I was triggered by the word "stubborn" in Papi's post in describing Shaka. In its context, I read it as a criticism of Shaka, and I believe there have been others here who used the same word to describe their frustration with Shaka's refusal to go to the portal. In fairness to Papi, he had valid points regarding the team overall, but that does not mean that I am in full agreement with him.

So, why did "stubborn" trigger me? Because there is little, if any, acknowledgement by many "portal fans" that we had no transfers out, that a high-level portal player would be a starter-leaving a player who thought his time to shine had come sitting on the bench- and leaving the rest of the team nervous about being "portalled over" in the future, and also leaving prospects like Miletic having serious doubts about Shaka's words vs. his actions.

Although there would be no way to prove it undisputedly at season's end, I think a high-level transfer would have made the team stronger, but only for this coming season. The consequences of adding the transfer are stated in the above paragraph. Accepting the possibility (or likelihood if you please) of a step down (hopefully only a slight one) this season is inherent] in Shaka's long-term strategy and MO. Shaka is planning for the upcoming and future seasons with his system. Perhaps it is time to revive the "five years to judge" mantra.

I will shortly be heading out of town for the day, but will leave by stirring the pot on the portal question:

Do you think Shaka would have gone to the portal if Kam left, or would he stay with his no-portal strategy?

50% of NBA players spend time in the G league.   I suspect, regardless of where they are drafted, TKo and Oso will spend time there.

The worst stripe shirts in history couldn’t save the Wolves.