Who is the worst positioned team for the rest of the decade?

[Mak]

I think its Wizards if Beal just leaves. They wont even be horrible enough to get top draft pick.

Lakers still have James and AD , plus players will go to LA. Kings have made so many bad moves but still have Fox and Sabonis.

[laronprofit9]

If Lebron leaves after next season with the Lakers not being able to move Westbrook for any future draft capital.

It’s the lakers. Without Lebron, the lakers will be bottom dwellers and the Pelicans will be getting their lottery picks while they are bottom feeding.

Also Lebron gone, means Lakers are not as attractive of a free agent destination

[Scalabrine]

Again, players enjoy going to NY, like it's a fun vacation spot for them. Players are CONSTANTLY able to force there way to teams, without it going through free agency. They haven't forced their way to NYC!

I agree that it hasn't happened, but you cant force your way to a team that has no picks to trade, good contracts to move, or any blue chip prospects. You have to recognize that that's been the case for the Knicks for past 20 years consistently aside from 2-3 seasons. I'd blame that way more on management and ownership, which definitely plays a role in this conversation, than the actual location and stadium of the franchise, which to me is an absolutely ridiculous argument in most cases.

High taxes, even being crazy rich, these guys aren't getting huge mansions like they would elsewhere, and NYC isn't warm. For all the benefits of the night life and social aspect, it's not a place to raise a family for those guys who are nearing 30 and looking to make a move. The knicks might do REALLY well if we removed the draft and let the 20 something's pick where they want to go to start out. But as these guys get older, that's going to be a less appealing city to live in, which shouldn't come as a shocker either.

Where do you live?? Honestly. That will help me wrap my head around your position...

The Knicks practice facility is in Westchester, which is where most players typically live. It's about 30-40 minutes from Madison Square Garden. Pretty much the same distance as Malibu is to whatever we're calling the LA arena is. Plenty of mansions there and some of the best schools in the entire country.

I don't even live in NYC, but you just sound like you're talking out of your ass to help prove a point that is incorrect.

I'm arguing that NYC is a more attractive market than Sacramento or OKC. Are you really arguing that thats not true????

[orlando_joe]

Surprised to not see the Magic higher.

No go-to player.
Players always injured and bad management of injuries.
Drafting history is questionable.
Limited valuable assets outside of draft picks.

Kings actually have a 2x all-star in Sabonis.
A lot of these teams have trade value in their current all-star level players.
0 current all-stars in Orlando.

so you think magic in worst position for rest of decade? you would rather be a team caped out ,winning 35-45 games a yr no good draft picks coming ,be in bad weather city,state taxes ...but have unhappy allstar that cant wait for contract to end
then magic who have all there own picks 1st and 2nd rd..plus 2 xtra first and 5 extra 2nds a top 5 pick this yr and 60 mill in cap space next summer with a bunch of 1 and 2 yr players not owed money for at least 2 yrs
so you think magic were in better shape a yr and half ago..with allstar,winning 40 games picks in teens and no cap space?
i just dont get it
you think magic in worst shape? crazy

[VFX]

Surprised to not see the Magic higher.

No go-to player.
Players always injured and bad management of injuries.
Drafting history is questionable.
Limited valuable assets outside of draft picks.

Kings actually have a 2x all-star in Sabonis.
A lot of these teams have trade value in their current all-star level players.
0 current all-stars in Orlando.

so you think magic in worst position for rest of decade? you would rather be a team caped out ,winning 35-45 games a yr no good draft picks coming ,be in bad weather city,state taxes ...but have unhappy allstar that cant wait for contract to end
then magic who have all there own picks 1st and 2nd rd..plus 2 xtra first and 5 extra 2nds a top 5 pick this yr and 60 mill in cap space next summer with a bunch of 1 and 2 yr players not owed money for at least 2 yrs
so you think magic were in better shape a yr and half ago..with allstar,winning 40 games picks in teens and no cap space?
i just dont get it
you think magic in worst shape? crazy

Most of these teams can trade all stars to get out of their current situations if they wanted to.

Who is Orlando trading?

It’s all draft luck at this point and rehabbing injury prone players.

People can talk about the Florida benefits all they want. Those free agents go to Miami.

[DrCoach]

Easily Lakers

[orlando_joe]

Surprised to not see the Magic higher.

No go-to player.
Players always injured and bad management of injuries.
Drafting history is questionable.
Limited valuable assets outside of draft picks.

Kings actually have a 2x all-star in Sabonis.
A lot of these teams have trade value in their current all-star level players.
0 current all-stars in Orlando.

so you think magic in worst position for rest of decade? you would rather be a team caped out ,winning 35-45 games a yr no good draft picks coming ,be in bad weather city,state taxes ...but have unhappy allstar that cant wait for contract to end
then magic who have all there own picks 1st and 2nd rd..plus 2 xtra first and 5 extra 2nds a top 5 pick this yr and 60 mill in cap space next summer with a bunch of 1 and 2 yr players not owed money for at least 2 yrs
so you think magic were in better shape a yr and half ago..with allstar,winning 40 games picks in teens and no cap space?
i just dont get it
you think magic in worst shape? crazy

Most of these teams can trade all stars to get out of their current situations if they wanted to.

Who is Orlando trading?

It’s all draft luck at this point and rehabbing injury prone players.

People can talk about the Florida benefits all they want. Those free agents go to Miami.

we just see it different..i think fa players will come to orlando over some other places never said best spot...but for sure not worst i think team out there that would trade spots with orlando magic situation ...but hey doom and gloom
i see it different

[jk31]

Surprised to not see the Magic higher.

No go-to player.
Players always injured and bad management of injuries.
Drafting history is questionable.
Limited valuable assets outside of draft picks.

Kings actually have a 2x all-star in Sabonis.
A lot of these teams have trade value in their current all-star level players.
0 current all-stars in Orlando.

Came here to say this, and by the same argument, Indiana. Sure they have some nice pieces, but no one who can become That Guy. The only way for them to right the ship is if an AD for all the Lakers young guy trade is available for someone who wants to go play in Florida and become the face of a blank slate franchise.

I think the Pacers are worse off though. Hali is a terrific player, but he’s not a guy who will compliment a contender, not lift a bad team’s floor. But guys like him are going to prevent them from bottoming out, and they’ll stay a 10-13 seed for years to come.

Yeah I can see Indiana and Orlando in the same situation.

All the other options have some kind of way to move assets and get better.

you guys do understand the the pacers have a really, really young team together + they will likely get a top 5 pick in this years draft? I don't see why Indy is in a bad situation to be honest.

[dhsilv2]

I agree that it hasn't happened, but you cant force your way to a team that has no picks to trade, good contracts to move, or any blue chip prospects. You have to recognize that that's been the case for the Knicks for past 20 years consistently aside from 2-3 seasons. I'd blame that way more on management and ownership, which definitely plays a role in this conversation, than the actual location and stadium of the franchise, which to me is an absolutely ridiculous argument in most cases.

High taxes, even being crazy rich, these guys aren't getting huge mansions like they would elsewhere, and NYC isn't warm. For all the benefits of the night life and social aspect, it's not a place to raise a family for those guys who are nearing 30 and looking to make a move. The knicks might do REALLY well if we removed the draft and let the 20 something's pick where they want to go to start out. But as these guys get older, that's going to be a less appealing city to live in, which shouldn't come as a shocker either.

Where do you live?? Honestly. That will help me wrap my head around your position...

The Knicks practice facility is in Westchester, which is where most players typically live. It's about 30-40 minutes from Madison Square Garden. Pretty much the same distance as Malibu is to whatever we're calling the LA arena is. Plenty of mansions there and some of the best schools in the entire country.

I don't even live in NYC, but you just sound like you're talking out of your ass to help prove a point that is incorrect.

I'm arguing that NYC is a more attractive market than Sacramento or OKC. Are you really arguing that thats not true????

We just saw James Harden force his way out of new york, in part because it was believed he didn't like living there. The question isn't if NYC is a better free agent spot than Sacramento (which was a team Ben Simmons had on his OK to be traded to teams), but if either are free agent destinations. If Neither is, then it really doesn't seem to matter the levels. Given that the Knicks seem to have become the number 2 team in new york in terms of free agents all but ends this imo. Players would rather play for the nets than knicks if they are looking to live there. And to top all this off, this isn't the early 00's or 90's anymore. Players don't need night life to go out and meet women, they can get on instagram or tinder and have their night planned out without stepping foot in a club.

Any pragmatic player looking for their next deal is going to see NYC as cold, high taxes, AND high real estate. Meanwhile if they're looking for access to capital markets, they're better off going to cali where the tech industry is. This is the same reason Chicago, a city I actually enjoy visiting, hasn't been able to capitalize on even jordan playing there to bring in free agents.

[Scalabrine]

High taxes, even being crazy rich, these guys aren't getting huge mansions like they would elsewhere, and NYC isn't warm. For all the benefits of the night life and social aspect, it's not a place to raise a family for those guys who are nearing 30 and looking to make a move. The knicks might do REALLY well if we removed the draft and let the 20 something's pick where they want to go to start out. But as these guys get older, that's going to be a less appealing city to live in, which shouldn't come as a shocker either.

Where do you live?? Honestly. That will help me wrap my head around your position...

The Knicks practice facility is in Westchester, which is where most players typically live. It's about 30-40 minutes from Madison Square Garden. Pretty much the same distance as Malibu is to whatever we're calling the LA arena is. Plenty of mansions there and some of the best schools in the entire country.

I don't even live in NYC, but you just sound like you're talking out of your ass to help prove a point that is incorrect.

I'm arguing that NYC is a more attractive market than Sacramento or OKC. Are you really arguing that thats not true????

We just saw James Harden force his way out of new york, in part because it was believed he didn't like living there. The question isn't if NYC is a better free agent spot than Sacramento (which was a team Ben Simmons had on his OK to be traded to teams), but if either are free agent destinations. If Neither is, then it really doesn't seem to matter the levels. Given that the Knicks seem to have become the number 2 team in new york in terms of free agents all but ends this imo. Players would rather play for the nets than knicks if they are looking to live there. And to top all this off, this isn't the early 00's or 90's anymore. Players don't need night life to go out and meet women, they can get on instagram or tinder and have their night planned out without stepping foot in a club.

Any pragmatic player looking for their next deal is going to see NYC as cold, high taxes, AND high real estate. Meanwhile if they're looking for access to capital markets, they're better off going to cali where the tech industry is. This is the same reason Chicago, a city I actually enjoy visiting, hasn't been able to capitalize on even jordan playing there to bring in free agents.

Are the Nets a free agent destination to you?

[Murray_17]

The kings are rided with will probably end being one of the worst contracts in the league and traded their best young prospect for a another max guy who is lock for just next season and could be asking out as soon as 2023.

Their roster doesn't make sense, team lacks shooting and defense and basically tried a soft reset of their build but still maxed Fox.

Other teams still looks like they're in no one land but they at least still have young pieces they could trade and hard reset. The Kings look like doom at least until they get rid of Fox's albatross

[Gusto1903]

I mean, the Lakers still have AD Westbrick and maybe Lebron they could flip for some assets in the next years. But Lebron is LeGone next summer, Westbrook has plummeting value, AD is injured and wont get back as much in return as the Nets for example got for Harden.

Itll be tough

[eitanr]

On paper, I think it's hard to look worse than the Lakers do right now - in reality, they will get some big name players who want to play in LA, and mostl ikely be back in contention in a few years.

Their sole hope is free agency, but when will they be in position to offer an incoming FA the MAX? Also, when was the last time they grabbed a marquee FA outside LeBron? I don't see how the answer is not the Lakers here.

[dhsilv2]

Where do you live?? Honestly. That will help me wrap my head around your position...

The Knicks practice facility is in Westchester, which is where most players typically live. It's about 30-40 minutes from Madison Square Garden. Pretty much the same distance as Malibu is to whatever we're calling the LA arena is. Plenty of mansions there and some of the best schools in the entire country.

I don't even live in NYC, but you just sound like you're talking out of your ass to help prove a point that is incorrect.

I'm arguing that NYC is a more attractive market than Sacramento or OKC. Are you really arguing that thats not true????

We just saw James Harden force his way out of new york, in part because it was believed he didn't like living there. The question isn't if NYC is a better free agent spot than Sacramento (which was a team Ben Simmons had on his OK to be traded to teams), but if either are free agent destinations. If Neither is, then it really doesn't seem to matter the levels. Given that the Knicks seem to have become the number 2 team in new york in terms of free agents all but ends this imo. Players would rather play for the nets than knicks if they are looking to live there. And to top all this off, this isn't the early 00's or 90's anymore. Players don't need night life to go out and meet women, they can get on instagram or tinder and have their night planned out without stepping foot in a club.

Any pragmatic player looking for their next deal is going to see NYC as cold, high taxes, AND high real estate. Meanwhile if they're looking for access to capital markets, they're better off going to cali where the tech industry is. This is the same reason Chicago, a city I actually enjoy visiting, hasn't been able to capitalize on even jordan playing there to bring in free agents.

Are the Nets a free agent destination to you?

The move + new ownership would make any conclusion difficult to assess. KD going there would force me to consider it, but one player doesn't make something a destination.

[NYPiston]

Treadmill teams are the always the worst positioned and Washington, Sacramento and San Antonio have the most "treadmill" feel to me. I'd throw in the Knicks too but they pretty much go without saying. Indiana has been the treadmill winner for years but I like the direction they're headed in now.
I wouldn't say the Lakers because they'll find a way to get the next disgruntled superstar to make them relevant once Lebron fades out.

Portland is another one now that I think about it especially if they try to make "win now" moves this offseason for the sake of appeasing Dame.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Where do you live?? Honestly. That will help me wrap my head around your position...

The Knicks practice facility is in Westchester, which is where most players typically live. It's about 30-40 minutes from Madison Square Garden. Pretty much the same distance as Malibu is to whatever we're calling the LA arena is. Plenty of mansions there and some of the best schools in the entire country.

I don't even live in NYC, but you just sound like you're talking out of your ass to help prove a point that is incorrect.

I'm arguing that NYC is a more attractive market than Sacramento or OKC. Are you really arguing that thats not true????

We just saw James Harden force his way out of new york, in part because it was believed he didn't like living there. The question isn't if NYC is a better free agent spot than Sacramento (which was a team Ben Simmons had on his OK to be traded to teams), but if either are free agent destinations. If Neither is, then it really doesn't seem to matter the levels. Given that the Knicks seem to have become the number 2 team in new york in terms of free agents all but ends this imo. Players would rather play for the nets than knicks if they are looking to live there. And to top all this off, this isn't the early 00's or 90's anymore. Players don't need night life to go out and meet women, they can get on instagram or tinder and have their night planned out without stepping foot in a club.

Any pragmatic player looking for their next deal is going to see NYC as cold, high taxes, AND high real estate. Meanwhile if they're looking for access to capital markets, they're better off going to cali where the tech industry is. This is the same reason Chicago, a city I actually enjoy visiting, hasn't been able to capitalize on even jordan playing there to bring in free agents.

Are the Nets a free agent destination to you?

I think the answer to that is yes, based on the fact that they signed two top 30ish players as FAs. The facts bear out that they are a FA destination based on results.

I think NY is a great city, and a place a lot of players would want to be for marketing and other purposes. They don't live like typical NYers, they have private planes, drivers, etc.

My issue with the Knicks is Dolan's meddling, which I think negates a ton of the attraction of NY. The Knicks have blown it when they've had space, and they've given out terrible contracts that prohibited them from having space.

Noah 4/72
Hardaway 4/71
Robin Lopez 4/54
Courtney Lee 4/48

The 2019 offseason agreements weren't as bad as those, but in all that time the Knicks have not attracted any stars to sign with them or force their way to NY, since Melo.

It is not a free agent destination, based on the facts.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Treadmill teams are the always the worst positioned and Washington, Sacramento and San Antonio have the most "treadmill" feel to me. I'd throw in the Knicks too but they pretty much go without saying. Indiana has been the treadmill winner for years but I like the direction they're headed in now.
I wouldn't say the Lakers because they'll find a way to get the next disgruntled superstar to make them relevant once Lebron fades out.

Portland is another one now that I think about it especially if they try to make "win now" moves this offseason for the sake of appeasing Dame.

As long as the current management structure is there I'm not putting the Spurs on a treadmill. Look at what they've done with Murray. They are still going to draft guys that nobody thought of who will exceed expectations.

[CraftylikeaFox]

The Kings have one of the most go nowhere rosters I've ever seen.

[John Murdoch]

Id prob say Spurs just because once pop leaves who knows how the culture changes and i dont see Dejauntae sticking around . Lakers are also in rough shape post LeBron era . We will see what they get for AD

[facothomas22]

Treadmill teams are the always the worst positioned and Washington, Sacramento and San Antonio have the most "treadmill" feel to me. I'd throw in the Knicks too but they pretty much go without saying. Indiana has been the treadmill winner for years but I like the direction they're headed in now.
I wouldn't say the Lakers because they'll find a way to get the next disgruntled superstar to make them relevant once Lebron fades out.

Portland is another one now that I think about it especially if they try to make "win now" moves this offseason for the sake of appeasing Dame.

Until the Front Office changes,the anwser is clearly the Lakers. They have zero first round picks until 2027 and with the Front Office issues the Lakers have,I can't see any good player wanting to join that team. After Anthony Davis leaves for Free Anegcy in a few years,it's very possible that their best player may end being someone like Austin Reeves or Horton Tucker,who both have ceiling of low tier role/bench players. Even 2010s Timberwolves/Kings and the 80s Clippers didn't have rosters that were so bad that they didn't even a single starting caliber player on the team,which is the situation the Lakers could be facing in the post Lebron/Davis era,unless they clean house in the Front Office.

The Kings would be a perfect choice if it wasn't for the Lakers.They seem to be content with being a 25-40 win team every season and the Mike Brown hire is a latest example of that. They traded away Tyrese Hailiburton for a guy who doesn't play defense and have basically reached his ceiling. De'Aaron Fox has regressed.The Front Office overall suck.Really the only thing that saves from being Lakers tier bad is the fact they will have some 1st round picks to work with, and at some point you would think they would draft a generational talent that would change the franchise just by luck alone. But then again this is the same team that passed on Luka Doncic for Marvin Bagley.

The Wizards is not a bad choice due Bradley Beal. I not sure which direction they want to go.They also seem content with mediocrity every season.However if Bradley leaves them or demands a trade,this could force the Wizards to do a full on rebuild,which should give them a chance of getting some top 5 draft pick and if they draft correctly,they could be back to being a playoff team a few years aftewards.

The Blazers/Spurs may or may not be a good choice.It depends. If they make desperate moves to try to stay competitive in the west,they may end up being one of teams that just stay around average to below average for a long time.However if they accept they are a rebuilding team and not try to force anything,their future within the next few years could be bright,espeically the Spurs being that they do have a history of drafting very well and developing their players correctly.