Reply With Quote
bro i think ur confused whats happening
Currently 6th and they haven't decided to tank yet by sitting players.
bro i think ur confused whats happening
havent decided yet?They traded away their top players,They want their pick to help rebuild for
the next few years.
We will know they are tanking when players are sitting. They haven't done that yet but when they do they will slide quickly down and end up 5th.
The Spurs can still get lucky and end up with the pick at 7 but it's to Toronto's best interest to not give the spurs a top 10 pick if they are close to 5th worst.
5th worst gives Toronto the higher odds to keep the pick so that would be their target, 5th worst.
It’s ok if we don’t get the pick in the upcoming draft. How many more 19 year olds do we need?
I don't know why I have to say this but you don't have to sit players to tank.
Also it doesn't matter if they tank if they just outright suck.
We saw last year teams tanking by sitting out players. Portland was a great example.
Toronto can easily tank away the season and fall to 5th if they want that draft pick. This year fewer teams are tanking with no Wemby in this year's draft.
6-9 picks are going to be interesting. Toronto does have a pretty weak SOS, so I think they will be fine once they get Poeltl back. They still play Brooklyn 3 times also
If Murray gets traded, I think Hawks start to tank as this will be the last season they can do it. They have a pretty tough SOS also. I can see them dropping to the 6th worst record.
I think the Warriors start to pick it up also that they won't be a threat.
I see it being:
6 - ATL
7 - TOR
8 - BKY
9 - MEM
A higher draft pick is still better than a lower one even with no Wemby in the draft. The Raps aren't going to be the only team trying to tank.
This is why the closeness of the pick to conveying/not conveying doesn’t bother me this year. I’d rather risk the non-convey for a shot at #7 this year, even in a supposed thin draft, than get #15 or #20 in a later supposed good draft. Toronto never seems to stay down for long. They picked Scotty at #4 overall, and were the 6 seed in the EC the next season.
I really see ATL going for the tank, since this is the last pick of their own that they control until 2028, especially if they have trouble moving their guards for the return that they want. This would present another obstacle to TOR.
The last two drafts were no-brainers, imo, as far as the lottery went. Obviously Wembanyama was the no-braineriest of all time, but I felt like Sochan was very clearly a no-brainer (as borne out - only Jaylin Williams rivals him in regards to who was on the board, although I like other players like Duren).
Kind of objectively fascinating to see what happens this year, as we have one or two high picks and no one is 'obvious.'
May be some sour grapes going on, but I would be okay with losing out on the Toronto pick this year... so long as it conveys the next two years.
Pros to Keeping: If we get two picks this year, we get to start developing two players immediately. We learn better what works. We fill more roles with players, which can help the team as a whole. It'll be fun mapping out two opportunities.
Cons to Keeping: That second pick, especially, looks dodgy. Do we really want to pick Matas Buzelis with a #7 or 8 pick? Our first pick looks iffy enough and it's likely we'll get stuck on a higher salary scale for a Risacher-type who is only, at best, 'very good.'
Pros to Losing the Pick: Guessing we get it next year, when we can bundle picks for flexibility, trades, or possibly going for players in a hopefully better draft. Potentially landing both the SAS and ATL picks, but also TOR and CHI, all in the lottery. That's crazy.
Cons to Losing the Pick: We cannot possibly bring on four rookies. Having too many picks drives their value down.
If it doesn't convey, we definitely need to try to move it in the summer. At that point the range of outcomes will be:
1) the pick conveys in '25 and we will have somewhere between 3 and 5 FRPs. There is a case to be made that even two might be more than we really want at that point (but we can always decide that later). I certainly don't want 3 picks, let alone 4 or 5. Teams will know this and the Spurs will lack leverage.
2) the pick doesn't convey in '25 and you are left with one more shot at it conveying in '26, which is risky. Even if it did convey in '26, there could still be a scenario where we have 3 picks that year (Best of SA/ATL, CHI, TOR). Both of these things combine to mean that the pick loses considerable trade value going into 2026 as the risk of non-conveyance will be higher and the Spurs will potentially lack leverage. The pick could regain some value towards the '26 deadline if TOR is clearly established itself in a position where the pick is likely to convey (removal of uncertainty for the acquiring team).
A good way to think of picks is to assign it a quan ative value to the pick. It doesn't really matter where you start at, but just keep in mind that ever year a pick does not convey, the value goes down because the odds of the pick conveying are reduced* (unless the protections are structured in a way where the odds of conveyance become more likely - then the calculus becomes a little trickier because it depends on the structure).
*The best illustration of this is to think of flipping a coin. If you have five opportunities to flip the coin, and you only need to get heads once, you have a 97% chance of that happening. But if the first flip is tails, you now only have a 94% chance of landing on heads at least once in the next 4 tries. When flip 4 lands on tails, you now only have an 88% chance. When flip 3 lands tails, you now only have a 75% chance. And if flip 4 is tails, you are now down to a 50/50 chance on your last flip.
The same thing happens each time the pick does not convey, all else equal. Odds of success = 1 - (odds of individual failure ^ n)
Hornets pick wont convey and I don't think the Bulls pick will convey if DMR leaves which he probably will.
This is why picks are over valued. Too many picks and you have to auction them off or its years of waiting for conveyance.
Chicago's goes 1-8/1-8 for the two years following 2025. They probably should just bottom out and tear it mostly down. The Zach LaVine salary is pretty nasty. They should probably get something good for Caruso, Vucevic might get something. Otherwise they're not in horrible shape salary-cap wise. Not sure what their ownership wants to do, but I'd go deep into the dank if I were them. All they owe is their pick to us, which they can protect via tank, and nothing else.
Does suck to lose the Chicago pick, but it was a throw-in for DDR, who we were losing anyway. It was worth a shot.
Lose? We lost the Chicago pick?
Conditional is suggested by previous post.
Yeah,but since the pick doesn’t even go on the clock until 2025, they’d have to tank for four years.
Well, if they're tanking this year instead of just sucking. Each year it becomes incrementally easier to tank the full yard instead of thinking about it from the start: going into season 25 tearing it down and getting a good pick etc., season 26 looking how they are, but sucking, so just tanking again, season 27 same thing and seeing they just don't have it, so going into the tank again.
No one probably sets about to tank for three years but it just becomes the best solution over time.
Would be legit hilarious if none of the protected picks that Wright traded for conveyed
That's the risk, really.Would be legit hilarious if none of the protected picks that Wright traded for conveyed
The Charlotte pick was thrown into the Atlanta trade for Dejounte. It was kind of icing on the cake. Charlotte wasn't great then and has gotten worse by firing a decent coach because he wasn't playing Kai Jones and James Bouknight enough (!). It was always 1-14 protected so at most was going to be a little bit of sweetness. At worst they'll give us two SNPs that will be in the 31-40 range.
The Bulls pick was outright squeeze for facilitating the move of DDR to Chicago out of nothing. We weren't going to resign him anyway, got to be gentlemen for getting him to a preferred destination, and got assets just the same. It hasn't even started to convey and is at 1-10, 1-8, 1-8. We may not even want it to convey next year anyway and the Bulls are in a spot where they may have to decide whether they want to tank for three full years just to hide the pick from us.
The Raptors pick was for a good center and if that doesn't convey, yeah, it's not great. But we didn't want to keep him anyway for various reasons even pre-Wemby. As it stands, it's still more than likely to convey this year. Even if it doesn't, they'll have to do some hardcore tanking to be absolutely certain it doesn't get to us. They'd have to do that while keeping young players like Barnes and Quickley happy.
One other note in regard to the CHI pick is that we also got Thad Young, who was used to convert the 33rd pick (which TOR used to take Koloko) into the 20th pick (Malakai Branham). Whether your feelings about Malakai, upgrading a SRP into an FRP and getting a chance at another FRP is pretty good for a player you were going to lose anyway (DDR).
They should be good on that one.
The fact that you have a chance at a lottery pick for Jakob in a walk year is amazing in itself! I’ll make that trade 100 out of 100
That's right. Brilliant. And Malaki is going to be nice, just needs work.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
