roundhead0 wrote:Reignman wrote:Honestly, **** the picks, picks have no tangible value unless the guy you actually get with the pick can be a franchise changer.
Like I said, you can hoard picks all you want but the odds of you building a team better than the one above via tanking is slim to none.
Not true.
Even guys who are just average starters or rotation players can be important to get via the draft. You get the player on a cheaper contract initially including for seasons where they may actuially be productive above their contract value. You also get them for enough time to get to know each other to see if it's a good fit. You have a better idea of what you are then re-signing, and they have a reason to consider re-signing with you without forcing you to overpay for them. This can help create team stability and having a decent player for a long time can be good for the fanbase.
And you talk about "building a team better than the one above via tanking" but what you also miss is that by giving up the additional first round picks
you had better make sure that what you are building now is good enough to be a contender. If it isn't then you have mortgaged the future to really not get anything great now, and so what's the point?
Since we are counting on JV, the time for cashing in other assets to go into a win-now mode should probably wait until he's actually ready to be an important piece. That's why it was potentially foolish to cash in a 1st round pick for Lowry (unless we were certain that we would be keeping him long-term), and that's why it's likely foolish to cash in so many future assets to be better for the next couple of years when a cornerstone of what you are relying on isn't ready yet.
The problem is, if you're not a destination city in the NBA the odds of you building a contender are practically none.
If the premise is championship or bust, you might as well pick a new team. The odds of us seeing a contender here is very slim (hitting the lottery, drafting a top 5 type and then putting the necessary pieces around him).
I'm much more realistic, for a team that's been in the league for 18 years we have absolutely no sustained history of being a team that wins more than it loses. We've been a perennial lottery team as far as I'm concerned.
Teams like that rarely get any love during free agency or with trades for superstars (where the superstar dictates where he wants to go, see KG/Bos).
If you want to be a true contender, you have to start gaining some credibility with free agents because if you don't, you have practically no shot.
In a perfect world, MU can build a perennial playoff team here (like the Hawks) for the next few years. Then hopefully we have the attention of FAs and/or some of these Canadian kids really break out and when their free agency comes up they look at T.O. as a legit option.
But make no bones about it, if this team tanks it up for the next few years, even those Canadian kids might have hard time coming here if they are as good as advertised. Nobody that has a competitive bone in their body wants to play for a loser.