drsd wrote: MagicMatic wrote:
Newsflash: not every team in the nba has a winning record. Are you going to tell me next that Ja Morant is in a bad situation because the Grizzlies went 34-39 and he’s “learning how to lose” and not in a “winning environment”?
I think he’ll be ok regardless. I’d also take him over a majority of winning teams point guards fwiw. Your argument makes no sense.
On average, half do. The real point is that the draft is about allocating the best players to the worst teams.
Correct, so are we discounting the fact that teams in poor situations, without great assets, are unable to develop players because of their circumstances? No.
Some teams are further along than others and happen to be competitive right away. It doesn’t mean these prospects can’t drive their teams into contention.
What you are talking about is a chicken - egg situation. LeBron James went 35-47 his rookie year on a “losing culture” Cavs team. Justise Winslow was drafted 10th to the Heat just recently and he isn’t a world beater. So I’m tired about hearing these unquantifiable statements like “culture” “winning attitude” and “losing mentality”.
The NBA is about talent and asset management. End of story. If you are going to talk about something substantial, in relation to the output of these players, you should be looking at roster situation, minute distribution, and skill set.
Clifford will undoubtedly give Fultz more time this upcoming season. That will result in more experience for him as a player. How he handles that responsibility is on him and Clifford. If the FO chooses to acquire more talent (for once) it’ll put him in a better situation for W’s and grow his confidence. If they decide to go younger by trading vets, then that opens more discussion and changes how
Fultz plays around the newly acquired talent.