# How many years away are the Nuggets



## jericho

As a lifelong Nuggets fan, don't know when I've seen them appear to be this far away from competitiveness. Jokic is a fairly intriguing player, but Mudiay spent last season looking a long ways from getting his game together and when I scan the roster I don't see much to get excited about. They don't seem to have the ingredients of an up-and-coming team, and they're not in a position to attract difference-making free agents.

So I'm curious...for them to get to a point where everyone expects a playoff run from them, how far away are they? I'm guessing 4-5 years.


----------



## e-monk

the Nuggets joined the NBA in 1976 they are now 40 years and counting away from contention (but at least you got to enjoy Doug Moe's ties)


----------



## RollWithEm

So if you were to list their best assets, how would you order them?

1) Jokic
2) Jamal Murray
3) Mudiay
4) Faried?
5) Nurkic??
6) Gary Harris???
7) Will Barton????

It is well within the realm of possibility that not a single one of those players will ever start for a 55-win Nuggets team. I definitely see them as still being in the early stages of a rebuild. 

They have their own pick and also Memphis' pick this coming season. I would imagine this team is going to finish somewhere between 28 and 38 wins this year. So their pick will likely be in the 6-10 range (unless the ping pong balls fall in their favor). The Grizzlies will probably be a bottom 4 playoff team in the West. I would guess the median result for those picks is around 8th and 19th. That's not horrible in a loaded draft, but it's not exactly a guaranteed windfall, either.

I guess the question would be whether they will ever be bad enough to bottom out with all the young talent they already have.

I'm going to predict that their next 50 win season is at least 3 years away if not 4 or 5.


----------



## e-monk

if Mudiay could shoot he'd be an electric player - Faried probably has trade value


----------



## jericho

RollWithEm said:


> So if you were to list their best assets, how would you order them?
> 
> 1) Jokic
> 2) Jamal Murray
> 3) Mudiay
> 4) Faried?
> 5) Nurkic??
> 6) Gary Harris???
> 7) Will Barton????
> 
> It is well within the realm of possibility that not a single one of those players will ever start for a 55-win Nuggets team. I definitely see them as still being in the early stages of a rebuild.
> 
> They have their own pick and also Memphis' pick this coming season. I would imagine this team is going to finish somewhere between 28 and 38 wins this year. So their pick will likely be in the 6-10 range (unless the ping pong balls fall in their favor). The Grizzlies will probably be a bottom 4 playoff team in the West. I would guess the median result for those picks is around 8th and 19th. That's not horrible in a loaded draft, but it's not exactly a guaranteed windfall, either.
> 
> I guess the question would be whether they will ever be bad enough to bottom out with all the young talent they already have.
> 
> I'm going to predict that their next 50 win season is at least 3 years away if not 4 or 5.


My hunch is you're in the ballpark on all these speculations. Getting to 50 wins in three years seems like very best case scenario, since nothing about their current roster suggests to me the core of a 50-win team. If Murray turns out to be amazing, Mudiay turns the corner and becomes a much better shooter and more reliable playmaker, Jokic takes it up a couple notches, and Faried is traded for a big who needed a change of scenery to shine...that's a lot of ifs.


----------



## jericho

e-monk said:


> the Nuggets joined the NBA in 1976 they are now 40 years and counting away from contention (but at least you got to enjoy Doug Moe's ties)


I don't remember him wearing ties. Just sort of stretched-out sports shirts.


----------



## e-monk

vs


----------



## HB

RollWithEm said:


> So if you were to list their best assets, how would you order them?
> 
> 1) Jokic
> 2) Jamal Murray
> 3) Mudiay
> 4) Faried?
> 5) Nurkic??
> 6) Gary Harris???
> 7) Will Barton????
> 
> It is well within the realm of possibility that not a single one of those players will ever start for a 55-win Nuggets team. I definitely see them as still being in the early stages of a rebuild.
> 
> They have their own pick and also Memphis' pick this coming season. I would imagine this team is going to finish somewhere between 28 and 38 wins this year. So their pick will likely be in the 6-10 range (unless the ping pong balls fall in their favor). The Grizzlies will probably be a bottom 4 playoff team in the West. I would guess the median result for those picks is around 8th and 19th. That's not horrible in a loaded draft, but it's not exactly a guaranteed windfall, either.
> 
> I guess the question would be whether they will ever be bad enough to bottom out with all the young talent they already have.
> 
> I'm going to predict that their next 50 win season is at least 3 years away if not 4 or 5.


No Hernangomez?

Looking at the squad, its plenty athletic and they have a lot of young promising players. 50 wins in a few years, maybe? Thing is, look around the league, there are so many teams loaded with young talent as well, some much better than the Nuggets. Who knows though, maybe they'll get a marquee player or two in the next few years, could be the key


----------



## jericho

Actually, monk, I have a tie that looks just like that.


----------



## jericho

HB said:


> No Hernangomez?
> 
> Looking at the squad, its plenty athletic and they have a lot of young promising players. 50 wins in a few years, maybe? Thing is, look around the league, there are so many teams loaded with young talent as well, some much better than the Nuggets. Who knows though, maybe they'll get a marquee player or two in the next few years, could be the key


How do they realistically get that marquee player (or two) other than by being both lucky and smart in the draft?


----------



## HB

jericho said:


> How do they realistically get that marquee player (or two) other than by being both lucky and smart in the draft?


Good question. One in which I don't have an answer. In this era of super teams, seems like only a few teams are in the running for getting these top guys. Then again the Warriors were in purgatory for a while so anything's possible. I think your squad is good enough to battle for those last few playoff spots which is going to affect their draft position and the type of guys they get. Coaching and internal development is going to be key going forward.


----------



## Bogg

I don't think Denver's in that bad of a spot, although I do think they need to figure out just what their short-term goals are. If they're looking to make the playoffs sooner rather than later then they need to consolidate some assets into one or two good players - they (reportedly) very nearly traded for Paul Millsap a few days into free agency, before Boston signed Horford, so I think they know this and it's the path they're attempting to go. Otherwise, it probably makes sense to cash out on Gallinari and at least put out feelers on what Faried/Chandler are worth in order to solidify one or two more high picks before building around the current young guys and the next pick or two. They're sort of just stuck in the middle right now, and it's an "easy" year to be bad coming up, with almost all the teams in the league giving it an honest effort, some more successfully than others.


----------



## RollWithEm

The other problem this team has is that Faried and Gallinari would have likely been traded already if they had any real value around the league. I think all their flaws have been on display for too many seasons now.


----------



## RollWithEm

jericho said:


> How do they realistically get that marquee player (or two) other than by being both lucky and smart in the draft?


I'm not sure that they do. Other than throwing a crazy offer at a team for a disgruntled superstar late in his prime, I just don't see it. Unless, of course, this current crop of youngsters turns out to be really good.


----------



## jericho

RollWithEm said:


> The other problem this team has is that Faried and Gallinari would have likely been traded already if they had any real value around the league. I think all their flaws have been on display for too many seasons now.


See, that's my concern. They're not going to bring back equal near-term value. Moving them (smartly) would be a step along the path of positioning the team to continue overhauling itself through the draft. And at this point they may as well move along with it. I'd prefer to see them bottom out and net a real stud or two in foreseeable drafts than improve just enough to stay in the middle of the pack (bottom of the lottery or just outside it) for the next several seasons.


----------



## RollWithEm

jericho said:


> See, that's my concern. They're not going to bring back equal near-term value. Moving them (smartly) would be a step along the path of positioning the team to continue overhauling itself through the draft. And at this point they may as well move along with it. I'd prefer to see them bottom out and net a real stud or two in foreseeable drafts than improve just enough to stay in the middle of the pack (bottom of the lottery or just outside it) for the next several seasons.


And that window is closing. As Mudiay, Murray, Jokic, and Nurkic improve, even getting rid of the vets won't be enough for them to truly bottom out. The time is now.


----------



## jericho

RollWithEm said:


> And that window is closing. As Mudiay, Murray, Jokic, and Nurkic improve, even getting rid of the vets won't be enough for them to truly bottom out. The time is now.


Hmm. We'll see. I'm not that impressed by that quartet yet. If they exceed my modest expectations, maybe they have a better chance than I think of adding a second-tier free agent next summer.


----------



## Bogg

jericho said:


> See, that's my concern. They're not going to bring back equal near-term value. Moving them (smartly) would be a step along the path of positioning the team to continue overhauling itself through the draft. And at this point they may as well move along with it. I'd prefer to see them bottom out and net a real stud or two in foreseeable drafts than improve just enough to stay in the middle of the pack (bottom of the lottery or just outside it) for the next several seasons.


Yea, I don't see Denver getting equal value back for Gallinari, owing to his status as an expiring contract, but that contract is also the same reason it's probably time to move him - plenty of teams are likely to come calling next summer, and there's a good chance he jumps to a playoff team somewhere (I could see Boston pursuing him if they strike out on the headliners next summer) and Denver winds up with nothing. Is he eligible for a renegotiation and extension? I'm not sure that giving him a hefty raise is what's best for the Nuggets, but with the way they seem to be building I wouldn't be surprised if they burned some of the cap space they have doing so, and Gallinari's injury-prone enough for it to make a ton of sense for him.


----------



## Adam

One of the Nuggets gets busted by the NBA for weed. He challenges the suspension and wins due to Colorado residence. Nuggets are granted the only weed exemption in the Association. Free agents flock to Denver. Cheech and Chong replace Rocky. Nuggets win their first championship.


----------



## jericho

Bogg said:


> Yea, I don't see Denver getting equal value back for Gallinari, owing to his status as an expiring contract, but that contract is also the same reason it's probably time to move him - plenty of teams are likely to come calling next summer, and there's a good chance he jumps to a playoff team somewhere (I could see Boston pursuing him if they strike out on the headliners next summer) and Denver winds up with nothing. Is he eligible for a renegotiation and extension? I'm not sure that giving him a hefty raise is what's best for the Nuggets, but with the way they seem to be building I wouldn't be surprised if they burned some of the cap space they have doing so, and Gallinari's injury-prone enough for it to make a ton of sense for him.


It's largely the realization that Gallinari is the Nuggets' best scorer that leaves me convinced they need to get worse in order to get better. He's probably not more than the third option on offense for a real contender. I wouldn't expect equal/fair value for him. Just a draft pick and an opportunity for the youngsters to play more.


----------



## jericho

On a relevant note, I will confess to having seen little of Murray. Anyone with a more informed perspective than mine care to venture an opinion about his functional role in the NBA?

The fact that he's billed as a combo guard coming out of the draft suggests to me he's likely to wind up as a Ben Gordon-like tweener who doesn't quite have the size or athleticism to defend the 2 position nor the playmaking abilities and instincts to man the 1. A handful of players manage to transcend the "combo" tag and thrive at PG (Westbrook, Curry), but most don't.


----------



## HB

I watched him at Kentucky and I saw some of his games in the summer league. He can score, and I get why people compare him with Brandon Roy. I don't see him as a point guard, I think he can evolve into a deadly all around scoring threat. He wasn't playing point at Kentucky either.


----------



## RollWithEm

Murray certainly seems like a MUCH better prospect at this point than Mudiay.

On another note, isn't it crazy that the Nuggets could generate this type of spirited conversation just a few short months ago? That password snafu really was the last nail in the coffin for this place.


----------



## RollWithEm

RollWithEm said:


> So if you were to list their best assets, how would you order them?
> 
> 1) Jokic
> 2) Jamal Murray
> 3) Mudiay
> 4) Faried?
> 5) Nurkic??
> 6) Gary Harris???
> 7) Will Barton????
> 
> It is well within the realm of possibility that not a single one of those players will ever start for a 55-win Nuggets team. I definitely see them as still being in the early stages of a rebuild.
> 
> They have their own pick and also Memphis' pick this coming season. I would imagine this team is going to finish somewhere between 28 and 38 wins this year. So their pick will likely be in the 6-10 range (unless the ping pong balls fall in their favor). The Grizzlies will probably be a bottom 4 playoff team in the West. I would guess the median result for those picks is around 8th and 19th. That's not horrible in a loaded draft, but it's not exactly a guaranteed windfall, either.
> 
> I guess the question would be whether they will ever be bad enough to bottom out with all the young talent they already have.
> 
> I'm going to predict that their next 50 win season is at least 3 years away if not 4 or 5.


Nurkic is gone now and they had to dump the Grizzlies pick in that deal. So two of their top 10 best assets just disappeared in a trade and got them back a Plumlee. Yikes. #FreeJokic


----------

