Unfortunately, adding the word 'arguably' in front of a stupid statement doesn't make it any less stupid.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
"...the draft is arguably the smallest part of building a successful team."
Collapse
X
-
Arsenalist wrote: View PostUnfortunately, adding the word 'arguably' in front of a stupid statement doesn't make it any less stupid.
Well, here is the list of finalists for the NBA championships since 2000
Los Angeles Lakers Indiana Pacers
Los Angeles Lakers Philadelphia 76ers
Los Angeles Lakers New Jersey Nets
San Antonio Spurs New Jersey Nets
Los Angeles Lakers Detroit Pistons
San Antonio Spurs Detroit Pistons
Dallas Mavericks Miami Heat
San Antonio Spurs Cleveland Cavaliers
Los Angeles Lakers Boston Celtics
Los Angeles Lakers Orlando Magic
Los Angeles Lakers Boston Celtics
Dallas Mavericks Miami Heat
I don't see the draft, or more specifically, having good drafting position, being a huge factor in any of those teams success, outside of Cleveland.
All of those teams have managed to find a nice piece or two in the draft over that span of time, but that is more a factor of good scouting and/or smart management trades (packaging late first round picks with other assets) than good drafting position. I make the assumption, given the context of the comment Smith was responding to (changing the ping pong ball distribution) that draft position was the main point in his reply.
An extreme example would be LA, which has made it to the finals 11 times in 24 years since 1985 when the lottery draft was first instituted. I those 26 years only 20 teams have made it to the finals, in 52 opportunities.
Los Angeles Lakers Boston Celtics
Houston Rockets Detroit Pistons
Portland Trail Blazers Orlando Magic
Phoenix Suns Chicago Bulls
Houston Rockets Orlando Magic
Seattle SuperSonics New York Knicks
Utah Jazz Philadelphia 76ers
San Antonio Spurs Indiana Pacers
Dallas Mavericks New Jersey Nets
Miami Heat Cleveland Cavaliers
There is no doubt that finishing badly for several years helped about half of those teams, but the other half made multiple appearances, built on a tradition of being good teams, with many play-off appearances, and consequently, many seasons outside of the lottery.
Comment
-
Puffer wrote: View PostWell, here is the list of finalists for the NBA championships since 2000
Los Angeles Lakers Indiana Pacers
Los Angeles Lakers Philadelphia 76ers
Los Angeles Lakers New Jersey Nets
San Antonio Spurs New Jersey Nets
Los Angeles Lakers Detroit Pistons
San Antonio Spurs Detroit Pistons
Dallas Mavericks Miami Heat
San Antonio Spurs Cleveland Cavaliers
Los Angeles Lakers Boston Celtics
Los Angeles Lakers Orlando Magic
Los Angeles Lakers Boston Celtics
Dallas Mavericks Miami Heat
I don't see the draft, or more specifically, having good drafting position, being a huge factor in any of those teams success, outside of Cleveland.
All of those teams have managed to find a nice piece or two in the draft over that span of time, but that is more a factor of good scouting and/or smart management trades (packaging late first round picks with other assets) than good drafting position. I make the assumption, given the context of the comment Smith was responding to (changing the ping pong ball distribution) that draft position was the main point in his reply.
An extreme example would be LA, which has made it to the finals 11 times in 24 years since 1985 when the lottery draft was first instituted. I those 26 years only 20 teams have made it to the finals, in 52 opportunities.
Los Angeles Lakers Boston Celtics
Houston Rockets Detroit Pistons
Portland Trail Blazers Orlando Magic
Phoenix Suns Chicago Bulls
Houston Rockets Orlando Magic
Seattle SuperSonics New York Knicks
Utah Jazz Philadelphia 76ers
San Antonio Spurs Indiana Pacers
Dallas Mavericks New Jersey Nets
Miami Heat Cleveland Cavaliers
There is no doubt that finishing badly for several years helped about half of those teams, but the other half made multiple appearances, built on a tradition of being good teams, with many play-off appearances, and consequently, many seasons outside of the lottery.
Philly had Iverson - #1.
The Nets had Martin (#1) and Jefferson (#13 acquired by trading their #7 pick).
Spurs had Duncan #1 and earlier Robinson #1.
Dallas had Dirk #9 - which they used their #6 pick to acquire.
Heat had Wade #5 - there would be no LBJ in South Beach without Wade.
Cleveland - #1 LBJ - as you mentioned.
Boston - Pierce was #10 and #5 was used to acquire Ray Allen.
Orlando, Howard, #1.
Take out Dallas (barely), Detroit, and the Lakers and they all had a top 5 pick in common as a centre piece to their success.
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostI think the Lakers Pistons are the exception to the rule.
Philly had Iverson - #1.
The Nets had Martin (#1) and Jefferson (#13 acquired by trading their #7 pick).
Spurs had Duncan #1 and earlier Robinson #1.
Dallas had Dirk #9 - which they used their #6 pick to acquire.
Heat had Wade #5 - there would be no LBJ in South Beach without Wade.
Cleveland - #1 LBJ - as you mentioned.
Boston - Pierce was #10 and #5 was used to acquire Ray Allen.
Orlando, Howard, #1.
Take out Dallas (barely), Detroit, and the Lakers and they all had a top 5 pick in common as a centre piece to their success.
No argument from here, but most of the teams you listed managed to get one outstanding draft pick, and then kept a position as one of the premier teams in their conference for years. The Spurs lucked out with the Duncan, Robinson deal, getting two high picks in consecutive years, just as the Raptors will be doing this coming draft.
Actually, with a #1 pick five years ago, and two consecutive lottery picks (last year and this) the Raptors are positioned to do well in the next few years, as we keep telling ourselves. But most teams have not had that opportunity.
I guess it depends on how important you figure getting one top five pick every 6-7 years is. No one thinks it's not a combination of the three items mentioned already, draft position, management and free agent destination desirability. The question would be how much weight do you put on each element.
I would think that Lakers, New York, Boston and Miami are the cream of FA destination spots. So that factor is important for those teams.
For everybody else I think I would rank them as
1.) Management and staff (includes scouting to maximize your drafting opportunities in less desirable draft positions)
2.) Draft position
3.) Free agent desirability
Last one is really a mute point because I think most US NBA players would pretty much go to any NBA city with no problem, outside of maybe Toronto, Minny, Oklahoma. Money would be the gamer changer in the last factor and THAT is important if you don't have the revenue to happily pay the luxury tax.
Comment
-
My thoughts?
The draft is very important, but where you pick is not nearly as important as how you pick, or how you choose to use that pick. SO ultimately, I would agree with the statement, DRAFT POSITION is arguably the least important way to build a team, especially because the top 3 are chosen by the ping pong balls.
Good scouting (over a long time line) will produce a better return with the draft pick than bad scouting. Good management is way more important than draft picks, because a badly managed team will just trade/lose any good players they draft in a bad trade or free agency."They're going to have to rename the whole conference after us: Toronto Raptors 2014-2015 Northern Conference Champions" ~ ezzbee Dec. 2014
"I guess I got a little carried away there" ~ ezzbee Apr. 2015
"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
Comment
-
Wow, there is a lot of hate for Doug Smith. I'll come to his defense. Yeah, his own opinions on basketball topics may be well off the mark at times but he also brings a lot of information to the table you otherwise wouldn't get. You're better off with him than without him... Unless of course you don't enjoy reading little tidbits he offers up through talking to this person or that person in the organization.
I'm with enlightenment on this one. His blog is usually a good read.
Comment
-
WhatWhat wrote: View PostI disagree adamantly with Dougie. The draft is extremely important-the most important part-of team building.
How important is the draft then? Compared to trades and coaching?
Comment
-
Puffer wrote: View PostIf you do a good job with your two lottery picks, you won't be seeing the lottery again for years, and will be selecting in the 20's.
How important is the draft then? Compared to trades and coaching?
i mean the very first part of your post inherently acknowledges what a patently and objectively false statement doug's is, so i don't follow how you're arguing for itLast edited by chris; Sun Mar 18, 2012, 05:00 PM.
Comment
-
chris wrote: View Postmarkedly less so, because you've already drafted franchise talent
i mean the very first part of your post inherently acknowledges what a patently and objectively false statement doug's is, so i don't follow how you're arguing for it
Never said it didn't hurt to have good position picking. But a lot of franchise players have been picked by good GM's selecting from spot number 9 on down. Personally I would rather have the management smarts working on the side of the team I am rooting for. Then you might wind up with a team the "franchise player" bolts to after his rookie contract is up.
Comment
-
joey_hesketh wrote: View PostI think Trades, Drafting, Coaching, Management all play an equal part.
If you only have trades, then you have the early days of the Mark Cuban Mavericks. (Or Championship Boston Celtics.)
If you only have Drafting, then you're left with the Sacremento Kings. (Or playoff Bound Timberwolves.)
If you only have Coaching, you're left with the Flip Saunders Wizards.
Thats what makes the NBA fun. Is that ANY combination of the above, can net you ANY combination of success.
I think D. Smith's comment was taken slightly out of context. First of all, he said "building" a successful team, not "rebuilding" so i dont think he was necessarily referring to the Raps. Also, if you think of it in terms of a team on the fringe of being successful, then draft picks are a small part of such a team. If its a team like the Raps, then picks are a huge part of the building process. I do hope after this draft, we never ever get a lottery pick again.
Comment
-
Puffer wrote: View PostThere are 8 lottery picks every year. Most of those picks stay in the league for 5 - 6 years. So that's 40 - 48 lottery picks. How many turn out to be true franchise players? How many of those 48 aren't even starters 3 year later?
Never said it didn't hurt to have good position picking. But a lot of franchise players have been picked by good GM's selecting from spot number 9 on down. Personally I would rather have the management smarts working on the side of the team I am rooting for. Then you might wind up with a team the "franchise player" bolts to after his rookie contract is up.
I think this is the perfect example of the argument, which is better, draft or trades
Comment
Comment