Stay the course or rebuild now

[MartinsIzAfraud]

Genuinely interested in the post-season press conference from Weltman tomorrow.

Injuries, great to make it to the playoffs again, Draft process different due to COVID but glad they've scouted throughout the year, let's run it back for 2021

I'm curious if there's any deviation from this. Anything as a sign to fans that we might not be as good next year and see next year as a transition season. Like what John Denton is referring to.

I don't see any reason they'd change up and give fans any idea as to what they're thinking. We'll know what the path is with the decisions they make or don't make.

Right now you'd almost have to say we're going to be worse than we are this year, it's somewhat of a given. Logically you'd also look to cash in on players you can and try a re-tool of the misfit pieces. Doesn't mean that's the path they're going to take especially when you consider its the last year of contract for both Cliff & FO.

[thelead]

Injuries, great to make it to the playoffs again, Draft process different due to COVID but glad they've scouted throughout the year, let's run it back for 2021

I'm curious if there's any deviation from this. Anything as a sign to fans that we might not be as good next year and see next year as a transition season. Like what John Denton is referring to.

I don't see any reason they'd change up and give fans any idea as to what they're thinking. We'll know what the path is with the decisions they make or don't make.

Right now you'd almost have to say we're going to be worse than we are this year, it's somewhat of a given. Logically you'd also look to cash in on players you can and try a re-tool of the misfit pieces. Doesn't mean that's the path they're going to take especially when you consider its the last year of contract for both Cliff & FO.

Agreed. Right off the bat, we know that JI will be out for the entire year next season. Then you look at Washington getting Wall back and Atlanta adding a lotto pick to a full season with Clint Capela. We're likely going to be in the lotto next year. They would be smart to tear it down and claim that they will be bad on purpose.

[OrlChamps2030]

I'm curious if there's any deviation from this. Anything as a sign to fans that we might not be as good next year and see next year as a transition season. Like what John Denton is referring to.

I don't see any reason they'd change up and give fans any idea as to what they're thinking. We'll know what the path is with the decisions they make or don't make.

Right now you'd almost have to say we're going to be worse than we are this year, it's somewhat of a given. Logically you'd also look to cash in on players you can and try a re-tool of the misfit pieces. Doesn't mean that's the path they're going to take especially when you consider its the last year of contract for both Cliff & FO.

Agreed. Right off the bat, we know that JI will be out for the entire year next season. Then you look at Washington getting Wall back and Atlanta adding a lotto pick to a full season with Clint Capela. We're likely going to be in the lotto next year. They would be smart to tear it down and claim that they will be bad on purpose.

Strong draft next year too

We all know this isn’t going to happen though. No point in even getting your hopes up

Maybe we finish with 33 wins and finally get the lotto luck we deserve

[MagicMatic]

I don't see any reason they'd change up and give fans any idea as to what they're thinking. We'll know what the path is with the decisions they make or don't make.

Right now you'd almost have to say we're going to be worse than we are this year, it's somewhat of a given. Logically you'd also look to cash in on players you can and try a re-tool of the misfit pieces. Doesn't mean that's the path they're going to take especially when you consider its the last year of contract for both Cliff & FO.

Agreed. Right off the bat, we know that JI will be out for the entire year next season. Then you look at Washington getting Wall back and Atlanta adding a lotto pick to a full season with Clint Capela. We're likely going to be in the lotto next year. They would be smart to tear it down and claim that they will be bad on purpose.

Strong draft next year too

We all know this isn’t going to happen though. No point in even getting your hopes up

Maybe we finish with 33 wins and finally get the lotto luck we deserve

Nah. They’ll push the “we will have a healthy season” until Isaac comes back and we will scrape by enough to make the first round of the playoffs. Start looking for prospects in the “strong draft” around pick 15. Maybe we will land Giannis 2.0. rinse repeat

[Last Guardian]

Stay the course? What even is the course? There is very little potential here. There isn't enough playmaking and shooting to be a good offensive team. There are too many weak defenders getting big minutes to be a dominant defensive team. I am not seeing what the vision is here to actually get behind continuing what we are doing.

The blueprint is Raptors and Bucks obviously. Both build through trades, development and high upside picks in the draft.
1- Bledsoe, Lowry- athletic, strong, pull up threat.
Fultz fits that team concept, still a lot of development to do. Lowry clicked when he was 27, Bledsoe 24.
2. Matthews, Van Vleet. Strong, good shooters. Van Vleet playmaker, Matthews more versatile defensively.
Fournier is not strong, but good shooter, average playmaker, fairly versatile defensively. He is very disappointing in this playoffs, but so was Van Vleet last year until Bucks series and Matthews many times before. I dont think he is the answer, but he is also not the problem. I am fine with moving him, but sg market is not exactly deep, and his market value is not exactly high with his contract situation. In the end Weltman must decide if he is the chemistry killer and when is the perfect time to trade him if he is.
3. Anunoby, Middleton- Long, good finishers, good shooters. Similarities end here. Anunoby is a great versatile defender, while Middleton is a shot maker and playmaker.
Okeke is long, good finisher and good shooter so the common theme remains. He is something of a mix between those two players above. I am high on him, but we just dont know until he starts to play.
4. Giannis, Siakam- long, athletic, good team defenders, good drivers and playmakers.
Isaac fits defensive side which is impressive given the competition but falls short on driving and playmaking. If he ever stays healthy we will need to find our offense elsewhere.
5. Lopez, Gasol- shooting, skilled, smart defender
Vucevic is the best ball handler of them, comparable shooter and worst rim protector (but not as far from Gasol as you would think, better than him last year !). He is more in a Gasol mold than Lopez. Complements Fultz and Isaac nicely with his shooting and playmaking.
Bamba is more in a Lopez mold. Rim protector and shooter. He lacks the smart defender part, but maybe it will come with time.

To me similarities are striking. We wont see the full extent of Weltman vision next year sadly, but we have pieces that not so many teams possess. Positions number 3 and 4 are obviously the hardest to get. For 2 games i thought we have it covered.

Yea not seeing this vision whatsoever. This is a major stretch to say the least.

All I know is that we can't continue what we are doing. We either rebuild correctly and build through the draft once again, or make trades that could help us win. I'm not imagining there is a trade out there that will move the needle that much though.

[Xatticus]

Building team without superstar is waste of time. However, how to get one should be the main talking point here.

1) draft.
Declining value as valiable option with new draft changes, high risk - questionable reward. Lot ot times players don't live up to hype or need years until they are really good. By that point most of them change teams.

2) trades
Stars get payed, to match salaries you have to sell your assets

3) free agency
most unreliable strategy

I would argue that the draft is the most unreliable mechanism to gain a top-10 star. Tanking does not work.

BUT: teams drafting for stars does work. Most elite teams today found talent in the draft, via NOT tanking. So the quandary exists.
Do not tank but use a draft slot to be excellent.

This is clearly where I felt the Magic failed in Bamba. Whatever next year's trade-down market for an obvious "Shai Gilgeous-Alexander" player, Orlando needs to start making said trades****. I am happy as Fultz will be better than Gilgeous-Alexander, but on the draft night, selecting Bamba when an obiovusius SGA trade was there to make, it made no sense.

...


p.s. I am sick of all NBA mangers selecting in the draft based on height. Length: ok. But height. This makes no sense.
I could go thought the last 5 draft were I could clearly see bad draft selections. (I could not see "good" draft selections and thus I am not a NBA GM.). But bad is obviously bad.



*** = Orlando might need to trade up to the 6-9 range in this narrative for the coming draft.
..

This is just wrong. You can argue about the efficacy of tanking as it relates to building a winning roster, but you can't argue that it doesn't help land stars. It just does. Higher draft picks have more value because they yield better players. Prospect evaluation isn't a perfected science, but it's not a crapshoot either, which is essentially what you are suggesting.

[jezzerinho]

I don't think Pepe is suggesting exactly that. With the rejigged lottery odds, the possibility of you getting your eval wrong and the fact that an 18-19 yo kid may only really develop into a star at the end of his rookie deal means that the odds of tanking to land star players who play on your team in their prime years are lower than ever.

[pepe1991]

Building team without superstar is waste of time. However, how to get one should be the main talking point here.

1) draft.
Declining value as valiable option with new draft changes, high risk - questionable reward. Lot ot times players don't live up to hype or need years until they are really good. By that point most of them change teams.

2) trades
Stars get payed, to match salaries you have to sell your assets

3) free agency
most unreliable strategy

I would argue that the draft is the most unreliable mechanism to gain a top-10 star. Tanking does not work.

BUT: teams drafting for stars does work. Most elite teams today found talent in the draft, via NOT tanking. So the quandary exists.
Do not tank but use a draft slot to be excellent.

This is clearly where I felt the Magic failed in Bamba. Whatever next year's trade-down market for an obvious "Shai Gilgeous-Alexander" player, Orlando needs to start making said trades****. I am happy as Fultz will be better than Gilgeous-Alexander, but on the draft night, selecting Bamba when an obiovusius SGA trade was there to make, it made no sense.

...


p.s. I am sick of all NBA mangers selecting in the draft based on height. Length: ok. But height. This makes no sense.
I could go thought the last 5 draft were I could clearly see bad draft selections. (I could not see "good" draft selections and thus I am not a NBA GM.). But bad is obviously bad.



*** = Orlando might need to trade up to the 6-9 range in this narrative for the coming draft.
..

This is just wrong. You can argue about the efficacy of tanking as it relates to building a winning roster, but you can't argue that it doesn't help land stars. It just does. Higher draft picks have more value because they yield better players. Prospect evaluation isn't a perfected science, but it's not a crapshoot either, which is essentially what you are suggesting.

2009- 6 allstars, 2 in top 5, 2 late lottery, 2 outside
2010 -4 allstars ( 2 top 5 picks)
2011- 7 allstars, 1 selected in top 5, 3 total in lottery, 3 outside lottery
2012- 6 allstars, 2 in top 5, 4 in lottery 2 outside lottery
2013- 3 allstars, 1 in top 5, 2 outside lottery
2014- 2 allstars, 1 in top 5 , 1 outside lottery
2015- 4 allstars, 3 in top 5. 1 outside lottery
2016- 4 allstars, 2 in top 5, 1 late lottery, 1 outside lottery
2017- 3 allstars, 1 in top 5, 2 in late lottery


39 allstar selected players
among 45 top 5 picks, 15 of them made allstar ( 33% of them)
81 player selected in late lottery- 15 allstars (18%)
13 outside lottery

Chances of dropping outside top 5 are sky high. 3rd worst record has 47,8% to draft outside 5 slot and is almost bound to draft 6th.
I'm not saying best players are not drafted in lottery, on paper, they are, however, putting yourself in situation where you are drafting high enough to get them is tricky and something that is almost completely based on dumb luck. I don't find dumb luck "strategy".

Dumb odds once again , in 2020 lottery happend. Hornets were 1 slot away from bubble and playoffs, they literally ended up having higher seed than Wizards- by not playing. Yet Hornets landed 3rd pick, where Wizards and Knicks draft 8th and 9th

[drsd]

So tell me. Why is everyone against the draft as the primary source of finding a #1 option on an offense without a real one? Is it taking a chance? Yes, but it’s at least a chance. The other options aren’t realistic in Orlando’s situation.

What I would "tell you" is that most elite teams are not elite through tanking. Most elite teams are elite from hitting on an elite NBA player in the not-top-3 picks.

This means that scouting matters and hitting on something I might call "luck" matters.

For example, five years fro now, Okeke might be all World. Okeke is the example of the kind of high-risk drafteee that changes a team's destiny.

Look to all of the last 8-NBA champions and this kind of story can be uncovered. Can an overall #1 win an NBA title? Yes but often never from the team that drafted player-X. And thus FA SIGNINGS MATTER as well.

I am an anti-tanker always. There is absolutely no evidence that tanking teams win titles.



..

[drsd]

This is just wrong. You can argue about the efficacy of tanking as it relates to building a winning roster, but you can't argue that it doesn't help land stars. It just does. Higher draft picks have more value because they yield better players. Prospect evaluation isn't a perfected science, but it's not a crapshoot either, which is essentially what you are suggesting.

I assume this is not about my comments. Tanking is bad. Always. I will never deviate from that notion. Organisationally it is a crippling philosophy.


..

[drsd]

This is just wrong. You can argue about the efficacy of tanking as it relates to building a winning roster, but you can't argue that it doesn't help land stars. It just does. Higher draft picks have more value because they yield better players. Prospect evaluation isn't a perfected science, but it's not a crapshoot either, which is essentially what you are suggesting.

Just to add to this discourse, nt necessarily to the above post:

in the Current draft system, the most like draft slot of the most awful NBA team is 5th.

There is literally no reason for a team to tank today. What is better is to have excellent scouts to select BPA at give the slot.

[Skybox]

Agreed. The NBA did a good job of differentiating "having the top pick works" from "tanking works"...cudos to them. You can certainly add 19 year old one and dones from an NCAA with unprecedented parity plus lots of internationals makes the draft even more exciting (also known as a crapshoot). All the top guys aren't at Duke or UNC or Kentucky anymore, so add the untested element to some...for even more fun, mix in a little COVID to the uncertainty stew. Fun to watch from here.

[MagicMatic]

This argument always resurfaces...

Is “tanking” the goal to land better picks? No.
Constructing a mediocre roster that nets you in the middle of the pack does nobody favors though. That’s what Orlando currently has with limited asset value.

You don’t need to tank to rebuild!

Moving pieces and making moves, through draft/trade, doesn’t equal “tanking”. No, you don’t need to roll out the worst roster in the league anymore to land the #1 pick. The Twolves just landed the #1 pick and have arguably better assets than the Magic.

You can field a roster of developing players, with vets in the mix, before making a bigger consolidation of assets. It’s not black and white.

When people use the term “rebuild”, they don’t mean “lose on purpose to get the top pick”. Somehow this is difficult for people to understand.

[Xatticus]

This argument always resurfaces...

Is “tanking” the goal to land better picks? No.
Constructing a mediocre roster that nets you in the middle of the pack does nobody favors though. That’s what Orlando currently has with limited asset value.

You don’t need to tank to rebuild!

Moving pieces and making moves, through draft/trade, doesn’t equal “tanking”. No, you don’t need to roll out the worst roster in the league anymore to land the #1 pick. The Twolves just landed the #1 pick and have arguably better assets than the Magic.

You can field a roster of developing players, with vets in the mix, before making a bigger consolidation of assets. It’s not black and white.

When people use the term “rebuild”, they don’t mean “lose on purpose to get the top pick”. Somehow this is difficult for people to understand.

Eh... I'm not opposed to tanking. It's situational. I would've tanked for LeBron. I would'nt have tanked for the 2013 draft (Oladipo). I would've tanked for the 2018 draft. I wouldn't have tanked for this draft. You have to know the target(s) when you decide to tank. If there isn't a worthwhile target, then it's simply counterproductive. I would never waste a year evaluating what you could already figure out by doing some research.

People that try to make steadfast declarations point to exceptions to justify their positions. A front office should never be blind to the future. They should be forecasting years in advance. If a draft class looks particularly appealing, you should know this years in advance and plan accordingly.

[MagicMatic]

This argument always resurfaces...

Is “tanking” the goal to land better picks? No.
Constructing a mediocre roster that nets you in the middle of the pack does nobody favors though. That’s what Orlando currently has with limited asset value.

You don’t need to tank to rebuild!

Moving pieces and making moves, through draft/trade, doesn’t equal “tanking”. No, you don’t need to roll out the worst roster in the league anymore to land the #1 pick. The Twolves just landed the #1 pick and have arguably better assets than the Magic.

You can field a roster of developing players, with vets in the mix, before making a bigger consolidation of assets. It’s not black and white.

When people use the term “rebuild”, they don’t mean “lose on purpose to get the top pick”. Somehow this is difficult for people to understand.

Eh... I'm not opposed to tanking. It's situational. I would've tanked for LeBron. I would'nt have tanked for the 2013 draft (Oladipo). I would've tanked for the 2018 draft. I wouldn't have tanked for this draft. You have to know the target(s) when you decide to tank. If there isn't a worthwhile target, then it's simply counterproductive. I would never waste a year evaluating what you could already figure out by doing some research.

People that try to make steadfast declarations point to exceptions to justify their positions. A front office should never be blind to the future. They should be forecasting years in advance. If a draft class looks particularly appealing, you should know this years in advance and plan accordingly.

Absolutely. It annoys me that tanking is vilified as a terrible strategy when it obviously has some merit as a legitimate avenue in a rebuild. However, rebuilding doesn’t always equate to tanking in totality. They obviously have to do their homework before making such a decision, but forfeiting a rebuild for mediocrity is a much worse decision in my opinion.

[pepe1991]

This argument always resurfaces...

Is “tanking” the goal to land better picks? No.
Constructing a mediocre roster that nets you in the middle of the pack does nobody favors though. That’s what Orlando currently has with limited asset value.

You don’t need to tank to rebuild!

Moving pieces and making moves, through draft/trade, doesn’t equal “tanking”. No, you don’t need to roll out the worst roster in the league anymore to land the #1 pick. The Twolves just landed the #1 pick and have arguably better assets than the Magic.

You can field a roster of developing players, with vets in the mix, before making a bigger consolidation of assets. It’s not black and white.

When people use the term “rebuild”, they don’t mean “lose on purpose to get the top pick”. Somehow this is difficult for people to understand.

Eh... I'm not opposed to tanking. It's situational. I would've tanked for LeBron. I would'nt have tanked for the 2013 draft (Oladipo). I would've tanked for the 2018 draft. I wouldn't have tanked for this draft. You have to know the target(s) when you decide to tank. If there isn't a worthwhile target, then it's simply counterproductive. I would never waste a year evaluating what you could already figure out by doing some research.

People that try to make steadfast declarations point to exceptions to justify their positions. A front office should never be blind to the future. They should be forecasting years in advance. If a draft class looks particularly appealing, you should know this years in advance and plan accordingly.

Problem is unrealistic hype and never knowing how execlly player will translate his game to NBA.
Almost everybody were blowing 2014 draft out of proportions.

8 different teams tanked so hard that they didn't even menage to collect 30 wins.
Bucks and 76ers went b*** deep for ping pong ball. Winning less than 20 games.
Magic had 23-59 record. That's god-awful 28% win percentage.

Two of most decorated teams in history of nba, Celtics and Lakers both went head first into tanking for that season.
Final results? One of most dissapointing nba drafts in last 2 decades. Grand total of 1 allstar in lottery, for now matching only 2000 draft as the worst draft since i belive 1990 and 1974. This is historiclly bad draft that once was compared with- the 2 best drafts ever- 2003 and 1996.

There is objective chance that 2020 draft, regardless how on surface bad it looks, ends up being better than once hyped to be best maybe ever -2014 draft. From start, players will face less pressure and nobody will have Kobe,Lebron, Melo, Hakeem comparison on his back to live up to.

[KillMonger]

I've asked this before but is Spencer Dinwiddie realistic for us?

[drsd]

You don’t need to tank to rebuild!

Moving pieces and making moves, through draft/trade, doesn’t equal “tanking”. No, you don’t need to roll out the worst roster in the league anymore to land the #1 pick. The Twolves just landed the #1 pick and have arguably better assets than the Magic.

You can field a roster of developing players, with vets in the mix, before making a bigger consolidation of assets. It’s not black and white.

When people use the term “rebuild”, they don’t mean “lose on purpose to get the top pick”. Somehow this is difficult for people to understand.

and-1

Management matters!

Teams cannot be built through the draft and being a GM is actually hard.


..

[drsd]

I've asked this before but is Spencer Dinwiddie realistic for us?

Orlando needs a SG upgrade. So: No !


..

[tiderulz]

I've asked this before but is Spencer Dinwiddie realistic for us?

Orlando needs a SG upgrade. So: No !


..

I would take him if the price was low, as adding talent to the roster is always a need. but I wouldnt say a priority. One thing about him, he has been a starter, then bench and person who closes games, hasnt had any public issue with coming off the bench. Would be a good locker room voice too. but we arent close enough that i would spend any large amount of trade capital for him.

i agree we need a SG upgrade first