OK--DoD aside from obvious centers.... So the #2 pick of a 6' PG with unspectacular athletic skills wasn't bone-headed enough, they passed on Odom as a #2 after clearly knowing Francis wasn't going to play with Bibby and live in an igloo. Let's also not forget you can trade down. Francis's #2 is worth a lot more on draft day than after he gives his for disgruntled speech. They could have probably traded down and grabbed Odom. When there are no obvious centers around, pick someone that can sell seats with spectacular athleticism. You can always trade them to Sportscenter for two first rounders in their fantasy basketball league. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited February 29, 2000).]
Hindsight is 20/20 my friend. There are always players that teams and scouts THINK are the best at their respective pick. Research is done, stats are looked at, team impact, physical shape and presence, etc. Sure, there are always hidden gems in the draft....ie Karl Malone, John Stockton. But how many can you name? And did we know on draft day they would be that good? Did the team that picked them know? I doubt it. So I am not sure why you argued my point DoD. There are always, what we believe to be, obvious best players in the draft. Mistakes are made, but assumptions are made also.
Cockiness is not a good thing in a lot of cases. But what I really want out of a player is more of a confidence than a cockiness. I just want a player that believes in his abilities. For every Isiah Rider, Cuttino Mobley, Vernon Maxwell, Larry Bird, and whoever, there is a Joe Dumars, Michael Dickerson, Julius Erving, and Hakeem Olajuwon. What's so bad about picking a 6'2", pg in Michael Bibby as the #2 pick in the draft. The guy is a good player. 14.3 ppg, 7.6 apg, 3.7 rpg, and 1.67 spg. I can't fault Vancouver for drafting a pg that can put up those numbers. It's not like Steve Francis is producing numbers exponentially better. I don't think Bibby will ever be as good as Francis, but he's not going to be a total bust. Um..I don't see these new wrinkles Cuttino Mobley has added in the last 2 years. The way he plays now is almost exactly how he played at Rhode Island. You can go back and watch some video of his game back then. It's not very different at all. I predicted that Vince Carter was going to be this good. I was a big advocate in trading all of our picks to move up and draft Carter. Started following his game in high school and got to see about 40 of his games in college. You could tell he was the real deal. The very moment I knew he was GUARANTEED to be special was in the semifinal game against Utah in 98. During the course of the game and down the stretch, he was the one player who stepped up to the physical challenge that Utah laid down. I could tell he wanted to be the man down the stretch. That was the one knock I was holding against him for most of his college career. The rest is history.
Da Man... It's tough when you break it down into personal definitions. I was trying to say I agree with thecabbage's claim that "heart" is somewhat meaningless in sports. To me, heart is better used in context of affections, life, death, war, surviving pain. Cockiness, Confidence, Winner, Loser, etc. is about sports. Wrinkles can be ratcheting your college game up to nba standards--piece-meal. He didn't have as many cuttin-nO! plays back in college did he? I never saw him play, but he was Conference MVP. again...I'm not comparing him to Dickerson, here. Dickerson is gone. I'm over it.
I have to give MD his due. I never thought he would be more than an average starting SG because of poor free throw shooting and lack of clutchness (confidence in tough situations is you will). Well this year there is no question MD has fixed problem #1, though it makes me think why the hell didn't he fix it midseason last year when it mattered for us . As far as #2, the jury is still out. So far in the biggest games he has been a-wall (in Final Fours, versus Lakers last year). I won't know more about this matter until 2012, when the Grizzlies have their first and last playoff series in their franchise, or until he gets traded to a winner. More seriously though, at the clip MD is racking up points and shooting well from 3 land and the line, I have less doubt he will grow into a confident and clutch player. I would now say (I wouldn't have at the beginning of the year), overall, he is a better player than Mobley or SA. Not by a lot over either (look at their #'s per minute), but I would give him the nod. But I still don't think MD will ever be any better than say Byran Scott or say Nick Anderson--great role players dependent on others to set them up, but their is no shame in this. Like Scott, I also have not seen the defensive instincts and feistiness from him to make me think he could be a Dumars or Mitch (all-NBA types), whereas I do see the all-around game in Jones, Finley, R. Allen or Kobe for instance. Nor have I seen a true scorer game of a Miller or A. Houston that would set him apart in other ways. I still don't think MD will ever be in these guys league, but he could prove me wrong, again. I do think Vancouver did the right thing in trading for the guys they got. As they didn’t need a PG or SF, their alternative would be to use their pick on Wally or Rip or Bender, and I would say the 2 main guys they got certainly make more of an impact on their team than any one of those rookies would. Still, I would take a Francis- Anderson-Mobley backcourt any day of the week over Bibby-Dickerson and whoever else (Price, Lopez?) they have. I think Anderson’s steadiness and physical defense coupled with Mobley’s first step and confidence off the bench are great compliments to Francis. If Vanc was really smart they would have done everything they could to sweet talk Francis into staying and ship Bibby to us for Mobley or MD + Othella. Bibby isn't bad and may even be an occasional all-star, but he is no Francis , make no mistake. Just look at Francis's first year numbers relative to Bibby's second, it is already apparent who the superior and more explosive guy is. It was just our luck that the superstar wanted to leave and we could get him for a young outstanding SG and an average aged, hardworking, good in the locker room, modestly talent PF who we replaced with a late first round pick. That is a great deal any time you can do it, regardless of the underlying reason.
Hoop-T, You just proved my point. "There is usually no obvious best player". If there were, that player would be picked first every time. Your points about Karl Malone, John Stockton just defend what I said. If people "knew" who the best player was, they would have picked either of these players. Hindsight is what you're using, not me. I "argued" your point because you said pick the obvious best player. I simply said, looking back, there is a best player. But in any given draft, there isn't necessarily one at draft-time. Heypartner said get the guy who's going to be the most exciting at that pick and place people in seats. I can go along with that, except that's not exactly easy, either. This all goes back to that old thread about what are the odds of getting a stud or even a very good player in the top 10 picks. Is having the 3rd pick historically any better than having the 6th pick? But like I said, that's an old thread, so I'll leave it alone. ------------------ <this space for rent>
