But I'm a fan, not an owner. The only reason why I worry about money is if it interferes with my team's ability to sign players. So sure, I worry about that too, but the Jazz are a small market team anyway. We can't and won't go over the cap. On top of that, we always need to overpay FAs to come here, we simply cannot build a team from free agency. Therefore we need to build through the draft, which means losing. Not that hard to figure.

Secondly, the 9 year scenario I've been mentioning is heavily dependent on the new CBA. Before that, the cap coming off of rookie contracts made it clear that a superstar's best interest was a shorter contract first, max contract later. That's changed, and we'll begin to see that as players like Davis and Irving get extended. But there's at least two examples in the last few years that prove my point: Cousins, and more notably, Paul George. They can't leave as RFAs, so they either take the max deal or the qualifying offer. No middle ground, unless the team caves and offers a shorter contract. You can argue history all you want, but the numbers simply state 9 years is the likely outcome.

Thirdly, I fully understand your point about finding talent in the mid first, I've addressed it twice now. Absolutely, you can find amazing talent in the middle of the first. That wasn't my point. The gist is that, while anomalies occur, finding superstars past the first half dozen picks is both astronomically unlikely and a total crap shoot. Are you trying to argue that, as opposed to the Jazz tanking, if the Jazz keep plodding along in the middle of the first round, they're just as likely to find as superstar?

Also, your point is absolutely ridiculous. You point out the handful of significant players to be drafted outside the first half dozen picks, and then claim, what? That the Jazz have the same odds of landing a superstar as a 8 seed than in the lottery? That superstars are not predominately drafted early on? What exactly is your point?

Lastly, I'm not arguing that finding a transcendental player is easy, I'm simply arguing that for the Jazz to win a championship, its necessary. And it's obvious that small-market teams require such a player to even be relevant. A superstar needs to be the Jazz's FIRST building block, whatever is lost in the meantime is nest to pointless, because without a superstar the Jazz can't do anything meaningful anyway. So you misunderstand: we're in our best position because we now have the potential to have a great team, rather than a mediocre one we've had for several years. In the NBA, potential for greatness is always better than mediocre production. That is reality.

P.S. It's "bated breath", "bated" meaning "in great suspense". Not sure how you would think "baited" when reading a very common idiom, but whatever.