Orlando Magic Daily Roundtable: Dealing with the Draftermath

4 of 6

NEW YORK, NY – JUNE 22: Anzejs Pasecniks walks on stage with NBA commissioner Adam Silver after being drafted 25th overall by the Orlando Magic during the first round of the 2017 NBA Draft at Barclays Center on June 22, 2017 in New York City. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. (Photo by Mike Stobe/Getty Images) /

Did the Orlando Magic make the right move trading their other picks? What opportunities do you think they missed?

Palmer: They absolutely did not make the right move trading their other picks. Jeff Weltman said the draft flattened out so they wanted to “preserve” the value of their picks. But they did not do that. There is almost zero chance the pick Orlando received for No. 35 is that high in 2019. Additionally, the first round pick acquired for No. 25 is top-20 protected. The Magic are a bad team with very limited assets on the team. It would have been very smart to invest in rebuilding the team through the draft as opposed to hoping things will fall in place through trading or free agency.

Doyle: I am right there with Zach on this one. I understand trading the picks if they did not like any of the players on their board. However what they got in return was not very appealing. I think the Magic should have used these picks to gain assets for trades that may develop this offseason and future offseasons. Even if it was to stash a player overseas, I think that has more value than a second round pick in 2020.

More from Orlando Magic News

Rossman-Reich: I do not know if I necessarily agree with Jeff Weltman’s assessment the draft flattened out so much there were no players available to take at No. 25. I get why the Magic did not want to bring in too many rookies. That part makes sense. So a deal like the one they made at No. 35 made a ton of sense. But, even with the limited cap room, I think I would have taken a player at No. 25. The guys I had on my board were backup point guards like Derrick White and Frank Jackson or a wing like Semi Ojeleye. The Magic did a good job filling that wing need in drafting Wesley Iwundu, so I am not losing sleep there. And point guard was not that dire of a need. I guess, where I fall is I take the Magic at their word that there were no opportunities to move out of the 25th pick. They probably tried to move up and could not find any takers. They probably tried to move down and could not find too many teams willing to move in. So maybe they did the best they could. Would I have done something different? Yes. But is what the Magic did defensible? Sure.

Flynn: I understand why the Magic traded for future picks but I think they missed a bigger opportunity. I find it hard to believe the Magic could not put together a better package than what the Sacramento Kings received for the No. 10 pick. Another missed opportunity would be to package those picks with a hefty contract and create cap space. In a deep draft, trading for uncertain future second round picks and a heavily protected (top 20 from the Oklahoma City Thunder) first was not the best move. Looking at players taken in the second round this year, it would have been better to do nothing and draft every pick. If kept, the Magic could have come out with Jonathan Isaac, Harry Giles, Wesley Iwundu and Frank Mason. Not to mention other players expected to contribute that were still on the board. Huge missed opportunity to get production from later picks or to move up for a cornerstone.