A little perspective for Draft Day

by howlingfantods on Jun 26, 2008 11:45 AM PDT

I've been hearing a lot of folks, media included, saying we have to move up from 13 to get a good player. Just for a little perspective, I thought I'd list the picks and draft positions for the top 5-10 players pretty much in order of quality from the 2001 to 2005 drafts. It's 5-10 since I don't feel like ranking limited role players, and in some years (like 2002), there are only a few good players.

2001 (the Kwame draft)
gilbert arenas	30
tony parker	28
pau gasol	3
joe johnson	10
tyson chandler	2
gerald wallace	25
jason richardson	5
shane battier	6
richard jefferson	13


2002
tayshaun prince	23
caron butler	10
amare	9
yao ming	1
carlos boozer	34


2003
lebron	1
dwade	5
bosh	4
david west	18
josh howard	29
melo	3
hinrich	7


2004
dwight howard	1
luol deng	7
andre iguodala	9
kevin martin	26
josh smith	17
devin harris	4
al jefferson	15
emeka okafor	2
ben gordon	3


2005
chris paul	4
andrew bynum	10
deron williams	3
monta ellis	40
danny granger	17
jason maxiell	26
linas kleiza	27
david lee	30
andrew bogut	1

Disclaimer - I spent around 5 minutes putting this list together, so I might've missed a few. Some folks might quibble with my rankings, like I recognize most would disagree with the order on the 2002 draft -- *shrug* what can I say, I hate bigs who can't or won't play defense, a common affliction to Yao, Boozer, and Amare.

So I think the point is pretty clear, right? Sure, there's usually slightly better chance of success drafting in the top 5, especially in years like 2003 where there are a bunch of no-brainers at the top of the draft board. But even then, there's no guarantees that high lottery picks outperform good picks from throughout the draft board. This year, I think we're looking at a 2005 type of year, where there are maybe one or two sure things, then a bunch of maybes.

Who are those good picks throughout the board this year? I have no idea, that's why they pay KP the big bucks, not me. Although I'll venture my guess that Brandon Rush, Roy Hibbert, Courtney Lee, and CDR will all make teams regret passing on them.

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

You are right, I disagree about 2002

It took some time but Yao is now the best player of that draft. Before he got injured this year he was on his way to the top 2 or 3 in MVP voting.

by TallTimber on Jun 26, 2008 12:06 PM PDT reply actions

I agree that the ranking is a little off

This is how I would do it:

amare 9
yao ming 1
carlos boozer 34
tayshaun prince 23
caron butler 10

With that said, good stats. It’ll be interesting to see how 06 and 07 play out….

"Beards--they grow on you"

by prezofdeath on Jun 26, 2008 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions

Like I said, I hate bigs who can't/won't play defense.

I think guys like that are a ticket to teams disappointing in the playoffs. I’ve seen a lot of different types of teams win the championships, but I have never seen a team with poor interior defense win it all.

by howlingfantods on Jun 26, 2008 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions

I agree completely

There is ALWAYS a good player on the board, somewhere.

That’s another reason why a team like the Hornet’s selling their 1st round pick for 3 million bucks is so silly… there are plenty of players who can help that young team and fill out their weak bench.

At #13, you obviously don’t have a chance at the alleged ‘no brainers’, but EVERY single draft has great, terrific players that go much later than they should and #13 has often had access to a good to great to hall of fame player.

Anyone watching these old NBA drafts re-plays in NBATV? I feel like a loser watching them, they are are a good mix of sad and hilarious…

Kobe is vaunted for his ability to make everyone better. Antonio Daniels went #4 when he was drafted, and was touted as a great shooter. Some French guy I never heard of was just taken by the Kings in the 1st round (maybe still the lottery?)

The ‘97 draft is on now. Seeing the clips of a young Tim Duncan at Wake Forest were pretty cool.

So many of these players in these drafts were SO GREAT, NO BRAINERS, SURE FIRE SUCCESSES. So many bad picks, every year, and this year is no exception for sure—no year is.

Having pick #3 doesn’t guarantee a great player, and pick #13 or even #27 doesn’t mean you can’t get a great player.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2008 12:15 PM PDT reply actions

I think this draft will cement KP's legacy

He will find a guy late and the Blazers staff will bring him up right. Or KP will make his first mistake. I am giddy for the draft.

President of the Petteri Koponen fan club.

by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 26, 2008 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions

I think it'll work for him no matter what he does

If KP takes some risks and makes some big moves, he’s earned the time it’ll take to see if it works before he gets criticized for it, and when/if it works out he looks like a genius. If he holds back and makes small, or no real deals, he’ll get praised for showing restraint when we all know he loves to gamble and make a great deal.

I love the draft, and I don’t think it’s an accident that my love for the draft as risen exponentially since KP took over the draft.

Hahahaha, watching the ‘97 draft, Derek Anderson just got drafted, and the commentators are saying his injury concerns are a thing of the past and that he’s tough and ready to play. Hahahahahaha…

Man, I gotta stop watching this, I am a huge nerd.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions

Wasnt DA on our payroll last year?

What ever happened to that guy?

President of the Petteri Koponen fan club.

by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 26, 2008 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions

He probably was

We used the “Allan Houston rule” to waive him and have his salary not count against our luxury tax, but still had to pay him.

He signed with Houston, and promptly was injured every game and didn’t play.

He was either traded or signed another FA deal with MJ’s Bobcats, and has been there as a backup for a few years.

His talent level and decent skills never materialized consistently in the NBA, and he bums me out. He seems so damn WEAK, and his good games for the Spurs and a few for the Blazers frustrated me.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2008 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions

I think this overlooks the reason you move up

which is to get control!! Not because you think ever guy picked at # 5 is better than every guy picked at # 10 (or #13). You do it because you want a specific a guy (or guys) and the move ensures that you get him! It isn’t a move to get a good player…it is a move to get the good player

GO says " Sir, you fornicated vertically…observe the consequences!

by 92wastheyear on Jun 26, 2008 12:25 PM PDT reply actions

I agree with that

Like KP always says, you target the player, not the pick. I think some lesser GMs kinda like the glamour and intrigue of the high pick and don’t always completely consider who they’d get there.

If he is trying for #5, it means he knows who he wants there.

Morty-furr

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2008 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions