Summary of “Strategic Choices Need to Be Made Simultaneously, Not Sequentially”

Although I have always emphasized that these five choices have to link together and reinforce each other, hence the arrows flowing back and forth between the boxes, it has become clear to me that I haven’t done a good enough job of making this point, especially as it relates to the choices of Where to Play and How to Win.
I had to tell my Australian friend that locking and loading on Where to Play choices, rather than setting the table for a great discussion of How to Win, actually makes it virtually impossible to have a productive consideration of How to Win.
An infinite number of Where to Play choices are possible, and equally meritorious – before considering each’s How to Win.
Making lists of Where to Play choices before considering How to Win choices has zero value in strategy.
Uber made a Where to Play choice that included China because it’s a huge and important market.
Microsoft made a Where to Play choice to get into smartphone hardware because it was a huge and growing market, seemingly adjacent to Microsoft’s own, but it had no useful conception of how that would be twinned with a How to Win – and it lost spectacularly.
P&G made a Where to Play choice to get into the huge, profitable, and growing pharmaceutical business with the acquisition of Norwich Eaton, in 1982.
All How to Win choices are useful, or not, depending on the Where to Play with which they are paired.
As a Canadian, I can’t help but recall the many Canadian retailers with powerful How to Wins in Canada that simply didn’t translate to a Where to Play in the U.S. Perhaps there is some solace in retailer Target’s disastrous attempt to extend its U.S. How to Win into the Canadian Where to Play – turnabout is, I guess, fair play.
The only productive, intelligent way to generate possibilities for strategy choice is to consider matched pairs of Where to Play and How to Win choices.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Five Player-Team Combinations to Avoid in the 2017 NBA Draft”

We are less than a month away from the 2017 NBA draft, and with all the downtime between NBA Finals games, this is the perfect time for fans and front offices alike to think about all the different options they’ll have at their disposal when their time on the clock comes up.
Here are five player-team draft combinations that would be the equivalent of forcing a square peg into a round hole.
Sixers: De’Aaron FoxDanny Chau: Assuming the Celtics and Lakers take their expected routes on June 22 and choose Markelle Fultz and Lonzo Ball with the first two selections, the Sixers will, once again, hold down the all-important pivot point in the draft at the third spot, where they’ve selected Joel Embiid and Jahlil Okafor, two players who have come to embody the successes and failures of the Sam Hinkie era.
The Sixers aren’t in a position where they have to draft for need, but they’re far enough along in their puzzle where they should start looking at how the pieces are fitting.
One year later, after Weltman took a job with Toronto, he played a role in the decision to draft Bruno Caboclo, a raw, unknown prospect from Brazil.
While Isaac is ranked seventh on my general board in The Ringer’s 2017 NBA Draft Guide, the Magic need to be thinking about finding their cornerstone this draft, even if there’s higher risk involved.
Orlando has significant draft capital with picks 25, 33, and 35, and they should find valuable pieces to fill those roles.
The quickest way to waste draft picks is to pick players whose skills don’t fit with the personnel around them and the system they will be in, and to do so without a clear plan as to how to use them.
Kings: Jayson TatumChau: Sacramento moved up in the draft lottery for the first time in nearly three decades, so of course it had to be the year that they were forced into a pick swap with Philadelphia.
Jonathan Isaac slotting in as a versatile, situation-dependent wing-big hybrid is intriguing with Cauley-Stein’s ability to stay in front of all five positions, but sooner or later, the team will have to address the fact that it hasn’t had a legitimate point guard since Isaiah Thomas in 2013.They desperately need someone to distribute - WCS can’t catch lobs that aren’t there; Buddy’s off-the-dribble game is getting better, but he deserves more easy baskets; Skal can’t roast players with his shockingly mature inside-out game without having a point guard who can ably get him the ball.

The orginal article.