Game 61: Orlando Magic (27-33) @ Toronto Raptors (44-16) - 3:30 PM ET

[VFX]

Do you see any benefit in it though? I get the tanking argument. I’ve been right there with you the last couple years. I’ve also been very critical of WeHam as well, but I’m starting to see some real signs of life here.

This is the million dollar question for me.

Clifford has shown he's a very competent NBA head coach. He believes in his system wholeheartedly and is a good enough coach to take a mid 20s win team and make them into a high 30s win team and there's something commendable about that.

That said...

What's next?

It's going to cost a lot of money to retain Vucevic and Ross. If they don't bring them both back, the team is clearly going to take a step backwards. That step backwards will be significant if Vucevic doesn't return.

But if you DO sign both of them back at fair market value, you're pretty much ensuring you won't have a significant amount of cap space or really cap flexibility for the next few seasons.

At that point, with limited avenues to improve the team both in free agency and in the draft, you're pretty much throwing your eggs into Isaac, Bamba and Fultz's development basket. You'd have a 35 to 40 win roster and the only chance of them improving past that would be on the back of how good Isaac, Bamba and Fultz end up becoming.

I love watching this team win games. I absolutely want to make the playoffs, even if they get swept. I just don't really know how the Magic can go from a 35-40 win team to a 45-50 win team capable of winning a playoff series or two.

In the next two to three years, I think a 5-8 seed is our ceiling. The value of Isaac, Bamba, and Fultz playing meaningful minutes in a winning environment is still undeniable to me though. That alone would make resigning Vuc and Ross worth it. Possibly both to a 3-year deal where at the end of it you would have Fultz and Isaac coming off their rookie contracts and ideally have them both be ready to take over the reins of the team.

It really comes down to how good you think Isaac, Bamba, and Fultz can be. I get that people here aren't high on that core and there are questions surrounding it but I think Isaac and Fultz, in particular, are really going to be very good players in this league. Im not sure if they will ever make us a championship contender by themselves, but I definitely think we could become a 50 plus win one. I can live with us making the 6-8th seed until those guys are ready because I still see a lot of value in it.

Can’t say I agree, but I support you or anyone for believing it. I wish I too could believe it, and that the pessimist in me wasn’t so prevalent regarding professional basketball.

[Optimus_Steel]

Do you see any benefit in it though? I get the tanking argument. I’ve been right there with you the last couple years. I’ve also been very critical of WeHam as well, but I’m starting to see some real signs of life here.

This is the million dollar question for me.

Clifford has shown he's a very competent NBA head coach. He believes in his system wholeheartedly and is a good enough coach to take a mid 20s win team and make them into a high 30s win team and there's something commendable about that.

That said...

What's next?

It's going to cost a lot of money to retain Vucevic and Ross. If they don't bring them both back, the team is clearly going to take a step backwards. That step backwards will be significant if Vucevic doesn't return.

But if you DO sign both of them back at fair market value, you're pretty much ensuring you won't have a significant amount of cap space or really cap flexibility for the next few seasons.

At that point, with limited avenues to improve the team both in free agency and in the draft, you're pretty much throwing your eggs into Isaac, Bamba and Fultz's developmental basket. You'd have a 35 to 40 win roster and the only chance of them improving past that would be on the back of how good Isaac, Bamba and Fultz end up becoming.

I love watching this team win games. I absolutely want to make the playoffs, even if they get swept. I just don't really know how the Magic can go from a 35-40 win team to a 45-50 win team capable of winning a playoff series or two.

I say resign them to keep this team relevant and keep adding to the roster. We do have some assets to make moves for more established players. Look at what OKC was able to pull off in snagging Paul George using our former assets. It can be done if we are clever, aggressive and opportunistic.

[yoyojw17]

This is the million dollar question for me.

Clifford has shown he's a very competent NBA head coach. He believes in his system wholeheartedly and is a good enough coach to take a mid 20s win team and make them into a high 30s win team and there's something commendable about that.

That said...

What's next?

It's going to cost a lot of money to retain Vucevic and Ross. If they don't bring them both back, the team is clearly going to take a step backwards. That step backwards will be significant if Vucevic doesn't return.

But if you DO sign both of them back at fair market value, you're pretty much ensuring you won't have a significant amount of cap space or really cap flexibility for the next few seasons.

At that point, with limited avenues to improve the team both in free agency and in the draft, you're pretty much throwing your eggs into Isaac, Bamba and Fultz's development basket. You'd have a 35 to 40 win roster and the only chance of them improving past that would be on the back of how good Isaac, Bamba and Fultz end up becoming.

I love watching this team win games. I absolutely want to make the playoffs, even if they get swept. I just don't really know how the Magic can go from a 35-40 win team to a 45-50 win team capable of winning a playoff series or two.

In the next two to three years, I think a 5-8 seed is our ceiling. The value of Isaac, Bamba, and Fultz playing meaningful minutes in a winning environment is still undeniable to me though. That alone would make resigning Vuc and Ross worth it. Possibly both to a 3-year deal where at the end of it you would have Fultz and Isaac coming off their rookie contracts and ideally have them both be ready to take over the reins of the team.

It really comes down to how good you think Isaac, Bamba, and Fultz can be. I get that people here aren't high on that core and there are questions surrounding it but I think Isaac and Fultz, in particular, are really going to be very good players in this league. Im not sure if they will ever make us a championship contender by themselves, but I definitely think we could become a 50 plus win one. I can live with us making the 6-8th seed until those guys are ready because I still see a lot of value in it.

Can’t say I agree, but I support you or anyone for believing it. I wish I too could believe it, and that the pessimist in me wasn’t so prevalent regarding professional basketball.

Dang.... the most real thing i've read on this board in a while!

[Catledge]

This post illustrates the complete disconnect with what I’m talking about.

Am I saying to outright tank? No.
Am I saying that winning is bad? No.

What I’m saying is simply - being in the middle of the pack in the nba is the worst spot. IMO that’s where this roster, without changes, is headed. That’s it.

It's not that I'm misunderstanding you. It's that I disagree with you.

I think a team of a low-end allstar plus four players (AG, Isaac, Bamba, and Fultz) with a low-to-middling chance of becoming a star is more likely to bust out of the middle of the pack than we would be if we had tanked and drafted Zion Williamson. That's because while our current situation obviously runs the risk of not working out, drafting Zion runs the risk of him either being another Wiggins (or worse) or leaving before he accomplishes anything.

You refer to "unforeseen development," but most player development is unforeseen. A lot of people thought Wiggins and Parker would be world beaters and Oladipo was a role player. Franchise planning based on those expectations led to big mistakes. The thought that we will be able to draft a sure-fire star AND that star will stay for the bulk of his career is an unrealistic expectation, at least as unrealistic as hoping that a couple of our young guys will become significantly better than they are today.

[VFX]

This post illustrates the complete disconnect with what I’m talking about.

Am I saying to outright tank? No.
Am I saying that winning is bad? No.

What I’m saying is simply - being in the middle of the pack in the nba is the worst spot. IMO that’s where this roster, without changes, is headed. That’s it.

It's not that I'm misunderstanding you. It's that I disagree with you.

I think a team of a low-end allstar plus four players (AG, Isaac, Bamba, and Fultz) with a low-to-middling chance of becoming a star is more likely to bust out of the middle of the pack than we would be if we had tanked and drafted Zion Williamson. That's because while our current situation obviously runs the risk of not working out, drafting Zion runs the risk of him either being another Wiggins (or worse) or leaving before he accomplishes anything.

You refer to "unforeseen development," but most player development is unforeseen. A lot of people thought Wiggins and Parker would be world beaters and Oladipo was a role player. Franchise planning based on those expectations led to big mistakes. The thought that we will be able to draft a sure-fire star AND that star will stay for the bulk of his career is an unrealistic expectation, at least as unrealistic as hoping that a couple of our young guys will become significantly better than they are today.

Then yes, we disagree with the projection of this current roster.

I’ll rephrase, it’s not “unforeseen” development. It’s moreso hitting an unexpected level of progress that we haven’t seen and would surprise us. Oladipo is a great example, but that kind of development is rare. Which is exactly why I’m not putting all my eggs into that basket of happening.

[Catledge]

This post illustrates the complete disconnect with what I’m talking about.

Am I saying to outright tank? No.
Am I saying that winning is bad? No.

What I’m saying is simply - being in the middle of the pack in the nba is the worst spot. IMO that’s where this roster, without changes, is headed. That’s it.

It's not that I'm misunderstanding you. It's that I disagree with you.

I think a team of a low-end allstar plus four players (AG, Isaac, Bamba, and Fultz) with a low-to-middling chance of becoming a star is more likely to bust out of the middle of the pack than we would be if we had tanked and drafted Zion Williamson. That's because while our current situation obviously runs the risk of not working out, drafting Zion runs the risk of him either being another Wiggins (or worse) or leaving before he accomplishes anything.

You refer to "unforeseen development," but most player development is unforeseen. A lot of people thought Wiggins and Parker would be world beaters and Oladipo was a role player. Franchise planning based on those expectations led to big mistakes. The thought that we will be able to draft a sure-fire star AND that star will stay for the bulk of his career is an unrealistic expectation, at least as unrealistic as hoping that a couple of our young guys will become significantly better than they are today.

Then yes, we disagree with the projection of this current roster.

I’ll rephrase, it’s not “unforeseen” development. It’s moreso hitting an unexpected level of progress that we haven’t seen and would surprise us. Oladipo is a great example, but that kind of development is rare. Which is exactly why I’m not putting all my eggs into that basket of happening.

These are the same thing. Again, it's not that I don't understand you.

I know that the Oladipo situation is rare, but the high pick that turns into a superstar who stays for a long time is also extremely rare. Giving up our best player and sacrificing a whole year of trying to win would put more eggs into a low-percentage basket.

[VFX]

It's not that I'm misunderstanding you. It's that I disagree with you.

I think a team of a low-end allstar plus four players (AG, Isaac, Bamba, and Fultz) with a low-to-middling chance of becoming a star is more likely to bust out of the middle of the pack than we would be if we had tanked and drafted Zion Williamson. That's because while our current situation obviously runs the risk of not working out, drafting Zion runs the risk of him either being another Wiggins (or worse) or leaving before he accomplishes anything.

You refer to "unforeseen development," but most player development is unforeseen. A lot of people thought Wiggins and Parker would be world beaters and Oladipo was a role player. Franchise planning based on those expectations led to big mistakes. The thought that we will be able to draft a sure-fire star AND that star will stay for the bulk of his career is an unrealistic expectation, at least as unrealistic as hoping that a couple of our young guys will become significantly better than they are today.

Then yes, we disagree with the projection of this current roster.

I’ll rephrase, it’s not “unforeseen” development. It’s moreso hitting an unexpected level of progress that we haven’t seen and would surprise us. Oladipo is a great example, but that kind of development is rare. Which is exactly why I’m not putting all my eggs into that basket of happening.

These are the same thing. Again, it's not that I don't understand you.

I know that the Oladipo situation is rare, but the high pick that turns into a superstar who stays for a long time is also extremely rare. Giving up our best player and sacrificing a whole year of trying to win would put more eggs into a low-percentage basket.

No, they aren’t. One is development at a projected rate (scouting, etc.) and the other is unexpected development that wasn’t accounted for. That’s like saying every team that passed on Giannis knew what he was going to be beforehand. Same with Isaac. GMs valued Isaacs ceiling at some point in the draft process and 5 teams passed for other players they thought were going to be better/ had a higher ceiling.

Where did I suggest any of that in my response to Prime or you? That deadline has passed and we are on the boat for winning. I’m pointing out that there is a ceiling. That’s it. You can disagree and move on if you’d like.