There is some speculation that we might be buyers at the deadline. The common thinking is that we want more picks or cap space. But the largely accepted theory is that it would be "bad" to just add some buy low players and sign a couple of FAs.
It is unlikely that anyone gives up their top 5 pick. What could we possibly offer the Bucks to give up the number one pick? Are we then going to rely on our old buddies ...the Ping pong balls ? It is far from certain that our pick falls in that range, unless Ainge starts dumping players on the cheap...which he said he wasn't going to do (and rival GMs are not giving up their picks either). And even if we were to get a good player in the top seven picks, it would not be the game changers (Parker, Embiid). With that in mind, remind me how that one guy is going to suddenly put us on the path of a championship. I do understand that clearing cap space allows us to make trades without matching salaries, and that route seems plausible...but some reports seem to contradict that as well.
There are quite a few guys that are out there (Asik, Waiters, etc ...and several FAs at the end of the year), that have star potential, and are still solid young talent. Even if we gave up a couple of picks (clippers pick, Philly pick) along with players like Bass, Green, AB ... Are we saying that adding Asik, Hayward and Waiters ( for example) would not make us better in the short AND long term? We would still have our future picks AND some good assets for a trade even if it wasn't working out by the trade deadline next year.
The same people who say it would "bad" to do this, also cite Rondo and sully as stars. If that is true, then wouldn't it be more logical to go all out to either 1) trade a bunch of picks and players to get one star ( I.e Westbrook) and then add Asik. Or 2) pick from the buy low players and add three or four...which almost certainly make us a playoff team. This lineup:
Rondo, Hayward, Green Sully, Asik .... Just adding those two players make us pretty respectable in the east....no?
I guess this is " bad" because we still couldn't beat Miami or Indy ( in theory) so let's just wait another three years for all those mid round picks to become stars (cause we all know how likely that is). So are we going to beat Miami and Indy anyway by going the draft route? If we are not in a rush anyway, why not win while we wait?
i guess I just don't understand why adding these players and making the playoffs FIRST, then adjusting and improving through trades and future picks later, is so roundly thought of as bad strategy.
Somebody help me out here.