Historically Free Agency is not the way to build a champion

[Moranis]

I posted this in another thread, but thought it might deserve its own thread.  I went through the last 10 or so champions and looked at their integral/essential parts (so top 4 to 5 players) and how the team acquired them.  The only player acquired through free agency to be a top 2 player for a title team was Lebron (maybe Billups though I think both the Wallaces and Hamilton were better than Chauncey that season, though Chauncey got hot in the playoffs).

So here is the list (Edit to include Golden State)

GS - Draft (Curry, Thompson, Green, Barnes), Trade (Bogut, Iguodala)
San An - Draft (TD, Parker, Manu) Draft day trade (Leonard)
Miami - Draft (Wade, Haslem), FA (James, Bosh)
Dallas - Draft day trade (Dirk), Trade (chandler, terry), FA (kidd)
Lakers - Trade prior to playing (Kobe), Trade (Pau, Odom), Draft (Bynum)
Celtics - Draft (PP. Rondo, Perkins), Trade (KG, Allen)
Miami - Draft (Wade, Haslem), Trade (Shaq, Toine), FA (Payton)
Detroit - Trade (Wallace, Wallace, Hamilton), FA (Billups), Draft (Prince)

Also of note, every single team aside from Detroit was essentially anchored by a player that the team drafted (LA and Dallas acquired their anchor before they ever played in the league so they were essentially drafted by them).  Now a lot of those teams had a fair amount of players in the rotation that were acquired via free agency, but a rotation player is not an anchor.  To get an anchor you need to draft them or trade for them and historically draft works better.  And obviously not all of those drafted anchors were top 5 picks (Dirk, PP, and Kobe were not), but it certainly seems to help.  Of note, most of the players acquired via trade that became anchor/star/etc. were also top 5 picks in their respective drafts. 

Putting your eggs in the free agency basket is not something I would do.  Historically it really has only worked out for Miami and LA and that was just in two specific off seasons (it obviously may work out for Cleveland as well, as James has them poised to be a real contender the next few seasons). 

[Csfan1984]

Are you kidding me what about all the support/role players. Most teams like Spurs and Cs had a lot of good FA pick ups. You absolutely need a good FA run and drafts to win.

[Roy H.]

That's  true.  There are certainly exceptions (Lebron to Miami; Lebron to Cleveland; Shaq to LA), but in general, you build contenders by putting together a strong foundation through the draft and supplementing with smart trades and, to a lesser extent, free agent signings.  Generally, you need to spend smartly, not lavishly, in free agency.

[More Banners]

Contracts are shorter now by a third. Those top players hit free agency every 4 years or so instead of every 6. More opportunities to move in FA, and a shorter time for a franchise to convince them to stay.

The draft can't assure a star, but a good balanced squad of support pieces can be put together cheapest through the draft. That seems to be what we have.

The hard part, no matter how it's done, is to bring in one or two of those special players.

By trade or FA, veterans win.

[fairweatherfan]

Contracts are shorter now by a third. Those top players hit free agency every 4 years or so instead of every 6. More opportunities to move in FA, and a shorter time for a franchise to convince them to stay.

The draft can't assure a star, but a good balanced squad of support pieces can be put together cheapest through the draft. That seems to be what we have.

The hard part, no matter how it's done, is to bring in one or two of those special players.

By trade or FA, veterans win.

Agreed.  It's very safe to say the draft/draft-day trade WAS the best way to get a championship-caliber core, but with player mobility at an all-time high I don't think you can extrapolate into the future.  Situations like Miami's weren't really possible (or at least a lot more difficult) before the new CBA, and will likely become increasingly common in the future.

It's also worth noting that several of the drafted players (Rondo, Parker, Kawhi, Ginobili, Perkins) were drafted around or below where we'll be picking this season, so counting them against us isn't really appropriate.  And Kobe/Pierce/Dirk were all picked just 2-7 spots higher than where we'll be, so not that far away from our position either.  There are only 2 players on the list picked top 5 by the teams they won rings with. 

And, very small correction - Udonis Haslem wasn't drafted by the Heat or anyone else.  Undrafted rookie FA signing.

[Celtics4ever]

you build contenders by putting together a strong foundation through the draft

The million dollar question is do we have a strong foundation?   I don't think so, but there are some sparks of talent here and there.  That being said, I think this team need but one or two upgrades and a star here and there and we will be fine.   We have the bench.

[Moranis]

Contracts are shorter now by a third. Those top players hit free agency every 4 years or so instead of every 6. More opportunities to move in FA, and a shorter time for a franchise to convince them to stay.

The draft can't assure a star, but a good balanced squad of support pieces can be put together cheapest through the draft. That seems to be what we have.

The hard part, no matter how it's done, is to bring in one or two of those special players.

By trade or FA, veterans win.

That is true.  But let's look at the 50 win teams this year

GS - Draft (Curry, Thompson, Green, Barnes), Trade (Bogut, Iguodala)
ATL - Draft (horford, Teague), Trade (Korver), FA (Millsap)
SAS - above all drafted
Hou - Trade (Harden, Ariza), FA (Howard)
Clips - Draft (Griffin, Jordan), Trade (Paul, Redick)
Mem - Draft (Conley), Trade (Gasol, Randolph, Green)
CLE - Draft (Irving, Thompson, Varejao), Trade (Love, Mozgov), FA (James)
Port - Draft (Lillard) , Draft day trade (Aldridge, Batum), FA (Matthews), Trade (Lopez)

So for free agents, you have Lebron going back to Cleveland, Dwight in Houston, Millsap in Atlanta, and Matthews in Portland.  That is it.  Everyone else was drafted or acquired via trade.

This notion that there is some great shift in landscape just isn't borne out by the current 50 win teams.  Even if you add 49 win Dallas, you still don't get much change as only Parsons and Ellis were free agent acquisitions (Dirk was a draft day trade and Rondo and Chandler were acquired via trade). 

[D.o.s.]

It's also worth pointing out that Matthews was an undrafted free agent who has played for Portland for almost his entire career.

[danglertx]

You can't say you build a team through the draft without noting where players were drafted because what the argument around here has been, is do you win now or tank for a superstar.  You can say San Antonio built through the draft but it isn't like they tanked for their players.  Robinson got hurt, so they had one horrible season and lucked into Duncan, who we tanked to get and didn't.

This is how they built their team around him and it wasn't with tanking;

Diaw—free agent
Duncan—drafted, we all know how tanking worked out for us that season.
Ginobli—second round pick
Danny Green – second round pick by Cavs, signed as free agent by Spurs in 2011
Kawhi Leonard—pick 15 by the Pacers and traded to the Spurs for George Hill
Patty Mills—second round pick by the Trail Blazers, signed by Spurs as a free agent, released and resigned by the Spurs.
Tony Parker—28th pick by San Antonio
Splitter—28th pick by San Antonio

Yeah they got cornerstone guys through the draft, but it was with the 28th pick and a second rounder.  They traded for a superstar in Leonard who was the 15th pick and signed Green who has been huge for them in the playoffs as a free agent. 

[wdleehi]

Free Agency is suppose to fill in the role player cracks.  Drafts and trades are what builds the foundation. 

[Donoghus]

Free Agency is suppose to fill in the role player cracks.  Drafts and trades are what builds the foundation.

Agreed.  Use free agents for supplemental players barring an unusual situation.   

When the alpha dog arrives in Boston, whenever it is, I think it's much more likely to be done via a trade than a big FA splash.

[danglertx]

Which way of adding a star is more likely, FA or trade, who knows because you never know who will be available. 

I was watching Mike and Mike this morning and they had a new front office insider on named Amin Alhassan (I probably didn't spell that correctly) and he was excellent by the way, but he pointed out what matters for free agents.

1. money
2. winning
2a. winning their way.  And his example was with  Kobe and Howard.  Kobe wanted Howard to defend, rebound and set picks.  Howard thinks, hey I'm a superstar, that isn't how I want to play.  His other example was Love who has to be thinking, I'm winning but I'm not playing the way I like to play.  You could make the same case for the Knicks.  You could come to the Knicks to play with Carmello but you are going to be a second fiddle to Carmello. 

Then he used the Celtics as the good example for pending free agents.  They have money, a good team, and you aren't going to come in with them saying, "hey this is Jared Sullinger's team rebound and set picks for him."  Which is why I think people are underestimating Boston as free agent destination.  They have all the role players, they just need that star who wants to be the man and the star won't have to fit in, they can win their way.

[slamtheking]

If anything, I think this points out relying on any ONE method to build a team will get you nowhere.  In order to build a contender, a GM needs to be able to acquire talent from all 3 methods: Drafting, Trading and Free Agency. 

based on track record, I believe this to be Danny's approach.  for all those bemoaning Philly's approach as the only viable one, they're missing the boat since Philly has neither the assets to make trades (unless they're giving up their high picks or players taken as high picks and hence would have no players from the draft) nor are they likely to be a FA destination until they become a contender (or at least a playoff team) which is several years away. 

[Who]

I think Free Agency is of growing importance. Superstar players move more often nowadays. Contracts are shorter so players available in free agency more often. Larger pools of talent in average free agent class than say 10 years ago.

I think it is a mistake to base too much on the past given the changes in recent years.

I think we will continue to see free agency grow in importance in terms of team building.

[slamtheking]

Which way of adding a star is more likely, FA or trade, who knows because you never know who will be available. 

I was watching Mike and Mike this morning and they had a new front office insider on named Amin Alhassan (I probably didn't spell that correctly) and he was excellent by the way, but he pointed out what matters for free agents.

1. money
2. winning
2a. winning their way.  And his example was with  Kobe and Howard.  Kobe wanted Howard to defend, rebound and set picks.  Howard thinks, hey I'm a superstar, that isn't how I want to play.  His other example was Love who has to be thinking, I'm winning but I'm not playing the way I like to play.  You could make the same case for the Knicks.  You could come to the Knicks to play with Carmello but you are going to be a second fiddle to Carmello. 

Then he used the Celtics as the good example for pending free agents.  They have money, a good team, and you aren't going to come in with them saying, "hey this is Jared Sullinger's team rebound and set picks for him."  Which is why I think people are underestimating Boston as free agent destination.  They have all the role players, they just need that star who wants to be the man and the star won't have to fit in, they can win their way.

excellent point on Boston as a free agency destination. 

the common reasons given for Boston not being a destination for free agents are typical hogwash:
- state income tax
- lousy nightlife
- bad weather.
blah, blah, blah.
Boston hasn't had the money to chase top free agents, pure and simple.  with the funds becoming available over the next few years, I think Boston will look pretty good to some of those FA's.   It's difficult to get any top player to leave their team due to the advantage that team has when it comes to money they can offer but for those players that do switch teams, I suspect Boston will be in the mix for the players they want.