Scase wrote:islandboy53 wrote:Scase wrote:Sacrificed the future of the team by trading away an immediate lotto pick which is handcuffing this team for a specific direction.
Trading one (1) first round pick is NOT "sacrificing the future of the team". Worst case,
perhaps there's a centre available who can replace what Jacob brings, in 2 or 3 years. In that scenario, the team
may be better in the long term, but it's worse in the short to medium term.
Far reaching and "extremely" risky, a lotto team, trading a lightly protected pick, with the sole purpose of making the play in, all while doing this with 3 pending FAs.
At the time of the trade, only FVV was a pending UFA. The trade was made to provide a competent, starting level centre as part of a final evaluation of the core and coach. The result of that evaluation was a new coach and, with the loss of FVV, a rebuild. Making the play in can be seen as part of the evaluation, but it was hardly "the sole purpose".
Scraping the bottom of the league. We are currently 6th worst in the NBA. This one I admittedly could have been clearer on.
But sure, it's hyperbole.
Your statement seemed to be that Poeltl was "scraping the bottom of the league", which is clearly massively hyperbolic. If you really meant that our current record is scraping that bottom, I agree, obviously.
If it were one pick and gone, sure.
But until it conveys it directly determines how the team can plan moving forward. If Masai thought that the best course of action for this team was to tank a couple years, get some good prospects from high picks, and go from there.
He is handcuffed by the exact scenario we are currently dealing with, a potential 60 loss season with no pick to show for it. Now deal with that for 3 years hanging over your head, and every year it doesn't convey you are essentially held hostage.
The thing is, we're not handcuffed. Quite the opposite. We have a solid core that can grow with Scottie. We have 2 picks this draft, guaranteed, that we can add to that core. We have either our own FRP next year, if we convey this year, or a third pick (top 6) this year if we don't. We have additional assets that can be traded to add future draft picks and/or young players - the 3rd pick this year, if we get it, Brown, Boucher, possibly Trent. We can sign free agents. We have salary flexibility to take on unwanted salary for future picks. The only thing that is unknown is when the pick conveys. Regardless, we have lots of picks moving forward, and should be able to add more. The only one being held hostage is you.
Scase wrote:You view it as a single pick, and I get that. The rest of the leagues GMs view it as leverage. The same way the Nets/Rockets have zero incentive to tank because they don't own their picks, that means that in any sort of trade negotiations any GM with half a brain will have some additional leverage, you can lowball, or raise your trade prices because you know that team cannot afford to be too bad. This is why I keep saying the trades biggest issues are the cascading effects.
As noted above, the team has a good base to build on, and lots of assets to build with, including draft picks. There is no expectation of an overnight rebuild, and the team can be patient, and build the right way. The only desperation is here on this board.
Not trading Siakam let us into a position where the opposing teams and Siakam himself held the most leverage, which results in worse returns and less bargaining power. None of this stuff exists in a vacuum.
As for the time of the trade, yeah FVV was the only one immediately pending, but OG was 100% going to be a UFA as there was no way he was sacrificing potentially 50mil just to sign an extension with us, so he is a UFA for all intents and purposes. Siakam, there was clearly no efforts made to extend him, and he also wanted to push his luck going for a supermax, so again, for all intents and purposes, a UFA.
This is some of the most bizarre "reasoning" I've run into in a while. Let's review. You originally said that FVV, OG and Siakam were all UFA's. On being called out, you concede that, yes, only FVV was a pending UFA. Sure, OG wasn't going to sign an extension, but he wasn't a pending UFA. There
were extension discussions with Siakam, but they broke off, presumably after FVV moved on. No doubt Pascal was hoping to qualify for a potential supermax extension, whether or not he would have received it. That still didn't make him a pending UFA at the time of the trade.
Trading a barely protected FRP when you are a lotto team, and have effectively 3 pending UFAs, for a mid tier centre is objectively bad management. Or at best, a terribly stupid gamble.
We had 1 pending UFA. Acquiring Poeltl was not a gamble, nor was it "objectively bad management". Providing a competent centre who can rebound, set screens, pass and protect the rim allowed a final evaluation of the FVV, OG, Siakam, Nurse "core. Signed to a long term contract, as he was, he's very movable for a solid return in the future. Negligible risk.
No one views a 28 year old mid tier centre as part of a "rebuild", you're being naive if you think so. Jak is going to be 29 years old at the start of next season, who in their right mind spends those kinds of assets to get a player that unequivocally provides no useful benefit for a rebuilding team? Jak belongs on a contender, not on a rebuilding team, at best all he contributes to is some empty wins that devalue our picks.
If you're doing a tear it down to the studs level rebuild, you don't need a Poeltl level centre. We're starting from a higher base, and a centre with Jacob's skillset is very useful to the development process. We need to focus on growing the team around Scottie and, if we have more wins because we develop faster, that's a good thing. Focusing on "not devaluing our picks" may be important in Washington or Portland or Charlotte, but we don't need to do that, other than in this current stretch, obviously.
By the time our "rebuilding" core gets to a competitive age, Jak is most likely turning 31 and his contract his expiring. So we spent assets and money for what exactly? Empty wins?
We traded a FRP for Poeltl. We have him for 3 more years (assuming he picks up his PO) of growth and development at a reasonable salary. At that point, he'll still have value in a trade, or he could be resigned at a smaller amount as a main backup centre. Again, we're aiming to win. Jacob helps us do that. That's a good thing.
A core of BBQ+P is unlikely to result in anything other than a first round playoff team. This team is starved for talent, trading away picks for win now players does not help the team long term.
This core, as it stands, may be no more than a 1st round team. Or it may be better. Either way, we will be adding to that core steadily, so it's a tad early to give up on it, don't you think? We're certainly not "starved for talent". Maybe you've been watching our G-league version too long. The future of the team is bright, my guy. Get ready to enjoy the ride!