NavLDO wrote:AtheJ415 wrote:I think this team will be bottom 5 if it remains as is. Probably right there around the 5 spot. I think trading Bledsoe for a young player puts us in the top pick conversation (bottom 3). The Irving trade, assuming it is Bledsoe plus something good/positive like Warren would still keep us bottom 5 imo.
People in earlier threads suggesting we were late lottery I think are in a pipe dream. It would be great if that happened to an extent because it likely means the young guys have developed a TON in a single offseason, but I think improvement will be much more gradual.
As for the article listing the prospect weaknesses--every player who is 17 or 18 has weaknesses. You could right the same type of thing about damn near every single top pick that has gone in the draft historically. What was written about Doncic is carbon copy about what was written about Curry except that Curry also had injury issues. Bamba is more well thought of than Gobert was when drafted.
I am excited about the top 5 of this draft, as are most of the people I look to for draft opinions, and I think there is nothing wrong with being excited for the top 5 here. There is a gap between them as it stands and the rest of the draft class. I think it is crucial to fall in that range.
I like our core overall, but we need another talent infusion to increase our odds of eventually rivaling a team like Philly or MN (our 2 probable rivals relative to age). Both of those teams should be in the playoffs this year since MN added Butler and Philly is in the east. That gives us a great chance to add a youngster or 2 (Miami pick) that closes the gap a bit. We can win next year when Booker and others are 20 and 21 respectively and we have an offseason to add a true star vet if possible.
Of course Bamba is...that's why he's considered a possibility for the #1 pick, whereas Gobert never was. That's not my point, nor the point of the article. In a 2013 Re-do Gobert would be Top-3, most likely. My point is, though, if these prospects are being compared to the likes of Gobert, Noel, etc., rather than AD, Marc Gasol, DMC, etc...how transcendent are they, exactly? Are any of them as 'wholly'-talented as KAT or Embiid when they came in?? I do not believe they are.
As far as us being a bottom 5 team, are you suggesting that Booker, Warren, Chriss, and Bender are 'maxed out', talent- and production-wise? Do you believe that Josh Jackson does not move the needle for us whatsoever? You say you like our core, but think we are a bottom 5 team, then go on to suggest that adding another 'youngster or two' will improve us, after saying that Minny added Butler so they should make it to the playoffs. You know we can only have 5 starters, right? As is, between Booker, Jackson, Warren, Chriss, and Bender, there is 5 right there, and not a single one plays PG. How is adding another 'youngster or two' going to do to help us?
I'm sorry, and I like our young guys as well, but our plan was never to march out 15 1st contract players and expect to win an NBA Championship. Some of them need to be packaged for 'win now' types, and if not, then our Draft Picks do. But keeping both? That only hurts us...it doesn't help us one iota.
Gobert is more valuable today than Gasol and maybe even DMC, so I don't see the 5th best prospect of this class getting compared to him as somehow weak. You could argue he's the most valuable center in the league right now. Also, there are smart people who believe Bamba might be able to shoot well in the NBA due to his touch and coordination.
Other things I've read about the top 5, just to even out the negatives with positives: Doncic, the projected consensus 4th pick, is considered the greatest Euro prospect ever. I've also read some claim he may be the best prospect since Lebron.
Bagley: Generational talent.
Ayton: 7 footer who can potentially impact both ends and shoot from the perimeter.
Porter: Multi-dimensional player who can be a franchise player.
All of them have questions. So did the top 5 of every draft. All had the same types of questions, and people often make similar comparisons that are fairly conservative due to those questions. That is not a reason to punt tanking when most consider this an absolutely loaded top 5. It's always a question of whether they develop. This draft is no different, but that is not a reason to not want a top 5 pick.
As for this gem: "As far as us being a bottom 5 team, are you suggesting that Booker, Warren, Chriss, and Bender are 'maxed out', talent- and production-wise? Do you believe that Josh Jackson does not move the needle for us whatsoever? You say you like our core, but think we are a bottom 5 team, then go on to suggest that adding another 'youngster or two' will improve us, after saying that Minny added Butler so they should make it to the playoffs. You know we can only have 5 starters, right? As is, between Booker, Jackson, Warren, Chriss, and Bender, there is 5 right there, and not a single one plays PG. How is adding another 'youngster or two' going to do to help us?"
I'll respond here. Obviously I am not suggesting that Booker, etc. are maxed out. I am suggesting that at ages 19, 19, 20, and 24 they are not prepared to beat out teams with a ton of vets in today's game. Booker is the best of the bunch and he graded out last year as average overall. I expect him to be better, as do I everybody else, but the reality is Chriss and Bender probably are both below average next year (Chriss going from below average to below average+, Bender going from real bad to below average), with Warren maybe crossing the threshold to good+. Vegas has us projected to be 5th worst. Vegas is usually right. Also, we are in a brutal conference, with the supporting guys being Tyson Chandler's corpse and a bunch of other young players who grade out as below average to bad and have not proven a thing as far as winning basketball games today. That may sound pessimistic, but in my opinion that is the reality of it and it is a necessary evil to rebuild via the draft. You go young in numbers, keep the guys who develop and hit on your draft picks, and then as they become true vets and are ready to win now, then you sign the remaining pieces when the time is right. Until then, you lose by playing young guys so that they develop and so that you know what you have to build around going forward.
As for MN and Phi, they are in the east. If we were in the east the playoffs might be possible, but we aren't. Since they are, they will likely, and are in fact both projected to, make the playoffs by Vegas. Life is different in the east, and life is different when you have the 1st overall picks. We have Booker, and we have some promising guys who may have been better picks than other teams made higher up, but we don't have Towns and Butler and Tibs. For those teams it makes sense to win now and get playoff experience because they have had multiple 1st overall picks and are in a conference where making the playoffs is feasible. We are not in either scenario, and most importantly, making the playoffs for this team is not feasible. The odds are damn near 0 unless you wanted to sell those youngsters for a bunch of stars, which would be the stupidest thing a team in our scenario could do.
As far as adding a couple more youngsters, well, we don't know who of our guys will actually pan out. The only one we can say with confidence is Booker. The rest are still open questions, and thus adding 2 more key youngsters is a big freaking deal. Our pick should be top 5 and the Miami pick in the mid to late teens. That potentially is adding a Doncic and a Dialo or Metu. Those are key cogs to the future of the team, and, if MN and Phi both make the playoffs, it helps us close the gap with them as far as elite talent goes. Multiple lottery picks are always key to any team's talent level, let alone a rebuilding one.
I am not advocating intentionally losing. I am advocating that our young guys are going to lose because the west is brutal and they aren't good enough yet. I have no problem with that and it says nothing of my opinion of our core because most aren't guys who were or are expected to contribute immediately. Chriss and Bender and DJJ are long-term projects.
Also, I don't expect us to contend with 15 1st contract players. I think our contention window will start when the ones who do pan out reach their 2nd contracts (RFA). Thus, I think we will lose this year a ton, lose a bit less next year (probably a mid lottery team by then), then maybe add a star or 2 in FA and be a bottom tier playoff team, then as the youngsters continue to improve in their mid 20s, we become a legitimate contender, and so long as we keep the key guys through their primes we can replace pieces in FA and via the draft to remain in contention for a long window. That is what I view as a realistic timeframe for contention. I don't think short circuiting this rebuild is the way to go, and I think winning a bunch of games this year is a pipe dream that would require an unusual amount of development from our youngsters this offseason across the board. It wouldn't just need to be Booker improving--it would need to be Warren, Booker, Ulis, Bender, Chriss, all improving to become above average to good with guys like Jackson, Peters, Reed being league average from day 1. The ROY winner is often not even league average, and in fact Brogdon was below average last year.
