Why is everyone acting like if we don't have draft picks?

[sasuke]

From sports analysts to Hawks fans are always talking about players for players trades that make our options for improvement look so limited. Can we talk about trading our draft picks to increase the chances of something happening? IMO, contenders & 2nd tier teams(us) shouldn't care about keeping draft picks.

The idea is to win now and non lotto picks most of the time can't help their teams to win now. Sometimes they don't even play after a year or 2 or see limited minutes as rookies. Just look @ Teague & Jo. Crawford, doing noting to flip things around. In 2 or 3 years they might help, but this team can't afford to play the waiting game any more.

Thats why I'll say screw it!!!! Trade the 2011, 2013 1rst rounders, the 2 extra 2nd rounders on 2012 & 2013 along with any combination of players to make something money wise affordable to happen. After all, our scouting is pathetic. If we had the Spurs scouts will be another story, but we don't.

[lethalweapon3]

http://www.hawksquawk.net/community/index.php/topic/355512-trade-out/

Didn't quite go as far as you, but agree that at least for this year we should use our draft pick either to add lower-tier veteran bench depth or in a package for something bigger.

~lw3

[coachx]

Perhaps b/c our picks are worth very little. In reality our pick is nothing more then a pot sweetner.

I'm hoping Bibby's expiring deal + pick 24-27 can get us decent veteran. You can't count on that though. Only a rebuilding team looking to shed a longer contract would do such a deal.

Edited February 9, 2011 by coachx

[Sothron]

Sorry, we need our draft picks to sell so the ASG can "improve" the roster by never spending a penny over to get into the luxury tax.

[Admin]

Sorry, we need our draft picks to sell so the ASG can "improve" the roster by never spending a penny over to get into the luxury tax.

I understand that is a tongue in cheek remark but to be fair they've yet to sell their 1st round pick in any year that I can remember ... but we do waste them on players that never amount to squat so we might as well trade them.

[niremetal]

From sports analysts to Hawks fans are always talking about players for players trades that make our options for improvement look so limited. Can we talk about trading our draft picks to increase the chances of something happening? IMO, contenders & 2nd tier teams(us) shouldn't care about keeping draft picks.

The idea is to win now and non lotto picks most of the time can't help their teams to win now. Sometimes they don't even play after a year or 2 or see limited minutes as rookies. Just look @ Teague & Jo. Crawford, doing noting to flip things around. In 2 or 3 years they might help, but this team can't afford to play the waiting game any more.

Thats why I'll say screw it!!!! Trade the 2011, 2013 1rst rounders, the 2 extra 2nd rounders on 2012 & 2013 along with any combination of players to make something money wise affordable to happen. After all, our scouting is pathetic. If we had the Spurs scouts will be another story, but we don't.

We're not going to be a lottery team, and draft picks from ~#20 to the end of the draft are really not worth anything (and "high" non-lottery picks aren't worth much more). You never see a trade involving a player better than, say, Anthony Johnson hinge on the inclusion of a future non-lottery pick. A clear majority of players picked outside the lottery never become more than role players (and even then, just for a few years), and a clear majority picked outside the top 20 never even become regular rotation players. Hell, even the "average" #14 pick over the past 25ish years in terms of production is Fred Jones.

I really think the NBA needs to scrap the second round altogether. It really serves no useful purpose. Let the teams focus their scouting efforts exclusively on possible first-round picks (hopefully that would raise teams' batting average on late first rounders), and make the other guys earn their spot in training camp or by proving themselves overseas. That was the logic behind shortening the draft to 2 rounds in the 80s but I think the time has come to shorten it even further. As it stands, a guy of the street with access to the various mock drafts who just made his picks based on the consensus "best player available" would have a batting average no worse than NBA GMs (RC Buford aside) when it comes to sub-lottery picks. That's not an exaggeration.

This is all to say that throwing in our first round draft pick won't make a difference in a trade that means anything.

Edited February 9, 2011 by niremetal

[sasuke]

Trust me guys, for rebuilding teams, it makes a lot of difference. Most of them build their core trough the draft. And even for non rebuilding teams that are set like to have picks. It's simple math :

BB + pick > BB

Zaza + pick > Zaza

Marvin + pick > Marvin

Teague, Jo Crawford +pick > Teague & Jo Crawford

Crawford's expiring + 2 1rst round picks = Beast in return.

Mo's expiring + pick = decent role player in return.

[coachx]

Trust me guys, for rebuilding teams, it makes a lot of difference. Most of them build their core trough the draft. And even for non rebuilding teams that are set like to have picks. It's simple math :

BB + pick > BB

Zaza + pick > Zaza

Marvin + pick > Marvin

Teague, Jo Crawford +pick > Teague & Jo Crawford

Crawford's expiring + 2 1rst round picks = Beast in return.

Mo's expiring + pick = decent role player in return.

Simply brilliant !

[Joker]

Trust me guys, for rebuilding teams, it makes a lot of difference. Most of them build their core trough the draft. And even for non rebuilding teams that are set like to have picks. It's simple math :

BB + pick > BB

Zaza + pick > Zaza

Marvin + pick > Marvin

Teague, Jo Crawford +pick > Teague & Jo Crawford

Crawford's expiring + 2 1rst round picks = Beast in return.

Mo's expiring + pick = decent role player in return.

Not really, teams that are rebuilding have planned for it already. Most teams had to budget because of the potential lockout and new CBA. It would be nice to get an upgrade for a pick, but it's unlikely. No one is that hyped with our picks. They are usually in the mid 20's and should be in the same area this year. We are kinda stuck. A late 1st value is like a 3rd rounder in the NFL. Not too many contributors you are going to get in a trade for that. Late 1st do help if you are at 10th pick and want to move up to 5th or 6th. No killer FA like last year where teams who trade Hinrich's of the world for caproom and that wouldn't help us since we don't have any.

[benhillboy]

We're not going to be a lottery team, and draft picks from ~#20 to the end of the draft are really not worth anything (and "high" non-lottery picks aren't worth much more). You never see a trade involving a player better than, say, Anthony Johnson hinge on the inclusion of a future non-lottery pick. A clear majority of players picked outside the lottery never become more than role players (and even then, just for a few years), and a clear majority picked outside the top 20 never even become regular rotation players. Hell, even the "average" #14 pick over the past 25ish years in terms of production is Fred Jones.

I really think the NBA needs to scrap the second round altogether. It really serves no useful purpose. Let the teams focus their scouting efforts exclusively on possible first-round picks (hopefully that would raise teams' batting average on late first rounders), and make the other guys earn their spot in training camp or by proving themselves overseas. That was the logic behind shortening the draft to 2 rounds in the 80s but I think the time has come to shorten it even further. As it stands, a guy of the street with access to the various mock drafts who just made his picks based on the consensus "best player available" would have a batting average no worse than NBA GMs (RC Buford aside) when it comes to sub-lottery picks. That's not an exaggeration.

This is all to say that throwing in our first round draft pick won't make a difference in a trade that means anything.

Why is the best GM in the league the least known? I only became familiar with him last year, as if the Spurs didn't have someone orchestrating their awesome run thus far. He pulls all of the right strings and evidently despises the spotlight. How it should be done.

[niremetal]

Why is the best GM in the league the least known? I only became familiar with him last year, as if the Spurs didn't have someone orchestrating their awesome run thus far. He pulls all of the right strings and evidently despises the spotlight. How it should be done.

Probably because he spends more time working the phones and looking at tape, and less time mugging for the cameras.

[AHF]

I don't mind using our picks in trades to get premium value but I don't buy into the idea that "we suck with our picks anyway so we might as well deal them."

We should fire our GM if we don't trust him to draft talent with late first round picks. San Antonio has Manu, Splitter, Scola, Parker, etc. from their late picks. The Lakers have had Marc Gasol, Toney Douglas, Jordan Farmer, Ronny Turiaf, etc. The Celtics have had Rajon Rondo, Glen Davis, Ryan Gomes, Delonte West, Tony Allen, etc. The Heat have had Eric Bledsoe, Marcus Thornton, Eddie House, Rasual Butler, and stolen Udonis Haslem, etc.

Basically, every team worth its salt drafts a range of starters and rotation players that help flesh out their roster. We should too and if our GM can't do that he should be fired.

[bird_dirt]

it would actually be nice if we were somehow able to move up in this draft. it isn't a super-stud can't miss a the top kind of draft, but there are some good players i wouldn't mind seeing the hawks pick up. when a draft isn't as hyped because there isn't a lebron, (oden) durant, or wall in it, it might be easier to get away with sneaking up for someone under the radar.

Kyrie Irving, pg from duke would be good. as for a center, Jonas Valanciunas from Lithuania has had a lot of good hype and could provide us with that elusive "legitimate" center we've been desperate for. i think either could potentially be starters in their second year, third year tops. they would be huge draft pick ups if we fail to trade for a pg or c.

Enes Kanter would be an interesting player, too, but he would seem a little like horf where he is kind of between a pf and c.

[niremetal]

I don't mind using our picks in trades to get premium value but I don't buy into the idea that "we suck with our picks anyway so we might as well deal them."

We should fire our GM if we don't trust him to draft talent with late first round picks. San Antonio has Manu, Splitter, Scola, Parker, etc. from their late picks. The Lakers have had Marc Gasol, Toney Douglas, Jordan Farmer, Ronny Turiaf, etc. The Celtics have had Rajon Rondo, Glen Davis, Ryan Gomes, Delonte West, Tony Allen, etc. The Heat have had Eric Bledsoe, Marcus Thornton, Eddie House, Rasual Butler, and stolen Udonis Haslem, etc.

Basically, every team worth its salt drafts a range of starters and rotation players that help flesh out their roster. We should too and if our GM can't do that he should be fired.

Then 28 of the GMs in the league should be fired. Because with the exception of Buford and Kupchak (but see below), there isn't a GM in the league who bats better than .500 on picks outside the top 20 (a "hit" in my view is a regular rotation player - someone who gets consistent minutes even when his team is fully healthy). And there isn't any GM who bats better than .500 on second rounders. None. No one. Not even Buford, though he gets closest.

Btw, you gave credit to Kupchak for a pick that he made on behalf of the Knicks (Douglas) and two guys who were second rounders (MGasol and Turiaf). If you expand it to include the second round, Kupchak doesn't even come close to hitting more than he's missed.

The Heat and Celtics both have batted well below .500. Your "etc" is misleading because it makes it sound like you provided a small sample of the many contributors those two teams have drafted outside the lottery, when in reality there are no other examples of "good" sub-lottery picks for either team in the past decade other than the ones you named besides Dorell Wright (whose found a niche as a gunner in Frisco) and arguably Dahntay Jones.

Like I said, a guy with access to the mock drafts could simply pick the consensus best player available and do as well or better than nearly all NBA GMs with sub-lottery picks. If I'm a time looking to cut costs, I nix the scouting department altogether, read DraftExpress, conduct a few individual workouts, and go from there. No really.

[AHF]

Then 28 of the GMs in the league should be fired. Because with the exception of Buford and Kupchak (but see below), there isn't a GM in the league who bats better than .500 on picks outside the top 20 (a "hit" in my view is a regular rotation player - someone who gets consistent minutes even when his team is fully healthy). And there isn't any GM who bats better than .500 on second rounders. None. No one. Not even Buford, though he gets closest.

Btw, you gave credit to Kupchak for a pick that he made on behalf of the Knicks (Douglas) and two guys who were second rounders (MGasol and Turiaf). If you expand it to include the second round, Kupchak doesn't even come close to hitting more than he's missed.

The Heat and Celtics both have batted well below .500. Your "etc" is misleading because it makes it sound like you provided a small sample of the many contributors those two teams have drafted outside the lottery, when in reality there are no other examples of "good" sub-lottery picks for either team in the past decade other than the ones you named besides Dorell Wright (whose found a niche as a gunner in Frisco) and arguably Dahntay Jones.

Like I said, a guy with access to the mock drafts could simply pick the consensus best player available and do as well or better than nearly all NBA GMs with sub-lottery picks. If I'm a time looking to cut costs, I nix the scouting department altogether, read DraftExpress, conduct a few individual workouts, and go from there. No really.

Who said anything about needing to hit .500? All you need to do is find some value in those picks and any good team should.

When you get a Glen Davis or Gortat or Parker or Arenas or Prince, etc. that is a big get for your team. For the Hawks, that record is not acceptable:

Here is the last 25 years of mid-late first round picks and 2nd rounders:

Jordan Crawford

Pape Sy

Jeff Teague

Sergiy Gladyr

Solomon Jones

Salim Stoudamire

Cenk Akyol

Josh Smith

Donta Smith

Royal Ivey

Boris Diaw

Travis Hansen

David Andersen

Terence Morris

Hanno Mottola

Scoonie Penn

Cal Bowdler

Dion Glover

Dan Dickau

Roshown McLeod

Cory Carr

Ed Gray

Alain Digbeu

Chris Crawford

Priest Lauderdale

Donnie Boyce

Troy Brown

Cuonzo Martin

Gaylon Nickerson

Doug Edwards

Rich Manning

Elmer Bennett

Anthony Avent

Rodney Moore

Trevor Wilson

Steve Bardo

Roy Marble

Haywoode Workman

Anthony Taylor

Jorge Gonzalez

Dallas Comegys

Terence Bailey

Terry Coner

Billy Thompson

Cedric Henderson

Augusto Binelli

Ron Kellogg

Here is how I categorize the hits as far as their value to this franchise (i.e., you don't get credit for drafting Haywood Workman since he was never even a fringe rotation player for the Hawks):

All-Stars: None

Non-All-Star Studs: Josh Smith

Starters: None

Quality Rotation Players: None

Rotation Players: Boris Diaw, Chris Crawford

Fringe Rotation Players: Royal Ivey, Jeff Teague, Solomon Jones

Incomplete: Jeff Teague, Jordan Crawford, Sergiy Gladyr, Pape Sy

Play was essentially worthless to the Hawks: Salim Stoudamire, Cenk Akyol, Donta Smith, Travis Hansen, David Andersen, Terence Morris, Hanno Mottola, Scoonie Penn, Cal Bowdler, Dion Glover, Dan Dickau, Roshown McLeod, Cory Carr, Ed Gray, Alain Digbeu, Priest Lauderdale, Donnie Boyce, Troy Brown, Cuonzo Martin, Gaylon Nickerson, Doug Edwards, Rich Manning, Elmer Bennett, Anthony Avent, Rodney Moore, Trevor Wilson, Steve Bardo, Roy Marble, Haywoode Workman, Anthony Taylor, Jorge Gonzalez, Dallas Comegys, Terence Bailey, Terry Coner, Billy Thompson, Cedric Henderson, Augusto Binelli, Ron Kellogg

It would be nice to see a 10% hit rate with our picks and GMs should lose their job over the kind of record we have seen. Our only GM who has met my expectations in this area of drafting was Billy Knight (who had bigger issues with his high lottery picks). Knight did a fine job snagging Josh and Boris even though he missed with many other late first/high second picks. I could pick out any number of teams not known for their drafting acumen that have a better history in this area but I don't know that I could find a single team with a worse profile since 1985.

[lethalweapon3]

Here is the last 25 years of mid-late first round picks and 2nd rounders:

Should Hendu make that list? (I meant Alan, not Cedric). I'm just being picky.

~lw3

[niremetal]

Who said anything about needing to hit .500? All you need to do is find some value in those picks and any good team should.

I don't see how you can reconcile those statements. If most of your picks never amount to squat, how are you finding value in your picks? If someone just following the consensus mock draft could do as well or better than you, how are you finding value in your picks? If you don't believe me on either of those points, go look at past drafts and mock drafts. You'll see that's not an exaggeration.

It would be nice to see a 10% hit rate with our picks and GMs should lose their job over the kind of record we have seen. Our only GM who has met my expectations in this area of drafting was Billy Knight (who had bigger issues with his high lottery picks). Knight did a fine job snagging Josh and Boris even though he missed with many other late first/high second picks. I could pick out any number of teams not known for their drafting acumen that have a better history in this area but I don't know that I could find a single team with a worse profile since 1985.

I think you missed my point from my last post. I was not saying our GMs have done a good job, at all. I was just making a point about the uselessness of talking about packaging late first round picks - which is the topic of this thread. Late first round picks aren't worth squat. No team holds out on trades involving players worth a damn in order to get a late first round pick or a second round pick. THAT was my only point. And it's tough to argue with, because you routinely see teams (generally playoff teams, for obvious reasons) sell or trade those picks for cash, conditional future picks, and other various forms of "squat."

I don't know of a single trade involving a starter - much less a guy worth trading Smoove or Jamal for - that hinged on the inclusion of a pick lower than ~#20 (really, I don't know of one that hinged on any non-lottery pick). So the idea of using our draft picks to put together a package for an impact player is a useless exercise, IMHO, because any deal that we could make with our late first round pick could almost certainly be made even without the pick. For example, I don't see the Warriors coming back and saying "we'll give you Curry/Biedrins for Smoove/Teague, but only if you throw in your projected #23 pick. Otherwise, we walk."

As for our GMs, yeah they have been terrible (as opposed to just "quite bad") with their draft picks. Babcock did lose his job, although it took far too long. The Clippers and Warriors are the only teams that I think have worse draft records. They rarely have performed well enough to make it out of the lottery - which means they only have few mid/late first rounders for us to evaluate.

Edited February 10, 2011 by niremetal

[sasuke]

Not really, teams that are rebuilding have planned for it already. Most teams had to budget because of the potential lockout and new CBA. It would be nice to get an upgrade for a pick, but it's unlikely. No one is that hyped with our picks. They are usually in the mid 20's and should be in the same area this year. We are kinda stuck. A late 1st value is like a 3rd rounder in the NFL. Not too many contributors you are going to get in a trade for that. Late 1st do help if you are at 10th pick and want to move up to 5th or 6th. No killer FA like last year where teams who trade Hinrich's of the world for caproom and that wouldn't help us since we don't have any.

Every season you see teams trading for picks, most of those picks are outside the lottery & if lottery bound their're protected. They draft players they covet , or they just trade them along with other similar picks/cash/taking on contract to move up in the draft. Giving up a pick in a trade with a rebuilding team is almost a most. to build trough the draft you need more than your own picks, other than that takes you longer. That's how they do it, at least in the NBA that I watch. Not sure if you're watching the same league. Those picks are worth 3 mill at draft night so they have value, don't say the opposite.

[AHF]

Hendu was 16th which I was putting as too close to the top of the draft. It is also why I didn't include our many, many terrible picks closer to the top 10.

I don't see how you can reconcile those statements. If most of your picks never amount to squat, how are you finding value in your picks? If someone just following the consensus mock draft could do as well or better than you, how are you finding value in your picks? If you don't believe me on either of those points, go look at past drafts and mock drafts. You'll see that's not an exaggeration.

The Clippers and Warriors are the only teams that I think have worse draft records. They rarely have performed well enough to make it out of the lottery - which means they only have few mid/late first rounders for us to evaluate.

Let's take your examples of the two absolute worst teams at drafting in this area and see if they got any value from this portion of the draft. (I am going to leave off players who haven't proven themselves and were 2009/10 draftees).

Clippers 1994-2008:

DeAndre Jordan

Jared Jordan

Guillermo Diaz

Daniel Ewing

Lionel Chalmers

Sofoklis Schortsanitis

Quentin Richardson

Marko Jaric

Rico Hill

Brian Skinner

Constantin Popa

Greg Minor

Now let's start from noting that these are nearly exclusively second round picks. They only had 2 or 3 first round picks that qualified.

So how does that value chart flow?

All-Stars: None

Stud Non-All-Stars: None

Starters: Quentin Richardson (started 60% of games)

Productive Role Players: DeAndre Jordan (soon will be a starter), Marko Jaric (started half his games and played 25 mpg over 7 seasons), Brian Skinner (started 1/3 and played 18 mpg over 13 seasons)

Role Players: None

Fringe Role Players: None

Useless picks:Jared Jordan, Guillermo Diaz, Daniel Ewing, Lionel Chalmers, Sofoklis Schortsanitis, Rico Hill, Constantin Popa

% of useful from 94-2008: 36%

* * * *

Golden State 1994-2008

Richard Hendrix

Jermareo Davidson

Marco Belinelli

Stephane Lasme

Kosta Perovic

Monta Ellis

Chris Taft

Derrick Zimmerman

Gilbert Arenas

Chris Porter

Jeff Foster

Tim Young

Marc Jackson

Marcus Mann

Andrew DeClercq

Dwayne Whitfield

Martin Lewis

Michael McDonald

Anthony Miller

Dwayne Morton

All-Stars: Gilbert Arenas

Stud Non-All-Stars: Monta Ellis

Starters: None

Productive Role Players: Marco Bellini (10.2 ppg this season), Jeff Foster, Marc Jackson

Role Players: Andrew DeClercq

Fringe Role Players: Anthony Miller

Useless picks:Richard Hendrix, Jermareo Davidson, Stephane Lasme, Kosta Perovic, Chris Taft, Derrick Zimmerman, Steve Logan, Tim Young, Marcus Mann, Dwayne Whitfield, Martin Lewis, Michael McDonald, Dwayne Morton

% of useful from 94-2008: 35%

* * *

So your handpicked choices for this exercise from 94-08 got anywhere from role players to All-Stars with roughly 35% of their picks even both teams were your picks for absolute worst in the league.

Anyone want to wager a guess how worthless Golden State believes the picks that selected Golden State thinks Monta Ellis and Gilbert Arenas were?

And these are your examples of the worst of the worst in the NBA. If this is the lowest value point for these picks, I am still seeing real value in them. Add in teams that have actually done well drafting in this area like New York (David Lee, Wilson Chandler, Landry Fields, Trevor Ariza, etc.), San Antonio (Parker, Manu, Scola, Splitter, Blair, George Hill, etc.) and you can see even more value.

However you make your choices it looks like a later pick is going to be about a 35% shot at a useful player with upside for All-Star potential. How could that not have real value?

Edited February 10, 2011 by AHF

[spotatl]

Not sure you guys have insider access but I thought it was a really interesting article from ESPN a couple years ago that went through all the different picks and different spots in the draft and gave you an "expected" player that has been taken at that spot. http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2009/insider/news/story?id=4206291

Basically just showing how quickly the value in the draft plummets as you go further down. Then they looked at the chance that a second round pick was a "scrub" and it was around 90% even at the top of the second round.