Whiteside, Alabi, etc?

[PaceRam]

Can someone please explain to me again why the Hawks sold their 2nd round draft pick when they could have selected Whiteside, Alabi or some other NBA prospect? I thought it was because it was some master plan to save money so they could afford one or two quality FA's but I guess I was wrong (as usual!).

[MaceCase]

:shake_puter:

[Randy]

Good question. Does anyone know how those guys did in Summer League play?

[niremetal]

Can someone please explain to me again why the Hawks sold their 2nd round draft pick when they could have selected Whiteside, Alabi or some other NBA prospect? I thought it was because it was some master plan to save money so they could afford one or two quality FA's but I guess I was wrong (as usual!).

Same reason the Lakers and Suns have sold higher picks in years past: The odds of getting someone who can noticeably contribute to a winning team in the near future are near zero. The odds of them even becoming a consistent rotation player anywhere are 25% or worse. I have never seen a team besides the Spurs that shows any signs of being able to spot "diamonds in the rough" from ~#21 on down in the draft. No, seriously. No one but the Spurs bats higher than .500 with second round or late first round picks. If you get someone who doesn't turn out to be a scrub, it's pretty much dumb luck.

That goes doubly for big men, since anyone 6'11 or taller with a modicum of talent generally gets picked way higher than they should. The ones who last to the second round are either American scrubs or long-term Euro projects. According to Wikipedia, the centers selected 31-45 in the previous 5 drafts were Nikola Peković (2008), DeAndre Jordan (2008), Ömer Aşık (2008), Ante Tomić (2008) Kyrolo Fesenko (2007) Stanko Barać (2007), Paul Davis (2006), Mile Ilić (2005), and Martynas Andriuškevičius (2005). Crapshoot is being generous.

The average stats of #31 picks in the past 20 drafts? 4.1 ppg, 1.9 rpg, 0.8 apg. Be still, my heart.

I have no problem with getting rid of that pick. None whatsoever. It's what happened since then that makes me irked. If you ask me, I would say that it would be better to scrap the whole second round and let training camps and Europe be the way non-first rounders get into the league (and also get rid of the idiotic rules allowing teams to retain the rights to international picks forever). Better to spend that roster spot on someone who once was a rotation player than on someone who probably never will be.

Edited August 4, 2010 by niremetal

[DeacKillsaDevil]

Alibi has Hepatitus B

Whiteside, apparently, has a bad rap as a head case / pre-madonna.

[AHF]

Same reason the Lakers and Suns have sold higher picks in years past: The odds of getting someone who can noticeably contribute to a winning team in the near future are near zero.

You realize the Suns sold Rajon Rondo so they could pay Marcus Banks more money, right?

In fact, you could field a competitive team of players sold by Phoenix alone:

Rajon Rondo

Rudy Fernandez

Luol Deng

Serge Ibaka

Marcin Gortat

Put me in the "disagree" column on this one. I cannot condone anyone commending the Phoenix Suns as a model franchise for selling their picks.

[niremetal]

You realize the Suns sold Rajon Rondo so they could pay Marcus Banks more money, right?

In fact, you could field a competitive team of players sold by Phoenix alone:

Rajon Rondo

Rudy Fernandez

Luol Deng

Serge Ibaka

Marcin Gortat

Put me in the "disagree" column on this one. I cannot condone anyone commending the Phoenix Suns as a model franchise for selling their picks.

First off, I didn't use them as a "model franchise." I cited them as an example of a contending team reasoning that it was better to unload sub-20 draft picks for little or nothing and go after veterans rather than roll the dice and hope the players they select turn out well. I didn't say the reasoning led to good results in every case, I just said it is hardly an unprecedented strategy for contending teams and that the logic behind it seems sound.

Second, the Suns strung together 4 straight 54+ win seasons and 3 WCF appearances in 6 years after those trades. I don't think they would have done too much better had they kept any or even all of those picks. Similarly, even if Toney Douglas unexpectedly busts out to become the next Dwayne Wade, I don't think the Lakers will be crying over losing that pick considering that they won a title a year later. Like with those teams, I am ok with selling the picks as long as it's part of a strategy that is (or rather, turns out to be) successful in making the Hawks contenders. I won't lose sleep over any particular battle as long as the war turns out the way I want. And unlike most, I really really like the roster we have now and think that the right coach can make them contenders.

Edited August 4, 2010 by niremetal

[KB21]

Actually, looking at the drafts between 1999 and 2005, the hit rate on second round picks in the early 2nd round (mostly 30-41 range with a three years being 29-31) is actually 37.5%. I looked at these drafts, starting arbitrarily with the 1999 draft, and used playing for at least 5 years in the league as a hit in this range. In this time period, 80 players were drafted. Thirty of them had 5+ year careers.

Keeping that 31st pick and utilizing it would have been more cost effective in the short term and likely more effective in the long run on the court. The group of Rick Sund, Dave Pendergraft, and Steve Rosenberry can flat out scout talent, and they should be given the opportunity to utilize that ability they have. Chances are, they would have landed a player that would have been a lot more effective on this team than either Jason Collins or Josh Powell.

[KB21]

This is interesting. I looked at the numbers for the middle part of the first round (10-19) and the latter part of the first round (20-29) during the same time span.

The results show me that scouting in the NBA can be much much better than what it currently is. Overall, NBA teams between 1999 and 2005 hit on 54.3% of their picks in the middle portion of the first round and 58% of their picks in the latter portion of the first round.

[MaceCase]

Same reason the Lakers and Suns have sold higher picks in years past: The odds of getting someone who can noticeably contribute to a winning team in the near future are near zero. The odds of them even becoming a consistent rotation player anywhere are 25% or worse. I have never seen a team besides the Spurs that shows any signs of being able to spot "diamonds in the rough" from ~#21 on down in the draft. No, seriously. No one but the Spurs bats higher than .500 with second round or late first round picks. If you get someone who doesn't turn out to be a scrub, it's pretty much dumb luck.

That goes doubly for big men, since anyone 6'11 or taller with a modicum of talent generally gets picked way higher than they should. The ones who last to the second round are either American scrubs or long-term Euro projects. According to Wikipedia, the centers selected 31-45 in the previous 5 drafts were Nikola Peković (2008), DeAndre Jordan (2008), Ömer Aşık (2008), Ante Tomić (2008) Kyrolo Fesenko (2007) Stanko Barać (2007), Paul Davis (2006), Mile Ilić (2005), and Martynas Andriuškevičius (2005). Crapshoot is being generous.

The average stats of #31 picks in the past 20 drafts? 4.1 ppg, 1.9 rpg, 0.8 apg. Be still, my heart.

I have no problem with getting rid of that pick. None whatsoever. It's what happened since then that makes me irked. If you ask me, I would say that it would be better to scrap the whole second round and let training camps and Europe be the way non-first rounders get into the league (and also get rid of the idiotic rules allowing teams to retain the rights to international picks forever). Better to spend that roster spot on someone who once was a rotation player than on someone who probably never will be.

Nire, I think the Suns or Lakers are bad examples when comparing teams to us. Both teams fielded much more quality cores than ours and in the case of one, are willing to pay deep into the tax. For an organization like ours with no real star yet alone multiple ones or an ownership willing to pay the lux tax we are precisely in need of cheap depth and if they have any modicum of the potential to become a productive member and enhance our core then we have to roll the dice on them. This beats signing bums off the street that have zero potential and, even worse, are on the down slope of an already mostly unproductive career.

[niremetal]

Nire, I think the Suns or Lakers are bad examples when comparing teams to us. Both teams fielded much more quality cores than ours and in the case of one, are willing to pay deep into the tax. For an organization like ours with no real star yet alone multiple ones or an ownership willing to pay the lux tax we are precisely in need of cheap depth and if they have any modicum of the potential to become a productive member and enhance our core then we have to roll the dice on them. This beats signing bums off the street that have zero potential and, even worse, are on the down slope of an already mostly unproductive career.

Disagree, both because I think our core is on the level of Phoenix's and because I don't think a team (other than BOS/NYK/LAL) trying to break through to the conference finals can afford to spend money and roster space on someone with a "modicum" of potential. Again, the average career PPG for a #31 is 4.1. Given the choice, I'd take a veteran minimum player who is situationally useful and who is a known quantity in terms of personality and locker room stuff.

Of course, the answer is different if you're talking about a team that isn't close to making a deep playoff run. But I think the Hawks are closer to that than people think. We've got a perennial All-Star, a young All-Star, two near All-Stars, and 4 solid rotation players behind them (Marvin/Bibby/Zaza/Mo). I think that in terms of the quality of the Top 4 and Top 8, the Hawks are as good as any team in the NBA this side of the Staples Center. Consequently, I consider spending a second round pick on someone who probably will never see the floor except in garbage time a waste.

Edited August 4, 2010 by niremetal

[AHF]

The Suns fubared their chances at a championship, IMO. At their peak, they were just below the Spurs and couldn't quite get there. Rondo, Deng (or Iggy or Josh Smith, etc.) and some additional role player beef could have made the difference.

As an example, mediocre Rasheed arguably made the difference for Boston this year. Once those cheap talents are drafted, though, they tend to remain under the control of their team (as was the case for the guys the Suns sold).

[DrReality]

Thier decision seems short sighted but only time will tell. Guess they were strapped for cash?

[gtmike]

Good question. Does anyone know how those guys did in Summer League play?

http://www.nba.com/summerleague2010/players/

[Diesel]

Can someone please explain to me again why the Hawks sold their 2nd round draft pick when they could have selected Whiteside, Alabi or some other NBA prospect? I thought it was because it was some master plan to save money so they could afford one or two quality FA's but I guess I was wrong (as usual!).

My take on this is so that they can afford to resign JJ and pay our first round pick.

I don't think all this crying over Whiteside and Alabi is warranted. It's the same freakin stuff every year, you guys get on here and cry about some Second rounder who we didn't get.

Well, let's see... Houston just traded David Andersen to Toronto with cash considerations for a top 55 protected pick.

Well, let's see... Nobody is beating down Garret Siler's door and if we really want him, we can invite him to camp and give him a contract.

I hate that we didn't have a shot at Marc Gasol or Josh McRoberts or Glenn Davis. However, let these guys make their name before we start back in with all this belly aching about us not getting them.

More than likely, Whitesides will be cut. We can get him later.

Edited August 4, 2010 by Diesel

[Buzzard]

My take on this is so that they can afford to resign JJ and pay our first round pick.

I don't think all this crying over Whiteside and Alabi is warranted. It's the same freakin stuff every year, you guys get on here and cry about some Second rounder who we didn't get.

Well, let's see... Houston just traded David Andersen to Toronto with cash considerations for a top 55 protected pick.

Well, let's see... Nobody is beating down Garret Siler's door and if we really want him, we can invite him to camp and give him a contract.

I hate that we didn't have a shot at Marc Gasol or Josh McRoberts or Glenn Davis. However, let these guys make their name before we start back in with all this belly aching about us not getting them.

More than likely, Whitesides will be cut. We can get him later.

But we have no shot at Lawal, Alabi, or Caracter they have been locked up. And that is just the headliners; quite a few 2nd rounders are getting signed everyday.

[Diesel]

But we have no shot at Lawal, Alabi, or Caracter they have been locked up. And that is just the headliners; quite a few 2nd rounders are getting signed everyday.

Let's wait and see how those guys pan out.

[drzachary]

Actually, looking at the drafts between 1999 and 2005, the hit rate on second round picks in the early 2nd round (mostly 30-41 range with a three years being 29-31) is actually 37.5%.

Those are good odds! More importantly, what's the statistical likelihood that a team that gives away its 2nd rounder for nothing will end up getting a good player out of the deal?

0.0%.

[Packfill]

Those are good odds! More importantly, what's the statistical likelihood that a team that gives away its 2nd rounder for nothing will end up getting a good player out of the deal?

0.0%.

What is the statistical likelihood that Jason Collins becomes a useful rotational player for the Hawks?

[drzachary]

What is the statistical likelihood that Jason Collins becomes a useful rotational player for the Hawks?

0.00001%