I don't get the point of the thread OP. I guess my response is... Duh!? No **** Sherlock!? Yeah, no kidding it's not 100% safe. So what in life is? Btw, I think top 5 picks in the NBA are freaking insane in value. Historically, the proportion of franchise superstars that are drafted in the top 5 is ridiculously high compared to later draft positions.
Durant's talent was undeniable. Steroids made Oden look like he was playing with middle school kids in college.
Sometimes I wonder if Oden fakes these injuries just so he doesn't have to take performance enhancement drugs. If you took these drugs to become the #1 pick I think you should be expected to keep taking them after you are paid.
Yeah. Exactly. Look at Dwight. 3/5ths of the starters are terrible defensively and yet they're a top 5 defensive squad in the NBA.
The purpose of this thread is to raise a discussion about the NBA draft and the science of the draft. If you don't feel this thread is useful, what was the purpose of you posting in it? To be negative? Some questions asked were: Why do teams take the unpolished big man over the already very good PG or SF, even though the percentages say otherwise? I understand the risk/reward factor, but I just wanted some other perspectives on the topic.
Fairly good points however IMHO what's really misleading is the competition. The NCAA game is just so different from the NBA in terms of qualtiy of players and opposition its kind of hard to see how they will fare in the NBA. For example Hasheem thabeet looked like a fairly good player in college, blocking more than 2 shots a game and just giving everyone a hard time. Here in the NBA, he couldn't do anything and had to be sent to the dleague because he couldn't even beat out 2nd string Hadadi for PT. Another factor is you don't know how well the player will improve or not improve in the NBA. Our very own Carl Landry is proof of that, when he started out he looked like he didn't even belong in the league, yet from the time of his summer camp to the start of the season he improved so much he didn't even look like the same player. On the other hand someone like Okafor looked like a franchise guy after his rookie year when he averaged a double double. 5 years later, and his stats are still almost exactly the same give or take a reb or a point.
Agreed. It's the same problem NFL teams have when it comes to the draft. The spread offense has made it very hard for teams to determine how players translate to the pros.
This is the key factor that is hard to judge about college and foreign players when drafting. Some guys are talented or have potential because of their athleticism, but you wonder about their motor, competitive instincts and dedication to basketball. Other guys are unbalanced workout warriors who are completely sold out to basketball and winning at all costs. Background checks and interviews
I understand the idea of drafting bigs. How many quality bigs were drafted outside the top 5. Bynum is the only one I can think of and that was because he was only 17 when he was drafted. However, how many college freshman dominated the way Durant did in his one year in college? Not even Jordan, Magic, Bird, and Dream dominated the way Durant did during their freshman year. Durant is 6'8-9" wing with a 7'4" wingspan, that has the quickness, range and handles of an elite 2 guard. The only people that have those type of freakish physical attributes have gone on to be MVP's of the NBA. Those players are Magic, KG, and Lebron.
The science is that it's an INEXACT science. Because we're dealing with human beings. Human beings aren't robots or equations used in video games. They're not entirely predictable. That's what makes them human. That makes everyone different. That makes it impossible to predict what their actions, growth, or heck, whether they're lying in their interview or simply workout warriors. What else is there to say? Morey probably has some of the best basketball stat geeks working for him, and even he can't predict outcomes well. He missed horribly on Dorsey, despite Dorsey being 24 and incredibly set in his skill level coming out of the draft. Dorsey was suppose to be a "safe pick", and ended up as perhaps Morey's worst draft decision.
In all fairness to Morey, Dorsey was drafted in the 2nd round (#33 overall). I wouldn't exactly call him a bust because most 2nd rounders don't make it.
I didn't label Dorsey a bust. I labeled him the worst draft pick of Morey's era(not including irrelevant ones). Which he is unless Taylor becomes irrelevant again. I mention it because out of all of Morey's picks, Dorsey was likely the "safest". He has no injury issues like Landry. He is older than our other picks. His skills seemingly translates best to the NBA. Yet he ended up being the most irrelevant of our young players. Which shows just how inexact a science the draft is. Even when the person drafting is a genius. :grin:
Rule No.1 to avoid drafting a bust: (1) Never draft an international prospect. Since Yao, all international draftees have been a bust. Bargnani is good but he definitely not worth a lottery.
Yes, but anyone who followed the Blazers would see that they were in more need of Oden than Durant. You don't need two wing players in the starting 5. If Oden was healthy from day 1, and developed into something great (such as Durant has done), then Portland might be battling for the 1 seed right now, not struggling to be the 7th.
This isn't really a good argument DD. Coming out of college, Okafor was 10x better than DH. Melo was also so much better than LBJ. Just because they're better now doesn't mean they will be better long term. Skillwise its usually the perimeter who's more skilled than the big.However if you think about it a HOF, franchise is worth two perimeter dudes (or in my case, 1.25 Jordans=1 Hakeem). That because a big guy could impact a game much more than a small guy, as Yao Ming's absence on our team has shown. Oden really showed a lot of potential coming out, and before his injury he was showing that to the world. Although if I was pritchard I would have taken Durant (as they already have Prizz and LMA), IMHO you can't really blame them for picking Oden, with the only exception if they knew about his knee problems and still picked him.
That was the weakest draft class in over 20 years, perhaps ever. In any other year, the top 5 of that draft goes 6~10, Brandon Roy included. Colangelo tried to trade down, but with no one prospect worth trading up for, he was stuck with the pick. He said afterwards that in a normal draft year that Bargnani would get picked lower, but that they chose the guy with the most appealling combination of size and skill. In hindsight, Roy is the stud of that draft, but even the team that drafted him didn't take him with their first available pick at #2 (Aldridge) and took him instead at #5. It's not Bargnani's fault it was a bad year.
Yeah if not for Rajon Rondo, 2006 would look kind of weak. Though the 2000 draft is MUCH worse. Only 2 All Star appearances COMBINED the entire draft class (Kenyon Martin, Michael Redd 2nd round) After Martin, they couldnt dig up another All Star until 42 picks later. They were both in the 2004 All Star game. So basically, only 1 season did the 2000 class have an All Star.
Per minute, Oden is a beast. Will he ever be able to stay healthy and up his minutes to be more of a factor?
