This is such a weird take from the guy who just wants them to "take more chances" which is basically just the strategy of eventually getting lucky. I bring up the 15 year history only to highlight their long standing history of trading for first round picks* when available which brings me to... Definitely they've passed on chances to use seconds (though they have collected them, they do give them back with annoying willingness). But for first round picks, you'll have to show your work on this one because there aren't an abundance of these types of trades to show me that they are suffering from inaction as much as no market (teams have tightened up that market big time). "constantly missing on max guys" is going to be a high bar for success. If we're modeling after successful teams, most did not get there via open market Max FAs, anyways. Although in the spirit of "taking shots", not sure if constantly freeing up space does count as a shot or not for you. They are trying something, even though as I stated their constant cap space has probably been a detriment to team building. The alternative is to never have max cap space in the first place because you lock up an abundance of non max players. It would be doing something, though not necessarily something productive towards getting top flight players, either. (or having a shot at one). Nah, if they passed on any move for Lopez that was a bad call, but most likely there just wasn't a market for him. Come Jan/Feb they should buy him out and grab some other bottom fodder to try out if no trade opportunity comes up. That's not what separates the winners from the losers. It's just what happens when the winners get the big difference makers and max out cap and other resources. Losers can/should do it too but they are still constrained by roster limits and can't just endlessly pursue those means either. Or if they do, they're just cycling through guys in a non meaningful manner. You keep saying this, but I think you need to show your work because there doesn't appear to be some active market they're ignoring to me. They've added lots of fodder, even hit on some dating back before the Butler trade when the Rose-window closed. Eventually lucking into a top 10 player is what matters. I actually think you like their core more than I do based on your initial comments, which makes this whole thing even more bizarre. I'm not all that thrilled with them, but you're so focused on some mythical process thing and that that is the failing rather than just a failing to acquire a top end talent... Well they might have acquired some top end talent according to you, but it doesn't count, they still suck at team building lol (including when they do what you want them to do and take a shot). For the record, as a general point, bypassing an opportunity is something we can measure them on as an active choice even if it doesn't lead to the type of "action" you want to see. For example, there were many rumors that had Butler for Rubio and the number 5 pick a year before they actually traded him. It was an active choice to do nothing. Not making a signing because you're using that spot for another development piece, or a trade chip, or a expiring contract for cap space are all active choices that lead to no action and can be judged as good or bad moves and all you wanna see is more action. Action=good is just a bad take. *A brief history of players shed for first round picks to highlight that GarPax would probably be completing more of these trades now, if available: Eddy Curry (and a pick swap), Tyrus Thomas, Thabo Sefalosha, James Johnson, Lou Deng (protected, ended up as seconds), Nikola Mirotic A history of second rounders wasted or given up for nothing is too exhaustive to list unfortunately.