eyriq wrote:Thinking back to the star, starter, role player, bust thought project, really fascinating how the average distribution is 4/3/4/3.
This implies that at No. 6 you can expect to add a starter and at No. 11 you can expect to add a role player.
Very much an oversimplified view, but like any model it has some interesting implications.
A draft is a complex system that doesn't lend itself to an exact science. So much missing and imperfect information resulting in stars, starters, and role players falling outside the lottery. At a certain point fit makes all the difference.
We just don't know....Even looking at "generational" drafts. Wiggins, Parker, Embiid. The only guy that lived up to expectations was the guy who sat out his first two years of the NBA, and plays a position the league doesn't care about anymore.
Then you add in the injury possiblility. Even Zion is getting thrown around in trade rumors..
I disagree with the fit aspect almost all of the time. You take the guy highest on your draft board, unless its a center and the team is already set at center (Jokic, Embiid, Gobert, etc). Every other position you need the depth or you can play guys together, and at some point guys are getting moved. If you have a couple/few guys right next to each other (tiered) sure pick the fit. Teams in the 20's are better equipped to draft for fit, for a couple reasons, not as many holes, and the guys in that draft range or more closley grouped together.
The Magic are in a rebuild, and we haven't had a consolidation trade since...the Toby Harris or Oladipo deals, and they were absolute terrible trades, by a desperate manager. At some point this FO will be making a trade, and you have to be able to trade from strength.
era. 
