a championship.

That's not answering my question but nice dodge. Just wondering why you referenced them as trade assets in 2 years.

People always think that they are making good signings when they make them. But then you end up with contacts like Harris, Fournier, Biyombo and Mozgov that end up strapping a team down and are difficult to get value for.

If you have it in your head that Vuc and Ross are trade assets in 2-3 years then that's not showing very much faith in them in the first place. I have no problems bringing them back as transition pieces with that 2-3 year timeline in mind. The problem is they are most likely going to want a 4-5 year deal... and together that's a heavy cap burden over a long period of time.

Next year's salary cap is $109M. Giving Vuc ~$25M and Ross ~$15M is a move that WeHam will have to be fully confident in. No room for thinking they are hopefully trade assets in 2-3 years.


That is absolutely not a dodge. Its a real answer, you just hate it because it destroys the same flawed narrative you keep trying to push.

Do you know what level each player will be performing at in 2 years? Do you know what the roster's health will be? No you 100% do not. How in the world are you assessing what specific moves will need to be made if you can't even name with any certainty who is even on the roster in 2 years?

I have already explained to you what the relationship is with that time range and them as trade assets in that span. If you want it explained to you again, scroll up and re-read...and no it absolutely has nothing to do with me thinking they won't be performing well at that point. That negative bias is yours...it is 100% NOT mine.

Cherry picking examples of contracts to fit your argument doesn't convince anyone. Every team has its very own shifting context and demands when it comes to asset retention and acquisition. Every single team has good signings and every single team has bad signings...NOBODY can predict future production. Why are you acting like you can? Teams make decisions to meet the demands of their context and that often requires paying players - sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. That's the reality of competitive sports.

Just because you have formulated this totally arbitrary $25m and $15m price tag, it does not mean that is what the market price will be. Even if that is what the FO ends up paying them, they absolutely have room to strategize about how they could also be used as trade assets in 2-3 years...LMAO thats absolutely ridiculous.
ezzzp
Head Coach
Posts: 6,216
And1: 3,329
Joined: Aug 25, 2009
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#125 » by ezzzp » Sun Jun 2, 2019 7:20 am

MagicMatic wrote:
Here’s the answer- they won’t be. They are more valuable to Orlando because there is no established offense, which it hasn’t been addressed for years. The chance they go up in value will mean Orlando has failed developing the youth to the extent that their numbers will go up even with age and less potential.


Actually, the answer is - you do not know.

Unless you are clairvoyant you have no idea how either of those players will produce through their next contract.

If anything the many studies on NBA aging point to your statement being more than likely wrong. For both, their next deal will be mostly in their prime (Ross 28-31 / Vuc 29-32). That is the age range when the majority of players have their highest production and for many their biggest impact towards winning.

Spoiler:
Image


Skilled high bbIQ bigs who's game isn't reliant on athleticism commonly age well. So Vucevic has a very good chance to be effective all the way through his next contract. Ross has less chance to age well as guards whose game is reliant on their speed and athleticism do decline after 30, BUT with the increase in 3PT shooting that decline is now much less dramatic.

Also, Vucevic and Ross having value does not mean that the core didn't develop. That's absolutely ridiculous. There can be more than two good players on a team. In fact that composition of quality prime vets + emerging youth is often the alchemy that produces many deep playoff teams and legit contenders.
pepe1991
RealGM
Posts: 10,599
And1: 8,417
Joined: Jan 10, 2016
   

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#126 » by pepe1991 » Sun Jun 2, 2019 10:58 am

MagicMatic wrote:
pepe1991 wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
Please enlighten me Pepe. What is my linear way of thinking?

Being in the middle of the pack in the nba is only acceptable if you are being carried by, or relying upon, young players with tremendous upside. If not, the ceiling is too low and you are missing either draft talent or Free agency draw. AG and JI are solid players that can contribute. However, they haven’t proven to be “carrying” the the team for the first statement to hold water. Especially if Vuc and Ross were the primary options offensively this season in contract years. There hasn’t been a window for this team to start pushing their chips in, and that’s because we haven’t had the chips to do it.

That’s not a linear way of thinking. In so many words it just means “don’t be a treadmill team”. That still opens up a lot of possibilities for development and team building. It’s not some revolutionary idea.



it is.

pepe1991 wrote:You said it lot of times ( and i can find it and qoute you ) that you are fine with return to lottery just to build in right way. That's linear way of thinking.


The lottery and trades are the two ways Orlando finds and adds elite talent in its current position. Those are two primary ways. One of them doesn’t require giving up assets. Doesn’t sound linear to me.

pepe1991 wrote:Every team is in middle of nowhere until it becomes good. And if anything, we learned that most teams had to mortgage future in order to contend.
In your mind, at least what i can figure from your posts, teams like Raptors, who were in ECF in 2016, than got swept TWICE in a row in 2017 and 2018 IN SECOND ROUD, are theadmill teams and they should have enter their rebuilding around 2017. Because, according to your logic, they were wasting time. Not too good to win it all. Not too bad to be in lottery. That's what you preach for a year now.
By same logic Spurs blew it , they should have blow whole roster up in 2013, after they failed to win it all.


No. Getting past the first and second round of the playoffs isn’t what I consider a failure. Managing to do it
with good watchable basketball makes it even better and worthwhile. Would it have been frustrating to be the Raptors in previous seasons? Yeah, but they had the assets to make those changes, primarily the allstar they drafted, and they are paying off.



pepe1991 wrote:You also want no part of Ross or Vučević because, according to you they don't fit timeline. Yet, you also claim that Gordon, Isaac and Bamba are not good enough to win it all, so what is your timeline ? Imaginary situation where Magic will be back in lottery in 2020 and find Michael Jordan ?
Not to mention that Vučević and Ross are "old" according to you, yet younger or about same age as Curry, Durant, Harden, Klay, Cousins , Lebron, Leonard, Lowry, Gasol, Lillard, Westbrook, Goerge...


What? I want no part in Vuc not because he’s “old” but because he inhibits Orlando into playing an archaic style of basketball that’s ultimately inefficient with his supporting cast. He’s 28 and had his (barely) first allstar season and is expecting big money. Where’s the ceiling? It’s not too high. That’s baffling to you that people would have qualms?

pepe1991 wrote:So what i get from you, is that you want your superstar first. Yet you never even once mentioned how you want to get him. You don't really propose trade, you don't really propose FA, you always claim that XY is unrealistic ( and most of time it's true ) . So what should anybody who reads from your figure than that you want to tank to oblivion until you find your guy ? Nevermind fact that odds of winning lottery AND getting player you want are abysmal but whatever.


Trade or draft. Those are the options. It always has been and always will be until players take notice that Orlando will be good for the foreseeable future, have room to grow, and aren't being led be mediocre to fringe allstar talent. I never said anything about needing to tank to get this done. Its just constantly interpreted that way because people can’t seem to separate the idea of a team from being poorly built with that of losing on purpose. Do you think if Vuc walked this team wouldn’t be abysmal for never addressing the lack of scoring options? It would be, but again, I fall into the category of people that would rather they attempt to acquire elite talent for 2-3 years, rather than they settle on a boring .500 product for another 5.

. There hasn’t been a window for this team to start pushing their chips in, and that’s because we haven’t had the chips to do it.

Window never exists until you open it. Raptors just proved it. You will never ever in sports or in life in general have perfect situation. You simply have to take risk. And in nba it's probably easiser than in any other sport pay no high price of making terrible mistake. Look at Nets. They made biggest fuc***y of all time with draft picks ,yet missed 3 freaking years of playoffs. And look at them now, back in FA as potentially big fish.

In whole east only Knicks are taem who didn't make it to playoffs for longer than 3 years. 3 years is pretty much optimal amount of time your rebuild can last. Everything after that leads to overlapping of rookie scale contract players who become more expensive.



The Raptors window was open when DeRozen became an allstar at 24 in 2013-14 and subsequently Lowry in 14-15. That’s lasted them until now. They are in the finals, by trading the player that opened that window for them in the first place for a top 3-5 player currently. I’m arguing we need that player(s) to open that window if they aren’t currently on this roster. That happens through trades or the draft and that isn’t “thinking linearly”.



Trade or draft. Those are the options. It always has been and always will be until players take notice that Orlando will be good for the foreseeable future, have room to grow, and aren't being led be mediocre to fringe allstar talent. I never said anything about needing to tank to get this done. Its just constantly interpreted that way because people can’t seem to separate the idea of a team from being poorly built with that of losing on purpose. Do you think if Vuc walked this team wouldn’t be abysmal for never addressing the lack of scoring options? It would be, but again, I fall into the category of people that would rather they attempt to acquire elite talent for 2-3 years, rather than they settle on a boring .500 product for another 5


How can you propse draft as strategy yet claim tanking isn't only logical path to your strategy ? You want superstar. How many superstars, by percentage, are being drafted outside top 8 per year ?

Pick 5: 117 selections (8.2% total)

^by now this is already over half of all All-star selections

Pick 6: 72 selections (5% total)

Pick 7: 36 selections (2.5% total)

Pick 8: 60 selections (4.2% total)

Pick9: 69 selections (4.8% total) Nowitzki and Havlicek account for 26 of these

Pick 10: 55 selections (3.85% total)

Pick 11: 33 selections (2.3% total)

Pick 12: 29 selections (2% total)

Pick 13: 32 selections (2.2% total) Kobe and Malone account for 27 of these

Pick 14: 52 selections (3.6% total)

Your plan is fundamentally stupid because probability to have success is microscopic.


Also let me get it straight . Derozan and Lowry never could do jack ***t in playoffs, but it's ok to you because they made it to second round , round that is around 3 to 4 wins away from Magic current success rate,and it's well justified for Raptors to not hit reset button , yet you are so against idea of Magic trying to do the same with Vučević and Conley or whoever they can add ,and who has allstar level potential ? What's logic behind it ? Why Magic can't, if Raptors could, collect that talented players and trade for superstar , along with using youth to get right peaces ? How having less good players will ever make you better ?

And that's why i said your line of thinking is pretty scripted and linear. You want trades, but you also want to let valuable players go witch itself hurts your trade potential as you lose assets. You second option is draft, yet you don't want to tank, witch,again, deflacts whole point of drafting if you can't maximise your chance.
You hate thredmill teams yet all your ideas lead towad building threadmill teams as you need miracles to make your plan possible.

Just to play dumb, Magic have 16 pick, but let's pretend Magic have 8th pick. Tell me single player that will be superstar and lead them to promise land ,that they could draft if they had 8th pick. ( because that's strategy you propose, draft but not tanking ) . We can go back in year or two to revisit your decision. Fun fact, last 8th pick who was allstar was Derozan drafted decade ago, him and Vin Baker are only allstars drafted 8th in last 30 years. But heeey, not need to tank to get good player, right? :wink:
"A straight path never leads anywhere except to the objective."
Andre Gide
zaymon
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,369
And1: 756
Joined: Jul 01, 2015
   

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#127 » by zaymon » Sun Jun 2, 2019 12:19 pm

I think we are at a stage where development is crucial. We wont tank fully with Gordon, Isaac, Bamba and Fultz becouse it makes no sense to not play them. I think we are at upper limit of youth level right now. I dont even mention rookie scale contracts. I can see a scenario where Fultz is healthy we dont resign Vucevic and remain in the playoffs but it will be difficult. Lets build our assets and consolidate them at a right time
Bold Predictions:
1. Deandre Ayton biggest disappointment of 2018 draft.
2. Nick Nurse becomes Orlando Magic Head Coach. (15.04.2018)
User avatar
MagicMatic
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,796
And1: 5,631
Joined: May 30, 2016
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#128 » by MagicMatic » Sun Jun 2, 2019 3:06 pm

pepe1991 wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
pepe1991 wrote:

it is.



The lottery and trades are the two ways Orlando finds and adds elite talent in its current position. Those are two primary ways. One of them doesn’t require giving up assets. Doesn’t sound linear to me.



No. Getting past the first and second round of the playoffs isn’t what I consider a failure. Managing to do it
with good watchable basketball makes it even better and worthwhile. Would it have been frustrating to be the Raptors in previous seasons? Yeah, but they had the assets to make those changes, primarily the allstar they drafted, and they are paying off.





What? I want no part in Vuc not because he’s “old” but because he inhibits Orlando into playing an archaic style of basketball that’s ultimately inefficient with his supporting cast. He’s 28 and had his (barely) first allstar season and is expecting big money. Where’s the ceiling? It’s not too high. That’s baffling to you that people would have qualms?



Trade or draft. Those are the options. It always has been and always will be until players take notice that Orlando will be good for the foreseeable future, have room to grow, and aren't being led be mediocre to fringe allstar talent. I never said anything about needing to tank to get this done. Its just constantly interpreted that way because people can’t seem to separate the idea of a team from being poorly built with that of losing on purpose. Do you think if Vuc walked this team wouldn’t be abysmal for never addressing the lack of scoring options? It would be, but again, I fall into the category of people that would rather they attempt to acquire elite talent for 2-3 years, rather than they settle on a boring .500 product for another 5.


Window never exists until you open it. Raptors just proved it. You will never ever in sports or in life in general have perfect situation. You simply have to take risk. And in nba it's probably easiser than in any other sport pay no high price of making terrible mistake. Look at Nets. They made biggest fuc***y of all time with draft picks ,yet missed 3 freaking years of playoffs. And look at them now, back in FA as potentially big fish.

In whole east only Knicks are taem who didn't make it to playoffs for longer than 3 years. 3 years is pretty much optimal amount of time your rebuild can last. Everything after that leads to overlapping of rookie scale contract players who become more expensive.



The Raptors window was open when DeRozen became an allstar at 24 in 2013-14 and subsequently Lowry in 14-15. That’s lasted them until now. They are in the finals, by trading the player that opened that window for them in the first place for a top 3-5 player currently. I’m arguing we need that player(s) to open that window if they aren’t currently on this roster. That happens through trades or the draft and that isn’t “thinking linearly”.



Trade or draft. Those are the options. It always has been and always will be until players take notice that Orlando will be good for the foreseeable future, have room to grow, and aren't being led be mediocre to fringe allstar talent. I never said anything about needing to tank to get this done. Its just constantly interpreted that way because people can’t seem to separate the idea of a team from being poorly built with that of losing on purpose. Do you think if Vuc walked this team wouldn’t be abysmal for never addressing the lack of scoring options? It would be, but again, I fall into the category of people that would rather they attempt to acquire elite talent for 2-3 years, rather than they settle on a boring .500 product for another 5


How can you propse draft as strategy yet claim tanking isn't only logical path to your strategy ? You want superstar. How many superstars, by percentage, are being drafted outside top 8 per year ?

Pick 5: 117 selections (8.2% total)

^by now this is already over half of all All-star selections

Pick 6: 72 selections (5% total)

Pick 7: 36 selections (2.5% total)

Pick 8: 60 selections (4.2% total)

Pick9: 69 selections (4.8% total) Nowitzki and Havlicek account for 26 of these

Pick 10: 55 selections (3.85% total)

Pick 11: 33 selections (2.3% total)

Pick 12: 29 selections (2% total)

Pick 13: 32 selections (2.2% total) Kobe and Malone account for 27 of these

Pick 14: 52 selections (3.6% total)

Your plan is fundamentally stupid because probability to have success is microscopic.


Also let me get it straight . Derozan and Lowry never could do jack ***t in playoffs, but it's ok to you because they made it to second round , round that is around 3 to 4 wins away from Magic current success rate,and it's well justified for Raptors to not hit reset button , yet you are so against idea of Magic trying to do the same with Vučević and Conley or whoever they can add ,and who has allstar level potential ? What's logic behind it ? Why Magic can't, if Raptors could, collect that talented players and trade for superstar , along with using youth to get right peaces ? How having less good players will ever make you better ?

And that's why i said your line of thinking is pretty scripted and linear. You want trades, but you also want to let valuable players go witch itself hurts your trade potential as you lose assets. You second option is draft, yet you don't want to tank, witch,again, deflacts whole point of drafting if you can't maximise your chance.
You hate thredmill teams yet all your ideas lead towad building threadmill teams as you need miracles to make your plan possible.

Just to play dumb, Magic have 16 pick, but let's pretend Magic have 8th pick. Tell me single player that will be superstar and lead them to promise land ,that they could draft if they had 8th pick. ( because that's strategy you propose, draft but not tanking ) . We can go back in year or two to revisit your decision. Fun fact, last 8th pick who was allstar was Derozan drafted decade ago, him and Vin Baker are only allstars drafted 8th in last 30 years. But heeey, not need to tank to get good player, right? :wink:


You are well aware that every draft is entirely different and that most players of real consequence are drafted near the top correct? Lol you and ezzzp keep claiming I’m saying “tank!” but I’ve never said it. What I’m saying is, “Don’t put the organization in a position that limits the talent acquisition if it’s obvious there are still major issues with the roster”. Pretty different statements than claiming losing on purpose is the only way.

There is currently no player to build around on this roster offensively. That’s an issue that needs to be solved. There is no back court of the future, and likely no point guard unless you believe the prospect of Fultz to be better than I do. Let’s solve those issues before we start perpetually drafting 16-20 and have to rebuild again when it obviously doesn’t work out. You literally said yesterday in the draft discussion thread that we aren’t drafting a star at 16 based on odds... that’s the truth, but now you are saying drafting in the top of the lottery isn’t viable. Contradictory much? or do you just pick and choose arguments to fit your agenda based on the thread you post in?

Not resigning Vuc doesn’t equal “tanking”. It’s called going in a different direction for any number of reasons. I’m simply saying that I think more good comes from him not being on the roster in the long run. Retaining him as an asset is fine if it makes sense, but I take issue with the idea that bringing him back and adding Conley is going to attract free agents to Orlando or be building anything substantial in the long run. You can disagree if you want it doesn’t really matter to me.

Wtf are you talking about with Lowry and Derozen? They’ve been way more successful than Orlando since Dwight’s departure as a duo. Raptors never get to the nba finals without trading Derozen in the most ideal scenario imaginable. Making it to the Eastern conference finals or semi finals isn’t a failed season. They were able to build the rest of their extremely deep roster AFTER they groomed two allstars at prime years and took multiple years to build around them.That’s entirely different than adding a 31 year point guard, on one of the most expensive deals in the league, to a team with a fringe allstar Center that has proven absolutely less than nothing in the playoffs. That’s why.

I’ve already explained to you, albeit your lack of reading comprehension, that trading isn’t outside of the realm of possibility. So I’m proposing trades and the draft as avenues for acquiring talent, but that seems “foreign” to you. Interesting.
User avatar
MagicMatic
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,796
And1: 5,631
Joined: May 30, 2016
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#129 » by MagicMatic » Sun Jun 2, 2019 3:15 pm

ezzzp wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
Here’s the answer- they won’t be. They are more valuable to Orlando because there is no established offense, which it hasn’t been addressed for years. The chance they go up in value will mean Orlando has failed developing the youth to the extent that their numbers will go up even with age and less potential.


Actually, the answer is - you do not know.

Unless you are clairvoyant you have no idea how either of those players will produce through their next contract.

If anything the many studies on NBA aging point to your statement being more than likely wrong. For both, their next deal will be mostly in their prime (Ross 28-31 / Vuc 29-32). That is the age range when the majority of players have their highest production and for many their biggest impact towards winning.

Spoiler:
Image


Skilled high bbIQ bigs who's game isn't reliant on athleticism commonly age well. So Vucevic has a very good chance to be effective all the way through his next contract. Ross has less chance to age well as guards whose game is reliant on their speed and athleticism do decline after 30, BUT with the increase in 3PT shooting that decline is now much less dramatic.

Also, Vucevic and Ross having value does not mean that the core didn't develop. That's absolutely ridiculous. There can be more than two good players on a team. In fact that composition of quality prime vets + emerging youth is often the alchemy that produces many deep playoff teams and legit contenders.


So you think that Vucevic and Ross’ value goes up? :lol: That would mean their numbers would probably be higher than what they produced previously considering they will be 31/32 with less potential and more expensive contracts. That would also mean their numbers went up with AG, Isaac, and Bamba being contributors as well. Highly unlikely and would mean we’ve failed at developing them into anything offensively. You just don’t like the idea that retaining them means they devalue as assets (which they will) when they resign for larger contracts than they currently have at an older age and with more milage.
ezzzp
Head Coach
Posts: 6,216
And1: 3,329
Joined: Aug 25, 2009
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#130 » by ezzzp » Sun Jun 2, 2019 6:05 pm

MagicMatic wrote:
ezzzp wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
Here’s the answer- they won’t be. They are more valuable to Orlando because there is no established offense, which it hasn’t been addressed for years. The chance they go up in value will mean Orlando has failed developing the youth to the extent that their numbers will go up even with age and less potential.


Actually, the answer is - you do not know.

Unless you are clairvoyant you have no idea how either of those players will produce through their next contract.

If anything the many studies on NBA aging point to your statement being more than likely wrong. For both, their next deal will be mostly in their prime (Ross 28-31 / Vuc 29-32). That is the age range when the majority of players have their highest production and for many their biggest impact towards winning.

Spoiler:
Image


Skilled high bbIQ bigs who's game isn't reliant on athleticism commonly age well. So Vucevic has a very good chance to be effective all the way through his next contract. Ross has less chance to age well as guards whose game is reliant on their speed and athleticism do decline after 30, BUT with the increase in 3PT shooting that decline is now much less dramatic.

Also, Vucevic and Ross having value does not mean that the core didn't develop. That's absolutely ridiculous. There can be more than two good players on a team. In fact that composition of quality prime vets + emerging youth is often the alchemy that produces many deep playoff teams and legit contenders.


So you think that Vucevic and Ross’ value goes up? :lol: That would mean their numbers would probably be higher than what they produced previously considering they will be 31/32 with less potential and more expensive contracts. That would also mean their numbers went up with AG, Isaac, and Bamba being contributors as well. Highly unlikely and would mean we’ve failed at developing them into anything offensively. You just don’t like the idea that retaining them means they devalue as assets (which they will) when they resign for larger contracts than they currently have at an older age and with more milage.


Nowhere do I say that their value increases. A player having value DOES NOT mean that their value goes up. Its not complicated :lol:

....and Vucevic and Ross producing well in their prime DOES NOT mean that the young players didn't develop. That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard anyone say on this forum. Newsflash! there can be multiple good players on a team. In fact good teams are composed of multiple good players, great teams have 2-3 stars + several high quality players.
User avatar
BadMofoPimp
RealGM
Posts: 45,794
And1: 10,666
Joined: Oct 12, 2003
Location: In the Paint

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#131 » by BadMofoPimp » Sun Jun 2, 2019 6:25 pm

Rarely do teams just allow assets to walk away unless they are able to sign equivalent or better value. I doubt Ross and/or Vooch go anywhere.
Image

Provin Ya'll Wrong!!!
User avatar
MoMM
General Manager
Posts: 8,843
And1: 959
Joined: Jan 08, 2002
Location: Florianopolis, Brazil
Contact:
       

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#132 » by MoMM » Sun Jun 2, 2019 6:47 pm

ezzzp wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
ezzzp wrote:
Actually, the answer is - you do not know.

Unless you are clairvoyant you have no idea how either of those players will produce through their next contract.

If anything the many studies on NBA aging point to your statement being more than likely wrong. For both, their next deal will be mostly in their prime (Ross 28-31 / Vuc 29-32). That is the age range when the majority of players have their highest production and for many their biggest impact towards winning.

Spoiler:
Image


Skilled high bbIQ bigs who's game isn't reliant on athleticism commonly age well. So Vucevic has a very good chance to be effective all the way through his next contract. Ross has less chance to age well as guards whose game is reliant on their speed and athleticism do decline after 30, BUT with the increase in 3PT shooting that decline is now much less dramatic.

Also, Vucevic and Ross having value does not mean that the core didn't develop. That's absolutely ridiculous. There can be more than two good players on a team. In fact that composition of quality prime vets + emerging youth is often the alchemy that produces many deep playoff teams and legit contenders.


So you think that Vucevic and Ross’ value goes up? :lol: That would mean their numbers would probably be higher than what they produced previously considering they will be 31/32 with less potential and more expensive contracts. That would also mean their numbers went up with AG, Isaac, and Bamba being contributors as well. Highly unlikely and would mean we’ve failed at developing them into anything offensively. You just don’t like the idea that retaining them means they devalue as assets (which they will) when they resign for larger contracts than they currently have at an older age and with more milage.


Nowhere do I say that their value increases. A player having value DOES NOT mean that their value goes up. Its not complicated :lol:

Exactly, let's think about the teams we are talking about (Memphis and Toronto).

Did Marc Gasol value go up in the last seasons? No.

Were they able to get anything relevant for him while carrying a 25M/year contract? Yes.

What did they get for him? C.J. Miles, Jonas Valanciunas, Delon Wright and a 2024 2nd round draft pick.

IMO, that's a good package for a veteran center who is 34-year old (3 years older than the timeline we are talking about Vooch).
User avatar
MagicMatic
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,796
And1: 5,631
Joined: May 30, 2016
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#133 » by MagicMatic » Sun Jun 2, 2019 7:18 pm

MoMM wrote:
ezzzp wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
So you think that Vucevic and Ross’ value goes up? :lol: That would mean their numbers would probably be higher than what they produced previously considering they will be 31/32 with less potential and more expensive contracts. That would also mean their numbers went up with AG, Isaac, and Bamba being contributors as well. Highly unlikely and would mean we’ve failed at developing them into anything offensively. You just don’t like the idea that retaining them means they devalue as assets (which they will) when they resign for larger contracts than they currently have at an older age and with more milage.


Nowhere do I say that their value increases. A player having value DOES NOT mean that their value goes up. Its not complicated :lol:

Exactly, let's think about the teams we are talking about (Memphis and Toronto).

Did Marc Gasol value go up in the last seasons? No.

Were they able to get anything relevant for him while carrying a 25M/year contract? Yes.

What did they get for him? C.J. Miles, Jonas Valanciunas, Delon Wright and a 2024 2nd round draft pick.

IMO, that's a good package for a veteran center who is 34-year old (3 years older than the timeline we are talking about Vooch).


Great deal for a rebuilding team to acquire young pieces in exchange for their 30+ year old Center who has declined drastically in production and is seeking a title at some point in his career.
User avatar
MagicMatic
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,796
And1: 5,631
Joined: May 30, 2016
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#134 » by MagicMatic » Sun Jun 2, 2019 7:21 pm

ezzzp wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
ezzzp wrote:
Actually, the answer is - you do not know.

Unless you are clairvoyant you have no idea how either of those players will produce through their next contract.

If anything the many studies on NBA aging point to your statement being more than likely wrong. For both, their next deal will be mostly in their prime (Ross 28-31 / Vuc 29-32). That is the age range when the majority of players have their highest production and for many their biggest impact towards winning.

Spoiler:
Image


Skilled high bbIQ bigs who's game isn't reliant on athleticism commonly age well. So Vucevic has a very good chance to be effective all the way through his next contract. Ross has less chance to age well as guards whose game is reliant on their speed and athleticism do decline after 30, BUT with the increase in 3PT shooting that decline is now much less dramatic.

Also, Vucevic and Ross having value does not mean that the core didn't develop. That's absolutely ridiculous. There can be more than two good players on a team. In fact that composition of quality prime vets + emerging youth is often the alchemy that produces many deep playoff teams and legit contenders.


So you think that Vucevic and Ross’ value goes up? :lol: That would mean their numbers would probably be higher than what they produced previously considering they will be 31/32 with less potential and more expensive contracts. That would also mean their numbers went up with AG, Isaac, and Bamba being contributors as well. Highly unlikely and would mean we’ve failed at developing them into anything offensively. You just don’t like the idea that retaining them means they devalue as assets (which they will) when they resign for larger contracts than they currently have at an older age and with more milage.


Nowhere do I say that their value increases. A player having value DOES NOT mean that their value goes up. Its not complicated :lol:

....and Vucevic and Ross producing well in their prime DOES NOT mean that the young players didn't develop. That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard anyone say on this forum. Newsflash! there can be multiple good players on a team. In fact good teams are composed of multiple good players, great teams have 2-3 stars + several high quality players.


Every player in the nba is an asset with value (trade or otherwise) and shelf life. That value changes year to year and contract to contract based on a number of factors. Vucevic’s value will not remain the same as soon as he signs a larger contract and if his production drops. No one needs “clairvoyance” to know that. It’s basic common sense and an inevitability in the nba.

The original comment was that they are “trade assets” in 2-3 years. Sure, EVERY player in the nba is considered a “trade asset” if you going into semantics. The point is that they are lesser assets than they were the minute they sign a larger contract, accumulate milage, get older, and provide less.
ezzzp
Head Coach
Posts: 6,216
And1: 3,329
Joined: Aug 25, 2009
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#135 » by ezzzp » Sun Jun 2, 2019 8:16 pm

MagicMatic wrote:
ezzzp wrote:Nowhere do I say that their value increases. A player having value DOES NOT mean that their value goes up. Its not complicated :lol:

....and Vucevic and Ross producing well in their prime DOES NOT mean that the young players didn't develop. That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard anyone say on this forum. Newsflash! there can be multiple good players on a team. In fact good teams are composed of multiple good players, great teams have 2-3 stars + several high quality players.


Every player in the nba is an asset with value (trade or otherwise) and shelf life. That value changes year to year and contract to contract based on a number of factors. Vucevic’s value will not remain the same as soon as he signs a larger contract and if his production drops. No one needs “clairvoyance” to know that. It’s basic common sense and an inevitability in the nba.

The original comment was that they are “trade assets” in 2-3 years. Sure, EVERY player in the nba is considered a “trade asset” if you going into semantics. The point is that they are lesser assets than they were the minute they sign a larger contract, accumulate milage, get older, and provide less.


You do not know the future. Why are you trying to pass off your biased presumptions as definitive statements? You do not have special powers to know what Vucevic will or won't net in a trade in 2-3 years.

If you have special clairvoyant powers...prove it, tell everyone what the final score will be for tonight's Finals game. :lol:
User avatar
MagicMatic
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,796
And1: 5,631
Joined: May 30, 2016
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#136 » by MagicMatic » Sun Jun 2, 2019 8:54 pm

ezzzp wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
ezzzp wrote:Nowhere do I say that their value increases. A player having value DOES NOT mean that their value goes up. Its not complicated :lol:

....and Vucevic and Ross producing well in their prime DOES NOT mean that the young players didn't develop. That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard anyone say on this forum. Newsflash! there can be multiple good players on a team. In fact good teams are composed of multiple good players, great teams have 2-3 stars + several high quality players.


Every player in the nba is an asset with value (trade or otherwise) and shelf life. That value changes year to year and contract to contract based on a number of factors. Vucevic’s value will not remain the same as soon as he signs a larger contract and if his production drops. No one needs “clairvoyance” to know that. It’s basic common sense and an inevitability in the nba.

The original comment was that they are “trade assets” in 2-3 years. Sure, EVERY player in the nba is considered a “trade asset” if you going into semantics. The point is that they are lesser assets than they were the minute they sign a larger contract, accumulate milage, get older, and provide less.


You do not know the future. Why are you trying to pass off your biased presumptions as definitive statements? You do not have special powers to know what Vucevic will or won't net in a trade in 2-3 years.

If you have special clairvoyant powers...prove it, tell everyone what the final score will be for tonight's Finals game. :lol:


How is saying what I said ”biased”? It pertains to every nba player.
User avatar
Skin
RealGM
Posts: 14,884
And1: 6,840
Joined: Jul 03, 2009
   

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#137 » by Skin » Sun Jun 2, 2019 8:55 pm

ezzzp wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
ezzzp wrote:Nowhere do I say that their value increases. A player having value DOES NOT mean that their value goes up. Its not complicated :lol:

....and Vucevic and Ross producing well in their prime DOES NOT mean that the young players didn't develop. That is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard anyone say on this forum. Newsflash! there can be multiple good players on a team. In fact good teams are composed of multiple good players, great teams have 2-3 stars + several high quality players.


Every player in the nba is an asset with value (trade or otherwise) and shelf life. That value changes year to year and contract to contract based on a number of factors. Vucevic’s value will not remain the same as soon as he signs a larger contract and if his production drops. No one needs “clairvoyance” to know that. It’s basic common sense and an inevitability in the nba.

The original comment was that they are “trade assets” in 2-3 years. Sure, EVERY player in the nba is considered a “trade asset” if you going into semantics. The point is that they are lesser assets than they were the minute they sign a larger contract, accumulate milage, get older, and provide less.


You do not know the future. Why are you trying to pass off your biased presumptions as definitive statements? You do not have special powers to know what Vucevic will or won't net in a trade in 2-3 years.

If you have special clairvoyant powers...prove it, tell everyone what the final score will be for tonight's Finals game. :lol:

Why is saying that "signing Vuc will help the Magic" not anymore a sign of special clairvoyant powers than saying "signing Vuc will hurt the Magic"?

Stop being a hypocrite. Your bias is equally as prevalent. The only difference is you are not taking any approach to alternate solutions so it's easy to take a backseat and criticize other ideas that may carry more risk/downside or more reward/upside.
ezzzp
Head Coach
Posts: 6,216
And1: 3,329
Joined: Aug 25, 2009
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#138 » by ezzzp » Sun Jun 2, 2019 9:47 pm

Skin wrote:Why is saying that "signing Vuc will help the Magic" not anymore a sign of special clairvoyant powers than saying "signing Vuc will hurt the Magic"?

Stop being a hypocrite. Your bias is equally as prevalent. The only difference is you are not taking any approach to alternate solutions so it's easy to take a backseat and criticize other ideas that may carry more risk/downside or more reward/upside.


My position has been that a competitive context is the most proven method to develop players and build up asset value. That is not my bias, its the philosophy of the best player development franchises in the NBA, which also happen to be THE BEST franchises in the NBA. In fact the first time I heard about that research was at a panel discussion at the Sports Analytics Conference dedicated to player development. That's the statement and position of the best player development minds in the NBA...not my bias.

Within that context, I have stated that retaining Vucevic and Ross is the most realistic way for the Magic to maintain that competitive context. But I have also even proposed Mike Conley trade and stated a key reason for that was to avoid reliance on Vucevic to maintain that competitive context. It has always been about the competitive context specifically for player development and asset management purposes.

Stop trying to spin it like its about some Vuc fanboy bias in order to draw attention away from fact that you and MagicMatic's theories keep getting destroyed.
MasterGMer
Pro Prospect
Posts: 895
And1: 110
Joined: Dec 09, 2011
   

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#139 » by MasterGMer » Sun Jun 2, 2019 10:34 pm

ezzzp wrote:
Skin wrote:Why is saying that "signing Vuc will help the Magic" not anymore a sign of special clairvoyant powers than saying "signing Vuc will hurt the Magic"?

Stop being a hypocrite. Your bias is equally as prevalent. The only difference is you are not taking any approach to alternate solutions so it's easy to take a backseat and criticize other ideas that may carry more risk/downside or more reward/upside.


My position has been that a competitive context is the most proven method to develop players and build up asset value. That is not my bias, its the philosophy of the best player development franchises in the NBA, which also happen to be THE BEST franchises in the NBA. In fact the first time I heard about that research was at a panel discussion at the Sports Analytics Conference dedicated to player development. That's the statement and position of the best player development minds in the NBA...not my bias.

Within that context, I have stated that retaining Vucevic and Ross is the most realistic way for the Magic to maintain that competitive context. But I have also even proposed Mike Conley trade and stated a key reason for that was to avoid reliance on Vucevic to maintain that competitive context. It has always been about the competitive context specifically for player development and asset management purposes.

Stop trying to spin it like its about some Vuc fanboy bias in order to draw attention away from fact that you and MagicMatic's theories keep getting destroyed.


I am with you ezzzp. The best way for player development is winning and playing meaningful games.

But every player has a ceiling and that is why not every team can develop like the "splash brothers" or "GDP"s. That is why we have to go through draft to find that ceiling of players. And then winning context comes into place and we build a winning and contending team.

Both are needed. Not just tanking for players nor winning as much as you can. But I am with you ezzzy with Conley trade and resigning Vuc and Ross.
MagicFan101
General Manager
Posts: 8,522
And1: 4,754
Joined: Jul 04, 2012
 

Re: GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion 

Post#140 » by MagicFan101 » Sun Jun 2, 2019 10:44 pm

BadMofoPimp wrote:Rarely do teams just allow assets to walk away unless they are able to sign equivalent or better value. I doubt Ross and/or Vooch go anywhere.


Question: Are the Bobcats happy today that they gave Batum that contract to keep him in town?


If Sacramento or whoever else throws a major offer at Vuc we have to think long term.

Return to Orlando Magic