penbeast0 wrote:Last time I felt this positive was the year we signed rookie Rick Mahorn and traded for Jeff Ruland and then actually played them. I don't know if any of these guys will ever be good but they are fun to root for.
McFilthy and McNasty
Some interesting times those were
Didn't turn into much and we then made a few 1st round pick for aging Gus Williams deals cutting short the rebuild in the hopes of getting a 1 and out playoff birth, but for a brief shining moment there was hope and fun (if you like thuggery when it's on your own team . . . which I do).
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
penbeast0 wrote:Last time I felt this positive was the year we signed rookie Rick Mahorn and traded for Jeff Ruland and then actually played them. I don't know if any of these guys will ever be good but they are fun to root for.
I remember when 7-11 had life-sized posters in the window of the Beef Brothers (maybe hawking Big Gulps or something). During the Grunfeld era, it was hard to get excited about something that should have been exciting because you just knew something was somehow going to screw it up.
AFM wrote:Can you guys please answer the OP? My level of concern is about a 3 right now out of 10. As long as Terd is in charge I can never be at a 1 or 2. Never trust a Greek or a Billionaire. That's my double bottom line.
0.
My concern will rise only if we get hosed by the lottery and/or draft guys who bust with our own picks in '25 and '26. At that point my concern would rise to 10. Everything really hinges on the lottery, and failing that, drafting the superstar whose hidden amongst all the complimentary and bust chaff in the rest of the draft (if we're hosed in the lotteries).
To be concerned right now is largely silly. All the evidence available suggests the guys they drafted, have not been busts, like guys picked around said slots, and/or stars who've exploded previously understood ceilings. They've been largely fine, but not particularly special, and all of us always knew that the build largely hinged, almost entirely on what we pulled out of the '25 and '26 classes (and maybe '27), '24 was gravy, and '23 was expected to be complimentary at best, that the players have ranged from meh to a touch above meh is largely a win, or at least treading water with regards to expectations of the respective classes and slots.
penbeast0 wrote:Last time I felt this positive was the year we signed rookie Rick Mahorn and traded for Jeff Ruland and then actually played them. I don't know if any of these guys will ever be good but they are fun to root for.
McFilthy and McNasty
Some interesting times those were
Didn't turn into much and we then made a few 1st round pick for aging Gus Williams deals cutting short the rebuild in the hopes of getting a 1 and out playoff birth, but for a brief shining moment there was hope and fun (if you like thuggery when it's on your own team . . . which I do).
Ruland got injured. That's the main reason that the Mahorn-Ruland teaming got cut short.
In 1983-84, Ruland injured his left knee, limiting him to 72 games over the next three seasons.
Circling back on the idea that we have to be lucky to get good. This is a long one even for me, so I'm trying to break it into chunks. But tl:dr: These guys are trying to outsmart the pingpong balls.
The Consiglieri wrote:The most frustrating most stressful thing right now, is that about 75-85% of what the next decade holds will come down to the balls that bounce around and come out in May of 2025 and 2026. So much work, 45 years of suffering as this teams fan base, and so very much is just riding around on ping pong balls. We've got a 1 in 2 chance this year of getting a top 4 guy (technically a touch more than that I know), and if we can just get past the 5th and 4th revealed cards (assuming we finish in slot 1), I genuinely think we're part of the way there, but it's terrifying to consider that we basically have about a 48% of just being totally ----ed, again, like always historically (I know 2001, and 2010, but those weren't world changing drafts like this one is, and to some extent '26). It's wild to think the past 2 years of building, and all the suffering comes down to that, but it does.
And it also doesn't.
The thing is the team has been shaving all %'s in their favor since they started this process. Even within a draft year they top up their percentage chances of landing a franchise guy by spending their surplus picks to climb the ladder. They were boxed into this strategy by prior management but they are making the numbers work on their behalf by buying into it wholesale. They are going to draft their way into relevance come hell or high water.
In Sheppard's Westbrook-for-Wall swap our draft picks were encumbered for the next 3 years. The only chance of landing a star was to lose hard and heavy or else waste our best asset: losses.
So ok. They assembled tanktastic teams built around high-usage low efficiency players like Kuzma. Poole. They sold away every player that had value in favor of future draft picks. This includes auctioning off fan favorites Deni. Gaff. Butler. Whomever. We have a lot of hair-shirt wearing and hair-tearing about this given that we had pretty much only one asset that was worth caring about. We can argue if this was necessary. Maybe foolhardy. But it was ballsy though.
Yeah it hurts, but the tactic tries to distill the 40 years of constant pain into 4-6 years of acute on-court misery -- with hope as an analgesic. I argue that hope is not unfounded. They've been super clever with their asset management given that they are all-in on drafting talent. They are damn sure committed to that at least. And find ways of increasing our % chances of success both within the draft and across multiple drafts.
Basically they are giving themselves more chances to get lucky. Nudging possibility towards likelihood. And they have done so since they started.
2023.
Spoiler:
We didn't land Wemby, so missed our first home run swing. Still we traded up for the talented upside of Bilal. With potential as a discount Giannis. A possible Siakam. Not bad if we can develop him, even if he's never a superstar. But the tactic is smart. We used our later picks to climb the ladder and pick a star caliber talent.
Basically the idea reverses PIF's annoying tactic of collecting every 2nd round pick possible and spending them in hopes that you catch the one Jokic. You can't. Unless you had a football team's 53 man roster + practice squad, and multiple minor league teams to develop your prospects, you cannot simply draft everybody every year in hopes one player rises out of the soup. They need minutes, reps, salary space, roster spots.
But it starts out with the same idea: collect all the picks. Then it goes one step further: concentrate those late picks into early picks higher up the draft ladder where there is a historically higher chance of success.
But there have been many. All approach it a different way but the curve pretty much looks the same whatever the metric.
Number #1 over all is generally strong. There is a drop off after #5. (And a weird blip where historically #2 is kindof a dud). Another drop off after #9. A steeper drop after the lottery. Then the curve flattens out beginning in the late 20's into the 30's.
After the 30's the picks are practically worthless individually.
But where I was wrong (along with PIF) was to say 'trade back always to get more swings at the pinata', and give yourself more chances to find a Jokic. Winger and Dawkins go the opposite direction. They trade those many late at bats for fewer big swings early. So that the % chance of winning is concentrated up where the difference in a single pick has a real effect. You pick the guy your scouting says is good, since he's not already gone by then.
And it may have worked in the case of Bilal. It is reassuring when you read the Synergy stat that says BCool measures with the quickest first jump of anybody in the NBA. Maybe these guys are right and they have an eye for talent. Doubling down on athleticism more than box score heroism. And it's possible highlights are more tradeable than +/- scores. Anyway. They continued in the strategy this past year:
2024.
Spoiler:
Last year was a notably meh draft, so while we did catch a #2 pick, there were no franchise guys. The Wiz decided to triple down on developmental prospects. Quadruple down even. Okay they pissed off our fanbase by shipping known quantities in Gaff and Deni to risk big swings on future stars. But they committed fully to the draft. Before, during, even after.
To get into draft positions they traded a half year before the draft. Then the big trade on the day before the draft, trading Deni for an unknown target that ended up as Bub. Then on the day of the draft dumping 2nds to move up for Kyshawn. And now a half year after the draft was over in the case of AJJ, retroactively 'drafting' a guy they liked.
What's funny is AJJ was picked one slot before we got Kyshawn. We clearly were scouting the Aussie league. What if AJJ was the guy they were hoping for at that spot, and George was the consolation prize? If so he'd better be better than Gafford or the haters will really have ammo. AJJ definitely fits the mould of the sort of player they like. Long fast athletic and young. Better potential than production, so maybe undervalued. If he's their guy I like the aggressiveness they show in going back to get him.
Anyway, seems innovative to me. At every point they are looking to improve their draft position and climb the chart to get the guys that scout well. All year they said the '24 draft was shallow in top end superstars, but deep in talent. They definitely committed to their beliefs. And drafted a quarter of their team in one year.
Meanwhile they have set themselves up for future runs to do the same thing.
2025.
Spoiler:
We get another at bat this year. This one in a draft with multiple all-stars according to scouts.
And while the odds for any one pick are poor, there's still a 40% chance we draft in the top 3. Where I am liking Ace Bailey as a tall shotmaker in the style of Tracy McGrady. Now think about it. After 40 years of losing, you wouldn't take a 40% chance of Tracy McGrady?
But even if we fall to 5, there will be movement in the lottery. Nobody's seen the March heroes rise yet. Nobody has jumped out the gym at the combine. Euro teams haven't started their playoffs. There will be players who show up and demand a look, as there are every year.
Okay, you could miss on 9x all-star Kyrie Irving, but instead pick up NCAA champion/4 x all star Kemba Walker. No matter where we draft there will be damned good players available.
To this we add a late pick, plus the option to package picks to move up. The Spurs just traded a lottery pick last year. Of course they would keep Flagg, but what if they fell to 2 or 3. And say Wemby wanted Bilal. Would you do it? Trade Bilal + #5 for the #3? I get the sense this team might. They don't seem to have sentimentality over players. They trust their scouting and go for it.
Either way. Point being there will be opportunities. We get one high pick no matter what. And whatever else we can do with the next one lower down.
(Far as I can tell we only have one 2nd round pick in 2025 since we swapped our own and sent one each to the Bucks and Griz. But still. You can only develop so much youth at once).
If we fail to land the franchise superstar this year though, we have more chances upcoming. And there is where their strategy really starts tilting the odds in our favor.
2026 .
Spoiler:
This year we will try to ensure we get a top 8 pick. If we are in danger of losing it it's because we some how got decent really fast. A good sign if that comes from our arsenal of young players. Unlikely, but bodes well for the future if so.
If somehow our vets were playing well enough to endanger our pick, no problem, we sell them fast while their value is high. Again, more assets culled. Win win.
So. We are gunning for a top 8 pick. But here is where we get crafty. This is the first year we get a pick swap with the Suns. Nobody thought this would come due this early. Or nobody but me anyway. We read where KD is pissed they shopped him. He expects to be traded over the summer. I don't see a superstar they'll get to take his place; nor a team willing swap equal value in winners. I don't think there is equal value for KD at his best. So if they shop him the Suns could very well be forced to ship him for picks and re-start it all. Even if not, they will be a year older next year, with a disgruntled team and no assets. Trying to fight it out in the West. They are primed to fall hard and fast.
Now imagine by some crazy fluke we end up better than expected and find ourselves with the 8th worst record. We are good enough to jump 7 spots in the tankstakes and risk losing our picks. Unlikely but then: #SoWizards happens. At that point we only a 25% chance of a top 4 pick. 35% chance we stay at 8. 40% chance we lose our pick to New York.
But check out what happens if PHX crashes out to the 6th worst record. Yes we still have a 40% chance to lose our pick to New York. But in that 60% chance to get a top 4 pick, all of a sudden our chance for #1 overall becomes better than any of the teams with the 4 worst records. You only swap picks after the lotto determines the order. So we get all the Suns pingpong balls. Our 6% + PHX 9% = 15%. Better odds than the worst of the losers.
Consider a more realistic scenario where those two records are flip-flopped. Put PHX at #8. Say we leapfrog 5 teams #6 worst. We now have only a 3% chance to lose our pick. But a 63.2% of a top 4 pick. Better than even the team with the worst record. In a draft that scouts say is even deeper than '25.
And what about the more likely scenario where we are still among the bottom 3. And PHX is 8th, say. There we are with a 20% chance of the #1 overall. And a 78% chance at a top 4 pick. Dybantsa. Boozer. Peterson. Arenas. Whoever.
All that in the lotto, plus we get a late pick from Thunder/Clips/Rockets that we can use or trade up, with some of the FOUR (4) 2nd round picks we have in '26. (Wait, no 3. We will ship one to the Knicks).
Point being luck matters. Yes. But they are giving us more chances to get lucky than anyone else. Stacking %'s on top of each other as a ladder to reach the top.
2027.
Spoiler:
By now our pick is no longer endangered by the Knicks. We will owe them one more 2nd rounder but we still have up to five (5) 2nd round picks in 2027. That's a lot of ammo to move up with.
2028. Similar to '26. This one is weird.
Spoiler:
From the Beal trade we already had swap rights for the 2nd best of Suns/Nets/6ers. This is better than it looks. --Brooklyn is rebuilding with youth. They'll be 3 years into developing their 4 picks from this year, if they keep them all. --The Suns will be out of the KD business. Beal finally off the books. Booker's last year before UFA. They'll be starting from the bottom. --The 76ers already can't keep George and Embiid on the floor, but they're on the books through 28.
To this we added the swap rights for 2nd best of Portland/Bucks. -- To my mind Giannis gone by then. Dame aging. And they are counting on Kuzma as their savior... -- Portland might not have a pick to swap since it could convey to the Bulls if the Blazers are in the playoffs. If their pick already conferred and they miss the playoffs, they get a lotto pick. So if they take the Bucks pick, we get all their combinations.
Basically we get the 2nd best pick of 5 teams. All of which are vulnerable. That's a dumptruck full of ping pong balls.
In addition we have three 2nd round picks to move up if we want. We had four, but shipped one. And the Magic have swap rights for our 2nd rd pick.
The five teams worth of pick swaps means we are free by 2028 to try to be good. We are playing with house money at that point.
Say we hit the numbers in 25 & 26. Cooper Flagg and AJ Dybantsa. Bailey and Boozer. Whatever. They prove instantly productive. By '28 Flagg/Ace could be in that 3rd year breakout. Our '24 rooks would be 4 year vets. Bilal entering his prime years, either extended or auditioning for his RFA deal. Poole off the books.
At that point if they drafted well, we should be fully accelerating towards the playoffs. Ready to flame out in the early rounds but scare some veteran teams. And if we do, we still can add talent by picking treasure from the wasteland of five teams. We can win and still get lottery picks. This tactic keeps going:
2029.
Spoiler:
2 first round picks. Our own pick + 2nd best of Celtics/Bucks/Portland. So, probably a late first rounder.
We also have four 2nd round picks this year I think. I'm losing track and need a spreadsheet. The Future Draft Pick sites have all dropped the ball and can't catch up with all our moves.
This is the last of the Deni picks. By now he will surely be an All-star and DPOY, edging out Wemby with his craftiness, so we better do something good with the late first rounder we get. Otherwise we will surely hear about it. Hopefully by now we will have drafted well enough to distract the haters. But I suspect the Deni fans will have a long memory.
2030.
Spoiler:
One or two picks. We have swap rights for the PHX pick. They will be digging out of a deep hole while our 25/26 picks are breaking out.
Meanwhile if Golden State is a top 10 team in the league we get their late 1st rounder. Never know. They run a smart organization. Could find a way to stay relevant.
To this we added 2nd round picks from PHX and Portland, but traded one of those away along with our own 2nd rounder.
This before getting any value from Brogdon. Middleton. Smart. Or any other moves we make in the next few years.
All that to say, the front office has set the team up for POTENTIAL dynasty. Yeah they have to draft smart. Yes there are more moves to make. But so far their asset management and 'strategery' is pretty cunning and long range looking. We are set up to continue to get chances even after we might get good. Luck is part of the strategy, but they are finding ways to make luck work on our behalf. Stack enough possibilities together and the improbable becomes practically certain. Not saying it's automatic, just saying they are making the math work for them. Luck favors the prepared. Here they are for damn sure doing the preparing. At this point it is more about scouting than it is about candles and human sacrifices to the gods of the ping pong balls.
Didn't turn into much and we then made a few 1st round pick for aging Gus Williams deals cutting short the rebuild in the hopes of getting a 1 and out playoff birth, but for a brief shining moment there was hope and fun (if you like thuggery when it's on your own team . . . which I do).
Ruland got injured. That's the main reason that the Mahorn-Ruland teaming got cut short.
In 1983-84, Ruland injured his left knee, limiting him to 72 games over the next three seasons.
I remember, then they traded him for Moses Malone and refused to play Moses and Manute together, instead continuing to try to pretend Terry Catledge would work well with Moses. Seriously, Manute was a strange, odd player combining the greatest shotblocking the league had ever seen with poor defense and a level of offensive incompetence that only Ben Wallace could approach but he was so good at his specialty and Moses covered his weak muscle/rebounding/scoring so well, I was sure it would work . . . especially if the refs made the (Kevin Loughery?) strategy of leaving him out at the 3 point line to draw illegal defense calls or force someone to cover him away from the action valid.
Rehashing an old rant, sorry.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
I just lost a giant post I was making, but I'm too interested in the topic to give it up, I'm just gonna rewrite it. I've been kind of running through some thoughts on a couple of separate topics related to this, namely.
How do you think the FO actually rates these guys? I think Flagg being #1 is borderline a fait accomplis.
But who do they have 2nd between Bailey, and Harper (is there a chance they'd have Edgecombe at 2, 3 or 4?)?
Edgecombe does seem like a lock for top 4 consideration based on what the board thinks of the FO and their preferences.
Then we get to: who in hell do we have at 5? Because it seems about 80% that we lock in at 1.01 pre-lottery (I do think there's a 10-20% chance that N.O., Utah, or Charlotte catch us, so that has to be considered a risk), and none of the mocks seem to agree on who should go at 5:
1. Jakucionsis-seemingly the most hated of the options and also the most consistently aggregated to 1.05. 2. Maluach-A big rim protector, kind of worried what else he brings. 3. Tre Johnson-Seems like the favorite around here for 5, pure scorer, and a gifted one at that it seems. 4. Knueppel-One of those picks that scares me, I don't get the sense he'll go here, but I've seen him at 5 in at least one mock and at 6 in another. 5. Fears-I expected him to climb boards a few months ago, but he seems to be falling due to various struggles the past two months or so. 6. Demin-He seems to float between 6 and 10. I should probably have him ahead of Fears.
Anyway, I am curious how people rank these guys and/or any guys I haven't listed as options at 5 they think this FO will seriously consider.
The other piece I was thinking about was just about how often does the projected top of the draft actually fall as expected? How often do we get that wtf?!?! pick? Hell, are we gonna be the wtf?!?! pick if we don't land a top 2 or 3 pick? So I started digging, and trying to scratch my fuzzy memories to make sure they're actually accurate. But the question is, how often do picks go against aggregate expectations at the top of the first round? I'm just working off vague memories, but here we go across the past 10 decades:
'15: Hezonja is the only one that might fit, and I think its more a case of there just being a big 3 or 4, and no consensus after or before KP.
'16: I definitely do not remember Bender being in anyone's top 5 that year, maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like that was a surprise at the time. I also kind of thought Hield was one of those classic, "oh, he was good in college, but he won't be able to bridge the gap to the NBA" prospects that was typically in that 9-15 zone, but went 6th. Am I wrong? Was Murray projected to go earlier? I can't remember.
'17: Static. I'm about 90% sure the '17 class's top 5 went top 5.
'18: Static. Only quibble I can remember, is that I could have sworn Young was projected top 3, but maybe he didn't go top 3 because of the Luca trade being pre-arranged? Just can't remember.
'19: Culver. I have a pretty strong memory that Culver, justified or not, was a guy projected in the top 3 or 4, and he fell to 6.
'20: Patrick Williams was 100% the shocker from what I remember. I also could argue that Okoro, Okongwu and Hayes were projected in the 5-7 zone, Hayes anywhere from 1-7, and Deni was 4th or 5th on nearly all boards (which is why I loved the pick at the time).
'21: My memory is that Barnes was the big surprise pick, that Suggs was the drop.
'22: Murray was the surprise pick here, jumping from I think 5th-7th projections to 4th?
'23: No surprises that I remember in the big-5, Bilal was the fast riser that jumped 10 or so slots, but none of the top 5 surprised.
'24: Last year I remember Holland as being a surprise. i think he was a part of the big 3 or 4 in fall of '23, but was generally considered outside the top 5 or 6 by the draft, then he went 5th. Clingan was the other one. By the draft it really sounded like he was a lock to go top 3 or 4, and then he fell to 7th.
So to me anyway, as you look at the past decade of drafts, there were about 5 or 6 real surprises inside the top 5. Feels like it happens every other year or so on average.
That's one last thing that I cling to if we have terrible lottery luck, it does seem distinctly possible that a surprise could happen big 3, probably not two surprises in the top 5, but definitely at least one is possible.
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:If you don't view Queen as a top-10 pick, it's because you're body shaming.
I'm kind of with you on this.... sometimes people spend too much time observing how a guy looks and not what he does. But all that weight does make you wonder if he can stay healthy (think Zion). I hope so, since I've always been a big Terp fan.
doclinkin wrote:...PIF's annoying tactic of collecting every 2nd round pick possible and spending them in hopes that you catch the one Jokic....
Bears no relationship whatever to anything I think or would want to do. All the same, amusez-vous.
Should have said “maddening”. The exercise of trading back multiple times to build the perfect six rookie draft. I recognize it’s just creative trolling. But it does drive some posters bonkers
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:If you don't view Queen as a top-10 pick, it's because you're body shaming.
I'm kind of with you on this.... sometimes people spend too much time observing how a guy looks and not what he does. But all that weight does make you wonder if he can stay healthy (think Zion). I hope so, since I've always been a big Terp fan.
Depending on the player it can have hidden upside. If a guy is carrying extra weight but gets on a conditioning regimen suddenly there can be a burst of speed or additional resilience. Turns into strength. Queen is skilled, he’s got balance. Footwork. Ball handling. Some finesse to his face up game. He’s not just beefy. My impression is shot does get swallowed up when he’s matched on big 5’s. So it will help to add range or a hook shot. But he’s crafty and clearly loves to hoop so you figure he will keep adding tools to his kit.
AFM wrote:Can you guys please answer the OP? My level of concern is about a 3 right now out of 10. As long as Terd is in charge I can never be at a 1 or 2. Never trust a Greek or a Billionaire. That's my double bottom line.
Prior to the wizards 3 game win streak, I was very concerned. Since the streak, my irrational exuberance has returned. In the games including the win streak and since, I think Bilal, George, TV and Bub have played well enough to justify hope. Saar might have had a decent game in his return to action post injury, plus the Wizards added 1-3 players from the 2 previous drafts and added 2 first round picks in the next 2 drafts.
Four first round picks in the next 2 drafts. Drafts predicted to be historic. Deep and talented.
Add to 6 players from the last two drafts. All of whom have at least shown flashes of being excellent players. Moments. And each are generally better than the guys picked after them. No total duds. Flameouts. Seeming good picks for the spot. Or justifiable anyway in the case of Sarr. A reasonable gamble.
Which suggests they are decent in scouting and drafting. The rest is just coaching and player development. Reps. Game minutes. Growing team chemistry. Learning how to win.
The rooks and Bilal have been here for such a short time it’s hard to say if that part can work. So it’s too early to say if you should be ‘concerned or alarmed’. If you like the guys we got. Or look at the draft picks after their selection and very few players are outperforming our guys. The rest is just wait and see. We are going to be young for a long time.
If they all stick, at some point we would have 10+ players on rookie contracts. The cap savings on that is silly. Room to add mega stars next to your youth brigade. Late career vets who actually can help in the win column when it’s time to start winning.
If we pull star players in the next couple drafts DC may look more and more like a fun place to play. With a new building. Youth energy. Respected management. A vision and a plan.
doclinkin wrote:...PIF's annoying tactic of collecting every 2nd round pick possible and spending them in hopes that you catch the one Jokic....
Bears no relationship whatever to anything I think or would want to do. All the same, amusez-vous.
Should have said “maddening”. The exercise of trading back multiple times to build the perfect six rookie draft. I recognize it’s just creative trolling. But it does drive some posters bonkers
Yeah... I did used to do that a bit. But it was in the nature of a joke. I think one time I got up to 7 rookies. But my goal was always to see whether I could find a set of trades, etc. that would allow me to make all 30 R2 picks! Never got there, sadly....
The serious goal, of course, was to convince that we should not neglect R2. Many of the best players in the league are R2 picks. &, for that matter, many of the worst are top 10 picks. Just the way it is....
TJ-D just one mvp of the rising stars challenge. Went #57 in the draft before last.
Didn't turn into much and we then made a few 1st round pick for aging Gus Williams deals cutting short the rebuild in the hopes of getting a 1 and out playoff birth, but for a brief shining moment there was hope and fun (if you like thuggery when it's on your own team . . . which I do).
Ruland got injured. That's the main reason that the Mahorn-Ruland teaming got cut short.
In 1983-84, Ruland injured his left knee, limiting him to 72 games over the next three seasons.
Side note/interesting coincidence. I met Ruland and spoke briefly to him at the Colts home opener (vs Den) in 83. On the memorial stadium concourse right as the game was about to begin. Good guy.
A lot of what we call 'thought' is just mental activity
When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression
Those who are convinced of absurdities, can be convinced to commit atrocities
AJJ definitely fits the mould of the sort of player they like. Long fast athletic and young. Better potential than production, so maybe undervalued. If he's their guy I like the aggressiveness they show in going back to get him.
The exercise of trading back multiple times to build the perfect six rookie draft. I recognize it’s just creative trolling. But it does drive some posters bonkers 