Mike1989

The defensive potential of the line up is really good, but unless the offense starts to catch up then well might not be a true contender. It’s critical the team becomes more balanced and offensively efficient because that’s what wins championships in the current era. If they can get the offense anywhere near the defense we’ll be a true contender.

Desmond Bane adds a proven 3pt shooter with a career average of .410, though it must be noted that he has averaged .386 over the past two seasons. Hopefully he’ll shoot nearer his average but he’ll need support from others to thrive. The offense is what is holding the team back in terms of the pace of play, ball movement (etc). So hopefully this is the first move towards helping the offense get nearer to our team’s defensive capabilities. My main concern about Bane is he’s played 68, 76, 58, 42 and 69 games. So he’s not played a full season and has missed a number of games over the past five seasons. I’m not well informed on why he’s missed games, but hopefully he won’t be missing as many games for us. I suppose this trade will come down to whether this move (and others) helps this team become a top four team in the east. If it does, the cost will not be looked upon negatively. However, if the offense continues to be inefficient and holds the team back, then it will be seen as an overpay.

It does have that Shaq era look. I think I’d have preferred them to commit to all black pin stripe, but I’m sure it will look the part when it’s worn by the players.

The ones on the right and left are excellent. I’m not sure about the middle one.

It’s going to be interesting to see if OKC and Indiana can close these series out 4-1, or whether the Wolves and Knicks can mount any kind of comeback. There’s been successful comebacks from 3-1 like Denver doing it twice during Covid and Golden State did it in the conference final and NBA finals. That said, there’s been unsuccessful ones too like Houston this year and Boston coming back from 3 nil and falling flat in game seven against Miami. I would agree that our team would benefit from reworking our roster to adopt some of the stylistic features we have seen from the likes of OKC and Indiana. However, you can say that most years because it’s a copycat league. The problem we have is our two main players and scorers - Wagner and Banchero - have similar strengths and flaws, which only become more obvious due to their supporting cast sharing similar strengths and flaws. If the team wants to build around Wagner and Banchero, then arguably they will need to consider the future of the other three starters. It’s still early days for Wagner and Banchero, both are young enough to get better and lead this team to where it wants to go. After all, it took Tatum and Brown until their 7th and 8th season to win a title, and that was after years of speculation about their ability to play together (though admittedly both shot better from behind the arc than Wagner and Banchero).

Malik Monk, Zach LaVine, DeMar DeRozan, Keegan Murray, Domantas Sabonis I’m not really sure what to think of the King’s starting five. They don’t look like a contender. If anything look like a team heading towards yet another rebuild, unless this lineup does something unexpected.

I never said it was fair value. I mean, Kevin Durant cost 4 first round picks and a pick swap. Damian Lillard cost 1 first round picks and two pick swaps. So what would AD’s and Doncic’s current trade value be? AD would probably cost at least what the Bucks paid for Damian Lillard, while Doncic should cost at least what the Clippers paid for Paul George. Could the Mavs have got more? Sure they could, but they either didn’t ask or didn’t push it because they wanted AD. Again, never said it was fair value. Also, nowhere near Pelicans AD is simply not true. He’s currently 2 points per game short of his best years in New Orleans and he was the second option in LA compared to the first option in New Orleans. His other stats are fairly similar. He’s been a very good player for the Lakers, and although he had a three season stretch after their championship when he missed a fair amount of games, he’s been fairly durable for the 23/24 and 24/25 seasons. That said, the Lakers have got a gift because five years from now Doncic will still be in his prime years while AD will be nearing the end of his career. So there’s no doubt that the Lakers got a steal and I would be an annoyed Mavs fan to see Doncic go.

There’s always an argument that can be made towards a league having preferred teams. For example, they are more likely to get a 50-50 call than another team. Look at the recent Bills-Chiefs game and the so-called catch in the first half by the Chiefs player. I suspect that wouldn’t have been ruled a catch if it was a Buffalo player. So yes, some teams get preferential treatment. However, my point purely was if the league was openly biased towards them, then they wouldn’t have vetoed the CP3 trade.

CP3 was going to the Lakers in that trade. So if the league was biased towards them they would have let it go through…

In theory you get “better” offers, but what would they be? Doncic has a player option in 2026 and will want to go to a contender. So, that limits the field a little bit. There’s teams who would want him, but they need to be able to put together a package that appeals to a team wanting to “win now”. Who could offer them a player like AD? The closest would be Jimmy Butler from Miami, or perhaps Paul George from the 76ers, but he’s injured at the minute. That said, as soon as the news leaks they would have to deal with distractions like the Heat are currently experiencing with Jimmy Butler. However, the Mavs would arguably be ten times worse because we’re talking about a 25-year old MVP candidate in his prime years being traded away, rather than a player in his mid-30s who has left teams in the past due to issues. So Dallas would be hit by media scrutiny, their fans would be in uproar, and their players would be questioning the team’s direction. At least this way the deal is done and they can start to fight the fires. They can try to sell their fan base on AD being a better fit in their team, but it’s a real hard sell and I’d be furious if I was a Mavs fan.

The only defence I can come up with is that their GM (and/or ownership) wanted to get this deal done before the media caught wind of it, or another organisation leaked the information that the Mavs are wanting to trade Doncic. If that news got out, then there would be a lot of negative press heading their way and they’d be fighting battles on multiple fronts. That said, I question how this trade gets passed when other trades have included significantly more. I mean, sure, Davis is a hell of a player and the Mavericks should get better defensively, but the Lakers got prime Doncic for Davis and a first round pick. The Mavericks got fleeced, unless of course they win championships with this lineup and the Lakers win nothing.

Knicks taking heat for not doing a deal, but it might actually benefit them. I don’t see the line up - Brunson, Mitchell, Barrett (if he wasn’t traded), Randle and Robinson - competing for and wining a championship. In a sense it would be similar to us having done a deal for Mitchell. He’d be a hell of an addition, but we aren’t competing for a championship yet. At least in Cleveland he’s got a young all star backcourt partner and two young all star quality front court players. Only position missing an all star caliber talent is small forward. Worth the risk for Cleveland if it works out because they’ve got the talent to compete for the east with his addition.

The pairing should work. Towns can score heavily and has an accurate 3pt shot, while Gobert does his thing. Be interesting to see how it turns out for the Wolves having paid a heavy price for Gobert. If we got Mitchell for that deal I’d be a happy Magic fan, but in all honesty I don’t see him wanting to come here and play ball. I suspect he’ll want to go to a big market team if he leaves the small market in Utah.

Their comparison to other skinny players is somewhat flawed. Yes, players like Anthony Davis, Giannis, and Durant came into the league skinny and managed to add weight. But what do they have in common? Broad shoulders, especially Davis and Giannis. They have very broad shoulders and have the frame to add the bulk. Chet is not only skinny but has a narrow frame. He currently weighs the same as some guards. The problem he will have in adding extra weight is how much can his frame legitimately add before it has a negative effect on his body? I suspect he’ll struggle to add sufficient weight.

That’s one extreme to another comparison Zion and Chet! What you need to consider here is does Chet’s frame allow him to put on extra weight and size or is he a naturally skinny guy? Chet doesn’t have broad shoulders like Dwight Howard. His shoulders seem quite narrow and that doesn’t really allow for a great deal of weight and size to be added. Durability is a legitimate concern for someone as skinny as Chet. Plus, how is he going to handle bigger and stronger players when attacking and defending? He’s not an ideal prospect. Too risky.

Let’s hope the first pick delivers another franchise changing player! The question I have is does this year’s draft class have a franchise changing talent? Or is this another draft class with some useful players but not needle moving players? I’m happy that we got the first pick, but I am not convinced we have a superstar waiting to be picked. I think it’s more likely we’ll get a good player than a great player. For example, I’ve seen Banchero compared to Julius Randle, which is not exactly the caliber of player a title contender builds around. Fingers crossed we land another superstar with the first pick, but I think a player in the next tier or two down is more likely.

I can see why we might be interested in drafting Barnes because he’s got a bit of Draymond Green about him. He’s a point forward that plays hard at both ends of the court and can defend 1-5. He’s got good athleticism and size. The downside is his shooting and scoring, but if he can develop that side of his game he’s got a lot of upside, and if he can’t he’s got the skills to be a good starting player. I’m not a supporter of the second pick. Keon has a ton of athleticism and plays hard defensively, and while he has intriguing upside, I don’t feel it is wise to be doubling down on players that can’t shoot and score. Ok our defense can be scarily good with the athleticism and defensive buy-in, but we will certainly struggle to shoot and score! For me, I’d rather take a gamble on Moses Moody developing into a plus player. His floor should be solid with his shooting, scoring and defensive ability. Ok his ceiling is more 3-and-D than all star, but who knows he could surprise people?! Or considering Jalen Johnson from Duke and betting on his upside, or bet on Josh Giddey’s intriguing upside.

Expand please. What makes him an excellent hire? I’ll be honest I’m not well up on NBA assistants compared to NFL assistants when it comes to what they can bring to the table as a head coach.

PG shot the ball better coming out of college. He shot 44% from outside as a freshman and 35% from outside in his second year. He made a huge jump from the free throw line going from 69% to 90%. But I will agree that as a prospect coming out of college he had elements of his game that he needed to fine tune to become a really good player. However, do keep in mind that he was discussed as a later lottery selection and not the fifth overall pick in the draft. Also, there was no need to put too much pressure on George because they had a prime Danny Granger and Roy Hibbert with solid starters built around them where they could slowly ease him into life in the NBA. The problem we have is we don't have the same kind of team environment to bring him into. We would need to sign a veteran to start at small forward to allow us to bring Kuminga off the bench and ease him into life in the NBA. Maybe we can bring back Otto Porter at a reasonable rate? I guess we could throw the kid in straight away like the Knicks did with RJ Barrett and just ride the ups and downs, but realistically we would need to be patient with Kuminga while he tries to improve his shooting percentages, iron out his shot selection and play high effort defense consistently. Is there anyone else we could take at 5? Not really and that's why I think a lot of Magic fans do feel a bit disgruntled at the minute. Once again we have probably missed out on selecting a franchise changing player and will have to bet on a player reaching their hypothetical upside, which to date hasn't really worked for us in recent years. Personally I am leaning towards trying to trade up or trade out to see if we can pick up a prospect we like in the league that we can bet on, but if we select Kuminga, then I will back him like I would any player on this team. The alternative selection would be Scottie Barnes. Now offensively he doesn't offer prolific scoring or high percentage shooting, but he has shown that he can play the point forward role and initiate offense. Defensively he plays hard, can defend the paint and guard pretty much each position. He's got the size and build to be a really good NBA player and could project to be a similar player to Draymond Green. If Barnes ever develops the shooting and scoring side, then that increases his ceiling, but even without that he can be a very good NBA player. Problem for us is that it doesn't fill our need of scoring and shooting, and potentially creates a logjam at PF meaning we might need to look at the future of Isaac and/or Okeke, but that could be the alternative selection for us at 5.

I’ve seen sufficient scouting videos and reports. Like I clearly said, he’s got to work on his effort at the defensive end because at times he coasts and there’s ample evidence in his time in the G-League. If he can continue developing his defensive array of skills AND put in consistent effort, he can be very good, but to date he’s shown inconsistent effort defensively. The key question here is does he view defense like Jabari Parker (ie “I’m paid to score, they don’t pay players to play defense”), or is he someone that needs the kick up the backside and the right coaching to turn it on? Also, shooting has never been a particular strength of Kuminga’s even going back to high school. Now there is a belief that he can develop a consistent shot, but at the same time there is a risk because not every player does. Factor in his poor shot selection, which also goes back to high school, and that’s something that needs to improve. End of the day you can be a special athlete and still put up 20 points or more in high school or college because you’re the best athlete on the court. In the NBA, that won’t always be the case, and that’s why he needs to develop on both ends and become more consistent with his defensive effort, improve shot selection and develop his shooting. If he can do that, he can be a special talent, but there’s a pretty big drop off if he doesn’t.

Toronto would be in play for him as well with VanVleet at PG, Green SG, Anunoby SF, Siakim PF, and whoever at C. Likewise they could select Suggs and have him and VanVleet in the backcourt together. Essentially I can't see any of the top four prospects getting past Toronto because they can all fit into their existing lineup.

The kid is inefficient from outside, inside and from the line. He's got a lot of work to do on his shooting and his shot selection otherwise he will remain inefficient. Fair enough he could probably average 15-20 points a night in a high volume role, but that is no use to a winning team. That's without considering he has a lot of work to do on the defensive end as well, mostly down to his effort, but also some down to technique. Obviously there's a lot of upside in Kuminga if he puts everything together, but there's also the risk of a low floor if he doesn't.

Honestly I’m not sure. That’s why I am so disappointed to fall because there’s no clear prospect to take at five that I would be entirely happy with. At the minute I’m leaning towards us trying to trade up or trading down. Averages wise he takes 5 three pointers a game and only hits on 25% of them. His other offensive percentages are inefficient as well. Ok, he’s still a kid and those numbers could improve, but there’s a lot of work he’ll need to do to become an efficient scorer, and generally a lot of high volume inefficient scorers can find it hard to improve because they tend to have shot selection problems to overcome as well. Gordon and Isaac shot better in college than Kuminga did in the G-League and possessed as much upside as Kuminga. His form might look ok, but Kuminga is just so inefficient at this point and that is a concern. If we was drafting him with Chicago’s pick, fair enough, but we aren’t and that’s my problem. It’s like when people link us to Keon Johnson from Tennessee. He’s got a ton of athleticism and plays tough on the defensive end, however he’s offensively inefficient. Now if Johnson puts it altogether he could be special, but there’s a significant risk that he might note, however if he doesn’t then at least he’s a very athletic and defensively strong player. Kuminga doesn’t contribute as much defensively, so there’s a lot of work to be done on the defensive end and on his shooting.

I guess he could provide a highlight reel with dunking and attacking the rim, but the rest of his game is unlikely to be fun to watch or develop to the extent that would see him become a star.

Isaac and Gordon both showed a fair stroke in college, yet neither player has developed into consistent shooters and are unlikely to become prolific outside shooters. Sometimes players can develop their shooting, and shot selection can improve with age and experience, but there are more examples of players that don’t. The way this team has been built in recent years I’d like to see us try to draft players that can shoot and score, rather than pin our hopes on fixing and improving their shooting.