u/No-Pollution-5841

I feel the lore of the Halloween franchise has been holding it back since Halloween II came out in 1981. The films feel the need to connect themselves to previous movies in the franchise and to hold their lore sacred. I think the lore in Halloween has always been one of its weakest components, yet the movies have so much trouble moving on from it. What if it didn't have to be that way? What if the only thing held sacred was what makes the franchise special, The Shape himself?

My idea for the next timeline is to return to the series' anthology roots, but to embrace Michael Myers, or The Shape, rather than discard him. The Shape is the franchise, and he is all you need to make a compelling Halloween movie. My proposed timeline is more of a formula for how the next few movies should be made. Here are the rules:

1. Every movie takes place after The Shape is shot by Loomis in 1978 and disappears.
2. Haddonfield, Loomis, and Lauri never return. No legacy characters or bloodline.
3. Each movie is completely self-contained.
4. Each film must have a distinct tone, atmosphere, and style.
5. The Shape's fate must be questionable by the end.
6. He is always referred to as "The Shape" and never "Michael Myers".
7. It is never explicitly confirmed that every "Shape" is the same person.
8. Each movie must take place on Halloween.

That's it. The premise of each movie is "It is Halloween in the year X in location X and The Shape reappears." Give each movie to a different director and let them tell their own Halloween slasher. The kind of energy I am going for is like a campfire story. If some kids from the universe of 1978 were going to tell campfire stories about The Shape reappearing, what would they look like? Each movie is a new campfire story. I don't mean this literally, but I think it illustrates the direction I want the franchise to go in. The urban legend and myth of The Shape take priority over clunky lore. I feel like there are a ton of fun settings and situations to place The Shape into that would make for a fun story:

• The Shape stalks a small suburban New England town in the midst of a blackout.
• The Shape stalks a dying 1980s mall in the middle of the night.
• The Shape stalks a rural Pennsylvania harvest festival.
• The Shape stalks a mountain town in the midst of a blizzard.
• The Shape stalks a grimy 1979 Halloween carnival.
• The Shape stalks a decaying early 1990s inner city.
• The Shape stalks a coastal town in the aftermath of a devastating hurricane.
• The Shape stalks a late 1990s roadside motel on a deserted highway.
• The Shape stalks a 1980s Summer camp having one last Halloween party before closing for the season.
• The Shape stalks a remote radio tower.
• The Shape stalks a charming island fishing village.
• The Shape stalks a small town high school football game.
• The Shape stalks a lonely, isolated highway in 1979.
• The Shape stalks a suburban gated community in the early 2000s.
• The Shape stalks a midnight train cutting through rural New England.
• The Shape stalks a mid-2000s aquarium hosting a Halloween night fundraiser.

I would genuinely be content if the franchise continued like this forever. There are an unlimited amount of cool ideas. Of course, I place a lot of value on these settings and atmospheres, but I still want these to be quality horror movies. If each movie was just "The Shape killing random people we don't care about in a new setting," that would be pretty mediocre. Ideally, another genre would be occurring in the background and we should be following real human beings that we can connect with. It should feel like The Shape is invading a story completely separate from him. If I had to add a rule to reinforce this idea, it would be something like:

9. Each movie must have its own genre story beyond The Shape, human characters, and emotional stakes beyond the kills.

For example, this prompt:

• The Shape stalks a midnight train cutting through rural New England.

could be a mystery thriller on top of a slasher. A divorced father and his son take a Halloween train ride together to reconnect. The point is that there is some sort of distinct genre or horror genre at work to keep each movie distinct. There are real humans with real motivations that we become endeared to.

So what do you guys think? The beauty of this "timeline" is that it can go on for as long or as short as you want. If we want to go back to sequels and legacy, we can do that whenever. This formula will still be intact and can be revisited. Could this be the future of the Halloween franchise? Would you be happy with the direction?

Sean Marks' offseason moves and comments have revealed exactly which direction the Nets intend to go. The ambiguity around our timeline is (mostly) gone, and we can finally relax knowing what we can expect from the team. The Nets will focus on player development and maintaining financial flexibility through the 2027-28 offseason, when they will restructure the roster and begin a period of championship contention.

How do I know this?

Let's first look at the moves. Acquired Julius Randle, whose contract expires in 27-28. Resigned Day'Ron Sharpe and Josh Minott, whose contracts expire in 27-28. Signed free agents Keon Ellis and Mo Wagner, whose contracts expire in 27-28. Noticing a pattern? We currently have 0 guaranteed dollars past the 27-28 season. It is unlikely that this is a coincidence.

Let's pivot a bit to why we didn't sign guys like Walker Kessler, Jalen Duren, Mitchell Robinson, or Tari Eason. Sean Marks was recently quoted saying:

If you're going after max level talent, they've got to automatically and absolutely change the trajectory of your team. This can't be "well, let's go get this and lock ourselves in to being a six or seven seed."

For starters, are Kessler or Duren "automatically and absolutely" changing the trajectory of our team? No. They lock us into that six- or seven-seed due to their talent relative to their contracts/projections. What about Robinson or Eason? They signed contracts that were 3 years or more in length. The Nets are attempting to keep their books clean after 2 years. Are guys of that caliber worth pivoting from that plan? I would argue absolutely not. The most important reason why Ellis and Wagner were signed was that they were willing to take 2-year deals.

The Plan

We have established that the Nets have built the roster to avoid guaranteed money entering the 27-28 offseason. What's the actual plan here?

Part 1: The Audition

There are 2 seasons before all of this cap space clears up. Before we get to the front office's intentions when that happens, what are their intentions for these next 2 seasons? The Nets will treat this period as an audition for the next iteration of this roster. Our youth and vets are going to get a lot of run, and the organization will decide who they want to move on with and who they want to move on from.

Development is going to be the name of the game. The Nets could have gotten a guy like Ja Morant for cheap, but he impedes player development. If Saraf and Powell were going to have a chance to make the rotation, the guard we brought in had to be someone they can realistically beat out over a 2-year period. Ellis is the perfect balance between potentially breaking out himself and being a challenge our young guys can realistically overcome. This kind of competition is amazing for facilitating growth. The next 2 seasons will be spent watching these little rotational battles and observing all the guys on this roster grow as individual players and as a team.

Winning is going to be less important to this team than you expect. I know a lot of people are hoping for a play-in push this year, but that's not the way this team is designed. The Nets will attempt to develop winning habits and a winning culture, but not at the expense of player development or the 2-year timeline. If winning games were more important than player development, we would have pursued free agents to fill our current glaring roster holes, like rim protection. If it was more important than the timeline, we would have signed more talented players that wanted longer deals. The front office understands that Wagner doesn't help with our rim protection, but they don't care because the timeline and player development are more important than winning right now. That being said, I think the organization hopes that, by next season, player and internal development can give us a chance at the play-in.

From this next 2-year period of Nets basketball, we can expect some fun low-expectation ball. We won't be winning as much as everyone wants, but the players and coaching staff will be trying their best, which should lead to a decent viewing experience. It won't be as exciting as signing a big name, like Kessler, but from the organization's perspective, this is how you build a winning team and success that can be sustained beyond a short, fragile window.

Part II: Championship Contention

After the 27-28 season, we can finally expect the Nets to start pushing in some of their chips and attempting to compete for an NBA championship. That offseason is going to be the most critical for the franchise since the clean sweep. We can expect the Nets to decide which of our current players belong on this contending team and explore superstar acquisitions through free agency and the trade market.

All of our rookies and sophomores will have team options available to them. The Nets are going to decide which of the guys proved they can compete for a championship and which didn't. If, for example, Ben Saraf doesn't show anything over these next two years, they will let his option expire or will have already moved on.

The Nets will also work on contracts for vets they want to be on that contending roster. Did Ellis make us believe he can contribute to a championship roster? He likely gets resigned here. Did Wagner never quite prove himself? We probably let him expire.

The Nets are going to use their plethora of cap space to star-hunt. Guys like Giannis, Bam, Jokic, and Luka have the potential to be free agents in this class. Are these the kind of franchise-changing players the Nets are talking about? Maybe. It definitely appears like the Nets are trying to position themselves to sign a guy like them into their cap space. I imagine we'll have some guaranteed money on the books at this point, likely at least MPJ (or whoever succeeds him). If a superstar is available for trade, this is when we could expect the Nets to make that trade.

Conclusion

That's the Nets' plan. Of course, I am not in the front office, so I cannot confirm any of this for a fact, but this is where all of Sean Marks' decisions are pointing. The Nets are setting themselves up to build a championship contender in the 2027-28 offseason. I'm personally a big fan of this plan. With the stage of the rebuild we're in, this is the fastest and most realistic path to genuinely contending. It shows some serious restraint and competence from the front office and even Tsai.

The elephant in the room is that there is a reality where we don't begin contending in 28-29. If none of the players on our roster develop and no one becomes available in that 27-28 offseason, this team should probably pivot to pushing back contending and continuing to focus on team development. That being said, I don't know if Tsai is willing to be that patient. There's a reality where Marks is forced to go all in 28-29 even if things don't break our way to save his job.

All that said, I believe in Marks, Tsai, and the front office. How this team has been operating since the KD era ended oozes competence. I am hoping that if people start understanding that this organization hasn't been directionless and that they have been and are currently following a comprehensive and flexible plan, maybe they'll start trusting in Marks again too. I know sports fanbases can be very results-based, but it shouldn't be that way. The process is more important than anything else. Marks and this front office have made a plethora of mistakes, but the process is pretty much always sound. They show genuine ability to learn and grow from their mistakes.

People are expecting more moves this offseason. They want something sexy and exciting. If there are moves that work with the plan, like the Randle trade, I think the Nets will consider them, but I do not think that is very likely. More than likely, this Nets team is set outside of possible salary dumps.

We are in great shape and should be excited for the future of Nets basketball. I know NBA fans hate to have to practice patience, but that is the reality of contending for a championship in this league. Let's buckle up and enjoy this next iteration of the team. If you go into the season with the right mindset, there is loads of fun to be had.

I made a list of Halloween watch orders. I personally use a different one from this list every year for my Halloween franchise watching. I attempted to design each in a way where it ends off on a quality movie with a good ending. Are there any other fun choose your own adventures you've come up with?

Classic Watch Order

• Halloween
• Halloween II
• Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers

The first three Myers movies in the franchise. The ending with Jamie on the stairs is a fantastic ending to this "choose your own adventure". I do not include Halloween 5 because the ending is a cliff hanger and Halloween 6 is a massive drop in quality. I like Jaime in Halloween 5, but I think her character is much more interesting if we leave 5 out. This trilogy is the highest quality way to watch this timeline in my opinion.

Strode Watch Order

• Halloween
• Halloween II
• Halloween H20: 20 Years Later

Just a perfect ending to Lauri's and Michael's story. Resurrection's retcon is hard to believe and ends on a cliffhanger. H20 is not a perfect movie, but as an ending to a trilogy it might be the best.

Green Watch Order

• Halloween
• Halloween 2018
• Halloween Kills
• Halloween Ends

This one is pretty self explanatory. I do not think any of these movies are low enough in quality to justify changing this official timeline. It has a satisfying ending. I know consensus is that Ends sucks, but it is one of my favorite movies in the franchise. Maybe Green did not plan out the entire trilogy, but it is nice to have one with consistent vision throughout.

Anthology Watch Order

• Halloween
• Halloween III: Season of the Witch
• Halloween (2007)
• Halloween Ends

Definitely going to be my most controversial "choose your own adventure". I do not think anyone will have a problem with the first two movies. Pairing Halloween and III as anthologies makes perfect sense. I like excluding II here because it gives the ending of the original Halloween some room to breath and some impact. I really think there is value in watching Halloween without II.

Here is where it gets a little weirder. I actually love Rob Zombie's Halloween. I just think its a ton of fun and Michael is at his scariest. It definitely is not an anthology movie, but I think it can act as one here. You can watch it as it's own contained story. I think the ending with Laurie shooting Michael in the head has a similar impact to the H20 ending. I prefer leaving the ending of this movie as is rather than including Zombie's second movie. For me it works better as a self contained story. I think this it can work in the spirit of anthology if you like the movie and want to put yourself in that mind space.

Halloween Ends is very clearly not an anthology film, but it I really think it can work here if you want it to. Ends feels quite disconnected and self contained from the rest of the Green trilogy. I sometimes find 2018 and Kills can be a bit of a slog to get through. It is almost refreshing to watch it separated from the rest. Halloween Ends is unique, experimental, and clearly attempts to be a spiritual successor to Halloween III. This movie feels the more like the ending to a timeline than anything else in the franchise. I think Ends as the finale to this anthology "choose your own adventure" works well and is satisfying in a way 2007 and III wouldn't be.

I will clarify that 1978, 2007, and Ends are my top 3 movies in the franchise so this watch order is like a love letter to Halloween and a guilty pleasure for me. While this works well for me specifically, I doubt it works with most people's taste. If you're open to it give it a try and you might have some fun.

Completionist Watch Order

Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers

Halloween 6: The Curse of Michael Myers

Halloween Resurrection

Halloween II (2009)

I love every Halloween movie. I may enjoy some less and think they some aren't good, but I love them regardless. This is not a proper timeline, but an excuse to watch the last 4 movies in the franchise even though I do not think they fit well in the other watch orders.

As long as 5 and 6 are watched together I think you can do this in any order. I just have it listed in release order here, but when I watch these four next I am going II and Resurrection on night one. I haven't seen II in a long time and want to pay close attention when I watch next so it'll go first. Resurrection is less important to stay awake for and a much lighter experience so it goes second. I'll do 5 and 6 and night two because 5 is my favorite of the bunch. Saving it for night two gives me something to look forward to. Also at least Curse is the last movie Donald Pleasence appears in so it has that going for it as a finale.

Conclusion

Those are my "choose your own adventure"s. A more palatable Anthology Watch Order for most people probably excludes 2007 and Ends plus maybe includes II (1981). Some people also may prefer to do a Zombie Timeline with just those two movies. I am wondering if you guys do anything like this or have your own creative watch orders. I would appreciate it if you shared!

Depth	Starter	Backup	3rd String	Two-Way
PG	Brown Jr.	Traore	Saraf
SG	Demin	Ellis	Powell
SF	Porter Jr.	Minott	Mann	Bilodeau
PF	Randle	Clowney	Jefferson	Johnson
C	Sharpe	Wolf

Depth	Starter	Backup	3rd String
PG	Brown Jr.	Traore	Saraf
SG	Demin	Williams	Powell
SF	Porter Jr.	Minott	Mann
PF	Randle	Clowney	Jefferson
C	Sharpe	Wolf

This is a watchable team.

Two years ago for Halloween I rewatched the entire franchise. Last Halloween I separated franchise into timelines/watch orders. Each Halloween I am going to watch a different timeline. Each timeline was created to follow the different in universe timelines, but to cut them off on good movies with endings satisfying for that timeline. Some later sequels technically continue timelines, but I think they weaken the endings that came before them. Last year I did the Green timeline. I was wondering what people think of this and how they'd separate the movies. My explanations are below.

Classic Timelinene
Halloween
Halloween II
Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers

This is the first timeline in the series, but I cut it off at Halloween 4. I did that because the ending to Halloween 4 is so good that it has a lot of impact as the ending to this timeline. Halloween 5 is definitely a step down in quality, introduces the cult of thorn and leaves off on a cliffhanger. It's existence retroactively makes the ending of 4 worse. Then including Halloween 6 dilutes the quality even further and ends on a pretty crappy note. I think the trilogy the way I have it is the best way to experience this timeline.

Strode Timeline
Halloween
Halloween II
Halloween H20: 20 Years Later

If you want a trilogy focused on Lauri this is a great way to do it. All great to solid Halloween films. The ending of H20 is a pretty metal way to end the viewing session and I think a great ending to the timeline. While Resurrection is technically included in the real version of the timeline, I think it retroactively lessens the impact of H20s ending and is an inferior ending point for this timeline.

Experimental Timeline
Halloween
Halloween III: Season of the Witch
Halloween (2007)
Halloween Ends

This timeline is largely me catering to my own tastes. It was originally me attempting to create an anthology timeline, but I didn't want a year with just 2 Halloween movies. I tinkered with adding Halloween Ends (one of my favorites in the franchise) and loved the idea. Ends feels almost like a spiritual successor to Halloween III and is somewhat self contained. I also had a Zombie timeline, but that was also just 2 movies and I think 2009 diminishes the ending of 2007. I prefer just watching 2007 as opposed to watching them together.

So I included Rob Zombies Halloween here too. I really wanted a watch order that includes 1978, but not the OG Halloween II. 1978's ending is so impactful when left on its own and I like that this watch order embraces it. 3, 2007, and Ends all have that divisive/black sheep energy. Halloween III can obviously be watched on its own and is perfect after 1978. Halloween 2007 fits less cleanly, but it still has that feel as a movie that feels optimal to watch as a one off.​ Ends feels like a successor to III, is relatively self contained from the other Green movies, and works well as the most natual ending point for this watch order. This includes my 3 favorite Halloween movies and will the year I look foward to most.

I understand most people would hate this timeline I imagine other people would prefer a 1) Anthology Timeline (1978 + III) and a separate 2) Zombie Timeline (2007 +2009).

Green Timeline
Halloween
Halloween 2018
Halloween Kills
Halloween Ends

Also self explanatory. This is the new timeline. It's a relatively cohesive trilogy with Halloween as its start. No reason to cut anything out of it. As I said I love Ends and think it is a perfectly suitable ending to this timeline.

Completionist Timeline
Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers
Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers
Halloween: Resurrection
Halloween II (2009)

No real cohesion to this and it isn't actually a timeline. This is just an excuse for me to watch these movies without lessing the impact the other watch orders. I decided release order is probably best.

My Next Few Years of Halloween
2025 - Green
2026 - Classic
2027 - Experimental
2028 - Completionist
2029 - Strode

Tier List

S Tier
Halloween (1978)
Halloween (2007)
Halloween Ends

A Tier
Halloween (2018)
Halloween Kills

B Tier
Halloween II
Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers
Halloween H20: 20 Years Later

C Tier
Halloween III: Season of the Witch
Halloween II (2009)

D Tier
Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers
Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers
Halloween: Resurrection

Rankings

1) Halloween (1979)

Simply a classic a the best movie in the franchise.

2) Halloween (2007)

If the white trash doesn't bother you this is the best modern Halloween movie. If you were to watch the whole franchise today, I think this is Michael at his scariest.

3) Halloween Ends

This movie feels incredibly fresh. The most creative movie in the franchise. The music is awesome. The directing and cinematography feels so good. It's the first time a timeline in this franchise gets real ending. This movie is amazing.

4) Halloween (2018)

It was actually kinda disappointing and underwhelming upon rewatch. Decent Halloween movie and an entertaining watch. That being said it can occasionally be a bit boring. Solid entry in the franchise, but just not as good as my first watch.

​5) Halloween Kills

I don't think this movie is much worse than 2018. Definitely very similar in quality. Both are fine. Michael is fairly scary. The kills are fun. If you want to watch a relatively cohesive Halloween timeline the Green Trilogy is your best bet. Ultimately these movies had a lot of potential and could have been incredible, but ultimately ​fall flat. While the trilogy is underwhelming (outside of Ends), the rest is so mediocre to bad that it is above the rest of the franchise.

6-8) Halloween II, 4, and H20

These movies all feel very similar to me. Solid atmosphere, kinda fun, but kind of boring. Usually the kills aren't cool enough and the story isn't interesting enough to make these movies great. None of them are terrible, but that isn't a very high bar. 2 is definitely the best. You still have Laurie and Loomis at their best. The hospital setting cool. The beginning of the movie is good. If you want to treat it as an ending to the franchise it is one of the better ones. Its biggest sin is that it can often be boring. The same can be said for the next 2. In 4, Jaime and Rachel aren't amazing, but they're endearing enough. Outside of the original kind of feels the most like a "Halloween" movie. Its often fun and never terrible. The ending is awesome and a great ending to a timeline if you want to stop there. H20 is definitely a step down, but it has the best Halloween atmosphere. Laurie is back, the university setting is pretty good, and I like Laurie's dynamic with her son. The movie suffers the most from boring sequences is ultimately a bit underwhelming. Another awesome ending to a timeline. This used to be one of my favorites, but it doesnt hold up on rewatch sadly.​

9-10) Season of the Witch and II (Zombie)

Season of the Witch is pretty bad. It is unique and has a few interesting things going for it, but it just isn't a good movie. I know it has a cult following and I respect the franchise for trying something new, but I just can't get behind it. I haven't watched the entirety of Zombies Halloween II in a very long time so I can't say much, but I remember it being bad. I imagine Michael is still scary enough and Zombie is competent enough to keep it from being the worst of the worst, but I don't remember. It tenatively stays here.

11-13) 5, Curse, and Resurrection

These movies are just quite abysmal. My biggest beef with them is that they ruin some awesome endings to timelines. Honestly I have tons of fun with 5. I really like Jaime, I like the atmosphere, Loomis is awesome, Tina is fun. It's still terrible and ruins that amazing ending in Halloween 4. It introduces the cult of thorn and the ending feels quite bad. The more I think about it the more I want to jump it above Halloween III though. The cult stuff in Curse just is not my thing. It actively turns me off. The producers cut ending is the worst thing in the franchise. That being said this movie has some sick atmosphere and Paul Rudd is fun. The theatrical ending plays into the vibe of having fun and not taking this trash seriously. The more I think about Resurrection the more I prefer it to Curse. The intro is kinda terrible, but also kind of interesting. I honestly enjoy the concept of some party kids watching the night unfold on a livestream. Busta Rhymes is one of the most fun characters in the franchise. Curse is heavy and trash while Resurrection is light and trash. For that reason I'm last second saying I prefer Resurrection.

Final Thoughts

I was probably hard on the franchise, but I love them all regardless. Even at their worst I still enjoy these movies. My favorite horror franchise of all time and shaped my love of horror.

​

I put together what I believe would be an ideal episode count for every season and an average chapter per episode. I am assuming an approximately equal amount of chapters is being adapted per episode for each book.

Season	Chapters	Episodes	Chs Per Ep	OG Content Per Ep
1	17	8	2.13	1.87
2	18	8	2.25	1.75
3	22	8	2.75	1.25
4	37	10	3.70	0.30
5	38	10	3.80	0.20
6	30	8	3.75	0.25
7	37	10	3.70	0.30

I went with 10 episodes for the later seasons for a couple of reasons. For starters it feels unrealistic to expect them to start producing 12 episode seasons, even if that would mean the pacing is more in line with the earlier seasons. 8 episodes feels like the pacing would be​ too fast and radically different from seasons 1-3. 10 is, in my opinion, the best compromise. Book 6 is shorter than 4, 5, and 7. Dropping it down to 8 episodes matches the pacing of the other seasons perfectly. It also might give the production a little breathing room.

The column for OG Content Per Episode is the amount of original material I think should be injected into each season in an attempt to maintain a consistent pacing throughout the whole show. I think they should aim to adapt about 4 "chapters" per episode​. This means that if, for example, season 1 is adapting ~2.13 chapters per episode it would inject 1.87 "chapters" of original content. 2.13 + 1.87 = 4.00. The earlier books need more expanded content to pad out the seasons and do more worldbuilding. As the stories get longer and more complex the need for expanded material becomes a bit less, not unnecessary, but they won't need as much time for it as seasons 1-3. This allows for the show to maintain a consistent pacing formula.

These chapter ratios wouldn't be strict. Maybe just a general guideline for the studio to follow. The studio should maintain flexibility. For example, with the current formula Harry wouldn't get to Hogwarts until the very end of episode 3. Season 1 should focus on getting to Hogwarts by the end of episode 2 and then while they only have 10 chapters to tell in 6 episodes, they can include most of their original content at Howarts itself. It actually looks like for every season the arrival at Hogwarts should happen towards the end of episode 2 (excluding S7 obviously). I feel like the movies skip a ton of great pre hogwarts content so that'll be nice.

What do you think? In my perfect world season's 4-7 would each be 2 episodes longer for more expanded content, but I don't think that's realistic. At this point I'm just hoping for some 10 episode seasons when necessary.

If these past two drafts went our way we could have been the next Spurs in two years, but they didn't. We have the worst talent in the league. There is no path through trading and free agency that would make us real contenders in the near future. No quick fixes will save this. The only choice is to take the L, suck it up, and continue practicing patience.

Draft BPA at 6, draft the 2nd rounder, keep Sean Marks and Jordi, maybe sign a promising young player in FA that has potential to make a Nickeil Alexander-Walker type leap, and spend this year developing our players and playing winning basketball. Next season we have 2-3 firsts​. They won't be great, but thats more shots at putting together a real NBA team. Keep making the occasional small move to snag a couple of more picks when we can. Focus on managing the cap to give us some flexibility. Wait for any perfect trade opportunities to show themselves.

Simply just developing young players, building draft capital, taking on cheap low floor guys with potential like Minott, and keeping flexibility. With the new lottery rules we're always going to have any incentive to play winning ball. Maybe after a few years we'll have some nice pieces, a real foundation of solid young players, and do luck into an awesome draft pick that we can build around. Hopefully we'll have maintained that flexibility and have the option to finally make meaningful big swings.

The only thing this franchise can do is accept the path of patience and that we're gonna have to experience mediocre basketball for a long time. Our timeline went from 2 years to 4-7 yeads. The front office making an emotional decision and spending our assets probably makes us a disappointing play in team the next 2 seasons and doomed to terrible basketball for the next decade +.