I think most of it comes down to coaching. If we are being honest how badly did they really screw up the roster in the off season given what was available to them?
Going into off season we knew we needed:
Improved shooting
more depth at PF
A Center to back up Mitch
Improved PG's
Better defenders
Better passing
A star
We took RJ Barrett who was clearly the best player available and he turned out great compared to expectations despite the many reservations people had(especially me, I wanted Culver but thank god i'm not running things).
Given how far behind in development we were it was always unlikely we'd get the biggest FA's. We wen't from having no NBA caliber PF's to having 3, one coming off a career season, one who was a respected two way vet for many good teams, and one wildcard which to many was fine.
We brought in 3 two way players that would improve our shooting(Morris and Wayne Bullock)
We got a very serviceable PG
So what gives?
You could make the argument that maybe we bring in a center instead of one of the PF's we brought in, and I'd agree given how raw Mitch was. But who were the feasible the alternatives? Dedmon? Valenciunas? Zubac? WCS? Dwight Howard?
You could make the argument that Payton wasn't enough, but if not him then who? Cory Joseph(who sucks right now)? a rapidly declining George Hill? Or make riskier allocations and spend over the top to lure Rubio or Rozier?
You could say that maybe we don't sign Ellington and trust Dotson and Trier to fight it out..but would we be better?
I knew coming in that the way we built this roster wasn't great but given the alternatives I'm not sure we would have been that much better. We got better passers, defenders, shooters, and more depth at the 4. We still lacked PG play, an outright go to player, and a reliable center but all things can be handled under a good coaching scheme. I'm not saying fire Fizdale yet but this idea that they are throwing him under the bus is overblown.