how long are you willing to put up with being bad?

[CTMagicUK 1,488]

I would not discourage the team from winning games, because what this team needs to do is develop a winning culture. They need to learn how to close out games (eg. the Spurs in game 5 against the Heat), and equally how to comeback from a deficit (eg. the Wizards overturning a 21 point deficit against the Lakers to win; or at least hit back like the Heat did in game 5 and keep the contest competitive). The best way to develop a winning culture is to win games. Last season we had the odd game here and there when everything went well, but there were games when we lost the lead, and other games when we fell behind and struggled to keep in touch. Now part of that comes down to not possessing enough quality, but it also comes down to our young players not having enough experience. The only way the players develop this experience is to get them out on the court and competing for wins, and ideally winning as many as possible.

 

Now taking that stride forwards might mean we miss out on a top five pick because we win 30 or more games. Obviously I would like to see us draft Wiggins, Parker, or Randle, because any of them could make a significant contribution to this team. But at the same time I want to see our young core of Harkless, Harris and Vučević, take a big stride forward and establish themselves as the core of this team. If those three can improve on their performances last season, and any further additions contribute to the team, then I would be more than happy to see this team play itself out of contention for a top pick. I am not one of those that says tank for the sake of it, because tanking does not mean we will get a player that will change the face of this franchise. It gives you a good chance, but for every Kevin Durant and LeBron James, there are the likes of Greg Oden and Hasheem Thabeet.

 

Personally I am of the belief that you do not necessarily need to have a top pick in the draft to build a competitive team. The Pacers are the prime example of a team that has developed a legitimate contenders without having had a top pick since selecting Rik Smits second overall in 1988. In their current team they drafted Paul George at #10, Danny Granger at #17, Lance Stephenson at #40; and although he was traded for George Hill, the Pacers drafted Kawhi Leonard at #15. All four of those players have become good to very good starting players in the NBA, three of whom play a part in the Pacers recent success. They also traded for Roy Hibbert who had been taken at #17 by the Raptors, traded for George Hill, and got David West in free agency. So the Pacers have proven that it is possible to build a contender without ever having a top pick in the draft. They have generally scouted well, made positive moves to acquire talent, and had some luck as well.

 

To bring this back to us. Yes, a top pick next year could help us, and we may end up with one. But there is no reason why we cannot build a legitimate contender even if we play ourselves out of contention for a top pick in next year's draft. We can get our future SG this year in McLemore, and all we would need to do is acquire our PG, which this team could do by seeing if a team would be willing to select Schroeder and trade him for AA or Davis. If we do that then our young core would be Schroeder, McLemore, Harkless, Harris and Vučević. That could be very positive going forwards, and that is without fleshing out the team with experienced free agents, acquisitions in the trade market, and further draft picks. A top pick would be nice, but if given an either or choice between a top pick or serious progression from our young players, I would probably take serious progression more often than not because it would show that those players are starting to prove that they can lead this team back to contention.

 

I don't want to contend, I want to win a title. To win a title you need more than just a good team, you also need a LeBron or Dirk or Duncan or Kobe. The best chance to get a player like that is with a high draft pick.

[Franchise408 116]

If you can't attract top free agents when you're constantly losing, and tanking "doesn't work" to bring in talent, how do we get better?

 

Rebuilding through the draft takes a solid front office, and some luck. The Warriors, Clippers and T-Wolves were lacking in the front office department, so were we. That's why we were all so excited about our new GM and front office changes. It takes some time for new pieces to improve, to build the team back up from scratch. The Magic seem to be acquiring decent pieces in the meantime, and hopefully making room in the pocketbook for some free agent acquisitions along the way.

 

The Cavs got lucky and got LeBron, but still largely utilized FA to fill out their roster around LeBron. The Heat were very similar in their pick of Wade, not winning it all until they added some major FA pieces along the way, not to mention their current team which, again, was built largely on FA acquisitions around a single great draft piece in Wade.

 

You could argue that Orlando, built around Dwight, was more successful than Cleveland as they built around LeBron (we did win more NBA finals games after all was said and done).

 

The point is, it takes a solid game plan. You can't just tank and expect things to fall into place, but being bad for a couple of years and picking up some great draft picks can help get that solid core to build the team around.

 

 

I would not discourage the team from winning games, because what this team needs to do is develop a winning culture. They need to learn how to close out games (eg. the Spurs in game 5 against the Heat), and equally how to comeback from a deficit (eg. the Wizards overturning a 21 point deficit against the Lakers to win; or at least hit back like the Heat did in game 5 and keep the contest competitive). The best way to develop a winning culture is to win games. Last season we had the odd game here and there when everything went well, but there were games when we lost the lead, and other games when we fell behind and struggled to keep in touch. Now part of that comes down to not possessing enough quality, but it also comes down to our young players not having enough experience. The only way the players develop this experience is to get them out on the court and competing for wins, and ideally winning as many as possible.

 

Now taking that stride forwards might mean we miss out on a top five pick because we win 30 or more games. Obviously I would like to see us draft Wiggins, Parker, or Randle, because any of them could make a significant contribution to this team. But at the same time I want to see our young core of Harkless, Harris and Vučević, take a big stride forward and establish themselves as the core of this team. If those three can improve on their performances last season, and any further additions contribute to the team, then I would be more than happy to see this team play itself out of contention for a top pick. I am not one of those that says tank for the sake of it, because tanking does not mean we will get a player that will change the face of this franchise. It gives you a good chance, but for every Kevin Durant and LeBron James, there are the likes of Greg Oden and Hasheem Thabeet.

 

Personally I am of the belief that you do not necessarily need to have a top pick in the draft to build a competitive team. The Pacers are the prime example of a team that has developed a legitimate contenders without having had a top pick since selecting Rik Smits second overall in 1988. In their current team they drafted Paul George at #10, Danny Granger at #17, Lance Stephenson at #40; and although he was traded for George Hill, the Pacers drafted Kawhi Leonard at #15. All four of those players have become good to very good starting players in the NBA, three of whom play a part in the Pacers recent success. They also traded for Roy Hibbert who had been taken at #17 by the Raptors, traded for George Hill, and got David West in free agency. So the Pacers have proven that it is possible to build a contender without ever having a top pick in the draft. They have generally scouted well, made positive moves to acquire talent, and had some luck as well.

 

To bring this back to us. Yes, a top pick next year could help us, and we may end up with one. But there is no reason why we cannot build a legitimate contender even if we play ourselves out of contention for a top pick in next year's draft. We can get our future SG this year in McLemore, and all we would need to do is acquire our PG, which this team could do by seeing if a team would be willing to select Schroeder and trade him for AA or Davis. If we do that then our young core would be Schroeder, McLemore, Harkless, Harris and Vučević. That could be very positive going forwards, and that is without fleshing out the team with experienced free agents, acquisitions in the trade market, and further draft picks. A top pick would be nice, but if given an either or choice between a top pick or serious progression from our young players, I would probably take serious progression more often than not because it would show that those players are starting to prove that they can lead this team back to contention.

 

Mike1989 pretty much said what I was going to say.

 

You build a good team by drafting smartly, and making smart personnel moves, not by "tanking" and racking up lottery pick after lottery pick. You do that, and you become the Warriors. I'm from the Bay Area and I love the Warriors (behind the Magic, of course), but I don't want this team to become the Warriors.

 

I don't want to contend, I want to win a title. To win a title you need more than just a good team, you also need a LeBron or Dirk or Duncan or Kobe. The best chance to get a player like that is with a high draft pick.

 

And yet, I showed you with historical fact how often those guys come along.

 

Refresher: It's not very often.

 

So as it stands, I'd rather be a "competitor", than to suck year after year after year in hopes of the off chance that we can land the next LeBron.

[Captain Hi-Top 791]

Maybe you missed the whole point about needing a solid front office, and being able to build both through the draft and free agency, not solely one or the other, or are you agreeing with me, I can't really tell.

 

By the way, you can "tank" by design, not effort, which is what we are doing. We aren't losing games on purpose, but we are acquiring talent without the expectations of winning now, with an emphasis on talent and potential versus bringing in guys for a "win now" type of building. End result, we "tank" by default while we rebuild, giving our talent time to get better while also getting ourselves in a position to add in quality free agents when the team is ready to take that leap.

[Murphy13 185]

Semantics, hi-top. You worry about culture regardless of the reasoning behind the losses, but with a keen front office we stand a better chance of coming out on top than most by going the tank-route. I personally still don't like the idea of being bad next season as the risk outweighs the likelihood of benefit to me, but I won't stop supporting our team!

[30Assists 342]

I'm against tanking just to suck enough to get a high draft pick - it seems like that never works out. I'm okay with developing players or letting hurt players heal up (like giving David Robinson that season off, in the aforementioned Spurs down year). So if we got Noel and rehabbed him for a year? Or 'Meer? Okay, fine.

 

I mean, you TRY to win as many games as possible, otherwise a culture of losing sets in and it's real hard to turn that ship around once it gets steaming (ask the Clippers). It becomes harder to get good free agents to come to your organization because they don't want to be on a joke team (which is why Boston, LA, Chicago, Miami regularly sweep up choice free agents for cheap).

 

So as I see it, you don't TRY to suck, but if the end result of playing loads of young players and rehabbing your vets is that you suck? Okay, fine: I'm good with us "tanking" that way. And if at the halfway mark you have no shot at making the playoffs, it's time to start playing around with goofy lineups you wouldn't do when the games really counted, or giving playing time to people who regularly ride the pine to develop them.

[trueblue 0]

My ceiling is 5 years.

 

The borderline is... I am always a Magic fans

[Mike1989 68]

I don't want to contend, I want to win a title. To win a title you need more than just a good team, you also need a LeBron or Dirk or Duncan or Kobe. The best chance to get a player like that is with a high draft pick.

 

Like you, I want the Magic to win titles. Obviously having a superstar on your roster makes it easier to win a title, but you also need a well rounded roster. As it stands our front court - Harkless, Harris, Vuc - has a ton of potential. Heck, one of them could become our star player. Vuc had a career year last season, and if he improves his game this season he could quite easily become one of the league's elite centers. Harkless and Harris might not become all star players, but they can certainly improve to become borderline all stars. That leaves the PG and SG positions, of which one or both could be addressed this off season. If we end up with a Bledsoe and McLemore/Oladipo combination, then we have a young and very talented line up. If that is fleshed out with good role players, then a good season is not beyond us. I would much rather us get 30 wins or more and see significant progression from the likes of Harkless, Harris, Vuc, and whoever else we draft and sign; than I would seeing us have another league worst record.

 

For me, if we can take that big step forwards then that will help us back on our way to becoming a contender again. Plus, having a good season where we get 30 wins or more, could make us an attraction proposition to prospective all star (or borderline) all stars in free agency next year. If our young talent has taken a big step forwards, then adding in further draft picks, and a big name free agent could propel us back into the play offs; and with further progression, into title contention.

 

I'd love for us to get Wiggins. But I honestly don't think we'll be in contention for it unless the likes of Harkless, Harris, Vuc, and whoever else we start don't produce. If they produce and take a step forward, we should be fine ourselves in a similar position to the T-Wolves or better.

[Ibn Battuta 127]

I don't want to contend, I want to win a title. To win a title you need more than just a good team, you also need a LeBron or Dirk or Duncan or Kobe. The best chance to get a player like that is with a high draft pick.

 

interesting since only duncan and lebron were #1 picks. Kobe was 13th and Dirk 9th.

[Franchise408 116]

I'm against tanking just to suck enough to get a high draft pick - it seems like that never works out. I'm okay with developing players or letting hurt players heal up (like giving David Robinson that season off, in the aforementioned Spurs down year). So if we got Noel and rehabbed him for a year? Or 'Meer? Okay, fine.

 

I mean, you TRY to win as many games as possible, otherwise a culture of losing sets in and it's real hard to turn that ship around once it gets steaming (ask the Clippers). It becomes harder to get good free agents to come to your organization because they don't want to be on a joke team (which is why Boston, LA, Chicago, Miami regularly sweep up choice free agents for cheap).

 

So as I see it, you don't TRY to suck, but if the end result of playing loads of young players and rehabbing your vets is that you suck? Okay, fine: I'm good with us "tanking" that way. And if at the halfway mark you have no shot at making the playoffs, it's time to start playing around with goofy lineups you wouldn't do when the games really counted, or giving playing time to people who regularly ride the pine to develop them.

 

 

Like you, I want the Magic to win titles. Obviously having a superstar on your roster makes it easier to win a title, but you also need a well rounded roster. As it stands our front court - Harkless, Harris, Vuc - has a ton of potential. Heck, one of them could become our star player. Vuc had a career year last season, and if he improves his game this season he could quite easily become one of the league's elite centers. Harkless and Harris might not become all star players, but they can certainly improve to become borderline all stars. That leaves the PG and SG positions, of which one or both could be addressed this off season. If we end up with a Bledsoe and McLemore/Oladipo combination, then we have a young and very talented line up. If that is fleshed out with good role players, then a good season is not beyond us. I would much rather us get 30 wins or more and see significant progression from the likes of Harkless, Harris, Vuc, and whoever else we draft and sign; than I would seeing us have another league worst record.

 

For me, if we can take that big step forwards then that will help us back on our way to becoming a contender again. Plus, having a good season where we get 30 wins or more, could make us an attraction proposition to prospective all star (or borderline) all stars in free agency next year. If our young talent has taken a big step forwards, then adding in further draft picks, and a big name free agent could propel us back into the play offs; and with further progression, into title contention.

 

I'd love for us to get Wiggins. But I honestly don't think we'll be in contention for it unless the likes of Harkless, Harris, Vuc, and whoever else we start don't produce. If they produce and take a step forward, we should be fine ourselves in a similar position to the T-Wolves or better.

 

Agreed with both of these.

 

You try to be as good as you possibly can each and every single year, each and every single game. There's a difference between "long term planning" and "tanking". Thinking long term and building up a young core of players to develop together is not "tanking". It's simply long term rebuilding. That I'm okay with.

 

But rooting for your team to lose just so you can get more ping pong balls for a #1 pick? No, that I'm not okay with.

[JJZFL 620]

Agreed with both of these.

 

You try to be as good as you possibly can each and every single year, each and every single game. There's a difference between "long term planning" and "tanking". Thinking long term and building up a young core of players to develop together is not "tanking". It's simply long term rebuilding. That I'm okay with.

 

But rooting for your team to lose just so you can get more ping pong balls for a #1 pick? No, that I'm not okay with.

 

Also totally agree.

 

In addition to the problems already mentioned with developing a culture of losing, you have the potential problem of losing community support. Yeah, the die-hards on this board don't seem to care if we have the league worst record for another 5 years, but for everyone else in the Orlando area, support for the team will wane quickly if that keeps up. How long do we think the team will stay here if the attendance and TV viewership plummet?

 

Only way to maintain fan support is to be as competitive as possible. You scratch and claw to win every game you can. Nothing else makes sense.

[CTMagicUK 1,488]

interesting since only duncan and lebron were #1 picks. Kobe was 13th and Dirk 9th.

 

I'm well aware of where those guys were drafted, that doesn't change the fact that a top 5 pick gives you the greatest chance of getting a star player. Both Dirk and Kobe were on the board when the teams before them picked so those teams had a chance to draft a HOFer and didn't. Thus, a good scouting network (like we now have) and a high draft pick gives you the greatest chance of drafting a star player.

 

Regardless I'm not pro tanking per say. I don't think deliberately losing is worth while nor do I think we will attempt to deliberately lose. I am of the opinion that being mediocre is pointless. There is no point being a .500 team with veterans at 2 or 3 positions, you might as well just blow it up get some assets for your vets and try again. Being an 8th or 7th seed is pointless, those teams won't ever win a championship.

 

There are 3 ways this team will become a legitimate contender ( meaning has a real chance to win a title)

 

1. We draft a star player.

2. We sign a star player in free agency or trade for a star player.

3. One of our current players develops into a star.

 

Option no. 3 is a tough one to call. I think a couple of our guys have All-Star potential (I don't think all of them will reach it obviously) but even if they did become All-Stars I can't see Vuc or Hark or Harris being the guy. They could all make very good 2nd and 3rd options on a great team but I have a hard time believing they'll becoming the guys who can lead teams to a championship.

 

After that I have to think is signing a free agent star any more likely than drafting one?

 

I understand the need to get people to come down and watch the team but I'm sure a brand new No. 2 overall pick would entice some fans (who may not know that this is a weak draft and we're not likely to draft a star) and the excitement of seeing a young exciting team, which we will be. I don't expect us to tank but I expect that we'll win a maximum of about 30 games because right now we don't have a great roster. And not only am I ok with that but I welcome that because it lets our young guys grow at their own pace and nets us an, at worse, Top 10 draft pick in a top heavy draft that has some real promising talent.

[Franchise408 116]

You say being a mediocre, 7th or 8th seed is worthless...

 

I direct you to this:

 

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ORL/2007_games.html

 

A sub .500 mediocre team that, with a couple of years, had an NBA Finals appearance.

 

There's nothing wrong with being a mediocre team, as long as you are -striving- to get better. For all the crap that Otis Smith gets around here, he was constantly -striving- to get better. And while his moves -after- the 2009 Finals didn't work out, his moves leading up to that point absolutely did.

 

Being a mediocre team is only bad if the organization is content with mediocrity. I don't think the Orlando Magic franchise currently is. Which is why an 8th seed doesn't scare me, because it is a stepping stone in it's own right to becoming a better team down the road.