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

[MasterGMer]

I hope we do not resign DJ. We draft some PG or sign someone with our MLE. What about a guy like Jeremy Lin. Dude averages more than 20 PPG in China and shot great on 3s. Could be a cheap sign depending on his career trajectory. And I think he could be a good backup PG

[Ducklett]

I hope we do not resign DJ. We draft some PG or sign someone with our MLE. What about a guy like Jeremy Lin. Dude averages more than 20 PPG in China and shot great on 3s. Could be a cheap sign depending on his career trajectory. And I think he could be a good backup PG

I average 20PPG in China.

[MagicFan101]

I hope we do not resign DJ. We draft some PG or sign someone with our MLE. What about a guy like Jeremy Lin. Dude averages more than 20 PPG in China and shot great on 3s. Could be a cheap sign depending on his career trajectory. And I think he could be a good backup PG

Austin Rivers has a $2.3M player option with the Rockets.

If he opts out I would throw at least part of the MLE at him before I target Jeremy ‘Frickin Lin.

[TheGlyde]

I don't think anything I said was much of a twist. Maximising your picks at any position is key, and that's how the good teams do it. Just because we haven't doesn't make the route less feasible.

What's "building through the draft" mean then? Are we now saying it's only reserved for teams that exclusively draft and retain a core contending team like GSW or OKC? I take it to mean using the draft as the means to acquire your best value pieces, whether they're kept or moved for a better fitting piece.

I think we have actually struck upon something here which explains not only this whole back and forth, but much of the recent back and forth on this Magic board.

It is all because of two vastly differing opinions on what "Building through the draft" actually means.

It's taken me off guard somewhat, because I never considered things the way you, MagicMatic and some others look at "building through the draft" as logical.

To me (I don't want to speak for pepe, zaymon, others etc) I base it on the transaction through which a player was acquired...

Not the transaction prior (or transaction(s) prior?) I'm not sure how far the rabbit hole is allowed to go... All the way back to the draft I guess?

There's 3 basic transactions right?
- If you drafted your core, you built through the draft
- If you traded for your core players, you built through trades
- If you signed core players in free agency, you built through free agency

If you don't see things that way, I can see why you could basically say that every team built through the draft, but I think this is a very flawed way of looking at things, as the reverse can just as easily be argued (where did you get those picks Boston, hmmm?) and thats exactly why we end up in these back and forth, circular arguments.

It's all over the definition/semantics of "building through the draft"

If you look at things the way you spelled out, where do you draw the line? I mean is there a certain degree of separation? Is there a time limit? If a drafted asset is on your team for 10 years and then you trade them, is this building through the draft? or trade?

Eg:
Were we built through the draft because we drafted Dwight and then traded him for Vuc?

Or more pointedly,
Were the 2019 NBA Champions Toronto built through the draft because they drafted DeMar Derozan and traded him for Kawhi?
Were the 2008 NBA Champions Boston built through the draft because they drafted Jeff Green, Delonte West, Ryan Gomes, Al Jefferson and Gerald Green and traded them for Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett?

These are probably two of the most well known trades in NBA history that led directly to titles... Or was it all just building through the draft?

Again, wouldn't this make every team built through the draft through this logic, in some way, if you stretch it far enough?

And can't you use the same logic to stretch it the other way?

Lets look at the Paul George trade. You said it was a 'build through draft' move because the Clippers used SGA in the trade (who they drafted).

What is Gallinari? Chopped liver? He scored 19.8ppg for the Clippers last season... and 18.7 for OKC this season. Does OKC trade George just for SGA and picks? I don't think so... So how is this transaction 'building through the draft' when the Clippers only drafted one half of the assets? Can't you just as easily say this was a build through trades because;
1. They traded to get Gallo and
2. They traded to get........... Paul George

Here's a tough one;
How were the 2006 NBA Champion Miami Heat built? They drafted Wade, but the Shaq trade is what put them over the top to win an actual title.

But they traded Lamar Odom, Brian Grant and Caron Butler to get Shaq.
Now Miami;
- Drafted Butler
- Traded for Grant and
- Signed Odom in Free Agency...

So which logic are we using for this to determine how Miami built their team (draft? trade? or FA?)

Wouldn't it be simpler to just use... The actual transaction (ie the trade)?

Conclusion:
The Celtics drafted Tatum, Brown and Smart. They built through the draft. Otherwise you could argue the reverse "Well no, they traded for those picks, they weren't their own picks"... No. Stop. The Celtics built through the draft.

The Lakers built through Free Agency and Trades. They drafted D'Lo, Ingram, Ball, Kuzma and those players took the team exactly nowhere. Nowhere. They flipped them for assets and built through FA and Trade to get to the team they are now.

The Clippers, same. built through Free Agency (Kawhi) and Trades (George).

...forest for the trees.

It's about accumulating assets. You can talk all you want about the semantics of this, but you can't trade to build your roster when you have no assets that anyone covets. How much do you suppose we can get in return for a guy that Clifford would rather bench in favor of Khem Birch? We've had opportunities to trade some of our vets, but Weltman stated that he will never see trading a player away as an opportunity. What do you suppose the collective trade value is for Clark, Ennis, Birch, and MCW? Nobody is going to give value for some journeyman that you plucked from the scrapheap.

And frankly, we can't really even discuss the merits of various paths that we have failed to pursue. We don't trade, we don't tank, we don't move up or down in the draft, and we haven't signed anyone of note. Our signature move in the three years that Weltman has been in charge was trading for someone else's bust and "wrapping our arms around him". I don't know why this **** always devolves into discussions about tanking as if it's a bad thing. At least it's something. "I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos". There are any number of paths one could pursue. We simply choose to pursue none of them. We re-sign anyone up for free agency, draft in slot, and scour the waiver wire. Weltman is Bartleby the scrivener.

I actually don't disagree with much of your post Xat, particularly your second last sentence, you nailed it pretty well there for sure as far as history to this point.

I agree with a lot of what Ben is saying as well, when he's basically saying maximise your draft assets no matter where you pick, and not advocating tanking. (I still think it was a bit of a stretch the way he broke it down, but nevertheless he's explained what he meant).

When we look at the big market teams, I think we could in some ways complete a 'poor mans version' of what they accomplished to be successful, but as a small market team we just can't do exactly what Boston, the Lakers or the Clippers did to its full capacity.

Could we do what Boston did?
Well first we need a couple of aging HOF's... so thats a problem, and then you need to pull off one of the most one sided trades in NBA history, and then you tank for a year and use all your picks for draft an amazing core.

Sure, it is possible we could pull of some massively one sided deal to trade Vuc, Evan, AG etc for some picks that turn out to be good, tank for a year or two, but Vuc, Evan and AG aren't KG and Pierce, just because one franchise pulled off a massively one sided trade, and drafted very (very) well with their draft picks, doesn't mean anyone can. There is a lot that could go wrong with this plan. It all fell perfectly for Boston, and for a franchise blessed with so much success over the years... Ugh. Gotta hate it.

Could we do what the Lakers/Clippers did?
I agree that Clark, Ennis, Birch, MCW etc have little value, but the Lakers had guys like that too. Every team does. The Lakers had Isaac Bonga, Jemerrio Jones and Moritz Wagner. Hardly high level talent, but they were required as throw ins to make the the AD deal happen. (I'm not saying we need to have scrubs at the ready for throw ins either , I'm just saying every team has some players with no value, and others who have value (Isaac, Fultz, Bamba)).

Could we parlay Isaac, Fultz, Bamba + filler and 3-5 future first round picks into a player like AD or PG-13? I think it's possible... But what is the point as AD/PG by themselves isn't enough to do much more than the 2019-20 Magic did.

You need a second star to make a move like that worth it, and the way the Lakers/Clippers got them (Free Agency) we simply can't do. Go ahead, Dump Vuc, Ross and AG for expirings and picks, bundle the picks up with your youngsters and go get AD/PG, but LeBron/Kawhi are not signing here in your capspace, and so this plan falls through.

So what is the plan we could do?
Denver, Milwaukee, Utah, Toronto.

These are possible plans that we could try to replicate. Small market teams that drafted well from any position, or found talent outside of the draft, and this is where as I said above, I agree with Ben in the sense that it isn't about tanking, it is about maximising your draft assets from any position, but it isn't like it is a choice to do this or not. Every team is trying to do this

I'm not saying either of you too advocated for it, but I have seen the following argument so many times: 'blow it up, because we will never draft a Giannis at #15' but finding a core player in the mid/late draft is happening much much more frequently than most people realise,

Nikola Jokić - #41, MPJ #14
Giannis Antetokounmpo - #15, Khris Middleton #39
Donovan Mitchell - #13, Rudy Gobert #27
Pascal Siakam - #27, Normal Powell #46, Fred Van-Fleet undrafted

For every small market team that has nailed good talent anywhere, we have just as many teams that can't get it together no matter how high they draft (Sacramento, Minnesota, New York) etc.

In the last decade of the NBA Draft there have been 16 NBA All-Stars drafted in the top 10 picks, and 15 who were drafted outside the top ten. (52% All-Stars drafted in top ten).

Granted there are a lot more picks outside the top 10 but if you compare the numbers to the previous decade (2001-2010) you had 35 top ten picks made at least one All-Star game, and only 22 players chosen outside the top 10 (61% All-Stars drafted in top ten).

Go back another 10 years (1991-2000) and its 40 top 10 picks vs 20 outside the top 10 (67% All-Stars drafted in top ten).

My point is, drafting in the top ten for a few years used to be a slam dunk to get yourself an All-Star.

Now, the draft is more and more of a crap shoot. Good players can be found anywhere, and for a small market team that is the most critical aspect toward being successful (as opposed to trading, tanking, moving up in the draft etc).

For the Magic, at this point, they like their picks in Isaac, Bamba and Okeke. They are hanging their hats on the 'we just got unlucky they got injured' card, and they are yet to be proven as bad picks (Bamba is running out of time, but you hear them all the time gushing over his rim protection and floor stretching etc), so this is why we got the answers we got in this athletic interview.

They still think they did a good job with those 3 draft picks, and for the most part the jury is still out, we are all just sick of running it back groundhog day style until it's proven beyond any doubt.

[MasterGMer]

I think we have actually struck upon something here which explains not only this whole back and forth, but much of the recent back and forth on this Magic board.

It is all because of two vastly differing opinions on what "Building through the draft" actually means.

It's taken me off guard somewhat, because I never considered things the way you, MagicMatic and some others look at "building through the draft" as logical.

To me (I don't want to speak for pepe, zaymon, others etc) I base it on the transaction through which a player was acquired...

Not the transaction prior (or transaction(s) prior?) I'm not sure how far the rabbit hole is allowed to go... All the way back to the draft I guess?

There's 3 basic transactions right?
- If you drafted your core, you built through the draft
- If you traded for your core players, you built through trades
- If you signed core players in free agency, you built through free agency

If you don't see things that way, I can see why you could basically say that every team built through the draft, but I think this is a very flawed way of looking at things, as the reverse can just as easily be argued (where did you get those picks Boston, hmmm?) and thats exactly why we end up in these back and forth, circular arguments.

It's all over the definition/semantics of "building through the draft"

If you look at things the way you spelled out, where do you draw the line? I mean is there a certain degree of separation? Is there a time limit? If a drafted asset is on your team for 10 years and then you trade them, is this building through the draft? or trade?

Eg:
Were we built through the draft because we drafted Dwight and then traded him for Vuc?

Or more pointedly,
Were the 2019 NBA Champions Toronto built through the draft because they drafted DeMar Derozan and traded him for Kawhi?
Were the 2008 NBA Champions Boston built through the draft because they drafted Jeff Green, Delonte West, Ryan Gomes, Al Jefferson and Gerald Green and traded them for Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett?

These are probably two of the most well known trades in NBA history that led directly to titles... Or was it all just building through the draft?

Again, wouldn't this make every team built through the draft through this logic, in some way, if you stretch it far enough?

And can't you use the same logic to stretch it the other way?

Lets look at the Paul George trade. You said it was a 'build through draft' move because the Clippers used SGA in the trade (who they drafted).

What is Gallinari? Chopped liver? He scored 19.8ppg for the Clippers last season... and 18.7 for OKC this season. Does OKC trade George just for SGA and picks? I don't think so... So how is this transaction 'building through the draft' when the Clippers only drafted one half of the assets? Can't you just as easily say this was a build through trades because;
1. They traded to get Gallo and
2. They traded to get........... Paul George

Here's a tough one;
How were the 2006 NBA Champion Miami Heat built? They drafted Wade, but the Shaq trade is what put them over the top to win an actual title.

But they traded Lamar Odom, Brian Grant and Caron Butler to get Shaq.
Now Miami;
- Drafted Butler
- Traded for Grant and
- Signed Odom in Free Agency...

So which logic are we using for this to determine how Miami built their team (draft? trade? or FA?)

Wouldn't it be simpler to just use... The actual transaction (ie the trade)?

Conclusion:
The Celtics drafted Tatum, Brown and Smart. They built through the draft. Otherwise you could argue the reverse "Well no, they traded for those picks, they weren't their own picks"... No. Stop. The Celtics built through the draft.

The Lakers built through Free Agency and Trades. They drafted D'Lo, Ingram, Ball, Kuzma and those players took the team exactly nowhere. Nowhere. They flipped them for assets and built through FA and Trade to get to the team they are now.

The Clippers, same. built through Free Agency (Kawhi) and Trades (George).

...forest for the trees.

It's about accumulating assets. You can talk all you want about the semantics of this, but you can't trade to build your roster when you have no assets that anyone covets. How much do you suppose we can get in return for a guy that Clifford would rather bench in favor of Khem Birch? We've had opportunities to trade some of our vets, but Weltman stated that he will never see trading a player away as an opportunity. What do you suppose the collective trade value is for Clark, Ennis, Birch, and MCW? Nobody is going to give value for some journeyman that you plucked from the scrapheap.

And frankly, we can't really even discuss the merits of various paths that we have failed to pursue. We don't trade, we don't tank, we don't move up or down in the draft, and we haven't signed anyone of note. Our signature move in the three years that Weltman has been in charge was trading for someone else's bust and "wrapping our arms around him". I don't know why this **** always devolves into discussions about tanking as if it's a bad thing. At least it's something. "I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos". There are any number of paths one could pursue. We simply choose to pursue none of them. We re-sign anyone up for free agency, draft in slot, and scour the waiver wire. Weltman is Bartleby the scrivener.

I actually don't disagree with much of your post Xat, particularly your second last sentence, you nailed it pretty well there for sure as far as history to this point.

I agree with a lot of what Ben is saying as well, when he's basically saying maximise your draft assets no matter where you pick, and not advocating tanking. (I still think it was a bit of a stretch the way he broke it down, but nevertheless he's explained what he meant).

When we look at the big market teams, I think we could in some ways complete a 'poor mans version' of what they accomplished to be successful, but as a small market team we just can't do exactly what Boston, the Lakers or the Clippers did to its full capacity.

Could we do what Boston did?
Well first we need a couple of aging HOF's... so thats a problem, and then you need to pull off one of the most one sided trades in NBA history, and then you tank for a year and use all your picks for draft an amazing core.

Sure, it is possible we could pull of some massively one sided deal to trade Vuc, Evan, AG etc for some picks that turn out to be good, tank for a year or two, but Vuc, Evan and AG aren't KG and Pierce, just because one franchise pulled off a massively one sided trade, and drafted very (very) well with their draft picks, doesn't mean anyone can. There is a lot that could go wrong with this plan. It all fell perfectly for Boston, and for a franchise blessed with so much success over the years... Ugh. Gotta hate it.

Could we do what the Lakers/Clippers did?
I agree that Clark, Ennis, Birch, MCW etc have little value, but the Lakers had guys like that too. Every team does. The Lakers had Isaac Bonga, Jemerrio Jones and Moritz Wagner. Hardly high level talent, but they were required as throw ins to make the the AD deal happen. (I'm not saying we need to have scrubs at the ready for throw ins either , I'm just saying every team has some players with no value, and others who have value (Isaac, Fultz, Bamba)).

Could we parlay Isaac, Fultz, Bamba + filler and 3-5 future first round picks into a player like AD or PG-13? I think it's possible... But what is the point as AD/PG by themselves isn't enough to do much more than the 2019-20 Magic did.

You need a second star to make a move like that worth it, and the way the Lakers/Clippers got them (Free Agency) we simply can't do. Go ahead, Dump Vuc, Ross and AG for expirings and picks, bundle the picks up with your youngsters and go get AD/PG, but LeBron/Kawhi are not signing here in your capspace, and so this plan falls through.

So what is the plan we could do?
Denver, Milwaukee, Utah, Toronto.

These are possible plans that we could try to replicate. Small market teams that drafted well from any position, or found talent outside of the draft, and this is where as I said above, I agree with Ben in the sense that it isn't about tanking, it is about maximising your draft assets from any position, but it isn't like it is a choice to do this or not. Every team is trying to do this

I'm not saying either of you too advocated for it, but I have seen the following argument so many times: 'blow it up, because we will never draft a Giannis at #15' but finding a core player in the mid/late draft is happening much much more frequently than most people realise,

Nikola Jokić - #41, MPJ #14
Giannis Antetokounmpo - #15, Khris Middleton #39
Donovan Mitchell - #13, Rudy Gobert #27
Pascal Siakam - #27, Normal Powell #46, Fred Van-Fleet undrafted

For every small market team that has nailed good talent anywhere, we have just as many teams that can't get it together no matter how high they draft (Sacramento, Minnesota, New York) etc.

In the last decade of the NBA Draft there have been 16 NBA All-Stars drafted in the top 10 picks, and 15 who were drafted outside the top ten. (52% All-Stars drafted in top ten).

Granted there are a lot more picks outside the top 10 but if you compare the numbers to the previous decade (2001-2010) you had 35 top ten picks made at least one All-Star game, and only 22 players chosen outside the top 10 (61% All-Stars drafted in top ten).

Go back another 10 years (1991-2000) and its 40 top 10 picks vs 20 outside the top 10 (67% All-Stars drafted in top ten).

My point is, drafting in the top ten for a few years used to be a slam dunk to get yourself an All-Star.

Now, the draft is more and more of a crap shoot. Good players can be found anywhere, and for a small market team that is the most critical aspect toward being successful (as opposed to trading, tanking, moving up in the draft etc).

For the Magic, at this point, they like their picks in Isaac, Bamba and Okeke. They are hanging their hats on the 'we just got unlucky they got injured' card, and they are yet to be proven as bad picks (Bamba is running out of time, but you hear them all the time gushing over his rim protection and floor stretching etc), so this is why we got the answers we got in this athletic interview.

They still think they did a good job with those 3 draft picks, and for the most part the jury is still out, we are all just sick of running it back groundhog day style until it's proven beyond any doubt.

I think you have done a good job explaining your position.

But the consensus here is that we just can not Run it Back or do nothing. I think injury is apart of the game. Every team has this. That shouldn't be the excuse. Even when those young stars were not injured, we still had a mediocre regular season.

The worst thing whether it is tanking or Free Agency is to avoid staying in the middle of things. Why after Dwight's departure, we hired Rob Hennigan and started a complete rebuild? Because we wanted to build a championship level team and avoid mediocrity.
Why did Cleveland traded all their vets after Lebron James left? Because they knew they couldn't compete for Championships no more.

That is the logic of "building thru the Draft". Because you can not get asset from anywhere rather than the Draft.

Of course, there are different models and ways of building a team or improve the team. Free Agency is one of them. But Orlando doesn't have the luxury to do that because Orlando is a small market and we don't have the stars to entice other stars to join.

OKC is a great example. They are located in a small market and they knew they couldn't have a Star thru trades or FA, so they parted ways with Donovan and they are on verge of trading CP3. Why? Because they are going full rebuild. More specific? They are tanking...

I am not a fan of tanking. But you just can not identify to me tanking won't work, because it works. You accumulate assets thru Draft, and that is the easiest way to build the team.

I think the problem with current team, of course, is we lack a legit All Star or Super Star to carry the team forward. We do have assets and veterans. But we need some gambling. Nothing is 100% safe.

How we gonna do it?

It is either trade up in the Draft. Or trade with some other teams selling.

My point reiterate again? We have to do something this offseason!

[fendilim]

I hope we do not resign DJ. We draft some PG or sign someone with our MLE. What about a guy like Jeremy Lin. Dude averages more than 20 PPG in China and shot great on 3s. Could be a cheap sign depending on his career trajectory. And I think he could be a good backup PG

Lin would be awesome especially for most teams struggling with finances because of the pandemic.

[pepe1991]

I would trade this roster and future picks for the TWolves or the Suns current roster and future picks. Not a second thought and it isn't close.

Huh, you do know those teams have no sucess whatsoever, right ? Where Suns might turn the corner for first time in last 10 years ( by turning corner i mean making playoffs and losing to some healthy Warriors team in sweep ) , T wolves are beyond hopless.
Both teams have "star" that puts up incredible numbers yet never achives anything close to playing winning basketball.
Both teams are knees deep into salary hell without any hope to be FA player for next 2 years at least.

Chances are, both stars will ask for trade within next 2 years and never-ending cycle of sucking on West for both teams will turn into another decade long pain. I mean that's pretty much T wolves in nutshell, they have history of having 1 elite player and having no clue what to do with him. KG, Kevin Love and now Towns. Wasteland of talents.
Suns,from Barkley to Nash, had 2 serious NBA rosters, and nothing serious since Amare left. Another- decade long , never ending rebuild.

You realize we haven't had any success either over this last 7 years either. 1 playoff win is the difference between us and the Timberwolves. The Suns and the Timberwolves at this moment in time have much brighter futures with their stars, rosters, and assets than we do and it isn't close. If they were in the East and we were in the West, this wouldn't even be a discussion.

Suns played last playoff game in March of 2010, T wolves won one playoff game in last 15 years..
Wolves finished year with 19-45 record, and you would change roster with them because of who? Towns? Their Towns- Russell pick&roll defense is embarrassing

Among 65 centers, Towns is a clear-cut No. 1 in offensive real plus-minus (4.93, with the next-highest player barely at 2.22). But he is dead last on the defensive side (minus-3.03).

He isn't just bad on defense, he , on his own makes their defense collapse. And now he has slow footed, not so interested nor inganged on defense point guard. They might score 120 a night but opponents will score 130 every night. They already allowed at least 131 points -13 times this year, and just 2 of 13 games went to OT

I get why casual fans think " 2 stars- better roster" , but basketball is more complicated than that.
"Towns is a star" ... ok. If he is such an amazing player that improves team why his record in nba is 162-230 /41% win percentage, average W-L record with Towns is 33-49. And even that is inflated because for only winning season in his career, team had Butler, who was notorious for calling him lazy. So in reality, without Butler his teams at average finish with 28-54 record.
What a superstar

Butler reportedly yelled out "they ain't s--t" and "they soft" at Wiggins and Towns, as he led third-stringers to victories over the staring unit.

Jimmy always knew they are frauds

[Skybox]

Aside from Hoping for significant trades, I’d like us to...
-let DJ leave, get away from ball-pounding, no D guard play-even if it costs us some wins while transitioning to something with real upside. Re-sign the versatile MCW and draft a scorer like Maxey or Kira Lewis or Dotson who may not be a pure PG but can lead the second unit with speed and energy and maybe more.
-trade an opted in Evan for a second frp. 2020 draft is somewhat flat and there is real potential to get lucky-double your chances to find a difference maker. If AG is the best trade chip ...get a pick, a prospect, and an expiring
-Give Okeke big minutes...even if it isn’t the way to win the most possible games out of the gate. Bamba too (if you just can’t play him, then trade him before he’s worthless). Personally, I’d try to sell high on Vuc to a contender who values win-now over dicey picks.
-I have tremendous respect for Cliff but, IMO, he’s here to hold things together and squeeze out wins not to gamble on high-ceiling creative game plans and lineups. I get that but I’m not for it. I’d love to see a young “visionary” get a shot (in the Nick Nurse mold)...I understand the risk of losing games.
-hunt big game...nobody is off the table, not Vuc, not Isaac, not Fultz...if the price is right. But don’t “dump” anyone for the sake of change.

[BlueBlazer]

2020 draft is somewhat flat

I’ve heard that one before.

[pepe1991]

Magic don't have full MLE for next year, according to hoops rumors
"These are projected values. If the Magic’s team salary continues to increase, it’s possible they’d be limited to the taxpayer mid-level exception ($5,718,000)."

Adding another MLE player makes Magic future salary even more tight for years to come.

Also pool of players that have interest in taking that money in pretty crappy 2020 FA is pretty dry. Most players, i assume, with any value, will bet on themselfs, take 1 +1 years contract ( player's option) and go balls to the wall in 2020-21 season.

[MagicMatic]

I think we have actually struck upon something here which explains not only this whole back and forth, but much of the recent back and forth on this Magic board.

It is all because of two vastly differing opinions on what "Building through the draft" actually means.

It's taken me off guard somewhat, because I never considered things the way you, MagicMatic and some others look at "building through the draft" as logical.

To me (I don't want to speak for pepe, zaymon, others etc) I base it on the transaction through which a player was acquired...

Not the transaction prior (or transaction(s) prior?) I'm not sure how far the rabbit hole is allowed to go... All the way back to the draft I guess?

There's 3 basic transactions right?
- If you drafted your core, you built through the draft
- If you traded for your core players, you built through trades
- If you signed core players in free agency, you built through free agency

If you don't see things that way, I can see why you could basically say that every team built through the draft, but I think this is a very flawed way of looking at things, as the reverse can just as easily be argued (where did you get those picks Boston, hmmm?) and thats exactly why we end up in these back and forth, circular arguments.

It's all over the definition/semantics of "building through the draft"

If you look at things the way you spelled out, where do you draw the line? I mean is there a certain degree of separation? Is there a time limit? If a drafted asset is on your team for 10 years and then you trade them, is this building through the draft? or trade?

Eg:
Were we built through the draft because we drafted Dwight and then traded him for Vuc?

Or more pointedly,
Were the 2019 NBA Champions Toronto built through the draft because they drafted DeMar Derozan and traded him for Kawhi?
Were the 2008 NBA Champions Boston built through the draft because they drafted Jeff Green, Delonte West, Ryan Gomes, Al Jefferson and Gerald Green and traded them for Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett?

These are probably two of the most well known trades in NBA history that led directly to titles... Or was it all just building through the draft?

Again, wouldn't this make every team built through the draft through this logic, in some way, if you stretch it far enough?

And can't you use the same logic to stretch it the other way?

Lets look at the Paul George trade. You said it was a 'build through draft' move because the Clippers used SGA in the trade (who they drafted).

What is Gallinari? Chopped liver? He scored 19.8ppg for the Clippers last season... and 18.7 for OKC this season. Does OKC trade George just for SGA and picks? I don't think so... So how is this transaction 'building through the draft' when the Clippers only drafted one half of the assets? Can't you just as easily say this was a build through trades because;
1. They traded to get Gallo and
2. They traded to get........... Paul George

Here's a tough one;
How were the 2006 NBA Champion Miami Heat built? They drafted Wade, but the Shaq trade is what put them over the top to win an actual title.

But they traded Lamar Odom, Brian Grant and Caron Butler to get Shaq.
Now Miami;
- Drafted Butler
- Traded for Grant and
- Signed Odom in Free Agency...

So which logic are we using for this to determine how Miami built their team (draft? trade? or FA?)

Wouldn't it be simpler to just use... The actual transaction (ie the trade)?

Conclusion:
The Celtics drafted Tatum, Brown and Smart. They built through the draft. Otherwise you could argue the reverse "Well no, they traded for those picks, they weren't their own picks"... No. Stop. The Celtics built through the draft.

The Lakers built through Free Agency and Trades. They drafted D'Lo, Ingram, Ball, Kuzma and those players took the team exactly nowhere. Nowhere. They flipped them for assets and built through FA and Trade to get to the team they are now.

The Clippers, same. built through Free Agency (Kawhi) and Trades (George).

...forest for the trees.

It's about accumulating assets. You can talk all you want about the semantics of this, but you can't trade to build your roster when you have no assets that anyone covets. How much do you suppose we can get in return for a guy that Clifford would rather bench in favor of Khem Birch? We've had opportunities to trade some of our vets, but Weltman stated that he will never see trading a player away as an opportunity. What do you suppose the collective trade value is for Clark, Ennis, Birch, and MCW? Nobody is going to give value for some journeyman that you plucked from the scrapheap.

And frankly, we can't really even discuss the merits of various paths that we have failed to pursue. We don't trade, we don't tank, we don't move up or down in the draft, and we haven't signed anyone of note. Our signature move in the three years that Weltman has been in charge was trading for someone else's bust and "wrapping our arms around him". I don't know why this **** always devolves into discussions about tanking as if it's a bad thing. At least it's something. "I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos". There are any number of paths one could pursue. We simply choose to pursue none of them. We re-sign anyone up for free agency, draft in slot, and scour the waiver wire. Weltman is Bartleby the scrivener.

My point is, drafting in the top ten for a few years used to be a slam dunk to get yourself an All-Star.

Now, the draft is more and more of a crap shoot. Good players can be found anywhere, and for a small market team that is the most critical aspect toward being successful (as opposed to trading, tanking, moving up in the draft etc).

For the Magic, at this point, they like their picks in Isaac, Bamba and Okeke. They are hanging their hats on the 'we just got unlucky they got injured' card, and they are yet to be proven as bad picks (Bamba is running out of time, but you hear them all the time gushing over his rim protection and floor stretching etc), so this is why we got the answers we got in this athletic interview.

They still think they did a good job with those 3 draft picks, and for the most part the jury is still out, we are all just sick of running it back groundhog day style until it's proven beyond any doubt.

That’s the issue. They haven’t drafted well or proven that they can find value outside of the lottery. Hell, they didn’t really find great value IN the lottery.

Therefore, people are using basic deductive reasoning.
We cannot build like a Boston or Los Angeles, so we have to utilize the draft as effectively as possible while lacking limited asset value. What does this mean? It means that we are at the mercy of this FO’s drafting ability. Not ideal.

You are correct that it’s no longer a “slam dunk” to draft an all star in the top 10. However, anyone playing the odds would much they rather “idiot proof” their decision by default earning a higher pick. It gives them less of a chance of botching it, but we all know they still can (Bamba #6).

They can “think” whatever they want about their draft picks. They’d never say to the media they regret their decisions...So far they’ve drafted :

-Defensive forward with a developing game on offense.
-Lengthy Center that is turning out to be a project.
-Injured 3-D wing that remains a mystery at NBA level.

None of these players skill sets solve the issues this organization has had offensively for YEARS, and they all happen to fit a pattern. I’m not going to even get into their second round selections mimicking the same or providing nothing at all.

You are right about the draft being important for a small market team with limited options in free agency. People are sick of them running it back and using Hennigan’s core to do so. These other examples of teams have built their cores through the draft, and given them the reigns, while we watch our picks continually get injured and watch buddy ball.

So when people say they want to “blow it up” it’s because they do not trust/want to be stuck drafting 15th and do not believe there is a high ceiling to this team.

[OrlandoSaban]

If the entire team were healthy, I think we could have made a nice playoff push

We would have beaten MIL
We would have beaten MIA

Injuries just absolutely killed us

[j-ragg]

If the entire team were healthy, I think we could have made a nice playoff push

We would have beaten MIL
We would have beaten MIA

Injuries just absolutely killed us

We were definitely on championship pace. Injuries suck.

[MagicMatic]

If the entire team were healthy, I think we could have made a nice playoff push

We would have beaten MIL
We would have beaten MIA

Injuries just absolutely killed us

Weltman is that you?

Regular season record against Bucks 0/4
Regular season record against Heat 1/4

Then again, we were fully healthy last season in a Vuc contract year and were gentleman swept by the eventual champions. How long are we using injuries excuse before people realize this roster is limited.

[fendilim]

If the entire team were healthy, I think we could have made a nice playoff push

We would have beaten MIL
We would have beaten MIA

Injuries just absolutely killed us

Weltman is that you?

Regular season record against Bucks 0/4
Regular season record against Heat 1/4

Then again, we were fully healthy last season in a Vuc contract year and were gentleman swept by the eventual champions. How long are we using injuries excuse before people realize this roster is limited.

weltman is too experienced to admit the weakness of this team.

[MagicMatic]

If the entire team were healthy, I think we could have made a nice playoff push

We would have beaten MIL
We would have beaten MIA

Injuries just absolutely killed us

Weltman is that you?

Regular season record against Bucks 0/4
Regular season record against Heat 1/4

Then again, we were fully healthy last season in a Vuc contract year and were gentleman swept by the eventual champions. How long are we using injuries excuse before people realize this roster is limited.

weltman is too experienced to admit the weakness of this team.

While continuing to not address the obvious weaknesses.

[magicman112]

We have turned into the Bucks when Hammond was the GM. Good enough to sneak into the 8th seed and get bounced in the first round year after year.

[pepe1991]

We have turned into the Bucks when Hammond was the GM. Good enough to sneak into the 8th seed and get bounced in the first round year after year.

I know i was only angry poster on board when we hired him.
He was Bucks GM for DECADE and never passed first round. He is definition of mediocrity on his job. Good enough to not be fired (while team having no expetations whatsoever) and not good enough to do anything more.

For almost 3 years he had " he couldn't knew Sanders liked weed that much " for another 2 he had " but he drafted Giannis" excuse. And for first 5 years he did nothing.

That's how i invision Magic stint. Eventually Magic will sumble upon some allstar and he will be glorified for it. But he will never put funcional nor logical roster around that man. Because he and Weltman are all in on drafting gimmicky players over players with specific talent and skill required for modern basketball like shooting and ballhandling.

I just can't wrap my head around notion that some contending teams GM's like Bucks and Clippers couldn't see that their teams have no playmaking whatsoever from guard positions and that Bledsoe and over a hill Matthews are NOT guards that will lead them anywhere.

Same with Clippers, angry Chivava and 6'0 shooting gaurd will take you that far at guard spots. Lou Williams is gimmicky small guard who is shoot first, shoot second guard who showed zero ability to make shots in playoffs. Ever. Angry Civava only plays defense if game is nationally televized.

[GatorbaitDD]

If the entire team were healthy, I think we could have made a nice playoff push

We would have beaten MIL
We would have beaten MIA

Injuries just absolutely killed us

This has to be sarcasm no? No, we would not have beaten those teams.

[KillMonger]

It's tough man, changes need to be made but we have no flexibility the only way to really make a splash this offseason is through trades.....If we're going to trade Vuc this is the year.....if we're going to trade AG this is the year......both of those guys might be that piece another team might need to put them over....i'm just afraid it's going to be another run it back season especially if you go by the bile weltman was spewing in this interview......i mean does he think he has an unlimited contract? He inherited the main cogs of this team, he has to start laying some ground work at some point right?