Jump to content
CTMagicUK

2021 NBA Draft Thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CTMagicUK said:

Aggressive defense, pushing in transition and sharing the ball. Those are things Mosley wants to do. Also things Scottie Barnes excels at. 

I'm not super high on Barnes at 5 for us but it seems logical. 

Good point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Soul Bro said:

Good point

About minute 14, question from Keith Smith about how he sees our defense....coach's response: "ability that we have length on this team, length is very important in this league"

Agree, Barnes is a versatile defender and at 6'8", wingspan of 7'3" and vertical of 39" fits the Magic mold. Plus can handle the basketball too as a Point Forward.

If he is there at #5, I think we pick him.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Nwhermit said:

Juhann Begarin was seen in town. Maybe #33 pick for draft-and-stash selection.

Where have you seen this? Think he'd be a fun stash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CTMagicUK said:

Where have you seen this? Think he'd be a fun stash.

Saw them coming out of the Arena, I have to search for his picture,  but it was definitely him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Franchise408 said:

You are simply looking at the players, but you are not looking at the contexts of the teams and their success (or lack thereof)

If a team's goal is to just get a superstar, then I guess the McGrady years were our peak years as a franchise, right?

Getting a superstar is not the goal. Winning a championship is. There are more teams that have won championships with 0 superstars than there are teams that tanked for a superstar and won a championship.

Allen Iverson - 0 championships with Philly

Anthony Davis - 0 championships (or even any post-season success) in New Orleans. NO is in no different a boat now with Zion.

Shaq - 0 championships in Orlando, and his one shot he had he was swept. That also isn't an example of tanking, as the team was an expansion team that was slowly building and acquiring talent through the draft, via Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott. Shaq also didn't get to the Finals with Orlando until they got a fluke 2nd #1 overall pick and turned that into Penny Hardaway. What kind of team was Orlando the year before they started making playoffs? A "medicore" middle of the pack team that had the best record of all non-playoff teams. The team wasn't tanking. They were building.

Magic - The #1 pick was traded for, so Magic was placed alongside an already winning team.

Worthy - Same as Magic

Ayton - Ayton is not the centerpiece of Phoenix's success. In fact, he was considered to be a potential bust until this year. Booker (#13 overall pick) and Chris Paul are the centerpiece of their success. Phoenix's success came from the opposite of tanking.

Embiid - The 76ers tops out at an ECF appearance the year they had Jimmy Butler. If the goal is getting knocked out of the 2nd round, then yes, Philly succeeded by tanking. But I don't think getting knocked out of the 2nd round is the goal.

Literally all of those other guys except McHale and Jordan have a combined 0 championships with the team that drafted them. And like Magic, Boston had acquired another team's top pick to get McHale. They didn't obtain it by tanking.

There are no examples of a team tanking, and using that philosophy to turn around and turn into a champion via that philosophy. Tanking does *not* work. It is a 0% success philosophy. It might bring you a superstar, sure, but you have completely depleted your team of any semblance of talent that there is nothing around that superstar to work with, and they have left to greener pastures by the time you are able to build up anything around them, and then they are gone and the franchise is back at square 1, having made no ground and are right where they were to begin with.

So just to make sure I still understand your previous explanation- you were fine with trading Gordon and Fournier, but not Vucevic. So if we rolled out the same roster next year, but slide our own pick up to like 7-10, and swap Carter and Chicago’s pick for Vucevic, you would be satisfied with that, but our current situation is unacceptable, because “we won’t win a championship?” Am I misrepresenting anything here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CTMagicUK said:

Aggressive defense, pushing in transition and sharing the ball. Those are things Mosley wants to do. Also things Scottie Barnes excels at. 

I'm not super high on Barnes at 5 for us but it seems logical. 

Not saying that we won’t draft him, but I don’t think generalizations about the style of basketball the new coach wants points to any draft prospect over another

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, O_SteveO said:

So just to make sure I still understand your previous explanation- you were fine with trading Gordon and Fournier, but not Vucevic. So if we rolled out the same roster next year, but slide our own pick up to like 7-10, and swap Carter and Chicago’s pick for Vucevic, you would be satisfied with that, but our current situation is unacceptable, because “we won’t win a championship?” Am I misrepresenting anything here?

You are over simplifying it, not sure if intentional or not.

My point is that purposefully sabotaging your team to purposefully be worse does not make a team better in the long run.

I am saying that the logic of trading Vuc because we had "topped out" is flawed logic. If we had reached the peak of what we could be with Vuc on the roster, then that is saying that youth cannot grow and develop. Our team was not built around Vuc, it is built on the 4 lottery caliber players we have on the roster all under the age of 23, all 4 of which were injured either A. for the entire season or B. for large chunks of the season. As constructed, the offense would not have run through Vucevic, because when the team was healthy, it wasn't. It was running through Markelle. Vuc was an all star caliber complimentary piece to Markelle and the youth.

The only reason this season was a loss was due to those injuries. Not for any weaknesses in our current roster makeup.

Next year, we will start the season healthy, with the exception that I don't believe Fultz or Isaac are projected to return at the start of the season, but will be back at some point within the season.

The roster with Vuc was already a playoff roster. Our youth core would continue to develop, and have an all-star alongside them. It's not about building around Vuc, it's about having talent around our youth.

We would have had a lottery pick regardless of trading Vuc or not. We still would have had the #5 pick this year. We would be missing out on pick #8, but have an all-star center.

Now, we still have those young players on our roster, but now there is no all-star to compliment them. Now we have dice rolls on a #8 pick, and whatever we use with the cap space freed up from Otto Porter's contract.

My argument is that it was needless. The team had already made the post-season for 2 consecutive years after the longest drought in franchise history, only missed this season due to injuries, and when we were healthy at the beginning of the season, we had the best record in the conference. So we shook things up needlessly just for the sake of shaking things up, and we went into intentional tank mode, with fans cheering on losses and boo'ing wins every step of the way. And for what? Because we had an injury plagued season during a year that saw the entire NBA hit with an increased level of injuries?

To me, that's not a reason to blow up the roster. The roster had not topped out at a #7 seed, and the roster had a lot in front of them. Now it's blown up and we have taken several steps backwards all in the name of shaking things up because the NBA had a lot of injuries this year.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were never going anywhere with Vuc's matador defense. Teams knew in crunch time they could just go at him and score. I used to cringe at the layup drills other teams threw at us. Yeah he scored a lot of points and got lots of boards, but how did it stack up against the points he allowed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Today, reports broke that the Rockets are trying to trade up for the number one pick. Yesterday, Kelly Iko of The Athletic, as well as other teams’ beat writers took a look at some potential deals for the Rockets with the number two pick. Some were considered hard passes (such as a trade-down with the Kings),some were considered interesting but not good enough (a trade with the Magic for 5, 8, and Wendell Carter Jr.), and only a couple were deemed acceptable. The bottom line: there are deals to be made, but it won’t be easy.

5,8, and Carter for 2 isn't good enough???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Franchise408 said:

.....It might bring you a superstar, sure, but you have completely depleted your team of any semblance of talent that there is nothing around that superstar to work with, and they have left to greener pastures by the time you are able to build up anything around them, and then they are gone and the franchise is back at square 1, having made no ground and are right where they were to begin with.

People's comments often make it sound as though tanking is a cost-free method of getting high draft picks.  But tanking has many costs.  First, as you point out, you are creating a very bad team that probably won't be all that good even if you get a good draft pick.  Second, as you get blown out repeatedly, you are teaching your players to expect to lose.  Third, the more you lose, the more the fans root for you to lose, because that next great star is always just around the corner in the next draft, which further reinforces the culture of losing.  Fourth, it's very difficult if not impossible to develop your young players properly in such an atmosphere.  Fifth, you are saying that you have no control at all over your destiny as a team, that all you can do is to stay as bad as possible until you finally hit it big in the draft lottery, because the only way you can create a winning team is by luck.

It is a mistake, in my opinion, not to take the costs of tanking into account and only to consider the potential benefits.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JJZFL said:

It is a mistake, in my opinion, not to take the costs of tanking into account and only to consider the potential benefits.

 

It's likewise a mistake to not take the benefits of tanking into account and only consider the potential downsides, which the anti-tanking crusaders will happily do.  

I actually agree that the Magic probably should have kept Vuc, but these anti-tanking arguments are getting tiresome.  Would you feel better if people used the word "rebuilding" instead?  

There are plenty of examples to support both sides of the argument, and so much of team success comes down to dumb luck outside of the draft lottery that it's really a waste of time to get all worked up over it. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×