I remember a lot of people saying last years draft class would be weak. We saw how that turned out. Solid draft class
This. You can't judge the class before anybody has played a game or even announced their eligibility. A lottery pick is a lottery pick and it will more than likely be somebody with immense talent. Really tough to predict.
The last lockout draft was a great one too (Dirk Nowitzki, Paul Pierce, Mike Bibby, Vince Carter, Rashard Lewis, Antwan Jamison). I think the Cavs made out like bandits here.
Yes and no....there are always surprises, but by and large franchise guys are foreseeable. "Good draft" and "Bad draft" aren't normally adequate descriptors. It's more about: Potential stars, can't miss guys, or role players Deep vs shallow Looking back: Last year, there was John Wall - "star" level excitement, but not like you saw with LeBron or Carmelo. There were interesting guys as well (Evans, Cousins, Favors), but no one seen as "lead your team to greatness" - I'd say that panned out as correct. 2009, it was all about Blake Griffin (ready to contribute at a high level, skilled and polished at the 4)....and then no one could decide for sure about anyone else. High risk draft. Curry came through.....but overall it was a bust-fest. 2008, there was serious tanking (Miami, shamelessly) because there was a lot of excitement over Rose and Beasley, with OJ Mayo a consolation prize. This was a draft I recall being labeled as shallow - a larger than normal drop off in talent after the top 7. There were more nuggets found in the second half of the first than were expected, though. 2007, there was a lot of Oden/Durant buzz...and plenty of folks thought that Portland did the smart/safe thing - both guys looked like they could potentially be franchise changers. Going into this draft, and things usually change dramatically with the Final Four, the basic buzz is that this draft class does not have those 2-3 guys that have potential star written on them, and no one at all that (today) looks like a franchise savior. Doesn't mean "bad"...but it means Cleveland can't be feeling great about unearthing a new face of the franchise with a #1 pick. Perry Jones looks like he could be something special if things come together, but he's not a sure thing. Kyle Irving is looking GOOD at the point, and might turn out to be a gem at PG. If Sullinger was 2-3 inches taller, teams would be excited about him. He's one of numerous bigs that have intriguing qualities hurt by worrisome downsides Cavs should come away with two building blocks, but it stinks that Baron Davis has to pollute the locker room in the meantime. This is not a silver lining personality type, and he already had a toxic relationship with Byron Scott by the time he left New Orleans.
Idiots, what more can you say. They could have had Kyle Irving instead of Mo Williams. I was astonished at the time of trade just dumbfounded. And now so are the Clippers.
That assumption is based off the belief that the Clippers would have played the exact same level of basketball with Davis that they did with Mo. A few more loses or a few more wins and their position in the lottery changes.
ok thanks. i just messed that up completely. But I still think they shouldnt have traded their top 10 protected pick.
