Which center that's available doesn't have strengths and weaknesses?
If some team is willing to give us the equivalent of 3 firsts for Kessler, that means 1) he's grossly undervalued here and 2) he's probably worth the 30+ million a year. But, I don't think he's worth 3 firsts, and I seriously doubt anyone's going to offer us the equivalent of 3 firsts.
Maluach may have more potential, but, unless every mock and analyst is wrong and the Jazz FO is executing a dandy of a smokescreen, we won't draft him at 5, and he won't be available at 21.
I'd like to see how Kessler does when we're actually trying to win. We have little information about how our young guys contribute to winning and what roles they can play in such a circumstance, as we've never asked them to win. We've put them in a position where we expect them to excel, but not too much, because we don't want to win. When we have won with them, the FO jettisons anyone who can help us win or sits their arses on the bench. I'm skeptical that this is the ideal way to judge who can contribute to winning, how, and in what role.
I wonder what would be the result if you took any of the key role players on Indiana or OKC and asked the same of them early in their careers what the result would be. My guess is pretty much what we've seen the last few years with our youngsters. They'd lose, and the fanbase would heap scathing criticism on each of them, hyper focusing on all their weaknesses, and pining for the bright shiny new things that their imaginations tell them would be so much better.
