The fallacy of "Long Term" planning in the NBA

[Paradise]

OKC's development of this current squad started 6 years ago with the acquisition of SGA.

The best GMs have a "long term" in mind.

And Presti’s plan only appears to have worked because SGA turned into an MVP candidate and they got him in a once in a lifetime deal. Without SGA, Presti’s plan would be looking very mediocre.

Teams need to have a long-term plan but they also need to be able make adjustments and have an understanding of where the league is at. Right now, the league is wide open. It’s not the time to sit back.

Nope. My Nets went from laugh stock with no real draft picks or cap space and within 5 years turned it into KD, Kyrie. It was a long term plan.

[meekrab]

OKC's development of this current squad started 6 years ago with the acquisition of SGA.

The best GMs have a "long term" in mind.

And Presti’s plan only appears to have worked because SGA turned into an MVP candidate and they got him in a once in a lifetime deal. Without SGA, Presti’s plan would be looking very mediocre.

Teams need to have a long-term plan but they also need to be able make adjustments and have an understanding of where the league is at. Right now, the league is wide open. It’s not the time to sit back.

Nope. My Nets went from laugh stock with no real draft picks or cap space and within 5 years turned it into KD, Kyrie. It was a long term plan.

And how'd that work out?

[fanofthegreats]

There is no planning at all. Teams must suck for others to win. All luck

[PistolPeteJR]

OKC's development of this current squad started 6 years ago with the acquisition of SGA.

The best GMs have a "long term" in mind.

And Presti’s plan only appears to have worked because SGA turned into an MVP candidate and they got him in a once in a lifetime deal. Without SGA, Presti’s plan would be looking very mediocre.

Teams need to have a long-term plan but they also need to be able make adjustments and have an understanding of where the league is at. Right now, the league is wide open. It’s not the time to sit back.

You realize part of trading and scouting is identifying talent and potential, including work ethic, right?

[NZB2323]

Second of all, Presti’s strategy is to accumulate assets. Lots of young players, lots of draft picks. They still have a bunch of draft picks coming. If you accumulate enough assets, one of them is bound to turn into a star.

Give that message to long-suffering Jazz, Wizards fans and see what that gets you.

The Wizards made the playoffs 4 years ago trying to be competitive with Beal and Westbrook. They were trying so hard to be competitive with Beal that they gave him the super max with a no trade clause. You make it seem like they’ve been tanking for decades.

The Jazz made the playoffs from 2017-2022, winning 3 playoff series. What do you mean by long suffering?

Presti kept the Thunder competitive with the CP3 signing not too long ago, and if he has enough bets, one is bound to pay off.

[NZB2323]

And Presti’s plan only appears to have worked because SGA turned into an MVP candidate and they got him in a once in a lifetime deal. Without SGA, Presti’s plan would be looking very mediocre.

Teams need to have a long-term plan but they also need to be able make adjustments and have an understanding of where the league is at. Right now, the league is wide open. It’s not the time to sit back.

First of all, the Thunder are good without SGA.

Second of all, Presti’s strategy is to accumulate assets. Lots of young players, lots of draft picks. They still have a bunch of draft picks coming. If you accumulate enough assets, one of them is bound to turn into a star.

They aren’t good without SGA. They are a play-in team without him.

Presti’s strategy was to continue with a middling team of George and Westbrook. Kawhi going to LAC forced his hand.

Presti has drafted Dieng, Cason, Chet, Poku, Giddey and Jdubs. Not a bad group but certainly not a group where you think any of them can turn into a superstar.

No one would be excited about their team if SGA wasn’t on it. That’s the reality. Presti’s “long-term” would be looking horrible without that SGA trade. lol.

The Thunder won 68 games this year. They were 5-1 in games he didn’t play. Using play-by-play data, the Thunder would have a +/- of about +5.8 instead of +12.8 if they didn’t have SGA. The Rockets don’t have an SGA and they were the 2nd seed.

But even if the Thunder were a play-in team with SGA, the youngest team in the league being in the play-in with a bunch of draft picks coming isn’t a bad spot.

[Rustyman]

Second of all, Presti’s strategy is to accumulate assets. Lots of young players, lots of draft picks. They still have a bunch of draft picks coming. If you accumulate enough assets, one of them is bound to turn into a star.

Give that message to long-suffering Jazz, Wizards fans and see what that gets you.

The Wizards made the playoffs 4 years ago trying to be competitive with Beal and Westbrook. They were trying so hard to be competitive with Beal that they gave him the super max with a no trade clause. You make it seem like they’ve been tanking for decades.

The Jazz made the playoffs from 2017-2022, winning 3 playoff series. What do you mean by long suffering?

Presti kept the Thunder competitive with the CP3 signing not too long ago, and if he has enough bets, one is bound to pay off.

Does anyone who is a fan of the Wizards or Jazz believe that they were contenders when they made the playoffs?

[Rustyman]

Let me put out my ideas on the future for the teams with the top 6 picks in the upcoming draft to explain my thinking on team building.

1. Dallas Mavericks.
- Player who will be around in 3 years: Cooper Flagg
- Draft: Cooper Flag
- Expectations for coming 3 years: 2nd Round, Conference Finals, Finals
- Strategy after 1 year: Keep team together hoping for health from Kyrie/AD and improvement from Cooper
- Strategy after 2 years: Keep team together if they make the Conference Finals. Trade AD/Kyrie if they show signs of aging.
- Strategy after 3 years: Break up team and build around Cooper Flagg, irrespective if they have won a championship in the 3 proceeding years

[Rustyman]

2. San Antonio Spurs
- Player to retain in 3 years: Wemby, potentially Castle if he has shown enough growth to be a 2nd or 3rd option on a championship team
- Draft: Dylan Harper, a big later.
- Expectations for coming 3 years: 2nd Round, Conference Finals, Finals. All these expectations shift up one level if they trade for Durant.
- Strategy after 1 year: Keep team together hoping for internal growth from Wemby, Castle, Harper
- Strategy after 2 years: Keep team together if they make the Conference Finals. If they don't, trade whichever of Fox, Castle is not performing
- Strategy after 3 years: If they have won a championship in 3 years, drop KD/money to extend Castle, Harper. If they haven't trade whichever of Fox/Castle/Harper delivers the biggest return.

There is no plan to keep everyone together for a 5 year window. The Spurs either win it all or they retool around Wemby.

[Rustyman]

3. 76'ers
- Player to retain in 3 years: Maybe Maxey if he sustains his performance and makes the All Star team 2 out of 3 years
- Draft: Ace Bailey
- Expectations for the coming 3 years: Conference Finals, Finals, Championship
- Strategy after 1 year: If they make the Conference Finals, keep the team together, else trade the underperforming parts
- Strategy after 2 years: If they make the NBA Finals, keep the team together, else trade the underperforming parts
- Strategy after 3 years: Trade Embiid, George and rebuild irrespective of whether they win the Championship.

[Chuck Everett]

2. San Antonio Spurs
- Player to retain in 3 years: Wemby, potentially Castle if he has shown enough growth to be a 2nd or 3rd option on a championship team
- Draft: Dylan Harper, a big later.
- Expectations for coming 3 years: 2nd Round, Conference Finals, Finals. All these expectations shift up one level if they trade for Durant.
- Strategy after 1 year: Keep team together hoping for internal growth from Wemby, Castle, Harper
- Strategy after 2 years: Keep team together if they make the Conference Finals. If they don't, trade whichever of Fox, Castle is not performing
- Strategy after 3 years: If they have won a championship in 3 years, drop KD/money to extend Castle, Harper. If they haven't trade whichever of Fox/Castle/Harper delivers the biggest return.

There is no plan to keep everyone together for a 5 year window. The Spurs either win it all or they retool around Wemby.

How many games is Wemby going to play in year 3? He's played 46 in year 1 and 2. Is he physically capable of making it through a season? This question has yet to be answered on the NBA level. And if he misses major time again next season, what then?

[Rustyman]

How many games is Wemby going to play in year 3? He's played 46 in year 1 and 2. Is he physically capable of making it through a season? This question has yet to be answered on the NBA level. And if he misses major time again next season, what then?

No one knows. However, his ailment this past season is something which has struck Ausar Thomson and Damon Lilliard in the past year and which both have returned from with seemingly no ill effect.

I would be much more worried if he had a lower limb injury. While historically, there haven't been many super long guys in the NBA who were relatively injury free, Wemby himself seems to have sustained no serious injuries in his career in Europe and USA thusfar.

I would say that based on the effort he puts in, Wemby is good for 10-12 years at least which is why I want to maximize every nanosecond of that window as we are already going into year 3.

My hope though is that Wemby has the type of body Kareem had and just keeps on going and going.

[magee]

Parity in the league is the only "long term" planning. Adam Silver wanted to build the NBA like the NFL, where each team could pay their stars and then it takes a few breaks for everything to align to compete for a title. And it doesn't matter what market they are in. Someone watching NBA for the first time in Dubai, Japan, India, Angola and Belize will all be either Pacer or Thunder fans in ten years because that's the team they liked more in these Finals.

That's long term planning.

[Devilanche]

Because to win you need a top 5 or top 10 player at least and those are expensive or impossible to trade for . So you draft in the hope you can develop one of them.

Once you get one of them and they are somewhat proven , you can pivot into a 3-5 year windows based on the rest of your roster.

Note - I believe for a top 10 players there’s only 12-15 legitimate candidates in a year who can get you to the finals . Once you remove those that aren’t available , then in short you will need to rebuild or even if you go all in you can only reach the first round or worst the play in.

Basically if you don’t want the bulls or Utah to think long term, what’s their route to winning in the next 3 season ?

[Rustyman]

They want to get the most money out of the fans with the least salary cap. The team is a for profit business. There are very few owners who actually strive for a ring regardless or profit.

The point is though that teams have to spend 90% of the salary cap. The difference between that and the luxury tax is I think no more than $50m. If a team is successful, I think they can very easily earn back their money and the gap between the salary cap and the luxury tax is where all teams seek to operate.

I think people confuse taking risks with blowing out the luxury tax and it need not be so. I think we will find in the coming years that most teams will operate in that range unless they feel they have a legitimate chance to win it all.

I don't think any NBA owner has gone broke owning a team. Success can come in a financially responsible manner.

[Rustyman]

Because to win you need a top 5 or top 10 player at least and those are expensive or impossible to trade for . So you draft in the hope you can develop one of them.

Basically if you don’t want the bulls or Utah to think long term, what’s their route to winning in the next 3 season ?

Lets take the Jazz:
- Keepers: None. Laurie's max contract for a non-max player will have them trading him for pennies on the dollar before long.
- Draft: Whichever guard looks like being the most explosive scorer.
- 3 year plan: Tank, Tank, Play-in. Get a coach which buys into your plan to tank.
- Year 1: Tank properly this year, even if your draft pick proves promising. Trade Laurie, Kessler and Collins for future capital and cap space
- Year 2: Tank again to get another competent player. Get some veterans to put around the promising 3-4 players you have.
- Year 3: Shoot for the play-in. Lower half of playoffs. Trade for some competent rotation players.
- Future: If it looks like the Jazz can establish themselves in the lower half of the playoffs, use your cap space and draft capital to improve the overall quality of the team.

[Rustyman]

Lets take the Bulls:

- Keepers: None
- Draft: Scoring wing or big. One of the few teams I would recommend for Derek Queen.
- 3 Year Plan: Playoffs, 2nd Round Playoffs, Conference Final
- Year 1: Decide which of the guard core you are keeping around. Trade the rest. Feature Buezelis and youth.
- Year 2: 5-8 seed. Look for some solid veterans based on what was learn't the year before.
- Year 3: Trade for a high-level scorer if you don't have one already. Trade any youth which hasn't improved in the previous 3 years.
Rinse and repeat until the Bulls have at least 2 All Star caliber players.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Making good win now moves that allow you to maintain flexibility is good. some examples are OKC trading Giddey for Caruso, Caruso was an expiring contract so even if he didnt work out they could have just let him walk and all that happens is they lose Giddey. Another example could be the Spurs trading for KD (at a reasonable price) who is also an expiring contract. They can use KD to get them out of their playoff drought, and if it doesnt work out the worst that happens is they lose Vassell or the #14 pick.

Making desperate win now moves that kill flexibility is bad. Some examples would be the Suns trading for Beal and his massive 5 year contract with a NTC, Philly signing PG to a massive 4 year deal, Denver extending Murray and MPJ to massive 4 year deals. Paying top 50 players like they are top 15 players is the biggest mistake that most GMs make

Those weren't necessarily win now moves, in particular the MPj one.
Both of them were young enough to make it a long term decision, to keep them as part of the Jokic core.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Because to win you need a top 5 or top 10 player at least and those are expensive or impossible to trade for . So you draft in the hope you can develop one of them.

Once you get one of them and they are somewhat proven , you can pivot into a 3-5 year windows based on the rest of your roster.

Note - I believe for a top 10 players there’s only 12-15 legitimate candidates in a year who can get you to the finals . Once you remove those that aren’t available , then in short you will need to rebuild or even if you go all in you can only reach the first round or worst the play in.

Basically if you don’t want the bulls or Utah to think long term, what’s their route to winning in the next 3 season ?

to clear, rebuilding doesn't necessarily mean going for a full teardown, as the Pacers showed

[doogie_hauser]

Boston and Ainge were ahead of their time by trading a cooked PP and KG to the Nets for picks that netted us Tatum and Brown and few other picks along the way.

The Sixers in hindsight probably should have traded Embiid a couple of years ago (the season after he won MVP) and would have gotten a decent haul.

Paul and Kevin's Celtics legacy was never tarnished/diminished by being traded, their numbers are retired at TD Garden.

Now that was long term planning that paid off brilliantly.

This is why I reiterate that Phoenix needs to cash in on Booker, they ain't getting close to winning a chip in the years left in his prime, they could get a decent foundation for their future if they traded him to the Pistons or Rockets etc

Giving him an extension is so short sighted by the Suns and Ibisha (hardly a surprise there)