falcolombardi wrote:Wonder what real gm will think about presti for EOY
Previous years he didnt get serious consideration because his demolition and asset seeking moves had still not became anythingh
This year it all came together as what is looking like nba most perfect rebuild in ages so one would assume he gets his due
Hopefully we dont get a situation where he now instead gets dismissee because chet, shai or jalen picks happened in other years
Spwcially because it would signal that long term "organic" team building just cannot win COY as opposed to FA signings or blockbuster trades that give more inmediate same yeat results
First, to be clear: Presti won EOY in '19-20 (in a tie with Riley).
So yeah, if you vote for Presti now based on directly, if only partially, because of acquiring SGA, you're double counting a thing 4 years after it was first counted, and I'd think everyone would find that problematic.
Let me put a few other things forward because this is worth making sure everyone's thought things through:
- Speaking from a big picture perspective on the nature of EOY, I believe it's an inherently flawed award, because many of the most important basketball decisions can't be properly evaluated for years.
- For this reason, speaking as project runner, what I've basically said is that you can vote however you want, but you have to justify it with moves from the past year. In practice this means that you can essentially put your finger on the scale to give it to guy who you believe deserves it most, but only if he's done stuff in the past year that specifically impresses you.
- Now just speaking about my personal druthers: I don't like giving EOYs for tearing down even when it's the right move and it's executed adroitly. There's probably some aesthetic distaste involved her to be honest, but what's also going on is me being aware of times in the past where stocking up on draft picks hasn't really ever paid off for teams. In a nutshell: You can plausibly execute an outstanding teardown as judged by the draft picks you acquire, without knowing a damn thing about which guys you should be drafting, and so giving the award to teardowns runs the risk of giving the award to a guy later exposed as not understanding the game of basketball very well at all. And such choices make the award lose meaning.
On that last, it might seem weird for me to be talking about essentially voting for an award with an eye toward making the award more meaningful, and that's fine - as I said, that's a personal thing for me, not something I'm looking to force on anyone else - but it really is a natural thing from my perspective.
Why do we give a Rookie of the Year award but not a 2nd/3rd/4th/nth-Year Player of the Year (NYPOY)? It's obviously not because that rookie is typically as good as those more experienced players, so why prioritize reward for a worse player? Because you're trying to get people excited about a player going forward.
And so, for me personally, I voted Joel Embiid over Malcolm Brogdon for ROY back in '16-17. Most didn't of course - Brogdon won both the NBA's ROY and our ROY - and their reasoning was clear: The best ability is availability; miss too much time and we'll given the award to someone else.
That's fine, but I'll just say: If we faced similar dilemmas every year and consistently chose the Brogdons of the NBA for the award, then what would be the value-add for having a ROY rather than other NYPOYs?