jmmagicfan

We mostly agree. I don’t know that MoB wants to go elsewhere, so not sure how motivated he will be to find another deal to “force management’s hand”, but we will see. You might be right on the Bol option, 1st year guarantee with 2nd year option is possible, but at that point wouldn’t it be in his best interest to take the QO and become a free agent?

For us to do a sign & trade with Bamba I think we would have to offer him the Qualifying Offer, which for him is almost the same as the full MLE ($10.1M v. $10.3M). There are only about four other teams with Cap Space to offer him more than that. There are only a few others that could even offer the full MLE. I'm just not sure there is a market for Bamba to get that. I think if we want him, we offer the QO, but try to get him a multi-year for something like 4/$36 with team options and/or non-guaranteed in years 3-4. I just don't see how you go much more than that for him. I think we're bidding against ourselves there. If he won't sign for the 4/$36, we let him play the one year on the QO as a "make or break" year. If someone else actually offers more, we have a decision to make; I just don't see it happening. Bol's QO is only about $2.7M. I think that might be worth doing on a make/break. I think we offer him something in the 4/$10, again with team options/health clauses, probably non-guaranteed in years 3-4; and if someone offers him more, you let him walk. Wagner - I agree, you guarantee this deal, as the value is obvious.

Another item of note, because of when/how we signed Devin Cannady to a "remainder of season" contract with years 2-3 unguaranteed; he is technically still on the roster until we waive him. He is unguaranteed until 1/10/23, so we could waive him with no penalty at any time up to the end of the year. As I recall, he actually was playing very well for us as a backup combo guard before his injury in 2020-21. With Harris being a free agent, and us possibly looking at Ivey or Sharpe, I expect that no action will be taken with his contract until training camp/last day to make roster changes before the season starts. Sometimes it is the little things like this that makes you realize our FO may be smarter than we give them credit for.

I posted this in the offseason thread, but it does bear repeating here in terms of options. The draft takes place 6/23, Bamba/Bol qualifying offers have to be made by 6/29, and Moe Wagner's contract becomes guaranteed 6/30. Obviously, our front office will do everything possible to keep others guessing about their plans, so don't expect a qualifying offer to either, or movement on waiving/guaranteeing until at least the 24th. They won't give any insight away by tipping their hands on plans for these three bigs that are currently on the roster.

Just some interesting dates for this summer's activities: 6/23/22 NBA draft 6/29/22 Qualifying offer deadline for Mo Bamba & Bol Bol (Brazdeikis/Schofield?) 6/30/22 Guarantee deadline for Moe Wagner 8/2/22 Free Agency pursuit 8/6/22 Free Agents may be signed So looking at these dates, I am willing to bet that no move will be made to either make Qualifying Offers to Bamba/Bol or to Guarantee Moe Wagner until after the draft; because this front office will not give anyone that additional information. They do like to play everything close to the vest, and making those moves might signal what we are/are not doing in the draft.

Givony has him mocked at #7, but had this to say, “Sharpe is oozing with talent, possessing elite physical tools with his exceptional frame, length and explosiveness, to go along with dynamic perimeter shooting ability. There was a reason Sharpe was the No. 1-ranked player in his high school class, but his lack of experience and how little he has been evaluated might make it difficult for a team picking higher than this to roll the dice on him.” I kind of had the feeling that he personally would pick him higher, but for the purpose of his mock, he wasn't sure anyone would have the cajones to pick him higher, so he didn't mock him higher. I'm not saying we should pick him higher, just saying he's worth a workout and a good, hard look.

I don't think anyone else coming directly from high school has ever had as much buzz as Lebron, and love him or hate him, deservedly so. On the other hand, the kind of buzz Sharpe has generated does remind me of the debates surrounding whether or not to pick Dwight #1. I think because Kwame Brown, Martell Webster and Darius Miles all turned out to have pretty mediocre careers, we have forgotten the buzz surrounding each of them. Kwame Brown did go #1, and somehow played 12 years(?!?)in the league, Webster went #6 and lasted 10, Miles #3 and played 7 (out two with knee) seasons. Each is definitely a cautionary tale for taking a high school player in the top 10. All we can do is hope/trust our F.O. will do their due diligence to make sure if they take this kid that he is more Dwight/Lebron/Kevin Garnett and less Brown/Webster/Miles. Conversely, I hope if they pass on him, that he turns out to be more Webster/Miles. I wouldn't wish Kwame Brown on anyone (well, maybe the Lakers or Heat). LOL

Wow, what a bold prediction!!! LOL

Paolo Fans - Don't overthink it, he will learn to play consistent defense.

As always, I think it will come down to health, at least in part. The Cs have a serious size advantage at almost every position, especially if RWilliams is back on the floor. GS definitely is the better offensive team, the Cs are the better defensive team. How much can Smart play and make life difficult for Curry/Poole? It looks like it could be a classic series, if Boston is focused for every game. I expect them to relax a couple times, though. That's kind of their history. I think if both teams remain (mostly) healthy, it will be Celtics in 7. One injury to a major guy on either team could completely change the outcome, though. Draymond Green is the cog that keeps the GS engine running by doing the little things as well as the occasional big thing. This is the final series I was actually hoping for.

I hope he's better than his uncle Jeryl Sasser! I don't think Jeryl was anyone's favorite Magic pick/player.

I was just getting ready to edit that, I had forgotten that Boston traded #1 (which became Fultz) for #3 (Tatum), and a future pick. So it has actually happened twice. Still, twice in 75 years isn't exactly often. Even if you say twice in the last 30 years because draft rules were much different prior to the 90's.

In point of fact, the ONLY time that the #1 pick has been traded for just other picks, and not included as part of a trade for established player(s) and other picks was the Webber/Hardaway trade. It's just that rare.

I would argue that this only happens if the Magic fall in love with Ivey, Sharpe, Griffin, or Murray; and if Houston/Sacramento/Detroit absolutely must have Holmgren/Smith/Banchero. At the end of the day, you have to be happy with who you choose #1, so that if the deal falls through because your guy isn't there at the later pick, you haven't screwed yourself putting the eggs into that basket. For example, Sacramento decides they "must have" Holmgren, and you really want Sharpe, but Houston pulls a stunner and picks Sharpe; now what?!? If you were planning on keeping the pick, would you have chosen Holmgren? I think trading the #1 pick has to take three things: 1) you have to be almost 100% sure that your top guy will still be there for the lower pick, and 2) you have to make sure that the guy you pick #1 is no lower than #2 on your own board. 3) you have to have some mighty big balls; because if your guy is gone before that lower pick, you are kicking yourself for taking the chance on losing your top pick by being greedy. I think both the first two items are easier/more likely when there is a general consensus of who the top one or two picks will be. I think Weltman/Hammond will have a very definite preference, as they are a) looking for a star and b) trying to build a team/winning culture around that star.

I think it is a lot more difficult these days to pull off that type of Webber/Penny deal. Back at that time, there really wasn't the type of access to tape of Hardaway, even though he played a season at Memphis. Memphis didn't have much of a national profile team at that time, and there wasn't the internet availability that there is now of Sharpe's high school, AAU, and other team real game experience. We talk about Sharpe being an "unknown" quantity because of not playing college ball, but truth is there's much more researchable video of him available than there was of Dwight when he came out of high school, or of Penny out of Memphis. Pulling off a "we'll take player x at #1, you take our guy at #2-4, and we will then do the trade" becomes much more difficult, especially since there isn't a consensus #1 this year. Webber was #1 on just about everyone's board, and Hardaway was actually a surprise pick at #3, as few teams had him ranked that high. Personally, I think we need to worry less about obtaining additional assets, and just make sure we get our guy at #1. We can all argue back and forth about who "our guy" should be - Holmgren, Smith, Banchero, Sharpe, Ivey, and I've even seen a couple of projections for Griffin or Murray. Just the fact that there are 3-5 guys getting national media coverage as potential #1 picks makes it less likely to me that we could trade down, get additional assets and still get our guy. It seems like this year everyone's board looks a lot different. You could potentially have almost every team in the league with a different 1-5 ranking of players. It might be the least consensus we've had since Cleveland ended up taking Anthony Bennett (oops!)

I think draft night is going to be very interesting - if 2/3 of what we hear about Sharpe is true, I can see the "top 3" becoming a "top 4" pretty quickly, and any of the guys going anywhere in that grouping. I can see us picking Sharpe and throwing everyone else a big curve ball. I can see us picking Chet or Jabari. I could even see us picking Paolo. I can see us picking one of them, and making a trade for someone picked further down plus some additional assets. At this point, I don't think anyone has any idea what this FO is going to do; and I like that. It makes people nervous, and that could lead to a good deal.

Again, I'm not saying I hate Holmgren as a pick, and if the team has done it's due diligence - looked at all his medical, had the doctor's do a complete examination, worked him out against guys with some beef, etc; then I would be okay with the pick. I just have reservations about his ability to be a superstar in the NBA based on a "less than imposing" frame and body-type. I get that he's very talented, and has a lot of potential, but the NBA is much faster, more physical, and puts a lot of wear and tear on big men's bodies. The fact that Holmgren hasn't had any major injuries that I am aware of is definitely a positive in his favor. Many of the other guys 6'10" and over who seem injury-prone did have some history. If I'm reading it correctly, injuries that "carry over" between seasons aren't counted in the subsequent seasons, so if there were an injury like Isaac's or Kawhi Leanord's that ended a player's season, and cost them the entire next season, it would not be accounted for in that second season. It might not actually move the numbers in a meaningful way, but it might. Their analysis eliminates what could be impactful data, so it increases the uncertainty; that uncertainty calls into question some of the conclusions drawn from analyzing the data - sort of a corollary of the GIGO principle. (Garbage In, Garbage Out), this one being what might be termed IIIO (Incomplete In, Incomplete Out).

Interesting find, but it does tend to lump together quite a few diverse injury types, and it doesn't differentiate between guys playing 30-35 minutes/game, and those playing 1-10 minutes/game. The formulation for their data seems far too simplistic to actually generate much useful analysis. It's conclusions seem to be too generic to support any demographic specifics. For example, a guy who only is playing 8 minutes a game gets injured near the beginning of the season, is out for 12 games, and is then cut. Based on their formula, those 12 games of injury counts the same as a guy who plays 34 minutes/game, and misses 12 games during the entire season from accumulated bumps/bruises. The fact the 8mpg guy actually missed 70+ games doesn't factor in once he is off an active roster. Now someone like Isaac wouldn't even count for 2021-22, because he wasn't hurt during that season. "For the purposes of this study, an athletic exposure was defined as 1 athlete appearing in 1 game. Game injury rates were calculated per 1000 athlete exposures. No distinction was made in the database between athletes who played all 48 minutes of a contest versus athletes who played 1 minute. During a single game, the maximum athlete exposures would be 24, when all 12 players from each team participate in the contest. This method describes the total number of athletes appearing in regular and postseason games. The incidence rate (per athletic exposure) for practices and preseason games was not calculated owing to unreliable reporting methods and lack of a standardized protocol. However, the frequency data for injuries and illnesses sustained during these activities were still included and analyzed. Incidence rates for a particular injury were defined as number of injuries per 1000 athlete exposures, as calculated with the following formula: total number of injuries×1000/total number of game exposures"

This is about the closest comparison I could find for height/weight to have a long, (mostly) healthy career; and even Garnett was 10 pounds heavier (and a couple inches shorter at the time, he was about 17). But as with most of the tall, skinny comparisons; most have wider shoulders to make you think their frame could fill out. Chet scares me more because of his frame than his actual weight. He just looks skinny through the shoulders.

I actually think that Boston has already had a couple of average games - at least partly due to Miami's defense. As good as Boston's defense is though, I'm not sure they will be able to shut down the GS offense. I think we will see. I have to say, that Robert Williams fingertip block completely stretched out, coming from inside the paint to block all the way out at the 3-point line was just crazy. When you see it slo-mo, the full extension is just incredible.

I posted this in the offseason thread, but I came up with a possible trade that does work on NBA Trade Machine | TradeNBA : Pacers get: T Ross, #1 pick Magic get: Malcolm Brogdon, #6 pick, Cavaliers 2023 1st round pick (Indiana owns these rights now) Pacers are looking to get out of Brogdon's contract (3 years), and the Magic get a younger 1/2/3, who could be our go-to scorer while our young guns are developing. We probably still get one of Sharpe/Ivey/Murray/Griffin/Mathurin with the #6 this year, and that gives us three first round picks in what is supposed to be a very deep draft next year - ours, Chicago's, Cleveland's.

So I was playing around on the NBA Trade Machine, and came up with this trade. What do you all think? NBA Trade Machine | TradeNBA Pacers get: Terrence Ross, 2022 #1 draft pick Magic get: Malcolm Brogdon, 2022 #6 draft pick, rights to Cleveland's 2023 1st round pick

I'm not sure that we would have a roster spot to even consider him for. A lot depends on what we are planning in the draft and free agency. Of course, it might be a good tactic to keep people guessing. I would certainly take a look at him, even if I didn't think we have a spot for him. There is always a Lakeland spot to consider too. I just don't see him making the Orlando roster. At seasons end, we had five guys that play (at least some) center on the roster - WCJ, Bamba, Lopez, M Wagner, and Bol. Of those five, only one is currently under a guaranteed contract for next year, WCJ. Moe Wagner has a contract, so all we have to do is guarantee it and he is back - at $1.8M this should be a no-brainer. If for no other reason than this kind of cheap, one year contract is valuable for making numbers work in trades. Bamba and Bol are potentially Restricted Free Agents, assuming we make them the necessary Qualifying Offers; or unrestricted if we do not. Lopez is already an unrestricted free agent. So we potentially could have anywhere from 1-4 centers tied to our cap space. If we guarantee Moe Wagner, and plan on making the QO offer to either Bamba or Bol, or plan on drafting Holmgren, we could end up overloaded at the center; so bringing in someone like Sotto to workout sends a signal about what is on the table and what might not be. I say bring him in.

Hampton”s biggest issue is that he is not a PG , but played a bunch of time as the primary backup

And that is how you elicit offers from another GM who is set on a specific player in the top three.