We're pondering philosophy this morning...
A whole lot of fandom--and for that matter sports--revolves around the feeling of being in control. Sportscasters and gamblers try and predict what's going to happen. General Managers try and accumulate information to find the best possible players. Coaches make game plans which players run, trying to control the court and impose their will on the opposing team. Sports is all about uncertainty and the constant battle against it. In general the more control you have the more successful you will be. But in the bigger picture the uncertainty also provides the spectacle and the fun. For most folks the game is only exciting when the outcome is still in doubt, right? Total control and predictability quickly becomes boredom.
So lets apply this to our current situation with the draft. Here are the questions:
--If you, as a fan, could know EXACTLY who the right person to pick was next Thursday and you could even bend KP's ear far enough to influence the pick, but along with that knowledge came an EXACT knowledge of how the team was going to do in the next ten years--in other words you'd know in advance how well we were going to do, whether and when we were going to win championships--would you take that deal? Would you accept the control if it meant losing the surprise? (Leave the gambling angle out for now and just speak as a fan enjoying the game...or not.)
--Let's say you could go back to the 1984 draft knowing what you know now about Bowie and Jordan. However when you got back there you were still just a fan and nobody in the Blazers office would pay any more heed to you than any other schmuck off the street. Would you want to know or would you prefer to be surprised, even if the surprise were a bad one?