Quit overrating the 12 pick. It sucks.

[BTP]

Do you know what the following names have in common:

Joe Smith
Purvis Ellison
Mark Workman
Andy Tonkovich
Bill McGill
Kwame Brown
Kent Benson
Michael Olowokandi
Greg Oden
LaRue Martin

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, they were all #1 NBA draft picks and they all sucked. If we win the lottery we should trade the pick if we are offered anything better than a bag of chips, because as you can clearly see, sometimes the #1 pick does not work out.

Greg Oden didnt suck because of basketball reasons unlike most of the other guys on that list. I think that statement is very shortsighted...

Different note:
I don't think the draft is a crapshoot, but rather that GMs like to gamble. If you find that special player late in the draft he'll propel the trajectory of your current roster in a different way than an average, but productive player would have.

Some GMs nowadays focus on market inefficiencies and trends.
There have been 3 big trends in the last decade since the league found out that (advanced) numbers dont lie.
1) Team defense. It's not a problem if you can't stay in front of a lot of guys in the league. But you gotta try to force him to a point where he shoots at a lower %. Individual defense is only a problem if you're up against the top10 offensive players in the world. You specifically need guys for these assignments if your best players is worse than the opponents best player.
2) Long range shooting. Nuff said.
3) Multi layered attack schemes. "Old" offenses partially had that as well like the triangle, but in a way too predictable way.
Simple pick and rolls are also too predictable unless your ballhandlers are really dangerous shooters off the dribble(compare: Curry, Steph; Nash, Steve). These pin down schemes for guys who aren't the best ballhandlers that enable them to get to the rim with 1 or 2 dribbles and give them a headstart are super nice.
I don't know who did them first(Probably San Antonio, but Ginobili is an awesome ballhandler without a headstart, so IDK)
I noticed them first with the Raptors when I realized how Casey let his guys run Horns last season and if it didnt generate a good shot or a gap to hit a rolling big to the rim, you could use it to free up DeMar DeRozan, who is not careful with the ball at all, to become an efficient scorer.
Since then Klay Thompson, Jimmy Butler, Kawhi Leonard, Arron Afflalo(Orlando), Wes Matthews have found ways to elevate their careers to new highs and added unprecedented value to their respective teams.

 

[green]

The draft can definitely be a crapshoot, but if you can find a good player, the advantages are monumental compared to trading for a player with a MUCH bigger salary and on a short deal. The salary cap makes it mandatory for teams to find cheap talent, and the best way to do that is through the draft.

So, you take the risk that one if 14 will end up being an ok player (Burks). OR, you pay a little more and guarantee the pick becomes a starter. Easy choice. IF you can trade it for a player like Barnes or Batum, you do it. You don't think twice.

 

[green]

You're overrating Barnes quite a bit, and rating Batum on what he has been, instead of what he currently is.

Have you watched Barnes this post season? I am not over-rating him. I'm saying he is better than anyone we could draft at 12, and better than Burks or Hood, which he is. That isn't over-rating him. That's being smart.

 

[green]

Green, don't you know there is injustice in the world that you should be devoting yourself to?

But seriously, on June 25th the Jazz will have the #1 overall pick. We're in it to win it bitches!

I made it very clear that I don't give a **** and anyone pretending to is lying.

 

[Siro]

And Malone, Stockton, Parker, Leonard, AK, etc were all taken after the 12th pick. The CHANCES you draft one of those guys at 12 is slim to none. IF you can trade #12 for Barnes, you do it. No brainer. You don't keep #12 for a minuscule chance the guy you pick becomes Barnes.

And what is it that makes the number 12 so specially foreboding? More importantly, how the **** are you a doctor???

 

[Gameface]

I made it very clear that I don't give a **** and anyone pretending to is lying.

You're silly

 

[orangello]

Do you know what the following names have in common:

Joe Smith
Purvis Ellison
Mark Workman
Andy Tonkovich
Bill McGill
Kwame Brown
Kent Benson
Michael Olowokandi
Greg Oden
LaRue Martin

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, they were all #1 NBA draft picks and they all sucked. If we win the lottery we should trade the pick if we are offered anything better than a bag of chips, because as you can clearly see, sometimes the #1 pick does not work out.

You left out another big one, Anthony Bennett.

Get it, big one?

 

[green]

Do you know what the following names have in common:

Joe Smith
Purvis Ellison
Mark Workman
Andy Tonkovich
Bill McGill
Kwame Brown
Kent Benson
Michael Olowokandi
Greg Oden
LaRue Martin

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, they were all #1 NBA draft picks and they all sucked. If we win the lottery we should trade the pick if we are offered anything better than a bag of chips, because as you can clearly see, sometimes the #1 pick does not work out.

Exactly my point. IF you have the #1 pick, and someone offers you a player that is the #1 level or better, you take it.

Just like if you have #12, and someone offers you Barnes or Batum, you trade it. Even the #1 pick is no guarantee of success. Trading the #1 pick for a current All Pro is a better risk.

Look at Cleveland. Maybe Wiggins becomes the next Jordan. Maybe he sucks. Kevin Love is an All Pro PF. Make the trade. Love is a guarantee. Wiggins is a dream.

 

[green]

13 is unlucky for the Hornets - who drafted Kobe and foolishly traded him to the Lakers.

Kobe forced his way to LA. If Kobe hadn't forced his way to LA, he would have played for NJ Nets.

 

[green]

And what is it that makes the number 12 so specially foreboding? More importantly, how the **** are you a doctor???

Nothing makes the #12 pick so foreboding. I'd be saying the same thing if we had the #10 pick. Or the #11. Or the #12. What makes the #12 pick what it is, is the fact that WE OWN THE PICK.

I am a doctor because I am smarter than you and work harder than you. Thats how. Pretty simple stuff. Be smart and work hard and you too can be a doctor. I did that. you didn't.

 

[stitches]

The biggest value(production/$ paid) in an NBA market that is capped both for teams and individual players, comes from two main sources:

1. Super stars - because their salaries are capped and usually their contributions are much higher than the salary they are being paid.
2. Rookie contract outplaying their rookie salary. That's why draft picks are extremely valuable. A lot of them outplay their salary by year 3 of the contract. And most rookie contracts are small enough as to not be any type of a detriment to the team even if they bust.

Of course there are others that massively outplay their contract, but those are much more rare because the league usually has had time to evaluate them for at least 4 years(their rookie contract) before they receive their next deal and it usually doesn't miss on great talents past their rookie contracts. Surprises with massive value gained with middling or low non-rookie contracts are rare and are usually triggered by injury concerns(i.e. Curry's contract, but now even if he was at max deal he'd still be a bargain).

This is why teams that have either superstars or great players on rookie contracts massively raise their level. Gaining value in those critical areas allows you to spend the rest of the salary cap in filling in the roster with players that usually would play at about their market value. For example, I would say Hayward and Favors play at about their market value.

Right now we have no super stars and we have 1 player on a rookie contract(Rudy) who is massively outplaying his contract. That's usually not enough.

For example, the Warriors right now have 1 superstar in Curry(arguably 2 if you include Bogut), 3 players in Klay, Green and Barnes that are massively outplaying their rookie contracts. That's why they can afford to pay 10-15 million each to several subs and have an all around great roster. And that's why they won't be able to keep all of their pieces once Green and Klay get max and the time comes for Barnes to get paid.

I hope you don't misunderstand this post to mean - picks are always better than an established player who will most likely play to his market value. I am not saying that. I am saying there are nuances in those considerations and all kinds of stuff factor into them - at what point of the development of the team we are, what is the make up of our current roster, are we at the point where we are set with our group and we are ready to contend, or do we need more young pieces who are likely to outplay their contract, what are reasonable expectations for our other young pieces, or even our non-rookie pieces(are they likely to outplay their contracts in the next several years), etc.

I personally wouldn't mind trading the pick for Barnes, I think he's probably better than what we can get at 12 but you also have to factor in his contract situation - he will have to get paid next year and would we be willing to do it. Keep in mind that this will be the year when everybody will have a ton of money and he will very likely get close to max money which would be about 23-24M. If we are unwilling to match any offer, is it worth trading a lottery pick for 1 year of him? Similar considerations with Batum(we might lose him for nothing in 1 year time)...

 

[Siro]

I am a doctor because I am smarter than you and work harder than you. Thats how. Pretty simple stuff. Be smart and work hard and you too can be a doctor. I did that. you didn't.

Nice.

 

[The Fresh Prince]

Waiting for our 12th pick to turn into an all star so this thread can be bumped gloriously.

 

[infection]

I think that a Batum or Barnes would at best be a marginal improvement over what we've got, and I lean toward standing pat as being a better move. If Barnes substitutes for Burks, sure.

What kind of doctor are you, green?

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

I find it interesting when we use draft position as some historical precedent that's a marker for future expectation. A more accurate assessment is to look at who has been drafted at 12 or beyond to have an idea of what kind of talent is on the board. For instance, Batum was the 25th pick; would we have a better chance landing a Batum with that draft position than with a #12?

I'd rather draft a player in hopes he's better. In that case the franchise is et up for years. Chances are we get a role player at a tenth of the cost of a batum. While he may not be as good he still helps, plus... We turn around and use the money we would've used on Batum for the player of our choice at the money and years we want. Those lotto contracts are becoming very valuable

You left out another big one, Anthony Bennett.

Get it, big one?

But but but... Hack swears he's going to be good. Lol

 

[fishonjazz]

. Barnes isn't short term. We would hold his restricted FA, which means it would be a 5+ year deal for him. Not short term at all. In fact, the very definition of long term in today's NBA.

If it's a 5 year deal does that mean we would have to max him? Are you suggesting we should max barnes? I hope not

 

[fishonjazz]

Exactly my point. IF you have the #1 pick, and someone offers you a player that is the #1 level or better, you take it.

Just like if you have #12, and someone offers you Barnes or Batum, you trade it. Even the #1 pick is no guarantee of success. Trading the #1 pick for a current All Pro is a better risk.

Look at Cleveland. Maybe Wiggins becomes the next Jordan. Maybe he sucks. Kevin Love is an All Pro PF. Make the trade. Love is a guarantee. Wiggins is a dream.

Wiggins > asset than love

 

[da ThRONe]

Exactly my point. IF you have the #1 pick, and someone offers you a player that is the #1 level or better, you take it.

Just like if you have #12, and someone offers you Barnes or Batum, you trade it. Even the #1 pick is no guarantee of success. Trading the #1 pick for a current All Pro is a better risk.

Look at Cleveland. Maybe Wiggins becomes the next Jordan. Maybe he sucks. Kevin Love is an All Pro PF. Make the trade. Love is a guarantee. Wiggins is a dream.

What you are failing to do is account for the situations involved. Cleveland just resigned the best player in the league which completely shifted their timetable for a title run. I highly doubt they pull that trade off if LeBron stays in Mia or goes to another team.

There's no sure thing other wise every time would go 41-41 every year. However smart teams have plans in place and their moves are always inline with said plan.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Nice.

Pretty much confirms the rampant complaints surrounding M.D narcissism.

What kind of doctor are you, green?

A dentist.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Greg Oden didnt suck because of basketball reasons unlike most of the other guys on that list. I think that statement is very shortsighted...

Different note:
I don't think the draft is a crapshoot, but rather that GMs like to gamble. If you find that special player late in the draft he'll propel the trajectory of your current roster in a different way than an average, but productive player would have.

Some GMs nowadays focus on market inefficiencies and trends.
There have been 3 big trends in the last decade since the league found out that (advanced) numbers dont lie.
1) Team defense. It's not a problem if you can't stay in front of a lot of guys in the league. But you gotta try to force him to a point where he shoots at a lower %. Individual defense is only a problem if you're up against the top10 offensive players in the world. You specifically need guys for these assignments if your best players is worse than the opponents best player.
2) Long range shooting. Nuff said.
3) Multi layered attack schemes. "Old" offenses partially had that as well like the triangle, but in a way too predictable way.
Simple pick and rolls are also too predictable unless your ballhandlers are really dangerous shooters off the dribble(compare: Curry, Steph; Nash, Steve). These pin down schemes for guys who aren't the best ballhandlers that enable them to get to the rim with 1 or 2 dribbles and give them a headstart are super nice.
I don't know who did them first(Probably San Antonio, but Ginobili is an awesome ballhandler without a headstart, so IDK)
I noticed them first with the Raptors when I realized how Casey let his guys run Horns last season and if it didnt generate a good shot or a gap to hit a rolling big to the rim, you could use it to free up DeMar DeRozan, who is not careful with the ball at all, to become an efficient scorer.
Since then Klay Thompson, Jimmy Butler, Kawhi Leonard, Arron Afflalo(Orlando), Wes Matthews have found ways to elevate their careers to new highs and added unprecedented value to their respective teams.

Oden was a number one pick who didn't work out. In the big picture it doesn't matter why.