The common saying seems to be that we should take the most talented player ... as if that’s somehow quantifiable . none of the 3-4 players available to us are already top 20 nba players. Therefore , it will depend on their development going forward. Some of that is in the player , some of that is on the team . (Some luck) Hence the need to have an organizational fit . It would be hard for a player to grow in an adversarial environment . What is our culture ? What sort of atmosphere can Silas and staff create ? Players have agency now . It’s tough to have total control over a guy. Rookie contracts are 4 years right ? I think you might be able to keep guys through RFA , but how well does keeping disgruntled guys work anyways ? So , talent and athletic ability matter , but they are a floor and then skills and smarts take over . All of the top guys meet the threshold and they all have their warts and potential. Does talent already on the team matter ? If we are thinking about a 2-4 year time span then maybe ? there’s pressure to be good quickly like there hasn’t existed in the league in a while. If you hit on a player but don’t put a good enough team around him then you are up ****’s creek . OKC hit on high b2b2b picks and managed not to keep a lot , but not enough . GS hit on top 10 picks and got guys that really wanted to be there in curry and Klay . GS never was bottom 3 bad . Then there’s the FA route , trade option. Patrick and Rafa are trying to think of how these prospects not only fit with the current roster but other guys you can get in the NBA . I believe that the number of twists and turns your decision making process can be presented with are too numerous . Drafting a guy with a 5+ year outlook is too unreliable. To elaborate on green , Suggs , and Mobley ; I’d say that Mobley is a hard sell for me . I think it’s still a tougher defensive learning curve and Mobley is not exceptionally strong at the rim runner role is he ? I’d concede that maybe I’m wrong , but I think bigs taking longer is still conventional wisdom . getting to green he is definitely the most advanced scorer . He adds a pretty good threat to our offense . If Silas is able to create a system where he can eat and use his athleticism he can be a demar derozan with a 3 ball , which is pretty damn good . You think he could get a percentage of the way there (on offense) fairly quickly . However , currently I’m settled on Suggs . I think he’s the closest to fulfilling his potential and becoming his own player . All players have their warts and his are concerning , especially as the smallest of the group . But if he can shore up one or two elements I think he fits best with KPJ and Tate and wood (assuming all 3 continue to improve) . He gives us a sick point of attack defender and our transition offense should be sick . My analysis is only half-hearted . I haven’t thought of trade scenarios . I could be completely wrong on the time frame assumption . But still, I think I’m right about fit .
Even if I agreed with the premise that fit was the most important thing....and I don't, Suggs is by far the worst fit.
I forgot to mention the most important thing @DaDakota is down on suggs. This means that he for sure we should take him.
Is KD being the most talented player of the draft ...somehow quantifiable? That being said, welcome to team Suggs Thugs OP, we are a small but well-established group.
KD was too skinny and everyone knows it takes big players longer to develop and they're always hurt, so everyone should have passed on KD.
Apologies, I didn't read your post, but assuming your title reflects intention: Fit is a terrible draft criteria for the worst team in the NBA. We need to find genuine stars. Apologies if your view was far more nuanced than I just caricatured it to be
lol at trying to compare KD and Mobley KD was an elite and supremely skilled scorer, he wasn't looked at as a rim-running big man who needed time to develop offensively. Him being 215 on a narrow frame wasn't a problem because he came in as a 6'9 wing, not a "generational defender" at center
the Rockets have no foundation to build around yet, so I don’t even want to hear about fit at this point
I actually tried to decide my favorite pick based on similar logic, but unfortunately there are posters in the "almost always wrong about everything" group that love/hate every single one of the prospects. So I'm afraid this line of reasoning can't really be used in this case unless you want to avoid Cade, Mobley, Green, and Suggs.
Not to step on OP’s toes, but I think the theory was that if all available players are relatively equal, if you draft someone who fits your current roster (albeit not great), they may have a better chance of developing and reaching their potential than if you took the highest ceiling and ask him go out and try to carry the team. You could actually end up hurting both him and the team in the long run. It’s an interesting theory, but one that would be hard, if not impossible, to prove. But it’s something to consider.
c If you describe "fit" from a slightly different perspective, it is a factor in NBA teams evaluation of players. My company is working with another company to support an NBA team for the draft (no, its not the Rox). One of the criteria they look at hard is whether the player is a fit for their team's culture. What they mean by this is his personality going to mesh with the other players. Things like is he a "me or I" or "we and us" guy; does he love the game; will he accept coaching from the staff and the other players; are his priorities his craft or does he have other interests/hobbies that he invests in heavily; etc. While this probably isn't news to anyone, I think its important to understand these intangibles and not only what talent/skills a player brings, but also elements of their character, desire, and overall fit within an organization's construct. I mentioned in another thread that I liked some of Green's intangibles. He seems to have a desire to be great, to perfect his craft, to learn from his mistakes, etc. Is he perfect, no, but he appears to have some of the extras that you want and need in a foundational player. Mobes, Cade and Suggs may have an equal amount and I don't want to turn this into who to pick, but wanted to chime in and say there is an element to fit. Now having said that, if you picking between someone who's ceiling is much higher than the other players on the board, a team certainly weighs that and will make a decision if the risk is worth it. I imagine that's why KPJ slid to the 30th pick the year he was drafted, most teams didn't see drafting him as worth the risk. This team is a play-off team, so they are looking at a particular type of player. Unlike us that needs to fill in many holes, they had a glaring one that stood out.
Good luck saying that in reddit. I'm getting downvoted like crazy for saying that. Just draft best talent available regard of position. We are not competing for the next 2-4 years. Worry about fit later. Can always trade. Suns is basically playing 1 C, 2 SF, 1 SG, 1 PG. Last year Heat is playing 1 PF, 1 SF, 2 SG, 1 PG. It's guard league now. Lakers playing AD at C last year. Now Bucks is mostly playing Giannis at C and bench Lopez.
We’re way too early in the building process to worry about fit. It’s all about acquiring the best talent possible. You focus on fit in a few years when you have a clearer idea of what you have and you’re really building a competitive team.
