But the draft is a crapshoot anyway. Always has been. Several #1 picks have been total busts. The “talent evaluators” get it wrong again and again. That’s why tanking doesn’t make sense. You’re losing games so you can get a player who may not even work out.
Look: 1. The draft is not a "crapshoot". Good talent evaluators make terrible picks much less frequently than bad ones. The most you can say is that there are a lot of factors that can prevent a good amateur basketball player from succeeding in the NBA. But everyone said LeBron was going to be an all-timer. 2. Because of 1., the very best players are still more likely to go in the first few picks. That means you will have no chance at getting them unless you pick there. The only way to pick there is either to do a great trade several years ago (perhaps the Pelicans this year) or to have your own pick and be bad (and lucky in the lottery). Sure there are great players available lower: Kawhi, Jokic. But much fewer. You're not getting Kareem or (H)akeem or David Robinson or Shaq or LeBron or Anthony Davis or Wembanyama unless you have the #1 pick. You're not even getting pudgy white-boy, non-certainty Luka Doncic if you're picking outside the top 3.
Nope, but I don’t see how it moved the needle, either. By the time Sharpe figures everything out, Lillard will be retired. And then we’ll have to start over. I don’t see a brighter future with Sharpe than we’ve had with Lillard. We’re just spinning our wheels.
The draft isn’t a crapshoot? You must be joking. Portland taking a teenager from Canada who didn’t play a minute of college ball is the perfect definition of a crapshoot.
I would submit, good evaluators elevate it to at the least, an educated crapshoot. Some GM's are notoriously bad, while others seem to do much better. Just like in life, some people are more prepared, or just have better skills. There is certainly no absolute certainty, except this era of Blazer being stuck in abject mediocrity for the vast majority of it's duration.
Higher picks are worth more than lower picks. Yes there is a huge variance in the worth of a single drafted pick. There is a lot of risk. Tanking has advantages and disadvantages. It isn't the solution to every situation. On the flip side it shouldn't be avoided in every situation. Only one of 30 teams wins a title. The MVP players that led teams to those titles were in the upper range of the lottery far more often than not.
Crapshoot would imply higher selections have the same expected worth as later selections. Thats clearly not the case. There has been many analysis of expected win shares/VORP/etc at various draft positions; and they all show huge increases in the expected on court worth of a pick as it is higher in the draft.
You shouldn't be comparing the past with Lillard to the future with Sharpe. You should be comparing the future with only Lillard to the future with Lillard and Sharpe. Does Sharpe guarantee anything? Certainly not. Hell he might even end up as a bust. Or he might end up as a star. We don't really know. But we do know the Blazers are in a much better place with him than without him. Lillard and a bunch of below average starters clearly won't ever contend. Put a bunch of young players with Sharpes potential on this team and there is something in the future to potentially look forward to. Will they contend? Maybe, or maybe not. But the Blazers certainly have a better chance with them than without.
One tank isn’t always enough. One more tank could put us in a great position to be a future powerhouse. If we get Wembenyama, we won’t have to wait for the returns. If you don’t like tanking, tell me how Dallas has the best player in the league.
If we lose the next 3 games and fall to 19-24, that is time to pull the plug. There are other teams that want it more.
I think the difference is he'd be dealing with a player who is far more advanced than any young player that he's been around.
If we lose both games to Dallas, we might move to 7th position in lottery. We will certainly pass OKC and Lakers by falling to 13th in West.