3 years of drafting without producing nba minutes
At what point should Trail blazers fans start to question our team for its inability to produce any quality players via the draft. Our roster as of right now has not 1 player getting quality or any minutes from our last 3 drafts. Should this be a concern? Is it our scouts, coach or both that should be held responsible. We seem to be one of the few teams not getting contribution from recent drafts?
86 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
McMillan deserve the least amount of blame, in my opinion
The ownership probably deserves the most, because of how indecisive they have been with their general managers(who along with scouts are largely responsible for draft duties) the last few seasons. Pritchard was highly over rated by fans too. I just hope Allen finds the right guy for the job the next time around.
The Blazers have drafted
2011: Nolan Smith – needs minutes to improve
2011: Jon Diebler – basically an American Draft-N-Stash
2010: Armon Johnson – needs minutes to improve
2010: Luke Babbitt – given enough minutes to show he sucks
2010: Elliot Williams – needs minutes to improve
2009: Victor Claver – Draft-N-Stash
2009: Dante Cunningham – modest NBA rotation player, got plenty of minutes, playing 18 mpg w/ Memphis
2009: Jon Brockman – playing 7 mpg with Bucks, fan favorite
2009: Patrick Mills – played enough minutes to prove he was too short to be an effective NBA player given his skills.
Overall, of 9 guys; two of them we know aren’t good (Mills and Babbitt); 2 are draft-n-stashed; 2 were traded away (Cunningham and Brockman) who are legitimate 8th/9th men on NBA teams; and 3 are rotting on the bench.
I’d say it’s fair to say McMillan is mostly at fault – those guys need minutes to show if they can play or not. The compressed season seems to be a good time to do so, althouhg without enough minutes for Batum, hard to say there are minutes for E-Will/Nolan; and Armon is probably not good enough but hasn’t had quite enough minutes yet.
M, period. Fresh, comma.
Brockman was never here. We traded that pick and took Jeff Pendergraph instead.
Pendergraph played 39 games for the Blazers averaging over 10 minutes a game as a rookie. So he clearly was given minutes to show what he could do. He now plays for Indiana and has appeared in only 2 games this year for a total of 8 minutes. So Nate played him and gave him a chance (more than he deserved, IMO).
Dante also got minutes here. He played in 63 games as a rookie and averaged over 11 minutes. So Nate gave him a chance to show what he could do.
Patty Mills played 64 games for the Blazers and averaged over 12 minutes. i.e. the guy you know that isn’t any good, got more minutes than Pendergraph or Dante. Again Nate certainly gave him a chance.
So the 3 players from the 2009 draft got plenty of opportunity to show what they can do.
Babbitt has done absolutely NOTHING ever. He hasn’t got much opportunity, only 24 games last year at 5.7 minutes per game, but he shot 15-56 (3 of 17 on 3’s, 3-9 on FREE THROWS), and has shown no ability to defend, rebound, pass, or wave a towel. How much time should Nate give him?
AJ got a chance last year. He played in 38 games and averaged 7.3 minutes, and many of those were quality minutes. He lost his spot to Patty Mills, who outplayed him. If you want to argue that Nate should have played him over Mills, that is your subjective opinion. But between AJ and Mills they played in 104 games. So Nate certainly gave them a chance and its just your opinion which one should have got more minutes or games.
That leaves us with Williams (injured his entire first year) and Smith. Effectively it is the rookie year for both players. As you said, there haven’t even been enough minutes for Batum, let alone playing these two rookies more. Of course if Felton keeps playing as bad as he has, Smith may get more minutes soon. But the bottom line is that Nate is not at fault at all for the playing time of draft picks the last 3 years. They got plenty of time or are just rookies, now only 13 games into their rookie seasons, which is far too early to be complaining they haven’t got a fair shot yet.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jan 18, 2012 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 9 recs
I don't think Babbitt to bad he's just not in the right role
they made him a 3pt shooter even though he’s pretty good rebounder and has a nice post game. He isn’t bad with the ball in his hands running the pick and roll. His shoot is awful but only from 3, he’s got a Kurt Thomas type mid range shoot. Just don’t make
Luke that 3pt guy and he’d be OK.
by Daddygr33nJeans on Jan 18, 2012 1:19 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Babbit is D league and nothing more...
Have nothing to write about him cause it’s just not worth it. That roster space should be filled with a center.
Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team.
-- Scottie Pippen
Luke jackson/morrison
OSU '06
GForce Crash Wallace FTW!
by TyboOSU on Jan 18, 2012 2:13 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Since Luke Jackson was a swingman and not a combo forward, the comparison doesn't work.
As I see it, Nik Caner-Medley is a better comparison. Then again, being compared to Caner-Medley says enough about how Luke Babbitt should’ve been viewed coming into the league.
"I Am Mine"
how many teams do you have to see him suck?
How many players in the NBA have played as many minutes as he has and failed to show any ability whatsoever?
M, period. Fresh, comma.
This is partly correct.
At Nevada, Luke Babbitt was a scorer with the ball in his hands rather than someone who played off the ball well; thus, trying to turn him into a spot-up shooter was a bad idea. That said, Babbitt wasn’t any better than an Adam Morrison or Nik Caner-Medley type as a scoring combo forward. All things considered, he belongs overseas instead of in the NBA.
"I Am Mine"
Some blame goes on each of these:
1) Later draft picks are more risky
2) Need to improve our player evaluation
3) A Nate quote from Quick’s recent article begs for the rest of the blame:
“Those are our guards (Felton, Crawford, Matthews),” he said flatly. “It’s not like we are going to go to our young guys.”
i like it here, there, everywhere.
Young guys don't play on a team
with no starts that is trying to compete.
Really
Check out Miami, NY, even LAL. All have rookie PG getting quality minutes. 2 of those drafted after our rookie pg.
Uhhh
did you read my 14 word post. I said NO STARS. Miami has 3 guys named Dwayne Wade Chris Bosh and Lebron James, you might have heard of them. NYK have 2 guys named Carmelo Anthony and Amare Stoudemire…they are kinda good, LAL….these guys named Kobe and Pau…I heard Kobe is alright.
starts.
Sorry read starts. Throw in Reggie Jackson in OKL. So the excuse is that since we dont have stars then we shouldnt care about draft results and development of players? Should it be opposite, shouldnt we be trying to develop young talent in loo of stars? I feel someone should be held accoutable for the lack of development of draft picks. You choose, but you cant have 3 PG taken after our pick playing on winning teams doing better and not have to question our draft or minutes philosophy.
My bad
Typo on my part. But my point is without stars there isn’t a lot of wiggle room to develop talent. We don’t have Durrant and Westbrook to make up for Elliot Williams mistakes. If we aren’t trying to win this year then sure throw in Nolan and Elliot get them some minutes and maybe they will be good in a few years. Or you play them in garbage time in their rookie year and slowly add minutes as they gain experience. My point is we don’t have enough talent to make up for rookie mistakes right now, if we want to win, they will watch that happen from the bench.
Lamarcus can't?
GW can’t? Besides, who on the Sixers is making up for Vucevic’s mistakes? Or Paul George’s mistakes in Indy? Or Gallinari/Mozgov’s mistakes in Denver?
That’s just this year alone. Heck, if you want to go back, just off the top of my head you have Detroit winning the title with huge contributions from Prince and Okur (2nd and 3rd years, respectively).
gallinari and paul george are pretty good
but i still agree with you…
the blazers give up big leads even when nolan and elliott don’t play, so nate might as well wise up and let them go instead of crawford at the 1.
I agree about George and Gallinari
although Mozgov and Vucevic aren’t in their category. You could also include Evan Turner and Jrue Holliday as young rotation guys on the Sixers. I more just didn’t get why the star/no star dichotomy mattered, and those guys are some clear counter examples. None of which, besides Gallinari, were especially high draft picks, either.
I think in the right situation Nate would play the young guys-
but you’ve got Crawford and Felton both looking for form and finding their role with the team, so I think giving them playing time becomes the priority at this point.
by simoninaustralia on Jan 18, 2012 5:17 PM PST up reply actions
I was speaking toward rookies
not 3rd year players.
Chicken or egg
For 3 years Nate has been in win now mode with a team that can’t get out of the first round. So basically we have 1 and done with no development of young players. Bad to square one, we don’t know if its drafting or Nate. But we do know Nate has not given players the chance to grow outside of a Batum (who seems to be getting a bit shafted on minutes of late) and a few players who got traded and or not signed. So basically this year we are setting up another 1 and done with no young player development and a possible stagnation of Batum with low play minutes. Not only that we wont be able to judge our scouts, interm GM or draft philosophy. Doesn’t seem like a smart long term. Maybe we do need a GM.
by Cabbol on Jan 18, 2012 3:17 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree with this
I’m not saying we shouldn’t play young guys, I’m just saying why we don’t. Personally I don’t think we are in a position to win now, so pretending like we are and running a team as if they are is just a mistake IMO. I put that on Allen though, not Nate. If Nate plays the young guys and shoes Allen he isn’t dedicated to winning now but developing talent to win later, history tells me Allen wouldn’t hesitate to show Nate the door.
The reason our young guys haven't been getting playing time
is that there are better players on the team at the same position. If you look back a couple years to when a rookie Nicolas Batum stole the starting small forward spot from Travis Outlaw, it becomes clear Nate will play rookies if they are good enough to get on the court.
Its a lot harder to draft when your not in the lottery. We played Roy & Oden when they were very young too, because they had the talent to stay on the floor.
by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 4:03 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Nate is the only coach ever to get anything out of Travis Outlaw
and he used him in a very precise way — as a stretch 4 off the bench. And his ability to score overrode his defensive deficiencies, lack of passing and rebounding. Last year at NJ he started and got long minutes at SF and his shooting went way down.
This may also have something to do with the fact that he finally “got paid,” as in overpaid — enough so that the nets amnestied him this year, in other words paid him to go away.
ignacio
Its real easy to play as a point guard
When your passing to several hall of famers. Ask Rondo. They develop because of that reason too. Reggie Jackson looks terrible for OKC, on the flip side Paul George has looked absolutely outstanding so far. Vucevic is a big, its a lot easier to get minutes when you play in the post & the fact that he is a good prospect, on a bad team. Just like Gallinari demanded playing time on a BAD TEAM in NY, that allowed them to trade for Melo! As we saw with Nicolas Batum, Nate McMillan will play a rookie if their play warrants it. We just haven’t drafted well at all. The blame falls on the scouts & the fact that our GM position is in complete disarray.
Only thing I kind of disagree with
Is the fact Elliot is getting no play time. I mean I’m not in practice so maybe Nate knows something I don’t. From what I have seen, Elliot should be getting at least 5 minutes a game, or maybe just against bad teams. I hope the plan is to let Jamal walk next year and have Elliot coming off the bench as our 2nd 2 guard.
I agree, EWill has looked good in spot minutes
and deserves a couple more. But he has two guards ahead of him that are proven products at the NBA level. Its not like he is showing up Wesley/Crawford in practice, or he would be getting more run.
I do agree with that
thought he isn’t shooting any worse then Jamal haha. That is a mute point of course, as Jamal has proven he can shoot better then he currently is, Elliot wasn’t even supposed to know how to shoot.
The
Problem is even up 20 Nate won’t get these young guys on the floor.
It is the Oden CURSE....
Ever since winning the #1 pick in the 2007 draft with very few exceptions our draft picks have sucked. Maybe when Oden leaves the curse will leave with him, just a theory.
Are you one of those deniers of global climate change?
The smarter you are, the more likely you are to be tripping balls at any given moment.
/keep Batum/ /trade for Bogut/
yes, if I had my way, the global climate would not change.
i like it here, there, everywhere.
by Name's Ash on Jan 19, 2012 7:48 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
This is why teams rebuild.
Shrewd GMs of mediocre teams improve via FA or look to swing deals that will move them up in drafts to get impact players. We have gone the FA route for a while (Camby, Wallace, Crawford, Felton, Matthews, etc). There are plenty of teams out there (most of the good ones) who have very little in the way of draft-pick production, because of the position from which they draft.
by The Penguin on Jan 18, 2012 2:35 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
yup
a huge problem is where teams draft. Even teams with lottery picks fail every once in a while, and therefore, the probability of failing as you get father down the draft ranks steadily rises.
I mean, common, look at Hasheem Thabeet, a second overall pick.
"I was a victim of a series of accidents, as are we all."
by thankyouforblaze on Jan 18, 2012 2:42 PM PST up reply actions
I think you meant
Weren’t*. As Mathews, Camby, Wallace, and Felton were acquired via trade not free agency.
Correct
Should have categorized as trade/FA.. OPP in other words.
by The Penguin on Jan 19, 2012 12:23 PM PST up reply actions
The larger
Problem is other teams are finding talent late in drafts and getting quality minutes. We are not. It would be prudent to find out why and why we are wasting so many resources on scouting, drafting and development.
Batum is really the only one
Dante was a good pick, Rudy wasn’t a terrible pick. Everything else has been really bad while impact guys keep going late all around us
"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'
by sammymohawk on Jan 19, 2012 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
The worst one for me, the one that bugged me at the time, outraged me,
was wasting a first-round pick on Victor Claver.
ignacio
I agree
That was pretty bogus. Though, to be fair, if we’re talking about the Blazers needing a PG, what came after Claver that year was Rodrigue Beaubois and Wayne Ellington. Beaubois might have worked out, but he seems to be just a bit more successful version of Patty Mills. Ellington is a no go. What hurts was the fact that they probably should have worked harder to move up 1 to 5 spots to get the late ’teens picks. The run on decent enough NBA PGs leading up to Claver is pretty depressing. 17th pick Jrue Holliday, 18th pick Ty Lawson, 19th pick Jeff Teague, 20th pick Eric Maynor, and 21st pick Darren Collison. Save Maynor, the Blazers would probably be better off with any of those guys than Felton.
Maybe our GM at the time shot himself in the foot
by not shooting down all the pritch-slap talk. Apparently the Blazers were looking to move up in that draft (the talk was for Tyler Hansborough), but he wasn’t able to get it done.
by simoninaustralia on Jan 18, 2012 5:24 PM PST up reply actions
What was
More depressing was how many people on Blazersedge was screaming to move up and crab one of those picks. Also passing on that center for the Spurs. Could have had our back up rebounder.
Don't feel like looking up the stats. but
I believe our draft picks have been pretty average in terms of production relative to draft position. Overall 1 below production expected for the pick(Babbitt) and a couple actually contributing above what you would expect (Dante Cunningham and Patty Mills). If you look at 2nd round picks and expected production anything is considered a bonus.
Our drafting issues have been we’re picking late in the draft and we don’t seem to be picking for need. Smith over Faried etc… However, we’re pretty much right at average as a drafting team. Certainly there is room for improvement, but it’s very rare that picking outside of the top 10 picks we’re going to end up with contributors…
Doing a quick stat. search on basketball reference it looks like there are about 180 players who play more than 15 or more minutes per game on average. You figure contributing players seem to last in the league about 10 years. That means that there are about 18 spots per year for contributors.
If you draft out of the lottery odds are you’re not going to get one of those contributors.
by boppitywop on Jan 18, 2012 3:34 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
totally false--the last few drafts have been very very very deep.
Even last year, which was supposed to be one of the weakest draft years in recent history, has produced almost 20 players playing over 15 mpg, and around 10 of which have won starting jobs with their teams already, with another few probably only a few games away from stealing starting jobs from vets who are starters in name only.
by howlingfantods on Jan 18, 2012 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
Don't forget that Adam Morrison almost averaged 30 minutes a game his first season...
give it a few years before you call a draft good or bad.
by simoninaustralia on Jan 18, 2012 5:28 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah,
Amazingly, by the end of the year we should be looking at 7 different PGs from the 2009 draft alone already starting in the league with Evans, Rubio, Jennings, Holliday, Lawson, Teague, and Collison (possibly 8 if you count Toney Douglas). Depessingly, 4 of those guys were taken with the 5 picks directly before Claver, with the 6th being another potential starter in Eric Maynor, if he ever makes it to a team that doesn’t have Russell Westbrook on it.
another potential starter in Eric Maynor, if he ever makes it to a team that doesn’t have Russell Westbrook on it.
not to mention before that he was on the Jazz behind DWill!
Yeah, but Claver was still a horrible pick.
The rest are pretty excusable. I defy anyone to find a playoff team that has more than one player taken in the 20’s that is a true rotation player and on their rookie deal. The list is probably longer than I realize, but still short.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
Easy quick example
2008 Boston Celtics. Rondo and Tony Allen as mid 20’s picks on their rookie deals, Powe and Big Baby as 2nd rounders on their first deals. Bonus Kendrick Perkins in the first year of a cheap extension.
If we’re talking this year alone and digging a little, Miami has Chalmers and Cole who would both be on rookie deals if Chalmers wasn’t a 2nd rounder. Chicago has Taj Gibson and Omer Asik. OKC has Ibaka and Maynor (I know, technically hurt, but Reggie Jackson is his mid-20’s replacement). The Spurs have James Anderson and Tiago Splitter (along with a couple 2nd rounders who would be on rookie deals with Blair and Danny Green). Denver has Rudy and Koufos.
If anything, we’re in the minority by not having a couple late first rounders who are contributing.on their rookie deals.
We have Wes$
and undrafted FA, we have Nic Batum still on a rookie scale deal. We played Rudy, till he sucked it up enough to get sent out of town, Brandon Roy was ROY, LMA played since his rookie year, Nolan Smith got some run tonight, hopefully more. JBay played a decent role in his Sophomore year, Donte and Jeff played their rookie years.
HO was saying that it's rare for playoff teams
to have more than one rotation player from the late 1st on a rookie deal. Just pointing out that it’s pretty common. I thought about including Wes in my list, but given that we didn’t draft/sign him originally, I don’t think it could like the others (Danny Green is the only comparable mentioned above). Most of those guys you mention with us from previous years were taken higher than the 20th pick, and so wouldn’t fit the original criteria.
We're
Not even getting role players out of these drafts. That I blame on Nate as he isn’t good at defining roles so its hard for players to develop specific strengths.
I give Nate credit for getting more out of lesser players.
He put Outlaw in a position to be an asset rather than a major liability by playing him at the 4 and giving him isos at the elbow. Outlaw was also very solid from outside He contributed, even though he’s not a very good all-around player. J Bay didn’t have an outside shot and was poor at using his speed to create open looks for other players. He was a solid fill-in for B Roy, but a poor complement, and a major disappointment at the defensive end. Nate had Dante Cunningham contributing as a starter. His mid range jumper and Nate’s defensive schemes hid his weaknesses on both ends of the courts. He still got PWND on the boards by bigger guys, but he DID contribute to wins.
In truth, we’ve seen most of these guys get chances. The ones Nate favored contributed. The ones Nate didn’t have gone on to even worse fortunes elsewhere. Channing is an example of a guy who needed a different system. J Bay too. Otherwise, Nate got more, and in some cases MUCH more, out of below average NBA players than any coach has. It helped to have B Roy, of course, whose presence alone gets guys open lanes and looks.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jan 19, 2012 10:14 AM PST up reply actions
The hard part is watching good players that we're in a position to draft go to other teams.
I’m not talking about Durant, and I’m not talking about the late 2nd rounders that some how pan out (Monta Ellis is the one that always sticks out in my mind). I’m talking about DaJuan Blair. I’m talking about Kenneth Faried. I’m talking about Omri Casspi and Taj Gibson. Ryan Anderson. The list is longer too……
All those guys went after Portland had a chance to nab them. And its not like people weren’t clamoring for them. The fans wanted those guys, the media predicted Portland taking them, the radio guys wanted them, etc. Management looks like a genius when the don’t listen to the cries for Adam Morrison and get Aldridge and Roy instead.
But they look equally dumb when the draft Wheelchair Oden and then cite Dajuan Blair’s knees as a cause for concern (with no risk 2nd round pick!) and Blair makes a nice HEALTHY career for himself. Everyone wants Faried? Its cool to pass on him if you get a stud instead, but Nolan Smith? And trade for Felton? And sign Crawford? And are still sitting on a combo guard from last year’s draft? WHY? Again, its genius if Smith is a diamond in a rough. But 3 weeks into the season, he clearly isn’t.
And why even draft Claver if he isn’t even going to come over for a summer league or training camp? You might as well have sold the pick. Its purely a waste.
The draft isn’t a science, its an art. Most late picks don’t become stars. But a lot do carve out rolls for themselves in the league. Many even become starters. How is it that we haven’t even landed one single rotation player in 3 years? With 10 picks? No one since Batum.
I think its safe to say that few teams have been as BAD at drafting as Portland has. Which is a bummer because with picks like Roy and Aldridge (forget Durant) we could have been competing for a title with even marginal drafts in the years that followed. Instead we’ve got ourselves NUTHIN.
I don’t know if Nate is to blame, or the scouts, or the GM turntable, or Paul Allen. But I do blame Nate for screwing up Jerryd Bayless. He could have been our PG if the coach did his job there.
/end rant, time for bed.
Don't forget that we traded up in the draft
to get Babbitt and Bayless. I thought those guys were going to justify the picks — otherwise, why give up additional players for them?
Claver and Babbitt were the worst.
I suppose, at the time, wing position was a key need for the future, but I still disagree with the assessment that either of these guys were NBA material. It’s just bad talent assessment, followed by inept draft day decision making.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Jan 19, 2012 10:08 AM PST reply actions
Dante could have produced, and will elsewhere :(
Look out for Memphis.
For the billionth time, Nate does not play rookie pgs, he is not the giddy one for them, he is also not the one who has the final say and signs the checks. Get off Nate PLEASE !!
Maybe, we could possibly draft a big man once in a while, dont be scared Paul, just because Greg didnt work out. You have to do it if you want to win.
just win baby !
Blah
Dante was so undersized & besides his mid range jumper he had no other offensive moves.
"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil
Same height as KT
much more upside than Rhino imo. Best draft pick Portlands seen in the above mentioned years. We’ll see how Dante developes. I like the kid. Watching the Rhino being towered over makes me throw up in my mouth every time. Talk about undersized. Were not playing football here.
just win baby !
by FrenchieFan on Jan 19, 2012 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
He has some good post moves though
I mean its not like he’s bad, he is short, but so is Chuck Hayes.

by 






























