Griff hasn't taken back a single bad contract to get assets

For a rebuilding team with no super "win now at all costs" mandate, isn't this pretty negligent?

I think he needs to do at least a cursory SWOT analysis of every move he's going to make

While we're not in super win now mode, we're also not in take bad contacts that will get assets mode either. Sure, getting a first to take on Horford would've been nice; but it would've tanked our flexibility in the summer of 2022. Griff's whole thing is maintaining flexibility.

If a team is going to attach a first to a contract, it's more than likely going to be a bad contact for multiple years. With Zion and BI on the roster, the Pels don't have the luxury to be taking those. Counterpoint, the teams taking those deals don't have the luxury of Zion and BI on their roster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelafanatic

While we're not in super win now mode, we're also not in take bad contacts that will get assets mode either. Sure, getting a first to take on Horford would've been nice; but it would've tanked our flexibility in the summer of 2022. Griff's whole thing is maintaining flexibility.

If a team is going to attach a first to a contract, it's more than likely going to be a bad contact for multiple years. With Zion and BI on the roster, the Pels don't have the luxury to be taking those. Counterpoint, the teams taking those deals don't have the luxury of Zion and BI on their roster

---

BI locked in for 5 years and Zion would have to do something historically different to not be here for 7 years at least, is exactly the sort of timeline you can afford to take on a year or 2 of a bad contract for assets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AusPel

BI locked in for 5 years and Zion would have to do something historically different to not be here for 7 years at least, is exactly the sort of timeline you can afford to take on a year or 2 of a bad contract for assets

---

But you have to leave yourself flexibility in order to make a move when one comes available. Also, who other than Horford and Iggy has been salary dumped for assets since Griff arrived?

You also could have taken on guys for no assets and then moved them for assets. A guy like Aron Baynes, for instance was dumped. Take him, and instead of keeping him and letting him walk like Phoenix did, you could have gotten a few 2nds last year. Several other guys like that.

But yes, the Favors over Iggy decision was huge. And giving up picks for Adams instead of taking on Horford was big too. You'd have slightly less flexibility than you have with Adams now after extending him, but if you make those two moves, you also have an additional 3 first round picks and 5 second round picks. And all for an additional 2.5 million dollars in guaranteed salary owed to Horford instead of Adams over these three years

It is easy to defend Griffin because none of the moves have been horrible and you can also make the claim that his detractors have hindsight. But the simple fact is that it is undeniable that he could built up the asset base a lot better these first two years. There is a chance he walked away with nothing of value from the 4th pick and Lonzo Ball. Got no additional assets from all the cap space he had in that same offseason. Gave up assets for a guy who wont be here when the team will be really good.

Its a bunch of little non ideal moves, none of which are completely indefensible. The logic behind all of them is there. But together, they all add up. If he made the perfect decision in each case, he could have Tyler Herro, Brandon Clarke, and additional 3 or 4 firsts and 5 or 6 seconds on this roster. Yes, that is hindsight, but just pointing out how much more equity he could have to pull off the big move. And he still might pull off the big move, because he has a lot of picks, but if he nailed all these small moves, he could make the big move AND still ahve a bunch of good assets to round out the roster. The margin of error is getting much smaller with each tiny mistake

Al Horford has completely fallen off a cliff though. And while, sure, Adams and Horford are close in terms of guaranteed salary, is the difference in play not worth at least a first round pick to you? Also comparing guaranteed salaries is a bit of fool's gold considering Horford's guaranteed in 2023 is 14.5 mil, which is significant (unlike Bledsoe for example at 3.5).

I dont get why it matters that Adams is say 10 or 20% better than Horford. What does it get us? We are 5-10 instead of 4-11. Culture aint great right now, so I dont think it would be much worse. Give me a few less wins (if that) and more assets for the bigger move. Maybe I get a better pick in the most recent draft and in the 2021 draft.

I have watched the Grizz and Thunder do this the right way. Look where the Grizz started compared to us. Go back to June of 2019 and compare what we had to what Memphis had. I would say we had a 2 mile lead and I think that gap is a couple hundred feet now. If that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

It is easy to defend Griffin because none of the moves have been horrible and you can also make the claim that his detractors have hindsight. But the simple fact is that it is undeniable that he could built up the asset base a lot better these first two years. There is a chance he walked away with nothing of value from the 4th pick and Lonzo Ball. Got no additional assets from all the cap space he had in that same offseason. Gave up assets for a guy who wont be here when the team will be really good.

Its a bunch of little non ideal moves, none of which are completely indefensible. The logic behind all of them is there. But together, they all add up. If he made the perfect decision in each case, he could have Tyler Herro, Brandon Clarke, and additional 3 or 4 firsts and 5 or 6 seconds on this roster. Yes, that is hindsight, but just pointing out how much more equity he could have to pull off the big move. And he still might pull off the big move, because he has a lot of picks, but if he nailed all these small moves, he could make the big move AND still ahve a bunch of good assets to round out the roster. The margin of error is getting much smaller with each tiny mistake

---

Yea I'm obviously not here to support every move Griff makes. While I like Jax, he was obviously a mistake at 8 considering the players drafted behind him. No matter what he grows into in the future, he doesn't have the trade value of a Herro or Clarke right now, when the Pels need it.

I'll defend the NAW over Clarke pick forever. Give me the upside guard all day. Even if it doesn't work out, I still think it was the right move.

Favors looks bad in hindsight. I think some of that is due to unforeseen circumstances of the death of his mom and mental health issues. Some blame is just on Griff's seeming naivety when it came to Favors' clear decline in athleticism

We have the flexibility right now to pause and develop our players as well as seed for a nice draft pick. I think we're in a fine position. But no, I don't think Griff did everything perfectly.

The sample size of contract dumps during DG’s tenure is so small that this feels like grabbing an outcome to justify a take that isn’t warranted yet.

If Atlanta does the Iggy deal instead of Memphis - would Memphis failing to do it be a justifiable criticism of their regime? Of course not. If the Knicks do the Horford deal instead of Thunder, does it mean Presti is any less skilled as a GM? Obviously not.

Whether we should criticize Griff for not trading Lonzo as soon as he knew he wasn’t going to extend him, after adding Bledsoe and Kira, is a fair debate to have. This one about coulda-woulda-shoulda on specific salary dumps is silly.

We can always wait longer for more info and draw a conclusion after all the data is in. I have heard this argument many times. It is too soon on Zion. Too soon on Griff, etc. But all we do in sports is talk about the future and judge what might be. While Griff certainly has time to turn it around and even some of his moves have time to work out better than they look like they probably will right now, I dont think we just 'wait and see' and have no opinion in the present. We wouldnt do that if he was seemingly nailing every move. But when it looks like a move might be bad, its always 'wait and see' - I find that odd

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

We can always wait longer for more info and draw a conclusion after all the data is in. I have heard this argument many times. It is too soon on Zion. Too soon on Griff, etc. But all we do in sports is talk about the future and judge what might be. While Griff certainly has time to turn it around and even some of his moves have time to work out better than they look like they probably will right now, I dont think we just 'wait and see' and have no opinion in the present. We wouldnt do that if he was seemingly nailing every move. But when it looks like a move might be bad, its always 'wait and see' - I find that odd

---

It’s not “wait and see” on all his moves. The only ones I quibble with being second guessed are the ones where we create this perfect alternate reality in hindsight. We’re comparing Griff to what we would have done as fantasy GM if we could accept every opportunity that was offered to other teams or sign any player based solely on what they signed for with another team.

There were more teams than just Thunder, Grizz, and Pelicans with cap space that could have absorbed salary dumps; not every team has equal access to every deal and we know this but pretend like there’s a group chat for every deal with all the GMs involved.

Maybe they would have done it if the player was different, or maybe if the pick was better. It would be fair to criticize a philosophy of not taking on salary dumps. I just don’t find much value in saying Pels should have done a deal that another team did without knowing what led to the 76ers dealing specifically with Thunder and Warriors dealing specifically with Grizzlies, and whether the Pelicans were ever engaged in talks with either to begin with.

All you’re doing is playing fantasy GM with a lack of info and the benefit of hindsight. There’s plenty to criticize in relative real time if folks don’t feel the need to be first on the internet with their take.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

We can always wait longer for more info and draw a conclusion after all the data is in. I have heard this argument many times. It is too soon on Zion. Too soon on Griff, etc. But all we do in sports is talk about the future and judge what might be. While Griff certainly has time to turn it around and even some of his moves have time to work out better than they look like they probably will right now, I dont think we just 'wait and see' and have no opinion in the present. We wouldnt do that if he was seemingly nailing every move. But when it looks like a move might be bad, its always 'wait and see' - I find that odd

---

Not trying to offend, but I feel like I remember you having the exact opposite approach for Dell's tenure

Also, I get the Thunder have a massive war chest of picks, but how can you possibly trust them to make those picks correctly at this point. Poku looks like quite possibly the worst player to ever step foot on an NBA court. To say they did it the "right way" while not acknowledging that they picked Poku over Precious, Maxey, Quickley, Bane, etc. would be a bit of an overstatement when we're criticizing the Pels for similar mishaps.

In reference to the Grizz, one day the medicals will come out on Tillman, but they're not great to say the least. Hard to fault what they've done with the success they've had so far, though. My issue with their method is I'm not really sure how they get their #2 guy at this point, and I don't think it's JJJ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelafanatic

Not trying to offend, but I feel like I remember you having the exact opposite approach for Dell's tenure

---

Actually I was the first to question Dell. Though none remember it now, the first few years, Dell had 100 percent approval rating outside of me. In Dell We Trust was actually a common phrase. He was called Dealer Dell and a Chessmaster....yes, all of this is true.

But when he chose to match Gordon instead if doing the offered sign and trade with Phoenix, I sounded the alarm. Tried to teach many about accepting sunk cost - something Dell refused to do. Also said he suffered from optimism bias

At the end I did defend him a bit because the backlash went too far. His strategy wasn't terrible and there are worlds where the franchise would have had much more success if not for terrible luck

But like Griffin now, I saw the issues with Dell very early. To be a successful GM you need to go against almost all human tendencies. You have to be able to be distant and objective. I believe sociopaths would make the best GMs