Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Top Mistakes Made By GMs In Drafts

  1. #1
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11,988
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Top Mistakes Made By GMs In Drafts

    Take note guys because I hate to say it but this is very timely based on where a lot of these draft related threads have been going:

    #5 – Drafting players with a questions about character
    This draft's potential culprit: Illinois's Jereme Richmond

    #4 – Drafting players with histories of injury
    This draft's potential culprit: Kyrie Irving

    #3 – Drafting for potential rather than experience

    Why they do it: Because open air is better than a closed ceiling. How many times do we see teams go with a kid that might be good rather than a player who already is undeniably reliable? Usually, the "potential" guys that succeed are the ones that pretty much everybody agrees on. The ones with a considerably smaller success rate are the "hope-so" guys, and that's where the problem lies. You're probably not going to strike out with LeBron James over anybody else in that amazing 2003 draft, for example, but in 2001 when three of the top four players were high schoolers, we saw a lot of faith poured into young guys when plenty of proven college studs were available. It gets teams into trouble more often than it saves them.

    Case in point: Jonathan Bender (Toronto, 5th pick in 1999 draft ahead of Richard Hamilton, Andre Miller, Shawn Marion, Jason Terry, and more), Kwame Brown, Tyson Chandler, and Eddy Curry (1st, 2nd, and 4th picks in 2001 draft ahead of Jason Richardson, Shane Battier, Joe Johnson, Richard Jefferson, and more), Shaun Livingston (LAC, 4th pick in the 2004 draft ahead of Luol Deng and Andre Iguodala), Marvin Williams (Atlanta, 2nd pick in 2005 draft ahead of Chris Paul and Deron Williams).

    This draft's potential culprit: Brandon Knight over Kemba Walker and Jimmer Fredette. You could say the same thing about Kyrie Irving, who's even more unproven than Knight in some ways, but Knight is a young, rail-thin point guard that teams hope will grow into something special, where Walker and Fredette have already proven what they can do over and over again.

    #2 – Trying to find the next big international success
    This draft's potential culprit: Jonas Valanciunas, Jan Vesely, Bismack Biyombo, and Donatas Motiejunas.

    #1 – Drafting big
    This draft's potential culprit: Jonas Valanciunas (6'11"), Donatas Montiejunas (7'0"), or Nikola Vucevic (7'0").
    Drafting undersized players
    This draft's potential culprit: Isaiah Thomas, PG, 5'10"
    Drafting for need over best player available
    This draft's potential culprit: The Minnesota Timberwolves, who if they keep the #2 pick probably will be forced to take someone other than Derrick Williams
    Source: Hoops World

  2. #2
    Raptors Republic All-Star RaptorsFan4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,752
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The Euro point is retarded. Not drafting someone who you feel is really good because they are euro = FAIL

    BTW There is no reason not to draft for potential over exp esp when this draft is so weak. I'd much rather have a guy who can possibly be a star than a bench player or barely a starter.

  3. #3
    Raptors Republic All-Star Fully's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,108
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Brandon Knight was a Mcdonald's High School American and averaged 17, 4 and 4 as a freshman and led an inexperienced team to the Final Four in the process.

    Yes, he's younger and less experienced than Jimmer/Kemba, but I think it's silly to infer that he hasn't earned his stripes yet. I'm not sure what else you wanted him to do in his first year in college.

  4. #4
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,176
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Hope you don't mind, Apollo, but this article by Joel Brigham is highly flawed. All he does is pick and choose examples to back up certain cliches.

    - "Drafting players with questions about character": I'm sure if someone tried, they could make up a similar list of players under the heading "Overrating good character."

    - "Trying to find the next big international success": Like RaptorsFans4Life said, this heading leaves no room for the possibility of drafting an international player because they just might be the subjective BPA. Someone should tell San Antonio to stop gambling on the next big international success. Not only is it a poor strategy, but it's unfair to the other teams that they're relying purely on luck yet draft so successfully.

    - "Drafting undersized players": This is more amusing because right before it, Joel has the heading, "drafting big." So GMs are overrating both the vertically gifted and vertically challenged? Boy, those players with prototypical heights sure have it rough!

    What do I mean by pick and choose? Flynn is listed under "drafting undersized players," yet he's only a quarter inch shorter than Walker, and larger where it counts (wingspan and standing reach). Walker, on the other hand, gets listed as a player with experience, along with the likes of Chris Paul, Luol Deng and others. Luol Deng only had one year college experience, yet he's lauded over Livingston. Flynn with his two years of college experience and a very decent playoff run under his belt doesn't count. Maybe because a junior was drafted after him (Curry). If only it was so simple as picking whoever spent more time in college. If Flynn and Deng were in the same draft, would Joel be advocating Flynn over Deng due to experience? I can understand comparing point guards with varying levels of experience (i.e. Knight vs Walker, though we won't know if its potential or experience/character that is being overrated until several years into their NBA careers), but comparing players who play different positions?

    Very, very inconsistent article. Rubbish.

    EDIT: I'm sure there are plenty of counterpoints if we just look through all the different drafts, but just to add a bit more, how about Childress over Deng, who at least play the same position? Livingston is a bad pick over Deng because Deng played one year of college ball, but what about Childress and his three years? One player has been a very solid piece for the bulls, while the other has been floating around. What about Thabeet and his great NCAA career? Point is, only in hindsight do we have the luxury of saying who was overrated and why.
    Last edited by Quixotic; Wed Jun 15th, 2011 at 04:16 PM.

  5. #5
    Raptors Republic All-Star ezz_bee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Kigali, Rwanda
    Posts
    1,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Pretty useless article.
    "We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon

  6. #6
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11,988
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I don't agree with the Internation point but I do agree with "fingers crossed hoping that upside becomes reality" drafting point.

  7. #7
    Raptors Republic Rookie dykers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    40
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    It's called "Poopsworld" for a reason.

  8. #8
    Raptors Republic Veteran ceez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,736
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Remember when the twolves had 2 straight lotto picks and drafted point guards? I still giggle to myself when i think about it.
    @jerboat

  9. #9
    Raptors Republic All-Star grindhouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,320
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    there was a time were it was unheard of to draft a 18 year old or international player, granted there have been some players who have come into the league that have dominated but the reality is they are few and far between.

  10. #10
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,196
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote dykers wrote: View Post
    It's called "Poopsworld" for a reason.
    I hate to admit it but of late I've been really disappointed with that site. They seem to be making garbage up now. I thought that was what ESPN was for.

  11. #11
    Raptors Republic Rookie
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    This article is stupid purely because, its poor talent evaluation that is the biggest mistake, in all these examples good players have set a precident for the "mistake". IMO the worst mistake GMs make is getting sucked into the hype about a player and where they should be drafted, tons of screw ups mid lottery.

  12. #12
    Raptors Republic Starter jimmie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    491
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The BPA theory of drafting has its own problems. There's nothing wrong with drafting for position in a draft like this where there's little separating the "best player available" from the rest, and little to go on in determining who that "best player available" actually is. Of course, all teams want to draft the best player available, but in the absence of damning evidence, it's a better bet to pick the "BPA" at a position of need. For instance, I might think a guy like Alec Burks will end up being the best player from this draft, but there's no way a team with Derozan should pick him at #5.

    In this draft, it's generally been assumed that Kyrie Irving is the BPA, with Williams a close 2nd. However, there's really nothing sure about that general assumption when you're talking about an 18 year old with a small body of work to evaulate. Even now, Cleveland is apparently considering Williams at the #1. Is Irving really the BPA?

    For Toronto, I can understand that the roster is so young, and the talent level still low enough that drafting for position might not seem like the right choice. But I'd argue the other way: because there's so little obviously separating guys like Knight, Walker, Kanter, Leonard, Vesely, Valanciunas, etc., and so little even separating a 2011 draft pick from a 2009 (Derozan) and 2010 (Davis) pick, you might as well fill a perceived hole with the pick. For TO, that means drafting a C, a SF, or a PG, since I think most here can agree that we'd prefer to see how DD and Ed develop (not to mention Amir), and add a new guy who can get minutes at his position to see if he has the potential to be a 3rd or 4th key piece. This squad in 2012 will still be all about player evaluation, not playoff contention, so minutes for guys will be as critical as internal competition.

    In my opinion, we have 2 clearcut starters for 2012 in DD and Davis at the 2 and 4. If Bargnani is not traded (I think he will be), he's the starting 5 again. James Johnson inherits the starting 3, and I think he can handle it, but it doesn't preclude drafting a SF if management thinks Leonard or Vesely can be better. Jose is in the same boat as Bargs -- starter if he isn't traded -- as I really can't see Bayless in that position (to me, he's a combo guard who will never be a true PG; would love to be proven wrong). So to me, the situation is manageable at the 2, 3, and 4 for a young rebuilding team, but starter material is needed at the 1 and 5.

    Draft Knight, or Walker/Kanter is my call. Still can't decide if I prefer Walker or Kanter. Either way, once one of the 1/5 gaps are filled, attention can turn to trades/free agency to fill the other.

    This team still needs depth and veteran presence, too -- the former of which could be addressed in the draft, but not at the #5 spot or fans will have Colangelo's head. Fair or not, whoever they bring in at #5 is going to be thrown into the fire of being a rotation player immediately and better produce at a decent rate. Fans aren't expecting a career bench player to be taken in the lottery. That also begs to fill a position with the BPA at that position instead of just taking whoever you think will be the BPA.
    Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •