Exactly. If it was as simple as Leeb is saying then nobody would be paying $7-8million for one dimensional big men. But yet they get paid! So clearly you can't just pick a big guy in the draft who was a good defender in college and automatically have him being a good defender in the NBA. Personally I think Fab Melo will be a better player than Drummond. But that says more of my opinion on Drummond.
At the time Morey traded Dalembert + #14 for #12, your statement above was no longer the way the Mock's were playing out. Ford, for instance, had Waiters in the top 7 and Lamb was where Waiters used to be (early teens). It had flipped. To Morey it was looking like he might have a shot at Lamb, but he thought it wise to leapfrog PHO. And his prediction at the time of the trade ended up being correct: Lamb was available at #12, and with Waiters/Ross/Rivers gone, PHO was not going to pass on Lamb.
You dont need to answer this but what possesses one to believe that big men arent equally overvalued in the draft? See Thabeet , Hasheem or as you well know Oden, Greg.
Yes, I could see that Sam. But if you have 3 picks, why not take a shot at a position of need if....IF...you have the BPA and a center close in ratings.... If your metrics are within like 10%, then to me, we should take a shot. DD
So basically you should draft the best player under your system except for when you arbitrarily decide to junk your system. I would love it if you came up to my blackjack table. The reality of the situation is that grabbibg an inferior player due to need never yields results. If you believe a player to be inferior you don't take him. This us what successful teams do.
Dalembert was also the 26 pick in the draft. He rode out a rookie dea till he showed promise,then got paid. No one forecasted asik and now he's getting paid. The rockets are going nowhere, but going nowhere with a guy on his rookie seems to be worth the risk even for an older team like the celtics. They have cap room even after resigning garnett. What made them draft melo at 22 vs offering asik 8m per?
Dalembert was also the 26 pick in the draft. He rode out a rookie dea till he showed promise,then got paid. No one forecasted asik and now he's getting paid. The rockets are going nowhere, but going nowhere with a guy on his rookie seems to be worth the risk even for an older team like the celtics. They have cap room even after resigning garnett. What made them draft melo at 22 vs offering asik 8m per? Its like the rockets are scared of drafting a center prospect because of the potental bust rate, but they will attempt to sign or trade for the guys after he's developed on another team.
And you're basically proving my point. Why even bother trying to draft the Dalemberts and Asiks when the hit rate at the back end if the draft is so low? Would you rather have 2% chance of a cheap Dalembert (after rookie growing pains) or 100% of a mature one at a higher price? Easy choice. As for the argument that they should nit even bother and just youth or tank olI don't disagree necessarily disagree but that's not the way Leslie wants to play it asyou know.
No my system is that you recognize the flaws inherent in the system. BlackJack is pure math, when you know all the outcomes, it is not really a decent comparison to this situation. Right now the metrics you generate for each player are based upon mostly observational data, and it is highly inaccurate. So, I believe that need is a factor to consider - they are certainly considering it now in free agency and also taking a shot at an unknown like Asik. DD
It's almost as if you're saying that's somehow a bad strategy?? I'm confused as to what your argument actually is anymore? IF the Rockets prefer to pay for a center (perhaps based on the fact that drafted ones tend to be crap) and instead of paying for forwards, prefer to draft them (based on the fact they seem to have a very high strike rate in getting good forwards) then isn't that a viable route? In the end a team made up of players in years 1-2 will suck badly. No matter if you've got Westbrook and Durant - experience is not negotiable. It would appear the Rockets prefer to take the experienced big man (rarely do big men produce in their first few seasons!) and draft other pieces. Other teams might prefer to keep rolling the dice on the big man and pay for other pieces. But based on "bust rates" alone, it would seem paying for a big might be a slightly better strategy?
This is a great point, so for me, I would ask, is Asik a guy that is proven? I mean, clearly getting Dwight would be amazing and even with Dalembert and Camby you knew what you were getting. But Asik, at least to me, is the same as drafting a big - just a big old unknown. DD
To you it seems that way bc you haven't done the rearch and don't know what you're talking about. NBA teams have - which is why Asik is seen as a more valuable commodity than Thabeet
Btw - only in the r****d incline planes of the DDverse is Asik an unknown commodity while Vasileos Spanoulis is a future star. You put Dan Langhi in the Hall of Fame after preseason but the Shiek needs more skins on the wall. Awesome and typical as the punchline writes itself.
And here I thought we were having a decent conversation, I should have known better. VSPan - I thought was worth a look at backup PG because Rafer sucked - nothing more. Dan Langhi was a tongue in cheek discussion. Either way, I still think Asik is not proven - he has been in a system that hides a lot of players - Tom Thibedeau makes a lot of people look great. Asik might be awesome, he might suck, I doubt we find out though, I believe Chi town matches. DD
He can't bust out the way Hashim did with the 2nd overall pick... He is a 2nd rounder, no expectations there, he has been good so far.... but still I would go with a star potential player here or at least 2 way player
A total lie as that's not remotely close to what you said they'd be. Exposing this lie for the tenth time is uninteresting though. What's more fun is how you figure that Asik is of equivalent value to a late round nobody that Chicago is probably going to match and thus shower 15 million on in 2014 and blow up their entire franchise for. Only in the bizarreo world of the DD verse can these two things coexist.
So clearly YOU wouldn't pay the big bucks for him. But in the end, the fact that you are ignorant of Asik and his game is quite irrelevant. He IS a known commodity. He HAS had 2 years in the NBA and HAS shown himself to be a good shotblocker and rebounder and an outstanding defender, both individually and as part of a team concept. There is no reason to believe he will be unable to handle the rigours of the NBA or learn to play in a system or be physically incapable. He has done all those. If YOU were not aware of that, it's perfectly fine. But hopefully now your question has been answered. There is leagues of difference between drafting a big and even picking up a bad big man who has been in the league 2 years. At least you've seen the bad big man in action for 2 years and know what he can do against the Dwight Howards or how he compares to the Joel Pryzybilla's.
