Discussion in 'Entertainment, Culture, and Sports' started by RFX45, Sep 22, 2010.
ahahaha...as crazy as all the NBA news was from yesterday, this one tops them all:
Why does improve have to mean making the playoffs? Will Cleveland, Wizards, Kings, Atlanta, Minnesota, Pelicans, Suns, Knicks be better teams next year due to this draft. I think so. And for the reasons I mentioned earlier, the Sixers have become a "better" team through this draft. My premise is not fucked, everything in sports is a big what if. What if Jrue tears his ACL next year? What if this was the best year he will ever have? What if he shoots his friend and leaves him in a ditch? Of course no one knows whats going to happen, all they can do is put a plan in place and try to execute it as best they can. Sixers know that better than anyone else (see: bynum) and look at last year's can't miss Lakers. Jrue was never going to be a game changer for them, he was going to keep them competitive at best. In Noel they get a potential game changer. Of course he can turn into Pervis Ellison but if he, or any other big man was a sure thing, you sure as hell wouldn't get them in a trade for Jrue Holliday.
And here are 20-29 picks, are there any stars? I'd be shocked if any of these guys are leading their teams but are there quality guys that can play 20-25 minutes and be effective?, I think so:
20 Tony Snell
21 Gorgui Deng (shirt worn on draft night made by CEGO)
22 Mason Plumlee
23 Solomon Hill
24 Tim Hardaway
25 Reggi Bullock
26 Andre Roberson
27 Rudy Gobert (I know nothing of this guy)
28 Livio Jean Charles (same)
29 Archie Goodwin
And in that group I would not be surprised to see more than just "solid" play from Hill, Hardaway, Roberson and Bullock. Deng will be a very good rim protector.
Again, everything is a toss up, if something is a sure thing, you are not going to get it in the middle of the draft or get it by trading a good shooting guard. But if you don't take the risk, then you'll just be another Milwaukee.
Sure doesn't sound it the way you are talking.
And no, not all of those you listed will make a productive 20-25 mintues per game. I mean are you serious, 20-25 minutes? Half of those guys will likely not crack the 10minute mark unless they are all drafted by the Bobcats.
But by improvement, what do you mean? Increase in ft% by 1? Win one more game that the past season? I mean seriously, even if you do not make the playoffs, the team still has to get an extra 10-20 wins base on that guys effort and contribution alone or else the guy is just a flop. Again, winning is the true goal and measure of improvement. Not all of those will help improve the team, hel some of those might be sent to the DLeague.
We will see how these guys do in training camp. Lillard didnt really caught my attention until then so there is a chance one or two of these draftees can be a future star.
I can see that you are going to take this literal as in, if a few of these lower picks average 12-14 points, or play solid 15-20 minutes you are going to come back with, "you said they would score 20+ and play 25+ minutes!"
We'll come back at the All Star break and see where all these guys are.
i've always thought the nba overvalued draft picks. given the rate at which even first round choices fail to deliver, i'd much rather take even a second-tier veteran.
Do you think this new wave of analytics will buck that trend? I feel like in the past it was far more subjective and a pure crap shoot. Now teams have some tangible performance evidence that will make draft order a better reflection of future nba success
I am obviously exagerating it but you are saying these 29 players are going to make improvements in their teams but really improvement w/o winning is subjective. Sure one player could run faster or defend better so the team is better but if they still lose and end up with the same record in the 20 minutes he played by averaging 5 points and 3 rebounds, then your value to being drafted at 10th pick is worthless. You can probably find a guy in the DLeague that can give you the same thing but that is not what these teams are looking for.
I mean look at your ridiculous claims, the 15 teams will improve with this draft? pick 20-29 can contribute and play 20-25 minutes? That is a lot of playing time and the teams that drafted 20-29 like the Bulls, Pacers, Knicks, Nuggets, Thunder, Clippers, Spurs, etc... they aren't going to get that much playing time and chances are, they are D-League bound. You really think they can break through these loaded teams? On the first year nonetheless? You are insane to say these is no luck needed for these guys to breakout because they are all that good.
And you are crazy for ignoring how good Jrue is and his ceiling potential, Noel is already a high risk player, there is a reason dude went 5th. No matter what you say, Jrue is the safer choice and you already have a name there. Yeah the league is full of "what ifs" but what is sure and a FACT is Jrue is an AllStar and a very good player. Noel could still miss the whole season next year, there is a huge possibility of that and even then, dude played what, half a college season? This dude could flop big time. Another FACT, Sixers are stupid with these risks. See how Bynum panned out? Exactly. They took that dumb risk and ended up with practically nothing. They are doing the same thing here and really, Noel is someone I see as being mediocre at best at this point. We won't know until he steps on the court but you have too much shit riding on him. Rebuilding a team hoping they get 2 good picks next year and that is why you traded your star player? That is a bad move and really, nothing but a championship or a Conference Finals appearance in the next 10 years involving those same players can prove me wrong.
This draft isn't as good as you are saying, just got to face that fact. Save this page and throw it in my face a year from now if I am wrong but there might be one Lillard-type of breakouts, maybe another semi-decent rookie but that is the most I would expect from this draft class. It isn't strong if tehy slightly improve a team w/o showing any results. I don't need to take that shit literally but if a player averages 12-14 pts a game but has the same wins, that isn't improving the team. If a player plays 20-25 minutes a game but the team only improved by one game, that isn't improving the team. And trust me, next year I am not even going to remember this discussion and who I am discussing it with so bookmark it and shove it down my throat if I were wrong, I'd admit it if I were wrong. Hell I really hope I am proven wrong and that there is a clear cut star that emerges from this draft but your claims for the whole draft class is simply insane (improving 15 teams no luck needed because these players are so that talented that there won't be a surprise breakout ). Prove to me those giant claims and you'll get a sincere and honest apology.
I have no doubt the analytics are getting better, but I think saying teams "now" have "tangible performance evidence" makes it sound like more of a quantum leap than it really is. They have always had tangible performance evidence. It's just a question of what data they choose to focus on and how they choose to interpret it.
the problem is, there isn't a lot of data available for incoming rookies. they're all high school players, one-and-dones, or international players for whom scouts might have attended a few games. so there's private workouts and the combine but that can go spectacularly wrong - we've got these famous stories about GM's holding a private workout, getting their socks knocked off, and getting completely infatuated with a player. the two stories that stick out in my memory are Jerry West with Kobe Bryant and...Joe Dumars with Darko Milicic
it's much easier to scout NBA players with all the film, game-to-game scouting and even those newfangled camera systems in some of the NBA arenas these days.
Ok just to clear everything up here. I did not say that every single player in this draft (1-29) will play big minutes and contribute big time. Here are my thoughts in a nutshell:
1. This draft was better than the "experts" are claiming.
2. Many teams got better because of this draft. If better to you means going from the basement to the Conference Finals, then yes, this draft sucked.
3. There was value low in the draft. Will every player from 20-29 be an All Star? No, but there will be more guys in that group playing substantive NBA basketball than anyone is thinking right now.
4. As to your bolded, thats rather silly as I can turn it around and say if Jrue does not take the Pelicans to the Finals in the next 10 years, he is a big washout.
Anyway, sports are nuts and sportsfans nuttier. I respect everyone's opinions and at the end of the day, the proof will be in the pudding. I'm just not going to pay too much attention to what is said about this draft from the same people (sportwriters/ESPN etc) that has Miami cakewalking to the trophy.
its different schools of thought. Teams like Knicks/Nets and obviously the Heat (teams with money, at least before the CBA) pretty much go the established veteran route. Other teams take their time and develop. You could never sell a NY team that is "rebuilding" with draft picks. People would rather pay to see some "star" that can put up 30 points, even if the team only wins 20 games. You can argue for either approach but I think the bottom line is that when you want to put butts in the seats, you better have a big name player.
Holliday is one of the most overrated, high usage players in the league who's shooting percentages keeps getting worse. 2014 draft has real players and Noel could turn out. SIxers needed to start over and that's what they did.
Lawerdad- yes Morrison is out of the league. The ways in which I hate Jordan as a GM are endless.
In what way are they better though? I mean all you are saying is that if they get 20-25 minutes but chances are, these guys aren't going to be good enough to crack those kind of minutes because they were drafted by teams with deep rosters. I can see this in the top 10 getting some grind but those above that, not so much.
I really just do not think so, I really don't. Again, cracking that line-up will be tough in deeper teams. If the other draftees from the past year couldn't do it, I have no reason to believe this years draft is any different. Look at last year for example, start at #11-#29, how many of those players are relevant or actually improved their team (significant improvement)? I honestly annot think of any of those players from 11-29 that has helped improved the team and you are claiming 15 teams will improve in this draft?
Look at 2010 draft, from 11-29, only about 4-5 are good enough to crack and make the starting line-up and some of those took luck and injuries to happen. Bradley and Vasquez got some run due to injuries but really, Vasquez is good but that draft didn't really make Memphis (team that drafted him) better. He isn't even good enough to start for the Pelicans anymore hence the Jrue acquisition.
You really saying this years draft is actually much, much better than those 2 years that they will have more impact to their teams when many analysts these guys are DLeague bound or benchwarmers? I don't know.
Still the safer bet at this moment, right now and they traded a possible disaster in Noel. Point is, Jrue's value is much higher than Noel. Jrue is already an AllStar, Noel might never be w/ that injury. If he did not have that injury, I'd be more inclined to agree with you that it is a good trade but getting an already injured guy and in hopes to acquire two good drafts next year, who can also be very risky (uncertainty of draft #) is just not looking good. It's a big risk and unknown reward to be honest because I do not even see Noel being that great center. Is a possible 15/8 guy (at his peak?) worth Jrue? Philly and you think so, I don't.
But as you said, we shall see. I really hope they make a believer out of me but I am not buying your inflated prediction.
Separate names with a comma.