Part V of a five-part series ahead of the 2024-25 NBA season, chronicling how the league reached this era of parity and the key questions that remain.
• Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV

---

Going back to the days of George Mikan’s Minneapolis Lakers and continuing through to Stephen Curry’s Golden State Warriors, dynasties have been a hallmark of the NBA.

But perhaps not anymore. Not in the parity era.

For the past week, The Athletic’s reporters have explained how and why dynasties appear to be remnants of the past. And, now, we’re expanding the conversation further.

Why would the NBA want parity? Are dynasties good for the game? And just how wide open is the league?

To answer those questions and more, The Athletic has assembled Darnell Mayberry, who covers the Chicago Bulls; Law Murray, who covers the LA Clippers; and Josh Robbins, who covers the Washington Wizards.

---

Why do you think the NBA wants parity? 

Darnell Mayberry: Parity sells. Just look at the NFL model. The more each fan base believes its team has a chance to win it all, the more interest the NBA will generate. Fans will shell out more money to attend more games and buy more merchandise. From city to city, business will boom. And the NBA, already heavily investing in its in-season NBA Cup to drum up more interest, will lean on marketing a level playing field come playoff time.

The league also continues taking strides to usher in a more competitive — and more compelling — regular season. The NBA recently took measures to curtail incentives for tanking teams. Now, the new collective bargaining agreement targets teams at the top of the standings. It all should help to make the marathon regular season more enjoyable.

Law Murray: I do not believe that the league wants the kind of parity where a broken clock is right twice a day or a garbage can gets a steak. I believe that we should be clear about that part at least. There has to be authentic parity, not artificial parity.

With that said, you never know who may emerge out of the good teams. And parity in the NBA helps to avoid the artificial super teams that highlighted the 2000s and especially the 2010s. (Who are we kidding, though? It’s sports. Someone is always going to find something to complain about.)

Josh Robbins: Darnell makes a convincing case here: Hope sells, and in team sports, hope creates revenue.

To amplify the point, if the answer to all your questions is money — a saying Tony Kornheiser has, for decades, attributed to the late TV executive Don Ohlmeyer — then we shouldn’t underestimate the power of the second apron’s harsh penalties to create a de facto hard cap on team salaries and limit team owners’ expenses. It’s good business to prevent costs from spiraling out of control.

But here’s something else to consider. Adam Silver, wisely, has attempted to turn the NBA into a league that captures fans’ attention for 12 months each year. Because the second apron is so punitive and restrictive and because bad contracts are more onerous than ever, drafting well and making smart roster-construction moves have never been more important. We already know that a large segment of fans have an unquenchable interest in the science of roster building; the new collective bargaining agreement should only heighten that interest and, in turn, help the league further its quest to command fans’ attention. This might not have been one of the rationales behind the new CBA, but heightening year-round interest will be a welcome byproduct.

---

Because of the new collective bargaining agreement, are super teams a thing of the past?

Mayberry: Don’t bet on it. The CBA can’t stop super teams. Nothing can truly dissuade players from teaming up when they have their hearts set on doing so. Given how much players make now, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a star sacrifice top dollar to get his team a smidgen closer.

We saw a preview with Jalen Brunson inking a team-friendly extension with the New York Knicks this summer. While I don’t envision a star signing anywhere for the minimum, it would be nothing for him to take significantly less to chase a championship on a one-year deal. Somebody somewhere will someday take a massive pay cut to pursue a title. And the rest of the league will be incensed.

Murray: It depends on what we’re calling a super team. Sure, free-agency loopholes helped create The Decision in 2010 and Kevin Durant’s next chapter in 2016. It’s rich when the old heads discuss how they would never have teamed up with their friends or rivals to win earlier in the 1980s. You don’t have to team up when you’re fleecing Ted Stepien’s teams for future first-round picks.

But I digress. There will always be super teams because they’re always going to be subjective. To Darnell’s point, there’s always going to be some owner, front office or even players who don’t care and will challenge the limits of what you can do in terms of team building and earning potential. The real query might be whether or not those bold line steppers get rewarded accordingly or not.

Robbins: With Durant, Devin Booker and Bradley Beal on his roster, the Phoenix Suns’ deep-pocketed Mat Ishbia certainly seems to think super teams can work. The Suns will provide an interesting test case. Can the Phoenix front office surround Durant, Booker and Beal with enough high-level role players to win a title? The CBA is working against them.

But the short answer is no, I don’t think super teams are a thing of the past. In the modern NBA, trades are the new free agency, and the biggest superstars continue to hold tremendous power over their teams.

---

Would parity in the NBA mean every team is average? 

Mayberry: Not necessarily. But it probably depends on the eye of the beholder. One person’s view of parity easily could clash with how another feels about bunched standings. And we’ll always have one or two elite teams, as well as the also-rans who can’t get right.

I thought last year provided a great example of how parity can exist even while the league maintains quality play. Eight franchises from the Eastern Conference won at least 46 games. Ten franchises from the Western Conference won at least 46 games. I view it as quality. I wouldn’t need to look far to find an opposing view.

Murray: I feel like we have to put some more respect on these teams. Wins don’t come in the mail, you have to go out and earn what you get in the NBA. And some teams are going to be built better, players will maintain and establish star status, coaches will coach better. The level of competition is rising, not plateauing. Teams can’t rest as much as they might have at the end of the 2010s. The NBA Cup made the autumn portion of the season more eventful than it had been in years. The Play-In Tournament has made the playoff bubble more interesting. There’s more to play for, and it’s not just because of the collective bargaining agreement. There are still buyers and sellers. No team wants to be in the middle, and the league is set up to accelerate some of these rebuilding efforts. If anything, the “average” teams are even more threatening than they had been in the past.

Robbins: No. A flat-out no. And why’s that? If the last two decades have taught us nothing else about the NBA, it’s that you must have at least one superstar (or, to put it another way, a truly “elite” player) to win a championship. OK, it’s true that six different teams have won the last six NBA titles, and that variety of winners is one measure of parity. But each of those champions — the Raptors, Lakers, Bucks, Warriors, Nuggets and Celtics — featured at least one player who already was considered a superstar when that postseason began; those superstars were Kawhi Leonard, LeBron James, Stephen Curry, Nikola Jokić and Jayson Tatum.

I’m talking about the elite of the elite. The reality is, that uppermost tier of truly great players is composed of so few members that there simply aren’t enough truly great players to populate all 30 teams. So, no, not every team will be average. The teams with elite players will have a chance to separate themselves. The teams without a transcendent player will be so far behind the eight ball that total parity, in which all 30 teams have a chance to win a title, does not, and will not, exist.

---

Are dynasties good for the NBA? 

Mayberry: I don’t like dynasties. I respect them. I appreciate the enormous commitment they require from all corners of any franchise that achieves it. But I don’t have to like dynasties to believe they’re still good for the NBA. It’s almost impossible to argue that they’re not.

The Warriors, Celtics, Lakers, Bulls, Pistons and Spurs have all built rabid fan bases in large part because of their dynasty days. The league will always have a robust market of loyal customers whenever a franchise forms a dynasty. Scores of fans here in Chicago (and around the world) still reminisce about the Bulls’ glory days from nearly three decades ago.

Murray: I’m with Darnell on respecting dynasties. But let’s call it what it is. A lot of fans and media want permission to not care about a lot of these teams. I get why some people need dynasties to be interested in the league, and how those dynasties carry crossover appeal. I just feel like that’s a casual approach. I always despised hearing how the league is better when “Team X” is good. I’m over here thinking about “Team Y” and “Team Z,” the ones where I guess the league isn’t at its best when those teams are dominating. If dynasties are good for the NBA, cool. Keep that same energy for the Charlotte Hornets and New Orleans Pelicans dynasties then.

Robbins: Who wouldn’t respect a dynasty? Winning one title is difficult as hell. Winning several titles in a compressed timespan is a remarkable achievement.

But I think it’s more accurate to say that great players facing other great players in as many competitive, high-stakes games as possible is what’s best for the NBA.

Yes, the Magic Johnson/Kareem Adbul-Jabbar Showtime Era Lakers were as close to a dynasty as we saw in the 1980s, but what made them so captivating is that they had to overcome Julius Erving’s 76ers and Larry Bird’s Celtics to make them great. What made those Celtics teams great is that they had to overcome Dr. J’s Sixers in the early ’80s and the Lakers throughout the decade. Isiah Thomas’ “Bad Boys” Pistons had to overcome Bird’s Celtics. And Michael Jordan’s Bulls had to unseat Isiah’s Pistons.

So, sometimes I think hot-take artists emphasize the wrong thing when they say dynasties are good for sports. Great competition and teams bringing out the best in each other is what’s good for sports. And preferably, the more charismatic the players, the better.

---

With the 2024-25 season just days away, do you think parity exists within the NBA right now?  

Mayberry: I do, absolutely. My hunch is that we’ll see the standings jumbled similarly to a season ago. There will be six or seven 50-win teams and a lot more 46-win franchises. The amount of talent that’s now sprinkled across the league has coupled with the power of the 3-point shot to make most nights an unpredictable toss-up.

But my definition of parity starts in June before I work my way backward. The NBA Finals participants, not just the champion, tell the story of parity for me. If the Celtics and Mavericks are the last two standing for the second consecutive season, I’ll change my tune. But I can’t see a rematch coming, or even multiple upcoming finals appearances for either franchise as a safe bet.

New blood in the final round matters, at least for me. It gets old seeing the same stars and the same franchises compete for championships. I’m a fan of this new era of parity.

Murray: Well, this isn’t football or those other sports where you can struggle to score and somehow still win your division after being the worst team in the league the year before. Basketball has a way of getting the cream to rise to the top. Unlike the other sports, scoring is expected. So if you are a bad team, you still aren’t going anywhere except the lottery. I think we should be clear on that. There are levels to this. And if you want to win a championship, you’d still better be a top-three seed. You can still count on one hand and have fingers left over how many teams have won the title without being at least that good.

On the flip side, look at the contenders. Everyone is familiar with the whole last six champions item. It goes deeper than that. No team has repeated as its conference champion either in the last five seasons — 2019 was the last time that the conference finals had four top-three seeds.

So long story short, there is parity to contend. We’re likely to get some random team breaking through to the conference finals in 2025. But if you want to win a title, you have to be good. You also have to show signs of being close to breaking through. The only champions in the last 10 years that didn’t have at least a conference finals appearance in the prior three seasons before winning it all were the 2014-15 Warriors and the 2019-20 Lakers. One of those teams needed another guy to establish a dynasty. And the other team had LeBron James on it, a dynasty unto himself, although one that the Lakers failed to extend beyond the bubble.

Robbins: The league is closer to parity, at least among its top teams. But total championship parity, in which at least half the teams have a legit chance to win the title in a single season, remains unrealistic. We may be living in a golden age of talent, but there just aren’t enough upper-tier players to go around for the majority of times to have a chance to win a championship.

Let’s use this season’s NBA GM Survey as a rough guide here. In the East, league GMs have identified five teams capable of reaching the NBA Finals: the Celtics, Knicks, Sixers, Bucks and maybe the Cavaliers. In the West, there are six: the Mavericks, Timberwolves, Thunder, Nuggets, Grizzlies and Suns. (OK, I know I’m leaving out some teams on the fringes of conference title contention, namely the Magic, Pacers, Pelicans and Warriors.)

Count ’em up, and that’s roughly 11 of the 30 teams capable of winning a conference title.

That’s progress in terms of achieving parity. But it’s not total parity. As Law said, “There are levels to this.” Right now, the upper levels appear to be more inclusive than ever. It’ll be fascinating to see how much wider the group will become.

(Illustration: Meech Robinson / The Athletic; Photos: Patrick T. Fallon / AFP; Nic Antaya / Elsa / Getty Images; John W. McDonough / Sports Illustrated via Getty Images)

I always like to start my NBA previews at the bottom and work my way up. And when it comes to bottoming out, nobody does it better than the lottery teams in the Eastern Conference. Last season, four East squads lost at least 57 games, and overall, the conference had seven of the league’s 11 worst records.

The Detroit Pistons’ 28-game losing streak took top honors, but Charlotte actually had the league’s worst scoring margin; the Hornets, Washington Wizards and Pistons combined to win fewer games than five NBA teams.

So, yeah, it was bad — and I’m not sure it will get much better in 2024-25. With a loaded draft led by Duke forward Cooper Flagg, several teams have ample motivation to tank for a high lottery pick. A couple spent their offseason leaning into that strategy, notably the Brooklyn Nets, while the Chicago Bulls pivoted less overtly in the same direction. (Connoisseurs of performance-art-level tanking efforts, circle your calendars for April 11: Washington and Chicago face off in the second-to-last game of the season.)

Here’s an interesting side dish: With so many laggards and 10 teams required to advance to the postseason, it’s possible we’ll see a historically bad record qualify for the Play-In. Even if not, the potential is definitely there for five 55-loss teams in this conference, despite the fact that they frequently play one another.

With that said, let’s take a closer look at my bottom seven teams in the East — their projected records, what they’re doing and where they might be headed. (We’ll discuss the rest of the league later this week.)

15. Washington Wizards (14-68)

I really couldn’t believe my eyes when my first run through projections spat out its results. Washington went 15-67 a year ago, and I sort of figured the Wizards would struggle to improve much upon that this season, but going through the math on my projections was jarring. This roster is bad.

The Wizards traded their best player from a year ago based on my BORD$ formula (Deni Avdjia, in a defensible swap for two firsts and two seconds) and lost starting point guard Tyus Jones to free agency. The best players on the team are Kyle Kuzma and Jordan Poole, I guess, and there’s a decent chance Kuzma is gone by February. And Malcolm Brogdon. And Corey Kispert. And maybe newly signed free agent Jonas Valančiūnas, too.

At least we know Poole won’t be going anywhere, not with the $96 million he’s owed over the next three years. (The contract could escalate even higher, but his incentives for reaching the playoffs or making All-Defense seem safe for the foreseeable future.) Poole will get a chance to rehab his value by playing on the ball this season, hopefully not to the detriment of the other four people hoping to touch it.

Obviously, this is all part of a down-to-the-studs rebuild, a welcome shift in mentality after years of chasing any shiny object that might net the Wizards the eighth seed and an immediate self-congratulatory parade. However, Washington’s failures to move on from Bradley Beal until it was too late have resulted in a more painful reset. This year is likely to be the necessary nadir before Washington can start the long trudge back up the standings.

The Wizards drafted three first-round picks this year, but all three are teenagers — and fairly raw ones. Realistically, they’ll take their lumps while they figure things out. Center Alex Sarr, selected with the second pick, is a potential defensive monster due to his quick feet, fast hands and 7-foot frame, while offensively he shows enough dexterity and ballhandling on the perimeter to provide some hope that there’s a unicorn in there somewhere.

That said, the 2024 version of Sarr is going to be a clear minus on offense, offering little threat in the post but also not far along enough as a shooter to scare anyone. The low-key swing skill here is his hands — he struggled to snare contested rebounds and catch in traffic last year. He may also play extensively power forward next to Valančiūnas while the Wizards wait for his body to fill out.

The other youngsters are a similar mix of promise and finger-crossing. Late-lottery pick Bub Carrington — acquired thanks to the Avdija trade — needs to work on his body and defense, but he had a solid summer league and might be the closest thing this team has to a legit sixth man. Late first-rounder Kyshawn George, meanwhile, is a 3-and-D hopeful who likely has a lot of Capital City Go-Go in his immediate future. Carrying over from a year ago, Bilal Coulibaly teased with potential at times but needs to be a more consistent shooter and decision-maker. The Avdija trade likely gives him a chance to start.

Watching the rookies learn while the Wizards get pummeled every night is the best thing that can be said for the Wizards-viewing experience this year. Poole vying with Cam Thomas for the league lead in field goal attempts per minute will offer a certain kind of entertainment, and Valančiūnas shot fake drinking games will be as merry as ever. Otherwise, this year is about player development, asset accumulation and scraping their way to a win total that keeps them out of history books.

14. Brooklyn Nets (21-61)

In the wake of their post Kevin Durant–Kyrie Irving implosion, the Nets are going to be really bad this season. But they also have a direction, one that wasn’t possible before, after regaining access to their own draft picks via the Mikal Bridges trade. That deal made tanking plausible — actually, mandatory — as the Nets can now freely pursue one of the league’s worst three records to maximize their lottery odds. Based on the roster, they have this part under control.

The Nets have just enough veteran talent on hand to lose respectably and avoid being historically terrible, but few of them will remain in the borough beyond the trade deadline. Point guard Dennis Schröder and forwards Bojan Bogdanović and Dorian Finney-Smith are likely spending the first half of the season auditioning for their next employers; Cam Johnson is 28 and signed for two years beyond this one, but he might consider a month-to-month lease as well. And hey, Ben Simmons is here for one last September of back-in-the-gym Instagrams. He’s either a $40-million expiring contract to put into a potential trade or a February buyout.

Re-signed center Nic Claxton is likely the one long-term keeper on the roster, although other young players will audition to be part of the future. Thomas, meanwhile, is likely to lead the team (if not the league) in field goal attempts but will need to generate higher-quality looks — and occasionally even let a teammate shoot — if he wants to be part of the long-term plan.

Deeper down, keep an eye on second-year pro Noah Clowney, who in summer league looked like he may pay long-term dividends after he was drafted as a raw teenager in 2023. Reclamation projects such as Ziaire Williams and Killian Hayes also will get their chances, as will fringe-rotation finds Trendon Watford and Jalen Wilson.

If you’re looking two years ahead and beyond, the Nets will jettison nearly all this roster flotsam except Claxton, Clowney and possibly Johnson. They have three late first-round picks in 2025 in addition to their own, four extra firsts in future seasons and max cap space coming on line next summer. The Nets also are sitting on a $23-million trade exception from the Bridges deal, although it’s likely to go unused until after the season given that they’re already pushing the tax line. (Incentives for Johnson could theoretically put them over in the absence of other moves.)

All of this will make for an ugly 2024-25, but Brooklyn basketball should get dramatically better from there.

It’s desperately needed medicine, but that won’t make it easier to swallow. The Hornets are done chasing 39 wins as cheaply as possible and fully embarking on a new, post-Michael Jordan era. Rick Schnall and Gabe Plotkin bought the team from Jordan in 2023 but held off on replacing the Friends of Mike in the front office and changing coaches until this past summer. Jeff Peterson — a veteran of successful rebuilds in Atlanta and Brooklyn — now has the conch in the front office, while Charles Lee replaces Steve Clifford on the sideline.

Now all they have to do is change the players. I kid, but this is not a great situation. Charlotte won 21 games a year ago, and even that was a bit of a miracle: The Hornets were 28th in offense, 29th in defense and last in net margin. Even in the Charmin-soft lower reaches of the East, making the Play-In with this roster seems unlikely.

The Bugs have one All-Star talent in LaMelo Ball, who has appeared in just 58 games over the past two seasons thanks to a series of ankle sprains and has often seemed indifferent (especially on defense) when he’s on the court. Beyond him, there are some solid players but zero star power, unless perhaps promising forward Brandon Miller (13.0 PER as a rookie) erupts in his second season.

Charlotte does seem to understand its situation, at least, which is more than can be said of some previous iterations of this franchise. This offseason, the Hornets used their cap room not on Gordon Hayward-esque splurges, but to take in salary and talent that other teams unloaded: two seconds from the Denver Nuggets to take Reggie Jackson, a second from the San Antonio Spurs to absorb the unwanted contract guarantee of old friend Devonte’ Graham and three more to take in the necessary outgoing players from New York to complete the Karl-Anthony Towns trade.

Conversely, the only acquisition of note was a reasonable two seconds going outbound to bring in 23-year-old, signed-through-2027 wing Josh Green. Bringing back Miles Bridges likely leaves many holding their noses due to his off-court history, but it leaves Charlotte with a full-strength starting five that won’t be embarrassed. Baby steps.

Those moves aren’t going to shake the foundations of the East, but they’re the first step in a rebuild, one that also must include upping the off-court investment from what’s been one the league’s most frugal franchises.

The biggest variable for the coming year is whether fly-swatting center Mark Williams can come back from a 2023-24 campaign lost to back surgery. Charlotte passed on a top-notch rim-protection prospect in Donovan Clingan on draft night to take a more speculative plunge on French forward Tidjane Salaun, and one wonders how much Williams factored into that. (For what it’s worth: I had Salaun 16th on my board, but I’ve also been told three other teams were ready to take him in the top 10 if Charlotte didn’t.)

Lower on the food chain, Charlotte will likely take teams’ temperatures on solid rotation players such as Grant Williams and Cody Martin to determine their trade market. Also, keep an eye on guards Tre Mann and Vasilije Micić trying to establish their careers after failing to take flight in Oklahoma City. Mann, in particular, might actually be something after playing 28 solid games in Charlotte after the trade; he’s a restricted free agent after the season. Micić is 30 and could be trade bait if he steps forward in his second season on this side of the ocean.

Looking at the chessboard, Charlotte is pretty asset-dry for a team in this position, owning only two protected firsts in 2027 from Miami and Dallas in addition to its own. (The Hornets technically owe their 2025 first to San Antonio, but it’s top-14 protected and will revert to second-rounders in 2026 and 2027 if, as expected, Charlotte misses the playoffs.)

The cap situation is relatively clean, but meaningful room looks unlikely the next two summers unless they trade Ball. Lee and Peterson will start the long effort of putting their imprint on this team, but even with favorable lottery luck, results might take a while.

12. Chicago Bulls (27-55)

The Bulls finally are doing what they should have when they changed management four years ago: launching a rebuild and lining up with a significantly younger roster for 2024-25.

The bad news is that they’ll likely be worse this year and face a slow slog back uphill, especially with few trade assets coming back in the rebuild and a future first still owed to San Antonio from the initial DeMar DeRozan deal. Nonetheless, this was the only move left on the chessboard after the Bulls’ 2021 asset-spending spree yielded three years of averageness and a roster that was only getting older and more expensive.

Chicago’s overarching plan this summer was the correct strategy, but the execution still felt bumpy. Not extracting a draft pick from Oklahoma City in the Alex Caruso-Josh Giddey trade seemed like a missed opportunity, as the Thunder have a million future picks and weren’t operating from a position of great leverage. The Bulls also dropped five years and $90 million on The Idea of Patrick Williams, something that felt more like a sunk cost fallacy on a player selected fourth in the 2020 draft than an honest valuation of where he is right now as a basketball player.

That money ended up mattering quite a bit later in the offseason. Among many what-ifs in Chicago is that if the Bulls hadn’t resigned Williams or if their ownership had been willing to pay into the tax, they could have taken in Harrison Barnes and an unprotected 2031 first-round pick swap from the Kings in the DeRozan trade. Instead, that asset went to San Antonio. The Bulls ended up with Chris Duarte, two second-round picks and cash. Yay?

The good news, again, is that there is a direction, and there is some real talent underlying it. Giddey was useless playing off the ball in Oklahoma City, but he’s a capable point forward with a smooth floater game and should get to showcase that skill set far more often with the Bulls.

First-round pick Matas Buzelis can be a high-impact two-way talent if he can up his shooting percentages and add a bit of lower-body strength, and combo guard Coby White has quietly become a very effective offensive player. Two other recent picks, athletic backup forwards Dalen Terry and Julian Phillips, hardly saw daylight last season, but each should get more opportunity.

Zach LaVine and Nikola Vučević are still Bulls, for now, and their contracts may keep them here a while longer. LaVine, at least, can be a major contributor for however long he’s around; he’s just not quite worth what he’s paid. The three years and $138 million remaining on his deal were widely reported to be a barrier to his departure dating back to the middle of last season.

Meanwhile, the baffling three-year, $60 million extension handed to Vučević in the 2023 offseason already looks indefensible. The Bulls backed him up by signing string bean Jalen Smith for three years and $27 million; at least he’s young, but this won’t fix the defensive hole in the middle. If you’re looking for another true five on this roster, two-way Adama Sanogo is the entire list.

Finally, Lonzo Ball coming back would be a big help, but there’s a big difference between surviving offseason pickup games and being a productive player against NBA starters. It’s an amazing story if he returns and contributes, but we’ll temper our optimism until we see him impacting games that matter.

The badness of the East will likely keep the Bulls in the Play-In race for much of the year, but don’t get too excited: The Bulls owe a top-10 protected pick to San Antonio from the DeRozan trade. That makes it strongly in their interests to land no better than the league’s sixth-worst record and guarantee they keep the pick regardless of how the lottery turns out. In a related story, I’m picking them to finish with the NBA’s sixth-worst record.

11. Detroit Pistons (28-54)

The good news is that this season should be less embarrassing than last year, or the year before that, or the year before that…

The Pistons haven’t won more than 23 games in a season since before the COVID-19 pandemic. They also haven’t won a playoff game since 2008, with just one winning season in that span.

In the fifth year of its rebuild from the Andre Drummond “era,” Detroit not only failed to win 30 games for the ninth time since 2008, but also didn’t even get halfway there, setting an NBA record with 28 consecutive losses and hitting midseason at 4-37. Only a heroic 10-29 charge to the finish line saved it from the worst record in NBA history.

The Pistons cleaned house after the season, after the one-year sideline reign of Monty Williams proved disastrous and the four years of the Troy Weaver administration saw zero progress in accumulating either talent or draft capital. Former New Orleans and Brooklyn exec Trajan Langdon took over the front office, while no-nonsense J.B. Bickerstaff is the new head coach.

It will take more than an organizational facelift, however, to get this team on the right path. Years of poor decisions have left Detroit with little star-caliber talent despite annual lottery picks. The closest thing is guard Cade Cunningham, a skilled but not overly athletic player who bore a massive offensive load with near-zero floor spacing a year ago and ground out a 54.6 true shooting percentage on 30 percent usage.

More shooting should make his life easier, but he isn’t Luka Dončić, and the Pistons need to stop using him like he is. He’s their best player, because somebody has to be, but the offseason decision to give him a max extension was more based on hope than results.

In terms of shooting, Detroit added Simone Fontecchio at last year’s trade deadline and Tim Hardaway Jr., Tobias Harris and Malik Beasley in the offseason. Those are legit, meaningful upgrades. It would also help tremendously if 2022 lottery pick Jaden Ivey can turn the corner both as a shooter and a playmaker, as he represents the best possibility of unburdening some of Cunningham’s massive playmaking load.

The frontcourt should be in better shape with Harris playing the four; while his contact was probably an overpay (two years, $52 million), he solidifies the lineup at its weakest spot and will be tradable money a year from now. He also should push Isaiah Stewart back to his natural center spot after last season’s failed power forward experiment. Beef Stew, the promising Jalen Duren and waiver pickup Paul Reed make for an effective trio, although Stewart may also be trade bait.

In the longer term, the best chance for the Pistons to make genuine progress lies in the development of their two most recent lottery picks. Forward Ausar Thompson is a plus athlete who plays hard, but his shooting is, shall we say, a bit subpar: Last season he achieved the near-impossible feat of having more airballs from 3 (23) than makes (18).

Detroit’s 2024 lottery pick, Ron Holland, is an explosive wing athlete. He was my top-ranked prospect before the draft. However, he will need work on his decision-making and shooting; he’s not anywhere near Thompson’s level of masonry, but how many guys like this can the Pistons play at one time?

On that note, Detroit’s biggest acquisition this summer might not be a player. Shooting coach Fred Vinson — who authored multiple miracles in New Orleans — came over with Langdon from the Pelicans and will have his hands full trying fixes on Thompson, Holland, Ivey and the rest of the gang.

The Raptors have rather quickly gone from one of the most admired organizations in the league to Team Shrug Emoji. Can they get their mojo back?

They embarked on rebuilding a year too late and ended up converting Fred VanVleet, Pascal Siakam and OG Anunoby into a grab bag of somewhat useful players and a couple of late first-round picks, with one still to come in 2026 from Indiana. The most valuable pick transacted was the one they sent out to acquire Jakob Poeltl from San Antonio. Yeah, not great.

Toronto passed on an opportunity to operate as a cap room team and instead picked up a $23 million option on Bruce Brown and extended a 33-year-old Kelly Olynyk for midlevel exception money. One can see a pathway where that might pay dividends, as the Raptors have enough expiring money and picks for a blockbuster trade if a big name becomes available. The Raptors also likely overreached on a $162.5 million extension for Immanuel Quickley in restricted free agency; he’s a valuable player, but it wasn’t clear against whom they were bidding.

That said, Toronto should be fine in first quarters, because 80 percent of the starting lineup is rock solid. Scottie Barnes made the All-Star team in his third season and is now the face of the franchise, Quickley is a solid two-way player whose lack of pure point guard skill is offset by Barnes’ heavy on-ball usage, and RJ Barrett was fantastic in the second half of last season and again for Canada in the Olympics, though he’s beginning the year injured. (While we’re here: The “BBQ” nickname for the Raptors’ three-best players might be the best thing they have going.)

Up front, Poeltl was an overpay asset-wise and a danger to innocent bystanders from the free-throw line, but he is a solid defensive center with some sneaky utility from the elbows on offense.

After that, it gets iffy fast. Brown seemed a possible fifth starter on paper until he had arthroscopic knee surgery before the season started; he’ll be trying to regain the impact he had in Denver after a rough 2023-24 for the Pacers and Raptors.

Gradey Dick is a theoretical movement shooter who struggled in his rookie season but might have to start because the other options aren’t even theoretically good. First-round pick JaKobe Walter is a possible 3-and-D guy but out with a shoulder injury and probably at least a year away from helping.

Up front, Olynyk was unplayable in the Olympics. Chris Boucher’s deal is finally expiring, but he’s still around and likely will need to play as the fourth big. Deeper on the bench, if Walter isn’t in the rotation, that probably means either lukewarm meh from Ochai Agbaji and/or cameos from all-glove, no-bat ball-pressure specialist Davion Mitchell. I should note that I’m a card-carrying fan of second-round pick Jonathan Mogbo, but his limited shooting makes him a better fit on rosters with more spacing than this one.

Where does all this leave us? With a roster that’s interesting but not particularly good. The Raptors won’t be overtly terrible in a year when it’s probably beneficial to be terrible, and yet they face an uphill battle to get into the playoffs. Toronto has a good chance of failing upward into the Play-In Tournament, surely adding a sprinkle of excitement to the Canadian spring during their likely one-game postseason. One wonders if that also will be the bar for second-year coach Darko Rajaković, a well-liked figure in the league but one whose first season at the helm was a bumpy ride.

It’s not really a Play-In Tournament unless the Hawks are involved.

In a league where everyone is either contending or tanking, the Hawks are looking at a fourth straight season of life in the middle class. In an East with a clear top eight and a dismal bottom six, projecting Atlanta to land ninth feels like one of the safest bets on the board.

The Hawks had a productive offseason though, finally executing the overdue Dejounte Murray trade to break up a pairing with Trae Young that wasn’t working. In the process, they shored up a woeful defense and restocked a barren draft cupboard. Atlanta still won’t have its own pick in the 2025 draft, so nix those Sag for Flagg scenarios, but the Hawks will have the Lakers’ choice and likely Sacramento’s (top-12 protected) too, plus an extra 2027 first.

The Hawks also nabbed an honest-to-goodness wing defender in Dyson Daniels in that trade; while his shooting comes and goes, this stopper role is one the Hawks have unsuccessfully attempted to fill for years now. The 21-year-old Daniels also can take reps at backup point guard if second-year pro Kobe Bufkin proves unready. Either way, the guy finishing games at shooting guard is likely to be Bogdan Bogdanović, who was robbed of the sixth man award a year ago and figures to remain elite in this role for as long as his knees can hold up.

The good news is the Hawks won the draft lottery. The bad news is they won it in 2024, a year with no clear top pick. In some ways, Atlanta seemed to opt for fit over ceiling by selecting French forward Zaccharie Risacher. (How much should we worry that none of the scouts interviewed for this thought the top pick in the draft would be the best player?) However, Risacher is a tall, mobile forward who can defend down on the positional spectrum and has a good basketball IQ; if his shooting holds up, he might be the player Atlanta thought it was getting when it drafted (and then extended) De’Andre Hunter.

Atlanta’s other big offseason decision is extending the best player nobody talks about, forward Jalen Johnson. He blew up as a starter in his third season with 16.0 points and 8.7 rebounds, and at age 22, he should have plentiful opportunity to expand his game with Murray gone. Bookending him with Risacher could make for a pretty imposing forward combo two or three years down the road.

That hints at another development in Atlanta — this team has become much younger. Daniels and Johnson are 22, Bufkin is 21, Risacher is 19 and Onyeka Okongwu is 23. All of them can guard, which is crucial when building around Young (himself not exactly a grizzled vet at 26). That’s the best hope for fixing last year’s 27th-ranked defense; the Hawks have never finished better than 21st in defensive efficiency in the Young era.

A succession issue at center also looms, where Clint Capela is 30 and on the last year of his deal, and Okongwu hasn’t been good enough to take over as a full-time starter. However, the Hawks are finally in a position where they can use most or all of the $23 million trade exception from the Murray trade on a replacement next summer without going into the tax, even after they pay Johnson. Moving Capela at the trade deadline also is an option, especially if they’re mired in the middle class as expected.

Overall, the Hawks might not win any more games than they did a year ago, but the arrow now points in a much healthier direction. They’re out of luxury tax hell, got 85 cents on the dollar back on the Murray trade and have the makings of a young core to carry them forward. Genuine progress in the standings, however, seems more likely a year from now.

(Top photos of LaMelo Ball and Kyle Kuzma: Patrick Smith, Jared C. Tilton / Getty Images)