C. Non-lottery draft position is a thing (worst record is guaranteed a top-5 pick)A. It does
B. Better odds are better odds.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
C. Non-lottery draft position is a thing (worst record is guaranteed a top-5 pick)A. It does
B. Better odds are better odds.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
C. Non-lottery draft position is a thing (worst record is guaranteed a top-5 pick)
I think Hardy is bought in. Trade 1-2 two of them, be slimy, and go get it.It seems like it would be completely within a team's control to have the worst record, but I believe it's harder than we think it is. I don't think the Pistons were trying to have the worst record last year and still did, for example. Sometimes other teams are just worse. I think we would need to move Lauri, Sexton, and Kessler to pretty much guarantee a worst record in the league, and even then we could get surprised.
I doubt it is. They would have to be paying Kuminga, Lauri, Draymond, and Steph max or near max contracts. If they are dealing Lauri they will have to deal Kuminga to the Jazz or to a 3rd team to get the Jazz more assets.I just read an article where they claimed The Jazz prefer Brandin Podziemski over Kuminga and that the deal won't happen without Podziemski. One would think this is music to Golden States' ears....
The issue is the team with the worst record only has a 14% chance at the #1 pick. The odds are the same with #2 and #3 and it's 12.5% with #4. Back in the day it was a lock but now... well... look at how The Pistons got ****ed. Some people on this board act like tanking hard guarantees #1 but as mentioned the odds are still bleak,.
Now... if the draft has 2-3 other guys who look to be beasts aside from Cooper, then that 100% changes things.
I doubt it is. They would have to be paying Kuminga, Lauri, Draymond, and Steph max or near max contracts. If they are dealing Lauri they will have to deal Kuminga to the Jazz or to a 3rd team to get the Jazz more assets.