Future of the Franchise

Let's say you're the GM. Or at least, someone the GM would listen to seriously.

What route do you think is best for the franchise? The way I see it, the Pelicans have three potential pathways that they can go over the next three or four years.

1) Try and set up again with another superstar, and build around them again, hoping that better moves are made and that we have better luck this time. A trade that follows this route might be based around New York, where we could acquire a potential superstar in this year's draft (Zion, RJ, Ja) and a bunch of young players with potential that could go around that star like Knox and Robinson.

2) Abandon the superstar route and follow what could be called the 2004 Pistons model. They didn't have any singular transcendent player, but they had a bunch of really good solid players that fit well together and had complimentary skills. A trade that facilitates this route might be a Boston based trade, where we could potentially acquire Tatum and Brown, and maybe some solid mid-first picks like Sacramento or the Clippers depending on what conveys. Maybe you think Tatum does have all-star potential, but even if he doesn't, this kind of tactic would put a fairly solid floor on the team's results, even if it also capped off the ceiling a little lower than you might want.

3) Bungle it. Go the superstar route but then trade every pick again so we can't build around that star. Or go the Celtics route but fail to acquire Tatum. Just be awful again and re-run the last 7 years.

Obviously none of us want Option 3. So, out of Option 1 and Option 2, which would you prefer? Build around the superstar and shoot for the highest possible ceiling, or ensure at least some degree of success with a team of non-star-but-solid players? What's your call?

If you have a chance to get a superstar you always get them. We simply have to hope we hit some luck with draft picks too though.

The Utah or Denver route seems the best way forward for us. But they all begin with being extremely lucky and hitting on some picks.

Bol Bol.

2 is probably the safer route

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

2 is probably the safer route

---

Yep, and I've heard a few people (although I can't remember who because my memory sucks) say that they are done with superstar drama and would be totally happy to play a Memphis role, where they just trot out to 45-50 wins every year and never really have a chance of a ring but have that solid floor.

So that's my question, really. Not what's safer, but if that's the option people would prefer.

Personally I'm interested in risking it all on the superstar, but I understand if other people wouldn't wanna do that.

You never really want to choose anything other than Option 1, because that's the one that leads to a championship. However, if you've grown up in New Orleans the past 50 years, you'd almost be happy with Option 2, if it just brought us consistent playoff appearances and a couple of deep runs a decade. I means, we've had 7 playoff appearances in 17 years.

Example: Atlanta Hawks. Before last season, they had made 10 consecutive playoff appearances. True, they only made it past the second round once in those ten years and lost in the Conf finals, but at least they were in the dance every year. The old phrase, "you can't win it if you're not in it" applies here. It would be nice for a change to have a team that at least is consistently decent and in the playoffs. Its still better than what we've had. It would also help build the fan base because they'd be relevant every year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Yep, and I've heard a few people (although I can't remember who because my memory sucks) say that they are done with superstar drama and would be totally happy to play a Memphis role, where they just trot out to 45-50 wins every year and never really have a chance of a ring but have that solid floor.

So that's my question, really. Not what's safer, but if that's the option people would prefer.

Personally I'm interested in risking it all on the superstar, but I understand if other people wouldn't wanna do that.

---

Dallas and San Antonio won titles without the superstars (Dirk maybe being the only one on Dallas). The problem is that nobody is going to beat this Golden State team. If that team dismantles, I don’t think we need some crazy god-tier superstar to win a title.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

Dallas and San Antonio won titles without the superstars (Dirk maybe being the only one on Dallas). The problem is that nobody is going to beat this Golden State team. If that team dismantles, I don’t think we need some crazy god-tier superstar to win a title.

---

Honestly I don't think that matters too much to us. If we're rebuilding, even if we take the second option, we won't be at our peak, where we're challenging for deep deep playoff success, for another 2 seasons probably. In that case, I think GSW will be kind of just naturally falling apart. Aging, maybe Durant leaves, Draymond is already receding, so on.

Has San Antonio won titles without superstars? I mean, I guess their 2014 championship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Honestly I don't think that matters too much to us. If we're rebuilding, even if we take the second option, we won't be at our peak, where we're challenging for deep deep playoff success, for another 2 seasons probably. In that case, I think GSW will be kind of just naturally falling apart. Aging, maybe Durant leaves, Draymond is already receding, so on.

Has San Antonio won titles without superstars? I mean, I guess their 2014 championship.

---

The way I see it once Lebron starts breaking down and Golden State dismantles, the talent will spread out and it will be anyone’s game. I also think as a small market we are much less likely to succeed going the superstar route because let’s Face it- we’d struggle to bring another superstar in. Boogie really fell into our lap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

The way I see it once Lebron starts breaking down and Golden State dismantles, the talent will spread out and it will be anyone’s game. I also think as a small market we are much less likely to succeed going the superstar route because let’s Face it- we’d struggle to bring another superstar in. Boogie really fell into our lap

---

Also, with a team concept instead of a single superstar, you're less likely to have anyone pressuring to get out of town the way CP3 and AD did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobertM320

Also, with a team concept instead of a single superstar, you're less likely to have anyone pressuring to get out of town the way CP3 and AD did.

---

That’s another good point. I think a “good team” can win a title, we are just unfortunately sandwiched between Lebron and Golden State atm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

The way I see it once Lebron starts breaking down and Golden State dismantles, the talent will spread out and it will be anyone’s game. I also think as a small market we are much less likely to succeed going the superstar route because let’s Face it- we’d struggle to bring another superstar in. Boogie really fell into our lap

---

In the West, I can see that. I think the East is kind of in the process of building powerhouses. If Niko stays in Milwaukee and they pay Middleton, that could be really scary, and obviously Philly is really loaded right now. If AD ends up in Boston with Kyrie, they're a finals threat, and if he ends up in NY with Kyrie and Durant obviously that's terrifying.

My personal view is that we should take the first route, go for the superstar and get Zion (preferably), but then have some patience beyond that, keep our picks and maybe get another year or two with top 10 picks to try and add possible stars naturally. In a way, that's kind of the Golden State route, but that does require some good drafting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

In the West, I can see that. I think the East is kind of in the process of building powerhouses. If Niko stays in Milwaukee and they pay Middleton, that could be really scary, and obviously Philly is really loaded right now. If AD ends up in Boston with Kyrie, they're a finals threat, and if he ends up in NY with Kyrie and Durant obviously that's terrifying.

My personal view is that we should take the first route, go for the superstar and get Zion (preferably), but then have some patience beyond that, keep our picks and maybe get another year or two with top 10 picks to try and add possible stars naturally. In a way, that's kind of the Golden State route, but that does require some good drafting.

---

Nothing wrong with that. It’s a tad risky imo, and I’d rather trade AD to Boston so that they don’t form the New York trio. AD and Kyrie would be good, but I wouldn’t be terrified of them.

And yeah I think the difference in the 1st route is we need to be more patient whereas we could go either way with the 2nd

Pelicanidae,

I am just glad that someone is talking about having a strategic plan. I just hope Mrs. Benson and Loomis are thinking the same way. I think best case scenario is for the Pelicans to get a young star in the draft. A centerpiece to build around. That way you don't have to deal with the loyalty issue for about 6-7 years. If you win, they stay, simple as that.

Let's say you get lucky and draft Zion since he's the hot name right now. Acquire enough picks to draft a solid nucleus of young players that fit your system that. You should then be able to theoretically retain that core for at least 5 years. Let them grow together. Totally revamp your European scouting department and use late number ones and 2nds to go after international players. See if you can get them out of their contracts to come to the big leagues. Take a hard look at your training staff. I am not sold on the idea that the Saints' trainers are good enough to cross train basketball players. I want an elite training staff dedicated to the Pelicans.

Stop going after mid-level free agent that had one good year and throwing money at them. There's a reason that their team didn't pay them. Look at what Dallas has done. I think they are the best model to emulate given the Pelicans' resources. Analytics, scout and sign international players; make the Pelicans players feel like they are a primary focus (not just a sideshow to the Saints). The goal is to learn how to have sustained success. Not just a decent season every 4 or 5 years.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-...vericks-2015-4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Sting

Pelicanidae,

I am just glad that someone is talking about having a strategic plan. I just hope Mrs. Benson and Loomis are thinking the same way. I think best case scenario is for the Pelicans to get a young star in the draft. A centerpiece to build around. That way you don't have to deal with the loyalty issue for about 6-7 years. If you win, they stay, simple as that.

Let's say you get lucky and draft Zion since he's the hot name right now. Acquire enough picks to draft a solid nucleus of young players that fit your system that. You should then be able to theoretically retain that core for at least 5 years. Let them grow together. Totally revamp your European scouting department and use late number ones and 2nds to go after international players. See if you can get them out of their contracts to come to the big leagues. Take a hard look at your training staff. I am not sold on the idea that the Saints' trainers are good enough to cross train basketball players. I want an elite training staff dedicated to the Pelicans.

Stop going after mid-level free agent that had one good year and throwing money at them. There's a reason that their team didn't pay them. Look at what Dallas has done. I think they are the best model to emulate given the Pelicans' resources. Analytics, scout and sign international players; make the Pelicans players feel like they are a primary focus (not just a sideshow to the Saints). The goal is to learn how to have sustained success. Not just a decent season every 4 or 5 years.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-...vericks-2015-4

---

This is less about “overpaying free agents” and trading for a package (like Boston) that will put us in contention sooner. Tatum is hardly anything to scoff at as well. Zion is hardly a sure thing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

This is less about “overpaying free agents” and trading for a package (like Boston) that will put us in contention sooner. Tatum is hardly anything to scoff at as well. Zion is hardly a sure thing

---

I think it is a lot about overpaying for guys who are just looking for a payday. Asik, Hill, Ajinca, Gordon -- just to name a few. Those deals crippled this franchise and forced us into mediocrity. Regarding Jason Taytum, in this "new NBA," even if you get him, you have him for 2 years tops before he is leveraging his way out. That's if he is as good as you hope which is the best case scenario. If he isn't (gets hurt or just doesn't develop any further), then you really got nothing substantial for AD and here we go again, back in the lottery and the cycle repeats.

I would rather go draft a young superstar on a rookie contract day one. Then acquire more young talent to place around him that compliments the superstar and the coach's system. That's a team that can grow together and maybe you have something in about 4 years.

I have actually changed my mind about this as I used to prefer signing the big name established guy and then grabbing veteran free agents. I just don't think that will work in New Orleans. No loyalty to the ball club. Soon as something goes wrong, guys are looking to get out. Even taking less money to do so. Better to build it slow and get it right instead of trying to do it in a single season or two.

I’d run a little of both if possible.

1st- I’m asking for Tatum, Brown, Williams, and 3-1sts but I want Rozier to sign and trade him. I’m hoping Ja Morant falls to 4 and we could offer Rozier, clips 1st, and sac 1st. I hope that’s enough to get him but all depends how the draft falls

2nd- draft Hunter or Culver with our first

3- I’m resigning Mirotic in the offseason we should have enough for him and another decent big maybe Randle.

I’m starting
Jrue-Brown-Tatum-Mirotic-Okafor

With a bench of
Ja Morant-Jackson-hunter/culver-Randle-Williams(Boston’s) with Kenrich, Bluitte, Stanley, and Elfrid all mixed in.

Hopefully Elfrid and Stanley come fairly cheap. Have to trade Moore and Hill would be our 15th player till he expires or traded at the deadline. This has lots of youth and a few veterans which should compete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Sting

I think it is a lot about overpaying for guys who are just looking for a payday. Asik, Hill, Ajinca, Gordon -- just to name a few. Those deals crippled this franchise and forced us into mediocrity. Regarding Jason Taytum, in this "new NBA," even if you get him, you have him for 2 years tops before he is leveraging his way out. That's if he is as good as you hope which is the best case scenario. If he isn't (gets hurt or just doesn't develop any further), then you really got nothing substantial for AD and here we go again, back in the lottery and the cycle repeats.

I would rather go draft a young superstar on a rookie contract day one. Then acquire more young talent to place around him that compliments the superstar and the coach's system. That's a team that can grow together and maybe you have something in about 4 years.

I have actually changed my mind about this as I used to prefer signing the big name established guy and then grabbing veteran free agents. I just don't think that will work in New Orleans. No loyalty to the ball club. Soon as something goes wrong, guys are looking to get out. Even taking less money to do so. Better to build it slow and get it right instead of trying to do it in a single season or two.

---

Those names you mentioned were poor moves by Dell from the get go so not the best examples. A more competent GM wouldn’t have butchered the AD era. Which coincidentally is something that we need going forward

And also we had our superstar there. We couldn’t have added another if we tried because nobody would sign for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

Those names you mentioned were poor moves by Dell from the get go so not the best examples. A more competent GM wouldn’t have butchered the AD era. Which coincidentally is something that we need going forward

---

I totally agree with your assessment of Demps. IMO, letting this current administration handle this trade is like letting Michael Jackson babysit your kid. Maybe I can't prove to you that it's going to end up bad but... do you really want to take that chance?

I think the best plan is clearly option 2. Look at the Raptors and the Nuggets as clear examples. They have collected good players and assets over the years and have always been competitive. Nuggets struck gold with Jokic to set them over the top and the Raptors took advantage of the Kawhi situation to get their star. I think you just have to make smart decisions and manage your assets intelligently. Not every move has to be a home run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Sting

I totally agree with your assessment of Demps. IMO, letting this current administration handle this trade is like letting Michael Jackson babysit your kid. Maybe I can't prove to you that it's going to end up bad but... do you really want to take that chance?

---

I think both are realistic routes we can take, and there is a chance Zion is the unstoppable alpha monster we are looking for. I like both packages. Looking at the shape the franchise is in atm, I’d prefer we went with 2 because I believe it will bring a winning atmosphere to a franchise that desperately needs it. Hopefully we snag a bonfied star in this draft regardless of spot.

@ShamsCharania: Sources: The New Orleans Pelicans are releasing forward Markieff Morris, who is currently dealing with an injury.

m.twitter.com/ShamsCharania


Future doomed lol

@wojespn: After considering the possibility of shutting down All-NBA center Anthony Davis, the New Orleans Pelicans plan to allow Davis back into the lineup...

Mistake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imnos 2

@wojespn: After considering the possibility of shutting down All-NBA center Anthony Davis, the New Orleans Pelicans plan to allow Davis back into the lineup...

Mistake

---

WE ARE SO STUPID

I would let him play the first quarter and then take him out


@NOLAJake: RT @ScottDKushner: I have been told by several people the NBA played a role in the decision for the Pelicans to play Anthony Davis for the remaind...

You guys told me this would not happen...

If AD gets hurt they better be giving us that first pick

So basically the NBA is screwing us. Why can't we screw them back? Sitting Anthony Davis is clearly NOT in the best interest of the organization. Period.

I know how this story ends. It never ends well.

He demanded a trade. The NBA values money and advertisement over fairness. Embarrassing from the league.

Can we not?

Like, I know there's a tendency for every thread to eventually converge into just a mixture of everything that's happening at any given time, but since we already have

1) Trade deadline thread
2) AD trade thread
3) #SitHim thread
4) Demps will play AD thread
5) AD Will File Grievance thread

I was kind of hoping that this thread could stay on topic as like, people's views about the future, rather than just becoming yet another place to talk about Davis.

To answer the OP, I think we have to go with the superstar option. The Pistons were such an absolute outlier in the history of the NBA by not having a true superstar, that they essentially became the exception that proves the rule. And even they had 4 All-Star (ish) level players. Superstars present their own challenges as has been mentioned, but they are also incredible to watch and give hope of a title at all points in their tenure (until their agent stabs the franchise right in the ****).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

To answer the OP, I think we have to go with the superstar option. The Pistons were such an absolute outlier in the history of the NBA by not having a true superstar, that they essentially became the exception that proves the rule. And even they had 4 All-Star (ish) level players. Superstars present their own challenges as has been mentioned, but they are also incredible to watch and give hope of a title at all points in their tenure (until their agent stabs the franchise right in the ****).

---

Personally, I think I largely agree. It's the highest risk, but it's also the highest reward. The important thing is sticking to the plan though. If, say, NY gets the first overall pick and we take that trade and end up with Zion, we have to commit to building that team up naturally rather than trading all of the picks in the world away to try and win now. It's hard to resist that urge, when you have a guy like Zion, or AD, who shows so much ability so early in their career, but you can't let yourself flinch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Personally, I think I largely agree. It's the highest risk, but it's also the highest reward. The important thing is sticking to the plan though. If, say, NY gets the first overall pick and we take that trade and end up with Zion, we have to commit to building that team up naturally rather than trading all of the picks in the world away to try and win now. It's hard to resist that urge, when you have a guy like Zion, or AD, who shows so much ability so early in their career, but you can't let yourself flinch.

---

Completely agree, which is why I maintain that the Jrue trade was a bad idea despite Jrue exceeding even my wildest expectations. The mindset that we had in building around AD cannot stay in place. We need a coherent plan over a number of years. You can't force a rebuild into a tight window

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

Completely agree, which is why I maintain that the Jrue trade was a bad idea despite Jrue exceeding even my wildest expectations. The mindset that we had in building around AD cannot stay in place. We need a coherent plan over a number of years. You can't force a rebuild into a tight window

---

For real. If we take the NY trade, they can offer us (potentially) their first overall pick this year, plus their own 2021 pick, plus the 2021 Dallas first rounder (obviously not really looking at second rounders).

If we were to take that, and our own pick this year falls at say, 7th, we could very easily get Zion and Bol Bol this year. Then, if we keep next year's first rounder, we could draft again in the top 10. That's three top 10 draftees in two seasons. Then in 2021, our pick would probably fall somewhere between 8th and 12th, the Knicks pick could be something like 16th (assuming that if they get AD, they also get Kyrie), and the Dallas first rounder could also be in that 15-20th range. Our pick + the 2021 Knicks pick could easily be packaged together to move up to something like 5th overall.

So obviously there's a lot of speculation there, and there's absolutely no way of knowing if that is what would happen, and there's obviously other trade possibilities for other picks and stuff in the meantime, but taking the Knicks trade could allow for

2019) Zion Williamson + Bol Bol + Kevin Knox + Mitchell Robinson
2020) Top #10 draft pick
2021) Top #5 draft pick + 15th-20th pick.

That's enough, really. It would be 2.5 seasons for a full rebuild as long as we drafted with some intelligence, with a new franchise player to be excited about the entire time and something entertaining for the fans. That's like, half the time it took for the Sixers to do their rebuild.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

For real. If we take the NY trade, they can offer us (potentially) their first overall pick this year, plus their own 2021 pick, plus the 2021 Dallas first rounder (obviously not really looking at second rounders).

If we were to take that, and our own pick this year falls at say, 7th, we could very easily get Zion and Bol Bol this year. Then, if we keep next year's first rounder, we could draft again in the top 10. That's three top 10 draftees in two seasons. Then in 2021, our pick would probably fall somewhere between 8th and 12th, the Knicks pick could be something like 16th (assuming that if they get AD, they also get Kyrie), and the Dallas first rounder could also be in that 15-20th range. Our pick + the 2021 Knicks pick could easily be packaged together to move up to something like 5th overall.

So obviously there's a lot of speculation there, and there's absolutely no way of knowing if that is what would happen, and there's obviously other trade possibilities for other picks and stuff in the meantime, but taking the Knicks trade could allow for

2019) Zion Williamson + Bol Bol + Kevin Knox + Mitchell Robinson
2020) Top #10 draft pick
2021) Top #5 draft pick + 15th-20th pick.

That's enough, really. It would be 2.5 seasons for a full rebuild as long as we drafted with some intelligence, with a new franchise player to be excited about the entire time and something entertaining for the fans. That's like, half the time it took for the Sixers to do their rebuild.

---

All in with this plan and it gives us so much control over our future because of the rookie contracts and the liquidity of draft picks. If we are offered the #1 pick this year (or even #2 possibly because I'm really starting to like Ja Morant) I think we need to jump at the chance because of how hard it is to land a real superstar in the draft and have such a long runway to work with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola3

All in with this plan and it gives us so much control over our future because of the rookie contracts and the liquidity of draft picks. If we are offered the #1 pick this year (or even #2 possibly because I'm really starting to like Ja Morant) I think we need to jump at the chance because of how hard it is to land a real superstar in the draft and have such a long runway to work with.

---

It is worth just saying, in case people read this and kind of mistake what I'm saying, that this scenario is entirely hypothetical. We don't know where any of these picks will fall yet, we don't know that NY would get Kyrie necessarily, we don't know how quickly Zion would improve our team, we don't know if Dallas with KP+Doncic becomes a top team within a year or two, it's all just theorising.

But I think it's a plausible approach to start looking at the future. Things could change and we'd have to adjust the plan along with that, but this general idea is something I'd be in favour of.

I think the decision to play AD was the result of a "nudge" from the NBA. They'd let Cleveland shut down JR Smith... and Houston to send Melo home... but they can't afford to allow a healthy AD to be sent home.

There goes the tank. I hope he doesn't get hurt (again) too and kill our trade value. If he does... the league owes us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroopyDawg

I think the decision to play AD was the result of a "nudge" from the NBA. They'd let Cleveland shut down JR Smith... and Houston to send Melo home... but they can't afford to allow a healthy AD to be sent home.

There goes the tank. I hope he doesn't get hurt (again) too and kill our trade value. If he does... the league owes us.

---

We were pretty bad with AD too so I'm not sure that it kills our tank all that much. Lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

We were pretty bad with AD too so I'm not sure that it kills our tank all that much. Lol

---

I disagree.

We play a lot of games that should be relatively close, and could easily be lost, in the upcoming 28 game home-stretch. While it's true that many of them (OKC, Toronto, Houston, Golden State) are probable losses even with AD, I think having AD could easily result in us picking up wins in some of the more closely contested games we face. For example, we play Utah twice. If we have no AD, I think we lose both times. If we do have him, I think we split that pair of games. Similarly, I think with AD we could possibly pull out a win over Sacramento, which we just wouldn't get without him.

I don't think this turns us into a great team, we won't be going 20-8 to finish the season or anything, but if having AD makes us go 13-15 over the home stretch instead of 10-18, those three extra wins could result in our pick being 9th instead of 6th by the lottery. Which sucks.

I would hope Gentry/management at least significantly limits his minutes. We cannot continue to play him 35-37 minutes a game. I would hope they limit him to 20-24 minutes a game.

The "Super Star" player route seems to take too much of a toll on a team and its' fan-base. I know it was stated in either this thread or another thread that the Pistons did it and they were an outlier, but the Grizz did it as well. I'd almost rather go the route of grinders and lunch pail guys than a super star. New Orleans seems to thrive on resilience and come back stories which is why Brees has become so popular and his leadership is infectious. A team built with those attributes and a leader who commands the team built on grinding, hard work and defense possibly could be an identity that lasts instead of the current identity of not being able to win with super stars that end up leaving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

I would hope Gentry/management at least significantly limits his minutes. We cannot continue to play him 35-37 minutes a game. I would hope they limit him to 20-24 minutes a game.

---

If you really want to troll Rich Paul & NBA. Put Davis in/start for a couple of seconds. Call timeout and take him out. He got his playing time. We did nothing wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harschman

The "Super Star" player route seems to take too much of a toll on a team and its' fan-base. I know it was stated in either this thread or another thread that the Pistons did it and they were an outlier, but the Grizz did it as well. I'd almost rather go the route of grinders and lunch pail guys than a super star. New Orleans seems to thrive on resilience and come back stories which is why Brees has become so popular and his leadership is infectious. A team built with those attributes and a leader who commands the team built on grinding, hard work and defense possibly could be an identity that lasts instead of the current identity of not being able to win with super stars that end up leaving.

---

Nobody was saying only the Pistons did it. I listed them as the example because they're the only team in the last 20 years to have won a chip using that tactic. Not trying to be rude to Memphis, but they were solid for a bunch of years and then flaked apart like a croissant.

I just want to not be terrible for the net 5-6 years, and honestly im not seeing a real good shot at that.

windhorst, on tatum:

quote:
“I was talking to about the Celtics the other day and they said the worst thing that happened to the Celtics was their success last season. Because now you’ve got Tatum, [Jaylen] Brown, [Terry] Rozier — these young guys are thinking dude, we went to Game 7 of the East Finals without you, Kyrie, without you, Hayward. We’re this level of player … This summer, they could be gone. They might up end in New Orleans [for Davis]. It’s gossip, but the gossip is Jayson Tatum wouldn’t mind if he’s shipped to New Orleans and has a chance to be the face of the franchise somewhere. Because he’s not going to get that opportunity in Boston, at least not in the immediate future.”

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

The 76'ers route is pretty solid. Get a couple young guys on star trajectories on rookie scale contracts then secure cap space just before extensions kick in and sign some stars/borderline all stars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Impose

The 76'ers route is pretty solid. Get a couple young guys on star trajectories on rookie scale contracts then secure cap space just before extensions kick in and sign some stars/borderline all stars.

---

I mean that's literally what we did with AD and Jrue (we traded for him right before his extension kicked in).

We just got slaughtered with injuries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I mean that's literally what we did with AD and Jrue (we traded for him right before his extension kicked in).

We just got slaughtered with injuries.

---

No, its not. We traded EVERY draft pick after AD. Every.Single.One.

I'm talking about finding at least 2 guys with all star potential as building blocks. We just got AD and started mortgaging our future immediately. There is a difference.