2012 Draft: Taking best player available vs Targeting a certain position

[BluesRocker]

I am hearing alot of talk about targeting a small forward or point guard. The game hasn't changed. You take best player available. You especially take a good big man. If we are lucky enough to draft first overall next year. You take Anthony Davis for sure. Who cares that we have Kanter and Favors. Having those three guys could turn out to be the most dominating rotation of bigs in the league in the future. Or you are drafting between 2 and 5 maybe take Andre Drummond or Jared Sullinger. Go ahead and hog all the bigs. Who cares. Just means that no one else has them. And also gives you tremendous leverage. Or even Jeremy Lamb. Who cares that we already have Hayward and Burks. Remember trades are always in the play. And you can just keep the best guys. This is assuming of course we have that good of picks. But even so I think it applies in the top 10 or so.

 

[spycam1]

I think everyone would agree with you. We're not saying we HAVE to draft a SF and PG, that's just what our roster probably needs the most. Although, there's a good chance the best player available will conveniently be a SF.

And if you get the top pick, you take Drummond, imo.

 

[The Midnight]

I think everyone would agree with you. We're not saying we HAVE to draft a SF and PG, that's just what our roster probably needs the most. Although, there's a good chance the best player available will conveniently be a SF.

And if you get the top pick, you take Drummond, imo.

Favors, Kanter and Drummond would make a very good front court for the future. All of them complement each other perfectly. Offense, defense, size, speed, power, etc.

 

[JimLes]

Drafting the best player is stupid, unless the difference between that guy and the guy you wanna draft based on need is tremendous. If you create a logjam at a position, sooner or later you'll have to clear it, never mind that you'll still have the original need to fill. You'll have to trade, and in a situation where you're a very motivated seller and everyone knows it. Return on your investment may not match your desires.

I mean, I hope Kanter does really well, but unless the Jazz were absolutely sure he was going to be significantly better than Jefferson, Millsap, or Favors, I think they should've taken Knight or Walker. This way, we're going to have to trade one of the above mentioned four for a guard, anyway. In a situation where you don't have your pick of every college player minus two to simply choose from, at that.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

I think teams typically draft BPA and consider position as a tie-breaker if two players are considered equal talents. The Blazers passing on Michael Jordan is pretty much the example people point to when arguing that you always take BPA.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Drafting the best player is stupid, unless the difference between that guy and the guy you wanna draft based on need is tremendous. If you create a logjam at a position, sooner or later you'll have to clear it, never mind that you'll still have the original need to fill. You'll have to trade, and in a situation where you're a very motivated seller and everyone knows it. Return on your investment may not match your desires.

I mean, I hope Kanter does really well, but unless the Jazz were absolutely sure he was going to be significantly better than Jefferson, Millsap, or Favors, I think they should've taken Knight or Walker. This way, we're going to have to trade one of the above mentioned four for a guard, anyway. In a situation where you don't have your pick of every college player minus two to simply choose from, at that.

I think there are certain positions--especially PG and Center--that a team gives priority to. It's really tough to get a top-quality center or point guard in any other way than the draft. Those two positions are the most instrumental to building the team. So if teams have a chance to draft a quality center or PG, they might jump at that chance over other drafting other positions. I think the Jazz FO think Kanter will be our long-term center. A guy who can score, rebound and defend at that position, and someone who is basically replacing Okur. If the Jazz were really impressed with Knight or Walker, I think they would have taken one of those guys.

The Jazz probably thought Kanter was one of the top players in the draft, and he also fit a long-term need, so they picked him.

 

[Kyoto]

Drafting the best player is stupid, unless the difference between that guy and the guy you wanna draft based on need is tremendous. If you create a logjam at a position, sooner or later you'll have to clear it, never mind that you'll still have the original need to fill. You'll have to trade, and in a situation where you're a very motivated seller and everyone knows it. Return on your investment may not match your desires.

I mean, I hope Kanter does really well, but unless the Jazz were absolutely sure he was going to be significantly better than Jefferson, Millsap, or Favors, I think they should've taken Knight or Walker. This way, we're going to have to trade one of the above mentioned four for a guard, anyway. In a situation where you don't have your pick of every college player minus two to simply choose from, at that.

Thinking like that is the same kind of thinking that made Portland draft Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan... or Greg Oden over Kevin Durant.

 

[BENTLEY]

Drafting the best player is stupid, unless the difference between that guy and the guy you wanna draft based on need is tremendous. If you create a logjam at a position, sooner or later you'll have to clear it, never mind that you'll still have the original need to fill. You'll have to trade, and in a situation where you're a very motivated seller and everyone knows it. Return on your investment may not match your desires.

I mean, I hope Kanter does really well, but unless the Jazz were absolutely sure he was going to be significantly better than Jefferson, Millsap, or Favors, I think they should've taken Knight or Walker. This way, we're going to have to trade one of the above mentioned four for a guard, anyway. In a situation where you don't have your pick of every college player minus two to simply choose from, at that.

This is dumb.

Let me illustrate: Jazz need a PG. Only prospects left in the draft are Karl Malone (we already have too many PFs!) and Kevin Kruger (Jazz need a PG!).

You're saying you'd pass on Karl Malone and pick Kevin Kruger.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Thinking like that is the same kind of thinking that made Portland draft Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan... or Greg Oden over Kevin Durant.

If you look at my previous post, what I'm saying here is that you consider position (especially C and PG) if players you are considering drafting are considered equal talents. I should have been more clear.

 

[cctrackstar]

We as fans would have to stop becoming so emotionally attached to players before we accept drafting best player available over need. Drafting best player available implies that we inevitably let go of someone else a few short seasons (or months) later. Imagine if we drafted a really good small forward, and decide to let go of Hayward. It would be the right decision, but I'm pretty sure that the fans wouldn't be too happy about it. Even this draft is kinda tough. We have Millsap and Al, yet who do we draft? Kanter, who threatens to usurp one of them. Even Favors mins are being threatened by the Jazz drafting a number 3 pick, a pick which many think should start. (fortunately Kanter is so inexperienced that nobody will expect him to right away.) But you have to admit that if he's not starting by next year that people will say the Jazz wasted a pick. So what happens to Millsap and Al? They were the 'saviors of the franchise' at the beginning of last season.

The end analysis is that you draft a player you think will help the team, and take care of the rest of the details later.

(BTW, Millsap is smoking something if he thinks he'd start on any championship contender in the NBA)

 

[Deleted member 848]

We as fans would have to stop becoming so emotionally attached to players before we accept drafting best player available over need. Drafting best player available implies that we inevitably let go of someone else a few short seasons (or months) later. Imagine if we drafted a really good small forward, and decide to let go of Hayward. It would be the right decision, but I'm pretty sure that the fans wouldn't be too happy about it. Even this draft is kinda tough. We have Millsap and Al, yet who do we draft? Kanter, who threatens to usurp one of them. Even Favors mins are being threatened by the Jazz drafting a number 3 pick, a pick which many think should start. (fortunately Kanter is so inexperienced that nobody will expect him to right away.) But you have to admit that if he's not starting by next year that people will say the Jazz wasted a pick. So what happens to Millsap and Al? They were the 'saviors of the franchise' at the beginning of last season.

The end analysis is that you draft a player you think will help the team, and take care of the rest of the details later.

(BTW, Millsap is smoking something if he thinks he'd start on any championship contender in the NBA)

Joel Anthony > Paul Millsap??

 

[Jazz4ever]

Drafting the best player is stupid, unless the difference between that guy and the guy you wanna draft based on need is tremendous. If you create a logjam at a position, sooner or later you'll have to clear it, never mind that you'll still have the original need to fill. You'll have to trade, and in a situation where you're a very motivated seller and everyone knows it. Return on your investment may not match your desires.

I mean, I hope Kanter does really well, but unless the Jazz were absolutely sure he was going to be significantly better than Jefferson, Millsap, or Favors, I think they should've taken Knight or Walker. This way, we're going to have to trade one of the above mentioned four for a guard, anyway. In a situation where you don't have your pick of every college player minus two to simply choose from, at that.

28 GMs in the league disagree with you. Jefferson and Sap are only under contract for 2 more years. Who knows what offers they receive after that. Tyson Chandler, who is a worse all around player than both, is asking for $17 million a year and I can see some team giving him close to that. Bigs are very expensive and if you can get a good one for 5 years on a rookie contract its hard to pass up. Guards are a dime a dozen, and much easier to acquire via FA or by way of trade.

 

[cctrackstar]

Joel Anthony > Paul Millsap??

He only got 27 min per game in the playoffs, hardly starter mins. Less in the regular season.

What this really means is that the Heat don't really have a starting player at his position. Part of why they lost.

This is why Milsap nees to realize that starting isn't everything. What he needs to do is make a difference in the game, and if his opponent is three inches taller than he is, then he won't.

I hope Corbin finds a way to play players in a situational way. If the other team goes small, Milsap destroys the competition. If he's facing Gasol, maybe Favors is a better bet.

 

[bluenote]

Why don't we wait to see what pick we have, then talk who's available and what our needs are at that point? Too vanilla of an idea? But while we are talking, I would say best player available or trade up or down to target a pg.

 

[Deleted member 848]

He only got 27 min per game in the playoffs, hardly starter mins. Less in the regular season.

What this really means is that the Heat don't really have a starting player at his position. Part of why they lost.

This is why Milsap nees to realize that starting isn't everything. What he needs to do is make a difference in the game, and if his opponent is three inches taller than he is, then he won't.

I hope Corbin finds a way to play players in a situational way. If the other team goes small, Milsap destroys the competition. If he's facing Gasol, maybe Favors is a better bet.

Tim Duncan averaged 28.3 MPG in the 2010-2011 season. Does that "hardly" make him a starter???

Paul Millsap is more than capable of being a starter on a contending team. I guarantee you that a team with Sap at the 4 and Dwight at the 5 would wreck absolute havoc. Leave your confirmation bias aside for a good minute, and think of what you're saying. I agree, Millsap will probably be excelled by Favors in the long run, but don't dismiss the skills of one of our top 2 players on the team.

Also, Charles Barkley's height deficiency never prevented him from being one of the all-time great power-forwards. I will never understand peoples pre-determined conceptions that height is EVERYTHING in basketball.

 

[bluenote]

O.K. forget what I said. As long as the point guard discussion keeps coming up, you guys should keep an eye on Trey Burke at Michigan. He is a freshman this year and looks very solid - smart, aggressive, poised, pretty good shot and looks to pass as well. Never makes dumb decisions besides a hurried up 3 here and there. Next year Michigan will break out with some other good freshman coming in- McGary, Glen Robinson III, and if Hardaway Jr.stays. Burke could go in the 2012 draft if he keeps improving this quickly. May be one of the few desirable point guards in the coming years.

Why don't we wait to see what pick we have, then talk who's available and what our needs are at that point? Too vanilla of an idea? But while we are talking, I would say best player available or trade up or down to target a pg.

 

[Dr. Jones]

O.K. forget what I said. As long as the point guard discussion keeps coming up, you guys should keep an eye on Trey Burke at Michigan. He is a freshman this year and looks very solid - smart, aggressive, poised, pretty good shot and looks to pass as well. Never makes dumb decisions besides a hurried up 3 here and there. Next year Michigan will break out with some other good freshman coming in- McGary, Glen Robinson III, and if Hardaway Jr.stays. Burke could go in the 2012 draft if he keeps improving this quickly. May be one of the few desirable point guards in the coming years.

I'm interested in seeing what McGary does.

 

[cowhide]

I am a big Kidd-Gilchrist fan. I doubt the Jazz will be getting the 1st pick. The GS pick is protected. I believe if it is 7th or higher then GS keeps the pick. I guess if you think the Jazz are going to suck this year then the Jazz pick might be in the lottery. I just don't see the Jazz being a lottery team this year.

 

[Brown Notes]

It's depressing to see constant draft threads when the season is about to start. It's almost like I'm on my Browns board.

 

[cctrackstar]

Tim Duncan averaged 28.3 MPG in the 2010-2011 season. Does that "hardly" make him a starter???

Tim Duncan is an old tired man, that's why he's only getting 28 min per game. I believe he's also getting more then the 2-3 points per game that Joel Anthony is getting, which kinda justifies him starting.
Millsap is much younger than Duncan, and if he 'were' good enough to start on a championship team he would demand more mins then that; which gives the other team plenty of time to take advantage of his shortness. (remember, your example Duncan is almost seven feet tall, strengthening my position.)

I guarantee you that a team with Sap at the 4 and Dwight at the 5 would wreck absolute havoc.

If this were true, than it wouldn't be Millsap that makes us a contender, it would be Dwight. All this is saying is that Millsap doesn't have what it takes to get it done without superstar help, so he'd be what, after a good point guard the third or fourth option. Yeah, every team needs good role players -like Millsap.

As for Charles Barkley, different player different time. Barkley did well at 6'7ish during a time that Karl Malone was dominating the league at 6'9. Now you have Pau Gasol at 7', Duncan at 6'11', Bosh at 6'11, Dirk at 6'11, all playing the majority of their time at the 4. In order to play the 4 for the majority of mins a player really needs to be at least 6'10, if not than that player is a LIABILITY.

Paul Millsap is a situational player. If the other team goes small, he's a great asset, and he may get significant mins playing that way, but if he were to start full time, enjoy the lottery, or first round exits.