Overall Morey has been very very good finding talent in the mid-late first round and especially so in the second round!! As regards Royce White, the Rockets had 3 picks (12, 16,18) that year. If you have 3 first round picks, I think you can take more of a risk and that is exactly what the Rockets did. Morey knew and even acknowledged publicly, that he felt that Royce was a big risk. Fact is that Royce was a talented player in college who had more talent than many guys drafted before him. His anxiety issues were the real concern. He hasn't played a single minute in the NBA and will probably go down as the worst 1st rd pick ever - BUT if you ever have multiple mid-late first round picks, that is a risk you should take every single time if you want your franchise to go anywhere, because the benefits could totally outweigh the risks.
Keep saying that to yourself.... Royce White, TJones and Jeremy Lamb are all drafted because they were in NEED FOR TALENT Back to the days where they got Kevin Martin, and they went for TWill, Jordan Hil and Flynn
Teams shouldn't draft for need because you don't know what your needs are in the future. And you can always trade away depth in front of a guy if he's special, i.e. traded Budinger after Parsons broke out or Brooks because of Lowry. Any smart team would take the best talent because you should.
A tale of two NBA franchises In 1982 the Lakers were fresh off a second championship season in the last 3 years. Their core was a young Magic Johnson, an aging Kareem, and veterans Norm Nixon, Jamal Wilkes, and Michael Cooper. They didn't have much at power forward with this garbage man Kurt Rambis who had knocked around for a couple seasons and was just a hustler/banger, and another dude that had blown out his knee a season before and hadn't looked good after he came back. By the flip of a coin they had earned the top spot in the draft and sitting atop the draft board was a speedy 3/4 man who played outside - in (Worthy) and a true power 4 (Terry Cummings) and a crazy good athlete (Dominique). While most people recognized Worthy as the best player, many in and around the Lakers thought they should either draft Cummings or possibly trade down in the draft for a young center (Lasalle Thompson) and get another pick or two with it. Worthy (and Wilkins) were considered repetitive because Jamal Wilkes was a standout wing playing alongside Magic and Nixon. Kareem was in his mid- 30 's. And the "need" fit was Cummings. Lakers took the BPA. The next season, after winning 58 games, and losing in the finals, the Lakers traded Norm Nixon, one of their core pieces for the #4 pick in the draft, Byron Scott. DYNASTY By contrast in 1982 the Utah Jazz coming off another losing season, drafted Dominique Wilkins. They had a pretty decent backcourt with Rickey Greene and they had a young undersized power forward who had just broke out as a big time interior scorer with these wonderful fakes and moves (Adrian Dantley). Wilkins gave them some hassle because he didn't want to play there. And instead of dealing with it the Jazz traded him for a decent veteran small forward (John Drew) and a backup shooting guard (Freeman Williams). The next 2 years brought in Mark Eaton, John Stockton, and Karl Malone. But they failed to win a single championship. Can you imagine Stockton, Hornacek, Dominique, Eaton, and Malone?
Houston draft strategy - draft another undersized finesse BS power forward We had enough of them b****es already and had to get rid of them
and can rebound, defend both PF and Center position if needed and pass proficiently. I don't know why you would want only a 3 pt shooting PF. NBA games has evolved already. Versatility is a premium nowadays.
At pick 18, best player available is usually a tweener (guard or forward) who dominated in college, but will usually be a role player at best. Considering the amount of PG's in the draft this year, and considering our glaring need at the position,how 'bout we select the best PG available?
Don't over think this. You didn't actually say size doesn't matter in basketball anymore? No, no, no. Just because one team won with an undersized PF does not mean you can do without. Nearly every title of this century had Shaq or a legit 6'10 PF. You damn sure need a big PF still, just maybe not to beat GSW. You still have to beat Griffin, AD, Zach, and LA in the West. Plus Ibaka will give small PFs fits, unless they are just 3pt shooters. You can't say small will work just because GSW has the most prolific 3pt shooting team ever to win a title, and their small PF is a Top 2 defender in the league. It is very important to create mismatches, and Griffin, AD, Zach and LA are hard to guard without size. Plus, if your PF is small, they are easier to guard and box out. The importance of size has not changed.
Size is nice, but if there's a Draymond Green or a Paul Millsap in this draft we should take him. He didn't say that size doesn't matter, just that the term "undersized" has taken new meaning now that every team seems to be playing small ball.
Whenever you consider need, you increase the chance of a bust. Drafting at 18, you're getting a guy that is unlikely to contribute right away, and may very well be a backup type player when he does.
should be try an draft lebron and just see what happens, is there an unwritten rule that says we cant. i dont care if it is a dick move lets just draft lebron james even if he does travel and what not
I don't really see any reason not to go BPA model, and really it's the way we've always operated (maybe not last year since we were looking for a guy to stash (that we didn't end up stashing)). When we drafted Royce White and Terrence Jones we already had Patterson, Marcus Morris, and Donatas Motiejunas on the roster. In this draft I'd be totally fine with them getting a point guard, even if the plan is to sign Llull and bring back Beverley. The power forward scenario above shows that BPA is the best approach. We had a glut of PFs, but still took two. One was a bust, the other has been a nice rotation player. Point is, Jones gave us flexibility to keep on flipping guys to try and get the right guy. While Patterson for Thomas Robinson never worked out, it was all a part of the process. Having guys you can plug into roles while looking for that "perfect fit" is a big part of the BPA model.
