What's new
By:

2016 NBA Season Notes/Info

Saint Cy of JFC said:
Drafting a PG with no jump shot is a risk. And yes, drafting players from mid-major is generally considered a risk even if PGAB doesnt agree.
Click to expand...

I'd say it's a case by case decision.
In his case I'd say he was a calculated risk. He was a 20yr old junior, which explains why he slipped under the radar in highschool and got to a smaller school.
From his college 'decision' interview:
Payton stated that he had interest from Tulsa, Tulane, Louisiana Tech, Wichita State, Texas A&M and several other state programs. But UL was his only Division 1 offer to date.
Click to expand...

His measurements were off the charts. He probably aced psychological exams predraft, seems bright.
 
BTP said:
I'd say it's a case by case decision.
In his case I'd say he was a calculated risk. He was a 20yr old junior, which explains why he slipped under the radar in highschool and got to a smaller school.
From his college 'decision' interview:


His measurements were off the charts. He probably aced psychological exams predraft, seems bright.
Click to expand...

So what does risk entail to you then? Almost every draft pick is a risk.
 
BTP said:
No it's making a high risk, high upside pick. Or do you want to tell me that guys like Gobert or Giannis didn't have sky high projected ceilings predraft?
Click to expand...

Because they were two foreign players who got overlooked. Foreign scouting still isnt as good as local scouting. Gobert was projected to go 5th overall at one point.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Because they were two foreign players who got overlooked. Foreign scouting still isnt as good as local scouting. Gobert was projected to go 5th overall at one point.
Click to expand...

Yes, they were. I'm sure if I start searching I'll find overlooked American prospects as well. But in this case, if foreign scouting is a market inefficiency despite it being known to be a good pond, they could have done something about it.
 
BTP said:
https://www.draftexpress.com/article/NBA-Draft-Prospect-of-the-Week-Rudy-Gobert-4212/

I just went back to read this pre draft writeup. That's the definition of high risk-high reward. The Jazz got lucky everyone including themselves passed on that potential early in the round and then found a stupid team willing to part with their pick and give the Jazz a no risk - high reward guy(Spurs had the 28th pick if you're curious ;) )
Click to expand...

So what would make Gobert high risk if he was drafted in the mid to late lottery?
 
I think any pick you make in the lottery is high risk, unless you are taking a consensus #1 overall pick. The risk if who you are passing on. I would also add a level of risk to players deemed to be "projects" or not NBA ready. So, to me, criticizing the Magic for not drafting "risky" enough just seems silly. They took plenty of players people deemed to have high potential projects. Gordon, Payton, and Hezonja all fit that category to me.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
So what would make Gobert high risk if he was drafted in the mid to late lottery?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's basically what I'm saying. The Sixers took risks with Embiid's foot and back potentially never fully healing and his longevity being impaired heavily. It's still a significant risk that every fan in Philly right now tries to forget.

Just look at Orlando's overall draft performance. Look what picks they gave away. The most ridiculous part was the Saric-Payton bluff.
 
Injury risk is often a double edged sword-- There's also risk in passing on a superior talent due to injury concern a la the teams with the picks before Nerlens Noel or Julius Randle..
 
BTP said:
Yes, that's basically what I'm saying. The Sixers took risks with Embiid's foot and back potentially never fully healing and his longevity being impaired heavily. It's still a significant risk that every fan in Philly right now tries to forget.

Just look at Orlando's overall draft performance. Look what picks they gave away. The most ridiculous part was the Saric-Payton bluff.
Click to expand...

What? I asked you a question to what would make Gobert considered a risky pick if he was drafted in the mid to late lottery. You responded "Yep thats basically what Im saying". There might be a language barrier here, but Im asking for you to describe to me what exactly would make Gobert be considered a "risky" pick if he was drafted in the mid to late lottery.
 
Gobert wasn't a risky pick either.. He was actually EXTREMELY,UNBELIEVABLY low risk at the spot he was selected.

He would've beenlow risk had the Jazz stayed pat at 14 and taken him at the bottom of the lottery -- I remember saying I'dbe cool with them taking him at 14.. One of the reasons I'd have cited were his potential to hit 65%-70% FT's
 
PG_AB said:
Gobert wasn't a risky pick either.. He was actually EXTREMELY,UNBELIEVABLY low risk at the spot he was selected.

He would've beenlow risk had the Jazz stayed pat at 14 and taken him at the bottom of the lottery -- I remember saying I'dbe cool with them taking him at 14.. One of the reasons I'd have cited were his potential to hit 65%-70% FT's
Click to expand...

Saint Cy of JFC said:
What? I asked you a question to what would make Gobert considered a risky pick if he was drafted in the mid to late lottery. You responded "Yep thats basically what Im saying". There might be a language barrier here, but Im asking for you to describe to me what exactly would make Gobert be considered a "risky" pick if he was drafted in the mid to late lottery.
Click to expand...

BTP said:
I just went back to read this pre draft writeup. That's the definition of high risk-high reward. The Jazz got lucky everyone including themselves passed on that potential early in the round and then found a stupid team willing to part with their pick and give the Jazz a no risk - high reward guy(Spurs had the 28th pick if you're curious ;) )
Click to expand...

I probably should've said that Gobert's profile is that of a high risk high reward kind of prospect. Since everyone passed on him, he turned into a no risk high reward guy as all the Jazz had to invest were a couple millions and a mid 2nd round pick.
At the time let's say Giannis would've been picked up around 5 and Gobert at 9. Those picks would've been highly discussed, scrutinized. But people would've added: "They got some legit upside. If their games ever catch up to the potential the bodies and personality offers, watch out!"
So yes targeting high reward players is something the Magic IMO missed out on a bit. We seem to have slightly different views on Gordon, Hezonja and Payton, but at least we're on the same page that targeting those guys is a good way to build a roster.
 
BTP said:
I probably should've said that Gobert's profile is that of a high risk high reward kind of prospect. Since everyone passed on him, he turned into a no risk high reward guy as all the Jazz had to invest were a couple millions and a mid 2nd round pick.
At the time let's say Giannis would've been picked up around 5 and Gobert at 9. Those picks would've been highly discussed, scrutinized. But people would've added: "They got some legit upside. If their games ever catch up to the potential the bodies and personality offers, watch out!"
So yes targeting high reward players is something the Magic IMO missed out on a bit. We seem to have slightly different views on Gordon, Hezonja and Payton, but at least we're on the same page that targeting those guys is a good way to build a roster.
Click to expand...

Im just trying to figure out what makes something high risk to you.
 
The Denver Nuggets are working to find a new home for center Jusuf Nurkic in advance of next month's NBA trade deadline, according to league sources.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Im just trying to figure out what makes something high risk to you.
Click to expand...

Investing a very coveted pick/asset to get something that may never pan out. If you invest a #1 pick, it's by definition high risk in most years.
Since the average return on a #1 pick is very high, missing out like Cleveland did with Anthony Bennett is potentially a huge problem. Now if you pair your high value pick with a prospect that's perceived to have a high variance and high ceiling, you create a high risk high reward situation. If you select Victor Oladipo with a #2 pick, you're not going for the highest reward, because the likelihood of Oladipo turning into a franchise player is 1%, while he's a worst case probably going to be a guy who can be the league's best 4th option on a contender with special roster makeup.
 
BTP said:
Investing a very coveted pick/asset to get something that may never pan out. If you invest a #1 pick, it's by definition high risk in most years.
Since the average return on a #1 pick is very high, missing out like Cleveland did with Anthony Bennett is potentially a huge problem. Now if you pair your high value pick with a prospect that's perceived to have a high variance and high ceiling, you create a high risk high reward situation. If you select Victor Oladipo with a #2 pick, you're not going for the highest reward, because the likelihood of Oladipo turning into a franchise player is 1%, while he's a worst case probably going to be a guy who can be the league's best 4th option on a contender with special roster makeup.
Click to expand...

So is that based off your own personal evaluation of a player's perceived floor/ceiling or the general consensus?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top