Weltman Talks to Robbins on Future of the Roster ($)

[pepe1991]

Aminu sucked, JI got injured = AG stays.

Long before Aminu hurt his knee, his play was sub-standard for his contract. With Okeke an unknown and Isaac certain to be out, if the Magic trades Gordon, then next year would be an overt stated that the team is not trying to win.


Question for TheGlyde, is there any universe where Iwundu is resigned?


..

It's sample size of 17 games, he got hurt during 18# game.
Don't get me wrong ,he was terrible. But he didn't really play much.

[Xatticus]

I can't wrap my head around notion how Evan walking away in FA can be viwed as good scenario.

1) Magic have no cap space, nobody will replace him, even if they draft SG that guy won't be 30 mpg solid contrubitor from day one anyway. Much rather pretty crappy NAW type guard that will go through hell of a struggle during rookie year

2) asset less. Simply one player less to trade.
This is very important. Magic will probably have no cap space for next year also, so you have to keep as many assets as possible to flip them into players you view as "future".

3). even worst shooting. Magic were 14# among teams that took most wide open 3s. 27th in efficiency from that shots. Evan was ONLY Magic player who was plus shooter whole year.


What Evan needs is to be involved more as spot up shooter and less of ballhandler. Main reason why he is ballhandling a lot is because PG can't shoot and there is no better secundary playmakers on roster.

Even if Magic somehow do have cap space( I repeat, they don't have any) they would still struggle to replace Evan.

Because the alternative is Fournier returning on a fat new contract. Frankly, you can get the useful **** that Fournier does for a lot cheaper than what he is being paid. If Fournier was our version of Redick and on Redick money, people would be fine with that, even though he isn't really as good as Redick. We're throwing in a lot of extra money for all the stuff we don't like about his offensive game. I suspect a lot of people around here would be more appreciative of Vucevic if he wasn't consistently used by Fournier in buddy ball plays to chase a big contract.

The key piece to every one of our pick-and-roll combos isn't the ballhandler. None of ours are good. Vucevic is what makes it a decent play. We just have three guys that dominate the pick-and-roll ball-handling duties: Fultz, Augustin, and Fournier. We need to find someone that can make a pass out of the pick-and-roll action. The only way the ball finds it's way out right now is from Vucevic on a short roll.

I'm as frustrated as anyone that we have done nothing to address our lack of playmaking and that we haven't drafted any guard talent in the Weltman era. The lack of alternatives in house certainly shouldn't be used to justify another massive overpay for a flawed piece that severely limits our upside for the duration of that next contract. Every player with a contract is an asset, but not every player is a positive asset. You can't give a guy a contract because you are afraid to lose them for nothing, if the value of that next contract is negative. A negative asset is worth less than nothing. It's one thing to be bad because you have a bunch of young players learning on the job, but it's just soul-crushing to watch a bad team that has an overpaid veteran core. There is just no hope to cling to.

[pepe1991]

I can't wrap my head around notion how Evan walking away in FA can be viwed as good scenario.

1) Magic have no cap space, nobody will replace him, even if they draft SG that guy won't be 30 mpg solid contrubitor from day one anyway. Much rather pretty crappy NAW type guard that will go through hell of a struggle during rookie year

2) asset less. Simply one player less to trade.
This is very important. Magic will probably have no cap space for next year also, so you have to keep as many assets as possible to flip them into players you view as "future".

3). even worst shooting. Magic were 14# among teams that took most wide open 3s. 27th in efficiency from that shots. Evan was ONLY Magic player who was plus shooter whole year.


What Evan needs is to be involved more as spot up shooter and less of ballhandler. Main reason why he is ballhandling a lot is because PG can't shoot and there is no better secundary playmakers on roster.

Even if Magic somehow do have cap space( I repeat, they don't have any) they would still struggle to replace Evan.

Because the alternative is Fournier returning on a fat new contract. Frankly, you can get the useful **** that Fournier does for a lot cheaper than what he is being paid. If Fournier was our version of Redick and on Redick money, people would be fine with that, even though he isn't really as good as Redick. We're throwing in a lot of extra money for all the stuff we don't like about his offensive game. I suspect a lot of people around here would be more appreciative of Vucevic if he wasn't consistently used by Fournier in buddy ball plays to chase a big contract.

The key piece to every one of our pick-and-roll combos isn't the ballhandler. None of ours are good. Vucevic is what makes it a decent play. We just have three guys that dominate the pick-and-roll ball-handling duties: Fultz, Augustin, and Fournier. We need to find someone that can make a pass out of the pick-and-roll action. The only way the ball finds it's way out right now is from Vucevic on a short roll.

I'm as frustrated as anyone that we have done nothing to address our lack of playmaking and that we haven't drafted any guard talent in the Weltman era. The lack of alternatives in house certainly shouldn't be used to justify another massive overpay for a flawed piece that severely limits our upside for the duration of that next contract. Every player with a contract is an asset, but not every player is a positive asset. You can't give a guy a contract because you are afraid to lose them for nothing, if the value of that next contract is negative. A negative asset is worth less than nothing. It's one thing to be bad because you have a bunch of young players learning on the job, but it's just soul-crushing to watch a bad team that has an overpaid veteran core. There is just no hope to cling to.

I never mentioned re-sign

Either trade him as asset after player option is picked, or let him walk in 2021. Resign is only objective option if team can adress other issues so keeping him as part of CBA rule that allows you to go over cap to re-sign your own players.


I mean, even if he walks during 2021, Magic money is so tight that they probably won't be able to do anything in FA.
Maybe draft guard this year for once, slide Gordon at PF, play Evan at SF again, roll with Ross or anybody else at SG and give 2020 pick that 20-25 mpg off bench ?

This team is so damn hopless when you try to search for alternatives

Packaging somebody to move up this draft,to get Hayes, Okoro, Nesmith, Edwards or Ball would be perfect. I just don't see front office doing it.

[Xatticus]

This is what I expected the team to do and I agree. There is no way they are going to trade away everyone and try to become the worst team in the league for 3 straight seasons praying to god they get lucky to win a superstar with very very low odds of that happening just to end up in the same position they are in now which has very very high odds of happening.

If you are even modestly competent, you aren't trading everyone away to chase a high draft pick. That's just a potential corollary benefit of trading away some short-term value to acquire future assets. The goal should be to leverage assets such that they align to provide the greatest value to you in the long term. E.g. Anthony Davis is a great player, but he wasn't worth nearly as much to New Orleans last year as he would've been to a contender. The assets that the Lakers traded to New Orleans were worth far more to New Orleans than they were to the Lakers. Any particular asset doesn't have the same value to every team at any given time. This is why you can have trades where everyone wins (Anthony Davis trade) or where everyone loses (Dwight Howard trade). Trades aren't zero sum.

We aren't competing now regardless of what we do, so the worst course of action we could take would be to trade future assets in an effort to win more games now. I wouldn't really say this is what this front office has done, though that is based almost exclusively on the Fultz trade. Our use of roster spots has clearly been oriented towards the immediate future. There is a clear contrast between how we have constructed our roster and how Denver or Toronto have constructed theirs. You can argue that Ennis, Aminu, Carter-Williams, or Birch have been useful additions to some extent or another, but how will those allocations of roster spots and minutes work out for us in three years' time?

[VFX]

This is what I expected the team to do and I agree. There is no way they are going to trade away everyone and try to become the worst team in the league for 3 straight seasons praying to god they get lucky to win a superstar with very very low odds of that happening just to end up in the same position they are in now which has very very high odds of happening.

Who in this thread suggested any of that?

Nobody is advocating for trading away everyone merely for draft picks. Also, how do you know the return would equate to “the worst team in the league”? You don’t.

You make it sound like searching for more value, and taking risks to land talent, is a far worse outcome than being a first round exit fringe playoff team picking 15th with no other options.

[BadMofoPimp]

This is what I expected the team to do and I agree. There is no way they are going to trade away everyone and try to become the worst team in the league for 3 straight seasons praying to god they get lucky to win a superstar with very very low odds of that happening just to end up in the same position they are in now which has very very high odds of happening.

If you are even modestly competent, you aren't trading everyone away to chase a high draft pick. That's just a potential corollary benefit of trading away some short-term value to acquire future assets. The goal should be to leverage assets such that they align to provide the greatest value to you in the long term. E.g. Anthony Davis is a great player, but he wasn't worth nearly as much to New Orleans last year as he would've been to a contender. The assets that the Lakers traded to New Orleans were worth far more to New Orleans than they were to the Lakers. Any particular asset doesn't have the same value to every team at any given time. This is why you can have trades where everyone wins (Anthony Davis trade) or where everyone loses (Dwight Howard trade). Trades aren't zero sum.

We aren't competing now regardless of what we do, so the worst course of action we could take would be to trade future assets in an effort to win more games now. I wouldn't really say this is what this front office has done, though that is based almost exclusively on the Fultz trade. Our use of roster spots has clearly been oriented towards the immediate future. There is a clear contrast between how we have constructed our roster and how Denver or Toronto have constructed theirs. You can argue that Ennis, Aminu, Carter-Williams, or Birch have been useful additions to some extent or another, but how will those allocations of roster spots and minutes work out for us in three years' time?

#1: No team is trading a top 5 pick for anybody on this team.
#2: It would take probably 3-4 seasons of being the worst team in the entire NBA to maybe get lucky and win a superstar in the draft. Then, it would still take years to develop a winning team.
#3: The vast majority of the top teams in the NBA did not get there through the draft but by GM's making risky moves.
#4: Our GM's don't make risky moves. Need new GM.

[Bensational]

This is what I expected the team to do and I agree. There is no way they are going to trade away everyone and try to become the worst team in the league for 3 straight seasons praying to god they get lucky to win a superstar with very very low odds of that happening just to end up in the same position they are in now which has very very high odds of happening.

Who in this thread suggested any of that?

Nobody is advocating for trading away everyone merely for draft picks. Also, how do you know the return would equate to “the worst team in the league”? You don’t.

You make it sound like searching for more value, and taking risks to land talent, is a far worse outcome than being a first round exit fringe playoff team picking 15th with no other options.

Yeah, these discussions are absurd right now. It's like political talk. If you question current leadership it means you must want some kind of extreme and detrimental alternative.

Everybody knows the new lottery odds deincentivized tanking, and consequently I haven't heard anyone say that should be a course of action. But rather than envisioning a team with even just one or two central pieces being different along with some more prospects, the mindset is a point-blank refusal of change.

[Bensational]

This is what I expected the team to do and I agree. There is no way they are going to trade away everyone and try to become the worst team in the league for 3 straight seasons praying to god they get lucky to win a superstar with very very low odds of that happening just to end up in the same position they are in now which has very very high odds of happening.

If you are even modestly competent, you aren't trading everyone away to chase a high draft pick. That's just a potential corollary benefit of trading away some short-term value to acquire future assets. The goal should be to leverage assets such that they align to provide the greatest value to you in the long term. E.g. Anthony Davis is a great player, but he wasn't worth nearly as much to New Orleans last year as he would've been to a contender. The assets that the Lakers traded to New Orleans were worth far more to New Orleans than they were to the Lakers. Any particular asset doesn't have the same value to every team at any given time. This is why you can have trades where everyone wins (Anthony Davis trade) or where everyone loses (Dwight Howard trade). Trades aren't zero sum.

We aren't competing now regardless of what we do, so the worst course of action we could take would be to trade future assets in an effort to win more games now. I wouldn't really say this is what this front office has done, though that is based almost exclusively on the Fultz trade. Our use of roster spots has clearly been oriented towards the immediate future. There is a clear contrast between how we have constructed our roster and how Denver or Toronto have constructed theirs. You can argue that Ennis, Aminu, Carter-Williams, or Birch have been useful additions to some extent or another, but how will those allocations of roster spots and minutes work out for us in three years' time?

#1: No team is trading a top 5 pick for anybody on this team.
#2: It would take probably 3-4 seasons of being the worst team in the entire NBA to maybe get lucky and win a superstar in the draft. Then, it would still take years to develop a winning team.
#3: The vast majority of the top teams in the NBA did not get there through the draft but by GM's making risky moves.
#4: Our GM's don't make risky moves. Need new GM.

#1: exactly why we should be trading our guys. If they don't have that value, then they're not good enough to carry a good team. Butler got LaVine and a #7 pick.

#2: you can't predict something like that, but Memphis and New Orleans would serve as strong examples of bucking that trend. The Magic have done so before. Even the Jazz and Bucks managed to draft franchise talent and turn their franchises around almost overnight.

#3: you are completely wrong on this point. Completely.

#4: you are completely correct on this point. Completely.

[VFX]

This is what I expected the team to do and I agree. There is no way they are going to trade away everyone and try to become the worst team in the league for 3 straight seasons praying to god they get lucky to win a superstar with very very low odds of that happening just to end up in the same position they are in now which has very very high odds of happening.

Who in this thread suggested any of that?

Nobody is advocating for trading away everyone merely for draft picks. Also, how do you know the return would equate to “the worst team in the league”? You don’t.

You make it sound like searching for more value, and taking risks to land talent, is a far worse outcome than being a first round exit fringe playoff team picking 15th with no other options.

Yeah, these discussions are absurd right now. It's like political talk. If you question current leadership it means you must want some kind of extreme and detrimental alternative.

Everybody knows the new lottery odds deincentivized tanking, and consequently I haven't heard anyone say that should be a course of action. But rather than envisioning a team with even just one or two central pieces being different along with some more prospects, the mindset is a point-blank refusal of change.

Yeah, I don’t get it at all.

The immediate takeaway is “Tanking Bad”, when nobody is talking about tanking or purposely losing to get a top 5 pick. Trading away some mainstays will give a return of picks AND players. There HAS to be a change at some point. Teams without true stars shouldn’t be coasting for 7-10 years because they are comfortable with mediocrity. It’s nonsense.

[Ducklett]

Who in this thread suggested any of that?

Nobody is advocating for trading away everyone merely for draft picks. Also, how do you know the return would equate to “the worst team in the league”? You don’t.

You make it sound like searching for more value, and taking risks to land talent, is a far worse outcome than being a first round exit fringe playoff team picking 15th with no other options.

Yeah, these discussions are absurd right now. It's like political talk. If you question current leadership it means you must want some kind of extreme and detrimental alternative.

Everybody knows the new lottery odds deincentivized tanking, and consequently I haven't heard anyone say that should be a course of action. But rather than envisioning a team with even just one or two central pieces being different along with some more prospects, the mindset is a point-blank refusal of change.

Yeah, I don’t get it at all.

The immediate takeaway is “Tanking Bad”, when nobody is talking about tanking or purposely losing to get a top 5 pick. Trading away some mainstays will give a return of picks AND players. There HAS to be a change at some point. Teams without true stars shouldn’t be coasting for 7-10 years because they are comfortable with mediocrity. It’s nonsense.

People think that the injuries were the only reason we aren't in the finals. You just have to give up on people on this board thinking logically.

[TheGlyde]

Aminu sucked, JI got injured = AG stays.

Long before Aminu hurt his knee, his play was sub-standard for his contract. With Okeke an unknown and Isaac certain to be out, if the Magic trades Gordon, then next year would be an overt stated that the team is not trying to win.


Question for TheGlyde, is there any universe where Iwundu is resigned?


..

Well yeah there is, but I don't see it as a good one. For the Magic or for Iwundu...

There are some things I like about Iwundu.

He gives good effort. He is one of the few players we have (against bench players at least) that can actually create his own shot, or get to the rim/draw a foul off his own dribble (without needing a screen). Many times though it's just not a great shot, or it leads to a wild layup where he tries to draw the foul and doesn't get the call because... Well he's Wes Iwundu.

He has a decent outside shot, and decent enough handles that saw him playing PG at times.

He's above G-League level but (judging from player Instagram pages) he doesn't seem to have close friendships with the other players on the team and I don't really see a reason to resign him when I can't see him developing into much more than he is now (He's older than AG). Him taking up a roster spot could prevent us being able to bring in a Duncan Robinson/Kendrick Nunn diamond in the rough on a minimum deal instead.

If he comes back, I think the Magic just simply struck out on all the guys they tried to sign, or couldn't find anyone either better (or with potential to be better), and that's not a good position for the Magic.

For Iwundu, if he comes back I see another year of him being a fringe rotation player and stop-gap starter if injuries hit. But if I was him (particularly if Ennis opts in), I would be looking for a cellar dwellar East team where he can latch on and be a consistent rotation player or fringe starter to boost his numbers into maybe getting the Bi-annual Exception or part of the MLE.

He strikes me as the kind of player who is out of the NBA before the age of 30, so he needs to try and get as much cash as he can while he can.

[drsd]

Well yeah there is, but I don't see it as a good one. For the Magic or for Iwundu.

This is how I feel.

i) Orlando needs an upgrade and

ii) Iwundu will perhaps command a salary beyond what the Magic could afford.

p.s. I cannot see Iwundu in Magic blue next season.



..

[Xatticus]

Well yeah there is, but I don't see it as a good one. For the Magic or for Iwundu.

This is how I feel.

i) Orlando needs an upgrade and

ii) Iwundu will perhaps command a salary beyond what the Magic could afford.

p.s. I cannot see Iwundu in Magic blue next season.



..

Picking up Ennis might've spelled the end of Iwundu's time here. It was a solution to a problem we didn't really have.

Ennis is a bit more physical defensively and he isn't as reluctant to fire up a three, but I don't otherwise see much of a difference. I don't think he is actually any better as a shooter, he isn't as quick in transition, and Iwundu is better on the ball. I think there is still some untapped potential in Iwundu, but his finishing at the rim is too poor to really take advantage of his other skills. He does get to the line consistently and he is a very dependable and consistent defender. He is probably our best player at getting over screens and he always extends his arms when chasing to take away easy passes. That's a really good habit. Given that Iwundu is going to earn the minimum, I think he is really good value, but Ennis has a player option and someone has to go if the front office is going to add anything this offseason.

[fendilim]

I can't wrap my head around notion how Evan walking away in FA can be viwed as good scenario.

1) Magic have no cap space, nobody will replace him, even if they draft SG that guy won't be 30 mpg solid contrubitor from day one anyway. Much rather pretty crappy NAW type guard that will go through hell of a struggle during rookie year

2) asset less. Simply one player less to trade.
This is very important. Magic will probably have no cap space for next year also, so you have to keep as many assets as possible to flip them into players you view as "future".

3). even worst shooting. Magic were 14# among teams that took most wide open 3s. 27th in efficiency from that shots. Evan was ONLY Magic player who was plus shooter whole year.


What Evan needs is to be involved more as spot up shooter and less of ballhandler. Main reason why he is ballhandling a lot is because PG can't shoot and there is no better secundary playmakers on roster.

Even if Magic somehow do have cap space( I repeat, they don't have any) they would still struggle to replace Evan.

Because the alternative is Fournier returning on a fat new contract. Frankly, you can get the useful **** that Fournier does for a lot cheaper than what he is being paid. If Fournier was our version of Redick and on Redick money, people would be fine with that, even though he isn't really as good as Redick. We're throwing in a lot of extra money for all the stuff we don't like about his offensive game. I suspect a lot of people around here would be more appreciative of Vucevic if he wasn't consistently used by Fournier in buddy ball plays to chase a big contract.

The key piece to every one of our pick-and-roll combos isn't the ballhandler. None of ours are good. Vucevic is what makes it a decent play. We just have three guys that dominate the pick-and-roll ball-handling duties: Fultz, Augustin, and Fournier. We need to find someone that can make a pass out of the pick-and-roll action. The only way the ball finds it's way out right now is from Vucevic on a short roll.

I'm as frustrated as anyone that we have done nothing to address our lack of playmaking and that we haven't drafted any guard talent in the Weltman era. The lack of alternatives in house certainly shouldn't be used to justify another massive overpay for a flawed piece that severely limits our upside for the duration of that next contract. Every player with a contract is an asset, but not every player is a positive asset. You can't give a guy a contract because you are afraid to lose them for nothing, if the value of that next contract is negative. A negative asset is worth less than nothing. It's one thing to be bad because you have a bunch of young players learning on the job, but it's just soul-crushing to watch a bad team that has an overpaid veteran core. There is just no hope to cling to.

evan and redick are totally different players.

Redick is definitely a better shooter, but Evan is a more complete offensive player. I doubt Redick can even handle the role of Evan as efficient as Redick is as an off the screen shooter, especially on this team where offensive threats are limited thus opponents simply zero in on guys like Evan, Ross, Vuc and Dj and dare others to beat them. These were evident during the playoffs.

Redick would simply be treated as another TRoss coming off screens, opposing players would simply delay him from curling off the screen so his man can chase him.


Also, evan walking simply dont make sense for us. In fact his expiring contract might come in handy for team owners who might look into lowering the salaries they are paying due to financial constraints caused by the pandemic.

[zaymon]

I can't wrap my head around notion how Evan walking away in FA can be viwed as good scenario.

1) Magic have no cap space, nobody will replace him, even if they draft SG that guy won't be 30 mpg solid contrubitor from day one anyway. Much rather pretty crappy NAW type guard that will go through hell of a struggle during rookie year

2) asset less. Simply one player less to trade.
This is very important. Magic will probably have no cap space for next year also, so you have to keep as many assets as possible to flip them into players you view as "future".

3). even worst shooting. Magic were 14# among teams that took most wide open 3s. 27th in efficiency from that shots. Evan was ONLY Magic player who was plus shooter whole year.


What Evan needs is to be involved more as spot up shooter and less of ballhandler. Main reason why he is ballhandling a lot is because PG can't shoot and there is no better secundary playmakers on roster.

Even if Magic somehow do have cap space( I repeat, they don't have any) they would still struggle to replace Evan.

Because the alternative is Fournier returning on a fat new contract. Frankly, you can get the useful **** that Fournier does for a lot cheaper than what he is being paid. If Fournier was our version of Redick and on Redick money, people would be fine with that, even though he isn't really as good as Redick. We're throwing in a lot of extra money for all the stuff we don't like about his offensive game. I suspect a lot of people around here would be more appreciative of Vucevic if he wasn't consistently used by Fournier in buddy ball plays to chase a big contract.

The key piece to every one of our pick-and-roll combos isn't the ballhandler. None of ours are good. Vucevic is what makes it a decent play. We just have three guys that dominate the pick-and-roll ball-handling duties: Fultz, Augustin, and Fournier. We need to find someone that can make a pass out of the pick-and-roll action. The only way the ball finds it's way out right now is from Vucevic on a short roll.

I'm as frustrated as anyone that we have done nothing to address our lack of playmaking and that we haven't drafted any guard talent in the Weltman era. The lack of alternatives in house certainly shouldn't be used to justify another massive overpay for a flawed piece that severely limits our upside for the duration of that next contract. Every player with a contract is an asset, but not every player is a positive asset. You can't give a guy a contract because you are afraid to lose them for nothing, if the value of that next contract is negative. A negative asset is worth less than nothing. It's one thing to be bad because you have a bunch of young players learning on the job, but it's just soul-crushing to watch a bad team that has an overpaid veteran core. There is just no hope to cling to.

evan and redick are totally different players.

Redick is definitely a better shooter, but Evan is a more complete offensive player. I doubt Redick can even handle the role of Evan as efficient as Redick is as an off the screen shooter, especially on this team where offensive threats are limited thus opponents simply zero in on guys like Evan, Ross, Vuc and Dj and dare others to beat them. These were evident during the playoffs.

Redick would simply be treated as another TRoss coming off screens, opposing players would simply delay him from curling off the screen so his man can chase him.


Also, evan walking simply dont make sense for us. In fact his expiring contract might come in handy for team owners who might look into lowering the salaries they are paying due to financial constraints caused by the pandemic.

Exactly, Redick wouldnt even get his shot off. Ross is three times as athletic as JJ and couldnt create much threes against bucks. Redick is not a ball handler, Fournier is secondary ball handler while we need a primary ball handler.

[Bensational]

Because the alternative is Fournier returning on a fat new contract. Frankly, you can get the useful **** that Fournier does for a lot cheaper than what he is being paid. If Fournier was our version of Redick and on Redick money, people would be fine with that, even though he isn't really as good as Redick. We're throwing in a lot of extra money for all the stuff we don't like about his offensive game. I suspect a lot of people around here would be more appreciative of Vucevic if he wasn't consistently used by Fournier in buddy ball plays to chase a big contract.

The key piece to every one of our pick-and-roll combos isn't the ballhandler. None of ours are good. Vucevic is what makes it a decent play. We just have three guys that dominate the pick-and-roll ball-handling duties: Fultz, Augustin, and Fournier. We need to find someone that can make a pass out of the pick-and-roll action. The only way the ball finds it's way out right now is from Vucevic on a short roll.

I'm as frustrated as anyone that we have done nothing to address our lack of playmaking and that we haven't drafted any guard talent in the Weltman era. The lack of alternatives in house certainly shouldn't be used to justify another massive overpay for a flawed piece that severely limits our upside for the duration of that next contract. Every player with a contract is an asset, but not every player is a positive asset. You can't give a guy a contract because you are afraid to lose them for nothing, if the value of that next contract is negative. A negative asset is worth less than nothing. It's one thing to be bad because you have a bunch of young players learning on the job, but it's just soul-crushing to watch a bad team that has an overpaid veteran core. There is just no hope to cling to.

evan and redick are totally different players.

Redick is definitely a better shooter, but Evan is a more complete offensive player. I doubt Redick can even handle the role of Evan as efficient as Redick is as an off the screen shooter, especially on this team where offensive threats are limited thus opponents simply zero in on guys like Evan, Ross, Vuc and Dj and dare others to beat them. These were evident during the playoffs.

Redick would simply be treated as another TRoss coming off screens, opposing players would simply delay him from curling off the screen so his man can chase him.


Also, evan walking simply dont make sense for us. In fact his expiring contract might come in handy for team owners who might look into lowering the salaries they are paying due to financial constraints caused by the pandemic.

Exactly, Redick wouldnt even get his shot off. Ross is three times as athletic as JJ and couldnt create much threes against bucks. Redick is not a ball handler, Fournier is secondary ball handler while we need a primary ball handler.

You guys don't know JJ. His team's have come to keep him as a forever moving off-ball threat, but he can still handle enough on the perimeter to make entry passes, and his IQ is a million times higher than Fournier. He would be an amazing presence for developing youth (he's currently taking NAW under his belt), and he would probably be even more of a crowd puller than Fournier with his history with the team.

Yeah we need a secondary ballhandler, but that just needs to be another wing. JJ at SG with Fultz and a playmaking 3 would be just fine.

[pepe1991]

Um no, JJ is very good spot up shooter that moves off screens, but super predictable and only useful on team filled with actual traets.
When he was on Bucks, with Jennings and Monta, he was usless , because there was nobody to drag defenders away from him.
But since that, he played with : Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, Embiid, Simmons, Ingram, Zion and JImmy Butler.

Since he leaved Orlando he was never anything more 3rd to 4th , in some cases 5th option.

How teams adjust to him is best viewed in playoffs, he is career over 13 ppg player who shoots 41,6% for 3, HOWEVER, he is only 10,9 ppg, 37% three point shooter in playoffs.

This doesn't even take in account no ballhandling skills, poor passing, horrific defense... Pretty much he is bit better version of Kyle Korver. That's why they last so long, they are spot up shooters who avoid most of the contact and play basketball like it's pick up game, No defense, limited effort, avoiding contact , just curling off screens for their own shots, and add no value if they don't shoot other than being treats if they get outside shot.
And pretty much force you into 4 on 5 on defense because they bring nothing to that side. During 76ers run JJ was always biggest target of every offense, and they tried to switch everything but simply could not with him, as he could not contain any player in front of him. Some were too fast ( pretty much any guards) some too strong ( vast majority of SFs, PFs and Cs).
Korver is, according to RPM, one of worst defenders for years.

JJ took 6% of his total shots inside 3 feet. Six. Even when he goes to FT line it's based on jumpshot foul, not him driving.
Also 93% of his 3s are assisted.


82% of Evan threes are assisted.

[Xatticus]

Um no, JJ is very good spot up shooter that moves off screens, but super predictable and only useful on team filled with actual traets.
When he was on Bucks, with Jennings and Monta, he was usless , because there was nobody to drag defenders away from him.
But since that, he played with : Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, Embiid, Simmons, Ingram, Zion and JImmy Butler.

Since he leaved Orlando he was never anything more 3rd to 4th , in some cases 5th option.

How teams adjust to him is best viewed in playoffs, he is career over 13 ppg player who shoots 41,6% for 3, HOWEVER, he is only 10,9 ppg, 37% three point shooter in playoffs.

This doesn't even take in account no ballhandling skills, poor passing, horrific defense... Pretty much he is bit better version of Kyle Korver. That's why they last so long, they are spot up shooters who avoid most of the contact and play basketball like it's pick up game, No defense, limited effort, avoiding contact , just curling off screens for their own shots, and add no value if they don't shoot other than being treats if they get outside shot.
And pretty much force you into 4 on 5 on defense because they bring nothing to that side. During 76ers run JJ was always biggest target of every offense, and they tried to switch everything but simply could not with him, as he could not contain any player in front of him. Some were too fast ( pretty much any guards) some too strong ( vast majority of SFs, PFs and Cs).
Korver is, according to RPM, one of worst defenders for years.

JJ took 6% of his total shots inside 3 feet. Six. Even when he goes to FT line it's based on jumpshot foul, not him driving.
Also 93% of his 3s are assisted.


82% of Evan threes are assisted.

Nah. Ben is right. He is really skilled. SVG turned him into a role player, but he did the heavy lifting for some really good Duke teams. That’s fine. He could’ve piled up stats on **** teams and made a lot more money. Even back when he was scarcely playing for us, you could see the skills. It’s amazing how poor so many NBA players are at delivering an entry pass, but Redick did it effortlessly without the benefit of height to create angles. Again, we’ve all seen Fournier run buddy ball ad nauseam. I don’t know why anyone would praise that aspect of his game.

[BadMofoPimp]

If you are even modestly competent, you aren't trading everyone away to chase a high draft pick. That's just a potential corollary benefit of trading away some short-term value to acquire future assets. The goal should be to leverage assets such that they align to provide the greatest value to you in the long term. E.g. Anthony Davis is a great player, but he wasn't worth nearly as much to New Orleans last year as he would've been to a contender. The assets that the Lakers traded to New Orleans were worth far more to New Orleans than they were to the Lakers. Any particular asset doesn't have the same value to every team at any given time. This is why you can have trades where everyone wins (Anthony Davis trade) or where everyone loses (Dwight Howard trade). Trades aren't zero sum.

We aren't competing now regardless of what we do, so the worst course of action we could take would be to trade future assets in an effort to win more games now. I wouldn't really say this is what this front office has done, though that is based almost exclusively on the Fultz trade. Our use of roster spots has clearly been oriented towards the immediate future. There is a clear contrast between how we have constructed our roster and how Denver or Toronto have constructed theirs. You can argue that Ennis, Aminu, Carter-Williams, or Birch have been useful additions to some extent or another, but how will those allocations of roster spots and minutes work out for us in three years' time?

#1: No team is trading a top 5 pick for anybody on this team.
#2: It would take probably 3-4 seasons of being the worst team in the entire NBA to maybe get lucky and win a superstar in the draft. Then, it would still take years to develop a winning team.
#3: The vast majority of the top teams in the NBA did not get there through the draft but by GM's making risky moves.
#4: Our GM's don't make risky moves. Need new GM.

#1: exactly why we should be trading our guys. If they don't have that value, then they're not good enough to carry a good team. Butler got LaVine and a #7 pick.

#2: you can't predict something like that, but Memphis and New Orleans would serve as strong examples of bucking that trend. The Magic have done so before. Even the Jazz and Bucks managed to draft franchise talent and turn their franchises around almost overnight.

#3: you are completely wrong on this point. Completely.

#4: you are completely correct on this point. Completely.

#3: Miami, Clips and Lakers didn't get there by tanking. Boston did. 3 of 4 sounds right to me.

[Bensational]

#1: No team is trading a top 5 pick for anybody on this team.
#2: It would take probably 3-4 seasons of being the worst team in the entire NBA to maybe get lucky and win a superstar in the draft. Then, it would still take years to develop a winning team.
#3: The vast majority of the top teams in the NBA did not get there through the draft but by GM's making risky moves.
#4: Our GM's don't make risky moves. Need new GM.

#1: exactly why we should be trading our guys. If they don't have that value, then they're not good enough to carry a good team. Butler got LaVine and a #7 pick.

#2: you can't predict something like that, but Memphis and New Orleans would serve as strong examples of bucking that trend. The Magic have done so before. Even the Jazz and Bucks managed to draft franchise talent and turn their franchises around almost overnight.

#3: you are completely wrong on this point. Completely.

#4: you are completely correct on this point. Completely.

#3: Miami, Clips and Lakers didn't get there by tanking. Boston did. 3 of 4 sounds right to me.

#3 you said "they didn't get there through the draft", but now you're saying tanking. Let's stick to the original thought:

Miami - drafted Bam + Herro, they traded Richardson and Winslow, former players they'd drafted, to help them get Butler and Igoudala. Miami doesn't have their current team without the draft.

Clippers - drafted SGA who allowed them to trade for PG, which secured the signing of Kawhi. Without the draft they can't build that team.

Lakers - drafted D'Lo, Ingram, Ball, Kuzma, Hart, etc. Traded D'Lo to clear space to attract Bron. Traded the rest of their drafted players for Davis. Again, they don't have that team without the draft.

Boston - Tatum, Brown, Smart are all draft picks who are playing lead roles for them.

Nuggets - Jokic, Murray, MPJr, Harris, Morris, etc all drafted.

The draft is essential to building a good team. Maximising value from any draft spot to have high value talent on cost effective contracts are the critical pieces to making leaps forward.