Let me quote a response I made in an old thread that I found:Letter N wrote:
Let me quote a response I made in an old thread that I found:
BryCo's speciality; the late lottery picks
I agree he was amazing at drafts in Phoenix. In Toronto.............not so much (in my opinion......obviously, who else would I be talking for?)
He hasn't been T-Wolves/Cavs bad, but he hasn't been Thunder/Blazers good either. For where he's drafted he's basically got a passing grade in Toronto.
I respect your opinion but I'm not quite sure how Bryan could have done better in the Toronto drafts.
In 2009, he could have drafted Jennings, but I thought DeMar was the right choice, as Jennings hasn't blown anyone away. Holiday/Lawson/Teague went 17/18/19 in that draft.. a lot of teams passed on them, and so I can't blame Bryan for doing that as well. Drafting Holiday or Lawson at 9 would have been a huge reach at the time.
In 2010, it was a pretty weak draft. I guess you could say Avery Bradley but he went 19th.
In 2011, I thought JV was the best pick.. still too early to say anything but I'd be surprised if he isn't going to have a better career than guys like Walker/Biyombo/Knight/etc.
In 2012, he could have drafted Drummond.. but I was scared to death of him. Ross is a safe pick not a sexy pick. But we'll see how that pick holds up in about 2-3 years.
i'm not really sure what better picks there were? a case could be made for lawson in the 2009 draft but that's about it.
my only issue with his drafting is he never moves up and gets a guy with obvious talent at a position of dire need.
@jerboat
Holliday and Lawson were considered reaches where they got drafted
@jerboat
BCs drafting in Toronto - whatever that grey area is between not terrible but not particularily good.
http://www.nba.com/2009/news/feature...sus/index.html
Jrue Holiday was a lottery pick in all but one of the mocks, Ty Lawson in half of them. They went 17 and 18 respectively
lol ok.
hmmm interesting. my memory is broken it would seem.
@jerboat
I wouldn't really call the Thunder & Blazers 'good' with their drafting at all. Portland has always been a terrible drafting team! I would call the Thunder 'lucky' and 'no brainers'.
Blazers
- 2006 - drafted Tyrus Thomas @ #4 (bad pick) --> they didn't draft Aldridge (picked #2 by Chicago) or Roy (picked #6 by Minnesota), both of those players were acquired via trade
- 2007 - drafted Greg Oden @ #1 (bad pick) --> instead of Kevin Durant
- 2012 - drafted Damian Lillard @ #6 --> it came down to Lillard, Barnes and Drummond. They already had Batum at SF and were planning to sign Hibbert in free agency (which they did, but it was matched by Indi), so it was a no brainer to fill their void at PG
Thunder
- 2007 - drafted Kevin Durant @ #2 --> thanks to Portland passing on him
- 2008 - drafted Russell Westbrook @ #4 --> was really a no-brainer pick
- 2009 - drafted James Harden @ #3 --> thanks to Memphis drafting Thabeet @ #2, was really a no brainer
If anything, this history points out the difference in talent typically available in the top-5 and the remainder of even the lottery. The 2012 draft was another example of that, which was the very reason so many were in favor or 'tanking' last year, to avoid ending up with 2nd-tier talent like Ross.
Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Thu Nov 15th, 2012 at 12:11 PM.
Draft day trade is drafting. No one has ever traded players traded in the same draft and pretended it wasn't their draft pick.
Why are Thunder getting no credit for making the correct pick at a high pick? BC had a high pick too once, how'd that work out for him.
Also let's not forget they drafted one of the top defensive big men in the league at 21 I believe in Ibaka.
I'm not saying the Thunder don't deserve credit. The point I was making was that you can't compare the Thunder's consecutive lottery picks (#2, #4, #3) with the Raptors recent consecutive lottery picks (#9, #13, #5, #8) because, after the top-5, the talent thins out significantly and every player comes with much less consensus and much more risk.
Even with 3 consecutive top-4 picks, the Thunder wouldn't be the team they are without lots of luck (not even counting luck with the lottery itself). Had Portland drafted Durant, the Thunder would likely be a bottom-feeder after drafting Oden. Had Beasley's issues been better known, there's a greater chance that Westbrook gets drafted top-3 (along with Rose & Mayo) instead of Beasley. Had Memphis taken Harden instead of Thabeet (everybody saw that bust coming), once again, the Thunder wouldn't have been the success story they became. Luck in the lottery, luck with picks ahead of their own... it makes drafting easy and makes drafters look like geniuses!
Here is a better understanding of Bryan's thought process during the draft:
http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey...right-athletes
Here is his reasoning for choosing Ross over Drummond:
Q: When evaluating a player, what really are you looking for? Does talent trump everything?
Colangelo: There’s a checklist: talent, physical tools, basketball IQ, how they perform, how we anticipate they’ll perform. Character. Emotional make-up. Marketability. Each component is part of the process. The toughest is what’s inside a player. You can’t see the heart, the emotional aspect of things.
Picking eighth, I passed on somebody I consider a top-five talent in the draft because we felt like he didn’t have the right mental makeup. I passed on someone we thought was a top-three physical specimen because we felt he wasn’t the right fit for our team and didn’t have the right mental makeup.
Well lets not forget what Colangelo thought of Bargnani's mental make up with the now infamous caliper test when he drafted him...
There was a lot of "nothing fazes this guy" talk about Bargnani's personality in 2006, implying that he's got the mental toughness of a Bobby Fischer.
Who would've thought that any type of motivational technique, roster changes, positional changes, and coaching changes also don't faze him :|
"I don't lie. I willfully participate in a campaign of misinformation." - Fox Mulder
you said they were lucky - ie. that chance outside their control determined their choices. That is by all definitions not giving someone credit.
And Russell Westbrook was a no brainer and would have come in at 3?
http://www.nba.com/draft2008/board/mock.html
says something much different
(Plus ofcourse there is Ibaka.)
He drafted in the top of the lottery 3 times, because he built his team with the intentions to collect top draft picks (ie. he tanked) - and then killed the draft time and time again. How can one define doing what you set out to do as lucky?
I disagree. They made the right pick when they were on the clock (credit deserved), but they were quite often only in the position they were in due to luck in the lottery and luck with the picks made ahead of theirs (ie: Portland drafting Oden, Miami drafting Beasley and Memphis drafting Thabeet).
I do agree that they have done well with later picks. Just don't point at consecutive #2, #3 and #4 picks as purely good drafting. And don't point to the Raptors draft picks at #9, #13, #5 and #8 as comparison and justification for arguing that BC is a poor drafter; that's just not fair.
So then the Valanciunas pick was lucky by BC. Let's take that one off his resume because Cleveland should've drafted him.
and Ed was luck because he was supposed to go in the top 10.
http://www.nba.com/2010/news/05/18/c...ock/index.html
And Demar was only available because Thabeet was drafted at #2 and therefore would have otherwise gone higher
CalgaryRapsFans is just destroying Colangelo's draft choices here.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote