tommysdu wrote: Now a question for you, do you think Simmons and Embid is a good enough team to contend?
I feel if we had not been able to trade for Kawhi, I still rather go with DD and Lowry - i don't think that is enough to win the title, but I don't think they are that far away from doing so (someone had to get DD over the mental hump - I believe he had the skills but just not mentally strong enough).
Why I wouldn't go the Sixers route. They sucked for at least 3 seasons - completely brutal and unwatchable. What they have in return for sucking is Simmons (great player, just can't shoot - maybe will be able to improve), Embid (Great player, a bit injury prone, still needs to improve). IMO, they are not that much if at all better than DD and Lowry. Also want to add Sixers got lucky with drafting these two players - imagine if they drafted more players like Flutz instead. Tanking is too risky and brutal for the fans for too many years. I don't know of many success stories from tanking, but I would say Raptors is a success story for staying competitive when days looked less than ideal. Yes luck had a lot to do with Raptors success, but I don't think anyone out there can argue Raptors got to where they are now just purely on luck
They could very well be (future development will tell), but that's not my point. Super-stars are a necessary element to a championship, but not the be all and end all. So, both Embiid and Simmons have a chance to become super-stars. But the lessons of this young season so far also demonstrate how important Ilyasova and Belineli were to their success last season. So, of course, to win it all, you also need great team management, competent coaching, excellent scouts and many other things. However, and that's the hardest element to get - you must have those super-stars. And my point time and again was that for a non-marquee franchise the surest way to get them is to draft them.