GM Philosophies and Theory - general offseason discussion

[BadMofoPimp]

Keep moving forward. Don't look back.

[zaymon]

4- You cant evaluate draft right now its too soon. Isaac has more potential than Fox and Tatum.

Seriously?

I would instantaneously accept an offer of either Tatum or Fox for Isaac.

Tatum and Fox are better right now, now argument here, but in 2,3 years? With Isaac defense he needs average 3 point shot to be more valuable than both of them. If they are not primary ball handlers on contenders there is no way they are more valuable than Isaac with his freak length, athletecism and defensive instincts. If you are not elite ball handler with elite shot, passing, court awareness, team spirit and god knows what else, you better be freak defensive rebounding big. Poor Irving, he is not freak enough.

[MoMM]

Seriously?

I would instantaneously accept an offer of either Tatum or Fox for Isaac.

Tatum and Fox are better right now, now argument here, but in 2,3 years? With Isaac defense he needs average 3 point shot to be more valuable than both of them. If they are not primary ball handlers on contenders there is no way they are more valuable than Isaac with his freak length, athletecism and defensive instincts. If you are not elite ball handler with elite shot, passing, court awareness, team spirit and god knows what else, you better be freak defensive rebounding big. Poor Irving, he is not freak enough.

Isaac has 2 inches more in terms of wingspan compared to his height. Both Tatum and Fox have 3 inches. They are not undersized by any means, in fact both have a good size for their positions. What about Isaac's slim frame? Will it help him?

[Bensational]

Spoiler:

Interesting discussion. Timing of contracts towards a window of known contention is the key. Let's break this down further.

This isn't intended to be a road map for how to build a team, just a case study.

Warriors - they got lucky with a lot of things falling into place at the right time. Curry having injury issues which lead to him signing an incredibly below market value contract, coupled with the increase in the salary cap, allowed them to add Durant. But they'd managed to win one championship without him, and have a finals appearance, so let's focus on that.

Star Player
featured scorer, elite offense
Curry, secured through draft (#7 pick?)

Secondary Star
featured scorer, elite offense, solid defender
Klay, secured through draft (#7 pick?)

Star Role Player 1
Elite defense, above average offense
Iggy, signed via FA

Star Role Player 2
Elite defense and versatile offensive coordinator
Draymond, secured through draft (2nd round?)

Veteran Anchor
Bogut, secured via trade for Monta


2011-12
It all started with the shift in direction by trading Monta for Bogut. Curry was injured, they landed another high pick, and took Harrison Barnes, and in the 2nd round they take Draymond.

2012-13
Setting Curry and Klay loose, they made the 2nd round of the playoffs.

2013-14
After their competitive season, they had the space to sign Igoudala.

2014-15
They made big changes, firing Mark Jackson and bringing Steve Kerr in. Klay, Draymond and Barnes were all still on rookie scale contracts, but all starters. Bogut, Iggy, Curry and David Lee were the only players on salaries north of $10M. They win a championship.

2015-16
Klay and Dray get paid. They lose the finals.

2016-17
They have the freakish chance of expanded salary cap and cap space to sign Kevin Durant.

The rest is history.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________


Now, the take away from here for me is the age of the rookies they were drafting in the first place.

Curry - 21 year old junior
Klay - 21 year old junior
Draymond - 22 year old senior

Being older, these players were further along in their growth and development that they were able to offer more immediate impact whilst still on rookie scale contracts.

That's got me thinking about the other competitive teams that have had high impact players on RSC's.

Portland - McCollum was a 22 year old senior, and a 20ppg starter by the 3rd year of his RSC
Toronto - Siakam was a 22 year old sophomore, and presently a 17ppg scorer in 3rd year of his RSC
Milwaukee - Brogdon was a 24 year old senior, and presently a 15ppg scorer in 3rd year of his RSC
San Antonio - White was a 23 year old senior, presently the Spurs starting backcourt in 2nd year of his RSC. Forbes was a 23 year old senior, also presently Spurs starting backcourt in 3rd year of his RSC.
Denver - Morris was a 22 year old senior, presently the 6th man for the Nuggets in 2nd year of his RSC


So, what I'm gathering is the importance of these teams to draft players who are capable of providing earlier impact within their bargain RSC contracts. Sure, they've all got stars already, all procured via various means. But when planning for a window of highly competitive seasons, these are the players you need to bring in.


I'm gonna mull this over whilst trying to figure out how to best fit this approach into the timeline of Vuc's next contract, with the other RSCs we already have in place.

I'm surprised this post hasn't gotten a bunch of 'And1's.

I think there is an obvious market inefficiency there due to the stigma against older prospects. The logic is that a player should enter the NBA as soon as they are able. Thusly, anyone that doesn't enter the NBA at an early age is deemed an inferior prospect. The problem is that every player has their own developmental curve. Everyone matures differently and everyone's situation is different.

I don't really see a common thread among those players though. McCollum was an undersized SG coming out of a small school. White played at a low tier in college because his physical development came late. He only transferred to Colorado for his final season. Forbes was an exceptional 3-point shooter in college; but an otherwise limited prospect. The knock on Morris was his physical tools, but I believe he led the NCAA in AST/TO all four of his years. Brogdon and Siakam were long and physically strong players with questionable offensive tools.

I think what you want to see from an older prospect is the physical tools that will allow them to succeed at the next level and demonstrable improvement over the duration of their collegiate career. That's why I did and still like Iwundu.

I think the biggest mistake that teams make is when they burn draft picks on highly-rated high school prospects whose prospect status has dimmed due to disappointing performance at the collegiate level.

Oh yeah, I wasn't trying to find a common through-line between those prospects mentioned other than them being older and capable of performing sooner. You're right, they would have all been drafted based off of different signs of promise, but they'd still come with risk.

CJ - a proven, gifted scorer in college. But, there are plenty of high scoring college players who don't make the jump. What separates CJ from the likes of Jimmer?

White, Brogdon and Morris are guys that showed the skill to shoot, penetrate, make plays and defend. Similar to CJ, you knew you were getting someone who had skills, but these guys also offered good sized bodies to go with that. Maybe less offensive capacity than CJ, but a more well rounded game. Brogdon wasn't as reliable at penetration and playmaking, but he could shoot, defend and had a long body as you said.

It's that separation of taking a player who shows they can already do something that's fundamental, like shooting or handling the ball well enough to get where they want in a crowd, versus taking the specimen with an amazing physical profile and hoping their skills grow into that body.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but in our position of trying to remain competitive and already having several raw prospects, a slightly more sturdy hand could be useful. Unless you feel like you've spotted the next Giannis at #16, then I guess you have to take a punt on him. But then, we're back in that position of not knowing what we've got until we're confronted with paying large sums to maybe see him realise his potential. So financially, I think it could be smart to stick with safer picks and known skill, build them up quickly, and consolidate them for bigger impact pieces down the road if the opportunity arises and fits the window of contention.

[yoyojw17]

2017 NBA Draft, list of non-freshman players drafted in the 1st round:
- Luke Kennard, #12
- Donovan Mitchell, #13
- Justin Jackson, #15
- D. J. Wilson, #17
- John Collins, #19
- OG Anunoby, #23
- Tyler Lydon, #24
- Caleb Swanigan, #26
- Kyle Kuzma, #27
- Derrick White, #29
- Josh Hart, #30

I'd say that at least 4 of them have a really good chance to be a better player than Isaac (Mitchell, Collins, Kuzma, White and maybe we can add Kennard and Hart to this list). With our #6 pick we could easily have traded for 2 of them. Imagine John Collins and Donovan Mitchell (best case scenario) on our team instead of Isaac...

There is a reason that most of the teams don't trade up in the NFL, they know that in most cases it won't work out, not to mention that their rookies usually play 3 or 4 years in NCAA before going to NFL, so it's way easier to evaluate them.

And what constitutes better players in your book? Cuz they will put up more points? But to each it's own.... the only player in my head i would take over him on that list is Mitchell..... and mayyyybe white.... but that one is a toss up still. Isaac in my head is 50% away from his full potential. a lot will change when his body really catches up. We all knew this drafting him and shouldn't expect more so soon. Shoot i can be dead wrong for all i know.... but if i was building a team... what i believe he can become.... is probably a lot higher than what you are projecting. Now... do i believe that he is going to be a 24pnt scorer... hell nah.... but i do believe that he will impact the floor greatly on BOTH ends of the floor

[pepe1991]

Everybody would take Tatum over Isaac both short and long term. That's not really arguable. And it has nothing to do with Isaac.
Around league he is being valued as one of the best young talents. He is also probably key reason why Pelicans didn't want to trade Davis to Lakers.

Tatum already has few nba records:
. youngest in history to score 200 points in playoffs
- 1 point shy for Kareem's all time record scoring in playoffs by rookie
- youngest ever to score 20 or more in 4 straight playoff games
- youngest in history with at least 6 blocks and 3 steals in same game

You look at his game : 15,7 ppg, 6,0 rpg ,2,1 apg
45% FG ,37% for 3, 85,5% FTs

At age of 21, even if he never improves at all from this, he will be huge asset to any team because he does not have deficiency in his game. He's long, he's athletic, fast , can shoot, plays defense, can rebound at respecful clip, above average FT shooter. You can literally send him today at any team left in playoffs and he would start on all of them because of it.

If Celtics didn't have army of hungry mouths to feed, he would probably be 20 ppg player this year.

[zaymon]

Everybody would take Tatum over Isaac both short and long term. That's not really arguable. And it has nothing to do with Isaac.
Around league he is being valued as one of the best young talents. He is also probably key reason why Pelicans didn't want to trade Davis to Lakers.

Tatum already has few nba records:
. youngest in history to score 200 points in playoffs
- 1 point shy for Kareem's all time record scoring in playoffs by rookie
- youngest ever to score 20 or more in 4 straight playoff games
- youngest in history with at least 6 blocks and 3 steals in same game

You look at his game : 15,7 ppg, 6,0 rpg ,2,1 apg
45% FG ,37% for 3, 85,5% FTs

At age of 21, even if he never improves at all from this, he will be huge asset to any team because he does not have deficiency in his game. He's long, he's athletic, fast , can shoot, plays defense, can rebound at respecful clip, above average FT shooter. You can literally send him today at any team left in playoffs and he would start on all of them because of it.

If Celtics didn't have army of hungry mouths to feed, he would probably be 20 ppg player this year.

Tatum is a better player and he will always be a better scorer, but when he is not first and second option on offense his value decreases. Isaac has edge in blocks, rebounds, deflections, post defense. On losing team needing buckets i cant see Tatum being worse than Isaac ever, but on a contender with multiple shot creators i see a scenario where in 2-3 years Isaac is more valuable. He has also much smaller ego which can be crucial in team building. In basketball sometimes less is more

[pepe1991]

Everybody would take Tatum over Isaac both short and long term. That's not really arguable. And it has nothing to do with Isaac.
Around league he is being valued as one of the best young talents. He is also probably key reason why Pelicans didn't want to trade Davis to Lakers.

Tatum already has few nba records:
. youngest in history to score 200 points in playoffs
- 1 point shy for Kareem's all time record scoring in playoffs by rookie
- youngest ever to score 20 or more in 4 straight playoff games
- youngest in history with at least 6 blocks and 3 steals in same game

You look at his game : 15,7 ppg, 6,0 rpg ,2,1 apg
45% FG ,37% for 3, 85,5% FTs

At age of 21, even if he never improves at all from this, he will be huge asset to any team because he does not have deficiency in his game. He's long, he's athletic, fast , can shoot, plays defense, can rebound at respecful clip, above average FT shooter. You can literally send him today at any team left in playoffs and he would start on all of them because of it.

If Celtics didn't have army of hungry mouths to feed, he would probably be 20 ppg player this year.

Tatum is a better player and he will always be a better scorer, but when he is not first and second option on offense his value decreases. Isaac has edge in blocks, rebounds, deflections, post defense. On losing team needing buckets i cant see Tatum being worse than Isaac ever, but on a contender with multiple shot creators i see a scenario where in 2-3 years Isaac is more valuable. He has also much smaller ego which can be crucial in team building. In basketball sometimes less is more

Teams tank for players that have capability to be scoring options on contenders. That seems to be what Tatum is, given that he already was leading scorer on ECF team, during rookie season.

Why would he not be first or second option in future?

Isaac has edge in all stats that make him PF, and his much worst in anything than makes good SF, Tatum is SF, so it's irrelevant.

but on a contender with multiple shot creators i see a scenario where in 2-3 years Isaac is more valuable.

But that's not how rebuilding is being done. You tank for go to options and scorers, and add complimentary peaces afte you landed star player. Shot blocking , rim protection , C-D scoring options are things you add after you landed marquee scorer/shooter like Tatum looks to be.

He has also much smaller ego which can be crucial in team building. In basketball sometimes less is more

This is subjective and not something that we, as fans should talk about much. We all come from different situations. Tatum was unexpected child of 19 years old girl that was basically just a teen when she got him. He, himslef, become a father at age of 19.
Most of big stars have big ego, Kobe once told story how him and Shaq were arguing who's ego is worst and Jackson pretty much told them that he has bigger ego than both of them combined

Given that this is not player A vs player B thread, my only point is that teams tank in hope to land guys like Tatum , Doncic... Exponential offensive talents, and history shows that if you can land that type of player, rest of rebuild is much easier than adding complimentary players and still needing to land star somehow.

[zaymon]

Everybody would take Tatum over Isaac both short and long term. That's not really arguable. And it has nothing to do with Isaac.
Around league he is being valued as one of the best young talents. He is also probably key reason why Pelicans didn't want to trade Davis to Lakers.

Tatum already has few nba records:
. youngest in history to score 200 points in playoffs
- 1 point shy for Kareem's all time record scoring in playoffs by rookie
- youngest ever to score 20 or more in 4 straight playoff games
- youngest in history with at least 6 blocks and 3 steals in same game

You look at his game : 15,7 ppg, 6,0 rpg ,2,1 apg
45% FG ,37% for 3, 85,5% FTs

At age of 21, even if he never improves at all from this, he will be huge asset to any team because he does not have deficiency in his game. He's long, he's athletic, fast , can shoot, plays defense, can rebound at respecful clip, above average FT shooter. You can literally send him today at any team left in playoffs and he would start on all of them because of it.

If Celtics didn't have army of hungry mouths to feed, he would probably be 20 ppg player this year.

Tatum is a better player and he will always be a better scorer, but when he is not first and second option on offense his value decreases. Isaac has edge in blocks, rebounds, deflections, post defense. On losing team needing buckets i cant see Tatum being worse than Isaac ever, but on a contender with multiple shot creators i see a scenario where in 2-3 years Isaac is more valuable. He has also much smaller ego which can be crucial in team building. In basketball sometimes less is more

Teams tank for players that have capability to be scoring options on contenders. That seems to be what Tatum is, given that he already was leading scorer on ECF team, during rookie season.

Why would he not be first or second option in future?

Isaac has edge in all stats that make him PF, and his much worst in anything than makes good SF, Tatum is SF, so it's irrelevant.

but on a contender with multiple shot creators i see a scenario where in 2-3 years Isaac is more valuable.

But that's not how rebuilding is being done. You tank for go to options and scorers, and add complimentary peaces afte you landed star player. Shot blocking , rim protection , C-D scoring options are things you add after you landed marquee scorer/shooter like Tatum looks to be.

He has also much smaller ego which can be crucial in team building. In basketball sometimes less is more

This is subjective and not something that we, as fans should talk about much. We all come from different situations. Tatum was unexpected child of 19 years old girl that was basically just a teen when she got him. He, himslef, become a father at age of 19.
Most of big stars have big ego, Kobe once told story how him and Shaq were arguing who's ego is worst and Jackson pretty much told them that he has bigger ego than both of them combined

Given that this is not player A vs player B thread, my only point is that teams tank in hope to land guys like Tatum , Doncic... Exponential offensive talents, and history shows that if you can land that type of player, rest of rebuild is much easier than adding complimentary players and still needing to land star somehow.

I think good rebuild is a flexible rebuild. I wouldnt limit us to one option. From latest NBA champions Boston Celtics, Miami Heat, Cleveland Cavaliers were build by adding star offensive players last. From this year contenders its Rockets, Raptors, Celtics you could argue if Jazz are close to contenders. What you wrote is one way to rebuild, you could argue its more sustainable, but i wouldnt say more successful ( even GSW added first option last)

[pepe1991]

Tatum is a better player and he will always be a better scorer, but when he is not first and second option on offense his value decreases. Isaac has edge in blocks, rebounds, deflections, post defense. On losing team needing buckets i cant see Tatum being worse than Isaac ever, but on a contender with multiple shot creators i see a scenario where in 2-3 years Isaac is more valuable. He has also much smaller ego which can be crucial in team building. In basketball sometimes less is more

Teams tank for players that have capability to be scoring options on contenders. That seems to be what Tatum is, given that he already was leading scorer on ECF team, during rookie season.

Why would he not be first or second option in future?

Isaac has edge in all stats that make him PF, and his much worst in anything than makes good SF, Tatum is SF, so it's irrelevant.

but on a contender with multiple shot creators i see a scenario where in 2-3 years Isaac is more valuable.

But that's not how rebuilding is being done. You tank for go to options and scorers, and add complimentary peaces afte you landed star player. Shot blocking , rim protection , C-D scoring options are things you add after you landed marquee scorer/shooter like Tatum looks to be.

He has also much smaller ego which can be crucial in team building. In basketball sometimes less is more

This is subjective and not something that we, as fans should talk about much. We all come from different situations. Tatum was unexpected child of 19 years old girl that was basically just a teen when she got him. He, himslef, become a father at age of 19.
Most of big stars have big ego, Kobe once told story how him and Shaq were arguing who's ego is worst and Jackson pretty much told them that he has bigger ego than both of them combined

Given that this is not player A vs player B thread, my only point is that teams tank in hope to land guys like Tatum , Doncic... Exponential offensive talents, and history shows that if you can land that type of player, rest of rebuild is much easier than adding complimentary players and still needing to land star somehow.

I think good rebuild is a flexible rebuild. I wouldnt limit us to one option. From latest NBA champions Boston Celtics, Miami Heat, Cleveland Cavaliers were build by adding star offensive players last. From this year contenders its Rockets, Raptors, Celtics you could argue if Jazz are close to contenders. What you wrote is one way to rebuild, you could argue its more sustainable, but i wouldnt say more successful ( even GSW added first option last)

Ofc, you can't force player into being something just because you need it ,but it's time and cost efficient to get star offensive player first because almost every year in open market you can add complimentary players ,where it's really hard to add star player in any way.

Also having player to build around , who can play with ball in his hands is exponentially more valable than to have one who can't. That's why most fans here ( for objective reasons) think Vučević can't be your main star, much like Embiid can't.

But as for Tatum as talking point, in my opinion his ceiling is Leonard , his floor is Paul George/ Kriss Middleton. i have hard time thinking about him without him being allstar in next 2 years.
That said, i don't like him ,but i think same could be said about Ingram, there is lot of things he doesn't do well yet, but i think his base talent is much higher than most non Lakers fans and some Lakers fan think. He is just on team with horrendus structure of power and leadership where people sabotage each other.

One outside a box name ,who somehow still flys under a radar, and who i wanted for years is still Jamal Murray. Things he is doing right now are incredible for 22 y.o. player. 25 ppg against Blazers , guy made 29 of 30 FTs in this series , having 6 rebounds, 5 assists without even being "playmaker".
I think it was back in 2017 when i wanted him in fantasy Gordon ( or whoever ) trade.

[BadMofoPimp]

I would take Tatum over Isaac any day of week. I am sure Slim appreciates the homerism.

[j-ragg]

Yeah Tatum/Fox over Isaac is a no brainer. Nothing against Isaac, just hasn't shown nearly as much as them. Would both fill gigantic needs on this roster too.

[ezzzp]

https://art19.com/shows/thewojpod

Highly recommend listening to Woj and Ryan Russillo starting at 26:00...they discuss having cap space and other GM philosophies

[Magic4champ]

Looking at all the excellent guards in the playoffs with CJ and Dame besting Jokic, our Magic needs a dynamic, play making and shooting guards to have playoffs success. I understand our defensive potentials but our offense surely needs these types of attacking guards.

[basketballRob]

I would instantaneously accept an offer of either Tatum or Fox for Isaac.

Tatum and Fox are better right now, now argument here, but in 2,3 years? With Isaac defense he needs average 3 point shot to be more valuable than both of them. If they are not primary ball handlers on contenders there is no way they are more valuable than Isaac with his freak length, athletecism and defensive instincts. If you are not elite ball handler with elite shot, passing, court awareness, team spirit and god knows what else, you better be freak defensive rebounding big. Poor Irving, he is not freak enough.

Isaac has 2 inches more in terms of wingspan compared to his height. Both Tatum and Fox have 3 inches. They are not undersized by any means, in fact both have a good size for their positions. What about Isaac's slim frame? Will it help him?

Isaac has a 7'6" wingspan now.

You might still be going by the measurements before his junior year of high school. He had a growth spurt since then.


Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[BadMofoPimp]

Fox is sooo good, I would almost consider Isaac and Fultz for Fox.

[Blue_and_Whte]

Fox is sooo good, I would almost consider Isaac and Fultz for Fox.

Kings hang up

[Skin]

I like the GM philosophies of both Henny and WeHam. If we had a mixture of both, I think that could be my ideal.

Love how Henny came in preaching a vision of long term sustainability, building step by step and organically. No skipping steps (even though that was his downfall - caused not by his own doing). I also love how much WeHam values extraordinary length and athleticism to form a modern model of success more loosely based on traditional position labels and more on positional groupings Guards, Wings, Bigs.

[MoMM]

Looking at all the excellent guards in the playoffs with CJ and Dame besting Jokic, our Magic needs a dynamic, play making and shooting guards to have playoffs success. I understand our defensive potentials but our offense surely needs these types of attacking guards.

At some point in this season, I proposed AG for McCollum to some Blazers fans on their board and they would have made the deal, no other assets involved. Imagine having McCollum in our team, that would be fantastic. We don't have anything close to that since McGrady's days.

D12 was dominant, but not a wing/guard.

[Skin]

Looking at all the excellent guards in the playoffs with CJ and Dame besting Jokic, our Magic needs a dynamic, play making and shooting guards to have playoffs success. I understand our defensive potentials but our offense surely needs these types of attacking guards.

At some point in this season, I proposed AG for McCollum to some Blazers fans on their board and they would have made the deal, no other assets involved. Imagine having McCollum in our team, that would be fantastic. We don't have anything close to that since McGrady's days.

D12 was dominant, but not a wing/guard.

We might have a chance...