You probably knew something like this would be coming, after I this past season or two providing evidence that tanking is overrated, that it doesn't very reliably produce the results we're hoping the Jazz have, and that the value of draft picks (difference between high and low picks) seems to be converging somewhat in recent years. And with all of the hullabaloo after the A. Ainge hire over the question of whether it's franchise malpractice to risk next year's pick and whether we should move players at below-market value to do that, maybe this bit of data is worth thinking about:
Of the final four playoff teams (before the Pacers' victory in Game 1 last night) -- categorization of players on the roster by draft position:
Number of players
1-10: 11
11-20: 12
20-30: 13
After 30: 23
Playoff total win shares
1-10: 10.9
11-20: 10.5
20-30: 8.1
After 30: 11.7
For this year's best teams, having a high draft pick increases your odds of doing well over lower picks. But just barely. The differences are likely much smaller than I think we imagine. These teams have, in Ainge's words, stacked, many good moves on top of each other. It may be far more important that we make good moves generally than that we just maximize our draft position. Maybe protecting next year's pick shouldn't be considered the end-all and be-all of the franchise's future. Protecting the pick might end up as the best move we can make, but I hardly think we can make that decision before the front office checks out what other options might be available.