Fringe vs Rebuild - 5 Year Trends - East vs West

[MagicMatic]

Hawks, Knicks and Cavs are rebuilding for solid 3 years now. Outside of Trae Young ( second worst guard defender in nba ,who is pretty much eastern version of Devin Booker , empty stats on 15 wins teams) they have nobody to build teams around.

Using word "rebuilding" loosly because they are doing nothing but spinning wheel of pathetic sucking for another year without any plan for future. Much like Suns and MInessota spent last 10 years "rebuiding" and never rebuilt.

RJ Barrett
Sexton
Knox
Hunter
Garland


Why are you pretending Magic didn't tank and it didn't work? Gordon, Hezonja,Payton, Isaac, Bamba are all lottery picks.
Where are stars?

How da F- somebody can advocate for tanking knowing that Suns won 18 games to draft f***ing Jarrett Culver

For every one of these examples there is a

Boston
Dallas
Philadelphia
Sacramento
Utah

Drafting a star player requires luck in the lottery, appropriate scouting, and available talent. Having better odds would have landed us KP or Doncic, and we ended up with Mario and Bamba. Minnesota decided to build around a new age big and a wildly inconsistent wing that never lived up to expectations. Neither of which are known for their work ethic or grit. Suns missed on nearly every pick (including Ayton) except arguably Booker. Both franchises have accomplished exactly the same amount as Orlando in the same timeframe - nothing.

Tanking isn’t the answer, especially now because of the rule changes. That’s not what this thread is about. Rebuilding doesn’t mean “Tanking” as much as it means making smart trades to raise the ceiling of the team at the expense of nba veterans that keep Orlando a treadmill.

For what it’s worth, I’d much rather have a team like New Orleans or Memphis right now than Orlando. Being in a position to land/attract star players while having losing records, likely missing the playoffs, and playing fun to watch basketball.

So why do you need to blow whole roster out to make right decisions?

Celtics, Jazz and Dallas never tanked.

Memphis and Pelicans, much like Magic, Suns, Kings will never attract free agents no matter what they "build" because free agents have zero desire to go there. You know it ,i know it, everybody knows it.
Even when smaller market teams get superstar on rookie contract ( Pelicans = Davis, Cavs = Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, Harden = OKC) they still never attract free agents and after few years stars leave and small market teams are back at square one.
Giannis already hinted what he will do if Bucks fail this year.

I saw on Jazz thread that Bojan Bogdanovic is the biggest free agent name they signed in their history. I love me some Bojan, but hello, it's freaking Jazz, team that had Malone and Stock, was regular NBA finals team, has big history, yet... because of location nobody ever goes there.
This is not really secret, after Davis got traded Holiday went to media and said that he only re-signed there because of him.

Kawhi walked away from championship team to go to play in LA.

We can talk here for years about this topic, reality is cruel. NBA stars care about location more than situation.

Dallas never tanked? Lol. Cuban said explicitly he wanted to and did. It was pretty clear Doncic was his target prior to that draft and trade. Boston drafted Tatum #2 and Brown #3. Memphis and New Orleans are more attractive destinations with Morant and Zion than what we have in Orlando. Isaac is the closest draw, but he isn’t on that level offensively.

Again, I’m not saying tanking is the answer, but the teams I listed now have better assets than Orlando because of the draft regardless of if they are traded or make them competitive within a window.

Ok so what are you trying to say? Orlando can’t acquire free agents because they are a small market and drafting is pointless because players will eventually leave for greener pastures? So you are saying there is no point at all....

I think a team like OKC was completely mismanaged and had a real chance at winning multiple championships because of their drafts. Utah has come close with Stockton / Malone. Atlanta was a contender within this decade despite not being the ideal franchise. Phoenix has its run with Nash and co. etc etc. Milwaukee might actually win it all this year built around Giannis. Small markets are capable when they draft well and manage contracts effectively.

The point is that it simply makes more sense to attempt to draft these kinds of players, within their 2x contract window, rather than pretending Orlando is accomplishing anything substantial by drafting 15-20 while failing to land talent via free agency. Anything short of that is assuming this FO will draft the second coming of Giannis within that range.

[pepe1991]

For every one of these examples there is a

Boston
Dallas
Philadelphia
Sacramento
Utah

Drafting a star player requires luck in the lottery, appropriate scouting, and available talent. Having better odds would have landed us KP or Doncic, and we ended up with Mario and Bamba. Minnesota decided to build around a new age big and a wildly inconsistent wing that never lived up to expectations. Neither of which are known for their work ethic or grit. Suns missed on nearly every pick (including Ayton) except arguably Booker. Both franchises have accomplished exactly the same amount as Orlando in the same timeframe - nothing.

Tanking isn’t the answer, especially now because of the rule changes. That’s not what this thread is about. Rebuilding doesn’t mean “Tanking” as much as it means making smart trades to raise the ceiling of the team at the expense of nba veterans that keep Orlando a treadmill.

For what it’s worth, I’d much rather have a team like New Orleans or Memphis right now than Orlando. Being in a position to land/attract star players while having losing records, likely missing the playoffs, and playing fun to watch basketball.

So why do you need to blow whole roster out to make right decisions?

Celtics, Jazz and Dallas never tanked.

Memphis and Pelicans, much like Magic, Suns, Kings will never attract free agents no matter what they "build" because free agents have zero desire to go there. You know it ,i know it, everybody knows it.
Even when smaller market teams get superstar on rookie contract ( Pelicans = Davis, Cavs = Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, Harden = OKC) they still never attract free agents and after few years stars leave and small market teams are back at square one.
Giannis already hinted what he will do if Bucks fail this year.

I saw on Jazz thread that Bojan Bogdanovic is the biggest free agent name they signed in their history. I love me some Bojan, but hello, it's freaking Jazz, team that had Malone and Stock, was regular NBA finals team, has big history, yet... because of location nobody ever goes there.
This is not really secret, after Davis got traded Holiday went to media and said that he only re-signed there because of him.

Kawhi walked away from championship team to go to play in LA.

We can talk here for years about this topic, reality is cruel. NBA stars care about location more than situation.

Dallas never tanked? Lol. Cuban said explicitly he wanted to and did. It was pretty clear Doncic was his target prior to that draft and trade. Boston drafted Tatum #2 and Brown #3. Memphis and New Orleans are more attractive destinations with Morant and Zion than what we have in Orlando. Isaac is the closest draw, but he isn’t on that level offensively.

Again, I’m not saying tanking is the answer, but the teams I listed now have better assets than Orlando because of the draft regardless of if they are traded or make them competitive within a window.

Ok so what are you trying to say? Orlando can’t acquire free agents because they are a small market and drafting is pointless because players will eventually leave for greener pastures? So you are saying there is no point at all....

I think a team like OKC was completely mismanaged and had a real chance at winning multiple championships because of their drafts. Utah has come close with Stockton / Malone. Atlanta was a contender within this decade despite not being the ideal franchise. Phoenix has its run with Nash and co. etc etc. Milwaukee might actually win it all this year built around Giannis. Small markets are capable when they draft well and manage contracts effectively.

The point is that it simply makes more sense to attempt to draft these kinds of players, within their 2x contract window, rather than pretending Orlando is accomplishing anything substantial by drafting 15-20 while failing to land talent via free agency. Anything short of that is assuming this FO will draft the second coming of Giannis within that range.

Dallas won 24 games and drafted Dennis Smith.
Dallas won 33 games and traded for Luka Dončić

Best example why tanking doesn't work right there. 9 Games boost, yet way better returning value.

Brown ( after 48 wins) and Tatum (after 55 wins) are nothing but incopetence of Billy King for GM and has nothing to do with Cetlics or their "rebuilding" strategy. They had no clue where that picks will land. They could just as easly be 21 and 29th pick.

All small markets mentioned have one thing in common- they never won anything. Bucks did, like 35 years ago ,so it's hard to even count.

You still pretend that finding star in lottery is done deal and only thing you need to do is suck enough. Well
20-62
23-59
25-57
35-47
29-53
25-57


Where are all superstars from all this sucesfull tanking?

Execlly.

Let me remind you that Mo Bamba is 6th pick from 2018 draft. That's a guy you sucked for. There are way more Mo Bamba's than Luka doncic out there

[tiderulz]

Hawks, Knicks and Cavs are rebuilding for solid 3 years now. Outside of Trae Young ( second worst guard defender in nba ,who is pretty much eastern version of Devin Booker , empty stats on 15 wins teams) they have nobody to build teams around.

Using word "rebuilding" loosly because they are doing nothing but spinning wheel of pathetic sucking for another year without any plan for future. Much like Suns and MInessota spent last 10 years "rebuiding" and never rebuilt.

RJ Barrett
Sexton
Knox
Hunter
Garland


Why are you pretending Magic didn't tank and it didn't work? Gordon, Hezonja,Payton, Isaac, Bamba are all lottery picks.
Where are stars?

How da F- somebody can advocate for tanking knowing that Suns won 18 games to draft f***ing Jarrett Culver

For every one of these examples there is a

Boston
Dallas
Philadelphia
Sacramento
Utah

Drafting a star player requires luck in the lottery, appropriate scouting, and available talent. Having better odds would have landed us KP or Doncic, and we ended up with Mario and Bamba. Minnesota decided to build around a new age big and a wildly inconsistent wing that never lived up to expectations. Neither of which are known for their work ethic or grit. Suns missed on nearly every pick (including Ayton) except arguably Booker. Both franchises have accomplished exactly the same amount as Orlando in the same timeframe - nothing.

Tanking isn’t the answer, especially now because of the rule changes. That’s not what this thread is about. Rebuilding doesn’t mean “Tanking” as much as it means making smart trades to raise the ceiling of the team at the expense of nba veterans that keep Orlando a treadmill.

For what it’s worth, I’d much rather have a team like New Orleans or Memphis right now than Orlando. Being in a position to land/attract star players while having losing records, likely missing the playoffs, and playing fun to watch basketball.

So why do you need to blow whole roster out to make right decisions?

Celtics, Jazz and Dallas never tanked.

Memphis and Pelicans, much like Magic, Suns, Kings will never attract free agents no matter what they "build" because free agents have zero desire to go there. You know it ,i know it, everybody knows it.
Even when smaller market teams get superstar on rookie contract ( Pelicans = Davis, Cavs = Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, Harden = OKC) they still never attract free agents and after few years stars leave and small market teams are back at square one.
Giannis already hinted what he will do if Bucks fail this year.

I saw on Jazz thread that Bojan Bogdanovic is the biggest free agent name they signed in their history. I love me some Bojan, but hello, it's freaking Jazz, team that had Malone and Stock, was regular NBA finals team, has big history, yet... because of location nobody ever goes there.
This is not really secret, after Davis got traded Holiday went to media and said that he only re-signed there because of him.

Kawhi walked away from championship team to go to play in LA.

We can talk here for years about this topic, reality is cruel. NBA stars care about location more than situation.

Carlos Boozer ring a bell? i would say he was a bigger name than Bogs

[tiderulz]

So why do you need to blow whole roster out to make right decisions?

Celtics, Jazz and Dallas never tanked.

Memphis and Pelicans, much like Magic, Suns, Kings will never attract free agents no matter what they "build" because free agents have zero desire to go there. You know it ,i know it, everybody knows it.
Even when smaller market teams get superstar on rookie contract ( Pelicans = Davis, Cavs = Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, Harden = OKC) they still never attract free agents and after few years stars leave and small market teams are back at square one.
Giannis already hinted what he will do if Bucks fail this year.

I saw on Jazz thread that Bojan Bogdanovic is the biggest free agent name they signed in their history. I love me some Bojan, but hello, it's freaking Jazz, team that had Malone and Stock, was regular NBA finals team, has big history, yet... because of location nobody ever goes there.
This is not really secret, after Davis got traded Holiday went to media and said that he only re-signed there because of him.

Kawhi walked away from championship team to go to play in LA.

We can talk here for years about this topic, reality is cruel. NBA stars care about location more than situation.

Dallas never tanked? Lol. Cuban said explicitly he wanted to and did. It was pretty clear Doncic was his target prior to that draft and trade. Boston drafted Tatum #2 and Brown #3. Memphis and New Orleans are more attractive destinations with Morant and Zion than what we have in Orlando. Isaac is the closest draw, but he isn’t on that level offensively.

Again, I’m not saying tanking is the answer, but the teams I listed now have better assets than Orlando because of the draft regardless of if they are traded or make them competitive within a window.

Ok so what are you trying to say? Orlando can’t acquire free agents because they are a small market and drafting is pointless because players will eventually leave for greener pastures? So you are saying there is no point at all....

I think a team like OKC was completely mismanaged and had a real chance at winning multiple championships because of their drafts. Utah has come close with Stockton / Malone. Atlanta was a contender within this decade despite not being the ideal franchise. Phoenix has its run with Nash and co. etc etc. Milwaukee might actually win it all this year built around Giannis. Small markets are capable when they draft well and manage contracts effectively.

The point is that it simply makes more sense to attempt to draft these kinds of players, within their 2x contract window, rather than pretending Orlando is accomplishing anything substantial by drafting 15-20 while failing to land talent via free agency. Anything short of that is assuming this FO will draft the second coming of Giannis within that range.

Dallas won 24 games and drafted Dennis Smith.
Dallas won 33 games and traded for Luka Dončić

Best example why tanking doesn't work right there. 9 Games boost, yet way better returning value.

Brown ( after 48 wins) and Tatum (after 55 wins) are nothing but incopetence of Billy King for GM and has nothing to do with Cetlics or their "rebuilding" strategy. They had no clue where that picks will land. They could just as easly be 21 and 29th pick.

All small markets mentioned have one thing in common- they never won anything. Bucks did, like 35 years ago ,so it's hard to even count.

You still pretend that finding star in lottery is done deal and only thing you need to do is suck enough. Well
20-62
23-59
25-57
35-47
29-53
25-57


Where are all superstars from all this sucesfull tanking?

Execlly.

Let me remind you that Mo Bamba is 6th pick from 2018 draft. That's a guy you sucked for. There are way more Mo Bamba's than Luka doncic out there

that isnt why tanking doesnt work. that is why a team should draft better. Imagine Dallas with Bam Adebayo, or Donovan Mitchell, Jarrett Allen, etc. So tanking could have made them a better team if they drafted better. its also in which draft you tank

[MagicMatic]

So why do you need to blow whole roster out to make right decisions?

Celtics, Jazz and Dallas never tanked.

Memphis and Pelicans, much like Magic, Suns, Kings will never attract free agents no matter what they "build" because free agents have zero desire to go there. You know it ,i know it, everybody knows it.
Even when smaller market teams get superstar on rookie contract ( Pelicans = Davis, Cavs = Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, Harden = OKC) they still never attract free agents and after few years stars leave and small market teams are back at square one.
Giannis already hinted what he will do if Bucks fail this year.

I saw on Jazz thread that Bojan Bogdanovic is the biggest free agent name they signed in their history. I love me some Bojan, but hello, it's freaking Jazz, team that had Malone and Stock, was regular NBA finals team, has big history, yet... because of location nobody ever goes there.
This is not really secret, after Davis got traded Holiday went to media and said that he only re-signed there because of him.

Kawhi walked away from championship team to go to play in LA.

We can talk here for years about this topic, reality is cruel. NBA stars care about location more than situation.

Dallas never tanked? Lol. Cuban said explicitly he wanted to and did. It was pretty clear Doncic was his target prior to that draft and trade. Boston drafted Tatum #2 and Brown #3. Memphis and New Orleans are more attractive destinations with Morant and Zion than what we have in Orlando. Isaac is the closest draw, but he isn’t on that level offensively.

Again, I’m not saying tanking is the answer, but the teams I listed now have better assets than Orlando because of the draft regardless of if they are traded or make them competitive within a window.

Ok so what are you trying to say? Orlando can’t acquire free agents because they are a small market and drafting is pointless because players will eventually leave for greener pastures? So you are saying there is no point at all....

I think a team like OKC was completely mismanaged and had a real chance at winning multiple championships because of their drafts. Utah has come close with Stockton / Malone. Atlanta was a contender within this decade despite not being the ideal franchise. Phoenix has its run with Nash and co. etc etc. Milwaukee might actually win it all this year built around Giannis. Small markets are capable when they draft well and manage contracts effectively.

The point is that it simply makes more sense to attempt to draft these kinds of players, within their 2x contract window, rather than pretending Orlando is accomplishing anything substantial by drafting 15-20 while failing to land talent via free agency. Anything short of that is assuming this FO will draft the second coming of Giannis within that range.

Dallas won 24 games and drafted Dennis Smith.
Dallas won 33 games and traded for Luka Dončić

Best example why tanking doesn't work right there. 9 Games boost, yet way better returning value.

Brown ( after 48 wins) and Tatum (after 55 wins) are nothing but incopetence of Billy King for GM and has nothing to do with Cetlics or their "rebuilding" strategy. They had no clue where that picks will land. They could just as easly be 21 and 29th pick.

All small markets mentioned have one thing in common- they never won anything. Bucks did, like 35 years ago ,so it's hard to even count.

You still pretend that finding star in lottery is done deal and only thing you need to do is suck enough. Well
20-62
23-59
25-57
35-47
29-53
25-57


Where are all superstars from all this sucesfull tanking?

Execlly.

Let me remind you that Mo Bamba is 6th pick from 2018 draft. That's a guy you sucked for. There are way more Mo Bamba's than Luka doncic out there

What you are failing to grasp in this thread (like everyone else anti-rebuild) is that “rebuild” doesn’t 100% equal “tank”. This is the same conversation I’ve had with ezzzp and his flawed ideas about what “tanking” is exactly.

Trading away vets that limit this team from :
A) Being true contenders.
B) Acquiring better talent via free agency (draw).
C) Acquiring better talent via draft (odds).
D) Acquiring better talent via trade (retaining players. age/contract price value ie sell high buy low).

Those are all factors that this current trajectory leads with this current roster, should they decide being a fringe playoff team is the way. However, you don’t need 7-10 years of data to know what does and doesn’t work effectively. The worst part is that the offense (our biggest deficiency) is completely predicated on the players that hold this team back from moving forward. If people believe being a fringe playoff team is a better direction knowing this, then I don’t really know what else to say.

Finding specific players, with the most ideal skill sets, to fit next to Hennigan’s core is a fallacy.

[j-ragg]

I don't trust WeltHam to make the pick if we even did tank, which we never would. Purgatory or nothing.

[drsd]

You can tank for 3 years and never win lottery , and never draft withing top 5 , never get anything close to cornerstone and simply got "outsucked" after it,as it's almost impossible to stay on bottom for that long, as your front office will probably be sacked by that point.

Look at "reformed" draft from 2019.
19 -63 Cavs drafted 5th.
Suns with 19 wins drafted 6th
Knicks with 17 wins ( worst record) drafted 3rd.

needles to say non of them got franchize talent.

Lakers, with 37 wins jumped to 4th pick.

You simply can't "gameplan " tank for this odds or take it as serious tool to rebuild a team.
Rebuilding in old fashioned- bottom it out way simply isn't useful or smart. It's actually pretty pointless and dangerous.

If you describe every non title contender team as threadmill team, than only Lakers and Clippers are not -threadmill teams. Because it's not really objective or realistic that any other team will actually win it this year other than them.

What I see as the new normal is teams not tanking per se, but trading veteran players for young players as part of a rebuild. That will result in a huge number off losses, but it creates a new normal of "asset acquisition". Orlando is a bit ahead of the curve on this, but one problem is that a ream like Atlanta will end up with a very unbalanced roster leading to players not being in a good system to develop.

I still think drafting BPA is the best way to rebuild. Here is looking at you Okeke!


..

[Popsicle1228]

I believe that the new draft rules will disproportionately negatively impact small market teams and create an even greater divide when compared to large market teams. For example, Lebron left the Cavs for the LA after the Lakers came off of a 35 win season. If we are being honest, Lebron would never sign with a 35 win Magic, Bucks, Jazz, Grizzlies, etc, but will sign with a larger market/more popular franchise despite the fact that the Lakers were awful for nearly a decade also.

Obviously the loss of Lebron (twice) will devastate any team and the Cavs were rewarded with a number #1 pick in 2011, 2013, and 2014. It makes sense that when a team takes a blow like the Cavs did that the lottery should favor them because unless a Mt. Rushmore type player like Lebron is playing there (who was also drafted #1), FAs will not be lining up to play in Cleveland Ohio. It was a statistical anomaly to have three #1 pick opportunities in 4 years when the draft odds heavily favored the worst teams. Under the new rules it would not only be an anomaly, but should be a near statistical impossibility for the Cavs to replicate said favorability. Given the new rules, what is a 19 win Cavs team meant to do? If it means drafting a Darius Garland with pick #5 every year then they are in trouble.

All this to say, from a historical precedence, many people are going to look at the term re-build and tank as synonymous terms. Assuming TheGlyde’s graphs are accurate, tanking for higher lottery odds was a viable strategy for a long time, but it is almost certain that it can no longer be relied upon. So to those saying lets re-build by breaking up the core, what does a successful re-build look like in the modern NBA for a small market team like the Magic?

I do not mean this comment to be divisive, I am just looking for clarity because I think some of our forum arguments may be coming down to semantics re-build vs tank etc. I am also looking for an answer that may give me hope because as a fan of the Magic, I just don't see an easy way off of the treadmill we are currently on. If we trade our vets for young unproven players with potential that often times does not pan out, we are certain to lose a ton of games for the foreseeable future without the cushion of favorable lottery odds. In my view our team is stuck between a rock and a hard place unless we get very lucky and win a trade for a current star or somehow with luck convince a superstar free agent to sign after establishing a winning culture and strong management that players respect and want to play for.

[MagicMatic]

I believe that the new draft rules will disproportionately negatively impact small market teams and create an even greater divide when compared to large market teams. For example, Lebron left the Cavs for the LA after the Lakers came off of a 35 win season. If we are being honest, Lebron would never sign with a 35 win Magic, Bucks, Jazz, Grizzlies, etc, but will sign with a larger market/more popular franchise despite the fact that the Lakers were awful for nearly a decade also.

Obviously the loss of Lebron (twice) will devastate any team and the Cavs were rewarded with a number #1 pick in 2011, 2013, and 2014. It makes sense that when a team takes a blow like the Cavs did that the lottery should favor them because unless a Mt. Rushmore type player like Lebron is playing there (who was also drafted #1), FAs will not be lining up to play in Cleveland Ohio. It was a statistical anomaly to have three #1 pick opportunities in 4 years when the draft odds heavily favored the worst teams. Under the new rules it would not only be an anomaly, but should be a near statistical impossibility for the Cavs to replicate said favorability. Given the new rules, what is a 19 win Cavs team meant to do? If it means drafting a Darius Garland with pick #5 every year then they are in trouble.

All this to say, from a historical precedence, many people are going to look at the term re-build and tank as synonymous terms. Assuming TheGlyde’s graphs are accurate, tanking for higher lottery odds was a viable strategy for a long time, but it is almost certain that it can no longer be relied upon. So to those saying lets re-build by breaking up the core, what does a successful re-build look like in the modern NBA for a small market team like the Magic?

I do not mean this comment to be divisive, I am just looking for clarity because I think some of our forum arguments may be coming down to semantics re-build vs tank etc. I am also looking for an answer that may give me hope because as a fan of the Magic, I just don't see an easy way off of the treadmill we are currently on. If we trade our vets for young unproven players with potential that often times does not pan out, we are certain to lose a ton of games for the foreseeable future without the cushion of favorable lottery odds. In my view our team is stuck between a rock and a hard place unless we get very lucky and win a trade for a current star or somehow with luck convince a superstar free agent to sign after establishing a winning culture and strong management that players respect and want to play for.

Its not going to be easy. As someone that is a strong proponent of breaking up the core, I think there could be a successful rebuild without wholesale tanking.

What does this look like? I would say it’s a combination of moving larger contract veteran players for multiple younger pieces and picks. This is similar to what OKC did with PG only on a much smaller scale. Ideally Orlando would be looking at taking back bad contracts, picks, and young players as a way of casting a wider net to land potentially better talent. If it’s no longer merely about getting the highest pick, then we should be focused on getting more.

Looking at franchises like New Orleans, and Memphis should be prime examples of how to build out of unsuccessful playoff / treadmill teams. They went from “playoff teams” to “youth movement with high potential” in less than a few years. They have players like Morant, JJJ, Clarke, Zion, Hayes, Ingram etc. potentially under contract for an extended amount of time. They can grow their assets for a potential package later (similar to Boston). Not only that, but these teams are fun to watch.

Having said all that, it obviously doesn’t always pan out. You are correct to accurately assess that this team is between a rock and a hard place. I just personally fail to view the alternative as a solution to the problem we face. 3/5 of the starters and our primary bench option are who they are. If anything, they’ve regressed or have proven to be as inconsistent as ever. If players are viewing this team within the same scope as we are, would they see this franchise as a good place to sign? I’d say it’s doubtful. What hasn’t worked is biding time with the same core Hennigan was fired for fielding.

[Popsicle1228]

I believe that the new draft rules will disproportionately negatively impact small market teams and create an even greater divide when compared to large market teams. For example, Lebron left the Cavs for the LA after the Lakers came off of a 35 win season. If we are being honest, Lebron would never sign with a 35 win Magic, Bucks, Jazz, Grizzlies, etc, but will sign with a larger market/more popular franchise despite the fact that the Lakers were awful for nearly a decade also.

Obviously the loss of Lebron (twice) will devastate any team and the Cavs were rewarded with a number #1 pick in 2011, 2013, and 2014. It makes sense that when a team takes a blow like the Cavs did that the lottery should favor them because unless a Mt. Rushmore type player like Lebron is playing there (who was also drafted #1), FAs will not be lining up to play in Cleveland Ohio. It was a statistical anomaly to have three #1 pick opportunities in 4 years when the draft odds heavily favored the worst teams. Under the new rules it would not only be an anomaly, but should be a near statistical impossibility for the Cavs to replicate said favorability. Given the new rules, what is a 19 win Cavs team meant to do? If it means drafting a Darius Garland with pick #5 every year then they are in trouble.

All this to say, from a historical precedence, many people are going to look at the term re-build and tank as synonymous terms. Assuming TheGlyde’s graphs are accurate, tanking for higher lottery odds was a viable strategy for a long time, but it is almost certain that it can no longer be relied upon. So to those saying lets re-build by breaking up the core, what does a successful re-build look like in the modern NBA for a small market team like the Magic?

I do not mean this comment to be divisive, I am just looking for clarity because I think some of our forum arguments may be coming down to semantics re-build vs tank etc. I am also looking for an answer that may give me hope because as a fan of the Magic, I just don't see an easy way off of the treadmill we are currently on. If we trade our vets for young unproven players with potential that often times does not pan out, we are certain to lose a ton of games for the foreseeable future without the cushion of favorable lottery odds. In my view our team is stuck between a rock and a hard place unless we get very lucky and win a trade for a current star or somehow with luck convince a superstar free agent to sign after establishing a winning culture and strong management that players respect and want to play for.

Its not going to be easy. As someone that is a strong proponent of breaking up the core, I think there could be a successful rebuild without wholesale tanking.

What does this look like? I would say it’s a combination of moving larger contract veteran players for multiple younger pieces and picks. This is similar to what OKC did with PG only on a much smaller scale. Ideally Orlando would be looking at taking back bad contracts, picks, and young players as a way of casting a wider net to land potentially better talent. If it’s no longer merely about getting the highest pick, then we should be focused on getting more.

Looking at franchises like New Orleans, and Memphis should be prime examples of how to build out of unsuccessful playoff / treadmill teams. They went from “playoff teams” to “youth movement with high potential” in less than a few years. They have players like Morant, JJJ, Clarke, Zion, Hayes, Ingram etc. potentially under contract for an extended amount of time. They can grow their assets for a potential package later (similar to Boston). Not only that, but these teams are fun to watch.

Having said all that, it obviously doesn’t always pan out. You are correct to accurately assess that this team is between a rock and a hard place. I just personally fail to view the alternative as a solution to the problem we face. 3/5 of the starters and our primary bench option are who they are. If anything, they’ve regressed or have proven to be as inconsistent as ever. If players are viewing this team within the same scope as we are, would they see this franchise as a good place to sign? I’d say it’s doubtful. What hasn’t worked is biding time with the same core Hennigan was fired for fielding.

I appreciate the feedback here and especially the recognition that your ideal rebuild may not “pan out.” We have several posters that speak in absolutes as if they know precisely how to fix the Magic’s problems (one in particular you debate with often Lol), when I don’t think any of us can provide a full proof prescription to cure our team’s ailments. Your post also clarified something. Whenever you said rebuild I automatically thought you meant tank for higher picks. What you prescribed here, I may not fully agree with, but is much more palatable than simply tanking.

P.S. I admittedly did not read your long form debates with said particular poster to understand your full viewpoint because debates with that poster always go the same way. Overlong and he/she is always correct no matter the subject and/or evidence.

[MagicMatic]

I believe that the new draft rules will disproportionately negatively impact small market teams and create an even greater divide when compared to large market teams. For example, Lebron left the Cavs for the LA after the Lakers came off of a 35 win season. If we are being honest, Lebron would never sign with a 35 win Magic, Bucks, Jazz, Grizzlies, etc, but will sign with a larger market/more popular franchise despite the fact that the Lakers were awful for nearly a decade also.

Obviously the loss of Lebron (twice) will devastate any team and the Cavs were rewarded with a number #1 pick in 2011, 2013, and 2014. It makes sense that when a team takes a blow like the Cavs did that the lottery should favor them because unless a Mt. Rushmore type player like Lebron is playing there (who was also drafted #1), FAs will not be lining up to play in Cleveland Ohio. It was a statistical anomaly to have three #1 pick opportunities in 4 years when the draft odds heavily favored the worst teams. Under the new rules it would not only be an anomaly, but should be a near statistical impossibility for the Cavs to replicate said favorability. Given the new rules, what is a 19 win Cavs team meant to do? If it means drafting a Darius Garland with pick #5 every year then they are in trouble.

All this to say, from a historical precedence, many people are going to look at the term re-build and tank as synonymous terms. Assuming TheGlyde’s graphs are accurate, tanking for higher lottery odds was a viable strategy for a long time, but it is almost certain that it can no longer be relied upon. So to those saying lets re-build by breaking up the core, what does a successful re-build look like in the modern NBA for a small market team like the Magic?

I do not mean this comment to be divisive, I am just looking for clarity because I think some of our forum arguments may be coming down to semantics re-build vs tank etc. I am also looking for an answer that may give me hope because as a fan of the Magic, I just don't see an easy way off of the treadmill we are currently on. If we trade our vets for young unproven players with potential that often times does not pan out, we are certain to lose a ton of games for the foreseeable future without the cushion of favorable lottery odds. In my view our team is stuck between a rock and a hard place unless we get very lucky and win a trade for a current star or somehow with luck convince a superstar free agent to sign after establishing a winning culture and strong management that players respect and want to play for.

Its not going to be easy. As someone that is a strong proponent of breaking up the core, I think there could be a successful rebuild without wholesale tanking.

What does this look like? I would say it’s a combination of moving larger contract veteran players for multiple younger pieces and picks. This is similar to what OKC did with PG only on a much smaller scale. Ideally Orlando would be looking at taking back bad contracts, picks, and young players as a way of casting a wider net to land potentially better talent. If it’s no longer merely about getting the highest pick, then we should be focused on getting more.

Looking at franchises like New Orleans, and Memphis should be prime examples of how to build out of unsuccessful playoff / treadmill teams. They went from “playoff teams” to “youth movement with high potential” in less than a few years. They have players like Morant, JJJ, Clarke, Zion, Hayes, Ingram etc. potentially under contract for an extended amount of time. They can grow their assets for a potential package later (similar to Boston). Not only that, but these teams are fun to watch.

Having said all that, it obviously doesn’t always pan out. You are correct to accurately assess that this team is between a rock and a hard place. I just personally fail to view the alternative as a solution to the problem we face. 3/5 of the starters and our primary bench option are who they are. If anything, they’ve regressed or have proven to be as inconsistent as ever. If players are viewing this team within the same scope as we are, would they see this franchise as a good place to sign? I’d say it’s doubtful. What hasn’t worked is biding time with the same core Hennigan was fired for fielding.

I appreciate the feedback here and especially the recognition that your ideal rebuild may not “pan out.” We have several posters that speak in absolutes as if they know precisely how to fix the Magic’s problems (one in particular you debate with often Lol), when I don’t think any of us can provide a full proof prescription to cure our team’s ailments. Your post also clarified something. Whenever you said rebuild I automatically thought you meant tank for higher picks. What you prescribed here, I may not fully agree with, but is much more palatable than simply tanking.

P.S. I admittedly did not read your long form debates with said particular poster to understand your full viewpoint because debates with that poster always go the same way. Overlong and he/she is always correct no matter the subject and/or evidence.

Those debates mostly devolved into semantics and always became personal. I definitely don’t believe there is one perfect way to build a competent and competitive team. What I do know is that being in the middle of the league as a fringe playoff team isn’t ideal for smaller market teams with obvious glaring weaknesses.

There are way too many factors involved to say that the draft is a bulletproof way to landing a star. The talent crop, depth, timing, lottery luck, etc. are undeniable circumstances for everything to break right. Tanking as a primary strategy isn’t viable anymore. More needs to be done to acquire talent in various ways. The draft just provides those assets without giving anything up.

Maybe I’m cynical in that I simply don’t believe that Orlando lands this talent, in a repetitive scenario of annual first round exits, despite appearing competitive. The league is just merciless when it comes to “talent always wins”.

[pepe1991]

For every one of these examples there is a

Boston
Dallas
Philadelphia
Sacramento
Utah

Drafting a star player requires luck in the lottery, appropriate scouting, and available talent. Having better odds would have landed us KP or Doncic, and we ended up with Mario and Bamba. Minnesota decided to build around a new age big and a wildly inconsistent wing that never lived up to expectations. Neither of which are known for their work ethic or grit. Suns missed on nearly every pick (including Ayton) except arguably Booker. Both franchises have accomplished exactly the same amount as Orlando in the same timeframe - nothing.

Tanking isn’t the answer, especially now because of the rule changes. That’s not what this thread is about. Rebuilding doesn’t mean “Tanking” as much as it means making smart trades to raise the ceiling of the team at the expense of nba veterans that keep Orlando a treadmill.

For what it’s worth, I’d much rather have a team like New Orleans or Memphis right now than Orlando. Being in a position to land/attract star players while having losing records, likely missing the playoffs, and playing fun to watch basketball.

So why do you need to blow whole roster out to make right decisions?

Celtics, Jazz and Dallas never tanked.

Memphis and Pelicans, much like Magic, Suns, Kings will never attract free agents no matter what they "build" because free agents have zero desire to go there. You know it ,i know it, everybody knows it.
Even when smaller market teams get superstar on rookie contract ( Pelicans = Davis, Cavs = Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, Harden = OKC) they still never attract free agents and after few years stars leave and small market teams are back at square one.
Giannis already hinted what he will do if Bucks fail this year.

I saw on Jazz thread that Bojan Bogdanovic is the biggest free agent name they signed in their history. I love me some Bojan, but hello, it's freaking Jazz, team that had Malone and Stock, was regular NBA finals team, has big history, yet... because of location nobody ever goes there.
This is not really secret, after Davis got traded Holiday went to media and said that he only re-signed there because of him.

Kawhi walked away from championship team to go to play in LA.

We can talk here for years about this topic, reality is cruel. NBA stars care about location more than situation.

Carlos Boozer ring a bell? i would say he was a bigger name than Bogs

Sign and trade, not free agent

[pepe1991]

I believe that the new draft rules will disproportionately negatively impact small market teams and create an even greater divide when compared to large market teams. For example, Lebron left the Cavs for the LA after the Lakers came off of a 35 win season. If we are being honest, Lebron would never sign with a 35 win Magic, Bucks, Jazz, Grizzlies, etc, but will sign with a larger market/more popular franchise despite the fact that the Lakers were awful for nearly a decade also.

Obviously the loss of Lebron (twice) will devastate any team and the Cavs were rewarded with a number #1 pick in 2011, 2013, and 2014. It makes sense that when a team takes a blow like the Cavs did that the lottery should favor them because unless a Mt. Rushmore type player like Lebron is playing there (who was also drafted #1), FAs will not be lining up to play in Cleveland Ohio. It was a statistical anomaly to have three #1 pick opportunities in 4 years when the draft odds heavily favored the worst teams. Under the new rules it would not only be an anomaly, but should be a near statistical impossibility for the Cavs to replicate said favorability. Given the new rules, what is a 19 win Cavs team meant to do? If it means drafting a Darius Garland with pick #5 every year then they are in trouble.

All this to say, from a historical precedence, many people are going to look at the term re-build and tank as synonymous terms. Assuming TheGlyde’s graphs are accurate, tanking for higher lottery odds was a viable strategy for a long time, but it is almost certain that it can no longer be relied upon. So to those saying lets re-build by breaking up the core, what does a successful re-build look like in the modern NBA for a small market team like the Magic?

I do not mean this comment to be divisive, I am just looking for clarity because I think some of our forum arguments may be coming down to semantics re-build vs tank etc. I am also looking for an answer that may give me hope because as a fan of the Magic, I just don't see an easy way off of the treadmill we are currently on. If we trade our vets for young unproven players with potential that often times does not pan out, we are certain to lose a ton of games for the foreseeable future without the cushion of favorable lottery odds. In my view our team is stuck between a rock and a hard place unless we get very lucky and win a trade for a current star or somehow with luck convince a superstar free agent to sign after establishing a winning culture and strong management that players respect and want to play for.

Its not going to be easy. As someone that is a strong proponent of breaking up the core, I think there could be a successful rebuild without wholesale tanking.

What does this look like? I would say it’s a combination of moving larger contract veteran players for multiple younger pieces and picks. This is similar to what OKC did with PG only on a much smaller scale. Ideally Orlando would be looking at taking back bad contracts, picks, and young players as a way of casting a wider net to land potentially better talent. If it’s no longer merely about getting the highest pick, then we should be focused on getting more.

Looking at franchises like New Orleans, and Memphis should be prime examples of how to build out of unsuccessful playoff / treadmill teams. They went from “playoff teams” to “youth movement with high potential” in less than a few years. They have players like Morant, JJJ, Clarke, Zion, Hayes, Ingram etc. potentially under contract for an extended amount of time. They can grow their assets for a potential package later (similar to Boston). Not only that, but these teams are fun to watch.

Having said all that, it obviously doesn’t always pan out. You are correct to accurately assess that this team is between a rock and a hard place. I just personally fail to view the alternative as a solution to the problem we face. 3/5 of the starters and our primary bench option are who they are. If anything, they’ve regressed or have proven to be as inconsistent as ever. If players are viewing this team within the same scope as we are, would they see this franchise as a good place to sign? I’d say it’s doubtful. What hasn’t worked is biding time with the same core Hennigan was fired for fielding.

Looking at franchises like New Orleans, and Memphis should be prime examples of how to build out of unsuccessful playoff / treadmill teams. They went from “playoff teams” to “youth movement with high potential” in less than a few years. They have players like Morant, JJJ, Clarke, Zion, Hayes, Ingram etc. potentially under contract for an extended amount of time. They can grow their assets for a potential package later (similar to Boston). Not only that, but these teams are fun to watch.

Before they were unseccessful playoff team and way before they were- youth movment with high potential , they were - youth movment with high potential. Only difference is that you know how that played out and you don't know how Memphis and Pelicans this time around will play out.


During 2013 Pelicans had one of hottest young prospects that whole world viewed as future star- Eric Gordon. If you remember whole Pelicans and Clippers contravery about him as NBA, at that moment owner of "Hornets= later Pelicans" didn't want to make that deal.
They also had 23 years old allstar point guard- jrue Holiday.
They also had former ROY Tyreke Evans.
They also had 10th overall draft picks - Austin Rivers.
They also had best young player in the world.
BUT after 2 yeras of climbing in standings, they relasped once again in 2015-16 falling into deep lottery ( 30-52). They make s** loud of moves for next season, get Cousins, draft Buddy Hield and.... win 4 more games ( 34-48 ) in 2016-17.

Year and half later superstar Anthony Davis is wearing " that's all folks" shirt and demands trade.

Memphis:
Franchize starts in 1995, does not make playoffs until 2003. After 3 years of first round exists new rebuild takes place:
2007 : Mike Conley
2008. trade Kevin Love because they had Rudy Gay, Pau Gasol, Kyle Lowry ( yes Kyle Lowry) 22 years old Darko MIlicic, and 25 years old Warrick. They get OJ Mayo ( also lottery pick)
2009 : 2# pick they select..... Thabeet
2010. 12# pick they select.... Xavier Henry

At that point they already lost Pau Gasol and Lowry and now have Randolph, Gay, Conley and Marc. At one point they even had Iverson, Demarr Carrol on their roster.
2011 playoffs they make HUGE upset and beat Spurs in first round. Lose in second to OKC, who later lost 4-1 to Dallas ( who won it all).
2012 time for next step? Eh. Lose in first round to Clippers. ( clippers get swept by Spurs in second).
2013 Memphis makes biggest run ever- nba conference finals. So they beat Clippers in first round ( if you remember that's one series where Blake and Randolph were fighting ), and they advance. But then key moment happends in other series. In clash with Pat Beverly - Russell Westbrook hurts his knee and is out for a season and- OKlahoma is next opponent to -- Memphis. They pass OKC and face Spurs in epic Western conference finals where they.... Get swept.

And that's their highlight of rebuild. After that in 3 of next 4 playoff series they lost in first round. Since 2017-18 they are rebuidling. Whole rebuild would actually start way sooner if Conley and Marc are not loyal to the fault and never bi***ed, moaned and cried like most of other stars do.

Every team that makes playoffs with some draft high draft picks can be viewed as exiting full of potential young team. Case and point Pelicans and Memphis in past. However, leap between being playoff team and contender is something that most teams fail at.

10 years from now i think some NBA fans will point finger at Philadelphia in 2018 and said "this is were they failed" when they Fultz trade instad of taking Tatum.

Same will be said for Celtics, who's contending fell apart with Hayward injury and Irving situation.
Lot of good NBA teams raise and fall over time, only 1 team wins every year, there are teams that are contenders for years yet never win anything ( Pacers 2011-2014, Houston 2016- present) . There are teams that come out of nowhere ( Raptors) , there are teams that rebuild for 15 years ( Kings, T wolves ) . There are teams that should have won it but they were unlucky ( Nash and Suns).

There is no blueprint to result. Lot of attemps and fails along the way.

[tiderulz]

So why do you need to blow whole roster out to make right decisions?

Celtics, Jazz and Dallas never tanked.

Memphis and Pelicans, much like Magic, Suns, Kings will never attract free agents no matter what they "build" because free agents have zero desire to go there. You know it ,i know it, everybody knows it.
Even when smaller market teams get superstar on rookie contract ( Pelicans = Davis, Cavs = Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, Harden = OKC) they still never attract free agents and after few years stars leave and small market teams are back at square one.
Giannis already hinted what he will do if Bucks fail this year.

I saw on Jazz thread that Bojan Bogdanovic is the biggest free agent name they signed in their history. I love me some Bojan, but hello, it's freaking Jazz, team that had Malone and Stock, was regular NBA finals team, has big history, yet... because of location nobody ever goes there.
This is not really secret, after Davis got traded Holiday went to media and said that he only re-signed there because of him.

Kawhi walked away from championship team to go to play in LA.

We can talk here for years about this topic, reality is cruel. NBA stars care about location more than situation.

Carlos Boozer ring a bell? i would say he was a bigger name than Bogs

Sign and trade, not free agent

he absolutely was a free agent and it was not a Sign & Trade. This was the famous part where Cleveland said they had a verbal agreement with Boozer, so let him become a RFA 1 year earlier, expecting him to re-sign with them but he went and signed a larger offer sheet with Utah.

[pepe1991]

Carlos Boozer ring a bell? i would say he was a bigger name than Bogs

Sign and trade, not free agent

he absolutely was a free agent and it was not a Sign & Trade. This was the famous part where Cleveland said they had a verbal agreement with Boozer, so let him become a RFA 1 year earlier, expecting him to re-sign with them but he went and signed a larger offer sheet with Utah.

Carlos Boozer is the latest domino to fall in NBA free agency, agreeing to a five-year deal with the Chicago Bulls on Wednesday.

The two-time All-Star forward is going to Chicago in a sign-and-trade with the Utah Jazz, giving the Bulls the dominant big man they've craved for years.

Shortly after Chicago announced the signing on Thursday, Jazz spokesman Jonathan Rinehart said Utah sent him along with a future protected second-round pick to the Bulls for a trade exception.

The deal gives the Jazz salary-cap flexibility while the Bulls get a major presence inside.

The Bulls did not disclose terms, but various sources told ESPN.com that the contract will be for between $75 million and $80 million.

https://www.espn.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=5361792

[tiderulz]

Sign and trade, not free agent

he absolutely was a free agent and it was not a Sign & Trade. This was the famous part where Cleveland said they had a verbal agreement with Boozer, so let him become a RFA 1 year earlier, expecting him to re-sign with them but he went and signed a larger offer sheet with Utah.

Carlos Boozer is the latest domino to fall in NBA free agency, agreeing to a five-year deal with the Chicago Bulls on Wednesday.

The two-time All-Star forward is going to Chicago in a sign-and-trade with the Utah Jazz, giving the Bulls the dominant big man they've craved for years.

Shortly after Chicago announced the signing on Thursday, Jazz spokesman Jonathan Rinehart said Utah sent him along with a future protected second-round pick to the Bulls for a trade exception.

The deal gives the Jazz salary-cap flexibility while the Bulls get a major presence inside.

The Bulls did not disclose terms, but various sources told ESPN.com that the contract will be for between $75 million and $80 million.

https://www.espn.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=5361792

we were talking about Utah Jazz free agent signings. Boozer became an up and rising star and left Cleveland to sign with Utah.

not sure why you are bringing up Chicago

[pepe1991]

he absolutely was a free agent and it was not a Sign & Trade. This was the famous part where Cleveland said they had a verbal agreement with Boozer, so let him become a RFA 1 year earlier, expecting him to re-sign with them but he went and signed a larger offer sheet with Utah.

Carlos Boozer is the latest domino to fall in NBA free agency, agreeing to a five-year deal with the Chicago Bulls on Wednesday.

The two-time All-Star forward is going to Chicago in a sign-and-trade with the Utah Jazz, giving the Bulls the dominant big man they've craved for years.

Shortly after Chicago announced the signing on Thursday, Jazz spokesman Jonathan Rinehart said Utah sent him along with a future protected second-round pick to the Bulls for a trade exception.

The deal gives the Jazz salary-cap flexibility while the Bulls get a major presence inside.

The Bulls did not disclose terms, but various sources told ESPN.com that the contract will be for between $75 million and $80 million.

https://www.espn.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=5361792

we were talking about Utah Jazz free agent signings. Boozer became an up and rising star and left Cleveland to sign with Utah.

not sure why you are bringing up Chicago

Ugh you are 100% correct, i screwed up thinking he went from Chicago to Utah after 2 years, not Cavs.

But he averaged like 15-11 when he signed with Utah , in his second year. Sure they were thinking about potential and improvments but he wasn't really that big of a deal, especially averaging that numbers on non-playoff contender.

Still, that's Utah Jazz, respected team that biggest FA , according to their fans were :Boozer, Bogadnovic and over a hill Joe Johnson.

https://www.slcdunk.com/the-downbeat-latest-jazz-news/2019/7/16/20696628/biggest-free-agent-signings-in-utah-jazz-history-bojan-bogdanovic

There is whole thread and their disscution about it.
It's not hard to notice that Utah because of geograpic position, really does not attract FAs. And that was my point all along.

[tiderulz]

Carlos Boozer is the latest domino to fall in NBA free agency, agreeing to a five-year deal with the Chicago Bulls on Wednesday.

The two-time All-Star forward is going to Chicago in a sign-and-trade with the Utah Jazz, giving the Bulls the dominant big man they've craved for years.

Shortly after Chicago announced the signing on Thursday, Jazz spokesman Jonathan Rinehart said Utah sent him along with a future protected second-round pick to the Bulls for a trade exception.

The deal gives the Jazz salary-cap flexibility while the Bulls get a major presence inside.

The Bulls did not disclose terms, but various sources told ESPN.com that the contract will be for between $75 million and $80 million.

https://www.espn.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=5361792

we were talking about Utah Jazz free agent signings. Boozer became an up and rising star and left Cleveland to sign with Utah.

not sure why you are bringing up Chicago

Ugh you are 100% correct, i screwed up thinking he went from Chicago to Utah after 2 years, not Cavs.

But he averaged like 15-11 when he signed with Utah , in his second year. Sure they were thinking about potential and improvments but he wasn't really that big of a deal, especially averaging that numbers on non-playoff contender.

Still, that's Utah Jazz, respected team that biggest FA , according to their fans were :Boozer, Bogadnovic and over a hill Joe Johnson.

https://www.slcdunk.com/the-downbeat-latest-jazz-news/2019/7/16/20696628/biggest-free-agent-signings-in-utah-jazz-history-bojan-bogdanovic

There is whole thread and their disscution about it.
It's not hard to notice that Utah because of geograpic position, really does not attract FAs. And that was my point all along.

if Boozer wasnt really that big a deal, why did Utah offer $27 million more than Cleveland? its was because you could see what he would become. in 6 seasons with Utah, he put up 19 ppg, 10.5 rpg and 2x Allstar.

[zaymon]

I am not ready to move on from Isaac, Fultz, Bamba and Okeke. Trading away Ross, Fournier or Vucevic will propably lead to a lot of losing and bad chemistry resulting in trade demands. Fultz is nowhere near ready to lead this team, Isaac is grrat but a complimentary piece, Okeke is hurt and Bamba needs years to develop. What " a minor rebuild" really means is losing credibility among veterans and slow death of this group of players. ( including Fultz and Isaac). Why commit to a team thats purposefully wants to lose ? Why give them a discount ? We will get the worst kind of free agents that sign here only for money, and use our team as a stat farm. Jeff Green rings a bell ? Bismack Biyombo anyone ? Maybe we want the Sacramento treatment ? Dedmon for 13 M ? Barnes for 21 M?

Memphis and New Orleans exemples to justify tanking/ rebuilding are so funny thats not even funny. Pelicans got Zion after 33 win season, Grizzlies got Morant after 33 win season. Someone wants to mention OKC ? Please dont.

[MagicMatic]

I believe that the new draft rules will disproportionately negatively impact small market teams and create an even greater divide when compared to large market teams. For example, Lebron left the Cavs for the LA after the Lakers came off of a 35 win season. If we are being honest, Lebron would never sign with a 35 win Magic, Bucks, Jazz, Grizzlies, etc, but will sign with a larger market/more popular franchise despite the fact that the Lakers were awful for nearly a decade also.

Obviously the loss of Lebron (twice) will devastate any team and the Cavs were rewarded with a number #1 pick in 2011, 2013, and 2014. It makes sense that when a team takes a blow like the Cavs did that the lottery should favor them because unless a Mt. Rushmore type player like Lebron is playing there (who was also drafted #1), FAs will not be lining up to play in Cleveland Ohio. It was a statistical anomaly to have three #1 pick opportunities in 4 years when the draft odds heavily favored the worst teams. Under the new rules it would not only be an anomaly, but should be a near statistical impossibility for the Cavs to replicate said favorability. Given the new rules, what is a 19 win Cavs team meant to do? If it means drafting a Darius Garland with pick #5 every year then they are in trouble.

All this to say, from a historical precedence, many people are going to look at the term re-build and tank as synonymous terms. Assuming TheGlyde’s graphs are accurate, tanking for higher lottery odds was a viable strategy for a long time, but it is almost certain that it can no longer be relied upon. So to those saying lets re-build by breaking up the core, what does a successful re-build look like in the modern NBA for a small market team like the Magic?

I do not mean this comment to be divisive, I am just looking for clarity because I think some of our forum arguments may be coming down to semantics re-build vs tank etc. I am also looking for an answer that may give me hope because as a fan of the Magic, I just don't see an easy way off of the treadmill we are currently on. If we trade our vets for young unproven players with potential that often times does not pan out, we are certain to lose a ton of games for the foreseeable future without the cushion of favorable lottery odds. In my view our team is stuck between a rock and a hard place unless we get very lucky and win a trade for a current star or somehow with luck convince a superstar free agent to sign after establishing a winning culture and strong management that players respect and want to play for.

Its not going to be easy. As someone that is a strong proponent of breaking up the core, I think there could be a successful rebuild without wholesale tanking.

What does this look like? I would say it’s a combination of moving larger contract veteran players for multiple younger pieces and picks. This is similar to what OKC did with PG only on a much smaller scale. Ideally Orlando would be looking at taking back bad contracts, picks, and young players as a way of casting a wider net to land potentially better talent. If it’s no longer merely about getting the highest pick, then we should be focused on getting more.

Looking at franchises like New Orleans, and Memphis should be prime examples of how to build out of unsuccessful playoff / treadmill teams. They went from “playoff teams” to “youth movement with high potential” in less than a few years. They have players like Morant, JJJ, Clarke, Zion, Hayes, Ingram etc. potentially under contract for an extended amount of time. They can grow their assets for a potential package later (similar to Boston). Not only that, but these teams are fun to watch.

Having said all that, it obviously doesn’t always pan out. You are correct to accurately assess that this team is between a rock and a hard place. I just personally fail to view the alternative as a solution to the problem we face. 3/5 of the starters and our primary bench option are who they are. If anything, they’ve regressed or have proven to be as inconsistent as ever. If players are viewing this team within the same scope as we are, would they see this franchise as a good place to sign? I’d say it’s doubtful. What hasn’t worked is biding time with the same core Hennigan was fired for fielding.

Looking at franchises like New Orleans, and Memphis should be prime examples of how to build out of unsuccessful playoff / treadmill teams. They went from “playoff teams” to “youth movement with high potential” in less than a few years. They have players like Morant, JJJ, Clarke, Zion, Hayes, Ingram etc. potentially under contract for an extended amount of time. They can grow their assets for a potential package later (similar to Boston). Not only that, but these teams are fun to watch.

Before they were unseccessful playoff team and way before they were- youth movment with high potential , they were - youth movment with high potential. Only difference is that you know how that played out and you don't know how Memphis and Pelicans this time around will play out.


During 2013 Pelicans had one of hottest young prospects that whole world viewed as future star- Eric Gordon. If you remember whole Pelicans and Clippers contravery about him as NBA, at that moment owner of "Hornets= later Pelicans" didn't want to make that deal.
They also had 23 years old allstar point guard- jrue Holiday.
They also had former ROY Tyreke Evans.
They also had 10th overall draft picks - Austin Rivers.
They also had best young player in the world.
BUT after 2 yeras of climbing in standings, they relasped once again in 2015-16 falling into deep lottery ( 30-52). They make s** loud of moves for next season, get Cousins, draft Buddy Hield and.... win 4 more games ( 34-48 ) in 2016-17.

Year and half later superstar Anthony Davis is wearing " that's all folks" shirt and demands trade.

Memphis:
Franchize starts in 1995, does not make playoffs until 2003. After 3 years of first round exists new rebuild takes place:
2007 : Mike Conley
2008. trade Kevin Love because they had Rudy Gay, Pau Gasol, Kyle Lowry ( yes Kyle Lowry) 22 years old Darko MIlicic, and 25 years old Warrick. They get OJ Mayo ( also lottery pick)
2009 : 2# pick they select..... Thabeet
2010. 12# pick they select.... Xavier Henry

At that point they already lost Pau Gasol and Lowry and now have Randolph, Gay, Conley and Marc. At one point they even had Iverson, Demarr Carrol on their roster.
2011 playoffs they make HUGE upset and beat Spurs in first round. Lose in second to OKC, who later lost 4-1 to Dallas ( who won it all).
2012 time for next step? Eh. Lose in first round to Clippers. ( clippers get swept by Spurs in second).
2013 Memphis makes biggest run ever- nba conference finals. So they beat Clippers in first round ( if you remember that's one series where Blake and Randolph were fighting ), and they advance. But then key moment happends in other series. In clash with Pat Beverly - Russell Westbrook hurts his knee and is out for a season and- OKlahoma is next opponent to -- Memphis. They pass OKC and face Spurs in epic Western conference finals where they.... Get swept.

And that's their highlight of rebuild. After that in 3 of next 4 playoff series they lost in first round. Since 2017-18 they are rebuidling. Whole rebuild would actually start way sooner if Conley and Marc are not loyal to the fault and never bi***ed, moaned and cried like most of other stars do.

Every team that makes playoffs with some draft high draft picks can be viewed as exiting full of potential young team. Case and point Pelicans and Memphis in past. However, leap between being playoff team and contender is something that most teams fail at.

10 years from now i think some NBA fans will point finger at Philadelphia in 2018 and said "this is were they failed" when they Fultz trade instad of taking Tatum.

Same will be said for Celtics, who's contending fell apart with Hayward injury and Irving situation.
Lot of good NBA teams raise and fall over time, only 1 team wins every year, there are teams that are contenders for years yet never win anything ( Pacers 2011-2014, Houston 2016- present) . There are teams that come out of nowhere ( Raptors) , there are teams that rebuild for 15 years ( Kings, T wolves ) . There are teams that should have won it but they were unlucky ( Nash and Suns).

There is no blueprint to result. Lot of attemps and fails along the way.

Yeah I agree with your last sentence.

I’m talking about the Pelicans and Grizzlies now in 2020.

They went from disgruntled superstars and cagey vets, leading them nowhere within their botched window, to now extremely promising teams with bright futures in less than two years. Hence my argument for a rebuild. Yeah, you can’t make terrible selections like Thabeet and Henry, but you have the window you create for yourself. There is no window in Orlando with this core group.

The point is that they cut bait when they did and were rewarded with a future instead of fooling themselves. AD’s injury riddled career in NO gave them no options in their window. Memphis was good but were on decline after years of being a decent playoff team.