Sorry, long post ahead. I don't disagree with overarching points but I will point out some specific things that I think you're missing.
pepe1991 wrote:They also drafted Bogut ( first overall), TJ Ford, Joe Alexander, Ferdette, Brandon Jennings and Henson in timespan 2005-2012 right before they stumbled across Giannis ( not even in lottery).
Pistons before Cade also relied heavily on draft as well. Their awesome draft houl includes Greg Monroe, Drummond, Brandon Knight, KCP and Stanley Johnson. each and every one of them was top 8 lottery pick.
Just before Cade, they drafted Killian Hayes after another epic 20-46 season.
That's my point though. None of those guys were franchise people and a lot of times they simply didn't get the chance to draft franchise changing talent. Were some still available? Of course, but it's harder to predict those talents. There would never be all-stars dropping past 6 or 7 unless if it was easy since it's not an exact science.
And that's quite a generous gap of players you're including too. Bogut is in 2005, Parker is in 2014. An entire rebuild happened between then
- also Bucks got lucky because they had 6th or 7th worst record for Bogut year. Only the Parker year did they really suck/fully embrace the tank.
But with Embiid you are making my point for me. They had the chance at Embiid! Front offices still have to make the correct decision as well. There is always inherent risk at tanking and I've always said that: lottery ball luck, scouting being good, and hoping nobody else takes your player unless you are #1. Tanking is risky. But the alternative is to be stuck in no man's land.
pepe1991 wrote:You simply have to be fine with competitive 35-40 wins season at some point as stepping stone for next big leap. Case and point- Cavs today.
I think we'd be closer to that if it wasn't for injuries though. We can't win with G league talent on our bench even with Jokic.
Plus, the Cavs are the worst example to make because they might be the luckiest franchise in the last 10 years when it comes to draft picks: 4/1/1/8/5/5/3 in the last 10 years. Compare that to Magic in the last 10 years: 2/4/5/6/6/5/1.
1. Getting lucky with Wiggins allowed them to get Kevin Love who helped them to a championship. Getting Garland and Mobley made it possibly to get Mitchell because he realized that they are young and talented. They couldn't make that trade with the #7 or #10 pick every year.
2. Boston became a competitive team because of the luxury of the 1st pick + great scouting. Where did that start from? Bottoming out and trading Pierce and Garnett. It eventually got them Tatum, Jaylen Brown, and a player like Kyrie (who, regardless of it if worked out or not, shows what sort of players can be had with young, promising all-stars.)
3. Sixers, despite it never turning out how they thought it would with Simmons and Embiid, had an all-star and a guy in MVP conversation because of tanking. It allowed them to go after players like Jimmy Butler and Harden. They've disappointed and still they are looked at as a threat in the Eastern Conference every year and have had all-stars in and out of their doors.
4. We see what New Orleans is starting to build because they took a chance trading AD and rolling the dice on young players and the draft. They got Zion. They have the Lakers pick this year which could net them another great young talent.
I can keep going...
"Tanking" is more than just sucking, it's having capital and options to maneuver and get better. I am thankful for Vuc because his talent actually brought some worth back. Without that, you're looking at another late 1st like Gordon got and seconds for Fournier. That is a terrible position to be in if we want to keep being a 30 win team. And some people wanted us to be a 30 win team even without Franz or Banchero. They just want to win even if there's no path to a 1st round playoff win.
If the Hornets get 35 wins this year, 13th pick, they will again be a team with vets whose contracts will be ending, a lone potential all-star player, and no real option to get better besides hoping Rozier/Hayward nets them any value. But if you trade those guys, you won't be a 35 win team.. don't think their fans are thrilled about that.
pepe1991 wrote:I'll never understand this fear from being gambler in nba. What's worst it can happen if you go balls to the wall for some SGA today? They got picks and draft somebody in 2024 or 2025 or 2026 that might be good ? And? At apsolute worst you trade SGA two years later for similar gain. At apsolue worst you suck, have awful year, win 20 games. Oh wait, that's execlly what is happening now. So how's that any different?
Hey, I would be fine for an SGA trade or for any talent that is young enough to not fall off by the time their contract ends. I think you will see that the front office will probably agree with you. If we don't get the 1st or 2nd pick, I can see that pick AND the Chicago pick being traded.
Would you rather have Banchero and Wagner or be stuck with Fournier and Vuc and Gordon? Honest question. Because saying "we should go all in this year" seems to be a new posting trend ONLY because of people seeing how good Banchero in these 5 games. When it was around draft time, nobody was really saying this stuff. They knew it was always 2023. I don't think they should ignore this season though. If there are moves to be made, make them. But why are people talking about it 5 games in the season when all of the trading chips can't play or have value to be moved? Wait until trade deadline.
Even guys like Doncic, Trae, Zion, etc, hell, Durant, LeBron, name most of players, their teams will be bad the first year or two. Very specific situations like Morant or Tatum made it so that they were competitive right away or only after a year, but that's not the norm.
