Rating this off season

[SalmonsSuperfan]

D-. Well on our way to another 39 win season. Trotting out the same bad team as last season. Extended Donovan for some reason. Weren't able to make any trades. The treadmill marches on...only, it's a treadmill, you don't actually move anywhere.
The reason it isn't an F is because a positive step in the right direction is simply the passage of time, one more year closer to Vuc, Pat, Collins, etc expiring. Giddey is being overpaid but it isn't the worst deal in the world and it's better than losing him for nothing. Should've been S&T'd though. Who knows if the draft pick is any good. Don't trust the team's ability to scout or develop players. The chances are good he's a bust.

[DuckIII]

One thing this thread makes obvious is that the grades themselves don't mean much when viewed together because we are using a wide variety of criteria as individuals.

Like for example, I think it would have been illogical to try to make any big moves to try to win more games next year. We don't have the assets to make the type of "big" moves that vault you into contention so it would have been just another short term and largely lateral move. Had we done things more along those lines, I would have given AK a D or F for continued incompetence of the same variety we've been seeing for years. Others would have given him an improved grade for trying to win more games.

I also don't give offseason grades based on the whole universe of outcomes. Like, I don't only give an A if you traded for Luka Doncic. You could do very little and get an A from me. You could be like Phoenix the last few years and appear to be doing a lot, and I'd give you an F. It depends entirely on each team's individual circumstances.

[Chi town]

AK didn’t get in his own way. That’s an A+ for AK.

For competent GM’s it was a B. Some opportunity cost at the draft without trades.

[Indomitable]

Didn't do anything overwhelming, didn't do anything stupid. My only real gripe is not unloading Vooch, but it's hard to put that in perspective when you have no idea whether it was feasible.

So you would give assets to unload him or take a longer bad contract back.

[jnrjr79]

Didn't do anything overwhelming, didn't do anything stupid. My only real gripe is not unloading Vooch, but it's hard to put that in perspective when you have no idea whether it was feasible.

So you would give assets to unload him or take a longer bad contract back.

That's why I said I "have no idea whether it was feasible."

[Chi town]

Didn't do anything overwhelming, didn't do anything stupid. My only real gripe is not unloading Vooch, but it's hard to put that in perspective when you have no idea whether it was feasible.

So you would give assets to unload him or take a longer bad contract back.

That's why I said I "have no idea whether it was feasible."

AK had expirings and 2nds at the deadline and he refused to take it. Demanded a 1st for Vuc.

[jnrjr79]

So you would give assets to unload him or take a longer bad contract back.

That's why I said I "have no idea whether it was feasible."

AK had expirings and 2nds at the deadline and he refused to take it. Demanded a 1st for Vuc.

I have seen no report that AK had expirings (as opposed to longer-term salary) and 2nds for Vooch last year, but I am aware he had offers that did not meet his demand for a 1st. However, that fact is irrelevant in a thread titled "Rating this off season," because those things did not occur this offseason. The title of the thread is not "rate AK's entire tenure." If it were, the grades would be a lot lower!

I am generally peeved Vooch was not unloaded this offseason, but to the extent you'd have had to take on bad salary or attach a draft pick to move him, then I'm fine just riding it out.

[dougthonus]

From a rating each individual move perspective, I'd say B/B+. The financial commitments made seem like generally good transactions, the draft pick they used felt like a pick with good upside and fitting a rebuilding strategy.

From a strategy perspective, I think the concern is all the things they didn't do and the overall direction they continue to move in, to me this is D+/C-:
Avoiding a real rebuild and moving in a retool direction
Not taking the high upside NOP trade

In the end, I think towards moving down the path they wanted to move down, I'm not sure they could realistically have done much better with the assets available. The larger concerns are still around the continued taking of short cuts towards. We did finally bail out of the old vet disaster, but we pivoted into a retool that's incredibly unlikely to yield meaningful long term results.

[League Circles]

One thing this thread makes obvious is that the grades themselves don't mean much when viewed together because we are using a wide variety of criteria as individuals.

Like for example, I think it would have been illogical to try to make any big moves to try to win more games next year. We don't have the assets to make the type of "big" moves that vault you into contention so it would have been just another short term and largely lateral move. Had we done things more along those lines, I would have given AK a D or F for continued incompetence of the same variety we've been seeing for years. Others would have given him an improved grade for trying to win more games.

I also don't give offseason grades based on the whole universe of outcomes. Like, I don't only give an A if you traded for Luka Doncic. You could do very little and get an A from me. You could be like Phoenix the last few years and appear to be doing a lot, and I'd give you an F. It depends entirely on each team's individual circumstances.

Absolutely. IMO all we can or should grade on is what choices were made in the context of how a team entered the off-season, which I define as making contract and trade offers and making draft picks.

[rosenthall]

The big swing item for their grade is their choice to not take the NO offer, assuming it was on the table. It might end up being a franchise altering decision.

[eierluke]

I give it a C+.

We just aren’t in position to be “building,” yet we keep doing it. It’s reminding me of the Weaver Pistons. Over-investing and hyping some low-growth stocks.

I like Matas and have high hopes, but he’s a wild card. His full season rookie stats resemble mediocre projection. Unless it was entirely Billy’s doing, with the tight-leash. Which it might be. My eyes suggested he’s good. But MVP track? I dunno - at that rate, I might as well call every team’s 19yo a future MVP candidate. Normally you want 3-5 of these interesting/enigma prospects on your team. Noa might be another, but there are some flags and his development might be really slow (for a mid payoff). We have 2, and their numbers probably won’t pop out.

Seems like we’ve been 4Y due for an explosive nuking of the roster, yet here we are, carefully tweaking irrelevant part by part. For whatever we gained in youth by dumping Zach, Demar, Caruso and Lonzo… we also possibly dumped arguably 4 better players (when healthy/available) than any one in this new core will ever be. Vuc is still here! (Incredible/nonsensical).

I like Giddey. Don’t love Coby. Unsure about Matas and Noa. Can say with certainty we’ll be picking low odds in the lotto or be getting swept out a 1st round.

Is there anything anybody can confidently say about this roster’s long term projection… other than we’re safely out of the 2nd apron?

As for Matas:
the eye test says he has PF size, high energy, some handles and range in his shot, his numbers however say that he has no PF rebounding.
This needs to be adressed soon, otherways he'll not even devellop into an above average starting PF.

[sco]

I give it a C+.

We just aren’t in position to be “building,” yet we keep doing it. It’s reminding me of the Weaver Pistons. Over-investing and hyping some low-growth stocks.

I like Matas and have high hopes, but he’s a wild card. His full season rookie stats resemble mediocre projection. Unless it was entirely Billy’s doing, with the tight-leash. Which it might be. My eyes suggested he’s good. But MVP track? I dunno - at that rate, I might as well call every team’s 19yo a future MVP candidate. Normally you want 3-5 of these interesting/enigma prospects on your team. Noa might be another, but there are some flags and his development might be really slow (for a mid payoff). We have 2, and their numbers probably won’t pop out.

Seems like we’ve been 4Y due for an explosive nuking of the roster, yet here we are, carefully tweaking irrelevant part by part. For whatever we gained in youth by dumping Zach, Demar, Caruso and Lonzo… we also possibly dumped arguably 4 better players (when healthy/available) than any one in this new core will ever be. Vuc is still here! (Incredible/nonsensical).

I like Giddey. Don’t love Coby. Unsure about Matas and Noa. Can say with certainty we’ll be picking low odds in the lotto or be getting swept out a 1st round.

Is there anything anybody can confidently say about this roster’s long term projection… other than we’re safely out of the 2nd apron?

As for Matas:
the eye test says he has PF size, high energy, some handles and range in his shot, his numbers however say that he has no PF rebounding.
This needs to be adressed soon, otherways he'll not even devellop into an above average starting PF.

I agree with your point, although, how important is it for him to be more than an average rebounder given that Giddey is elite.

Post Giddey deal, I'm at a B-. There wasn't much to be done. It is arguable about the return we got for Ball, but I like Okoro. I loved bringing Jones back, especially on that deal. Giddey deal was good too. I would up my grade to an A- if we just buyout Vuc.

To me (as opposed to AK), this season is about:
1) Developing Matas into a #2 option
2) Developing Noa
3) Figuring out what needs to be added to the Giddey/Matas duo

[BahamaBull]

Id give it a C. Management did everything they could to keep being mediocre, which apparently is exactly what the owners of this **** franchise want… so they achieved their goal.