In the wake of Myles Turner's defection to the Milwaukee Bucks, attention is drawn to a much deeper problem in the NBA – the reality that the league is built on splash and hype, not continuity and development.
While initially shocking to many of the Indiana Pacers faithful, Turner’s exit is now old news. Following his departure, the Pacers were left in a moderate lurch at the center position. With the draft already in the rearview mirror and a thin free agent market at the position, the front office had to get creative in filling out this end of the roster. While the moves to trade for Jay Huff, sign James Wiseman, exercise their option on Tony Bradley, and extend a qualifying option on Isaiah Jackson are prudent, the Pacers’ potentially lackluster center room is the result of something much more significant in the league.
Why is the draft before free agency?
Team development would be prioritized if teams knew what their rosters looked like before the draft took place. Had Myles Turner signed with Milwaukee prior to draft night, the Pacers might have taken a chance on a center with one of their picks. Would this lead to guaranteed success? Of course not. Would it make more sense to draft players to a roster that was not liable to such fluctuation? Of course, it does.
This reality is clearly seen in the media coverage of and push for big-time “superstars” and their movement (how many times have you seen Kevin Durant’s name in the media news since his last trip to the NBA Finals?). I am not saying these players are not phenomenal, but in the era of player power and “Shams Bombs,” the emphasis is on seismic movement, not necessarily the game, the good of the team, or young players.
The second apron era makes splashes that much splashier
Draymond Green recently shared extensively on X his opinions on how free agency is “over” now that the first and second salary cap aprons are in effect. His point was that there is less spending (not necessarily less money) to go around before teams are handcuffed by the new rules. With this backdrop, big money moves are so much more significant. It is like finding water in the desert. Thirsty for something exhilarating in the midst of a dry free agency period, media, fans, and even the league try to capitalize on and hype up every move, regardless of its on-court significance or long-term ramifications for the teams or the sport itself.
Do teams want to win games or win views?
As Stephen Curry developed into the league’s three-point king, he became incredibly exciting and incredibly successful. It is clear that his (and a few others’) style of play changed the league from top to bottom, but not everyone found the same success that he did. Splashy moves are the exact same thing. Some moves are splashy and successful, but many are not. As was seen with the Pacers in this past season’s playoffs, the successful team is not always flashy or hyped. So, even while the league continues to push hype and wild moves, teams like the Pacers are set up to build their way and continue to make the best out of less-than-ideal situations. You know, the situations that are “bad” because they don’t elicit enough splash.