What are your best Fournier trade proposals?

[pepe1991]

And again, i don't care about being right or wrong, what pisses me off is that most of bias goes at expense of own team, that they are allegedly support. How can you be fan of a team if only thing you wanna se is bunch of 19 years old contribute to 10 wins , to add even more 19 years old players until one day one of them isn't new Lebron ?

Literally every single Magic youth player is held by: future hall of famer until proven otherwise standards, if you dare to be objective and say something critial , you are hatefull idoit. Yet when they are proven wrong ( Hezonja, Payton...) they never talk about them riding their d***s for half of decade.

Oh bull you don't. I've never seen someone twist stats the way you do, and Ive NEVER seen you admit to being wrong. And to say you don't care about being right or wrong, and then to end with a point about people being 'proven wrong' is a pure contradiction of that. Nevermind you celebrating when Bamba got injured off the back of a discussion that you fundamentally misunderstood.

I've never really seem you say a positive thing about the team, you're always looking to crap on it and play contrarian. The only players you stick up for consistently are euros, and DJ Augustin. Don't try and high road this. That's a joke.

I also never seen person that leaves forum on meltdown and returns with fake account to fight people he didn't agree with, than i saw you

I've never really seem you say a positive thing about the team, you're always looking to crap on it and play contrarian. The only players you stick up for consistently are euros, and DJ Augustin. Don't try and high road this.

This is quite hilarious, my favorite player is Kawhi Leonard, last time i checked, he was born in California.
My least favorite player in nba is Nurkić, last time i checked he was from mid Bosnia, and last time i checked, Bosnia was still in Europe.
Problem is how you see " hate" and "love". When i say DJ is doing fine , it comes with standards he fits: backup PG , starter by accident, solid veteran, limited by size.
But you can accept that and you ignore it. However when i say, what belive is objective opinion on others ( Gordon - role player, Isaac starter by accident, Bamba without body for NBA, Payton somebody who doesn't fit modern NBA.... ) you take it as personal attack and get all butthurt. But that's not mine but your problem.

Talking about agendas, everybody with pair of funcional eyes can see through your bias and that you want Vučević and Fournier gone so your favorite players can "shine". Your golden boy Gordon to be more specific, that you compared with Kawhi ( how ironic...) It's wery speific players you want to see gone: two foreign players. Maybe you are just person fuiled by ethnic based hatred? See, how easy it is to paint person in racist colors.
Despite a fact Vučević is best Magic player, but hey, i'm one who is "bashing and hating" and you keep your moral highground as "objevtive and just want to see team better in future". But i'll just call bull on that. Just like Skin can pretend that he is not plotting for Vučević deparutre for almost 4 years now.

And where i "celebrated Bamba injury" ? Another poor attemp to discredit somebody by flat out lying. Bamba was guy i wanted Magic to pick. I have history logs from 2018 to prove it. Guy got hurt because his body wasn't ready.

[yoyojw17]

Clifford's teams in Charlotte showed something of a pattern to me. Slow start, late season hot start. Second season drop off (albeit with Kemba missing games).

I'm not seeing this "Slow start, late season hot" pattern...plus its a pretty big generalization that can describe half the league. Here is a closer look:

Spoiler:

• 2013-2014: 43-39

(Nov) 17-8 (Dec) 15-6 (Jan) 7-9 (Feb) 6-4 (Mar) 9-7 (Apr) 7-1

26 win improvement and 1st round sweep by the Miami super-team.

Key Reasons for improvement: Development of Walker + offseason acquisition of Al Jefferson


• 2014-2015: 33-49

(Nov) 4-14 (Dec) 6-9 (Jan) 10-4 (Feb) 3-6 (Mar) 8-9 (Apr) 2-7

10 win regression and no playoffs.

Key Reasons for regression: Injuries to A Jefferson for 3 weeks in early January and K Walker for 2 months mid Jan to mid March. Big $ off-season acquisitions of Lance Stephenson and Marvin Williams laid an egg. Stephenson was a total disaster. According to Charlotte media, Stephenson was locker room cancer who ruined the team’s chemistry, and refused to fit into system. They immediately traded him at seasons end.

• 2015-2016: 48-34

(Nov) 10-5 (Dec) 7-7 (Jan) 6-11 (Feb) 7-3 (Mar) 13-3 (Apr) 5-3

15 win improvement and took Miami super-team to 7 games in 1st rd

Key Reasons for improvement: Kemba Walker takes a huge leap in efficiency and 3P%. Addition of free agents Nic Batum, J Lin, and C Lee. Clifford balanced the lineup by moving Jefferson to bench as 6th man, inserting better defender C Zeller into starting unit. Bench unit of J Lin/A Jefferson/J Lamb/C Lee/MKG are one of best bench units in NBA that season.


• 2016-2017: 36-46

(Nov) 10-8 (Dec) 9-7 (Jan) 4-11 (Feb) 3-8 (Mar) 9-7 (Apr) 1-5

12 win regression. No Playoffs

Key Reasons for regression: Lost 3 key pieces of their bench to FA (Lin, Jefferson and Lee). Bench was major reason for prior year success. Went from top bench to one of worst. Batum and Williams have underwhelming season


• 2017-2018: 8-12

Clifford has health scare on December 6th...out for season, ends tenure in Charlotte.

The pattern is there.

2014-15
First 41: 17-24
Second 41: 25-14


2015-16
Before Kemba was injured: 18-26.
Whilst Kemba was injured: 10-8
Upon Kemba return: 5-15


2016-17
First 41: 19-22
Last 41: 28-12

2017-18
First 41: 20-21
Second 41: 16-24

3/4 slow starts. 2/4 hot finishes. 2/4 sort-of-collapses.

Even in the injured Kemba year, that injury didn't make the impact you're trying to present it as, as they actually had a better record over that stretch than during the time Kemba played.

There's a pattern there.

Coupled with Vucevic really only displaying this recent standard in a contract year I don't think it's unfair to remain skeptical about Clifford's ability to keep him, and the rest of the team, maintaining a high level of performance. Doesn't make it a conclusion, but it's perfectly acceptable enough data to have doubts.

Totally disagree. Before Vogel's arrival, Vucevic was in All-Star conversation in 14-15 and 15-16 seasons.

Spoiler:

If he's the type of person that only tries in contract years to milk as much money as possible; then why did he unnecessarily sign an early extension at team friendly discount (4y/$53m) before the 14-15 season to play in Orlando?

Every player and agent in NBA knew that the salary cap was going to take a giant leap the following summer. All he had to do was hit RFA in 15-16 and he would have gotten a massive payday. That's the summer a lot of players, including many bigs got paid...Biyombo $72m, Mozgov $68m, Noah $72m etc .

24 year old Vucevic (2014-15): 19.3 PPG / 10.9 REB / 21.5 PER

25 year old Vucevic (2015-16): 18.2 PPG / 8.9 REB / 21.1 PER

28 year old peak prime Vucevic (18-19): 20.8 PPG / 12.0 REB / 25.5 PER ...and an All-Star

I'm sorry, but arbitrary claims like "in the consideration for all star" don't really pull any weight or add value. They're completely intangible, and ultimately - he wasn't one.

Why would Vuc risk financial security and take a 1 year deal over a long term offer, on a team where he was being gifted minutes and a featured role? Of course he would be happy to take a bit less with that in mind. He's also probably just a good bloke who did the team a solid. Now? He's suffered through 6 years of losing, looking at his last big pay day opporunity, and he has a baby now, so his incentives and priorities could have shifted to give him extra motivation for this season. You can't pretend that contract years don't add incentive for players to give extra effort.

By all expectations we overachieved this season, so expecting that to be the new standard might be too presumptuous.

Not me. This season, I was expecting a 36-37 win season and more if one of the young players took a leap. It turned out to be Vucevic who elevated and got back on the ascent track he was prior to Vogel.

So, they still overachieved even by your own expectations. And overachieved on the back of a contract year player performing at an exceptionally high standard for himself.

However, if we trade Fournier now and manage to return a lower cost prospect, that is someone that could be part of a consolidation trade. Even if we only manage to trade him for cheaper role players, those are easier to move in deadline deals. $17M is hard to move unless the player is justifying the contract.

I wouldn't trade Fournier early unless there was a clear upgrade to the roster involved. To me that's absolutely not for a "low cost prospect" that might never be half as good as Fournier.

Fournier is 26 now heading into his peak prime starting next season. He's not a 29 year old Aflallo on an expiring contract; or a 28 year old JJ Redick about to enter UFA in 3 months.

Afflalo is probably a fair comp. He also posted highly efficient numbers. What was his end value? Did he end up becoming a major contributor on other teams, after being a primary focal point for Orlando? No. He became a cheap role playing journeyman.

Cheaper role players aren't easier or harder to trade at the deadline. Every trade transaction is unique in context.

What? Smaller, cheaper contracts are always easier to move.

Magic fans like you have undervalued Fournier since the day he was traded to Orlando. He has done nothing but exceed expectations. If he was a high lottery pick from NCAA most Magic fans would love him.

As is evident by actions, not rhetoric - NBA GM's and NBA coaches don't undervalue him. He'll be a valuable asset to consolidate in the coming years.

See, you're just lumping me into a pool of people whose opinions you won't entertain, but I've been a Fournier fan from early on. I was quite vocal about trading Oladipo because I thought we had Fournier as a better option (woof, was I wrong there). I always liked him. I still like what his game offers. But, on a team that's strapped for playmaking potential, I don't see him as being integral in any way, shape, or form. There is a reason why a playmaking backcourt is our biggest need whilst Fournier is still playing there.

What evidence from GMs are you talking about? The fact he's on the team being testament to how valued he is? Or is it testament to the team not being able to get a decent return for him?

I wouldn't be disappointed with what you're proposing. But I am also open to exploring other options, too.

I'm open to other options, but I'm not open to giving away good assets (like Fournier) for garbage just because of a sector of Magic fans don't like the player

I've not seen anything to suggest you're open to the prospect in any way. In a thread titled "What are your best Fournier trade proposals", you haven't listed a single proposal. You've just said "hold on to him and hope to consolidate him later". Try to entertain some possible thoughts for trades, because you've got a great mind for that and I often like your ideas.

Even though we disagree on how much we value Fournier, I'm not disagreeing because I think your data or logic is flawed. They're just different approaches to hypothetical GM'ing.

I guess there is just a really blurred line between pessimism and being realistic on this board. For me a realistic person.... sees the positive things and while still being cognizant of the fact that THAT may not happen. Us trading for fultz indicates that we like the possibilities of him healing up and being what he was expected. you go "YEYYYYYYY we did a great job finding a future point guard.... his health is still not a guarantee though... but the mere fact we went with it the higher ups have high hopes".... the pessimist goes... "he's just trash and we wasted Simmons and pick on him!". The pessimist totally ignores the brightside of the issue and pursues the downfall as the reality instead.

So needless to say... there is the grey area produced because people write differently and have different personal opinions that were not expressed in their writing. Causing friction due to misinterpretation.

I think Clifford did a great job this season. I believe that the team will sustain it. I can't compare our team vs. a totally different personnel in the hornets. it's like comparing apples and oranges. And the leadership of Fournier and vuc are 2 of the things that i think are important to the consistency. Can i be wrong.... dang right i can.... but vuc is a part of the foundation and i believe that evan is also /will also be one those players as well. I do not expect fournier to repeat this seasons downfall and i fully expect him to bounce back from it all.

Same goes with the improvements that gordon, isaac and bamba will make. Aaron will fine tune his shot selection and his efficiency will elevate. That to me is all i would like to see from him along with even tighter defense. Isaac and bamba's bodies have been things that we all said has to develop before we see their true potential.... so let's wait a little and see if that becomes true before making decisions of their careers. Giannis is a beast on the court now because he is no longer the one getting bullied at 196 lb.... but doing the bullying at 242lb. Some players will not have the desire to throw their bodies around though they are taller than everyone else....because they weigh as much as some guards. lol

so those things in my beliefs are more than possible but may not come to fruition . To me that is being realistic... but to others that is me being optimistic. hahaha it's all in the eyes of the beholder

[tiderulz]

And again, i don't care about being right or wrong, what pisses me off is that most of bias goes at expense of own team, that they are allegedly support. How can you be fan of a team if only thing you wanna se is bunch of 19 years old contribute to 10 wins , to add even more 19 years old players until one day one of them isn't new Lebron ?

Literally every single Magic youth player is held by: future hall of famer until proven otherwise standards, if you dare to be objective and say something critial , you are hatefull idoit. Yet when they are proven wrong ( Hezonja, Payton...) they never talk about them riding their d***s for half of decade.

Oh bull you don't. I've never seen someone twist stats the way you do, and Ive NEVER seen you admit to being wrong. And to say you don't care about being right or wrong, and then to end with a point about people being 'proven wrong' is a pure contradiction of that. Nevermind you celebrating when Bamba got injured off the back of a discussion that you fundamentally misunderstood.

I've never really seem you say a positive thing about the team, you're always looking to crap on it and play contrarian. The only players you stick up for consistently are euros, and DJ Augustin. Don't try and high road this. That's a joke.

I also never seen person that leaves forum on meltdown and returns with fake account to fight people he didn't agree with, than i saw you

I've never really seem you say a positive thing about the team, you're always looking to crap on it and play contrarian. The only players you stick up for consistently are euros, and DJ Augustin. Don't try and high road this.

This is quite hilarious, my favorite player is Kawhi Leonard, last time i checked, he was born in California.
My least favorite player in nba is Nurkić, last time i checked he was from mid Bosnia, and last time i checked, Bosnia was still in Europe.
Problem is how you see " hate" and "love". When i say DJ is doing fine , it comes with standards he fits: backup PG , starter by accident, solid veteran, limited by size.
But you can accept that and you ignore it. However when i say, what belive is objective opinion on others ( Gordon - role player, Isaac starter by accident, Bamba without body for NBA, Payton somebody who doesn't fit modern NBA.... ) you take it as personal attack and get all butthurt. But that's not mine but your problem.

Talking about agendas, everybody with pair of funcional eyes can see through your bias and that you want Vučević and Fournier gone so your favorite players can "shine". Your golden boy Gordon to be more specific, that you compared with Kawhi ( how ironic...) It's wery speific players you want to see gone: two foreign players. Maybe you are just person fuiled by ethnic based hatred? See, how easy it is to paint person in racist colors.
Despite a fact Vučević is best Magic player, but hey, i'm one who is "bashing and hating" and you keep your moral highground as "objevtive and just want to see team better in future". But i'll just call bull on that. Just like Skin can pretend that he is not plotting for Vučević deparutre for almost 4 years now.

And where i "celebrated Bamba injury" ? Another poor attemp to discredit somebody by flat out lying. Bamba was guy i wanted Magic to pick. I have history logs from 2018 to prove it. Guy got hurt because his body wasn't ready.

you guys are starting to make this personal instead of making it about the "post" and not the poster.

[Xatticus]

You start off with logical answer , on ezzp clear mistake on how ppg adds to 3% ,than finish your post on ridiculous claims that shots of Gordon have more value than shots of Evan.

Why?
Their eFG% : Gordon 50,7%, Evan 50,9%
their TS% Gordon 53,8% , Evan 53,6%

So from pure value per shot perspective ,there is virtually zero difference.

Even if we expend contribution to offense from potential assists, FT%, FT rate and impact on offense by offensive rating, we still get:
Evan with 109,3 off rating ,vs Gordon 106,6
Evan with 17,6% assist percentage vs Gordon 16,6
Evan had the worst year at drawing fouls since 2013-14 ,yet even that doesn't give Gordon some edge in their debate because Gordon sitting at 3,2 FTA a game still doesn't do it well enough ( or knocks them down at good rate, 73%, for career below league's average ).

Given rest of advance stats is pretty similar, without any significant indicators of Gordon's superiority ( or Evan's for that matter) , it's more than safe to say that there is zero difference,based on 2018-19 season between Evan or Gordon trying to score. Results are in both cases mediocre.
Historically, Evan is superior offensive player by wide margin based on his spot ups ,FT%, TS, eFG% ... Will Gordon surpass him in future is yet to be determined.

But if you are going to act like fact chacking police, at least yet your facts straight.

Bonus fact:
Over last 3 years, Evan's points per shot were 1,25, 1,23 and now this year dipped to 1,15, with always ranks him around middle of pack among SGs, apart from this year where he is terrible ( second worst)

Gordon's points per shots are 1,15, 1,18 and 1,19 , but that also always ranks him among top 5 worst PFs.
For comparison Griffin's points per shot is 1,37 and best value per shot, at PF goes to Giannis and his 1,60 points, where, at SG position NOBODY gives you better than 1,35.

I don't want to argue Gordon vs Evan, i want to argue logic vs " i wanna be logical as long as it fits my bias".

Conclusion: both players , one in bad year and one in his probably second best year, give mediocre results when they shoot. There is no difference in their shots, efficiency and logical answer on question who should shoot more is -neither. But that goes beyond this argument.

I literally answered your question within the same sentence.

Personally, I see little point in giving a large share of offense to average offensive players that bring little else to the team. An Aaron Gordon shot is significantly more valuable than an Evan Fournier shot because it comes along with the defense and versatility that Gordon brings when he is on the floor.

You can't compartmentalize offense because a player must be on the floor to take shots. It might be a relevant discussion if you could call timeouts and change lineups after every possession. This is exceptionally obvious when two players have nearly identical sets of shooting metrics; as was the case with Gordon and Fournier this past season.

I already addressed the insignificance of the difference between Fournier's shooting line this year and in years past. Suffice it to say that the difference within one game amounts to roughly half of what you gain from one offensive rebound, one forced turnover, or one additional forced miss at the defensive end.

So I ask you... which player provided greater value for the usage they were allocated this past season? If you can't get the answer to this correct, you are hopeless.

[Skin]

Ben, don't let pepe troll you. You got 'em already.

[ezzzp]

That is some ridiculously bad math.

Spoiler:

The difference between .340 and .371 on Fournier's volume is 14 additional makes over the course of the entire season. That's a total of 42 extra points for the year or an additional half of a point per game. To give you some perspective on the insignificance of that, the value of a single possession is about 1.1 points.

Per game scoring is primarily a function of field goal attempts. Fournier could score an extra five points per game and it wouldn't actually mean he is any better. He could score five fewer points per game and it wouldn't actually mean he was any worse.

Fournier could easily reach that additional 5.2 points per game if we simply took 4.5 shots per game away from the rest of the team and gave them to Fournier. That would almost certainly do more harm than good though, as he was below the team average in efficiency metrics.

Personally, I see little point in giving a large share of offense to average offensive players that bring little else to the team. An Aaron Gordon shot is significantly more valuable than an Evan Fournier shot because it comes along with the defense and versatility that Gordon brings when he is on the floor.

You're correct, not sure how I did that but I totally botched that math.

But giving a player more shots and role in offense because of defense and versatility makes zero sense to me...are you saying that Tony Allen FGA's are more valuable than Ray Allen FGA's?

Gordon is a career .534 TS% /.321 3P%
Fournier is a career .558 TS% / .371 3P%

• Points Per Touch

Gordon: (18-19) .297 PPT / (17-18) .294 PPT / (16-17) .329 PPT / (15-16) .243 PPT / (14-15) .231 PPT
Fournier: (18-19) .348 PPT / (17-18) .426 PPT / (16-17) .367 PPT / (15-16) .317 PPT / (14-15) .317 PPT

• Creation for others (AST%)

Gordon: (Career) 12.0 / (18-19) 16.6 / (17-18) 11.7 / (16-17) 10.5 / (15-16) 10.3 / (14-15) 6.3
Fournier: (Career) 14.2 / (18-19) 17.6 /(17-18) 14.8 / (16-17) 14.8 / (15-16) 12.8 / (14-15) 11.5

• Driving (18-19)

Gordon: 456 drives / 205 FGA at 42.9 FG% / 82 FTA at 70.7 FT% / 10.3 AST% with 10.3 TOV%
Fournier: 706 drives / 311 FGA at 47.6 FG% / 64 FTA at 78.1 FT% / 11.9 AST% with 6.4 TOV%

• Catch and Shoot (eFG%)

Gordon: (18-19) 51.4 / (17-18) 54.5 / (16-17) 46.0 / (15-16) 43.5 / (14-15) 34.3
Fournier: (18-19) 54.0 / (17-18) 58.6 / (16-17) 54.2 / (15-16) 59.4 / (14-15) 55.9

[drsd]

Getting back to the thoughts of "Fournier trade proposals?", I am convinced that he can only be traded for a backup SF to replace Ross. So why do that? (Rhetoric).

Fournier and Mozgov coming off the books to make a major FA slash for 2020/21 is the point of his contract right now. Trading that away makes no sense to me.


..

[pepe1991]

You start off with logical answer , on ezzp clear mistake on how ppg adds to 3% ,than finish your post on ridiculous claims that shots of Gordon have more value than shots of Evan.

Why?
Their eFG% : Gordon 50,7%, Evan 50,9%
their TS% Gordon 53,8% , Evan 53,6%

So from pure value per shot perspective ,there is virtually zero difference.

Even if we expend contribution to offense from potential assists, FT%, FT rate and impact on offense by offensive rating, we still get:
Evan with 109,3 off rating ,vs Gordon 106,6
Evan with 17,6% assist percentage vs Gordon 16,6
Evan had the worst year at drawing fouls since 2013-14 ,yet even that doesn't give Gordon some edge in their debate because Gordon sitting at 3,2 FTA a game still doesn't do it well enough ( or knocks them down at good rate, 73%, for career below league's average ).

Given rest of advance stats is pretty similar, without any significant indicators of Gordon's superiority ( or Evan's for that matter) , it's more than safe to say that there is zero difference,based on 2018-19 season between Evan or Gordon trying to score. Results are in both cases mediocre.
Historically, Evan is superior offensive player by wide margin based on his spot ups ,FT%, TS, eFG% ... Will Gordon surpass him in future is yet to be determined.

But if you are going to act like fact chacking police, at least yet your facts straight.

Bonus fact:
Over last 3 years, Evan's points per shot were 1,25, 1,23 and now this year dipped to 1,15, with always ranks him around middle of pack among SGs, apart from this year where he is terrible ( second worst)

Gordon's points per shots are 1,15, 1,18 and 1,19 , but that also always ranks him among top 5 worst PFs.
For comparison Griffin's points per shot is 1,37 and best value per shot, at PF goes to Giannis and his 1,60 points, where, at SG position NOBODY gives you better than 1,35.

I don't want to argue Gordon vs Evan, i want to argue logic vs " i wanna be logical as long as it fits my bias".

Conclusion: both players , one in bad year and one in his probably second best year, give mediocre results when they shoot. There is no difference in their shots, efficiency and logical answer on question who should shoot more is -neither. But that goes beyond this argument.

I literally answered your question within the same sentence.

Personally, I see little point in giving a large share of offense to average offensive players that bring little else to the team. An Aaron Gordon shot is significantly more valuable than an Evan Fournier shot because it comes along with the defense and versatility that Gordon brings when he is on the floor.

You can't compartmentalize offense because a player must be on the floor to take shots. It might be a relevant discussion if you could call timeouts and change lineups after every possession. This is exceptionally obvious when two players have nearly identical sets of shooting metrics; as was the case with Gordon and Fournier this past season.

I already addressed the insignificance of the difference between Fournier's shooting line this year and in years past. Suffice it to say that the difference within one game amounts to roughly half of what you gain from one offensive rebound, one forced turnover, or one additional forced miss at the defensive end.

So I ask you... which player provided greater value for the usage they were allocated this past season? If you can't get the answer to this correct, you are hopeless.

Historically Evan is superior player on offense that commands attention, and even in his worst shooting year of his career, he still got defenders glued to him ,especially in playoffs. Gordon, who played his best sesason on offense in his career, still didn't make leap over Evan's worst, and as we could see in playoffs, was stlil dared to shoot and could not take adventage of being ignored by defense.
So yes, Evan still provides greater value on offense than Gordon.

If you can't understand difference between shooter that greats attention a nd player who never gets extra attention from defense, than you are beyond hopless.

Also your point from start made no sense, why would you want Gordon to shoot more because he provides better value on defense or "overall" ( witch he does not )? Does that mean that Igoudala should shoot more than Curry because he plays better defense?
You noticed error of poster and just tried to push your agenda at the end.

it's funny how you went from level headed poster to complete biased poster in short period of time.

[ezzzp]

Fournier and Mozgov coming off the books to make a major FA slash for 2020/21 is the point of his contract right now. Trading that away makes no sense to me...

The Magic won't be able to use any cap space in summer of 2020 (heading into 20-21 season). They have to conserve that space because Fultz and Isaac are restricted free agents summer of 2021. Otherwise they are going into ridiculous levels of Luxury Tax.

Those two contracts are each going to jump from rookie scale to at bare minimum starter scale (17% of salary cap = +$20m). That's if they are just average (Fournier level) starters...if they become more than that, then expect other teams offer sheets to be much higher.

Then the following summer Aaron Gordon hits free agency. He'll be eligible for a 30% max contract. Even if he isn't a max player, its going to take a big offer from the Magic to get him to stay in Orlando for a 3d contract through his prime years.

Then the next summer, Bamba hits free agency.

...this is what happens when teams accumulate and rely on too much youth, their rookie scale contracts all mature in compressed time span making it near impossible to keep them all.

Its why I've been for retaining all assets to use in consolidation trades over next 1-2 years to upgrade roster as cap space isn't looking viable with or without Fournier/Vucevic as the lack of $ will be because of numerous contracts dramatically increasing from rookie scale to regular cost.

[Skin]

Fournier and Mozgov coming off the books to make a major FA slash for 2020/21 is the point of his contract right now. Trading that away makes no sense to me...

The Magic won't be able to use any cap space in summer of 2020 (heading into 20-21 season). They have to conserve that space because Fultz and Isaac are restricted free agents summer of 2021. Otherwise they are going into ridiculous levels of Luxury Tax.

Those two contracts are each going to jump from rookie scale to at bare minimum starter scale (17% of salary cap = +$20m). That's if they are just average (Fournier level) starters...if they become more than that, then expect other teams offer sheets to be much higher.

Then the following summer Aaron Gordon hits free agency. He'll be eligible for a 30% max contract. Even if he isn't a max player, its going to take a big offer from the Magic to get him to stay in Orlando for a 3d contract through his prime years.

Then the next summer, Bamba hits free agency.

...this is what happens when teams accumulate and rely on too much youth, their rookie scale contracts all mature in compressed time span making it near impossible to keep them all.

No, no, no... the scenario where you hit on players you drafted is the ideal scenario. This is exactly what you want.

What you don't want is to overpay for them. So long as you're paying the right value, then it's ok.

This is why the "we must retain the asset" argument fails. This is what happened to us with Harris and Fournier. We didn't want to lose them for nothing (like we are now facing with Vuc). Then when we do want to trade them, we can't get anything good.

The time to trade them is before the deadline prior to their summer of FA. Especially true for RFAs. That is the best time to get value for them. Teams trading for them gain the Restricted leverage so they'll likely offer more. Once you sign your own FA and you overpay, then that's when you get in trouble because nobody wants to trade for an overpaid player and give up something good.

But the bottom line is we need to be frugal with our cap space and only spend on players we value at the amount we value them. Don't over pay. Don't be afraid to lose them for nothing because cap space is never "nothing".

Can't make signings that are going to leave you in an disadvantageous position should you decide you need to trade them. Imagine the difficulty after giving Vuc a 5 year, $28-32M per year deal. Our team would be cap strapped an unable to improve in any way other than by getting super lucky with draft picks in the late teens (because you won't be bad enough to be picking any higher).

[pepe1991]

Fournier and Mozgov coming off the books to make a major FA slash for 2020/21 is the point of his contract right now. Trading that away makes no sense to me...

The Magic won't be able to use any cap space in summer of 2020 (heading into 20-21 season). They have to conserve that space because Fultz and Isaac are restricted free agents summer of 2021. Otherwise they are going into ridiculous levels of Luxury Tax.

Those two contracts are each going to jump from rookie scale to at bare minimum starter scale (17% of salary cap = +$20m). That's if they are just average (Fournier level) starters...if they become more than that, then expect other teams offer sheets to be much higher.

Then the following summer Aaron Gordon hits free agency. He'll be eligible for a 30% max contract. Even if he isn't a max player, its going to take a big offer from the Magic to get him to stay in Orlando for a 3d contract through his prime years.

Then the next summer, Bamba hits free agency.

...this is what happens when teams accumulate and rely on too much youth, their rookie scale contracts all mature in compressed time span making it near impossible to keep them all.

No, no, no... the scenario where you hit on players you drafted is the ideal scenario. This is exactly what you want.

What you don't want is to overpay for them. So long as you're paying the right value, then it's ok.

This is why the "we must retain the asset" argument fails. This is what happened to us with Harris and Fournier. We didn't want to lose them for nothing (like we are now facing with Vuc). Then when we do want to trade them, we can't get anything good.

The time to trade them is before the deadline prior to their summer of FA. Especially true for RFAs. That is the best time to get value for them. Teams trading for them gain the Restricted leverage so they'll likely offer more. Once you sign your own FA and you overpay, then that's when you get in trouble because nobody wants to trade for an overpaid player and give up something good.

But the bottom line is we need to be frugal with our cap space and only spend on players we value at the amount we value them. Don't over pay. Don't be afraid to lose them for nothing because cap space is never "nothing".

Can't make signings that are going to leave you in an disadvantageous position should you decide you need to trade them. Imagine the difficulty after giving Vuc a 5 year, $28-32M per year deal. Our team would be cap strapped an unable to improve in any way other than by getting super lucky with draft picks in the late teens (because you won't be bad enough to be picking any higher).

Rookie scale extensions are not cheap.
Especially early extensions who are designed for superstars in making.

2014 draft class for example:
Wiggins- max contract
Joel Embiid- Max contract
Parker , $20M a year deal ( 1+1 due injuries tho)
Gordon 4 years $84M
TJ Warren 4 years $54M
Harris 4 years $82M
Smart 4 years $52M
Exum 3 yeras $33M
Lavine 4 years $78M

Literally everybody with any value got their $11-20M deals. That's not cheap. And Embiid and Wiggins got their <$25 000 000 deals.

[ezzzp]

No, no, no... the scenario where you hit on players you drafted is the ideal scenario. This is exactly what you want.

What you don't want is to overpay for them. So long as you're paying the right value, then it's ok.

This is why the "we must retain the asset" argument fails. This is what happened to us with Harris and Fournier. We didn't want to lose them for nothing (like we are now facing with Vuc). Then when we do want to trade them, we can't get anything good.

The time to trade them is before the deadline prior to their summer of FA. Especially true for RFAs. That is the best time to get value for them. Teams trading for them gain the Restricted leverage so they'll likely offer more. Once you sign your own FA and you overpay, then that's when you get in trouble because nobody wants to trade for an overpaid player and give up something good.

But the bottom line is we need to be frugal with our cap space and only spend on players we value at the amount we value them. Don't over pay. Don't be afraid to lose them for nothing because cap space is never "nothing".

Can't make signings that are going to leave you in an disadvantageous position should you decide you need to trade them. Imagine the difficulty after giving Vuc a 5 year, $28-32M per year deal. Our team would be cap strapped an unable to improve in any way other than by getting super lucky with draft picks in the late teens (because you won't be bad enough to be picking any higher).

No, no, no...nobody hits on all their drafts, nobody.

Being in a scenario having to decide which of multiple young players is worth what (in a cluster) is NOT what you want. Because of the age that players enter the NBA, its difficult to know what players you are overpaying or should keep. That's where your argument fails.

That is exactly why scenarios like trading Oladipo and maxing out Wiggins occur.

If the Magic had retained Harris instead of trading him for cap space, they wouldn't have ended up with either Jeff Green or Biyombo. They would have had a very good trade asset or good young player instead.

[pepe1991]

Vast majority of players after 4 years are still treated as "prospects" yet already getting payed like proven stars.
And that's the trap of rebuild.

I will use Wizards as example 2011- present
Wizards draft picks:
1#
6#
3#
3#

Nobody can say they didn't tank hard. They did. Who they got? John Wall, Ian Vesely, Otto Porter and Beal. By default one pick was dumpster fire.

Wall went to sign 5 years $80 M extension. ( max contract at times)
Otto Porter got his 4 yeras, $108M (after cap explosion)
Beal got his 5 years, $127M ( max contract )

Problem? After , on surface sucesful rebuild, they resigned 3 super high lottery pick and were virtually broken .
Over time they added another poor contract in Ian Mahinmi but let's not fool ourselfs, vast majority of their cap was tied with Beal, Wall and Porter, their high praised picks.

And that's the problem. Orlando faced that problem with Evan, Harris and Oladipo.
Evan and Oladipo were too expensive to keep both, and both got overpayed for what they showed at that point.
Harris, in Hennigan's desire to have cap space, was dumped in salary dump trade, after getting his rookie extension (over)payday.

This is nothing new ,but it's more obvious nowdays than ever, that teams resign their high praise lottery picks without any clear vision about them ,and it always comes to bite them in a** .
Wiggins is flagship example of that.

He was 1# pick, talent is there, 1# pick wants to be payed like one, he demands the max. Team can't lose first overall draft pick so they sign him on 5 years max money, and now they can't even rebuild because of him. And guy blows.
Even smart organisation like Celtics, screwed up with Smart ( how irronic...).

[Skin]

No, no, no... the scenario where you hit on players you drafted is the ideal scenario. This is exactly what you want.

What you don't want is to overpay for them. So long as you're paying the right value, then it's ok.

This is why the "we must retain the asset" argument fails. This is what happened to us with Harris and Fournier. We didn't want to lose them for nothing (like we are now facing with Vuc). Then when we do want to trade them, we can't get anything good.

The time to trade them is before the deadline prior to their summer of FA. Especially true for RFAs. That is the best time to get value for them. Teams trading for them gain the Restricted leverage so they'll likely offer more. Once you sign your own FA and you overpay, then that's when you get in trouble because nobody wants to trade for an overpaid player and give up something good.

But the bottom line is we need to be frugal with our cap space and only spend on players we value at the amount we value them. Don't over pay. Don't be afraid to lose them for nothing because cap space is never "nothing".

Can't make signings that are going to leave you in an disadvantageous position should you decide you need to trade them. Imagine the difficulty after giving Vuc a 5 year, $28-32M per year deal. Our team would be cap strapped an unable to improve in any way other than by getting super lucky with draft picks in the late teens (because you won't be bad enough to be picking any higher).

No, no, no...nobody hits on all their drafts, nobody.

Being in a scenario having to decide which of multiple young players is worth what (in a cluster) is NOT what you want. Because of the age that players enter the NBA, its difficult to know what players you are overpaying or should keep. That's where your argument fails.

That is exactly why scenarios like trading Oladipo and maxing out Wiggins occur.

If the Magic had retained Harris instead of trading him for cap space, they wouldn't have ended up with either Jeff Green or Biyombo. They would have had a very good trade asset or good young player instead.

Well, I wouldn't say nobody... Duncan, Ginobili, Parker.... Westbook, Harden, Durant... Curry, Klay, Draymond... off the top of my head... I'd say those qualify..

But I agree... it's uncommon... which actually is a point that helps my argument. If not all picks pan out, then that would alleviate burden on the cap and you wouldn't run into the problem you first brought up about not being able to afford to keep them all.

We don't know what Harris would have gotten us if we kept him. The problem with Harris was that he was good, but not great. Most agreed that he was a good #3/4 option on a good team and that's what he is today. So it was problematic for us because he blocked PT for Gordon and Hezonja.... 2 Top 5 picks who the Magic needed to find out about.

But Coach and GM weren't on the same page. Coach was chasing playoffs, GM wanted development... The trade for Jennings/Illy was thought to help both. Coach gets his old soldiers to make a push. GM gets PT for young players he drafted w/out long term salary attached to newly acquired players. It fell apart hard and Skiles ran away noting differences in philosophy.

Scenarios like Oladipo and Wiggins occur because of wrong choices. If you have a GM with a good scouting eye then you can avoid these types of mistakes. But simply put, the NBA is littered with bad GMs.

[Skin]

The Magic won't be able to use any cap space in summer of 2020 (heading into 20-21 season). They have to conserve that space because Fultz and Isaac are restricted free agents summer of 2021. Otherwise they are going into ridiculous levels of Luxury Tax.

Those two contracts are each going to jump from rookie scale to at bare minimum starter scale (17% of salary cap = +$20m). That's if they are just average (Fournier level) starters...if they become more than that, then expect other teams offer sheets to be much higher.

Then the following summer Aaron Gordon hits free agency. He'll be eligible for a 30% max contract. Even if he isn't a max player, its going to take a big offer from the Magic to get him to stay in Orlando for a 3d contract through his prime years.

Then the next summer, Bamba hits free agency.

...this is what happens when teams accumulate and rely on too much youth, their rookie scale contracts all mature in compressed time span making it near impossible to keep them all.

No, no, no... the scenario where you hit on players you drafted is the ideal scenario. This is exactly what you want.

What you don't want is to overpay for them. So long as you're paying the right value, then it's ok.

This is why the "we must retain the asset" argument fails. This is what happened to us with Harris and Fournier. We didn't want to lose them for nothing (like we are now facing with Vuc). Then when we do want to trade them, we can't get anything good.

The time to trade them is before the deadline prior to their summer of FA. Especially true for RFAs. That is the best time to get value for them. Teams trading for them gain the Restricted leverage so they'll likely offer more. Once you sign your own FA and you overpay, then that's when you get in trouble because nobody wants to trade for an overpaid player and give up something good.

But the bottom line is we need to be frugal with our cap space and only spend on players we value at the amount we value them. Don't over pay. Don't be afraid to lose them for nothing because cap space is never "nothing".

Can't make signings that are going to leave you in an disadvantageous position should you decide you need to trade them. Imagine the difficulty after giving Vuc a 5 year, $28-32M per year deal. Our team would be cap strapped an unable to improve in any way other than by getting super lucky with draft picks in the late teens (because you won't be bad enough to be picking any higher).

Rookie scale extensions are not cheap.
Especially early extensions who are designed for superstars in making.

2014 draft class for example:
Wiggins- max contract
Joel Embiid- Max contract
Parker , $20M a year deal ( 1+1 due injuries tho)
Gordon 4 years $84M
TJ Warren 4 years $54M
Harris 4 years $82M
Smart 4 years $52M
Exum 3 yeras $33M
Lavine 4 years $78M

Literally everybody with any value got their $11-20M deals. That's not cheap. And Embiid and Wiggins got their <$25 000 000 deals.

Not arguing that it's not expensive. Arguing that if you can build a team that way, then that's a great recipe for success... but it takes understanding your players and their potential and not falling in love with the smell of your own poo.

[MagicMatic]

No, no, no... the scenario where you hit on players you drafted is the ideal scenario. This is exactly what you want.

What you don't want is to overpay for them. So long as you're paying the right value, then it's ok.

This is why the "we must retain the asset" argument fails. This is what happened to us with Harris and Fournier. We didn't want to lose them for nothing (like we are now facing with Vuc). Then when we do want to trade them, we can't get anything good.

The time to trade them is before the deadline prior to their summer of FA. Especially true for RFAs. That is the best time to get value for them. Teams trading for them gain the Restricted leverage so they'll likely offer more. Once you sign your own FA and you overpay, then that's when you get in trouble because nobody wants to trade for an overpaid player and give up something good.

But the bottom line is we need to be frugal with our cap space and only spend on players we value at the amount we value them. Don't over pay. Don't be afraid to lose them for nothing because cap space is never "nothing".

Can't make signings that are going to leave you in an disadvantageous position should you decide you need to trade them. Imagine the difficulty after giving Vuc a 5 year, $28-32M per year deal. Our team would be cap strapped an unable to improve in any way other than by getting super lucky with draft picks in the late teens (because you won't be bad enough to be picking any higher).

Rookie scale extensions are not cheap.
Especially early extensions who are designed for superstars in making.

2014 draft class for example:
Wiggins- max contract
Joel Embiid- Max contract
Parker , $20M a year deal ( 1+1 due injuries tho)
Gordon 4 years $84M
TJ Warren 4 years $54M
Harris 4 years $82M
Smart 4 years $52M
Exum 3 yeras $33M
Lavine 4 years $78M

Literally everybody with any value got their $11-20M deals. That's not cheap. And Embiid and Wiggins got their <$25 000 000 deals.

Not arguing that it's not expensive. Arguing that if you can build a team that way, then that's a great recipe for success... but it takes understanding your players and their potential and not falling in love with the smell of your own poo.

Of that list only Embiid maybe is worth his contract, barring his health. AG’s is only good because it scales down. None of those players are guys you can build around or deserving of “max”. That’s where teams make mistakes. Giving guys a boatload of money, that decline to lesser valued assets, become difficult to move until they are expiring deals. If those same players are past their prime it becomes even more difficult.

[ezzzp]

Well, I wouldn't say nobody... Duncan, Ginobili, Parker.... Westbook, Harden, Durant... Curry, Klay, Draymond... off the top of my head... I'd say those qualify.

But I agree... it's uncommon... which actually is a point that helps my argument. If not all picks pan out, then that would alleviate burden on the cap and you wouldn't run into the problem you first brought up about not being able to afford to keep them all.

If anything that just proves my point, not yours but nice try.

Also, the Spurs example was in era when rookies entering NBA were older plus they weren't drafted in a cluster. Tim Duncan was 22 (1997 draft); T Parker was 19 drafted 4 years later in 2001, Manu was 25 years old as rookie and drafted in 02.

The OKC is perfect example of core that team couldn't keep together specifically for reason I stated.

GSW is the only one, BUT that was only because Curry had serious injury concerns and hadn't yet erupted so he was on cheap contract PLUS Green's contract matured just before the salary cap spiked in 2016.

We don't know what Harris would have gotten us if we kept him. The problem with Harris was that he was good, but not great. Most agreed that he was a good #3/4 option on a good team and that's what he is today. So it was problematic for us because he blocked PT for Gordon and Hezonja.... 2 Top 5 picks who the Magic needed to find out about.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the Magic could have gotten more than unusable cap space or 22-25 games of B Jennings and E Ilyasova. Both in trade return or actual production. Of course that's just hypothetical, but I bet most people who pay decent attention to NBA would agree with me on that.

That the Magic had to decide on Harris to be able to look at Gordon and Hezonja only adds to my argument.

High draft picks aren't certainties, and in clusters they force rash decisions because team has usually intentionally sacrificed an entire season (of revenue etc) to acquire them. Those decisions are almost always on players <24 years old and often on teams losing a lot so not only are they raw but their numbers can't be analyzed in relation to winning basketball.

But Coach and GM weren't on the same page. Coach was chasing playoffs, GM wanted development

It was ownership pushing for the playoffs. If you recall Rich DeVos' health was rapidly deteriorating and had retired because of it. Dan Devos and family, along with PBO Alex Martins wanted him to make sure he would be able to experience competitive team.

From various reports, Hennigan and Skiles clashed over Payton. From January on, there were incidents on the bench were you would see Skiles yelling at EP and Payton blowing him off. Hennigan went all in on EP and in the end he died on that hill. Skiles was right and while I wasn't happy with what WeltHam got for EP, they confirmed Skiles view and made the right call for the sake of big picture.

People also want to say Skiles didn't develop Hezonja, but that just isn't true. He played him 18mpg in 79 games...and those were gifted minutes because Mario was probably most raw defender I've ever seen enter the NBA. But by season's end, Skiles was putting him on opposing team's best bench scorer and even put the ball in his hands with second unit.

Skiles was also key to Oladipo's development in my opinion. Prior to benching him, VO was out-of-control on both ends, but afterwards he started to play less erratic and valuing possessions more and taking less careless risks on defense.

Skiles also played interesting small ball lineup of Oladipo SG/Fournier SF/ Gordon PF that was very fun to watch...not super effective because VO/AG couldn't shoot...but he was going in the right direction.

Vogel destroyed all that progress.

The trade for Jennings/Illy was thought to help both. Coach gets his old soldiers to make a push. GM gets PT for young players he drafted w/out long term salary attached to newly acquired players. It fell apart hard and Skiles ran away noting differences in philosophy.

The trade for Jennings/Ilyasova was 100% all about the offseason cap space otherwise it would have been different return...its why Frye was also moved same time...familiarity with coach and his system was just extra.

Skiles quit because Hennigan was doubling down on Payton and he saw that Hennigan was in way over his head trying acquire three max players in summer when 2/3's of NBA had at least one max salary slot available in cap space. He was right about both.

Scenarios like Oladipo and Wiggins occur because of wrong choices. If you have a GM with a good scouting eye then you can avoid these types of mistakes. But simply put, the NBA is littered with bad GMs.

Bad choices forced to be made because of the conditions created from too many young players clustered together. Hennigan was supposed to have "good scouting eye." If you don't have the right cap spacing that's what happens; and if you don't have the right infrastructure (which most tank teams don't because that is decimated by fiscal cutbacks to absorb losses) then development suffers tremendously.

That's before you even get into ego dynamics of numerous young players trying to make it their team. Which as Oladipo told Woj was key problem in Orlando.

[Skin]

Well, I wouldn't say nobody... Duncan, Ginobili, Parker.... Westbook, Harden, Durant... Curry, Klay, Draymond... off the top of my head... I'd say those qualify.

But I agree... it's uncommon... which actually is a point that helps my argument. If not all picks pan out, then that would alleviate burden on the cap and you wouldn't run into the problem you first brought up about not being able to afford to keep them all.

If anything that just proves my point, not yours but nice try.

Also, the Spurs example was in era when rookies entering NBA were older plus they weren't drafted in a cluster. Tim Duncan was 22 (1997 draft); T Parker was 19 drafted 4 years later in 2001, Manu was 25 years old as rookie and drafted in 02.

The OKC is perfect example of core that team couldn't keep together specifically for reason I stated.

GSW is the only one, BUT that was only because Curry had serious injury concerns and hadn't yet erupted so he was on cheap contract PLUS Green's contract matured just before the salary cap spiked in 2016.

We don't know what Harris would have gotten us if we kept him. The problem with Harris was that he was good, but not great. Most agreed that he was a good #3/4 option on a good team and that's what he is today. So it was problematic for us because he blocked PT for Gordon and Hezonja.... 2 Top 5 picks who the Magic needed to find out about.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the Magic could have gotten more than unusable cap space or 22-25 games of B Jennings and E Ilyasova. Both in trade return or actual production. Of course that's just hypothetical, but I bet most people who pay decent attention to NBA would agree with me on that.

That the Magic had to decide on Harris to be able to look at Gordon and Hezonja only adds to my argument.

High draft picks aren't certainties, and in clusters they force rash decisions because team has usually intentionally sacrificed an entire season (of revenue etc) to acquire them. Those decisions are almost always on players <24 years old and often on teams losing a lot so not only are they raw but their numbers can't be analyzed in relation to winning basketball.

But Coach and GM weren't on the same page. Coach was chasing playoffs, GM wanted development

It was ownership pushing for the playoffs. If you recall Rich DeVos' health was rapidly deteriorating and had retired because of it. Dan Devos and family, along with PBO Alex Martins wanted him to make sure he would be able to experience competitive team.

From various reports, Hennigan and Skiles clashed over Payton. From January on, there were incidents on the bench were you would see Skiles yelling at EP and Payton blowing him off. Hennigan went all in on EP and in the end he died on that hill. Skiles was right and while I wasn't happy with what WeltHam got for EP, they confirmed Skiles view and made the right call for the sake of big picture.

People also want to say Skiles didn't play Hezonja, but that just isn't true. He played him 18mpg in 79 games...and those were gifted minutes because Mario was probably most raw defender I've ever seen enter the NBA. But by season's end, Skiles was putting him on opposing team's best bench scorer and even put the ball in his hands with second unit.

Skiles was also key to Oladipo's development in my opinion. Prior to benching him, VO was out-of-control on both ends, but afterwards he started to play less erratic and valuing possessions more and taking less careless risks on defense.

Skiles also played interesting small ball lineup of Oladipo SG/Fournier SF/ Gordon PF that was very fun to watch...not super effective because VO/AG couldn't shoot...but he was going in the right direction.

Vogel destroyed all that progress.

The trade for Jennings/Illy was thought to help both. Coach gets his old soldiers to make a push. GM gets PT for young players he drafted w/out long term salary attached to newly acquired players. It fell apart hard and Skiles ran away noting differences in philosophy.

The trade for Jennings/Ilyasova was 100% all about the offseason cap space otherwise it would have been different return...its why Frye was also moved same time...familiarity with coach and his system was just extra.

Skiles quit because Hennigan was doubling down on Payton and he saw that Hennigan was in way over his head trying acquire three max players in summer when 2/3's of NBA had at least one max salary slot available in cap space. He was right about both.

Scenarios like Oladipo and Wiggins occur because of wrong choices. If you have a GM with a good scouting eye then you can avoid these types of mistakes. But simply put, the NBA is littered with bad GMs.

Bad choices forced to be made because of the conditions created from too many young players clustered together. Hennigan was supposed to have "good scouting eye." If you don't have the right cap spacing that's what happens; and if you don't have the right infrastructure (which most tank teams don't because that is decimated by fiscal cutbacks to absorb losses) then development suffers tremendously.

That's before you even get into ego dynamics of numerous young players trying to make it their team. Which as Oladipo told Woj was key problem in Orlando.

People normally start to separate posts in order to make it difficult to respond to each point. Do you want me to quit or reply? I'm not gonna separate each point.

Nice to see your turn around though... starting from saying "nobody does it" to making excuses for that did proves my point. Sorry buddy, you can't have it both ways.

...and OKC could've kept Harden, but it was their choice not to. If their GM thought Harden would be this version of Harden, there is no way he would've let him go. ...this goes back to my point about GMs being able to understand their players. Presti failed.

The value in the Harris trade was terrible. Don't try to paint a picture that I thought otherwise. I just said I think we could've gotten a better deal before the deadline.

..and I have done my fair share of chirping in disgust in how we handled our first rebuild attempt. NEVER EVER EVER should've drafted Hezonja after already having Oladipo, Fournier, Harris (who you just gave $17M to) and Gordon (who you just spent the 4th pick on in the previous year).

If you want to make a point that building through the draft and overlapping positions is a bad concept, then I can follow you there. If you're constantly going to take BPA regardless of need, then you will find yourselves in the position that the Magic were. Young players cannibalizing each other for PT. Dipo vs Fournier ... Harris vs Gordon vs Hezonja ... had we just drafted based on "BPA that fits a need", then maybe we end up with WCS or Myles Turner... WCS would be an interesting compliment to Vuc and Turner would be an upgrade imo. ...in either case, had we done that, then we would've never signed Biyombo and never dealt with a bust in Hezonja. There would be enough PT for both Harris and Gordon. Acquiring young talent at overlapping positions just points to a GM that lacks faith and trust in his eye for talent. It lead to poor team chemistry and racking up the losses.

Building through the draft is ideal if you do it right. I actually like what WeHam has done so far based on their options. Maybe would've wished they traded up last draft, but I can respect how they executed their vision of length/defense paired with offensive potential. But if they resign Vuc for 5 years and bury Bamba in the process, then that sucks. Once they come to the realization on Vuc that they did on Elfrid, then it will be too late. He will be too hard to trade.

[ezzzp]

People normally start to separate posts in order to make it difficult to respond to each point. Do you want me to quit or reply? I'm not gonna separate each point.

Nice to see your turn around though... starting from saying "nobody does it" to making excuses for that did proves my point. Sorry buddy, you can't have it both ways.

...and OKC could've kept Harden, but it was their choice not to. If their GM thought Harden would be this version of Harden, there is no way he would've let him go. ...this goes back to my point about GMs being able to understand their players. Presti failed.

The value in the Harris trade was terrible. Don't try to paint a picture that I thought otherwise. I just said I think we could've gotten a better deal before the deadline.

..and I have done my fair share of chirping in disgust in how we handled our first rebuild attempt. NEVER EVER EVER should've drafted Hezonja after already having Oladipo, Fournier, Harris (who you just gave $17M to) and Gordon (who you just spent the 4th pick on in the previous year).

If you want to make a point that building through the draft and overlapping positions is a bad concept, then I can follow you there. If you're constantly going to take BPA regardless of need, then you will find yourselves in the position that the Magic were. Young players cannibalizing each other for PT. Dipo vs Fournier ... Harris vs Gordon vs Hezonja ... had we just drafted based on "BPA that fits a need", then maybe we end up with WCS or Myles Turner... WCS would be an interesting compliment to Vuc and Turner would be an upgrade imo. ...in either case, had we done that, then we would've never signed Biyombo and never dealt with a bust in Hezonja. There would be enough PT for both Harris and Gordon. Acquiring young talent at overlapping positions just points to a GM that lacks faith and trust in his eye for talent. It lead to poor team chemistry and racking up the losses.

Building through the draft is ideal if you do it right. I actually like what WeHam has done so far based on their options. Maybe would've wished they traded up last draft, but I can respect how they executed their vision of length/defense paired with offensive potential. But if they resign Vuc for 5 years and bury Bamba in the process, then that sucks. Once they come to the realization on Vuc that they did on Elfrid, then it will be too late. He will be too hard to trade.

I do it to clarify what I'm responding to, but if that's too complex for you to navigate then I'll just give you a wall of text from now on.

I didn't turn around on anything. In fact I reiterated how absolutely ridiculous and totally wrong your attempt to spin that was.

OKC didn't and $ was the key factor. Stop making excuses. It does not go to your point at all.

Your words: "We don't know what Harris would have gotten us if we kept him." You said that in response to me saying Magic should keep him as asset. Stop trying to spin it.

Building through the draft isn't any more ideal than winning state lottery is ideal career path Constructing quality rosters requires use of all three levers of improvement: the draft, trades, and free agency...PLUS you must have right infrastructure in place.

Its comical how you use worst possible case to exaggerate re-signing Vucevic. Vucevic is not Payton, not even close lmao.

[Xatticus]

That is some ridiculously bad math.

Spoiler:

The difference between .340 and .371 on Fournier's volume is 14 additional makes over the course of the entire season. That's a total of 42 extra points for the year or an additional half of a point per game. To give you some perspective on the insignificance of that, the value of a single possession is about 1.1 points.

Per game scoring is primarily a function of field goal attempts. Fournier could score an extra five points per game and it wouldn't actually mean he is any better. He could score five fewer points per game and it wouldn't actually mean he was any worse.

Fournier could easily reach that additional 5.2 points per game if we simply took 4.5 shots per game away from the rest of the team and gave them to Fournier. That would almost certainly do more harm than good though, as he was below the team average in efficiency metrics.

Personally, I see little point in giving a large share of offense to average offensive players that bring little else to the team. An Aaron Gordon shot is significantly more valuable than an Evan Fournier shot because it comes along with the defense and versatility that Gordon brings when he is on the floor.

You're correct, not sure how I did that but I totally botched that math.

But giving a player more shots and role in offense because of defense and versatility makes zero sense to me...are you saying that Tony Allen FGA's are more valuable than Ray Allen FGA's?

Spoiler:

Gordon is a career .534 TS% /.321 3P%
Fournier is a career .558 TS% / .371 3P%

• Points Per Touch

Gordon: (18-19) .297 PPT / (17-18) .294 PPT / (16-17) .329 PPT / (15-16) .243 PPT / (14-15) .231 PPT
Fournier: (18-19) .348 PPT / (17-18) .426 PPT / (16-17) .367 PPT / (15-16) .317 PPT / (14-15) .317 PPT

• Creation for others (AST%)

Gordon: (Career) 12.0 / (18-19) 16.6 / (17-18) 11.7 / (16-17) 10.5 / (15-16) 10.3 / (14-15) 6.3
Fournier: (Career) 14.2 / (18-19) 17.6 /(17-18) 14.8 / (16-17) 14.8 / (15-16) 12.8 / (14-15) 11.5

• Driving (18-19)

Gordon: 456 drives / 205 FGA at 42.9 FG% / 82 FTA at 70.7 FT% / 10.3 AST% with 10.3 TOV%
Fournier: 706 drives / 311 FGA at 47.6 FG% / 64 FTA at 78.1 FT% / 11.9 AST% with 6.4 TOV%

• Catch and Shoot (eFG%)

Gordon: (18-19) 51.4 / (17-18) 54.5 / (16-17) 46.0 / (15-16) 43.5 / (14-15) 34.3
Fournier: (18-19) 54.0 / (17-18) 58.6 / (16-17) 54.2 / (15-16) 59.4 / (14-15) 55.9

No… of course not. That would be a silly argument. That's using two players that bear absolutely no resemblance to one another at the offensive end in place of two players that had remarkably similar usage and efficiency metrics this past season. Nor would I make an argument that a PJ Tucker shot has more value than a James Harden shot. These are hyperbolic statements that attempt to distort the entire nature of the argument.

The statistics you provided are almost entirely inconsequential because they are either embedded into the efficiency metrics (which tell more) or they simply don't reflect the present. I could cite the disparity in dunks, but it would add nothing to the argument. Why would I care about points per touch?

The goal is to get as much value as you can out of your distribution of minutes and usage. It's negligent not to consider the totality of a player's production when trying to accomplish this task.