The biggest bets in the National Basketball Association (NBA) are often made by the people who never have to pay if they lose. Today, the NBA’s front office has an increasing tendency to gamble with assets it does not truly own. Teams trade draft picks five, six or even seven years into the future on the premise that a blockbuster move will instantly put them in championship contention. A recent example according to ESPN, includes the Phoenix Suns, who sent out multiple future first round picks to acquire Kevin Durant, and later Bradley Beal, as well as the Minnesota Timberwolves who gave up a large package of future picks for Rudy Gobert.
On occasion, these gambles pay off. When they don’t, effects can last for years: coaches get fired, general managers are replaced and star players move on. Only the franchise and its fans are left to live with the consequences of a gamble made nearly a decade earlier. No executive should have the power to do this to a team. The NBA should not allow franchises to trade draft picks more than two or three years into the future as long range pick trading incentives riskier, and often more irrational decisions, at the expense of both the organization and its loyal fans.
The primary issue is accountability. A general manager is judged for decisions made in the present, not for what happens six years in the future. When a trade works, the executive is praised as an innovative mastermind. When it fails, that same executive may already be working for another franchise while a different one is forced to pay for the mistake. Essentially, future assets are used as gambling chips by executives without requiring them to remain and face the consequences. It is difficult to imagine any business allowing an executive to risk nearly a decade’s worth of resources without accountability, and professional sports should be no different. Limits on how far into the future a pick can be traded should reflect the need for responsible team building that addresses present needs while accounting for future implications.
In 2013, the Brooklyn Nets shipped multiple future first round draft picks to acquire aging stars Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett in a desperate attempt at an instant championship contention. The move fell flat. In the years that followed, Brooklyn bottomed out and lacked the draft capital needed to rebuild effectively.
While this is the clearest example, the Phoenix Suns and Minnesota Timberwolves have also embraced similar “all in” approaches that show how one misguided gamble can shape a team’s outlook for nearly a decade.
Fans are forced to endure the consequences the longest. They remain loyal through every disappointing season. A draft pick is more than just a future asset, it is a symbol of hope that the franchise is doing its due diligence in building a successful team. If too many picks are traded away, one failed gamble can leave a franchise talentless, inflexible and without hope, with its more passionate supporters paying the price for someone else’s decision.
There is always an argument that teams should be allowed to take whatever steps are necessary to win a championship. It is impossible to deny that risks are essential in professional sports. However, every risk should have its limits. Restricting teams to trading draft picks only two or three years into the future would still allow blockbuster deals while preventing executives from making decisions so far reaching that their consequences become someone else’s problem.
Championships should be achieved through intelligent risks, not through blind gambles. Draft picks are the most important resources for struggling teams, and the future general managers should inherit assets that allow them to make calculated decisions rather than repair avoidable mistakes.
